How Dark is too Dark?

It's only too dark when I have to turn my monitor up.

Kidding aside... Yeah, I dunno. If you ask me, the prequels are the darkest slice of Star Wars; yet they are filled with light, beauty, colour, grandeur, and whimsy. I mean, can it get much darker than ROTS, really? But look how Lucas manages the final events of that film. After all the pain and suffering, there is an angelic sense of hope at the end. 

So I guess it comes down to tone; or more elusive properties. What I personally can't stand is dour. Or forced darkness. I've always felt a lot of other blockbuster entertainments suffer from this, but not Star Wars. I always think it's worth bearing the series descriptor in mind on Wikipedia:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wars


Or the description given on Wookiepedia:

starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Star_Wars


Or, for that matter, the description on its Reddit page:

www.reddit.com/r/StarWars/


Two of those descriptions use a term I like and believe is central: epic space opera. Of course, on Charlie Rose in 2015, Lucas insisted the series was actually closer to soap opera, though I think he was talking more about the main saga films (which he, of course, invested all his creative energies and personal resources into). 

The idea of Star Wars being a space opera, and epic in its modality, should help keep creatives (and fans) on the straight and narrow when it comes to expanding it and fashioning new works in its name. It isn't "Star Trek" or "The Twilight Zone". It's its own beast -- heavy, thematic, intense, foreboding; yet also broad, sweeping, zesty, propellant, fun.

Star Wars is the idealised realisation of a unique concoction started furtively back in the 1930s with "Flash Gordon", yet despite the success of the Marvel franchise, it has no rivals in its class: i.e., it has become the epic space opera of our time. So do right by it. Do it dark, do it serious; but don't forget colour, vigour, humour, bold spectacle, and a sensational scope. For every insipid Imperial or invisible moisture farmer, there is a Jabba the Hutt and a General Grievous. For every stoic Jedi or scheming Sith, there is a Watto and a Jar Jar. 

Another part of the descriptions I like there is the end of the Reddit one, where it declares that the franchise is "centered around a film series that began with the eponymous 1977 movie". Concentric circles. The germ of Star Wars is the original film, the endosperm is the saga, and the bran and the husk are whatever gets put around the films and the saga to keep their basic integrity intact. Crude analogy, but you get the idea. Of course, over time, the brilliance of the original saga films may dim as they become swamped by ever more content on the periphery; but for now, and for a long time to come, they remain the hinge and the pivot of the whole franchise.

The Wookiepedia description also notes a core set of ingredients: "the Star Wars franchise employs archetypal motifs common to religions, classical mythology, and political climax, as well as musical motifs of those same aspects". As soon as you lose these, you lose the essence of Star Wars. The franchise constantly evokes elements of sacrifice, patterns of consumption, and eras of decline and instability that are as old as human civilisation itself. If the historical and cultural intelligence of Star Wars is forgotten or pushed aside, the franchise will cease being Star Wars.

Last, but not least, let me not overlook the fact that George Lucas gets a mention in all three descriptions: "created by George Lucas" is a phrasing shared by all three. Going forward, I think it needs to be kept in mind by all people that work on Star Wars and consume it that the core aspect of the franchise was created by one man; or is the vision of a singular personality. Thus, while pursuing their own artistic visions, they should always ask the question, "What would George do?" If they cannot ask that question sincerely or arrive at sincere answers, they are making or consuming something that is Star Wars in name only. Hopefully, with his original saga films and what he approved of for "The Clone Wars", Lucas has laid a firm foundation. 

So, yeah: darkness is allowed. But just remember that Star Wars follows its own rules for that. I believe, given the Taoistic overtones of the Force, light and dark can co-exist in this franchise, but a careful balance has to be maintained. Star Wars should never be dark for its own sake or because it fits with existing trends. To quote the song "T-U-R-T-L-E Power" from a childhood classic:

Remember the words of your teacher, your master:
"Evil moves fast, but good moves faster!"
than light shining for your illumination.

It depends on how 'dark' is defined. And children's entertainment can be dark. Kids know bad things happen, and there's a time and place for creators who can deliver thoughtful entertainment for them to digest it. I mean, Where The Red Fern Grows is a childhood rite of passage. And I grew up singing Puff The Magic Dragon in music class.

What always strikes me as curious is how people rave about ESB being dark, but I think ANH and RotJ are darker. The entire PT too. I mean, no main characters die, for one thing. (I've gone into detail about this in the ESB Over-Hyped? Thread).
One of the troubles with ESB is that the way it was made struck such a chord with people that they expect every SW movie to be like that. It's used as the measuring stick for each subsequent film, which is unrealistic. But everyone says they love it because it's dark. So what does Disney do? "Let's make everything dark."
Then again, most of Walt Disney's animated films were pretty dark, actually.


Here's one of my favorite Lucas quotes, from this video on Vimeo:

The discovery that the world isn't the way it had been portrayed in our youth, that it was a grim, evil place, and that horrible things were going on all the time - I said, "Well, this is what I'm gonna make my movies about. I'm gonna make the powerful movies. I'm gonna make the films that tell the world the way it is. How what a terrible place we live in and all the bad things that are going on. Maybe that will inform people, and there will be some change."
I made that film and it wasn't very successful. And it portrayed a very grim, modern, isolated world where people didn't care about each other. It wasn't very effective. It wasn't very successful and it wasn't very well-liked, actually.
Some of my friends said, "Well, why don't you make something different, something that's not like you, something that's funny or upbeat." And Fran said, "You can do a regular movie. Why don't you do a comedy, why don't you do something that's really accessible to people." And so American Graffiti was the closest thing I could think of to an accessible movie.
And I made that film, and it was a positive film. It had positive values, it was about growing up, it was about the issues of growing up, and changing your life, and facing those changes and not being afraid of those changes.
And it was an extremely popular film. And I got a lot of letters back from everybody saying how it changed their lives, and how powerful it was for them. And how it put them on the right track, and how it made them feel positive about life again. And I came to a realization at that point that it was more valuable for me to make films, not about the way the world is - because I discovered very quickly that most people discover very quickly what the world is like, it's not news to them how terrible it is. But what they need is a vision of what the world should be, or what it could be. That's when I started out to make Star Wars. Basically I wanted to tell a fairy tale that had these positive values, that showed what caring about your fellow man and not caring what race they're from or planet.
- George Lucas


And yet, I feel like he didn't completely abandon the idea of showing how grim and brutal life can be in Star Wars at times.

I remember the first time I watched Revenge of the sith and being Impresed when noticing the contrast in tone compared to the Phantom Menace, and I thought it worked, seeing the "little boy Padme knew on Tatooine" commiting atrocities and burning allive after yelling how he hates Obi Wan, how the status quo Episode I presented changed for the worst with almost all prequel only chararcters dying. Don't know how, considering he didn't do much in the movies but I felt bad for Ki-Adi-Mundi.

What I'm saying is that as much as people complain on The Phantom Menace being too "childish" It makes For a better payoff in Revenge of the Sith that if all of the trilogy was the same tone.

An usually kind and happy man being angry is scarier than a embittered yelling edgelord being angry. This can be applied to this. the light and dark moments compliment each other, light moments make dark ones more effective, thats why comedic moments are called comic RELIEF. But obviuslly you need to have a balance and because the oposite, unless you are making a comedy can be as bad.

Subtext Mining
This explains why some fans liked TESB and TCW
tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TrueArtIsAngsty