Why is toxic fandom destroying everything?
- Thread starter Sgt. Sacrament
- Start date
?
The idea he planned it out is what's historically false.
Folks trying to pretend his stuff was High Art are fooling themselves, which doesn't change that he crippled the potential of the spinoffs.
Right, the person who crippled the series deserves no blame...
Lucas got rid of the only villains the series had to work with, then he said the Dark Side was destroyed forever, so the Disney writers had nowhere to make new villains and conflict from in the first place
It amazes me (not) that this thread has devolved into a Star Wars argument. 
It amazes me still further the 100% certitude with which people speak on topics as if they know exactly how to run these franchises, with not a shred of doubt. Just "the showrunners are wrong".It amazes me (not) that this thread has devolved into a Star Wars argument.
Lucas said a lot of contradictory things about Star Wars over the years. It is obvious that his ideas/plans evolved and changed over time.
Just the nature of the beast. Not really seeing the big deal, either way.
This.
You can continue to live in the realm other than reality, but there's no creator in the world that will ever agree that he had an obligation to leave the grave open for future owners to continue a film series beyond its chronological last act. Your argument is nonsensical in the extreme.
...and none were to be hired for the ST--the very reason JJ, Kennedy, et al.'s only effort was to rip-off a settled story and dig graves, because they realized they did not have an original, appealing idea of their own, so they dragged OT characters and concepts into their ridiculous sequels, instead of doing their job and (here's the shocker) create something new.
It amazes me (not) that this thread has devolved into a Star Wars argument.
And the entire discussion in response to Star Wars fans are killing the franchise.
Huh? Darth Vader's name is literally meant as a clue, as 'vader' is father in Dutch, and 'darth' is meant to evoke dark, as in 'dark side of the Force.'
What he didn't plan ahead of time was Leia being Luke's sister. The 'another' Yoda was referring to in ESB was a completely different person as Luke's sister Nellith Skywalker.
I think you will need to provide links to sources for both of those statements please. Regarding the "Dark Father" connection from Vader=Father, I don't think it was meant to be taken as Luke's father at all. At least when the character was created.
This is one of those things that there simply can't be a winner on, unless they have notes from the time indicating where Lucas wanted to go. Though even notes aren't thorough, we'd have to have access to Lucas's headspace for that.
I don't have links off the top of my head, but I am not in the habit of randomly making stuff up. You are welcome to do your own research. I do know that Mark Hamill himself made the statement about vader=father, because I saw him on a show saying it.
Yes, but fans know how to read minds.
For Luke's sister here is a write up on the 1978 first Draft of ESB by Leigh Brackett
https://www.denofgeek.com/movies/star-wars-the-empire-strikes-leigh-brackett/
Thanks for the clarification. So Nellith being Luke's twin sister was an idea even before ESB as filmed was envisioned, and possibly carried over from that until the decision was made to make Leia Luke's sister in ROTJ.
As for Vader being Luke's father from the get-go, I have a hard time believing that Uncle Owen's 'that's what I'm afraid of' line wasn't meant to foreshadow that.
Last edited:
There are links to old interviews and articles about old interviews with references to the original statements in them. I have referred to Lucas 1977 Rolling Stone interview multiple times.
Mark Hamill doesn't really know what was in Lucas head, and he is an actor embodying a character. Anything he says regarding the creation process is second hand at best and mostly guesswork/interpretation on his part.
I mean, the guy's entire body burned in lava. I'm pretty sure that would have caused permanent damage to certain matters of biological mechanics.
Indeed, I remember someone once making a joke that that's why he flies around in a Star Destroyer so much larger than normal Star Destroyers.
Seeing how he had his own ideas for Sequel stories afterwards, he did think he had that obligation. Which is sad that he sat on his hands for so long.
Actually it's because if they had done someone wholly original and new with no OT characters, it would have bombed royally because the "fans" can't accept anything not tied to the OT.
Star Trek thankfully was able to survive this barrier, but Star Wars could not escape it.
I remember watching a YouTube video of 'The Day in the Life of George Lucas' as the filmmakers followed George around Skywalker Ranch as he was getting ready to start working on 'The Phantom Meance' and George talked about how he had the first prequel movie written and started writing/jotting down notes for the second and third movies, as well as ideas/notes for the third trilogy set after ROTJ, that he planned on doing once the second and third were done.
I also remember reading/hearing that George turned over all his ideas/notes for the third trilogy in the sale to Disney with him saying that Disney could do/take whatever they wanted with the notes or feel free to ignore them; and he was somewhat upset when Disney went a different direction.
So, this idea that George didn't have another trilogy planned after the Prequel movies is bunk.
I also remember reading/hearing that George turned over all his ideas/notes for the third trilogy in the sale to Disney with him saying that Disney could do/take whatever they wanted with the notes or feel free to ignore them; and he was somewhat upset when Disney went a different direction.
So, this idea that George didn't have another trilogy planned after the Prequel movies is bunk.
Similar threads
