Great New Lucas Quote . . . Total Film May 2008

2046 · Post by **2046** » Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:04 am

Take a gander at this.

"The Star Wars universe has expanded far beyond the movies. How much leeway do the game makers and novel writers have?

They have their own kind of world. There's three pillars of Star Wars. I'll probably get in trouble for this but it's OK! There's three pillars: the father, the son and the holy ghost. I'm the father, Howard Roffman [president of Lucas Licensing] is the son and the holy ghost is the fans, this kind of ethereal world of people coming up with all kinds of different ideas and histories. Now these three different pillars don't always match, but the movies and TV shows are all under my control and they are consistent within themselves. Howard tries to be consistent but sometimes he goes off on tangents and it's hard to hold him back. He once said to me that there are two Star Trek universes: there's the TV show and then there's all the spin-offs. He said that these were completely different and didn't have anything to do with each other. So I said, "OK, go ahead." In the early days I told them that they couldn't do anything about how Darth Vader was born, for obvious reasons, but otherwise I pretty much let them do whatever they wanted. They created this whole amazing universe that goes on for millions of years!

Are you happy for new Star Wars tales to be told after you're gone?

I've left pretty explicit instructions for there not to be any more features. There will definitely be no Episodes VII-IX. That's because there isn't any story. I mean, I never thought of anything. And now there have been novels about the events after Episode VI, which isn't at all what I would have done with it. The Star Wars story is really the tragedy of Darth Vader. That is the story. Once Vader dies, he doesn't come back to life, the Emperor doesn't get cloned and Luke doesn't get married..."

Praeothmin · Post by **Praeothmin** » Fri Apr 11, 2008 2:36 pm

But, but, that is not what he meant to say, don't you see???

:-)

Mr. Oragahn · Post by **Mr. Oragahn** » Fri Apr 11, 2008 8:42 pm

Ah, so George still likes the taste of freedom and creativity? :)

Which shows does he speak about?

l33telboi · Post by **l33telboi** » Fri Apr 11, 2008 9:12 pm

Mr. Oragahn wrote:Which shows does he speak about?

Probably the new animated and the live-action ones coming up. It would seem they're going to be as canonical as the movies. Which is... interesting.

Kane Starkiller · Post by **Kane Starkiller** » Fri Apr 11, 2008 10:14 pm

So what exactly is new? Licenced books don't always match with films particularly when it comes to fates and histories of main movie characters hence no cloned Emperor (which was an idiotic idea to begin with) etc.

Praeothmin · Post by **Praeothmin** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 1:07 am

Kane Starkiller wrote:hence no cloned Emperor (which was an idiotic idea to begin with)

Couldn't agree more.
Once a good character dies (whether he's evil or good), never bring him back...

Post by **Mike DiCenso** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 1:22 am

Interestingly enough, this is the second concrete reference (from Lucas himself no less) to the Star Trek franchise and how it seperates the movies and TV series from the novels and other licensing of it's expanded universe.

Given that Lucas again makes the connection again between his franchise and the ST one and how it handles expanded universe material, I'd say this pretty much clinches the seperation of the SW movies from it's Expanded Universe materials.
-Mike

Mr. Oragahn · Post by **Mr. Oragahn** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 2:21 am

Kane Starkiller wrote:So what exactly is new? Licenced books don't always match with films particularly when it comes to fates and histories of main movie characters hence no cloned Emperor (which was an idiotic idea to begin with) etc.

With the slight difference that Lucas thinks the EU does not always want to be faithful to the movies and, instead, take its own way (the hold back bit).

He also shows how he disagrees with certain things the EU has set in stone regarding certain characters. Particularily on the Emperor clone.

So it's rather extremely clear that in his mind, the EU is another thing on its own.

Now, this doesn't preclude anyone from using the EU+films policy as far as I get it. But considering his position, I wonder if all of the stuff he's introducing in his new canon material will fit with the EU.

The thing is, it's probably the clearest quote we ever got, but many had reached those conclusions a long time ago.

2046 · Post by **2046** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 4:58 am

Kane Starkiller wrote:So what exactly is new? Licenced books don't always match with films particularly when it comes to fates and histories of main movie characters hence no cloned Emperor (which was an idiotic idea to begin with) etc.

Well, nothing's new to me, since I've known George's take on things for years now, as have many others.

However, for those who still try to claim that the EU is a required part of Star Wars, invariably valid for further understanding of the films, a quote like this will always be new and different and strange and a thing to be surpassed and spun and evaded.

In short, it is yet more evidence that the EU is not occurring within the same timeline/universe as the films of Lucas.

2046 · Post by **2046** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 5:00 am

Perhaps the funniest reply has come from Mange:

"That was excellent. While GL maintains that the EU is not what he would've done, he nevertheless recognizes it."

When I read that I just guffawed . . . there's no better word to describe it. Apparently, by even acknowledging the existence of the EU, Lucas blesses and canonizes it.

Sheesh.

2046 · Post by **2046** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 4:37 pm

Here's another reply from elsewhere:

"Well, first of all, I do not tend to take that much notice of anything GL says about the EU: it is clear that to him, there are separate layers of continuity, but I do not agree. That's my opinion, as when the EU really began with the Timothy Zahn books and the Dark Empire comics, Lucas Licensing (was it called that back then? We really should get a book about Lucasfilm in the future) was to make sure everything jived with what was established in the movies. West End Games operated that way also, and all was fine and dandy until the Prequels came up in which GL himself contradicted some events established by the EU... Luckily, most of that has been retconned, and everything is fine and dandy again... To me, Star Wars and the EU being in a separate continuity really takes away the joy of Star Wars... So, to me, those remarks of George Lucas do not mean that much as the Creator is not into Star Wars as much as we, the fans, do..."

This is an honest reply. The guy basically says he is intentionally ignoring Lucas in favor of Licensing, because he prefers to view the EU as part of Star Wars.

It's perfectly fine to make that choice openly as this guy did . . . the problem comes when that choice is made yet the person tries to hide it behind deceitful attempts to pretend Lucas said something else entirely, like "oh, I wouldn't have done it that way, but I recognize the validity of the EU."

Kane Starkiller · Post by **Kane Starkiller** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 1:17 am

2046 wrote: Well, nothing's new to me, since I've known George's take on things for years now, as have many others.

However, for those who still try to claim that the EU is a required part of Star Wars, invariably valid for further understanding of the films, a quote like this will always be new and different and strange and a thing to be surpassed and spun and evaded.
In short, it is yet more evidence that the EU is not occurring within the same timeline/universe as the films of Lucas.

Only if you ignore the very quotes you provided.
Why exactly does Roffman "tries to be consistent" and why does Lucas try to "hold him back" if they are different timelines? There is a specific group of novels called "Infinities" which represent the different timeline.
Similarly his statement that Vader doesn't come back to life, Luke doesn't marry etc. is yet another confirmation it's all the same timeline. If there were different timelines then Lucas would say that in his timeline Vader doesn't come back to life etc. but instead he is making a blanked statement: Vader doesn't come back to life period. There is only one timeline.
Finally I certainly don't claim EU is required part of Star Wars. You are free to make up any evidence inclusion policy you wish. But that is, of course, your personal choice and not some fundamental truth.

GStone · Post by **GStone** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 2:13 pm

Kane Starkiller wrote:If there were different timelines then Lucas would say that in his timeline Vader doesn't come back to life etc. but instead he is making a blanked statement: Vader doesn't come back to life period. There is only one timeline.

If this is true, then if Roffman tries to be consistent, while Lucas holds him back, the EU doesn't really mean anything when it comes to star wars. No novels, no ICS, etc. are applicable.

You want a 'blanked statement'? Try this:

"He once said to me that there are two Star Trek universes: there's the TV show and then there's all the spin-offs. He said that these were completely different and didn't have anything to do with each other. So I said, "OK, go ahead." "

2046 · Post by **2046** » Mon Apr 14, 2008 5:51 am

Kane Starkiller wrote: Similarly his statement that Vader doesn't come back to life, Luke doesn't marry etc. is yet another confirmation it's all the same timeline.

That's the most extraordinary thing you could've said.

If there were different timelines then Lucas would say that in his timeline Vader doesn't come back to life etc. but instead he is making a blanked statement: Vader doesn't come back to life period. There is only one timeline.

What Lucas said was that there was no story. As before, his universe occurs in a select period of time, and what happens before or after is unknown.

But to your mind, he just invalidated vast portions of the EU at a stroke while simultaneously declaring it to be in the same timeline, and despite the whole two-universe, parallel-universe, "completely different and didn't have anything to do with each other" thing.

Do you have any idea how absurd that sounds? Re-read what you said then read the quote. Then do it again for good measure. Does the dissonance between what you said and what Lucas said not leap out at you? How do you circumvent it?

I'm not asking in a mean-spirited way . . . I'm genuinely curious.

Why exactly does Roffman "tries to be consistent" and why does Lucas try to "hold him back" if they are different timelines?

Licensing tries to keep the EU consistent with the films, both at the time at via retcons. That's old news.

Mr. Oragahn · Post by **Mr. Oragahn** » Mon Apr 14, 2008 2:57 pm

GStone wrote:
Kane Starkiller wrote:If there were different timelines then Lucas would say that in his timeline Vader doesn't come back to life etc. but instead he is making a blanked statement: Vader doesn't come back to life period. There is only one timeline.
If this is true, then if Roffman tries to be consistent, while Lucas holds him back, the EU doesn't really mean anything when it comes to star wars. No novels, no ICS, etc. are applicable.

You want a 'blanked statement'? Try this:

"He once said to me that there are two Star Trek universes: there's the TV show and then there's all the spin-offs. He said that these were completely different and didn't have anything to do with each other. So I said, "OK, go ahead." "

Give me a few minutes to spin that...