logo Sign In

Is Revenge of the Sith the Best or Worst Prequel? — Page 5

Author
Time

DrDre said:

It’s interesting that you criticize Qui-Gon’s death and bearing on the story, when Lucas ultimately managed to better flesh out Qui-Gon’s character, motivations, and relationships with Obi-Wan, and Anakin over the course of a single movie than Snoke was developed over the course of two movies in the ST. I would say Snoke is to Ben Solo what Qui-Gon is to Obi-Wan and to a lesser degree Anakin, only Snoke has far less scenes, and Snoke and Ben Solo’s relationship is far less developed obscuring Ben Solo’s character motivations.

Let’s try not to get too far off topic with the ST talk, especially when the comparison is so labored and irrelevant to the discussion.

The problem is Qui-Gon is basically the closest thing to a main character in TPM, and then he’s gone. There are two things that went wrong - he should have been far more in the background in a mentor role, and his influence on Obi-wan and Anakin should have been more clearly conveyed in the other films (which is to say more than not at all, which is the case).

Anyway, I’m going to give this as half a point in favor of ROTS.

Author
Time

i think i’ve said this before and i’ll say it again - i see Qui-Gon as the perfect jedi, and i’m pretty sure Anakin saw him as the perfect jedi too. and i think that that’s very important to the overall saga.

Qui-Gon was the jedi Anakin really looked up to and wanted to be like, while other jedi in the PT such as Obi-Wan and Windu represented a lot of what was wrong with the order (a factor that ultimately ended up pushing Anakin over to the dark side). i also think that, during RotS, Anakin lost the notion of what was right and wrong (obviously) and ended up painting jedi and sith with the same brush - meaning that in his head both groups were equally bad - and so he chose to join the faction that could save his wife and didn’t condemn passion. and i think that, in the end, Qui-Gon was the only jedi he ever saw as a truly good man.

with that in mind, i think that RotJ Luke is a very similar character to Qui-Gon in TPM in terms of how they act and their moral standards. i think Vader saw that too, and that seeing it made him see hope in the jedi once again, since the only living jedi was, then, as good a man as Qui-Gon, the man he looked up to his whole life. and i think that was one of the main factors that made him save Luke (besides Luke being his son, the most important factor imo), which ultimately means that from my understanding Qui-Gon is a very important character overall.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

yotsuya said:

He largely did away with the political structure when he abolished the Senate in ANH in favor of regional governors.

Notably this all happened offscreen and was quickly summed up in a couple lines of dialogue.

Collipso said:

i think i’ve said this before and i’ll say it again - i see Qui-Gon as the perfect jedi, and i’m pretty sure Anakin saw him as the perfect jedi too. and i think that that’s very important to the overall saga.

Qui-Gon was the jedi Anakin really looked up to and wanted to be like, while other jedi in the PT such as Obi-Wan and Windu represented a lot of what was wrong with the order (a factor that ultimately ended up pushing Anakin over to the dark side). i also think that, during RotS, Anakin lost the notion of what was right and wrong (obviously) and ended up painting jedi and sith with the same brush - meaning that in his head both groups were equally bad - and so he chose to join the faction that could save his wife and didn’t condemn passion. and i think that, in the end, Qui-Gon was the only jedi he ever saw as a truly good man.

with that in mind, i think that RotJ Luke is a very similar character to Qui-Gon in TPM in terms of how they act and their moral standards. i think Vader saw that too, and that seeing it made him see hope in the jedi once again, since the only living jedi was, then, as good a man as Qui-Gon, the man he looked up to his whole life. and i think that was one of the main factors that made him save Luke (besides Luke being his son, the most important factor imo), which ultimately means that from my understanding Qui-Gon is a very important character overall.

As with many elements of the PT clearly Lucas had a great idea in his head that didn’t translate properly on screen. Qui-Gon is supposed to be a sort of especially independently minded Jedi, which that much at least is clear, but I think his problems with the Jedi ideologies and his distaste for many of the rules could have done with a good deal more emphasis. This way it could nicely dovetail with Anakin’s similar mindsets toward the Jedi order and his eventual turn. As is, this thread is subtext at best. Even when Anakin falls it’s only very minorly only maybe because he has a problem with a rule or two, and he of course never even mentions Qui-Gon after he becomes Hayden Christensen, let alone speaks fondly of his influence (not that that’s the only way to portray such influence, but you get what I mean).

The theory that Qui-Gon is the only Jedi Anakin ever saw as a “truly good man” is a nice theory, but ultimately just that - a theory. There’s evidence that could potentially support it, but at the end of the day nothing like that is ever clearly (or even subtly) communicated in the films.

Author
Time

DominicCobb said:
The theory that Qui-Gon is the only Jedi Anakin ever saw as a “truly good man” is a nice theory, but ultimately just that - a theory. There’s evidence to support it, but at the end of the day nothing like that is ever clearly (or even subtly) communicated in the films.

The entire character of Qui-Gon is utterly wasted since nothing results from his death. If Obi-Wan was reckless in TPM and it caused him to become more stoic, then that would be a character thing. If he was a figure that Anakin looked up to and Obi-Wan always failed to match him as a teacher then that would be a character thing. But for any of that to work you have to actually write characters.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Mocata said:

DominicCobb said:
The theory that Qui-Gon is the only Jedi Anakin ever saw as a “truly good man” is a nice theory, but ultimately just that - a theory. There’s evidence to support it, but at the end of the day nothing like that is ever clearly (or even subtly) communicated in the films.

If he was a figure that Anakin looked up to and Obi-Wan always failed to match him as a teacher then that would be a character thing.

well, he was. isn’t there a scene in AotC where Anakin talks about Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan feels bad for not being as good as he was?

Author
Time

Collipso said:

Mocata said:

DominicCobb said:
The theory that Qui-Gon is the only Jedi Anakin ever saw as a “truly good man” is a nice theory, but ultimately just that - a theory. There’s evidence to support it, but at the end of the day nothing like that is ever clearly (or even subtly) communicated in the films.

If he was a figure that Anakin looked up to and Obi-Wan always failed to match him as a teacher then that would be a character thing.

well, he was. isn’t there a scene in AotC where Anakin talks about Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan feels bad for not being as good as he was?

Dooku mentions Qui-gon I think, and there’s a deleted scene where the librarian talks about Qui-gon as well, but that’s it. Anakin doesn’t mention him at all in Episodes 2 and 3.

You probably don’t recognize me because of the red arm.
Episode 9 Rewrite, The Starlight Project (Released!) and ANH Technicolor Project (Released!)

Author
Time

ohhh right, i’m thinking about the 2D animated series. there are a couple of scenes in that that really add to what i’m talking about. unfortunately nothing like that is in any of the movies, so my argument is, therefore, invalid. well, that sucks 😛

Author
Time
 (Edited)

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

It’s interesting that you criticize Qui-Gon’s death and bearing on the story, when Lucas ultimately managed to better flesh out Qui-Gon’s character, motivations, and relationships with Obi-Wan, and Anakin over the course of a single movie than Snoke was developed over the course of two movies in the ST. I would say Snoke is to Ben Solo what Qui-Gon is to Obi-Wan and to a lesser degree Anakin, only Snoke has far less scenes, and Snoke and Ben Solo’s relationship is far less developed obscuring Ben Solo’s character motivations.

Let’s try not to get too far off topic with the ST talk, especially when the comparison is so labored and irrelevant to the discussion.

The problem is Qui-Gon is basically the closest thing to a main character in TPM, and then he’s gone. There are two things that went wrong - he should have been far more in the background in a mentor role, and his influence on Obi-wan and Anakin should have been more clearly conveyed in the other films (which is to say more than not at all, which is the case).

Anyway, I’m going to give this as half a point in favor of ROTS.

I used the example to point out a possible double standard, but I might have used ANH as an example as well. Tarkin serves as one of the main antagonists in that film, and after ANH he’s gone, never to be mentioned again. However, Tarkin serves a purpose beyond his apparent role as the villain. Firstly, ANH is far more political than TESB and ROTJ. For one the political situation is mentioned or discussed on numerous occasions, between Leia and Vader early on, in the Death Star conference room, and again between Tarkin and Leia before the destruction of Alderaan. The more personal story of Luke, Obi-Wan, and Vader is very much in the background, and used as a McGuffin to get Luke to join the fight against the Empire. Secondly, Tarkin and Vader are exponents of two different worlds, the old and the new. Tarkin’s presence is a constant reminder that Vader is a leftover of a bygone era in a world where technology is seen as the ultimate political tool. With Tarkin’s death Vader comes into his own, and the personal story of Luke, Vader, and Obi-Wan is put front and center in the next movie.

Qui-Gon’s character serves a number of purposes. For one he is the mirror that exposes the Jedi order’s dogmatism, a dogmatism that would continue to plague them in subsequent films. Secondly, without Qui-Gon’s involvement Anakin would never have been trained. Qui-Gon’s actions in the story directly impact the further development of the main characters, and the development and outcome of Lucas’ six part story. Thirdly, Qui-Gon’s death is a stark reminder to the Jedi order that the Sith are still at large and as dangerous as ever. The death of a main character reminds us of the stakes, and also conveys the idea that Anakin has lost a father figure who might have steered him on the path of the righteous. That void is filled by Palpatine who would take over the role of father figure in subsequent films to the detriment of the entire galaxy.

Author
Time

chyron8472 said:

So, there are people here who say TPM is the best PT film?
…but its plot is completely pointless, as the only relevant bits are summed up by character dialogue in AOTC. The very fact that you can watch Star Wars in machete order (4-5-2-3-6) and cut out TPM altogether without missing anything says something.

I don’t care that it’s “pointless” because it’s a more well-crafted film than AOTC (which is also 90% “pointless”) and ROTS (which is just a checklist of shit that should have been spread across three films crammed into one, which makes it less “pointless” by necessity, but also makes it a worse film).

Author
Time
 (Edited)

ChainsawAsh said:

chyron8472 said:

So, there are people here who say TPM is the best PT film?
…but its plot is completely pointless, as the only relevant bits are summed up by character dialogue in AOTC. The very fact that you can watch Star Wars in machete order (4-5-2-3-6) and cut out TPM altogether without missing anything says something.

I don’t care that it’s “pointless” because it’s a more well-crafted film than AOTC (which is also 90% “pointless”) and ROTS (which is just a checklist of shit that should have been spread across three films crammed into one, which makes it less “pointless” by necessity, but also makes it a worse film).

Indeed.

Author
Time

I don’t think I would call TPM well crafted. There’s very little story in it. No identifiable protagonist. Nothing means anything. AOTC and ROTS are trash but they have actual protagonists who make decisions that affect the outcome of the film. Both these films explore themes and ideas and have a central conflict that is present from begining to end.

And apart from the very impressive visual effects the rest of the direction is piss poor at best. Many scenes with as much tension and energy as a table read. TPMs saving grace is that it doesn’t try and do too much story stuff. The plot is simple and easy to follow. The stakes are so remarkably low that its all too easy to just sit back and enjoy the fireworks.

AOTC fails to make its romance connect with the audience and ROTS has a character turn that is so abrupt and underwritten that it ruins Darth Vader. But both these films show significantly more craft in writing and directing.

AOTC and ROTS have conflict, TPM has none. TPM is the worst prequel.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Chewielewis said:

I don’t think I would call TPM well crafted. There’s very little story in it. No identifiable protagonist.

Qui-Gon, maybe?

Nothing means anything.

Yep. Because nothing in Ep1 happens that is important to the stories of Eps2-3, that isn’t also explained in Ep2.

AOTC and ROTS are trash but they have actual protagonists who make decisions that affect the outcome of the film. Both these films explore themes and ideas and have a central conflict that is present from begining to end.

The big Gungan v. Droid battle is pointless outside of being a diversion—we have no stake in whether they live or die in the battle because it doesn’t matter to Naboo defeating the Trade Federation. The Naboo pilots are stupid because they could fly right through the hangar and blow up the reactor but they don’t—Anakin does it on accident, to their confusion. The battle against Maul has glaring problems, like why there needs to be multiple force fields or why Obi-Wan doesn’t use Force Speed like he did earlier. Creepy Puppet Yoda’s appearance was a problem with the theatrical release; Jar Jar’s character was overtly racist, extremely annoying, and had no bearing on the plot of TPM; and Ric Olie, aka Captain Obvious, is obvious. And there’s a throwaway scene where they ruin the mysticism of the Force by attributing Force-sensitivity to mitochondria.

Basically, the gungan battle against the droids is mostly filler; the podrace is mostly filler; (at least) one of the characters is annoying and only funny on an immature level; the mysticism and wonder of the Force is undermined; and the story doesn’t matter to the trilogy nor the saga. So no, I wouldn’t call that “well crafted.”

TV’s Frink said:

chyron just put a big Ric pic in your sig and be done with it.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

chyron8472 said:
And Jar Jar’s character was overtly racist

I think this statement has no real basis in reality to be honest, and says more about the US’s historic relationship with racial stereotypes and racial issues in general then what’s actually in the movie. For the character to be overtly racist one must first find sufficient evidence for either racist intentions, or clear evidence of the character being a racial stereotype, neither of which is the case in my view. I personally fail to see how an orange amphibian with floppy ears is supposed to be representative of a person of color outside of the fact that the character was portrayed by a black man.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Despite all that, and despite it’s insignificance to the greater Star Wars saga, I still think that the Phantom Menace is the most watchable movie in the prequel trilogy.

JEDIT: Even if Jar Jar isn’t racist, you gotta admit the nemoidians accents are disgusting.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

snooker said:

Despite all that, and despite it’s insignificance to the greater Star Wars saga, I still think that the Phantom Menace is the most watchable movie in the prequel trilogy.

JEDIT: Even if Jar Jar isn’t racist, you gotta admit the nemoidians accents are disgusting.

I must admit the accents reminded me somewhat of an Asian stereotype, but then again there wasn’t much else about those characters that seemed particulary Asian, so I view the similarity as coincidental. I think people were generally so upset about TPM, that they were looking for anything bad to accuse Lucas off, and so the whole racism angle was born. I think there’s plenty of evidence in the real world, that Lucas is anything but a racist, and so my belief is that dislike for TPM drove critics to embrace the worst possible interpretation of these characters and events.

Author
Time

i never got the racist claims towards the neimoidians in TPM. i think they speak with an accent to differentiate them, since they were the first aliens speaking english in the saga at that point. just because their accents are similar to that of asians, like dre said, there’s nothing particularly asian about them.

regarding jar jar: i really don’t understand the racist claims either. he’s just a silly gungan. how is that racist?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I seriously don’t see how The Phantom Menace is more watchable than Revenge of the Sith. Nothing happens in TPM that we care about; and Jar Jar and TPM-Anakin’s acting are not more watchable than ROTS-Anakin’s acting.

TV’s Frink said:

chyron just put a big Ric pic in your sig and be done with it.

Author
Time

chyron8472 said:

Chewielewis said:

I don’t think I would call TPM well crafted. There’s very little story in it. No identifiable protagonist.

Qui-Gon, maybe?

Nothing means anything.

Yep. Because nothing in Ep1 happens that is important to the stories of Eps2-3, that isn’t also explained in Ep2.

AOTC and ROTS are trash but they have actual protagonists who make decisions that affect the outcome of the film. Both these films explore themes and ideas and have a central conflict that is present from begining to end.

The big Gungan v. Droid battle is pointless outside of being a diversion—we have no stake in whether they live or die in the battle because it doesn’t matter to Naboo defeating the Trade Federation. The Naboo pilots are stupid because they could fly right through the hangar and blow up the reactor but they don’t—Anakin does it on accident, to their confusion. The battle against Maul has glaring problems, like why there needs to be multiple force fields or why Obi-Wan doesn’t use Force Speed like he did earlier. Creepy Puppet Yoda’s appearance was a problem with the theatrical release; Jar Jar’s character was overtly racist, extremely annoying, and had no bearing on the plot of TPM; and Ric Olie, aka Captain Obvious, is obvious. And there’s a throwaway scene where they ruin the mysticism of the Force by attributing Force-sensitivity to mitochondria.

Basically, the gungan battle against the droids is mostly filler; the podrace is mostly filler; (at least) one of the characters is annoying and only funny on an immature level; the mysticism and wonder of the Force is undermined; and the story doesn’t matter to the trilogy nor the saga. So no, I wouldn’t call that “well crafted.”

It’s well crafted from a technical perspective. The CG doesn’t overwhelm everything; the aesthetics are quite nice.

Author
Time

DrDre said:

chyron8472 said:
And Jar Jar’s character was overtly racist

I think this statement has no real basis in reality to be honest, and says more about the US’s historic relationship with racial stereotypes and racial issues in general then what’s actually in the movie. For the character to be overtly racist one must first find sufficient evidence for either racist intentions, or clear evidence of the character being a racial stereotype, neither of which is the case in my view. I personally fail to see how an orange amphibian with floppy ears is supposed to be representative of a person of color outside of the fact that the character was portrayed by a black man.

For what it’s worth, my friends and I all agreed Jar Jar acted, walked and talked with the racial stereotypes of a black man. From the strutting type gait, the “mesa sorry” type language etc. It was painfully obvious to me and many others. It isn’t one of those things that you have to look at “just right” to see it either.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

chyron8472 said:

I seriously don’t see how The Phantom Menace is more watchable than Revenge of the Sith. Nothing happens in TPM that we care about; and Jar Jar and TPM-Anakin’s acting are not more watchable than ROTS-Anakin’s acting.

It depends greatly on our own point of view. If you’re looking at it from the perspective of the overall story of the saga, sure it’s fairly superfluous. But taken in isolation, it’s a grand, impressive, and weird sci-fi movie that just happens to take place in the Star Wars universe where ROTS tries so much to tie into the OT that it can’t help but be lessened by the comparison.

You probably don’t recognize me because of the red arm.
Episode 9 Rewrite, The Starlight Project (Released!) and ANH Technicolor Project (Released!)

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Creox said:

DrDre said:

chyron8472 said:
And Jar Jar’s character was overtly racist

I think this statement has no real basis in reality to be honest, and says more about the US’s historic relationship with racial stereotypes and racial issues in general then what’s actually in the movie. For the character to be overtly racist one must first find sufficient evidence for either racist intentions, or clear evidence of the character being a racial stereotype, neither of which is the case in my view. I personally fail to see how an orange amphibian with floppy ears is supposed to be representative of a person of color outside of the fact that the character was portrayed by a black man.

For what it’s worth, my friends and I all agreed Jar Jar acted, walked and talked with the racial stereotypes of a black man. From the strutting type gait, the “mesa sorry” type language etc. It was painfully obvious to me and many others. It isn’t one of those things that you have to look at “just right” to see it either.

Well, I’m a black man, and I didn’t percieve Jar Jar as reflecting on me as a person, or on my racial background. I just saw a clumpsy floppy eared orange character meant to entertain kids portrayed by a black man who gave the character a somwhat Caribbean inflection in his speech. However, I’m absolutely convinced that the character in no way was intended to ridicule or attack people of color, and so I can only view such a point of view as stemming from a sort of overcompensation in response to racial stereotyping that happened in the past. To quote another user on another forum:

If I’m a black man and another black man says “Hey, that guy is tall, clumsy , stupid and speaks funny, that’s supposed to be us.”, I would say “it may be you sir, but that does not represent me.”

So, in my view if you see a racial stereotype in Jar Jar Binks, it’s because you are conditioned to see a racial stereotype, not because Lucas put it there to ridicule another race of people.

Author
Time

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

It’s interesting that you criticize Qui-Gon’s death and bearing on the story, when Lucas ultimately managed to better flesh out Qui-Gon’s character, motivations, and relationships with Obi-Wan, and Anakin over the course of a single movie than Snoke was developed over the course of two movies in the ST. I would say Snoke is to Ben Solo what Qui-Gon is to Obi-Wan and to a lesser degree Anakin, only Snoke has far less scenes, and Snoke and Ben Solo’s relationship is far less developed obscuring Ben Solo’s character motivations.

Let’s try not to get too far off topic with the ST talk, especially when the comparison is so labored and irrelevant to the discussion.

The problem is Qui-Gon is basically the closest thing to a main character in TPM, and then he’s gone. There are two things that went wrong - he should have been far more in the background in a mentor role, and his influence on Obi-wan and Anakin should have been more clearly conveyed in the other films (which is to say more than not at all, which is the case).

Anyway, I’m going to give this as half a point in favor of ROTS.

I used the example to point out a possible double standard, but I might have used ANH as an example as well. Tarkin serves as one of the main antagonists in that film, and after ANH he’s gone, never to be mentioned again.

My criticism of Qui-Gon has nothing to do with him dying. In fact, that he dies in TPM is one of the few things I would not change about him.

However, Tarkin serves a purpose beyond his apparent role as the villain. Firstly, ANH is far more political than TESB and ROTJ. For one the political situation is mentioned or discussed on numerous occasions, between Leia and Vader early on, in the Death Star conference room, and again between Tarkin and Leia before the destruction of Alderaan. The more personal story of Luke, Obi-Wan, and Vader is very much in the background, and used as a McGuffin to get Luke to join the fight against the Empire.

Saying ANH has more politics than TESB and ROTJ doesn’t say much, because those two films have practically zero politics. And I’m not saying these films shouldn’t have galactic politics in them, they just shouldn’t be at the forefront. If you think Tarkin’s politicking is the focus of ANH while Luke’s story is in the background, you need to watch that film again. The Death Star scenes are asides to Luke’s story, with the galactic politics featured therein minimal (and succinctly presented in direct relation to the stakes of the story at hand), and nothing near the extent of what is portrayed in the PT.

Qui-Gon’s character serves a number of purposes. For one he is the mirror that exposes the Jedi order’s dogmatism, a dogmatism that would continue to plague them in subsequent films. Secondly, without Qui-Gon’s involvement Anakin would never have been trained. Qui-Gon’s actions in the story directly impact the further development of the main characters, and the development and outcome of Lucas’ six part story. Thirdly, Qui-Gon’s death is a stark reminder to the Jedi order that the Sith are still at large and as dangerous as ever.

When did I ever say Qui-Gon was pointless? The problem is TPM puts too much focus on the one off character, while Obi-wan stands around in the background, and Anakin isn’t introduced until halfway through the film.

The death of a main character reminds us of the stakes,

You’re suggesting that Lucas made Qui-Gon a main character, so that his death could raise the stakes more significantly? The stakes in a series of films where we already know the outcome? Not to mention, the threat that kills him is also dispatched immediately thereafter.

The main purpose of killing the mentor is not to simply raise the stakes. It is to affect the protagonist’s journey, and leave them to fend for themselves. Unfortunately, though Lucas obviously had it in mind, the impact of Qui-Gon’s death is not touched upon in a meaningful way in the later films.

and also conveys the idea that Anakin has lost a father figure who might have steered him on the path of the righteous. That void is filled by Palpatine who would take over the role of father figure in subsequent films to the detriment of the entire galaxy.

Except we only see Palpatine talk to Anakin once in AOTC, while in the same film he says that Obi-wan is like a father to him… but then in ROTS they’re “brothers”… The truth is Lucas had an interesting idea with the dueling father figures, but completely fucked it up in terms of what actually made it on screen (where Anakin and Obi-wan bicker half the time, and we only know Anakin and Palpatine are friends because he tells us such, not because we actually see it). Good ideas that are practically nonexistent in the finished product due to poor execution - the prequels in a nutshell.

DrDre said:

So, in my view if you see a racial stereotype in Jar Jar Binks, it’s because you are conditioned to see a racial stereotype, not because Lucas put it there to ridicule another race of people.

That’s pretty obviously not how recognizing stereotypes actually works (and is kind of insulting). I don’t think there are many who think Lucas consciously included characters that resemble racist caricatures in his films (and, indeed, one should note that much of Jar Jar is Ahmed Best’s creation).

Personally I had no idea of the resemblance when I first saw the film, because I was a kid. But the similarities are obviously there when you compare Jar Jar to historical caricatures such as Stepin Fetchit and the like. I don’t think it’s enough of a similarity to be a significant criticism of the film (and hell if that film’s critics need anything more to criticize), but it’s disingenuous to say there’s no comparison to be made and then to also claim stereotyping of those making the comparison.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

DominicCobb said:

DrDre said:

It’s interesting that you criticize Qui-Gon’s death and bearing on the story, when Lucas ultimately managed to better flesh out Qui-Gon’s character, motivations, and relationships with Obi-Wan, and Anakin over the course of a single movie than Snoke was developed over the course of two movies in the ST. I would say Snoke is to Ben Solo what Qui-Gon is to Obi-Wan and to a lesser degree Anakin, only Snoke has far less scenes, and Snoke and Ben Solo’s relationship is far less developed obscuring Ben Solo’s character motivations.

Let’s try not to get too far off topic with the ST talk, especially when the comparison is so labored and irrelevant to the discussion.

The problem is Qui-Gon is basically the closest thing to a main character in TPM, and then he’s gone. There are two things that went wrong - he should have been far more in the background in a mentor role, and his influence on Obi-wan and Anakin should have been more clearly conveyed in the other films (which is to say more than not at all, which is the case).

Anyway, I’m going to give this as half a point in favor of ROTS.

I used the example to point out a possible double standard, but I might have used ANH as an example as well. Tarkin serves as one of the main antagonists in that film, and after ANH he’s gone, never to be mentioned again.

My criticism of Qui-Gon has nothing to do with him dying. In fact, that he dies in TPM is one of the few things I would not change about him.

However, Tarkin serves a purpose beyond his apparent role as the villain. Firstly, ANH is far more political than TESB and ROTJ. For one the political situation is mentioned or discussed on numerous occasions, between Leia and Vader early on, in the Death Star conference room, and again between Tarkin and Leia before the destruction of Alderaan. The more personal story of Luke, Obi-Wan, and Vader is very much in the background, and used as a McGuffin to get Luke to join the fight against the Empire.

Saying ANH has more politics than TESB and ROTJ doesn’t say much, because those two films have practically zero politics. And I’m not saying these films shouldn’t have galactic politics in them, they just shouldn’t be at the forefront. If you think Tarkin’s politicking is the focus of ANH while Luke’s story is in the background, you need to watch that film again. The Death Star scenes are asides to Luke’s story, with the galactic politics featured therein minimal (and succinctly presented in direct relation to the stakes of the story at hand), and nothing near the extent of what is portrayed in the PT.

Qui-Gon’s character serves a number of purposes. For one he is the mirror that exposes the Jedi order’s dogmatism, a dogmatism that would continue to plague them in subsequent films. Secondly, without Qui-Gon’s involvement Anakin would never have been trained. Qui-Gon’s actions in the story directly impact the further development of the main characters, and the development and outcome of Lucas’ six part story. Thirdly, Qui-Gon’s death is a stark reminder to the Jedi order that the Sith are still at large and as dangerous as ever.

When did I ever say Qui-Gon was pointless? The problem is TPM puts too much focus on the one off character, while Obi-wan stands around in the background, and Anakin isn’t introduced until halfway through the film.

The death of a main character reminds us of the stakes,

You’re suggesting that Lucas made Qui-Gon a main character, so that his death could raise the stakes more significantly? The stakes in a series of films where we already know the outcome? Not to mention, the threat that kills him is also dispatched immediately thereafter.

The main purpose of killing the mentor is not to simply raise the stakes. It is to affect the protagonist’s journey, and leave them to fend for themselves. Unfortunately, though Lucas obviously had it in mind, the impact of Qui-Gon’s death is not touched upon in a meaningful way in the later films.

and also conveys the idea that Anakin has lost a father figure who might have steered him on the path of the righteous. That void is filled by Palpatine who would take over the role of father figure in subsequent films to the detriment of the entire galaxy.

Except we only see Palpatine talk to Anakin once in AOTC, while in the same film he says that Obi-wan is like a father to him… but then in ROTS they’re “brothers”… The truth is Lucas had an interesting idea with the dueling father figures, but completely fucked it up in terms of what actually made it on screen (where Anakin and Obi-wan bicker half the time, and we only know Anakin and Palpatine are friends because he tells us such, not because we actually see it). Good ideas that are practically nonexistent in the finished product due to poor execution - the prequels in a nutshell.

DrDre said:

So, in my view if you see a racial stereotype in Jar Jar Binks, it’s because you are conditioned to see a racial stereotype, not because Lucas put it there to ridicule another race of people.

That’s pretty obviously not how recognizing stereotypes actually works (and is kind of insulting). I don’t think there are many who think Lucas consciously included characters that resemble racist caricatures in his films (and, indeed, one should note that much of Jar Jar is Ahmed Best’s creation).

Personally I had no idea of the resemblance when I first saw the film, because I was a kid. But the similarities are obviously there when you compare Jar Jar to historical caricatures such as Stepin Fetchit and the like. I don’t think it’s enough of a similarity to be a significant criticism of the film (and hell if that film’s critics need anything more to criticize), but it’s disingenuous to say there’s no comparison to be made and then to also claim stereotyping of those making the comparison.

I’m not saying no comparison can be made, I’m saying how one judges such a comparison depends heavily on conditioning, and in my view the US’s history with racial issues has conditioned many people to be hyper sensitive to any percieved racial stereotyping. I certainly don’t remember it being a point of discussion in my country.

Author
Time

DrDre said:

Creox said:

DrDre said:

chyron8472 said:
And Jar Jar’s character was overtly racist

I think this statement has no real basis in reality to be honest, and says more about the US’s historic relationship with racial stereotypes and racial issues in general then what’s actually in the movie. For the character to be overtly racist one must first find sufficient evidence for either racist intentions, or clear evidence of the character being a racial stereotype, neither of which is the case in my view. I personally fail to see how an orange amphibian with floppy ears is supposed to be representative of a person of color outside of the fact that the character was portrayed by a black man.

For what it’s worth, my friends and I all agreed Jar Jar acted, walked and talked with the racial stereotypes of a black man. From the strutting type gait, the “mesa sorry” type language etc. It was painfully obvious to me and many others. It isn’t one of those things that you have to look at “just right” to see it either.

Well, I’m a black man, and I didn’t percieve Jar Jar as reflecting on me as a person, or on my racial background. I just saw a clumpsy floppy eared orange character meant to entertain kids portrayed by a black man who gave the character a somwhat Caribbean inflection in his speech. However, I’m absolutely convinced that the character in no way was intended to ridicule or attack people of color, and so I can only view such a point of view as stemming from a sort of overcompensation in response to racial stereotyping that happened in the past. To quote another user on another forum:

If I’m a black man and another black man says “Hey, that guy is tall, clumsy , stupid and speaks funny, that’s supposed to be us.”, I would say “it may be you sir, but that does not represent me.”

So, in my view if you see a racial stereotype in Jar Jar Binks, it’s because you are conditioned to see a racial stereotype, not because Lucas put it there to ridicule another race of people.

I agree that Lucas did not intend to ridicule anyone…that being said, Jar Jar is a stereotypical African American in many ways. They are exaggerated in the manner Dom mentioned of course but that is what makes it glaringly obvious. The asian and Jewish stereotypes are quite obvious as well.

Interesting bit I found whilst typing this out for you.

https://davechen.net/2012/02/racism-and-ethnic-stereotypes-in-star-wars-the-phantom-menace/

"Bruce Gottlieb over at Slate wrote up a pretty good summary of Lucas’s racial offenses when Phantom Menace was first released:

Crafty Japanese trade villains aren’t the only heavy-handed ethnic stereotype in The Phantom Menace. As the story continues, the heroes slip past the evil Japanese to a nearby planet. There, they attempt to repair their broken spaceship but are stymied by the hook-nosed owner of the local parts shop–Watto–who also happens to have a thick Yiddish accent! (To hear an example, click “Great.”) Psychological manipulations that work on almost everyone fail with Watto–“Mind ticks don’ta work on me … only money! No,” he cries–and the heroes get what they want only through the bravery of a gifted slave boy (Anakin Skywalker). At the end of the desert planet sequence, Anakin is emancipated but separated from his mother, who still belongs to Watto. Even in a galaxy far away, the Jews are apparently behind the slave trade.

And then there’s Jar Jar Binks, the childlike sidekick with the unmistakably West Indian accent and enormous buttocks. Jar Jar is likable, easygoing, and dumb as dirt–always being scolded or saved from death by the Jedi knights. His stupidity and cowardice are running jokes throughout the film. And his people, the Gungan, are a brave but primitive tribe who throw spears and rocks at the oncoming army in the climactic battle sequence. Only Hispanics escape Lucas’ caricature, which is actually something of a mixed blessing since Hispanics often rightly complain that they are ignored in the national race debate."

Author
Time

Oh yeah, I somehow forgot about Watto. He’s the worst stereotype in the movie!