AuRon wrote: ↑Thu Apr 04, 2019 6:43 pm
I'm not going to make a big post here, but in response to the above comments: there are reasons why I choose to think of the original Thrawn trilogy as an alternate "sequel trilogy", and the conclusion to "my version" of the Star Wars saga. Its obvious that Lucas intended for his story to have a happy ending, and I kind of feel that that should be respected. The Thrawn trilogy shows us what happened after Return of the Jedi, but while still allowing a happy ending.
I've heard about what happens in the later "legends" books, and while some of it sounds interesting, a lot of it sounds pretty unappealing. Luke turning to the dark side, the emperor being resurrected, the empire hanging around for another 20 years with a revolving door of new leaders, Jedi developing god-like powers beyond what was ever shown in the movies, the emperor having a secret "noble" purpose behind forming the empire to stop an alien invasion... I'm not a Lucas fanboy, but I still feel that the story he told on the original movies should be respected, and not torn down, which I feel a lot of this stuff does.
Papls wanted the Empire anyways.That retcon was madem to give Thrawn a more complicated motivation.
AuRon wrote: ↑Fri Apr 05, 2019 12:23 am
To make it clear, I'm not going to put George Lucas on a pedestal. He has his flaws. He was creative and ambitious, but obviously needed help from other people to put a good story together. But if you're going to say that its okay to disregard or tear down what happened in earlier movies, and the story and character development doesn't matter, then what does matter?
Are you watching for the characters? The storylines? The action? The setting? Nostalgia? What is it that people like about Star Wars, and makes them want to see more, while saying they're fine with stuff from the original movies being thrown out?
Personally, I think the best way to do new Star Wars movies would have been to set it hundreds of years after the original movies, so that you could do whatever you want without screwing with the original story. I also would have tried coming up with a more original story than "empire versus rebels again". Lucas made it clear that the original movies were partially inspired by World War 2, and the Vietnam war. So, a new movie series could have taken cues from more recent wars. Instead of space nazis, maybe have space terrorists, and religious zealots. That would have been different.
But Disney never would have done any of that, because they wanted to use the old characters for nostalgia.
You don't have to use new wars as inspiration. The public is much more disconnected and the US has such superiority on the ground that you cannot compare them to Vietnam or WW2.
Slash Gallagher wrote: ↑Fri Apr 05, 2019 6:29 am
You don't have to use new wars as inspiration. The public is much more disconnected and the US has such superiority on the ground that you cannot compare them to Vietnam or WW2.
These days yeah. But back when the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan first started, they were constantly talked about. They were heavily covered in the news, and were a common topic of debate. Those wars just ended up going on for so long with so little being accomplished that eventually people stopped caring. Except for those who still have to experience it first hand. Of course, terrorist attacks can still make the news, like the one in Paris.
Keep in mind, even Vietnam wasn't fought like a "traditional" war, since the Vietnamese were heavily outmatched, and yet still managed to win, because they could hide in the jungles and the villages. That was actually the inspiration for the Ewoks.
Slash Gallagher wrote: ↑Fri Apr 05, 2019 6:29 am
You don't have to use new wars as inspiration. The public is much more disconnected and the US has such superiority on the ground that you cannot compare them to Vietnam or WW2.
These days yeah. But back when the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan first started, they were constantly talked about. They were heavily covered in the news, and were a common topic of debate. Those wars just ended up going on for so long with so little being accomplished that eventually people stopped caring. Except for those who still have to experience it first hand. Of course, terrorist attacks can still make the news, like the one in Paris.
Keep in mind, even Vietnam wasn't fought like a "traditional" war, since the Vietnamese were heavily outmatched, and yet still managed to win, because they could hide in the jungles and the villages. That was actually the inspiration for the Ewoks.
Ewok stuff is pretty cringe. Also Rifles vs spears led to 10 to 1 causualty in Taiwan. The Taiwanese tribes could not be nearly as effective aginst an early modern Japanese Army despite knowing the terrain way better.
I like the Ewoks kinda but i could do without them in ROTJ.
Gotta agree with Slash. The novel did a better job, I think, of detailing the Ewoks and their role, which was only hinted at once in the film - that they were losing and it was ultimately a stalling effort to buy time, and the battle only really turned once Palpatine loosened his Battle Meditation and Chewie stole an AT-ST walker, flipping the tide on the Imperials.
"A culture's teachings - and more importantly, the nature of its people - achieve definition in conflict. They find themselves, or find themselves lacking."
— Kreia, Knights of the Old Republic 2: The Sith Lords
I'm not saying the Ewoks single handedly defeated the empire, I'm just saying why Lucas was insistent on using them (as opposed to Wookies), and what his inspiration was. At least, that was his narrative justification for it. You could say that he also wanted to have something to appeal to children more.
AuRon wrote: ↑Fri Apr 05, 2019 3:55 pm
I'm not saying the Ewoks single handedly defeated the empire, I'm just saying why Lucas was insistent on using them (as opposed to Wookies), and what his inspiration was. At least, that was his narrative justification for it. You could say that he also wanted to have something to appeal to children more.
AuRon wrote: ↑Fri Apr 05, 2019 3:55 pm
I'm not saying the Ewoks single handedly defeated the empire, I'm just saying why Lucas was insistent on using them (as opposed to Wookies), and what his inspiration was. At least, that was his narrative justification for it. You could say that he also wanted to have something to appeal to children more.
I thought the original idea was to have the Vietnam allegory be Wookie spears versus ray guns, then he decided he could not fit that in the first movie he just put Chewie in (using a ray gun) and then we he decided he could do his spear versus ray gun conflict in the third movie he decided to mix it up with Ewoks (half a Wookie). So the Vietnam inspiration was there form the original idea and had nothing to do with the Ewok Wookie substitution. I admit I am not that sure about these things, but that is the way I remember hearing it.
Yours Truly,
Allan Olley
"It is with philosophy as with religion : men marvel at the absurdity of other people's tenets, while exactly parallel absurdities remain in their own." John Stuart Mill
"Stay on topic..."
"We're too far off subject..."
"Stay on topic..."
"A culture's teachings - and more importantly, the nature of its people - achieve definition in conflict. They find themselves, or find themselves lacking."
— Kreia, Knights of the Old Republic 2: The Sith Lords
You know... I've found myself reevaluating canon Luke's actions, ever since the new trailer dropped and I nearly had a panic attack, but that's beside the point. I'm starting to think, if not consistent to the original trilogy, then I can at least accept this version of Luke as canon Luke.
"A culture's teachings - and more importantly, the nature of its people - achieve definition in conflict. They find themselves, or find themselves lacking."
— Kreia, Knights of the Old Republic 2: The Sith Lords
AuRon wrote: ↑Fri Apr 05, 2019 3:55 pm
I'm not saying the Ewoks single handedly defeated the empire, I'm just saying why Lucas was insistent on using them (as opposed to Wookies), and what his inspiration was. At least, that was his narrative justification for it. You could say that he also wanted to have something to appeal to children more.
I thought the original idea was to have the Vietnam allegory be Wookie spears versus ray guns, then he decided he could not fit that in the first movie he just put Chewie in (using a ray gun) and then we he decided he could do his spear versus ray gun conflict in the third movie he decided to mix it up with Ewoks (half a Wookie). So the Vietnam inspiration was there form the original idea and had nothing to do with the Ewok Wookie substitution. I admit I am not that sure about these things, but that is the way I remember hearing it.
A good argument for both Disney and Lucas being bad franchise managers.
