26 minutes ago, KungFuFerret said:Which is fine, I guess it's just my experience dealing with veterans at the VA that makes me not see every piece of land someone fights on, as being vital. Sometimes it really is just "this is where they met up to punch faces"
Well, the movies are 2 hour compressed legends, so they wouldn't waste time showing places that aren't important. The less important places get treatment in the animated shows and literature.
56 minutes ago, whafrog said:Well, the movies are 2 hour compressed legends, so they wouldn't waste time showing places that aren't important. The less important places get treatment in the animated shows and literature.
Right, but even you say 'less important'. There is a term for what I'm referring to, I saw it in a youtube clip about Star Wars....I'm trying to remember it. Targeted Intercontextuality, or Forced Intercontextuality. Something like that. Basically a film structure guy, whose youtube channel discusses the craft of storytelling in a visual medium, coined the phrase (as far as I know). It's basically when a franchise shoves in connections to previous things going on, without any real need or benefit to the story. Basically fanservice, but not just that. To me, Star Wars is infested with this type of thinking, and personally it annoys me to no end.
I usually use SWTOR for this, because it's got SO many examples in one place. But basically how they do so many callbacks, and trying to tie everything to make it more important. Like how every cantina band, no matter what planet, seems to almost ALWAYS bee that same alien band from Mos Eisly. Nevermind that it's 5000 years prior to that event, and on multiple planets. Every image of a poledancer is a twi'lek, every Hutt is a mobster. When you play the scoundrel character, you of course have a Wookiee copilot, and end up with a Princess-ish character, in a ship that has a very Falcon-esque shape to it. How you of course go visit Hoth and Tatooine, because of course you do. And I'm kind of rambling now.
Let me sum it up this way. Force Awakens, and Last Jedi, were building up the Rey From Nowhere angle. Which I'm totally fine with, I mean even Luke says "ok yeah that's basically nowhere". But putting a giant death weapon, and turning the location into some Epic Battlesite to Save the Galaxy (at least that's the gist I get from that), runs counter to the "From nowhere" angle. She's not from nowhere, she's from the planet that housed the secret doom weapon of Palpatine, and the site of some epic battle. If it was just "This is where conflict 2703 of 5000 took place", then it makes more sense, but when you have it be the dwelling place of the heart of the beast, it's less from nowhere, and becomes a Somewhere.
And that's why it was never brought up in the films, because the filmmakers, were actually trying to make it be nowhere. It's a forgotten dirtball in the middle of nowhere, with the husks of a few ships because a battle took place there years ago. But apparently it wasn't important enough to sustain, because it's become a planet of nomads and scavengers, not the seat of any source of power or anything.
But then the people writing the book, with their own idea, decide "I'm going to make Jakku important! Because reasons!" And they fabricate this big epic reason for Jakku to even be there. Which just, seems contrary to the point of the place in the first place. If the protagonist is supposed to a nobody from nowhere, don't try and retcon the place to be a Somewhere. Leave it as a Nowhere, and have the device be somewhere else.
2 hours ago, whafrog said:Lost me there...actually far earlier. I can't really agree with any of your positions, because your premises are flawed or misleading. But, no point in arguing about taste...
And they say if you can't add something constructive, you shouldn't comment at all. Good on you for bucking the trend.
Most of the argument that confirm Palpatine as a crazy sociopath, are tied up in the Aftermath books, and yeah, they are cannon, so not much point arguing it, but there was at some point decent potential to have this character (also known as the ruler of the galaxy) be something more than a one note cartoon villain, but that path has been lost to us forever.
Instead we have a madman that just tricked everybody, for basically no reason other than his own quest for power, representing a dynasty that has lasted for 1000 years (since Banes rule of 2, which is also cannon) that he has no interest in continuing, putting extra effort to create a super weapon for the sole purpose of destroying his own legacy (instead of using those resources to gain more power, or i dunno, extend his own life).
It just leaves us with a lot of conflicting actions that make no sense if his goal was his own power or security.
Similar to KunFuFerrets comments regarding the 'importance' of Jakku. Its a weird tie in, and in my mind evidence of a bad book.
For the most part, whenever you are writing a character and questioning their motivations, if the best answer you can give is 'because he is crazy' or 'because he is evil', its probably not a good character.
32 minutes ago, Silidus said:And they say if you can't add something constructive, you shouldn't comment at all. Good on you for bucking the trend.
Most of the argument that confirm Palpatine as a crazy sociopath, are tied up in the Aftermath books, and yeah, they are cannon, so not much point arguing it, but there was at some point decent potential to have this character (also known as the ruler of the galaxy) be something more than a one note cartoon villain, but that path has been lost to us forever.
Instead we have a madman that just tricked everybody, for basically no reason other than his own quest for power, representing a dynasty that has lasted for 1000 years (since Banes rule of 2, which is also cannon) that he has no interest in continuing, putting extra effort to create a super weapon for the sole purpose of destroying his own legacy (instead of using those resources to gain more power, or i dunno, extend his own life).It just leaves us with a lot of conflicting actions that make no sense if his goal was his own power or security.
Similar to KunFuFerrets comments regarding the 'importance' of Jakku. Its a weird tie in, and in my mind evidence of a bad book.
For the most part, whenever you are writing a character and questioning their motivations, if the best answer you can give is 'because he is crazy' or 'because he is evil', its probably not a good character.
Well he's not really a good character. Few characters are in Star Wars. The comics also paint him in a rather dim light. On top of that is the dreadful state of the Imperial military. That organisation is made to crumble like a stack of cards since the officers backstab each other to advance, and not the political kind but the actual fatal kind.
3 hours ago, KungFuFerret said:But then the people writing the book, with their own idea, decide "I'm going to make Jakku important! Because reasons!"
All the current authors have to run their ideas by the story group, or the story group hires them with a specific goal in mind, eg "you have to explain why Jakku is important". Wendig was writing *before* the movie was released, so it's not like he could have made it up on his own.
Force Awakens release date: December 2015. Aftermath release date: September 2015. The book was a lead-in to the movie, and Jakku was always meant to be important.
I'll grant you your complaint for the EU, but they don't appear to be doing that anymore.
Fine, he started writing it before the films, that doesn't change the fact that the location itself was so unimportant that we are told none of that in the movie (the thing that is driving the main story arc), and all of the characters in the movies continue to refer to it as "nowhere". The unimportance of Jakku contradicts the idea that it is somehow important.
And besides, being greenlit to write something probably just boiled down to "Does it contradict anything we're doing in the films? No? Ok then whatever."
5 minutes ago, KungFuFerret said:And besides, being greenlit to write something probably just boiled down to "Does it contradict anything we're doing in the films? No? Ok then whatever."
Well, the author had to know about it before he could write about it. As far as I know, he's never been connected to anybody at Lucasfilm. They contacted him, not the other way around, and gave him a crazy deadline.
I'm not really sure why what you're complaining about is a problem. The potential of the SW universe is practically infinite. Seems to me the story group realized they could cater to a wide variety of fans by doling out information on multiple levels, explored through various media. Exploring the importance of Jakku isn't a key thing for most of the casual movie fans, it's just a cool backdrop. So why not leave it to other media to dig deeper?
8 minutes ago, whafrog said:Well, the author had to know about it before he could write about it. As far as I know, he's never been connected to anybody at Lucasfilm. They contacted him, not the other way around, and gave him a crazy deadline.
I'm not really sure why what you're complaining about is a problem. The potential of the SW universe is practically infinite. Seems to me the story group realized they could cater to a wide variety of fans by doling out information on multiple levels, explored through various media. Exploring the importance of Jakku isn't a key thing for most of the casual movie fans, it's just a cool backdrop. So why not leave it to other media to dig deeper?
I've already explained why I dislike it, and don't feel to repeat myself. You disagree, that's fine.
57 minutes ago, KungFuFerret said:Fine, he started writing it before the films, that doesn't change the fact that the location itself was so unimportant that we are told none of that in the movie (the thing that is driving the main story arc), and all of the characters in the movies continue to refer to it as "nowhere". The unimportance of Jakku contradicts the idea that it is somehow important.
And besides, being greenlit to write something probably just boiled down to "Does it contradict anything we're doing in the films? No? Ok then whatever."
Being “nowhere” makes for an ideal place to hide your If Someone Takes Me Out, I’m Taking Everyone Else With Me apparatus.
4 minutes ago, Nytwyng said:Being “nowhere” makes for an ideal place to hide your If Someone Takes Me Out, I’m Taking Everyone Else With Me apparatus.
Fine, you win. Every single place ever seen in any of the films, or even hinted at are all now required to be Very Important Places. This will be the new law, and it is so. Can we drop it now? I'm frankly tired of debating it.
2 minutes ago, KungFuFerret said:Fine, you win. Every single place ever seen in any of the films, or even hinted at are all now required to be Very Important Places. This will be the new law, and it is so. Can we drop it now? I'm frankly tired of debating it.
Sure, because that’s exactly what was said.
Did the EU-now-Legends have a tendency to do what you suggest here? Sure. It’s much less of A Thing now, though.
19 hours ago, Silidus said:But why?
Because Palpatine did not believe in the rule of two. He was a firm believer in the rule of one. His believe was that it was a mistake to train the man who will kill you, he believed that your own strength alone was which mattered. If the universe can't get up on it's feet after you have burned it down? Than it can go to **** for all he cares.
Besides, the burned the empire down, but he set the foundation for the first order as well. So he was prepared for the case that his rule of one fails, but his plan seems to have been immortality and an infinite empire under his rule.
Even under the old Canon (Now Legends), Palpatine had always had the Empire set up to implode without him as ruler. In the ole canon, this was done through his intentionally setting his subordinates against one another in their own back-stabbing personal quests for power. He also went to great lengths to "ensure" his "immortality" through the use of Clone bodies he would transfer his life essence into. He intended to rule the galaxy forever .
On 1/23/2018 at 11:58 AM, KungFuFerret said:
Let me sum it up this way. Force Awakens, and Last Jedi, were building up the Rey From Nowhere angle. Which I'm totally fine with, I mean even Luke says "ok yeah that's basically nowhere". But putting a giant death weapon, and turning the location into some Epic Battlesite to Save the Galaxy (at least that's the gist I get from that), runs counter to the "From nowhere" angle. She's not from nowhere, she's from the planet that housed the secret doom weapon of Palpatine, and the site of some epic battle. If it was just "This is where conflict 2703 of 5000 took place", then it makes more sense, but when you have it be the dwelling place of the heart of the beast, it's less from nowhere, and becomes a Somewhere.
For what it's worth, it wasn't a galaxy-threatening weapon. The weapon was supposed to destroy the fleets and armies - Imperial and Rebel/Republic - battling in and around Jakku. Jakku was a trap, for everybody. My impression of the Contingency was that it was essentially a suicide bomb, based on some kind of artifact that Palpatine or his agents found. It wouldn't have had any actual direct effect on the rest of the galaxy, aside from gutting most military might and killing a bunch of famous war heroes. It was supposed to cause chaos, by leaving a huge power vacuum, but it wasn't like stars were going to implode or something.
I think the most intriguing part of the whole deal is that the Jakku Observatory was only one of many such facilities; what were the others for?
On 25/01/2018 at 3:50 AM, coyote6 said:For what it's worth, it wasn't a galaxy-threatening weapon. The weapon was supposed to destroy the fleets and armies - Imperial and Rebel/Republic - battling in and around Jakku. Jakku was a trap, for everybody. My impression of the Contingency was that it was essentially a suicide bomb, based on some kind of artifact that Palpatine or his agents found. It wouldn't have had any actual direct effect on the rest of the galaxy, aside from gutting most military might and killing a bunch of famous war heroes. It was supposed to cause chaos, by leaving a huge power vacuum, but it wasn't like stars were going to implode or something.
I think the most intriguing part of the whole deal is that the Jakku Observatory was only one of many such facilities; what were the others for?
The Emperor was basically the kind of guy who, if he couldn't have his empire, no one else would have an empire. He wanted everyone to suffer for their failure to protect him.
On 1/23/2018 at 8:58 PM, KungFuFerret said:Right, but even you say 'less important'. There is a term for what I'm referring to, I saw it in a youtube clip about Star Wars....I'm trying to remember it. Targeted Intercontextuality, or Forced Intercontextuality. Something like that. Basically a film structure guy, whose youtube channel discusses the craft of storytelling in a visual medium, coined the phrase (as far as I know). It's basically when a franchise shoves in connections to previous things going on, without any real need or benefit to the story. Basically fanservice, but not just that. To me, Star Wars is infested with this type of thinking, and personally it annoys me to no end.
I usually use SWTOR for this, because it's got SO many examples in one place. But basically how they do so many callbacks, and trying to tie everything to make it more important. Like how every cantina band, no matter what planet, seems to almost ALWAYS bee that same alien band from Mos Eisly. Nevermind that it's 5000 years prior to that event, and on multiple planets. Every image of a poledancer is a twi'lek, every Hutt is a mobster. When you play the scoundrel character, you of course have a Wookiee copilot, and end up with a Princess-ish character, in a ship that has a very Falcon-esque shape to it. How you of course go visit Hoth and Tatooine, because of course you do. And I'm kind of rambling now.
Let me sum it up this way. Force Awakens, and Last Jedi, were building up the Rey From Nowhere angle. Which I'm totally fine with, I mean even Luke says "ok yeah that's basically nowhere". But putting a giant death weapon, and turning the location into some Epic Battlesite to Save the Galaxy (at least that's the gist I get from that), runs counter to the "From nowhere" angle. She's not from nowhere, she's from the planet that housed the secret doom weapon of Palpatine, and the site of some epic battle. If it was just "This is where conflict 2703 of 5000 took place", then it makes more sense, but when you have it be the dwelling place of the heart of the beast, it's less from nowhere, and becomes a Somewhere.And that's why it was never brought up in the films, because the filmmakers, were actually trying to make it be nowhere. It's a forgotten dirtball in the middle of nowhere, with the husks of a few ships because a battle took place there years ago. But apparently it wasn't important enough to sustain, because it's become a planet of nomads and scavengers, not the seat of any source of power or anything.
But then the people writing the book, with their own idea, decide "I'm going to make Jakku important! Because reasons!" And they fabricate this big epic reason for Jakku to even be there. Which just, seems contrary to the point of the place in the first place. If the protagonist is supposed to a nobody from nowhere, don't try and retcon the place to be a Somewhere. Leave it as a Nowhere, and have the device be somewhere else.
Naah...
The point is it's famous enough to be known, but it's literally in the middle of nowhere. Just check where Jakku is on the galaxy map.
It's kinda like if she said she was from where the battle of gaugamela happened.
Yeah, you'd know of the place because of the famous battle, but it's still pretty much in the middle of nowhere.
Just because there was a famous battle doesn't mean it's "somewhere".
I mean, you know that famous place "little big horn" where there was this famous battle?
Yeah, it's in the middle of nowhere.
On 1/23/2018 at 9:05 AM, Silidus said:I kinda see that as the point of the whole system.
Similar to the Sith training as a whole... reward brutality, reward bullying, and elevate those that overthrow or betray their superiors. Its like the training of Darth Maul, applied on a galactic scale.Again, it feels wrong that Palpatine could be a dogmatic Sith, except that he wasn't written that way, but many of his actions lean that way. I nstead, despite that he is the only example the audience (movies) has of 'a Sith', he is not a very good Sith, and seems instead to be a sort of cartoon level villain .
"I do this in the name of EVIL"
"why?"
"What do you mean why, do you not even see my black cloak and everything?"
My bold above...
It seems like a lot of people are missing the point, and attributing some great character writing to the talented Mr Lucas... Star Wars is a cartoon . It just happens to not be animated.
Watch some of the old Flash Gordon serials... Cartoons. That's what George was making, just updated... for the '70's and '80's.
It's bad, one dimensional writing at best... with a layer of deep mythos underneath, which gives it just enough gravitas to be compelling. Don't get me wrong... I love it. Always have. But don't expect much from the characters... any semblance of depth is either just that, added by later writers, or pasted on by fans...
17 minutes ago, Bishop69 said:My bold above...
It seems like a lot of people are missing the point, and attributing some great character writing to the talented Mr Lucas... Star Wars is a cartoon . It just happens to not be animated.
Watch some of the old Flash Gordon serials... Cartoons. That's what George was making, just updated... for the '70's and '80's.
It's bad, one dimensional writing at best... with a layer of deep mythos underneath, which gives it just enough gravitas to be compelling. Don't get me wrong... I love it. Always have. But don't expect much from the characters... any semblance of depth is either just that, added by later writers, or pasted on by fans...
I think that's fair to say with regard to the OT. It stands on its own, is a pretty straight forward opera about knights and magic, chosen ones and the forces of Evil, basically a D&D campaign done in space, and that's GREAT. It does what it set out to do, and you are absolutely correct in saying Lucas really wasn't shooting for anything more in depth than that.
The issue is more about what happened after that. The prequels can't really claim the same, they were ABOUT depth. The entire premise was to tell the background story of the fall of the old republic, to flesh out the Jedi, the story of Anakins fall, and the characters who were responsible for it.
But instead, we got the cartoon again. I get that its part of the starwars narrative from the OT, but given how much the prequels differed from the OT in terms of style, structure, tone and scope.... keeping the cartoonish superficiality of the characters was probably NOT the thing to hold on to.
No argument, Silidus... but I think that the depth you're talking about was the intent of the prequels... not the reality.
The common thread between the two groups of films - George.
George just isn't that good of a writer, and wasn't willing or able to involve people with real talent in that area. And so... what we got was lines about sand and Jar Jar Binks.
I'd be in good company by stating that what depth there is in the originals comes from the involvement of his ex-wife (Marcia Lucas), Kasdan, and Kirshner.
George is all about the Ewoks. I mean... look at what he added to the originals, with basically unlimited money to throw at them, and no one to say 'No...'
The Prequels had much more depth and complexity than the Originals. Say what you want about writing and quality and whatnot, but the fact of the matter is that overall plot of the original is very simple and the plot of the prequels is much more complex.
43 minutes ago, Yaccarus said:The Prequels had much more depth and complexity than the Originals. Say what you want about writing and quality and whatnot, but the fact of the matter is that overall plot of the original is very simple and the plot of the prequels is much more complex.
I will grant that there is the germ of a really good storyline just under the surface of the prequels.
Its just badly executed, and really needed a very competent story writer who understood how to create a complex layered villain in Palpatine, the problems with Democracy, and the 'Dark Side' of a morally good character sliding into an 'Ends justifies the Means' mentality.
(prequel rant incoming)
I think if I were to pick a scene where it went off the rails, I would say it was the end of the chase scene in clone wars.
At the end of the chase, we have the bounty hunter crashing into the street full of people, and Anakin and Obiwan landing behind her.
Instead of running into the club, she should have simply torn down the street.
Anakin, seeing her escaping Force Grips her and slams her into the end of the ally, and when I say Force Grips, i mean the full power and extent of the 'chosen ones' abilities, waves of force power causing damage all down the street, people panicking or being thrown back.
Obiwan sees this and is horrified, yelling to Anakin "No Ani, you must stop, this is not the Jedi Way.", pushing Anakin down and breaking his hold on the Bounty Hunter, who then escapes.
This scene is then later called back, when that same Bounty Hunter results in the death of Anakins mother (casualty, plot or revenge), resulting in Anakin blaming Obiwan and the Jedi Order for the death of his mother, blaming their perchance for INACTION for the suffering in the galaxy, and swearing to use his power whenever possible to make sure that nobody every has to suffer.
This way we set up a clear dynamic between the Jedi Order and Sith, contrasting the difference between accepting the outcome of situations as 'the will of the force' vs bending the force to their will to achieve a desired outcome. Later development of the theme can show how Anakin becomes Vader, as more and more people begin to fight against the 'oppression' imposed by his idea of the greater good and security, and he becomes increasingly convinced that people (and aliens) can not be trusted with their own futures and must be brought to heel and shown the path to safety an security.
The word is not cartoon, but
pulp
(fiction space soap opera).
The tradition is indeed Flash Gordon, but that is original as well rather classic pulp, larger than life characters, lots of archetype, etc
Other notable examples are John Carter, Conan, Zorro, Solomon Kane, Tarzan, etc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCWcsm1Oyjc
1 hour ago, Silidus said:(prequel rant incoming)
We have all this and more in TCW anyway, the pet project from GL which was running on his money too.
Just now, SEApocalypse said:We have all this and more in TCW anyway
Yup, if only it had somehow been better done in the movies...
Ok Disney, heres the deal... 'lose' all copies of the PT movies and bring Filloni and the CW writers in to finish the last 2 seasons of Clone Wars leading up to, and finishing with the birth of the twins and Obiwan going into exile.
And then we will never argue about star wars in a forum thread again.
7 minutes ago, Silidus said:Yup, if only it had somehow been better done in the movies...
Ok Disney, heres the deal... 'lose' all copies of the PT movies and bring Filloni and the CW writers in to finish the last 2 seasons of Clone Wars leading up to, and finishing with the birth of the twins and Obiwan going into exile.
And then we will never argue about star wars in a forum thread again.
I am not sure if I would take that deal
I am fine with deeply flawed art and discussing it in a forum is fun.
Now asking Filoni and Lucas if they would like to do a special edition of the prequels ... that sounds rather nice. ;-)