ST Why do we assume death of a principle?

i dont believe they need to kill them off at all. And i believe they could possibly kill one or three....but as long as its not the wookie.....i cant handle two chewie deaths. no sir.

 

Because death is powerful storytelling.

And my principles died long ago.

 

u also have to keep in mind harrison, mark, and carrie arent getting any younger. Harrison especially, since he's in his 70s. i doubt all 3 would sign contracts to appear in star wars films for the next 5 years. plus Harrison wanted Han to die a long time ago. Lawrence Kasdan wanted someone to die in Jedi, but Lucas vetoed it.

 

Thing is, as others have pointed out, Ford now is not necessarily the Ford of 30 odd years ago. His tune has changed massively about Star Wars from boredom and disdain to actually looking like he's enjoying himself in interviews.

 

Death may be powerful storytelling, but it's also been done. To death.

There are plenty of other reasons the Big Three couldn't help Rey or Finn out in the pivotal moment.

And I do know Lucas' mind when it comes to Obi-Wan's death, because he already explained it.

Harry Potter, Frodo, Luke... Star Wars is already spoken for. Having the mentors die in each SW trilogy is gonna get old really fast. Bilbo didn't have anyone die on him in order to infiltrate Smaug's lair... Gandalf wasn't always around when he needed him, but Gandalf didn't have to die to accomplish that.

Death can be a powerful tool... But it can also be incredibly cheap.

 

I disagree... it can't be overdone IMO, as we all live in a mortal world where everyone dies eventually.

IMO it would be more cheap story-wise to expect these three to live forever.

 

Man it will be sad too.

I made a double post by mistake, so changing this one to not say the same thing lol

 

eLF is right. It sucks to say it, but we're facing the very real possibility that we may just see one (or more) of our beloved favorites get killed off during the course of the ST.

Everyone has to go some time.

 

Probably, because they are old. People tend to retire when nearing that age, all it takes is for Mark, Harrison or Carrie to say I'm out and suddenly we are left with some cognitive dissonance in the story.

 

That's massively overstating the case. Bilbo isn't senile at the beginning of the quest, he's just old. Particularly in the book. And since we're talking literary/cinematic tropes what Frodo does or doesn't know is irrelevant. We know that Gandalf is very much alive from quite early in TTT, even before we meet Frodo again. All that mattered was that the two leads were separated from their mentor figure.

To list just a few other (hardly exhaustive) examples of epic films with mentors/parents surviving: The Matrix (Morpheus), The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe (Aslan. Coming back counts as not dead), The Hobbit (Gandalf), and Back to the Future (Doc Brown). From further east (but aping Western examples) there are a large number of Anime, most notably Fullmetal Alchemist. Killing the mentor/parents for shock value/to increase the threat is definitely a common trope in these sort of films, but it's hardly universal.

What they do in TFA depends very much on what roles the characters take and where the story is going. I wouldn't have that hard a time imagining Leia politicking her way to victory, Han leading the fleet like Lando in ROTJ, and Luke and the two new leads splitting off to face different enemies ala Yoda and Obi-Wan in ROTS. They can all be given important tasks that don't involve either abandoning the leads or following them everywhere. The idea that the big three can't function as secondary characters like Yoda or Mace Windu and that they must die and they must do so in a blaze of glory which is the only way for the story to advance just seems to be cutting off too many narrative possibilities for me. I wouldn't be surprised to see one or all of the returning characters die by the end of IX, but the idea that they must all go really bothers me.

 

None of the original OT is going to die in this film, especially not Solo. There is no way they made fans wait 30+ years to see these characters only to take them away permanently.

 

Nobody's expecting them to live forever; some of us are just expecting (some or most of) them to survive the trilogy, and get removed from the action in other ways.

Death is just a cheap way to inject drama into the mix. Alien3. Claremont & Lucas' Shadow Moon.

 

It not only ups the stakes for the younger leads, but pushes them to where they need to be.
Leias_Leia_Bun was very succinct as to why this works for the story and Rey etc.

 

Does Jabba the Hutt and Boba Fett count?

 

I thought the reason we assumed a main character would die is that we continually confuse J.J. Abrams with Josh Whedon, a director known for killing off main characters.

 

I'm talking about when Frodo gets to Rivendell, not the very beginning of the story. Sure, Bilbo is still in pretty good shape when he leaves the Shire, but Frodo hasn't started his quest yet then. Frodo is still in the "ordinary world" stage of his Hero Journey. By the time Frodo is officially on his quest to destroy the ring and sees Bilbo again in Rivendell, he is shocked at how much Bilbo has declined. Both mentally and physically, Bilbo is in pretty bad shape by then, even in the books.

I couldn't disagree more. Frodo is the main hero of the story. Frodo's state of mind -- what he thinks and feels as he goes on his quest -- is extremely relevant. How can you possibly say that Frodo's state of mind is NOT relevant?

The whole point of removing the parents and mentors is to force the hero to face down his or her biggest challenge without the "crutch" of any parent-figure to come to their rescue. Frodo goes to Mt. Doom believing with absolute conviction that Gandalf is dead and cannot possibly save or help him. That matters. It makes Frodo's final challenge even more excruciating.

Again, I disagree. Frodo's state of mind is hugely important to the drama of the story.

No, the mentor doesn't have to die. They have to be unavailable. But killing the parent/mentor is more dramatic, more final, and provides a much greater opportunity for character growth of the young hero. It often spurs the hero to grow up and take more responsibility onto himself/herself. That's why it's so common.

More to the point, so far in the Star Wars saga, the mentors and parents have all died before the main hero faces his final challenge. I don't count Anakin/Obi-Wan for several reasons. One, Anakin is an anti-hero who becomes evil at the end. Two, by the time of ROTS their relationship was more one of friends than a father-son or mentor-student. When the film opens they are supposedly buddies, and Anakin keeps rejecting Obi-Wan's attempts to teach him.

Good luck with that.

In my opinion, they will all be gone the end of IX. Yes, theoretically they could find minor B-plot busywork for the OT3 to continue in supporting roles. But, assuming Rey is indeed a legacy character, it would take away much of the drama for her story. It would significantly dilute the drama for all of the next-generation characters because it would 1) reduce their screentime in a cast that is already over-crowded, 2) reduces Rey's motivation to grow up and take responsibility for herself, and 3) reduces Rey's accomplishments because Rey knows (and the audience knows she knows) that mom, dad, and/or Uncle Luke are all still around.

And again I ask, for what? Why would TPTB sacrifice all this dramatic juice just to avoid upsetting a small group of die-hard fan who don't want to see some make-believe people make-believe die?

Think of the scene in ANH when Luke comes home to find Owen and Beru have been murdered. He sees the skeletons, we see the horror in his face, the music swells, and then he turns to Ben and declares: "I want to come with you to Alderaan. There's nothing for me here now. I want to learn the ways of the Force and become a Jedi like my father."

Powerful stuff.

Now let's re-imagine the scene. Luke returns home to see a moving-van in front of the farm. Owen and Beru are loading up the van, and Owen announces to Luke that he has sold the farm. He and Beru are retiring and moving to some other planet, and Luke is now free to go with Ben do as he wishes.

Structurally-speaking, it accomplishes the exact same thing. It gets Luke off the farm and onto the next stage of his adventure. Is it dramatically powerful? Not really. Dramatically, it just lays there like a dead fish. Can you imagine John Williams' stirring music swelling up as we watch Owen and Beru load boxes onto a van? Do you think this scene would have remotely the same impact on the audience as the scene we actually got?

Didn't think so.

 

Absolutely! If you read the books, by the time Frodo reaches Rivendell, Bilbo's mind is so exhausted that he is sleeping most of the time Frodo is there. Waking up long enough to help someone with a song or try writing one of his own, but often falling a sleep during the task etc.

 

With admitting to have not reading the thread (sorry), it's a pretty simple answer. It's time to pass the torch to a new generation. Even Yoda and Obi-Wan had a passing, as it's a natural part of one's journey in the universe. The death of any principle character should not be avoided. They are our heroes, and an unavoidable part of some hero's journeys is making the ultimate sacrifice, like Anakin.

In fact, if all the OT heroes escape TFA alive, I'll be pretty surprised.

Unless it's R2 and C3PO. I've already explained elsewhere why their existence is critical throughout the entire saga.

 

Better bring a box of tissues to the movie just in case

 

valar morghulis

 

No, but they add variety to it.

Of the core characters we've had two sacrifices to save another, a death from old age and cut down in lightsabre combat.

No, but if all the Original heroes die in the ST, the new Trilogy is going to be too somber an affair. Nor do we need to see it happen.

The ST could conclude with Luke still being alive - Luke has passed on what knowledge he has and seen peace finally brought to the galaxy. He leaves the GFFA in the care of the younger heroes and heads of into the "sunset", he has done all he can and know leaves to seek more personal enlightenment, a quest from which he will not return.

Leia could also survive beyond the Sequels and any Future Trilogy could reveal that she passed away naturally and in peace at some point in the intervening years. Likewise it could confirm that Luke never returned from his "walkabout", adding mystery to his legend - perhaps even a myth begins are his story that, like Fionn McCumhaill (Finn McCool) or King Arthur, he will return should the galaxy faces it's "darkest hour" (but only as a myth within the mythology )

I'm also not convinced that Han Solo is guarenteed to kick the bucket - all the "sources" I read included the much exaggerated desire of Ford to kill off Solo - Ford isn't mentally unbalanced and he hasn't done TFA just kill off a fictional character 30 years later. Killing Han was a genuine belief by Ford that it was the best way for the character to complete his story. Ford has returned to Star Wars because he wants to play the part and liked how the character was written- not because he wants to kill it. It could be that it was the the "death scene" that clinched the deal - but it would have been the quality of writing of the death scene not that there was a death scenes.

 

It was a miracle getting Harrison Ford to be Han Solo again. So it is not reaching to suggest he would only do the one film and get the ending he always wanted. That's where the Han dies rumors come from.

 

lovelikewinter

Yeah, I bet he does...

 

valar dohaeris

 

I think the point has been demonstrated that there isn't a need for any of the three to die. As stated previous Luke can be a sage who has helped guide a new generation and goes off in the sunset. Leia could be in the government and Han could actually finally settle down. None of the 3 need to die. Also, just because they have a role in TFA doesn't mean they will in the next two as they might not be relevant to the story.