logo Sign In

The Merits of the Prequel Trilogy and the "Saga" — Page 8

Author
Time
Post link
Oh, and sorry to be 4 steps behind the flowing conversation ... I can only read and post sporadically.


I'll tell you one thing, this conversation has gotten me to the point where I might do the unthinkable ...




... I might Netflix Revenge of the Sith (heheh, it's the only Star Wars not sitting on my shelf) ... and watch the film I swore I'd never subject myself to again!


.
Author
Time
Post link
Tiptup,

I'm not really saying you're wrong. All I'm saying is fear drove him to that point. It's the fear of losing the one he loves. It's fear of letting history repeat itself when you know in your heart that you can make a difference. That's all Anakin's problem really is. He loves Padme. Life without her isn't life. If he feels in his heart that he either has the power or can obtain the power to save her, he's going to do it...everyone else be damned.

And it's not like the Jedi didn't give him reasons to turn his back on them. They openly used him against a person they knew he was close to. Sure, he's a Jedi first and foremost but just look who Anakin is in the Prequels. Anakin is loyal to people he loves, not ideals (Ideals the Jedi try to teach him. Why is he this way? Because of his age...hence the reason why Lucas had him at nine in the first film). This is why his fall to the Darkside thematically revolves around people he cares for.

He's loyal to Palpatine. He's loyal to Obi-Wan. He's loyal and loves Padme and his Mother. The Jedi should've know better than to put Anakin in that situation. Why do you think Obi-Wan was reluctant to ask him?

On top of all of that is the disrespect factor. Obi-Wan kills the first Sith in a millennum and he's promoted to Jedi Knight without question. Anakin saves Obi-Wan twice, whips the shit out of a powerful Sith Lord, ex-Jedi Master who kicked the shit out of Obi-Wan twice, and saves the Chancellor of the Republic from what could've been death. I'm not saying he should've been promoted to master but they definitely should not have asked him to spy on a father figure. Anakin needed to have some respect from his superiors...and I'm not talking Obi-Wan.
Twisted by the Dark Side, young Skywalker has become. The boy you trained, gone he is. Consumed by Darth Vader.

-Yoda; Episode III Revenge of the Sith.
Author
Time
Post link
To Jumpman and Gomer, or anyone who still kinda likes the PT, what would think if Lucas did just one prequel?

Now hear me out, I really think Lucas could have done one prequel, or a prologue, and I think a majority of fans would have been happy, and all the Jar Jar & Anakin/Padme crap that turned off so many friends I know would have never existed.

If Lucas just made one 3 1/2 hour Prequel, and really streamlined the script. The movie would contain several flashbacks in the first hour to really give key plot points from TPM & AOTC all told through Anakin/Obiwan as good friends saving the Chancellor.

Lucas would not be so indebted to Anakins story, but more of the macro plot points that tie nicely with 4-6. He could 3 hours to show Anakin turning, The birth of the rebellion, The Clone Wars at the beginning, The force ghost explanation, the duel.

I am just saying that Episode III is really the movie everyone wanted to see in the end, and if Lucas just made that and it really came out great without all the problems that plagued the other two prequels, I think it would have been a huge success, and you wouldn't have this division of fans.

Now many fans like Jumpman and GoMer will feel slighted, cause they want more SW movies, so 1 PT movie would not be enough, and I respect that. I just think the Prequels are too long of a story, and all the red meat, the true plot points that tie to the OT are there in ROTS. The backstory of Anakin was not the reason why I wanted the PT, the events that led up to the OT as per Anakin/Obiwan were the reason why, and there is a huge difference.
Author
Time
Post link
CO,

I'll openly admit and even Lucas said so in the Vanity Fair issue leading up the release of Episode III, that he really only had enough story for one film. He's quoted as saying that "Episode I was 20%. Episode II was 20%. And Episode III was 60% of the backstory outline he had."

But, thematically, there are too many threads dealing with Anakin's arc that would've been gone had he just done one film. It's very clear, to me, that Lucas had alot to say/show with this Anakin story arc. And there are too many plots points that would've been lost.

I totally get the attitude of not wanting to deal with the "political junk" and the "love story" stuff. For many of you, it gets in the way of what everyone has been waiting to see. But, go back and reread the prologue to the Original Star Wars novel. It's the blueprint to the Prequels. On top of all that, Lucas in interviews in the early 80's, specifically stated that "if" he were to go back and do the "backstory", it would be totally different in tone, character, and era. He said he would go for something that was more about the "political machinations" of how the Republic crumbled.

I don't have the exact interview but I've read it plenty of times online in varies forums.

I totally understand the idea of "Episode III" is enough. I, in part, agree. But, I just don't think Episode III works withouth the threads he set up in the previous films. And again, that depends if you really want to see the "mother" and the "political" plot.

I like the fact that the characters, era, and tone is drastically different from the Original Trilogy. As much as he did copy the Original Trilogy, in terms of specific beats, if he'd copied the exact feel and tone of the Original Trilogy, he would've caught hell for not coming up with something different. As it stands, many feel that stylistically, the Prequel Trilogy isn't Star Wars.

All I say is why does Star Wars have to be only defined in one way? I understand the Originals started it all. That can't be taken away. But, why limit the vision and universe of Star Wars?



Twisted by the Dark Side, young Skywalker has become. The boy you trained, gone he is. Consumed by Darth Vader.

-Yoda; Episode III Revenge of the Sith.
Author
Time
Post link
I kinda agree that all the meat was saved for Sith, but it was a meal poorly prepared. Worse, in terms of having only one prequel ... it's a dark, dark story once we get to the meat (whether or not it's seasoned properly).


Let me say this rather bluntly .... Star Wars is best when it's joyful, ebullient, fun, humorous, and HAPPY!


The Empire Strikes Back may have had it's darkness, but the world did not fall in love with Star Wars because it was dour, depressing and meloncholy.



Believe it or not, Attack of the Clones is by far my favorite prequel ... it has a jolly tone which I find most StarWarsian. All the other (plentiful) faults aside, the other two prequels are simply too dour in tone ... and the presence of Obi-Wan Kenobi, Yoda and the whinebag who becomes Darth Vader do nothing to make those films StarWarsic to me.


.
Author
Time
Post link
CO,

Essentially, what many of you are suggesting is that you wanted the Prequels more plot driven than character driven...is that about right?

For me, they're very balanced between plot and character.....
Twisted by the Dark Side, young Skywalker has become. The boy you trained, gone he is. Consumed by Darth Vader.

-Yoda; Episode III Revenge of the Sith.
Author
Time
Post link
Jumpman, I agree with you on the political stuff of TPM & AOTC, and I actually liked that stuff, but again it isn't totally necessary to connect to the OT, cause if Lucas was so steadfast in telling that story that deals with the politics, how the hell could he leave on the cutting floor the birth of the rebellion scenes? That to me is every bit as important to tying the saga because it is the first shot of ANH and Tantive IV.

I am saying one prequel would have not built up this angst against Lucas and I feel he lost so many fans when ROTS finally hit the theater. By having one prequel in the year 2000 lets say, the anticipation for 3 years about this 3 1/2 hour prologue that will answer every burning question we all had since 1983, many fans wouldn' t have had time to get burned again and again.

Many fans got burned by TPM, and feel it is a piece of shit, and I know many who never went back. Then AOTC, they couldn't take the romance, and that is when they checked out. By ROTS, you had the diehards who loved the PT by then, and then the fans who were sticking it out, but were suspect.

With one Prequel Prologue movie, the expectations would have been enormous, many would have loved it, and many would have been let down, but it would have been one movie, and fans would have moved on. The PT spanned 7 years of what ifs? Will AOTC be the movie we were expecting with TPM? Will ROTS be as great as ESB? Will ROTS be the one we waited for?

That stuff would have been gone, it would have been one movie, not a character arc, not really a story per say, but just a huge prologue that spans the events that lead up to the empire taking power, and whatever you want to say, that is one f-ing interesting story. For whatever I have my problems with ROTS, that is the story I waited for, for 7 years, and it will always be one of the most interesting SW movies, even if I have major problems with the movie.

I understand Lucas wanting to tell a different story with the PT, and having different tonality, different look, etc. But when you tie a saga 1-6 as a one story about Anakin, it just comes off as too much. If Lucas did a seperate trilogy of prequel events that tied in with the OT, but not as one story, but two seperate stories of the SW universe, that could have worked. Lucas tried to make two different stories, with different looks, tonality, and feel into one story of Anakin Skywalker, and that is where it will never connect for me.
Author
Time
Post link
CO,

Actually, you do get a good sense that something is brewing at the end of Episode III. I mean, look at how it shifts. It shifts to Obi-Wan, Yoda, and Bail. Visually, Lucas using the Blockade Runner set as another clue. The twins are emphasized as a symbol of "hope" at the end, hence all the planning revolving around them. Plus, Padme's assessment of the Republic to Anakin on the verandah is a pretty clear indication that something isn't right. And the reason why I think it works is because it's coming from Padme, the headstrong defender of the Republic for two films prior. On top of all that, the Episode IV crawl essentially explains the Rebellion scenes. That's why I wasn't sad that they were gone...eventhough it cut out one my reasons for watching the Prequel...Miss Portman.

"I am saying one prequel would have not built up this angst against Lucas and I feel he lost so many fans when ROTS finally hit the theater. By having one prequel in the year 2000 lets say, the anticipation for 3 years about this 3 1/2 hour prologue that will answer every burning question we all had since 1983, many fans wouldn' t have had time to get burned again and again.

Many fans got burned by TPM, and feel it is a piece of shit, and I know many who never went back. Then AOTC, they couldn't take the romance, and that is when they checked out. By ROTS, you had the diehards who loved the PT by then, and then the fans who were sticking it out, but were suspect.

With one Prequel Prologue movie, the expectations would have been enormous, many would have loved it, and many would have been let down, but it would have been one movie, and fans would have moved on. The PT spanned 7 years of what ifs? Will AOTC be the movie we were expecting with TPM? Will ROTS be as great as ESB? Will ROTS be the one we waited for?

That stuff would have been gone, it would have been one movie, not a character arc, not really a story per say, but just a huge prologue that spans the events that lead up to the empire taking power, and whatever you want to say, that is one f-ing interesting story. For whatever I have my problems with ROTS, that is the story I waited for, for 7 years, and it will always be one of the most interesting SW movies, even if I have major problems with the movie.

I understand Lucas wanting to tell a different story with the PT, and having different tonality, different look, etc. But when you tie a saga 1-6 as a one story about Anakin, it just comes off as too much. If Lucas did a seperate trilogy of prequel events that tied in with the OT, but not as one story, but two seperate stories of the SW universe, that could have worked. Lucas tried to make two different stories, with different looks, tonality, and feel into one story of Anakin Skywalker, and that is where it will never connect for me."

I totally understand what you're saying. In the past (on other forums), I've even stated that there is an "alternate Prequel Trilogy" if you really look at it. And many come to the same conclusion. The Clone Wars would be the entire background of the three films and on the way, we meet Padme and we'd get all the political stuff and Anakin falling for Padme. But, the Clone Wars would be the driving force behind it all. And that does have merit.

As an aside, I love the love story between Anakin and Padme a bit more than Han and Leia. I'm a hopeless romantic at heart and from a stylistic standpoint, I totally get what Lucas was going for. My old high school friend, who's into Literature like I am, loved the love story because it reminded her of the old stories. Now, Lucas took a big chance on doing that type of love story in the environment of Star Wars. I'd say 90% felt he didn't make it work at all. I say he made it work pretty good but if he'd go back and do one more re-edit of Episode II, he'd nail it because in the script, it's golden.

But again, I'm a romantic. What can I say?
Twisted by the Dark Side, young Skywalker has become. The boy you trained, gone he is. Consumed by Darth Vader.

-Yoda; Episode III Revenge of the Sith.
Author
Time
Post link
It's a shame the Clone Wars cartoon series ever existed. Much as its style could not have been credibly done as a live-action film ... it was as exciting, and fun, and backstory-curiosity-satisfying as any Star Wars prequel could have hoped to be. I don't think I'm alone in finding that animated series to be infinitely better than the live-action prequels (um, I guess live-action in the sense that a few of the actors were real, heheh). It's a detriment to the prequels that Clone Wars is out there for comparison.

* * * * *

Hey, I'm a sucka for romance, too. I totally dug the romance in Episode II. I chaulked up the stilted dialogue and cornball acting of the love story to an homage to filmic styles of the past, like so much of the original Star Wars was.

But as forgiving as I was willing to be, the romance sunk to unfathomable depths of stupidity and vacuousness and absurdity in Revenge of the Sith. And all the meat of the tale that I'd been waiting through six years of two lead-up films for ... was also presented so poorly that I felt robbed, cheated, bent over and used.


It's not a matter of not liking the love story, not liking the poliltics, or even not liking the Anakin story itself ... it's just that it was done piss-poorly.

Phantom Menace may have been a let-down for 16 years in the Star Wars wilderness ... but Return of the Sith was a veritable elevator shaft plummet to hell in how much of a let-down it was for investing as much heart as I did in the new trilogy, hoping it would all turn out well in the end.

Frankly, if the other two films had not been such obvious and slow lead-in teasers for the last movie, not so much would have been riding on that single film's shoulders .... shoulders that I feel could not support the weight of a gnat.


.
Author
Time
Post link

Originally posted by: Jumpman
Tiptup,I'm not really saying you're wrong. All I'm saying is fear drove him to that point.

First of all, Jumpman, this precise topic is why I made this thread in the first place, so if I seem heated at any point, keep that in mind. When Go-Mer said that the fear of loss was meaningfully portrayed in the prequels by George Lucas, his statement struck a major nerve with me. I have the exact opposite opinion. In fact, George Lucas’ maimed attempt at making this ethic the lesson of his latest movies is precisely why I hate the prequel trilogy. I don’t hate the prequels because the films in it are that incredibly horrible (though they are far from great), but because they ruin the perception of my three favorite movies of all time (the OT). The number one way they do this is by totally transforming the chief villain of the series; Darth Vader.

Okay, so fear drove him to go to the dark side of the force and I accept that just fine. I really, really wish he didn’t have to have been such a whiny, pathetic punk on his way there, but alright, I’ll accept even that part. Fear made him become an apprentice of Palpatine and I accep that too. But fear was Anakin’s excuse for murdering a fellow Jedi and then going on to murder countless innocent children? Nowhere did his fears justify that kind of action.

Sure, we all have our moments where we willingly do the wrong thing, we ignore the feelings of others and what is right. In that sense I can understand Anakin. However, there are certain actions, so extreme and vile that while performing them, you can have absolutely no doubt that what you are doing is absolutely wrong. Killing hundreds of children makes Anakin into someone that is evil that he should never be identified with at that point. And you’re telling me that this was all to prevent the outcome of some random, 5-second dream of his wife’s life in danger?! How on earth is that any kind of a rational justification for what he went on to do?! Revenge of the Sith is either made by a sloppy mind or a truly sick mind.

Now, when I see Darth Vader walk onto the blockade runner in “Episode IV” and I still happen to have the prequel trilogy in mind, all I can think of is how disgusted I am by the character. Beneath the immense on-screen presence and James Earl Jone’s highly intelligent voice acting and the wonderful dialogue is just a whiny, sickening, evil, psychopath and I don’t even want to look at him anymore. It’s disgusting what George Lucas has done.

The old idea I had always had of Darth Vader as being an evil monster, but still one that was s rational and one that tried to be an honorable warrior went right out the window with the prequel trilogy. Nowhere does Darth Vader struggle to justify what he does, instead he just goes ahead and murders young children who have no chance to even fight back. What a fucking pussy. Nowhere was his background tortured, twisted, or dark, he just had a few bad things happen to him, and then because his personal feelings are all that matters to him, he goes and kills anybody who stands in the way of his slightest, emotional discomfort. That is a psychopath who nobody should ever be interested in.


Originally posted by: Jumpman
And it's not like the Jedi didn't give him reasons to turn his back on them. They openly used him against a person they knew he was close to. Sure, he's a Jedi first and foremost but just look who Anakin is in the Prequels. Anakin is loyal to people he loves, not ideals (Ideals the Jedi try to teach him. Why is he this way? Because of his age...hence the reason why Lucas had him at nine in the first film). This is why his fall to the Darkside thematically revolves around people he cares for.

He's loyal to Palpatine. He's loyal to Obi-Wan. He's loyal and loves Padme and his Mother. The Jedi should've know better than to put Anakin in that situation. Why do you think Obi-Wan was reluctant to ask him?

On top of all of that is the disrespect factor. Obi-Wan kills the first Sith in a millennum and he's promoted to Jedi Knight without question. Anakin saves Obi-Wan twice, whips the shit out of a powerful Sith Lord, ex-Jedi Master who kicked the shit out of Obi-Wan twice, and saves the Chancellor of the Republic from what could've been death. I'm not saying he should've been promoted to master but they definitely should not have asked him to spy on a father figure. Anakin needed to have some respect from his superiors...and I'm not talking Obi-Wan.


Oh, so it’s everybody else’s fault that Anakin killed children?

Give me a break. Anakin didn’t go through anything in his life that many other people have not. Sure he’s had setbacks and people not trusting him, but really, I don’t blame them. The Jedi did the right thing in every instance in terms of Anakin’s place in the order (based on what the prequels tell us anyways). Just because we might have problems and because we might not always get what we want, does not mean we can be so self absorbed that we can murder countless innocents.


Lastly, about the romance, it was a good idea, and I am perhaps one of the largest hopeless romantics you can find, but my romantic side was not affected by the Anakin/Padme romance at all. It was hollow on so many levels. They were apparently attracted to each other, but why? With Han and Leia I could feel the discomfort of the possibility for attraction, and when they fell for each other you knew it was genuine. Perhaps that was because of the acting performances and better dialogue, but something was missing in AotC.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
Post link
Tiptup,

You're disgusted by Lucas because he shows a character doing everything he could, even when he knows it's wrong, because of love? Because of the fear of being helpless in trying to save the one who represents life to him?

That's all Anakin did. I'm not justifying what he did. I'm not saying it's right what he did. It's completely pathetic. But, I understand the reasons why he did it. You seem to understand the reasons why and it doesn't fly for you. Fine. I can't change that. But, for me, it's sad what happened to this kid.

"because they ruin the perception of my three favorite movies of all time (the OT). The number one way they do this is by totally transforming the chief villain of the series; Darth Vader."

Yes. Darth Vader is changed forever. But, there's no story in the Prequels if you show Anakin as this badass Jedi warrior with an attitude and a streak of evil behind him. What's the point of telling that tale? We already know he becomes the representation of all that is evil with the Galactic Empire. You can't just show him as being always like that before he became Darth Vader.

As far as the romance goes, Anakin's side is pretty clear cut from the moment he met Padme in Episode I. That's not the issue. The issue is Padme and the fact that both of these characters are essentially novice when it comes to romance. It's awkward because of the fact that they've never done this before, on this level. Padme's the worse because it's pretty clear, she's never had a childhood. Padme's accepting of Anakin has more to do with Anakin's loss of his Mother more than it has to do with actually being in love with him. The film clearly shows she's attracted to him. But love? I wouldn't go that far. But, it's no accident that when Anakin loses him Mother, Padme is on Tatoonie. She takes her place figuratively. And when we get to the moment where Padme feels that they're not going to live through this situation, we get the confession. She's lying to herself but she doesn't know if she's going to make it either. But once she says the magic words, she can't take them back. Now, it's very clear when we get to Episode III that Padme is definitely in love with Anakin in the way Anakin is in love with her. She clearly learned to love him, in the way we categorize love, in between Episodes II and III.
Twisted by the Dark Side, young Skywalker has become. The boy you trained, gone he is. Consumed by Darth Vader.

-Yoda; Episode III Revenge of the Sith.
Author
Time
Post link
Tiptup, I totally agree with you and this is where Lucas failed at convincing me about Anakins fears. In Lucas's eyes, TPM should show two things, that Darth Vader is an innocent little child, again because a majority of the audience saw it 4-6 first and he has to make us unlearn what we have learned. And secondly, that Anakin leaving his mom at ten years old sparks these constant fears that make him do bad things later in life when those fears are now seen through what will happen to his wife.

On the first point, Lucas succeeded in showing me that Darth Vader wasn't a bad kid on the block from day one, so he succeeded in that point. On the second point about fears, he failed miserably. First of all, Anakin was a slave, Lucas showed nothing of the mental scars on Anakin/Shmi that being a slave does to you. He came home with Padme, Jar Jar, and QuiGon, and they had a nice dinner, and everything was hunky doory. Just watch Conan the Barbarian, it is only shown for about ten minutes, but that is what it is like being a slave. You see Arnold doing the same job for years and years and you yearn for him to get the hell out of that awful life. I don't think Conan is the greatest movie when it comes to character development, but it suceeded a hell of alot more of making its point than TPM does.

OK, so Anakin leaves him mom for 10 years, and has a dream she is suffering. He goes back and finds her near death, and when she dies, he goes apeshit and kills Tuskens. At that point, Lucas had me, I bought that whole scene in AOTC, cause I put myself in that position, and I could rationalize if someone killed one of my parents, I would get irrational and may lose it like Anakin did. To me, Anakin took revenge on the Tuskens, and all of us have that revenge gene in our body at some point in our life, and this was as extreme as you get.

OK, so we get to ROTS, and Anakin has a dream of Padme and she is dying, at this point I still buy it, I am on board with Lucas. So Palps tells him he has this trick of saving people, cool scene, good setup. So what does Anakin do? NOTHING? The whole next hour of the movie should have showed Anakin trying to find out more about this trick, does he ask Yoda? Does he ask Kenobi or Mace? Now at that point, he doesn't trust the jedi totally, but it would still make a point by them laughing at his question, that maybe they aren't showing him everything to be a jedi.

Then he doesn't even ask Palps just once, how is this done? Not that Palps would even show him, or even respond to him with a coherrant answer, just give him more B.S. that would make the viewer sympathize with Anakin that he is on board with Palps. The fact that Anakin does not even question how this is done wants he finds out Palps is the Sith Lord makes the story ridiculous. How could Anakin believe Palps after he has started this war for 10 years? How could Anakin believe Palps after he was behind killing several of his fellow Jedi? How could he believe Palps as Palps watched him fight Dooku and didn't say a word other than, "He is a sith lord, you're no match for him." You may look at it as Anakin being desperate, I look at Anakin now as a total idiot, and being duped and being an idiot are two different things.

So we get to Mace fighting Palps, and Anakin walks in. Doesn't Anakin wonder what happened to the other 3 Jedi who left with Mace? So Mace is about to Kill Palps, and Anakin takes his hand off, then Palps kills him with Lightning and Anakin says, "What have I done?" Right there, he knows the jedi aren't evil, he knows he did a bad thing, but what does he say to Kenobi on Mustafar, "I always knew the jedi were evil!!" If you did Anakin, you wouldn't have said, What have I done?

So he then pledges to Palps his allegiance, so Palps say to go kill all the kids in the temple. Why wouldn't Anakin atleast say, "Hey, wait a second, what does this have to do with saving Padme?" My point is Lucas did such a bad job of distinguishing the dark side instead he made it all about Padme. Anakin should have felt the darkside in him, and that would make him think irrationally, he was always rationale, cause it was only about Padme, and that is why he has tears on Mustafar before Padme lands, he always knows what he is doing, and that is just plain stupid.

So then we get to Mustafar, and his argument with Padme. So then he throws out, we can rule the galaxy, I can overthrow the Chancellor......." Where the hell did that come from other than tying what Vader said in ESB? Anakin never talked about ruling the govt other then the little picnic with Padme where he thinks one person should make all the decisions in politics. Lucas never established that Anakin was about power from day one, it was always about Padme, so that line comes from left field.

Then he says to Kenobi, "My Empire!" WTF? When was it about his Empire? Anakin just cried 5 minutes ago before Padme showed up, cause he knew what he was doing wasn't right in some ways, but it was for Padme, so he could justfiy it. So what does 'My Empire' have to do with saving Padme, other then tying to Vader in the OT.

So this leaves me my question, "What the hell do attachments have to do with any of this stuff?" If I had a dream about my mother dying and wife dying, I would be just as scared as Anakin was to lose someone, and Lucas didn't need Anakin leaving his mother to make that point, the dreams did!! Not once did Anakin leaving his mother occur to me in ROTS that was one of the reasons for his actions, and I know many of you guys didn't think that until you heard Lucas's commentary or read an interview somewhere. And if that is true, then Lucas failed, cause if fans can't pick up that message by watching the movies, and have to get their facts through interviews, then the story failed on screen.

Lucas had me at the end of AOTC, I was buying the whole story in 2002 about Anakin, but ROTS is so ludricrous and so uncompelling, I turned against the PT after ROTS and the bad turn, not because of Jar Jar.
Author
Time
Post link
CO,

Whoa. Anakin leaving his mother doesn't spark constant fears. He's sad that she's not with him, but not fearful. The fear creeps in when we get to Episode II and the dreams he has....

Second, Anakin does ask the Jedi, in a round about way. He can't reveal specifically the attachment he's having dreams about but he does reveal it to Yoda, before Palpatine tells his "Sith" tale. Plus, remember the funeral of Shmi in Episode II. He specifically states that "he wasn't strong enough to save her and that he won't fail again." Why does he have such thoughts in this way? Because, he believes he's the Chosen One and that he can and should be able to do anything....hence the resentment he has toward Obi-Wan and the Jedi for "holding him back."
Twisted by the Dark Side, young Skywalker has become. The boy you trained, gone he is. Consumed by Darth Vader.

-Yoda; Episode III Revenge of the Sith.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Jumpman
CO,

Whoa. Anakin leaving his mother doesn't spark constant fears. He's sad that she's not with him, but not fearful. The fear creeps in when we get to Episode II and the dreams he has....



Just like he has dreams of freeing the slaves in TPM, is that ever followed up? That shows me that Anakin has alot of dreams, but for some reason doesn't try to free his mom between TPM & AOTC?
Author
Time
Post link
CO,

The only evidence we have of Anakin not being able to go back to get his mother is the Jedi way. As he tells Padme on the cruiser, "Attachment is forbidden. Possession is forbidden."

That's the whole problem with him. Had Anakin been taken when he was a baby, he wouldn't be attached to his Mother, just as Obi-Wan and Mace aren't. They don't know them. Anakin was raised by his mother. She was the only thing he knew. She's the one who guided him to be this selfless individual at nine in Episode I. That doesn't just turn off just because you're going to be studying the Jedi Way. This is why Yoda didn't want this...."He's way too old."

As for his turn, the Darkside does play a part but I'll even admit that it's way too subtle in that sequence we he kneels before Palpatine. It's implied.
Twisted by the Dark Side, young Skywalker has become. The boy you trained, gone he is. Consumed by Darth Vader.

-Yoda; Episode III Revenge of the Sith.
Author
Time
Post link
CO,

Him wanting to overthrow Palpatine begins in that scene in Palpatine's office. Why else does he decide to go and do Palpatine's bidding?

He can't go back to the Jedi, because he had a hand in Mace's death.
He knows who Palpatine really is.
The Jedi have used him.
Palpatine has used him.

What choice does Anakin have left? Himself and his wife. Nobody else matters.

But Palpatine holds the key. It doesn't matter that Palpatine doesn't show the key. It doesn't even matter if Palpatine has the key. To Anakin, the possiblity is all that matters and he has to take it, because of the promise he made in Episode II. He's not thinking about the Jedi. He's not thinking about Palpatine and the "Sith ways." He's thinking about himself and what he has to do to save his wife.

And no, I had that figured out well before the Episode III commentary....Twelve times in the theatre will do that to you.
Twisted by the Dark Side, young Skywalker has become. The boy you trained, gone he is. Consumed by Darth Vader.

-Yoda; Episode III Revenge of the Sith.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Jumpman
CO,

The only evidence we have of Anakin not being able to go back to get his mother is the Jedi way. As he tells Padme on the cruiser, "Attachment is forbidden. Possession is forbidden."

That's the whole problem with him. Had Anakin been taken when he was a baby, he wouldn't be attached to his Mother, just as Obi-Wan and Mace aren't. They don't know them. Anakin was raised by his mother. She was the only thing he knew. She's the one who guided him to be this selfless individual at nine in Episode I. That doesn't just turn off just because you're going to be studying the Jedi Way. This is why Yoda didn't want this...."He's way too old."

As for his turn, the Darkside does play a part but I'll even admit that it's way too subtle in that sequence we he kneels before Palpatine. It's implied.



I agree with you about taking him as a baby, and that is one of the things that actually made sense from the PT, if you are not attached to anyone, it is easier to fight for the cause, rather than fight for an individual.

But falling in love with Padme, has nothing to do with leaving his mother at 10 years old, it is just a natural occurence in life. He could have been taken as a baby, and still fell in love with Padme, and that comes down to the persons actions. And to me it is cop out by Lucas to say if Anakin was taken as a baby, he would have never fell in love with Padme, and never been Darth Vader.

Is Lucas saying not one jedi in 1000 years ever fell in love? There had to be one of them who maybe fell in love and strayed, just like Count Dooku was a jedi and he became a sith out of power or disgust from the jedi order, it does happen, but that is Count Dookus personality, not because of Jedi.

The one thing I hate about the PT, is makes Anakin like one of those people on Oprah Winfrey show, it is someone elses reason why I did it. I did this cause I had a bad upbringing, I did this cause one of my parents died early in life, etc. Lucas constantly gives an out to Anakin, and to me that undermines the strongness of Lukes character in the OT. Maybe Luke was just a stronger willed person than Anakin, nothing more nothing less. No two people are the same, and I think by constantly giving excuses to Anakin, what Luke eventually does in the context of 1-6, is really secondary now.
Author
Time
Post link
CO,

Yes. Loving someone is not the Jedi Way. You can have compassion for the whole of civilization but you can't be attached to one person. Because of the nature of the Force and the fact that the Jedi manipulate the Force to their own will, if one is emotionally attached to an individual, one could slide easily down the path of possessiveness in wanting to keep that individual with them. The problem stems from the Dark Side. It's more powerful than the Light Side and it will "dominate you."

As Anakin so foolishly states to Obi-Wan, "you underestimate my power", it is clear that the Dark Side has him. He's not thinking rationally during that fight because of his belief that he has control of the "Dark Side."

This is the path of the Jedi. I don't read EU one bit but I'm sure there are tales of other Jedi loving someone eventhough they know it's not the way and could lead down a dangerous path. Again, it has to do with the Force. The Force is clearly a powerful thing. Why else does Vader bait Luke about his sister in Episode VI and that baiting causes Luke to loose it for a moment when he goes beserek on his father....

...it's the fear of loss of a loved one and the nature of the Force.
Twisted by the Dark Side, young Skywalker has become. The boy you trained, gone he is. Consumed by Darth Vader.

-Yoda; Episode III Revenge of the Sith.
Author
Time
Post link
CO,

"The one thing I hate about the PT, is makes Anakin like one of those people on Oprah Winfrey show, it is someone elses reason why I did it. I did this cause I had a bad upbringing, I did this cause one of my parents died early in life, etc. Lucas constantly gives an out to Anakin, and to me that undermines the strongness of Lukes character in the OT. Maybe Luke was just a stronger willed person than Anakin, nothing more nothing less. No two people are the same, and I think by constantly giving excuses to Anakin, what Luke eventually does in the context of 1-6, is really secondary now."

You would be right if Lucas didn't show Anakin questioning himself in Episodes II and III about his wants and desires. He openly admits in Episode II that what he did to the Tusken Raiders was wrong. When Obi-Wan asks what Padme would do if she were in his position on the gunship, he knows that she would do her duty, as he states. He openly tells Padme that "he wants more, but he knows he shouldn't"

Anakin is constantly battling back and forth between what he desires and wanting to do the right thing and be a good Jedi.
Twisted by the Dark Side, young Skywalker has become. The boy you trained, gone he is. Consumed by Darth Vader.

-Yoda; Episode III Revenge of the Sith.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Jumpman
CO,

Yes. Loving someone is not the Jedi Way. You can have compassion for the whole of civilization but you can't be attached to one person. Because of the nature of the Force and the fact that the Jedi manipulate the Force to their own will, if one is emotionally attached to an individual, one could slide easily down the path of possessiveness in wanting to keep that individual with them. The problem stems from the Dark Side. It's more powerful than the Light Side and it will "dominate you."

As Anakin so foolishly states to Obi-Wan, "you underestimate my power", it is clear that the Dark Side has him. He's not thinking rationally during that fight because of his belief that he has control of the "Dark Side."

This is the path of the Jedi. I don't read EU one bit but I'm sure there are tales of other Jedi loving someone eventhough they know it's not the way and could lead down a dangerous path. Again, it has to do with the Force. The Force is clearly a powerful thing. Why else does Vader bait Luke about his sister in Episode VI and that baiting causes Luke to loose it for a moment when he goes beserek on his father....
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





See, that is where ROTJ does a better of job of showing the darkside gripping Luke. Palps is baiting him in the throne room, and finally the darkside gets to him, and he goes apeshit like Anakin did on the tuskens, and that is why I like both scenes in AOTC & ROTJ. But in ROTS, he makes a CALCULATED decision to join Palpatine, not having the darkside take him over, and that is where it makes Anakin look like an idiot, cause he he is not joining Palps because of the darkside, but because he want to know this trick to save Padme. That is the whole key plot point that changes the whole dynamics, learning this trick to save people, Anakin is aware of this all the time, and the darkside does not take him over like the Tusken slaughter.



Author
Time
Post link
CO,

I say that Anakin makes a CALCULATED decision to CHOOSE HIMSELF AND HIS WIFE, not joining Palpatine. The crux of it is that he feels that he must do Palpatine's bidding to get what he wants (Yoda's words don't offer anything. At least with Palpatine, he offers something that Anakin can grasp a hold off. Essentially, Yoda asked Anakin to give up his wife. And we all know he's not going to do that. He wants his cake and to eat it too.) But, that doesn't change the fact that he's also decided to get rid of Palpatine who he feels he has what he has. What Anakin wasn't counting on was the Dark Side dominating him.

Now, you are correct in that Episode II and Episode VI do a great job of showing that. But, I like the decision by Lucas of Anakin choosing to go this route, eventhough he knows what it might mean, because of love and fear of losing his wife.

I'm pretty positive that 100% of the diehard Original Trilogy fans would've never gone this way but I feel it makes for a compelling story and I'm glad he did do that. It would've been a very easy story for Lucas to show that Anakin gets upset at the Jedi and just decides to betray his friends. It would've been easy to show that Anakin was always a hothead and never was really a good person underneath.

The problem is that everyone knows he's going to the Dark Side. It's not a secret. So, in Lucas' mind, he has to figure out a way to make Anakin's trip to the Dark Side not what anyone expected. This is why he makes the crucial decision of showing Anakin at nine in Episode I. The threads of his fall are in that film.

I mean, I'll admit that Lucas could've made Anakin at least 16 in the first film and still have him live with his Mother on Tatoonie. The problem is that, in general, when everyone gets to that age, we all want to get away from our parents one way or another. He's not really dependent on his Mother at 16.

He still could've been good, selfless, and an earnest young man. But, leaving the home at age 16 isn't as tramatic as leaving at 9.
Twisted by the Dark Side, young Skywalker has become. The boy you trained, gone he is. Consumed by Darth Vader.

-Yoda; Episode III Revenge of the Sith.
Author
Time
Post link
CO,

You know what's the most interesting part of this whole debate? If you read the "Making of Episode III" book, originally, Lucas conceived, wrote, and shot Anakin's turn in the manner to which you suggested. But, he didn't think it jived with what had been done on Episodes I and II.

Plus, he really wanted to show that Anakin, even by choice, was a victim in this whole game. He did choose, but between the Jedi and Palpatine, he was also a victim.

And I can understand the idea of "Darth Vader being a victim" would piss off Original Trilogy fans.
Twisted by the Dark Side, young Skywalker has become. The boy you trained, gone he is. Consumed by Darth Vader.

-Yoda; Episode III Revenge of the Sith.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Jumpman
CO,

You know what's the most interesting part of this whole debate? If you read the "Making of Episode III" book, originally, Lucas conceived, wrote, and shot Anakin's turn in the manner to which you suggested. But, he didn't think it jived with what had been done on Episodes I and II.

Plus, he really wanted to show that Anakin, even by choice, was a victim in this whole game. He did choose, but between the Jedi and Palpatine, he was also a victim.

And I can understand the idea of "Darth Vader being a victim" would piss off Original Trilogy fans.



I think this goes to the point as to why for many the PT story of Anakin does not translate well on screen, but better in the novels. Just for the record, I love all 3 PT novels, and have never gotten through one OT novel, but I love the OT movies, and think the PT movies are OK.

This is why Lucas was taking a chance with doing a character study on Anakin as his main theme of the PT, the viewer has to understand and 'buy' the characters motivations for doing the things they do, and in the novels, I bought it, in the movies I didn't. In the novels, the writers were allowed to flesh out important scenes compared to the movies where they are very short edits. I be honest with you, just the ROTS turn scene and lead up to it, could be a whole movie, rather then the first 40 minutes, but of course time is of essence.

The difference between the OT & PT is the OT story is basic, good vs evil, and very easy to understand, and you don't have to understand the characters motivations, their actions speak for themselves. For the PT to succeed, the fan had to buy the turn scene, and you did, and I didn't. The viewer had to buy everything that led up to Anakin turning, or else it would come off as far fetched.

I believe the way Lucas does SW movies, he got it right with the OT, and really had an uphill battle with the PT. The OT movies don't need to show every single emotion of the characters, it just has to get from point A to point B, and the viewer follows it to conclusion. What I am saying is the generality of the OT, the stuff we don't know, the basic story is probably its greatest strength. Lucas was able to tell a basic story of good vs evil, which is done in so many other movies, have your typical characters: Princess, Wizard, Farmboy, Scoundrel, Bad guy in a cape, and make into something much deeper then it really is when you take a step away and just kind of assess the story.

If you think about it, The OT story is not rocket science, but again, if it was, we would be have the same debates where neither of us would budge, because we were either sold on the story & characters or not. We could sit here all day and debate Anakins turn, the bottom line is you bought it, and I didn't.

I will find a quote from the Annotated Screenplays where Lucas talks about how he makes movies, and how he doesn't get too involved with the psychies of the characters.
Author
Time
Post link
The reason why he had to change it is because he hadn't designed the film(s) to fascilitate that "driven by greed" angle properly. There needed to be some kind of emotional angle to invest our sympathy, and thats what Episode II was lacking and why Anakin was hated by most viewers--he was just whiny and greedy and wanted things his way. Why should we care about a character like that? Episode III IMO was the best prequel and i think Lucas' changing of Anakin's arc in that film was the best thing he has done in Star Wars since he hired Irvin Kershner in 1978.

But, CO is right--the rest of the film does not follow the logic laid out in the "doing it for padme" arc. Lucas was so close to creating a great character film. What happened? Well, the film was not written--or even shot--with the whole Padme arc in mind. It was all added in post-production--even the dream sequences; initially it was just a single nightmare, and not even the primary reason for his turn. But it fell flat. It didn't work because AOTC was a debacle, so he had to re-shift the entire film to a spontaneous, emotional act--saving Palpatine in order to save Padme. This was a stroke of brilliance in my opinion--finally we are dealing with character motivation and emotion here. But Lucas ultimately botched it. Why? Because he didn't rebalance the rest of the film. It was just too late--the film was already shot and in the can, and in order to re-balance it the film would essentially have to be re-shot and re-filmed from the ground up. The problem was that after Anakin turns the film links back up to the initial version where Anakin is "twisted by the darkside". When he accepted Palpatine's offer in Palpatine's original "reveal" scene he genuinely believed that the Jedi were plotting against him and was slowly feeling the darkside and being corrupted by it; in fact, in the original version when he kills Mace Windu he doesn't say "what have i done"--he says "i cant believe the jedi were really taking over." Thus, his decision to go to the temple and kill these traitors was justified, and this links up with what he says at the end--"I should have known the Jedi were plotting to take over...from my point of view the Jedi are evil." But instead Lucas re-filmed the entire arc of his transformation. He re-filmed the reveal scene to make about keeping Padme alive. He added more vision scenes and more scenes about anakin become obsessed about saving padme. He added a scene where Anakin tells Mace about Palpatine's identity. He added the brilliant rumination scene. And he added the great scene were Anakin is absent for the Mace-Palpatine fight, comes in halfway and is goaded by both of them to choose a side--and then choses Palpatine, saying "what have i done...just help me save padme." But now after this section is finished, it returns to the original version--why the hell is Anakin suddenly killing his children, when he was just loyal to Mace windu a few minutes earlier when he told him the truth about Palpatine?? His acceptance of the Sith was a spontaneous emotional response related to Padme, not any sort of personality flaw or corruption/betrayal issue.

Lucas got the first 50% of it right, but then didn't have time--or didn't realise--that the all-important final 50% was not re-aligned in sync with the new story arc. I would rather have the version that exist now and is inconsistent rather than the absolutely flat and totally unconvincing original version. ROTS was imperfect but i thought it was pretty good in spite of these inconsistencies because i felt some emotional attachment to the story and characters for once--Lucas set it up great, and although the ending didn't follow through he at least had me by that point and the terrific action scenes and drool-inducing finale partially made up for the few flaws that remained. If you thought ROTS sucked you can at least be thankful it wasn't as bad as it was originally shot.
Author
Time
Post link
CO,

Totally agree. This is one of the reasons why I "wish" Lucas wasn't so dogmatic about Star Wars films being two hours and a few mintues in length. Had Lucas kept completely to the prequel scripts and didn't worry about running time, I don't think we'd be having this debate now.

Plus, the "style of Star Wars" was also something else he wanted to keep, eventhough he was making a character study. And that's just a hard thing to accomplish. And another thing that really hasn't been touched on is the time period "feeling" that Lucas is trying to replicate. Essentially, if you break it down, the Prequels are period pieces. Think about how the characters are labeled. Look at the wardrobes. Look at the politics. Look at the love story. Every characteristic is found in period pieces, either in literature or films. The problem is the setting. It's a science-fiction setting and that's a clash of acceptance if you ask me.

But, I'm also a firm believer that an audience needs to bring something to the table. I don't like films that spoon feed everything to me. The Original Trilogy is a simple tale but it doesn't spoon feed you either. With the Prequels, it's not overtly complex at all if you apply "some" thinking but you have to totally understand the story.

I liked the first two Prequel novels. I would've liked the third one, if it was written differently. The style that it was written in bugged me. But, I still prefer the films to the novels, hence the reason I got rid of the novels.

Also zombie, the "dreams" were part of the original script, from what I read.
Twisted by the Dark Side, young Skywalker has become. The boy you trained, gone he is. Consumed by Darth Vader.

-Yoda; Episode III Revenge of the Sith.