Theories on what exactly the Knights of Ren are

[Driver]

The negative consequence is I've wanted to see this in a movie since I was 8 years old:

 

And I know, I know--you think it would have changed what worked in the PT. But I say SO WHAT! Even if it worked in the PT, there was a way it could have worked better had the ideas been explored more.

[Poe Dameron]

You got a chicken and the egg problem here. Lucas didn't write the Rule of Two and say to himself, "Oh crap, now I can't have a huge Sith army I'd plan to introduce and then wipe out. Guess I wrote myself into a corner. Driver will be so disappointed."

 

No. Palpatine taking over himself was always the story. It would have been exactly the same even if Yoda had never said that line. All the line does is have Yoda say that they know the threat isn't over, and give a justification as to why the Sith are so few in number.

 

Furthermore, I don't recall any serious expectation of a full Jedi vs. Sith war in the Prequels. Hordes of Dark Side users overwhelming the Jedi just doesn't fit with the status of the galaxy in the Original Trilogy. I believe this is the first time I've seen anyone make this specific complaint.

[Guest El Chalupacabra]

 

I don't know about that. Even before the PT, I I picked up on the motivations to turn Luke: both Vader's motive, and the Emperor's.

 

That was just a long way of saying they both wanted Luke. Which we already knew.

 

The problem I'm bringing up is they don't really give Luke a tangible reason why he would ever consider joining them even if Luke did fall to the Dark Side. Their hook has no bait.

 

The thing to remember with the Sith, and dark siders in general, is that they are basically drunk with power the dark side gives them. Jedi are trained to learn a little bit at a time (at least relative to Sith, and there are exceptions of Jedi learning fast, like Luke), and learn to handle the power they gain, so they don't fall to the dark side. However, when jedi or other force users fall to the dark side, they gain power really fast, and it basically goes to their head. They aren't necessarily more powerful than the light side, but they gain their power quicker, and from their point of view, are more powerful.

 

I don't think it is so much that the Emperor and Vader are trying to offer Luke anything more than a quicker path to power, but I think what the Emperor is betting on is that Luke is as susceptible to falling to the Dark side, as Anakin was. Even Yoda stated that he was reluctant to train Luke because he was too old, undisciplined, reckless, and too much like his father. So if Yoda knows this, so does the Emperor.

 

As for Vader's attempt to entice Luke, at the time of TESB, I think Vader is a "true believer" in the dark side, and also is still in the mentality that the Jedi were "evil" from his point of view. He is so twisted by TESB that he thinks all he has to do is show Luke how much power the darkside can give him, and the way Vader tried to do that was push him to the point where Luke give into his anger, and falls to the darkside on his own. Vader basically was hoping once Luke was pissed enough, fell to the darkside and saw how much stronger it made him, Luke would see it Vader's way.

[Poe Dameron]

I don't think it is so much that the Emperor and Vader are trying to offer Luke anything more than a quicker path to power, but I think what the Emperor is betting on is that Luke is as susceptible to falling to the Dark side, as Anakin was.

 

Palpatine had been prepping Anakin since he was a child. He advised Anakin after his first slip to the Dark Side and goaded him into his second. Counseling him that it was okay to murder in certain cases. He had real bait to entice him (saving Padme).

 

Anakin's seduction was the culmination of over decade's worth of slow work, planning, corruption, and opportunity.

 

The attempt to turn Luke had none of that. No planning and no plan. If anything, it was the exact opposite of Anakin as Palpatine was busy murdering Luke's friends and loved ones. Perhaps giving Luke the anger needed to fall to the Dark Side. But giving Luke no incentive whatsoever to want to join the Emperor.

[DANA-kin Skywalker]

The problem I'm bringing up is they don't really give Luke a tangible reason why he would ever consider joining them even if Luke did fall to the Dark Side. Their hook has no bait.

 

You don't need bait if the fish jumps out of the water and onto the boat. That's what the emperor thought had happened. Luke had given himself up and sought out Vader on his own accord, just as the emperor had foreseen. The emperor thought he had a win-win scenario. If Luke's desire for force training can be exploited, great. If he's willing to murder his own father to get it, there's the leverage he needs to turn him. Threatening Luke's friends and twin sister can also be used as pressure points. Given how powerful Luke already is, once he tastes the power of the dark side he'll want more, in exchange for service. If he's wrong...kill him. One less threat. Win win.

 

Palpatine didn't underestimate Luke. He had Luke right where he wanted him. He underestimated Vader. He did overestimate Luke's desire for power, though. For Luke, power wasn't that important.

[Tex]

You got a chicken and the egg problem here. Lucas didn't write the Rule of Two and say to himself, "Oh crap, now I can't have a huge Sith army I'd plan to introduce and then wipe out. Guess I wrote myself into a corner. Driver will be so disappointed."

 

No. Palpatine taking over himself was always the story. It would have been exactly the same even if Yoda had never said that line. All the line does is have Yoda say that they know the threat isn't over, and give a justification as to why the Sith are so few in number.

 

Furthermore, I don't recall any serious expectation of a full Jedi vs. Sith war in the Prequels. Hordes of Dark Side users overwhelming the Jedi just doesn't fit with the status of the galaxy in the Original Trilogy. I believe this is the first time I've seen anyone make this specific complaint.

One of the many things that the PT did to diminish the Jedi cool factor was have Palp n Ani kill all of them. The OT made such a Big deal about how great the Jedi were, and then the PT showed them all getting wiped out by a Senator and a douche.

 

If the Jedi were so awesome they should've been able to handle it. Reminds me of the question posed to Dionne Warwick about the Psycic Friends Network going bankrupt, which was "How did you not see that coming?"

[DANA-kin Skywalker]

Palpatine and Anakin didn't kill them all by themselves. They were branded traitors and enemies of the republic. The idea was the entire army of the empire was after them, and the Sith controlled that army. Considering the Jedi were in the middle of the war surrounded by said army, we saw most killed immediately during order 66 but some got away...presumably hunted down between episode 3 and 4. Only Obi-Wan and Yoda survived.

 

Did you even watch the movies?

[Guest El Chalupacabra]

 

I don't think it is so much that the Emperor and Vader are trying to offer Luke anything more than a quicker path to power, but I think what the Emperor is betting on is that Luke is as susceptible to falling to the Dark side, as Anakin was.

 

Palpatine had been prepping Anakin since he was a child. He advised Anakin after his first slip to the Dark Side and goaded him into his second. Counseling him that it was okay to murder in certain cases. He had real bait to entice him (saving Padme).

 

Anakin's seduction was the culmination of over decade's worth of slow work, planning, corruption, and opportunity.

 

The attempt to turn Luke had none of that. No planning and no plan. If anything, it was the exact opposite of Anakin as Palpatine was busy murdering Luke's friends and loved ones. Perhaps giving Luke the anger needed to fall to the Dark Side. But giving Luke no incentive whatsoever to want to join the Emperor.

 

Well, maybe THAT is the point, too, though. Perhaps Palpatine didn't think he needed to plan like he did with Anakin out of hubris. That lack of foresight did cost the Emperor his empire, after all. History if full of even more stupid mistakes.

 

In all fairness to Palpatine, neither he nor Vader knew about Luke, until ANH, so it's not like Palpatine had the years to plan with Luke as it was.

[Driver]

You got a chicken and the egg problem here. Lucas didn't write the Rule of Two and say to himself, "Oh crap, now I can't have a huge Sith army I'd plan to introduce and then wipe out. Guess I wrote myself into a corner. Driver will be so disappointed."

This may not have been the scenario, but I'm pretty sure he wrote himself into a corner like Shadowdog pointed out. At the end of the day, maybe Lucas didn't envision an army of Sith... OR DID HE...

 

Furthermore, I don't recall any serious expectation of a full Jedi vs. Sith war in the Prequels. Hordes of Dark Side users overwhelming the Jedi just doesn't fit with the status of the galaxy in the Original Trilogy. I believe this is the first time I've seen anyone make this specific complaint.

Those early drafts we talk about? In more than one the Ashla (Jedi) and Bogan (Sith) are equal in numbers.

 

Most of my impressions of what the PT would be were based on those early drafts mixed in with my own childhood versions of the stories. At the end of the day, I think Lucas had better ideas in the past and chose to abandon them.

 

The draft that was adapted by Darkhorse for funsies, that Rinzler wrote, was super cool. If Lucas had taken that draft, changed up the character names, swapped out the things that got saved for ANH and handed it to somebody to rewrite the terrible dialog (which killed the comic BTA), that would have been a great Episode 1.

 

My hatred for TPM might be because Lucas had a better movie written just sitting there, and it wasn't used. That script had great potential.

 

No. Palpatine taking over himself was always the story.

Actually, the intro Lucas wrote for the journal of the Whills, seen in early scripts as the crawl, that recycled and edited for the beginning of the ANH novelization, and also referenced in the ANH radio play (which before the EU existed was considered canon) talked about how the Empire came about because the Emperor was a figurehead corrupted by mischievous senators and politicians.

 

Again-- I totally agree with you that Palpy playing both sides was great. And maybe he did that because there was only two Sith, but I still feel like there was another way to tell this story with him having a secret Sith army that could be killed off just as easily as the Jedi by the time the OT rolls around.

 

That video I posted, some EU stories, Clone Wars, Rebels-- many of them have showed the sort of set up I was craving and it works fine... well.. as well as can be expected for the EU.

[DANA-kin Skywalker]

Furthermore, I don't recall any serious expectation of a full Jedi vs. Sith war in the Prequels. Hordes of Dark Side users overwhelming the Jedi just doesn't fit with the status of the galaxy in the Original Trilogy. I believe this is the first time I've seen anyone make this specific complaint.

The clone wars we got in the PT were nothing like I'd expected since seeing the OT.

 

Luke: "YOU Fought in the Clone Wars?"

Ben: "Yes. I was once a Jedi knight, the same as your father."

 

This equates Jedi fighting the clone wars. Jedi are already equated fighting primarily with lightsabers, so the mental image I've always had were Jedi fighting clones, lightsaber vs lightsaber. Some of wilder mental images were of Ben Kenobi fighting an evil clone of himself in a lightsaber duel. With the information given, something along those lines are reasonable expectation if we were to see a movie about them. Whe the PT was about to come out, and I heard it was going to have to do with the clone wars, I fully expected to see the Braveheart lightsaber battle. Maybe not the Obi-Wan vs Evil-Wan mental image, but definitely Obi-Wan vs Clone of some bad Jedi. The role the force would have played in that scenario would have been a big question mark, but certainly could have been written around.

[Poe Dameron]

 

You don't need bait if the fish jumps out of the water and onto the boat. That's what the emperor thought had happened. Luke had given himself up and sought out Vader on his own accord, just as the emperor had foreseen.

 

Then he's the dog who caught the car. What part of Luke coming to try to redeem Vader leads him to believe that he'll just up and join the Emperor? Palpatine's a master manipulator. It's his true strength as portrayed in Return of the Jedi (and then expanded upon greatly in the Prequels). Everything is going according to his plan. He's led the Rebels into a trap. Luke has come to Vader who has brought him to the Emperor. He'll give Luke a taste of the Dark Side by offering him the chance to kill him and then... nothing. We just skip right to Palpatine thinking that Luke will, for some reason, join him. It's basically:

 

Step 1: Piss off Luke

Step 2: ???

Step 3: New Apprentice

 

There's never been a good explanation as to what Palpatine's Step 2 was supposed to be. How would he bridge the gap between bringing out the anger in Luke to having him serve below him. We're left with Palpatine thinking that Luke would stop wanting to kill him and then join him and turn on everything that he cares about because... reasons.

 

 

Actually, the intro Lucas wrote for the journal of the Whills, seen in early scripts as the crawl, that recycled and edited for the beginning of the ANH novelization, and also referenced in the ANH radio play

 

I meant in the writing of the Prequels. Lucas obviously had already decided on Palpatine working mostly alone in bringing down the Republic by the time that line was written. The Rule of Two had no bearing on the lack of a Sith army as you weren't going to get it anyway.

 

 

The draft that was adapted by Darkhorse for funsies, that Rinzler wrote, was super cool.

 

I thought at one point I'd like to see someone just make that movie for the fun of it. Even before that comic came out. But, really, there's good reason why those scripts were abandoned. As fun as it is to look through them, ultimately they didn't make for a good movie. Though it's always fun to notice the little pieces that Lucas picked up from them when he created the Prequels, mostly names like Mace and Whitesun.

 

Seriously, I recall many different projections for how the Prequels would go written around 1995 after the movies were announced but before production. Many thought that the Clone Wars would already be going on at the beginning of Episode I and possibly finish in that movie, but I don't recall a single one that projected a Sith army.

 

Is there a way it could have been done? I suppose. But we're getting into adolescent Driver's wishes for cool individual scenes. Those scenes you put up are just little snippets without much plot. Not any more a story than the little lightsaber battles that people choreograph and post online. Not a movie, but a concept.

 

Had Palpatine nuked a thousand Sith from space, I'm sure he'd be hearing about how lame that was too. Plus easy to see coming. There aren't many ways to dispose of that army beyond Palpatine betraying them that make sense.

[Stevil]

You're forgetting it's different times.

 

Palpatine wasn't the all powerful in the prequels and he hadn't turned the Chosen One to the dark side. So yes he had to work for it.

 

But in ROTJ Palpatine is already the man. He flipped the Jedi's saviour to his side. He can do anything. Turning Luke means nothing to him. In fact in ESB he labels him a threat. Basically says if he won't join us we'll kill him. Not having Luke join him will not tip the fate of the galaxy or gain him less power as he already has it.

 

So the plan was join me or die. Always was and clearly stated throughout the movies.

[Metropolis]

 

I've never even tried to embed a YouTube video. Gotta look that up.

[Poe Dameron]

 

So the plan was join me or die. Always was and clearly stated throughout the movies.

 

You're going around the problem though. The plan to turn Luke was nonexistent. The Emperor may as well have just killed Luke because there was no way he'd ever get him to join without giving reason why Luke would want to.

 

As I said at the beginning. It makes no sense from a psychological or character motivation point-of-view. Yeah the Emperor was cocky, but that doesn't mean that he was delusional. Palpatine was still a manipulative guy playing the long game in Return of the Jedi. His plan to release false intelligence to lure the Rebellion into a trap proves that he was still the chess master of the galaxy. He predicted long in advance that Skywalker would come to him of his own will. You would think he'd think of something to manipulate Luke with that would move him closer to what he wants. We didn't need the Prequels to know this about his character.

 

Over-confident Emperor can explain not seeing flaws in his plan and assuming that things will go the way he expects. But it can't explain him not having a plan in the first place.

[Guest]

The only way it makes sense is to mess with Vader. Vader joined the dark side to protect his wife from an imaginary threat, so there was always something inside him holding onto that. Forcing Vader to choose the dark side over family.

[Driver]

Is there a way it could have been done? I suppose. But we're getting into adolescent Driver's wishes for cool individual scenes. Those scenes you put up are just little snippets without much plot. Not any more a story than the little lightsaber battles that people choreograph and post online. Not a movie, but a concept.

You know what I do for a living right?

 

I don't bring it up often because it makes me sound even more pompous than I normally do-- but... yeah, you don't need to be pedantic. I kinda know the difference between concept and story. It's not worth my time or energy to write an entire movie as a Star Wars fan to make a simple point. Obviously a visual I want to see isn't going to suddenly fit into what's been established in the PT.

 

Maybe this is just my curse. But I am always surprised to see people defending things they know are flawed because what was done was done and they have to accept it. My brain doesn't do that. I always, ALWAYS immediately wonder about how it could have been different. So I'm not just saying MORE SITH IN PHANTOM MENACE WOULD MAKE IT BETTER. What I want would obviously require a different movie altogether. And for the 3256234535th time-- if the core idea is evil Palpatine, master manipulator-- there's a million ways to make that work other than what we got. If you can't wrap your head around the possibility, that's cool. My mind joust doesn't do that.

 

And here's what else I know-- you don't write a movie without knowing what you want to accomplish. It's not a book where you can explore ideas and develop them on the page. It doesn't work like that.

 

Movies are often made by having the ideas, concepts, and moments you want to present and then working backwards from them to find the right story. Lucas had a handful of things established in the OT to work from, and he chose to ignore them as long as he could because he changed his mind about things. That was a mistake.

[DANA-kin Skywalker]

What part of Luke coming to try to redeem Vader leads him to believe that he'll just up and join the Emperor? Luke has come to Vader who has brought him to the Emperor. He'll give Luke a taste of the Dark Side by offering him the chance to kill him and then... nothing.

 

Step 1: Piss off Luke

Step 2: ???

Step 3: New Apprentice

 

Again: POWER. His offer was darkside force power, a prestigious position in the Empire, and a longer lifespan. I thought this was obvious when he said these exact words:

 

"Surprise! I set a trap for the rebel alliance! They will all be dead soon, but you don't have to be. You've got a lot of potential. If force power is something that interests you, then you will need the training only I (glances at Vader)...er...I mean we can provide."

 

Sorry about that, but apparently I had to make it more obvious.

 

Step 1: Piss off Luke.

Step 2: Give Luke a taste of the darkside and see if he likes it.

step 3: gain a New Apprentice, or kill an enemy.

 

Does the emperor's offer of power seem a little light to you? Me too! That was the whole point. The emperor fully expected Luke to piss his pants, get angry, then go OOH, DARKSIDE, YES, TEASE IT, OOH, MORE...; and then get down and kneel in front of him with his mouth open. Or...die. Either one of those. He underestimated his resolve, but it didn't matter much because Luke was a dead man. The grave error the emperor made was underestimating Vader. He gave Luke just as much reason to join as he gave Vader to stay. His loyalty to him at that point was hollow.

 

I think what you are failing to acknowledge is the audience's viewpoint versus the emperor's viewpoint. We knew Luke would never accept his offer of power, because we know him well. The emperor doesn't know Luke as well as we, the audience does. There is no built-in "motivational problem" here. There was nothing wrong with the emperor's test for Luke, it's just that the audience had the answer sheet. We know Luke to be pure, but someone less pure might have taken him up on that offer. His father did.

[Exodus]

^^ this

 

 

You don't need bait if the fish jumps out of the water and onto the boat. That's what the emperor thought had happened. Luke had given himself up and sought out Vader on his own accord, just as the emperor had foreseen.

Then he's the dog who caught the car. What part of Luke coming to try to redeem Vader leads him to believe that he'll just up and join the Emperor? Palpatine's a master manipulator. It's his true strength as portrayed in Return of the Jedi (and then expanded upon greatly in the Prequels). Everything is going according to his plan. He's led the Rebels into a trap. Luke has come to Vader who has brought him to the Emperor. He'll give Luke a taste of the Dark Side by offering him the chance to kill him and then... nothing. We just skip right to Palpatine thinking that Luke will, for some reason, join him. It's basically:

 

^^ this

 

Step 1: Piss off Luke

Step 2: ???

Step 3: New Apprentice

 

There's never been a good explanation as to what Palpatine's Step 2 was supposed to be. How would he bridge the gap between bringing out the anger in Luke to having him serve below him. We're left with Palpatine thinking that Luke would stop wanting to kill him and then join him and turn on everything that he cares about because... reasons.

 

To Palpatine, the power of the dark side was reason enough. I always figured that he assumed Luke would only need but a taste of that power by giving in to his anger, and that there would be no turning back at that point.

[Stevil]

 

 

So the plan was join me or die. Always was and clearly stated throughout the movies.

 

You're going around the problem though. The plan to turn Luke was nonexistent. The Emperor may as well have just killed Luke because there was no way he'd ever get him to join without giving reason why Luke would want to.

 

As I said at the beginning. It makes no sense from a psychological or character motivation point-of-view. Yeah the Emperor was cocky, but that doesn't mean that he was delusional. Palpatine was still a manipulative guy playing the long game in Return of the Jedi. His plan to release false intelligence to lure the Rebellion into a trap proves that he was still the chess master of the galaxy. He predicted long in advance that Skywalker would come to him of his own will. You would think he'd think of something to manipulate Luke with that would move him closer to what he wants. We didn't need the Prequels to know this about his character.

 

Over-confident Emperor can explain not seeing flaws in his plan and assuming that things will go the way he expects. But it can't explain him not having a plan in the first place.

You answer your own question.

 

Once the Emperor's long-term plan had played out and he's destroyed the rebellion once and for all... Luke's only options were to join him or die. That was the choice he offered. He had nothing to go back to once they were all dead and he wasn't getting out of the throne room alive.

 

Behind door number 1 was the Dark Side and all the power you can eat.

 

Behind door number 2 was death.

 

They were Luke's choices. He didn't have to buy him cake and take him to the fair to win him over. It was just I'm going to kill all your friends and you're going to serve me or you're going to fry.

[DANA-kin Skywalker]

^^

 

Yep. He went for the hard sell with Luke because he didn't need the customer.

[Zerimar Nyliram]

I'm just surprised you all are freely using the term "Rule of Two" now, considering how often I used to hammer it down your throats every time someone said, "Two-Sith Rule, a derp-a-derp!" and then caught flak for it just because it originated in the EU.

What brought about the change of attitude? Is it because the term was used in The Clone Wars?

[DANA-kin Skywalker]

Because the EU is no longer a threat to us.

 

Just kidding. I really have no idea what you are talking about because I took like a thirteen year hiatus from posting here.

[Poe Dameron]

You know what I do for a living right?

 

I assure you that I'm aware.

 

 

 

Maybe this is just my curse. But I am always surprised to see people defending things they know are flawed because what was done was done and they have to accept it. My brain doesn't do that. I always, ALWAYS immediately wonder about how it could have been different. So I'm not just saying MORE SITH IN PHANTOM MENACE WOULD MAKE IT BETTER. What I want would obviously require a different movie altogether.

 

That last is the key. You're not even critiquing the movie at that point. You're just stating what your adolescent self thought would be a cool visual. Well, whatever the problems with the Prequels, a lack of cool visuals wasn't among them. You even point out how the video clip you showed was Prequel-esque So at best this is a solution in search of a problem.

 

Critiquing of the movie needs to, at least, critique what's there. Suggesting ways that certain elements could have been done differently is one thing. But if you start off with a whole new direction, keying it on a vague notion, then you're just creating nebulous fan fiction.

 

 

 

And for the 3256234535th time-- if the core idea is evil Palpatine, master manipulator-- there's a million ways to make that work other than what we got.

 

And my response to that again is the same as always. What we got was fine. Again, you're fixing a part of the movie that wasn't the problem.

 

 

 

And here's what else I know-- you don't write a movie without knowing what you want to accomplish. It's not a book where you can explore ideas and develop them on the page. It doesn't work like that.

 

I'm sorry, but that's just a false and shockingly limiting statement on your part. Of course there's a discovery process involved in writing a screenplay. Same as any other type of writing. And of course a writer can realize that what they thought was important wasn't really the story after all.

 

It's not optimal for it to happen. But it most certainly can. And does not necessarily effect the quality.

 

 

 

Movies are often made by having the ideas, concepts, and moments you want to present and then working backwards from them to find the right story. Lucas had a handful of things established in the OT to work from, and he chose to ignore them as long as he could because he changed his mind about things. That was a mistake.

 

If you're talking about the original scripts again, that was abandoned a long, long, LONG time before the Prequels were even started. Crap, if he'd done that sort of thing, we might be stuck with the Kaiburr crystal being an important element.

 

If you're back on pushing forward some of the elements, then, again, you're re-writing the whole thing based on your own fan fiction. Deciding what elements you thought should have been the focus. That, in and of itself, was not a mistake in any way shape or form. Lucas could have made a better, or possibly a much worse set of movies if he'd followed your advise on that.

 

Given that this was the story he wanted to tell, chances are very high that he would have done much worse and the cohesion that does exist throughout the Prequels would have been lost if he'd forced himself in your preferred direction.

 

 

 

You answer your own question.

 

No, I made it clear why Palpatine never had a chance.

 

That's still not a plan. If that's all he had, then he should have killed Luke from the start. Because 100 out of 100 times, when you kill a man's friends, and then he goes on to get a taste for murder via your henchman, then your butt is going to be next. There is no logic to thinking that Luke, fresh from killing his father, would do anything other than attack Palpatine if he'd truly fallen to the Dark Side. If he thought Luke would just feel the power of anger and want more of it right on the spot, that doesn't make any sense either.

 

Sheesh, at least hold Leia hostage or something. Have her disappear from the movie after the speeder bike chase and then brought into the throne room for the Emperor's ultimatum. Promise that she'll be left alone if Luke submits. Delay the Death Star's next shot and threaten to blow up the Millennium Falcon if Luke doesn't kill Vader. Do something so that Luke will be tempted.

 

Y'know, I'm seeing a lot more resistance to this idea, even though I thought it very obvious back when I was a teenager. But I heard on this very board not long ago that Anakin's turn was sudden, and I've heard it many other places as well. Do the people who are trying to explain away this obvious flaw even jump up and defend the much better explained and set up turn to the Dark Side from Anakin?

 

 

 

I'm just surprised you all are freely using the term "Rule of Two" now, considering how often I used to hammer it down your throats every time someone said, "Two-Sith Rule, a derp-a-derp!" and then caught flak for it just because it originated in the EU.

 

It's not EU. Yoda says it at the end of The Phantom Menace.

[Driver]

 

And here's what else I know-- you don't write a movie without knowing what you want to accomplish. It's not a book where you can explore ideas and develop them on the page. It doesn't work like that.

I'm sorry, but that's just a false and shockingly limiting statement on your part. Of course there's a discovery process involved in writing a screenplay. Same as any other type of writing. And of course a writer can realize that what they thought was important wasn't really the story after all.

 

It's not optimal for it to happen. But it most certainly can. And does not necessarily effect the quality.

Let me correct you and clarify. Because as usual, you're cherry picking what I say to find the bits that contradict themselves. You are one of the most intelligent people here until you disagree with something, then you suddenly take everything very literally and play dumb to be contrarian.

 

When I say "on the page" I refer to actual scripting. You can sit down and write prose and see where it goes. You don't sit down and wing a screenplay. I mean-- sure, you can-- and Lucas kinda did... but that's not something any profession screenwriter really does. Especially not if they're getting paid. Dialog? Sure. The beats of a scene? Totally. Blocking-- for sure. But plot? No way.

 

The discovery process you are talking about happens, OBVIOUSLY-- but not when you are writing a script. If it's a spec script you got research and outlines and maybe writing dialog only scenes. If it's a paid script you're going to be in development for months with half a dozen producers all throwing ideas at you. When you start writing it wil of course become organic, and possibly change direction. But you don't get to that point without writing toward something.

 

It's not the only way of working, but most every screenwriter I know (outside of arthouse autuers) is going to spend a lot of time outlining and plotting a story. If you are working for a studio, you don't get the green light until you've shown them an outline. Maybe Shadowdog can speak to going the indy route-- but at the very least you'd need a simple beat sheet to know where you story is going to go.

 

If you don't plan at least somewhat you're going to run into trouble. And it most certainly can, and almost always does, effect the quality. If there's one thing most every bad movie has in common it's poor planning-- be it writing, budgeting, or directing.

 

George Lucas was responsible to only himself. No one could tell him "Hey, let's rewrite that so it's not terrible." He had his ideas, and in most cases he laid them out in a very on-the-nose way.

 

 

Movies are often made by having the ideas, concepts, and moments you want to present and then working backwards from them to find the right story. Lucas had a handful of things established in the OT to work from, and he chose to ignore them as long as he could because he changed his mind about things. That was a mistake.

If you're talking about the original scripts again, that was abandoned a long, long, LONG time before the Prequels were even started. Crap, if he'd done that sort of thing, we might be stuck with the Kaiburr crystal being an important element.

I clearly said ideas established in the OT.

 

That said-- why can't you inject the tiniest bit of imagination? Nobody wants the Kaiburr Crystal. That was dumb. Obviously I don't want an exact adaption of that old script-- I even pointed out it was so stilted and stiff that the comic adaption suffered.

 

But the basic story-- an exiled Jedi returns to service, handing his son off to his old partner for training, after a Sith kills his other son. The mentor is wrapped up in the politics of a remote planet that a corrupt government is trying to take over. An ill-timed invasion forces the boy to escape with the last surviving members of the planet's royal family.

 

That's what I liked. That is Star Wars. Stop using me saying that I liked that old script to therefor mean I want it literally adapted, warts and all. I'm just talking ideas, not specifics.

 

 

If you're back on pushing forward some of the elements, then, again, you're re-writing the whole thing based on your own fan fiction. Deciding what elements you thought should have been the focus. That, in and of itself, was not a mistake in any way shape or form.

You know what they say about opinions...

 

If my only complaint about the PT was that it wasn't what I wanted it to be-- you'd have a point. Then I would be nothing but a whiney fan boy.

 

Don't get me wrong, that's certainly an element.

 

But the PT, on its own, is terrible. TFA is nothing like what I ever imagined a sequel to the OT would be-- but I don't hate it. Because it wasn't a steaming pile like the PT.

 

Lucas could have made a better, or possibly a much worse set of movies if he'd followed your advise on that. Given that this was the story he wanted to tell, chances are very high that he would have done much worse and the cohesion that does exist throughout the Prequels would have been lost if he'd forced himself in your preferred direction.

Wow.

 

Look-- you don't have to agree with me, or even like what I like. Or even like me. But I'm just throwing out ideas and situations and you're just telling me I suck. Obviously a few random ideas isn't meant to stack up against a completed movie (even a bad one). But you've gone from fun debate to being an asshole with that comment.

 

I get it. I come off as pompous. I've never actually said "I could have written a better Star Wars movie than George Lucas." I wouldn't want that pressure. But at the end of the day... yeah, I think I could.

 

But guess what. So could you.

 

So could half the people on nightly, or Dave Filoni. Or Lawrence Kasdan.

 

I think you suspect my ego has a much bigger part in this debate than it actually does.

 

You are by far the most willingly obtuse person I've encountered in some time.

 

Which is probably why you totally fit in here.

 

Y'know, I'm seeing a lot more resistance to this idea, even though I thought it very obvious back when I was a teenager. But I heard on this very board not long ago that Anakin's turn was sudden, and I've heard it many other places as well. Do the people who are trying to explain away this obvious flaw even jump up and defend the much better explained and set up turn to the Dark Side from Anakin?

I used to say this a lot-- I still do sometimes. But if you track Annie's dark moments-- they are layered in there. Even more than Luke had. I think the real problem is the performance and follow-through.

 

After he kills the sandpeople he whines about it, admits it to Padme-- and then it's totally forgotten until Palpy brings it up in ROTS. I love to blame Hayden for a lot of stuff-- but I think this where it is valid. His performance never carried that weight. You never had the feeling that he was carrying around that guilt or shame.

 

There's also the fact that Palpatine's offer was so intangible. It was just an idea.

 

You'll be thrilled to know I haven't rewritten Anakin's turn in some fashion for you to hate on-- I don't know what the answer is. But I am certain that a more concrete thing for Anakin to react to, AND a better actor would have helped a lot.

 

But you have to admit, for him to go from reporting Palpatine cause he knows it's right, to changing his mind and saving him, and then on to killing a bunch of little kids with zero reservation in the course of one day is kinda hard to buy.

[Zerimar Nyliram]

 

It's not EU. Yoda says it at the end of The Phantom Menace.

 

No, he did not. Yoda said, "Always two there are; no more, no less. A master and an apprentice." The term "Rule of Two" was 100% an EU invention.