|
Post by AQUA SALZ! on Feb 3, 2024 5:12:47 GMT 1
Here’s a funny, pointless question for everyone who knows Star Wars better than I do (i.e., practically everybody).
I rewatched RotJ the other day, and it inspired me to look up the scenes that Lucas changed when he reedited the originals. And I started wondering if the original RotJ is really supposed to imply the Rebels have completely defeated the Empire.
Obviously the Emperor and Vader are dead, and clearly the Rebellion has had an enormous victory by blowing up the second Death Star, but… Surely there are Tarkin-like leaders out there who can take charge? Surely the Empire has tons of other ships with tons of other soldiers? Surely the Emperor had some kind of back-up plan?
The reedited ending indicates—by showing all the other planets celebrating—that the Empire is indeed defeated once and for all, or at least till J.J. Abrams and Disney’s board of directors came along with Star Wars 2: The Quest for More Money.
But the original ending keeps things small and localized with the Ewoks, and it gives the sense—at least to me—that things have turned in our heroes’ favor but the war’s not over yet.
I dunno, maybe I’m overthinking this, but I kinda like that interpretation better, in part because RotJ seems like a smaller, more minor-key picture than the others (certainly than Empire, which feels like a grand old, bigger-budgeted, rip-roarin’ adventure flick). And also because it seems like a saga that isn’t over yet, exciting the imagination.
What say you?
|
|
|
Post by AQUA JAR!™ on Feb 3, 2024 21:54:09 GMT 1
I am pretty certain that George's intention was that without the Emperor's control and influence, the Empire was gone as soon as he was.
The Eastern European like statue toppling that was added on later only makes this even more clear.
|
|
|
Post by ])-Kyle "Wild Child" Gibney-([ on Feb 3, 2024 23:22:20 GMT 1
I am pretty certain that George's intention was that without the Emperor's control and influence, the Empire was gone as soon as he was. The Eastern European like statue toppling that was added on later only makes this even more clear. Statue?
|
|
|
Post by ])-Kyle "Wild Child" Gibney-([ on Feb 3, 2024 23:25:15 GMT 1
Well, there was Thrawn and others Im guessing. Look at Mando with Moff Gideon etc. It's all canon now. However with the expanded universe I guess it's up to the fan ultimately
|
|
|
Post by AQUA JAR!™ on Feb 3, 2024 23:55:37 GMT 1
I am pretty certain that George's intention was that without the Emperor's control and influence, the Empire was gone as soon as he was. The Eastern European like statue toppling that was added on later only makes this even more clear. Statue? on the right:
|
|
|
Post by WOLVERINE JACK! on Feb 4, 2024 7:56:13 GMT 1
I agree with Jar Jarrington. The end of old Palpy Palpington is meant to be seen as the end of the Empire.
There was once a plan to go onto another trilogy but Palpington wouldve been kept alive for it. They scrapped the idea after Empire went over budget and Lucas Lucington decided to end at three.
|
|
|
Post by WOLVERINE JACK! on Feb 4, 2024 8:04:28 GMT 1
On a related note: I’d like to know why they didn’t invite Admiral Ackbar to the big ewok party! So not cool! 😡
|
|
|
Post by AQUA CAT! on Feb 4, 2024 16:13:52 GMT 1
I agree with Jar Jarrington. The end of old Palpy Palpington is meant to be seen as the end of the Empire. There was once a plan to go onto another trilogy but Palpington wouldve been kept alive for it. They scrapped the idea after Empire went over budget and Lucas Lucington decided to end at three. I do declare I do concur. ANH left it open because Vader wasn't on the Death Star when it blew, so it could have ended there and then but with Vader stranded, but they pressed on. It seemed to me though with Vader and Palpatine all but certainly dead, the Empire was leaderless and toast. I think it was implied the empire was kaput after ROTJ, and that whatever came later had to be a new if similar one. For decades between films I thought Palpatine was in a league of his own until Snoke showed up.
|
|
|
Post by AQUA SALZ! on Feb 4, 2024 17:00:59 GMT 1
I am pretty certain that George's intention was that without the Emperor's control and influence, the Empire was gone as soon as he was. The Eastern European like statue toppling that was added on later only makes this even more clear. Maybe he did intend that—certainly he did by the time he added the edits—but funnily enough, on this viewing I honestly felt like the death of the Emperor was the turning point but there was still work to be done. Which all may seem a rather pointless point (either way it means the Rebels have won, at least in the long run), but I think having a less definitive ending makes the movies seem more mythic. I dunno. BTW, I found this post wondering the same thing: https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/xs1im/wait_so_how_exactly_is_the_empire_defeated_in/
|
|
|
Post by AQUA SALZ! on Feb 4, 2024 17:03:24 GMT 1
Well, there was Thrawn and others Im guessing. Look at Mando with Moff Gideon etc. It's all canon now. However with the expanded universe I guess it's up to the fan ultimately I haven’t read these books (or seen Mandolorian), though Thrawn sounds like the kind of villain I would have recommended for Star Wars sequels. Purely in terms of the movies, though, I almost feel like the original ending offered Lucas a way out in case he wanted to make follow-ups (rather than prequels): Yes, the Rebellion is well on its way to victory, but not quite there yet.
|
|
|
Post by AQUA SALZ! on Feb 4, 2024 17:09:58 GMT 1
I agree with Jar Jarrington. The end of old Palpy Palpington is meant to be seen as the end of the Empire. There was once a plan to go onto another trilogy but Palpington wouldve been kept alive for it. They scrapped the idea after Empire went over budget and Lucas Lucington decided to end at three. That’s interesting… I don’t know the details, but as I wrote to Biz, I wonder if Lucas went with the small-scale Ewok party ending just in case he wanted to make more. By the time he reedited them, of course, he’d decided that RotJ was the end.
|
|
|
Post by AQUA CAT! on Feb 7, 2024 6:37:16 GMT 1
I agree with Jar Jarrington. The end of old Palpy Palpington is meant to be seen as the end of the Empire. There was once a plan to go onto another trilogy but Palpington wouldve been kept alive for it. They scrapped the idea after Empire went over budget and Lucas Lucington decided to end at three. That’s interesting… I don’t know the details, but as I wrote to Biz, I wonder if Lucas went with the small-scale Ewok party ending just in case he wanted to make more. By the time he reedited them, of course, he’d decided that RotJ was the end. It's always possible. In the event the franchise would resume, which it did, ROTJ set it up well enough by having a new empire created from the ashes of the last one. I think though that the force Ghosts showed up at the end of Jedi to indicate they're at peace now, or that they're free now; somehow they're finally at rest. If it was meant to continue, I think it was meant to continue into new movies, I think it set itself up for a new evil. One last push. The First Order seemed a lot bigger, more extremist, but less organized, and less understanding of not always ruling with an iron fist.
There's an interesting episode of Andor where the Empire makes a strategic decision not to interfere with an occupied planet's religious population witnessing a rare meteor shower, or something. There's no strategic advantage to stopping them, but there is a disadvantage to offending them. The First Order, in my opinion, would have stopped them for no other reason than to assert dominance. Palpy Palpington's empire would see the value in not making everyone your enemy at every turn.
|
|
|
Post by AQUA SALZ! on Feb 7, 2024 20:29:03 GMT 1
That’s interesting… I don’t know the details, but as I wrote to Biz, I wonder if Lucas went with the small-scale Ewok party ending just in case he wanted to make more. By the time he reedited them, of course, he’d decided that RotJ was the end. It's always possible. In the event the franchise would resume, which it did, ROTJ set it up well enough by having a new empire created from the ashes of the last one. I think though that the force Ghosts showed up at the end of Jedi to indicate they're at peace now, or that they're free now; somehow they're finally at rest. If it was meant to continue, I think it was meant to continue into new movies, I think it set itself up for a new evil. One last push. The First Order seemed a lot bigger, more extremist, but less organized, and less understanding of not always ruling with an iron fist. There's an interesting episode of Andor where the Empire makes a strategic decision not to interfere with an occupied planet's religious population witnessing a rare meteor shower, or something. There's no strategic advantage to stopping them, but there is a disadvantage to offending them. The First Order, in my opinion, would have stopped them for no other reason than to assert dominance. Palpy Palpington's empire would see the value in not making everyone your enemy at every turn. Good point—and a good counterargument to what I was thinking. Have Lucas and/or the other filmmakers (Marquand, Kasdan) said what they were thinking with the ending? Maybe they just ran out of money or something? If the goal really was to show that the Empire was finished, I could imagine showing Imperial ships elsewhere being surrounded by Rebel forces—I don’t know, something like that. Even the original Star Wars’s ending, with the Wizard of Oz-esque handing out of medals, feels more climactic, more final. But no, we have a small dance party with the Ewoks. That’s what got me wondering. As for the First Order: I never figured out what it’s supposed to be. From what I remember of Force Awakens (I’ve only seen it once all the way through), it’s made up of Imperial remnants and sympathizers, which is all well and fine for a sequel. But already by that movie, it seems to have taken control—complete with Nazi rallies—and reduced the Republic to ragtag rebels again! I still don’t see why they didn’t go with putting the Republic in charge and making the rebels into the bad guys, which would have added at least a little moral ambiguity. I feel like that was the original intention that got lost along the way. Re: differences between the Empire and the First Order, I don’t know about the Empire’s decisions in general, but Tarkin in Star Wars makes that decision to blow up Leia’s planet (Alderaan? Yes, I looked it up) for no particular reason other than asserting dominance. Tarkin, by the way, is my favorite SW villain—even more than Vader or the Emperor!—mostly because of how great Peter Cushing’s acting is. I wish the film hadn’t killed him off.
|
|
|
Post by AQUA CAT! on Feb 13, 2024 19:00:06 GMT 1
It's always possible. In the event the franchise would resume, which it did, ROTJ set it up well enough by having a new empire created from the ashes of the last one. I think though that the force Ghosts showed up at the end of Jedi to indicate they're at peace now, or that they're free now; somehow they're finally at rest. If it was meant to continue, I think it was meant to continue into new movies, I think it set itself up for a new evil. One last push. The First Order seemed a lot bigger, more extremist, but less organized, and less understanding of not always ruling with an iron fist. There's an interesting episode of Andor where the Empire makes a strategic decision not to interfere with an occupied planet's religious population witnessing a rare meteor shower, or something. There's no strategic advantage to stopping them, but there is a disadvantage to offending them. The First Order, in my opinion, would have stopped them for no other reason than to assert dominance. Palpy Palpington's empire would see the value in not making everyone your enemy at every turn. Good point—and a good counterargument to what I was thinking. Have Lucas and/or the other filmmakers (Marquand, Kasdan) said what they were thinking with the ending? Maybe they just ran out of money or something? If the goal really was to show that the Empire was finished, I could imagine showing Imperial ships elsewhere being surrounded by Rebel forces—I don’t know, something like that. Even the original Star Wars’s ending, with the Wizard of Oz-esque handing out of medals, feels more climactic, more final. But no, we have a small dance party with the Ewoks. That’s what got me wondering. As for the First Order: I never figured out what it’s supposed to be. From what I remember of Force Awakens (I’ve only seen it once all the way through), it’s made up of Imperial remnants and sympathizers, which is all well and fine for a sequel. But already by that movie, it seems to have taken control—complete with Nazi rallies—and reduced the Republic to ragtag rebels again! I still don’t see why they didn’t go with putting the Republic in charge and making the rebels into the bad guys, which would have added at least a little moral ambiguity. I feel like that was the original intention that got lost along the way. Re: differences between the Empire and the First Order, I don’t know about the Empire’s decisions in general, but Tarkin in Star Wars makes that decision to blow up Leia’s planet (Alderaan? Yes, I looked it up) for no particular reason other than asserting dominance. Tarkin, by the way, is my favorite SW villain—even more than Vader or the Emperor!—mostly because of how great Peter Cushing’s acting is. I wish the film hadn’t killed him off. I clearly have brain damage because I thought I responded to this. I must have literally just forgot to click create post.
It's hard to really say.
I can't remember where I picked this up, but my understanding from ages ago was it was supposed to go up to Episode IX. Perhaps that was supplied as the explanation for why ANH inexplicably started at Episode IV. I think it could have ended at Episode IV because of the totally Wizard of Oz-esque ceremony, but I also grew up after all 3 came out, so for me there was never a buffer period between the next movie. I've no idea what it's like to have seen the end of ANH and wonder if there will or won't be a sequel.
Tarkin's cool. This is what hurts the most about losing the reply I thought I posted. A treasured moment for me in Star Wars is Tarkin at the moment the Death Star explodes. His contemplative face is the last thing we see before it blows up. He died in that position. That fascinates me for some reason. I think with Alderaan, Tarkin showed his true evil by asserting dominance over just Leia. If it were anyone but Tarkin, I'd have said it was a short-sighted decision, but he has such control over it. Something about Alderaan seemed more controlled to me, more measured, more of a statement to one person. Something about the First Order destroying those 5 planets in The Force Awakens seemed almost... like following the same script. Not the script like the beats of the first movie, but following the script of the original Empire, but just more. Something about it seemed less thoughtful to me, like it destroyed those 5 planets because it felt it needed to be taken seriously, whereas I detected no groveling for validation from Tarkin. At that point in the film, he was the only character who seemed like he had any sway at all over Darth Vader.
|
|
|
Post by AQUA JAR!™ on Feb 13, 2024 19:27:47 GMT 1
I'd have to google it for you, but George did have a sequel trilogy planned, with the Emperor and Luke's sister both still out there somewhere.
Changing the sister to Leia, and then putting Emp in a postion to be killed, are both evidence that he changed his mind, and wanted RotJ to be "the end"
|
|
|
Post by WOLVERINE JACK! on Feb 13, 2024 19:35:56 GMT 1
I'd have to google it for you, but George did have a sequel trilogy planned, with the Emperor and Luke's sister both still out there somewhere. Changing the sister to Leia, and then putting Emp in a postion to be killed, are both evidence that he changed his mind, and wanted RotJ to be "the end" I read some quotes from Lucas recently from the time he was making Return where he basically said he wasn’t enjoying himself. I think Gary Kurtz leaving was a major blow. Making Empire was also difficult for him because it went way over budget. I guess it just became too stressful. As far I know the only known details on that sequel trilogy are the two things you mentioned about the sister and the emperor. Han, also would’ve been dead, as the original plan had him killed in Return. Though that may have changed because supposedly Lucas was always against that idea.
|
|
|
Post by AQUA CAT! on Feb 13, 2024 21:34:31 GMT 1
I'd have to google it for you, but George did have a sequel trilogy planned, with the Emperor and Luke's sister both still out there somewhere. Changing the sister to Leia, and then putting Emp in a postion to be killed, are both evidence that he changed his mind, and wanted RotJ to be "the end" I read some quotes from Lucas recently from the time he was making Return where he basically said he wasn’t enjoying himself. I think Gary Kurtz leaving was a major blow. Making Empire was also difficult for him because it went way over budget. I guess it just became too stressful. As far I know the only known details on that sequel trilogy are the two things you mentioned about the sister and the emperor. Han, also would’ve been dead, as the original plan had him killed in Return. Though that may have changed because supposedly Lucas was always against that idea. I would have been really intrigued to see a part 3 without Han. By Return of the Jedi I think they were all quite safe in their plot armor.
In retrospect it makes moving on without Obi-Wan and Tarkin all the braver, although I guess with no Han there would be less to no Jabba. The idea of Lando filling that role is just... I don't even know. Like a "what-if?" of movie possibilities.
|
|
|
Post by WOLVERINE JACK! on Feb 13, 2024 21:37:46 GMT 1
I read some quotes from Lucas recently from the time he was making Return where he basically said he wasn’t enjoying himself. I think Gary Kurtz leaving was a major blow. Making Empire was also difficult for him because it went way over budget. I guess it just became too stressful. As far I know the only known details on that sequel trilogy are the two things you mentioned about the sister and the emperor. Han, also would’ve been dead, as the original plan had him killed in Return. Though that may have changed because supposedly Lucas was always against that idea. I would have been really intrigued to see a part 3 without Han. By Return of the Jedi I think they were all quite safe in their plot armor.
In retrospect it makes moving on without Obi-Wan and Tarkin all the braver, although I guess with no Han there would be less to no Jabba. The idea of Lando filling that role is just... I don't even know. Like a "what-if?" of movie possibilities.
I’ve never been clear on precisely when Han was supposed to die. Would it have happened at the end of ESB? Or early on in Return? I’m not sure anyone has ever been specific on that but I suspect it was meant for Return, presumably after the Jabba sequence. I still wonder how he would’ve died too. Maybe they never got that far along
|
|
|
Post by AQUA JAR!™ on Feb 13, 2024 22:12:09 GMT 1
I would have been really intrigued to see a part 3 without Han. By Return of the Jedi I think they were all quite safe in their plot armor.
In retrospect it makes moving on without Obi-Wan and Tarkin all the braver, although I guess with no Han there would be less to no Jabba. The idea of Lando filling that role is just... I don't even know. Like a "what-if?" of movie possibilities.
I’ve never been clear on precisely when Han was supposed to die. Would it have happened at the end of ESB? Or early on in Return? I’m not sure anyone has ever been specific on that but I suspect it was meant for Return, presumably after the Jabba sequence. I still wonder how he would’ve died too. Maybe they never got that far along there are two different answers 1 Ford supposedly wasn't coming back for RotJ, which is why his character was "kidnapped" 2 when he was talked back in by a producer, he wanted Han to die in the shield bunker raid
|
|
|
Post by WOLVERINE JACK! on Feb 13, 2024 23:57:50 GMT 1
I’ve never been clear on precisely when Han was supposed to die. Would it have happened at the end of ESB? Or early on in Return? I’m not sure anyone has ever been specific on that but I suspect it was meant for Return, presumably after the Jabba sequence. I still wonder how he would’ve died too. Maybe they never got that far along there are two different answers 1 Ford supposedly wasn't coming back for RotJ, which is why his character was "kidnapped" 2 when he was talked back in by a producer, he wanted Han to die in the shield bunker raid Ah ok. Thanks. I probably did read this years ago and forgot.
|
|