As I kind of expected — but don’t really understand — the consensus in the world of fans and punditry in the wake of the “Star Wars — Episode VII” announcement is that the sequels will almost certainly ignore the Expanded Universe of novels and comics. The ForceCast’s Jimmy Mac surmised that “Episode VII” would take place 20 years after “Return of the Jedi” (since we know the movie will be a brand-new story, that timeline placement would overwrite established canon) and he and co-host Jason came up with all kinds of non-EU-related theories in their first episode after the announcement. Meanwhile, the Star Wars Book Report host said the announcement means “the EU will be blown out of the water” and that we’ll just have to accept that in order to enjoy the new movies.
Surfing the internet, those who even acknowledge that adherence to the EU is a possibility are few and far between. Christian Blauvelt, an excellent “Star Wars” journalist with Hollywood.com, acknowledged that a story set at the end of the novels timeline (40 years after “Episode VI — Return of the Jedi”) is a possibility (although he also listed several other sequel possibilities). And “Thrawn Trilogy” author Timothy Zahn did the same in a great interview with Entertainment Weekly where I think he absolutely nailed what the sequel trilogy will be about:
“I’d love to see a good father-son, or mother-son or -daughter story. I’d like to see family. We haven’t seen a lot of good family stuff in ‘Star Wars.’ A lot of it has been dysfunctional, and driven by somebody else. Anakin was a slave and manipulated all his life. Luke and Leia never knew each other. … Some family interaction would be something different for the new movies to do. There are a lot of directions you can go with the Skywalker families and really kick some serious butt.”
I will grant that there are reasons to assume George Lucas and Disney will ignore the EU. For one, modern moviegoers are accustomed to — and even seem to enjoy — re-imaginings and reboots, such as Christopher Nolan’s “Batman” films and this past summer’s “Spider-Man” movie. Marvel did a “Hulk” film in 2003 and another in 2008, and they aren’t related to each other. Weird oddities such as “X-Men: First Class,” which definitely is a prequel but also ignores established continuity, have hit theaters without too much backlash. We live in a time when studios and movie-goers seem much more interested in the artistic aspect (how a movie is made, the cinematography, the style, the performances, and the way it’s adapted from source material) rather than the idea of a serialized story that can be followed from one episode to the next. The Internet buzz has been as much about who will direct “Episode VII” as what the story will be.
And, most notably, Lucas has ignored some aspects of continuity in the prequels and “The Clone Wars”: Boba Fett in “Episode II” overwrote “Boba Fett’s Tale” from “Tales of the Bounty Hunters.” The deaths of Even Piell and Adi Gallia in “The Clone Wars” contradicted “Coruscant Nights” and the “Clone Wars” comic, respectively. Also on the TV show, Lucas’ vision of Mandalorian culture and architecture differed from Karen Traviss’ in her “Republic Commando” books. And Lucas established that Greedo and Dengar were around in the Clone Wars, contradicting stories in “Tales from the Mos Eisley Cantina” and “Tales of the Bounty Hunters,” respectively.
So the gut reaction that the sequels will definitely ignore the EU isn’t based on nothing. However, this assumption ignores a plethora of evidence pointing the other direction. I’d argue that once a “Star Wars” fan looks at this evidence, they’ll have a pretty good feeling of what “Episode VII” will entail — and they’ll feel great about it, because it will honor all the (admittedly enjoyable) work they’ve done keeping up with the books and comics.
In honor of the fact that there will be nine “Star Wars” movies when the sequel trilogy is complete, here are the top nine reasons that the new films will honor the EU and take place at the end of the novels timeline, four decades after “Episode VI”:
1. Lucas has only contradicted the EU in the aforementioned relatively minor issues centered on characters. The biggest “reboot” is the Mandalore controversy, but I’m not convinced that Lucas’ vision of Mandalore totally contradicts Traviss’. In fact, a better-established clone-Mandalorian connection is apparently in the works for future “Clone Wars” episodes; we may have jumped on Lucas for this one too quickly. Here’s the important thing: He has never overwritten anything involving the main characters — the Skywalker and Solo families.
2. The prequels and “The Clone Wars” are very close to Lucas’ heart and mind. But the sequel trilogy? Not so much. Through the years — unless he was flat-out denying that there would be sequels — he has only admitted to a vague notion that the sequels will feature an older Luke as a Jedi Master passing on his knowledge of the Force to a younger generation of Jedi Knights. This is what Luke has already been doing in the EU, and what he can continue to do in the new movie. When Lucas had something specific planned, he told the licensees “hands off.” That’s why there were no prequel-era stories until Lucas told them, and why Han and Chewbacca’s first meeting hasn’t been chronicled (A.C. Crispin skipped over it in her “Han Solo Trilogy,” as per orders from on high).
3. Check out this coincidence (or is it?): The ages of Mark Hamill, Carrie Fisher and Harrison Ford match up almost perfectly with the ages of their characters if the next episode is to be set right after the most recent book saga, “Fate of the Jedi,” 40 years after “Return of the Jedi.” At this point on the timeline, Luke is 63; Hamill will be 64 when “Episode VII” hits theaters in 2015. Leia is also 63, of course; Fisher will be 59. Han Solo is 73; Ford will be — check this out — 73!
4. Here’s another coincidence that might be more by design than we think: There are no major series from Del Rey currently in the works. Since 1999, Del Rey has had a meticulous plan for epic “Star Wars” series; we always knew what big thing was coming next. First it was the 19-book “New Jedi Order,” then it was the nine-book “Legacy of the Force,” then it was the nine-book “Fate of the Jedi.” When “Fate” wrapped earlier this year, there was no announcement of the next major saga. In fact, some fans worried that “Star Wars” publishing might be headed for a dark age (How silly that seems now!). Among post-“Fate of the Jedi” novels, all we know is that a “Sword of the Jedi” trilogy featuring Jaina Solo is planned. I think this is because the next major saga is intended to be the sequel trilogy, and Lucas gave the folks at Del Rey a heads-up about this. (We know “Episode VII” has been in the works for a while. After the announcement, Hamill admitted that Lucas brought up the idea of “Episode VII” to him and Fisher last year. And the 2015 date — a little more than two years away if we assume a Memorial Day release — suggests that the ball is already rolling.)
5. Lucas respects — and is, in fact, inspired by — the EU more than we give him credit for. He used Zahn’s Coruscant as the name of the capital planet, and also borrowed Zahn’s idea of a lightsaber being used to catch Force lightning. He brought comic-book characters Aayla Secura (an appearance in the Geonosis arena) and Quinlan Vos (a mention by Obi-Wan) into the prequel trilogy. He adapted a comic book, “Slaves of the Republic,” into a Season 4 “Clone Wars” arc. He included “Tales of the Jedi’s” main planet, Onderon, in a recent “Clone Wars” arc, and retained the cool features of the planet such as the flying beasts and the walled city.
6. Lucas contributes to the EU more than we give him credit for, especially when it comes to major plot, character and historical points. “Tales of the Jedi” scribe Tom Veitch based his Jedi and Sith lore on in-depth talks with Lucas. The press materials for the novel “Darth Plagueis” made a point of noting that the story was approved by Lucas. The death of Chewbacca that jump-started the “New Jedi Order” was OK’d by Lucas. Later in that saga, Lucas requested that Anakin Solo be killed off so as not to have two Anakins running around in various books. That much we know. There’s no evidence that Lucas had any hand in the creation of Ben Skywalker (Luke’s son) or Allana Solo (Leia and Han’s granddaughter, pictured above with her pet nexu, Anji), or the killing off of Jacen Solo (Leia and Han’s son, and Allana’s dad) or Mara Jade (Luke’s wife). But he has gone on record saying there was no Mara Jade in his vision of the future Luke (perhaps indulging in exaggeration, the Star Wars Book Report hosts regularly comment that Lucas hates Mara Jade). So it works out nicely — either through a bit of collaboration from Lucas that we haven’t been privy to, or through sublime coincidence — that the cast of EU characters has been pared down and is now ripe for some new characters and ideas.
7. In recent years, Lucas has become interested in female action heroes. But while Ahsoka Tano is certainly the breakout star of “The Clone Wars,” Lucas has never given us a live-action female main character — although they could certainly hold their own in battle, Leia was a second fiddle to Luke, and Padme was a second fiddle to Anakin. I think Allana, 8 years old at the end of “Fate of the Jedi,” could be the main character of “Episode VII.” That provides the kid angle similar to Anakin in “Episode I.” Jaina, Ben, Vestara, Jag and Tahiri would be the young-adult Jedi Knights along the lines of Obi-Wan in “Episode I,” while Luke would be the mentor, paralleling Qui-Gon in “Episode I” and Obi-Wan in “Episode IV.”
8. There are a ton of reference books on “Star Wars” chronology, planets, characters and history. Why blow that up and render those books apocryphal if you don’t have to, and if you admire this rich history in the first place? The novels and comics were referred to as a “treasure trove” in the Disney announcement; that’s not a phrase you’d use if you were planning on discarding a large chunk of it as if it were glorified fan fiction.
9. “Episode VII” is a great chance to expose new customers to the rich library of EU novels and comics. Simply put, it’s a great business move for Disney to respect the EU and make money off of the back catalogue in addition to fresh products. And the best commercial would be the opening crawl of the first sequel movie, while also serving as a nod to longtime fans. It could go something like this (I’m assuming a batch of new Sith would be the villains, but story-wise, the possibilities really are wide open):
STAR WARS Episode VII KNIGHTS OF THE GALACTIC ALLIANCE
The galaxy-wide celebration of the destruction of Darth Vader and the evil GALACTIC EMPIRE proved to be short-lived. In the decades that followed, the fledgling government struggled with resurgent Imperials, warlords and even the extragalactic YUUZHAN VONG invaders.
The heroes of the Rebellion — LUKE SKYWALKER, HAN SOLO and PRINCESS LEIA ORGANA — raised new generations of JEDI KNIGHTS as these wars flared up and faded. Luke has a son named BEN. Han and Leia have a daughter, JAINA, and a granddaughter, ALLANA.
Finally, it is a time of relative peace for the GALACTIC ALLIANCE. But in a dark corner of the galaxy, an ancient enemy awakens …
Technically, all we know for sure is that: 1) “Episode VII” will take place after “Episode VI” (because we can count), 2) It’ll be an original story based on a Lucas outline, and 3) Lucas told Hamill and Fisher last year that he would make the sequels. But looking at the context clues, there is overwhelming evidence that “Episode VII” will respect the Expanded Universe and take place at the end of the novels timeline, about 40 years after “Return of the Jedi.”
Am I right? Share your thoughts and theories below.
Comments
http://starwarsbookreport.com/?p=1831 Check out the rebuttal to this blog post over at The Star Wars Book Report (episode 61). Thanks to Jesse and Wayne for giving a lot of extra attention to this blog post.# Posted By John Hansen | 11/7/12 6:49 PM
Here’s an excellent response from a reader, Fransulo. I’ll paste it here:
Hi John.
Tried to comment the following on your last post “Evidence suggests Star Wars sequel trilogy will respect, not ignore the E.U. but it was reported as spam…I wonder why?
First of all I would like to congratulate you on an excellent and gripping article. Some of your points – compelling and well thought out – I would disagree with. But that’s one of the many things about the “Disney-Star Wars” announcement that has me buzzing; listening to other peoples ideas and sharing my own. There is no wrong or right idea, just different ones.
So as you asked “Am I right? Share your thoughts and theories below.” Well let’s find out. I’m not dissecting your points, but let’s go through them one at a time.
1. Your last line, sums it up nicely. “Here’s the important thing: He has never overwritten anything involving the main characters – the Skywalker and Solo families.” No he hasn’t, so this can only be a good thing, but has there really been an opportunity to do this until now. I don’t think so.
2. Yes Lucas has been very vague about a third instalment of movies, but I think that point alone pokes a hole in your theory. If Lucas was more involved in the E.U. – especially post ROTJ – guiding it as it expanded, then yes I think your argument would be valid, but he hasn’t. Yes I think there is a strong possibility we will see an older Luke Skywalker passing on his knowledge of the force to a new generation of Jedi, most notable the next generation of Skywalkers, which has been done in the E.U. but it doesn’t necessary mean it’s going to be done the same way, (Jedi Academy Trilogy)
3. Actors being the same age as their characters, coincidence, I would have to say yes. If Disney want Harrison Ford to look 50, to play Solo in a film set 20 years ABY, then I think Ford will get one hell of a make over. Nice idea, but I’m afraid a bit weak.
4. I think this is one of your strongest arguments. It could be just another coincidence, but still possible, has Lucas already asked Del Rey not to go past the 45 ABY mark because of the films.
5. Yes I totally agree, Lucas does respect the E.U. But I think it’s a case taking out what he likes, and discarding the rest. If Lucas has a vision that the Sith return 20 ABY, and has Disney on board to explore this idea in the films, he’s not then going to say, hang on what about the E.U.
6. Another valid point, but in a way also contradicts your main point. Your title “Evidence suggests Star Wars sequel trilogy will respect, not ignore, the E.U.” But how can the E.U. be respected if one of the main characters – Anakin Solo – is going to be written out of the next instalment of films (and he will) If Lucas requested Anakin Solo to be killed off because he didn’t want two Anakins running around in various books, then there isn’t a hope in hell he is going to make an appearance, or be mentioned in the new trilogy. And if that is the case for Anakin Solo, then I’m afraid young Ben Skywalker will get the chop as well, for the same reason. Yes some of the E.U. characters will be pared down, allowing for new characters to be introduced, but discarding prominent characters like Anakin I’m afraid is disrespecting the E.U. Also if the film is to be set 45 ABY, how will they explain the absence of Chewbacca. Such an iconic Star Wars character – if killed – deserves to be killed off on the big screen in a blaze of glory, and not using big yellow words in the opening credits of Episode 7.
7. Sorry have to disagree with this one as well. The prequels were based around Anakin Skywalker, the original trilogy around the Skywalker twins, Luke and Leia. So keeping with this trend, and with Lucas influence, the new Trilogy has to be about the next generation of Skywalkers. If the film is to be set 45 ABY it means skipping a whole generation of Skywalkers. Jaina would be 36, and Anakin and Jacen already killed off. Don’t see the logic with Disney jumping in at this point.
8. Yes Disney would be foolish not to use all the reference books that are currently out there, and yes Disney did use the reference “treasure trove”. I don’t think they will discard large chunks of it, just ignore parts they thing won’t be relevant to the new movies, and use what they think will. I’ve no doubt there will be hidden Easter Eggs in the movies that only E.U. fans will get.
9. I won’t dog on your 9th point. Might not totally agree with it, but your opening crawl is excellent.
For what’s it worth here’s my 2-cents worth, posted on www.swbookreport already.
My knee-jerk reaction when I first heard the “Disney-Star Wars” news was PROTECT THE EU! Like many E.U. fans – I presume – I have become quite attached to the ever-expanding universe, and the thought of Disney coming along and re-writing it, appalled me. I thought, if the scrolling intro to the Episode 7 started with…”1,000 years have passed since the death of Emperor Palapatine,” then Disney could leave the E.U. timeline along, avoiding alienating fans, and still allow the E.U to go on after the Legacy era.
But the next day – after most knee-jerk reactions – I reconsidered, and thought maybe that might not be the best approach. If there was a chance of seeing Luke Skywalker on the big screen wielding his lightsaber, or seeing Han Solo shrug “I’ve got a bad feeling about this.” as he turned to Leia, just one more time, do I think an opportunity like this should go by without at least being explored, the answer would have to be no. So what are the chances of this happening? I think quite high. We’ve already heard reports that, Harrison Ford and Mark Hamill are willing to return, so why not.
So what does lie, or, should I say not lie, ahead? I would like to make three points before going any further.
1. Lucas hasn’t passed over the Start Wars mantle to Disney to stamp all over it. The eighteen-month negotiations weren’t on the lines of, Disney: George, we like to buy Star Wars. George: Eh! No freaking way! Disney: We pay you $4 Billion. George: Ok where do I sign? No way would Lucas pass over Star Wars to Disney – or anybody else for that matter – if he didn’t like what he heard, if they didn’t share his vision. And as Lucas has been kept on in a consultancy roll, he will still have some influence on the new films.
2. Disney haven’t paid $4 billion to be constraint to what’s in, or isn’t in the E.U. novels. They would be foolish not to use the mammoth collection of reading material in some way or another, but don’t expect the films to be based on what solely can be found in the E.U.
3. One word, Skywalker. The prequels were based around Anakin, the original trilogy around the Skywalker twins, Luke and Leia. So keeping with this trend, and with Lucas influence, the new Trilogy has to be about the next generation of Skywalkers.
With all this in mind – I think – there are two possible entry points to the Star Wars universe timeline for Episode 7. It is a fair assumption they will be set after ROTJ, so we are looking at either within the E.U. timeline, or after the E.U. timeline, i.e. after the Legacy era, 45 years after ABY.
Before trying to predict when, let’s discard a couple of options that may be on the table. This is kind of a response to your link to John V. Hansen, excellent and compelling article. I can only think of one reason for Disney going post Legacy era – 45 years after ABY – and that would be to accept what came before in the E.U, as canon, that everything (all the major plots anyway) happened in the E.U. novel, and that Episode 7 is a continuation of the Star Wars story from that point. I just can’t see this happening. This would mean, no Chewbacca, no Jacen, no Anakin, and picking up with Jaina at the age of 36. You have already skipped over a generation of Skywalkers, which I don’t think fits into Lucas vision. I just think the 45 year gap is too long, too much has happened. Some could argue, the Solo children could be made younger, or not to kill off Jacen and Anakin, but if you’re doing this, you are already stepping all over the E.U. so why set the movies so far after ROTJ. And how would you explain the absence of Chewbacca. Such an iconic Star Wars character – if killed – deserves to be killed off on the big screen in a blaze of glory, and not using big yellow words in the opening credits of Episode 7. I just won’t stand for it, and to be honest I don’t think a lot of Star Wars fans will either. So would Disney then not kill off Chewbacca, which then brings me back to my earlier argument, why set the movies so far after ROTJ if you’re going to discard a lot of what’s in the E.U. novels?
So if the new movie isn’t going to be set post E.U. novels, then this just leaves within the current E.U. timeline. So, will Disney stay loyal to the E.U. fans and use just what is in the Novels, or, actually base the film on one of the books or Trilogies, I think it’s safe to say the answer is no. This – again – brings me back to an earlier point, Disney haven’t paid $4 billion to be tied to what is, or isn’t in the Novels. I would be shocked if they didn’t use some of the material that can be found in the novels, which Lucas has done before – Coruscant being the prime example – but don’t expect Episode 7 to be based around one or some of the novels, like Timothy Zahns’ Thrawn Trilogy, but I wouldn’t rule out Thrawn making an appearance, or at least being referenced.
Another point I think is the Solo and Skywalker children, or more importantly their names. From John V. Hansen article he states “Lucas requested that Anakin Solo be killed off so as not to have two Anakins running around in various books” If this is the case – and I have no reason to doubt Hansen – I can’t see a second Anakin making an appearance in Episode 7, and if this is the case, I think it’s safe to say Ben can be ruled out as well, not to say we won’t see Luke handing over his lightsaber to a younger version of himself, it’s just that his/her name won’t be Ben.
I’m a big E.U. fan, but I think a lot of what has gone on in the E.U. novels is going to be discarded, especially post New Jedi Order. Disney has big plans for the next instalment to the Star Wars saga, what this will be remains to be seen, but I think it’s a safe bet, it’s going the be brand new, something we haven’t seen, or read before – and this does pain me to say – may be a good thing.
My prediction would be around the 25 ABY mark, around the New Jedi Order Series. It would allow Disney to use the Solo twins (sorry no Anakin), which would make them around 16. It still allows Disney the ability to reference the books, like the Jedi Academy, and the rise and fall of Thrawn. It also gives them the opportunity to introduce a new enemy to the New Republic that hasn’t been seen on the big screen before in the shape of the Yuuzhan Vong, and we still – more then likely – get to see our old favourites, Han, Luke and Leia. And how cool – and gruesome – would it to see Chewbacca getting killed on the big screen. This is hopeful thinking on my part as above I expect Disney to dazzle us with something new.
Again, I’m not disregarding your article, just a difference of opinion.
Let us know what you think.
Fransulo# Posted By John Hansen | 11/7/12 9:33 PM
Fransulo–
I’ll address your rebuttal using the same numbering system. (If I skip a number, it’s because we basically agree or I don’t have anything new to add.)
1. The SW Book Report pointed out one thing I overlooked: “Jedi Trial” and the “Clone Wars” microseries have different portrayals of Anakin’s knighting. So Lucas did alter a Skywalker arc there. Relatively minor, but still worth mentioning.
2. From the very beginning of the EU (the comic strips and “Splinter of the Mind’s Eye”), Lucas mapped out eras or plot points that writers were not allowed to play in. Namely, the prequel era, but also the Han Solo-Chewie meeting. Of course, writers accidentally tread on his toes, as with the Boba Fett thing. But Lucas never said “hands off” of the sequel era. I think this is because for many years he genuinely did not have an idea for sequels. Then, in the last few years, he did get an inkling of an idea. And it may have been actually somewhat inspired by the EU, although there’s no way we can know that at this point. I also think that after the sequel trilogy, we could see movies such as Joe Johnston’s Boba Fett movie or a Lucas-penned movie about Chewie and Han meeting. That way, we’d get to see Chewie on screen again even though he can’t be in Episode VII according to my theory.
3. It seems odd to me that Lucas would try to make the actors look 20 years younger — or cast younger actors in those iconic roles — if there’s no good reason to do that. And if he talked to Mark and Carrie last year, but did not warn them that he is going to re-cast their roles, that would be kind of cruel to get their hopes up. I guess your reason is that it’s important to have the very next generation (young Jaina, Jacen, Anakin, or if you go a bit farther up the timeline, young Ben) in their coming-of-age years. I don’t think that’s crucial. I think any future generation works for the theme of passing on the baton. In this case, according to my theory, it would be two generations hence, which would be Allana Solo. Possibly also a child of Jaina’s and Jag’s (to be born in “Sword of the Jedi”) which could be 100 percent Lucas’ character.
6. I think Ben Skywalker is safe because, throughout the prequels, the name Obi-Wan was used. And, besides, I don’t think Ben will be the main character — Allana or an original Lucas creation will be the main character. Actually, Ben will be in the role of Obi-Wan from Episode I. How will they explain the death of Chewbacca? He died in the books — that’s how he’ll explain it. Maybe a line of dialogue. Remember, these books are not obscure little side projects. They all topped the NY Times Bestseller lists and there was a ton of hype when Chewie died. It would be much harder to explain his presence in the film than his absence. And a Chewie/Han movie would soothe the pain for moviegoers who miss Chewbacca.
7. The logic is just that 40-years-after-ROTJ works perfectly for the EU timeline and the actors’ ages. Again, I don’t think it’s absolutely crucial that every generation be chronicled in the medium of film. Ideally, if this was all planned out ahead, yes, it would be nice. But given the current reality of the actors’ ages and the EU stories written so far, I don’t think skipping a generation is an awful thing.
In general, I think Episode VII’s adherence to the EU will be on par with “The Clone Wars.” About 90 percent of it will match up, and about 10 percent of it will not. Generally, the quality will be so good that we might not even notice the inconsistency when we are watching the film (to be honest, I didn’t give the Fett origin contradiction much thought when watch Episode II the first time). But I just don’t see the sense in having fans sit down in the theater in 2015 and we’re trying to figure out why nothing at all matches up with the EU, like Chewie or Jacen being alive after he was dead, or Mara never existing, or something like that.
Now, if Lucas developed a sudden passion and inspiration for a sequel trilogy script, that might be different. But I really think his inspiration here was just to write a sequel trilogy treatment that is largely centered on story and theme more so than character or even timeline placement. (In fact, it could be that his treatments are entirely based on plot and theme, and the screenwriter will actually be asked to incorporate the EU timeline and characters into it somewhat so George doesn’t have to deal with all that technical stuff and can just focus on story, which is his strength.)
If George is about half as engaged with the sequels as he was with the prequels, which seems to be a fair assessment, then I think he’d be totally open to positioning it in an open era of the timeline and not contradict the EU. I think it’s entirely possible that some of the EU characters would be not be mentioned at all, such as Jaina, Jag or Tahiri, or even Ben. I think for the sake of a Skywalker connection, Allana is an enticing possibility as a main character, or Jaina’s child. My point is not that Lucas will incorporate the EU heavily (in fact, I’d be surprised if he did), it’s simply that he will not trample all over it as if it never happened. I think Episode VII absolutely can give us the best of both worlds.
At any rate, I guess we agree on some points and disagree on others, and pretty much anything on both of our lists is within the realm of possibility at this point. Thanks for the interesting discussion. 🙂
John# Posted By John Hansen | 11/7/12 10:17 PM
Hi,
This could go on for a bit, maybe we might agree on everything by 2015, but in essence, our stance on this topic isn’t too far apart. We’re singing from the same hymn sheet so to speak, it’s just that you’re a couple of pages ahead. If the E.U. hadn’t progressed passed, let’s just say the start of New Jedi Order Era – 25 ABY- we would probably agree on most things. Lucas and Disney could hop in at this stage, taking what they want from the previous books, omitted what they don’t, and as long they don’t “trample all over it”, and not contradict any of the previous major plots or characters, there wouldn’t be any problems, and everyone would be happy. Now fast-forward 20 years to the end of the Legacy era, and you are basically saying exactly the same thing, just from a different point in the E.U. timeline.
I suppose the critical thing – which you touched on nicely – is that the theme, storyline and characters will be the driving force for the new movies, not the timeline. If Chewbacca, Anakin Solo or Jacen aren’t critical to the plot, well then yes just leave them out; don’t mention them. My point was that I think it would be an injustice to kill off such an iconic Star Wars character in Chewbacca by just having his death mentioned in passing during the new film, or at the start of the opening crawl, which, in a way I feel they would have to do to explain his omission. (For Anakin or Jacen you could just not mention them)
Maybe I’ve being going about this all-wrong, I’ve been transfixed, obsessed even, with the timeline, and where in the E.U. the new films will take place.
Think back to the original trilogy, more importantly the time gap between each film. (Now correct me if I’m wrong) there is no hint of the time lapse between the movies, in Empire or Jedi. Yes, you can take it there isn’t a big gap as none of the characters aged considerably, but is it months or years. Of course that is made very clear now in the E.U. timeline, but back when the films were released was it? Same with the prequel trilogy. How many years has Anakin aged between, Clones and Sith? From the films alone you just can’t tell. Only between Sith and Hope, do you know – just from the movies – 19 years has passed, but even then an exact age was never put on Luke or Leia. So why should the new movies be any different. Yes Lucas will have to place it somewhere within the E.U. timeline, but from the movie alone, I have a feeling there will be no way of telling. The opening crawl won’t start with … 25 years have passed since the death of Emperor Palpatine. Where am I going with this? Bear with me I’m getting there.
Where within the E.U. timeline the new films fit isn’t really that important. If the three main protagonists return, will it really matter how old they are? Not really. Are they 50, 60, 70, who really cares, or we know is that they are older. The Solo children – presuming they do appear – if their ages don’t match up to what they are in the E.U. is it really going to mess things up? Not really. For die hard fans, maybe, but that could soon be forgotten if the films turn out to be what we all hope and dream they will…freckin awesome. I know it’s not exactly the same, but all of the Stark children in Game of Thrones are a few years younger in the books then what they are portrayed in the series, and that didn’t cause an outcry. The only big gotcha is if they change things considerably with the Solo kids. Like having triplet girls or something, which – I think we all agree – can’t see happening unless they purposely want to stamp all over the E.U. If they were – which I think they will – going to have at least one Skywalker offspring in Episode 7, it wouldn’t make sense if they didn’t use Jacen or Jaina. I haven’t mentioned Anakin (you know my stance on that) or Ben. Just from episode 61 from the Star Wars bookreport, referring to Lucas as not seeing Luke as married after ROTJ. That means no Mara Jade, and no Ben – obviously.
So here’s to both of us being right, 20,30,40 ABY, it’s not going to make a big difference, it may throw a few novels off, cause a few contradictions, but nothing major. There was still the E.U. before this announcement, and it will still be there after the film, and of course there will always be Star Wars…but what’s going to happen to the rest of the E.U. – pre ABY, when Disney start to make further movies after the new trilogy? I think I see another article coming along.
Thanks again, discussion has been great.
Fransulo# Posted By Fransulo | 11/8/12 6:39 PM
Fransulo–
Yeah, we aren’t too far apart, and I might be rehashing some things, but hey, it’s a lot more fun than arguing about politics on Facebook.
Yes, it’s mainly the “trampling all over it” that I don’t think should happen, and I don’t think it will happen. Like I said, about 90 percent consistent to the EU, about 10 percent contradictory of the EU (like maybe there’ll be a Boba Fett-type situation).
As far as Chewie goes, I would say he got an honorary death in “Vector Prime” and the repercussions were felt by Han for several books to come after that. That’s something that can only be done in books; Yoda, Obi-Wan, Qui-Gon, etc., didn’t get the same attention in the films. So if you love Chewie, it’s better that his death is explored in books. And I don’t mean his death will be mentioned as an unimportant side note; rather, I’m thinking of an important scene that allows Chewie’s death to be mentioned, something that will have some power and poignancy to it while also filling in people who don’t follow the books. Maybe an adult Lumpy is in it, and Han chats with him about how much they miss Chewie. Or maybe Lowbacca. Or an original G.L.-created Wookiee who was an old friend of Chewie. The Wookiee could even be played by Peter Mayhew. Having Chewie in Episode VII would actually dishonor the character, not to mention all the writers who worked so hard to chronicle his death and generally did a good job. And, the more I think about it, a “Han meets Chewie” movie seems possible, and it could include Peter Mayhew plus a new actor as Han.
I think we will have a way of telling the time gap, just like we do between most of the movies (the gap between Empire and Jedi being the exception). The tip-off would be the ages of the three main characters (who now would be supporting “mentor” characters). Since they are all going to be almost four decades older, why not make the characters four decades older? Why jump through the hoops of prosthetics or CGI or new actors to make them only 20 years older? Especially since 40 years older fits so nicely with the EU? It seems like a lot of effort with little to gain. Like you say, you’d gain the kids being younger, but I guess it’s just not important to me that the very next generation be chronicled in film. I’m fine with skipping ahead to Allana (two generations removed from the OT).
I agree that the opening crawl won’t state the exact number of years, but then again, it doesn’t have to. The three main characters will appear two generations older, and that’s good enough. Another advantage of the 40-year gap is that it really enforces the idea that the Rebellion won something. Just as the Empire’s victory resonates more by having Episode IV 20 years later rather than three years later, if the New Republic/Galactic Alliance was seriously threatened on film just a few years later, it would cheapen Episode VI. Twenty years would be enough time, true, but following this line of thinking, 40 years is even better. And of the few GL quotes out there about the sequel trilogy, he is fairly consistent in envisioning Luke being an Obi-Wan-type mentor character in his 60s. And the fact of his meeting with Mark Hamill last year — it all falls into place so perfectly.
Here’s another angle that you didn’t bring up but other people have. Some people say that “Legacy of the Force” and “Fate of the Jedi” should be overwritten by the films because they were terrible. I say that quality isn’t important; what’s important here is that these were all heavily hyped, meticulously plotted-by-committee New York Times bestselling books. It really is a different situation than the Marvel comics of the 1980s. Back then, Star Wars was not what it is today. The notion of the EU as something with value and heft wasn’t established yet. (Even with that considered, there were actually very few contradictions back then. There was Jabba the Hutt looking different, but generally the Marvel comics enriched, rather than contradicted the films.) I’d be more open to the idea of “re-booting” the story if, say, Star Wars had completely been killed off because those books were so despised (and they really weren’t as bad as everyone says, in my opinion) and a couple decades passed with Star Wars being dead in the water. But with those books having been published so recently, it sets up a very chaotic, confusing situation to immediately overwrite them. Yes, there will be a lot of people in the audience who don’t know anything about the EU. But let’s not discount the fact that there will be a lot who DO know the EU. What would be gained from confusing and alienating them? Nothing, if we’re just talking about a plot outline here with Luke being an old mentor, rather than something more detailed involving a younger main trio.
Yes, the non-episodic movies would make a good blog post. Obviously, there’s the Han-Chewie story and the Boba Fett movie that Joe Johnston wants to do. Then there’s the idea of animated adaptations like the Thrawn trilogy. And the planned TV show that never happened between the prequel and original trilogies. Or maybe a big movie event that wraps up the Clone Wars series and explains what happens to Ahsoka. Tons of ideas are out there — and there’s no need for any of them to trample on the EU! 🙂
John# Posted By John Hansen | 11/9/12 2:31 AM
The more I read this blog, the more I realise we’re on the same side. Yes the new trilogy would fit in nicely at the end of the current E.U. timeline, why purposely go out and upset E.U. fans of the post Jedi era if there isn’t a need. And the more I think about it you could be right about the Chewbacca debate, a fitting moment with Han could well do him justice, re-writing his death scene or just ignoring it could have the opposite effect, suppose we just have to wait and see.
I still think the age the actors and characters are is immaterial, I don’t see the big issue with them (Ford, Hamill and Fisher) playing younger, or maybe even older roles. In the last two Indiana Jones instalments, Ford was around 10 years older the Dr Jones in both films.
I haven’t read anything past The New Jedi Order so I can’t comment on the Legacy of the Force and Fate of the Jedi series, but yes I would agree why discard them if there isn’t a need. I suppose it all depends on the direction Disney and Lucas want to go in.
Wherever the new films fit in the E.U. timeline I think there will be very little reference to what occurred in the E.U. Maybe a mention of Thrawn or the Yuuzhan Vong, but nothing major, or plot essential. But expect new characters to appear that E.U. fans will find hard to explain. They have form for this already in the shape of Ahsoka in the Clone Wars.# Posted By Fransulo | 11/12/12 12:58 PMYes, you sum things up very well. In defense of the people who believe Episode VII won’t take place after Fate of the Jedi: I haven’t heard anyone say it would be stupid for Lucas to honor the books and the established timeline and take advantage of the actors’ ages. In fact, many people have told me “I hope you’re right.” It’s just that they believe Lucas cares so little about the EU that he will overwrite it even if he doesn’t have to. And there is evidence of that, such as Mandalore, Even Piell, Adi Gallia and Anakin’s knighting. All of those contradictions could’ve been avoided without hurting the story. Of course, I’ve presented evidence on the other side as well. Episode VII screenwriter Steve Arndt will be a wild card: I’ve read that he’s a big original trilogy fan. But is he a big EU fan? If the answer is no, those of us who enjoy the sweeping serial that is Star Wars could be in trouble. (By the way, regarding Ahsoka: I see it as all the 2002-05 stuff happened, and then all the Ahsoka stuff happened, with a few exceptions such as “Labyrinth of Evil.”) And I really like Ahsoka and “The Clone Wars” and the animation. I originally liked the microseries animation better, and I now see that that’s a ridiculous stance. Now, a week doesn’t go by that I don’t marvel at the visual quality of the show. So I’m going to try to keep an open mind. And who knows, Arndt might just come through with a 40-years-after-Jedi yarn that continues from the EU and all those people talking about Chewie and Mara and Jacen and Thrawn being in the movie are going to look stupid.# Posted By John Hansen | 11/12/12 4:39 PM
I really enjoyed this article. You make some excellent points. I was just doing some research on Wookieepedia to clarify what you had said. I think it would be perfect if the new Star Wars trilogy were to acknowledge the EU and take place around 45 ABY. At that point in time, Allana would be around 9 years old (the same age Anakin was in Episode I). There was also a rumor that was started by a tweet that hinted that the main character of Star Wars VII would be a female. It’s also been rumored that Lucas had 12 movies planned. Maybe this could be centered around Allana’s start as an apprentice and rise to a Jedi Master, or taking over Luke’s place as Grand Jedi Master?
Anyway, the whole idea of fitting these new movies into the EU timeline sounds perfect for me. All of the die-hard EU fans would be satisfied. Not to mention, I could still read all the post-ROTJ novels and not feel like it was pointless. 😉# Posted By Drew | 3/11/13 7:55 PM
Thanks for the comment. I hope everything falls into place nicely with the EU and Episode VII. There’s no good reason why it shouldn’t. But so far I’m not impressed with Disney with their cancellation of the 3D films and now The Clone Wars. This doesn’t seem to be an outfit that gives much of a rip about what the fans want.# Posted By John Hansen | 3/11/13 10:08 PM
I was actually ready for the Clone Wars to end myself, and I wasn’t excited about the 3D releases. I’m quite happy that Lucasfilm will be making a new animated project. Maybe we’ll get an animated series of the Thrawn trilogy or Shadows of the Empire? Or maybe something between 3 and 4. Anyway, by hiring JJ Abrams, ending the Clone Wars, McCallum “retiring”, and working on bringing back the original cast, I’m really liking what Disney has done so far. Of course, I’ll have to just wait until 2015 to make my final judgement. Anyway, I hope we get more casting and plot announcements soon. Or some web documentary series like we got with the prequels!# Posted By Drew | 3/13/13 9:31 AM
You have basically answered my prayers my friend. I’m so speechless, I can barely come up with anything to say. Thank you so much for explaining all of this. 😀# Posted By Zac Bender | 4/8/13 10:56 PM
Zac–
Well, I wrote this when Disney first purchased Star Wars. The things they’ve done since then have made me more cynical about how much they will respect the EU. Certainly, they haven’t shown much respect for The Clone Wars.
—John# Posted By John Hansen | 4/9/13 10:08 PM