From "The Annotated Screenplays": The Origins of Darth Vader, Anakin Starkiller, and Luke's Father

Obviously you have not seen Empire of Dreams on the bonus disc of the CT DVDs, and if you have then you heard wrong. What Lucas was saying was that ANH, TESB and ROTJ were all originally combined as one long movie and that he broke them up into three shorter movies. Whether or not the story remained the same is debateable, as evidenced by this thread, but that's what he meant to say.

And, you are correct in saying that he didn't intend for there to be 12 films. He had originally intended for there to be 9, actually. I believe it was Gary Kurtz who said that. Ideas for 7-9 were eventually condensed into ROTJ.

 

Actually you are both wrong.

Lucas did indeed plan to have 12 films at one point in early 1978. In fact they were officially announced in the Official Star Wars Fanclub newsletter, and talked about by Lucas in the March 1978 issue of Time. So when he mentioned to Dale Pollock that he was planning to do 12 films he wasn't lying. Later he turned it into 9 films, and in a May 1980 issue of Bantha Tracks he even addressed the change, stating that films 10-12 were only added after the success of Star Wars and that they weren't really necessary.

As for writing a big script that was divided into thirds, this is one of the more bolder outright-lies that Lucas has made over the years. The script he is referring to is the 1974 rough draft, which ends with the protagonists recruiting wookies to battle the imperials, destroying the death star and having the sith character redeem himself. However, the script is not at all otherwise like ESB or ROTJ and is actually shorter than the final draft of ANH, being something like 132 pages and not the 300 page beheamoth Lucas claims.

 

Ok, here's a question.....If Darth Vader was originally intended to be just another general, just another baddie, and not really important in ANH, then why did George Lucas give him such a dramatic entrance in the film? It feels strange if Vader is just another henchman. I mean, it'd be the same thing if Piett came on-screen in a dramatic stroll, right?

 

If I understand you correctly, Darth_Faith, I believe that you are really asking two separate questions, imho.

Whether Darth Vader was "originally intended" to be "just another general", would I think, be true of the character with that name who appears in the rough draft dated '74 that zombie mentioned. So in that case, yes, as 'originally intended', i.e. the rought draft, yes, Vader would have been 'just another general' and relatively unimportant in the story.



But, I think that you're really posing a hypothetical about the final 1977 film: was Darth Vader in that movie supposed to have been 'just a general' or a minor character??

No, I wouldn't say that. He's very important, in that he's connected one way or another with Luke's - and Obi-Wan's - past, and is a 'catalyst' for, or at least initiates actions (both in the past and in the present film) that serve as a catalyst for Luke to want to become a Jedi.

 

I posted this in another thread but it is relevant here--in fact, i was inspired because of this very thread!

I figured this would be the best place to post this since it deals with the overall "Saga." For the better part of two years now i have been working on a book, which i have since titled "The Secret History of Star Wars." Its something that should be of interest to everyone in this forum and i think would benefit everyone to read it. It explores the writing and creation of the series, beginning before Lucas even wrote his first treatment in 1973 and tracing how that document came into existance, showing how the film was developed draft by draft and year by year. It explores how Darth Vader was merged with Luke Skywalker's father in 1978, forever altering the course of the series, how Darth Vader was turned into a sympathetic character in 1981 and then redeemed, and how the prequel stories came to be and shifted the franchise into a new six-film series, and basically charts the evolution of the series, shattering many myths and presenting some very seldom known facts. I also added a bunch of appendices to address other tangential issues, one of the more interesting ones being an uncovering of what the mysterious "Journal of the Whills" actually is.

There has never really been something as ambituous and far-reaching as this ever done in the fan community, which takes all the x-factors and disconnected little bits of knowledge and finally puts them all together in a cohesive "answer." In a way, that is what i hope this is--a sort of answer, a way for people to finally understand "ah, so that is how that happened." It explains the how, when and why of the Star Wars story itself.

It would be impossible to post this in the thread as some people do with their essays--it clocks in at over 400 pages--but i built a website for it. The book is available for download in PDF format and is just under 4 MB in size. A hefty read? I suppose so. But i guarantee that it will be worth it.

http://secrethistoryofstarwars.com


Also, someone opened a thread that was closed (??) asking what the mysterious Jorunal of the Whills actually is. If you read my book, there is a lengthy appendix (approx 20 pages) that goes into detail about what it is, how it was developed and what happened to it. I recommend reading it for an in-depth answer. The short version is this: the Journal itself never existed. It was an in-universe concept, where the Star Wars story was part of a tale being told within the very story itself, sort of how Lord of the Rings is a story but also a story that exists within the tale itself. Lucas liked the presentation of the tale being told by wiser beings and existing as part of a grander narrative--the "A long time ago" opener is the remnant of this concept. The Journal was supposed to be a tale within the GFFA that chronicled the entire galaxy by beings called Whills, and the Star Wars stories were supposed to be a part of it, a sort of history book. Later, Lucas had accumlated a wealth of notes and treatments on his galaxy, and he jokingly referred to the binder in which he stored these notes as the Journal of the Whills, since it was a kind of collective reservoir of all the Star Wars history. Later the concept of the beings of the Whills were incorperated into the sentient god-like aspect of the Force. The treatment about "Mace Windu" is sometimes errroneously thought to have been a pre-1973 story that is called Journal of the Whills--it is not. The first treatment, the first thing ever written, was in May 1973 and was called The Star Wars, and was basically a re-make of Hidden Fortress. The "Mace Windu" treatment, as far as my research shows, was the treatment for the 1974 rough draft, where Mace Windu was an alternate name for either Kane, Luke or Annikin (similar to the way those names were revised in the later "first draft" where Kane became Akira for example).

 

zombie, do u have star wars insider 92? i dont have it. however, i think it goes into a bit of detail into that mace windu story in the 'unknown origins' article by j.w. rinzler.

 

No, though it seems that all he has done so far is just look at the original storyboards. The series in SWI i assume is merely a sort of "preview" for his upcoming Making of Star Wars book, for which he had supposedly looked at some of Lucas' early notes. I have not heard anything regarding a specific "journal of the whills" document, though if he could produce or confirm the existence of such a thing we should all be very grateful, as it is something still muddied in many x-factors.

 

http://hem.bredband.net/wookiee/development/index.html

Here's a link to another very thorough look at the first scripts.
His sources is centered I believe around this classic site.

http://www.starwarz.com/starkiller/

 

Zombie, that book sounds sweet! There is a great deal of misinformation, rumor and misconception out there regarding the true origins and development of STAR WARS that needs to be dispelled once and for all. Given how gifted a debater you are, and how many little-known facts you have at your fingertips, I feel certain The Secret History of Star Wars is going to knock people's socks off!

I read the summary on your website, but sadly I cannot download the PDF here at the public library where I do all my posting. Is there any chance this baby is going to see publication by a legitimate publishing house? I'd be proud to have a copy on my bookshelf, wedged between Bouzerau's Annotated Screenplays and my stack of old Starlog magazines....

 

Sadly, i can't see any way it could be published, due to copyright clearance reasons.

Also, you can see just how much there is to learn about the early Star Wars writtings--because we are still discovering some! My Journal of the Whills appendix is going to need a bit of a revision in a few months--because J.W. Rinzler, in his research for his forthcoming Making of Star Wars book, found a story synopsis which appears to predate the May 1973 "The Star Wars" synopsis. In my appendix, i observed that the reference to the Journal existing as a handwritten pre-May-1973 synopsis in The Annotated Screenplays is an insertion by the editor, as Bouzereau is clearly ignorant to its existance. This is true. However, my conclusion was wrong: it wasn't inserted to validate the "Mace Windu" document that Pollock spoke of in 1983, which i concluded was actually the treatment for the 1974 rough draft. Rather, i suspect that the document was unearthed at the last minute, after Bouzereau had already written the main body, and stuck in there, resulting is the very curious reference to it in TAS' list of sources. What Rinzler has now revealed is that this document indeed is real and indeed is the "Mace Windy" document, which pre-dates the May 1973 document by a few months (Lucas himself says he began writing in January of 1973). This is only given a two or three sentence blurb in the new Star Wars Insider, unfortunately, but hopefully it will be expanded upon for the upcoming book he has written. I believe it is also said that it is only two pages long, not the 40 page document TAS claimed. Plot-wise the SWI says very little, only that Mace Windy takes an apprentice in the story sort of like Qui Gon in TPM (which is already obvious from what we knew from Pollock's description), but it is also said that it ends with the two jedi-bendu being dispatched by "the chairman" on a secret mission, sort of like how TPM begins, i guess as a sort of cliffhanger.

 

I've read rumors that Lucas freely attributed the origin of the "Vader is Luke's father" idea to Leigh Brackett in some old interview. Can anyone confirm that?

 

The first page of this thread shows that's clearly impossible, I'd say. Vader=Anakin is George's idea.

And my, what an idea it is.

 

I would be astonished to discover that's true. Brackett's screenplay draft, written shortly before her death, did not include the Vader-as-father plot point. If she hatched the idea, why would she not have not written it into her draft?

Furthermore, in all my research into this matter, I've never heard anyone make reference to that contention, not even as a rumor.

 

Just wanted to thank Zombie for his well written ebook, possibly the best book I have ever read about Star Wars, fact or fiction. Kudos sir!

 

On the Episode III Commentary track, (which is very entertaining and informative, BTW) Lucas contends that his "original screenplay" for STAR WARS (by which he means the treatment, I think) could have been subtitled "The Tragedy of Darth Vader" since it established Vader as an evil villain in the opening scenes, then through the course of this one film (basically an early version of A NEW HOPE plus A Wookiee Battle a-la ROTJ), Vader's son brings out the good in him until he, Vader, sacrifices himself by killing the Emperor as we see in ROTJ.

How Lucas can contend this -- when we have all his original drafts, early notes and treatments in edited form and published by Lucas Books in The Annotated Screenplays -- is beyond my capacity for understanding. I hold the man in high regard as an Auteur, a brilliant filmmaker and a businessman, but his assertions on this score are demonstrably untrue. In which draft explicated by L. Bouzereau in TAS does Lucas expect us to find Darth Vader killing the Emperor, let alone revealing his alleged paternity of Luke? It's an invention, an after-the-fact revision of history made all the more ridiculous by the fact that his own company has provided the evidence which contradicts his claims.

Otherwise, Lucas' and others' commentary on all the DVDs for all the movies is very enlightening. I recommend it heartily, if one can sift through a little bull sprinkled here and there regarding the Origins of Darth Vader.

 

Some might be interested in also exploring the visual origins of Darth Vader: I added such an article on my website. There are a bunch of rare artwork scans that i made and comparison photos to Fighting Devil Dogs and Doctor Doom and stuff. I also explore how the costume changed in the sequels to reflect the post-1976 cyborg angle.

The Visual Development of Darth Vader

 

Great job on the costume write-up, Zombie.

 

Zombie, that is a sweet link, fascinating reading, and absolutely essential to the purposes of this thread! You've achieved quite a remarkable feat, assembling information from a wide variety of sources into one vastly informative and entertaining essay. The development of Darth Vader is an example of the creative process at its most collaborative and successful. One factoid I note you've left out, however, is that Vader's dying respiration in ROTJ ("Help me take this mask off, etc.") was created by Burtt in 1977 as one of the possible sound signatures for the character in his prime, but it was deemed to wheezy/mechanical/sickly. Of course, for this final scene it was absolutely perfect so Burtt dusted off the tape, so to speak, and used it at long last.

On a note related to my own previous post, Lucas is far more honest, frank and forthcoming with the true facts of Vader's creation in the "CHARACTERS OF STAR WARS" documentary on the 2004 Bonus DVD. He explains, quite refreshingly, that Annikin Starkiller and Darth Vader were originally two different characters (which has been the entire goal of this thread), which he eventually dovetailed into one. How he can reconcile this admission with his other contention about the so-called "Tragedy of Darth Vader" (see my post above) is beyond me!

 

Actually, I did notice that factoid in Zombie's article.

Also, I want to point out that Zombie's investigation of the meditation chamber in ESB is quite interesting--something I'd never really thought about before!

 

I think they said that in the ROTJ commentary, right?

 

The bit about ROTJ is in there Vortigern! And yeah, Burtt talks about that in the "reveal" scene commentary track. I actually captured an audio clip of it and had processed it and played around with the EQ so as to actually bring out the breathing sound so you could clearly hear the raw sound effect but then the file got corrupted and i deleted the original. D'oh.

 

Lucas actually admitted that? Wow.

 

Yeah, but then he 'admitted' that the character merge happened with an early draft of SW , and not ESB, as was actually the case (that it happened with ESB's second draft). So one should of course take his 'admission' with a grain of salt.

 

Unless I misheard Mr. Lucas, which is entirely possible, he said that the ENTIRE Star Wars Saga, not the original drafts, could be subtitled "The Tragedy of Darth Vader".

 

Even so, according to him it was the 'subtitle' to something that he wrote in 1975.