[showmethemoney]

I might as well set this plot point straight. In the first place, there was no chance Vader was going to go back to check on his "family" on Tatooine. He met them only once, very briefly, and his memories of his time there are not exactly pleasant. What possible reason would he have for checking up on them?

Secondly, allowing Luke to keep the Skywalker surname is something Obi-wan probably decided -- he was hoping that once Luke became a hero and met up with his father, Vader would learn the name and realize that Luke was his son. This would have several positive effects -- it would shock Vader, remind him of his past, make the fight more difficult for him, stir up emotions, etc.

Thirdly, Vader and Palpatine firmly believe the baby (they think there was only one child) is dead. There is absolutely no reason either of them would ever be searching for a child.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Oh, sure! You are rigth, and maybe with another director we all should have understand that. But the movies only made up to think that Obi-Wan took a wrong decision. if I'm Vader and I want to know what happens with my family, I'll check Tatooine for sure. In fact, Vader should have suggest to be the first target to nuke with the Death Star just bicouse of the sand.

[Darth Borba]

I might as well set this plot point straight. In the first place, there was no chance Vader was going to go back to check on his "family" on Tatooine. He met them only once, very briefly, and his memories of his time there are not exactly pleasant. What possible reason would he have for checking up on them?

Secondly, allowing Luke to keep the Skywalker surname is something Obi-wan probably decided -- he was hoping that once Luke became a hero and met up with his father, Vader would learn the name and realize that Luke was his son. This would have several positive effects -- it would shock Vader, remind him of his past, make the fight more difficult for him, stir up emotions, etc.

Thirdly, Vader and Palpatine firmly believe the baby (they think there was only one child) is dead. There is absolutely no reason either of them would ever be searching for a child.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I like how you have to "set plot points straight" and give "definitive" answers to questions from other fans, like you're some kind of special Star Wars nerd or something.

By leaving all these little bits that don't make sense in the new Star Wars movies, it just gives off the impression that Lucas isn't really that worried about making any sense of the whole thing at all. It's like he just wanted to get certain things in the new movies and didn't care at all what happened before. He'll probably edit the old ones and make them crappier, again.


It just bothers me and seems like the new PT is actually taking away from the OT by explaining things that don't really need explanation. It make absolutely no sense to watch Episode III and then pop in 1977's (I think) "A New Hope." I mean come on, anyone that sees these movies in order from 1-6 for the first time is going to be really confused. Let's face it, the best part of Star Wars was LUKE, I AM YOUR FATHER. That means nothing now. Sure, most of us will show our kids the movies 4-6 first, and some won't even show them the PT (haha), but that's not the point. These movies were necessary, and they couldn't even stick to the original plot. He had Three whole new movies to follow a few simple rules.

I guess I'd just rather not have learned about Anakin or Yoda with a light saber or anything like that. When I originally saw the movies, I had no reason to want to see what happened before, and I still don't.

I've said it before, even if there weren't so many plot holes or annoying parts that just don't go together with the originals, the movies still probably would have sucked in my opinion. It's just annoying that so many little things come up that don't make sense when you watch the originals.

[showmethemoney]

IF, and i mean IF the prequels were so good that erase the memories of the OT, THEN i dont care if the mistery is off, but it came to be quite the contrary.

[Darth Borba]

I like how you have to "set plot points straight" and give "definitive" answers to questions from other fans, like you're some kind of special Star Wars nerd or something.

By leaving all these little bits that don't make sense in the new Star Wars movies, it just gives off the impression that Lucas isn't really that worried about making any sense of the whole thing at all. It's like he just wanted to get certain things in the new movies and didn't care at all what happened before. He'll probably edit the old ones and make them crappier, again.
It just bothers me and seems like the new PT is actually taking away from the OT by explaining things that don't really need explanation. It make absolutely no sense to watch Episode III and then pop in 1977's (I think) "A New Hope." I mean come on, anyone that sees these movies in order from 1-6 for the first time is going to be really confused. Let's face it, the best part of Star Wars was LUKE, I AM YOUR FATHER. That means nothing now. Sure, most of us will show our kids the movies 4-6 first, and some won't even show them the PT (haha), but that's not the point. These movies were necessary, and they couldn't even stick to the original plot. He had Three whole new movies to follow a few simple rules.

I guess I'd just rather not have learned about Anakin or Yoda with a light saber or anything like that. When I originally saw the movies, I had no reason to want to see what happened before, and I still don't.

I've said it before, even if there weren't so many plot holes or annoying parts that just don't go together with the originals, the movies still probably would have sucked in my opinion. It's just annoying that so many little things come up that don't make sense when you watch the originals.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I mean the new movies were UN-necessary and they couldn't even stick to the original plot..

[Darth Borba]

IF, and i mean IF the prequels were so good that erase the memories of the OT, THEN i dont care if the mistery is off, but it came to be quite the contrary.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

pfft I'm starting to think it was an accident that the OT came out as good as it did after seeing what Lucas is doing to the old ones and the creation of the whole PT alone...

[Despondent]

Ya think?

(ps, welcome to the forums)

[CowboyCurtis]

You know, I kind of wished I hadn't shown my kids the PT now. I should've hidden them away and only let them watch the OT (which they do prefer), but then they would have an untainted view of the OT. Of course, I can still keep it hidden from them... they're pretty young yet.

[darth gimp]

I think JRR Tolkien didn't want the Silmarilian (the background for the hobbit, LOTR) published, because he wanted the past to be mysterious, like "a light on a distant shore". I think what Lucas did in making the prequel was violate Tolkien's Rule. So I think he was setting himself up for a bigger challenge then he anticipated. Violating the "rule" and making a good movie was just beyond him.

[showmethemoney]

I think JRR Tolkien didn't want the Silmarilian (the background for the hobbit, LOTR) published, because he wanted the past to be mysterious, like "a light on a distant shore".  I think what Lucas did in making the prequel was violate Tolkien's Rule.  So I think he was setting himself up for a bigger challenge then he anticipated.  Violating the "rule" and making a good movie was just beyond him.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If the movies were so good that erase the OT from our memories, Go with breaking any rule!
It's not the case...

This post has been edited by showmethemoney: 11 July 2005 - 06:00 PM

[darth gimp]

good point. Can't argue with that. Just hard to imagine (after the fact) that it could even be possible.

[Hari Seldon]

I think JRR Tolkien didn't want the Silmarilian (the background for the hobbit, LOTR) published, because he wanted the past to be mysterious, like "a light on a distant shore".  I think what Lucas did in making the prequel was violate Tolkien's Rule.  So I think he was setting himself up for a bigger challenge then he anticipated.  Violating the "rule" and making a good movie was just beyond him.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The Silmarillion is no "background for the hobbit, LOTR".
That would be like saying the evolution of Mankind was the background for the great world wars or something along those lines...

The Silmarillion works more like a bible for Middle Earth's world or, if you prefer, as a "background" to the world of Middle Earth.

And sorry if I'm being too picky.

[showmethemoney]

good point.  Can't argue with that.  Just hard to imagine (after the fact) that it could even be possible.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The first season of tv series "Smallville" (only the first chapters, to me) is an example of a pretty acceptable prequel. (and we are talking about a very established character here, too)
It doesn't matter you like or not the show, is -at leat- consistent.

This post has been edited by showmethemoney: 13 July 2005 - 08:29 PM

[jerfus17]

Leia only remembers images and feelings of Padme because she's unable to recall too much from when she was 3-4 years old or whenever it was that her mom originally died. It's not images and feelings based off being a 5 second old newborn baby with latent force powers. It was because in the original story, Padme wasn't supposed to die. She was supposed to live out her days with Leia. GL really messed this up BIG TIME.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes, you are correct. In the original story, Luke and Leia's mother (who wasn't named Padme'), gave Luke to Obi-wan, and fled with Leia to live on Alderaan with her friends the Organas. Bail Organa, who was orginally the same age as Anakin and a close friend; took Leia under his wing after her mother died when Leia was around 4 years old.

[darth_newmacer]

Yes, you are correct.  In the original story, Luke and Leia's mother (who wasn't named Padme'), gave Luke to Obi-wan, and fled with Leia to live on Alderaan with her friends the Organas.  Bail Organa, who was orginally the same age as Anakin and a close friend; took Leia under his wing after her mother died when Leia was around 4 years old.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Now, if Lucas had gone along with this "Original" story, maybe more people would appreciate the Prequels!

[thehitman]

The trouble is is that we shouldn't have to be bothered to fill in the gaps with ridiculois leaps of logic. Lucas was too sloppy with the PT, and was more interested in gabage CGI and merchandising than making a quality work.

And I agree with those here who say he has reduced SW completely to kid's shit, losing much of the grown up subtext.