PDA

View Full Version : Speaking of timelines....



stillakid
05-20-2005, 11:34 AM
Two issues come to mind.

1. Padme's pregnancy

Exactly what was the timeframe of this film anyway? At the beginning of the film, she announces that she's pregnant but isn't really showing...or is she and I didn't notice? :confused: If not, then how on earth (naboo or coruscant :D ) does she get to full term so damn fast? All the rest of the events during the film seem to happen in rather quick succession, not over the period of several months. So what's going on there?

The fix: Drop Padme's death and the birth of the kids altogether. It was very unnecessary in every way. Anakin didn't need to choke her at all. It was Obi Wan's presence that made him think Padme betrayed him. So once that happens, his loyalty and love for her is gone completely. The movie could end with her still expecting, but being quite depressed, and giving birth in between III and IV. Then Leia's words about mom being "sad" make sense and this issue of the quick pregnancy suddenly isn't one. It would also retain the surprise of the "other" in the OT. But as it stands right now, the surprise is shot to hell, the ROTS timeline is suspect, and Anakin's fall is watered down. Anakin could have left Mustafar just hating Padme for her betrayal and that would have been more than sufficient.


2. Death Star

19-ish years to complete construction on the Death Star when Death Star II, which is bigger and more powerful, takes considerably less time? Why bother showing this at all? The plans were enough to foreshadow problems on the horizon and let a brand new audience know that more even worse things were in store for our heroes.

Tycho
05-20-2005, 01:03 PM
Padme was 8 or 9 months pregnant at the start of the film.

The film took place over only several days in their lives.

If you read behind the scenes stuff especially with costumer Trisha Bigger, you might have heard that George wanted Padme to look like someone pregnant, who was wearing clothes to hide that she was pregnant, or else she'd lose her job because the Queen would send her home to Naboo and appoint someone less distracted to be the Senator.

As to the Death Star, I think that in the TV series or whatever, they need to establish that Palpatine commissioned more than one of these things at the SAME TIME. In other words, Endor would have been completed not long after the first one from Yavin was operational EITHER WAY. Luke just happened to destroy the first one as soon as it was activated.

The question remains is should these things be left to the EU to explain? Is there something wrong if the audience doesn't "get it?"

People should know that women hide their pregnancies for all kinds of reasons anyway. Why there is a larger misconception that Padme had just conceived the day before Anakin landed on the burning ship is beyond me. There was dialogue in which Anakin said "had it not been for the chancellor's being kidnapped, we still would have been away for many more months." That told me (as well as the CW cartoon and other stuff I'd read) that he hadn't seen her for 8 months at least, and I'd gather that an "I'm pregnant letter" on the holonet might have been read by others they didn't want to risk knowing their business.

stillakid
05-20-2005, 01:15 PM
Padme was 8 or 9 months pregnant at the start of the film.

The film took place over only several days in their lives.
I understood that they hadn't just conceived. That isn't the issue. The problem is that while she may be dressing as if she is hiding it, I find it a little difficult to believe that A) she'd not tell Anakin sooner that she was pregnant, particularly if we join her at around 8 or 9 months in, and B) that she would be walking and running around as if she was only 1 or 2 months pregnant. I know that women carry differently, but almost universally, at 9 months, nobody is running anywhere. Just sitting is almost comedic to watch. Hiding the pregnancy is one thing, but the way she acted the part doesn't jive with the timeline.



If you read behind the scenes stuff especially with costumer Trisha Bigger,
I ordered her book from starwars.com. The EXPENSIVE version! :greedy:



As to the Death Star, I think that in the TV series or whatever, they need to establish that Palpatine commissioned more than one of these things at the SAME TIME. In other words, Endor would have been completed not long after the first one from Yavin was operational EITHER WAY. Luke just happened to destroy the first one as soon as it was activated.
So, sort of like the scenario in the movie CONTACT? Um, I don't buy it.


MOTTI
This station is now the ultimate power in the universe. I suggest we use it. And if this one doesn't work out, well, at least we have a backup.

:rolleyes:



The question remains is should these things be left to the EU to explain? Is there something wrong if the audience doesn't "get it?"
Yes. There is something wrong. A well written story will not leave questions like this hanging in an audiences mind. It's perfectly okay to leave some stuff "offscreen," but inviting questions of logic is another. For instance, we didn't need to actually SEE the process that happened for Vader to learn that Skywalker was the one who blew up the Death Star. Because we are smart enough, we can figure out that the Empire has spies and such and that's probably what happened in between IV and V. The question is not whether everything should be spelled out and rammed down our throats, but rather, what could be added or removed from the story to better tell only that which is required to convey the message? Dumping EU material onscreen is the wrong way to look at it. If there is an important piece of information that is required to motivate the story to the next scene, then it belongs in. But if the information is unnecessary or gratuitous, then it should be excised and left for a fan film to explore.

2-1B
05-20-2005, 01:31 PM
Was it said that it takes 20 years to finish the Death Star ? That thing could have been floating around for 15 years completed for all I know, and they just didn't use it until the Rebel Alliance was proving such a threat.

Lobito
05-20-2005, 01:38 PM
Its like in comics...remember the "no price"? There are a lot of holes in the storyline, for instance the one when Leia tells Luke how she remembers her real mother. So Leia says "she was kind but sad" or something like that, making no sense with ROTS. So the stupid "no price" explanation would be that Leia believed that her real mother was Bail Organa's first wife, then she died and Bail married again. Making the second wife the "adoptive mother" and the firs one the kind and sad one, cuzz she knew all the truth. So Leia never knew she was daughter of Padme. what????? So the stupid explanation says that Leia has one real mother and two adoptive mothers... huh?? :confused: Anyway.......

I dont remember obi wan picking up Anakin's lightsaber after their fight in Mustafar. So how come he tells Luke that Anakin told him that he wanted Luke to have his lightsaber when he was old enogh, but Owen would not allow it... sheesh!! No price??

Bantha274
05-20-2005, 01:41 PM
You guys really love to tear these films apart, don't you? lol
j/k

In the Clone Wars cartoons, you see Anakin and Padme together one last time before he heads out to fight across the galaxy. This is when the twins are actually conceived.
ROTS obviously begins about 9 months later.

Bantha274
05-20-2005, 01:43 PM
I dont remember obi wan picking up Anakin's lightsaber after their fight in Mustafar. So how come he tells Luke that Anakin told him that he wanted Luke to have his lightsaber when he was old enogh, but Owen would not allow it... sheesh!! No price??

Sorry, but you're wrong. He does pick up Anakin's saber as he walks away.
Look for it when you see the movie again, which I'm sure you will.
Right?:confused:

stillakid
05-20-2005, 01:44 PM
Was it said that it takes 20 years to finish the Death Star ? That thing could have been floating around for 15 years completed for all I know, and they just didn't use it until the Rebel Alliance was proving such a threat.


TARKIN
This bickering is pointless. Lord Vader will provide us with the location of the Rebel fortress by the time this station is operational. We will then crush the Rebellion with one swift stroke.

stillakid
05-20-2005, 01:46 PM
You guys really love to tear these films apart, don't you? lol
j/k

In the Clone Wars cartoons, you see Anakin and Padme together one last time before he heads out to fight across the galaxy. This is when the twins are actually conceived.
ROTS obviously begins about 9 months later.


Geesh, you don't really pay attention, do you? :rolleyes: I'll repost what I said just a few posts earlier:



I understood that they hadn't just conceived. That isn't the issue. The problem is that while she may be dressing as if she is hiding it, I find it a little difficult to believe that A) she'd not tell Anakin sooner that she was pregnant, particularly if we join her at around 8 or 9 months in, and B) that she would be walking and running around as if she was only 1 or 2 months pregnant. I know that women carry differently, but almost universally, at 9 months, nobody is running anywhere. Just sitting is almost comedic to watch. Hiding the pregnancy is one thing, but the way she acted the part doesn't jive with the timeline.

Lobito
05-20-2005, 01:54 PM
Sorry, but you're wrong. He does pick up Anakin's saber as he walks away.
Look for it when you see the movie again, which I'm sure you will.
Right?:confused:

Yup!! Dont get me wrong, i love all the saga all 6 films, hey its sw!! Thats why i wrote about the no pirces. :D

El Chuxter
05-20-2005, 03:26 PM
If you're going by the EU history of the Death Star, my guess is they're in the Maw Installation and that's the prototype. The original won't be started for a few years. One of the few cases where EU actually fixes a serious timeframe error in the films.

stillakid
05-20-2005, 05:21 PM
If you're going by the EU history of the Death Star, my guess is they're in the Maw Installation and that's the prototype. The original won't be started for a few years. One of the few cases where EU actually fixes a serious timeframe error in the films.

Even if true, the general audience would never know that. But I suppose for that matter, a general audience wouldn't care that much anyway to notice. :D

rbaumhauer
05-20-2005, 11:30 PM
For timeline issues, there is just no fixing the biggest problem - the 20-year span between Eps 3 and 4 when everybody ages about 30-35 years. We've been over Obi-wan numerous times, and there's just no way that he's 58 in ANH (as the timeline would suggest).

Even worse, though - how could nobody involved with the movies have noticed that the actors playing Owen and Beru in AOTC/ROTS are at least a couple decades too young? Beru looks like a teenager still (the actress was probably 21 during filming), but she's freakin' middle-aged in ANH (Shelagh Fraser was in her mid-50s during filming). How was this not obvious?

Rick

2-1B
05-21-2005, 12:42 AM
TARKIN
This bickering is pointless. Lord Vader will provide us with the location of the Rebel fortress by the time this station is operational. We will then crush the Rebellion with one swift stroke.

thank you, stillakid, I forgot about that line. :)

Well that is cleared up for me then, the DS was not just sitting around "waiting" to be used.

I do still think there is some leeway with the ROTJ DS2 since it's not fully finished as far as being a sphere . . . they just decided to make it operational sooner. :crazed: :crazed: :crazed:

Beast
05-21-2005, 01:57 AM
For timeline issues, there is just no fixing the biggest problem - the 20-year span between Eps 3 and 4 when everybody ages about 30-35 years. We've been over Obi-wan numerous times, and there's just no way that he's 58 in ANH (as the timeline would suggest).

Even worse, though - how could nobody involved with the movies have noticed that the actors playing Owen and Beru in AOTC/ROTS are at least a couple decades too young? Beru looks like a teenager still (the actress was probably 21 during filming), but she's freakin' middle-aged in ANH (Shelagh Fraser was in her mid-50s during filming). How was this not obvious?

Rick
Have you ever seen people who live in the scorching hot desert? Typically they look a great deal older than they actually are. Mostly due to the harsh conditions and the arid environment. The only people you can truly judge the aging issue on is Obi-Wan, Owen, and Beru. And all of them are being constantly being bombarded by the environmental conditions. Considering that Alec Guiness was only 60 in 1974, it's not that much of a stretch. Phil Brown turned 60 in 1976 and Shelagh Fraser turned 50 in 1972. Joel Edgerton turned 30 in 2004 and Bonnie Piesse turned 20 in 2003. Slap on 20 years to everyone and add in the environmental effects. Sounds fine to me. :p

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

rbaumhauer
05-21-2005, 09:13 AM
Sorry, JJB, but that's such a clear case of willfully making yourself believe what you want to believe, in spite of all evidence to the contrary, it just boggles my mind. If you honestly believe that living in the desert can make someone who looks like Bonnie Piesse in ROTS turn into Shelagh Fraser in ANH within twenty years, you need to lay off that Lucas-brand Kool-Aid.

If either of the actor's actually looked like they "live in the scorching hot desert", you might have a point, but Shelagh Fraser hardly had the tan, leathery skin of somebody who was "bombarded by the environmental conditions" - guess she just spent most of her time in the cool, shady underground dwelling, but that (again) gets us back to the question of why she looks at least 30 years older.

In addition, it's already been established that Guinness was intended to be playing older than his actual age in ANH, not younger - in a story meeting for ROTJ, Anakin's appearance when the helmet comes off is supposed to be,"in his sixties, about 10 years younger than Ben in ANH." Given his years of Jedi training and service, I would expect Obi-wan to be a strong, virile guy for longer than the average, regardless of where he's been living - there's just no way he's 58 in ANH, and all evidence from the time indicates that he's intended to be in his 70s.

Lucas clearly (and obviously) changed the timeline when he started writing the PT and decided that he wanted Anakin to be a child in TPM, but somehow never thought to adjust other characters' ages to compensate. This is really basic stuff, but for whatever reason, he just couldn't be bothered to pay attention to his own established story.

Rick

Beast
05-21-2005, 10:06 AM
Totally disagree with you. Especially considering all of their ages plus 20 years are fairly close to the ages of the people who played the characters in ANH. Everyone ages differently. And I know 80 year olds who only look in their 50's, and 40 year olds who look like death warmed over. Frankly I think it's just another sad nitpick. :p

MTFBY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

rbaumhauer
05-21-2005, 10:42 AM
OK, according to JJB, 20 + 20 = 55 (or close enough)

:rolleyes:

Beast
05-21-2005, 10:56 AM
OK, according to JJB, 20 + 20 = 55 (or close enough)

:rolleyes:
Who said that? Let's look at the numbers going off the release date. Even though everyone was a year or so younger when the films were being shot.

Ewan McGregor - 34 (2005) + 20 Years = 53 / Alec Guiness - 63 (1977)
Joel Edgerton - 31 (2005) + 20 = 51 / Phil Brown - 61 (1977)
Bonnie Piesse - 22 (2005) + 20 = 42 / Shelagah Fraser - 55 (1977)

Considering environmental conditions, it's fairly reasonable that most of the characters look 10 years older than their true ages. Besides, I think you're just nitpicking ages. Nowhere in the movies is anyone's ages firmly stated. :p

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

Veers
05-21-2005, 12:50 PM
Was it said that it takes 20 years to finish the Death Star ? That thing could have been floating around for 15 years completed for all I know, and they just didn't use it until the Rebel Alliance was proving such a threat.


No one really knows how long it took to contstuct that Death Star. When Vader asked Motti about the construction of the Death Star, that comment suggest maybe it was just built recently. Who knows. :confused:

rbaumhauer
05-21-2005, 03:32 PM
JJB - you might have a leg to stand on if the PT actors didn't actually look younger than their real ages - Bonnie Piesse still looks like a teenager!

Not surprisingly, you won't touch what's stated in black and white about Obi-wan's "original" age in the OT, since there's just no way you can rationalize that one.....

Rick

Sith Lord 0498
05-21-2005, 05:00 PM
No one really knows how long it took to contstuct that Death Star. When Vader asked Motti about the construction of the Death Star, that comment suggest maybe it was just built recently. Who knows. :confused:

When did Vader ask Motti about that? Are you referring to the line "Don't be too proud of the technological terror you've constructed."?

Mr. JabbaJohnL
05-21-2005, 06:56 PM
Padmé was 8-9 months or so pregnant, but she hid it until she was alone with Anakin, and later with Obi-Wan. Even when she gave birth to the kids, she sure didn't look like she was 9 months pregnant with twins. But, what're you gonna do?

I'm willing to bet that when they built the second Death Star, they used what they knew from building the first one, so that likely sped up the time it took to build it. Plus, it's only about 75% done when we see it, and for all we know, only a small portion of the inside parts are actually done. Maybe they did the laser, outside, and some "choice" inside parts first?

The age thing has been done to death. For all we know, the Lars family is in their mid-30s when Luke is brought to them, then in their mid-50s when they die. Obi-Wan is 38 in ROTS, so about 57 in ANH, which isn't that big of a stretch, since Alec was 62 when he did ANH. Who knows? None of the characters' ages are explicitly stated in the films, just the EU.

stillakid
05-21-2005, 07:26 PM
Have you ever seen people who live in the scorching hot desert? Typically they look a great deal older than they actually are. Mostly due to the harsh conditions and the arid environment. The only people you can truly judge the aging issue on is Obi-Wan, Owen, and Beru. And all of them are being constantly being bombarded by the environmental conditions. Considering that Alec Guiness was only 60 in 1974, it's not that much of a stretch. Phil Brown turned 60 in 1976 and Shelagh Fraser turned 50 in 1972. Joel Edgerton turned 30 in 2004 and Bonnie Piesse turned 20 in 2003. Slap on 20 years to everyone and add in the environmental effects. Sounds fine to me. :p

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

You forgot that the camera also adds ten pounds. :rolleyes:

Seriously, do the rationalizations and apologies never stop? Is Lucas really infallible in your eyes? Seriously. :confused:

Sith Lord 0498
05-21-2005, 10:38 PM
Seriously, do the rationalizations and apologies never stop? Is Lucas really infallible in your eyes? Seriously. :confused:

Nobody said Lucas is infallible. In fact, I think he's a very inconsistent writer who can't even maintain the simplest of continuities. For me, the SW universe is so prosperous because of the efforts of all the other writers (in terms of novelizations and EU, the actors, the fans, etc.). Nobody is apologizing for Lucas, and our "rationalizations" are simply fans doing their best to fill in the gaping holes and bring order to the inconsistencies that Lucas has created so that we can enjoy the stories in spite of Lucas.

stillakid
05-22-2005, 12:52 AM
Nobody said Lucas is infallible. In fact, I think he's a very inconsistent writer who can't even maintain the simplest of continuities. For me, the SW universe is so prosperous because of the efforts of all the other writers (in terms of novelizations and EU, the actors, the fans, etc.). Nobody is apologizing for Lucas, and our "rationalizations" are simply fans doing their best to fill in the gaping holes and bring order to the inconsistencies that Lucas has created so that we can enjoy the stories in spite of Lucas.

Thank you for stepping up to the plate on that. :) But are you the exception, or the rule? Because there are some lurking about who make the claim that there are no inconsistencies or gaping holes and that all this discussion is just, I don't know...conjured up whining or nitpicking or something. As if we go out looking to invent problems to complain about or something. Obviously that's an absolutely ridiculous idea...who would do such a thing? :confused: