Star Wars Episode 7: Set for 2015 Release

[88Devin12]

Can we get back on topic please?

As George Lucas himself would surely say, thanks to Star Wars being the core essence of Joseph Campell's theories on myth, everything is on topic.

Oh, and 88Devin, if you have a problem with Shakespeare's licentiousness, why are you so desperately defending a series that promoted incest? Or did Lucas edit that out of the latest special edition?

It didn't promote incest. Luke kissed Leia in the first film, prior to it being worked out that they were brother & sister. With Han Solo, you had the drama between the three. Han was going to be killed off in 2, leaving  Luke with the princess. However, it was worked out that Luke & Leia were brother & sister (therefore couldn't be together) and the fans loved Han Solo so much Lucas ended up having to include him in ROTJ. The fact Han Solo lived was due to the pressure of the fans on Lucas. Also, incest would imply something happened between Luke & Leia, which nothing did, and in fact it was "broken off" once they found out.

[vamrat]

Can we get back on topic please?

[88Devin12]

On topic:

Star Wars Episode VII-IX Details Spelled Out From Anonymous Source
http://comicbook.com/blog/2012/11/02/star-wars-episode-vii-ix-details-spelled-out-from-anonymous-source/

While it's anonymous and a rumor, I really hope it's true.

[FormerReformer]

Can we get back on topic please?

As George Lucas himself would surely say, thanks to Star Wars being the core essence of Joseph Campell's theories on myth, everything is on topic.

Oh, and 88Devin, if you have a problem with Shakespeare's licentiousness, why are you so desperately defending a series that promoted incest? Or did Lucas edit that out of the latest special edition?

It didn't promote incest. Luke kissed Leia in the first film, prior to it being worked out that they were brother & sister. With Han Solo, you had the drama between the three. Han was going to be killed off in 2, leaving  Luke with the princess. However, it was worked out that Luke & Leia were brother & sister (therefore couldn't be together) and the fans loved Han Solo so much Lucas ended up having to include him in ROTJ. The fact Han Solo lived was due to the pressure of the fans on Lucas. Also, incest would imply something happened between Luke & Leia, which nothing did, and in fact it was "broken off" once they found out.

So- according to you, full on making out with your sister is ok so long as (a) you didn't know it was your sister; (b) the director/screenwriter didn't know it was your sister; and (c) she only did it the second time to make that lovable rogue jealous? So long as these requirements are met, and "nothing happened" (other than, you know, making out) everything is fine?

[88Devin12]

As for the story, I read that Lucas' plans were for each trilogy to have 20 year gaps between the trilogies, so Luke would be in his 40s in these films (I guess makeup could fix the age issue). Lucas also set out a plan for a fourth trilogy as well.

[88Devin12]

Can we get back on topic please?

As George Lucas himself would surely say, thanks to Star Wars being the core essence of Joseph Campell's theories on myth, everything is on topic.

Oh, and 88Devin, if you have a problem with Shakespeare's licentiousness, why are you so desperately defending a series that promoted incest? Or did Lucas edit that out of the latest special edition?

It didn't promote incest. Luke kissed Leia in the first film, prior to it being worked out that they were brother & sister. With Han Solo, you had the drama between the three. Han was going to be killed off in 2, leaving  Luke with the princess. However, it was worked out that Luke & Leia were brother & sister (therefore couldn't be together) and the fans loved Han Solo so much Lucas ended up having to include him in ROTJ. The fact Han Solo lived was due to the pressure of the fans on Lucas. Also, incest would imply something happened between Luke & Leia, which nothing did, and in fact it was "broken off" once they found out.

So- according to you, full on making out with your sister is ok so long as (a) you didn't know it was your sister; (b) the director/screenwriter didn't know it was your sister; and (c) she only did it the second time to make that lovable rogue jealous? So long as these requirements are met, and "nothing happened" (other than, you know, making out) everything is fine?

Your point is completely invalid. As I said, in the first movie, when it came out, Luke & Leia were not brother and sister. When the second movie came out, they were, but again, neither knew it yet.
Like I said, your point is completely illogical and invalid. Incest is certainly not promoted or celebrated in the film. It's not a black or white issue. Incest is wrong, but incest is not promoted in the film.

In fact, if you look at the very definition of incest, it isn't "kissing", it's sexual relations between two people who are too closely related. That never happened, therefore, no incest. As I said, your logic and your argument is completely invalid.

[celticfan1888]

Can we get back on topic please?

As George Lucas himself would surely say, thanks to Star Wars being the core essence of Joseph Campell's theories on myth, everything is on topic.

Oh, and 88Devin, if you have a problem with Shakespeare's licentiousness, why are you so desperately defending a series that promoted incest? Or did Lucas edit that out of the latest special edition?

It didn't promote incest. Luke kissed Leia in the first film, prior to it being worked out that they were brother & sister. With Han Solo, you had the drama between the three. Han was going to be killed off in 2, leaving  Luke with the princess. However, it was worked out that Luke & Leia were brother & sister (therefore couldn't be together) and the fans loved Han Solo so much Lucas ended up having to include him in ROTJ. The fact Han Solo lived was due to the pressure of the fans on Lucas. Also, incest would imply something happened between Luke & Leia, which nothing did, and in fact it was "broken off" once they found out.

So- according to you, full on making out with your sister is ok so long as (a) you didn't know it was your sister; (b) the director/screenwriter didn't know it was your sister; and (c) she only did it the second time to make that lovable rogue jealous? So long as these requirements are met, and "nothing happened" (other than, you know, making out) everything is fine?

Your point is completely invalid. As I said, in the first movie, when it came out, Luke & Leia were not brother and sister. When the second movie came out, they were, but again, neither knew it yet.
Like I said, your point is completely illogical and invalid. Incest is certainly not promoted or celebrated in the film. It's not a black or white issue. Incest is wrong, but incest is not promoted in the film.

In fact, if you look at the very definition of incest, it isn't "kissing", it's sexual relations between two people who are too closely related. That never happened, therefore, no incest. As I said, your logic and your argument is completely invalid.

I agree with this post.

[FormerReformer]

Can we get back on topic please?

As George Lucas himself would surely say, thanks to Star Wars being the core essence of Joseph Campell's theories on myth, everything is on topic.

Oh, and 88Devin, if you have a problem with Shakespeare's licentiousness, why are you so desperately defending a series that promoted incest? Or did Lucas edit that out of the latest special edition?

It didn't promote incest. Luke kissed Leia in the first film, prior to it being worked out that they were brother & sister. With Han Solo, you had the drama between the three. Han was going to be killed off in 2, leaving  Luke with the princess. However, it was worked out that Luke & Leia were brother & sister (therefore couldn't be together) and the fans loved Han Solo so much Lucas ended up having to include him in ROTJ. The fact Han Solo lived was due to the pressure of the fans on Lucas. Also, incest would imply something happened between Luke & Leia, which nothing did, and in fact it was "broken off" once they found out.

So- according to you, full on making out with your sister is ok so long as (a) you didn't know it was your sister; (b) the director/screenwriter didn't know it was your sister; and (c) she only did it the second time to make that lovable rogue jealous? So long as these requirements are met, and "nothing happened" (other than, you know, making out) everything is fine?

Your point is completely invalid. As I said, in the first movie, when it came out, Luke & Leia were not brother and sister. When the second movie came out, they were, but again, neither knew it yet.
Like I said, your point is completely illogical and invalid. Incest is certainly not promoted or celebrated in the film. It's not a black or white issue. Incest is wrong, but incest is not promoted in the film.

In fact, if you look at the very definition of incest, it isn't "kissing", it's sexual relations between two people who are too closely related. That never happened, therefore, no incest. As I said, your logic and your argument is completely invalid.

So, just to be perfectly straight here, you see nothing wrong with open mouthed kissing between brother and sister, so long as they don't know? It's not legally incest, after all- no naughty parts are touching (unless you consider tongues to be naughty). There's nothing even close to "sexual relations" going on there?

As for the first movie- here's something to ponder: while it is certainly true that Luke and Leia weren't brother and sister when the first movie came out (speaking outside of the movie universe), they WERE brother and sister when the second movie came out (unless Lucas originally intended Han to be the "another"- which fits in perfectly with his hack screenwriting "I've had it all planned out for years" [seriously, I just wrote it about five second ago] MO). Further, in the Special Edition Lucas is so in despair at the thought of Han shooting first that he digitally rewrites history, where merely a few snips of film are all that are required to remove the "ick" factor from this discussion. So, shooting first if the other guy has pretty much flat out stated he is about to shoot you is bad, but brother/sister make-outs are perfectly fine in Lucas's book.

[88Devin12]

Can we get back on topic please?

As George Lucas himself would surely say, thanks to Star Wars being the core essence of Joseph Campell's theories on myth, everything is on topic.

Oh, and 88Devin, if you have a problem with Shakespeare's licentiousness, why are you so desperately defending a series that promoted incest? Or did Lucas edit that out of the latest special edition?

It didn't promote incest. Luke kissed Leia in the first film, prior to it being worked out that they were brother & sister. With Han Solo, you had the drama between the three. Han was going to be killed off in 2, leaving  Luke with the princess. However, it was worked out that Luke & Leia were brother & sister (therefore couldn't be together) and the fans loved Han Solo so much Lucas ended up having to include him in ROTJ. The fact Han Solo lived was due to the pressure of the fans on Lucas. Also, incest would imply something happened between Luke & Leia, which nothing did, and in fact it was "broken off" once they found out.

So- according to you, full on making out with your sister is ok so long as (a) you didn't know it was your sister; (b) the director/screenwriter didn't know it was your sister; and (c) she only did it the second time to make that lovable rogue jealous? So long as these requirements are met, and "nothing happened" (other than, you know, making out) everything is fine?

Your point is completely invalid. As I said, in the first movie, when it came out, Luke & Leia were not brother and sister. When the second movie came out, they were, but again, neither knew it yet.
Like I said, your point is completely illogical and invalid. Incest is certainly not promoted or celebrated in the film. It's not a black or white issue. Incest is wrong, but incest is not promoted in the film.

In fact, if you look at the very definition of incest, it isn't "kissing", it's sexual relations between two people who are too closely related. That never happened, therefore, no incest. As I said, your logic and your argument is completely invalid.

So, just to be perfectly straight here, you see nothing wrong with open mouthed kissing between brother and sister, so long as they don't know? It's not legally incest, after all- no naughty parts are touching (unless you consider tongues to be naughty). There's nothing even close to "sexual relations" going on there?

As for the first movie- here's something to ponder: while it is certainly true that Luke and Leia weren't brother and sister when the first movie came out (speaking outside of the movie universe), they WERE brother and sister when the second movie came out (unless Lucas originally intended Han to be the "another"- which fits in perfectly with his hack screenwriting "I've had it all planned out for years" [seriously, I just wrote it about five second ago] MO). Further, in the Special Edition Lucas is so in despair at the thought of Han shooting first that he digitally rewrites history, where merely a few snips of film are all that are required to remove the "ick" factor from this discussion. So, shooting first if the other guy has pretty much flat out stated he is about to shoot you is bad, but brother/sister make-outs are perfectly fine in Lucas's book.

Again, your logic is completely flawed here. I never said that two siblings kissing is "okay", I said it is not incest, and isn't the promotion of incest. You cannot fault the two for doing so, because they didn't know the other was their sibling, what do you expect, do you expect people to not kiss until marriage? Do you fault someone for falling in love with someone, even if that other person is married, and the other person isn't aware of the marriage? Do you automatically accuse them of adultery? You are jumping to conclusions and falling into a fallacy. You have A, and you have C, but A & C doesn't equal B.

Your logic is thus:

A. Luke & Leia kiss
B. Luke & Leia don't know they are siblings
C. Incest is sex between siblings
D. Incest is wrong
E. Making out with a sibling is wrong
F. The movie promotes incest

Where you say: A + (C + D) = F where C is apparently also the definition of E, and equivalent.

You leave out factor B. Where ignorance plays a huge part in the equation. You also make an error in equating incest with making out.

Your logic just doesn't add up and makes no sense whatsoever.

My logic, on the other hand, goes like this:

A. Incest is sex between siblings (or close relatives)
B. Incest is wrong
C. Luke & Leia are siblings
D. Luke & Leia don't know they are siblings
E. Luke & Leia kiss
F. Incest hasn't been committed

(A + B) + C + D + E = F

On top of that, i'd also add that Luke & Leia are not knowingly guilty of a wrong, unless you expect people in love to withhold any physical contact at all until marriage. Maybe you'd be more suited to the Amish? Oh wait, they don't do that entirely either!

[FormerReformer]

Can we get back on topic please?

As George Lucas himself would surely say, thanks to Star Wars being the core essence of Joseph Campell's theories on myth, everything is on topic.

Oh, and 88Devin, if you have a problem with Shakespeare's licentiousness, why are you so desperately defending a series that promoted incest? Or did Lucas edit that out of the latest special edition?

It didn't promote incest. Luke kissed Leia in the first film, prior to it being worked out that they were brother & sister. With Han Solo, you had the drama between the three. Han was going to be killed off in 2, leaving  Luke with the princess. However, it was worked out that Luke & Leia were brother & sister (therefore couldn't be together) and the fans loved Han Solo so much Lucas ended up having to include him in ROTJ. The fact Han Solo lived was due to the pressure of the fans on Lucas. Also, incest would imply something happened between Luke & Leia, which nothing did, and in fact it was "broken off" once they found out.

So- according to you, full on making out with your sister is ok so long as (a) you didn't know it was your sister; (b) the director/screenwriter didn't know it was your sister; and (c) she only did it the second time to make that lovable rogue jealous? So long as these requirements are met, and "nothing happened" (other than, you know, making out) everything is fine?

Your point is completely invalid. As I said, in the first movie, when it came out, Luke & Leia were not brother and sister. When the second movie came out, they were, but again, neither knew it yet.
Like I said, your point is completely illogical and invalid. Incest is certainly not promoted or celebrated in the film. It's not a black or white issue. Incest is wrong, but incest is not promoted in the film.

In fact, if you look at the very definition of incest, it isn't "kissing", it's sexual relations between two people who are too closely related. That never happened, therefore, no incest. As I said, your logic and your argument is completely invalid.

So, just to be perfectly straight here, you see nothing wrong with open mouthed kissing between brother and sister, so long as they don't know? It's not legally incest, after all- no naughty parts are touching (unless you consider tongues to be naughty). There's nothing even close to "sexual relations" going on there?

As for the first movie- here's something to ponder: while it is certainly true that Luke and Leia weren't brother and sister when the first movie came out (speaking outside of the movie universe), they WERE brother and sister when the second movie came out (unless Lucas originally intended Han to be the "another"- which fits in perfectly with his hack screenwriting "I've had it all planned out for years" [seriously, I just wrote it about five second ago] MO). Further, in the Special Edition Lucas is so in despair at the thought of Han shooting first that he digitally rewrites history, where merely a few snips of film are all that are required to remove the "ick" factor from this discussion. So, shooting first if the other guy has pretty much flat out stated he is about to shoot you is bad, but brother/sister make-outs are perfectly fine in Lucas's book.

Again, your logic is completely flawed here. I never said that two siblings kissing is "okay", I said it is not incest, and isn't the promotion of incest. You cannot fault the two for doing so, because they didn't know the other was their sibling, what do you expect, do you expect people to not kiss until marriage? Do you fault someone for falling in love with someone, even if that other person is married, and the other person isn't aware of the marriage? Do you automatically accuse them of adultery? You are jumping to conclusions and falling into a fallacy. You have A, and you have C, but A & C doesn't equal B.

Your logic is thus:

A. Luke & Leia kiss
B. Luke & Leia don't know they are siblings
C. Incest is sex between siblings
D. Incest is wrong
E. Making out with a sibling is wrong
F. The movie promotes incest

Where you say: A + (C + D) = F where C is apparently also the definition of E, and equivalent.

You leave out factor B. Where ignorance plays a huge part in the equation. You also make an error in equating incest with making out.

Your logic just doesn't add up and makes no sense whatsoever.

Your assumption is that my equation of C with E is incorrect which I might grant you now (though I would at least consider brothers and sisters making out to be attempted incest), but my 3 year old self whose first clear memory is seeing Jedi in the theater would have thought nothing of the actual naughty parts, however he knew quite clearly that E (to the extent of making out, subtracting the sibling) is something only Mommy and Daddy do, would beg to disagree. I leave out factor B because factor B is irrelevant, especially in the context of classical literature- factor B did not stop Oedipus from gouging out his eyes when he found out what he had been up to, nor (to put it more closely to your private interpretation of classical) Arthur paying the price for siring Mordred upon his sister. You also leave out the true factor F that leads to G (your F)- namely that Lucas has seen no problem revising those portions of the trilogy he currently finds morally questionable (Han shooting first), yet he leaves in not one but two make out sessions between brother and sister.

[vamrat]

Former, you are over-convoluting the problem.  If princess Leia were your sister, would you make out with her?  I know I would.  This really is a straight forward question.  Either A, you would make out with her, or B, you are dishonest, or C, you play for the other team, and I don't mean the Dark Side.  So really, how can you judge either Luke or Devin?

[88Devin12]

Can we get back on topic please?

As George Lucas himself would surely say, thanks to Star Wars being the core essence of Joseph Campell's theories on myth, everything is on topic.

Oh, and 88Devin, if you have a problem with Shakespeare's licentiousness, why are you so desperately defending a series that promoted incest? Or did Lucas edit that out of the latest special edition?

It didn't promote incest. Luke kissed Leia in the first film, prior to it being worked out that they were brother & sister. With Han Solo, you had the drama between the three. Han was going to be killed off in 2, leaving  Luke with the princess. However, it was worked out that Luke & Leia were brother & sister (therefore couldn't be together) and the fans loved Han Solo so much Lucas ended up having to include him in ROTJ. The fact Han Solo lived was due to the pressure of the fans on Lucas. Also, incest would imply something happened between Luke & Leia, which nothing did, and in fact it was "broken off" once they found out.

So- according to you, full on making out with your sister is ok so long as (a) you didn't know it was your sister; (b) the director/screenwriter didn't know it was your sister; and (c) she only did it the second time to make that lovable rogue jealous? So long as these requirements are met, and "nothing happened" (other than, you know, making out) everything is fine?

Your point is completely invalid. As I said, in the first movie, when it came out, Luke & Leia were not brother and sister. When the second movie came out, they were, but again, neither knew it yet.
Like I said, your point is completely illogical and invalid. Incest is certainly not promoted or celebrated in the film. It's not a black or white issue. Incest is wrong, but incest is not promoted in the film.

In fact, if you look at the very definition of incest, it isn't "kissing", it's sexual relations between two people who are too closely related. That never happened, therefore, no incest. As I said, your logic and your argument is completely invalid.

So, just to be perfectly straight here, you see nothing wrong with open mouthed kissing between brother and sister, so long as they don't know? It's not legally incest, after all- no naughty parts are touching (unless you consider tongues to be naughty). There's nothing even close to "sexual relations" going on there?

As for the first movie- here's something to ponder: while it is certainly true that Luke and Leia weren't brother and sister when the first movie came out (speaking outside of the movie universe), they WERE brother and sister when the second movie came out (unless Lucas originally intended Han to be the "another"- which fits in perfectly with his hack screenwriting "I've had it all planned out for years" [seriously, I just wrote it about five second ago] MO). Further, in the Special Edition Lucas is so in despair at the thought of Han shooting first that he digitally rewrites history, where merely a few snips of film are all that are required to remove the "ick" factor from this discussion. So, shooting first if the other guy has pretty much flat out stated he is about to shoot you is bad, but brother/sister make-outs are perfectly fine in Lucas's book.

Again, your logic is completely flawed here. I never said that two siblings kissing is "okay", I said it is not incest, and isn't the promotion of incest. You cannot fault the two for doing so, because they didn't know the other was their sibling, what do you expect, do you expect people to not kiss until marriage? Do you fault someone for falling in love with someone, even if that other person is married, and the other person isn't aware of the marriage? Do you automatically accuse them of adultery? You are jumping to conclusions and falling into a fallacy. You have A, and you have C, but A & C doesn't equal B.

Your logic is thus:

A. Luke & Leia kiss
B. Luke & Leia don't know they are siblings
C. Incest is sex between siblings
D. Incest is wrong
E. Making out with a sibling is wrong
F. The movie promotes incest

Where you say: A + (C + D) = F where C is apparently also the definition of E, and equivalent.

You leave out factor B. Where ignorance plays a huge part in the equation. You also make an error in equating incest with making out.

Your logic just doesn't add up and makes no sense whatsoever.

Your assumption is that my equation of C with E is incorrect which I might grant you now (though I would at least consider brothers and sisters making out to be attempted incest), but my 3 year old self whose first clear memory is seeing Jedi in the theater would have thought nothing of the actual naughty parts, however he knew quite clearly that E (to the extent of making out, subtracting the sibling) is something only Mommy and Daddy do, would beg to disagree. I leave out factor B because factor B is irrelevant, especially in the context of classical literature- factor B did not stop Oedipus from gouging out his eyes when he found out what he had been up to, nor (to put it more closely to your private interpretation of classical) Arthur paying the price for siring Mordred upon his sister. You also leave out the true factor F that leads to G (your F)- namely that Lucas has seen no problem revising those portions of the trilogy he currently finds morally questionable (Han shooting first), yet he leaves in not one but two make out sessions between brother and sister.

No, again as I said, you cannot find complete fault with them, and cannot ignore the fact that they don't know each other is their sibling. I'm not talking about, nor care about classical literature, I'm talking about real morality here and modern norms and practices.

There are many cases out there of people who marry and later find out they are actually brother and sister, and were adopted by different families with different last names and all. Do we automatically condemn them unconditionally for incest? No, we recognize that the fault doesn't lay with them. Now, if they didn't separate, then it would become their sin.

Same thing for this story. Again, Luke & Leia never had sex, therefore, incest isn't committed, and your comparison with "classical literature" is not consistent, because in those cases, incest is actually committed.

Also, as I'm saying, you shouldn't find anything morally abhorrent about what happened, because neither of them knew and neither of them did something sinful. In fact, as soon as Luke found out, he stepped back and treated her as a sister. There, however, would have been a wrong if he hadn't broken it off once he knew.

Like I said, would you prefer that people courting each other should even refrain from kissing until they are married?

As for Han shooting first, it wasn't that it was morally objectionable for Han to shoot first, Lucas edited it because it didn't fit the narrative of Han he wanted, and it showed Han as being too cold-blooded. If it fit the narrative he wanted to tell, he would have kept it in there, it's morality is irrelevant except in however Lucas wanted to show Han. Did he want Han to be a cold-blooded killer, or did he want him to be a bad boy who was really a good person at heart?

For Luke & Leia and their "kissing", leaving it in shows their innocence and the consequence of their father's fall to the dark side. It shows they are two innocent teenagers/early 20ers who are oblivious to the fact that they are siblings.  It doesn't show them as being immoral, or as "tainted" in some way.

Things are not as black and white as you seem to want them to be, there is a lot of grey out there.

[88Devin12]

Former, you are over-convoluting the problem.  If princess Leia were your sister, would you make out with her?  I know I would.  This really is a straight forward question.  Either A, you would make out with her, or B, you are dishonest, or C, you play for the other team, and I don't mean the Dark Side.  So really, how can you judge either Luke or Devin?

HA...

Let's be serious though, the better way to ask the question is: If Leia wasn't your sister, would you kiss her? If you fell in love with her and kissed her, but found out later she was your sister, what would you do? Did you do anything wrong? You didn't know she was your sister, and neither did she.

[FormerReformer]

Can we get back on topic please?

As George Lucas himself would surely say, thanks to Star Wars being the core essence of Joseph Campell's theories on myth, everything is on topic.

Oh, and 88Devin, if you have a problem with Shakespeare's licentiousness, why are you so desperately defending a series that promoted incest? Or did Lucas edit that out of the latest special edition?

It didn't promote incest. Luke kissed Leia in the first film, prior to it being worked out that they were brother & sister. With Han Solo, you had the drama between the three. Han was going to be killed off in 2, leaving  Luke with the princess. However, it was worked out that Luke & Leia were brother & sister (therefore couldn't be together) and the fans loved Han Solo so much Lucas ended up having to include him in ROTJ. The fact Han Solo lived was due to the pressure of the fans on Lucas. Also, incest would imply something happened between Luke & Leia, which nothing did, and in fact it was "broken off" once they found out.

So- according to you, full on making out with your sister is ok so long as (a) you didn't know it was your sister; (b) the director/screenwriter didn't know it was your sister; and (c) she only did it the second time to make that lovable rogue jealous? So long as these requirements are met, and "nothing happened" (other than, you know, making out) everything is fine?

Your point is completely invalid. As I said, in the first movie, when it came out, Luke & Leia were not brother and sister. When the second movie came out, they were, but again, neither knew it yet.
Like I said, your point is completely illogical and invalid. Incest is certainly not promoted or celebrated in the film. It's not a black or white issue. Incest is wrong, but incest is not promoted in the film.

In fact, if you look at the very definition of incest, it isn't "kissing", it's sexual relations between two people who are too closely related. That never happened, therefore, no incest. As I said, your logic and your argument is completely invalid.

So, just to be perfectly straight here, you see nothing wrong with open mouthed kissing between brother and sister, so long as they don't know? It's not legally incest, after all- no naughty parts are touching (unless you consider tongues to be naughty). There's nothing even close to "sexual relations" going on there?

As for the first movie- here's something to ponder: while it is certainly true that Luke and Leia weren't brother and sister when the first movie came out (speaking outside of the movie universe), they WERE brother and sister when the second movie came out (unless Lucas originally intended Han to be the "another"- which fits in perfectly with his hack screenwriting "I've had it all planned out for years" [seriously, I just wrote it about five second ago] MO). Further, in the Special Edition Lucas is so in despair at the thought of Han shooting first that he digitally rewrites history, where merely a few snips of film are all that are required to remove the "ick" factor from this discussion. So, shooting first if the other guy has pretty much flat out stated he is about to shoot you is bad, but brother/sister make-outs are perfectly fine in Lucas's book.

Again, your logic is completely flawed here. I never said that two siblings kissing is "okay", I said it is not incest, and isn't the promotion of incest. You cannot fault the two for doing so, because they didn't know the other was their sibling, what do you expect, do you expect people to not kiss until marriage? Do you fault someone for falling in love with someone, even if that other person is married, and the other person isn't aware of the marriage? Do you automatically accuse them of adultery? You are jumping to conclusions and falling into a fallacy. You have A, and you have C, but A & C doesn't equal B.

Your logic is thus:

A. Luke & Leia kiss
B. Luke & Leia don't know they are siblings
C. Incest is sex between siblings
D. Incest is wrong
E. Making out with a sibling is wrong
F. The movie promotes incest

Where you say: A + (C + D) = F where C is apparently also the definition of E, and equivalent.

You leave out factor B. Where ignorance plays a huge part in the equation. You also make an error in equating incest with making out.

Your logic just doesn't add up and makes no sense whatsoever.

Your assumption is that my equation of C with E is incorrect which I might grant you now (though I would at least consider brothers and sisters making out to be attempted incest), but my 3 year old self whose first clear memory is seeing Jedi in the theater would have thought nothing of the actual naughty parts, however he knew quite clearly that E (to the extent of making out, subtracting the sibling) is something only Mommy and Daddy do, would beg to disagree. I leave out factor B because factor B is irrelevant, especially in the context of classical literature- factor B did not stop Oedipus from gouging out his eyes when he found out what he had been up to, nor (to put it more closely to your private interpretation of classical) Arthur paying the price for siring Mordred upon his sister. You also leave out the true factor F that leads to G (your F)- namely that Lucas has seen no problem revising those portions of the trilogy he currently finds morally questionable (Han shooting first), yet he leaves in not one but two make out sessions between brother and sister.

No, again as I said, you cannot find complete fault with them, and cannot ignore the fact that they don't know each other is their sibling. I'm not talking about, nor care about classical literature, I'm talking about real morality here and modern norms and practices.

There are many cases out there of people who marry and later find out they are actually brother and sister, and were adopted by different families with different last names and all. Do we automatically condemn them unconditionally for incest? No, we recognize that the fault doesn't lay with them. Now, if they didn't separate, then it would become their sin.

Same thing for this story. Again, Luke & Leia never had sex, therefore, incest isn't committed, and your comparison with "classical literature" is not consistent, because in those cases, incest is actually committed.

Also, as I'm saying, you shouldn't find anything morally abhorrent about what happened, because neither of them knew and neither of them did something sinful. In fact, as soon as Luke found out, he stepped back and treated her as a sister. There, however, would have been a wrong if he hadn't broken it off once he knew.

Like I said, would you prefer that people courting each other should even refrain from kissing until they are married?

As for Han shooting first, it wasn't that it was morally objectionable for Han to shoot first, Lucas edited it because it didn't fit the narrative of Han he wanted, and it showed Han as being too cold-blooded. If it fit the narrative he wanted to tell, he would have kept it in there, it's morality is irrelevant except in however Lucas wanted to show Han. Did he want Han to be a cold-blooded killer, or did he want him to be a bad boy who was really a good person at heart?

For Luke & Leia and their "kissing", leaving it in shows their innocence and the consequence of their father's fall to the dark side. It shows they are two innocent teenagers/early 20ers who are oblivious to the fact that they are siblings.  It doesn't show them as being immoral, or as "tainted" in some way.

Things are not as black and white as you seem to want them to be, there is a lot of grey out there.

So Lucas can have as much grey as he wants, but Shakespeare is abhorrent because he enjoyed puns based on naughty parts?

And why did you put "kissing" in quotes? There's no need for quotations there, "kissing" is quite clearly what they were doing.

I wouldn't call a few isolated incidents "many cases". Some say that would be sloppy writing [citation needed].

In a PG movie, kissing is as close as we're going to get to sexual relations. I suppose we should congratulate Lucas' restraint that we can even have this debate. Still, the very playbook Lucas has claimed to be playing from (myth cycles) demands that unwitting incest meet its tragic fate. Replacing Sebastian Shaw with Hayden Christensen at the end of Jedi does not count- the tragic fate should be upon the offenders, not the audience.

As for people refraining from kissing (open mouth full on make out kissing, not a quick peck in greeting) before they're married- I'm not a priest, bishop, nor canonist, so it's not my call. But I think in the first millennium of the Church it would have probably been considered a sexual act.

I'm not even going to touch the Han part- Lucas' revisionism can be debated between here and judgement day. 1977 Lucas had no problems with Han both shooting first and being a good person at heart, as evidenced by "You're all clear, kid, now let's blow this thing so we can go home!" A generation of Star Wars fans had no problem reconciling Han the Cold Blooded Killer with Han the Redeemed Hero. 1997 Lucas the Hack apparently had a problem with it- which shows a moral shift on his part: 1977 GL believed Han could be redeemed, 1997 believed Han had to be perfect from the start (but brother/sister makeouts okay).

[FormerReformer]

Former, you are over-convoluting the problem.  If princess Leia were your sister, would you make out with her?  I know I would.  This really is a straight forward question.  Either A, you would make out with her, or B, you are dishonest, or C, you play for the other team, and I don't mean the Dark Side.  So really, how can you judge either Luke or Devin?

Sister? No- she wasn't that hot til the slave girl costume anyway. Cousin? Seriously tempted. 2nd cousin? Almost definitely.

I don't know if that answer has me playing for "the other team"- I've been pretty sure which team I've been on since the first time I made it 20 minutes into Jedi and saw the slave girl costume (but then I was also fairly certain that Carrie Fisher wasn't my sister).

[primuspilus]

Sister? No- she wasn't that hot til the slave girl costume anyway. Cousin? Seriously tempted. 2nd cousin? Almost definitely

The greatest truth of Star Wars.

I do miss my old nerd arguments....arguing familial ethics using a science fiction series.......

PP

[Kerdy]

I guess Disney really wanted a good Sci-Fi franchise, after John Carter bombed, even though I thought it was a fairly decent movie.

I liked it too. Not sure why it bombed.

Probably because they didn't spend 45 minutes of the movie with people having sex or doing drugs.

[Achronos]

I guess Disney really wanted a good Sci-Fi franchise, after John Carter bombed, even though I thought it was a fairly decent movie.

I liked it too. Not sure why it bombed.

Probably because they didn't spend 45 minutes of the movie with people having sex or doing drugs.

It was an unexpected surprise for me given I had low expectations.

[Fabio Leite]

Too much argument about the incest thing.

Yes, if they didn't know they were siblings, they even didn't know each they had a sibling how could they possibly imagine that? They did not grow up together and met for the first time as two post-adolescent young adults. There's no such thing as "sibling alert", not even with the Force.

The movie portrayed it with no support for incest. When they found out they stopped immediately. Yes just "ooops". They would be promoting incest if they actually invested in their initial mutual attraction after that. The dry cut in their attraction shows that script writers had no intention of even glamourizing the thing, since we know pretty well that if such a freak accident happened in real life those feelings wouldn't be that easy and simple to solve.

And although probably noone here went through anything like that, who has never committed a sin without knowing it? I particularly have said things I didn't know were offensive, I took decisions I though were right but weren't. Star Wars showed the ideal way to deal with this: repent (it doesn't have to be a drama novel, just change your ways) and move on.

[TheMathematician]

Too much argument about the incest thing.

Yes, if they didn't know they were siblings, they even didn't know each they had a sibling how could they possibly imagine that? They did not grow up together and met for the first time as two post-adolescent young adults. There's no such thing as "sibling alert", not even with the Force.

The movie portrayed it with no support for incest. When they found out they stopped immediately. Yes just "ooops". They would be promoting incest if they actually invested in their initial mutual attraction after that. The dry cut in their attraction shows that script writers had no intention of even glamourizing the thing, since we know pretty well that if such a freak accident happened in real life those feelings wouldn't be that easy and simple to solve.

And although probably noone here went through anything like that, who has never committed a sin without knowing it? I particularly have said things I didn't know were offensive, I took decisions I though were right but weren't. Star Wars showed the ideal way to deal with this: repent (it doesn't have to be a drama novel, just change your ways) and move on.

ways that i never even though about star wars as, but probally should have

[FormerReformer]

Too much argument about the incest thing.

Yes, if they didn't know they were siblings, they even didn't know each they had a sibling how could they possibly imagine that? They did not grow up together and met for the first time as two post-adolescent young adults. There's no such thing as "sibling alert", not even with the Force.

"I know. Somehow.... I've always known."

[Papist]

There seems to be a lot of star wars anger in this thread. 

[FormerReformer]

There seems to be a lot of star wars anger in this thread. 

I blame the fear of a bad movie. Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate.... Hmmmm, y'know one could almost think that with the SE, the prequels, and now this selling to Disney Lucas is attempting to turn Star Wars fans to the dark side.

[Gamliel]

There seems to be a lot of star wars anger in this thread. 

+++

[Fabio Leite]

Too much argument about the incest thing.

Yes, if they didn't know they were siblings, they even didn't know each they had a sibling how could they possibly imagine that? They did not grow up together and met for the first time as two post-adolescent young adults. There's no such thing as "sibling alert", not even with the Force.

"I know. Somehow.... I've always known."

*Somehow* "Wow, I really like this boy and feel confortable with him. Plus he saving me was kind of sexy. Since there is nothing to stop me from doing it why not kiss him?" later - "Oops, our bad, let's move on with that."

[FormerReformer]

Too much argument about the incest thing.

Yes, if they didn't know they were siblings, they even didn't know each they had a sibling how could they possibly imagine that? They did not grow up together and met for the first time as two post-adolescent young adults. There's no such thing as "sibling alert", not even with the Force.

"I know. Somehow.... I've always known."

*Somehow* "Wow, I really like this boy and feel confortable with him. Plus he saving me was kind of sexy. Since there is nothing to stop me from doing it why not kiss him?" later - "Oops, our bad, let's move on with that."

"Oh, hey, I just found out I've been caught in a love-triangle and one of the members just so happens to be my brother. I am just going to shrug it off, with no reaction of disgust- because that's the completely healthy and normal reaction to have in this situation."

[Fabio Leite]

Too much argument about the incest thing.

Yes, if they didn't know they were siblings, they even didn't know each they had a sibling how could they possibly imagine that? They did not grow up together and met for the first time as two post-adolescent young adults. There's no such thing as "sibling alert", not even with the Force.

"I know. Somehow.... I've always known."

*Somehow* "Wow, I really like this boy and feel confortable with him. Plus he saving me was kind of sexy. Since there is nothing to stop me from doing it why not kiss him?" later - "Oops, our bad, let's move on with that."

"Oh, hey, I just found out I've been caught in a love-triangle and one of the members just so happens to be my brother. I am just going to shrug it off, with no reaction of disgust- because that's the completely healthy and normal reaction to have in this situation."

Jediism doesn't do guilt.

And yes, in their particular case that's exactly the healthy thing to do. They didn't know, they just felt comfortable with a person who was a friend. If they had been raised together and "got crazy" in a drunk night, then yes, lots of therapy to be done. But in that kind of unlikely accident? There is really no moral problem there. They didn't know. When they learned the truth, they stopped. How many can say that of the sins we are addicted to?

Now the scriptwriters did not focus on that realistically, since in a "real" situation that would be mixed feelings land with lots of guilt in the way until they rearranged their roles in their hearts and minds. The accusation being that the writers treated it in a shallow unbelievable way, one has to agree that they treated it poorly precisely to avoid giving it unproper focus for a family movie. I even don't think it was shallow. Star Wars works with archtypes, and Luke is the ideal monk-knight and Leia is the ideal princess. They are archetypically noble, therefore in control of their feelings, thus being able to immediately switch to family mode once they learned that was their true relation.

[vamrat]

Ok guys, the incest thing really is a non-issue.  Leia was hot (we could debate point of peak hotness all day) and so Luke lip-locked with her.  End-o-story.

The real thing that bothers me about Star Wars is when Han gets turned into an ice cube by Jabba and the next time you see Lando, he has Han's girl, his ride, his pet, and is even wearing his freaking clothes!  Who does that?  Goes to rescue a guy so puts his clothes on?  You just know that at some point he went into Han's kitchen, drank all his Space Beer, then put the empty bottles back in the fridge.

[celticfan1888]

Ok guys, the incest thing really is a non-issue.  Leia was hot (we could debate point of peak hotness all day) and so Luke lip-locked with her.  End-o-story.

The real thing that bothers me about Star Wars is when Han gets turned into an ice cube by Jabba and the next time you see Lando, he has Han's girl, his ride, his pet, and is even wearing his freaking clothes!  Who does that?  Goes to rescue a guy so puts his clothes on?  You just know that at some point he went into Han's kitchen, drank all his Space Beer, then put the empty bottles back in the fridge.

The clothes were the outfit of a particular type of pilot. Lando needed it. Lucas has explained that much lol

[FormerReformer]

Too much argument about the incest thing.

Yes, if they didn't know they were siblings, they even didn't know each they had a sibling how could they possibly imagine that? They did not grow up together and met for the first time as two post-adolescent young adults. There's no such thing as "sibling alert", not even with the Force.

"I know. Somehow.... I've always known."

*Somehow* "Wow, I really like this boy and feel confortable with him. Plus he saving me was kind of sexy. Since there is nothing to stop me from doing it why not kiss him?" later - "Oops, our bad, let's move on with that."

"Oh, hey, I just found out I've been caught in a love-triangle and one of the members just so happens to be my brother. I am just going to shrug it off, with no reaction of disgust- because that's the completely healthy and normal reaction to have in this situation."

Jediism doesn't do guilt.

And yes, in their particular case that's exactly the healthy thing to do. They didn't know, they just felt comfortable with a person who was a friend. If they had been raised together and "got crazy" in a drunk night, then yes, lots of therapy to be done. But in that kind of unlikely accident? There is really no moral problem there. They didn't know. When they learned the truth, they stopped. How many can say that of the sins we are addicted to?

This is right to a certain extent-

Now the scriptwriters did not focus on that realistically, since in a "real" situation that would be mixed feelings land with lots of guilt in the way until they rearranged their roles in their hearts and minds. The accusation being that the writers treated it in a shallow unbelievable way, one has to agree that they treated it poorly precisely to avoid giving it unproper focus for a family movie.

This argument doesn't fly. By even introducing this into a "family movie" they have given it improper focus. My biggest problem with Star Wars growing up has always been precisely this. A child can understand the whole Darth Vader arc- after all, Mommy and Daddy still love you and forgive you after you've been bad (and in a broken generation one must reconcile forgiveness with Mommy and Daddy being bad). The Luke/Leia thing has always been problematic. It is even more problematic if Lucas had really had this reveal planned all along (not that I believe he did)- at the end of the first Star Wars, before Lucas or the first audience knew the story would be successful enough to earn a sequel, there was nothing to prevent the audience from believing that after the credits there would be a "happily ever after" for Luke and Leia. If Lucas didn't have the reveal planned all along, it is equally problematic, because by the time Jedi rolled around he knew there were millions of kids watching and decided this reveal would be appropriate.

I even don't think it was shallow. Star Wars works with archtypes, and Luke is the ideal monk-knight and Leia is the ideal princess. They are archetypically noble, therefore in control of their feelings, thus being able to immediately switch to family mode once they learned that was their true relation.

Of course, the main thing is something we didn't realize as kids- Lucas was a hack. All his talk of "archetypes" and Joseph Campbell was his way of intellectualizing what was essentially a good pop-corn movie. Luke was not "the ideal monk-knight"- he was a knight-errant, and like Lancelot or the young Arthur thought with the wrong head- first in Star Wars when he disregarded the orders of Obi Wan, then in Empire when he left his training behind (though, of course, by the third movie he became the ideal knight- I won't add "monk" to the title as the whole chastity thing was something Lucas wouldn't think of until that drunken weekend in which he pounded out the script for Phantom Menace). At best Lucas read through The Hero With a Thousand Faces while going- "Ooooh, plot twists! Let's throw in the Oedipal issues of father versus son. Hey, myths address taboos- Luke and Leia made kissies in the first two movies, let's make 'em brother and sister!" without even understanding the purpose of a myth's addressing of the taboo (something T.H. White understood and addressed in his introduction to The Once and Future King).

Don't get me wrong- I love the Star Wars trilogy. I've blown up the Death Star and taken out an AT-AT on Hoth too many times to count. But in the end, the trilogy was just a bunch of pretty special effects, a halfway decent storyline, some rather stilted dialogue, and a mess of contradictions due to lazy writing.

[HabteSelassie]

Greetings in that Divine and Most Precious Name of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!

Not sure I even know what to say... Another Star Wars movie???

"It's lame.. everything's lame."

stay blessed,
habte selassie

[Achronos]

I'm with FormerReformer on this. George Lucas never planned a trilogy initially. That's why "A New Hope" was added as a subtitle later on. Since Lucas saw how much a cash cow the original was, he was going to milk the hell out of it, which he did.

I love the first movie because it is an exceptionally great-bad movie. I enjoyed how he paid some homages to Kurosawa, but Star Wars holds a special place for me because how rooted it was in my childhood.

Even as a kid the whole Luke/Leia brother sister thing was very jarring to me.

[Fabio Leite]

Much better.

[Fabio Leite]

Tymothy Zahn on Episode VII and the EU:

Zahn’s books won’t be directly adapted, but the author says that was always the case: “The books were always just the books.”
But years ago, he was briefed on Lucas’ plans for sequels, and how the Thrawn books would fit in. “The original idea as I understood it— and Lucas changes his mind off and on, so it may not be what he’s thinking right now – but it was going to be three generations. You’d have the original trilogy, then go back to Luke’s father and find out what happened to him [in the prequels], and if there was another 7th, 8th, or 9th film, it would be Luke’s children. The Thrawn Trilogy really would have fit into the gap,” the author said.

(...)

“Frankly, I’m interested to see what they’re going to do,” Zahn says. “Is Lucas going to skip a generation so that Mark Hamill, Harrison Ford, and Carrie Fisher can do their roles at the proper age? Or would they try some CG ‘youthing,’ like the filmmakers did with [Jeff Bridges] in Tron: Legacy? Could they reboot and use different actors? That sounds like it would be a horrible sacrilege, but Star Trek got away with it.”
Setting the sequels after the Thrawn series, but following the direction it set out in its conclusion, would be Zahn’s preference. “It would also be a little less likely to run roughshod all over the books,” Zahn says. “On the other hand, it’s George Lucas’ property and if he wants to ignore the books and comics, that’s his perfect right.”

http://insidemovies.ew.com/2012/11/02/star-wars-sequels-timothy-zahn/

[Gamliel]

I enjoyed the Star Wars movies, but I wonder if Disney should do us a favor and drop the next movie.  Leave the expanded universe to the books, such as was suggested in the above link.

[podkarpatska]

J.J.Abrams to direct next Star Wars film. He did justice to Star Trek so maybe there is hope. http://m.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2013/01/jj-abrams-directing-the-new-star-wars-exciting-or-terrifying/272513/

[orthonorm]

Ok guys, the incest thing really is a non-issue.  Leia was hot (we could debate point of peak hotness all day) and so Luke lip-locked with her.  End-o-story.

The real thing that bothers me about Star Wars is when Han gets turned into an ice cube by Jabba and the next time you see Lando, he has Han's girl, his ride, his pet, and is even wearing his freaking clothes!  Who does that?  Goes to rescue a guy so puts his clothes on?  You just know that at some point he went into Han's kitchen, drank all his Space Beer, then put the empty bottles back in the fridge.

LOL!

This might redeem you, when it comes time to judge.

Make more with the funny please.

[orthonorm]

Too much argument about the incest thing.

Yes, if they didn't know they were siblings, they even didn't know each they had a sibling how could they possibly imagine that? They did not grow up together and met for the first time as two post-adolescent young adults. There's no such thing as "sibling alert", not even with the Force.

"I know. Somehow.... I've always known."

*Somehow* "Wow, I really like this boy and feel confortable with him. Plus he saving me was kind of sexy. Since there is nothing to stop me from doing it why not kiss him?" later - "Oops, our bad, let's move on with that."

"Oh, hey, I just found out I've been caught in a love-triangle and one of the members just so happens to be my brother. I am just going to shrug it off, with no reaction of disgust- because that's the completely healthy and normal reaction to have in this situation."

Jediism doesn't do guilt.

And yes, in their particular case that's exactly the healthy thing to do. They didn't know, they just felt comfortable with a person who was a friend. If they had been raised together and "got crazy" in a drunk night, then yes, lots of therapy to be done. But in that kind of unlikely accident? There is really no moral problem there. They didn't know. When they learned the truth, they stopped. How many can say that of the sins we are addicted to?

This is right to a certain extent-

Now the scriptwriters did not focus on that realistically, since in a "real" situation that would be mixed feelings land with lots of guilt in the way until they rearranged their roles in their hearts and minds. The accusation being that the writers treated it in a shallow unbelievable way, one has to agree that they treated it poorly precisely to avoid giving it unproper focus for a family movie.

This argument doesn't fly. By even introducing this into a "family movie" they have given it improper focus. My biggest problem with Star Wars growing up has always been precisely this. A child can understand the whole Darth Vader arc- after all, Mommy and Daddy still love you and forgive you after you've been bad (and in a broken generation one must reconcile forgiveness with Mommy and Daddy being bad). The Luke/Leia thing has always been problematic. It is even more problematic if Lucas had really had this reveal planned all along (not that I believe he did)- at the end of the first Star Wars, before Lucas or the first audience knew the story would be successful enough to earn a sequel, there was nothing to prevent the audience from believing that after the credits there would be a "happily ever after" for Luke and Leia. If Lucas didn't have the reveal planned all along, it is equally problematic, because by the time Jedi rolled around he knew there were millions of kids watching and decided this reveal would be appropriate.

I even don't think it was shallow. Star Wars works with archtypes, and Luke is the ideal monk-knight and Leia is the ideal princess. They are archetypically noble, therefore in control of their feelings, thus being able to immediately switch to family mode once they learned that was their true relation.

Of course, the main thing is something we didn't realize as kids- Lucas was a hack. All his talk of "archetypes" and Joseph Campbell was his way of intellectualizing what was essentially a good pop-corn movie. Luke was not "the ideal monk-knight"- he was a knight-errant, and like Lancelot or the young Arthur thought with the wrong head- first in Star Wars when he disregarded the orders of Obi Wan, then in Empire when he left his training behind (though, of course, by the third movie he became the ideal knight- I won't add "monk" to the title as the whole chastity thing was something Lucas wouldn't think of until that drunken weekend in which he pounded out the script for Phantom Menace). At best Lucas read through The Hero With a Thousand Faces while going- "Ooooh, plot twists! Let's throw in the Oedipal issues of father versus son. Hey, myths address taboos- Luke and Leia made kissies in the first two movies, let's make 'em brother and sister!" without even understanding the purpose of a myth's addressing of the taboo (something T.H. White understood and addressed in his introduction to The Once and Future King).

Don't get me wrong- I love the Star Wars trilogy. I've blown up the Death Star and taken out an AT-AT on Hoth too many times to count. But in the end, the trilogy was just a bunch of pretty special effects, a halfway decent storyline, some rather stilted dialogue, and a mess of contradictions due to lazy writing.

Who knew there was this much win in this nerd thread.

Star Wars, all of them suck pretty seriously. Maybe Empire was sit-through-able. And this is how I thought as a kid.

Thank you for dissing on Lucas and Joseph Campbell in one fell swoop, both hacks in the extremity.

If you had worked in a complaint about that ridiculous music score being the Der Ring for our generation, I would've asked you to marry me..

[orthonorm]

I enjoyed how he paid some homages to Kurosawa . . .

Even as a kid the whole Luke/Leia brother sister thing was very jarring to me.

How couldn't it? He would've if he had never watched a Kurosawa film. Kurosawa perfected too much of the vocabulary for that sorta film making or wrecking in this case.

As to Lukeia: it's probably just where I come from, but I didn't understand why something silly like parents held in common should stop true love.

[Michał Kalina]

J.J.Abrams to direct next Star Wars film. He did justice to Star Trek so maybe there is hope. http://m.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2013/01/jj-abrams-directing-the-new-star-wars-exciting-or-terrifying/272513/

A Trekkie directs SW? Is that some kind of a joke?

[PeterTheAleut]

J.J.Abrams to direct next Star Wars film. He did justice to Star Trek so maybe there is hope. http://m.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2013/01/jj-abrams-directing-the-new-star-wars-exciting-or-terrifying/272513/

A Trekkie directs SW? Is that some kind of a joke?

Nope.

[Maria]

J.J.Abrams to direct next Star Wars film. He did justice to Star Trek so maybe there is hope. http://m.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2013/01/jj-abrams-directing-the-new-star-wars-exciting-or-terrifying/272513/

A Trekkie directs SW? Is that some kind of a joke?

Nope.

PetertheAleut,

Your avatar Christmas Tree looks like a Star Wars Robot, is it?

[PeterTheAleut]

J.J.Abrams to direct next Star Wars film. He did justice to Star Trek so maybe there is hope. http://m.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2013/01/jj-abrams-directing-the-new-star-wars-exciting-or-terrifying/272513/

A Trekkie directs SW? Is that some kind of a joke?

Nope.

PetertheAleut,

Your avatar Christmas Tree looks like a Star Wars Robot, is it?

No, it's a Dalek from Doctor Who.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxD-5z_xHBU

[jmbejdl]

J.J.Abrams to direct next Star Wars film. He did justice to Star Trek so maybe there is hope. http://m.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2013/01/jj-abrams-directing-the-new-star-wars-exciting-or-terrifying/272513/

A Trekkie directs SW? Is that some kind of a joke?

Not sure it's accurate to call him a Trekkie when he's said that growing up Star Wars was always more his thing than Star Trek. That sounds just like me and I certainly wouldn't call myself a Trekkie. He did do a really good job with the Star Trek reboot. It was actually a decent film.

James

[Asteriktos]

He did do a really good job with the Star Trek reboot. It was actually a decent film.

And all he had to do was De-Trek it (by his own admission)   

[Tags:]

OrthodoxChristianity.net > Moderated Forums > Other Topics > Topic: Star Wars Episode 7: Set for 2015 Release