ST The Development Of The Sequel Trilogy

I never said that KK intentionally trashed Lucas' ideas. However she did hire two people to direct movies, at least one of which did intentionally do this. Hosnian Prime and real deserts verify this, among other things.

I wish she had fired other people because of artistic differences to be honest, and it would have been harder than what she had to do. I'm not sure that her firing anyone resulted in poor box office results. The two main reasons appear to be very wrong timing and failed marketing, plus general audience reaction to previous endeavors.

I wish I was as optimistic as you, but I'm just cautious (plain, not cautiously optimistic) about how much and at what lenghts they listen and evaluate things that did not go exactly perfect. I would have liked to see drastic measures instead of never admitting that anything was less planned than it could have been

 

What’s the deal about real deserts? We had real deserts in ANH, ROTJ, TPM, AOTC, and ROTS.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Ok. His commentaries aren’t canon. And based upon the films, he is the Chosen One. It’s vague enough for JJ and Terrio to play with. I hope they don’t.

But...

Kenobi tells Maul he thinks Luke is the Chosen One. Wiggle room or just because he gave up on Anakin?

Mark Hamill said he believed Ben was the Chosen One. Hamill or Skywalker?

I believe based upon the films Anakin is. It could change.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Kenobi tells Maul in a story that had nothing to do with Lucas so if we're talking about Lucas-level canon, anything from Rebels and indeed the sequels is out, as is anything Mark Hamill says. In both the pre-sequel movies and the Clone Wars, both of which have Lucas' direct involvement, Anakin is deemed to be the Chosen One. The Mortis arc of Clone Wars addresses this directly. There's no ambiguity about his status. What it actually means to be the Chosen One is a different matter of course. The Father of the Mortis gods believes that the Chosen One commands both light and dark and maintains balance between them whereas the Jedi believe that the Chosen One is an agent of the light, meant to destroy the Sith and return the Force to its natural state, which he ultimately does in ROTJ.

I think it would be wrong for the sequels to undermine this. In fact I think having Snoke be a Sith in all but name already undermines it. The conflict really should have moved on from light vs dark to something new.

I do think something interesting could have been done with the Skywalker bloodline. Anakin was conceived by the Force. I suspect that Anakin's potential was close to that of the Mortis Force gods and it's not unreasonable to suggest that his children and their children would have the same potential and some kind of story could have been told about the Skywalkers being kind of protectors of the Force going up against an enemy who believes the Skywalkers are actually an abomination of the Force.

Heck, for a long time I thought Snoke would turn out to be a Force god, or at least descended from them. Of course, I also thought Rey would turn out to be a creation of Snoke, who only went after Ben Solo after Rey was taken away from him and that Rey would need to confront her destiny as an apparent weapon meant to destroy the Skywalkers. As with most things of course, we fans tend to put more thought into where things could go than the actual writers.

 

Wow! Meditate upon this I will.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

'Something new' would inevitably just come own to another variation of good vs evil - it's a fantasy saga after all. Built into the DNA of Star Wars is the idea that being good is hard, but being good when you're given magical abilities and powers beyond the mortal is the hardest thing of all - one slip, and you're gone. That idea, explored in interesting ways, could give you trilogy after trilogy. The failure of the ST thus far is partly a consequence of the filmmaker's unwillingness or inability to fully inhabit the fundamental mythic underpinnings of the story. Your ideas are interesting though.

 

The movies tell us that a chosen one who's conceived by midi-chlorians brings balance to the Force by destroying the Sith. That's Anakin. All from the movies. Deviating from that would be a retcon.

 

SW is all about good vs. evil. But we don’t need anymore trilogies if this Saga. I liked these 2 films and hope JJ hits a grand slam. I’m sorry you don’t. Would it have been better for Lucas had stayed on? For me it would have.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Among many other things that bother me in ST, the thing that bothers me mostly is how undercooked ST is story wise, design wise, character wise.

Like, you brought Snoke. Okay. We can take it if you do him justice. Reveal him as Darth Plagueis in Ep8. Simple? Simple. Effective? Yes! Connects villains of all three sagas, brings so much possibilities for future exploration of secrets of Force, gives us the look at his relationships with Palpatine and mystery behind Anakin's birth. It may even turn him in a greatest SW villain who patiently orchestrated everything, including his own death.

You gave Kylo Ren distinctive, Revan-esque mask and robe. PLEASE, CONTINUE! Dont stop! Give us the hints on it being inspired, or even belong to ancient Sith Lord, who ruled the Galaxy over a few thousand years ago, and possess the might of the Dark Side of the Force. It will bring so much potential for the new Star Wars movies, it will enrich the lore of canon and make up for a new stories.

Introduced Knights of Ren? Okay, give them lightsabers and make them active part of the trilogy, the Nazguls of Star Wars. Cool looking villains, cool action, tons of fanservice and entertainment.

Broke Rey's lightsaber? Fine, we can swallow it. She has two parts of Anakin's kyber-crystal? She is good at staff figthing? She seemed to be attached to her old staff she carried around for two movies? Okay, what the logical conclusion? GIVE HER A GODDAMN LIGHT-STAFF. Just imagine her igniting one blade in the trailer, but we see that the hilt of the lightsaber is very long, just like Maul's one. Everyone will loose their minds. "Is she gonna use the light-staff?!!!!" That would be cool.

And many others, more minor things. Everything i mentioned speaks of inability or fear of LF people to think creatively. They dont seemed like a fans of this franchise actually.

 

Not really as the prophecy is rather under-developed.
Based just on the films it is possible that the sith unbalance the Force by simply existing.
And if another jedi turned to the dark side and became a sith then the Force would again be unbalanced.

So 20 years after RotJ, a Jedi turns to the dark side, becomes a sith and the Force goes out of balance.
No retcon.

Bye for now.
Old Stoneface

 

Honestly, from the way he said it, I don't think Hamill was referring to the Chosen One prophecy so much as he was saying Kylo was the chosen one to carry on the Jedi.

 

Yeah, I can see that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Not at all.

The prophecy is developed as it needs to be regarding the movies especially as prophecies are just that and not detailed summations of future events.

Based on the films it's impossible that the Sith merely existing unbalances the Force and the same goes for any changing of light to dark or dark to light.

 

https://boards.theforce.net/threads/mizzlewump-rumor-too-many-coincidences.50021948/

Most of these ideas have been addressed in TFA/TLJ by either a)using/discarding them, or b)using them with modifications and/or expanding them.

These have not been addressed yet:

And now we have the teaser of IX, 'Leia's' film, featuring Lando, the lead character (who happens to be female and therefore a 'daughter'), and Palpatine's laughter.

The 'sith homeworld' can still be a thing too.

The impression is that of VII and VIII forming a tight couple from the beginning (for example, 'the apprentice takes control of the power dynamic between the two pretty quickly' sounds like Kylo killing Snoke) from the plot POV; with both the backstory and the plot concerning the 'daughter' and Leia being left out of that dyptic. That points to a backstory-charged story for IX.

 

To start with the latter, why?

The only thing the films say is that Anakin is to bring balance and to do so, he must kill the sith.
Ergo any Sith living = Force not balanced. No Sith Living = Force Balanced.

Nowhere is it said why the Sith cause this imbalance or that Palpatine is doing something extra evil that causes an imbalance that other siths in the past did not do.
Also nowhere is it stated that the Force is balanced at this specific point.

If not this then does Force only becomes unbalanced when the Sith grow powerful?
We know that the Sith ruled the galaxy 1000+ years prior to TPM so was the Force unbalanced then?
If no why?
If it was, was it brought back into balance?
If yes, was a chosen one involved back then too? If no chosen was needed then, why is one needed now?
Not Answered!

Which leads to the first point, the whole prophecy thing is poorly developed.
It is vague, just thrown out there to make the story seem more epic and to elevate Anakin over Luke.
That only Anakin could do this because Luke isn't "special" enough.

Why do the Jedi even bother with the prophecy?
They think it means to kill all Sith, who they think are all centuries dead.
And it has been established that Force users can see the future but that there is an uncertainty, "Always in motion is the future." So what they see might not happen or might not happen in the way they think.
So why is this prophecy different? What makes it special?
Not answered!

And there was a lot of potential for the prophecy to impact Anakin's character.
That the reason that he was so arrogant and felt the rules did not apply to him was due in part to him having the title of "Chosen One" so it went to his head.
Or one could show Anakin wondering what he is supposed to do or that the burden weighs on his mind.
But nothing.

So the ST had a lot of wiggle room because this was so vague and they could do any number of things with it.
To me they did not really do much with it which is a pity.
The concept of balance, the seemingly cyclical nature of the Sith and the Jedi, Sith rise up and try to conquer the galaxy, they are defeated and go into hiding and then come back many years later.
There is potential there if it is developed properly.
Alas we get little in the ST.

Bye for now.
The Guarding Dark

 

The Sith have been around for thousands of years and the Force was in balance. It wasn't even out of balance when TPM started as far as the Jedi could perceive. If it had started at all (which seems likely) it was only in the way of a blind spot where they couldn't see the Sith returning to the galactic stage. By ten years later they knew their powers had diminished because the Clones creation (which had been set in motion 10 years earlier) was completely missed by them. In the meantime of course Sidious (as Palpatine) became Supreme Chancellor.

The Sith ruled/terrorized the galaxy previously in some major way at least once previously and the Force was not out of balance. No Chosen One came forth to bring balance at that time.

That doesn't work at all as by that logic the Force has been out of balance for many thousands of years at least which would be a completely different story. The Force being out of balance and it doesn't really mean anything and they've just had the last 1000 years of relative peace?

Of course it does. Destroying the Sith brings the Force back into balance. They took it out of balance so destroying them brings it back.

Again the idea that the Force has been out of balance for thousands of years already makes no sense. If it had then there would not have been at least 1000 previous year or more of peace in the galaxy and the rule of the Sith referred to would hardly have ended now would it? They would still be in charge.

The story is not that the Force was out of balance previously and the Jedi without a Chosen One brought it back into balance. The whole point is that the Sith changed tactics from before where they openly engaged with allies to fight for control in outright battles where the lines of good and evil were clear. This time they worked from within and in secret to have those who they would have fought against in unison to fight each other instead then take over while eradicating the Jedi.

The basic allegorical tale that strikes me is that previously it was a simply and outright good vs evil fight which was in balance because sometimes good won and sometimes evil won. The galaxy had periods of light and dark. If you go by the Old Republic there were plenty of wars over thousands of years so that was balanced. In the saga itself the point is that rather than fight in the open the Sith now cause the good (light) to fight each other so the shadow of evil (darkness) can envelope everything and therefore it's all out of balance. The proper good government is secretly controlled by the Sith so evil becomes the normal state of affairs. With the Sith now defeated the lines of good and evil are clear and able to go back into balance. This is the symbolic representation of what we see. In stricter Star Wars terms the Sith interfere with the symbiosis of the galaxy where being works to mutual advantage. The Sith of course only work to their own personal advantage using everyone to get what they want.

What does that even mean? It's a prophecy not a detailed directive of what to do in case the Sith take the Force out of balance.

It doesn't say Anakin Skywalker will join the Jedi in the 1000th year after the Sith disappeared et al.

In TPM we see that they aren't all that bothered. That's the point!

You just answered it from what is in the movies themselves!

Again these are all in the movies but not spelled out to the nth degree that some wanted.

It really isn't because over 6 movies we saw the in fact the Force did go out of balance, Anakin was in fact the Chosen One and he destroyed the Sith and brought the Force back into balance.

The ST has not much at all to do with the previous six movies except for wanting to replay a greatly diminished and erratic version of the previous 6 movies particularly the OT.

 

Four years later, and this conversation is still happening. Yes, I’m sure they were aware of the real deserts in those 5 other Star Wars films. Which is good evidence to suggest that they probably weren’t contrasting TFA with Star Wars/ the PT, but rather, with other CGI and studio-heavy blockbusters. They were simply making the point that location-shooting will enhance the look and authenticity of this world, and that the movie wasn’t going to look like your typical genre fare.

There’s no evidence that it was a potshot at the PT. But if you’re really defensive about the PT, it’s understandable why you’d see it that way.

 

Well, the PT was criticized for the CGI. Lucas took a lot of heat for that. As Klimo pointed out, GL did use a lot more practical effects, sets, and real locations than advertised, TPM having not only more visual effects than the OT combined, but more sets than the OT combined as well. So perhaps Lucas should have shown there to be more, dare we say, balance? Kennedy said he’d would have used more practical effects if the technology had been there for the PT.

When TFA and the other projects were announced, many people here did think Disney was trying to distance itself from the PT. Whether true or not, JJ when he made ST in 2006 and used about 1000 CGI shots, said he likes to use practical as much as possible.

Kennedy said they’d try to go back to as much practical as possible, Kasdan said he got that feeling of more OT balance when he arrived, and JJ said that was his goal, and that there was a trend towards more practical. Nevertheless, the CGI in TFA stood around 2500 shots, breaking ROTS’s SW record of 2100 IIRC.

So the real deserts statement does sound like a shot at the PT. True, Geonosis was fake.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

and to contrast your exasperation.....TWENTY years later and we still have to read articles and listen to people tell us that the PT sucked because:

1. There was too much CGI
2. GL sucks as a director/writer
3. Lloyd/Christensen suck
4. POLITICS

Us sensitive PT fans surely must move on right?

"We hollowed out a REAL planet"
-Simon Pegg

 

Except they never say that the Force is in balance at any point. You assume that it is but it is never said.
Also the Sith had been around for 1000 years and the Jedi never once sensed them.

And this brings the question why?
If the Sith don't cause an imbalance by simply existing and only if they are powerful, like in RotS, then why did this not apply to the time 1000 years before TPM. The Sith were powerful and ruled the galaxy.
So why wasn't the Force unbalanced?
Not answered!

The Force not being in balance and there being peace are not shown to be related.
If as you say, the Sith ruling the galaxy 1000 years ago and we can infer that this was not peaceful as Mace talks about the oppression of the sith. Since you argue that the Force was NOT imbalanced despite this, so why would the fact that there is peace show that the Force is balanced?

You missed the point, do the sith cause the imbalance by just existing or are they doing something specific?
If the latter, what is this specific thing?
Again, since you argue that the sith ruling the galaxy 1000 years ago and this was an oppression, despite this the Force was still in balance.
So it can't be the Sith ruling the galaxy as that didn't unbalance the Force before.
Again underdeveloped.

Again, the films don't establish that war means Force unbalanced. And again, the last sith war did not unbalance the Force according to you.
And them being in charge last time did not unbalance the Force, again according to you.

Since the PT films don't tell us anything how the Sith gained power last time, this reasoning lacks support.

Again, the films don't tell us anything what the previous wars were like or how the sith worked.
The EU goes into that but the EU is not the films.

Also, if the Force has never been unbalanced ever in the history of the Jedi. How would the Jedi know what could cause it?
Te sith has been around and even been powerful and this somehow did not cause an imbalance.
So how exactly could the Jedi conclude that the Sith were the cause when they have never caused this before?

Ummm... it is. The directive is simple "Kill the Sith".
And by making Anakin the only person that can kill the Sith it diminishes Luke. Luke is not special enough, he can't bring balance, only Anakin can. And not because Anakin is a better person than Luke or anything like that. It is just because Anakin has more midis.

They all still knew about it which given that it is a prophecy about someone killing people the Jedi though long dead, why would they even bother to study it?

Nope! Read what I wrote again.
The Jedi can see the future but it is uncertain, the prophecy is not uncertain, why?
Who made it, why do the Jedi treat this differently than their normal power?
Not answered!

Nope because there is no point where they say that the Force IS balanced.
Also the Jedi think that bring balance means kill the sith but they also admit that they could be wrong.
So again, there is plenty of wiggle room for the ST here.

And even if they would go with that the Force was balanced by Anakin in RotJ.
Assuming that there would be some kind of threat, some dark side users, war etc.
If the Force is for some reason not imbalanced in the ST then the films would need to explain why.
How come these bad guys don't unbalance the Force but the Sith did.

And given that the OT never once talked about prophecy or balance, then to people watching the films in episodic order, the last time balance was talked about was three films ago.

TFA does mention balance as Jedi are somehow needed for the balance and they also talk about evil coming back in different guises, the sith, the empire and now the FO.
But then TLJ did little with that.

Bye for now.
Old Stoneface

 

Haha! I was wondering if I was the only one who felt this way.

 

It's also understandable why you'd see it that way, if you realize that the only evidence you seek for, would be a direct statement from JJ that he was aiming at a potshot at the PT, and that is never going to happen.

While you seek for evidence, I think I am going to go with the multiple signs that JJ hates the prequels and with the not so crazy idea that he made it a point to promote TFA by emphasizing on how prequel-like it is not, and how this time they have done things better than Lucas did in the 2000s.