See what does make it cohesive to me is that we simply have a "trilogy of trilogies" that loosely ties together if you want them to, even if it isn't a perfect and seamless 9 film narrative. Not to beat a dead horse but as we've often discussed we are required to hand wave/ignore some pretty big discrepancies to even make the OT fit together. So with that in mind I won't hold the cohesiveness *between* separate trilogies to a higher standard.
George himself abandoned a lot of his cooler ideas so I can accept the ST without his blessing since in my mind it kept enough of his ideas (some that were even discarded ROTJ ideas) like Luke being in exile and a woman seemingly overshadowing Anakin. Even better than that they discarded his lamest ideas (microbiotic Whills, people as mere "vehicles", etc.)
I'm just glad that you've at least softened in your dislike of the ST, even if you still don't "like" it per se.
It makes no sense. The Chosen One was defined as the one who would bring balance *by destroying the Sith.* That's the added context that the PT gave to Anakin's story which ended with destroying Palpatine in ROTJ.
Redefining "Chosen One" to not encompass anything regarding destroying the Sith would basically retcon key dialogue/exposition from the PT and result in the Jedi seeming even stupider than they already did.
I guess you could make the argument that Leia wouldn't have existed without Anakin, so she'd be an extension of a larger "Chosen One" destiny in destroying the Sith and restoring balance, but that's lame.
It seems the sequels were destined to be pointless regardless of who wrote them. Cash grabs and nothing more, no matter what.
Welcome back ajp, I was hoping you'd read that!
So...going back to our earlier discussions about the ST. Does this in any way legitimize TROS for you? Now that we know that even George himself was going to make the Chosen One a female wielding Leia's lightsaber?
Hell TROS even validated that Anakin *did* fulfill his prophecy when he himself told Rey to "bring back the balance as I once did." Clearly moreso than Lucas would have apparently. Man there's just no end to the amount of retcons he'd do to his own Saga.
I remember being pissed when he retconned the Saga from being the story of Luke to the story of Anakin. But no it was the story of Leia all along.
At least with the current "Skywalker Saga" we have three separate trilogies with three separate heroes. Sure Rey defeats Palpatine at the very end but only with the help of the heroes from the previous two trilogies (and still needed to be rescued by "the last Skywalker" as Palps called him.)
"The book reads, ?By the end of the trilogy Luke would?ve rebuilt much of the Jedi, and we would have the renewal of the New Republic, with Leia, Senator Organa, becoming the Supreme Chancellor in charge of everything. So she ended up being the Chosen One.?"
That makes zero sense whatsoever. So, Luke rebuilds the Jedi Order... but since Leia is the Supreme Chancellor she becomes the Chosen One?
The author clearly has no idea what he is talking about. There is no logic in that, none. This was a trash article, very click baity, and most likely designed to take heat off Disney's trash story.
Please explain how one sentence, that is clearly delusional, makes no sense, and is utterly wrong, somehow makes up for what Disney has done.
It doesn't. Author clearly has no idea what he is talking about.
You can't even dispute what he said?
You even know that article is trash and clearly wrong
Just stop. No it isn't. There are multiple ideas that would have been better than what we got.
You're making a lot of sense in how you justify accepting the 3 trilogies - since GL himself was creating some disconnects in his own 2 before the ST even came along. Where I would debate how comparable the lack of cohesion is, though, comes down to how Lucas used the PT to connect by setting up the events of the OT in more fleshed-out context.
The use of Anakin as "Chosen One" (and I didn't care for that any more than you did, btw) did manage to add another layer of significance to the climax resolution of the OT. Killing Palpatine became a bigger deal than it had been before. Not only did Vader/Anakin assassinate the leader of the Empire, he actually ended the mastermind and puppetmaster who created and sustained the entire galactic conflict. It centralized everything.
After the PT, it was a lot harder to imagine a new "Emperor" threatening the galaxy in the same way again because of how much he built Palpatine up in the PT. No one was gonna have that kind of quasi-omnipotence and evil influence again any time soon. Having Vader end him was now even more of a triumphant conclusion; even more of a revenge angle as well. Plus, it set a new context to the nature of the Skywalkers and why they were so important (for better or worse).
What I'm getting at is that the PT *did* work seamlessly with the OT in what matters most to me: story. It maintained a thematic and plot throughline from Ep1 to Ep6. It bumbled and stumbled in executing that, but the general overarching takeaway was singular and cohesive.
I can't see how his ideas for Maul/Talon/Leia would've maintained that throughline, however. It comes across to me as thematically disconnected as the ST does. But like you said, the Disney ST didn't give us the sharp turn (180 in a key way) that the Whills would've introduced. So, did you and I get the lesser of two ST evils? Yeah, probably.
