Well, for that show, sure, but you can still have those moments. if they did a second Obi-Wan show, stuff like that could be worked in. I know some really have Skywalker fatigue, but none of the alternatives to Obi-Wan discussing Leia's real parents with her is nearly as impactful for me, personally.
Oh for sure. Like I said - it can be impactful and well-written and still be totally the wrong thing to exist. It doesn't fit. It makes no sense. And it really doesn't jive with the OT unless we assume Leia was hit by a Men In Black flashy thing as she walked back into the palace of Aldaraan at the end of the show.
I hate everything about him being in that show.
But honestly, I'm READY for a great Boba Fett show to come along and be at least a few of the things I want for the character.
I genuinely feel like the only way to make a good Boba Fett show is to recast the actor and do pre-ESB Boba. I genuinely don't think they have any idea where to take 'Jabba Fett' and I don't actually think it's necessarily even a good idea to try.
And as far as "watching this thing changes how you feel about the other thing", is Empire Strikes Back ruined by Leia being his sister? I mean, come on, two serious liplocks in that movie. AND, on top of that, when doing interviews for (I think it was) Attack of the Clones, he was talking about how, in Star Wars anyway, kissing is as serious as sleeping together. So that's why Anakin and Padme.... but wait, George, seriously? Have you watched Empire lately? Big goddamned yikes. (I have googled for twenty minutes to find it but cannot. One of these days damnit, but I read it over 20 years ago so maybe my memory has even embellished.)
I don't take things George says seriously. The narrative in the story is what matters. George's weird sexual hangups don't matter to me. It actually never bothered me much that they kissed for a lot of reasons (not like 'I'm okay with incest' reasons or anything like that). That being said, it's also not a contradiction just because it's weird. Even the 'from a certain point of view' thing was a copout but still effective -enough- to explain it away. He lied. Great. It doesn't necessarily have to be a good explanation to be an acceptable one.
But if ESB had come out and the Death Star was just floating around still functional and they went 'turned out it didn't blow up after all!' - then yeah, that would have ruined that film and ROTJ by proxy, by literally ignoring actual events we witnessed in ANH.
I also think we will tend to give the OT a break for two reasons; 1) Nostalgia, and 2) We understand now that it wasn't written all at once and that George and Co. were writing on the fly to create the stories. Given how it all came together, it's understandable that it wasn't all perfectly planned out. But there's NO reason why new media 40 years after the OT came out should conflict with the OT. So when it does do so, it stands out way, way more as just oblivious stupidity and a lack of respect for the material, which makes it far harder to just 'get over.' As it were.
Maybe my point would be clearer if instead of "personal canon" its more "related IP I care about vs the related IP I don't care if I see again"
That definitely makes a lot more sense to me. For me, 'personal canon' implies you're actively pretending part of the material doesn't exist and refusing to acknowledge anything it, rather than just something you don't want to watch again but recognize technically happened.
Regarding the droids slavery thing- it's a tricky line. Because you have some folks that clearly use droids as slaves (and other living beings as slaves) like Jabba, but then you have people like Luke or Ezra or Cal who treat droids well
That doesn't seem tricky. That seems like 'some people are bad to their slaves and some people are nice to their slaves.'
I wonder if Lucas was going more for a Frodo/Sam thing with Luke and 3PO, since (in the books) Sam does call him master, but isn't a slave. It was more of a British officer kinda thing.
'Master' is actually, sort've, an old world version of 'Mister.' You might address a guy as 'Master Blacksmith' or 'Master Innkeeper.' It's a term of respect for someone that is essentially NOT landed gentry and does not have authority to use any legitimate title - again, the same way we use 'Mister' or 'Sir' today.
That being said... it still reads very wrong coming from a literal slave.
I may have been giving Lucas waaaaaaaay too much credit, though, especially given how he doubled and tripled down on ethic stereotypes for aliens in TPM. The Nemoidians? Oof. Watto? Yikes on bikes.
Yeah, I think the real problem is George himself has some serious latent racist beliefs.
"I'm going to buy your child because he's special but leave you to die on this desert shithole planet," for example. I love these movies but there's something in every film that makes you wonder, like, who did the Ewoks eat so Leia could have that dress?)
I think that's my problem with Star Wars. I'm exactly the kind of person that immediately pinpoints and then dwells on shit like this.
lso, the animatic sequence was very interesting with the cameras recording the whole thing and beaming the fight out to the galaxy, all proving Palpatine's POV - the Jedi are trying to kill him.
And then less than 20 years later people think Jedi were just a myth? It still doesn't make any sense.
what is Wuher supposed to serve them?
Oil? Haven't we established in Star Wars that droids will drink oil and shit? There's like a whole droid bar.
One of my biggest gripes about the PT: pretty much all the “heroes” are totally unlikeable.
Hard agree with al of this. Everyone in the PT is just a fucking dickhead. Going way back, many pages, to my complaint about how Anakin only becomes Vader because everyone in his life is committed to turning him into an evil psycho by being just the worst pieces of shit in his life at every possible turn.
I disagree about Obi-Wan, he starts out condescending in TPM, but seems like a real person with a clear sense of right and wrong by the start of AotC. I found rooting for him and Padme to be very easily.
I think AotC and RotS Obi-Wan still read as arrogant and short-sighted to a fault. TPM Ben was just a different kind of arrogant and short-sighted - because it was less earned, less deserved, and he was standing next to basically the only Jedi in the entire franchise that wasn't one of the worst people alive.
Seeing that Yoda was totally outnumbered, being played, and had to retreat would have made a lot more sense than what we got. Something that happened a few times in the Star Wars editing/filming process is they cut out some small yet needed sequence that I think would have added some emotional depth. Like how exactly Padme was Queen - she was elected as a child, and there was a scene with her parents I think filmed for TPM, that would have made clear she was a normal kid, not "royalty" from some lineage. That thread I think would have helped in AotC to support why she and Anakin could have a connection due to being thrust into an "adult" role as kids. If nothing else it would have meant we didn't first see her parents during her funeral. In the TPM novelization Anakin helps/saves a Tusken Raider - it goes a long way to show him as being a good person at the start with a pure heart, but also helps explain his betrayal and subsequent anger at the Tusken Raiders kidnapping his Mom (and the Jedi not letting him go to deal with that). Even in The Last Jedi they inexplicably cut the 45 seconds of Luke needing to be alone when he hears about Han's death.
This is the problem with Capitalism. Artists can't just make art. There's got to be a businessman who doesn't understand art at all that gets final say. So we end up with SO many movies and TV shows having cut content that explain really important elements of the story.
I remember when the studio wouldn't allow Ridley Scott to release his version of Kingdom of Heaven. The film bombed and got pretty terrible reviews for a truncated story with a lot of 'oh how convenient' moments. But when Ridley finally released his extended cut, all of a sudden it was getting really good reviews and almost all of the complaints people had were actually answered in the film by small pieces of dialogue and exposition.
Studio execs ruin movies. Period. They WANT movies to just run between the flashiest scenes because that's all studio execs are wired to understand. Because they, themselves, have no fucking depth, media literacy, or souls.
It's on D+ and it shows the two being separated in a way where Yoda CAN'T get back to him and I was struck - why the hell is this not in the movie? Also, the animatic sequence was very interesting with the cameras recording the whole thing and beaming the fight out to the galaxy, all proving Palpatine's POV - the Jedi are trying to kill him. And then Yoda realizes just how much he's getting played. It also lends to him going into hiding - the bounty on his little head would be astronomical for his attempted assassination and everyone would know his face, which renders him useless to any future fight.
)