The problem with the Star Wars EU is the same problem that, in my opinion, affects the Dragonlance series: it just has gone on for too long. How many times in the heroes' lifetimes can some ultimate evil arise? How many times can they save the world?
AHC: Save Star Wars
- Thread starter Emperor Norton I
- Start date
Except that both series managed to pass the torch to the next generation (Young Jedi Knights/Junior Jedi Knights + New Jedi Order and Dragons of Summer Flame + The Jean Rabe Trilogy, respectively), and are in the process of passing the torch to the generation after that (Fate of the Jedi and The War of Souls trilogy.)
Yes, but, she is a Sith. Of course she is going to try and equate both Sith and Jedi, it's a very sithy thing to do
Still, her criticisms are spot on, and the Jedi had a huge ethical conundrum they didn't solve wisely.Also, she isn't fully dark, and her ends aren't evil. She's willing to be cruel, but there's selflessness in addition to her selfishness.
I know little else about the EU, but wasn't really the topic of "sith vs jedi is just a jedi civil war" touched anywhere else?
The purpose of Star Wars was always to be just what it was, like it or not. It didn't know what audience it would get in 1978. George Lucas just made a type of film he wanted to make, and it caught on, and caught on with young people and teenagers and kids especially because of the adventure element and the escapism of that universe. It doesn't need to "grow up" with it's audience, whatever that may entail, because that assumes it was as immature as the children in the audience. Nothing could be further from the truth. It is one of those universal films. It just needs to be the type of thing it always was.
To say it needs to be a gritty, rated-R film is to misunderstand it as much as to say it should be for the kids. It's like a 50's Western; everything in their is the maturity level of an adult, but accessible to anyone, and kids love it for the reasons kids love things.
The problem with the EU is also that anyone can make a story, completely altering the fate of the universe, and it can be bad or a bad direction.
To say nothing of the fact that a mature story that asks uncomfortable questions need not be gritty, filled with graphic violence, sex, or moral corruption. It is perhaps too childish, paradoxically, to assume that evil must prevent the affectations of evil in a snidely whiplash manner, or that deep down we're all bastards.
Animal Farm, for example, is a children's fable. But it presents very tough questions that do not have easy answers, and not even the author felt that he had the answers.
Star Wars itself had its share of uneasy questions. Lando Calrissian presents the problems of collaboration vs. resistance quite clearly, and doesn't yield a simple answer. The scenes with the Ewoks and C3PO are direct indictments of superstition and blind religious faith. Luke has to grapple with taking the easy route of moral compromise, and does so seriously, even though he lives in a universe that is profoundly Socratic, where one has to actively prevent damage to one's soul as a force user to avoid drastic consequences.
By "gritty", you mean morally complex stories that question the general narrative of their genre right? Again, refer to Apocalypse Now/Heart of Darkness for how it can be done right. Besides, there isn't much wiggle room for adventure and fantasy in any prequels compared to the OT. You WILL have to look at how the Republic became the Empire, and how good men become evil, which entails a much more mature and complex approach than simple tales of good and evil (for instance, you can't get away with going "war is a fun adventure" anymore).
Here's an idea: have Jedi go much, much worse than OTL such that the "Star Wars Trilogy" is viewed in much the same way that the "Godfather Trilogy" is viewed, which is to say "Hey, weren't those first two episodes awesome?" Amp up the ridiculousness of the Ewoks. If Jedi becomes a critical flop and a commercial disappointment, you just might rein in Lucas enough that he sets about doing the prequels to really try and recapture the timeless classic aspect of Episodes IV and V.
Part of this is my view that Return of the Jedi really isn't a very good movie (and that the seeds of Jar-Jar Binks are already there in the Ewoks). I realize that in and of itself might be a thread-derailing opinion, though.
Heavy
Banned
Part of this is my view that Return of the Jedi really isn't a very good movie (and that the seeds of Jar-Jar Binks are already there in the Ewoks). I realize that in and of itself might be a thread-derailing opinion, though.
There's a lot of great stuff in Jedi but I'd be inclined to agree it's the weakest movie in the original trilogy.
I've heard that ESB was a phenomenal risk and exceeded its budget to such an extent that there was a fear bordering on expectation on the studio's part that it was going to bomb and bomb hard. I suppose that's why ROTJ feels like kind of a "safe" movie, if you see what I mean.
Another problem with the prequels is the idea that you needed a clone army in order to pull off what Palpatine did. While you can argue the merits of the idea of the clone army itself (before the prequels, the assumption was that the war was against Clones), I think it robs the narrative of a major opportunity.
What I would have done was have Palpatine's rise based on nepotism. He is democratically placed in a position, and uses it to appoint and promote officials and officers based on loyalty. Therefore when the time comes for a coup, all these officials in key positions and positions of authority back him because of their loyalty, and/or because they will be further awarded. And there's always the possibility that their underlings will sell them out and get them killed to get promoted should they turn their backs on Palpatine.
That is a prime opportunity to show increased corruption in the Republic, as well as corruption Palpatine fosters, and to show how the Republic and the individuals are corrupted by power and greed and ignoring evil and allowing things to go as far as they did by making compromises with all those bad things. That is a very reflection of the Sith. And all that would be reflected in Anakin's own corruption and turning to evil, and would show the logical environment that all happened in. It would be this whole monolithic, intertwined narrative, and would properly explain why a good Republic turned into this evil Empire.
What I would have done was have Palpatine's rise based on nepotism. He is democratically placed in a position, and uses it to appoint and promote officials and officers based on loyalty. Therefore when the time comes for a coup, all these officials in key positions and positions of authority back him because of their loyalty, and/or because they will be further awarded. And there's always the possibility that their underlings will sell them out and get them killed to get promoted should they turn their backs on Palpatine.
That is a prime opportunity to show increased corruption in the Republic, as well as corruption Palpatine fosters, and to show how the Republic and the individuals are corrupted by power and greed and ignoring evil and allowing things to go as far as they did by making compromises with all those bad things. That is a very reflection of the Sith. And all that would be reflected in Anakin's own corruption and turning to evil, and would show the logical environment that all happened in. It would be this whole monolithic, intertwined narrative, and would properly explain why a good Republic turned into this evil Empire.
There's a fine line that needs to be walked here (which George Lucas never even had to walk because he didn't even come close to doing it correctly) which is making the situation and infrastructure screwed up and wrong in such a way to allow Anakin's fall to the dark side to be something that makes sense, while also not making it so screwed up and evil in itself as to make you agree with Anakin's actions. You have to view the Republic and Jedi as something of good in the whole which was destroyed by the evil of Palpatine and those loyal to him. Otherwise, Obi-Wan's lamenting at the beginning of "A New Hope" is undercut, and is undercut with the response that the Republic and Jedi were already corrupt and wicked. You have to make the narrative agree with his lamenting.
Perhaps Obi wan is viewing the Republic from a certain, nostalgic, point of view.
For someone like Palpatine to get into power, the Republic has to be already rotten to the core. My idea is a mix of Brazil and Apartheid South Africa.
- A highly corrupt government that is sliding into despotism.
- a lot of tensions (religious, ethnic, nationalist, all three?) under the surface
- Episode 1 is about the trigger event to the Clone Wars,
- Episode 2 is Anakin beginning to fall out with the Jedi, especially with regard to Jedi atrocities in the war.
- Episode 3 is about the chaotic aftermath which leads to General Palpatine, the Sith Lord with Darth Vader by his side, using his reputation as war hero to mount a military coup and proclaim himself emperor.
ETA: What really jades Anakin towards is the hellish atmosphere that is war (going into full on Vietnam style War is Hell for my prequels, unlike the "war is a fun adventure" of pre-ww1 jingoism). This can be seen in his gradual transition into Darth Vader (damage caused by war to his mind and body)
You can have the Republic be corrupting, but the Jedi cannot also be as corrupt as the Republic. And the narrative should be that the Republic is corrupting and becoming wicked like the Sith, but that the soul of the Republic is at it's core good (Just like Episode 6: "I can sense the good in you") and could be redeemed from the path it is on, and Palpatine and the Empire aren't helping. That's the things you've said, but it has to be handled carefully. Had those prequels been made, the audience should never feel that the Republic had it coming or that the Empire was no big deal given what was going on. It has to be a feeling that the Republic itself was, in what it was becoming, had gone over to the dark side when it became the Empire, and the things that were going on were what allowed the Empire to overtake it. But the Empire itself has to be both understandable as something that happened, while also a stark difference. There is no redeeming the Empire, whereas there was redemption for the Republic. And that way you could explain how anyone goes over to the dark side, and it would serve as a meta-plot for the fall of Anakin to the Dark Side as Vader.
You'd also need to establish a much firmer, clearer connection between the leaders of the Rebellion and that redeemable element within the Republic otherwise the prequels ALSO have the unintentional side-effect of taking all the wind out of the Rebellion's sails.
Personally when I was watching the original trilogy before the prequels with all the talk of the Old Republic, a multi-species Rebellion (even though there's a grand total of TWO women in the whole galaxy but that's another issue), against a monolithic Galactic Empire it was easy and made sense to root for the Rebels. They were obviously the underdogs and while no one was standing up and giving soliloquies on the rights of sentient beings or anything like that the story gave the strong sense that there was some kind of higher, justified reason for their struggle.
With how Lucas handled the fall of the Republic and the rise of Palpatine to his status as Emperor that whole sense of high-minded idealism gets a lot more hollow. When you've got things like Leia's adoptive (and never seen in OT) father as one of the major supporters of the war and the Clone Army, Luke and Leia's parents were both big-time war supporters, and no one saw the fall of the Republic coming until they voted Palpatine a crown its hard to make the "Good Republic vs Evil Empire" narrative stick when the people who are supposed to be the good guys aren't that much better than their enemies. It has the profound effect of making the Rebellion, post-prequels, feel less like some noble cause and more like a lot of sour grapes.
It doesn't help that the entire Jedi Council doesn't seem to have the brains or political instincts the Gods gave to insects, by the end of Revenge of the Sith I was already thinking what was so great about the Jedi Order if they couldn't figure out the Chancellor who is quietly amassing dictatorial power is the Sith Lord they're looking for. The EU materials just make it worse by openly saying Palpatine had SITH ART installed IN HIS OFFICE!
The way Lucas was writing it you'd think the last frame in Revenge of the Sith was going to be a propaganda video extolling the virtues of despotism
Personally when I was watching the original trilogy before the prequels with all the talk of the Old Republic, a multi-species Rebellion (even though there's a grand total of TWO women in the whole galaxy but that's another issue), against a monolithic Galactic Empire it was easy and made sense to root for the Rebels. They were obviously the underdogs and while no one was standing up and giving soliloquies on the rights of sentient beings or anything like that the story gave the strong sense that there was some kind of higher, justified reason for their struggle.
With how Lucas handled the fall of the Republic and the rise of Palpatine to his status as Emperor that whole sense of high-minded idealism gets a lot more hollow. When you've got things like Leia's adoptive (and never seen in OT) father as one of the major supporters of the war and the Clone Army, Luke and Leia's parents were both big-time war supporters, and no one saw the fall of the Republic coming until they voted Palpatine a crown its hard to make the "Good Republic vs Evil Empire" narrative stick when the people who are supposed to be the good guys aren't that much better than their enemies. It has the profound effect of making the Rebellion, post-prequels, feel less like some noble cause and more like a lot of sour grapes.
It doesn't help that the entire Jedi Council doesn't seem to have the brains or political instincts the Gods gave to insects, by the end of Revenge of the Sith I was already thinking what was so great about the Jedi Order if they couldn't figure out the Chancellor who is quietly amassing dictatorial power is the Sith Lord they're looking for. The EU materials just make it worse by openly saying Palpatine had SITH ART installed IN HIS OFFICE!
The way Lucas was writing it you'd think the last frame in Revenge of the Sith was going to be a propaganda video extolling the virtues of despotism