The Making of Return of the Jedi

[ChrisIII]

Been reading this book (It's a bit old, came out in 2013, right after the Disney sale so it gets a bit of a mention) but here's some interesting tidbits from what I've read so far.




-Although he'd later change this for the prequels pretty much, Lucas in the story meetings says that the force is can be for everyone, but it's only the Jedi who really focus on it and use it. He also states that Yoda is in fact, not a Jedi, but is more of a sort of religious elder, and Palpatine has a similar role for the dark side.

-Alec Guinness was originally promised a larger role-he wasn't too happy with only standing still in ESB. While the original script by Lucas gave him more to do as Obi-Wan would come back to life and even chat with the Emperor and Vader a bit, this was rolled back to him being a ghost again, although he was given a bit more to do than in ROTJ, including being able to move around and sit down. (Force ghosts being able to interact to the physical world is something that the sequels picked up on too I guess).

-Lucas describes the whole Anakin backstory, which lines up with the prequels to a degree except with the mother, who lives for a while on Alderaan with Leia.

-Ralph Mcquarrie wasn't too pleased with Jabba ending up being a slug/worm creature.


-Speaking of Jabba, Lucas's primary inspiration seems to be the Fat man played by Sidney Greenstreet from The Maltese Falcon.

-There was some talk of killing Lando off. I wonder if this in part led to the internet myth that the Falcon/Lando would die at the end of ROTJ.

-Lucas just decides to ditch the concept of Imperial city planet Had Abbadon, citing costs and other concerns. Of course the planet would be reimagined as Coruscant by the EU and Lucas himself in the prequels. Kasdan didn't agree with this, citing in part that the finale would now seem a bit too much like the original film.

-Kasdan wasn't too happy with the Ewoks either.

-Originally, Leia was not going to accompany the rest of the group to Tatooine but do her own "Forest moon" mission, and the movie would open with her doing the shuttle mission alone. Other than that, the Jabba part of the story is pretty much the most intact part of the original concepts for the film.

-At one point they thought of the Rebels turning the Death Star on Had Abbadon!

-They thought about using Vader's star destroyer for the opening scene, but decided to just go with the regular one instead for some reason. The old Marvel comics adaptation has this. However in the finished film Vader's destroyer doesn't show up until the Tyderium mission.

-They also mused having Luke become the new Vader for a bit, but Lucas wanted a happy ending.

-They also mused having Luke be the new peaceful leader of the Galaxy, but Lucas also made it clear that Luke would be content with simply being a Jedi.

-Jerjorodd. The Death Star commander-who is given a minor role in the final film is a major player in earlier drafts as a rival of Vader's, and at one point was even considered to be an alien, with a look that seems a bit like a mix between the Emperor's advisors and the Trade Federation guys from the prequels. The concept of Vader having a dangerous rival would of course wind up in some EU, such as Shadows of the Empire, and the first Marvel Vader comic. Also the relationship between Kylo and Hux in the sequels. Also, funny thing is in the earlier scripts he is the one lecturing Vader about the Death Star! He even gets the line "The Emperor does not share your optimistic appraisal of the situation". In the film's deleted scenes, Jerjorodd does get some more stuff to do, and a tense scene with Vader, but nothing like the original draft.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

That part I like best in Rinzler's book is the transcripts of audio recordings Lucas had with Kasdan and others during the writing of the screenplay.

That was great.

The important thing which Rinzler drove home when he wrote it is that Lucas went into Return of the Jedi with the intention of giving the OT characters an ending, so he was combining and putting together ideas for multiple movies into a single film.

To be honest Had Abaddon points towards Exegol more than Coruscant. Exegol is a Planet that is fully evil and that represents Had Abaddon whereas Coruscant was a good planet going bad.

Reading ROTJ I never got a sense that any of the choices other than the ones Lucas made would have worked or have been better.

[ChrisIII]

True-if you look at Mcquarrie's work on the planet plus some of the early depictions in the EU, Coruscant sort of looks more like a BLADE RUNNER smog-filled dystopia than the colorful city we see in the prequels. I think even Palpatine's molten lair was supposed to suggest this, thatt the volcano was contributing to the look of the place.

[Revolutionary_Jack]

True-if you look at Mcquarrie's work on the planet plus some of the early depictions in the EU, Coruscant sort of looks more like a BLADE RUNNER smog-filled dystopia than the colorful city we see in the prequels. I think even Palpatine's molten lair was supposed to suggest this, thatt the volcano was contributing to the look of the place.

Coruscant still has a Blade Runner vibe, like the opening speeder chase in AOTC and the nightclubs of Coruscant as well as the industrial area where Palpatine and Dooku convene is very much in that style.

But other parts of the city-planet look grand, which feels right in my view. The entire point is darkness and light are two sides. The Jedi Temple is at Coruscant but so is the Senate. You see this in TESB where you have Cloud City (the only part of the OT that anticipates the aesthetic of the prequels) which is all bright and Jetsons Googie on the outside but in the carbonite chamber and so on, it's dark, cave-like and gritty.

[ChrisIII]

Funny thing is Cloud City was originally intended as an Imperial prison for ANH, probably serving the same story purpose the Death Star does for Leia's imprisonment.

It does pretty much end up a prison for Han and co. anyway.

Kind of interesting that some of the licensed material for Cloud City also shows that version, which is far less smoother and more mechanical-looking than the final film version. More like a Cheeseburger than the frisbee we wound up with.

[Bruce Wayne]

To be honest Had Abaddon points towards Exegol more than Coruscant. Exegol is a Planet that is fully evil and that represents Had Abaddon whereas Coruscant was a good planet going bad.

From the Annotated Screenplays, Had Abaddon is described as a city planet with runaway pollution with an underground lava throneroom. So it's a cross between Coruscant and Mustafar.

The idea of Had Abbadon being a Sith Planet like Exegol is more from the Legends/NuEU.

[ChrisIII]

Reading further it's interesting that Hammill had the idea of Luke going to the dark side to do a "know thy enemy"/infiltration kind of thing.

Which is pretty part of "Dark Empire".

[Revolutionary_Jack]

Ultimately what counts is Lucas rejecting the ideas and insisting on the story we got. That's what is more interesting.

[Güicho]

-They also mused having Luke become the new Vader for a bit, but Lucas wanted a happy ending.
.

Reading further it's interesting that Hammill had the idea of Luke going to the dark side to do a "know thy enemy"/infiltration kind of thing.

Which is pretty part of "Dark Empire".

Or rather, "Know thy enemy arc" is all summed up beautifully without a word, in one epic unforgettable scene; Luke looking at his own (symbolic) hand, recognizing and knowing it's a part of him, it just as easily flows through him as it did his father), it's a part of him.
Yet that (who and what came before) doesn't define him or control him, it's his choices that do.
And he makes that ultimate choice, switches off his saber - with that single act, he show his father the path he could never take, to redemption, and hence Return of the Jedi.
That's it, done, any more would be redundant superfluous fluff.
Luke knows it's about recognizing and accepting both halves, not fearing them, that's the path he took.

That's why the ridiculous step backward he takes in Last Jedi, then hiding away clinging to Jedi dogma, cowering in fear of his own choices , was such an absolute ridiculous betrayal of everything the character had learned about himself and become.

You can tell Hamill knew this in every interview leading up to release.

[WebLurker]

Or rather, "Know thy enemy arc" is all summed up beautifully without a word, in one epic unforgettable scene; Luke looking at his own (symbolic) hand, recognizing and knowing it's a part of him, it just as easily flows through him as it did his father), it's a part of him.
Yet that (who and what came before) doesn't define him or control him, it's his choices that do.
And he makes that ultimate choice, switches off his saber - with that single act, he show his father the path he could never take, to redemption, and hence Return of the Jedi.
That's it, done, any more would be redundant superfluous fluff.
Luke knows it's about recognizing and accepting both halves, not fearing them, that's the path he took.

That's why the ridiculous step backward he takes in Last Jedi, then hiding away clinging to Jedi dogma, cowering in fear of his own choices , was such an absolute ridiculous betrayal of everything the character had leaned about himself and become.

You can tell Hamill knew this in every interview leading up to release.

We're never the same person we were decades ago, nor does learning a lesson once mean that we'll always follow it in the future.

The ROTJ Luke never faced the failures and trials that lead to TLJ Luke withdrawing from it all, nor was it written that he wouldn't screw up just because he'd gotten it right once before. We're buying into the legend created around the character, not the man the character actually was (who, as we know from ESB, was someone who failed quite a lot, even with the best of intentions). As the movies say, there is no conflict.

[ChrisIII]

Another interesting aspect is that Carrie and Marquand apparently discussed having Leia be more 'feminine' in the movie, perhaps explaining in part why she doesn't bicker with Han that much in ROTJ, if at all (The closest thing we get I think is Han's misplaced jealousy).

[Revolutionary_Jack]

We're buying into the legend created around the character, not the man the character actually was

I don't want to divert this to TLJ but I have to say there's no such thing as "the man the character actually was" when it comes to Luke Skywalker. Luke isn't a historical figure around whom you have a contrast between a historical record and popular memory and monumentalization in the real world. He's a fictional character conceived and created by George Lucas. Lucas conceived the character in a particular way in the first three films and that's all there is to him.

There's no additional room anywhere to draw from vis-a-vis Luke. That room has to be created and built from the ground up, if you want to do something with Luke outside the first three films.

(who, as we know from ESB, was someone who failed quite a lot, even with the best of intentions).

Showing concern for your friends and losing a duel doesn't give grounds for him to raise a lightsaber over his nephew.

TLJ made it that Luke let his legend get to his head and so on, but what that is isn't elaborated, it's basically a fix-anything-here empty shape of jigsaw where fans can insert anything they want without the movie doing anything...i.e. doing the movie's job for it.

[WebLurker]

I don't want to divert this to TLJ but I have to say there's no such thing as "the man the character actually was" when it comes to Luke Skywalker. Luke isn't a historical figure around whom you have a contrast between a historical record and popular memory and monumentalization in the real world. He's a fictional character conceived and created by George Lucas. Lucas conceived the character in a particular way in the first three films and that's all there is to him.

There's no additional room anywhere to draw from vis-a-vis Luke. That room has to be created and built from the ground up, if you want to do something with Luke outside the first three films.



Showing concern for your friends and losing a duel doesn't give grounds for him to raise a lightsaber over his nephew.

TLJ made it that Luke let his legend get to his head and so on, but what that is isn't elaborated, it's basically a fix-anything-here empty shape of jigsaw where fans can insert anything they want without the movie doing anything...i.e. doing the movie's job for it.

If you say so.

[ChrisIII]

I would argue that to a degree, the more emotional, sarcastic Luke of the sequel trilogy is a bit closer to the whinier, impulsive Luke from ANH to ESB than the mostly stoic, calmer warrior from ROTJ (That the EU largely based their version of post-ROTJ Luke on).

[Revolutionary_Jack]

I would argue that to a degree, the more emotional, sarcastic Luke of the sequel trilogy is a bit closer to the whinier, impulsive Luke from ANH to ESB

By "bit" what do you mean exactly? How small does a bit measure in your estimation.



My feeling is that TLJ asks audiences to do its job. It had no basis for its character turn and wasn't doing any groundwork of establishing that new basis and instead it relies on audiences to basically rewire how they saw and understood the previous movies. Some might call it, asking the audience to fill in the blanks and not relying on backstory for motivations and so on...others would call it gaslighting the audience by telling them that the character that they had seen and known for more than 30 years and so on was entirely wrong and mistaken.

...than the mostly stoic, calmer warrior from ROTJ (That the EU largely based their version of post-ROTJ Luke on).

Fact is that the Luke that was handed to the ST creators was ROTJ Luke, and if they are saying that Luke backslided or so on, they need to give reasons for doing that, and the ones we got didn't make sense. TLJ depends on audiences thinking ROTJ is a bad movie or that it's Luke is somehow inadequate. That's not true.