The shoe-horning of the Lars into AOTC = Bad Writing 101

and he was wrong to do so, though I do agree with a large number of his comments about the PT

 

" If GL expanded on every character for the sake of expanding on them, the movies would be b-o-r-i-n-g-!"

Well personally I don't find that kind of stuff boring. We aren't talking like an hour devoted to owen or anything, but just a bit more then "hello, I'm your brother"

Lars still could've been used effectively. We get this gawd-awful exposition from Cliegg about the Tuskens taking her, and they went out looked for her, and how he hurt his leg, blah..blah... I would've liked to have seen a scene where Anakin hooks up with Owen and a few other men who are looking down at the encampment of Tuskens, and Owen tries to dissuade him from going down there, but he does anyway and kills the Tuskens.

This would have shown where Owen gets his thoughts on Anakin, why he is (essentially) scared of him and what he does.

 

Yeah, a relationship needed to be there between them, onscreen and played out. In a lot of ways, it should have been Owen whom Anakin made his confession to, not Padme. Especially considering that Padme's becoming attracted to Anakin after finding out he is a murderer make no sense.

What ANH really implies is that Anakin had to make a choice between Owen and Obi-wan who are each pulling him in different directions, different life styles, and Anakin eventually choose to follow Obi-wan. But that these were two opposing forces in his life, and that there was interaction involving Owen, anakin and Obi-wan.

 

That's actually quite a good idea Holy Ben Kenobi. It really wouldn't have added anymore time to the movie and that part of the movie could still be wrapped up neatly and on to the next scene.

To take you idea and run,,,Something like Clieg is already legless when Anakin shows up, indicats Owen and his posse are out looking for Shmi. Anakin goes out, catches up with them. Owen has some plan to try to negotiate for Shmi and Anikan goes ape on the Tuskens. That could've been rather neato.

 

Thanks, ObiWanJohn. See, that's exactly what needed to be done.

It's such a simple idea, too. Lucas just needed more time. I would've gladly waited another year (or even two, hell, we waited THIS long for all this).Lucas just needed more time to work on re-writes. How many times did he re-write Star Wars? How many drafts? How many ideas did he turn and twist over and over until he got it?

One of the other issues I have with Lucas, is reading interviews, bios, etc. about him, the general consenus was that he always wanted to get the shot or the edit, and quickly move onto the next scene, deal with the next issue, but AOTC is one of the most monotonous films he's made. I was grateful for the action sequences.

The scene with Owen always falls flat. It is one of the dullest scenes. The rule of thumb in screenwriting is "show don't tell," right? This scene with Cliegg blathering is all overdone exposition.

 

You guys seem to be forgetting that Episode III will undoubtedly show why there is bad blood between Owen and Obi-Wan.

 

I don't believe in GL needing more time. Firstly I think by putting Qui Gon Jinn to have gone into Tattoine instead of Obi Wan, allowed scenes like C3PO mentioning "an Obi Wan Kenobi, does that name anything to you?". GL has specific scenes/story line methods prepared.

I also feel GL is doing things step by step, what is necessary already has been filmed, I don't think there will be any changes in this case, as Ep. III probably will add more depth between the characters, if the Story calls for it. Depends on how Ep. III is done.

IMO ofcourse.

 

GL has a lot of ground to cover then, all of which could've been dealt with effectively in any of the previous two movies.

I still stand by the thought that he needed more time to sort this all out. He had the money, he had the time. I don't know what you mean by taking it 'step-by-step' as writing the script is the first step, and he should've taken a little more time to do it. He has admitted he doesn't like to write.

 

I agree with a lot of 4LOM's points I would add one other though. What is a Sith and why do they want revenge ala Darth Maul's comments in TPM and why only 2.
Now I have read Brooks book and it went into the history of them. But if you have only just seen the films you would not have a clue about them.

To be honest I am not a huge fan of the prequels and seem like George's very poor attempt to copy Citizen Kane in Space. CK for those who have not seen the film was about a 9 yr old boy who is taken from him mother. Then it skips foward ten years and he becomes a news paper reporter and the audience is rooting for him. Then his own success and power bring him down (he also has an Odiepus complex). and turn him into a monster before at the end of his life regretting what he has done.
The attempted story idea with Anakin is very similar though no where near as succesful.

 

I don't think we will get more Owen in EpIII and I don't think it's needed.

 

GL has a lot of ground to cover then...

He had a lot of ground to cover in Jedi as well, yet he managed to pull it off.

The other thing that seems to escape your attention is that Lucas doesn't have to explain everything, he only needs to explain just enough to seque into Episode 4 and let the rest of the questions be answered by the already completed films. And according to Ewan McGregor, Lucas has tied up every loose end in Episode 3 and covered everything that needs to be covered to make a seamless transition into the next chapter.

 

I do like the idea of George putting Owen with Anakin and then witnessing Anakin's rashness and massacre directly, but on the other hand that would've taken away from the "lone rider" sense of drama in Anakin riding out alone to find his mother. Also, the very fact that Cliegg, Owen, and the farmers gave up after their first ambush (you can read about it in the novelization) and Anakin refused to give up contrasted their lifestyles a bit.

I don't like the recommendation for Luke's older sister being Beru at all. This would shed doubt on the "Chosen One"/Jesus/Dalai Lama allegories, as a sibling would bring up the "why didn't the midicholrians (sorry, that word is so ridiculous I refuse to learn the correct spelling!) have anything to do with Anakin's sibling". Also, the fact that Vader would never even keep track of his REAL sister is hard to buy; the fact that the Lars is a step family he only met once explained why he never looked into them again and why that was an ideal place for Luke to hide.

I feel that George did an admirable job of showing the backstory (as others pointed out, Owen and Beru were only in less than fifteen minutes of the original trilogy, so the backstory didn't have to be overwhelming), and we'll see his fear/dislike of Obi Wan in some form of Episode III presumably (since I'm spoiler free I don't even know if Owen's character is coming back, but I figure Luke has to get to Tantooine sometime/way!)

 

I do like the idea of George putting Owen with Anakin and then witnessing Anakin's rashness and massacre directly, but on the other hand that would've taken away from the "lone rider" sense of drama in Anakin riding out alone to find his mother. Also, the very fact that Cliegg, Owen, and the farmers gave up after their first ambush (you can read about it in the novelization) and Anakin refused to give up contrasted their lifestyles a bit.

It'd still work. He's still a "lone rider" until he meets up with Owen.

I don't think we will get more Owen in EpIII and I don't think it's needed.

I don't either, but I still think GL did a hammer job on putting Owen and Beru into the story. Yes, the characters didn't need anymore screen time than they did ANH, but what is shown in AOTC is hackneyed and heavy-handed, just as the title of this topic says--bad writing.

He had a lot of ground to cover in Jedi as well, yet he managed to pull it off.

Surprised? I don't agree with that either. Leia as his sister? Another bad attempt at pulling another surprise on the audience. Could've been dealt with differently. Another DS? Not really good writing. Stealing from himself to make another movie. Rather weak, really.

 

I don't either, but I still think GL did a hammer job on putting Owen and Beru into the story.

But they are not all that importent to what happens in the story. It shows why Luke will be given to them. But for the story at hand they are not needed. So it's not really bad writing. It is knowing how much story they need. Which again in the end is not much do to the fact that they are not all that importent to the over all story.

 

I think the relationship(or lack thereof) between Anakin and Owen is very nicely portrayed in AOTC. When you get to ANH, it will make perfect sense to have Owen and Beru saying:

- Luke's just not a farmer, Owen. He has too much of his father in him.

- That's what I'm afraid of.

When Obi-Wan then says:

- He feared you might follow old Obi-Wan on some damn fool idealistic crusade, like your father did.

You'll get the sense that Obi-Wan and Owen have had their share of disagreements, but you won't need to have seen it. As anidanami points out, it's not THAT important to the overall plot.

 

But what did Owen SEE of Anakin to make him say what he did to Luke? All Anakin did was drive back with his mother's body, glower at everybody, go into the shop, yell and cry in there, and blubber at his mother's grave...

This is what makes Owen say what he did? Just doesn't digest with me.

And what "idealistic crusade" did he see Anakin go to? Did Anakin tell him he was going someplace, what he was doing? Did Owen disagree with it?

You'll get the sense that Obi-Wan and Owen have had their share of disagreements, but you won't need to have seen it.

Maybe we don't get to see it, but Owen isn't the same person as he is in ANH. He is gruff or crusty enough. Yes, some of that comes with age, but you're still basically the same person from Owen's age to later in your life. And don't argue that Owen may have changed over time. Sorry, his life looks pretty stagnant there (and that's why Luke wanted to leave).

 

People are always blathering away on the internet
about "bad writing", "show, don't tell" and so on.

The truth is, we aren't going to be completely certain of why Lucas has handled certain things in the way he has until Episode III is out. Then we can view Star Wars in it's totality and THEN we can make a final judgement. I wouldn't read the first two chapters of a novel and pass judgement on a writer. I'd wait until I finished the book.

I think it'll all end up working out nicely in the end.

Besides, rules are made to bent and broken.

Alfred Hitchcock killed off his main character in PSYCHO in the first 40 minutes of the film. Worked pretty good. Freaked out the audience. Normally you wouldn't do that. But overall, it succeeded as a classic that's recognized and remembered even today. Kubrick broke numerous rules with many of his films, especially 2001: A Space Odyssey. What some narrow minded people regard as "bad writing" is seen by others as daring risk-taking. Great creativity and art is often about ignoring the rules and turning convention on it's head.

I'd love to see some screenwriting teacher lecture some of the great filmmakers on "the rules."
Those that can't do, teach.

 

Besides, rules are made to bent and broken.

Only when you bend or break them for a clear purpose.

Remember the end of Reloaded, when they resolved the battle offscreen and told you about it later? Not only did it rob the battle of any possible punch, but it left many viewers confused; plenty of perfectly intelligent people left the theater thinking that Zion had already been destroyed.

 

Reloaded was a confused mess of a movie anyway, so it's not really the best example of "breaking the rules".

 

Reloaded was a confused mess of a movie anyway, so it's not really the best example of "breaking the rules".

"Breaking the rules" is what Taratino and his kind do, not Lucas. Lucas' stories are relatively linear, and supposedly simple. Even in "breaking the rules," there are still rules in story-telling and film-making, and Lucas is generally a stickler for that sort of thing.

Reloaded can be used as an example. It "broke the rules," too, and it failed. But in Lucas' case, he isn't breaking the rules, he's just not a good script-writer.

 

Didn't they pretty much say in Reloaded that Zion had been destroyed and that the only survivor was this Bane? That's not bending the rules, that's being a stupid writer.

Holy_Ben: The problem your having with this stems from the fact that you had a vision of Anakin and Owen being friends(or at least knowing eachother) and that vision turned out to be false. Now you're so eager to hold on to your old vision that you're unable to see that the relationship between Owen and Ben in ANH fits perfectly with what happens in AOTC.
Noone in ANH ever said that Owen and Anakin were in disagreement over anything. We only get indications of disagreements between Owen and Ben. All that's being said is that Owen thought Anakin should've stayed on Tatooine and not gotten involved. That doesn't necessarily mean that they knew eachother.
Owen did accept to raise Luke, but probably to honor the memory of Shmi more than anything else. It's also fair to assume that Shmi had told Owen a lot about Anakin, especially since Owen knew who he was when he introduced himself. The way it looks now, Owen probably meant that Anakin should have stayed on Tatooine already in TPM and not left his mother behind to head out on some great adventure. And I think after having met Anakin in AOTC, Owen started to dislike Anakin, because he didn't seem to care about anything else than excitement and adventure, and going out on idealistic crusades with whoever this Obi-Wan Kenobi was who sent a message for him.
Then, when Obi-Wan(probably) shows up with Luke, don't you think Owen will be pretty mad at him?

But this is not the focus of the story. It's a plot that's sort of taking place between the lines. Just like many other plots throughout the saga.

 

Holy Ben Kenobi- what you do not seem to realise is this matter of differences is not likely to be explained until Episode 3 is released. So there is no real way we can debate this as we are missing vital information regarding Owen and Anakin and whatever happened to make Owen say what he did to Beru in A New Hope.

 

Didn't they pretty much say in Reloaded that Zion had been destroyed and that the only survivor was this Bane?

He was referring to the battle above Zion, not the battle for Zion itself, but you see; even now, people still misinterpret it because it's so unclear.

 

To be honest I am not a huge fan of the prequels and seem like George's very poor attempt to copy Citizen Kane in Space. CK for those who have not seen the film was about a 9 yr old boy who is taken from him mother. Then it skips foward ten years and he becomes a news paper reporter and the audience is rooting for him. Then his own success and power bring him down (he also has an Odiepus complex). and turn him into a monster before at the end of his life regretting what he has done. The attempted story idea with Anakin is very similar though no where near as successful.

Uh, while there are similarities (the one's you mentioned)
between the basic outline of the stories
of Anakin and Charles Foster Kane, I think it's a quite a stretch to say that Lucas is attempting Citizen Kane in Space. Given the scale, the action sequences and the imaginative flavor of SW, I'd say SW is a far more ambitious project than Citizen Kane, and that's not even counting the moral lessons and the element of spirituality represented by the Force.

(I do not mean to belittle the ambition of Citizen Kane,
for what Orson Welles attempted in his time was
VERY gutsy and artistically daring!)

Anakin becomes a torturing, brutal villain who kills people casually and is a slave to a Sith Lord.
They are not the same kind of person and they are not on the same kind of journey.

The single biggest difference, and it's a HUGE one, is whether or not the main character is redeemed. Charles Foster Kane died rich, lonely and sadly by himself. Anakin is saved by his son, heroically destroys the evil dictator and has a smile for his son as he passes away.

As to whether or not Lucas has been successful, I think we'll have a fuller appreciation of that issue in May 2005.

 

The problem your having with this stems from the fact that you had a vision of Anakin and Owen being friends(or at least knowing eachother) and that vision turned out to be false. Now you're so eager to hold on to your old vision that you're unable to see that the relationship between Owen and Ben in ANH fits perfectly with what happens in AOTC.

Are you ignoring Obi-Wan's line,"..and he was a good friend."

So far in the PT, I do not see that "good friend" aspect. The little sniggering in the elevator up to Amidala's apartment hardly counts as it was Anakin who was stroking his ego, thinking he was better than his master. That hardly counts as being a friend in my book. Yes, there was a false vision.... Lucas's. He's not looking back at the OT. He's shoe-horning, not craftily, cleverly fitting it in.

Noone in ANH ever said that Owen and Anakin were in disagreement over anything. We only get indications of disagreements between Owen and Ben. All that's being said is that Owen thought Anakin should've stayed on Tatooine and not gotten involved. That doesn't necessarily mean that they knew eachother.

Not have gotten involved in what? Nobody even tells Owen where Anakin is going, what he's doing. Does Owen even know about what's going on outside of Tattooine? How could he object? What's the idealistic crusade? None of this is explained.

If it's in three, and I hardly doubt it will be, I'll eat my hat with ketchup, but it's not looking good.

That aside, Owen's temperament, tone, attitude, what have you, implies that he knew a lot more about Anakin than he's telling Luke. If Owen had NOT met Anakin, how could he have developed his opinion of him? How could he have developed his opinion of him from his limited exposure to Anakin?

I see NO evidence of Owen's opinion in ANH being formed out of his experiences in AOTC.

But this is not the focus of the story. It's a plot that's sort of taking place between the lines. Just like many other plots throughout the saga.

Not directly, but it does, or it should.

what you do not seem to realise is this matter of differences is not likely to be explained until Episode 3 is released.

We'll see, but I still chalk it up to bad writing. Why drag it out through two movies, especially when Owen "isn't that important" when it could've been dealt with in one movie, and Owen would only be needed briefly in third.

I'm not asking for "tons" of Owen time. What needed to be done to establish how Owen feels about Anakin could have been done in the same amount of screen time that he was given in AOTC, and it would've made the movie better, but alas...