Saga How much of Lucas' ST treatments ended up in the films?

"Not enough" is the obvious answer, but there are still things that were directly inspired by his treatments or were altered from his ideas. Also themes that run through the films that came from Lucas.

There are the obvious ones like Rey as the female protagonist, but what about subtler ones? I think Luke training Rey to sense the Force on Ahch-To is a simplified version of what Lucas would have done in expanding the Force with the Whills.

Then there is Palpatine as someone hiding and controlling Snoke from behind the scenes to convert Ben Solo, which would have been Maul doing the same through Talon to Han and Leia's son in Lucas' version.

I also see the dyad as something that relates to the Whills and the will of the Force. Palpatine calls the dyad a "lifeforce" of Rey and Kylo's bond, which could relate to the Living Force and Lucas' expanded view of the Force.

 

Do we know if Lucas had the whole Resistance vs First Order in mind or was it different?

 

No, he didn't. He specifically said that there wouldn't be any stormtroopers in his version of the ST, but some ex-stormtroopers had established groups that would rebel against the Republic. And no weird situation where the Republic exists but there is also a resistance for some reason.

 

More than people think.
-Luke going into exile and being bitter. He still would've died in VIII.
-A Rey-like character
-Leia showing way more power in the force than she did in the original trilogy.
-Anakin's grandchildren. We got one in the actual sequel trilogy.
That's mostly it, if I recall correctly. But a lot of people act like there is almost nothing in common.

 

It depends on which version of his ST you're talking about, but the version he proposed to Disney/LF actually does share a lot of narrative beats and themes with the ST we ended up having, like @Darth Dnej pointed out, most notable with Luke Skywalker's exile and the character of Kira/Rey, who, while her ancestry was changed, was pretty much the same character in function of being the new Skywalker heir and the one that helps Luke return to being a hero, on top of being a junker from a desert planet, etc.

 

Supposedly Lucas wanted to bring back Darth Sidious, but I don’t know if I really believe that, because I read a different account that said he wanted Maul to be the main villain.

 

https://www.polygon.com/star-wars/2...princess-leia-star-wars-archives-prequel-book

He was apparently. I would have preferred it to what we got. I was quite interested in seeing Maul take on the NR with a crime army. Of course elements of this have made it to canon, but in a much smaller scale.

Where did you hear that Lucas wanted Palps to be the villain?

 

This den of geek article: https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/star-wars-the-rise-of-skywalker-george-lucas-story/

Although now that I re-read it, it just says Lucas spoke with Abrams and Terrio about the story of episode 9 before the script was written. Whether or not any ideas from Lucas made it into the script is ambiguous.

 

I looked a bit further into the meeting Abrams and Terrio had with Lucas, and from what I could find, it sounds like it had more to do with broad ideas about the Force rather than specific story points like Palpatine’s return. Here’s a quote from an interview with Chris Terrio by Rolling Stone magazine:

Did you get to come along when J.J. met with George Lucas for this film?
I did. And it’s not as though we we had a conference on specific story points. It’s more about really listening to George. It was almost a philosophical discussion about the nature of the Jedi and the nature of the Force, and about what his intentions were when he was originally writing the first episode. It was like sitting down with a with some grand master and just listening to his wisdom. I don’t even know if George knows to what extent we wrote down and conferred about and really tried to understand the spirit of what he said. As far as the specific story goes, who knows if George would agree with it, but I hope that philosophically he’ll feel we understood the spirit of what he was doing.​

So I would guess some of the more mystical elements of the final movie may have been influenced by that conversations, such as the emphasis placed on Rey trying to commune with the Jedi of the past, and generally things related to the netherworld of the Force.

 

Tom Veitch said it was Lucas who suggested having Sidious return for Dark Empire. Maybe that’s what you’re thinking of?

 

One correction here; although Pablo Hidalgo stated he believed Lucas was going to kill Luke in his Episode 8, I think he was referring to a later draft, perhaps after Arndt was more involved. Mark Hamill clarified that in the outlines that Lucas explained to him when all three stars signed onto the trilogy in 2011-2012, he would have survived until the end of Episode 9. Here is what he said:

Mark: I happen to know that George didn't kill Luke until the end of [Episode] 9, after he trained Leia. Which is another thread that was never played upon [in The Last Jedi].
​

Lucas seemed to reiterate this in a 2019 interview:

Lucas: By the end of the trilogy Luke would have rebuilt much of the Jedi, and we would have the renewal of the New Republic, with Leia, Senator Organa, becoming the Supreme Chancellor in charge of everything.
​

It would have been quite different. More of a focus on the New Republic vs. the criminal underworld. Perhaps ideas borrowed from the shelved Underworld project, particularly with Darth Maul being involved. This is the outline in Lucas' words:

Lucas: Episode VII, VIII, and IX would take ideas from what happened after the Iraq War. “Okay, you fought the war, you killed everybody, now what are you going to do?” Rebuilding afterwards is harder than starting a rebellion or fighting the war. When you win the war and you disband the opposing army, what do they do? The stormtroopers would be like Saddam Hussein’s Ba'athist fighters that joined ISIS and kept on fighting. The stormtroopers refuse to give up when the Republic win. They want to be stormtroopers forever, so they go to a far corner of the galaxy, start their own country and their own rebellion. There’s a power vacuum so gangsters, like the Hutts, are taking advantage of the situation, and there is chaos. The key person is Darth Maul, who had been resurrected in The Clone Wars cartoons — he brings all the gangs together.

Darth Maul trained a girl, Darth Talon, who was in the comic books, as his apprentice. She was the new Darth Vader, and most of the action was with her. So these were the two main villains of the trilogy. Maul eventually becomes the godfather of crime in the universe because, as the Empire falls, he takes over.

The movies are about how Leia — I mean, who else is going to be the leader? — is trying to build the Republic. They still have the apparatus of the Republic but they have to get it under control from the gangsters. That was the main story.​

So with that you can see many things are significantly different.

Something else I'd like to note: even the idea of the sequels existing in the first place -- an idea that George himself restarted in 2010 or so -- was something that he, previously and vigorously, fundamentally disagreed with. He himself said that any sequel concepts from him would be invented wholecloth, as he had not really planned anything of any significance out about them, and wouldn't even consider them part of the main story of Star Wars. He had it written into his will that he wouldn't allow anyone to make any and that the story was over with 6. But the company was struggling, his criminal-focus passion project Underworld was cancelled, and Red Tails was not successful, so all of these things I think inspired him to come up with a new idea for the sequels. I would have liked to see his ideas, but it's worth noting what he himself had to say about the idea of ever doing sequels:

1997
Lucas: The whole story has six episodes.... If I ever went beyond that, it would be something that was made up. I really don't have any notion other than, 'Gee, it would be interesting to do Luke Skywalker later on.' It wouldn't be part of the main story, but a sequel to this thing.
------
1999
What about the reports that Episodes 7, 8, and 9 - which exist in novel form - will never reach the screen?
Lucas: The sequels were never really going to get made anyway, unlike 1, 2, and 3, where the stories have existed for 20 years. The idea of 7, 8, and 9 actually came from people asking me about sequels, and I said, "I don't know. Maybe someday." Then when the licensing people came and asked, "Can we do novels?" I said do sequels, because I'll probably never do sequels.
------
1999
"What would it take for you to do a third trilogy, with episodes VII, VIII and IX?
Lucas: Don't count on it. There's nothing written, and it's not like I'm completing something. I'd have to start from scratch. The idea of a third trilogy was more of a media thing than it was me.
------
2005
Lucas: To be very honest with you, I never ever thought of anything that happened beyond Episode VI. It's the Darth Vader story. It starts with him being a young boy and it ends with him dying. The other books and everything kind of go off on their path, but I never ever really considered ever taking that particular story further.
------
2005
What if someone else, beside you, came to you and said, 'I want to make Episode VII?' Could you see that happening?
Lucas: No.
No? Absolutely, positively -- you're really closing the door without any wiggle room whatsoever?
Lucas: Right. There is no Episode VII.
Even for someone else to come up with?
Lucas: Well... There's a possibility there of maybe another offshoot movie somewhere, about an offshoot character in that world. But not about Luke Skywalker, not about that group of people and that struggle to bring democracy back to the galaxy.
------
2007
Lucas: I’ve left pretty explicit instructions for there not to be any more features. There will definitely be no Episodes VII-IX. That’s because there isn’t any story. I mean, I never thought of anything.
------
2008
Lucas: I get asked all the time, 'What happens after "Return of the Jedi"?' There really isn't any story to tell there. It's been covered in the books and video games and comic books, which are things I think are incredibly creative.
​

So that gives some context about the treatments which were created 2010-2012, and though I would have liked to see them put to screen if given the choice, were stories that even George himself didn't consider seriously pursuing for a very long time, and were crafted in a relatively short period of time ("from scratch" in his words) near the end of his time at Lucasfilm. It's not like with the prequels and originals where he was thinking about the other during each trilogy, working to make them fit together and reference each other, and planning it all out together over decades. One is reminded of certain ideas Tolkein had towards the end of his career about a sequel to LOTR, that ultimately he stepped away from and didn't go further with. They may have been great, or not, but it's worth having this little context when discussing it, especially with Lucas' changing plans or non-plans on this subject.

 

Exactly. This is why it's bewildering when people get upset that George Lucas's treatments were not used. He didn't have much. He had a thumbnail sketch. From all the evidence that is out there, it's apparent that Lucas didn't really even have a proper outline or treatment that could be used to make a film (let alone a trilogy). Clearly, some of his stuff DID make it into the ST. Clearly, in George Lucas's mind, the story is OVER after ROTJ.

So then, it becomes a question of : Are we (as fans) open to continuations of the Skywalker story poster Episode 6, or not?

 

I think that is going a bit too far. Just because he said stuff in the past, doesn't mean he couldn't have changed his mind later on. He clearly started developing the sequels even before he made it clear that he would sell Lucasfilm. You can believe that you are done, and then come up with something new later on. Stories aren't set in stone. With the time spend on developing the story before the sell, there definately was something that offered at least broad terms, probably more defined for the first movie than for the rest. Though one has to make it absolutely clear that there is a gargantuan difference between an outline and the finishd product. None of the movies matched their outline, because that's just not how development works. Therefore it is a bit silly to sugest that they should have stuck with an outline and tried to stay as close to it as possible, because that's something Lucas wouldn't have done either.

It's not like the prequels were some clearly defined story. He basically had nothing beyond some little nuggets here and there when he started on those movies. He himself even said "Now all I need is an idea" when he started developing the PT. There never were six developed stories, just like he didn't have three stories for Indiana Jones, like he claimed to Spielberg. There may have been broad ideas on where the general storyline of the prequels would go, but nothing like "there are six stories to tell, and then it is done".

 

If he started developing the sequels then as far as i believe it was probably no earlier then 2008 at most.

 

The nerve of the filmmakers thinking the were anywhere on the same planet as the spirit of what George was doing after they had made a movie which completely destroyed the themes of George's six film and multi-season television series, and then saying they hope George gets what they were doing, especially after how he reacted to The Force Awakens?

 

That's not why people get upset.

People get upset because they feel that only one of two options should be considered:

1. No story at all about the Skywalkers after ROTJ, leaving the saga of the 6 movies as complete as it was.
2. If there was to be a story about the Skywalkers after ROTJ, only Lucas should be the one determining what it should be about.

I don't know why so many years later people still get confused with this. Also, he reserves the right to change his mind whenever he wants to. His creation, his choice. We all change our mind about countless things in our lives. Just because he said something in 2005 and in 2007, which by the way were at the height of his mental fatigue with Star Wars and the fans, and what a toll it takes on his life, it doesn't mean he was not allowed to revisit his saga.

Pretty much almost nothing though, compared to the stuff that didn't make it, and compared to the stuff that were in the sequels, but had nothing to do with his ideas.

 

WOAH! Leave that rationality at the door! But for real, this is what I have been saying for years. GL can totally change his mind on his creation, it's his! That is just common sense!

 

So, some SW fans are upset only because nobody but George Lucas should be making Skywalker saga SW films? That's it?

If I may be so bold as to join you in proclaiming to know what people are thinking....

People get confused because George Lucas had every opportunity to make new Skywalker saga films himself. Yet, Lucas basically did everything in his power to make sure that someone else made the Skywalker saga films while he got paid to stay out of it.

Lucas could have been THE producer. He could have stayed on as creative consultant, he could have ensured that he had the only story input. He didn't. Everything that transpired was a result of his doing.

It's confusing why one of the most brilliant minds in cinema, who historically/repeatedly fought for control over his own creative works, company, ip, and merchandise would (somewhat) surprisingly and blatantly sell out and then whine publicly about it afterwards.

Remember, in the eyes of GL, a large section of the fanbase turned on him long ago. Lucas alluded to the fact that it wasn't worth dealing with that aspect of it. He definitely had some major hurt feelings after the reception that the PT got. Now, other filmmakers are the subject of fandom's ire and Lucas still isn't happy about what he did?

Bottom Line: We were NEVER going to get a Lucas sequel trilogy. Were we? That was never on the actually on the table. So it's confusing to me that fans get pissed about that fact.

 

Clearly none of the ever read the Expanded Universe.

 

Palpatine return is not some of them because Lucas wanted to respect the Chosen One Prophecy yes he liked Dark Empire but that came out before the Prequels

 

Yes.

I love the EU and the stories with the Skywalkers after ROTJ.
I still think that anyone who were to make post-ROTJ stories with the Skywalkers, should have at least used every single treatment that Lucas wanted to, even if Lucas didn't make the movies himself.

Again, not sure why this is confusing. It's a pretty standard angle that many fans have. The EU novels are NOT the sequel movies.

And he felt betrayed when they did them the way they did them, for a reason.

Nah, he trusted the people that took upon the task to do him and his stories justice. They didn't. He felt betrayed. Pretty simple course of events. And many fans agree with him.

I am not. He was done with it. He has every right to feel done with it. And he has every right to whine about it publicly as well.

We will either talk about the story, or about the fans. Two separate subjects. And every person has the right to feel a certain way about these two aspects. I don't understand this false equivalence. You're practically saying that one has to either think that the fans were right about the PT and they are right about the ST, or that they are wrong about both trilogies in their criticism. But that point of view is not mandatory. I certainly don't agree with it.

You cannot know this for a fact. Lucas definitely went back and forth in his head about it before deciding to go on with the sale. I personally think it is very possible we would have gotten a ST by Lucas as an overseer of the projects if he hadn't sold the company.

 

So, you have a fundamental problem with any SW ST not made by George Lucas?

Yet, George Lucas is the guy who chose/did this. He is responsible, no?

Nah? You just casually dismiss this? You absolve Lucas of any part he played in the fact that it was George Lucas who deliberately chose NOT to make the ST? He chose to have done without his input. No?

Who betrayed Lucas? Kathleen Kennedy? His handpicked successor? I have not heard of Lucas saying anything like this? Have you? Has Lucas mentioned Kennedy in such a way?

I'm not trying to be obstinate, I genuinely don't believe it's a "pretty simple course of events." All that exists are vague accounts and second hand perspectives, no? Consider all of the artists, musicians, film makers, etc. who get taken advantage of by big corporations: That is NOT what happened with George Lucas.

Again, he chose to walk away with no guarantees or input on what the sequels would be. Hell, he could have dictated that they NEVER make sequels with the Skywalkers.

Wait? I thought we weren't talking about fans?

I am a huge fan of George Lucas. I know he made the white slavers comment (which is all kinds of icky coming from George) but I have yet to see him comment on the fact that he felt "betrayed." I only read that he wasn't impressed with the ST using the same designs, aesthetics, and that TLJ was "beautifully made."

1. You don't dictate what "we" talk about.
2. We've been talking about BOTH the fans and the story this entire time.

This is what I'm saying. We don't get to cherry pick when fandom is justified, or not , in their criticisms/opinions of Star Wars. There are a myriad of opinions on what Star Wars should be and one really doesn't hold more weight than the other. You simply agree with some opinions more than the others and label it as "being right." IMO we fans are equally as insane about our collective digesting/debating about the ST as we were about the PT.

You are right. I cannot know anything Lucas thinks. I have to take him at his word. Before the sale to Disney, Lucas's last word on the subject was that the story was over after the events in ROTJ. Listen, I love the GL and think he's a genius, but he has notoriously flipped flopped on the developments/plans for a potential ST.

Bottom Line: I think you are speculating as to what Lucas "would have done" and not giving enough attention to what he actually did do: George Lucas walked away from Star Wars for money.

IMO, love it or hate it, George Lucas is the guy most responsible for what you are getting in the Disney owned era of Lucasfilm.

 

I have a fundamental problem with any SW ST that disrespects the Star Wars made by Lucas, yes.

Nope, this is the opposite of what is true.
And if you question that Lucas felt betrayed, Bob Iger himself says it in his book.

I most definitely dictate what I will talk about.

Irrelevant comparison. Any artist deserves to feel betrayed, regardless of how much money they have made.
And fans can choose to agree or disagree with them. I happen to agree with Lucas if he felt betrayed.

I responded to your points.

This topic is about how much of Lucas' input got into the ST films. We have seen the narrative before. First, it's the "Lucas would have done the same". When it gets debunked, rightfully so, it's the "Well he got the money, so he doesn't have the right to feel betrayed". And then there's the "Well he wouldn't have made them anyway, so it's good we got what we got".

You are constantly making this a cyclical conversation by beating around the bush. It's one we have done 4 times before, or more.

To summarize, for me, Lucas has every right to feel betrayed, I have every right to support him in that, and I have every right to say that what I have personally wanted from Star Wars after the prequels (and many many other fans too, which is immaterial, but since you always go back to what fans wanted and said, well this is also what a lot of fans wanted and I will tell it how it is), is a coherent story and continuation of the legacy of the first 6 classic movies. Now whether it would have been directed by Lucas or not, I don't really care. But I do care that his vision is preserved. His vision was clearly NOT preserved. And I think that's very sad.

You can disagree with me all you want, I am not going to change my mind about all of the above. Any random hypothetical so called "arguments" have zero value to me. I am evaluating what we got, and express my preference over what we got, which is either NOTHING or something from GL. We good? Or do we want to go another cycle around the same topic, where you move the goal posts again in order to (falsely) prove that Lucas brought it upon himself and I should blame him for any misgivings I might think exist in Star Wars?

 

Fair enough. Though, this a subjective, and more importantly, different claim than before.

The fact that Lucas is responsible for the scenario where we now have a Disney owned (non Lucas associated) Star Wars films (like the ST) is "the opposite of true?" Okay.

Bob Iger? So we are going off of what Bob Iger said? Fact is: We simply have not heard this from Lucas himself. Like I said, this is 2nd hand information.

I did some digging and found Kathleen Kennedy's take on this. Surely it's not the dramatic "betrayal" that you make it out to be. Check it out:

(From Rolling Stone magazine November 2019)

Again, while it does show that George had a harder time than expected letting go, it was the choice that he made. Again, George Lucas chose to walk away from Star Wars for money. He chose to let Disney own the company. He chose for Kathleen Kennedy to steer the ship. She states that they continue to be great friends. Again, this just isn't painted to be the betrayal that you claim. Perhaps she's lying?

Yep, that's how it works.

What? What does that even mean? Artists deserve to feel betrayed? Explain that more?
Lucas (the artist) made a business deal. He can feel how he wants. That said, we have no record of Lucas stating that he felt "betrayed."

Yep. You can feel how you want about it. I am a Lucas fan as well. He has stated whether he felt betrayed or not. You are, again, simply believing the words of Bob Iger. Again, 2nd hand speculation.

And I thank you for that. When addressing these points, we have both talked fans and story.

Clearly you are responding to some earlier conversation you had with someone else because I never said, "Lucas would have done the same." I am quite sure his ST would have been different one way or another.

1. No debunking here. I agree that Lucas's hypothetical ST would have been different.
2. I am not arguing Lucas's "right to feel betrayed." I am arguing that we don't actually now that Lucas felt betrayed. Sure, Iger said this. Is he a reliable source. Kathleen Kennedy (again Lucas's good friend and hand picked successor) doesn't describe Lucas's issues as a betrayal at all. Lucas certainly has not said this. Has he?

I am certainly happy we get more Star Wars movies instead of no Star Wars movies. I am sorry that you aren't as it's a nice place to be.

You are responding to me as well. If you don't want to discuss, or is you are dissatisfied you can always press the ignore button and move on. You dictate how and what you do around here. Remember?

I hear you. To summarize, for me, you have every right to love and hate on any and everything that you want. Yet, realize you speak only for yourself. You don't speak for all the other PT lovers, or ST haters, Lucas, etc.

You are free to make any interpretations about what has been said that you want. We don't actually know whether Lucas feels betrayed or not. We have clear evidence of two conflicting accounts of Lucas's feelings. That's it. Lucas has NEVER stated that he feels "betrayed by Kennedy, Iger, Disney, or whatever. Again, you are free to assume what you want.

Again, you chose to respond to me/engage. Why even bother if my thoughts/feelings/opinions have no value? Certainly I value what you have to say, or else I wouldn't take the time to engage in discourse with you. I am sorry it's not a two way street.

Again, you can just click ignore if you don't actually want to exchange/consider other viewpoints from a fellow Star Wars/George Lucas fan.

 

Nah, he clearly expressed it to Iger. Who by the way has no reason at all to lie about it. If anything, he would have a reason to say the opposite.

Kathleen Kennedy confirms that it was difficult at first for Lucas in the quote you submitted. And is sugarcoating everything else about it. It's absurd to deny how Lucas feels about the ST. She never actually contradicts anything that Iger said.

This is an undeniable truth. He didn't even go to the premiere for episodes 8 and 9. I don't know why you seem to have a very strong desire to prove me wrong, but it's just not happening. Lucas DID feel betrayed that they threw out his treatments, that is a fact whether people like it or not. And even he didn't (and we know he did), this is irrelevant to whose "fault" it is that they threw out his treatments and we got a totally different ST. And that's the whole group that (actually did not) planned the ST, which includes KK, JJ, RJ and Bob Iger most probably. I don't actually care who it was. But it certainly wasn't Lucas.