Star Wars Obi-Wan Kenobi Standalone Movie Confirmed

I like the idea behind the Ewoks, a primitive army defeating a technologically advanced army, the primitive army using its knowledge of the terrain to its advantage. The Wookiees or the Rebels would have worked just fine in that regard. Isn't that what the Rebels were supposed to be, a ragtag army taking on the evil galactic Empire?

 

Well Endor was supposed to be Chewbacca's home planet of Kashyyyk, but Crazy Uncle George wanted to merchandise to a whole new generation of kids with the Bwoks, err Ewoks. (It had been 6 years since the OG movie premiered.). If it happens on Kashyyyk, then I'm OK with what happened. You got your a--es kicked by giant Sasquatches with bowcasters. I'm good with that. But Ewoks, please.

And yes, Rebels teaming with a planet of Wookiees, I'll take the Rebs/Wooks for +450.

You've heard the saying about bringing a knife to a gun fight -- the Ewoks brought rocks to a freakin' Laser fight. (Can't remember if the lasers were attach to Great White Sharks or not.)

 

Give them a break, the Stormtroopers can probably barely see anything out of those helmets! No wonder they kept missing...

It's common knowledge that Lucas wanted Wookies on Endor, but he thought that having already established Chewie as technologically adept that it didn't make sense, plus they couldn't find nearly enough seven-foot extras to play an entire village of Wookies... so he cut them in half, slightly altered the name, and voila... problem solved.

The only problem I have with the Ewoks is the cloying, cutesy sentimentality in some scenes regarding them - I know for a fact it wasn't director Richard Marquand's idea (and that little nugget came straight from Phil Tippet); in fact, no-one but George Lucas liked and/or wanted the Ewoks in the movie - had they been more feral and vicious little critters, it would have worked just fine... but I guess George wanted something cute to bring home to the kids.

I would dare say the Kashyyyk sequence in Episode III is what George had in mind all those years ago but simply couldn't nearly achieve for numerous reasons, both technological, practical, and financial... had that sequence been in Jedi, it would have been all kinds of awesome, I agree!

 

Just people that wanted it to be dark and brooding all the time. That was never what Star Wars was about. You will struggle to find better scenes in the Star Wars universe than: Jabba's Palace/Death of Jabba, Speeder Bike Chase, Final space battle and especially the Emperor's Throne Room.

It is only a lesser film when compared with the first two.

 

I agree that all of those scenes were good (especially the exceptional FX and choreography of the Death Star II battle), along with those between Luke and Vader. If you read one of my lesser responses, you'll see that I don't think the series should have remained as dark, or even have gone as narrarively dark and dismal as The Empire Strikes Back. But I would srgue that ESB is lighter, more whimsical, and even fairy-tale-esque, in many respects than the original. 'Jedi' wasn't quite the full return to Star Wars as it was in 1977, as 'Jedi' was sfar more child-oriented and sanitized than the original Star Wars film, which was starker, and comparatively more grounded in realism, with blood, cold-hearted murder (pre-special edition), implied torture abounding, and intricate political discussions, discrimination, and the deaths of several non-villain characters (including a beloved, kindly old man) also occuring.

Return of the Jedi is still a patchy, largely mediocre film, and has the weakest narrative of the three original films. Its entire 'B' story, after the parties (Luke and Leia, Han, et al.) split after Luke's surrender to Imperial authorities on Endor, is mediocre. Harrison Ford is visibly 'going through the motions' throughout most of the movie, and his portrayal of Han Solo as Leia's loyal companion and heroic 'do-gooder', is largely out of character. Carrie Fisher also gave her worst performance in the trilogy, but I attribute this more to a similarly questionably written trajectory for Leia, who became something of a sex object, temporary slave, then-nanny for small, cuddly bears, Han's inseparable, doting girlfriend, and then Luke's kindly sister. In fact, the one place Leia could have held her prior authority and voice was taken up by an entirely unneccesary new character (Mon Mothma). If Leia helped lead the first Death Star battle with the Alliance's leadership in Star Wars and directly conmanded the troops on Hoth in Empire, why couldn't she have been been the paramount leader of the Alliance in Jedi?

Continuing on about Leia, there was no need to have another familial twist in revealing Luke and Leia to be twins, which was simply an incredibly lazy (and unnecessary, as Leia had already clearly selected Han over Luke by the end of 'Empire' and Luke matured and became utterly preoccupied with being a Jedi Knight) means of resolving the love triangle between Han, Leia, and Luke. Ultimately, this only served to make the romantically charged scenes between Luke and Leia in the earlier two films (including the once iconic 'for luck' kiss/grappling hook scene in SW) incestuous and unsettling for fans and casual viewers alike for the next 35 years (and counting!).

Return of the Jedi also sowed the seeds for the more child-oriented narrative and aesthetic of the Prequels. The ewoks were a hitherto unseen effort in the series to draw in small children (and the contents of their parents' wallets). To add insult t injury, their design (small bipedal bears) was utterly unimaginative, when LFL had already developed dozens of groundbreaking, unique alien creature designs (including in 'Jedi' itself with the Twi'leks, Nien Nunb, Admiral Ackbar, etc.!). The silly, bizarre, and tasteless humour that would come to defame the saga from 1997-2011 also saw its first appearance here in Jabba's mocking little rat-monkey creature, Salacious B. Crumb. Jabba, despite becoming iconic and not quite descending to the revulsion of taste of the PT, was still more kid-friendly than many fans expected of the previously unseen, notorious intergalactic gangster who struck such fear into Han and commanded ferocious bounty hunters in the preceding films. Although my opinion here has often proven to be controversial, Emperor Palpatine is a pantomime 'dark wizard'-style villain, an elderly, pale man in a black robe, complete with cackling and lightning bolts that can emanate from his fingers. Even though Ian McDiarmid was not without his moments in this role, his lack of subtlety and inarguable 'pure eeeeeviiiiiiil' nature were all a far-cry from the regal and mysterious air Clive Revil gave to the character in his first, brief appearance in the pre-2004 releases of ESB. Compare this to the significantly more nuanced, mature, and subtle Imperial villains of the preceding films (e.g., Peter Cushing's Tarkin, the Imperial moffs aboard the Death Star, Veers, et al.) and it's clear that Lucas was intentionally pandering more overtly to children with his 'updated' Emperor.

Let's also delve into the laziness. Recycling the Death Star as a major plot point was utterly unimaginative and unnecessary. Originally, Lucas planned for Darth Vader to take Luke to the dark and austere industrial capitol planet of the Empire (then named Had Abaddon), where the Emperor's throne was located. Two small death stars, still in construction, were present to defend the planet and so forth. Due to budget constraints, this wasn't brought to the screen, but couldn't the Emperor's throne have simply been an extra-gigantic Imperial vessel of some variety, stated to be something along the lines of a moving city and superweapon in itself? Perhaps the Death Star itself could have been this vessel, or just an all together different mechanical power? Darth Vader, a villain so iconic that his very name became almost instantly synonymous with evil beginning in 1977, is redeemed - and entirely so at that - just by the horrific sight of his son getting nearly electrocuted to death? Wouldn't a more nuanced and partial 'turn' have been appropriate for the character, while still serving to effect his intervention against Vader and brief affection toward Luke? Couldn't *some* effort have been placed into making Endor appear a bit more alien and unique, and less like the Redwood Forest? Lazy, Lazy, Lazy.

There are also problematic, albeit more minor, oversights too, which demonstrate the minimal thought that was put into the making of the film by Lucas, Marquand, Kurtz, and co. Obi-Wan's spirit, which is undeniably immaterial and mystic when it appears in ESB, non-chalantly sits on a log when he 'has some 'splainin to do' to Luke. Boba Fett, although a non-critical character (to say the least), had nonetheless become a fan-favourite, precisely for being intimidating. Boba Fett is inexplicably just hanging around Jabba's Palace, and is anticlimactically subdued, with ease, by Luke. Additionally, why is the unmasked Vader/Anakin so kindly looking? When the back of his exposed head was revealed in ESB, it was bulbous, veinous, sickeningly coloured, and generally indicative of radiation or mutation. Furthermore, why is Anakin's spirit (in the original theatrical version) look just about as old as Obi-Wan? Was Lucas, at this point, implying that he was in his '40s or '50s when he fathered Luke, and in his '60s or '70s as Vader by the time of the original movies? How can diminutive, and poorly mobile, bear-creatures, armed only with spears and stones, defeat an elite Imperial garrison?

Additionally, I would say that 'Jedi' has the weakest soundtrack of any of the three original films, although John Williams still composed a wonderful score. It's cinematography and directing, more pressingly, are largely amateurish (save for the battle, lightsaber, and other general FX sequences) and at odds with the majestic scope and style of SW and ESB.

To end this lengthy post, I'll make one last point: 'Jedi' is, in my opinion, the most dated and 'of its time' film in the Original Trilogy. From the sprinkling of disco with Lapti Nek (original theatrical version), the 'safer' and more lighter general tone and aesthetic from any preceding film, the more pantomime villain, clear-cut victory and redemption, ROTJ screams 1983. If only it had a 'music video' sequence, it would fit the '80s Hollywood formula to a tee. The original Star Wars undoubtedly exudes the mid-'70s, but it broke ground on all counts, providing something entirely (at least visually and sonically) unexperienced up until that point, and which still stands, forty years later, as a timeless masterwork in Western mainstream cinema. The Empire Strikes Back is perhaps even less evocative of 1980 than the original was for '77, with Irvin Kershner's brilliant, other-worldly directing and the immaculate sets, character designs, cinematography, staging, et al.

I don't subscribe to the notion of some Star Wars purists or cinephiles that Return of the Jedi is in anyway an 'atrocious film' or entirely 'crap' or 'worthless' from beginning to end. I loved the movie dearly, and still do, largely, warts-and-all. Empirically, however, it was the weakest of the indelible Original Trilogy, and, to quite some degree, marked the end of the initial, awe-inspiring, classic, groundbreaking era of the Star Wars saga, while demonstrating rough elements of its next two decades as an unadulterated, excessively effects-laden, repugnant, affront to the tastes, and its lazy, entirely uninspired, and overly commercialised rehash of its former self that it is in the present.

 

The Leia is Luke's sister angle wasn't so much about tying up the love triangle as it was about resolving Ben and Yoda's brief exchange in Empire:

Ben: "That boy was our last hope."
Yoda: "No, there is another."

It's been said that this brief exchange was included to give the audience the sense that there was another "hope" who could take Luke's place should Luke perish, thus adding a bit more tension to the film. They had to account for this brief exchange in Jedi, and Lucas came up with the Leia is Luke's sister angle. I agree that it wasn't a good decision.

I've argued that the other "hope" should have been revealed as Anakin, and I believe it would have been a perfect remedy to the other "hope" exchange. Anakin returns from the dark side, destroys the Emperor and brings balance to the Force.

 

I remember reading something (an interview with Gary Kurtz?) that said that the original plan was that the line would indeed refer to a sister, but that Luke's story would continue for three more films. He would face Vader in VI, and the Emperor in IX. In VII-IX Luke would be searching for his sister. This never panned out because Lucas was so burnt out that he decided to just end it with VI.

 

That sir, is a great post. It seriously should be put on a blog somewhere. I don't agree with much of it, but it is the best treatment of this position I have read.

Points I do agree with:

1. There should not have been a 2nd Death Star. I know it really wasn't supposed to be in Star Wars, but after that horse was out of the barn, they should have invented something else. The only thing that saves it, is the Emperor using it as a trap.

2. Ewoks: We all long for Wookies. And I wish he had pulled that off. And I agree with you, that they could have come up with far better and more interesting designs. It was this decision alone that made Jedi a "kid movie" (it certainly wasn't Leia in a gold bikini!). But, that said, I loved them as a kid. And kids today still love them.

I never had a problem believing they could defeat a garrison of storm troopers. Conquerors rely on indigenous populations not rising up against them. The sheer numbers would defeat technology. If the middle Americans would have united, the Spaniards would have been easily dispatched for instance (even with smallpox ravaging them). So you have a united indigenous population on their home terrain. They are aided by a Jedi Knight, and skilled rebels led by Han and Leia. It is not that hard to believe.

A few points I disagree with:

1.. Redwood Forest: Lucas said he wanted to show different environments in the films. He had done sand, ice, clouds, space, mechanized, etc. So he felt a forest environment with green tones was about all that was left to him. So I don't find it very lazy.

2. The Emperor: He is simply fantastic, and widely regarded as so. Lucas has a knack for creating memorable villains. He managed to give us someone more evil than Vader, which is an accomplishment. It made Vader's turn that much more plausible.

3. Vader's turn: Luke said he sensed good in him. Vader was conflicted. Luke then turned himself in to wage psychological warfare on Vader, and Vader himself commented how powerful Luke was. Finally, the Emperor tells Luke to kill Vader which would push him further, and then trying to kill his son was the final straw. I love this plot line, and thought it played out perfectly.

4. Luke and Leia twins: This really ties us some plot points. It leaves no animosity between Luke and Han over Leia's affections, and it covers Yoda's "There is another" line.

5. Jabba: I find him perfect. He is absolutely disgusting (mouth licking shot with Leia), he kills indiscriminately (feeds the dancing girl to the Rancor for no reason), he is powerful (cannot be swayed by a Jedi mind trick), and he is smart (he suspected the plot to free Han and was waiting for Leia).

 

I never could figure how he got so much done with alligator arms.

 

This was the thing that bugged me about Lucas. As kids in the 70s and early 80s we all knew of his plan to do 3 trilogies. But then he got burned out and finished it all with VI. Then whenever the question was raised if we would see the last trilogy he claimed there never were plans to do one. Instead of saying he got burned out he tried to alter history and say it was never in the cards. Sorry George we didn't imagine it.

 

And it gave us probably the best action sequence of the entire trilogy - the Speeder-bike chase - that thing still wows three decades later!

Jedi is an imperfect film (for reasons I discussed earlier), that much is obvious, and always had/has an overall feeling to me of 'let's get this thing finished and over with'... but it's still highly entertaining, has a genuine emotional heft to it, and was a good way to end the saga. Sequels are hard to pull off successfully, threequels are even tougher... and when you consider the very limited technology they had to work with back then, compared to even a few years later, their job in topping what came before in terms of action and spectacle was that much more challenging.

And it wasn't just Lucas who came up with the story; it was himself, director Richard Marquand, screenwriter Lawrence Kasdan, and producer Howard Kazanjian who all sat in a room together for two whole weeks hammering out the plot... it was still mostly a collaborative effort.

I dig Jedi, despite it's flaws... to me, it's where the SW story ends.

 

Yes, I read that as well. But due to the fact that Lucas decided to end it after Jedi, he passed the sister role on to Leia, a weird decision in light of what happened between Luke and Leia in Empire.

 

I think he said he didn't recall owning any droids. And if R2 and C3PO were as common models as a Ford Focus, that inconsistency could be forgiven. Now as to neither of the Droids recognizing Obi Wan, then you'd have to assume it was their memories that were wiped.

 

I love Star Wars movies, but if they keep this up they will definitely run this thing into the ground. I know everyone has their own favorite Star Wars character, but come on, enough is enough.

It sort of reminds me of what happened to the Star Trek franchise. ST:TNG was great, so they did Deep Space 9 and Voyager, which oversaturated things to the point where, when they got to the "Enterprise" series and Star Trek: Nemesis, they were running on fumes and fans were disinterested.

Like the old saying goes: How can I miss you if you never go away?

 

My favorite Star Wars alien is the Hammerhead from the Mos Eisley cantina. The way things are going it sounds like if I just wait long enough, they'll be doing a movie about him, too. Right after the R5-D4 movie - the red droid that Luke almost bought from the jawas...

 

If you like Hammerhead.......

 

So what you're saying is that George finally made an '80s-authentic version of the movie in 1997 or so?

I do love the theory that 3PO was definitely wiped, as suggested by the end of Revenge Of The Sith, but R2 never was.

 

Yes, one announced film and one planned movie about main characters from the original film that started it all are obviously clues that they're going to end up having an hour and a half plus about every rubber alien and metal droid ever.

That couldn't possibly be an overreaction by grumpy people who don't seem to like Star Wars that much at all.

 

If one popular fan theory is correct, an Obi-Wan stand-alone might revolve around or include...

Spoiler

...the fact that he's somehow related to Rey.

 

Sue me, but I like Lapti Nek. It's quite catchy. I like Salacious Crumb. I like Jabba. I like nearly everything about the original Jabba scene.

 

Regarding the potential for interesting stand-alone stories, Lucasfilm could take a risk or two by taking a page from Claudia Gray's book. No pun intended. Gray has written two excellent Star Wars novels, Lost Stars and Bloodline, that Star Wars fans would do well to check out. Of course, novel writers can take risks that filmmakers beholden to multibillion dollar corporations cannot.

 

Great post. If they'd had a full-fledged fight scene between Han and Boba Fett, killed off Han, omitted the embarrassing Luke and Leia are brother and sister revelation, used wookies instead of ewoks, and ended it w/ Leia enmeshed in bureaucratic turmoil w/ Luke walking off into the sunset, it'd be a great movie. Maybe someone will remake it some day....

 

busted! but, I was referring to how the movie would end...not on a cliffhanger, just a kind of "the rebels won, but sometimes winning can be kind of a drag" type ending...

 

Thank You! I think having Lando heroically die instead of Han (in the destruction of the Millennium Falcon) would have been more feasible. One of the very few things I found meritorious about The Force Awakens was Han coming full circle from when we first 'met' him in '77 (sceptical, self-centred, solitary, dismissive of the elder authority figure in Obi-Wan, and even anti-heroic to a large extent) as an elder (as the Force-believing mentor figure who cherishes family and sacrifices himself in a desperate last attempt to redeem his wayward son). Bureaucratic turmoil could have simply been the responsibility of eradicating the rest of the Empire and rebuilding the Republic (apparently, this became the case in the decades after ROTJ). Remake? Eh...I'd save that time, money, and effort for a Prequel Trilogy remake.