What do you think of The Prequel Trilogy? A general discussion. — Page 26

JadedSkywalker said:

I think Anakin would have worked better if he was portrayed differently. He is so unlikable. So unrelatable. A problem of the prequel is there no Luke Skywalker to latch onto. No real central protagonist, even though Anakin is supposed to be that. Is he supposed to be an Anti-hero? Lucas didn’t seem to know where he wanted to go with the character.

Hayden acts like he is portraying dark and conflicted/selfish and arrogant. But where is the good friend and star pilot. Damn fool who follows old Obi-Wan on an idealistic quest.

Anakin and Obi in AOTC and ROTS interact with playful camaraderie. Anakin snipes in direct petty arrogance once at Obi AOTC. I think the movies flaws is that it doesn’t start building their friendship enough in TPM. Not because of Qui-Gon, because I think both can be done.

That being said, if Anakin and Obi didn’t have the turmoil, I don’t think it’d make much sense for Vader to wanna kill him. I suppose that could just be about his injuries, but personally, I like the tense emotional resentment and bitterness of a brother who feels like he has to prove he’s better kinda angle to me.

You don’t have a believable through line of the Anakin who wants to use power to restore order to the galaxy, because he has zeal for justice, but the ends justify the means. And the more he uses the dark side, the more he digs himself into a place where he can’t escape and The Emperor is waiting to grab a hold of him.

That is what I wanted to see the Shaw Anakin become Darth Vader. The Horror Gargoyle in the Mask, the machine man.

But that has nothing to do with how Vader turns away from the dark side in the OT and it doesn’t parallel Luke’s potential to turn, which was done by Palpatine and Vader using those he cared about to try and manipulate him.

He is a slave to the Sith as much as he was a slave on Tatooine and a slave to the Jedi. He really is an undeveloped person and a pathetic and pitiable wretch. Frankenstein’s monster, and a terror to the galaxy.

And Padme’s dreams and Anakin’s ambitions they all are manifest in their children.

People dislike that, but apparently that was what George wanted a scared kid trapped in a machine body. A young man who lost his mother and his wife. And his true sin was not in his evil acts, it was his desire to hold onto them selfishly.

I think one spirals into the other, if Anakin had not been so selfish, I think the idea is that he wouldn’t have done the evil acts, as he wouldn’t have viewed it through the lens of getting what he wants only.

I don’t see the issue with being the scared kid thing, as Vader’s penchant for lashing out with violence, I think showcases his immaturity.

Condemned to live as Darth Vader because he tried to change fate based on a vision of the future. Like Oedipus trying to outsmart the oracle. If he accepted the nature of things and dispassionately let them fade into the force, he would have been a good Jedi or so the films attempt to say. Letting people stay slaves is fine too, it’s not the mandate of the Jedi to free them.

It’s never stated that letting people stay slaves is “fine”. And Anakin’s conflict is never about freeing slaves, it’s just about his mom. Freeing slaves is never said to be wrong in the movie. But it’s something no one is any position to do in TPM. The slaves have bombs in them, so Qui-Gon and Obi can’t do anything about it. In overall context, to take action to rescue the slaves could cost the slaves their lives.

Broom Kid said:

Most Anakin problems are rooted in Lucas’ late decision to age him down to single digits instead of letting him be a middle-school kid/pre-teen.

I think that disconnects from the softer angle and the longing for a parental figure that I think a lot of main relationship dynamics hinge on. Qui-Gon works, to me, more as a potential dad figure that is lost if Anakin isn’t a teen, and the loss of that is what Palpatine steps into, emotionally manipulating Anakin, again I think works more with him as a child vulnerable and such. His dynamic, in concept, with Obi, I think works more as a brotherly angle of Obi being responsible for Anakin, and when Qui dies, Obi takes on the responsibility of raising his brother basically, which leads to a relationship that while is still one of love is also one of tension and rivalry and bickering, because Anakin doesn’t respect Obi as a dad figure and Obi struggles in being a mature guardian figure, because Palpatine has usurped that role for Anakin, and down the road of the character I think takes away the weight of what Vader killing Palpatine in Return Of The Jedi is, to me, which is: Vader rejecting the dad whose manipulated and oppressed him and used him nearly his whole life, to be a selfless dad in giving up his life to rescue his son.

And honestly, his whole weird conception of the Jedi as super-repressed monks - which is only just now in the last 10 years getting seriously investigated as a terrible thing to have been in the first place. And frankly a massive disconnect from what he was alluding to in the first three movies. They were clearly samurai-ish, so there was obviously a code, but he turned them into deranged monks and then mandated we’re supposed to think of them all as good guys ANYWAY.

They never do anything really villainous in the movies as a collective, so why would we see them as bad guys?

Also, I don’t see what is in the OT that is contradicted by the jedi’s depiction in the PT. They seem to have all the same main rules and goals to me.

The truth is simply that he didn’t really have a handle on basics like characterization and plot when he came back from a self-imposed creative retirement, and he never got that handle he USED to have back. He wrote all his heroes like robots and undercut any real dramatic forward motion whenever he could, and instead of making it better he fell back on “I meant to do it like that, of course” and because he’s the CEO there’s nothing you can really say to that.

But yeah, if Anakin starts at age 13 you have so much more opportunity to infuse him with a roguish personality from jump, and it’s easier to build that forward in the next two movies. But instead you start him at 9 and now nothing about him makes a lot of sense, or reads as recognizable human behavior.

Why should he have a roguish personality?

But then again choosing to make him more or less the main character of not just the prequel trilogy, but BOTH trilogies (by default) by retconning the story to be about Anakin Skywalker’s fall and redemption (even though he never actually GOT redeemed at the end of Jedi, he just did one good thing for his kid before dying) he also completely goofed. Anakin should have been a SUPPORTING CHARACTER at best, and the POV should have been either Padme or Obi-Wan. But it obviously would have never occurred to him to make the Prequel Trilogy be ACTUALLY about Luke & Leia’s mom, in the same way the Original Trilogy was about Vader’s kid. Not Vader.

I think Padme is the main character of TPM. I think AOTC is more an ensemble, though I actually think Obi is more the main heroic protagonist of AOTC than anyone else, as he’s the one whose driving the main plot forward. I think ROTS is the only movie where Anakin is the central protagonist, which I think makes sense at least.

Vader died to rescue his son out of a selfless love I think, and is depicted I think at the end of ROTJ to have become a heroic character again.

Padme isn’t in the OT, so I think it’d be a narrative disconnect to make her the one the trilogy is about wholesale, and also I think it’d not showcase much in the way of story structure for Anakin becoming Vader.

Superweapon VII said:

It never occurred to me, either. But damn, now I love the idea.

Dagenspear said:

JadedSkywalker said:

I think Anakin would have worked better if he was portrayed differently. He is so unlikable. So unrelatable. A problem of the prequel is there no Luke Skywalker to latch onto. No real central protagonist, even though Anakin is supposed to be that. Is he supposed to be an Anti-hero? Lucas didn’t seem to know where he wanted to go with the character.

Hayden acts like he is portraying dark and conflicted/selfish and arrogant. But where is the good friend and star pilot. Damn fool who follows old Obi-Wan on an idealistic quest.

That being said, if Anakin and Obi didn’t have the turmoil, I don’t think it’d make much sense for Vader to wanna kill him. I suppose that could just be about his injuries, but personally, I like the tense emotional resentment and bitterness of a brother who feels like he has to prove he’s better kinda angle to me.

I don’t think that’s true at all. The more their friendship is genuine, the more drama there is when they fight. They don’t need to secretly resent each other to end up fighting.

SparkySywer said:

I don’t think that’s true at all. The more their friendship is genuine, the more drama there is when they fight. They don’t need to secretly resent each other to end up fighting.

I didn’t speak on the drama. I spoke on character. To me, Anakin’s tension with Obi works as a set up for his resentment and bitterness and then hatred of him.

SomethingStarWarsRelated said:

With this rumored restored Original Trilogy coming for the 50th anniversary it makes me think:
What would Disney/Lucasfilm do for the PT when the next significant anniversary comes along?
Since there’s no real restoration work that would need to be done (at least for AOTC and ROTS) perhaps in the next couple of years there will be even greater advancements in upscaling tech that would allow for an upscaled PT release? And I’m talking about upscaling that actually adds detail that wasn’t there before (for example: Starlight by Topaz). Obviously it would be great to have all the deleted scenes at the same resolution too…

im highly skeptical of setting the precedent for using AI to add detail to an image in the restoration process, especially for an official release. i really don’t see the value of it for preservation/presentation purposes especially when dealing with a source that’s already in HD. maybe i’m just a purist but i don’t like setting that role for AI as an additive process.

Well the Phantom Menace certainly could be restored from the camera negative. But going back to that instead of the filmout tape, will never be done. 2000 or more shots? and nearly every shot altered digitally in some way. You are talking about remaking the movie from the camera raw.

There would be diminishing returns to redo II and III. They have digital masters. They could certainly bring back the theatrical color timing for Episode II, and remove the DNR they applied to both II and III.

Re-rendering already 2k resolution images for 4K would make little sense.

There are cheaper solutions for Phantom Menace go back to the filmout tape before the DNR processing for the 3D conversion or use an interpositive/internegative.

Also why not restore the theatrical cut with Creepy Puppet Yoda. And the same timed edit as 1999.

I think it’s merely a design preference. But I preferred the used universe of Star Wars 1977 over the bright and clean cgi esthetic of the prequels. It lent a sense of authenticity and realism that the prequels lacked. And that also the sequel trilogy lacked.

The dinged up and dirty and dingy look of things. Landspeeders, the Millennium Falcon. X-Wings of the rebel alliance. Lightsaber hilts etc, blasters. Kenobi’s Robes. The detail work on Threepio and Artoo. And on Vader’s suit and all its parts and pieces including the cape.

And how the Rebels were much more utilitarian. the Empire more clean and antiseptic and austere in design. How the rebels could just be farmers or privateers or whatever port of call they hailed from. Some of them might even be criminals like Han Solo. Or people out on the fringe. Luke being a former moisture farmer and all of that. Kenobi being able to pass as a Tatooine local wearing the garb of a farmer. Of course, they made those Jedi Robes.

I think each world and culture should have varied more in the prequels. You would only get bright and Shiny on Coruscant but not on the lower levels. the Jedi being at the height of their arrogance, I wouldn’t have changed much about how they looked in the prequels. except maybe different colored lightsabers of various colors and different robes not just the Tatooine garb.

JadedSkywalker said:

I think it’s merely a design preference. But I preferred the used universe of Star Wars 1977 over the bright and clean cgi esthetic of the prequels. It lent a sense of authenticity and realism that the prequels lacked. And that also the sequel trilogy lacked.

I’d suggest it’s also a totally different part of the galaxy mostly, at a different time. Why would it be the same if the place, time and structure of things is different?

The dinged up and dirty and dingy look of things. Landspeeders, the Millennium Falcon. X-Wings of the rebel alliance. Lightsaber hilts etc, blasters. Kenobi’s Robes. The detail work on Threepio and Artoo. And on Vader’s suit and all its parts and pieces including the cape.

Being older things, I think makes sense they’d be that way. New things owned by politicians and newer Jedi with more resources, I think it works that it’s not that really.

And how the Rebels were much more utilitarian. the Empire more clean and antiseptic and austere in design. How the rebels could just be farmers or privateers or whatever port of call they hailed from. Some of them might even be criminals like Han Solo. Or people out on the fringe. Luke being a former moisture farmer and all of that. Kenobi being able to pass as a Tatooine local wearing the garb of a farmer. Of course, they made those Jedi Robes.

Who said it was the garb of a farmer? There’s similarities I think (robe and neck thing mainly), but Obi-Wan’s clothes aren’t what I see as aggressively similar. Obi even has a clasp on his belt for his saber. Also, ROTJ is the movie that showed Anakin wearing the exact same clothes as Obi I think, in his post Vader form.

I think each world and culture should have varied more in the prequels. You would only get bright and Shiny on Coruscant but not on the lower levels.

I think there’s more of grungy kinda vibe in the lower levels when we see it in AOTC. And the Gungan city I think looks neither like Coruscant or Naboo. Similar with Geonosis and Utapau not looking like any of them.

I think the prequels are awesome and really cool. There are definitely some flaws with them but the OT wasn’t perfect either and I think a high amount of criticism is either exaggerated, based off of false info, or both. And IMO the amount of great stuff that the prequels had vastly overshadows the flaws so I don’t mind the flaws too much

[Spartacus01 said:]

Anakin never went to see his mother before Attack of the Clones because the films heavily imply that the Jedi weren’t allowing him to. You can say whatever you want about Anakin, but one thing we know for sure is that he’s impulsive, rebellious, and doesn’t hesitate to take risks or rush to save the people he cares about. That’s his core trait and also his biggest flaw. If he had been physically able to visit his mother whenever he wanted, and if the Jedi really weren’t stopping him, then you’d expect him to go see her every chance he got. And as soon as he started having those nightmares, he would have immediately run to check on her. The fact that he didn’t, even while being haunted by those visions, means that something was holding him back. And since he was part of the Jedi Order, it makes sense to conclude that it was the Jedi themselves who were preventing him from going.

Stop him? The Jedi stopping anyone from doing anything by coercion is neither something the Jedi are shown to do in the movies, nor are they said to do it. What would they do to stop him? How would they stop him? I don’t think that lines up. Moreso, I’d think they’d advise against it.

Anakin was told by his mother to not look back and that her future was there. Anakin trying to be committed I think can have other reasons, trying to be a proper Jedi, trying to make his separation from his mother worth it, trying to justify a feeling of guilt in him potentially feeling like he abandoned her. Especially considering the Jedi aren’t shown to have any ability or attempt to force any Jedi to do anything in the movies.

Yes, it’s true that Anakin could technically have walked away from the Jedi Order whenever he wanted. But it’s not that simple. If he’d left before Attack of the Clones, he’d basically be on the streets. Everything he owned belonged to the Order, so leaving would mean giving all of that up. He’d end up wandering the lower levels of Coruscant, trying to scrape together some crappy job just to survive. And if he’d left after marrying Padmé, sure, he could’ve lived with her, but Anakin wasn’t the kind of guy to sit around doing nothing all day. He’d still need a purpose, something meaningful to do, a goal to chase, and that’s not something you just figure out overnight. After spending over a decade in an institution that gave him structure and something to focus on, walking away wasn’t exactly simple.

First, it’s never said in the movies that people just are tossed out with no assistance and no oversight if they quit. Second, Anakin wasn’t a lone kid. He had Palpatine behind him as an ally. If he quit the Jedi, I don’t see why Anakin would expect that his friend in political high places Palps wouldn’t back him.

The rest is in regards to Anakin’s emotions on the situation, not what the Jedi make him do, which was my issue.

I’d likely rebuy Phantom Menace in 4K if it was the theatrical cut without the extreme DNR. The other two films I will never likely buy again. And Disney isn’t going to revert Phantom Menace. We aren’t getting creepy Puppet Yoda and the shorter edit of the film.

Fanedits that restore deleted scenes Is well a fanedit. I wouldn’t mind extended cuts of the prequels but then I would likely watch them only once.

I don’t have nostalgia over the prequel, but I do remember being hyped to see episode I before it came out and read the novel and screenplay and listened to the soundtrack in advance of the film. I used to sort of like the film or overlook its faults enough to have been excited to pre-order the letterbox tape, to buy the DVD and to pick up and import the laserdisc.

Having watched it on 4K, did I like it in 1999 because It was Star Wars, or because of its status as a film. Poor dialogue is at least a complaint now in hindsight. Not a lot of depth to characters.

There wasn’t even a complaint at the time about too much cgi, or not enough real. It was the novelty of having a new Star Wars, any Star Wars for the first time in 16 years.

I was a little underwhelmed by it in the theater and wondered when it was going to get good despite liking the podrace and the duel of the fates. It was kind of bland.

I think my hate for the prequels came much later like after the release of Revenge of the Sith. And thought is this all it is, no more Star Wars. No Sequel trilogy. Mediocre at best films. Or was it Kingdom of the Crystal Skull that convinced me, or Lucas continuing to deny the originals. Maybe that became a subject of bitterness.

I didn’t recapture that feeling I got from seeing Star Wars on the big screen in 1997 or when I saw ROTJ in 1985. I only got that feeling again from the Force Awakens and it was fleeting. I was fooled that wasn’t original recipe Star Wars it was new coke.

I still don’t know why I stuck with a franchise I haven’t liked a single film in since 1983. Perhaps it is habit. Or hope sometime they’ll be a good Star Wars entry.

While I agree with Broom Kid about Anakin’s age, there is a movie that portrays a 9 year-old Anakin perfectly in my mind, and that film is Conan the Barbarian '82.

Conan is 9 years-old, his parents and people are slaughtered by James Earl Jones and his cronies, he’s thrown into slavery and then forced into gladiatorial combat before eventually becoming free and pursuing his vengeance.

Robert E Howard purists aside, there is nothing cutesy or cringey about this kid. He is sympathetic and innocent, and he is absolutely the kind of ‘warrior forged by hardship’ that could embody the noble spirit of an Anakin Skywalker that has the potential to go down a dark road. You could have him freeing himself and his brother Owen from slavery, have Owen reject vengeance/violence and insist on lying low as a farmer, have Anakin befriending the idealistic Obi Wan and going off to be a Jedi, have the Jedi create a tangible impediment to Anakin’s vengeful quest (or even have them revealed as inadvertently responsible for the attack on Anakin’s village by way of prior inaction) and thus pave the way for Anakin’s ultimate rejection of the Jedi and Obi Wan. It’s a dark tale of course, but you pepper it with Star Wars-isms like snappy one-liners, comedic robots and aliens, and maybe even a love triangle.

This Anakin could be a hero, a great friend, a romantic lead, and still plausibly become a bad guy.

Just my 2 cents…

Shopping Maul said:

While I agree with Broom Kid about Anakin’s age, there is a movie that portrays a 9 year-old Anakin perfectly in my mind, and that film is Conan the Barbarian '82.

Conan is 9 years-old, his parents and people are slaughtered by James Earl Jones and his cronies, he’s thrown into slavery and then forced into gladiatorial combat before eventually becoming free and pursuing his vengeance.

Robert E Howard purists aside, there is nothing cutesy or cringey about this kid. He is sympathetic and innocent, and he is absolutely the kind of ‘warrior forged by hardship’ that could embody the noble spirit of an Anakin Skywalker that has the potential to go down a dark road. You could have him freeing himself and his brother Owen from slavery, have Owen reject vengeance/violence and insist on lying low as a farmer, have Anakin befriending the idealistic Obi Wan and going off to be a Jedi, have the Jedi create a tangible impediment to Anakin’s vengeful quest (or even have them revealed as inadvertently responsible for the attack on Anakin’s village by way of prior inaction) and thus pave the way for Anakin’s ultimate rejection of the Jedi and Obi Wan. It’s a dark tale of course, but you pepper it with Star Wars-isms like snappy one-liners, comedic robots and aliens, and maybe even a love triangle.

This Anakin could be a hero, a great friend, a romantic lead, and still plausibly become a bad guy.

Just my 2 cents…

Broom Kid said:

Conan is a really good example, 100%.

I don’t argue against the idea of a story that could align with that. But my general perception of that would be that I think it offers not much to Luke’s story. I prefer the conflict of Anakin’s attachments and the more interpersonal, emotional conflict of it and how that parallels Luke’s care for his friends and that leading him to reckless behavior and the idea of the death of them in ROTJ nearly being what leads him to turn to the dark side.

On top of, to me, the angle of the lack of a dad figure, the loss of Qui-Gon in that, Obi not being someone who is in a place to fill that role but feels responsible for him in connection to Qui-Gon. For me, when Qui dies, Obi takes on the responsibility of raising his brother basically, which leads to a relationship that while is still one of love is also one of tension and rivalry and bickering, because Anakin doesn’t respect Obi as a dad figure and Obi struggles in being a mature guardian figure, and Palpatine has usurped that role for Anakin, and down the road of the character I think brings weight of what Vader killing Palpatine in Return Of The Jedi is, to me, which is: Vader rejecting the dad whose manipulated and oppressed him and used him nearly his whole life, to be a selfless dad in giving up his life to rescue his son.

I do think Anakin in the TPM is a bit overly cutesy, but I only see that as a minor thing in that movie. For most of his scenes I think he’s generally more serious, sad or excited, rather than overly cutesy to me.

I also prefer, personally, Owen being Anakin’s step brother, rather than brother, as I feel that a character driven so much by his personal connections, I feel it doesn’t really connect much for Vader to have had a brother that he was raised with, and then that brother dies and it never comes up in the OT. I already feel like it’s an issue in the OT that they’re never mentioned again after they die.

See I thought Owen was going to be Obi-Wan’s brother because of the novelization of Return of the Jedi, then I saw Attack of the Clones and Lucas introduced this Cliegg character and Owen was Anakin’s step brother.

Like the origin of Boba Fett, I ended up being very disappointed.

Out of the three the only one that connects at all to the OT is Revenge of the Sith.

Because the duel over a volcano goes back to the interview Lucas gave in the 1970s, even if Vader was not Anakin Skywalker at the time.

I figured Obi-Wan was partially responsible for Anakin’s fall and the birth of Darth Vader, because of pride and hubris. Anakin was slowly seduced to evil because he chose the quick and easy path.

Instead in the movie it is choose the dark side to save Padme. And Anakin isn’t a secret Sith assassin going around slaughtering Jedis. Padme dies in childbirth as well unlike originally planned for the mother of the twins.

In the prequel Obi-Wan is basically a little bit of a moron, like the rest of the Jedi because the plots needs them to be caught by Sidious unawares. But he isn’t at fault, its Anakin who is responsible for his own fall. He is contemptible and not a likable character or relatable. If we were supposed to be on his side and upset by his downfall, as if he had been Luke, well Lucas didn’t do it well at all. We like Luke, Anakin whines endlessly and never follows orders. He is always doing his own thing. And the Jedi like to make excuses for him because he was the chosen one. The movies show Kenobi as a dogmatic image of virtue, at least Lucas thinks so. Despite all of Kenobi’s later lies and certain point of view.

And of course the Jedi could never have been wrong about attachments despite that they make us human. People don’t become Sith, for taking a wife and raising children. Never mind where do little Jedi’s come from the stork. But I think Lucas was talking about possessive negative control and not love. But he confounded it with celibacy and not being attached, Forbidden romance like Romeo and Juliet. Or maybe even Hamlet and Ophelia, like Ophelia just being in Hamlet’s orbit destroyed her. Not the romantic idea of love where one is willing to die for their partner and lay down their life. No its sell your soul to the devil out of fear you’ll lose her.

The prequel doesn’t work as a tragedy Lucas isn’t a great playwright. He was barely able to make the first trilogy work and he very sort of artfully made Vader the father, hackwork like made Leia the sister. How he handled the love triangle between the trio was laughable. Now its the Star Wars trilogy as we have it, but it wasn’t planned. I have great love and nostalgia for those imperfect, but very fun almost stubbornly flawed works of art. I don’t think of the prequel that way, I see a good idea poorly executed. Muddled with space politics. The interesting ones, the one about how Democracy fall to fascist dictatorship’s halfway done well by Lucas. But the space taxes thing never made any sense. And the plot requiring the Jedi to act stupidly and incoherent and very dogmatic and like politicians. And Anakin’s turn on a dime made no sense. One moment he’s like what adventure are we going on today Obi-Wan, and then the next he is killing younglings.

Lucas was onto something despite being bad at dialogue and his constant retcons. he made a Saga that lasted and endured. Whether you respect the prequel or Disney Star Wars or you don’t. Lucas imagination and his eye for visuals is uncanny. The films work purely in a visual medium, the music, the editing. He gets little credit for how it all came together. We will all credit the other editors or Johnny Williams. And he does deserve some credit despite trying to bury the original for over 40 years. He created a modern myth, a piece of pop art. No matter his detractors he will always be like a rockstar or a maverick in the history of film.

JadedSkywalker said:

See I thought Owen was going to be Obi-Wan’s brother because of the novelization of Return of the Jedi, then I saw Attack of the Clones and Lucas introduced this Cliegg character and Owen was Anakin’s step brother.

How does that make any sense with the movies? Why would Obi-Wan’s brother be Luke’s uncle? Why would Obi-Wan have no real reaction to his death? What does Owen being his brother add to anything?

I figured Obi-Wan was partially responsible for Anakin’s fall and the birth of Darth Vader, because of pride and hubris. Anakin was slowly seduced to evil because he chose the quick and easy path.

How would Obi being prideful make Anakin become a fascist dictator whose okay with blowing up planets? That being said, I think his arrogance is there in TPM and AOTC, though less so in AOTC, but not the main reason, more a step in Anakin’s friction with him.

Instead in the movie it is choose the dark side to save Padme. And Anakin isn’t a secret Sith assassin going around slaughtering Jedis. Padme dies in childbirth as well unlike originally planned for the mother of the twins.

Considering how Luke was nearly turned was in connection to his loved ones, I think that makes sense.

In the prequel Obi-Wan is basically a little bit of a moron, like the rest of the Jedi because the plots needs them to be caught by Sidious unawares. But he isn’t at fault, its Anakin who is responsible for his own fall. He is contemptible and not a likable character or relatable. If we were supposed to be on his side and upset by his downfall, as if he had been Luke, well Lucas didn’t do it well at all. We like Luke, Anakin whines endlessly and never follows orders. He is always doing his own thing. And the Jedi like to make excuses for him because he was the chosen one. The movies show Kenobi as a dogmatic image of virtue, at least Lucas thinks so. Despite all of Kenobi’s later lies and certain point of view.

I don’t really get this. I think the Jedi could’ve been written better and with more tactical focus, but I don’t think the Jedi have real evidence of Palpatine being what he’s revealed as. And they’re shown to be suspicious of something about him in ROTS.

Being upset by his downfall, I don’t think amounts to being on his side. I’ve seen plenty of reactions of people who mostly find a lot of Anakin generally sympathetic.

Anakin doesn’t whine that much I think. Only like a few times in AOTC and ROTS.

Considering the OT has Obi lie and still treats him like a noble character, I don’t know why him being treated that way in the PT is a drastic shift.

And of course the Jedi could never have been wrong about attachments despite that they make us human. People don’t become Sith, for taking a wife and raising children. Never mind where do little Jedi’s come from the stork. But I think Lucas was talking about possessive negative control and not love. But he confounded it with celibacy and not being attached, Forbidden romance like Romeo and Juliet. Or maybe even Hamlet and Ophelia, like Ophelia just being in Hamlet’s orbit destroyed her. Not the romantic idea of love where one is willing to die for their partner and lay down their life.

Some people are off to me about attachments and defending them and conflate attachments with connections and with general care/love.

What do you mean, where do little Jedi come from? Jedis don’t automatically come from Jedi bloodlines in the movies. It’s suggested in TPM I think that they can come from non force sensitive families and identified.

Celibacy is never mentioned in the PT.

Muddled with space politics. The interesting ones, the one about how Democracy fall to fascist dictatorship’s halfway done well by Lucas. But the space taxes thing never made any sense. And the plot requiring the Jedi to act stupidly and incoherent and very dogmatic and like politicians. And Anakin’s turn on a dime made no sense. One moment he’s like what adventure are we going on today Obi-Wan, and then the next he is killing younglings.

I’m not too sure I get the space taxes issue.

What turn on a dime? I think there’s criticisms to be had about his turn, but he doesn’t kill the younglings I think out of a want to kill them. I think his desperation to prevent Padme’s death is set up.

We know Palpatine wanted to become Chancellor to seize control of the Republic and convert it into the Empire.

But other than the whole maneuvering with the trade federation and attacking the Naboo made no sense.

Why does he want to attack the Naboo, why does he want to kill the Queen or later be perfectly fine with Padme potentially being assassinated, but also perfectly fine in using her for his own ends. Jar Jar approving emergency powers.

Why did Dooku leave the Jedi order and the republic. The movies don’t explain. We get a hint he was disillusioned with democracy, and was upset over Qui-Gon’s death that is about it. Why join the Sith that is a huge leap.

We get he wants to get rid of any opposition Sidious does, political or otherwise the Jedi. And he needs the Jedi as a scapegoat for his evil fascist ambitions. To pin a rebellion upon. The Jedi moved against the chancellor and became traitors. He convinces Anakin almost, that the Jedi like the Sith desire power and don’t want to share it. That they are a jealous of his power. There is a enough of a hint of corruption, in what the Jedi asked Anakin to do spying on the Chancellor he is convinced the Jedi went bad.

It was corruption to merely fight in the Clone Wars, because the Jedi are keepers of the peace and not soldiers. Sidious wants the Jedi to be perceived as heroes and then to fall and be seen as villains. He wiped them all out except for Yoda and Kenobi. The whole thing was like an exercise in getting Anakin to grow in power, and to get him to help destroy his enemies. Sidious is like the bad father and Kenobi is the good father. Kenobi fails as a surrogate father and a big brother to Anakin. Because of Anakin’s fear of loss and greed.

JadedSkywalker said:

We know Palpatine wanted to become Chancellor to seize control of the Republic and convert it into the Empire.

But other than the whole maneuvering with the trade federation and attacking the Naboo made no sense.

Why does he want to attack the Naboo, why does he want to kill the Queen or later be perfectly fine with Padme potentially being assassinated, but also perfectly fine in using her for his own ends. Jar Jar approving emergency powers.

Why did Dooku leave the Jedi order and the republic. The movies don’t explain. We get a hint he was disillusioned with democracy and was upset over Qui-Gon’s death that is about it. Why join the Sith that is a huge leap.

We get he wants to get rid of any opposition Sidious does, political or otherwise the Jedi. And he needs the Jedi as a scapegoat for his evil fascist ambitions. To pin a rebellion upon. The Jedi moved against the chancellor and became traitors. He convinces Anakin almost that the Jedi like the Sith desire power and don’t want to share it. That they are a jealous of his power. There is a enough of a hint of corruption in what the Jedi asked Anakin to do spying on the Chancellor he is convinced the Jedi went bad.

It was corruption to merely fight in the Clone Wars because the Jedi are keepers of the peace and not soldiers. Sidious wants the Jedi to be perceived as heroes and then to fall and be seen as villains. He wiped them all out except for Yoda and Kenobi. The whole thing was like an exercise in getting Anakin to grow in power and to get him to help destroy his enemies. Sidious is like the bad father and Kenobi is the good father. Kenobi fails as a surrogate father and a big brother to Anakin. Because of Anakin’s fear of loss and greed.

I think the original plan was for the Federation to win, Palpatine uses this to vote out Valorum, and then the Federation secedes and becomes the seperatists

JadedSkywalker said:

We know Palpatine wanted to become Chancellor to seize control of the Republic and convert it into the Empire.

But other than the whole maneuvering with the trade federation and attacking the Naboo made no sense.

Why does he want to attack the Naboo, why does he want to kill the Queen or later be perfectly fine with Padme potentially being assassinated, but also perfectly fine in using her for his own ends. Jar Jar approving emergency powers.

He’s from Naboo. I think his plan is shown as him using the situation to gain sympathy, it being his home and him being senator.

Where does he order them to kill Padme specifically? Because I only remember the trade federation wanting her to sign a treaty.

Unless you’re referring to AOTC? In which case, Palpatine is never said or shown ordering her death. The trade federation are shown to be the ones asking Dooku for her head in exchange for their joining of the separatists I think.

Why did Dooku leave the Jedi order and the republic. The movies don’t explain. We get a hint he was disillusioned with democracy, and was upset over Qui-Gon’s death that is about it. Why join the Sith that is a huge leap.

The movies aren’t about Dooku’s turn to the dark side. By the same merit, we never learn why Vader was a fascist or villainous in the OT. That being said, I think Dooku could also possibly want to betray Palpatine and kill him, seeing as how he seems to seek to get Obi to join him in AOTC and kill Sidious, but I do think Dooku’s motives there are ambiguous. I think we gain more information about why Dooku would turn to the dark side than we gain about why Anakin did in the OT overall. I do think more could’ve benefited the movie and would’ve been interesting though.

We get he wants to get rid of any opposition Sidious does, political or otherwise the Jedi. And he needs the Jedi as a scapegoat for his evil fascist ambitions. To pin a rebellion upon. The Jedi moved against the chancellor and became traitors. He convinces Anakin almost, that the Jedi like the Sith desire power and don’t want to share it. That they are a jealous of his power. There is a enough of a hint of corruption, in what the Jedi asked Anakin to do spying on the Chancellor he is convinced the Jedi went bad.

It was corruption to merely fight in the Clone Wars, because the Jedi are keepers of the peace and not soldiers. Sidious wants the Jedi to be perceived as heroes and then to fall and be seen as villains. He wiped them all out except for Yoda and Kenobi. The whole thing was like an exercise in getting Anakin to grow in power, and to get him to help destroy his enemies. Sidious is like the bad father and Kenobi is the good father. Kenobi fails as a surrogate father and a big brother to Anakin. Because of Anakin’s fear of loss and greed.

I don’t disagree with this being what happens.

Good point about the OT. The only thing we know about Vader’s motivations is Kenobi saying he was pupil of mine before he turned to evil, he helped the Empire help hunt down and destroy the Jedi Knights and betrayed and murdered Anakin.

And we see in Empire he wants to end the conflict of the rebellion to rule with Luke at his side as the two Sith before even Lucas came up with rule of two. To get rid of Sidious. Vader’s ambition to be Emperor of the Galaxy like when he asked Padme to rule the universe with him.

As for blowing up planets he doesn’t stop it but that seems to be Tarkin’s ambition. Perhaps Palpatine but we never see him and, in the first film Vader is Tarkin’s henchmen. Leia senses this and insults Vader, holding Vader’s leash.

In cut dialogue Vader is referred to as the Dark Lord of the Sith, as he was called in the novelization. Who were the Sith at that point a race of assassins, a dark side cult. It’s not plain. So much was mysterious that the EU created the term dark jedi. They insisted Vader and The Emperor were dark jedi. Lucas likely had an idea on the Sith origins but didn’t put in the movie.

We understand Vader is the right hand of the Emperor and enforcer of his will. But Vader has his own agenda he sends thousands of probes trying to find Luke Skywalker. He is obsessed with the boy after he destroyed the death star. He has pride in what Luke was able to do despite his failure to stop the death star’s destruction.

Vader’s need for belonging and attachment lead to his downfall as a Sith. Seduced by the light. It’s fairly obvious without Luke, Vader does not get redeemed.

JadedSkywalker said:

Good point about the OT. The only thing we know about Vader’s motivations is Kenobi saying he was pupil of mine before he turned to evil, he helped the Empire help hunt down and destroy the Jedi Knights and betrayed and murdered Anakin.

And we see in Empire he wants to end the conflict of the rebellion to rule with Luke at his side as the two Sith before even Lucas came up with rule of two. To get rid of Sidious. Vader’s ambition to be Emperor of the Galaxy like when he asked Padme to rule the universe with him.

As for blowing up planets he doesn’t stop it but that seems to be Tarkin’s ambition. Perhaps Palpatine but we never see him and, in the first film Vader is Tarkin’s henchmen. Leia senses this and insults Vader, holding Vader’s leash.

In cut dialogue Vader is referred to as the Dark Lord of the Sith, as he was called in the novelization. Who were the Sith at that point a race of assassins, a dark side cult. It’s not plain. So much was mysterious that the EU created the term dark jedi. They insisted Vader and The Emperor were dark jedi. Lucas likely had an idea on the Sith origins but didn’t put in the movie.

We understand Vader is the right hand of the Emperor and enforcer of his will. But Vader has his own agenda he sends thousands of probes trying to find Luke Skywalker. He is obsessed with the boy after he destroyed the death star. He has pride in what Luke was able to do despite his failure to stop the death star’s destruction.

I think similarly in regards to the idea of his character for the most part.

Are you being sarcastic? I can’t tell. Because most of that is Vader being in all the OT, being a main big bad, unlike Dooku I think and aren’t really built I think as what motivated Vader to the dark side. As far as what we learn about Dooku in AOTC, that he was a Jedi who turned to evil, that he’s speaking against the corruption of the republic, that he’s an idealist, he’s leading the separatists, was Qui-Gon’s mentor, is suggested I think to miss him, asks for Obi to join him so they can destroy the sith and is working for Palpatine.

Hayden wasn’t bad as Anakin. He wasn’t bad once he stepped into the suit as Vader either. All the complaints are on the directing and writing of George Lucas. The awful dialogue. Some of that is Anakin being a sullen bad boy anti-hero, when the prequel probably should have had Anakin as more heroic and then slowly seduced to evil. He turns bad in the film Revenge of the Sith, as we have it out of shear arrogance, stupidity and greed.

I get it that is the point, Anakin is pathetic and the OT built him up as this historic villain with a tragic backstory.

The story of him wanting to save his wife and child and making a devil’s bargain that is completely understandable.

But he makes it happen by how he interprets his vision of the future. He is responsible for her death. She lost the will to live and didn’t stick around to raise Luke or Leia. The movies don’t even blame him for the Tuskens, the ones he slaughter to the last women and child, Padme excuses it. He is well on his path to the dark side at that point when his mother dies and he snaps. And says he will learn power to stop people from dying.

No Anakin is judged for the premeditated murder of Dooku and the younglings in the film. The killing of the separatists leaders of the trade federation who wanted to surrender and pleaded for mercy in the novelization.

My biggest issue with the film is if Anakin and Vader are supposed to be different, I would suggest Vader and Anakin are one and the same as portrayed in the prequel except for in the Phantom Menace. The whole certain point of view, the good man who was your father was destroyed. Well, we never see him as a good man in the prequel or a good friend, he isn’t an amazing starpilot or a cunning warrior. He is just someone who made a devil’s bargain with Sidious based on one conversation. Rather stupid and abruptly because of some dream he had. Like Lucas was doing a play on Oedipus defying the oracle. Sealing his own fate, with Anakin’s vision of the future and trying to prevent it from happening making it happen.

Like Bruce Wayne is the mask. I submit Darth Vader is Anakin. He isn’t just his darker half or shadow. Certain point of view seems to be lying Ben Kenobi’s way to dissemble and to tell himself a lie because it feels better.

You’d have to do a page one rewrite of the prequel to have the good man who because of zeal joined the Clone Wars, and was slowly seduced to evil. All Anakin was is just driven by greedy and selfish motives, and it’s hard to have any sympathy. Other than for the little slave boy on Tatooine or the teenager who lost his mother. All the rest of his choices he makes on his own. Its true Sidious/Palpatine tells him what he wants to hear. While Kenobi urges patience and to follow the Jedi creed.

The biggest problem is he simply is not a likable leading character, he isn’t the Luke Skywalker of the prequel trilogy. Who isn’t really bad but is just impatient and chooses the quick and easy path. No, he is a loathsome and contemptible person. Revenge of the Sith made that clear.

The most likable people are probably Qui-Gon in the first one who really was a nothing character really the archetype of the mentor. And Obi-Wan is full of the Jedi code and creed in the prequels. But his sort of surrogate father/older brother figure to Anakin, he isn’t a bad guy per se. Maybe a little too dogmatic. Was he wrong about Anakin needing to center himself and to have patience.

And yeah Anakin could have followed his training or left the Jedi order. Is the Jedi responsible even a smidge for his fall. Kenobi certainly felt guilty of something. promising his master he would train the boy despite Yoda warnings.

The movies make the audience and Palpatine aware of what is going on but the Jedi oblivious. Is that good storytelling we need to go from point A to point B, the script needs a reason for Anakin to do these things because he is the villain in the OT. We don’t have a way to judge the story other than the dark side clouds everything. That is why the Jedi were dumb.