Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

George Lucas's Terrible Idea for Star Wars Episodes 7-9 (indiewire.com)

Posted by EditorDavid on from the meet-the-midi-chlorians dept.

In an interview with James Cameron, George Lucas reveals what he'd planed for the final three Star Wars films: "[The next three 'Star Wars' films] were going to get into a microbiotic world," he told Cameron. "There's this world of creatures that operate differently than we do. I call them the Whills. And the Whills are the ones who actually control the universe. They feed off the Force...." In terms of his storytelling, Lucas regarded individuals as "vehicles for the Whills to travel around in... And the conduit is the midi-chlorians. The midi-chlorians are the ones that communicate with the Whills. The Whills, in a general sense, they are the Force."

Lucas is confident that had he kept his company, the Whills-focused films "would have been done. Of course, a lot of the fans would have hated it, just like they did 'Phantom Menace' and everything, but at least the whole story from beginning to end would be told."
Lucas acknowledges in the interview that "Everybody hated it in 'Phantom Menace' [when] we started talking about midi-chlorians," prompting one Ars Technica editor to add "Because it was a really dumb idea." He speculates that if the final three Star Wars movies followed Lucas's original plan, "Imagine, if you can, our heroes shrinking down like the Fantastic Voyage to go meet some midi-chlorians."

Knowing Lucas's plans for the franchise "should make every Star Wars fan send a note of gratitude to whoever at Disney decided to buy the franchise and take it away and out from under Lucas' control."

155 of 312 comments (clear)

  1. Hmmm... by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Interesting

    To be sure, it's a pretty stupid idea. But one can almost understand where he was coming from. Anything else, including the Extended Universe, would just have been variations on the pre-existing themes. New dark lord and/or war lord rises, picks up where Palpatine and Vader left off, and a ragtag band of rebels goes to war again.

    You know, just like what's actually happening in the main Episode films.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    1. Re:Hmmm... by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      I suspect it would have done that anyway though. Episodes 1-3 were intended to "rhyme" with Episodes 4-6. It was less obvious than 7-8-second-half-of-8, but that's in part because there was a lot of (non-plot related) stuff in the first three (midichlorians, Jar Jar Binks, etc) that distracted people from what was happening underneath. But yeah, it was also because Abrams and, to a lesser extent, Johnson, wanted to also duplicate the way the OT movies rhymed with each other.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    2. Re:Hmmm... by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Funny

      As far as I can see it, George Lucas has two skills:

      1) Making memorable characters/scenes. Face it, one of the most vivid characters of all time is Jar Jar Binks.

      2) Making people happy when they leave the theater. Even the prequels, when people left the theater, they were happy.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    3. Re:Hmmm... by alvinrod · · Score: 4, Interesting

      When you've got an entire universe where plenty of stuff has happened a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away I think it would have been better to tell an entirely new and different story within that universe largely disconnected from the original trilogy. Part of the problem with the prequel trilogy and the sequel trilogy is that they're too beholden to a story created in the original trilogy that didn't need to imagine what exactly had occurred before or what would happen after it ended.

      When writing the original Star Wars do you suppose Lucas had any real idea what the Clone Wars were other than something that sounded cool and to establish a relationship between Ben and Luke's father? Do you suppose when everyone was celebrating on Endor (or it's moon if you want to be that pedantic) that Lucas had given any thought as to the ramifications of what had just occurred to the political situation in the galaxy and what it might mean going forward? Of course he didn't, because those things were unimportant to the story being told.

      However, if some time later you decide to make sequels or prequels to that story, you're beholden to offhand remarks or comments that weren't well fleshed out because you didn't sit down to write or plan out those in advance of your initial story. Tell new stories in that universe that have nothing to do with the characters or events in the original and you might be able to get something narratively satisfying. You can still drop a few references in as subtle winks to the audience if you want, but you won't be so restricted.

      Look at Tolkien's work for an example of stories spanning ages and only being connected by tiny threads. You can certainly find them between the Silmarillion and Lord of the Rings, but they're largely unconcerned with one and other and enjoyment of one doesn't depend on having read the other. I suspect that this is the same reason that the Hobbit movies weren't good (apart from trying to make them tonally something that the story wasn't) as they tried to tie it to Lord of the Rings more than it needed to be.

    4. Re:Hmmm... by epine · · Score: 1

      Even the prequels, when people left the theater, they were happy.

      I was one of those people in the theatre for the first prequel.

      My friend and I left the theatre so disgusted (I recall this vividly) that afterwards I had to mentally quarantine the 1977 Star Wars (which I first watched at exactly the right age) to prevent it from catching Jarbola.

      I've always preferred 77 to Empire, and none of the other episodes (Ewoks, shudder) have ever been dear to me in the least.

      In Phantom, it was somewhere around the submarine sequence that my friend and I had the following exchange: Is this as good as it gets? Pained shrug. Soon followed by nails dredging palms.

    5. Re:Hmmm... by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Its STD with Michael and the mycelium spores..

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    6. Re: Hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Lucas's skills .. from someone who has never seen THX-1138

    7. Re: Hmmm... by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      I have never seen any of the other SW movies except the 1977 Star Wars, which I saw in 1977 in the theatre.

      I thought it was cool at the time, but dislike what the 'space western' influence did to the science fiction genre.

    8. Re: Hmmm... by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 2

      Could you be more ......... specific?

    9. Re:Hmmm... by Hognoxious · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Making people happy when they leave the theater.

      People are happy when they leave the dentist's chair.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    10. Re:Hmmm... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I like the concept behind the preqels and sequels, even if they were not always executed very well.

      We see the fall of the Jedi order, the flaws in it laid bare. Then the rebels fight back and eventually defeat the empire, but with no Jedi to maintain order and only evil force users the First Order rises out of the ashes.

      Now it looks like they are going to conclude with how the rebellion and the good guys can survive in a post-Jedi universe, where the Force is unbound by the old religious dogma. Obviously there will be a showdown between Ray and Kylo Ren, echoing Return of the Jedi but surely with a different outcome.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    11. Re:Hmmm... by alvinrod · · Score: 1

      I can understand wanting more of your favorite characters and to see the story go on just a little bit further. I've read plenty of books or watched many films where I wished for just one more chapter or another scene. However, in looking back across all of the times where that wish came true, I never found the follow up stories to be as good as whatever new story managed to grab my attention next and make me want to see more of that. What made the initial story so good was its completeness, which somewhat precludes the follow up from continuing that story in the same satisfying way.

      There might be some sense is making those prequels and sequels if Lucas had planned out all of them from the beginning and the original trilogy was part of a larger narrative arc, but that wasn't the case. It wasn't intentionally built in such a way as to fit well within that larger story and so everything built up around it feels shallow and hollow by comparison.

    12. Re:Hmmm... by dabadab · · Score: 1

      or it's moon if you want to be that pedantic

      It's "its moon" if you want to be that pedantic.

      --
      Real life is overrated.
    13. Re:Hmmm... by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

      but with no Jedi to maintain order and only evil force users the First Order rises out of the ashes

      This would actually have been an interesting story. Who is Snoke and how did he gain power? Who paid for Starkiller Base (ugh, that name)? Why did the Rebellion continue to be such a tiny, continually underfunded activity after the fall of the Empire, instead of becoming a new secular version of the Jedi Knights? Why did the First Order rise to power in preference to the Rebellion in the immediate aftermath of the Empire, after 30 years of seeing what that kind of rule brought?

      Answering those questions would have made the setting for "The Force Awakens" much less jarring, but would have made it more difficult to incorporate the original three actors of the first trilogy.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    14. Re:Hmmm... by Wraithlyn · · Score: 1

      The novel Star Wars: Bloodline (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wars:_Bloodline) apparently deals with the time period right before Force Awakens and sets up The First Order, the new Resistance, etc.

      --
      "Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson
    15. Re:Hmmm... by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      It is sad that I prefer this pretty stupid idea to the SJW war-against-religion-and-patriarchy that the current storyline has turned into.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    16. Re: Hmmm... by stoatwblr · · Score: 1

      > the 'space western' influence

      That influence has been around almost forever. SW was classic space/horse opera in the 1930-40s mould. Ep1 was even truer to that paradigm than ep4 complete with "yellow peril" (which was an artifact of the first Cold War - with Japan)

    17. Re: Hmmm... by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      If they had actually gone all the way towards making Jar Jar Binks an evil character, this would completely have redeemed episode one.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    18. Re:Hmmm... by EmptyHead · · Score: 1

      I was not happy when Jar Jar was presented. Having a large part of the movie taking place on a My Little Pony planet would have been less annoying.

    19. Re:Hmmm... by Peter+P+Peters · · Score: 1

      but with no Jedi to maintain order and only evil force users the First Order rises out of the ashes.

      Hang on, that's not right. After RoTJ, both Jedi and Sith are gone, and more importantly the Rebels win, so there's no more bad guys. In TFA, the setting is completely inconsistent as somehow the First Order, which have an unoriginally identical setup to the Empire with all the same format military hardware, is in charge, and the Resistance are made up of the ex-Rebels, who from RoTJ would now actually be the incumbent government rather than a 'resistance'.
      It's only 30 years between RoTJ and TFA, nowhere near enough time to for a First Order, or Snoke to establish themselves as the dominant force in the galaxy with associated armies and hardware. At what point do the rebels rename themselves resistance? Why aren't they in charge now that the Empire is destroyed?The whole thing was a mess.

      Had this been done properly, the story should have maybe been about how the Rebels, now in power have fragmented factions and are starting to crumble, which allows a dark element to take seed. Instead they just went for 'A New Hope now with added SJW!'. It sucked arse and is just getting worse.

      Obviously there will be a showdown between Ray and Kylo Ren, echoing Return of the Jedi but surely with a different outcome.

      Don't kid yourself. It will be exactly the same and you know it.

    20. Re:Hmmm... by Peter+P+Peters · · Score: 1

      Answering those questions would have made the setting for "The Force Awakens" much less jarring, but would have made it more difficult to incorporate the original three actors of the first trilogy.

      I don't think so, in fact it could've have been a whole lot better.
      The Rebels establish a new Republic and the next era starts there +30 years. Rather than simply re-do A New Hope, have a fresh story where Leia is the Queen, or President or something, Han is an old drunk hanging out a dingy bars, Lando could've been included as he should be as a local boss, with Chewy as head of security, Luke can still be a hermit, and the Rey and Kylo could be written-in easily as the precocious next generation upstarts coming through the ranks. (Screw Finn, his character sucked)
      The story would start out that something isn't right in the crumbling Republic, and Lando and Chewy are tasked by Leia to investigate. During this mission they collect Rey and Kylo somehow along the way, shit happens, they bump into Han and Luke, they join up, then split up and Kylo goes bad, ultimately resulting in the discovery (to the audience) of a new dark side of the Force. Some end-battle ensues which the Rebels win a Pyrrhic victory and sets the scene for the next film, ie the Republic beat a mysterious Sith boss, but it uncovers a larger menace that they realise that because of their 30 years of peace they aren't equipped to deal with. So it leaves the audience with anticipation about all the possibilities for the next film

      I thought of that in 5 minutes and it's already better than any Star Wars film produced since 1980. And it also would've allowed the original cast including Lando to hand over the baton with an original story, not a crap remake. Then the second film would be all original with no more old characters.

    21. Re:Hmmm... by Anonymous+Cow+Ward · · Score: 1

      They did mention the "New Republic" in Ep7, which I assumed was what the Rebellion made when the Empire fell. Presumably, some of the Imperial Navy splintered off and refused to join the New Republic, and at least one of those splinters became the First Order and held some amount of formerly Imperial space. Starkiller base's first target was the New Republic's capital, I thought.

      --
      Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
    22. Re:Hmmm... by Peter+P+Peters · · Score: 1

      They did mention the "New Republic" in Ep7, which I assumed was what the Rebellion made when the Empire fell. Presumably, some of the Imperial Navy splintered off and refused to join the New Republic, and at least one of those splinters became the First Order and held some amount of formerly Imperial space. Starkiller base's first target was the New Republic's capital, I thought.

      So how do you build something like a Starkiller base without the incumbent authority being aware of it? The time and resources devoted to the task would take decades and would be impossible to hide. And it would seem odd that just after having two Deathstars destroyed due to design flaws, the bad guys would then just go build a yet another Deathstar with pretty much the same design?

    23. Re:Hmmm... by Anonymous+Cow+Ward · · Score: 1

      They may not have built the whole thing - the Empire had a lot of superweapons in development that weren't as big or flashy (or as far along) as the Death Star. It's possible the Empire started Starkiller base a while back, the records were destroyed/lost when the New Republic rose to power, and the First Order just kept it in their space while it was being finished.

      I imagine they thought an actual planet would be harder to destroy, but yeah, the First Order seems to have learned nothing from the fall of the Empire.

      --
      Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
  2. Bullshit. Disney is just as horrible. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The first two were made with passion. The rest are chasing dollars and it shows.

    1. Re:Bullshit. Disney is just as horrible. by skoskav · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Ehh, the kamikaze scene sure is impressive in visuals and audio, but the scene is ruined within minutes(!) as Rose prevents a main character from doing it again, even though the kamikaze was the single most helpful act in the film.

      Plot woes also arise because X-wings are faster-than-light capable, making jihad a tactically obvious option for the Rebels. I prefer it when the universe's physics demands 16th century battleship tactics to be the optimal solution.

    2. Re:Bullshit. Disney is just as horrible. by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why even bother with suicide missions, simply have a droid drive the ship. Or build FTL torpedoes. As impressive as the scene was, it invalidated pretty much everything we have learned about space battle tactics and strategy from the other movies. That’s one thing people disliked about the new Disney movies. The midichlorian rubbish was bad but at least is was an attempt to explain what we were already familiar with, instead of totally ignoring it.

      Still, all of this is still a sight better than Lucas’ pitch for the 3rd trilogy. I mean, it might conceivably result in halfway decent movies, but would it still be Star Wars? Ideally you’d want these trilogies tied together by the universe and a long story arc, with some overlap in characters. Not set in a completely different environment, with the only tie-in being the characters and some plot points the got shoehorned in. At least that’s what his pitch sounded like.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    3. Re:Bullshit. Disney is just as horrible. by gosand · · Score: 1

      I agree with you about the first two being the only two REALLY good ones.
      But you should look up a video about Star Wars being saved in the edit. After watching that, I am fully convinced that Lucas has very little talent when it comes to movie making. Remember this - he said in interviews that the first two movies were NOT his vision. Even with this story, about where he wanted to take the storyline, illustrates this.

      I think he's just a hack who got lucky by having good casting and good people working on the movies.

      --

      My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

    4. Re:Bullshit. Disney is just as horrible. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The point of that scene was that if everyone dies saving the others then you end up with no one left. The heroic suicide attack is heroic but not a winning strategy.

      As for light speed ramming, keep in mind that was the biggest ship the rebels ever had. If anything didn't make sense it was the space bombers, but it's Star Wars so scientific accuracy isn't really a thing in that universe.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    5. Re:Bullshit. Disney is just as horrible. by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 1

      Plot woes also arise because X-wings are faster-than-light capable, making jihad a tactically obvious option for the Rebels

      Particularly when they can be piloted by droids. Cut out all the life support and space for a human, turn them into guided missiles, win.

    6. Re:Bullshit. Disney is just as horrible. by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      Bands evolve, and so do movie franchises, but I would the next album from any band to at least be more or less the same genre as the last ones. Not Kate Bush doing death metal, or the Dire Straits doing a rap album.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    7. Re:Bullshit. Disney is just as horrible. by Motard · · Score: 1

      ...it invalidated pretty much everything we have learned about space battle tactics and strategy from the other movies.

      Heh.

    8. Re:Bullshit. Disney is just as horrible. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The point of that scene was rendered moot by Rose doing a heroic suicide attack on her own friend to prevent him from doing a heroic suicide attack to save the entire resistance so she could tell him that heroic suicide attacks accomplish nothing and we can only beat our enemies with love while their entire defensive line is destroyed in the background because no one engaged in a heroic suicide attack. Also earlier a heroic suicide attack saved everyone and was presented as a noble sacrifice... But that time a woman was doing it so it's ok.

    9. Re:Bullshit. Disney is just as horrible. by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 1

      We're not talking about Star Trek.

    10. Re:Bullshit. Disney is just as horrible. by dcollins · · Score: 1

      "The point of that scene was that if everyone dies saving the others then you end up with no one left"

      This makes no sense. xP(x) xP(x)

      --
      We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
    11. Re:Bullshit. Disney is just as horrible. by tkotz · · Score: 1

      I hear a lot of people complain about the dropping bombs in space. and there are a couple things to keep in mind.
      1) it was primarily an aesthetic choice because they wanted to quickly convey to viewers what was the role of this vehicle.
      2) In space gravity is still in effect.
      3) Star wars tech level is almost unimaginably high. The power output of their systems are unimaginably high. Their use of anti-gravity(or an apparently similar technology) is incredibly common place. Why make a wheel-barrel when you can make an anti-grav-barrel.
      4) From 3 we see that ships in Wtar Wars are not in orbit around planetary bodies. They are just hovering above out in space as soon as they loose power they just fall out of the sky. As seen with capital ships in EP3 and EP6.
      5) From 2 & 4, If you just make certain that your target is between the bomber and the planet, your bombs will fall on it.
      6) This does let shine a bigger problem across Star Wars technical, shields are just plot armor. They have almost no discernible attributes.

  3. Re: At least it wasn't 'social justice' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The problem with 'social justice' is that it's a total misnomer. It's not social; it's anti-social. It's also not justice; it's injustice. That's why sane people find 'social justice' to be so unappealing: sane people don't support anti-social injustice.

    The Star Wars saga has always been about getting its universe to a state of real justice, to the betterment of its societies. That's why 'social justice' is so incompatible with the Star Wars saga. You can't mesh the anti-social injustice of 'social justice' with the actual justice and the improvement of society that is so fundamental to the Star Wars stories.

  4. Call me crazy... by Drakster · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Call me crazy, but I have a (morbid?) fascination of giving George Lucas a budget, isolating him from the fan community and press, and simply leaving him to his own devices to produce the Star Wars movies he visions.

    Judging by the changes he's made to them already, I wouldn't expect them to be good, but nonetheless, it would certainly be interesting to see.

    1. Re:Call me crazy... by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 4, Funny

      Call me crazy, but I have a (morbid?) fascination of giving George Lucas a budget, isolating him from the fan community and press, and simply leaving him to his own devices to produce the Star Wars movies he visions.

      Call me crazy, but I have a (morbid?) fascination of giving George Lucas a budget, isolating him from the fan community and press, and simply leaving him to his own devices to produce the THX 1138 movies he visions.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    2. Re:Call me crazy... by avandesande · · Score: 2

      You have to be kidding, episodes 1-3 were a directoral disaster. Watch the redlettermedia review for a lesson on movie making....
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    3. Re: Call me crazy... by TimMD909 · · Score: 1

      Autopsies are interesting too, but is it the type of interesting that a person would generally want to see?

    4. Re:Call me crazy... by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      Episodes 1-3 were terrible... but they were a really good story. Let me pitch this prequel trilogy to you.

      The Jedi are an ancient order but after thousands of years they've become corrupt and disconnected from the lives of ordinary people. The galaxy is in decay. If you live outside of the core worlds you are vulnerable to child trafficking and slavery. Worlds are owned and run by crime lords, while the decadent core worlds turn a blind eye and squabble over tariffs and trade disputes.

      Anakin Skywalker is born into slavery and aspires to be a Jedi thinking that he can change the galaxy, free all of the slaves and bring justice to the Galaxy. He finds though that the Jedi have no interest in making the Galaxy better but are only concerned with meditating while the the Galaxy burn around them.

      Believing that bureaucratic dithering and inaction generation after generation is tantamount to complicity in the atrocities taking place across the Galaxy Anakin joins the political party of a new Chancellor promising to finally use the power, military and authority of the Republic to bring law and order to the outer worlds. The new Chancellor also tells Anakin that the Jedi are ideologically withholding much of their potential.

      When the Jedi discover that the Chancellor is in fact a Sith Lord they begin a military coup to remove him from office. Anakin, believing that the Jedi are acting in a partisan fashion against someone who just threatens their authority, defens the chancellor and strikes back against the Jedi order which he perceives as treasonous and undemocratic.

      Anakin embraces the dark side and attempts to build a military empire to bring peace, freedom and stability to the galaxy by force. Clean up the outer worlds. Purge undesirable murderous elements and unite the whole galaxy in a unified government. He choose the name Darth Vader.
      ---

      It's a great story! They're just terrible movies. On its surface you can see how an amazing story could be told but it would have needed to be told from Anakin's perspective. Instead we see the story from Obi Wan's perspective and isn't at all charitable to the person whose arc we really needed to sympathize with: Anakin.

      Also Episode I was useless. Again it should have been told from Anakin's perspective not Obi Wan's from almost the start. It would have been nice to start with Obi Wan's perspective, but then when he meets Anakin see him have his own crisis of faith in the Jedi as he meets this young slave and questions his own place in the world. Then we could have focused on Anakin and the corruption of the Jedi\Republic. Then when we hit Episode 3 at the very end had a good Malcolm X vs MLK.

      In other words, the prequels should have been what Black Panther was only even more sympathetic to Killmonger's perspective.

    5. Re:Call me crazy... by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 1

      On its surface you can see how an amazing story could be told but it would have needed to be told from Anakin's perspective. Instead we see the story from Obi Wan's perspective and isn't at all charitable to the person whose arc we really needed to sympathize with: Anakin.

      And this right here is why copyright as it exists today is such a travesty. Those movies could be excellent, but they can't be made because they're obviously derivative works. They'd also overshadow Disney's version of the franchise so severely that Disney's massive expense in buying Lucas Film would probably end up an unrecoverable loss. (If it isn't already.)

  5. planed for the final three Star Wars films by ChoGGi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    subtle dig at the boring natural of the new movies, or just bad editing...

    1. Re:planed for the final three Star Wars films by ChoGGi · · Score: 1

      Ahem natural == nature

  6. Prequels by malditaenvidia · · Score: 1

    Whenever I see some millennial mouthbreather claiming that the prequels weren't that bad, or that Jar Jar is alright and that the new disney movies are much worse, I'm going to point them to George's comments here. That man lost his mind somewhere between Return of the Jedi and The Phantom Menace, and all this does is cement that fact.

  7. Re:Are You Kidding me? by Leuf · · Score: 1

    At least he writes a coherent storyline.

    Did you just make an argument centered around The Phantom Menace having a coherent story line?

  8. I wish Star Wars ended after original trilogy by walterbyrd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Everything since then has been total crap.

    1. Re: I wish Star Wars ended after original trilogy by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      The original series was crap, too. "Luke, I am your father.". Really?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re: I wish Star Wars ended after original trilogy by skoskav · · Score: 1

      I disagree, but I am curious why you think that as it's a somewhat rare opinion that's seldom expanded upon. A New Hope and Empire together were acclaimed for both their technical and storytelling work in the fantasy and science fiction genre.

      Return of the Jedi though I find to have some serious issues:
      * The first 30 minutes is spent on a bizarrely roundabout plan to rescue Han, and ultimately serves no purpose as Han has nothing to do for the entire movie besides standing outside of a door during the third act
      * Storm troopers are useless buffoons, loosing all dramatic tension compared to the previous films where they were intimidating and mostly competent
      * The Emperor had nothing to really entice Luke with for turning to the dark side, making his plan kind of dumb
      * A lot of exposition is filmed in the lazy "shot reverse shot" technique, or delivered with people sitting down -- this is foreboding to the abysmally lazy and flat filming in Phantom Menace

      By the way, the line was "No, I am your father."

    3. Re:I wish Star Wars ended after original trilogy by grep+-v+'.*'+* · · Score: 5, Interesting

      What are you talking about? It did.

      Just like there was only a singnle Matrix and Men in Black movie. Anybody who says differently is just a evil heretic trying to deceive you and needs to drink much more than they already have.

      --
      If the universe is someone's simulation -- does that mean the stars are just stuck pixels?
    4. Re: I wish Star Wars ended after original trilogy by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      I want to point out the stupidity of ww2 fighters dropping a torpedo into a thermal exhaust port, flown by a guy who has never piloted a space craft before.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    5. Re: I wish Star Wars ended after original trilogy by skoskav · · Score: 1

      The first 30 minutes is spent on a bizarrely roundabout plan to rescue Han, and ultimately serves no purpose as Han has nothing to do for the entire movie besides standing outside of a door during the third act

      Lando gathered intelligence. Plan A was Leia. Plan B was Luke. Plan C was fight their way out. Fits perfectly with the strategy used so far. The purpose was primarily adventure. Entertainment. The purpose of Han was a friend and a temporary mcguffin, something to adventure for. The sequence showed the barbarity of the outer-rim and really is a standout piece with the cantina scene in the first, and ice planet in the second to present to the audience an alien setting.

      I agree with you that the whole rescue sequence by itself does great world-building, and it's entertaining to watch plans go wrong, and seeing a Jedi solve problems without a light saber. But the ensuing "plan C" relied on so much contrived convenience that it seemed like it was meant to be "plan A." Did the gang ever expect to get their droids back from the exchange? What if R2D2's drink tray would have blocked the light saber dispenser, or not all of Luke's friends were there to help him on the barge, or if the trained bounty hunter opted for long-range weaponry against the Jedi? And while I'm at it, why couldn't the Rebel's armada of warships take Han back by force, or exchange him for space gold?

      Storm troopers are useless buffoons, loosing all dramatic tension compared to the previous films where they were intimidating and mostly competent

      They were never very menacing. Han, afraid of the empire, chased down a squad of them alone in a new hope.

      Okay I'll grant you that. That scene was weird. Generally though, storm troopers were always pushing the gang back, making them have to escape or find alternate routes. The gang could only temporarily hold them back with blasters. In Return of the Jedi they were beaten by sticks, rocks and running headfirst into childishly simple traps en masse.

      The Emperor had nothing to really entice Luke with for turning to the dark side, making his plan kind of dumb

      Power. He was offering power. A common trope for one side to present the other with something only the presenter values.

      But to use an example... in Episode 3 the evil senator enticed Anakin with the power to bring back Padme. That's a strong motivation for turning to the dark side. If Luke was given a similar proposal and managed to turn it down, the moral of the story would have been more powerful. But alas Luke is only offered something vague, so there's no moral quarrel. The movie is not allowed to have a bitter-sweet ending like in, say, Empire.

      A lot of exposition is filmed in the lazy "shot reverse shot" technique, or delivered with people sitting down -- this is foreboding to the abysmally lazy and flat filming in Phantom Menace

      Sometimes yes, sometimes no. A rule of thumb violation that does not amount to much. Complaints that only people with some but not a great deal of filming technique knowledge care about. Many, many award winning movies do the same. Would you say the Schindler's list scenes with dialog delivered by people sitting to be abysmally lazy?

      Hmm, I tried to be specific in saying that Phantom Menace had abysmally lazy and flat cinematography. I recall it generally having three types of ways to deliver dialogue: People sitting down, filmed in shot-reverse-shot; people walking slowly, filmed in shot-reverse-shot; and people walking from one side of the screen to the other, stopping, then switching to shot-reverse-shot. It felt like a stage play. Rarely did scenes work with physical depth, because they filmed in front of bluescreens.

      Skimming through my copy of Schindler's List now, I only found a few long-ish scenes where they filmed it in sh

    6. Re: I wish Star Wars ended after original trilogy by umafuckit · · Score: 1

      The original series was crap, too. "Luke, I am your father.". Really?

      Got to agree there. I've found them unwatchable since I ceased to be 8 years old.

      --
      soylentnews.org
    7. Re: I wish Star Wars ended after original trilogy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      the Terminator series successfully made it to two films (they should have stopped there)

    8. Re:I wish Star Wars ended after original trilogy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Just like there was only a singnle Matrix and Men in Black movie. Anybody who says differently is just a evil heretic trying to deceive you and needs to drink much more than they already have.

      Q: How many Highlander movies are there?

      A: There can be only one!

    9. Re:I wish Star Wars ended after original trilogy by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I get the matrix, but mib? Who cares? The first one was cute, they continued to be cute. But that's all. It's not great Cinema.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    10. Re:I wish Star Wars ended after original trilogy by Wrath0fb0b · · Score: 1

      I wish Star Wars ended after original trilogy ... Everything since then has been total crap.

      So just to be clear, it would be preferable in your mind that they release 3 good movies in the series and then stop, rather than 3 good ones and 6-8 bad ones. even if you only watch the first 3?

      I don't get it. Does the mere existence of bad sequels have a backwards-in-time effect that worsen the original?

      We get it that you thought the sequels were bad, but this just doesn't make any sense.

    11. Re: I wish Star Wars ended after original trilogy by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      Luke had piloted spacecraft before, and used to hunt small flying prey in them. You can argue that shouldn't have been enough, but he was apparently a pilot with some experience.

    12. Re: I wish Star Wars ended after original trilogy by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      Now, Anakin in the prequel, *that* was just ridiculous.

    13. Re:I wish Star Wars ended after original trilogy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I don't get it. Does the mere existence of bad sequels have a backwards-in-time effect that worsen the original?

      That's certainly possible. It could be that you feel the entire effort in the original three was for naught given the events in the recent Disney movies.

      Personally I view the movies as being for kids so if my son enjoys it I'm happy. I enjoyed the original three as a kid and sat through the prequels before coming to my realization.

    14. Re: I wish Star Wars ended after original trilogy by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Luke had piloted spacecraft before, and used to hunt small flying prey in them

      A speeder that floats two feet off the ground is a spacecraft, is it? Tell me more.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    15. Re: I wish Star Wars ended after original trilogy by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      No, not his speeder. He sometimes flew a T-65, a small one-seater that was actually related to the X-wing. We never saw him actually fly one, but it was referred to in dialog.

    16. Re: I wish Star Wars ended after original trilogy by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Oh ok, that part is reasonable then lol.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    17. Re:I wish Star Wars ended after original trilogy by toddestan · · Score: 2

      The problem is that they wrote Tommy Lee Jones' character out at the end of the first movie. A touching scene that was very well done if you asked me. Then they realized for the sequel they wanted the Will Smith / Tommy Lee Jones duo back, and therefore spent the entire first act of MIB2 undoing the ending of the first movie. The stupid part is they had already set up for a sequel, but ended up completely scrapping that in an attempt remake the first movie again.

      Never did see the third movie.

  9. Yeah - it's dumb. by RyanFenton · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's dumb in the same way the ending to Mass Effect 3 was dumb - introducing new elements into the storyline, right at the end, and shoehorning them in as some great answer to the conflict you created, without actually resolving the conflicts themselves - just dissolving them behind this lame new scrappy-do thought you just had.

    The question is though... why did they commit the same error several times over with the NEW sequels also? Turning the tables upside down over and over, never actually explaining the philosophies, but just shaming any previous understanding and flippantly killing characters for drama. The premadonna Mary Sue character suddenly inventing lightspeed warfare, out of all the galaxy. Malus ex machina at every turn.

    Listen - I understand that Star Wars isn't high cinema. I know it comes inspired from cheesy serial films, and pulpy hammy sci-fi hero stories. But for a film series worth THAT many billions of dollars, you'd think they'd at least want to hold to the odd integrity of the characters at least a little.

    But for some reason, every writer that picks up the series wants to mind-swap the characters with some passion play for their favorite philosophical idea - make Luke and Han REALLY be talking about economic theory, or transcendence or whatever.

    I definitely empathize with Mark Hamill leaving the role in open disgust. There were an endless number of ways any of this could have played out - it's just annoying to never see any sense of the original characters playing out, just their image used as crude tools to give a feeling, then switch message.

    That's kind of how things roll out in big business though. Those that best posturing about being able to produce a thing are usually going to outmaneuver those that have a better plan, but are posturing less.

    That's show business.

    Ryan Fenton

    1. Re:Yeah - it's dumb. by mlyle · · Score: 1

      Luls premadonna

    2. Re:Yeah - it's dumb. by ckatko · · Score: 1

      >It's dumb in the same way the ending to Mass Effect 3 was dumb

      Maybe that's because the entire series was ripped off of Star Control 2 so they didn't know what they were doing.

    3. Re:Yeah - it's dumb. by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      why did they commit the same error several times over with the NEW sequels also?

      Becauae JJ Abrams is an idiot who has public said many times that he thinks that's good storytelling. And every project he's ever worked on has had the same errors.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    4. Re:Yeah - it's dumb. by dcollins · · Score: 1

      "That's kind of how things roll out in big business though"

      Yet somehow the Marvel movies are generally fresh, crowd-pleasing, critically acclaimed, and make tons of money, after 19 movies and counting.

      --
      We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
  10. George Lucas..... by modmans2ndcoming · · Score: 1

    A guy that directed two good movies (THX and SW Ep 4)....and sold toys up the wazoo...

  11. "a lot of the fans would have hated it" by swell · · Score: 1

    When you consider that aliens living in your digestive tract are able to manipulate our hormones, make us hungry, control our immune system and more ... is it so hard to think that similar entities are a component of the 'force'?

    Yes, it is. We want to live in a superhero world surrounded by cinema magic and sexy women and there is no room here for stupid tiny microbes. How could infinitesimal biojunk stimulate our fantasies in the way that our pea brains require?

    --
    ...omphaloskepsis often...
    1. Re:"a lot of the fans would have hated it" by avandesande · · Score: 2

      I have a feeling that a movie about this would be shit.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    2. Re:"a lot of the fans would have hated it" by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      It's the switch that's impossible. If there had been microscopic bits of cells the whole time, it's fine.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
  12. Original Titles, Episodes 7 through 9 by Alan+R+Light · · Score: 5, Funny

    Episode VII: The Whills To Power

    Episode VIII: Triumph of the Whills

    Episode IX: The Last Whills and Testaments

    1. Re:Original Titles, Episodes 7 through 9 by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      and the Gungan side story with perhaps unsavory ethnic stereotypes about a chubby little Whills who says, "what chu talkin bout, Whillis?"

    2. Re:Original Titles, Episodes 7 through 9 by owenferguson · · Score: 1

      Played by Will Wheaton.

    3. Re:Original Titles, Episodes 7 through 9 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And the spin off "Whatcha talkin' 'bout Whills?"

    4. Re:Original Titles, Episodes 7 through 9 by az-saguaro · · Score: 1

      The real question is Whills he or wonts he?

      If he do, it might be more like Last Whills and Testicles.

      Maybe a Star Trek crossover fantasy where they rescue tiny Force whales, "Free Whillsy".

      Starring Whills Wheaton.

    5. Re:Original Titles, Episodes 7 through 9 by Ken_g6 · · Score: 1

      Followed shortly by Episode X: Where There's a Whill There's a Way (to make more movies.)

      --
      (T>t && O(n)--) == sqrt(666)
  13. I forget who by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    but there was some pretentious schmuck who filled Lucas' head with the idea that the movies were anything more than an homage to old pulp serials from his childhood. He suggested all this extra meaning that just plain wasn't there and it all went to Lucas' head. We have him to thank for crap like mideclorians and Lucas' mistaken belief that he could cut it as a script writer.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:I forget who by avandesande · · Score: 1

      kind of like when metallica believed they were artists

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    2. Re:I forget who by Brett+Buck · · Score: 1

      Those pretentious schmucks are the FANBOYS of the original trilogy, who treat Jedi like a real religion and consider Empire Strikes back high art. They were the kids who were about 11 when Star Wars came out. They then had 30 years to fantasize about it and grow up, and when the prequels came out with far fewer gaping plot holes than the originals, they were sacrilege. A bunch of retarded teddy bears defeated the empire in the original, for God's sake. And I hate to break it to you, but Jar-Jar was hardly any worse than R2D2. Who makes a repair robot that makes baby-like cooing noises when scared? I can assure you that the plethora of cute robots were just as idiotic to grownups in 1977 as Jar-Jar was to grownups in 1999 and worse, led to a bunch of other even more ridiculous cute robots in the (endless) rip-offs.

                That's not to say this "Secret life of toenail fungus" concept by Lucas is any good, either, but for goodness sake, aside from the cool effects of spaceships getting blown up, ALL of the movies were pablum. This recent batch is worse precisely because they take themselves too seriously, because the fans expect them to be taken seriously, and all the fun has been sucked out them - by fanboy demand.

    3. Re: I forget who by Brett+Buck · · Score: 1

      These "archetypes" predated Joseph Campbell by about 2500 years. I suspect Lucas managed to "stumble" upon them by finding a script or seeing the movie "The Hidden Fortress".

  14. Not so sure about "anything else"... by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 2

    To be sure, it's a pretty stupid idea. But one can almost understand where he was coming from. Anything else, including the Extended Universe, would just have been variations on the pre-existing themes.

    I dunno about the "anything else" part.

    I read a story somewhere about a hypothetical origin of the Sith, being a temple on a long-abandoned planet somewhere that still held a sort of sentient psychic malevolence. A story revolving around finding this out (the origins of the Sith), tracking down the planet, and the subsequent battle to destroy it might be pretty interesting. The original Sith don't need to be even remotely human, and could make for some creative backstory.

    Part of good storytelling is creativity and color - things that are simply interesting to find out. Add a little surprise and unexpected development, enforce interior logic, and you've got the makings of a good movie.

    ...or you could just foreshadow the solution in the one out-of-place scene at the beginning of the movie, have a lot of things happen for no apparent reason, use a lot of special effects, have the characters verbally explain what's going on, and let the outcome depend on the heroic efforts of one special person.

    Like *that's* never been done before...

    1. Re:Not so sure about "anything else"... by NormalVisual · · Score: 2

      The original Sith don't need to be even remotely human, and could make for some creative backstory.

      [Scene: a laboratory on an ancient world]

      "Hey Bob, come look at this."

      [camera pans down into a microscope]

      "Huh, that's strange. Never seen black midichlorians before."

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
  15. why Lucas needs to be controlled by Uberbah · · Score: 2

    The guy comes up with some great ideas and should be paid to create storyboards - the concept of the pod race on Tatooine (stressing concept here, not necessary what was in TPM), the sabre duel between Kenobi/Jinn and Maul.

    But - those ideas should be handed over to a competent writer to be used or discarded as need be. So midiclorians would have been nipped in the bud, and the Ewoks would have been limited to being the cuddly native teddy bears of Endor. Said screenwriter could have then gone with the first idea for VI, where it was escaped Wookie slaves that defeated "an entire legion" of the Emperor's best troops.

    Same goes for Peter Jackson, who's Lucas complex metastasized after the LOTR trilogy. Every time I hear Guillermo del Toro's name I cry inside that he wasn't able to direct The Hobbit, instead of PJ.

    1. Re: why Lucas needs to be controlled by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      I noticed while shopping for DVDs today that the three parts of 'The Hobbit' are now packaged and being marketed as 'The Hobbit Trilogy' which is a little bit tooth-grinding. I mean, wtf?

  16. Clone Wars by The+Evil+Atheist · · Score: 1

    People forget the Clone Wars 3D animated series was also Lucas' idea. And that his original ideas of the original trilogy were also terrible.

    It's never just the leaders, it's also about the people around him. I'm sure if Lucas did get around to making 7-9, he'd have had people like Dave Filoni assisting him.

    --
    Those who do not learn from commit history are doomed to regress it.
  17. OH MY God... by SumDog · · Score: 1

    this is the best idea ever. This is immediately better than SW 7/8. I'm not even trolling. Those were terrible. I want to see this. I want to see Annihilation, StarWars style.

    1. Re: OH MY God... by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      No, Annihilation is Vandeveer's Southern Reach project brought to film. That's actual SF, not schlock.

  18. Seconded on ME3 by Uberbah · · Score: 1

    The inevaduhble organics/synthetics concept was shot when you had the chance to make peace between the Geth and the Quarians. If I were to ever win a large Powerball, I'll commission Netflix to make a Mass Effect series. First to make sure Femshep makes lots of little blue children, and the second is to come up with a real ending to the series.

  19. Different by JBMcB · · Score: 1

    I read his comments a few days ago and thought that, while it sounded goofy, at least it would be different.

    The whole point of science fiction is you can do anything you want. A main character can be a cloud of gas, or a planet. What they you do? Another fascistic bad guy who has magic powers and uses a giant gun to blow up planets. AGAIN. As awful as the prequels were, at least they tried to do some new things.

    I didn't care that much for Rogue One as a whole, but at least it was different.

    --
    My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
    1. Re:Different by dryeo · · Score: 1

      The whole point of science fiction is you can do anything you want

      No, that's science fantasy. Science fiction should be self consistent. Sure you can have some new science that is indistinguishable from magic, but it should be consistent, not do anything you want. No changing the rules just because.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    2. Re:Different by hazardPPP · · Score: 1

      The whole point of science fiction is you can do anything you want.

      Not really, as was already explained in another reply. Also, Star Wars is not science fiction.

    3. Re:Different by JBMcB · · Score: 1

      The whole point of science fiction is you can do anything you want.

      Not really, as was already explained in another reply. Also, Star Wars is not science fiction.

      I think Science Fiction is a broad enough category that Star Wars fits in, even if it has elements of fantasy, and the main plot driver isn't society being effected by technology.

      --
      My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
    4. Re:Different by Wraithlyn · · Score: 1

      It's more accurate to call it Space Opera. But Space Opera is a sub-genre of Science Fiction.

      --
      "Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson
  20. Re: BZZZ. Lucas's ex-wife wrote the outline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Which is why after they separate everything Star Wars goes to shit. Lucas is a hack, an needed someone to control him and give him direction. Without it what you get is Jedi onward: garbage.

  21. Re:Are You Kidding me? by alexgieg · · Score: 1

    Did you just make an argument centered around The Phantom Menace having a coherent story line?

    It had. Jar Jar Bink was supposed to be revealed to be Darth Plagueis in the following movies, and the "phantom menace" of the title, hidden in plain sight. It would have worked weren't for Jar Jar having been written in such an exaggerated goofy way, with his Sith powers so subtly shown (you can actually notice them if you pay extreme attention to minor details of his acting, such as him moving his mouth and speaking the phrases of other mind-tricked characters a split second before they actually speak), that people absolutely hated it all. So Lucas scrapped that idea and went somewhere else with the prequel trilogy, which made it even worse than it would have been otherwise.

    --
    Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
  22. Re: Oh thank goodness then by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

    'What we got' could be seen as an infection. We didn't all need to catch the disease.

    About a decade ago I got a job working with a Star Wars fanatic. Before then I had managed to just ignore the whole SW universe aside from having seen the film once in 1977. (There is so much other stuff and culture that a nerd can choose to be involved with than mainstream 1980s SF films. i.e. The Prisoner, Twin Peaks, Punk Rock, Industrial music, TTL gates, etc)

    Annyhow, I sort of inoculated myself from the Star Wars disease during the period after the prequels by chasing down a copy of the Christmas Special, which is the only other SW production that I've watched, except I've also watched (I kind of like) Turkish Star Wars. Jefferson Starship rock the Christmas Special, btw.

    The mainstream Lucas crap is, well....

  23. Re: Reality surpassed sci-fi long ago! by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Science Fiction was badly damaged by the space cowboy shit that Lucas and his gang brought. The new wave SF of the 70s was awesome: Ellison, Pohl, Ballard, Sturgeon, LeGuin, etc.

    The Star Wars crap sucked the oxygen out of the SF subculture. It took decades to recover (Meiville, Vandermeer, etc.)

  24. why ? by Tom · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Knowing Lucas's plans for the franchise "should make every Star Wars fan send a note of gratitude to whoever at Disney decided to buy the franchise and take it away and out from under Lucas' control."

    Why?

    Granted, his last works don't exactly give me much confidence, but those movies they made instead, let's just cut the crap and agree that they were bad. Really, really bad. They were so bad that the one thing they were good at was being material for CinemaSins.

    Most movie outlines, when given in elevator-pitch format, sounds either silly or trivial.

    Probably, Lucas' change there would have ruined it, especially as it came from nowhere (watched in chronological order, these midi-chlorians are mentioned what, twice, then not spoken about for 5 or so movies, then suddenly they are at the center of the story?).

    But what they did with the movies instead definitely ruined it. The last one especially was cringe-worthy.

    But both of these competing concepts are a great example of how Hollywood works: Milk everything to the max, and make sure that the discussion about it never ends. When people stop talking about your shit between franchise releases, stir up some controversy to keep the juice flowing.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    1. Re:why ? by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Granted, his last works don't exactly give me much confidence, but those movies they made instead, let's just cut the crap and agree that they were bad.

      No, I'm not going to agree by reason of I disagree. Ep 7 was a complete retread of Ep 4, but it was a stylishly done retread. It certainly wasn't perfect: if didn't need another even bigger death star, but it was pretty fun and I enjoyed it.

      Ep 1 however was an utter heap of crap. Really boring annoying crap with incredibly annoying characters, a boring story and a woeful script.

      The last one especially was cringe-worthy.

      Less so than Ep's 1 to 3. I give you "I don't like sand..."

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
  25. Jar Jar Power! [Re:Prequels] by Tablizer · · Score: 4, Funny

    Sorry, but I'm a Jar Jar fan. The Force channels power through his clumsiness. That's rare in cinema. (Scooby Doo & Shaggy don't count because not backed by supernatural powers.)

    --
    Table-ized A.I.
    1. Re:Jar Jar Power! [Re:Prequels] by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Scooby Doo & Shaggy don't count because not backed by supernatural powers.

      Depends, does being so high they can actually fly all the way to orbit count as a superpower?

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    2. Re:Jar Jar Power! [Re:Prequels] by SixMinutes · · Score: 1

      Sorry to burst your bubble about Shaggy, but...

      http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki...

    3. Re:Jar Jar Power! [Re:Prequels] by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      The Dark Side corrupted the series. The original cartoon used to indirectly sell the idea that everything had a rational explanation. Later they deviated into more Ghost-Busters-like.

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
    4. Re:Jar Jar Power! [Re:Prequels] by GonzoPhysicist · · Score: 1

      This is all but confirmed in an episode of The Clone Wars cartoon

      --
      horror vacui
  26. Re: Choosing between Disney and Lucas... by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

    During the short twilight period in ~1940 when Poland was being munched on, you didn't have to choose between Stalin and Hitler, they were one big happy ideology.

  27. Re:At least it wasn't 'social justice' by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Oh dear. And here you are, all out of tissue. Not to worry, I'm sure they can patch you up in your next cognitive therapy session.

    I dunno - It really is a different tack, with Disney expounding on Lando's pansexuality. i mean, whatever two consenting adults do is cool, but I really can't get into a character that wants too have sex with my little girl or my mailbox or my lawnmower.

    Disney trying to branch off into where characters want to stick their pecker or fig is an annoying and irrelevant side trip that wrecks their story line.

    Mostly because it turns the movies into clumsy propaganda pieces. "The Last Jedi" was exactly that Apparently Solo wasn't actually too bad, but in the aftermath of TLJ, Kennedy et al told the old fans they were not needed, and called them misogynists. and other derogatory names.So it tanked

    Perhaps when dealing with people who give you their discretionary money for entertainment, you shouldn't tell them you don't need them. https://screenrant.com/star-wa...

    And make no mistake - The Last Jedi has a specific third wave feminst agenda "Offers the harsh condemnation of mansplaining we need in 2017" https://www.vanityfair.com/hol...

    No problem if you want to make political films catering to third wave feminists. But so far, they are happy that the films are becoming openly misandryic. But t appears the ladies they now consider their target audience neither watch the films, nor do they buy the promotional mechandise.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  28. I'm still glad Disney bought Star Wars by steveha · · Score: 2

    The Force Awakens showed that Disney has the ability to make a movie that looks and feels like a Star Wars movie ought to. Its plot wasn't the best, but I cut them a lot of slack, figuring that movie had a crushing load to carry (it had to not fail, and it had to not have all the fans hate it) so it made sense that the plot was loaded up with things that we'd seen before.

    I was looking forward to the next one... and then it was The Last Jedi which is just a bleak mess. Oh well.

    Disney can manage the look and the feel. They just need to get a good story and let it play out properly on screen and we could yet get watchable Star Wars movies.

    So now we find out that George Lucas's big vision was to do a new trilogy about mystical creatures being the power source for The Force? He still thinks midichlorians was a good idea, and he wants to use that for the new trilogy? That actually sounds worse than The Last Jedi to me.

    George Lucas seems to be getting worse over time. I thought ewoks were kind of annoying... then, Jar Jar Binks... now "Whills"? I'm glad that didn't happen.

    The original Star Wars movie was actually pretty terrible in its rough cut. Deft editing saved it, and Lucas had three people helping him sort out the edit. Then Empire Strikes Back he handed off script and directing to other people, who did a great job. Then in the prequel trilogy, he wrote and directed and what we got was exactly what he intended... and it wasn't great. He needed other people pushing back on his bad ideas and helping him in the areas where he is weak, and he didn't get that. His first idea went straight to screen and he was never forced to rework and improve. Lazy directing went straight to the screen. Nobody had the power to say "no" to him. Too bad.

    P.S. If you haven't seen this, and you're a Star Wars fan, this is totally worth 20 minutes of your time: How Star Wars Was Saved in the Edit

    P.P.S. Oh wow, "Journal of the Whills" was part of George Lucas's original name for the movie! If you watch that video linked above, you can spot it on the picture of the first page of the script.

    But even if George Lucas insists that this Whills/midiclorians thing was his original plan, I don't buy it. He was making things up as he went along. I'm certain that the plot point of Luke and Leia being siblings wasn't invented in time for the first movie, or else they would have probably skipped her giving him a peck on the cheek for luck; original concept art had everyone armed with glowing swords, not just a few characters; etc. A lot of what we love was added during the process of making the movies, and much of it came from creative contributions from people who were not George Lucas.

    --
    lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
  29. Re:At least it wasn't 'social justice' by mSparks43 · · Score: 1

    social justice would actually be infinitely preferable to the totally fake disney generation bullshit that is in control of the televisors these days.

  30. Would have been cool by ET3D · · Score: 1

    I'm curious where Lucas could have taken this. More curious than I am about anything else in the Star Wars universe.

    1. Re:Would have been cool by ckatko · · Score: 1

      Seriously! He would have taken Star Wars and fuckin' "hard sci'd" the shit out of it.

      I would have stood up and applauded that because it would have wrecked the previous movies without any sense shame.

      THE BALLS on this guy.

    2. Re:Would have been cool by MrKaos · · Score: 1

      I'm curious where Lucas could have taken this. More curious than I am about anything else in the Star Wars universe.

      Exactly. People who dived into Lucas' creation suddenly thought they owned it. They didn't respect the vision of the guy who was writing stories that served the story instead of a franchise. They were only in the territory, it was Lucas mapping it.

      Sure I enjoy the Disney versions however what I see is the filling in of all the back story that Lucas created and Lucas could have farmed that out to Disney to keep fanboys happy while he focused on innovating the story to the final manifestation based on the fact that the inspiration for Star Wars came to Lucas and not the Disney Board.

      If you want something great and interesting you have to let people take risks with the story. Star Wars lost that as soon as people started whining about Jar Jar, took it too seriously and forgot that it was a bunch of kids who made it into the cultural icon it is.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
  31. Stop Knocking the Idea Itself by Zamphatta · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm tired of people saying this would've been horrible. Bad ideas are turned into good stories just as easily as good ideas are turned into bad stories. Hppens all the time. It's all about the writing & ability to make something enjoyable. A good director and screenwriter can make any idea work for a large audience. Personally I would like to have seen how this would've played out. Would've taken Star Wars in a fresh new direction, even if it didn't seem like Star Wars. Couldn't have been worse than The Last Jedi.

    1. Re:Stop Knocking the Idea Itself by Njovich · · Score: 1

      Noooo, people cannot handle something existing that they don't feel 100% comfortable with. That's why every film these days has to go by dozens focus groups to remove every bit of originality and we cannot have original stories anymore, only derivatives.

  32. Lucas continues to prove... by CRB9000 · · Score: 2

    George Lucas continues to prove, no, INSISTS upon proving, that he is the worst person to handle his own properties. He comes up with kickass ideas, but, left too long in his hands, he finds incredible ways to completely screw them up. At a certain point, you have to stop painting, otherwise, it just looks like a mess.

    1. Re:Lucas continues to prove... by ckatko · · Score: 1

      Or you know, you could just not watch those movies.

    2. Re:Lucas continues to prove... by MrKaos · · Score: 1

      Or you know, you could just not watch those movies.

      and let the rest of us enjoy them for what they are.

      --
      My ism, it's full of beliefs.
  33. Star Wars by ledow · · Score: 2

    Is it just me that find Star Wars tedious, badly-written shite?

    I mean, I wasn't around when the first came out. Maybe I missed the cult-train on that, but it was never anything more than a poor sci-fi movie to me. Not even "comparing the technology", it still had tons more CGI etc. in it than anything else for years afterwards, but I never found anything about the movie compelling. The "classic" sequels were just more of the same dross. People in teddy-bear costumes. It was like a very bad episode of Star Trek, after the budget had run out, but then tacked on with expensive CGI.

    Then a lapse in time, in which possibly the "best parts" of the whole thing came out - the video games. The old DOS X-Wing / Tie-Fighter games were great. Because it was the cool bit of the films put into your hands with the sound effects.

    I literally haven't even seen any of the "prequels" all the way through. I couldn't stand them. It was more of the same but with some decent-quality camera work and costuming, but stuck alongside the old dross.

    I honestly can't fathom what's interesting about the storyline at all. It's a Star-Trek episode at best, in terms of concept. The early films remind me of poor 80's things like Flash Gordon. Fabulous and cultish but if you watch with anything approaching a modern critical eye, they are utter trash with a soundtrack

    And it died off. In the 90's, Star Wars died and was just history, and became unpopular. Then it revamped and everyone went mad for it again.

    I'm a geek and I'm often assumed to be both a Trekkie and a Star Wars guy and I honestly can't stand either. I can suffer watching an episode but I'm smirking to myself the whole time (and Patrick Stewart face-palming too).

    I honestly don't get why. The acting is poor. The CGI is ruined by the crap (whether that's CGI characters or the complete lack of consistency by using CGI and bear-suits in the same scene). The storyline is quite literally "good versus evil". The dialogue is either twee or literally so dull I switch off (reminds me of parts of the Matrix sequels).

    I don't get what's there to make a multi-million-dollar franchise. I certainly don't get what's in the plotline to actually get upset about.

    I would honestly rather watch Spaceballs on loop.

    1. Re:Star Wars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Not even "comparing the technology", it still had tons more CGI etc. in it than anything else for years afterwards

      The only CGI in the first film was the graphics in the Death Star briefing before the rebels' attack.

      What is it today that people refer to any old visual special effects as 'CGI'?

    2. Re:Star Wars by skam240 · · Score: 1

      "I mean, I wasn't around when the first came out. Maybe I missed the cult-train on that, but it was never anything more than a poor sci-fi movie to me. Not even "comparing the technology", it still had tons more CGI etc. in it than anything else for years afterwards, but I never found anything about the movie compelling. The "classic" sequels were just more of the same dross. People in teddy-bear costumes. It was like a very bad episode of Star Trek, after the budget had run out, but then tacked on with expensive CGI."

      Your wording is a little awkward here. Are you talking about CGI in the original trilogy?

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    3. Re:Star Wars by JustNiz · · Score: 1

      > I mean, I wasn't around when the first came out.

      Before the first Star Wars movie came along, Sci Fi moviemaking was in the doldrums, the norm had become standard B movie fare, men in cheesy rubber monster suits and "special" effects so cheap that they didn't even bother hiding the strings. The plot was inevitably at best a simple variant of "monster kidnaps cute girl, hero scours the galaxy to find and kill monster, so saves a now grateful and in-love girl."

      The effect the original Star Wars movie's truly new moviemaking and storytelling concepts had on revitalizing the entire Sci-Fi genre and even world in general was so large that it redefined the way all sci-fi moves are made to this day.

      The reason you can't appreciate it is exactly because the change it triggered was so fundamental that people your age and younger have no basis for comparison.

    4. Re:Star Wars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I mean, I wasn't around when the first came out

      And that sums up why your view doesn't quite get it. Certain films at certain times push the envelope and make everyone go wow.

      Star Wars did it with a plot that wasn't original (it is "Princess in the Tower" in space), but the special effects and creativity were incredible, and it re-established science fiction at a time when it wasn't cool.

      Compare to the original Jurassic Park, sure the special effects are looking a bit old now, but anyone who watched the original knows how amazing it was at the time.

    5. Re:Star Wars by jdschulteis · · Score: 1

      Not even "comparing the technology", it still had tons more CGI etc. in it than anything else for years afterwards

      The only CGI in the first film was the graphics in the Death Star briefing before the rebels' attack.

      What is it today that people refer to any old visual special effects as 'CGI'?

      He wrote that he wasn't around when the first movie came out. Probably not aware that the spaceships were physical models shot with (computer-controlled) physical cameras.

    6. Re:Star Wars by ledow · · Score: 1

      Maybe it's not "CGI", let's say "special effects".

      Didn't they have the light sabres in the first one?

      Was not ILM basically BORN for the original Star Wars movie?

  34. Re: At least it wasn't 'social justice' by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1, Funny

    Trump fag?

    I came here looking for some intelligent conversation, but I got you.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  35. THIS! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    She took his ep4 script and turned it into something that wasnâ(TM)t crap.

    Unfortunately she was no longer involved by the time we got the jar jar bunks ep1 mess and all the completely moronic George mess of sheer stupidity that followed. If we had her around through every movie Iâ(TM)ll bet ep1-3 and 7-9 would have been as good as 4-6. Sadly for fans that was not the case.

    1. Re:THIS! by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Ep4 was crap. It was saved in the edit, the original cut and script were epic bad.

      Lucas's best film remains 'American Graffiti'.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  36. last jedi is still crap tho.. by umghhh · · Score: 1

    When it came to cinemas around I watched star wars original movie (that would be star wars 4) like 30 times in a 6 weeks period in which I hardly visited school. This ended of course with a big shout from my father but the I still recall the fascination with which I was watching it over and over again. I was not so excited about any of the other movies of which parts 1-3 I had to use force to watch. As I did not have any I used beer instead. Part 7 was ok although I already started to wish tat empire wins for a change. In part 8 this wish became almost as strong as a wish to quit in the middle. I left the cinema after an hour or so. Roque One was quite something comparing to parts 7-8 a story and a movie worth the name. Part 8 ended the main stream of SW movies tho. I do not think I will spend a buck on a ticket for part 9 if it ever gets made. I think I converted to dark side eventually.

  37. Would never have worked by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

    Rachel Welch is too old.

  38. disney is worse by gl4ss · · Score: 1

    you seriously don't understand how the warp shenigans in tfa and tlj break up 100% of all point in the plots in 4,5,6 and even rogue one?

    1) warp drives can be engaged into capital ships as weapons.
    2) you can bypass planetary shields with warp drives.
    3) planet masses no longer matter.

    also i gather that they break large parts of the plot in solo too...
    the new stuff is actually worse than lucas's terrible ideas. they break contuinity. it's like if you put a device in star trek that let you teleport people in 0 ms to the klingon homeworld.

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  39. Nah by Berkyjay · · Score: 1

    Knowing Lucas's plans for the franchise "should make every Star Wars fan send a note of gratitude to whoever at Disney decided to buy the franchise and take it away and out from under Lucas' control."

    Disney is way worse.

    1. Re:Nah by ckatko · · Score: 1

      The difference with George is... there's actual new ideas.

      Whereas all Disney can do apparently, is repackage old ones in different ways and by the end of the movie you don't feel like you've see anything new.

      George, as batshit insane at it sounds, is still... creative.

    2. Re:Nah by Berkyjay · · Score: 1

      This is exactly what I've been saying to my friends. You know George is coming from an honest place. Disney just wants to extract the cash from our wallets.

  40. We've already had the best of Star Wars. by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    I agree that Lucas's vision sounds awful but the franchise is not in safe hands with Disney either. They are also clearly going down the "lets fuck the whole thing up" road.
    I mean look at Solo. What a turd that was. Even I, a longtime Star Wars fan actually fell asleep in the theater and couldn't wait for the movie to finally end, it really was that insipid and BORING.

  41. Pick a side. by ckatko · · Score: 2

    "New Star wars are too similar" vs "Prequels aren't similar enough"

    Friggin' pick one already.

    And if you think there's a third route, "make them just similar enough", enjoy another twenty Pirates of the Caribbean movies.

    If you think you can write a better Star Wars, hurry up and do it already.

    1. Re:Pick a side. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      >"New Star wars are too similar" vs "Prequels aren't similar enough"

      >Friggin' pick one already.

      Look, I'm just saying there's an option beyond 'literally frozen in a block of ice' and 'incinerated in a ceramics furnace' when cooking my steak.

  42. Re: At least it wasn't 'social justice' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You have no idea what "pansexual" means, do you?

  43. Re:Are You Kidding me? by alexgieg · · Score: 1

    did Lucas (or someone else in the know) state this was the original intent?

    Almost. Jar Jar's voice actor hinted strongly that the story was moving in that direction, see here: Star Wars: The Darth Jar Jar Binks theory is partially true, says actor.

    --
    Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
  44. Re: At least it wasn't 'social justice' by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

    You have no idea what "pansexual" means, do you?

    Well now in todays world of an infinite number of genders it's someone who is perfectly happy to fuck anything. The reason that the writer smugly announce Lando's pansexuality is because he was insinuated to be fucking the woman robot, who was in no way shape or form humanoid, but the equivalent of fucking R2D2, a porg, od the tailpi[pe on your mamma's car. Across the spectrum, anything is a fine thing to stick your dick in.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  45. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  46. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  47. Re:At least it wasn't 'social justice' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I dunno - It really is a different tack, with Disney expounding on Lando's pansexuality. i mean, whatever two consenting adults do is cool, but I really can't get into a character that wants too have sex with my little girl or my mailbox or my lawnmower.
    Disney trying to branch off into where characters want to stick their pecker or fig is an annoying and irrelevant side trip that wrecks their story line. ...
    Apparently Solo wasn't actually too bad

    You admit to not seeing Solo, so I'll educate rather than berate: At no point in the movie does Lando even seem to be pansexual. His malfunctioning copilot droid thinks Lando loves "her", but that's it.

  48. Re: At least it wasn't 'social justice' by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

    Your "little girl" is 25 and you wish she was humping Lando instead of Meth-head Dave.

    Settle down, Dave

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  49. Why do we need to continue the SW universe? by lamer01 · · Score: 1

    I mean the story was told, everyone liked it, move on. Continuing it just makes a mess of everything obviously. Find a new story/universe to tell.

  50. Re:At least it wasn't 'social justice' by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1
    I've been pissing off the AC's.

    Excellent.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  51. When all you have is a hammer by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    I liken The Hobbit to that adage of When the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem is a nail...

    The problem I think was budget and corporate greed. In that after the success of the LOTR movies Jackson got a boatload of money to make The Hobbit. The reason they gave him a boatload of money, is so they could make a boatload of money. They do that by making the movie into a blockbuster, then making it span three long movies. I mean this made sense for LOTR, as it was 3 actual books and each book was like 500 pages, a total of 1500 pages of material. The hobbit was less than 150 pages TOTAL. What they did was drag it out for profits, you can only do that so much with original material before you just have to start making stuff up. Anyway bottom line is Jackson got paid, and the movies made tons of money, so that is why the Hobbit became what it was in the movies. I think as a director, he was more less "directed" to do that, or was specifically hired under the assumption that he would.

    If Jackson had a smaller budget, only made one movie, I think we obviously would have saw something much different, and perhaps better.

    On a somewhat unrelated side note the much maligned Battlefield Earth is an example of the opposite side of that same coin, when you take a book of 1200 pages or so of materials and make it into a 1.5h movie, a lot of stuff is going to get lost in translation (bad acting etc aside just saying it was doomed to start)...

  52. All your base pairs is belong to miRNA by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    All your base pairs is belong to miRNA
    Except those which belong to siRNA
    Your genes are spliced
    You're really mice
    With circDNA modifications that let you play

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  53. Lucas is fucking trolling you by omfglearntoplay · · Score: 1

    There is no way he was serious... no way, come on, micobiotic world??!! Good for you George, you trolled Slashdot and who knows how many other sites and people.

  54. sorry.. by SuperDre · · Score: 1

    His idea couldn't be any worse than what we've already got, TLJ is really the worst blockbuster movie ever.. it's really crap CRAP..

  55. Re:AHA! Lucas wants to be L Ron Hubbard by h4ck7h3p14n37 · · Score: 1

    "'You don't get rich writing science fiction. If you want to get rich, you start a religion." -- L. Ron Hubbard

  56. Re:At least it wasn't 'social justice' by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

    I am a libtard thru and thru, but holy shit that vanity fair article is just too much. They specifically say that they movie makes the women right and good and vice versa, but act like that is a good thing! How do these people not realize they are overcompensating? I have no problem with strong female characters, but when they are the leaders and heroes nearly exclusively in so much, it is too obvious it is to manipulate society.

    Third wave feminists are the left wing's version of White Supremacists and conspiracy kooks.

    Not all right of center people agree with the American Nazi Party or the Klan, and hopefully few on the left of center side identify with the third wavers and their version of social cancer. Which is - as the VF article illustrates - pure sexist bigotry. And lest we forget the other bugaboo, the people who are demanding that Star wars resape itself in a non-male fashion, the problem is apparent that it isn't just males - it is White males

    https://mashable.com/2018/02/0...

    Yes, the peopel who will take to the streets to protest against racism and sexism are themselves both racist bigots and sexist bigots. Replace every "white" with "black" and every male with "women", and look what we get when the text is altered:

    But make no mistake: By continuing to hire only black women, Lucasfilm is not helplessly reflecting some unfortunate but unchangeable norm. It's making an active choice to reinforce a status quo that rewards black women while systematically shutting out anyone else.

    Racist and sexist bigotry is racist and sexist bigotry, be it left or white ^H^H^H^H^H^ right

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  57. Re: Reality surpassed sci-fi long ago! by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 1

    Neuromancer? Snowcrash?

    Exceptions that prove the rule.

    Though '80s sci fi was stuck in a cul-de-sac of existential crap anyway, regardless of Star Wars distorting the general public's view of sci fi.