GEORGE LUCAS: What are his plans for the third trilogy?

[Temis the Vorta]

The only thing known is that at one point the "other" mentioned in ESTB was intended to be the main character of the Sequel Trilogy.

That makes sense. When I try to think through what the sequel trilogy should be about, Leia (who was retconned into the role of "the other") keeps horning in and trying to become the main character. It's irresistible - for her to be Force sensitive yet not understand or accept it, or even be actively hostile towards it, is a huge fact that needs to be dealt with by any sequel story.

 

[Whofan]

There's one flaw in that line of reasoning-Leia is able to sense Luke in ESB through the force. So if not his sister, then she was at least another force-sensitive.


Also some of your ideas, Temis, do play out in the EU a bit, and also in the Infinities version of the trilogy.


(Infinities-basically Lucasspeak for tales not in continuity-were the Star Wars versions of "What if"? and basically told alternate versions of the three films-Luke fails to destroy the Death Star and Leia is recaptured and goes to the dark side; Luke dies from his injuries on Hoth and Vader is left to be trained by Yoda and confront her father; and in ROTJ the Jabba rescue goes terribly wrong, with Han blind, 3PO destroyed and some other twists).

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Thus what was wrong with the Star Wars Prequels (and Return of the Jedi even) in the first place. It was all about cool stuff happening at a mile per minute with no regard to telling a good story.

Except he forgot to put in the cool stuff. Unless you mean John Williams' score...

Well, What Lucas thought was cool stuff...

I mean the films were pretty visually dazzling and that's kind of what R&W was talking about as if the next set had to raise the bar with "cool stuff" and I think that is why the prequels failed. Lucas spend much of the script writing thinking up cool VFX than trying to have a coherent script that made sense and had good dialogue.

Yeah the visuals are certainly cool - I loved the Art Deco look of the interiors that harkened back to the Flash Gordon origins of Star Wars. Even though Padme's costumes and hairdo's got ridiculous, I did appreciate the artistry of the costuming, makeup and hair departments. Some of the ship designs were gorgeous. And big-ass space battles are always fun.

But the fact that the visuals and the music were so good just perversely made it worse that the far more important factors of story and characters were so botched. John William's great music for the Mustafar battles was wasted on a fight that had zero dramatic oomph because I never bought the notion that Obi-Wan and Anakin were friends, or that Anakin's fall was tragic (the stupid punk got what he deserved). Ditto for Anakin's Jedi costuming in ROTS, which I liked a lot - the clothes are great, too bad someone else isn't inside them.

What really irked me is envisioning the army of highly talented people (including some of the actors) whose wonderful artistry went to waste just because the boss didn't understand his talent isn't on par with the people he's hiring. He should have hired a talented writer, a talented director and someone talented to do a better job with the casting, to complete the package.

There's one flaw in that line of reasoning-Leia is able to sense Luke in ESB through the force. So if not his sister, then she was at least another force-sensitive.

I'm not sure how this contradicts what I said - I'm assuming that Leia is Force-sensitive (and I think it's been established that there isn't going to be any "other" sister out there in the cosmos - Leia was shoehorned into that role for ROTJ).

It's open to interpretation whether Leia would have sensed Luke even if she weren't Force sensitive. It's just fun to think that that did play a role in getting Luke rescued.

 

[Kegg]

I can't think of any space opera movies within the past couple decades at all off the top of my head -

J.J. Abrams did this one that was okay back in '09.

And I'd probably call Avatar a planetary romance rather than a space opera, but fiddlesticks, a spade is a bloody shovel.

But yes, space opera isn't as big as it once was, and in the summer we don't trip over a half-dozen space opera films like we do comic book superheroes (the only major contender for a 'space opera' movie this summer was - surprise! - a superhero movie).

Compare those TV series to the PT and Lucas comes off pretty badly.

I think a better point of comparison is the Lord of the Rings films - not that Lucas fares any better here. They're both epic film trilogies set in exotic fantasy worlds which are big on spectacle - but I don't think I'm ruffling any feathers to suggest Jackson's films far outpaces Lucas when it comes to story and characterisation.

On the other hand, Abrams' Star Trek has distinctly less spectacle than Lucas's prequel trilogy, but it's much better at handling its leads then the prequels are, which makes it a much more entertaining watch. I've seen it described as the Star Wars film the prequels weren't and I think there's a fair bit of a truth to that.

 

[Set Harth]

The only sure way to get rid of any possibility of the Sith is to get rid of the Jedi, too.

Not really. Bane, Plagueis, Palpatine, and Maul ( to name a few ) were never Jedi to begin with.

She respects that Luke believes in the Force, but that doesn't mean she does.

According to her dialogue in ROTJ, she does seem to believe in it. In any event, not believing in things she's seen with her own eyes would tend to make her a character in a ludicrous state of denial.

Vader can die, but the dark side doesn't die with him - it can't. It's eternal.

As a part of the Force, it lasts as long as the Force itself does. This doesn't make it a "curse" in the most literal sense of the word. It's something you make the choice to use ( or not ). A high midichlorian count isn't a guarantee of falling; Yoda never fell.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

I knew I was forgetting something obvious. I think of Star Trek in the same category as Serenity - it ain't a movie so much as a continuation of the TV series (or series-es, whatever the plural is). (And more evidence that the mere fodder of the genre, spaceships and whatnot, is useless without a core identity. The reason Trek XI worked so beautifully is that Abrams was true to what Star Trek is all about, in contrast with the way Lucas was not true to what Star Wars is all about, in the PT).

Ugh, no more Star Wars if George Lucas in involved. That dude really fucked everything up.

He just needs to continue his collaboration with Dave Filloni, who is the antidote to Lucas' fuck-up-Star-Wars tendencies. What works in The Clone Wars should also work in movies. I'd loooove to see Ahsoka Tano in live action, and I even know the actress who looks enough like her as an adult to be perfect: Rosario Dawson (who ironically is also going to be a Klingon or Vulcan or both).

 

[Sindatur]

I can't think of any space opera movies within the past couple decades at all off the top of my head -

J.J. Abrams did this one that was okay back in '09.

And... in the TV Series mentioned by Temis, she also mentions a Space Opera Theatrical film Firefly: Serenity.

 

[Whofan]

Problem is, on the movie screen Clone Wars did not work either. Critics hated it more than the trilogy!

 

[Gepard]

On the other hand, Abrams' Star Trek has distinctly less spectacle than Lucas's prequel trilogy, but it's much better at handling its leads then the prequels are, which makes it a much more entertaining watch. I've seen it described as the Star Wars film the prequels weren't and I think there's a fair bit of a truth to that.

nuKirk's bad-boy-who's-a-rapidly-rising-star thing makes him a better Anakin than the Anakin we got, for one.

 

[Set Harth]

magna guards that could 'hang' with jedi in 1 on 1 combat

Supposedly. However, in the films ( including the TCW film ) they went down pretty easily, and ganged up on Jedi on several occasions.

The reason Trek XI worked so beautifully is that Abrams was true to what Star Wars is all about

Fixed.

 

[Broccoli]

Problem is, on the movie screen Clone Wars did not work either. Critics hated it more than the trilogy!

In fairness, it wasn't a movie in the traditional sense. It was the first few episodes spliced together to market the series. The episodes themselves were weak and had a very poor narrative flow when connected together (which shouldn't come as any surprise). Everything about it screamed "cash grab" which certainly played in its disfavor.

The flick was designed for a small portion of the Star Wars fanbase. The fact that it was released in August is very telling about how well the studio thought it was going to do.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

The only sure way to get rid of any possibility of the Sith is to get rid of the Jedi, too.

Not really. Bane, Plagueis, Palpatine, and Maul ( to name a few ) were never Jedi to begin with.

Then they'll have to get rid of all Force users, which may involving killing innocent children, but for a traumatized society, such things are possible. And that would be another serious stress on both Luke and Leia, since they played key roles in restoring the Republic and whatever it gets up to is partly their fault - which is good, the more stress on them, the better. They're both very very good people so we need extreme stresses to make the threat of the dark side plausible.

She respects that Luke believes in the Force, but that doesn't mean she does.

According to her dialogue in ROTJ, she does seem to believe in it. In any event, not believing in things she's seen with her own eyes would make her a character in a ludicrous state of denial.

She doesn't believe that the Force is part of her personal destiny, then. She needs to reject it personally, in her own life, because that obliviousness gives the dark side a crack in her armor.

The objective here is to make it plausible that smart, resourceful, level-headed, unfailingly moral Leia is at any risk at all. She's gotta be the least plausible personality type to fall to the dark side, which increases the dramatic tension if it does seem that regardless, she is at risk.

Another goal is to increase the contrast between her and Luke, to give the parallel stories a nice sense of differentiation. Luke's journey becomes more mystical as it goes, but Leia's is stubbornly material and deals with political shenanigans. She doesn't see that her destiny is also mystical because that's just not her mindset.

Vader can die, but the dark side doesn't die with him - it can't. It's eternal.

As a part of the Force, it lasts as long as the Force itself does. This doesn't make it a "curse" in the most literal sense of the word. It's something you make the choice to use ( or not ). A high midichlorian count isn't an automatic guarantee of falling; Yoda never fell.

I mean "curse" in more of a fairy tale sense, not as something that has literal reality in the story. Despite the good intentions of the twins, the curse will dog them and provide dramatic tension - that's the purpose of the curse, to convince the audience that there's another shoe that's going to drop and a reason other than eye candy to go see all three movies.

Basically I'm constructing the story with two goals in mind: maximum dramatic tension, and keeping the mystical elements at the heart of the story. The first is good for any story and the second is what Star Wars needs to stay true to its unique identity.

If someone can come up with an alternative sequel that accomplishes both goals, I'd be interested in hearing about it. It's a tricky thing to try to achieve.

 

[Admiral_Young]

Indeed. "The Clone Wars" movie was specifically targeted towards children. That's why it had a baby Hutt at the fulcrum of it's plot. Lucas probably thought that would be cute to include, not to mention something we'd never seen before.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

Problem is, on the movie screen Clone Wars did not work either. Critics hated it more than the trilogy!

I meant The Clone Wars TV series only - the one that Dave Filoni is working on - too many things bopping around with the same name, dammit!

 

[Broccoli]

Problem is, on the movie screen Clone Wars did not work either. Critics hated it more than the trilogy!

I meant The Clone Wars TV series only - the one that Dave Filoni is working on - too many things bopping around with the same name, dammit!

Dave Filoni did work on The Clone Wars movie. He was the director.

 

[Set Harth]

Then they'll have to get rid of all Force users, which may involving killing innocent children, but for a traumatized society, such things are possible.

Don't I know it. Just imagine if they found out that the existence of Force-sensitive children meant higher taxes. Hoo boy! Those kids had better get on the next bus to Companion Aurek, and FAST. That still wouldn't work in the long run, though. The first Jedi and Sith had to come from somewhere, and you're never going to be able to purge all potential Force-sensitives in the entire galaxy.

Dave Filoni did work on The Clone Wars movie. He was the director.

Yes, as stated above that movie is basically just the "first" three episodes. And it got the same hate that the prequels got, imagine that.

 

[Admiral_Young]

^ ^Yep. His audio commentary for the movie is awesome.


To get rid of all the Force users isn't a solution. The Force is "everywhere" in the Star Wars galaxy as has been discussed in your other thread Temis. Lucas attempted foolishly to use "science" to break it down and explain it but it doesn't need explaining...and if it does, Obi-Wan does a pretty good job of doing so in "Star Wars".

 

[Kegg]

Problem is, on the movie screen Clone Wars did not work either. Critics hated it more than the trilogy!

In fairness, it wasn't a movie in the traditional sense. It was the first few episodes spliced together to market the series.

Basically. The episodes were revised a little and the action was upscaled in places to make it more cinematic, but it never escapes being a pilot arc for a TV show.

It's also why the series begins a little weirdly, in a standalone episode about Yoda.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

On the other hand, Abrams' Star Trek has distinctly less spectacle than Lucas's prequel trilogy, but it's much better at handling its leads then the prequels are, which makes it a much more entertaining watch. I've seen it described as the Star Wars film the prequels weren't and I think there's a fair bit of a truth to that.

nuKirk's bad-boy-who's-a-rapidly-rising-star thing makes him a better Anakin than the Anakin we got, for one.

Well that's damning with faint praise! And not a parallel I'd ever have thought of.

I think (hope!) Kirk is on a trajectory that is far less dramatic than Anakin needed. Kirk is just your usual sort of smartass punk. Not odious or doomed to be evil or any of that. A bit of maturity (provided by the next movie kicking him around some and making him wise up about his limitations) is all he needs.

The original Kirk was a wonderfully complicated guy, with a great deal of seriousness, sincerity and heart, along with a lot of glibness, devil-may-care-ness and even rebelliousness. He was a walking bundle of contradictions that nevertheless added up to a very believable character. Reconstructing a character of that depth is a good use for three movies and I'm rooting for them to pull it off.

Anakin is a completely different sort of fish, and as tough as Kirk might be to construct convincingly, Anakin is a character type that is rarely even attempted - a sympathetic and heroic character who the audience believes in and follows along his journey, who becomes horrifically evil, and we buy it every step of the way.

The solution is not to make him unheroic to begin with, which seemed to be the "strategy" of the PT. If he's no hero, why do we care about his story at all? The Clone Wars is using the greater amount of screen time to tell a better story - start the guy off as a hero with intelligence and many likable qualities and then just start throwing the kitchen sink at him.

His society is fucked up and corrupt, the war is going badly, the clones are being treated unjustly, he can't be with the woman he loves because of stupid Jedi rules, he's constantly worried about his padawan's safety and is told that he's wrong to feel that way, and he's on a mystical journey that shows him he has greater powers (and responsibilities) than everyone else, and possibly is above all the dark and light side Force users.

And if Anakin is the only person who is right and everyone else is, maybe not wrong, but just not in possession of the whole truth, why not solve all his problems with one sweep of the hand? Isn't that his job, after all?

If they keep going the way they're going, they'll construct a perfectly plausible scenario under which anyone would snap. Anakin can become evil without ever losing the audience's sympathy.

 

[Temis the Vorta]

The reason Trek XI worked so beautifully is that Abrams was true to what Star Wars is all about

Fixed.

I know there's a bit of bitterness about that, but Trek XI wasn't based on mysticism, so it can't be Star Wars at the core. Being heavy on action comes from it being a movie, not because Abrams is a treasonous bastard who would rather be doing Star Wars.

We'll never get back to the idea-, character- and plot-centric Star Trek that we all want (I know I want that) until it returns to the long form of TV. I wouldn't at all mind a Star Trek cartoon series that runs back to back with The Clone Wars and even has the same visual style (but of course very different content).