A trilogy of Han and Leia's kids? Pass. The story is over. The Empire has fallen. Bad guys lost.
When Lucas said there was a 9 part trilogy.... he was making shit up.
There isn't a final trilogy.... certainly not one already planned and outlined.
Is Katie Lucas the Heir To The Star Wars Empire?
- Thread starter Whofan
- Start date
A trilogy of Han and Leia's kids? Pass. The story is over. The Empire has fallen. Bad guys lost.
When Lucas said there was a 9 part trilogy.... he was making shit up.
There isn't a final trilogy.... certainly not one already planned and outlined.
That alone would make TCW worthwhile!
The fact that they're also improving Obi-Wan, the political backstory and maybe even the Sith stuff now is just gravy.He's a BAD Jedi and he's training Ahsoka to be a bad Jedi, too. But the Jedi are so rigid and nannyish that it's hard to fault him even tho we know what's going to happen.
I heard that in the Law and Order opening narration voice.
I think the last three films were an idea Lucas was considering when Kurtz was still involved with the films-but when Kurtz left, pretty much all the ideas for that were kind of compressed into ROTJ and lightened up. From what Kurtz said, ROTJ (or whatever title it would have had) would have ended on a similar note to Empire, with the rebels losing and Han dead (Although Vader would also be dead) and Luke leaving on a kind of quest to find his sister (not Leia).
THESE ARE THEIR STORIES!I heard that in the Law and Order opening narration voice.
Source?
Here's at least part of where Kurtz talks about his initial plans for Star Wars. It's very interesting that Kurtz seems to imply the success of Raiders of the Lost Ark changed the course of Lucas's ideas for the saga... (From IGN.com)
IGNFF: Well what were the original outlines for the prequels? Since they can be compared and contrasted now that the first one's out there, and the second one's soon to be out there. Were there major differences from what you saw, from the original outlines of prequel ideas?
KURTZ: Well a lot of the prequel ideas were very, very vague. It's really difficult to say. I can't remember much about that at all, except dealing with the Clone Wars and the formation of the Jedi Knights in the first place – that was supposed to be one of the keys of Episode I, was going to be how the Jedi Knights came to be. But all of those notes were abandoned completely. One of the reasons Jedi came out the way it did was because the story outline of how Jedi was going to be seemed to get tossed out, and one of the reasons I was really unhappy was the fact that all of the carefully constructed story structure of characters and things that we did in Empire was going to carry over into Jedi. The resolution of that film was going to be quite bittersweet, with Han Solo being killed, and the princess having to take over as queen of what remained of her people, leaving everybody else. In effect, Luke was left on his own. None of that happened, of course.
IGNFF: So it would have been less of a fairy-tale ending?
KURTZ: Much, much less. It would have been quite sad, and poignant and upbeat at the same time, because they would have won a battle. But the idea of another attack on another Death Star wasn't there at all ... it was a rehash of Star Wars, with better visual effects. And there were no Ewoks ... it was just entirely different. It was much more adult and straightforward, the story. This idea that the roller-coaster ride was all the audience was interested in, and the story doesn't have to be very adult or interesting, seemed to come up because of what happened with Raiders of the Lost Ark and the Indiana Jones films – and the fact that that seemed to make a lot of money and it didn't matter whether there was a really good story or not – that wasn't what this kind of film was about. We had serious differences about a lot of that.
IGNFF: Well what were the original outlines for the prequels? Since they can be compared and contrasted now that the first one's out there, and the second one's soon to be out there. Were there major differences from what you saw, from the original outlines of prequel ideas?
KURTZ: Well a lot of the prequel ideas were very, very vague. It's really difficult to say. I can't remember much about that at all, except dealing with the Clone Wars and the formation of the Jedi Knights in the first place – that was supposed to be one of the keys of Episode I, was going to be how the Jedi Knights came to be. But all of those notes were abandoned completely. One of the reasons Jedi came out the way it did was because the story outline of how Jedi was going to be seemed to get tossed out, and one of the reasons I was really unhappy was the fact that all of the carefully constructed story structure of characters and things that we did in Empire was going to carry over into Jedi. The resolution of that film was going to be quite bittersweet, with Han Solo being killed, and the princess having to take over as queen of what remained of her people, leaving everybody else. In effect, Luke was left on his own. None of that happened, of course.
IGNFF: So it would have been less of a fairy-tale ending?
KURTZ: Much, much less. It would have been quite sad, and poignant and upbeat at the same time, because they would have won a battle. But the idea of another attack on another Death Star wasn't there at all ... it was a rehash of Star Wars, with better visual effects. And there were no Ewoks ... it was just entirely different. It was much more adult and straightforward, the story. This idea that the roller-coaster ride was all the audience was interested in, and the story doesn't have to be very adult or interesting, seemed to come up because of what happened with Raiders of the Lost Ark and the Indiana Jones films – and the fact that that seemed to make a lot of money and it didn't matter whether there was a really good story or not – that wasn't what this kind of film was about. We had serious differences about a lot of that.
See, I always thought the acting was as equally to blame for Ani's dooshyness as the writing. Even the infamous "sand" line would have come-off better in the hands of a more competent actor. People say how much better Christensen is in other stuff. I don't see it. I've seen several of his other films (including the Stephen Glass film) and he just never impressed me.
Of course, that still ultimately falls back on Lucas, but I'm just saying.
But you're right. Toon Ani is better in every way.
Actually according to the Secret History of Star Wars, Kurtz's incompetence as a producer was what largely changed Lucas's view of SW.
Prior to production problems in ESTB, Lucas wanted SW to be an open franchise with no definite end with directors like Kershner coming in and doing a movie and continuing the story that Lucas started.
This may be heretical, but I really think there's only one thing the three sequel movies can be about (and I haven't read ANY of the EU novels in that time period, so I'm going at this blind, but I've heard that at least some of this has been broached in the EU):
The war is over, Leia is trying to restore the government of the Republic, Luke is trying to rebuild the Jedi Order, when they are blindsided by the newly restored Senate, who demand that Jedi be outlawed on the very sensible theory: No Jedi, no Sith.
Luke objects, the Senate threatens to lock him up (he's Darth Vader's son! of course they try to lock him up!!!) Leia throws a fit, but in the end Luke goes into hiding (I kinda like the idea of Leia sending Han along to help him survive, being an expert in that sort of thing - we really never got enough of Han and Luke interacting for my tastes).
Meanwhile, Leia sensibly tells nobody (who doesn't already know) about her parentage. However, I've always wondered what would happen to a Force sensitive person who simply ignored their abilities, and whether that would be asking for trouble, Luke and Han are out of the picture and Leia would have no idea what the "symptoms" are of darkside-ism, to look out for in herself.
Leia has survived a terrible war in which her whole planet was destroyed, only to find the ingrateful bastards whose freedom she fought for, a lot of whom were probably happy to profit from the Empire, are now turning against her blameless, heroic brother, and would turn against her if they knew the truth. She's highly prone to anger, bossiness and self-righteousness, and she's completely oblivious to the danger she's in. If there's a better formula for creating a Sith, I can't think of one.
That retains the core of Star Wars, which is basically that the Skywalkers are the most frakked-up family in the galaxy and just can't stop squabbling among themselves.
I just can't envision Star Wars without at least one Skywalker kicking up shit. If the Skywalker and Solo children can be brought in on the fun, we could keep it going indefinitely, although I'd be more inclined to just carry the story over three movies spanning only a few years, without any time for kids to enter the picture as adult or even adolescent characters.
) but if Anakin had been written like he should have been, I think a different casting choice would have been required.
And it's true that no actor could have pulled off idiocy like the sand line, and the love-babble, etc. But maybe a better or at least savvier actor would have thrown the script in Lucas' face and called his agent.
The war is over, Leia is trying to restore the government of the Republic, Luke is trying to rebuild the Jedi Order, when they are blindsided by the newly restored Senate, who demand that Jedi be outlawed on the very sensible theory: No Jedi, no Sith.
Luke objects, the Senate threatens to lock him up (he's Darth Vader's son! of course they try to lock him up!!!) Leia throws a fit, but in the end Luke goes into hiding (I kinda like the idea of Leia sending Han along to help him survive, being an expert in that sort of thing - we really never got enough of Han and Luke interacting for my tastes).
Meanwhile, Leia sensibly tells nobody (who doesn't already know) about her parentage. However, I've always wondered what would happen to a Force sensitive person who simply ignored their abilities, and whether that would be asking for trouble, Luke and Han are out of the picture and Leia would have no idea what the "symptoms" are of darkside-ism, to look out for in herself.
Leia has survived a terrible war in which her whole planet was destroyed, only to find the ingrateful bastards whose freedom she fought for, a lot of whom were probably happy to profit from the Empire, are now turning against her blameless, heroic brother, and would turn against her if they knew the truth. She's highly prone to anger, bossiness and self-righteousness, and she's completely oblivious to the danger she's in. If there's a better formula for creating a Sith, I can't think of one.
That retains the core of Star Wars, which is basically that the Skywalkers are the most frakked-up family in the galaxy and just can't stop squabbling among themselves.
I just can't envision Star Wars without at least one Skywalker kicking up shit. If the Skywalker and Solo children can be brought in on the fun, we could keep it going indefinitely, although I'd be more inclined to just carry the story over three movies spanning only a few years, without any time for kids to enter the picture as adult or even adolescent characters.He was a good casting choice if you assume Anakin is supposed to be a loathsome punk, because the actor is very good at playing loathsome punks (anyway, I hope for his sake it's just acting
) but if Anakin had been written like he should have been, I think a different casting choice would have been required.And it's true that no actor could have pulled off idiocy like the sand line, and the love-babble, etc. But maybe a better or at least savvier actor would have thrown the script in Lucas' face and called his agent.
Similar threads
