Chefelf.com Night Life: 84summers - Viewing Profile

Hello. I haven't posted in 2.5 years, though I never stopped being a fan of this site's humor & insight. After 11 years plus, it could confidently describe itself as being timeless.

Anyway...

I just finished reading James Lucerno's "Labyrinth of Evil." And last year I read "Dark Lord: Rise of Darth Vader." I am very excited to read "Cloak of Deception," which (sincerely) is one of my favorite films. It is also awful, I know.

I'm very impressed by Lucerno's writing. He doesn't betray Lucas's version of the characters at all; their simplistic dialogue and motivations. Somehow, he enhances them! He gives the characters a much needed sense of reason and motive. He also brilliantly references other events and characters, including Zonama Segot from 'Rogue Planet', the worst novel I've ever read.

He's also exceedingly good at giving this Universe some definition. Did you know the Trade Federation has a robot army to fight off pirates, as granted by the Senate? See what that alone does to your perception of this Universe.

Also, Valorum 'mysteriously' died in a spaceship explosion. And Sifo-Dyas was a political dissident like Dooku, who was dispatched basically the day after he placed an order for a clone army.

Such details are necessary yet conspicuously missing from the films. Not only does he provide them, they are also smoothly incorporated into the plot and used to further enhance the characters. They're not shoe-horned in at all!

"Dark Lord: Rise of Darth Vader" is even more impressive because it has new characters (meaning they're not restricted to what Lucas has already written) and perfectly bridges the gap between the trilogies. He devotes a lot of time to showing how Vader deals with his new body and how he perfectly hones his rage to completely eliminate Anakin. He also hunts Jedi across the galaxy.

It bridges the Anakin we've seen (and disdain) with the Vader we love, seemlessly and engagingly.

I don't know if Lucerno is a fan, but his writing is exceptionally crafted and reverent. I was wondering if anyone here felt the same or differently?

I was watching "The Making of Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" documentary on the Indiana Jones DVD set Bonus Materials disc, and I heard this:

Steven Spielberg: When George (Lucas) and I were in Hawaii and I agreed to direct Raiders, George said that if I did wind up directing the first one that I would need to direct all three. He said he had three stories in mind. It turned out George did not have three stories in mind. We had to make up all the other subsequent stories..."

Sound familiar? Like any other criticisms on George Lucas's work? And this isn't any chump talking (though I would hardly call ChefElf a chump), this is Steven Spielberg, master filmmaker and one of Lucas's best friends!

There' s more. Something else I noticed...

Steven Spielberg: (On Temple's opening scene) George's idea was to start the movie with a musical number. He wanted to start the whole film with a big Busby Berkeley dance number...that was George's contribution..."

In his interview on the 1997 VHS release of Return of the Jedi- Special Edition, Lucas had this to say...

George Lucas: In the Jabba the Hutt scene there was a little musical number which we never really had the time to shoot. When we were doing it, the production was running behind and everyone was racing. We managed to catch just a couple of shots of the band and we put a little bit of music in it, but it was meant originally to be a big musical number; which I thought would be funny in the middle of a Star Wars film."

Return of the Jedi was shot in London, 1982, then released in summer 1983, when Spielberg was shooting Temple of Doom.

Lucas took the idea he couldn't complete in Jedi and used it for Temple.

All of these films borrow (plagiarize?) from 30's serials, etc. I recall someone insightfully saying that what made the original Star Wars trilogy great was the talent of others who were only under the supervision of Lucas. And Indiana Jones is Spielberg's accomplishment (and Spielberg always credits his actors, editors, photographers, etc. He recognizes the team effort.)

At this point, I'm not sure why George Lucas is considered to be the creative visionary he is credited as being.

Any thoughts on any of this?

I realized something while watching the "new trilogy" the other night. Bail Organa isn't just some impotent senator, he's a baby-stealer! But more so, Luke and Leia have a living, biological Aunt!

In Episode II, Deleted Scene 5, titled "Padme's Parent's House", we are introduced to Padme's sister Sola Naberrie, as well as Padme's mother and father, Ruwee and Jobal Naberrie (fair guess which is which). They can be seen at Padme's funeral at the end of Episode III. Anyway, these people are, in fact, Luke and Leia's direct family, their aunt and grandparents!

Not only that, Sola had "pretty young daughters" named Ryoo and Pooja (the artificially giggling children in the deleted scene) according to the overly helpful Star Wars Databank. They are Padme's niece & nephew which, by my math, makes them...Luke & Leia's biological cousins!

Extended universe? There's an actual extended family in the canon! The significance of this: Luke & Leia are no longer lost orphans of the saved galaxy. They have family out there somewhere, and lots of it.

Anyway, it struck me that at the end of Episode VI, while it is only possible their grandparents are still alive, it is almost certain their Aunt is alive and well, living on Naboo (which was edited into the 2004 version of Ep. VI). Ryoo (stupid name) and Pooja (*really* stupid name) have probably even married and spawned by the end of Episode VI. So the Naberrie family is even larger.

On a side note, certainly Naboo remembers their beloved elected queen, for whom they tried to amend their constitution so she could serve more than two terms? Luke & Leia could visit Naboo's memorial museum and historic sites to learn about their family. Then again, do Luke & Leia EVER learn about the existence of Padme Amidala Naberrie-Skywalker? Should they?

Going back to Episode III, it is ridiculous that Bail Organa just gets a child free, and that Luke is sent to live with people he isn't really related to (and who probably never liked him so much), when the twins have living, direct relatives on Naboo. It wouldn't be far-fetched, either. After all, Vader doesn't ever go after the Lars family. Surely the babies would be just as safe on Naboo, even if it is apparently the trivial center of the galaxy as ChefElf observes.

And wouldn't Obi-Wan be more comfortable on Naboo than Tatooine? When he isn't learning how to pester Qui-Gon in the afterlife, he could look over the lake, and try to guess the names of the birds singing, then vacantly muse, "I like the water." (Not to mention the continued adventures of old friends like Captains Panaka & Tarpuls, who we can see playing chess at the Naboo VFW talking about that blockade when Obi-Wan shows up for whatever business.)

Of course, I am aware that the only reason the kids are divided the way they are is so that Lucas can continue his pretension that the saga was always meant to be seen as one whole giant story. But the idea that by the end of the saga Luke and Leia still have relatives is a surprising and fairly significant thought. Also, I just thought the idea of Bail Organa as baby-thief was smirk-worthy.

ChefElf mentioned a sitcom where two Jedis and a Senator raise twin babies. How about a made for TV drama where the Naberries try to get their daughter's child back from the Senator and his unlikeable, awful wife?

That's all a bit much I know, but there it is. Shocking, no?