Were the Prequels planned this way? Based on Lucas ' 82 quote.

Whilst i don't hate the prequels, there are many things that are wrong with them, and many reasons why they are different to the OT. I had always assumed that this was because George's plan hadn't been fixed all thoses years ago, and now they just weren't coming together for him...

however i discovered this quote from 82, that puts things in a new light - and makes me question his motivation for the entire PT.

The First Trilogy
STARLOG: 1982
Source: STARLOG Magazine #48, July 1982
 
"The first Trilogy will not be as much of an action adventure kind of thing. Maybe we'll make it have some humor, but right now it's much more humorless than this one...a little more Machiavellian - it's all plotting - more of a mystery." George Lucus

So Jar Jar was shoe horned in. And george's lack of strong in our face baddies (why isn't darth maul/whoever a developed character that was in the saga until episode 3 - i don't think it would have detracted from vader later on to have another bad ass sith in the saga).

the OT was about a group of friends that all played off one another because they were opposites. They were simple yet charming and it was all told from one character's POV to make the story a personal journey. this is one of the strongest elements of the OT, yet George ditched it in PT to have an open narrative that wasn't based around anyone in particular. he must have planned this but why?

Basically he decided to change the few key ingrediants to his old trilogy. but why?

The reason alot of fans aren't happy isn't because they aren't children anymore (this is prehaps the weakess arguement so far George), but because George has changed alot of things that made the OT great.

It smells of a backstory that has been made to fit, rather than adapted to the series with an understanding of why the OT was loved and successful.

but then again george isn't stupid, i feel there may be artistist reasons for making the first three chapters stiff and impersonal, and the last three chapters warm and personal.... but why???

sure we will care more about Luke's journey when we watch them all back to back, but shouldn't we have cared just as much about anakin's, obi-one's or padme's.....

 

1. Ideas change. Things GL said in the 80s can change from now.

2. The Prequels have a different forumla. It is not worse it is not better it is just different. There is a lot more things to tell in the Prequels and the prequels are much more complex.

3. The Original Trilogy was not only told from the POV of Han Luke and Leia as you have said. Like the Prequels it was a narrative. The scenes of Vader, the droids etc, prove my point. You cannot say that the classics are only told from the Big Three POV. In that respect the two trilogies are the same.


-Seldon

 

Darth Onion:

There's a 'Basher's Sanctuary' in the TPM forum. Why don't you go and live *there*? Stuffing every Thread in this Forum with your 'Jar Jar was shoehorned' (whatever that means) rhetoric is hardly going to change anyone's opinion.

 

George changed the story dozens of times over the years. Heck, he was still changing things on AotC right up to the very last minute, so much so that the film movie audiences saw a diffrent movie than the digital movie audiences.

 

What is wrong with everyone?
It's OBVIOUS that George has been cloned and brought back as the flannel-wearing director from hell!!

 

Ideas always evolve of course, but George's take on the prequels seem very close to what he said in 82.

structurely the PT are mysteries, which is exactly what the OT wasn't. it was full of heros who knew who the baddies were, they all wore black and were very cinematic. so far the PT has lacked opposition(strong bad guys(which as all you script writers will know are what drives a story along)) - and essentially what made the OT great.


" 3. The Original Trilogy was not only told from the POV of Han Luke and Leia as you have said. Like the Prequels it was a narrative. The scenes of Vader, the droids etc, prove my point. You cannot say that the classics are only told from the Big Three POV. In that respect the two trilogies are the same."

Could you explain this point as i don't quite get what you are saying?

everything has a narrative. that is how stories are told. the OT is told via Luke's journey to be a Jedi. It is his story, not Han's, not leia's, not vader's (although he is the subject).

The PT is not told from anybody's POV. It is no-one's journey, not really even anakin's. it is about him sure, but it is not as personally told as Luke's journey. This trilogy is open to intrepretation. in TMP qui-gon was basically the main character. in AOTC obi-wan seems to be the main man.

has george purposefully structured the PT so the audience can pick who they want to follow themselves? experimental and brave if he has. but why? why is the first part going to be an impersonal story and the second a much more personal tale? what effect will this have on the overall story?

I am not here to bash the prequels, just to try and understand them better.

Spike Edit: I've asked you before to play nice. If you can't play nice with other people, you get a time out.

 

why is the first part going to be an impersonal story and the second a much more personal tale? what effect will this have on the overall story?

Darth Onion

this way he has created a monade. A full circle.
The OT and the PT form a symbionic circle. They benefit from each other. The PT is Grey.(impersonal, stiff etc..) The OT is Black-White (personal, loose ). This has accomplished this: You cannot seperate the grey from the black and white anymore because (now)it has an opposition. You cannot say anymore: The empire is pure evil. The rebbels are pure good. To the empire the rebel alliance are like seperatists; they are threatening the order in the galaxy etc..

I hope you understand it better now..

(sorry for my english, i'm from Holland,you know! )

 

BomBad: "What is wrong with everyone?
It's OBVIOUS that George has been cloned and brought back as the flannel-wearing director from hell!! "

the key word there is director, he didn't direct the OT. so now we see why he never did.

 

He directed ANH.

 

ohk, i guess that was before he went senile.

 

Can you give us evidence of Lucas going senile?

 

Guys, make intelligent arguments and cut the sarcasm. I don't want threads in this forum to become a mess of bickering. Show the quality posting this forum is known for.

 

If these prequels were coming out now and the OT had never come out it would be huge.

But since that hasn't happened I would say not only are they more msyterious but they are also darker and in a different time period of the saga. The OT is adventurous and has a group of characters that save the day similar to LOTR or the X-Men. The prequels tell how everything gets screwed up in the galaxy and I think fans expected an OT with better special effects and that only true SW fans could appreciate the prequels. I have assimilated SW lore into my life so these prequels are good, though TPM is in mind more of a rough draft, it had its moments but could have been a little more developed or thought out.

 

I beleive Darth Onion misses something of a major point when he disses the opinion of George's that "many fans disliked TPM because they had grown up."

The idea he had for the prequels in his head in the 70s/80s did *not* include things like Jar Jar or the podracing. These were put in to bring the charcaters together (check), offer some visual hooks outside of the big finale space battle/duel (check), and ...drumroll please... to **give something kids of Anakin's age could relate to** (funny charcaters, comedy, computer-game style excitement). Is it any wonder many older and 'wiser' fans couldn't relate as strongly to those aspects of the film??

Apart from that, the tone is exactly the sort of thing George always imagined....as he himself put it in one of the AOTC webdocs, all the ILM stuff was to translate onto film the story he had in his head.

 

If you read the "Journal of the Whills" preface to the novelization for ANH (ghostwritten for Lucas by Alan Dean Foster, but the preface is said to be taken directly from Lucas's legendary notebooks), it is obvious that Lucas hewed very strongly to that storyline when making the prequels. So yes, I think the PT we've seen so far was what he had in mind, and much farther back than 1982.

 

Whilst i don't hate the prequels, there are many things that are wrong with them, and many reasons why they are different to the OT. I had always assumed that this was because George's plan hadn't been fixed all thoses years ago, and now they just weren't coming together for him...

however i discovered this quote from 82, that puts things in a new light - and makes me question his motivation for the entire PT.

The First Trilogy
STARLOG: 1982
Source: STARLOG Magazine #48, July 1982

"The first Trilogy will not be as much of an action adventure kind of thing. Maybe we'll make it have some humor, but right now it's much more humorless than this one...a little more Machiavellian - it's all plotting - more of a mystery." George Lucus

based on that quote, id say GL has done a remarkable job adhering to his original vision.

So Jar Jar was shoe horned in. And george's lack of strong in our face baddies (why isn't darth maul/whoever a developed character that was in the saga until episode 3 - i don't think it would have detracted from vader later on to have another bad ass sith in the saga).

well, we can agree to disagree on jar jar's importance. i appreciate his child-like anitcs because his character gives the saga a much needed feeling of light-heartedness and innocence. a stark contrast to the eventual state of the galaxy starting in AotC. feelings not felt again until the end of RotJ. and while we dont have a vader in the PT. i wouldnt want any other bad guy to upstage palpatine. his characterization in the PT have been nothing short of spectacular. it has given me alot of respect for his character and given depth the a very 2-D emperor. he is just as effective as vader, only in a different and necessary way.

the OT was about a group of friends that all played off one another because they were opposites. They were simple yet charming and it was all told from one character's POV to make the story a personal journey. this is one of the strongest elements of the OT, yet George ditched it in PT to have an open narrative that wasn't based around anyone in particular. he must have planned this but why?

the PT was about a group of friends that all played off one another because they were opposites. They were simple yet charming and it was all told from one character's POV to make the story a personal journey...

Basically he decided to change the few key ingrediants to his old trilogy. but why?

GL told us himself... "The first Trilogy will not be as much of an action adventure kind of thing. Maybe we'll make it have some humor, but right now it's much more humorless than this one...a little more Machiavellian - it's all plotting - more of a mystery."

The reason alot of fans aren't happy isn't because they aren't children anymore (this is prehaps the weakess arguement so far George), but because George has changed alot of things that made the OT great.

i think this is a very valid point. much of whats 'wrong' with the PT are still 'wrong' with the OT. bad writing, cheesy acting, too many bad special effects... but we were much more accepting as kids and chose to focus on the cool stuff like cool aliens, lightsaber fights, space battles... as kids will do AND still do with the PT. my 10 yr old brother loves the PT and cant stand to watch the 'boring' OT. as much as i try to sway him with arguments of better plots, better characters... all to no avail. he loves the PT and will probably cherish them as much as we cherish the OT.

It smells of a backstory that has been made to fit, rather than adapted to the series with an understanding of why the OT was loved and successful.

but then again george isn't stupid, i feel there may be artistist reasons for making the first three chapters stiff and impersonal, and the last three chapters warm and personal.... but why???

sure we will care more about Luke's journey when we watch them all back to back, but shouldn't we have cared just as much about anakin's, obi-one's or p

 

The only real thing tone-wise that I dislike about the PT (that means putting my sadness over the loss of old school cinema to CGI aside) is that I think it needed to be more character-driven. Sure, there should be large battles going on and such during the Clone Wars, but why did the whole Battle of Naboo have to be there? To me it seemed like an excuse to use CGI (ah crap, it's snuck back in ). Even so, you could keep those things in if you really think it's necessary (it's not, we didn't have a big battle in ESB and it's still a fan fav), but you have to focus on the character stories more.

SW is a story of father's and sons and all that encompasses. Watch very closely and you'll see this remarkably complex progression p):

Yoda --> Dooku --> Qui-Gon --> Obi-Wan --> Anakin --> Luke

Tada! There is your core, and that's what needs to be focused on. Especially the relationship between Anakin and Obi-Wan because it is the only one of these present in all 6 of the films. Why don't we see more of Obi-Wan in TPM? Why doesn't he exchange more than two lines with Anakin? Because there simply wasn't enough film time. Had that been changed, the tone would have been more personal.

I understand that it's a mystery because Palps is one awesomely bad conniving dude. I get that this isn't the same kind of 'the good guy underdogs fight the big bad guys' type of story the OT was. I like that about it, because you get two contrasting eras and societies. This is a story about being pompous set in a time of great pomp, a very regal and strict era for the socialites and Jedi. That's a more than fine tone to take, just don't forget the core. I have my own versions of 'deleted' or 'extended' scenes from the films in my head (and in my fics), so for me it's been more flesched out. But it would have been nice if GL had done it in the first place.

-sj loves kevin spacey

 

Tada! There is your core, and that's what needs to be focused on. Especially the relationship between Anakin and Obi-Wan because it is the only one of these present in all 6 of the films.

All six? Vader killed Obi Wan in Episode IV. I don't see how their relationship is "present" beyond that, unless you count their ghosts standing side by side in ROTJ.

I'm also not sure what you mean by the loss of "old school cinema" to CGI. The FX that were present in the OT were most certainly not of the "old school" of cinema; they were cutting edge at the time, even if they look archaic to us now. SW has always been on the cutting edge of technology, no matter what that might be.

I do understand what you mean about the story in the PT not being as "personal." The OT was Luke's story, it was about his hero's journey. The galactic war was a part of the story, but it was the backdrop.

The PT, on the other hand, is more general. The rise of the Emperor to power and the disintegration of the Old Republic and the Jedi Order shares the screen with Anakin's journey, rather than being the backdrop. However, the disintegration of the Old Republic/Jedi Order is much more intertwined with Anakin's journey than the galactic war was with Luke's in the OT.

 

Dee Dee, what you say is perhaps partially true. But I think it is you who has wholley missed the point. the PT hasn't met expectation, NOT because we are no longer kids, but BECAUSE it is different in tone. It has a different purpose.

The main problem perhaps being the charcters in PT say things to each other, rather than feel for each other. that is this trilogy great failing, and one George has deliberately manufactered (lord knows to what purpose). It is no-one's journey so we can just watch rather than feel we are part of the story. My question is why? Because George is lazy and fat, and couldn't care less? I don't buy that. He is by nature an experimental film maker - and he has a purpose with the dry plot and bad acting. but what?

how can you possibly know what George had in his head in 82? Can you provide evidence that George didn't want a Pod race from the very begining of the saga? Nope.

George's set piece's are among the most memorable in screen history, so I doubt he comes up with these things lightly. However...

Jar Jar is obviously the result of a love affair with his animation team. George plain dropped the ball. it happens, when you lose perspective and is very easy to do on a feature film - especially when you won't listen to anyone because you know best.

To all the jar jar protestors, that is WHY he has virtually been written out of the saga. George realised his mistake(or was made to realise).

And for the record I don't hate the prequels. I do like them alot. They just have another purpose. It wouldn't have been too hard to turn the PT into Obi-Wan's, Anakin's or Padme's journey (I always wanted her to be a female Jedi, who ends up fighting Anakin to her death, to protect their children - but that's just my bad)...

 

Jar Jar is obviously the result of a love affair with his animation team. George plain dropped the ball.

How so? Jar Jar did what he needed to do.

To all the jar jar protestors, that is WHY he has virtually been written out of the saga. George realised his mistake(or was made to realise).

Not so. Jar Jar's role was always supposed to be more limited in Ep 2 and Ep 3. He played a big role in Ep 1 because one of the major story threads was the Naboo invasion and the coming together of the Queen's people and the Gungans.

It wouldn't have been too hard to turn the PT into Obi-Wan's, Anakin's or Padme's journey

Actually, it would have been, because the story was meant to be more general. It doesn't start in medias res to the extent that the OT does. It has to establish all of the overarching storylines that go through the saga. Making it focus on one character would have limited the storytelling, and anyway, Anakin's story is inextricably linked with the rise of the Empire.

(I always wanted her to be a female Jedi, who ends up fighting Anakin to her death, to protect their children - but that's just my bad)...

I'm glad Lucas didn't do that. No offense, but I don't find that scenario very appealing at all.

Besides which, Lucas is not obliged to follow, or even know, what you wanted, and to expect him to do that and then criticize him for not doing it is completely unfair.

 

Shelly, Jar Jar was supposed to be the chewbacca of this trilogy. He was suppose to be in ALL THREE films, and looking at AOTC structurely, proberly have gone on an adventure with Obi-Wan. you don't give a character major screen time and then cut them, unless there are problems. if you believe otherwise that is your choice.

if you think i am criticizing Lucas for not doing what i wanted you really can't have read my post that throughly. i am trying to understand why he deliberately made this trilogy lack the personality of the last. it may be a more artistic step - but is it as entertaining?

 

Shelly, Jar Jar was supposed to be the chewbacca of this trilogy.

According to whom?

He was suppose to be in ALL THREE films,

And he's been in both prequel films so far.

and looking at AOTC structurely, proberly have gone on an adventure with Obi-Wan.

What adventure? Obi Wan went on no adventure. He went on a clue-finding mission.

you don't give a character major screen time and then cut them,

Why not?

unless there are problems.

Or unless there is no reason to continue to give them major screen time.

What's your evidence that Jar Jar was supposed to go on "an adventure" with Obi Wan, and was supposed to be the Chewbacca of the PT?

if you think i am criticizing Lucas for not doing what i wanted you really can't have read my post that throughly. i am trying to understand why he deliberately made this trilogy lack the personality of the last.

Lack, or simply give it another personality?

it may be a more artistic step - but is it as entertaining?

I think it is. It's just entertaining in a different way. It makes you think a lot more than the OT did. It has a lot more intricacy than the OT did.

 

" the OT was about a group of friends that all played off one another because they were opposites. They were simple yet charming and it was all told from one character's POV to make the story a personal journey. this is one of the strongest elements of the OT, yet George ditched it in PT to have an open narrative that wasn't based around anyone in particular."-Darth Onion

I see what you're saying Darth Onion. The PT is less personal than the OT. But I wonder if that has more to do with us as viewers than George as a director/writer. I wonder if Anakin, Obi-wan, and Padme aren't resonating to the same effect as Luke, Leia, and Han did because we know of the tragedy in store for them. I think we see Anakin's choices such as the tusken slaughter and judge him too harshly instead of sympathysing with the pain of holding his dying mother as well as we would if we did not know it was the first sign of Vader.

"The first Trilogy will not be as much of an action adventure kind of thing. Maybe we'll make it have some humor, but right now it's much more humorless than this one...a little more Machiavellian - it's all plotting - more of a mystery." George Lucus

From that I think George knew to one degree or another that the PT would have less personal resonance even back in 82, and I also think he expected fan reaction to be somewhat mixed with this new trilogy.


People like what they like, and some of what they like can make little sense to someone else...that's 1 thing that makes us human.
As for me I like history, and I see this as an enactment of a crucial point in the history of the Star Wars galaxy.
The PT engages me on a scholarly basis more than on a personal one at least not as much as the OT did, although I do find myself surprised when reading Anakin in the Jedi Quest books and catching myself sympathysing for little Vader.

"(I always wanted her to be a female Jedi, who ends up fighting Anakin to her death, to protect their children - but that's just my bad)..."-Darth Onion

Nah, Padme was right to be a senator, a non-force user simply because this trilogy is so heavy with Jedi and Sith already. Padme brings the perspective of the senate/republic government and the non-force using populace to the gestalt of the foreground characters...if she was a Jedi we'd miss the ties between the Jedi and the republic and the senate scenes would be even more boring and irrelevent to us. Besides Padme being a political figure connects with her daughter leia being a political figure the same way Anakin and Luke connect over the being a Jedi.

 

lots of great posts here with some truly valid points. From where I stand, having enjoyed the OT in theaters the 1st time around, the problem with the prequels is that Luca seems to be disconnected from the stories now. I'm sure that when the saga was conceived, Lucas wasn't as well of as he is now decades after merchandising and ILM have made him a fortune. As aresult I think Lucas' original films benefitted from where he was in his own life's journey.

I agree with some who say that the prequels seem like more of a way to cash in on a franchise because both the PM and AotC don't really add anything iof value to the original Satr Wars saga.

Now before i get bashed for saying that, (lol) all I'm suggesting is that nothing in the prequels has made me feel like i've discovered something new or exciting with respect to the original films' storyline. We already knew eveyrthing we needed to know after ESB.

When the prequels were announced I had hoped that we would see more of the SW universe but also understand why Luke & Co.'s needed to triumph over the Empire. i think the most important storyline ine the prequels should be the turning of Anakin but to this point, Lucas has danced around the subject entirely. The best exampleof this is when Anakain returns to Tatooine to find his mom. This is the most crucial point in the star wars universe!!! As soon as his mom dies, Anakin starts his journey to the dark side. Lucas shouldve devoted so much more time and effort to this one plot point. We all know that in a fit of rage Anakin exacts vengeance on the sand people but in the scope of the movie, its just a quick battle. How could Lucas does this?!?! This was his opportunity to show us the birth of one of the greatest villains/characters ever created, but instead he cuts away anmd the story goes down hill from there.

All that said, yes its just my opinion, but I honestly think that Lucas is just too far removed form what made his OT so great. I'm not even talking about the reliance on CGI and SFX to make things flashier, but in all honesty, where is the substance in the prequels?!?!? : ( (sigh8*)

The beauty of original SW trilogy was that it was an epic tale, in the most classic sense, right up there with LotR, The Illiad, the Odyssey - the good vs the bad, the trials, the journey, and the idea that when all hope is lost, characters will find something inside them to rise up and triumph over insurmountable odds.

The hopeless romantic that I am, I'll hold at hope that Episode 3 will retsore my faith in Lucas but until then i will treat the OT as there own separate universe. Maybe one day Hollywood studios will remake the prequels! hey if they can spent so much money remaking great films in to bad ones, maybe they'll eventually figure out how to do he opposite.

My 2 cents...

PS: Tell GL to give us back the FORCE and can the science experiment! Mito-whatevers!

 

I think if new audiences enjoyed the PT and ther charcters as much as we did then we would definitiely be hearing about it. Why else would we hear so much dis-satisfaction from SW fans familair with the OT?

I dont think OT fans are disconnected because they're older, instead I think Lucas is disconnected from what and how he created in the OT. No one couldve forseen the popularity and phenomen the OT would create, yet the PT seems to have failed in comparison.

Again, is it too late to have Peter Jackson direct the "real" prequels?!?!?