Why Didn't Qui Gon Gin's Body Disappear Like Obiwan's and Yoda's? — Page 5

I think I read somewhere that in the original ROTJ novelization (which I believe was supposed to be canon, might be wrong and not sure if it still is even if it was), Vader does disappear and Luke does only burn his suit. It’s still possible that it happens off-screen in the film, though I don’t know why they wouldn’t show that and I also think I read somewhere that they originally did intend to. My guess it that perhaps they wanted it to be a surprise when he appears to Luke at the end.

As for Qui-Gon, no clue. Lucas probably didn’t intend for him to be a force ghost when filming TPM, but then he felt compelled to overexplain everything in ROTS so he made Qui-Gon the “original” force ghost Obi-Wan “learned” it from. Which is stupid and takes away from the mysticism of the originals like many other things in the prequels. The whole “I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine” thing worked better in the originals as it was. And the fact that Vader looked surprised when Obi-Wan disappears means he did not know about this “technique” and it’s doubtful he somehow “learned” it before he died, so it would have made a lot more sense if they just made it a spiritual thing only accessible to the most powerful Jedi with the strongest connection to the force, not something they had to consciously learn.

Density said:

I think I read somewhere that in the original ROTJ novelization (which I believe was supposed to be canon, might be wrong and not sure if it still is even if it was), Vader does disappear and Luke does only burn his suit.

That wouldn’t explain anything because we see Vader die on-screen and he doesn’t disappear immediately, unlike Obi-Wan and Yoda.

TV’s Frink said:

Density said:

I think I read somewhere that in the original ROTJ novelization (which I believe was supposed to be canon, might be wrong and not sure if it still is even if it was), Vader does disappear and Luke does only burn his suit.

That wouldn’t explain anything because we see Vader die on-screen and he doesn’t disappear immediately, unlike Obi-Wan and Yoda.

Obi-Wan disappeared more immediately than Yoda, who kind of faded away slowly after he took his last breath whereas Obi-Wan was gone instantly before the lightsaber even went all the way through him. So that’s already inconsistent. You can come up with some sort of convoluted Lucas logic to explain why Vader might take even longer, like the residual functioning of the suit kept his heart pumping or the Force had to take extra time to sort out his soul because he was Vader and the chosen one or whatever bullshit. We don’t actually see his corpse for long. It’s plausible that he disappears right after the scene cuts. Point is it makes at least a little more sense than him just not disappearing at all.

I guess the other explanation could be that something about the cremation ritual would allow both Vader and Qui-Gon to become force ghosts, like only if the body is gone can you be a ghost. If that is the case, then perhaps that is the “secret” Qui-Gon discovered and passed on to Obi-Wan and Yoda, who then used the Force in their last moments to will their bodies to disappear so they could live on as ghosts. (Which is consistent with the meditation stance Obi-Wan appears to take right before he dies, like he is putting all of his remaining energy into something.) But it wasn’t necessary for Vader since he was cremated anyway.

That only really works though if the Jedi did not routinely use cremation and Qui-Gon was an exception for some reason. If they did, you would think there would be lots of other dead Jedi ghosts who would have communicated with the living at some point. But I don’t know what else makes Qui-Gon so special, and is also consistent with Vader becoming a force ghost despite not disappearing on-screen. The fact that both were cremated is all they have in common, and the thing that all the known force ghosts have in common is that their bodies dissolved somehow, either by incineration or evaporation.

Yoda states that Qui-Gon learned the path back AFTER he died and he taught Yoda, who teaches Obi-Wan.

Yoda and Obi knew the secret before they died, and they disappeared.
Qui-Gon and Anakin didn’t know how to come back before they died, and so they didn’t disappear.

As I said before, your theory fits the available facts but is still nothing more than a theory. There’s nothing in the films that directly points to this as the reason some Jedi disappear and some don’t. And there’s certainly nothing in the OT that points to this at all.

TV’s Frink said:

As I said before, your theory fits the available facts but is still nothing more than a theory. There’s nothing in the films that directly points to this as the reason some Jedi disappear and some don’t. And there’s certainly nothing in the OT that points to this at all.

I don’t get what is so hard about looking at evidence and coming to an obvious conclusion. Why would Lucas write in the Qui-Gon thing that makes my theory work and not have had that in mind?

Because it doesn’t explain Obi-Wan in Star Wars and Vader in ROTJ from 1977 to 2004. If you ignore the PT then it’s completely not-obvious. At best it’s Lucas trying to fix his earlier laziness through a retcon over 20 years later.

TV’s Frink said:

Because it doesn’t explain Obi-Wan in Star Wars and Vader in ROTJ from 1977 to 2004. If you ignore the PT then it’s completely not-obvious. At best it’s Lucas trying to fix his earlier laziness through a retcon over 20 years later.

But the PT exists and i’m not ignoring it. And doesn’t the very fact that he bothered to fix it at all hurt your “lazy” narrative?

Chlorine said:

TV’s Frink said:

Because it doesn’t explain Obi-Wan in Star Wars and Vader in ROTJ from 1977 to 2004. If you ignore the PT then it’s completely not-obvious. At best it’s Lucas trying to fix his earlier laziness through a retcon over 20 years later.

But the PT exists and i’m not ignoring it.

Yeah but you think the PT is good for some reason. PT, OT, then ST, right?

And doesn’t the very fact that he bothered to fix it at all hurt your “lazy” narrative?

No…he was lazy in 1983.

TV’s Frink said:

Chlorine said:

TV’s Frink said:

Because it doesn’t explain Obi-Wan in Star Wars and Vader in ROTJ from 1977 to 2004. If you ignore the PT then it’s completely not-obvious. At best it’s Lucas trying to fix his earlier laziness through a retcon over 20 years later.

But the PT exists and i’m not ignoring it.

Yeah but you think the PT is good for some reason. PT, OT, then ST, right?

And doesn’t the very fact that he bothered to fix it at all hurt your “lazy” narrative?

No…he was lazy in 1983.

…And he corrected his mistake. Are you saying PT Lucas was less lazy than OT Lucas?

Are you saying you aren’t a sock of multiple previously banned accounts?

TV’s Frink said:

Are you saying you aren’t a sock of multiple previously banned accounts?

Are you saying that you’re dodging the question?

Lucas is a lazy director. If you want just one example, he doesn’t give a shit about actors and has no interest in directing them, and it’s super obvious in the PT. So no, I’m not saying PT Lucas was less lazy than OT Lucas, but it doesn’t matter when he was more lazy. That’s a dumb question.

So are you saying that you’re dodging the question?

TV’s Frink said:

So no, I’m not saying PT Lucas was less lazy than OT Lucas, but it doesn’t matter when he was more lazy.

This doesn’t make sense.

TV’s Frink said:

So are you saying that you’re dodging the question?

Chlorine said:

TV’s Frink said:

So no, I’m not saying PT Lucas was less lazy than OT Lucas, but it doesn’t matter when he was more lazy.

This doesn’t make sense.

Neither does your question.

I’m not dodging anything. I’m not a sock. You brought that up only to deflect from my question.

TV’s Frink said:

Chlorine said:

TV’s Frink said:

So no, I’m not saying PT Lucas was less lazy than OT Lucas, but it doesn’t matter when he was more lazy.

This doesn’t make sense.

Neither does your question.

How so?
You said that even if he retconned it during the PT, 1983 Lucas was lazy.

That implies that you think that PT Lucas is less lazy than OT Lucas, so I asked you for confirmation on that.

Chlorine said:

I’m not dodging anything. I’m not a sock. You brought that up only to deflect from my question.

No, I brought it up because I believe you are a sock. And I answered your question.

Chlorine said:

TV’s Frink said:

Chlorine said:

TV’s Frink said:

So no, I’m not saying PT Lucas was less lazy than OT Lucas, but it doesn’t matter when he was more lazy.

This doesn’t make sense.

Neither does your question.

How so?
You said that even if he retconned it during the PT, 1983 Lucas was lazy.

That implies that you think that PT Lucas is less lazy than OT Lucas, so I asked you for confirmation on that.

Jesus Christ.

TV’s Frink said:

Chlorine said:

I’m not dodging anything. I’m not a sock. You brought that up only to deflect from my question.

No, I brought it up because I believe you are a sock. And I answered your question.

But you admitted that your answer didn’t make sense.

TV’s Frink said:

Chlorine said:

TV’s Frink said:

Chlorine said:

TV’s Frink said:

So no, I’m not saying PT Lucas was less lazy than OT Lucas, but it doesn’t matter when he was more lazy.

This doesn’t make sense.

Neither does your question.

How so?
You said that even if he retconned it during the PT, 1983 Lucas was lazy.

That implies that you think that PT Lucas is less lazy than OT Lucas, so I asked you for confirmation on that.

Jesus Christ.

What about this situation is escaping you?

Look, was PT Lucas more lazy than OT Lucas? I don’t know and I don’t care. They’re both lazy, which one is more lazy is irrelevant.