Quote
Entirely too much. Regarding Padme's will to live, there is no way that anybody who wants their kids would just lose the will to live once they're born. This was written by a man who has adopted his children, as Lucas has, and does not have biological children of his own. Unless Padme just didn't want these kids (which, in no way, comes across in this film), the sheer nature of having children would give somebody a reason to live, not to die. If she was mortally wounded, it could have believed it that she simply survived long enough for her children to live.
From the novel, one gets the feeling that Padme loves Anakin more deeply than anyone has ever loved anything. Indeed, even after all the horrible things he had done, she was still willing to forgive him and "go away" with him. It's intended as a "Romeo & Juliet" level of love. And, having lost him, she sees no reason to live. . . she is quite literally dying of a broken heart. She sees no point in going on without Anakin, and raising his children without him is not an option for her.
Is this lame? Well, I'm not a big fan of her "dying of a broken heart" either. But, you can't really state empirically (pardon the pun) that a woman just could *never* feel that way. Believe it or not, there are a lot of people who have children and never have that "parental gene" click on. Some people just don't bond with their children. I'm not saying that Padme was one of those people. . . but things just aren't so cut and dried as you seem to want to make it. It's at least conceivable to me that the birth of her twins might not restore Padme's will to live given who their father was, what he had become, and what she had lost.
Quote
Regarding the "phone call" scene in ESB, are we to believe the Emperor doesn't have the intelligence (i.e. strategic information) that Vader does about the guy who blew up the Death Star? And are we to assume the Emperor isn't the least bit curious why Vader's taken the Imperial fleet off on a mission scouring the galaxy for some unnamed somebody or something? And if Vader has no problem dropping the Skywalker name to his officers, are we to assume he doesn't expect the Emperor will know pretty quickly what he's up to? These three added lines in ESB make no sense, even now that Ep III has played out. They are, quite simply, in the wrong place.
I believe Vader is in charge of finding the Rebels. The fact that this allows him to simultaneously search for his son is just gravy. I always assumed that Vader heard the name "Luke Skywalker" from his own network of spies. And that the Emperor probably heard the name as well from his own sources. In the OOT, it's hard to determine if the Emperor is referring to Luke for the the first time in Vader's presence, or if he's referring to him again, but now attributing him with powers that could destroy them. In the DVD-OT, it seems to me that it's being more clear that it is the former. But it's not drastically different either way as you could interpret the OOT to mean essentially the same thing. Indeed, you could interpret the DVD-OT to be saying that the Emperor has finally determined that this "Luke Skywalker" isn't just a pretender trading on a former Jedi's famous name (or the Rebellion may be using the name for propoganda). . . and that he truly is the son of Anakin.
It isn't common knowledge in the Empire that Vader was Anakin Skywalker, is it?
Anyways, there is so much to hate about what Lucas has done to the films. I just don't think this one warrants so much venom when there are much more egregious and problematic changes to be addresssed!
