It's 1980 and you've been handed the reins to the franchise

[CmdrWilkens]

I'm glad that at least havokeff gets it. Some of the other replies in this thread really make me think that Yoda was on to something when he told Luke, "You must unlearn what you have learned."

The problem is that RotJ (Ewoks aside) has a very powerful message and was incredibly successful ALREADY. When you mess with the root of that formula then you are venturing into a potential minefield. By the time RotJ is slated to come out (and the clamour will certainly be there to get it done by '83) the fanbase is already highly entrenched with some prevailing views developing. However the biggest thing is that we are not yet in the era of disillusionment and skepticism in mass media that the late 90s and the early years of this millenium have shown. The audience craves, not simplicity because that is never the case, but rather a clear and consistent vision of characters. If you go muddying up our visions of the core characters by introducing something like either a mom who sleeps around for Luke or a rapist for Vader then trying to keep Luke as a singularly heroic character or trying to storyline a redemption for Vader becomes tricky to pull off at best.

Again yes you can throw all sorts of new ideas out there, the OP specifically asked for it, but that doesn't mean they would work as well or better than the original premise. I think tweaking it would be best, avoiding a DSII issue and getting rid of the Ewoks (or at least making them fierce instead of cudly, more along the lines of the early concept sketches) are refinements that coudl help but don't affect the hugely successful core story.

[Adrian Laguna]

getting rid of the Ewoks (or at least making them fierce instead of cudly, more along the lines of the early concept sketches)

The Ewoks are fierce. Their attack on the Stormtroopers is ruthless, uncompromising, and well planned. It's not their fault the enemy had a millennial tech advantage. The only things I might change in Endor are show the Stormies kicking more Ewok ass, and the Rebel commandos playing a larger role.

[Galvatron]

Really? Who cares? How about everyone who has seen SW the way it is right now.. you know, how Vader started out as Anakin, on the right side, turned into a jerk and was redeemed.

We know that Anakin had redeeming qualities once-upon-a-time. He was the great pilot/hero, loved Luke's mother, etc. But this version of Vader hasn't done anything good except spawn Skywalker. He was an adulterer before he even fell to the Dark Side.

My version of Vader is one of the good guys in Episode I. It isn't until Episode II that he starts down the dark path.

And, lest you forget, the real Anakin became a mass murderer of women and children before he fell to the dark side.

Do you like what I did there? How I used your exact words to describe Vader as he is RIGHT NOW!

You amuse me. Of course Anakin/Vader is an asshole. The way the movies stand now, we see him BECOME an asshole and then, at the end of his life, TURN AWAY and become the hero of prophecy.

Galvatron's Vader appears to start in ass-land, and then Luke would be driven to save him simply because of their biological link, and not because he is the hero he has looked up to for his entire life.

My Vader would also start out as a good guy. Not necessarily a likeable one, but a good guy nonetheless. The real Anakin was an annoying whiner. So why such an attachment to him?

How would Luke's mother not telling Obi-Wan who Luke's real father is make him a "moron"?

Because Obi-Wan is Vader's master, Anakin's best friend, and has the fucking Force.

Obi-Wan doesn't witness the deed. And he's not omniscient.

Again... How does Obi-Wan not knowing the truth make him a "twit"?

How exactly do you and Galvatron intend to explain Obi-Wan's ignorance? It's not remotely plausible.

It is if you use your brain. Why would Obi-Wan know? He wasn't there. He didn't see Vader and Anakin's wife getting it on. Neither did Anakin. Neither did Palpatine. No one else knows. So why should Obi-Wan?

[CmdrWilkens]

getting rid of the Ewoks (or at least making them fierce instead of cudly, more along the lines of the early concept sketches)

The Ewoks are fierce. Their attack on the Stormtroopers is ruthless, uncompromising, and well planned. It's not their fault the enemy had a millennial tech advantage. The only things I might change in Endor are show the Stormies kicking more Ewok ass, and the Rebel commandos playing a larger role.

Their attack yes but after spending the previous hald an hour making them superstituous teddy bears who hug everybody in sight when they become part of the tribe makes them far too cute. The original concept sketches with barred fangs and gangly appearences would be much better suited than the cuddly lovable ewoks that you really have to immerse yourself to see how they won.

[Havok]

Really? Who cares? How about everyone who has seen SW the way it is right now.. you know, how Vader started out as Anakin, on the right side, turned into a jerk and was redeemed.

We know that Anakin had redeeming qualities once-upon-a-time. He was the great pilot/hero, loved Luke's mother, etc. But this version of Vader hasn't done anything good except spawn Skywalker. He was an adulterer before he even fell to the Dark Side.

Uh, in case you missed it, Anakin was a MASS MURDER. That's a little worse than an adulterer, and you seem to have no problems with accepting that his redemption is good.

Do you like what I did there? How I used your exact words to describe Vader as he is RIGHT NOW!

You amuse me. Of course Anakin/Vader is an asshole. The way the movies stand now, we see him BECOME an asshole and then, at the end of his life, TURN AWAY and become the hero of prophecy.

Galvatron's Vader appears to start in ass-land, and then Luke would be driven to save him simply because of their biological link, and not because he is the hero he has looked up to for his entire life.

Man, did you read the OP at all? It is 1980. There is NO ROTJ, NO TPM, NO AOTC, NO ROTS. After two movies Galvatron's Vader and the real Vader ARE THE EXACT SAME GUY. You don't know where Vader starts whether it is ass-land or fucking candy land. And what makes Luke's wanting to save his father any different in EITHER scenario. They are BOTH Darth Vader to Luke. It doesn't matter what he did as young Anakin or young Vader. A. Because Luke wasn't around to see ANY of it and know ZERO about it and B. Luke BELIEVES there is still good in him, thus his attempt at redemption. That stands in either version.

P.S. I'm glad I amuse you.

How would Luke's mother not telling Obi-Wan who Luke's real father is make him a "moron"?

Because Obi-Wan is Vader's master, Anakin's best friend, and has the fucking Force.

News Flash. Palpatine had the Force and didn't know that Anakin had TWO children.
NEWS FLASH. ANAKIN HAD THE FORCE and didn't know that HE had two kids.

Again... How does Obi-Wan not knowing the truth make him a "twit"?

How exactly do you and Galvatron intend to explain Obi-Wan's ignorance? It's not remotely plausible.

Haven't you ever heard of a secret? Being a Jedi does not make you omniscient. If it did the Jedi might have avoided that little annoyance called EXTINCTION a tad better.

You immediately assume that Anakin, who isn't even mentioned by name in ANH or TESB, is the same person as Vader

"Luke's father" is already established as the best star pilot in the galaxy and a hero of the Clone Wars. He is unnamed, but he IS a character. When Vader says that he is Luke's father, that is what I understood. At the very least the possibility was rather strongly on the table, and Luke was immediately angry at Obi-Wan for not telling him. Notice the lack of Obi-Wan showing up at the end of ESB saying "Holy shit, I did not see that coming!"

Exactly. ""Luke's father" is already established as the best star pilot in the galaxy and a hero of the Clone Wars. He is unnamed, but he IS a character." And Vader is established as the man that killed him. So we have two established SEPARATE characters. Luke is mad at Ben because he didn't tell him that VADER was his dad. Not that he didn't tell him that Anakin and Vader were the same person.

I call bullshit, because Anakin and Vader being the same person isn't explained until ROTJ.

Do you honestly think that Luke's emotional anguish over the true identity of his father was going to be followed up by "Hey, not to worry! Anakin didn't fall to the Dark Side, he was just a cuckold!"

Luke: "You know what? You may be my BIOLOGICAL father, but you're not my REAL father, and if there's any good in you I don't care. Eat lightsabre, bitch."

I'm not even sure what you are trying to say there.

If you were 20 and thought your dad died in Vietnam, because your uncle told you so and he WAS THERE and some other guy comes and tells you he is actually your father and has proof, do you immediately think "This guy and my dad must be the same person and my uncle is a fucking liar!" OR "This guy must be my REAL dad and the guy who I thought is my dad is still dead in Vietnam."

Probably not, but then again me and my uncle don't have the fucking Force. It also depends on if the guy is saying "Dude, I fucked your mom" or "Dude, I'm the father your uncle told you about, returned at long last!"

I think we can all safely say that just because you have the Force doesn't mean you automatically figure everything out, don't you?

Vader says only that he is Luke's father. Luke "searches his feelings" and realizes it is true. So now we have Luke knowing his father is Vader. Based on what Obi-Wan has said earlier, that Vader killed Luke's father, what is more likely now...

Vader is my real dad and Ben was wrong about that, but Vader still killed who Ben thought was my dad.

OR

Vader is my real dad and Ben LIED about that AND it turns out that he didn't actually kill the guy who Ben said was my dad, but never actually killed anyone and was the guy that Ben said died all along. It was just one point of view.

Yeah the second one makes SO much more sense.

At any rate, you analogy also fails because Star Wars is not real life. We are discussing Galvatron's artistic choice vs. Lucas' artistic choice. The former artist has now resorted to telling his critics that they "just don't get it" instead of considering why some people don't want Star Wars to be about who Padme's baby daddy.

Oh you are right SW isn't real life. We shouldn't be talking about it at all because movies don't ever try to convey real emotions or anything like that in them. Do I REALLY need the "eye rolling" emoticon here.

Remember just because Lucas didn't have Vader be Anakin in his first plot outlines, doesn't mean it wasn't a good direction to take the story. I'm not saying your take on Star Wars is without merit, but I believe it would be quite difficult to make it more compelling than the "real" one.

I'm not saying that it was a bad direction either, but Galvatron's version of having them be separate people makes WAY more sense to me than what Lucas ended up doing and it make Obi-Wan into NOT a fucking liar with "his own point of view". A love triangle between Anakin, Darth and Luke's mom, while not quite original, would be just as compelling as it was in ANH and TESB between Luke, Han and Leia.

[Adrian Laguna]

We know that Anakin had redeeming qualities once-upon-a-time. He was the great pilot/hero, loved Luke's mother, etc. But this version of Vader hasn't done anything good except spawn Skywalker. He was an adulterer before he even fell to the Dark Side.

Uh, in case you missed it, Anakin was a MASS MURDER. That's a little worse than an adulterer, and you seem to have no problems with accepting that his redemption is good.

You are ignoring the cultural make-up of the audience. Depending on how you portray it, an adulterer could actually be less redeemable than a mass murderer. Remember, in the US, sex is evil.

[Ryan Thunder]

Remember, in the US, sex is evil.

Parts of it, rather. Wouldn't do well to start painting everyone with the same brush, now, would it?

[Adrian Laguna]

You are ignoring the cultural make-up of the audience. Depending on how you portray it, an adulterer could actually be less redeemable than a mass murderer. Remember, in the US, sex is evil.

No actually it's more than that. For some reason the audience's reaction to a character's behaviour does not often fit with how bad the character's actions actually are. For example, from TVtropes.org:

"In Doctor Who it is heavy implied that the Master beat his wife, Lucy Saxon, a move that many fans decried as being beneath him. This is in spite of the fact that the Master has personally killed countless individuals, destroyed a large part of the universe with an entropy field, took over the Earth and tried to slaughter the human race, and once attempted to kill one of the Doctor's companions after taking over the body of her father and destroying his mind. What do you think he would do if he had a girlfriend?"

[Dooey Jo]

*el snipo*

Good thing that as per the OP ROTJ hasn't been made yet.

I thought as per the OP we were allowed to make our own films. That's how I'd make a RotJ where Luke has sex with the identical (but female) twin of his would-be father, his mother really was a whore, and the Emperor is played by a woman (which he really was in ESB). Well... either I do it, or someone else does a parody afterwards


But anyway, you are forgetting what the Emperor says in ESB: "The son of Skywalker must not become a Jedi".
In this version, Luke is in fact not the son of Skywalker at all (unless his mother's name was Skywalker, but that's not what the story implies), but the son of Vader, who is not a Skywalker (or is his name Darth Vader Skywalker?). If you want to do an alternate continuation, that's fine, but you'd probably have to change that line in your special edition release of ESB... Of course, you can say that the Emperor was also deceived but that's just convoluted: No-one knew, except for Vader and Luke, who found out through the force, but no-one else who had the force, not even the supremely force-using Emperor, or Obi-Wan who spent a long time together with both Luke and Vader, could find out the same way.

[NecronLord]

"In Doctor Who it is heavy implied that the Master beat his wife, Lucy Saxon, a move that many fans decried as being beneath him. This is in spite of the fact that the Master has personally killed countless individuals, destroyed a large part of the universe with an entropy field, took over the Earth and tried to slaughter the human race, and once attempted to kill one of the Doctor's companions after taking over the body of her father and destroying his mind. What do you think he would do if he had a girlfriend?"

I've never heard it described as 'beneath him.' And it wasn't heavily implied in that most people required the commentry to twig that 'actually, she's not hungover, that's meant to be a black eye.'

As for what I'd do. I'd do exactly what Lucas did, no changes, aside from maybe more ewok-killing on the Stormtroopers' part, and a bit more of the rebel commandos. Why mess with success?

[Havok]

But anyway, you are forgetting what the Emperor says in ESB: "The son of Skywalker must not become a Jedi".

OOOOOOOOO. Good fucking point. I forgot all about that line.
That does make Galvatron's version more complicated, now doesn't it. Still doable... well... wait...
If you take what the Emperor said in it's entirety, he wanted "The son of Skywalker" dead. It is Vader, who in this version, knows that Luke is actually his son and not Anakin's, that suggests that they turn him instead. If you look at it this way it could lend more weight to the Darth, Luke connection. If Luke was Aanakin's son, why would Vader want him around? This could actually help Galvatron's version.

[Anguirus]

My version of Vader is one of the good guys in Episode I. It isn't until Episode II that he starts down the dark path.

Ok, so then your challenge is to make Anakin, Vader, and Obi-Wan all distinct and likable heroes in Episode I.

And, lest you forget, the real Anakin became a mass murderer of women and children before he fell to the dark side.

A good point. Would we see Vader facing similar harsh circumstances (dead mother) in your take on the films? Because you have to split the story up between Anakin and Vader...though that would be a lot easier without the extraneous crap Lucas put in his prequels.

Obi-Wan doesn't witness the deed. And he's not omniscient.

Obi-Wan didn't witness Anakin fucking Padme in Episode III either, but he's not a moron and his connection to a power that is literally omniscient doesn't hurt either.

Uh, in case you missed it, Anakin was a MASS MURDER. That's a little worse than an adulterer, and you seem to have no problems with accepting that his redemption is good.

His killing sprees are at the absolute depth of a fall of a character was already shown to be heroic and appealing. "Luke's father" Anakin was already established as a hero figure by 1980: the task of this rewrite is to make Vader's early life heroic enough so that his fall is similarly compelling. And then you realize that you've just made Vader the central character of the saga again, and Anakin starts looking a bit extraneous.

Or, you could not bother making Vader a compelling character, but then Luke doesn't have as much of a reason to care about him.

For the nth time, it's not that you couldn't make this work, but it's just inherently tougher to make interesting.

Man, did you read the OP at all? It is 1980. There is NO ROTJ, NO TPM, NO AOTC, NO ROTS.

Don't patronize me, jackass. I've been reading this thread from the beginning. I was trying for days to figure out what bothered me about Galvatron's take on things, and I think I finally figured it out.

You don't know where Vader starts whether it is ass-land or fucking candy land.

I was going by the OP, where Vader was always dark and tortur-y. Also, without more detail his seduction of Anakin Skywalker's wife could get into serious sketch-ville.

A. Because Luke wasn't around to see ANY of it and know ZERO about it and B. Luke BELIEVES there is still good in him, thus his attempt at redemption.

He believes "Obi-Wan's bff" has good in him, not necessarily "sexed my mom and murdered Obi-Wan's bff."

And wait a sec! It's 1980! You have no idea that Luke thinks there's any good in Vader!

News Flash. Palpatine had the Force and didn't know that Anakin had TWO children.
NEWS FLASH. ANAKIN HAD THE FORCE and didn't know that HE had two kids.

Palpatine and Ana/Vader also wanted to crush all memory of his former life. Vader also did use the Force to find out about Leia in the end.

Obi-Wan is a very good friend of both men involved (possibly even of the woman) and is therefore in the perfect position to know everything. Why do you think Luke is pissed at him at the end of ESB?

What on earth makes you think a scene where Obi-Wan pleads ignorance to Luke is compelling?

Exactly. ""Luke's father" is already established as the best star pilot in the galaxy and a hero of the Clone Wars. He is unnamed, but he IS a character." And Vader is established as the man that killed him. So we have two established SEPARATE characters. Luke is mad at Ben because he didn't tell him that VADER was his dad. Not that he didn't tell him that Anakin and Vader were the same person.

Exactly right. Luke cares about his unnamed father. He doesn't care about Vader. If Vader and his unnamed father are not the same person, then he just has to feel skeezy, and not like "wow, my lifelong hero kicks puppies and murders children. And again, he will then be mad at Ben for being ignorant. That scene will be memorably brief. "Why didn't you tell me?" "I didn't know." "Okay."

Vader is my real dad and Ben was wrong about that, but Vader still killed who Ben thought was my dad.

OR

Vader is my real dad and Ben LIED about that AND it turns out that he didn't actually kill the guy who Ben said was my dad, but never actually killed anyone and was the guy that Ben said died all along. It was just one point of view.

Yeah the second one makes SO much more sense.

From a dramatic standpoint, it does. Mentors keeping information from Luke = interesting. Luke's hero being Luke's nemesis = interesting. Luke's mom being a cheater and Ben being ignorant? That's like anti-mythic.

Besides, think about the line itself:

"Obi-Wan never told you what happened to your father."

"He told me enough! He told me you killed him!"

"No, Luke. I am your father."

In this conversation, "your father" is understood as Anakin, aka "yet unnamed, bitchin' pilot, Obi-Wan's bff, all around good guy." Vader is telling Luke that Obi-Wan lied. Did Vader kill him? No, he claims. Vader is him.

That's the implication, anyway. Could Vader be lying, to drive a wedge between Ben and Luke? Sure. But isn't it so much more interesting that he tells the truth? That the good guy is the liar?

Notice that in this conversation it doesn't even appear that Vader knows what lie Obi used. He can tell that Luke's not thinking of him as his father, so he asks a leading question. If he killed Anakin, it would make more sense for him to say "The man I killed/Skywalker was not your father. I am!"

Oh you are right SW isn't real life. We shouldn't be talking about it at all because movies don't ever try to convey real emotions or anything like that in them. Do I REALLY need the "eye rolling" emoticon here.

How about I stick one in because you're strawmanning me? I said that your analogy was false because in a story like Star Wars, what s more compelling is often superior to what is more likely.

A love triangle between Anakin, Darth and Luke's mom, while not quite original, would be just as compelling as it was in ANH and TESB between Luke, Han and Leia.

Hopefully much more so, to be honest. The amount of tension between Luke and Han over Leia was pretty negligable.

But anyway, you are forgetting what the Emperor says in ESB: "The son of Skywalker must not become a Jedi".

Oh, man, how did I forget that? Yeah, that pretty much tears it, unless the Emperor was ignorant or speaking figuratively.

[Galvatron]

But anyway, you are forgetting what the Emperor says in ESB: "The son of Skywalker must not become a Jedi".

Once again...

The emperor doesn't know that Vader is Luke's real father. He, like everyone else, assumes that Luke Skywalker is the son of Anakin Skywalker. Follow?

My version of Vader is one of the good guys in Episode I. It isn't until Episode II that he starts down the dark path.

Ok, so then your challenge is to make Anakin, Vader, and Obi-Wan all distinct and likable heroes in Episode I.

I don't see that as much of a challenge. Most of the interplay in the prequels is between Anakin and Vader. Anakin is the commander of the fighter group, Vader is his subordinate, while Obi-Wan is the general of the ground pounders. Not unlike the arrangement we saw in the Clone Wars cartoon.

And, lest you forget, the real Anakin became a mass murderer of women and children before he fell to the dark side.

A good point. Would we see Vader facing similar harsh circumstances (dead mother) in your take on the films? Because you have to split the story up between Anakin and Vader...though that would be a lot easier without the extraneous crap Lucas put in his prequels.

No dead mother. Vader's progression to the dark side takes the form of committing increasingly violent acts against the enemy. Admiral Tarkin also influences Vader, not to use "power of the dark side," but to do what must be done to achieve a lasting peace. Vader hates war. Tarkin convinces him that little things like torture and genocide are a means to end it. Tarkin is the emperor's proxy in this scenario.

It isn't until the bombardment of Mandalore in the latter half of Episode II that Vader finds himself having to choose between Tarkin and the Jedi.

[Anguirus]

The emperor doesn't know that Vader is Luke's real father. He, like everyone else, assumes that Luke Skywalker is the son of Anakin Skywalker. Follow?

Ok, but that decreases the "Vader is Palpatine's utter and total pwned bitch" factor, so his rebellion is more predictable. Also it decreases Palpatine's scary prescience. Just pointing this out, it's not necessarily a bad thing as far as your take on the story.

[Isolder74]

But anyway, you are forgetting what the Emperor says in ESB: "The son of Skywalker must not become a Jedi".

Once again...

The emperor doesn't know that Vader is Luke's real father. He, like everyone else, assumes that Luke Skywalker is the son of Anakin Skywalker. Follow?

The fact that Sidious was a master of the dark side does not bode well to your theory. Its obvious in that that He does know who Vader really is.

Its is obviously apperent that you don't like the idea of the Dark Side perverting a good man into an insane monster. Not only does your idea create a major moral problem and give Luke no real reason to try and redeam Vadar but also make Vader nothing more than an asshole at best. It also turns Luke's Mom into an unfaithful spouce further giving Luke even more reason to kill Vader if his conception was from a rape if you insist that they are seperate people.

If it is the case that Vader turn dark then killed Anakin after boinking his wife, which gives Vader almost nothing redeamable about him, then we are still stuck with making Vader's idenity requiring a backstory other than what is already implied. You don't like the idea that Ben did not tell Luke everything about his father make Ben evil somehow? How would you have taken that information?

[Galvatron]

Ok, but that decreases the "Vader is Palpatine's utter and total pwned bitch" factor, so his rebellion is more predictable.

This is a good thing, in my opinion. My Vader was never the whiny emo twit that the prequels portray him as.

And Vader already told us he intended to rebel against the emperor in TESB. That was part of his pitch to Luke, remember?

[Anguirus]

Definitely remember that, and it could have been developed a lot differently from there, but there is also something interesting about the once-great Jedi now totally in the thrall of the Evil Overlord.

[Galvatron]

Definitely remember that, and it could have been developed a lot differently from there, but there is also something interesting about the once-great Jedi now totally in the thrall of the Evil Overlord.

The introduction of Grievous and Maul as Prince Jerjerrod's Sith bodyguards in Episode VI would hopefully demonstrate to us that the emperor has a lot of muscle protecting him, thereby giving us an idea of the difficulty that Vader and Luke--even with their combined strength--would face in trying to overthrow him.

[Alexian Cale]

Definitely remember that, and it could have been developed a lot differently from there, but there is also something interesting about the once-great Jedi now totally in the thrall of the Evil Overlord.

The introduction of Grievous and Maul as Prince Jerjerrod's Sith bodyguards in Episode VI would hopefully demonstrate to us that the emperor has a lot of muscle protecting him, thereby giving us an idea of the difficulty that Vader and Luke--even with their combined strength--would face in trying to overthrow him.

Agreed. In my opinion, the best dramas are when the antagonist has several advantages over the protagonist. Be it intelligence, strength, resources, or all the above. It makes the heroes' triumph even greater.

[Havok]

Anguirus

So I had this whole big response all typed up and ready to go, but I deleted it.

I had a realization.

You are looking at Galvatron's version in the same way you look at GL's version. As the Story of Anakin Skywalker. His rise, fall and redemption. However in Galv's version, as far as I can tell, it is the story of Darth Vader. His rise, fall and redemption.

Based on this you are trying to keep Anakin as a central character when he really becomes like Qui-Gon, heavily influential on the whole saga, but not a necessary character to have around for more than a movie or two.

I think if you look at it this way it may change your view.

Also in Galv's version Darth Vader is the person we always wanted him to be. A bad ass. Not the emo kid that Anakin ended up being and that most of us disliked.

P.S. Sorry for the strawmanning and patronizing.

[Galvatron]

AnguirusBased on this you are trying to keep Anakin as a central character when he really becomes like Qui-Gon, heavily influential on the whole saga, but not a necessary character to have around for more than a movie or two.

You're on the right track, but my Anakin would die in Episode III so he'd be around far longer than Qui-Gon was. However, his death would be a jarring, unexpected shock since he's the main alpha hero of the prequels. Think of him as the Optimus Prime of Star Wars.

[Anguirus]

Sorry your response got deleted! I hate that!

I think I understand that Galvatron isn't making his story about Anakin Skywalker. Almost of necessity, Anakin is less prominent than Vader (though still prominent). What I'm saying is that IMO it's less epic and compelling if they are different people, because it weakens the characters of Obi-Wan and Palpatine, as well as cheapens the bond between Luke and Vader.

So...yeah. I think it's an interesting take on things but it would be tough to make as interesting as the "real" saga, even with the added badassery and none of the "Lucas' has bad judgment" prequel filler.

[Elfdart]

There isn't much that I would change, aside from flushing most of the EU.

As far as the movie itself is concerned, since I'm not the one who got fucked over by the DGA and had quit the WGA, I would have done what Lucas wanted to do: let Steven Spielberg or David Lynch direct the third movie. Richard Marquand turned in some good movies, but his style didn't really fit Star Wars, nor did that of his DP Alan Hume. I would have kept Peter Suschitzky as DP, since much of the interior camerawork on the DS2 was awful. What's the point of all that detail on the sets if you're shooting 90% closeups?

Maybe a different director could have gotten better performances out of Harrison Ford (who was half-hearted at best in ROTJ -his worst performance as an actor in any movie) and Carrie Fisher (who was doped up like Lindsey Lohan).

The costume designer(s) would have to dress up Han Solo to look like -oh, I don't know- a Rebel General. Those commando helmets that make the Rebels look like they have rolodexes on their heads would also be gone. Luke's Jedi costume would look like what Ben wore under his Jawa robes in ANH and ROTS. There would be more original music, rather than re-worked themes from the other two movies. NO YUB-YUB SONGS!

The story would remain mostly the same, except:

1) As the heroes make their way back to the cavern where their ships are waiting, Lando announces to Luke that he has a gift for him: Lobot and Wedge took the liberty of retrieving Luke's X-Wing from Bespin (clearing up a hiccup in the story). Luke thanks Lando, climbs aboard and heads off for Dagobah. I would also recycle the way Luke and Leia flew a Y-Wing in Splinter of the Mind's Eye as the explanation for how they got to Tattooine. Wedge and Lobot fly away in the Y-Wing. While the fighters are taking off in the background (the scene doesn't dwell on the fighters, by the way), Han and Lando reconcile: something to the tune that Han understands how Lando had no choice since the Empire's reprisals... Lando and Han agree that the Empire is to blame and the Empire will regret crossing them.

Leia, Chewie, Lando and the droids climb aboard the Falcon, not realizing that a wounded but still dangerous Boba Fett and a few of Jabba's surviving henchmen have followed the heroes to their hideout. There is a final duel between Han Solo and Boba Fett. Fett is quicker with his blaster than Han is with his Mauser pistol, but Solo has a derringer-blaster up his sleeve that is already pointed at the bounty hunter, and kills Boba Fett once and for all. Lando kills the other heavies with the concealed blaster cannon as Han races aboard.

As the Falcon zooms out of the atmosphere, an ISD (Vader sends one to Tattooine on the off chance that Luke and Leia might try to rescue Solo) moves to interdict the ship. Han makes ready to jump into hyperspace and looks at Lando.

LANDO: Yes, it's fixed.
[Falcon streaks into hyperspace]

On the bridge of the ISD, a junior officer exclaims "Sir, the Millennium Falcon has just jumped-"

CAPTAIN: I don't think that was the Millennium Falcon.

JUNIOR OFF: But sir-

CAPTAIN (quietly to his junior officer): Would you like to explain to Lord Vader how you lost track of that ship?

JR. OFFICER: You're right -it couldn't have been the Millennium Falcon. Just another freighter.

2) Luke and Leia would NOT be siblings. Leia would still be the Other, but not because of any kinship with the Skywalker family. During the expedition to Endor, Leia discovers her abilities with the Force. She can manipulate objects about as well as Luke in TESB.

3) The ewoks would be replaced by wookiees, and Endor with Kashyyk. As a goof, I'd make Chewbacca a runt among the wookiees: the others are all bigger than he is.

4) I'd expand on the space battle, and the extra shots wouldn't include so many closeups, but pans of the battlefield to give a sense of scope to the battle. I'd expand on the decision Lando and Ackbar make to close with the ISDs. The DS2 has a rebel ship in its sights, but the ship cuts in its emergency thrusters and just barely dodges the blast from the superlaser -a blast that obliterates a nearby ISD. The Rebel Fleet expoits this unexpected hole in the Imperial Starfleet's formation. The DS2 ceases fire. When the DS2 is doomed, I'd show a number of ISDs running away in panic.

5) Instead of drawing her pistol to kill stormtroopers who have her cornered, Leia uses the Force on a nearby E-Web, points it at the stormtroopers and blows them away. Needless to say, Han is dumbfounded. By the way, Han will be the cool Han Solo of the first two movies, not the wanker he is in ROTJ and the EU.

I'll deal with the Prequels later.

[Vympel]

The costume designer(s) would have to dress up Han Solo to look like -oh, I don't know- a Rebel General. Those commando helmets that make the Rebels look like they have rolodexes on their heads would also be gone. Luke's Jedi costume would look like what Ben wore under his Jawa robes in ANH and ROTS.

Bob Brown on his defunct webpage had many valid points before the prequels etc totally turned him off the franchise forever, one of them was that adopting Ben's desert rags as a Jedi costume was nonsensical - he was hiding on Tatooine, and compared to say, Uncle Owen, he looked virtually the same, clothing wise. In those circumstances, clothing Luke in the same manner and calling it a Jedi costume - no, for me, it was a failure of imagination in the prequels and it'd be a similar failure in RotJ. Luke's outfit in RotJ was great - the prequel outfits were somewhat redeemed because they borrowed some features from it at least (the high boots most notably).

[CmdrWilkens]

The costume designer(s) would have to dress up Han Solo to look like -oh, I don't know- a Rebel General. Those commando helmets that make the Rebels look like they have rolodexes on their heads would also be gone. Luke's Jedi costume would look like what Ben wore under his Jawa robes in ANH and ROTS.

Bob Brown on his defunct webpage had many valid points before the prequels etc totally turned him off the franchise forever, one of them was that adopting Ben's desert rags as a Jedi costume was nonsensical - he was hiding on Tatooine, and compared to say, Uncle Owen, he looked virtually the same, clothing wise. In those circumstances, clothing Luke in the same manner and calling it a Jedi costume - no, for me, it was a failure of imagination in the prequels and it'd be a similar failure in RotJ. Luke's outfit in RotJ was great - the prequel outfits were somewhat redeemed because they borrowed some features from it at least (the high boots most notably).

The only prequel Jedi costume that was at all cool was Anakin's and that in part because it was so similair to Luke's from RotJ. That little bit, when it comes time for the prequels, would certainly make it much moreso the default than the "We all came from Tatooine" look Lucas actually used.