ST The Development Of The Sequel Trilogy

Explored? Sure. But just because she is Yoda's back up plan it still doesn't mean that she HAS to accept it. And that could have been even more interesting and consequential for the Skywalkers and the future Jedi than possibly just her becoming a Jedi because that's the easier route.

You could even have a bit of a rift form between Luke and his sister because she rejects the offer to train. Maybe this is why Luke is alone in the ST. The Jedi life can be lonely. Especially if he's committed to training more Jedi and rebuilding and she chooses to rebuild the government. Their lives drift a part a bit. Which can happen naturally in life.

 

• Luke: If I don't make it back, you're the only hope for the Alliance.
• Princess Leia: Luke, don't talk that way. You have a power I don't understand and could never have.
• Luke: You're wrong, Leia. You have that power too. In time you'll learn to use it as I have. The Force runs strong in my family. My father has it. I have it. And... my sister has it. Yes. It's you, Leia.
• Princess Leia: I know. Somehow, I've always known.

I think the logical implication here is that Luke was stating the future. Not as in a future force vision, but rather as in his thoughts on what would happen in the future. Luke believed that Leia would one day learn to use the force "AS I HAVE." He's comparing her to himself and Anakin. And she confirms that she's always known this.

Then later on, she feels the force again, when she reassures Han that Luke isn't dead. And she tells him just that.

This was where her character was headed at the end of ROTJ. Combined with the fact that Luke will now need to train new force users, and she's the only other force user he knows of, I think one can argue Leia was teased to be trained by Luke and probably become his first student and probably one day become a Jedi and probably one day train her own students. Not saying this had to happen. I'm saying this was the future ROTJ teased.

 

Just because she's always known that she was his sister or 'something' more powerful, still doesn't mean that she's going to be a Jedi. Using the force, yes, perhaps. Definitely. A trained Jedi knight fighting evil doers along side her brother and rebuilding the Jedi? I don't see her wanting that future. Maybe something in the middle. Political leader using her force intuition for the betterment of all.

Not that any of this even matters .lol.

 

I think Hamil said at one time (maybe in the 90s/80s) that Lucas told him that Luke would train Leia. We know from the Sequel Trilogy that Leia is somehow the "chosen one" of the sequels (like Anakin was in the PT and Luke was in the OT) in that she apparently helps repair the Republic as its leader as well as the protagonists of the sequels probably being her kids.

We know Disney-LFL had no clue of what to do with Leia (see Leia Poppins in TLJ which apparently came from Kennedy and Rian discussing that ROTJ scene) even before Carrie Fisher passed away. Which is just more evidence of how haphazard the sequels were produced/written.

 

Leia was wasted in the ST well before Carrie Fisher passed away. In fact, IMO ROS represents her best.

 

I was rewatching the Clone Wars animated movie last week and realized that with Leia as Supreme Chancellor, in the Lucas sequels, we would’ve potentially seen a few scenes like the one below from the prequels.



The Jedi Order serves the Senate and the Chancellor, so in that role Leia would’ve been, essentially, Luke’s boss. Unless of course the Jedi Order operated very differently in that era. We do know Luke would’ve still been secluded for part of the story. And if early leaks were correct, then the Jedi Order would not be much of a thing until later movies in the trilogy. But still, it’s cool to remember what the Chancellor’s role is in relation to the Jedi, a very active role of leadership, very much in constant communication with the Jedi Council as they encounter new problems that require Jedi attention.

 

Leia without doubt is the worst served OT character in the sequels IMO. She’s a passenger in each film and has absolutely no utility. Her characterisation may not be as overtly contentious as Luke’s, but that she’s effectively used as nostalgic wallpaper, speaks to the passive sexism that’s prevalent in the sequels.

 

I personally find George's original TFA idea so much more compelling. Seemingly inspired by the aftermath of the Iraq war as the New Republic tries to exert control following the fall of the Empire, thematically exploring the challenges of post war reconstruction, a galaxy riddled with chaos and lawlessness. The Stormtroopers acting as Sadaam's Baathist fighters who became ISIS, refusing to give up after Republic victory. Then Darth Maul sweeps in as the messianic figure who can rally the remnants, reuniting the criminal underworld against the New Republic. That core conflict is far more interesting than the rehash we got. Darth Talon becoming his most valuable disciple, who somehow infiltrates the mind and life of a young Ben Solo and seduces him (perhaps in more ways than one) to the dark side...the film focusing on Ben's fall rather than the entirety of it happening off screen...seeing how this affects Luke and sends him into a self imposed exile, entering a period of seclusion, meditating and reassessing his position within the greater canvas and throughout the arc of the film rediscovering his vitality.

We were robbed.

 

And arguably this would be a natural progression for the character. I don't think SW fans would have been surprised if that was the position she held. Also from a story point of view it makes her easier to be 'sidelined' for the films, because in that position we wouldn't expect her to be racing around with a blaster with Han and Luke.

 

There's no specific reason why the NJO would serve the Chancellor in the post OT period. Lesson learned. The Jedi got too close to politics and that was used to end them so that they no longer really served democracy, but an office instead.

I could just as easily see Luke keeping the Jedi removed from the specific politics of the government and simply serving the Force and the galaxy where its needed. And that could actually be an interesting story where Leia and the NR is actively seeking Luke's new order to officially join said NR, just like the old days, and Luke is uninterested or focused on other matters.

 

I was being nice...

I think both of those options could/should have been on the table, fleshed out, and ultimately shaped to create some really interesting post-ROTJ world building. Leia as leader of the New Republic, and heading up the 'political' dynamic, would have been a natural evolvement. Equally, Leia being some venerable Jedi Master, who was removed from the political institutions, would also have been fascinating to see. That we just get the laziest reset of her OT role, but without the utility, as 'leader in/of the rebellion', was really the worst possible option IMO. It short changed the character and short changed the actor... but that is an unfortunate recurrent theme in the ST.

 

Everyone got reset.

Leia, fighting w the rebellion looking for some secret plans/map.
Han, being a selfish pirate again.
Luke back to being 'I can't go with you to Alderaan' like he was before he accepted the journey in ANH.

And they're all split up not really knowing each other anymore.

Its truly lazy. And uninspired.

 

I'd honestly extend this to Vol. II as well given that the plan was clearly to make the First Order's Dark Side presence something more resembling the One Sith/Brotherhood of Darkness. A character resembling Darth Wredd would have been loads better, let alone a Skywalker going through a similarly vengeful but explicitly ideologically-driven motive. In fact, I'd argue Ben's sentiment to effectively burn down the old paradigm was likely an outright clumsy emulation of Wredd in some ways as I'm convinced a lot of initial script ideas had to have come from this series. Hell, in much the same way Wredd reconstructs his torture helmet, Kylo also reconstructs his helm after he shattered it. The more I revisit the series, the more I see just worse parallels in the film's scripts.

 

Yep probably. Lucas 100% would have wanted political meetings like this in the ST. Probably why Disney didn't do it. At the time these parts of Star Wars were not well received.

I think Lucas's ST would have been the original cast in a PT tonal structure. Because thats just where Lucas was mentally compared to where he was when he did the OT. And obviously fans response to that would be Agh lucas is turning the OT characters into the PT. When at the time they just wanted the OT again.

 

Maybe. But it's also possible that seeing the OT characters, in their original voices, in a PT digital environment, would have been insanely cool.

And who is to say that Lucas hadn't learned something after the PT? Maybe he would've righted some wrongs. In fact, the Clone Wars show actually showed some growth I'd say, in terms of getting away from some of the worst parts of the PT (which I loved).

 

The Clone Wars was a PT show. A PT expansion if anything. Lucas was righting the wrongs with each PT movie but he always kept the concept within that same political stance.

Its like, didn't his son or someone say in his ST Leia was going to be revealed as the chosen one in some way? Now lets say thats not about the prophecy. Although maybe it was going to be and Leia was going to end the Sith for good with politics. But lets speculate and say it wasn't that. You know Lucas would probably take Leia into a more political direction, because Lucas likes politics and because leia would be like Padme. Lucas has a lot he wants to say with Politics. He has a lot of imagination and underlining themes with Politics.

Which the OT as a whole felt very inspired by flash gordon. While the PT felt more like a guy who spent years worldbuilding his own universe and had a lot to say with it.

 

Where does Lucas state he was “righting the wrongs with each PT movie”? You do come out with some utter nonsense. There’s a huge difference between adjusting technique/approach, building upon what went before and doing narrative and technical hand break turns to right the wrongs of a previous film. I think you’re confusing a criticism of the ST with George Lucas. The only thing levelled at Lucas, that comes anywhere near that, was the absence of Jar Jar Binks in AOTC/ROTS, which was clearly a reaction to the insane amount of on-line hate that character and actor received. I think Lucas was wrong for effectively writing that character out, but it was understandable. Whereas each of the ST films tried to move away from the previous, to the point of ridiculousness.

 

As bad as Jar Jar was, I still give props to Lucas for even trying it. It was a big risk. Not just because the character was fully CG in 1999, but also because the character was a fool archetype. Nothing like that had been done in the OT, at least not to this extent, and so at least Lucas was trying new things. He over did it. He even admitted it, and tried to pull it back some in subsequent movies, but still tried to complete Jar Jar's 'arc', where he's eventually used by Palpatine into doing his evil, unknowingly. Done a little better, that could have been an amazing story beat to pull off.

Whereas the ST is just blatantly copying the OT, doing so badly even though they have the playbook, and then erratically reversing course each movie because they fumbled some part of the previous story or characters and have no grand vision. They took no risk. They receive no runner-up prize.

 

He righted the wrongs of what he felt would make people like his film more. There is most certainly noticeable evolving of tone and rebalancing of it. Obviously Jar Jar faded until he wasn’t in episode 3 at all. Lucas started to balance more action into the films to the point episode 3 takes time out to have 4 lightsaber fights just because people love the fights. Which was probably for those crying about the films being boring because of politics. Also I believe it was said there was dialogue coach on the set or episode 3 and Spielberg may have helped with episode 3 abit. So Lucas didn’t want people to hate his film but he also didn’t want to give up his creative integrity so he wrapped it all up with something he felt fans would eat up.

He didn’t have to state anything, just look at the films and you can see even Lucas either felt pressure to make his films more exciting or he was infact pressured by others to do so.

I’m going to assume he was pressured by others to remove Jar Jar as he clearly made sure Jar Jar was involved in Clone Wars and had episodes just for him. In doing so it seems like Lucas didn’t like giving in to peer pressure and this was his way of righting THAT wrong too.

 

The tone wasn't a mistake. Just because you didn't like it, doesn't mean Lucas made mistakes.

TPM was supposed to start off light and very kiddy, so that it eventually balanced against Ep 3's very dark story. Its amazing how intended tonal progression is now a criticism for some ST fans. Imagine if the ST even had a tone, let alone one that progressed any.

Star Wars is a fairy tale. That's what TPM is. TPM was supposed to represent golden age, an innocence. It's a mirror of Anakin at his own age. In fact, each movie's tone, the galaxy itself, reflects Anakin's character and growth, his loss of innocence, his maturity, his fall, his corruption, and where he is presently. (One can almost say the same with the OT now, retrospect, if they choose).

And although changes to the story and characters were obviously made, the overall vision DID NOT. In each movie the same saga story progressed. That is inherently not what took place in the ST, and this attempt at 'Lucas did it too' bashing to justify the mistakes in the ST is absurd and basically gaslighting at this point.

And Jar Jar was in Ep3. What's this nonsense about "faded until he wasn't in EP 3 at all". What movie did you watch? He was used in Palpatine's plans as a foolish pawn into giving Palpatine the power he desired, all unknowingly. That's a little more than not "at all".

 

The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles had that same issue. Everyone thought they were getting a fun adventure series like the movies—you know, young Indy solving mysteries and having wild escapades like in the beginning of Last Crusade. Instead, we got Indy basically walking through history lessons and political drama.

Lucas clearly did the same thing with Star Wars as his interests changed. Look, I'm all for creators making what they want to make—it's their art. But it feels like he was trying to force one style into a completely different kind of story, and the results were... well, often mixed at best. It's like he had a new vision but tried to squeeze it into the old packaging.

One could say the same about The Last Jedi and Rian Johnson.

 

Oh yeah sorry, jar jar had a cameo at Padmes funeral. Lucas didn't give up on Jar Jar which is why he gave Jar Jar relevance whether fans like it or not. But he was clearly pressured to only make him just a cameo for episode 3. He tried to tone his goofyness down for episode 2 but people still complained i guess. Although he brought the goofyness back for Clone Wars so i think there might have been a little pride there for his original idea for Jar Jar.

And the Star Wars movies evolve by each episode. Episode 6 is a far cry darker and structually different than episode 4. Which yes was always going to happen for episode 3 considering its story. But that doesnt really change the fact that episode 3 does feel more fanservice than episode 1. Episode 1 feels like Lucas confident in himself and his more stoic political direction or storytelling. While episode 3 feels like someone feeling a little pressured to do more of what people liked from episode 1 and 2 because it might guarantee people like the film. Which is fine for me as Episode 3 is my favourite Star Wars movie so i do personally think it worked. While episode 1 is most certainly a little slow at times and episode 2 struggles a bit tonally to know what it wants to be.

The Clones Wars is clearly an show more in line with episode 3. But at the same time it is still very different to the OT. And many at the the time just wanted an 80s tone inspired Star Wars movie.

 

With all sincerity, you seem to have very little insight into these things. It’s like a stream of unfettered consciousness that you let pour from your fingertips to the keyboard.

Please provide the quotes where Lucas purposely included more lightsaber fights in ROTS to “right the wrongs”. Do you honestly believe that, for example, the Obi-Wan/Anakin duel was not a perfectly natural attempt to outdo what went before, but instead was some form of course correction on Lucas’ part? Do you not think, as part of world building and establishing geo-political situation of the galaxy, that the first film in a trilogy would naturally do more ground laying in terms of establishing the political institutions (given that their dismantling is a significant moment in republic turning to empire)? Do you post some of this nonsense just for attention and to get a rise? Is that your intention?