StarWars 1-3 fan theory about Jar Jar Binks

[DerAlex]

This makes the rounds for a few weeks now, but it was news to me.

Pretty much everybody conciders the SW prequels to be a failure in every aspect apart from financially. Certain facts remain true, such as the massively boring scenes in a childrens movie, Lucas being an awful director, overuse of CGI that didn't look amazing when it came out and certanly didn't age well and so on. (see Plinketts reviews again for a refresh of everything wrong with the prequels. I know it's certanly time for me ;)). On the other hand, Lucas was never a bad writer and story teller. Until the prequels, that is.

What if Jar Jar Binks was "The Phantom Menace"? What if Lucas changed ep2 and ep3 to "fix" the problem that nobody wants to see Jar Jar again, while compromising the whole 3-movie-story-ark? What if Lucas originally wanted to Keyser Soze the shit out of everybody?

Before you dismiss this idea outright, here is the post on reddit that started this rumor. It is well worth the read, as are the comments beneath it:

https://www.reddit.com/comments/3qvj6w/

And here it is in video form:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yy3q9f84EA

It's even kinda-sorta relevant to a reoccuring theme in this forum, namely creators changing the vision of their work because of community pressure (everybody hate hate HATED Jar Jar)

The whole theory closely parallels the mule from the foundation trilogy by Isaac Asimov. George Lucas took inspiration from that series in the past, so it would not be surprising that he would adapt that character to in the prequels.

There is soooo much more to this theory, the reddit thread linked above is full of additional thoughts and ideas supporting this theory, I highly suggest a read. I had a whole lot of fun reading it, and I dont even like Star Wars all that much. If Jar Jar was initially planned to be the "main evil" behind Palpatine, and he truly was influencing everyone in the film, not only does it make the first film more watchable, but it does seem to explain the rewrites, the filler characters (Dooku), and the ridiculousness of Jar Jar's ability to "luck" out in a universe where there is no "luck". This is one of the silliest, yet compelling, fan theories about Star Wars that exists.

Bonus:
According to the voice actor of Jar Jar, the working title/script title of ep2 was Jar Jar's great adventure

And... what if this is all still canon? Maybe the new Star Wars episodes by JJ Abrahams will suprise a lot of people D:

On the other hand... From George Lukas himself:
"Don’t tell anyone … but when ‘Star Wars’ first came out, I didn’t know where it was going either. The trick is to pretend you’ve planned the whole thing out in advance. Throw in some father issues and references to other stories — let’s call them homages — and you’ve got a series."

Fun theory nonetheless

[Gilberreke]

Pretty much everybody conciders the SW prequels to be a failure in every aspect apart from financially.

My favorite Star Wars movie is Phantom Menace. I liked Attack of the Clones. That third one (can't even remember the name) was a shitpile and is the only one I've only seen once.

That said, the Clone Wars TV series (the 2D one, not the 3D one obviously) by Genndy Tartakovsky is better than all the movies combined (I just love Tartakovsky so much).

So yes:

1. The Clone Wars
2. The Phantom Menace
3. Empire Strikes Back
4. Return of the Jedi
5. Attack of the Clones
6. A New Hope
7. Revenge of the Sith (had to look up that name :D)

[DerAlex]

to be fair, I said "pretty much everybody". Only a sith deals in absolutes :D

edit: I misread your message. More precisely, I confused "Clone Wars" with "Attack of the Clones" on your #1, so everything in this following spoiler is what I edited out since it is not as relevant... I still find that ranking somewhat strange, but sujective enjoyment can't be objectively analyzed.

Spoiler

Show

I'm still reading about the theory in the OP, and, funnily enough, coincidentally came accross a response that fits way to perfectly as to not steal it, since I agree with it in most parts:

--------------------------------

Attack of the Clones is actually one of my least favorite movies of all time, so I could not disagree more.

First of all, the vast majority of the film is spent with a split party, but unlike in "The Empire Strikes Back," the single character (Obi-Wan in this case) doesn't spend the movie making major character development or anything. Instead, Obi-Wan spends the entire movie like a damn procedural police show character chasing down clues. He accomplishes nothing, and if it weren't for the coincidental timing of Anakin and Padme's arrival, followed by the coincidental timing of the entire Republic Army, he would have been dead. His entire plotline is entirely unnecessary, and the only reason he needed to go do that is to 1: Show us that the Emperor has an army (Why is this necessary? I would have been plenty happy to believe a large galactic government has an army. Do we really need Sidious to create it?!) and 2: keep Obi-Wan away from Anakin and Padme which brings me to:

ANAKIN AND PADME. This has to be one of the worst romances in history. I don't care if your headcannon says that Anakin was force manipulating Padme the entire time or whatever. The romance that we, as an audience, are supposed to care about is treated more as an inevitability than as a developing romance. You don't have an Empire situation where Han and Leia have so much sexual tension that it manifests itself as a kind of animosity, you don't even have a standard romance where two characters circle around each other until you see the things that they see in each other. What you have is a cold, standoffish relationship that, if you do believe in the force manipulation theory, is really rapey, and if you DON'T believe in that makes no sense at all.

Even if that was handled better, we still didn't need ANY time on Naboo. Nothing that happens there is any more powerful or interesting than what's happening on Tatooine. A significantly better Episode II would be "Episode II: Return To Tatooine." It would be a story about Anakin and Obi-Wan trying to find Anakin's mother, and Anakin being destroyed by her eventual death. The extreme emotional state that puts him into would make him vulnerable and relatable, rather than the Anakin we saw in Episode II who was abrasive, awkward, and possibly abusive. Episode II denied us the tight, character-driven story that we got from Empire, and instead inundated us with pointless CGI which comes to a head in:

THE FINALE. I could probably write a whole book on why the finale of Episode II was one of the worst film finales in history. A good film will lead to it's finale in every way. The characters will have a lot hanging on the finale both in terms of physical stakes (money, political power, or even their lives), and also emotional stakes. We have none of that in Episode II. Even if it SEEMS like the characters' lives are in peril, they clearly are not. If there was any real tension, then Dooku completely alleviates that when, instead of killing any of the Jedi, he just walks away from his final fight with Yoda, Obi-Wan, and Anakin. That fight is just a clusterfuck of awful. the random Lightsaber wounds that cause people to fall to the ground seem like some not-fully-formed idea from the mind of a DnD GM who needed some characters to be out of the fight for some reason.

The fact that Yoda shows up all Deus-Ex-Machina to save them doesn't help either. And if Yoda is showing up, why didn't he bring ANY support? No clone troopers to help him arrest this "dangerous insurgent" no other Jedi? REALLY!? So much for a wise and powerful master. That image gets destroyed even more when he battles Dooku by jumping around like a friggin' insect buzzing around a cow's tail. Yoda should have never been in a lightsaber fight EVER. In the original trilogy we had no problem with Yoda and the Emperor being "caster" characters. They used the force like DnD wizards use magic. They didn't wield swords because their magic was way more powerful, so weapons were just unnecessary. Even though the two of them squared off in Episode 3 (in my least favorite sequence from that film), it wasn't as bad as Yoda jumping around at lightning speed like some 5 year old on meth.

All of this was backdropped by the least important battle in the Star Wars universe. Here's a bunch of disposable clones against a bunch of even more disposable droids. If the clones win then the Separatists need to find a new secret hideout, and if the droids win then... well nothing really happens AT ALL. The Republic still has a target planet, and their army is now significantly weaker. In fact, I'm pretty sure the clones win because they were (for some reason) the "good guys" but I honestly couldn't tell you how that battle turned out. Nobody of importance was hurt during the actual battle. Jango Fett died shortly before the battle began, but we couldn't possibly give a damn about him since he has NO CHARACTER. He just shows up and randomly decides to fight Obi-Wan. (By the way, if the Emperor was a smart man, why did he send the source of his supposedly secret clone army to kill Padme instead of sending some other bounty hunter?) The finale even laughs in the audience's face by having Padme fall out of a transport, only to be found, conveniently, by clone troopers all of 10 seconds later. Any time even the smallest bit of tension arises, it is immediately shot down.

Now I'll admit, Episode 3 wasn't a fantastic movie at all. It has a lot of plot holes, and the pacing drags in some areas, but the finale of that film actually mattered. Episode 3 ends with two friends being torn apart by political and ideological beliefs, as well as personal motivations. Anakin is fighting, in his mind, to save his wife and unborn children. He is, tragically, wrong. Obi-Wan is fighting to stop the monster he thinks he has created. We have an epic fight (which, granted, could have been a few minutes shorter) which is an external reflection of both of their internal conflicts. We actually have high stakes (assuming it wasn't a prequel) because either character could end up destroyed at the end. Ultimately, Vader's destruction makes sense in context. It was the logical conclusion of a story about one man being told his family is about to die. He was willing to do anything: denying his beliefs, his entire life's work, and even his one true friend, to save his family. The ultimate implications of this choice are so massive that they cause the original trilogy to happen.

If you were to just watch one Prequel movie before Episode IV, it would have to be Episode III. I think we can all agree that Episode I was both horrible and unnecessary. Episode 2, however, is equally as unnecessary, but drags on through not one, but 2 completely unnecessary main plot lines just to lead us to a pointless conclusion that doesn't even really get concluded until the beginning of Episode III.

--------------------------------

Full credit to generalzee on reddit

I'm not trying to be a dick, everybody has their own opinion about stuff. Still... why?

[Gilberreke]

As a reply to the spoiler:

Yes, if you are one of the many people that dislike the prequels, you can get away with just watching episode III I guess. I also agree that Attack of the Clones is a horrendous movie, its saving grace that places it above the like/dislike line is all of the fan service scenes, such as the Yoda battle scene, the Jedi arena fight and the land battle vehicles used by the clone warriors. This is why, even though the plot is so forgettable, I still placed it above A New Hope and Revenge of the Sith, because these movies are just far below the like line for me.

I just rewatched New Hope because I want to rewatch the original trilogy before watching the new one. At one point I seriously considered just turning it off, because I consider it to be nigh unwatchable. The prop design is horrible, the plot cliché, the characters completely uninteresting and the actors just generally terrible (I know there's debate whether this was their own fault, I certainly know Harrison Ford can act a lot better than New Hope Han Solo). Saving grace: Obi Wan Kenobi's character and actor were really cool, thus making it that more aggravating when that's the only character to die.

Revenge of the Sith I just have nothing good to say about. It's as bad as the other three prequels in all of the areas people discuss when they say it's bad, it just has no saving graces. No memorable scenes, bad cast, horrible setting, etc.

So why do I place Phantom Menace on top? That's a bit odd. Well, my favorite character and actor are child Anakin. I just like the innocence there and I think it was a brilliant way to introduce a new generation to Star Wars. I also enjoy the fighter scenes in Star Wars and I think the pod racing was the best representation of that throughout the movies. Next big reason is Quigon Jinn. Quigon and Obi Wan are obviously the best characters in all six movies and this is the only prequel to have Quigon. I rate Darth Maul higher than most of the Sith too, so that helps (Dooku could have been cool, but wasn't, Darth Vader is rubbish except for a few key scenes which do elevate him a lot, etc). In terms of scenery, Phantom Menace is probably the best movie of all 6, though I guess the best setting of all is Cloud City? Not sure, I'd be interested in other people's favorite setting. In Star Wars terms, Naboo is also the setting that's most well-rounded, with a beautiful city set, varied outdoor scenes (those plains where the droids fight their battle are awesome, color-wise) and the visually interesting Gungan city.
So yes, it's probably not the best movie for a lot of reasons, but the saving graces are so high, that it outranks the other movies by the virtue that none of the movies are actually good overall (Empire Strikes Back comes close of course).

Finally, why do I rank Clone Wars above the movies? Because it's good. It's actually in some of my "top 100" lists. I don't think the movies have anything that is top 100 in any category, this has several. So it's not bonkers awesome unless you're into Tartakovsky animation of course (why wouldn't you be? That's another debate), but it wins by virtue of George Lukas having touched the rest.

Example: look at the camera in this, the visual story it tells, without any dialogue, the way it uses what the Star Wars universe hands it, and makes it shine. It's like the guy from Samurai Jack took over from Lukas and made everything good. Wait. That's exactly what it is.

[devak]

I've seen the fan theory before and i don't really mind the idea, but i think it might be a bit too out-there. I think it would be cool to have a Darth Jar Jar but i think right now, fans need something to thoroughly ignore the prequels rather than a painful reminder of them

I don't really have a favorite when it comes to Star Wars movies (The original trilogy is better, but also quite aged) whereas the prequels are difficult to judge at all.

in my opinion:
Phantom menace is way, way too long (about 20 minutes of it has any relevance to anything)
Attack of the Clones has a really, really crappy Anakin that ruins everything.
Revenge of the Sith is ok, but the romance (or attempt at romance) is so terible that i find it hard to take the rest serious.

What i don't like about the originals is mostly that it's definitely dated. Although calling it's plot "cliche" is somewhat of a strange one considering it's so old and probably heavily contributed to making it cliche

[Gilberreke]

Although calling it's plot "cliche" is somewhat of a strange one considering it's so old and probably heavily contributed to making it cliche

I don't buy this. The plot was already cliche at the time it came out. It's not like Star Wars invented the older mentor, the siblings separated at birth, the rough hero with a heart of gold, the weak point, the evil establishment, etc... These were all established, corny and tired cliche tropes before the movies came out. In fact, a lot of positive reviews for the original trilogy compared the story to Greek myths, so the cliches it uses can be dated to a time before the Romans.

[devak]

I don't buy this.

Ever heard of the Monomyth?

Anyway, it's not really what i meant. Cliche's vary from time to time, depending on what is popular. Star Wars was unique since it mixed various elements that no other movie before really did. Many movies that followed more or less copied the formula, which is why the original trilogy may seem more cliche than it really was (at the time).

[Gilberreke]

Star Wars was unique since it mixed various elements that no other movie before really did.

I'll need some concrete examples, as I still don't really buy the argument. It's hard to discuss of course, since neither of us was an adult that can compare at the time it came out.

[DerAlex]

I've seen the fan theory before and i don't really mind the idea, but i think it might be a bit too out-there.

Most of the stuff in this theory can indeed be explained away by saying "plothole", or "it was done for the effect alone", but what it find pretty hard to explain away is Jar Jar mouthing stuff that other people are saying. That one I can't explain, maybe apart from saying the animation team made a doodoo, but it syncs up a little too well. And then, you already have a fire burning, and all the stuff on top of it is just more fuel.

-------

On another note, on the topic of rating the 6 episodes, I want to chime in here. I am by no means a big SW guy, not at all. In fact, by virtue of being both too old and too young, I didn't see the original trilogy at launch or even close to launch, and at the same time I wasn't in the target audience for the prequels when they came out, right between the "early teens PG" bracket and the "old enough and full of nostalgia" bracket. So I have no real emotional connection to them, which allows me, at least I feel like it does, to view them somewhat objectively, even thou I deliberatelly haven't seen them in the last 15+ years in protest of GL's let's change everything again and again-approach to "preserving" his legacy. (on a side note, I heard disney plans to release the original cuts, so there is always that to look forward to)

The original trilogy is god awful. The prequel trilogy even more so, but for completely different reasons. There I said it. I still like ep4-6, but I like them as somebody that loves movies as an art form and likes to analyze movies. A New Hope especially I would describe as only a few small steps above "Space Mutiny" as in fun to watch, but not a good movie (keep in mind my memory might be a little fuzzy after 15+ years, so take this with a grain of salt. It might very well be that I watched them in a puberty induced I-hate-everything-popular kind of mood, this is obviously highly subjective). The overarching storyline of the original trilogy is also pretty obviosly "made up on the spot", even more so with the prequels which are more or less retro-fitted into an overarching lore, at some points quite literally by changing the originals.

But what the originals have what the prequels do not have is a love for telling a story, a love and a respect for cinema, and seriously impressive special effects for the time. They are "fun". They tell the shit story in a heartwarming way, as wishy-washy as that sounds, and as unquantifiable as this is. Compared to the originals, the prequels felt very boring to me, very cold, very calculated. In ep4-6, the characters are exactly that, characters. In the prequels they are merely characteristics, sometimes even named like that. General Grievous? Seriously? What happened to Admiral Imabadguy, Captian Nefarious, and Colonel Bonetopick? On top of that, the prequels have what I call ChristopherNolanitis, in that emotions aren't acted, they are stated and explained by the characters, which is NOT the actors fault, but the fault of the director and the writer, which in this case is a double Lucas.

What it comes down to is this: For me it doesn't matter if A New Hope revolutionized storytelling, which it surely didn't, or if it used tired old cliches or if it created entirely new ones. I'd rather see a shit story told in an honest way, with muppets in a bar, and a gay golden robot, than to have a good story told at me, quite literally, by people sitting around, standing around, or walking around in front of a green screen (if the prequels have a good story is debatable as well, but for this point it is not relevant, it's about how good the story is told, not how good the story itself is). E4-6 are shot like a fairy tale, e1-3 are shot partly like a documentary or something on c-span, mixed with video game cutscenes. It's a mess, tonally, it doesn't blend well at all. Somewhere along the line, GL forgot how to movie. Or, like Red Letter Media says, he became "too big" to have people around him that criticize his ideas, tell him what doesn't work, and nudge him in a better direction. In my opinion, Star Wars ep4-6 have a warmth to them that I think would allow me to enjoy them right now, whereas the prequels just make me angry in a way that very few movies do ("Gravity" comes to mind. Or "Death Bed: The bed that eats").

[Gilberreke]

I can get behind pretty much everything you said in that last post. Like I explained, somehow the Phantom Menace did resonate more for me, but other than that, you're pretty spot on as far as my feelings go.

As for the Darth Jar Jar thing, oddly enough it seems plausible, though I'm not buying the handwaving. All of the mind tricks in other scenes have people specifically waving their hands with palms down, usually it a bit pointed. It's very recognizable and I don't see it in Jar Jar's movements. So if that was foreshadowing, I'm not buying it. If it was deliberately obtuse, sure, but I don't quite buy they'd go that far. It's certainly an enjoyable read, unlike 99% of the fan theories.

[devak]

I'd rather see a shit story told in an honest way, with muppets in a bar

It may not be common knowledge or anything, but the original star wars was made on a nearly non-existent budget. There was also pretty much no hope it would attract an audience, the executives didn't understand it. It only got played in many cinemas because it got shoved down their throat.

And then it was something nobody had really seen before (mostly in that it mixed elements in a new way) and it became huge.

[DerAlex]

It may not be common knowledge or anything, but the original star wars was made on a nearly non-existent budget. There was also pretty much no hope it would attract an audience, the executives didn't understand it

Very true. GL even waived (some of?) his salary in exchange for the rights to merchandise himself, in order to save money for the production. An offer the executives gladly accepted, which made GL infinity billion dollars.

[Rob]

I read this fanfic a while back after seeing a Cracked video discussing it, and I love it. It makes a lot of sense, and rumors from JarJar's voice actor that GL rewrote the following films after APM released makes it even more plausible.

I'm pretty easy going with most movies, so I enjoyed all the Star Wars movies. I don't get all rabid when a film doesn't go the way I imagined it. And I actually liked JarJar, his 'luck' and silly helplessness made me enjoy him as a character. After reading the fanfic and possible supporting evidence from cast in the movie, makes me sad for JarJar. He was left unfinished, all because rabid fans thought they knew what they wanted, which resulted in even worse films for the remainder of the trilogy, in the eyes of said rabid fans.

The hatred for JarJar and his 'luck' would have been instantly reversed when it was revealed he was the mastermind behind the Sith with subtle flashbacks showing him using the force in APM. When GL rewrote the following movies, it solidified what everyone believed was a terrible character. If he would have stayed the course, with his original plans, the prequels would have been more enjoyable.

Sure, maybe the second movie would have received less than stellar reviews (assuming JarJar's reveal wouldn't have been til the 3rd movie) but once the third movie came out, everyone would have rewatched both movies ad nauseam trying to find the hidden clues. But good luck convincing a studio to allow for a perceived flop just to resurrect the series with the last of the trilogy.

[Gilberreke]

So I've been thinking about viewing order yesterday. I'm writing this from the viewpoint of a fictional 17 year old that has somehow never heard of Star Wars and wants to get up to speed. I don't think it makes a lot of sense to make this viewer watch the original viewing order of 4/5/6/1/2/3, that's just not the most pleasant experience I think. You can't go 1/2/3/4/5/6 as that would completely ruin the big reveal of 5. So that leaves us with a viewing order of 4/5/2/3/6, but where do you put Phantom Menace? Since Phantom Menace still has a very innocent Anakin, I would put it before Empire Strikes back. The extra reveal of that sweet kid being Vader makes the plot of 5 even more shocking. I probably wouldn't watch Phantom Menace first, as it would be fun for the viewer to come to know Anakin right away as Luke's father I think. So I think the most fun viewing order is:

A New Hope
Phantom Menace
Empire Strikes Back
Attack of the Clones
Revenge of the Sith
Return of the Jedi

So, let's look at the new canon. Right now, The Clone Wars (the 2008 CGI version, not the 2003 version I love so much) is part of canon (and I think Rebels is too?), so what do we do if that 17 year old wants to watch it? I think it wouldn't be very fun to have someone watch Clone Wars in between 2 and 3 where it fits chronologically. With the above viewing order, that would mean you have to watch a whole lot of stuff between Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi, to the point that you hardly remember who Luke is before you watch Return of the Jedi. After the sequel trilogy will be over, this might be a possibility, as Return of the Jedi would mainly be the lead-in to the new movies, which would slowly refresh who the characters are. Right now though, for people wanting to watch The Clone Wars, I'd probably recommend complete chronological order. So, that would be 1/2/TCW/3/Rebels/4/5/6. I think you could also go with original viewing order of course.

I'm watching TCW now for the first time, and though I really don't like the animation, there's a lot of cool canon stuff in there. I think I'll watch it completely and then go on to Rebels.

[FlowerChild]

but where do you put Phantom Menace?

I'd vote for around 6 feet under, but maybe 8 would be best just to be sure :)

[devak]

I'd vote for around 6 feet under, but maybe 8 would be best just to be sure :)

sounds about right.

So I've been thinking about viewing order yesterday.

I'd say 4 5 2 3 6.

Skip 1. Like, entirely. A few months ago i rewatched all six movies, and everything in Phantom Menace is pretty much summed up in Attack of the Clones anyway. It also makes Padme/Anakin a thousand times less creepy, and it's still creepy.

The mortal sin of Phantom Menace is that about 20 minutes of it is actually relevant: Anakin is a slave from tatooine, becomes jedi. Trade Federation is amassing power, Palpatine is a politician out for power and the sith reappear. The movie wraps this in more than an hour of completely irrelevant and never-again mentioned story, including things like podracing and the fact that in a 31st century-ish galactic superpower slavery still exists. Oh and irrelevant trade law and politics.

Or that the entire prequel plot exists because the Jedi didn't do the obvious and remove the main source of fear from what may be the most important figure in a thousand years of history who has, without a doubt, the greatest potential Force power know, by buying his mom from his slaver. Or that Jedi fail at basic math because he's supposed to bring balance to a Force that's clearly outbalanced about 1000 to 2 by jedi.

I understand the whole "balance to the force" idea (Anakin first brought balance by killing the Jedi and then by killing the remaining sith. With just one Jedi left, it's about as close to neutral as it can be). I just think the situation makes little sense, even if the Jedi being arrogant and passive was intentional on Lucas' end.

As a closing thought, maybe it's better to have the order be 4-5-6 -2-3 if you want people to retain their desire to actually see the movies, because the prequels are painful. The oldies have the excuse of being old, the first, and made on a shoestring budget. The prequels have no excuses, really.

[Gilberreke]

You should really read the rest of the thread :p

Phantom Menace is my favorite movie out of the 6, so yeah, its order is important. Besides, who the hell would go through the trouble of watching a marathon of 6 mediocre movies and then skip one? That makes no sense :p

[jorgebonafe]

but where do you put Phantom Menace?

I'd vote for around 6 feet under, but maybe 8 would be best just to be sure :)

Two feet under is better. That way animals find the body, and it will be consumed faster.

[Gilberreke]

Help, I'm starting to feel like a special snowflake again. Someone get the spray.

[FlowerChild]

Help, I'm starting to feel like a special snowflake again. Someone get the spray.

Hehe...I'm pretty sure we're looking at something similar to the dinosaur thing we discussed awhile ago...but in reverse :)

In this case, episodes 4-6 are the movies of my youth, while 1-3 are the ones that pummeled that childhood dream, took a dump on it, and then asked for its phone number with the promise of future play dates. I remember being genuinely angry after watching episode I in the theater, all the more so because there was such a huge gap between Jedi & Phantom Menace which inevitably set expectations for it very high. There was already indication that Lucas was losing his edge in Jedi with the whole Ewok thing, and it was like that personal trend had continued for 15+ years while he wasn't making films and Episode I was what resulted from the public suddenly being exposed to years of his slow decline all at once.

My biggest hope for 7-9 are that they're somehow going to patch those memories back together because 1-3 largely ruined them for me and made the original trilogy look bad by explaining away a lot of what was cool about it (like replacing the mysticism of the force with microscopic pseudoscience bullshit) and refining the special effects to an extent that made the earlier films rather painful. In the process they also went back and played revisionist history with the original films fucking with them even further with stuff like that ugly-ass Jabba scene in episode IV and the nefarious "Han shot first" fiasco.

All in all, I really wish they had just let the first 3 stand as they were. Yes, they were cheesy 70s & 80s space opera, but for people my age, they were *the* cult movie phenomenon that pretty much every kid (and many adults) was into. You've got to remember that at the time, there was absolutely nothing like Star Wars and it occupied a rather special place in our hearts that goes slightly beyond what is rational as a result ;)

And yeah, if you absolutely must show episodes 1-3 to this theoretical youth, I'd axe both 1 & 3, not just 1 as was suggested above. You can't possibly show 3, and definitely not show it last due to Vader stumbling out of his restraints like a 1940's Frankenstein and saying "Noooooo!" in a manner that never fails to cause me to spew beverage out of my nose in laughter :)

Two feet under is better. That way animals find the body, and it will be consumed faster.

I think I'm more concerned with its unholy evil causing it to reanimate and come back stronger than ever before. Maybe we should just nuke the site from orbit...

[William the tuba]

On the subject of ruined childhood memories...

[FlowerChild]

On the subject of ruined childhood memories...

Lol! I knew it :)

I think there must be some interesting element to the story arc to Lucas' life that caused him to essentially get way lamer with age. I highly recommend watching THX 1138 if anyone here hasn't before as it's hard to believe that the guy behind it wound up also being responsible for Episode I:

Spoiler

Show

And here, have some related humor:

Spoiler

Show

[Gilberreke]

[FlowerChild]

higher ground

Worth looking up is a recent Mythbusters where they attempted to prove/disprove higher ground being a factor in lightsaber duels. Was a total geek-out and a real riot to watch :)

[Gilberreke]

Worth looking up is a recent Mythbusters where they attempted to prove/disprove higher ground being a factor in lightsaber duels. Was a total geek-out and a real riot to watch :)

I saw that :). I don't quite agree with the experiment as being conclusive, but it had some interesting parts to it.