Discussion in 'Literature' started by TypoCelchu, Oct 30, 2012.
I ignore those two, having only seen the first one and wasn't that impressed with it.
I actually liked both, the latter more than the former but as I understand it, they weren't your typical Trek films. Meaning I enjoyed it.
I just couldn't get over the fact they never even tried to fix it with the first one.
Fix what ?
Solid like a sponge.
Wait.... We're not really getting flashbacks, are we? I'd rather get resurrected Vader....
Honestly at this point
@Starkeiller I haven't a clue what stuff I've read was rumours and what was rumours talking about other rumours only being rumours.
We could get flashforwards as well...
LEIA! WE HAVE TO GO BAAACK!
how is 52 or 53 old??
Again, it depends on how hard someone's life has been. Some 60 year olds look better than people in their 30s, but then some 50 year olds look worse than people in their 90s.
The number isn't important. But somebody who had their arms and legs hacked off and hasn't seen sunlight in two decades? That's not a good way to keep looking young.
I understand the need for more Vader. It's a commercial franchise, and playing within that world, trying to meet certain expectations and hit certain notes, I understand the appeal. I think a reappearance of the empty costume is a smart way to do it that doesn't break the flow.
Yeah. Villains like that Darth Maul guy didn't really have a lot of commercial pull, did they. Nobody watched the prequels before the put ep3 Vader on the mechandise, did they.
Exactly. They can draw inspiration from Vader, like the imposing black outfit of Maul, or the armoured warrior of Revan, but they shouldn't need to have Vader in the films unless they don't have enough confidence in their original creative material to stand on its own feet.
You surely realize the irony of using Darth Maul as an argument for not bringing back an existing villain...
Creatively, yes. But we're not talking about a creative wonderland. We're talking about the biggest commercial entertainment property in the known universe. As I said, playing within that world, looking at the very specific creative art of making commercial entertainment which predicts what people expect and tries to find a creative way to make it work within those constraints... that's what I'm talking about here.
I'm just not interested in tossing out theoretical creative platitudes which aren't relevant to the actual sort of film they're making. Anyway, Vader obviously wouldn't be the villain, but the use of his suit in some way seems like a valid transitional element.
"In some way" is the key phrase there.
Plenty of Sith outfits have been inspired by Darth Vader's suit in some way. Just look at the plethora of characters that became icons of the EU immediately after their first cover art. (And heck, there's a reason people make so many jokes about Vader's pants being stolen by Cade and countless other characters.)
But even in the case of Revan or Adas, that didn't mean they literally wore Vader's exact suit.
I just don't personally think that's the only possible extent to which it can be effectively featured, and regardless, realistically, I just think they have aims for it to show up directly. Again, I'm not talking about what can happen in a world where they're taking it easy and just trying to make a good movie... I'm talking about the commercial process of making a patently Star Wars movie.
And the thing about Maul and the prequels is also not so precise when you consider the advertising for TPM: Vader's shadow behind Jake Lloyd. Not to mention the appearance of full-on suited Vader in RotS. This would simply mirror that; some significant appearance at the beginning, short but important, which would then transition to something else (either the actual villain or whatever transpires after the Force ghost appearance).
I'd call it a 2-for-the-price-of-1-argument, since bringing him back was controversial creativity. Did he come back for the money? Yes. Was he created for the money in the first place? Yes.
The TPM poster was a way to explain to the confused public that this boy was going to be Vader in the end; as much as the huge "Episode I" title was in there to drive the point home that this was earlier, some characters wouldn't exist yet, and we all knew the ending. There's no actual Vader in Ep1 except for the breathing after the credits, and this is what the movies have a precedence for: Tusken Raiders on the soundtrack when Palpatine reminds Anakin and the audience that there'd been that slaughter business. Hearing Vader's breathing during an exposition scene in which the main villain relates his relation to the late Vader would be a little touch like that.
Vader in armour being in ep3 is somewhat different, since that is where the story was supposed to end, and one of the easiest ways to have the movies match up (especially since in no way could you have made a satisfying ep3 that wouldn't spoil Vader's ep5 revelation). I agree that someone could look at the burned-out armour, but I can't really see a flashback being a good idea.
And what would be the commercial pull of such a scene? Have the shot in the trailer and mislead everyone in the audience? Going Abrams-style and keeping it the best-kept secret, having that little scene in there without making it a commercial factor? Produce lots of action figures of one of the less important characters in the movie (that's actually already been a best-selling action figure for close to 40 years)?
The interesting question (that I don't have time for right now, sadly) is if a flashback scenario could be an interesting vehicle to explain the existence of a ST, as much as the prophecies, visions and dreams of the PT explained the sense of a PT to an audience that already knew the OT.
I thought about the prophecies and such too, thinking that perhaps a Force ghost-inspired vision could achieve the same effect. I don't think a flashback is a good idea per se, but anything could be good if executed well enough. I mean, that's the real trick, isn't it?
and that is why it needs to never happen. ever.
Actually, now I'm trying to think of a way to pull that off. Showing the end from Vader's POV and leading us to believe Padme and the infant(s) had died wouldn't work since the shared last name is a probably unavoidable tipoff.
Perhaps simply not using the Vader title prior to the suit, and show Obi-Wan leaving Anakin for dead without showing Sidious' arrival. Or some more convoluted way to misdirect the viewer into thinking Vader and Anakin are separate characters and imply Vader has in fact killed Anakin.
Clearly it would have to work for first-time viewers as well as those who'd seen the OT. If you wanted to go further back and restructure TPM and AOTC with this in mind, there are even more options. I don't think it would be easy, and I'm not even arguing it would be a good idea necessarily, but it's an interesting thought experiment.
The solution is to watch the OT first. Of course.
But, but it says Episode 4!
Search your feelings. You know it be true.