Star Wars: Lucasfilm/Disney Planning Stand Alone Movies

[Talcy]

I'm done with the subject.

[Justin]

For crying out loud, Tesla. STOP with this! He is dead. The man is dead. What &*&^ing planet do you live on? What villainous an unredemptive activities in the Original Trilogy?? Choking people to death repeatedly, torturing his own daughter (whether he realised who she was or not), a willing participant in the destruction of an entire planet, KILLING THE GOOD GUYS, trying to kill his own son and maiming him.

Darth Vader was, for the most part, not a hero. At the last minute he remembered who he was but that does not wipe away the things he did. You point out that you never said everything he did was heroic, but to make a stand alone film about Darth Vader would, logocally, cover a period of his life when he was outrightly evil and not heroic in the slightest. To do otherwise would be to plant doubt in his mind during that peroid, which would dilute the effect of the character during SW and ESB.

Seriously, this is getting ridiculous.

Also, basing a stand alone film on a villain - so there is the need to introduce a new hero. This isn't Hannibal Lecter we're dealing with. Audiences do go to the movies to see the bad guy win like that.

Not to mention that he killed women and children BEFORE he became Darth Vader (yeah the Sand People weren't "humans," but that's what "civilised" people always say about indigenous populations to justify murdering them), and then he murdered the Jedi younglings! Come on man, he was EVIL.

[borgmatrix]

Saw an interesting debate was in progress and wish it had caught my eye sooner.

Darth Vader is not dead. Even setting aside (as yet) untold stories from the Fall of the Republic to the Battle of Endor, Darth Vader was only another name for Anakin Skywalker, and Anakin Skywalker is not dead. "Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter"--remember Yoda saying that? Anakin's body may be gone, but he is not, and, as a man is the sum total of his experiences and his actions, Darth Vader, as a name and as a component of Anakin's experiences and actions, continues to live so long as Anakin lives, which, for all we know, in Force Ghost form, might be forever. There are a myriad ways he could be brought back, in one capacity or another, to one degree or another. (I can, for one thing, picture Anakin manifesting to Luke in his Vader aspect, with the Vader voice, to make particular points regarding his choices, and their consequences.)

Interesting thoughts. And I'd say I agree. When it gets to calling this one man Anakin, then saying by the time of ROTS and after (in eyes of Obi-wan and Yoda), that Anakin's dead replaced by this monstrosity called Darth Vader, but then get to the OT and Anakin's still alive in there somewhere(in Luke's eyes), but nope he's not (in Sidious' eyes), and then by end of ROTJ Vader's now dead, and Anakin's alive as Luke cradles him. And then he really dies, and we see the funeral pyre. But then he's there in "ghost" form and is going to live on...I mean, it gets to be semantics what we call him. Were there every really two completely different beings at various levels of death or life within that body, one called Anakin and one called Vader? No. So, yeah, from that perspective, with this guy living on forever through the Force, whatever we want to call him, he's around.

But, also, Darth Vader was clearly seen or treated as a representation of evil. By the time he's one with the Force, I think even Anakin would say he's not Darth Vader. And if he were still gripped by evil, my impression is he couldn't become one with the Force.

But I think the way you're looking at it is more interesting than pure black or white, here he's evil/Vader and here he's good/Anakin. I like the idea of him being a summation of all he's done, and therefore Vader always being a part of him. That seems more like reality. It would definitely be very cool if he were to appear to Luke, occasionally, in his armored Darth Vader for teaching purposes. Reminds me a bit of Luke's encounter in the Dagobah system.

As far as Vader being one of the best known villains in cinema history--Two things. One, He is also one of the most popular characters in the Saga

Definitely. Vader has been such a popular character, I don't think it'd be a hard sell at all to get audiences to accept a stand alone movie centered around him.

Two, there's this: he's not the villain of the piece, he's the hero. Looking at his conduct in the original trilogy, which is where the image of Vader most people have, the cyborg lieutenant of the Emperor, formed, there's nothing particularly villainous about anything he does. Judged in the proper context: These are, to a large extent, Samurai movies, and Vader is a samurai, meeting out justice as a samurai, a high-ranking samurai especially, would, and serving his lord well in pursuit of putting down an armed insurrection against the duly constituted head of the government.

This I'm not sure about, LT. In regards to, "he's not the villain of the piece, he's the hero", I could accept that more with the PT. Except, that by the latter half of ROTS, he's not the hero. He's not even truly the Emperor's Samurai, as we'd already seen earlier in the movie that he did not agree with Palpatine's way and wanted to arrest him. When he finally kneels before his "lord", it's not because he's been convinced Sidious' way is right (quite the opposite with his "what have I done?!?!?"), but because he's desperate to save Padme..."I'll do whatever you want...just help me save Padme." I wouldn't say there's anything heroic about going against what you believe is right in order to satisfy/pursue a selfish desire.

By the time of the OT, with Padme long gone, perhaps he believes in defending the Empire and following his orders against the enemy that is the Rebel Alliance. But by this time, I'd say Luke holds the place of the hero of the story. Vader might not be the villain of the piece, but he is a villain. Or maybe the better descriptors would be that Luke is the main protagonist, and Vader the major antagonist (for Luke, anyway).

[Lord Tesla]

Saw an interesting debate was in progress and wish it had caught my eye sooner.

That makes two of us.

Interesting thoughts. And I'd say I agree. When it gets to calling this one man Anakin, then saying by the time of ROTS and after (in eyes of Obi-wan and Yoda), that Anakin's dead replaced by this monstrosity called Darth Vader, but then get to the OT and Anakin's still alive in there somewhere(in Luke's eyes), but nope he's not (in Sidious' eyes), and then by end of ROTJ Vader's now dead, and Anakin's alive as Luke cradles him. And then he really dies, and we see the funeral pyre. But then he's there in "ghost" form and is going to live on...I mean, it gets to be semantics what we call him. Were there every really two completely different beings at various levels of death or life within that body, one called Anakin and one called Vader? No. So, yeah, from that perspective, with this guy living on forever through the Force, whatever we want to call him, he's around.

But, also, Darth Vader was clearly seen or treated as a representation of evil. By the time he's one with the Force, I think even Anakin would say he's not Darth Vader. And if he were still gripped by evil, my impression is he couldn't become one with the Force.

But I think the way you're looking at it is more interesting than pure black or white, here he's evil/Vader and here he's good/Anakin. I like the idea of him being a summation of all he's done, and therefore Vader always being a part of him. That seems more like reality. It would definitely be very cool if he were to appear to Luke, occasionally, in his armored Darth Vader for teaching purposes. Reminds me a bit of Luke's encounter in the Dagobah system.

Than you, sir. :howdy: I'm glad someone else gets the point. You have no idea how glad.


Now I'm generally inclined to agree that you can't do the Ultimate Jedi Mind Trick if you're still steeped in the dark side. But...plainly past dark side experience is no bar--or at least not an instant disqualifier. Then one thinks about Yoda's words, "Once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny," and one wonders: what happens if you slip after you've made the jump to the afterlife? (And of course all this will have to be revised--read: thrown out--if undead Sith start popping up in the New Trilogy.)

The interesting thing (maybe) about the Vader manifestation of Anakin is that it first came to me while I was working on a fan fiction. Anakin Skywalker needed to make contact with Han Solo, and the only way he could do so was by means of the Vader image and the Vader voice: appearing as Vader and calling Han "Captain Solo" was what finally made Anakin perceptible to Solo. That evoked Bespin and that got his attention. All of which is only relevant, I suppose, as the preface to this observation: that writing fan fiction is a pretty good analytical tool. Or at least has been for me.

At any rate, it would surely get Luke's attention, I think.

This I'm not sure about, LT. In regards to, "he's not the villain of the piece, he's the hero", I could accept that more with the PT. Except, that by the latter half of ROTS, he's not the hero. He's not even truly the Emperor's Samurai, as we'd already seen earlier in the movie that he did not agree with Palpatine's way and wanted to arrest him. When he finally kneels before his "lord", it's not because he's been convinced Sidious' way is right (quite the opposite with his "what have I done?!?!?"), but because he's desperate to save Padme..."I'll do whatever you want...just help me save Padme." I wouldn't say there's anything heroic about going against what you believe is right in order to satisfy/pursue a selfish desire.

By the time of the OT, with Padme long gone, perhaps he believes in defending the Empire and following his orders against the enemy that is the Rebel Alliance. But by this time, I'd say Luke holds the place of the hero of the story. Vader might not be the villain of the piece, but he is a villain. Or maybe the better descriptors would be that Luke is the main protagonist, and Vader the major antagonist (for Luke, anyway).

The one clear distinction I do make, up to a point, between Vader and Anakin as independent entities is between Original and Prequel Trilogies, because the Chosen One was one thing in the OT and something else entirely in the PT--Which is hardly surprising, given that he was created backward. (This distinction only holds from our side of the camera, of course.)

The point I was trying to make was that he wasn't particularly villainous in the OT, which is where Vader first appeared, which is where most of us formed our understanding of Anakin as armored cyborg, and not that that he was necessarily good, let alone heroic. He was the Emperor's right hand, carrying out his duties. Vader's past, his motivations up to that time, were never made clear.

Anakin taken in his totality is a different matter, of course. Even in the prequels, it can be argued he was villainous and heroic, and given the magnitude of some of his actions, it's difficult to say which aspect of his nature was more pronounced. Yet the overall hero he remains: There's no rule that says every thing a hero does must be heroic, or even good.

But, in the OT, well, what do we see? Not the undisciplined, fear-driven young man from ROTS, whose actions are self-serving and tragic. (One wonders, though, about some of his willingness to kill...just about anyone: might some of it be attributable to the thinking that lay behind such utterances as Yoda's to Luke that he should allow his friends to die, if honored what they fought for? That whole thing about attachments and avoiding them might have only started making sense to Anakin once he had slipped out of the light and into the darkness.)

Rather there is the man kept alive by machinery and his own black will (to paraphrase Obi-Wan in the ROTJ novelization), who does the Emperor's bidding pursuant to a goal: preservation of the Empire, as it would seem (post ESB) in hopes that he will one day rule it. (With Luke at his side, at least once he learned Luke was his son, which I assume he knew before the Emperor told him.)

And part of that would be the meteing out of justice. Which for Vader I have always assumed meant inflicting punishment and compelling order--what else did he have to keep him going after Padmé's death and his own ruination?--as suggested by his speech to Luke about "...end[ing] this destructive conflict."

To Luke I could concede a more heroic role, if it weren't for his repeated failures after the Battle of Yavin, and his being overshadowed by Han Solo at almost every turn.

One last thing we have to remember about Anakin is that he is the Chosen One--with the Force and the Prophecy at his back (and on his back). He's more than a hero...he's that, but he's a demigod, too, or as near as makes no difference, not the Messiah, but a messiah, albeit a deeply flawed one, and that kind of power, that kind of...heritage...usually gets judged by a different standard. His "What have I done?" to me is a gloss on "Eloi, Eloi lama sabachthani?", adapted to a galaxy that has no Deity, other than the Force, and a natural sequel to his Gethsemane experience in the Council Chamber after Windu's departure. He's being driven toward a destination, a destiny, and it is a heroic journey--he is the hero--no matter the circuitousness of the path, no matter the many wrong, disastrous, tragic, horrific, turns he takes on the way to his ultimate triumph.

(Here's hoping all this makes sense. It does to me, but I'm in the midst of a pollen barrage that's almost as thick outside my head as the allergy fuzz inside.)

[borgmatrix]

Then one thinks about Yoda's words, "Once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny," and one wonders: what happens if you slip after you've made the jump to the afterlife? (And of course all this will have to be revised--read: thrown out--if undead Sith start popping up in the New Trilogy.)

Intriguing. I'm sure Lucas was just thinking, once you're there, you're there. But I suppose one could slip up afterward, like Lucifer and his fallen angels being cast out of heaven. Regarding undead Sith, I know in other media we have seen them. I recall Jedi Knight Exar Kun encountering the spirit of a Sith while exploring his tomb (Naga Sadow maybe?). And then later, I think he and Ulic Qel-Dromma encountered a different Sith spirit who named them Sith master and apprentice, respectively. Don't remember if there was any exploration if those Sith existed in a state of "unrest" on Earth, or were one with the Dark Side of the Force or something else. If Sith do live on as spirits, and can reappear, then is there a disadvantage to using the Dark Side vs the Light Side? Of course, until undead Sith turn up in the movies, maybe none of this matters.

The interesting thing (maybe) about the Vader manifestation of Anakin is that it first came to me while I was working on a fan fiction. Anakin Skywalker needed to make contact with Han Solo, and the only way he could do so was by means of the Vader image and the Vader voice: appearing as Vader and calling Han "Captain Solo" was what finally made Anakin perceptible to Solo. That evoked Bespin and that got his attention. All of which is only relevant, I suppose, as the preface to this observation: that writing fan fiction is a pretty good analytical tool. Or at least has been for me.

Sounds awesome. Yeah, writing would be a great way to gain new, previously undiscovered insights.

The point I was trying to make was that he wasn't particularly villainous in the OT, which is where Vader first appeared, which is where most of us formed our understanding of Anakin as armored cyborg, and not that that he was necessarily good, let alone heroic. He was the Emperor's right hand, carrying out his duties. Vader's past, his motivations up to that time, were never made clear.

Okay, but a lot of bad guys in movies follow orders of their higher ups. That doesn't negate villainy, right? I understand what you're saying, but...

Anakin taken in his totality is a different matter, of course. Even in the prequels, it can be argued he was villainous and heroic, and given the magnitude of some of his actions, it's difficult to say which aspect of his nature was more pronounced. Yet the overall hero he remains: There's no rule that says every thing a hero does must be heroic, or even good.

Sure, and I'd agree with that through the half-way point of ROTS. But by the end, he's definitely gone over fully to something else.

And part of that would be the meteing out of justice. Which for Vader I have always assumed meant inflicting punishment and compelling order--what else did he have to keep him going after Padmé's death and his own ruination?--as suggested by his speech to Luke about "...end[ing] this destructive conflict."

Not much. He definitely struck me as suffering in the OT. Not the cackling, I'm-enjoying-every-moment-of-this evil that the Emperor was, but someone living in misery and taking out his anger on everyone around him.

To Luke I could concede a more heroic role, if it weren't for his repeated failures after the Battle of Yavin, and his being overshadowed by Han Solo at almost every turn.

That's maybe more about Luke's incompetance than his level of heroism.

He's being driven toward a destination, a destiny, and it is a heroic journey--he is the hero--no matter the circuitousness of the path, no matter the many wrong, disastrous, tragic, horrific, turns he takes on the way to his ultimate triumph.

It was definitely a "circuitous" path. Would have been interesting to see how things would have played out if he'd let Mace kill Palpatine and stuck with the Jedi in ROTS.

[Talcy]

To Luke I could concede a more heroic role, if it weren't for his repeated failures after the Battle of Yavin, and his being overshadowed by Han Solo at almost every turn.

To be a more compelling character, a hero has to fail before he can be truly heroic. Otherwise there is no drama.

[Lord Tesla]

To be a more compelling character, a hero has to fail before he can be truly heroic. Otherwise there is no drama.

So, the hero must fail before he succeeds? Hmmm. Who does that sound like? :scratchchin: Say, sounds a lot like...Darth Vader. Lots of drama in that one. (Not to labor the point.)

[Lord Tesla]

Intriguing. I'm sure Lucas was just thinking, once you're there, you're there. But I suppose one could slip up afterward, like Lucifer and his fallen angels being cast out of heaven.

I'm sure Occam's Razor works here, however shocked some might find my invocation of it: I don't think GL tended to think things out very far beyond what he needed at the moment when he was in the flurry of creation, let alone the drudgery of writing, rewriting, shooting and cutting the darned films. Especially by the time he was making ROTJ.

A Luciferian expulsion is certainly an interesting line of speculation. The next question, then, would be, if you've been cast out of the Force Afterlife, what have you been cast out into? I mean, are you out of the Force, out of the Galaxy--ever wonder why Obi-Wan limited the Force to binding only the galaxy, presumably their galaxy, together, and didn't say something more general, maybe saying "worlds" or "the universe"? Is it limited to that one galaxy? Would a Jedi in our neighborhood be simply a guy with a really powerful flashlight?--or into oblivion?

Regarding undead Sith, I know in other media we have seen them. I recall Jedi Knight Exar Kun encountering the spirit of a Sith while exploring his tomb (Naga Sadow maybe?). And then later, I think he and Ulic Qel-Dromma encountered a different Sith spirit who named them Sith master and apprentice, respectively. Don't remember if there was any exploration if those Sith existed in a state of "unrest" on Earth, or were one with the Dark Side of the Force or something else.

I do remember something about all that. I'm pretty sure Exar Kun even turned up in ghost-form at the Yavin Praxeum to muck up Luke's plans. Seems to me it worked something like demonic possession, only with a coma.

The tomb Kun entered was Freedon Nadd's; he was allied in some fashion with Ulic Qel-Dromma, but I'm fuzzy on the details--which I shouldn't be, since I looked into this stuff not so long ago when I was writing "Ascent" and "Descent."

I think they were generic Sith-equivalent Force Ghosts, in all cases.

If Sith do live on as spirits, and can reappear, then is there a disadvantage to using the Dark Side vs the Light Side?

Well, I suspect you'd spend a lot more on cosmetic surgery as a Sith, unless you didn't mind the physical effects that seem to go along with those that don't end up as giant windup toys.

Of course, until undead Sith turn up in the movies, maybe none of this matters.

True enough. But...it would open a lot of avenues for them.

Sounds awesome. Yeah, writing would be a great way to gain new, previously undiscovered insights.

Thanks. Kinda makes me wish I'd continued with that one. (And, who knows, I may yet.) I think of writing the fictions at least in part as performing thought experiments with the characters, with light entertainment as a byproduct.

Okay, but a lot of bad guys in movies follow orders of their higher ups. That doesn't negate villainy, right? I understand what you're saying, but...

No, it wouldn't negate villainy. But, in the original trilogy, especially in ANH, Vader's villainy derives mainly from his placement in opposition to the Rebellion, who wear the Good Guy label. Removed from that context, his actions would appear different, because they were not inherently evil.

Sure, and I'd agree with that through the half-way point of ROTS. But by the end, he's definitely gone over fully to something else.

Not many would dispute that. I think I was making a point about the prequel trilogy as a whole, though these things get complicated pretty quickly. And, one might look at the second half of ROTS, and see it as Anakin beginning to learn the value of Jedi detachment, and how to employ it, looking at the mercilessness of it and embracing it. The right idea at the wrong time, one might say. (And/or evidence of the error of the Jedi in trying to inculcate Jedi values into Anakin rather than simply training him to use his gift and trusting to the nature of the One chosen by the Force.)

Not much. He definitely struck me as suffering in the OT. Not the cackling, I'm-enjoying-every-moment-of-this evil that the Emperor was, but someone living in misery and taking out his anger on everyone around him.

Precisely!

That's maybe more about Luke's incompetance than his level of heroism.

You have a point...but...I've always thought heroism required a modicum of deliberateness about it, leading to a measure of intended success. The difference between stepping on a land mine and throwing one's self on a land mine, one might say. Luke kept throwing himself at land mines, but he kept missing, even if he did occasionally end up with the results he wanted, once or twice.

It was definitely a "circuitous" path. Would have been interesting to see how things would have played out if he'd let Mace kill Palpatine and stuck with the Jedi in ROTS.

Indeed. Indeed. Of course, you could write a fan fic about it, and explore it that way.

The way I see it, even if Anakin had allowed Windu to kill the Chancellor, or if Anakin had killed him himself, as he should have when he first discovered Palpatine's secret, conflict between him and Windu was inevitable. It was inherent in Windu's perception of Anakin, and Anakin's reaction to that perception. You can see the origin of Anakin's decision to intervene against Windu in the looks they exchanged in TPM.

[borgmatrix]

I'm sure Occam's Razor works here, however shocked some might find my invocation of it: I don't think GL tended to think things out very far beyond what he needed at the moment when he was in the flurry of creation, let alone the drudgery of writing, rewriting, shooting and cutting the darned films. Especially by the time he was making ROTJ.

Yeah, agreed.

A Luciferian expulsion is certainly an interesting line of speculation. The next question, then, would be, if you've been cast out of the Force Afterlife, what have you been cast out into? I mean, are you out of the Force, out of the Galaxy--ever wonder why Obi-Wan limited the Force to binding only the galaxy, presumably their galaxy, together, and didn't say something more general, maybe saying "worlds" or "the universe"? Is it limited to that one galaxy? Would a Jedi in our neighborhood be simply a guy with a really powerful flashlight?--or into oblivion?

Hadn't thought things through when I posted that, in terms of whether one could be cast out of the Force. I was thinking more along the lines of still having freedom of choice, and therefore still being able to do evil even if one with the Force. If that were to happen, maybe one would be cast from the Light Side of the Force into the Dark Side? Of course, that would suggest two Forces. :confused:

I didn't remember Obi-wan saying "galaxy", but I think my assumption has been he meant universe.

The tomb Kun entered was Freedon Nadd's; he was allied in some fashion with Ulic Qel-Dromma, but I'm fuzzy on the details--which I shouldn't be, since I looked into this stuff not so long ago when I was writing "Ascent" and "Descent."

Oh, I think I'm remembering now. Ulic and other Jedi had defeated Freedon Nadd, right?. Then, Exar became interested in learning more about the Dark Side/Sith and went poking around wherever Nadd was buried.

No, it wouldn't negate villainy. But, in the original trilogy, especially in ANH, Vader's villainy derives mainly from his placement in opposition to the Rebellion, who wear the Good Guy label. Removed from that context, his actions would appear different, because they were not inherently evil.

True. Though watching him constantly choke out his own people would suggest the bad guy label even if we hadn't been told so.

Indeed. Indeed. Of course, you could write a fan fic about it, and explore it that way.

Huh. There's an idea.

The way I see it, even if Anakin had allowed Windu to kill the Chancellor, or if Anakin had killed him himself, as he should have when he first discovered Palpatine's secret, conflict between him and Windu was inevitable. It was inherent in Windu's perception of Anakin, and Anakin's reaction to that perception. You can see the origin of Anakin's decision to intervene against Windu in the looks they exchanged in TPM.

I don't know. I tend to believe Mace's trust would have been won by Anakin uncovering the truth about Palpatine and making the right decision to stand against him. Any looks they exchanged in TPM were long forgotten by Anakin in the Chancellor's office as he saw his wife's life flashing before his eyes. That was blinding him entirely to making the right decision.

[Tovor]

Interesting. A Star Wars remake of Seven Samurai? But is it the real deal, of fanboy rumors?

http://geektyrant.com/news/2013/1/14...lucasfilm.html

[Talcy]

Nope. It's got more in common with The Hidden Fortress.

[Master Magnus]

Nope. It's got more in common with The Hidden Fortress.

Yes, the first Star Wars movie has, but the rumour is about a stand-alone movie based on Seven Samurai.

[Talcy]

Ah! Stick. Wrong end. Numpty.

I'm sure I heard this before - someone mentioned it as a potential Yoda movie (wrongly connected to Zack Snyder). Lucas did style much of Yoda during Revenge of the Sith on the central Samurai from Seven Samurai, espcially where he rubs his head when concerned or bothered by something.

[Talcy]

Yup, this is where I heard the rumour before. Not sure how much truth there is to it - could be true for all we know but I think it was formally denied by Snyder & LFL.

Slash Film - First Stand Alone Film Will Centre on Yoda.