ST Why the ST is Likely to Work Better as a Trilogy than the Others

Don't get me wrong. I think both the OT and PT worked great as trilogies, but the ST is likely to work even better because it is not saddled with the burdens the other two had, which affected their plot points.

The OT was burdened with the uncertainty of it even being a trilogy at the beginning (hence the destruction of the Death Star in the very first film) and Lucas's fatigue in the end (hence the quick wrapping up of all elements to make it work as a Saga finale). The PT was burdened with the requirements of being a direct narrative antecedent to the OT (hence the "loss of will" Padme death and the general cramming of story points that perhaps needed a little more time spent on them). By contrast, the ST knows it has three movies to tell a story (unlike the OT) and the freedom to go to a different place if development requires it (unlike the PT). In short, I think we're in for the best yet . What do you think?

 

I would characterize it as the ST has a lot more freedom than the previous 2, but it also has the additional 'pressure' (if you will) to be better than the PT. So I think its a wash, but in a good way.

 

Great argument... let's hope the logic on paper translates to the big screen like you theorize.

 

Fortunately, that's not that hard.

 

Haha true true!

 

The ST will only hav ea leg up in this area if the creators plan it out from the start. Lucas knew with the PT that was going to get to make all 3 movies, but (at least it appears this way) he didn't plan out the whole thing when he started so we got the ever changing villains, a few dropped and unexplored plot threads like Sifo-Dyas and the prophecy, and under developed things like Jedi maintaining their identity after death and Dooku's turn etc... All things that could have been foreseen and fixed with some planning at the start. Its possible that Kennedy and Abrams and co. make the same mistakes with the ST.

 

Reminder: please find a way to have this discussion without the thread becoming a PT vs. OT battle.

 

It's possible that a lot of PT developments had to be tossed because the focus had to be constrained to what would lead to Episode IV. The ST doesn't have these same constraints

 

It could be, but I don't think they had drop Sifo-Dyas or kill darth Maul because were they had to end up at the end of Episode 3. I think those things happened because Lucas tackled the movies 1 at a time.

 

I think Maul dieing was a result of the need to have a 10 year gap between I and II and Anakin's turn not being until III.

 

but Maul had the Vader position as apprentice and was marketed like he was Vader. It was a wasted marketing push and could've been avoided. Inventing Dooku could've been avoided if they used Maul the entire trilogy. Heck, Dooku could've been moved to the GG role and we could've avoided the wacky droid general.

 

ESB and ROTJ could have been so much better and more coherent if they didn't kill off Tarkin in ANH.

 

let's not equate the 2. Vader was the main villain in SW and was marketed as such. Tarkin was like the TF guys in TPM. Maul was marketed as the main villain and called "the new face of evil" by Lucas and the promotional crew, even being equated with being as evil and menacing as Vader. Having him killed off in TPM made no sense and was only needed because there was a 10 year gap between TPM and AotC.

Maul's visage was everywhere and on all the packaging for TPM products. Just as Vader was.

 

SW isn't what it used to be, so JJ probably has a lot of pressure to have the saga remain relevant in this day and age.

 

I most certainly will equate the two, thank you. Tarkin was the main villain in ANH, not Vader. And I, for one, don't particularly care about how one or the other was "marketed."

 

as far as the title of the thread, I think as a sequel it will be easier to keep coherent since it is free to go forward. The PT had to try and fill in the backstory while creating it's own story at the same time. That is more difficult than the ST.

 

Tarkin captured Leia, ordered the deaths of the Lars, tortured Leia, killed Kenobi in a duel, and tried to shoot doen the hero? Vader was clearly the main villain (antagonist) in ANH.

Tarkin was the Viceroy Gunray.

 

Stop spamming the boards with your video.

 

Interesting OP.

It depends on how we look at it. Although the ST has the story moving forward, there is 2/3 of the saga already told. If the ST ignores this, then I think the story suffers. In order for it to be a rich story, it must honor and maintain what has come before, and not superficially, but thematically and profoundly.

I agree. However, these 'unexplored plot threads may simply be 'unfinished' plot threads that need to be tied. Stitching the enitre fabric of the saga in to a whole.

They have the constraint of being sequential, especially when one considers that Episode VII will be a chronological sequel to VI, but more importantly, a follow up to III.

 

No, Tarkin is the main villain. It's obviously implied that Tarkin ordered Leia tortured ("Lord Vader will provide us with the location of the rebel fortress..."), then it's Tarkin who orders the Death Star to destroy Alderaan. The Death Star is the big danger in the movie--it's the dragon that needs to be slain--and it's commanded by Tarkin, not Vader. Tarkin just orders Vader around. Ergo, Tarkin is the main antagonist, not Vader.

The PT has one constant main villain: Sidious. The OT does not. It would be more coherent it it had one.


EDIT:

Sorry, I didn't see this.

 

Looks like you might be weakening your own argument here. If you're saying the death of Maul was due to there being a gap between I and II, then his death is clearly the result of planning, not improvisation.

Nonetheless, I don't care how good of a story *planner* you are, if you're worth a lick of salt as a storyteller you're going to accommodate the changes and developments that arise naturally from the story as you're executing it. The position of the PT presented, if not actual, then at least perceived limitations to how much Lucas could accommodate those changes. There was probably a certain level at which Lucas couldn't allow *himself* to be surprised by the story, lest he allow it to veer off from where the OT required it to go.

The ST is free from that narrative oppression. If Episode IX veers off from the ST outline out of dramatic necessity, then fine. There's no following event lording over it.

 

Back on topic, I'm not just sure this is true. I guess it depends on what the goal is. If the goal is for the ST to finish an arc that encompasses the whole saga, then it's not as you say "free from narrative oppression"--it would need to be linked to stuff introduced in the PT. It in introduces a conflict or issue that will be independent of what came before, then yes, it will be unconstrained in that regard.