logo Sign In

Return Of The Jedi - a general Random Thoughts thread — Page 9

Author
Time

Shopping Maul said:

Just throwing his weapon aside and saying “ha ha you can’t make me angry” might be a nice piece of Zen, but it’s completely useless as a means to defeat evil and is of no value whatsoever to the thousands being slaughtered outside.

You’ve missed the point. It was Luke flipping the tables.
He was goading the Emperor to attack, just as the Emperor had been doing to him, believing that when he did, his father would return & kill the Emperor.
And it worked.

Ray’s Lounge
Biggs in ANH edit idea
ROTJ opening edit idea

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Shopping Maul said:

canofhumdingers said:

Chalk me up as another respectful disagree-er, Mr. Maul. I feel like you’re intentionally twisting things to make your interpretation work.

Luke was warned multiple times to be wary of the emperor and his power. I think the movie makes it pretty obvious he goes in there knowing his only chance of beating the emperor is by turning Vader back so they can work together (just as Vader argued in ESB, but with both of them on the light side rather than the dark). His focus is on turning Vader because that’s both important to him personally AND crucial to his plan. And he takes the huge gamble at the end by throwing his weapon away. It’s his Hail Mary pass to get Vader to turn, and it works. Which also serves multiple purposes.

This is a nice interpretation (I’m not being sarcastic) but there is nothing in the movie that indicates this is what Luke is thinking. He states very plainly to Leia that his intentions are a) to turn himself in because he’s a liability and b) to bring Vader back to ‘the good side’. Everything he does bears this out. There’s nothing about distracting Palpatine or defeating the Sith.

To each their own. I personally thought it was very obvious from the movie. Luke is warned by Yoda that Palpatine is too powerful for him to defeat, which means he can’t just kill the guy. Instead, he chooses to use his hopes of redeeming his father as a way to help kill Palpatine. He has the same mindset as Vader in ESB, but uses it for good instead of evil.

He had just lost his temper and beaten his father in anger, and stepped very close to the edge of turning dark himself. Throwing away his weapon was also him checking himself in that moment and stepping back from the edge.

Had he lost his temper? Or had he acted in self-defence (or more specifically defence of Leia and the rebellion)? This is where the ROTJ version of the Dark Side becomes silly. In the prequels Anakin was tempted by fear and power, and made choices that he felt he couldn’t retreat from. In TROS Rey is tempted by the acceptance of power as an only means to save her friends. In ROTJ the Dark Side is merely getting angry. Luke had every right to kick Vader’s butt. He also had every right (and I’d say an obligation) to do everything he could to stop these monsters from killing more people. Just throwing his weapon aside and saying “ha ha you can’t make me angry” might be a nice piece of Zen, but it’s completely useless as a means to defeat evil and is of no value whatsoever to the thousands being slaughtered outside. Even if Luke was hoping Vader would pitch in (there’s nothing to indicate this is the case) he was taking an awful gamble with people’s lives just so he could get Vader a bedside conversion.

Once again, I feel like you’re thinking in terms of “real life”, rather than in terms of story and themes. The whole philosophy of the Jedi (at least before the EU turned them into badass lightsaber-wielding ninjas) is that you should always choose the nonviolent option. Instead of Force choking Vader and Palpatine, or helping the Rebels kill stormtroopers, he chooses to find a way to both definitively end Palpatine’s reign and bring his father back to the light in one fell swoop. That’s one of the saga’s best illustrations of the Jedi philosophy, which is much more in the style of mythic fantasy rather than macho action.

But as others have pointed out, there’s no way Luke would’ve succeeded or even survived a straight up face-to-face fight with Palps. And as I mentioned, Luke knew that. This was a game of chess, not dodgeball. It was far more a mental fight than physical. And Luke distracting the emperor from the battle outside and successfully appealing to the conflict within Vader was the master play. And he succeeded.

I do like this interpretation but again, I don’t think this is what the film is saying. Everything about ROTJ is kind of dumbed down - the Dark Side is reduced to mere anger, Palpatine’s seduction is absurd (why would Luke take Vader’s place? Even if Luke had killed Vader in anger, there was absolutely no reason to assume he’d then be pals with the Emperor), and the film entirely forgets that Vader was a bad guy. Other posters here keep saying it’s an indication of how much someone (ie Vader) can change - and I get that - but it ignores the injustice of Vader being given this chance even as he is complicit in a slaughter occurring right at that very moment. That’s why I keep giving the Ewok party mock-scenario - not because I actually believe Luke would have told his story, but because it shows how this whole thing would actually appear to someone who doesn’t have this emotional connection to Vader and/or this ludicrous need to never show anger lest it impede religious doctrine.

But that’s not what the movie is saying at all. Palpatine was the one who thought that showing anger once leads to eternal darkness, and he turned out to be wrong when Luke professed himself to be a Jedi and Vader turned back to the light. The core message of the movie (and the saga in general) is that everyone can change, that your mistakes don’t define your life. If you think the villain’s motivation is the main message of the movie, then you’re interpreting it wrong.

He wouldn’t tell wedge “I hid under the stairs and threw my weapon away”. He’d tell him about the intense cerebral fight he was in to outsmart the emperor and the emotional roller coaster he went thru to get his father (one of the most evil people in the galaxy at that point) to repent from his evil ways, rejoin the light, and defeat the evil before them. If he told wedge anything at all, b/c as others have stated, Luke had no reason to need to justify his actions to anyone by that point.

Yes, but if he did happen to to tell the stairs story he’d get some pretty quizzical looks, and with good reason. Because a normal person would hold Vader and the Emperor accountable. A normal person would go down fighting. This “yeah but he was my dad” thing coupled with the “as a Jedi I’m not allowed to get mad” thing would not sit well with normal people, especially people who had lost loved ones and lives to these monsters. That’s the point. If Jedi really are so constrained, then perhaps Jedi aren’t a great idea after all.

I can extend the Ewok party analogy to Rey and come out squeaky clean. Let’s say Rey’s partying on not-Yavin after the battle of Exigol. Hobbit-boy asks her what happened. She says “I fought Palpatine and by the grace of the Force I won”. Now Luke could say the same I guess. But then Hobbit-boy asks for details. Rey comes out shining. No ‘stairs’, no “I hesitated 'cos anger is bad”, no “I spared everyone and threw my weapon aside”. And more importantly Rey’s actions absolutely impacted the battle. At best Luke prevented Palpatine’s early escape form the exploding DS, but this was more or less by virtue of how things played out, not because of any plan or actions on Luke’s part. I know you say that Luke had a chess-like master plan but there’s nothing in the film that indicates this is true.

But Rey’s defeat of Palpatine is an entirely different situation. Palpatine was the only person there, and Ben only showed up for 2 minutes before being incapacitated. At that point, her only choice was violence. Also, the reason she was able to defeat Palpatine by her own was because the Jedi of the past gave their power to her. Without that, she would have died. Since Luke didn’t have that kind of power boost, his only hope was to redeem Vader.

My preferred Skywalker Saga experience:
I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Couldn’t have said it better Ray and Starkiller. The movie is about redemption and not stooping to the level of your enemies. And it delivers an elegant illustration of the Jedi ideology in the way Luke defeats the emperor. Just because the movie doesn’t hold our hand and spell out things doesn’t mean that all the pieces aren’t there for my interpretation to clearly be the intent. Luke was clearly intent to turn Vader in order to defeat the emperor. That was his plan, he stuck to it and used the nonviolent Jedi ideology to bring his father back and win the day. The movie may be uneven and weaker than its two predecessors, but I’ve always thought it completely stuck the landing in the most satisfying way.

Author
Time

canofhumdingers said:

Couldn’t have said it better Ray and Starkiller. The movie is about redemption and not stooping to the level of your enemies. And it delivers an elegant illustration of the Jedi ideology in the way Luke defeats the emperor. Just because the movie doesn’t hold our hand and spell out things doesn’t mean that all the pieces aren’t there for my interpretation to clearly be the intent. Luke was clearly intent to turn Vader in order to defeat the emperor. That was his plan, he stuck to it and used the nonviolent Jedi ideology to bring his father back and win the day. The movie may be uneven and weaker than its two predecessors, but I’ve always thought it completely stuck the landing in the most satisfying way.

Good point.

I would not say ROTJ is uneven and weaker. It has plenty of depth (these discussions alone are indication enough). I would say that in many aspects it has much more depth than SW and ESB.

真実

Author
Time

It’s the worst paced of the three, I think uneven is pretty fair. Compared scene for scene it might have some of the lowest and highest points of the trilogy for me, probably more lighthearted than what a lot of people wanted but I definitely don’t consider it a failure.

“The ability to destroy a planet is insignificant next to the power of the Force.” - DV

Author
Time
 (Edited)

It is definitely not a failure. Personally I would say it is one of the best films ever made and I am certainly not alone. I mean it is in top 100 best rated films on IMDB (which give an idea of a general opinion from a larger range of film enthusiasts).

真実

Author
Time

ray_afraid said:

Shopping Maul said:

Just throwing his weapon aside and saying “ha ha you can’t make me angry” might be a nice piece of Zen, but it’s completely useless as a means to defeat evil and is of no value whatsoever to the thousands being slaughtered outside.

You’ve missed the point. It was Luke flipping the tables.
He was goading the Emperor to attack, just as the Emperor had been doing to him, believing that when he did, his father would return & kill the Emperor.
And it worked.

Or not.

I mean there is nothing to indicate that this is Luke’s intention. And does Vader really look like he’s in the mood for a bitchin’ team-up at that point? I think this whole “Luke planned it this way” thing is a real stretch.

It’s also not in the novelisation. There’s no 'Luke threw his Lightsaber aside, hoping in that moment that Vader would see the light and help him rid the universe of this Emperor". No, Luke stumbles through it all just like it appears in the film, with the one caveat being that he does actually hope to kill the Emperor at first but realises - at the time that he ditches the saber - that he can’t give in to violence. Nothing about a masterplan or believing Vader would turn.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Shopping Maul said:

Or not.

But it does work. The Emperor attacks & Anikin Returns.
You may not like it, & that’s fine, but that is what happens.

Shopping Maul said:

ray_afraid said:

Shopping Maul said:

Just throwing his weapon aside and saying “ha ha you can’t make me angry” might be a nice piece of Zen, but it’s completely useless as a means to defeat evil and is of no value whatsoever to the thousands being slaughtered outside.

You’ve missed the point. It was Luke flipping the tables.
He was goading the Emperor to attack, just as the Emperor had been doing to him, believing that when he did, his father would return & kill the Emperor.
And it worked.

I mean there is nothing to indicate that this is Luke’s intention. And does Vader really look like he’s in the mood for a bitchin’ team-up at that point? I think this whole “Luke planned it this way” thing is a real stretch.

Luke didn’t plan for it to go down the way it did, he just knew he somehow had to Return Anikin.
You’re right about one thing: Luke is stumbling through & flying by the seat of his pants. Adapting to what’s happening & acting on that “instinct” Obi-Wan was telling him about.

Ray’s Lounge
Biggs in ANH edit idea
ROTJ opening edit idea

Author
Time
 (Edited)

But Luke wasn’t planning to appear before the Emperor - Vader took Luke to Palpatine when he initially refused to turn back to the light side as Luke asked him to. Luke wanted to surrender to the Imperials to avoid having Vader sense what the Rebels were doing through him, and to have a face-to-face talk with his father. If he failed at turning his father, he might be killed, but his friends would no longer be in danger from his Force link to Vader.

And besides, why would Luke think it was his job to kill the Emperor anyway? The Rebel fleet destroying the Death Star was supposed to be responsible for that.

“That Darth Vader, man. Sure does love eating Jedi.”

Author
Time
 (Edited)

^ True. When they first arrive, Luke figures they’re all about to die in the DS explosion.
But that’s before the Emperor reveals that it’s all a trap & it’s all working perfectly.
Like I said, Luke is really flying by the seat of his pants. “Instinct.”

Good conversation. It’s making me realize I like RotJ more than I thought…

Ray’s Lounge
Biggs in ANH edit idea
ROTJ opening edit idea

Author
Time

ATMachine said:

But Luke wasn’t planning to appear before the Emperor - Vader took Luke to Palpatine when he initially refused to turn back to the light side as Luke asked him to. Luke wanted to surrender to the Imperials to avoid having Vader sense what the Rebels were doing through him, and to have a face-to-face talk with his father. If he failed at turning his father, he might be killed, but his friends would no longer be in danger from his Force link to Vader.

And besides, why would Luke think it was his job to kill the Emperor anyway? The Rebel fleet destroying the Death Star was supposed to be responsible for that.

So now we come full circle and you guys have accidentally made my initial point for me.

This conversation began with me saying that back in '83 it bugged me that Luke did not actually save the galaxy. As you say a) he turned himself in because his being sensed was a liability, b) his only concern was redeeming his father - not destroying the Sith, and c) it was the fleet destroying the DS that was responsible for the victory.

Note there is nothing good about Luke having to turn himself in to nullify detection. This makes him a liability - not an asset! What turned the tide of the battle was Chewbacca hijacking a Scout Walker, not the fact that Luke was in the throne room. The movie should be called Return Of The Wookiee.

Author
Time

Shopping Maul said:

ATMachine said:

But Luke wasn’t planning to appear before the Emperor - Vader took Luke to Palpatine when he initially refused to turn back to the light side as Luke asked him to. Luke wanted to surrender to the Imperials to avoid having Vader sense what the Rebels were doing through him, and to have a face-to-face talk with his father. If he failed at turning his father, he might be killed, but his friends would no longer be in danger from his Force link to Vader.

And besides, why would Luke think it was his job to kill the Emperor anyway? The Rebel fleet destroying the Death Star was supposed to be responsible for that.

a) he turned himself in because his being sensed was a liability,

Yes, that’s true. But that helped, didn’t it? Han and Leia didn’t want to be sensed while on their super secret infiltration mission.

b) his only concern was redeeming his father - not destroying the Sith

Not true at all. If you actually watch the movie, it clearly shows that Luke wants to redeem his father as a way to destroy the Sith. It’s completely obvious, and I feel like you’re not even trying to look at the details of the movie.

c) it was the fleet destroying the DS that was responsible for the victory.

The fleet was part of it, but if Luke didn’t redeem Vader there would be no guarantee that Palpatine would die. Remember all those Imperial officers evacuating in the scene where Vader dies? Palpatine would be one of them if Luke hadn’t convinced Vader to intervene.

Note there is nothing good about Luke having to turn himself in to nullify detection. This makes him a liability - not an asset! What turned the tide of the battle was Chewbacca hijacking a Scout Walker, not the fact that Luke was in the throne room. The movie should be called Return Of The Wookiee.

I feel like you think the Endor battle and Luke’s redemption of Vader are part of the same thing, when they actually have completely different goals. Luke wasn’t trying to help the Rebels blow up the Death Star, that would just be a short term victory that doesn’t matter in the big scheme of things. Instead, he chose to use his father’s inner conflict to destroy Palpatine, guaranteeing victory once and for all.

My preferred Skywalker Saga experience:
I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX

Author
Time

ray_afraid said:

canofhumdingers said:

I feel like you’re intentionally twisting things to make your interpretation work.

I’m beginning to agree.

Why would I do that? This was my first impression in 1983 when the film came out, not some meme that I’ve been captivated by. I wanted to love this film! TESB is still my favourite movie of all time. Why would I want ROTJ to suck? If anything I’d love to be convinced otherwise.

Author
Time

Shopping Maul said:

ray_afraid said:

canofhumdingers said:

I feel like you’re intentionally twisting things to make your interpretation work.

I’m beginning to agree.

Why would I do that? This was my first impression in 1983 when the film came out, not some meme that I’ve been captivated by. I wanted to love this film! TESB is still my favourite movie of all time. Why would I want ROTJ to suck? If anything I’d love to be convinced otherwise.

Well, you might want to watch the movie again. It seems like you haven’t watched it in a long time, and as a result your perception of it might be warped. In my opinion, it’s kind of uneven, but it’s still a great end to the trilogy. I highly recommend watching it again.

My preferred Skywalker Saga experience:
I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX

Author
Time

StarkillerAG said:

Shopping Maul said:

ATMachine said:

But Luke wasn’t planning to appear before the Emperor - Vader took Luke to Palpatine when he initially refused to turn back to the light side as Luke asked him to. Luke wanted to surrender to the Imperials to avoid having Vader sense what the Rebels were doing through him, and to have a face-to-face talk with his father. If he failed at turning his father, he might be killed, but his friends would no longer be in danger from his Force link to Vader.

And besides, why would Luke think it was his job to kill the Emperor anyway? The Rebel fleet destroying the Death Star was supposed to be responsible for that.

a) he turned himself in because his being sensed was a liability,

Yes, that’s true. But that helped, didn’t it? Han and Leia didn’t want to be sensed while on their super secret infiltration mission.

Yes, but this isn’t a good thing. This is further evidence that Jedi Knights might not be the best idea in town. It’s like the fat kid in a football team realising that maybe he should sit this one out.

b) his only concern was redeeming his father - not destroying the Sith

Not true at all. If you actually watch the movie, it clearly shows that Luke wants to redeem his father as a way to destroy the Sith. It’s completely obvious, and I feel like you’re not even trying to look at the details of the movie.

Okay, this is the meat of the matter and I’m not being facetious - where in the movie is it obvious that Luke sees redeeming Vader as a means of destroying the Sith and, by extension, helping the battle’s outcome? To give a Sam Harris analogy, if I were to slip on the kitchen floor and stab you with a knife, this would yield the same result as me deliberately seeking to murder you with that knife. The difference is intent. Luke’s intention in the movie is spelled out - he can’t bring himself to kill his dad and wants to bring him to the good side. He says nothing about destroying the Sith, and all of his actions - his hesitation, his hiding under the stairs, and his relinquishing his weapon - bear out his intentions. I’m just stating what the film states. Now, everyone in this conversation claims I’m missing an implied subtext - that Luke saw all of this as a means to bring Palpatine down. I just don’t see it. Furthermore I would say that ethically Luke should have had destroying the Sith at the forefront of his thoughts and intentions - not redeeming Vader. If the film had shown Luke to be demonstrably doing all he could to defeat the Emperor - with Vader’s turn as an offshoot of this process - then it would make ethical sense and Luke would indeed be the ‘hope’ that the saga had branded him. As it stands the death of Palpatine is the offshoot with Luke’s personal (and I would say selfish) family concerns being his primary focus.

c) it was the fleet destroying the DS that was responsible for the victory.

The fleet was part of it, but if Luke didn’t redeem Vader there would be no guarantee that Palpatine would die. Remember all those Imperial officers evacuating in the scene where Vader dies? Palpatine would be one of them if Luke hadn’t convinced Vader to intervene.

Note there is nothing good about Luke having to turn himself in to nullify detection. This makes him a liability - not an asset! What turned the tide of the battle was Chewbacca hijacking a Scout Walker, not the fact that Luke was in the throne room. The movie should be called Return Of The Wookiee.

I feel like you think the Endor battle and Luke’s redemption of Vader are part of the same thing, when they actually have completely different goals. Luke wasn’t trying to help the Rebels blow up the Death Star, that would just be a short term victory that doesn’t matter in the big scheme of things. Instead, he chose to use his father’s inner conflict to destroy Palpatine, guaranteeing victory once and for all.

See above. I still maintain Luke only cared about redeeming Vader.

Author
Time

StarkillerAG said:

Shopping Maul said:

ray_afraid said:

canofhumdingers said:

I feel like you’re intentionally twisting things to make your interpretation work.

I’m beginning to agree.

Why would I do that? This was my first impression in 1983 when the film came out, not some meme that I’ve been captivated by. I wanted to love this film! TESB is still my favourite movie of all time. Why would I want ROTJ to suck? If anything I’d love to be convinced otherwise.

Well, you might want to watch the movie again. It seems like you haven’t watched it in a long time, and as a result your perception of it might be warped. In my opinion, it’s kind of uneven, but it’s still a great end to the trilogy. I highly recommend watching it again.

Actually I know the thing off by heart, I’m pretty sure I’ve watched it more times than any sane person!

That said, I do plan to watch it with yours, Ray’s, and Canofhumdinger’s etc etc points in mind. I’m not hostile about this at all (internet tone can be hard to read) and like I said to Ray, I genuinely wanted to love this movie. So yeah, maybe I’ll pick something up during 47000th viewing!

Author
Time

Shopping Maul said:

ATMachine said:

Note there is nothing good about Luke having to turn himself in to nullify detection. This makes him a liability - not an asset! What turned the tide of the battle was Chewbacca hijacking a Scout Walker, not the fact that Luke was in the throne room. The movie should be called Return Of The Wookiee.

I like the sound of that. 😄

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

Shopping Maul said:

StarkillerAG said:

Shopping Maul said:

ATMachine said:

But Luke wasn’t planning to appear before the Emperor - Vader took Luke to Palpatine when he initially refused to turn back to the light side as Luke asked him to. Luke wanted to surrender to the Imperials to avoid having Vader sense what the Rebels were doing through him, and to have a face-to-face talk with his father. If he failed at turning his father, he might be killed, but his friends would no longer be in danger from his Force link to Vader.

And besides, why would Luke think it was his job to kill the Emperor anyway? The Rebel fleet destroying the Death Star was supposed to be responsible for that.

a) he turned himself in because his being sensed was a liability,

Yes, that’s true. But that helped, didn’t it? Han and Leia didn’t want to be sensed while on their super secret infiltration mission.

Yes, but this isn’t a good thing. This is further evidence that Jedi Knights might not be the best idea in town. It’s like the fat kid in a football team realising that maybe he should sit this one out.

But that’s not what Luke was doing. It seems like you think his actions in the throne room were an act of cowardice, but they were actually an act of bravery. He restored the heart within his father, and in the process destroyed the Sith. That’s not a cowardly act at all, and it in no way makes Luke equivalent to a fat kid on a football team.

b) his only concern was redeeming his father - not destroying the Sith

Not true at all. If you actually watch the movie, it clearly shows that Luke wants to redeem his father as a way to destroy the Sith. It’s completely obvious, and I feel like you’re not even trying to look at the details of the movie.

Okay, this is the meat of the matter and I’m not being facetious - where in the movie is it obvious that Luke sees redeeming Vader as a means of destroying the Sith and, by extension, helping the battle’s outcome? To give a Sam Harris analogy, if I were to slip on the kitchen floor and stab you with a knife, this would yield the same result as me deliberately seeking to murder you with that knife. The difference is intent. Luke’s intention in the movie is spelled out - he can’t bring himself to kill his dad and wants to bring him to the good side. He says nothing about destroying the Sith, and all of his actions - his hesitation, his hiding under the stairs, and his relinquishing his weapon - bear out his intentions. I’m just stating what the film states. Now, everyone in this conversation claims I’m missing an implied subtext - that Luke saw all of this as a means to bring Palpatine down. I just don’t see it. Furthermore I would say that ethically Luke should have had destroying the Sith at the forefront of his thoughts and intentions - not redeeming Vader. If the film had shown Luke to be demonstrably doing all he could to defeat the Emperor - with Vader’s turn as an offshoot of this process - then it would make ethical sense and Luke would indeed be the ‘hope’ that the saga had branded him. As it stands the death of Palpatine is the offshoot with Luke’s personal (and I would say selfish) family concerns being his primary focus.

It’s never outright stated, but the implication is there. Yoda explicitly warns Luke, “Do not underestimate the power of the Emperor.” After that discussion, he begins to genuinely wonder whether Vader can be turned back to the light. This implies that he wants to get Vader’s help in destroying Palpatine, and that implication is furthered when Luke literally begs Vader to turn back as he’s about to be brought before the Emperor. He knows that Vader is his only hope of ending the Empire once and for all.

c) it was the fleet destroying the DS that was responsible for the victory.

The fleet was part of it, but if Luke didn’t redeem Vader there would be no guarantee that Palpatine would die. Remember all those Imperial officers evacuating in the scene where Vader dies? Palpatine would be one of them if Luke hadn’t convinced Vader to intervene.

Note there is nothing good about Luke having to turn himself in to nullify detection. This makes him a liability - not an asset! What turned the tide of the battle was Chewbacca hijacking a Scout Walker, not the fact that Luke was in the throne room. The movie should be called Return Of The Wookiee.

I feel like you think the Endor battle and Luke’s redemption of Vader are part of the same thing, when they actually have completely different goals. Luke wasn’t trying to help the Rebels blow up the Death Star, that would just be a short term victory that doesn’t matter in the big scheme of things. Instead, he chose to use his father’s inner conflict to destroy Palpatine, guaranteeing victory once and for all.

See above. I still maintain Luke only cared about redeeming Vader.

And I still maintain that Luke cared about Vader as a means of destroying Palpatine. But since it’s clear that neither of us will budge on our positions, maybe we should just stop.

My preferred Skywalker Saga experience:
I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX

Author
Time

SilverWook said:

Shopping Maul said:

ATMachine said:

Note there is nothing good about Luke having to turn himself in to nullify detection. This makes him a liability - not an asset! What turned the tide of the battle was Chewbacca hijacking a Scout Walker, not the fact that Luke was in the throne room. The movie should be called Return Of The Wookiee.

I like the sound of that. 😄

Fan edit time!

And TFA will open with “Chewbacca has vanished! In his absence the sinister First Order has risen from the ashes…” etc etc

Author
Time

StarkillerAG said:

Shopping Maul said:

StarkillerAG said:

Shopping Maul said:

ATMachine said:

But Luke wasn’t planning to appear before the Emperor - Vader took Luke to Palpatine when he initially refused to turn back to the light side as Luke asked him to. Luke wanted to surrender to the Imperials to avoid having Vader sense what the Rebels were doing through him, and to have a face-to-face talk with his father. If he failed at turning his father, he might be killed, but his friends would no longer be in danger from his Force link to Vader.

And besides, why would Luke think it was his job to kill the Emperor anyway? The Rebel fleet destroying the Death Star was supposed to be responsible for that.

a) he turned himself in because his being sensed was a liability,

Yes, that’s true. But that helped, didn’t it? Han and Leia didn’t want to be sensed while on their super secret infiltration mission.

Yes, but this isn’t a good thing. This is further evidence that Jedi Knights might not be the best idea in town. It’s like the fat kid in a football team realising that maybe he should sit this one out.

But that’s not what Luke was doing. It seems like you think his actions in the throne room were an act of cowardice, but they were actually an act of bravery. He restored the heart within his father, and in the process destroyed the Sith. That’s not a cowardly act at all, and it in no way makes Luke equivalent to a fat kid on a football team.

b) his only concern was redeeming his father - not destroying the Sith

Not true at all. If you actually watch the movie, it clearly shows that Luke wants to redeem his father as a way to destroy the Sith. It’s completely obvious, and I feel like you’re not even trying to look at the details of the movie.

Okay, this is the meat of the matter and I’m not being facetious - where in the movie is it obvious that Luke sees redeeming Vader as a means of destroying the Sith and, by extension, helping the battle’s outcome? To give a Sam Harris analogy, if I were to slip on the kitchen floor and stab you with a knife, this would yield the same result as me deliberately seeking to murder you with that knife. The difference is intent. Luke’s intention in the movie is spelled out - he can’t bring himself to kill his dad and wants to bring him to the good side. He says nothing about destroying the Sith, and all of his actions - his hesitation, his hiding under the stairs, and his relinquishing his weapon - bear out his intentions. I’m just stating what the film states. Now, everyone in this conversation claims I’m missing an implied subtext - that Luke saw all of this as a means to bring Palpatine down. I just don’t see it. Furthermore I would say that ethically Luke should have had destroying the Sith at the forefront of his thoughts and intentions - not redeeming Vader. If the film had shown Luke to be demonstrably doing all he could to defeat the Emperor - with Vader’s turn as an offshoot of this process - then it would make ethical sense and Luke would indeed be the ‘hope’ that the saga had branded him. As it stands the death of Palpatine is the offshoot with Luke’s personal (and I would say selfish) family concerns being his primary focus.

It’s never outright stated, but the implication is there. Yoda explicitly warns Luke, “Do not underestimate the power of the Emperor.” After that discussion, he begins to genuinely wonder whether Vader can be turned back to the light. This implies that he wants to get Vader’s help in destroying Palpatine, and that implication is furthered when Luke literally begs Vader to turn back as he’s about to be brought before the Emperor. He knows that Vader is his only hope of ending the Empire once and for all.

c) it was the fleet destroying the DS that was responsible for the victory.

The fleet was part of it, but if Luke didn’t redeem Vader there would be no guarantee that Palpatine would die. Remember all those Imperial officers evacuating in the scene where Vader dies? Palpatine would be one of them if Luke hadn’t convinced Vader to intervene.

Note there is nothing good about Luke having to turn himself in to nullify detection. This makes him a liability - not an asset! What turned the tide of the battle was Chewbacca hijacking a Scout Walker, not the fact that Luke was in the throne room. The movie should be called Return Of The Wookiee.

I feel like you think the Endor battle and Luke’s redemption of Vader are part of the same thing, when they actually have completely different goals. Luke wasn’t trying to help the Rebels blow up the Death Star, that would just be a short term victory that doesn’t matter in the big scheme of things. Instead, he chose to use his father’s inner conflict to destroy Palpatine, guaranteeing victory once and for all.

See above. I still maintain Luke only cared about redeeming Vader.

And I still maintain that Luke cared about Vader as a means of destroying Palpatine. But since it’s clear that neither of us will budge on our positions, maybe we should just stop.

No probs! Well, it has been fun and I appreciate the back and forth. All the best, and like I said I will keep your thoughts in mind when I next view ROTJ.

Author
Time

ray_afraid said:

Shopping Maul said:

Well, it has been fun and I appreciate the back and forth.

Ya know, it really has been a good talk. Good to see everybody’s opinion & nobody stooping too low.
Also, this really has increased my opinion of RotJ. Funny what happens when you talk this stuff out.
😃

Back atcha Ray - I love hanging out here! Thanks again and may the Force do it’s thing!

Author
Time

Just to say guys what a terrific debate that was - enjoyed reading that with nobody getting irritated or nasty!