Saga The Writing of TESB

Strange you should say this. After re-watching the Han-Leia scene discussed here I went on to watch the AOTC 'Romance' Featurette... so there they are showing 'moody' shots of Anakin and talking of how he has an 'edge' a "James Dean like quality", and on to Natalie Portman talking of how he was a bit of a "bad boy" and the girls all go for a "bad boy". I'm glad nobody was here to see me because I'm pretty sure my mouth hung open, jaw well dropped, for quite a while as I contemplated what these scenes - in the eyes of the actors and film-makers - are meant to imply. That Anakin is a bit 'edgy'; a "bad boy"; James Dean-esque.. Eeermm...He's a mass murderer (I feel like shouting it at them as they laugh it up about his image). I know there can be a fuzziness in the lines between this sort of characterisation and that sort of characterisation but there is a huuuuge disparity between edgy "bad boy" and mass murderer.

 

My point was that Han didn't pay off Jabba before. He could have payed off Jabba long before Hoth. The Rebels relocated to Hoth, he encountered that Bounty Hunter on Ord Mantell. You can see in the character's interaction that something happened since ANH, that it's not just two days later.
I complained because he didn't pay off Jabba. There was no reason for him to wait. This hesitation led to a situation where he was about to let them down again. I'm not as familiar with the film as you are, so I'll accept your protest that he didn't leave after all (although thought the situation more or less forced him to stay).

Yeah, but he already did that in ANH. He developed in ANH by puting himself into risk to save/help Luke and the others. So that's not new to ESB. That's why I would have expected to see him actually lowering the mask of badass-ness in ESB as a logical step of development.

Well, this may be an individual thing, but I feel character development is at its best when it merges with the overall plot. I also think that this is more challenging from a writing standpoint than separating both elements (remember: the writing was my original complaint).

This is why I clearly prefer Padmé's development in TPM to Leia's in ESB.
Padmé was constantly searching for others to help her out throughout the film. The Jedi could barely help her. The Senate was absolutely no help. That led to her realizing she must find a way to save their planet on their own. Don't rely on others, do it yourself. And that realization (development) initiated the outcome of the film's plot. It freed their plant. So both plot and character development were combined nicely.
ESB's Leia, on the other hand, lives in insolation. What irritates me the most about this is the fact that it would have been so easy to merge character and plot development in that film as well. They could have written Leia as overly confirmed to avenge Alderaan's fate who would stop at nothing. That would have made a good connection to ANH's events and made up for her lack of emotions in this prior film. Then, Han could have been the one to stop her from destroying herself and together they would have found a vital element for the final destruction of the Empire in ROTJ and fallen in love. It would have achieved the same amout of character development (in a much better way, imo), if not more, and developed the plot as well.

I just think combining plot and character development is a key challenge while writing. And TESB was probably the worst Star Wars film in that regard, imo, which was my original complaint.
Hopefully I could make my original intent clearer now.

I think it's best to say that we just disagree on Han
I feel that all of these steps (developing friendship) you mention were already achieve by the end of ANH and ESB, if anything, contradicted that which made him almost seem out of place later in ROTJ. This may be a question of interpretation.

 

Okay, this I KNOW we covered in our last debate months ago. He didn't let go only because he was focusing on trying to listen to what was going on outside the ship. I don't think he really registered what she was saying, He was focusing on any possible immediate danger, etc. She says it again, he says "don't get excited" etc, then *lets her go*. And I totally agree, the "don't have time for anything else" was innuendo. But he had already let her go when he said it, and it was a JOKE. I mean, Leia's comment "Captain, behind held by you isn't quite enough to get me excited" kinda opened the door to it. It was harmless teasing, and Leia was clearly irritated at the end because she knew she had walked into that one. In their little war of verbal battles, he had clearly won that round. That's all.

And again, I really, really, don't think Han's failure to let go the first time was due to any sexual or cruel purpose. He could've let go, but he was focused on something a little more pressing that was happening in *that moment*. I can't honestly say I would've done it differently in his position.

But really? Does he need to admit it? Between the two of them, he's the one who's been more or less wearing his heart on his sleeve. Again, you can see it clearly in the first interaction in the command center, when he tries to say good-bye. He's trying to be nice, is clearly expecting/hoping for a warmer response from her, but she coldly shuts him down. He tries repeatedly to get her to admit her feelings, which she denies. But why else would he be trying so hard unless he felt something, too? In a way, his response is kind of beautiful when you think about it. Because after all her denials, she finally says it. And in a way it's almost reassuring her "I know"--as in don't worry about it. Don't feel bad. I understand.

And again, his concerns for her safety, his words to Chewie after he makes him give up a final fight in attempt to save him ("the princess, you have to take care of her"--which, in my opinion, definitely shows its NOT all about him anymore. It's about her) and the way he looks at her, clearly demonstrates that he loves her, too. Maybe it was a little cowardly, but then again, its also very real. A lot of guys have trouble with those words, but they demonstrate their love in other ways. And Han, throughout the movie, has clearly done this. Not only in the way he pursued her, but in the way he kept putting her first, and risking his life on her behalf. In my eyes, those demonstrations of love are a lot more significant and meaningful than mere words. He could've said "I love you, too", and I guess that would've been nice. But I also think it's unnecessary. And it doesn't make me doubt his feelings for her in the least.

 

I guess it depends on whether the story is 'about' the political struggle and plots related to that, or if it's 'about' the characters who happen to be participating in that struggle. For example, if you're making a historical movie set during, say, World War II, you could tell the story of an American soldier starting at Normandy on D-Day, continuing through to V-E day. You could focus on the battles, the stuff directly related to the overall war in Europe, because you're interested in the 'plot' of how the war was won and Europe liberated. However, you could also tell the story of how the soldier, as his unit moved across the landscape, was nearly killed, then rescued by some local people and nursed back to health, discovering that one of them had been a famous mathematician in the days before the war; from this experience the soldier would learn something and then rejoin the war 'proper.' These experiences take place against the backdrop of the looming war, but many of them aren't directly related to defeating the Nazis, etc, except in that both the soldier and the locals want to get rid of them.

I think either option is a valid way to tell a story. And your point about tying character development to plot development is a really good one. But it just depends on what kind of story is being told - which is why it's also important that Someone (can't recall the name - EDIT: it was oierem) brought up that the plot to ESB was constructed while SW was supposed to be a pretty much ongoing series, or at least a long serial that would be various adventures against the backdrop of the galaxy. Lucas even talked in that era about how by making the first film he'd 'constructed the walls' of the setting, allowing others to then go in and explore. Of course, that sense - in relation to the films at least - changed a bit, concurrent with the story tightening in on the Skywalker family (Anakin became Annikin + Darth, in other words). But ESB walks the tightrope between those two conceptions of what the films are trying to do. If the saga had been planned the way it ended up (tight focus on one/several characters through the whole shebang, plus a single continuous politicotheological struggle, as opposed to the earlier notion that lots of different stories would be told, not even necessarily in chronological order), things probably would have been different.

EDIT. To clarify, even with a focus on one or several characters, etc, you can still tell 'one-off' 'character development-only' stories, if you're still thinking of the universe you're constructing as a huge, functioning universe. Basically it boils down to: if your characters are 'the right people in the wrong place at the wrong time,' then you can have stories that are mostly about them, and in so telling, illuminate life in the larger world you're creating. If your characters are the most important agents in the biggest historical events in galactic history, then the (wait for it) sense of scale is altered. This is something I sense might be different between the OT (or Trilogy of Trilogies) and PT. Some of the earlier notions, operative when the OT was being made - the twelve-film serial, the Trilogy of Trilogies - seem like a group of loosely connected stories focusing on different human aspects, all set in the same universe. The PT-era saga plan is more like (as above) a single politico-theological struggle that has metaphysical importance. When you're telling that kind of story, the little character pieces you inherited from older, more open conceptions of the story might seem like wasted time. Hence, Han and Leia in ESB.

EDIT 2. To illustrate, it's like if we found out that all of Indiana Jones' adventures were actually tied together and were building up to something big and worldchanging... except for that one time he went after the Holy Grail. That was just so he could reconcile with his dad. That would stick out as a story that is working in a different way, perhaps a holdover from a different plan.

 

I really don't think I could've said it better than Lt.Cmdr.Thrawn, so I'm not even going to try.

But it's interesting what you said about Padme, because I don't really see much character development in her at all. I'll admit that TPM probably did the most for her in that department, but the following two movies? In Episode II she just serves as love interest to Anakin--and I have to say, that was a poorly developed love story on several fronts. One being, that when she finally told Anakin "I love you", I had NO IDEA where that came from. I just didn't see it. But whatever. (And yes, I'm aware you made the same argument for Leia in ESB, but I felt like I got to know Leia better, and saw her character change through that story, but I didn't really see how Padme's love story changed her. And for me, it didn't really shed any new light on her character either--besides a questionable taste in men. Har. har).

And then by Episode III, Padme's only purpose seems to be as a walking womb for Luke and Leia, and as a convoluted motive for Anakin turning to the Dark Side. She loves Anakin. But other than that, I don't really feel like I know much about her at all. Oh, and she was a senator and queen. But those aren't really character traits, they're job titles.

 

The lack of the political scenes in ROTS didn't help. If they were in there, that would have helped me care for Padme's fate.

 

I think I should be offended, but that's actually really funny…..

 

Could be about you and PiettsHat, could be about Han and Leia.

Could be about EVERYONE!

 

Huh???????????????????????

 

Or could be about no-one. I have gained an understanding of (even if I don't share) PiettsHat 's reasoning that I, perhaps, did not have before. There is, also (and this is worth noting I think) no antagonism or 'one-upmanship' going on. In fact (and I've argued this before about AI and chatbots) it is rather obvious from chatbots (and AI) that there is no sign of conceptualising or of empathy. They may have logic matrices which allow them to contextualise strings of argumentation and stored phiosophical content but they cannot /do not place themselves and their discussion into any sort of coneptual space - as distinct from a contextual space.

There are occasions when it can appear that a chatbot is involved, but that is usually where an argument is switched (to avoid ceding a point) or a concept is used without understanding of it.

In short, I don't see anything of a chatbot nature here.

 

I think Force Smuggler was referring to the EpIII deleted scenes involving Padmé and the nascent 'Rebellion' leaders.

 

^^^
So more the 'deletion' of the political scenes, rather than 'lack' thereof. So much good material tossed aside, similar to the scenes with Padme's family in AOTC.

DRush76 - these one-line over-the-top replies of sheer outrage aren't helping the discussions at all.

 

You see I read this scene differently. here Han is engrossed 'elsewhere', it is Leia that is reading something into the moment that isn't there and Han is reacting to that.

As others have pointed out it is not his words per sé that are important. They need to be seen in the context of Han's visible emotional state; he is vulnerable at this moment and he expresses that physically (as someone else said, Harrison Ford plays this absolutely on the button), As for cowardly? He's just stopped Chewie from losing it telling him to protect the Princess. He accepts his fate not wishing for those he cares for to endanger themselves for his sake (I think he is protecting Chewie here as much as Leia).

Han doesn't get his girl from his pushiness, he gets her because he is, by now, shown to be that man at the end of TESB. That is the Han Solo that Leia loves.

 

To the original poster:

Empire was perfect. It really was a perfect science fiction movie that has eclipsed the original (when many would have thought that to be impossible back in the day). It focused on the characters.....that felt like REAL PEOPLE we could relate to and care about. We saw them grow and face the toughest of situations.

It's why Empire is considered a classic and a few other movies in the series you may like (that were made let's say from 1999-2005) will never be regarded as such. Whenever you hear of Hollywood making a sequel to a popular movie, they always reference two movies: The Godfather Part II and The Empire Strikes Back. There's a reason for that. All sequels strive to be of that caliber.

 

Wasn't the only thing Padme did aside from Anakin in the movie was the "so this is how liberty dies, with thunderous applause" line? Lame! Waste of character potential! Where's the starting the Rebellion? Biggest missed opportunity of the Saga to tie it to the OT. Padme's family was needed in AOTC as well.
Lack of/deleted close enough.

 

That's not what a lot of people said at the time though:

http://starwarsblog.starwars.com/20...ion-the-empire-strikes-back-original-reviews/

 

@Lt.Cmdr.Thrawn
Thank's for your response.

I think the film made it quite clear that Padmé was struggling whether she could allow herself to start a relationship or if her duties and obligations made that impossible. It was up to her to decide whether they should be a couple of not which was a logical thing after TPM. She was only living for her people ("serving") prior to AOTC and that changed in this film. So she went from being extremely independent and dutiful to being able to love "egoistically". I always felt that was much clearer and better portrayed than in Leia's case.
Unfortunately, Padmé tried to live a lie which led to her and Anakin's tragic end (see below).

Padmé was certainly more passive in ROTS, but I think that was perfectly in line with her development. As said, she was very independent in TPM. She allowed herself to love in AOTC. ROTS, now, shows a person who's held captive by their own deception. The only person with whom she could be herself (without lies and deception) was Anakin, so of course she became very focused on Anakin. She was still willing to change the world for the better and criticized what was going on (when she asked Anakin to ask Palpatine to stop fighting, in the Senate etc.) but she was unable to act because she was too concerned and burdened with her own life, their secret relationship and what that deception would me for their child and the future.

In short: She went from being a very job-related to a very private person. The only thing that went wrong with her life was the deceptive nature of their relationship which made in unhealthy and destructive. I find it fascinating that one fatal decision (living a lie, not living as a couple) changed her fate in terrible way.

I wondered how long it would take for a poster like you to show up.

No, it was not. At least not from my point of view.

There were very few people who felt that Empire had eclipsed the original "back in the day" which makes your statement even more absurd.

This is so childish.Still:
I could relate to Luke, but I could never relate to Han and Leia which makes your post a false statement. I should not even adress your disturbing notion about "real people". Is it you to decide who's a "real person" and who isn't? Anakin felt much more "real" to me than Han. Maybe that's because I'm not a "real person"? Huh?
No, that's just my perception and I'm aware of that. You should be mature enough to see that difference as well.

Yay!!! Someone who can see the future!
No tell us something more interesting and relevant about the future...?!

And? Am I supposed to sit down, accept this as the ultimate thinkg and stop forming my own opinion by using my own intellect?
Seems an awful lot like a dictatorship to me...that's uninspiring, anti-creative, anti-individualistic and stagnant. Not my cup of tea.

Now ObiAlKenobi, after all that nonsense, could you finally provide an argument that's the product of your own brain/though process?

 

"Family Guy" had the perfect response to this.

LOIS/LEIA: "I love you."

PETER/HAN: "**** off!"

The problem is pacing. All movies, good and bad, cut scenes that drag regardless of how important they are to the development of the characters. ANH cut out Luke and Biggs's interactions at the start of the film and TESB cut out scenes of Luke's training with Yoda.

 

Honestly, look at what you wrote to my responses. You are acting like a fool. My answers are not "absurd" as you put it. If you want to attack me as being "absurd", "immature", etc. then you are really showing yourself to be those things. It's called projection

You can believe what you want about "Empire" and those jewels called Prequels. But, do not be surprised when people disagree with you.

 

Jf F

Does anyone know approximately how long it took for Empire to start receiving the kind of critical acclaim it generally does now? I'd be interested to see reviews rom the early 90s say, a similar time after the Pt that we've reached now.

 

I get that she was struggling between duty and "love", because that's what the dialogue told me, but I didn't really "see it" on screen. Maybe that was due to Natalie's cardboard performance, or the weaknesses in the script, or both. I'm not sure. But I felt like I was just flat out told stuff about Padme, but never *shown* it. I'm sorry if I'm coming across as weird and vague, but I have no idea how to articulate what I mean right now.

But I really do appreciate hearing your views on this. I know this is going to come across and patronizing or condescending--and trust me, I mean this in the kindest way possible--but it's always interesting reading these "deep" interpretations of the motives and characters in the prequels, because I barely got anything out of them at all. So it's actually like "Huh, that's interesting. Didn't see it." I'm not sure if I entirely buy into these interpretations, but I appreciate reading them just the same. And seriously, I don't mean that to sound insulting or anything. And I'm sure you kinda feel the same way when you see me delve into the ESB storyline. It's kinda cool though. Kinda shows that in terms of the SW saga, there's something for everybody.

Anyway, that was just a random aside. Maybe that was just a lame attempt at brokering a little peace between PT and OTers.

You know what? I'm going to concede your point here. I've always seen Padme's arc throughout the PT as sort of a character regression rather than development, but you're right. Maybe that was supposed to be the point. But I still feel like if that was the point, it could've been conveyed better in ROTS. Because what you say is interesting, and I would've actually really liked to seen a better depiction of what you described. Instead I feel like Lucas was left with this character who, by Episode III, he had no idea what to do with. She kinda just paced around her apartment and bit her nails over Anakin. (And to be fair? I think a very similar argument could be made for Leia in ROTJ. It's funny, because while you take issues with her use in ESB, it's ROTJ where I find her the most lacking).

Did they not live as couple? I mean, I know they kept their relationship a secret, but they were clearly sharing a bed in ROTS. But did Anakin not actually live with her? (This is not an argument, I'm actually asking you. Because I always assumed they did live together (and wondering why no one noticed) until you said that.

Ouch, a little harsh with ObAKenobi, don't you think? I'm sure they don't need me to defend them, but wow. I feel like your responses to them were a little more venomous than what was called for.

 

I love Empire, but the dialogue is typically nerdy, slightly clunky Star Wars fare. I appreciate it on it's own level and the sum is greater than it's parts.

I never did watch Star Wars for clever dialogue.

 

only one kenobi and Yanksfan

I get that Han may not have been paying attention to Leia's protests. But I still think it's pretty clear that she was uncomfortable and I just think the scene would have worked better if he had apologized rather than throwing out an innuendo-laced remark, which wouldn't have done much to put Leia at ease. That's just the way I see it though. I'll let the point drop because I get the feeling that no one's really interested in hearing me blather on about it.

In regards to the the thread topic as a whole -- the writing of TESB -- I would say that I concur with the opening post. Overall I don't understand why ESB's writing is so praised. It's not that it's bad, but ESB is often held up as a superior example of writing, set apart from the other Star Wars films and I just don't see it.

It has some beautiful dialogue, but so do the other films as well. And the other films might have clunky dialogue, but so does this one. One example I can think of is Han and Leia's dialogue in the hallway on Hoth. I've really never been sure what they've been going for there. Han just sounds kind of childish and instead of flirting with Leia, he sounds more aggressive and taunting -- such as the remark about how she could use a kiss. I just don't see how it's flirting, especially given the tone of voice he uses.

The plot is also equal parts brilliance and mediocrity. Everything with Luke is great. But I think other portions of the film could use work. Why, for example, is no one able to follow Luke off Hoth when they follow Han and Leia? Vader never seems interested in tracking down Luke himself. Even the Rebellion, as soon as they escape, is dropped with no resources dedicated to their pursuit. And the entire plot line with Boba Fett and Jabba seems a little odd given the events of the previous film.

See, one of the problems I have with ESB is that I don't feel it built upon ANH or set up for ROTJ very well. In some instances, it even undermined the points of the movies. We see Han, for example, get paid in ANH -- yet ESB completely ignores this. Or ESB fails to build upon the destruction of Alderaan or show how the Empire was affected by the loss of their super weapon. All of this, in my opinion, does little to support and give meaning to the events of ANH and ROTJ. I've always felt that while the individual films of the OT are great, the three don't work nearly as well as they could as a trilogy and a large part of that has to do with ESB. It's the "bridging" chapter and I feel that it doesn't invest enough in this part of its job. Perhaps that's due to the trilogy not being planned out from the beginning, but it is still an issue I have. Particularly because the film does devote a lot of time to Han and Leia's romance which isn't really plot relevant. Han and Leia could remain good friends and the story would still be largely the same.

 

I actually always thought that the Anakin/Padmé romance had a larger "good girl wants a bad boy" quality to it. One of the reasons I enjoy it is because I think (whether intentionally or not) the film works as a remarkably good deconstruction of the trope. The whole idea and appeal of the "good girl" wanting the "bad boy" is that he's dangerous, but she can "tame" him -- that, for her, he'll be a good man. That she can redeem him through her love. Given that, I think Padmé and Anakin's relationship works remarkably well at deconstructing the dangers behind this idea (whether it was Lucas' intention or not). Anakin has serious problems and Padmé, to me, has always come across as a martyr figure and the type of person who sees it as her job to fix things (in large part, I think this is why the events of ROTS hurt her so badly -- because she is not only powerless to fix things, but has actually made them worse unintentionally).

Padmé, on her own, can't save Anakin. He needs professional help, in my opinion. And when she tries to "save" him, it ends in disaster. As it should.

I don't like it when the "good girls want bad boys" trope is played straight. Mostly because I think it can lead to an unhealthy mentality. People who are abused or in relationships with addicts sometimes fall prey to the idea that their love can save the person they're with. And I find that's an incredibly foolish and rather dangerous notion. Love might be a good motivator to turn your life around, but someone who has a drug addiction or who is beating their spouse needs professional help. And while I do believe the people who stay in such relationships do feel love for the person they're with, it's a really, really unhealthy mindset to live in.

I think AOTC, even though it doesn't show the fallout of the relationship, does a good job of demonstrating how Anakin and Padmé are setting themselves up for disaster. Between Anakin's dialogue of how it would destroy them (melodramatic as it is) and the final scene of Padmé grasping his skeletal hand, the films does show (in my opinion) the self-awareness that while Anakin and Padmé may love each other, that won't be enough to save them if they're not willing to confront the huge issues facing them.

I actually always liked Padmé's depiction because I felt that her arc, like Anakin's was intentionally negative. They're part of the generation that failed and it's left up to Luke and Leia to pick up the pieces. She's stripped of her power and influence throughout the films as the world falls more and more out of balance. I actually think AOTC sets up really well for this where we see the galaxy become more and more militarized and "masculinized" while elements traditionally considered more feminine are suppressed. One of the most striking things is the fact that a woman dies in the arms of each of the main characters -- Padmé holds Cordé as she dies, Obi-Wan holds Zam Wessel, Anakin holds Shmi. AOTC is, in a lot of ways, the beginning of the end.

I know the scene where Padmé asks Anakin to talk to Palpatine about diplomacy rubs a lot of people the wrong way, but I think it's an important scene to show. Because it demonstrates just how hollow the Senate -- and, by extension, Padmé's -- influence has become. She's a Senator, but she's reduced to asking Anakin to talk to Palpatine because going through the Senate and making a motion (as he suggests) is going to accomplish nothing. And even as Palpatine declares the formation of an Empire, there's nothing Padmé can do -- the film makes clear that he's been gathering more and more power through emergency measures and now, her political role is largely to rubber-stamp him.

It's a nice extension of Episode II, I think, in that in Episode II Padmé is forced from the capital and, while she may actively try to engage the Separatists, can't prevent the war from breaking out or Dooku's escape (unlike in TPM where she successfully reclaimed her planet). I think Padmé's character is the opposite of Anakin's in a lot of ways -- where he is very selfish and concerned with hoarding power, I think she comes across as very devoted to others (such as taking the job of Senator even though she wasn't keen on it) and hasn't invested as much in her own life.

I actually see the point where Padmé really falls in love with Anakin as being after the fireplace scene. I think that's an important turning point because it's where Anakin lays all his cards on the table and then let's Padmé decide to do what she wants. One of the things I like is that, after that scene, it is Padmé who initiates every other romantic action. She decides to go with him to Tatooine, she follows him outside and reaches up to hug him as he departs, she goes down to the garage to comfort him, she is the one to admit she loves him. And, throughout that, Anakin is really respectful of her -- after she's made it clear during the fireplace scene that she doesn't think they can be together, Anakin goes back to calling her Senator and doesn't make a move towards her again (although he does grab her hand to help her down from their vehicle, but that's more out of politeness than anything). In a way, I've always felt that the Tusken slaughter demonstrated to her how broken Anakin was and she wanted to fix him. That, if he needed her, she wasn't being selfish by being with him. One of the things that she makes a big deal out of is the fact that she doesn't want him to give up his future for her. Even in ROTS, when he says he is tired of deception and doesn't care if the Jedi find out, she reprimands him and says not to make such statements.