Very good comparison and based on the current leaked info, I'm prone to agree with that stance.
Sorry, no way in hell Batman retires for 8 years at such a young age like he did in the Nolan trilogy. That's not Batman. And although Luke being captured is not the same as willingly doing nothing, they would both be the same problem IMO: screenwriters simply not knowing what to do with those characters during the 'downtime' between films, and I strongly dislike that.
okay, here is another reason I think Luke won't be captured for 30 years and it should be pretty apparent: That is thirty full years of continuity where Disney can pretty much do nothing with Luke. No novels or offshot films about him during that period, no nothing. They COULD but there would be a very limited amount of story to tell as he's pretty much out of commission. It's a waste.
Nah. Contextually it was well explained why Bruce retired Batman.
30 years of captivity is going to be harder to sell, and even harder still to justify why there hasn't been some sort of progress in rescuing him from his allies.
I dug how the prequels and the OT had those parallels (the rhyming of the poetry), but it's starting to feel more like a detriment to the series. Maybe they feel like they have to make some of these plot choices (luke being gone like obi wan, young heroic sons not knowing their fathers, on and on) to fit the poetry, that could lead to some really unfortunate plot choices. Why can't a character have their own destiny instead of repeating old ones over again?
I must say, I'm not liking the idea of flashbacks and
their use as retcon to shoehorn the Inquisitor into the timeline as a big bad.
It also suggests Rebels plays a major part in VII, which is also strange since usually the shows reference the movies. not the other way around (with the exception of the original CW toon leading to Ep III and Grevious' first appearance).
Former EU doesn't matter any more. It may be used for inspiration but don't assume anything based on it.
And cut scenes probably don't count as canon either, do they?
Yeah, the retconning of SW history being done by Episode VII is actually worse than the prequels.
I thought there can only be two Sith, because too many Sith resulted in infighting and the destruction of the order. Now you're saying there's an army called the Inquistors that are loyal to the Sith???
Former EU doesn't matter any more. It may be used for inspiration but don't assume anything based on it.
And cut scenes probably don't count as canon either, do they?
I have no issue with flashbacks, if Jedi can use the force to see the future, why not the past? Has to be well done though. Not sure how well they will fit in.
I like the idea of flashbacks and the opening shot being a little different (floating hand vs. a ship). Break away from the expected patterns and open up the narrative techniques a bit for the new trilogy.
The more I think about those rumors, the more I really like them. Doing a new SW movie presents a big challenge in not having the story feel like it's derivative or copying something from the former EU. Seems like the
Inquisitors
are distinct enough from previous various major post-RotJ threats we've seen before (new Sith villain, Emperor's return, new Imperial leader, etc.).
I have no issue with flashbacks, if Jedi can use the force to see the future, why not the past? Has to be well done though. Not sure how well they will fit in.
That's the problem, flashbacks are just about never done well. And the idea of going back as a way to introduce a big bad in a "he's been here all along!" kind of way is also just about always lame. In this case it is also in danger of just feeling like a lame excuse to have Vader on screen. Not that it'll ruin the movie or anything, though.
I highly doubt Luke has been captive for literally 30 years. He would be skull and bones after a certain point. It's more likely been just a couple of years at max.
Well that's what I'm wondering: who said he's been missing since then? Seems some people are jumping the gun unless I missed something. Just because they have to go look for him doesn't mean he's been captive or gone for 30 years.
Seems like a game of telephone to me, where the original rumor has mutated over time and through retellings.
Well that's what I'm wondering: who said he's been missing since then? Seems some people are jumping the gun unless I missed something. Just because they have to go look for him doesn't mean he's been captive or gone for 30 years.
Seems like a game of telephone to me, where the original rumor has mutated over time and through retellings.
I highly doubt Luke has been captive for literally 30 years. He would be skull and bones after a certain point. It's more likely been just a couple of years at max.
Missing doesn't equal captured. The rumor itself isn't very clear on the exact timeline.
If I had to guess, I'd say Luke took off and started wandering the galaxy alone like Kasdan originally wrote for the end of RotJ. At some point he stumbled onto something he shouldn't have and got captured and got his hand cut off. This could have happened 30 years ago or right before the film takes place, the rumor certainly doesn't specify.
Everything that dropped yesterday came from a couple sources who basically shotgunned EVERYTHING at multiple outlets. When IndieRevolver just started slapping cards on the table, it prompted LR & BadAss to step on the gas themselves.
It's why Devin was tweeting about laughing his ass off if this actually was misinformation, because it's a TON of stuff that provides both new things, and a lot of connective tissue that ropes in older rumors as well.
Odds are high it's NOT misinformation, of course, which makes the picture that's evolving even more crazy, because it seems JJ is definitely trying to shake some shit up. But it's also very likely some of these details are fucked, because we ARE still basically dealing with a game of Telephone. It's a much better played game of Telephone than it was back during the Prequel days, but it's still Telephone.
... because we ARE still basically dealing with a game of Telephone. It's a much better played game of Telephone than it was back during the Prequel days, but it's still Telephone.
My memory's hazy but I think a lot of the leaked prequels stuff from back in the day turned out to be true ala Kamino flying mount concept art.
What's your opinion on a flashback scene? I don't think they have a place in Star Wars and would feel too much like Spock's exposition from Star Trek, but the new movie should still be fun regardless. To me the Star Wars text scroll and force visions like Cave Vader or Hoth Kenobi Ghost would be the ticket on how to explain things for the new trilogy, which Abrams could very well be doing instead of following the footsteps of Star Trek.
I don't know about a LOT of it. There was definitely some valid shit that leaked out, but back then, because there wasn't really a sense of how people were supposed to play this game, and everybody was hungry to establish a rep as opposed to now, where a lot of people know how to do this online enthusiast press thing - it was WAY easier for bullshit to spread. So while there were a lot of valid things that came out, they usually got mixed in with some flat-out bullshit, almost ALL of which wasn't being put out there by Lucasfilm, but by prankster dickheads pulling their puds about how smart they were for fooling webmasters.
I don't mind the idea of it. People talk about Star Wars trying new things, going in new directions, the more you start breaking those sorts of traditional Star Wars conventions, the more that new feeling can flourish, I think.
Of course, that's all contingent on whether or not it's executed well. I mean - it's not like the concept of flashback is THAT foreign to audiences. Pulled off well, many people might not even think to question that what they're seeing is breaking Star Wars convention. They're just enjoying the story as it's being told.
Pretty much all the new rumors say that he's been captive for 30 years.
This isn't really a contradiction from the old rumors of Han saying that Luke's been "missing for 30 years" either.
Han and the other good guys only have knowledge of his disappearance, but not his captivity, since they don't know about the Inquisitor villains' existence.
Odds are high it's NOT misinformation, of course, which makes the picture that's evolving even more crazy, because it seems JJ is definitely trying to shake some shit up. But it's also very likely some of these details are fucked, because we ARE still basically dealing with a game of Telephone. It's a much better played game of Telephone than it was back during the Prequel days, but it's still Telephone.
Not to mention that, unlike the prequel years, there are currently FOUR movies (all with their directors already attached) and a TV series at various stages of filming, pre and post production. There's going to be a LOT of crossed wires by people who don't have a big picture overview of the whole thing.
I don't know about a LOT of it. There was definitely some valid shit that leaked out, but back then, because there wasn't really a sense of how people were supposed to play this game, and everybody was hungry to establish a rep as opposed to now, where a lot of people know how to do this online enthusiast press thing - it was WAY easier for bullshit to spread. So while there were a lot of valid things that came out, they usually got mixed in with some flat-out bullshit, almost ALL of which wasn't being put out there by Lucasfilm, but by prankster dickheads pulling their puds about how smart they were for fooling webmasters.
I don't mind the idea of it. People talk about Star Wars trying new things, going in new directions, the more you start breaking those sorts of traditional Star Wars conventions, the more that new feeling can flourish, I think.
Of course, that's all contingent on whether or not it's executed well. I mean - it's not like the concept of flashback is THAT foreign to audiences. Pulled off well, many people might not even think to question that what they're seeing is breaking Star Wars convention. They're just enjoying the story as it's being told.
Yea it'll be interesting to see how much stays true.
For the flashback you're right it's all about the execution. I think it's a criticism that mostly forumgoers would share since the movie going public will have no problem with a flashback as long as the movie is a fun ride.
With all due respect, most film series are lucky to even make it to three films, let alone six, so I'm not sure why you're acting six films that have thus far established a fairly consistent narrative and visual identity is some trivial number.
Yes, it's true that 6 is a high number for a series, but one does not usually discuss repertoire in terms of 'series'. To develop a real repertoire that can be spoken about in both positive (what's there, this is the 'easy' part) and negative (what's not there, the 'hard' part), an artist usually produces more than 6 pieces. Sometimes that artist might be producing work of such utter and rigid consistency that you can make these kinds of leaps. Maybe you can make the argument that Star Wars *was* this, but with new directors, producers, screenwriters, etc. these things will change.
Not having flashbacks is about as ingrained as not having slow-motion - there's a particular linear storytelling style that every movie has adhered to, so I have to assume there's some sort of cohesive vision to "what SW is." Furthermore, they seem to have gone to great lengths in replicating the OT style with these new films, so the deviations are bound to be even more noticeable.
You can assume that, but it's just that: an assumption. It's, like, your opinion, man. It's quite bold to say that things NOT there are parts of the vision, since there are literally thousands of 'things' that could have been in Star Wars but weren't. Their absence is not inherently part of the vision. And even if you're right, it's not Lucas' vision anymore. It'll be J.J.'s vision. Clearly a vision informed by and based on his own understanding of Lucas', which will of course differ in ways both big and small from Lucas', yours, or mine. Because he's not Lucas, you, or me.
And yes, they are obviously trying to give rise to memories of the OT with these films. No doubt about that. But to extrapolate the visual dialect of the film to a rigid adherence to the narrative devices of prior films is a bit reaching to me.
As somebody who's dabbled in screenwriting and directing, I think it's often under-appreciated how important maintaining narrative/plot device/visual continuity is within and between films, especially in situations where there is director transitions or studio meddling.
If JJ and company feel like it's absolutely necessary to tell a good story, then I agree sometimes rules can be broken. Unfortunately, I don't feel like this plot idea justifies it, and even sounds lazy and cynical
(got to have Vader tied into some long-running-but-never-seen villains to give them credibility and give him a cameo for fan nostalgia reasons).
I think if you've dabbled in these things you might have some understanding of how a short blurb can fail to represent a full idea and do it justice, and even appear ridiculous and silly stripped of all the context actually telling a story brings.
It goes without saying that we don't have all the facts of the new movie's plot or even a "SW Storytelling Bible."
All I'm going off is the released rumors for this film and extrinsic evidence from the released movies thus far, particularly the fact that six other films had opportunities to use flashback narrative devices and evidently decided against employing them.
My opinion is subject to change depending on its execution... but since we're in a rumor thread, I feel commenting on rumors is fair game (and even couching them with terms like "it sounds like the plot idea doesn't justify the deviation" to illustrate that I don't have all the facts).
It feels a bit unfair to basically shut me down or tell me to refrain from giving my impression on what I think so far. "I think" being implied in every sentence.
I doubt he's literally been jailed for thirty years...that would be idiotic on numerous levels. He's simply too powerful.
Most likely he got caught in his feelings after killing Vader and went into seclusion or in search of some grand understanding of the force. During this time he runs into enemies and purposefully allows himself to be captured in order to learn their scheme.
Having the hero of the most beloved trilogy of Star Wars end up getting punked for thirty straight years right after beating Vader in 1 on 1 combat, the same dude that wrecked how many Jedi and ended that era...all of this to try to beat it over our heads that these new villains are legit?
That's just unbelievably bad
The fact that he's missing is something I think is interesting. But being taken hostage for that amount of time is really dumb. What could they possibly be doing with him for that amount of time? Slowly draining his force energy in order to power a giant mech?
It's not like he legit overpowered Vader. He was Vader's kid, and Vader had a soft spot. He got caught bluffing and Luke went after him with more than a little bit of the darkside running through him as well.
Luke isn't really all that superpowered by the end of Jedi. If Anakin doesn't turn, Luke's dead. Even if he wanted to take the Emperor head on, he would have gotten his shit wrecked.
So lets say four or five force-users trained by an "inquisitor" or even Vader himself jump him. Keep in mind like three years previous, dude didn't even know when a fuckin WAMPA was sneaking up on him, it's possible Luke isn't the greatest at using the force as a form of Spidey Sense. He gets shot on that sail-barge, too. Why wouldn't they be able to keep him penned up?
What if they're using him somehow? Or even more interesting - what if he's gotten Stockholm Syndrome from his time imprisoned with them? What if they've started to rub off on him throughout that time?
Like, people are thinking of Luke as if he actually is a full-fledged superhero of a Jedi as opposed to being the right guy, at the right time, in the right place to do the most amount of good he can do.
How was that lame? Considering the charges they had him on, why isn't that a good reason to have him locked up? Especially considering his being locked up led to the single best sequence in the entire movie?
I'd rather they come up with a good reason for him to be out of commission rather than come up with a whole bunch of super-awesome stuff that he did in the meantime that I can't watch and will be relegated to spin-off novels and comics that won't be as satisfying as actually WATCHING HIM be badass.
I dont think they mean Luke will actually be held captive. It actually sounds more like Luke is in the same position as Obewan was at the beginning of Episode IV. He even looks like him in the photos from the set he posted.
Let's be clear, if Vader is in, it won't be only because of nostalgia. The number one reason to include Vader, is so Disney can sell a Vader toy and plaster him over cereals and merchandising/licensing deals. Nostalgia to rope in the 40 year old manchilds second. Story reasoning last.
Lucas did once say (and we know Lucas only talked about the films when talking about Star Wars) that Luke is the Jedi with most potential. Anakin would have had more but the cybernetics he got... (Star Wars, and many other old scifis have this annoying anti-transhumanism stance.)
Also the EU is funny. Luke wasn't supposed to be that powerful, everyone just wrote him ridiculously powerful. Everyone but Zahn, who suggested Luke was drawing on the Dark Side to be that powerful, that it was dangerous. Too bad every other EU writer ignored Zahn's stuff too much. The others had no subtlety, no sense of cause and consequence...
Lucas did once say (and we know Lucas only talked about the films when talking about Star Wars) that Luke is the Jedi with most potential. Anakin would have had more but the cybernetics he got... (Star Wars, and many other old scifis have this annoying anti-transhumanism stance.)
Also the EU is funny. Luke wasn't supposed to be that powerful, everyone just wrote him ridiculously powerful. Everyone but Zahn, who suggested Luke was drawing on the Dark Side to be that powerful, that it was dangerous. Too bad every other EU writer ignored Zahn's stuff too much. The others had no subtlety, no sense of cause and consequence...
He did fall to the dark side with the rebirth of Palpatine but then he when back to the light side again and defected. It was a bit of a cop out really I thought. At least Carnor Jax and Crimson empire made it a bit more interesting though.
I doubt he's literally been jailed for thirty years...that would be idiotic on numerous levels. He's simply too powerful.
Most likely he got caught in his feelings after killing Vader and went into seclusion or in search of some grand understanding of the force. During this time he runs into enemies and purposefully allows himself to be captured in order to learn their scheme.
He's not THAT powerful. It's the EU that establishes post-Jedi Luke as a Yoda-esque master. When the movies leave off, Luke has only just finished his training as a Knight, if that.
