Holy $#!+: they fixed the saber clash (ROTJ Blu-Ray)

[Vympel]

Got my copy today.

This release is amazing. Seriously, the Original Trilogy looks fantastic on my HDTV, the sound is out of this world awesome.

Of course, I've only gone through a selection of scenes in RotS, ANH, TESB, and watched the "Noooo" scene in RotJ, but I'm really, really pleased.

Sadly, Vader's sabre is still annoyingly pink in bits in the TESB duel, but for some reason it doesn't bother me as much as I thought it would.

The way the original trilogy looks - its just great. I've noticed so many things in just my short couple of hours that I've never noticed before - heck, I never even noticed that C-3PO has a long stick-like bolt sticking out of the top of his head until just tonight. And the Stormtrooper armor in ANH especially is so scuffed and beat up, its really cool!

And jeezus the extras alone. I mean fuck, I saw just a handful of the available deleted scenes, and they're all interesting in one way or another.

One deleted scene series I loved is "Jerjerrod's Conflict" - just wow. That actor was so wasted. His deleted scenes should've stayed in the movie*. In any event, its great to see how closely the RotJ novel followed the original shooting script, before edits - a lot of the stuff in the novel is lifted directly from these deleted scenes.

*In particular, where he tries to block Vader and Vader chokes a bitch is awesome, particularly where the Red Guards react in the exact same way they did to Yoda's presence in RotS.

So, of the big publicised changes - I'm still not a fan of the Nooo, but its not as bad as the original Youtube video made it seem, for some reason. Its probably down to atmosphere.

I actually like the new Krayt Dragon call.

[Sharp-kun]

Got my copy today.
One deleted scene series I loved is "Jerjerrod's Conflict" - just wow. That actor was so wasted. His deleted scenes should've stayed in the movie*. In any event, its great to see how closely the RotJ novel followed the original shooting script, before edits - a lot of the stuff in the novel is lifted directly from these deleted scenes.

Was it ever said why that was cut? I remember reading it in the novel as a kid and thinking "that's really cool" as it added more tension to the tunnel run with them being on a timer.

I assume time?

[Vympel]

Was it ever said why that was cut? I remember reading it in the novel as a kid and thinking "that's really cool" as it added more tension to the tunnel run with them being on a timer.

I assume time?

Doesn't say why, but I'd imagine time, because unlike with some of the other deleted scenes, its practically ready for intergration.

Some funny stuff is some cut Rebel pilot footage for Battle of Endor. There's two female pilots (including one really bad one who's basically an old lady and who kept misunderstanding what lines were being relayed to her), a Sullustan pilot and even a Mon Calamari pilot (who jokes about never flying Lucas airways again).

Its clear from the dialog they're being asked to read that this is the attack on the Communications Ship, also in the novel.

[Sharp-kun]

Its a shame. Rather than add pointless NOOOOO's, I'd much rather they reintegrated scenes like Jerjerrod's.

[Stravo]

I got mine on Friday and watched AOTC, ROTS and ANH. My immediate reaction is that at least ANH looks even more amazing and sharp then any of the prequels do. Obviously the OT will benefit far more from extra resolution and picture quality. Like Vympel I too was surprised to see Threepio has a long bolt at the top of this head at the begining of ANH. I have seen this movie countless of times and it is the first time I noticed it.

For me the compilation commentaries have been a gold mine of good storytelling background stuff about the movies and how they were made. The main reason I only got through three movies this weekend is that after watching the movie I then repeat it again with the compilation commentary.

Here are some nice tid bits so far I have gleaned from those commentaries:

There was an actual mention of Star Wars v Star Trek, in AOTC when Obi Wan takes his fighter to Geonosis and hooks up to the hyperdrive unit the SFX guy mentions that he was told by GL to tone down the streaking effects for the hyperdrive because it was too reminscent of ST warp drive streaks from the movies. What was interesting was the way he prefaced it which raised my eyebrows he says "And then I got in trouble for a little Star Wars v. Star Trek content in this coming scene" so I of course being part of this site for years half expected some sort of slip about fire power or even a passing statement about the debate itself probably jokingly but I should have known better. Still it was a nice little aside.

The cast commentaries are generally very cool especially when you get to hear from people like Alec Guiness or Peter Mayhew. Unfortunately Carrie Fisher's are ridiculously trite and full of self depracation and shitty humourous observations - for example in ANH she says "The script at the end says the princess turns to the audience and she is staggeringly beatuful. Well, I didn't feel comfrotable with that until I crossed out the 'LY' and the 'beautiful' and that made me feel better" Thanks Carrie now STFU. I'd rather hear the sound guy drone on about his sound library than this shit.

Harrison is so dry and serious that you have to wonder how the hell he could play cool people like Solo and Inidiana Jones.

Mark Hammil is such a fanboy and I love his geekness.

Yet another counterpoint to George's insistance that this was all planned out - in the commentary during the Battle of Yavin a production guy notes that GL came to him with a last minute change as they were wrapping up filming on ANH. He said he wanted to insert a scene where Vader survives. The guy complains that it smacks of setting up a sequel and its kind of cheesy (whatever the term for that was in the 70's). So obvioulsy Vader surviving was not in the shooting script and not even planned until GL decides to do it near the end of the movie. He really needs to let this "I knew it all along" shit go. Too much evidence to the contrary out there.

GL makes a statement at the end of ANH commentary that if you have the technology and the ability and artist should go back and fix up his artwork. He goes on to say that it happens all the time - every artist and writer always goes back to redo their work. Ahem, I don't think we have a new edition of any of Steinbeck's work, The Sistine Chapel was not touched up by Michaelangelo after it was completed, Shakespeare didn't release "Hamlet, the Special Edition" I have heard this argument before that a piece of art is never really complete - it's usually an argument from filmmakers. GL however is clear that no one else should - he complains about colorization of films and special editions released by the studio and not the director. So I guess that means we will be seeing new expanded editions of this trilogy until the day he dies.

There is a discussion by the fight coordinator in ROTS about "power levels" and how GL created a chart for him of where each character stood in terms of overall fighting power on a scale of 1-10 and the numbers acted as a sort of Richter Scale so that the difference between each number represents a very large difference.

Obi-Wan is a strong 8, Anakin in ROTS is a 9, Emperor and Yoda are clearly 10's. The one thing I don't agree with however is his assesment that Obi Wan would have won the duel with Anakin but he was holding back throughout most of the fight, in his words he was like a man taking a beating from his lover not wanting to lash out so Obi Wan is just weathering the storm of Anakin's blows.

If that is what he wanted to choreograph then he failed because my impression was Obi Wan knew he was outmatched and was finding a way to win an advatange against Anakin, basically using his mastery of Soretsu, the defensive lightsaber style, to survive long enough to put Anakin in a position where they were either both killed or Obi Wan could gain an advantage because he just wasn't strong enough to take out Anakin by ability alone. He had to use the one advatange he had over Anakin which was experience. IMO he was clearly losing and totally on the defensive. I didn't see any hesitation on his part either, hell I saw clear killing blows attempted on his part in the very early parts of the duel.

I'll update with more observations as I watch ESB and ROTJ. I don't think I can bring myself to watch TPM even for the commentaries.

[Elfdart]

Yet another counterpoint to George's insistance that this was all planned out - in the commentary during the Battle of Yavin a production guy notes that GL came to him with a last minute change as they were wrapping up filming on ANH. He said he wanted to insert a scene where Vader survives. The guy complains that it smacks of setting up a sequel and its kind of cheesy (whatever the term for that was in the 70's). So obvioulsy Vader surviving was not in the shooting script and not even planned until GL decides to do it near the end of the movie. He really needs to let this "I knew it all along" shit go. Too much evidence to the contrary out there.

Not this shit again.

If anyone needs to let it go, it's ass-hurt fanboys thinking that because a filmmaker doesn't document every idea that pops into his head as it happens, he couldn't have possibly thought of it beforehand. The various drafts, as well as the script for Star Wars have been online for years. Show me the one where Vader is killed. Because, to use AHFB logic, if Lucas didn't include such a scene in the script that they were using, then he couldn't possibly have been thinking of killing off Vader in the film, which means...

...Vader survives!

By the way, where and when did George Lucas say that the story of the series "was all planned out"? I detect a straw man here.

Second (assuming for shits and giggles that he really did say he had it "all planned out"), so what if Lucas did just make it up as he went along? What difference does it make?

[El Moose Monstero]

By the way, where and when did George Lucas say that the story of the series "was all planned out"? I detect a straw man here.

Not to take part in the debate here, but as a driveby comment since I watched it last week - if you have the DVD release for EpIV, you can listen to what sounds like a partial collection of the same people from the blu-ray commentaries (Lucas, sound guy, carrie fisher).

I can't quote exactly as I don't have the memory, but he talks about having it all planned out in a 200 page script before making Episode IV, drawing his inspiration from a Saturday matinee type show. During that discussion, he implies but does not explicitly state that the key plot points from the films were already mapped out - i.e. Luke and Leia's relationship.

[Stravo]

My dislike to Lucas' dishonesty in re-writing his own history sprung up from the various interviews he's given over the years but really came to the fore during his commentaries in the films where he continues to state without reservation that it was "as I intended" from the start. In looking up more I stumbled across this site: http://secrethistoryofstarwars.com/index.html based on a book of the same title.

Here is a quote from that book:

And the most extreme exaggeration yet, where he makes another infamous claim to having a "Tragedy of Darth Vader" script:
"The films are designed to be one movie. It started out as the tragedy of Darth Vader, it was meant to be one movie, you never knew what came ahead, you never knew what came behind, but in order to write it, I had to write a backstory first...and the subtitle of the movie really was The Tragedy ofDarth Vader. It started out with this monster coming in, throwing everybody around, threatening people, choking guys, and halfway through the movie you realise the monster is actually a man. He's the father of the hero. And then at the
end of the movie you realise that this son inspires the monster, or the father, to be the hero of the movie, and that he'd been living this terrible life. You know, trapped in this suit, he sold his soul to the devil— and all that stuff was supposed to be stronger than it was when I ended up breaking it into three parts. And the icon of Darth Vader became so strong that he was
the icon of evil, it was hard to sort of think of him as a tragic character...now with [the prequel trilogy] in place, I hope people think of it as... The Tragedy ofDarth Vader, which [the story] was originally meant to be." 938
Amusingly, an exchange between Francis Coppola and George Lucas in a 1999 BBC documentary while reminiscing about early Star Wars drafts that Coppola read has Lucas fumble clumsily about having Darth as the father in that original script, to which Coppola exclaims: "Really?"
"You finished the script and then you gave it to me," Coppola remembers as the two eat lunch. "I thought it was terrific. And then you totally changed it! And I kept saying 'Why are you changing it?' What was it that— how did that script differ? I know that you added the two robots at the beginning, but what was it that the script that I read, how did that differ? Other than that opening, was that the main difference?"
Lucas shifts uncomfortably in his seat, saying "Well, there was a lot of character difference," and fumbles through a stuttered explanation before stating, "I had Luke and Leia sort of both in it, and um...Darth Vader, the father, was actually there, he was the father."
"Really?" Coppola interrupts. "He was—"
"He was their father," Lucas cuts him off.'
What a surprise that not Coppola, nor anyone who saw the early drafts, has any recollection of this, or the infamous Tragedy ofDarth Vader script Lucas now claims to have written. In fact, is it any wonder that just as Lucas wrote into Episode III itself a Sith legend titled "The Tragedy of Darth Plagueis," Lucas himself suddenly began talking of his own legend titled "The Tragedy of Darth Vader"?
It is unfortunate that Lucas has chosen this dishonesty, both for his own integrity and for the future scholars of cinema who will be misled on the origins of the most popular film of all time by the very creator of it. It is not difficult to understand and sympathize with Lucas' motives for exaggerating the history of his story—what started as an exaggeration in 1980 grew more and more over the years, and as it did, so too did the importance of keeping it secret. At the time Lucas made his initial statements he could not have possibly have known any of the behind-the¬scenes information and early drafts would ever be leaked out or published, or that his comments would be collected and analysed. And, indeed, this would not have even been possible until recently—due to the availability of said information and the communication of the internet. It is no small wonder then that the information and speculation I have presented here are becoming more and more common amongst online fans.
My initial goal in writing this work was to make known the truth that Father Skywalker and Darth Vader were not the same character until well after the first Star Wars film was released, and to chart the origin and evolution of this fascinating character. This is the very first time this theory has been published in any form, though it is not the first time it has been brought up. I was not made aware of such a possibility until around 2003, when Noah Henson on a discussion board at The
Force dot Net brought up the fact that Darth Vader does not appear in any form in the earliest drafts of Star Wars, and therefore that the accepted notion that Anakin Skywalker was always the main part of the backstory must be inaccurate. This came as a result of the recent publishing of the book The Annotated Screenplays, which provided synopses of Lucas' early drafts for the original trilogy, which I myself had not read at the time. This got me thinking, and as I read the actual early drafts of Star Wars, which have been available for years, I realised that this was true. Researching as many vintage George Lucas interviews as possible, it became obvious that Lucas clearly had in mind an entirely different series in 1977, and I soon began to connect the dots on this decades-old conspiracy. At first I could not even believe it myself— after all, having grown up with the films, and having read many Lucas interviews, the notions of Anakin's backstory being the first genesis for Star Wars and of the entire series blueprinted in an extra-long script were simply accepted.
But as my detective work became more and more intense I began to see a clear evolution in the story—and backstory—of Star Wars, and intrinsically tied to it all, Darth Vader's story. The evidence in favour of my suspicions was overwhelming, and I became frustrated that this had been suppressed from the public. My frustration soon turned to fascination, however, as I uncovered the secret history of Star Wars, untold, locked away all these years and unknown by nearly all. It illuminated an utterly fascinating process of creation, and although disappointed by Lucas for acts I deemed deceptive, I found even more admiration for him through the sheer ingenuity with which he invented his saga, all the while keeping the public thinking he had it all figured out!

This is not about criticising the man for not having it planned out. It's about the abject dishonesty and disinformation being put out there by him about his so called plan. Star Wars is clearly a standalone movie. I was there on line in the summer of 77 and saw it and there was no Episode IV, No A New Hope, on the title crawl. It was simply Star Wars. The story in and of itself made absolute sense.

Was I thrilled that there were sequels? OF COURSE I was. Was I shocked at the revelation of Vader as Luke's father? Damn right, one of the greatest plot twists in a movie ever. Do I care that this was all made up as he went along? Hell no. Good for him.

What I don't like is the lying and rewriting history and the fanboys who swallow it all whole and nod and ask for more. The man wrote a classic, one of the greatest sci fi epics of all time, but don't piss on my leg George and tell me it's raining.

Read the book. I just started getting into it and it is very well done and sums up everything I had always suspected for quite some time. The website is really cool too, it explores things like why is Star Wars and ESB so good but eveything starts to go down hill after that story wise?

[Elfdart]

By the way, where and when did George Lucas say that the story of the series "was all planned out"? I detect a straw man here.

Not to take part in the debate here, but as a driveby comment since I watched it last week - if you have the DVD release for EpIV, you can listen to what sounds like a partial collection of the same people from the blu-ray commentaries (Lucas, sound guy, carrie fisher).

I can't quote exactly as I don't have the memory, but he talks about having it all planned out in a 200 page script before making Episode IV, drawing his inspiration from a Saturday matinee type show. During that discussion, he implies but does not explicitly state that the key plot points from the films were already mapped out - i.e. Luke and Leia's relationship.

This is the problem with fanboys: taking everything Lucas says literally. Luke and Leia were meant to be the same character (early production art shows Luke as a girl wearing the same jumpsuit Padme wore in AOTC), but were split off when Lucas realized one character wasn't enough to handle everything he had in mind and probably because he couldn't make up his mind whether the main character should be male or female. So yes, they were twins all along.

In addition to blind Nerd Rage there's a very poor understanding of how the creative process works. A writer comes up with all sorts of ideas. Some he follows through with and others are set aside. Now the clever artist is smart enough not to just throw all that material away since it can often be used later -either as-is or with some changes. The idea for having Han Solo be a suave gambler and snappy dresser complete with Clark Gable mustache may not have been used in Star Wars, but Lucas was smart enough to bring it back as Lando Calrissian in The Empire Strikes Back. Which means Lucas had the idea for the Lando character before he had made ANH, let alone TESB. No doubt the AHFB, when hearing this, will shit his pants in impotent fury ("George Luca$ is teh LIURRRRRR!").

Time after time in all the sequels/prequels Lucas uses characters, places, names, plot lines, artwork and even framed shots that were created for Star Wars before he started actually making the movie, but for one reason or another weren't used. The idea that Lucas and/or his subordinates didn't really think of any of that stuff and "George Luca$ is teh LIURRRRRR!" when he says they did is moronic.

[Elfdart]

My dislike to Lucas' dishonesty in re-writing his own history sprung up from the various interviews he's given over the years but really came to the fore during his commentaries in the films where he continues to state without reservation that it was "as I intended" from the start. In looking up more I stumbled across this site: http://secrethistoryofstarwars.com/index.html based on a book of the same title.

Just as I thought: Someone other than Galvatron has now waded into that pile of shit and thinks it's creme brulee.

This is not about criticising the man for not having it planned out. It's about the abject dishonesty and disinformation being put out there by him about his so called plan.

So that's why Mark Hamill and Carrie Fisher were signed to do three Star Wars movies when they did the first one. It's why Lucas gave up his director's fee to get all sequel rights. That George Lucas is one sneaky motherfucker, isn't he?

Star Wars is clearly a standalone movie. I was there on line in the summer of 77 and saw it and there was no Episode IV, No A New Hope, on the title crawl. It was simply Star Wars. The story in and of itself made absolute sense.

Your point?

Was I thrilled that there were sequels? OF COURSE I was. Was I shocked at the revelation of Vader as Luke's father? Damn right, one of the greatest plot twists in a movie ever. Do I care that this was all made up as he went along? Hell no. Good for him.

What I don't like is the lying and rewriting history and the fanboys who swallow it all whole and nod and ask for more. The man wrote a classic, one of the greatest sci fi epics of all time, but don't piss on my leg George and tell me it's raining.

What "lying"?

Read the book.

I read it back when it was online. Next time I get the urge to read the paranoid ravings of a disgruntled fanboy with delusions of grandeur and a throbbing hate-on for a successful artist, I'll just pick up a copy of Mark David Chapman's diary.

[Darth Tedious]

Wait, wait, wait...

How the fuck is anyone managing to disbelieve that Vader wasn't going to be Luke's father from the get-go??

I suppose Vader being Dutch for father was just a huge fucking coincidence...

[VF5SS]

Well from a certain point of view, "Vader" is also a part of the word "invader."

Plus it sounds cool :d

[Anguirus]

Elfdart, speaking as a relatively unbiased observer (what the fuck do I care who came up with what when?) I would like to let you know that you aren't actually making much of a case here. Do you have any evidence that the material in Secret History is fraudulent? (Note that I have not read the book.)

It shouldn't need to be pointed out, but "actors were signed up for sequel deals, and GL wanted sequels too" is not remotely the same thing as "Lucas had the saga in something like its present form planned out from day 1." Everything I've read over the years that wasn't a GL interview suggests that Vader's relationship to Luke was decided during pre-production of Empire.

On the other hand, sometimes it seems like you are arguing that we simply shouldn't care about Lucas' creative process, only the end result. However, if this is your argument, then you are having the wrong one; Stravo et al. aren't talking about the end result, only frustration with Lucas' possible lack of candor.

[Elfdart]

Elfdart, speaking as a relatively unbiased observer (what the fuck do I care who came up with what when?) I would like to let you know that you aren't actually making much of a case here. Do you have any evidence that the material in Secret History is fraudulent? (Note that I have not read the book.)

You can start with the front cover. What "secret" did the author uncover? All his sources are citations from newspapers, magazines, TV interviews and so on. The only thing he adds is his own paranoia.

It shouldn't need to be pointed out, but "actors were signed up for sequel deals, and GL wanted sequels too" is not remotely the same thing as "Lucas had the saga in something like its present form planned out from day 1."

It depends on what you mean by "something like its present form". Do I think he had every detail planned out? No. Do I think he had a general idea of how the story would (if he was able to do the whole thing) unfold and how the relationships between the main characters would play out? Yes.

Everything I've read over the years that wasn't a GL interview suggests that Vader's relationship to Luke was decided during pre-production of Empire.

Since the story idea came from George Lucas, then he is the only person on the face of the earth who would know. Writers and creators don't keep notarized, witnessed documents about where and when they came up with an idea. Anyone other than George Lucas is only speculating on the subject. To call Lucas a liar (as the author does repeatedly) without any grounds to back it up is AHFB territory.

Nice choice of weasel words, by the way ("Vader's relationship to Luke was decided"). As if a filmmaker who hasn't yet decided about a plot twist is proof that he wasn't thinking/planning/wanting to do it much earlier.

On the other hand, sometimes it seems like you are arguing that we simply shouldn't care about Lucas' creative process, only the end result. However, if this is your argument, then you are having the wrong one; Stravo et al. aren't talking about the end result, only frustration with Lucas' possible lack of candor.

So now it's his possible lack of candor? Watch those goalposts fly! I don't object to someone showing interest in how an artist goes about creating a work of art, or speculating on the subject. What I object to are people who, basking in their own ignorance, accuse the artist of being a liar without any evidence to back it up. Until someone either invents a mind-reading machine or finds an authentic note or journal entry or something showing that the idea of Vader being Luke's father didn't pop into Lucas' head until 1978, that's all this is: speculation -with a side of AHFB neuroses.

[Batman]

Yes, possible lack of candor. Kindly remember that there's more one person other than you involved in this thread and it was Stravo who complained about Lucas having lied about the 'I had it all planned out from the start' angle, not Anguirus.

[Anguirus]

You can start with the front cover. What "secret" did the author uncover? All his sources are citations from newspapers, magazines, TV interviews and so on. The only thing he adds is his own paranoia.

So...NO fraudulent material then, because it's all sourced. The "secret" seems to come from the fact that his research comes up with different conclusions than "official" reference material that Lucas had a hand in.

It depends on what you mean by "something like its present form". Do I think he had every detail planned out? No. Do I think he had a general idea of how the story would (if he was able to do the whole thing) unfold and how the relationships between the main characters would play out? Yes.

If you don't want to keep arguing in circles with everyone (and, everyone, that goes to you too) you need to lay out what you think specifically. And, since you called SHoSW fraudulent, it would make sense for you to point out what specific claims of the author you disagree with.

Here, I'll start: I am deeply skeptical of claims that Darth Vader was considered to be Luke's father by ANYONE before Empire was scripted, and of claims that Leia was the "other" Skywalker twin before Jedi was scripted. This doesn't affect my opinion that the former plot element is awesome and the latter plot element is, well, mediocre but it let them wrap things up. (Note that Leia being the "other" opens up a deep plot hole in Empire. Ben apparently doesn't know about the "other" and Yoda is content to rest some of his hopes on the "other" whilst still advising Luke to leave Leia to die at the hands of Vader.)

I think plot elements like "the Empire loses in the end of the saga" are a little broad to be of interest.

Nice choice of weasel words, by the way ("Vader's relationship to Luke was decided"). As if a filmmaker who hasn't yet decided about a plot twist is proof that he wasn't thinking/planning/wanting to do it much earlier.

Hmm, I hadn't thought of that connotation. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.

You realize I actually like you, right dude? I wanted to let you know that you hadn't actually introduced anything to the thread other than "I hate that Secret History guy."

So now it's his possible lack of candor? Watch those goalposts fly!

How can I move the goalposts in my first post?

What I object to are people who, basking in their own ignorance, accuse the artist of being a liar without any evidence to back it up. Until someone either invents a mind-reading machine or finds an authentic note or journal entry or something showing that the idea of Vader being Luke's father didn't pop into Lucas' head until 1978, that's all this is: speculation -with a side of AHFB neuroses.

Film history is allowed to be more complicated than just "interview screenwriter, go home, break out the cocaine."

Also, what the fuck is an AHFB, and what are my neuroses?

[RogueIce]

Here, I'll start: I am deeply skeptical of claims that Darth Vader was considered to be Luke's father by ANYONE before Empire was scripted, and of claims that Leia was the "other" Skywalker twin before Jedi was scripted. This doesn't affect my opinion that the former plot element is awesome and the latter plot element is, well, mediocre but it let them wrap things up. (Note that Leia being the "other" opens up a deep plot hole in Empire. Ben apparently doesn't know about the "other" and Yoda is content to rest some of his hopes on the "other" whilst still advising Luke to leave Leia to die at the hands of Vader.)

Something I've always wondered about then, with the Other Skywalker.

Which other character would have fit? Because there's nobody else from the first two movies who I could buy as a sibling of Luke, and I doubt they would have A) just inserted a whole new character into RotJ for somebody that important, or B) just left it dangling and unresolved.

Unless it was going to be Wedge Skywalker instead of Antilles. Which would have been awesome...

[Eternal_Freedom]

Nah, Wedge as a character is awesome enough, especially in the Rogue/Wraith Squadron books.

Even positing, say, Han or Lando as the Other Dude would leave the same plot hole as it does with Leia, but oh well.

[Stravo]

Here's the thing. If you think someone is lying you find evidence that you can impeach him with. You know, pesky little things like conflicting statements, witness statements like co-workers and colleagues who say one thing while the person claims another. In the end it's all about credibility. Either you believe that a bunch of written statements from interviews, recollections from colleagues and evidence from the person's own writing that conflicts with a statement given by someone or you believe the person.

Elfdart is saying we can't know for certain what was in GL's mind for us to say one way or another. What I'm saying is that looking at things from the perspective of all the evidence in play (annotated screenplays, statements by co-workers, GL's past interviews, news articles) contradicting the one person's say so I have to give it to the evidence and not the person. IMO GL's credibility that the Tragedy of Darth Vader was all there before Star Wars was even filmed is stretched beyond belief in light of the contravening facts. He has reasons to make that claim, the news articles and other sources are merely stating what was at the time and have no reason to say otherwise. Either GL is lying or the rest of the people, news articles, other written sources are lying. Which is more credible?

When polticians and others are investigated for lying, when people are sued for fraud and coverups this is exactly how things are fereted out. If you have someone on the stand you impeach them with precisely the kind of information that is contained in the book and the website when you want to show that they may be lying.

Example of how this works:

You say you had the Tragedy of Darth Vader all planned out and even written down before Star Wars was filmed correct?
Yes
Well then can you explain to me why Francis Ford Coppolla, your mentor, a man you shared all your scripts with for writing suggestions and feedback expressed confusion on a key plot point that Darth Vader was Luke's father?
I can't explain it.

See how that works?

I'm not going to touch on the claims of paranoia and such, form what I can tell the author is laying out what is in the record. He is doing what a lot of investigative journalists do, making inferences from available facts. He's not pulling these sources out of his ass.

[Elfdart]

One deleted scene series I loved is "Jerjerrod's Conflict" - just wow. That actor was so wasted. His deleted scenes should've stayed in the movie*. In any event, its great to see how closely the RotJ novel followed the original shooting script, before edits - a lot of the stuff in the novel is lifted directly from these deleted scenes.

*In particular, where he tries to block Vader and Vader chokes a bitch is awesome, particularly where the Red Guards react in the exact same way they did to Yoda's presence in RotS.

That's Michael Pennington. I just saw him the other night in the Nicol Williamson version of Hamlet and he's very good. Quite a few first-rate actors got "wasted" in these movies because they played only bit parts. Of course you could say the same about countless other movies, like Lee Marvin playing a bit part as a sailor in The Caine Mutiny. Watching ANH again, I think Phil Brown (Uncle Owen) gave as good a performance as Peter Cushing, Alec Guinness or anyone else, though it was a smaller and less-appealing role.

[Bakustra]

Here, I'll start: I am deeply skeptical of claims that Darth Vader was considered to be Luke's father by ANYONE before Empire was scripted, and of claims that Leia was the "other" Skywalker twin before Jedi was scripted. This doesn't affect my opinion that the former plot element is awesome and the latter plot element is, well, mediocre but it let them wrap things up. (Note that Leia being the "other" opens up a deep plot hole in Empire. Ben apparently doesn't know about the "other" and Yoda is content to rest some of his hopes on the "other" whilst still advising Luke to leave Leia to die at the hands of Vader.)

Something I've always wondered about then, with the Other Skywalker.

Which other character would have fit? Because there's nobody else from the first two movies who I could buy as a sibling of Luke, and I doubt they would have A) just inserted a whole new character into RotJ for somebody that important, or B) just left it dangling and unresolved.

Unless it was going to be Wedge Skywalker instead of Antilles. Which would have been awesome...

What has come out over the years suggests that the "Other" was conceived of as being introduced after ROTJ when Lucas put together his plan for 9 movies. She would be Luke's sister, but not Leia. At that point, Jerjerrod was going to replace Vader as the face-to-face antagonist after ROTJ, and he would be the Emperor's young son. The Emperor himself would not have confronted the heroes until movie 9 aboard the Second Death Star. Leia became the "Other" very early in the development of ROTJ, roughly around where Lucas actually started working on the script- because the initial scripts for ROTJ already saw the condensation of 6-9 into one movie. So at no point was the "Other" planned to be a major character that only appeared in ROTJ, because by the time work started in earnest on ROTJ, she had already become Leia.

Note that this makes people who whine about 7-9 never coming out fairly pathetic, because the original plots for those movies were condensed into ROTJ and so there's literally no point to making them. The Emperor is dead and the story of the movies is concluded.

[Galvatron]

At that point, Jerjerrod was going to replace Vader as the face-to-face antagonist after ROTJ, and he would be the Emperor's young son.

I don't recall that ever being the plan (even according to Michael Kaminski's book), although it does sound eerily similar to my own ideas.

[Bakustra]

At that point, Jerjerrod was going to replace Vader as the face-to-face antagonist after ROTJ, and he would be the Emperor's young son.

I don't recall that ever being the plan (even according to Michael Kaminski's book), although it does sound eerily similar to my own ideas.

I'm pretty sure that he was going to be the face-to-face antagonist at some point, as a reinterpretation of Valorum in the early drafts of The Star Wars, but I may have mixed up the particulars somehow.

[Elfdart]

If you don't want to keep arguing in circles with everyone (and, everyone, that goes to you too) you need to lay out what you think specifically. And, since you called SHoSW fraudulent, it would make sense for you to point out what specific claims of the author you disagree with.

I didn't say it was "fraudulent". I called it "paranoid" and a "pile of shit". Kindly keep your words in your mouth where they belong and don't try to put them in my mouth.

Here, I'll start: I am deeply skeptical of claims that Darth Vader was considered to be Luke's father by ANYONE before Empire was scripted, and of claims that Leia was the "other" Skywalker twin before Jedi was scripted.

It's one thing to be skeptical about it, or to say that there's no concrete evidence for these twists before TESB or ROTJ, respectively. It's another to jump from these factoids to the conclusion that Lucas is a serial liar who couldn't have thought of these ideas earlier.

This doesn't affect my opinion that the former plot element is awesome and the latter plot element is, well, mediocre but it let them wrap things up. (Note that Leia being the "other" opens up a deep plot hole in Empire. Ben apparently doesn't know about the "other" and Yoda is content to rest some of his hopes on the "other" whilst still advising Luke to leave Leia to die at the hands of Vader.)

No, it means Ben didn't think Leia had a chance, seeing as how she was imprisoned by Vader at the time. You remember that part? The reason Luke was running off to Bespin in the first place?

I have no idea whether Luke and Leia were always meant to be literally brother and sister or whether it was just metaphorical: splitting one character in two. Whether the characters were meant to be biologically related from the beginning is not important. I didn't like the twist myself since Leia could just as easily have a Jedi lineage of her own, and it makes the GWTW-style love triangle into a huge cop-out.

It does work in some ways, though:

1) Waiting until near the end of the series to introduce such an important character (one who is never mentioned before) is lame beyond belief.

2) It cements the idea that Jedi are the product of a rare genetic quirk AND training in the Jedi arts, making them rare to begin with and very difficult to replace.

I think plot elements like "the Empire loses in the end of the saga" are a little broad to be of interest.

I've already explained why I think the idea of Vader being Luke's father was in Lucas' head from the beginning. The idea of Luke and Leia being siblings was there probably the moment "Luke" was split into two characters -i.e. very early in the creation of the story.

Also, what the fuck is an AHFB, and what are my neuroses?

Ass Hurt Fan Boy. I wasn't referring to you in particular, but anyone who is convinced they know what Lucas was or wasn't thinking 30-40 years ago, to the point where they repeatedly call him a liar is quite neurotic, or in SDN parlance: a fucktard.

[SylasGaunt]

I suppose Vader being Dutch for father was just a huge fucking coincidence...

Yes. There's hundreds of languages in the world. That a word happens to have a meaning in one of them isn't remarkable. This is like Bible code bullshit - with a big enough pool, you can find just about anything you want.

Does Dutch have any special meaning to George Lucas (e.g., does he or his family speak it)? If you can demonstrate that, maybe it wasn't coincidence.

But without something like that.... yes, it's plausibly just a coincidence.

See the whole SyFy = Syphilis thing for a less pleasant version of this effect.


I've started watching through it. ANH looks really good, and I was happy to see that it was cleaned up from the DVD version. I'll have to give ESB a look next.