ok, I just joined and I haven't had that much time to look around so I'm sorry if you may have discussed this in the past. In case you haven't, I figured for my first topic I would talk about the most disturbing part of Star Wars for me.
Luke and Leia kissing!!! If it's true that George Lucas knew they were going to wind up being siblings when he wrote it, well, then I am just grossed out by the thought of it. It still bugs me!!!
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
What, you got sompin' 'gainst incest?
Posted by Da_bang80 (Member # 528) on :
I don't think Lucas intended for them to be brother and sister when he wrote ANH. From poking around real quick there seems to me that he didn't write them in as twins until ROTJ, I also read that the original idea was that Luke's sister wasn't Leia but new character that would be introduced in ROTJ.
I found the following on this forum. Interesting if true.
quote: They romantically kissed. Once. The other times they were pecks on the cheek or face that are the same as siblings share. So nothing they really did could be considered "incest."
But the bigger part of it, really, was that Lucas didn't decide to make them twins until ROTJ. I've heard (and don't take this verbatim, it's been awhile) that the original plot of ESB had Luke turning to the dark side, and his sister would be introduced in movie 3 to help bring him back. Hence why having a love triangles with Han/Leia/Luke wasn't a big deal until he reworked the idea.
I personally like the way he did it. Much better than trying to introduce a pivotal character in the last movie and reworking a plot around it. Luke and Leia's chemistry was more friendship/sibling anyway, so it came to head when it turned out they really were sister and brother. (No, really, watch ROTJ sometime and compare how they interact then to the other movies. Lucas did a great job of directing their mannerisms to mirror each others.)
It had to be a beautiful moment for Lucas, to realize that his created characters worked right into his hands. If nothing else, he sure had a good laugh at his fans' expense
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Carrie Fisher was doing an NPR interview (while pushing her current book, of course) and she said that the "slave girl" cstume left noting to the imagination and kept...sliding in places. She said that Jeremy Brett (Boba Fett before Lucas robbed him of the role) got quite a show as they did multiple takes.
Posted by Mars Needs Women (Member # 1505) on :
I seem to recall a similar problem with her A New Hope outfit, but in that case it was a much more conservative look.
Posted by Williamlk (Member # 2236) on :
Did you hear her father died! Not Darth Vader, Eddie Fischer.
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: Carrie Fisher was doing an NPR interview (while pushing her current book, of course) and she said that the "slave girl" cstume left noting to the imagination and kept...sliding in places. She said that Jeremy Brett (Boba Fett before Lucas robbed him of the role) got quite a show as they did multiple takes.
Awesome as Brett would have been.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Yeah you're right- I get those two confused all the time. Jeremy Brett would have made a great Palpaltine, IMHO.
quote:Originally posted by Williamlk: Did you hear her father died! Not Darth Vader, Eddie Fischer.
Someone Photoshop Eddie Fischer as a force-ghost.
Maybe next to the ghost of Lucas' integrity- he's announced that the trilogy will be re-mastered for 3-D and re-released into theatres. ..and this time Alderran fires first!
Posted by Williamlk (Member # 2236) on :
I like that idea! He could call it Alderran Strikes Back!
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
Luke and Leia kissing never bothered me at all. It's not like they *knew* they were siblings at the time. Nor is it like she was ever really even hitting on Luke. In ANH, she was in-a-hurry-Senator girl and wasn't exactly interested in love. In ESB, when she kissed Luke, she was just trying to make Han mad. I gots no problem. The prequel trilogy in its entirety offends me morally to a much greater degree.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Hey, the whole point to the series seems to be that no matter what you do, no matter how many millions you murder- even killing children personally- you'll still enjoy the same happy afterlife as Yoda.... As long as you kill someone even worse than you are.
Also, slavery is okay with the Jedi- particularly that of droids, but backwater white trash children are good too...
But most of all, the Jedi ability to predict the future is slightly worse than a magic 8-Ball. Q: "Who is Darth Sideous?" A: "Image cloudy: Ask again later"
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
I'm not sure I would say it's ok with them. I got the impression, though, that they realized it's an issue that it would be pointless to get involved with. How are the Jedi going to end slavery throughout the galaxy? On Tatooine, Qui-Gon was there to protect the queen. Trying to free the slaves there would've put his mission in danger.
Wait a minute... did you just get me to defend the logic of Episode 1... I feel dirty.
Posted by MinutiaeMan (Member # 444) on :
I think the biggest lesson from all the prequels was that the Jedi were a bunch of self-absorbed pricks and that they needed to be wiped out almost to the last man in order to learn some humility. Consider how full of themselves Yoda and Mace Windu were in the various council scenes, and contrast to Yoda's more sensible spiritualism in "Empire".
But yeah, Jason's analysis is good too; "as long as you kill someone even worse than you are"... heh.
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
I think that element to the story in itself is fine. So the good guys aren't as awesome as they think they are. It's just that the prequels are so badly laid out... I'm not even sure that's the story he was trying to tell.
Posted by Pensive's Wetness (Member # 1203) on :
isnt that what's The cartoon series('s) was about? filling in gaps of Lucasfilm's pocketbook?
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
quote:Originally posted by Minutiaeman: I think the biggest lesson from all the prequels was that the Jedi were a bunch of self-absorbed pricks and that they needed to be wiped out almost to the last man in order to learn some humility. Consider how full of themselves Yoda and Mace Windu were in the various council scenes, and contrast to Yoda's more sensible spiritualism in "Empire".
quote:Originally posted by Aban Rune: I'm not even sure that's the story he was trying to tell.
I'm almost positive that wasn't what Lucas was trying to convey. But Minutiaeman's right; that's how it came across. I really hated Mace Windu's self-righteous attitude, and when Palpatine killed him I almost felt he deserved it for being so stupid.
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
My point is, the story of how the noble, honorable Jedi that we all thought we knew from the original trilogy also had some major character flaws and sort of brought alot of things on themselves isn't a bad story to tell. Especially against the backdrop of everything else going on. Why couldn't Lucas have told that story? Instead of the story of how Anakin awkwardly whined his way into Padme's pants? Or the story of how C3PO's head got switched with a Battle Droid?