The Rancor Pit Forum Index
Welcome to The Rancor Pit forums!

The Rancor Pit Forum Index
FAQ   ::   Search   ::   Memberlist   ::   Usergroups   ::   Register   ::   Profile   ::   Log in to check your private messages   ::   Log in

Episode IX
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> General Star Wars -> Episode IX Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Owner/Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 5223
Location: Columbus, OHIO, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Sun Dec 23, 2018 12:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

CRMcNeill wrote:
Thoughts?

I don't really have that sense from the sequel trilogy overall. While the First Order is a fringe empire and the Resistance is a fringe rebellion the New Republic doesn't officially sanction, the Starkiller destroying the Republic capital and it being seen across the entire galaxy immediately puts the conflict into the large scale. It's the "shot heard 'round the world" on a galactic scale. And the whole Resistance was not in the Falcon at the end of TLJ. Snap Wexley, the TFA pilot who scouted out the Starkiller, is off with a Resistance force on some mission elsewhere while TLJ is taking place. In TLJ, the Resistance put a call out to the entire galaxy and even though no one replied immediately, the message is out there. The end of the film showed the stable kids on the casino planet hearing about Luke's final stand against the First Order, and the one who is Force-sensitive cares about the Rebel ring Rose gave him.

I feel TLJ overlapping with TFA is the only thing that really works against the scale of the trilogy, but that's what happens when you end the first film with a cliffhanger of Rey handing Luke the blue Skywalker lightsaber. You can't jump forward and skip over that. The only way TLJ could have been any different in time is if they picked up with that, then later had a big time jump within the film itself, which is also unprecedented in main saga Star Wars but used in the anthology films. The cliffhanger was just a cheap trick to leave people wanting to know what happens next when you have no idea what is going to come next because you are just passing the lightsaber to the next director in the chain. So ultimately, the issue with this trilogy is not scale as much as it is the multimillion dollar chain story trilogy without an overarching plan.

We won't be able to judge if a one year time jump to Episode IX seems fitting to the story of the ST or not without seeing the film. Officially, RotJ takes place in the year following TESB. My main issue with short time jumps in general is actor age getting off tract with character age. Mark Hamill was 30 when he filmed RotJ, and it showed. RotJ was filmed six years after ANH but only takes place four years later. Episode IX is filmed four years after TFA but takes place one year later, a three year difference. I feel they need to be more creative and find a way to make the story of sequels take place the same or more time in real life between productions.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration & Log-In Help
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
TauntaunScout
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 20 Apr 2015
Posts: 223

PostPosted: Mon Dec 31, 2018 8:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

6 years, plus a real-life car accident requiring facial surgery. The character certainly went through enough stress in ESB to prematurely age a person though Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Owner/Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 5223
Location: Columbus, OHIO, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Mon Dec 31, 2018 11:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

TauntaunScout wrote:
6 years, plus a real-life car accident requiring facial surgery. The character certainly went through enough stress in ESB to prematurely age a person though Smile

That's a good point. The real disbelief suspension is required for the opening of TESB where Hamill already has his post-motorcycle-crash/wampa-attack face.

I have an actor/character age analysis I made to help fine tune my personal Star Wars timeline. Even after some tweaks, the actors for Luke, Owen, Beru, and Obi-Wan all were older and appear a good amount older than their character ages, so I came to the conclusion that those Tatooine suns have an brutal aging effect.

Smile
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration & Log-In Help
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
TauntaunScout
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 20 Apr 2015
Posts: 223

PostPosted: Mon Dec 31, 2018 12:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Whill wrote:
TauntaunScout wrote:
6 years, plus a real-life car accident requiring facial surgery. The character certainly went through enough stress in ESB to prematurely age a person though Smile

That's a good point. The real disbelief suspension is required for the opening of TESB where Hamill already has his post-motorcycle-crash/wampa-attack face.

I have an actor/character age analysis I made to help fine tune my personal Star Wars timeline. Even after some tweaks, the actors for Luke, Owen, Beru, and Obi-Wan all were older and appear a good amount older than their character ages, so I came to the conclusion that those Tatooine suns have an brutal aging effect.

Smile


I don't know what or if the official ages of anyone was established back in the 70's or 80's. But to me the most anti head-canon thing about the prequels was, I'd always felt like Obi-Wan, Vader, and the Emperor were way older than they are. I thought Obi-Wan was like 90, Vader was like 70, and the Emperor was like 110+ years old.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MrNexx
Commodore
Commodore


Joined: 25 Mar 2016
Posts: 1266
Location: Houston

PostPosted: Mon Dec 31, 2018 12:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Whill wrote:
TauntaunScout wrote:
6 years, plus a real-life car accident requiring facial surgery. The character certainly went through enough stress in ESB to prematurely age a person though Smile

That's a good point. The real disbelief suspension is required for the opening of TESB where Hamill already has his post-motorcycle-crash/wampa-attack face.

I have an actor/character age analysis I made to help fine tune my personal Star Wars timeline. Even after some tweaks, the actors for Luke, Owen, Beru, and Obi-Wan all were older and appear a good amount older than their character ages, so I came to the conclusion that those Tatooine suns have an brutal aging effect.

Smile


Twice the suns, twice the UV, and you know they didn't have bacta to regenerate themselves.
_________________
"I’m telling you, you’ll never have a deeper sleep than curled up in a Wookie’s lap."
“We're going to win this war, not by fighting what we hate, but saving what we love.”
http://rpgcrank.blogspot.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Owner/Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 5223
Location: Columbus, OHIO, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Mon Dec 31, 2018 1:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MrNexx wrote:
Twice the suns, twice the UV, and you know they didn't have bacta to regenerate themselves.

Exactly! Bacta is a luxury on Tatooine, and it would evaporate too easily.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration & Log-In Help
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Sovereign Protector


Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 12023
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

PostPosted: Mon Dec 31, 2018 4:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TauntaunScout wrote:

I don't know what or if the official ages of anyone was established back in the 70's or 80's. But to me the most anti head-canon thing about the prequels was, I'd always felt like Obi-Wan, Vader, and the Emperor were way older than they are. I thought Obi-Wan was like 90, Vader was like 70, and the Emperor was like 110+ years old.


When i first saw ANH, i had NO idea on the age of Vader, but though Obi-wan was in his late 70s. When i saw ESB/ROTJ i thought Palpaltine was a good 85-90...
_________________
Confuscious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Owner/Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 5223
Location: Columbus, OHIO, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Tue Jan 01, 2019 7:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

garhkal wrote:
TauntaunScout wrote:
I don't know what or if the official ages of anyone was established back in the 70's or 80's. But to me the most anti head-canon thing about the prequels was, I'd always felt like Obi-Wan, Vader, and the Emperor were way older than they are. I thought Obi-Wan was like 90, Vader was like 70, and the Emperor was like 110+ years old.

When i first saw ANH, i had NO idea on the age of Vader, but though Obi-wan was in his late 70s. When i saw ESB/ROTJ i thought Palpaltine was a good 85-90...

Ouch. Sir Alec Guinness was and looked older than the character's official age, but I didn't think he looked even close to 90, even as a little kid. No, official ages weren't established back then but my character age analysis was done in light of the prequels and the official timeline. My original impetus for doing so and tweaking my personal timeline was Obi-Wan's age.

The official timeline is based around Anakin Skywalker's life. In designing the prequel trilogy, Lucas was hoping they would artistically compliment the classic trilogy. He was hung up on symmetry (See Ring Theory). When Anakin returns to the light and dies, he had spent exactly half of his life on the Dark Side. Since Luke was born when Anakin crossed over, in RotJ Luke is about the same age as that Anakin was in RotS (46).

Legends and Canon have Obi-Wan at 57 in ANH, while Qui-Gon was 60 in TPM. Alec Guinness was 62 when he filmed ANH and he looked a little older. Liam Neeson was 45 when he filmed TPM. Qui-Gon was the the Obi-Wan of TPM, and I can understand Lucas wanting Liam Neeson for the role regardless of his age, but no way that Qui-Gon should be the 60-year-old between those two. Qui-Gon was an able duelist in exciting action scenes while Alec Guinness looked like he could barely hold up the lightsaber prop. Obi-Wan's got to be at least 60.

On the prequel end, the official timelines makes Obi-Wan 25 in TPM. Making him 60 in ANH would make him 28 in TPM. 25 is already really pushing it for a a padawan not being promoted to knighthood so I just couldn't make him any older. The only solution that worked for me was adding years to the timeline. The Clone War between AotC and RotS is 2 years longer in my timeline, and I added another year after RotS. So in my timeline Obi-Wan is 25 in TPM and 60 in ANH, the max and min ages I will accept, respectively.

And I added another year to the time between TESB and RotJ, so I have two extra years before RotS and two extra years after which even maintains Lucas' "Skywalker symmetry" (Age 25 and 50 now) although that was never my purpose. These extra years make ANH 35 years after TPM, which makes the SWAJ dates work for an in-universe dating system again - In my SWU, Palpatine enacted a new dating system based on his ascension to Supreme Chancellor, so TPM occurred in Year 0. My timeline helps a lot of actor/character age discrepancies too.

For the most part, Canon has kept the Legends ages but a couple characters have been re-aged. Legends made Palpatine 85-86 in RotJ, but Canon made him a little older (approximately 88 ). Han Solo has also been made a few years older, which puts him closer to (but still under) Harrison Ford's age.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration & Log-In Help
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
TauntaunScout
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 20 Apr 2015
Posts: 223

PostPosted: Thu Jan 03, 2019 7:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

For society at large to have pretty much forgotten what the force was, I figured Vader and Obi-Wan had to be pretty darn old.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Owner/Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 5223
Location: Columbus, OHIO, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2019 1:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Ben Kenobi: A young Jedi named Darth Vader, who was a pupil of mine until he turned to evil, helped the Empire hunt down and destroy the Jedi Knights. He betrayed and murdered your father. Now the Jedi are all but extinct.


TauntaunScout wrote:
For society at large to have pretty much forgotten what the force was, I figured Vader and Obi-Wan had to be pretty darn old.

Interesting. I guess you thought that the Jedi Order was destroyed long before Vader finally caught up with Luke's father, because Luke's father couldn't have died much more than 9 months before Luke was born and Luke wasn't that old in ANH.

My impression from the first film alone was that the Clone Wars occurred longer ago in the past, but that wasn't the end of the Republic and Jedi which didn't occur until around the time of Luke's birth.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration & Log-In Help
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
TauntaunScout
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 20 Apr 2015
Posts: 223

PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2019 1:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It all gets very muddy very quickly, in a way that kids and teens are more willing to accept than we are, probably.

As a child I sort of figured that "hunting down" the Jedi must have taken a lot longer than what is shown in the prequels. And since "the empire" hunted them down, you are given to assume that the rise of the empire and fall of the republic pre-dates the fall of the death of the Jedi., I also assumed that Leia's memories of that sad woman were their actual biological mother.

If you just take the OT lines at face value a meaningful timeline is about impossible to figure out but that's fine since mystique was part of the attraction.

A lot of the adults would be old enough to remember the Jedi of the PT. Making "Don't try to frighten us with your sorcereror's religion" a weird given the new timeline. You sort of assume then, as a viewer, that the Jedi have been gone since before that middle aged man was born.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Sovereign Protector


Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 12023
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2019 3:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TauntaunScout wrote:
It all gets very muddy very quickly, in a way that kids and teens are more willing to accept than we are, probably.

As a child I sort of figured that "hunting down" the Jedi must have taken a lot longer than what is shown in the prequels. And since "the empire" hunted them down, you are given to assume that the rise of the empire and fall of the republic pre-dates the fall of the death of the Jedi., I also assumed that Leia's memories of that sad woman were their actual biological mother.

If you just take the OT lines at face value a meaningful timeline is about impossible to figure out but that's fine since mystique was part of the attraction.

A lot of the adults would be old enough to remember the Jedi of the PT. Making "Don't try to frighten us with your sorcereror's religion" a weird given the new timeline. You sort of assume then, as a viewer, that the Jedi have been gone since before that middle aged man was born.


Exactly. Heck most of that inner table with Tarkin on the 1st death star, would have been what, in their mid 40s, when the purge started? Certainly not long enough for them to all forget.
_________________
Confuscious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Owner/Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 5223
Location: Columbus, OHIO, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Fri Jan 04, 2019 8:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TauntaunScout wrote:
A lot of the adults would be old enough to remember the Jedi of the PT. Making "Don't try to frighten us with your sorcereror's religion" a weird given the new timeline. You sort of assume then, as a viewer, that the Jedi have been gone since before that middle aged man was born.

I can see that. Between 1977 and 1986 I saw the original Star Wars movie twice (and the two sequels once each), but I did have a few publications like the storybooks and a couple Star Wars magazines. Although never used in the classic films and never defined until the 90s, Dark Vader sometimes had the title of "Dark Lord of the Sith" in the 70s. We didn't know what the Sith meant in the 70s, but I thought Admiral Motti's line about Vader's "sad devotion to that ancient religion" referred to that Sith title because Vader had been described by Obi-Wan as having betrayed the Jedi so wouldn't still be devoted to their religion anymore. And I was a little Bible and archeology nerd at that time so his use of the word "ancient" just meant to me that the Sith religion, whatever that was, was at least two thousand years old. Something being "ancient" didn't necessarily mean that it had been gone for a long time, just that it has existed for a long time. (The pyramids are ancient but still there.) So it seemed to me that Jedi and the Sith were opposing sects that both used the Force, and they were both ancient (the good religion of Star Wars and the bad religion of Star Wars). However we knew nothing of the Emperor in the 70s and there was no evidence of there being any other Sith remaining, so from ANH I had the impression that Obi-Wan was the last Jedi and Vader was the last Sith. With TESB I thought Yoda was the real last Jedi, and with RotJ revealing the Emperor to be a Force user I presumed he was in the Sith religion too.

The prequels and more modern publishing don't change much. In light of the prequels, Admiral Motti is definitely referring to Vader's Sith religion, which in canon has been around for at least two thousand years. Motti doesn't know Vader had ever been a Jedi, but it was public knowledge that Vader was a Sith. The Sith were known in history as being defeated by the Jedi one thousand years earlier and thought destroyed, but then Dooku was known as a Sith so they either came back or returned from hiding. Vader was thought to have maybe been an apprentice of Dooku who traded sides to become loyal to Palpatine. Palpatine and Vader allowed Vader to have the mystique of a mysterious background and secret identity because it helps his fearful reputation. Admiral Motti is genuinely pissed off that someone with Vader's supposed power and reputation he still hadn't come up with the stolen data tapes or the location of the Rebel base. He is mocking Vader's Sith religion. And Force users of any kind are very rare in the Empire, so a lot of people have fallen for Palpatine's propaganda machine. Palpatine literally rewrote history to minimize widespread belief in the Force, and the ones who knew better usually knew better to keep their mouths shut about to avoid attacking unwanted attention.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration & Log-In Help
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
TauntaunScout
Lieutenant Commander
Lieutenant Commander


Joined: 20 Apr 2015
Posts: 223

PostPosted: Sun Jan 20, 2019 7:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Whill wrote:
Vader sometimes had the title of "Dark Lord of the Sith" in the 70s. We didn't know what the Sith meant in the 70s, but I thought Admiral Motti's line about Vader's "sad devotion to that ancient religion" referred to that Sith title because Vader had been described by Obi-Wan as having betrayed the Jedi so wouldn't still be devoted to their religion anymore.


None of us knew what the Sith was but Tarkin said (or nearly said) "The Jedi are all but extinct: you my friend are all that remains of their religion" so as far as guys in those uniforms are concerned I'd think the religion meant Jedi.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sutehp
Commodore
Commodore


Joined: 01 Nov 2016
Posts: 1431
Location: Washington, DC (AKA Inside the Beltway)

PostPosted: Sun Jan 20, 2019 9:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TauntaunScout wrote:
Whill wrote:
Vader sometimes had the title of "Dark Lord of the Sith" in the 70s. We didn't know what the Sith meant in the 70s, but I thought Admiral Motti's line about Vader's "sad devotion to that ancient religion" referred to that Sith title because Vader had been described by Obi-Wan as having betrayed the Jedi so wouldn't still be devoted to their religion anymore.


None of us knew what the Sith was but Tarkin said (or nearly said) "The Jedi are all but extinct: you my friend are all that remains of their religion" so as far as guys in those uniforms are concerned I'd think the religion meant Jedi.


Actually, Tarkin may have meant the Jedi or the Sith or even perhaps belief in the Force in general, but Motti was directly referring to belief in the Force in general as a religion. How do we know? Remember, what prompted Motti to refer to that "sad religion" was Vader saying that the Death Star's ability to destroy a planet was insignificant next to the power of the Force[emphasis mine], rather than a direct mention of either the Jedi or the Sith. Tarkin's remark is more ambiguous since it's not a direct reference. But Motti was directly responding to Vader's mention of the Force in particular.
_________________
Sutehp's RPG Goodies
Only some of it is for D6 Star Wars.
Just repurchased the X-Wing and Tie Fighter flight sim games. I forgot how much I missed them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> General Star Wars All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 4 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group


v2.0