George Lucas and Repetition

After reading so many of the debates on the Saga, I realize that many of the reasons that longtime fans (not necessarily older fans) prefer the OT and more recent fans (not necessarily younger fans) prefer the PT is that George Lucas's talent really lie in creating an incredible visual universe, but as far as stories, character and ideas go, he is often very, very repetitive. This was one of the principle criticism of Return of the Jedi (other than its "kiddiness" back when it came out in the '80s. We had already seen a Death Star get blown up, we had already seen Luke and Vader duel, we already had the Cantina scene, did we really need Jabba's palace, the list goes on. I won't even get into the bottomless pits that are so ubiquitous.

Then in the PT we get Jango Fett, and so many light saber fights that they start to become mundane. Even the space battles start to look alike, and that is why there is so much argument about CGI vs. Models, that is the major difference, nothing in deeper substance. Some love this repetition, as they see it as connecting the films--i.e. Anakin vs. Dooku in front of Palpatine at the beginning of Sith and Luke vs. Vader in front of Palpatine in Jedi, the rooms even look the same. So Lucas's advocates look at the repetition as vital to story telling and art (see the "visual story telling" thread in this forum) and his detractors see it as recycling, loss of creativity, etc. I personally see abit of both arguments; the self-referencing and repetition gets old after awhile, as do the hommages to other films--yes we get it; but it is also very hard to keep coming up with great new ideas all the time, which leads back to my initial point: to some degree Lucas made different versions of the same film 6 times; some may be objectively better, others worse, but chiefly we like the ones we saw first the best, as that is when we first saw his beautiful universe; it is the universe that many of us love, much more than the story, acting, etc. We notice the shortcomings in the installments we saw later. Ofcouse, some of us are such fans that we can never get enough and would love to see 8, 9 and 10, even if it is just another go round of the same (like the EU largely is, with the Emperor coming back, etc.).

Thoughts?

 

In DVD commentaries for Phantom Menace, Lucas expressed his vision, that the different trilogies act like rhyming verses of poetry. The genius here is the repetition which compares and contrasts the two diverse hero journeys and accompanying characters. Either you appreciate these carefully crafted connections, or you don't--in fact your opinion here is directly related to whether or not you like all six films.

-Seldon

 

I'm not sure if I understand your point, Seldon. A person likes however many films they like, do they not?

DarthPoppy, you have a point, but honestly I don't think that has any real baring as to whether or not people like one or the other more. Repeating plot-points and themes that are successful is done all the time. Star Trek is very repetitive and it was successful for decades. I've resently become a fan of the TV series 24. Oh, man, is that show repetitive, but I still like it. The writers of such things know this and play on it to continue success.

 

In DVD commentaries for Phantom Menace, Lucas expressed his vision, that the different trilogies act like rhyming verses of poetry. The genius here is the repetition which compares and contrasts the two diverse hero journeys and accompanying characters.

Nice.

Either you appreciate these carefully crafted connections, or you don't--in fact your opinion here is directly related to whether or not you like all six films.

I absolutely appreciate the clever paralleling/forshadowing/poetic rhyming and the ingenious idea/courageous effort/excellent realization.

 

This is a great thread.


have you ever accepted that the movies are MIRRORS of each other?

The concept of similar events and or circumstances that lead to opposite results?


The two trilogies are mirrors for each other.

I really bought into this theory of the opposite repititions (MIRROR) when I watched the Attack of the Clones commentary. The one scene in which Robert Coleman (the animation director) chimed in on one of the scenes. It was the scene in which the Slave I and Kenobi's fighter were fighting in the asteroid field. Obi-wan's fighter hides on the asteroid and the Slave I leaves, its crew wholly believing in Kenobi's destruction. Coleman opened my eyes to this theory when he remarked somehting like this:


and the slave one goes right by. now, when han solo does this in Empire Strikes Back, it fools everyone BUT Boba fett. and why? because he saw it before here (cut to image of obiwans fighter on the asteroid).



That is amazing. It is a mirror. Here, it worked in EPII. but not in EPV, where it failed against Boba Fett (the same guy itfooled in EPII).


in EPIII, anakin turns by saving Palpatine during his lightning defense against mace windu. He chose to save his friend and turned to the dark side. In EPVI, vader is presented with a similar situation, but now realizes he should save his son and choose good, kiling his master and thus turns to the light side.



so many mirrors occur in the two trilogies that it is amazing to look at them back to back. Teh repetition is not the right word. in the respect of similar events occuring, yes, they are repetitive, but only opposite in their result. Which makes them more fun and impressive to watch.

good job, george

watch the six movies and you'll see them.




BATTLELION

 

I'll agree about the genius of the rhyming stanza approach and the way that the trilogies reflect each other ... up until the point at which the second Death Star is introduced. At that point it became repetitive IMO.

 

in my opinion it it more like rhythm than repetition, i suggest you see the "visual Storytelling" thread. It might help you believe it is rhythm over repetition.

 

Well, GL has said that he originally intended for the Death Star to be at the end of the whole story and he just moved it up into ANH because at the time that was likely to be the whole story. I agree with the rhythm of everything else, but I still think DS2 was a bit unoriginal.

 

DarthPoppy wrote, "After reading so many of the debates on the Saga, I realize that many of the reasons that longtime fans (not necessarily older fans) prefer the OT and more recent fans (not necessarily younger fans) prefer the PT is that George Lucas's talent really lie in creating an incredible visual universe, but as far as stories, character and ideas go, he is often very, very repetitive. This was one of the principle criticism of Return of the Jedi (other than its "kiddiness" back when it came out in the '80s. We had already seen a Death Star get blown up, we had already seen Luke and Vader duel, we already had the Cantina scene, did we really need Jabba's palace, the list goes on. I won't even get into the bottomless pits that are so ubiquitous.

Then in the PT we get Jango Fett, and so many light saber fights that they start to become mundane. Even the space battles start to look alike, and that is why there is so much argument about CGI vs. Models, that is the major difference, nothing in deeper substance. Some love this repetition, as they see it as connecting the films--i.e. Anakin vs. Dooku in front of Palpatine at the beginning of Sith and Luke vs. Vader in front of Palpatine in Jedi, the rooms even look the same. So Lucas's advocates look at the repetition as vital to story telling and art (see the "visual story telling" thread in this forum) and his detractors see it as recycling, loss of creativity, etc. I personally see abit of both arguments; the self-referencing and repetition gets old after awhile, as do the hommages to other films--yes we get it; but it is also very hard to keep coming up with great new ideas all the time, which leads back to my initial point: to some degree Lucas made different versions of the same film 6 times; some may be objectively better, others worse, but chiefly we like the ones we saw first the best, as that is when we first saw his beautiful universe; it is the universe that many of us love, much more than the story, acting, etc. We notice the shortcomings in the installments we saw later. Ofcouse, some of us are such fans that we can never get enough and would love to see 8, 9 and 10, even if it is just another go round of the same (like the EU largely is, with the Emperor coming back, etc.).

Thoughts?"

 

Cool thread.

In my other post I was just talking about the mentioning of Dooku as a fallen Jedi possibility being an example of GL repetition as later Anakin becomes a fallen Jedi as well.

- Dooku falls

- Qui Gon doesn't

- Obi Wan doesn't

- Anakin falls

^^ Hmmm

 

I have faith in George..you can be sure that every echo of Luke's future journey felt in Anakin's is completely intentional and some would say, integral to any understanding & enjoyment of the prequel trilogy.However, Jango Fett, Death Star 2 & the AOTC asteroid chase are repetitions that have no reason to exist apart from the coolness/convinience factor.

 

I've always liked the fact that the Empire went back to the Death Star in ROTJ, fixing the flaw in their supreme weapon and trying it again. Not only is is logical to fix it and make another one, especially since it was such a terrifying weapon, but it's also a great psychological blow to the Rebellion. Here they had pinned all their hopes on destroying the Death Star, accomplished this and felt some hope without the planet-destroyer, then along comes another one. It shows how much more advanced the Empire is than the Rebellion, being able to just start work on another huge space station while the Rebellion has to deal with equipment falling apart.

The use of repitition works really well when you watch the films sequentially and are able to see the downfall of Anakin and his redemption by Luke who was tempted in many of the same ways.

 

Why would Qui-Gon fall to the dark side? Qui-Gon was not tempted by the dark side like Obi-Wan was. I don't see why you are showing an example of repetition that doesn't even exist in the six episodes.

 

It wasn't about bringing back Jango just because the suit looks cool. It was about putting Slave 1 in AOTC to mirror Slave 1 in TESB.

AOTC:
Anakin has a vision of his mother suffer.
Obi-Wan tracks Slave 1.

TESB:
Slave 1 tracks Han and Leia.
Luke has a vision of his friend's suffer.

 

I always felt that a small, but major flaw in Lucas? ?Tone Poem? theory is that the opening of EP 2 differs from Ep 5 (it?s counter part) in that the camera pans up, not down after the scroll.

Such a small, geeky thing to harp on?but after hearing how these films are to echo one another?that threw me for a loop?

OK, it?s a official?I?m a geek?

 

Agreed.

I think this is an example that speaks more of Lucas' frustrations and exasperations at the time than it does his conscious and subconscious desire to have elements overlap and repeat. According to Gary Kurtz, whose comments in a lengthy interview that IGN conducted with him are revealing (though I don't agree with them all -- especially his appraisal, or rather critical malignment, of Kubrick's latter films), Lucas was burnt out after The Empire Strikes Back. Kurtz claims that he was willing to randomly throw things together and rehash elements if necessary because he felt that his hard work on the preceding films was undervalued. In short: Kurtz claims that Lucas felt audiences would accept just about anything. This sounds a little far-fetched to me, but if you look objectively at Return of the Jedi, it doesn't seem like an adequate continuation of the beautiful palette of TESB or its abstract storytelling. ROTJ has some powerful segments -- but there's an absence of intrigue and complexity after TESB.

Ideally, at least in hindsight, you'd have more an epic struggle -- the film would be darker, more desperate, with light and hopefulness breaking through the fog of uncertainty as the conclusion neared. This doesn't entirely come across in ROTJ. The Jabba and Ewok sections, even at their peaks, feel a little whimsical and leisurely. The only sequence that unequivocally works is the three-way conflict between Luke, Vader and Palpatine -- and the stunning space battle that it is juxtaposed with. But even here there's a problem (the very one under discussion): this conflict should not be happening here. The end battle should be at Coruscant -- giving a sense of the Rebels driving the Empire back to its home AND providing a mirror with ROTS (ROTS: big space battle over Coruscant at start; lightsabre duel is shorter with faceless clones continuing fight outside; ROTJ: big space battle over Coruscant at end; lightsabre duel is longer with real friends of Luke continuing the fight outside -- which Palpatine uses to tempt him). The conflict between Luke, Vader and Palpatine would also play out in the Jedi Temple. But its insides would look almost identical to the existing interior of the Death Star II. This would be a powerful symbol of Palpatine's complete control and perversion of everything the PT once showed. Finally, with the interpersonal conflict ended, and Palpatine again thrown down a shaft/reactor or out a window (mirroring Mace's death), the Temple itself would undergo destruction, either as a result of Palpatine's death (perhaps sending out a metaphysical shockwave -- as when the "eye" detonates in Return of the King), or a physical object (e.g. the remnants of a megalithic Star Destroyer) falling from the sky. The reign of the PT Jedi and Sith would be fully ended. Luke would then be poised to start things anew.

But, aside from that blight on the saga, I think Lucas has certainly shown remarkable imagination and intelligence in his "rhyming" construction. The most powerful of these, ironically enough, probably occurs in ROTJ: it is the moment when Luke slices off Vader's hand and recalls Vader doing the same to him. That is great filmmaking. It's the kind of moment you savour like fine wine. And it's the kind of thing that makes you stick with Star Wars, despite evoking passion of intense negativity at times, through thick and thin.

Much of the fun and enjoyment that occurs external to the vicarious enjoyment of the film-watching experience itself is in dissecting these parallels and considering their manner and extent. They seem to be everywhere. Even if some are accidental, because of the very deliberate nature of those that seem too obvious to be coincidence, one is encouraged to see links everywhere. There is no shame in reading intent where none n

 

EDIT: It should be noted, in my above example of the interpersonal conflict between Luke, Vader and Palpatine occuring in the Jedi Temple, that Luke would no longer be immersed in the heart of a physical space battle -- which would diminish the immediacy of his conflict, even if, for example, Luke was able to view it on a screen of some kind (nothing beats looking at something "for real", especially in cinematic terms, as Luke does when he stares out the window). It isn't easy to deconstruct a Star Wars film and put something else in its place when you think the original idea is flawed. You often lose something vital when you do.

 

While I'd agree that this repetition can be good in that it helps with both timing and with fun, I definitely wouldn't call it all that "impressive."

The ten Friday the 13th movies are likewise fun; you know what to expect when you go to one. If you are looking for a movie with x, y and z and x, y, and z were in the first movies, its a safe bet you'll see it in later movies.

Lucas's critical error may have been repeating the wrong things or perhaps it was where he didn't repeat that was the problem.

Two death stars was unfortunate.

Two "choosing between right or wrong" moments (Anakin and Sids, Luke and Sids) was good.

"I have a bad feeling about this" was good.


Now Sids with a lightsaber... Yeck. Totally breaks the poetry.

Poop and fart jokes... yeck. Totally breaks the poetry.

 

How many P and F jokes were there? One of each.

In ANH,

THREEPIO: No, I don't think he likes you at all.

Artoo: "Beep, burp, bloop"

THREEPIO: No, I don't like you either.

Dr Evazan: "He doesn't like you"
Luke: "Im sorry"
Dr. Evazan: "I don't like you either"

Later on...

Han: You're pretty good in a fight. I could use you.
Luke: They could use a good pilot like you.

And here is the kicker:
OWEN: Look, it's only one more season.

Luke: Look, I can take you as far as Anchorhead

Han: Look, going good against remotes is one thing.

HAN: Now, look, don't get any funny ideas. The old man wants us to
wait right here.

Luke : Look, will you just find a way back into the detention block?

LUKE: Look, a few minutes ago you said
you didn't want to just wait here to be captured.

HAN: Absolutely, Your Worship. Look, I had everything under control
until you led us down here.

HAN: Look, Your Worshipfulness, let's get one thing straight

HAN: Look, I ain't in this for your revolution.


Ah, poetry

 

I think we can safely assume that Lucas didn't intend any of that. Or can we?

That man, that man!

 

DARTHIRONCLAD I was just thinking out loud in my posting where I was going down the line of Jedi masters. I wasn't necessarily trying to show an example of repetition in that list though. Just pondering.


I didn't mention 1 single thing about Qui Gon falling though. No clue where you got that from.

"Qui-Gon was not tempted by the dark side like Obi-Wan was."

 

Sorry.