Another "Awesome" Fan Idea For How the Movies Should've Been

[Jim Raynor]

Are you literally insane? Honest question.

"Concession accepted."

See how stupid a conversation quickly becomes when people stop giving a crap and start resorting to stupid one/two sentence posts?

[Bakustra]

Let it go, Ford. It's Jim Raynor.

[Ford Prefect]

"Concession accepted."

See how stupid a conversation quickly becomes when people stop giving a crap and start resorting to stupid one/two sentence posts?

You're just unbelievable, you know that? I give a ballpark figure figure for how long the article you've posted is, which anyone who writes essays can do at a glance, accuse me of being weirdly specific and then launch into a totally unnecessary paragraph by paragraph breakdown of what was actually said. Do you not get the irony here? The best part is that you're still wrong. Your reading is just your reading, but we can still read it, Jim. It's still there.

[Jim Raynor]

What's amazing is that you're trying to deny that this fan theory was trying to patch up supposed plot holes, when it clearly was. But clearly, I'm "still wrong" to you because for some odd reason you chose to make this an issue and can't bear to budge from it.

[Ford Prefect]

The fact that it has something about plot holes in it does not mean that it is about closing plot holes. This is a very basic intellectual concept. The majority of the idea is about adding drama to films that have no drama: to inject something into the prequels to make us re-evaluate the characters and events of the originals. You know, in much the same way that 'I am your father' made us re-evaluate the original film.

[Batman]

Um-it didn't. 'I am your father' was part of the original film.

[Jim Raynor]

The fact that it has something about plot holes in it does not mean that it is about closing plot holes. This is a very basic intellectual concept. The majority of the idea is about adding drama to films that have no drama: to inject something into the prequels to make us re-evaluate the characters and events of the originals. You know, in much the same way that 'I am your father' made us re-evaluate the original film.

And yet the article, which is the only way I even know about this stupid fan theory, clearly portrays it as a way to fix plot holes. Also according to the article, this theory existed before the first prequel. One of the "plot holes," the one pertaining to Obi-Wan's half-faked alias in ANH, exists independent of the prequels. So it's not about "adding drama" (as defined by fanboys who have no idea how to write) to a movie that has "no drama" in your opinion. It's literally fanboys thinking up stupid crap in the 1990s.

[Ford Prefect]

Um-it didn't. 'I am your father' was part of the original film.

Maybe I'm not privy to the special chronology where The Empire Strikes Back was the original film, but ...

And yet the article, which is the only way I even know about this stupid fan theory, clearly portrays it as a way to fix plot holes.

Look, mate, don't try to tell me how it was. I know how it was. I was there.

The article is right there for all of us to read. It suggests a state of affairs which is exciting and which forces us to think about the character of Ben Kenobi from the original films. Creatively, that's the only thing a prequel is even good for.

[Jim Raynor]

Alright, so you were part of SW fan forums back in the day, and know of this fan theory from personal experience? It had nothing to do with fixing plot holes (which the newer article implies, or at least uses as a tool for), and was just an honest attempt at a cool story in the 1990s? OK then, I'll take your word for it.

There, stupid bitch fight over.

[Stofsk]

Obi-Wan issues aside, I do like the idea of the Clone Wars being between cloned Jedi.

I think it's an awesome idea actually.

[Galvatron]

As do I. In fact, it's a crucial component to my version of the backstory in which Anakin and Vader are separate people.

I could do without the OB-1 thing though...

[Stofsk]

Yeah, when I said it was an awesome idea, I'm mainly responding to what Gandz was saying about armies of jedi vs jedi. Just the imagery of that would have looked awesome on the big screen.

Ob-1... yeah, no.

[aussiemuscle308]

When i first heard Ben mention of the 'clone wars' i imagined something like Clones were everywhere and banded together in force starting a conflict between 1sts and clones. (the sort of thing that leads to banning of cloning). Millions of clone jedis fighting would more likely be called the Jedi Wars.

[Vympel]

Seriously? There's an argument about whether or not the extract is about "fixing plot holes" or "inserting drama"?

First of all, the article clearly thinks its important, since it says "Oh, and it closes a gigantic plot hole in the prequels" So no, Jim is not "attacking a strawman" when he attacks the notion this is even a plot hole. Its plain as day that this article thinks Obi-Wan not ever letting on that he is familiar with the droids is some sort of big (indeed, even "gigantic") problem, and it goes on to complain about it at the end again with "As for Obi-Wan, he forgot all about R2-D2 and C-3PO after spending three whole movies with them because ... you know what, at this point we don't even care". That's more than enough to warrant talking about it, irrespective of whether its the main thrust or not.

And Bakustra:-

Let it go, Ford. It's Jim Raynor.

No more of this sort of thing. Either participate or don't, but don't post insubstantial snipes. It stinks of a vendetta.

[Havok]

The web site I'm getting it from is the one talking about it supposedly closing "plot holes."

Dude, that is irrelevant to the thing which you've actually posted which, you know, we can all see. And you know what I see? A 250 word article where 50 words mentioned closing a plot hole. Go fucking figure.

Are you for real? The whole thing is about perceived plot holes by the author. Just because he only pontificates about the "gigantic" one for 50 words doesn't mean that is what the entire article is about.

Ford, you are full of shit. This idea doesn't make us think about Obi-Wan or add more characterization, in fact it weakens him. Fucking christ, the guy goes on to say that cloning Boba Fett was a bad idea and he had literally zero impact outside of one scene in the movie, and people hate it, yet he wants to fuck up arguably the strongest character of the whole sage by making him two different people? What the fuck.

[Bakustra]

Why don't you explain what these other plot holes are, then, and why we should abandon the customary forms of English syntax, where "Oh, and" and its equivalents are used to introduce lesser but supporting ideas? Because I read the article, and it's about "Wouldn't it be cool if a) we had a war between clones of Jedi and b) some actual suspense and plot twists in the prequels" with "closing a plot hole" being secondary.

But it's great to see that you're so invested in the Star Wars prequels! Are you able to articulate the reasons why they resonate with you so well?

[Bakustra]

That being said, I don't think that this is a particularly good idea, but what it would do is make us reevaluate the original trilogy. This barely happens with the PT as it stands, where the only major intentional revelations are that Darth Vader's initiation into the Sith was mass-murder and that he built C-3PO, and the only one that makes us reevaluate anything in the OT is the latter, where it slightly modifies ESB. There is of course the unintentional reevaluation that comes with Anakin going from "annoying kid" to "sullen snot", but I'm not going to count incompetence here. A prequel only works artistically if it provides a twist or reevaluation of the original story- otherwise, it's pointless. All that we needed to know about the PT we knew from the OT- Darth Vader was Anakin, he fell, Obi-Wan defeated him, the Emperor took over. The rest is largely inconsequential details.

[Channel72]

The ideas in this article are utter garbage. Making Obi Wan a clone and having millions of cloned Jedi running around would water down the mysticism of the Jedi worse than Midichlorians did. Jedi would become cheap, expendable foot soliders instead of legendary warriors/mystics who mostly work alone or in pairs.

Yes, the actual Prequels suck, but it's largely due to execution rather than general ideas.

[Havok]

You mean aside from the four or five plot holes this guy's ideas CREATE that he then has to explain so that his idea stays "cool"?

He clearly thinks the entire story of Obi-Wan in the OT is a plot hole created by the PT's new information. OMG why is he on the planet? Why does he keep the same last name? DOESN'T THE EMPIRE HAVE PHONE BOOKS?!

I mean, his idea is to fix a perceived plot hole, he creates more plotholes, then has to fix his own plotholes, and then jumps on what he perceives as another plothole. How is this article not about plotholes?

And, I like the information the PT adds as I think it strengthens what was already there, minus a few things, I'm not a fan of the acting in the majority of the main characters or the casting choices. Thematically though, they are equally as strong as the OT IMO.

[Channel72]

A prequel only works artistically if it provides a twist or reevaluation of the original story- otherwise, it's pointless. All that we needed to know about the PT we knew from the OT- Darth Vader was Anakin, he fell, Obi-Wan defeated him, the Emperor took over. The rest is largely inconsequential details.

I see your point, but the Prequels did introduce some new ideas which make us reevaluate the OT - it's just that most of them aren't very interesting, or are just downright silly. For example, the fact that Vader was part of a Messianic prophecy reveals more about Vader's ultimate betrayal of Palpatine, as he "brings balance to the Force."

But yeah, there's no "plot twist" revelation that changes some fundamental dynamic in the OT. I'm glad there wasn't, because judging from how the Prequels actually turned out, that probably would have ended up damaging the OT even further.

[Bakustra]

You mean aside from the four or five plot holes this guy's ideas CREATE that he then has to explain so that his idea stays "cool"?

He clearly thinks the entire story of Obi-Wan in the OT is a plot hole created by the PT's new information. OMG why is he on the planet? Why does he keep the same last name? DOESN'T THE EMPIRE HAVE PHONE BOOKS?!

I mean, his idea is to fix a perceived plot hole, he creates more plotholes, then has to fix his own plotholes, and then jumps on what he perceives as another plothole. How is this article not about plotholes?

And, I like the information the PT adds as I think it strengthens what was already there, minus a few things, I'm not a fan of the acting in the majority of the main characters or the casting choices. Thematically though, they are equally as strong as the OT IMO.

Please don't act like water- you implied that his entire position was all about plotholes when it's about sharing a fan theory he thought was a) awesome and b) offering a reevaluation of the OT, with c) fixing a plot hole being secondary. We can tell this from the structure of the article and the syntactical choices.

Also, the point of a prequel is not to strengthen the perception of the existing movies, from an artistic perspective. If that has to happen, then the original movie was suffering from failure to communicate.

A prequel only works artistically if it provides a twist or reevaluation of the original story- otherwise, it's pointless. All that we needed to know about the PT we knew from the OT- Darth Vader was Anakin, he fell, Obi-Wan defeated him, the Emperor took over. The rest is largely inconsequential details.

I see your point, but the Prequels did introduce some new ideas which make us reevaluate the OT - it's just that most of them aren't very interesting, or are just downright silly. For example, the fact that Vader was part of a Messianic prophecy reveals more about Vader's ultimate betrayal of Palpatine, as he "brings balance to the Force."

But yeah, there's no "plot twist" revelation that changes some fundamental dynamic in the OT. I'm glad there wasn't, because judging from how the Prequels actually turned out, that probably would have ended up damaging the OT even further.

Part of their problem is that Lucas seems to have run out of energy when it came to the PT, because there was plenty of room to add stuff to reevaluate the OT without damaging the basic story. But what we got was an intended "everything happens just like the OT said" and a twist on the Clone Wars that doesn't do much. So if he was willing to attempt to present a PT that made you reevaluate the majority of the OT, then the PT would probably be better in other ways, as he'd be devoting something closer to the energy that he did to American Graffiti and A New Hope.

[Elfdart]

This article, like most of the fantasy re-writes offered up by disgruntled fanboys, is illuminating -only not in the way the author intended.

I remember numbskulls talking about Obi-Wan/OB1 in fan magazines more than 15 years ago. It was stupid then and it's stupid now. Drama-wise, the more of something you have the cheaper it becomes. If Jedi can be churned out like potato chips then there's nothing terribly special about them as a whole, is there?

Plot-wise, you have two cornerstones of the plot in the series: (a) the Jedi have been exterminated, aside from Obi-Wan and Yoda and (b) the Sith are also a very exclusive club, where sometimes two -let alone three- is a crowd. Only very a tiny few people are qualified to be Jedi or Sith, and only those lucky enough to have this rare inherent talent AND training in the use of the Force can join the club.

If anyone can become a Jedi or Sith, then it's impossible to cut their numbers down by much, let alone exterminate them. If they're rare to start with, and a perfect storm arises, then one might come pretty close like Palpatine did.

As far as the "plot holes" regarding Obi-Wan's name and exile on Tattooine are concerned, just keep in mind that going by the movies, there's no reason to believe that anyone other than Luke, Owen and Beru have ever heard of Ben Kenobi. They could have referred to him as Jedi Master Obi-Wan Kenobi and it wouldn't have mattered if they were the only ones who knew he was on the planet.

[Bakustra]

This article, like most of the fantasy re-writes offered up by disgruntled fanboys, is illuminating -only not in the way the author intended.

I remember numbskulls talking about Obi-Wan/OB1 in fan magazines more than 15 years ago. It was stupid then and it's stupid now. Drama-wise, the more of something you have the cheaper it becomes. If Jedi can be churned out like potato chips then there's nothing terribly special about them as a whole, is there?

Plot-wise, you have two cornerstones of the plot in the series: (a) the Jedi have been exterminated, aside from Obi-Wan and Yoda and (b) the Sith are also a very exclusive club, where sometimes two -let alone three- is a crowd. Only very a tiny few people are qualified to be Jedi or Sith, and only those lucky enough to have this rare inherent talent AND training in the use of the Force can join the club.

There is nothing to suggest that there is some sort of inherent talent necessary to use the Force in the original movies- indeed, the Jedi are portrayed as a populistic entity, which a congenital talent would work directly against.

If anyone can become a Jedi or Sith, then it's impossible to cut their numbers down by much, let alone exterminate them. If they're rare to start with, and a perfect storm arises, then one might come pretty close like Palpatine did.

As far as the "plot holes" regarding Obi-Wan's name and exile on Tattooine are concerned, just keep in mind that going by the movies, there's no reason to believe that anyone other than Luke, Owen and Beru have ever heard of Ben Kenobi. They could have referred to him as Jedi Master Obi-Wan Kenobi and it wouldn't have mattered if they were the only ones who knew he was on the planet.

Yes, that would be why Luke speaks of him as though he were a character generally known in the Anchorhead region, as opposed to being someone only they know exists. Please don't annihilate the subtleties of English speech in your hurry to close a plot hole you yourself demean.

[Channel72]

There is nothing to suggest that there is some sort of inherent talent necessary to use the Force in the original movies- indeed, the Jedi are portrayed as a populistic entity, which a congenital talent would work directly against.

I'd like to believe this - but unfortunately, even the OT suggests there is at least some genetic component to force sensitivity. It's the reason Luke knows that Leia has serious force potential. He says to her something like "my father had it, I have it, my sister has it... yes, it's you Leia, etc." It also seems to be the reason in TESB that the Emperor knows that "the son of Skywalker" is going to be a problem that has to be addressed.

Clearly, the fact that the Skywalker family keeps churning out force-sensitives isn't supposed to be a coincidence. On the other hand, the OT never goes as far as the Prequels by showing that force-sensitivity is completely determined by genetics - but it's easy to see how this conclusion can be derived from the minimal information we get in the OT regarding this issue.

I think the evolution from Jedi-as-populist-hero to Jedi-as-genetically-determined-demi-god began as early as TESB, when Luke stopped being an insignificant farmboy turned hero, to the predestined heir of the Jedi legacy.

[Elfdart]

Yes, that would be why Luke speaks of him as though he were a character generally known in the Anchorhead region, as opposed to being someone only they know exists.

Feel free to quote from the movie where it's implied that Kenobi is "generally known in the Anchorhead region".