Badmovies.org Forum

I'm a Star Wars fan, but not overly so, and I'm sure the fanatics will be able to help me out.

Correct me if my recollection is wrong, as I tend to remember A New Hope from the perspective of my 10-year-old mind when it came out and I saw it before it was altered.

In the original Star Wars film, A New Hope, I don't remember The Emperor ever coming up in dialogue. I could be wrong though.

But that's not the main thing I'm asking. It almost seemed to me like Darth Vader was subservient to Grand Moff Tarkin, almost as if Vader was a dark and powerful watchdog on a leash. That was always the vibe I got from the original film. Then, as the franchise developed, Vader was more of the top dog, with the exception of The Emperor. The Vader of The Empire Strikes Back and forward would never have taken orders from Tarkin.

It's things like this that lead me to doubt the notion I've heard many times that George Lucas had a grand developed storyline all the way back when he was making Star Wars. I have no problem believing that he had some basic premises established, but I get a little annoyed when I hear people rave about what a genius George Lucas was in that he had this whole thing planned out from the beginning. My recollection of the original version of the film does not bear that notion out. Don't get me wrong, I grew up with Star Wars and it will always hold a special place in my heart, but I just don't buy into the whole "Lucas is God" mindset.

George Lucas is smart... but not a genius I agree. Did you know he's still adding to Return of the Jedi?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Oe0hBAiqdQ&feature=related

I'm a big StarWars fan... but not a nerd like the ones you hear in that clip lol. :wink:

I actually believe there was reference of an emperor but I'm not sure where, although Darth Vader in Star Wars (1977) was consider a sorcerer.  :buggedout:

I do think George Lucas was a genius... although he has gotten very lazy after Empire Strikes Back. This is why I'm upset with the prequels... I know he could do better then that.

I think that tarkin was in charge of the deathstar project, which palpatine had a thing for but vader was lukewarm to. Palpatine gave the construction and operation of the deathstar to tarkin, vader was assigned to protect the deathstar by finding the stolen data. As such in matters of the deathstar vader was under tarkin even though vader was normally the emperor's right had man.

The emperor was mentioned in star wars as having just dissolved the senate. Maybe he was running things behind the scenes with the senate as a puppet, until the DS was ready and he was ready to openly come out and take power as a dictator, with fear of the deathstar to keep the local systems in line.

Remember the bit about the emperor has dissolved the senate, and how will we keep order without the bureaucracy, and that governors now had direct control (Under palpatine, of course) and that fear of the deathstar would keep the local systems in line.

That seems to make some sense to me.

The Emperor gets one mention.

Welcome to the "revisionist history" (as I heard one podcast call it) of George Lucas.  As Akira mentioned I think he does get one mention in the meeting where Vader chokes one of the officers.

I have so much trouble with plot points in the whole SW world.   I really think its Lucas saying in his mind "meh, people will buy it" or simply forgetting where the frig he was going at times plot wise.  A big one that bugs me is the whole dialog between Obi Wan and Luke.  At one point, I believe it was ROTJ Obi Wan makes mention of how he thought he could train Anakin better than Yoda.  It kind of made me think Obi Wan trained him in secret against Yoda's wishes.  Then we get Anakin training in the prequels with Obi Wan approved by Yoda and the council.  

Lucas is an idea man but has no absolutely no business executing his ideas.  He lacks the finess to pull anything off and the only time his material shines is when he is only slapping his name on it.  


Get that man the frig away from finished material!!!!  :hatred:

Oh and don't even get me started on the Han/Greedo thing of shooting first.  Han Solo was a scumbag went we first meet him in ANH, he shot first. 

Oh, I agree. Han was definately a scumbag, although scoundrel is the preferred term in SW. I see Han as someone who was not an evil guy, he just existed on his wits and short term gain. He's basically a pragmatic gunslinger who didn't know he had a soul until the right situation came along.

I appreciate the input. Like I said, I do love SW, but I've just never bought that Lucas had as much thought out from the beginning as some seem to give him credit for.

And the whole Grand Moff Tarkin being over Vader was more of a feel thing I got from the first film. To me, it seemed like Lucas rethought a few things once the success of ANH made him able to keep the storyline going.

I've long been in the camp that STAR WARS was made as a stand alone film.  The characters may have had some back story to flesh them out for the actors and such, but no way do I buy that Lucas had this whole mess planned out before he started.

I personally think that when SW was made, there was no thought even to a sequel...much less two and then (years later) three prequels.

I would agree with this for the most part. Star Wars was made with a fairly small budget and a lot of innovative ideas for effects. Lucas likely had some of the sequel material in his head, though I doubt much of it was written in any publishable form. By the time Empire Strikes Back was in serious development, he had started to plan out the nine-movie series (that thankfully now will never happen). I was a major SW nerd back in those days of the original trilogy. I lost interest when the "extended universe" stories started coming out, and the prequels killed most of my love for the franchise. The original SW movie is the only one that is still watchable in my opinion. Whoever directed ESB didn't know how to direct actors (that movie shows Harrison Ford at his worst, acting-wise). RotJ improved the acting, but the Ewoks just don't work for me. I like the idea of primitives beating the Empire, but Ewoks? Really?

Thus endeth my Star Wars rant of the day.

I remember seeing Star Wars as a ten year old and asking my Dad afterwards "Why did it say Part 4 at the start?"  :question:

  I was a kid when Star Wars first came out and back then, before all this midichlorian business, I was under the impression that The Force was influenced by the user's will, kind of like Green Lantern's ring. I thought this because while entering Mos Eisley Obi-Wan tells Luke that the Force can contol the weak minded, or something to that effect(These are not the droids you're lokoking for). Tarkin seems pretty tough minded and I just thought that he was strong willed enough to resist any of Vader's Force based shenanigans. Plus anyone who rises to Imperial Governor is probably no slouch in the Evil or Ego department. 

And, because he's, you know...PETER CUSHING.  He takes crap from no one.   :teddyr:

Including Christopher Lee.

I don't disagree with you regarding your suggestion that who'd have thought there'd be a sequel...??  Let alone a franchise.  But, I will note that there is a TIME magazine story (probably in the wake of the second film) from that era describing the later films that weren't produced for a long long time. 

This is over thinking, but I wonder if it was generally knmwn that Vader was really known to be the "heir".  It seems that he was just known to be the Emperor's thug/troubleshooter/fixer. 
"So you are holding Vader's leash now" etc.
-Ed

I still have and watch my old VHS copies of the THX remastered versions that weren't befouled by Lucas' 90's and 00's freakout.  There are a couple things he added that are ok, but for the most part everything that was added makes the movies worse.

The novelization of Star Wars had a prologue which explained Palpatine's rise to power through the Senate to Emperor in barely over a page.  Guess that could have saved a lot grief to fans over Episodes 1-3...

Agree... the whole Greedo shooting first was insanely bad...

But the worst part was when Han actually walked around (and over) Jabba... Gee the scene gives too much power to Han (since he's stepping on the mob leader) and it doesnt convince us because Jabba in Return of the Jedi is quite large.

(http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20081217162725/starwars/images/2/2e/Jabba_the_Hutt_SoC.jpg)

If that doesn't convince you that Lucas didn't have everything planned out ahead of time, how about this.

(http://img841.imageshack.us/img841/6438/jabba20the20hut.jpg)
That yellow walrus looking guy is Jabba as he appeared in the original comicbook adaption long before the fat slug movie version showed up. 

They shot test footage of a human jobba... a fat guy in a fur coat:
(http://homepage.mac.com/merussell/iblog/B835531044/C757811845/E113752182/Media/HumanJabba.jpg)

They didn't intend to CGI over the fat guy when they shot that though, right?  I mean, there were no effects back then that would have been even mildly convincing for a shot like that.  They could have done stop motion or a guy in a fat slug suit, but either one of those would have been filmed directly, not added later with effects.

Lucas couldn't just leave a masterpiece alone.  He had to go and try to ruin it.  Wanna know why nobody has remade Citizen Kane or Casablanca, George?  It's because they're masterworks and only an egotistical idiot would try to improve on them.

Apparently (I have not read it, I'm getting this from wikipedia), in her book Icons: Intimate Portraits (http://www.amazon.com/Icons-Intimate-Portraits-Denise-Worrell/dp/0871133067/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1290192233&sr=8-1), Denise Worrell gives this 1983 (pre-prequel) quote from Lucas:



The wikipedia article goes on to say that no script exists that shows the full story (of even just the original trilogy) as Lucas has claimed.  The closest that can be confirmed is that he had an STAR WARS script that had the asteroid field of ESB and the forest battle of ROTJ...but NONE of the other story elements of either (ie, Vader being Luke's father, etc, etc).

Early drafts of the original script had Luke's father still alive and training his son; the dead father element came rather late and it seems there is no documented proof (in the form of script drafts or production notes) that Vader = Father or Leia = Sister, etc.

It sure seems to me that all of that came later and was weak exploitation of the success of STAR WARS.  Rather than creating a NEW story, Lucas cashed in on his earlier success by tacking on a bunch of back story that is nonsensical within the universe defined solely by Ep. IV.

It's a shame, really.  But, it was his property to do with as he pleased.  Too bad one of the most ground breaking movies ever made was diluted like that, though.

And if the emperor tells Vader to let Tarkin run the show, he's going to obey. Mind you, if Tarkin seriously screwed up (without getting blown up), Vader would no doubt have removed him from command. Vader was kind of a big-picture guy throughout the first three movies, doing his own thing and letting the military commanders take care of business, unless they messed up.

But I don't think Vader was necessarily envisioned as the emperor's right-hand man from the start. In A New Hope, he was clearly a henchman. Maybe the most ruthless, intelligent and powerful thug at the emperor's disposal, but still a thug. I got the impression that Vader was always taking someone's orders, hence Princess Leia's little dig about Tarkin "holding Vader's leash." He was widely feared, but only as the disfigured psychopath who gets called in for the really tough jobs. He was like the primary henchman in a James Bond movie - working for the villain, but more formidable than his boss and more autonomous than the other henchmen. While having no official rank, it's clear he's above generals and admirals from the beginning, but taking orders from the regional governor, which is apparently what a Grand Moff is.

And although Vader moved even farther up the ladder, he never quite becomes the villain. The closest he gets is in The Empire Strikes Back, where the emperor makes an appearance, but Vader is running the whole show. Then the emperor fully assumes the role of villain. Vader was always a henchman.

I quite agree about The Force. When they started talking about midichlorians in the newer trilogy, I cool concept of The Force was ruined for me.

I never understood why the midichlorians were added. There was nothing in the prequels that would have made any less sense without them. All it accomplished was to ruin what was already a nice, neat idea that gave just the right amount of plausibility to fit magic into the story.