Originally posted by: Tiptup
) Anyway, I don't see Anakin as a complete psychopath.
When it comes to the Tusken Raider slaughter, Anakin knows what he did was wrong after he did it, so you could argue temporary insanity brought on by the trauma of having his mother die in his arms because of them.
As far as slaughtering the younglings and betraying the Jedi order, he did rationalize that even if only to himself:"I will not betray the Republic."
"My loyalties are with the Chancellor, and the senate, and with you."
"From my point of view the Jedi are evil".
Anakin had it all worked out in his head that what he was doing was for the greater good of the galaxy, but it was all really motivated by his selfish desire to save Padme from a potential death. His rationalization was just how he coped with that decision. Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
About force jumps, I still don't see the problem. Luke's jumps were already fantastic, and to me, most of the Jedi jumps in the prequels aren't all that much higher than Luke's. I understand -that- you prefer more subtle jumps. I don't quite understand why. I see. So, this is still a very extreme issue for you then? Interesting. I am truly sorry Go-Mer. I mean, I understand that you have a fixation upon this subject, but as I have already stated many times, I do not. The super jumps are not any kind of an extreme problem for me at all. I simply mentioned it off the top of my head in my first post. It was something that didn’t match up with the rest of the “saga” to me in a vague sense and that’s all. I’m now sorry that the Jedi jumps have now struck such a strong nerve with you. As I have already said before in this thread, and for many of the precise reasons you outlined in your last post, I am easily able to overlook this issue and pretend it somehow works.
Sure, I’ll admit that I still consider the super-jumps to be small flaw in the sense that the previous movies had already ingrained such a strong image of the Jedi into my mind. They moved like ordinary people for the most part and could only perform miraculous feats with great labor and concentration. Perhaps Luke was just an unskilled novice as you say, but I always got the impression that Luke was a pretty capable Jedi in terms of his physical capabilities. But, as you said, I never knew any of those things for certain, and I’m thus able to overlook and accept the super jumps. Oh good, I misunderstood. I thought this was a big deal that you couldn't roll along with. My mistake.
Only a Sith lord deals in absolutes! (I love that line About force jumps, I still don't see the problem. Luke's jumps were already fantastic, and to me, most of the Jedi jumps in the prequels aren't all that much higher than Luke's. I understand -that- you prefer more subtle jumps. I don't quite understand why. I see. So, this is still a very extreme issue for you then? Interesting. I am truly sorry Go-Mer. I mean, I understand that you have a fixation upon this subject, but as I have already stated many times, I do not. The super jumps are not any kind of an extreme problem for me at all. I simply mentioned it off the top of my head in my first post. It was something that didn’t match up with the rest of the “saga” to me in a vague sense and that’s all. I’m now sorry that the Jedi jumps have now struck such a strong nerve with you. As I have already said before in this thread, and for many of the precise reasons you outlined in your last post, I am easily able to overlook this issue and pretend it somehow works.
Sure, I’ll admit that I still consider the super-jumps to be small flaw in the sense that the previous movies had already ingrained such a strong image of the Jedi into my mind. They moved like ordinary people for the most part and could only perform miraculous feats with great labor and concentration. Perhaps Luke was just an unskilled novice as you say, but I always got the impression that Luke was a pretty capable Jedi in terms of his physical capabilities. But, as you said, I never knew any of those things for certain, and I’m thus able to overlook and accept the super jumps. Oh good, I misunderstood. I thought this was a big deal that you couldn't roll along with. My mistake.
Originally posted by: Tiptup
What I’m unable to overlook or accept however is your outright dismissal of my point of view. You have implied that I am supremely illogical for gathering the impression that I did. Apparently, to formulate a general concept of the Jedi, based upon what the movies themselves have made me accustomed to, is some sort of supreme crime in your eyes. I’m sorry but I find that odd. After all, I able to understand your point of view to a degree, and yet you somehow cannot even see where I am coming at all. Well maybe "illogical" isn't the right way to put it. I guess it's just a difference in the way we each approached these new movies. I certainly never assumed that Jedi would be doing all of the things they did in the PT on my own going on the classic trilogy. Certainly there are more fantastic qualities to some of the things the Jedi can do in the prequels. Still, I didn't see that as an "artistic" or "logical" flaw, it was just the way things were in this story. I then adjusted my perception to fit with this new information, replacing my assumptions with how things "really" were. To me it all clicked and made perfect sense as I watched these movies for the first time. Instead of folding my arms and saying: "Hey Luke never did anything like that in the classic trilogy" I put my hand under my chin and said: "So -that's- how Jedi were when they were the guardians of peace and justice in the old Republic." Obviously, this wasn't a big deal for you either, so really the lack of logic here was in my perception that it was.
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
I really don't see why you would say it's incoherent.
From my point of view, RotS is either incoherent or Anakin is a psychopath. Either way I can’t enjoy the movie. I’ve already told you this before and you totally failed to reply. Oh well, if you can’t understand my point of view even to the slightest degree, then you can hardly claim to have an open mind. What I’m unable to overlook or accept however is your outright dismissal of my point of view. You have implied that I am supremely illogical for gathering the impression that I did. Apparently, to formulate a general concept of the Jedi, based upon what the movies themselves have made me accustomed to, is some sort of supreme crime in your eyes. I’m sorry but I find that odd. After all, I able to understand your point of view to a degree, and yet you somehow cannot even see where I am coming at all. Well maybe "illogical" isn't the right way to put it. I guess it's just a difference in the way we each approached these new movies. I certainly never assumed that Jedi would be doing all of the things they did in the PT on my own going on the classic trilogy. Certainly there are more fantastic qualities to some of the things the Jedi can do in the prequels. Still, I didn't see that as an "artistic" or "logical" flaw, it was just the way things were in this story. I then adjusted my perception to fit with this new information, replacing my assumptions with how things "really" were. To me it all clicked and made perfect sense as I watched these movies for the first time. Instead of folding my arms and saying: "Hey Luke never did anything like that in the classic trilogy" I put my hand under my chin and said: "So -that's- how Jedi were when they were the guardians of peace and justice in the old Republic." Obviously, this wasn't a big deal for you either, so really the lack of logic here was in my perception that it was.
Originally posted by: Tiptup
I get the impression that if George Lucas were to decide tomorrow that Jedi could shoot beams of radiation from their eyeballs and melt storm troopers in a single second with them, you would then wholeheartedly accept that concept. And, if I were to then express even the slightest reservation about that power, I can only guess that you would accuse me of being completely illogical and unfair. Now come on, we were talking about how an existing force power from the classic trilogy was portrayed to more of an extreme in the prequels, not a force power that magically appeared out of nowhere. Some of the things the Jedi do in the prequels that they never did in the classic trilogy such as Jedi speed (seen in the beginning of TPM), I can see as being something more out of left field.
Also I'm not saying that I force myself to enjoy things that aren't enjoyable, I just strive to see what the filmmaker was trying to get across, and don't let my pre-conceived notions about "how it should be" get in the way of enjoying it for what it is. I don't spend a whole lot of time second guessing the film maker, and instead just enjoy what he has done as much as possible.Originally posted by: Tiptup
Otherwise, I see how you could enjoy that focus from the prequels. However, I have trouble seeing that focus in the films. How are you able to overlook the many times that the films are clearly hypocritical in regard to that focus? I see many times where the films display the fact that what’s “right” for an individual is what actually determines what is then right for the greater good more than anything else. To me that clear display seems to contradict the focus you enjoy. Therefore, how are you able to overlook inconsistency? Why is that seeming hypocrisy unimportant to you?
I really do want to understand your point of view, Go-Mer. Assuming you can act with a reasonable mind.
Could you be more specific as to what you find to contradict what I am seeing? To me Anakin's desire to save Padme from possible death is a good thing. It's personal for Anakin because he has a personal interest in keeping her around because he loves her. The path he goes down in pursuit of that goal pushes the whole galaxy into the dark times of the Empire. In that way, Anakin put himself above the rest of the galaxy and it ended up being bad for everyone.Originally posted by: TiptupI get the impression that if George Lucas were to decide tomorrow that Jedi could shoot beams of radiation from their eyeballs and melt storm troopers in a single second with them, you would then wholeheartedly accept that concept. And, if I were to then express even the slightest reservation about that power, I can only guess that you would accuse me of being completely illogical and unfair. Now come on, we were talking about how an existing force power from the classic trilogy was portrayed to more of an extreme in the prequels, not a force power that magically appeared out of nowhere. Some of the things the Jedi do in the prequels that they never did in the classic trilogy such as Jedi speed (seen in the beginning of TPM), I can see as being something more out of left field.
Originally posted by: Tiptup
I say that with any movie I am watching. To me the point of watching a movie is to be entertained. The more I enjoy it, the more I have gotten out of the deal. For that reason, I try to work with the entertainment as much as possible. The Star Wars Saga is just where I happen to get the most enjoyment out of the deal when it comes to movies.Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Obviously to you this is a fairly large deal, and one you have a hard time rolling along with. Uhh, no, I already said in this thread that this issue isn’t a “fairly large deal” to me at all. In fact, I have stated the opposite a number of times now. For crying out loud, the first time I watched The Phantom Menace, I didn’t even notice the jumps were as high as they were! It was not until a later viewing that I saw how extreme they were and, sure, became somewhat bothered by them. But still, it’s not this important to me. It is nothing to debate to the extreme degree you apparently want to debate it. I’ve been trying to dispense with the issue for a number of my posts now. I already stated that they can work from a different point of view. Again, I misunderstood, my mistake.
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
To me it's important to enjoy these movies as much as possible.
The focus of Revenge of the Sith to me is the manifestation of the grey area involved with good and evil. The morals of ROTS are very similar to the morals presented across the entire saga. That love is better than hate, and compassion is better than greed, but also that life doesn't always make the right choices very clear. On the one hand, saving Padme and Shmi are noble, compassionate things. Anakin strives to obtain the power to control these things, and is then consumed by the desire to control the plight of the entire galaxy, so he "can make things the way he wants them to be", but as Padme asks, "at what cost"? It's an examination of what's "right" for an individual and at what point that becomes less important than what's "right" for the greater good.
First, why is it important to enjoy the prequels “as much as possible”? Do you say that with every movie or just with movies that are related to Star Wars? Do you say that with every TV show that happens to come along? Isn’t better to enjoy what you actually find enjoyable and not force yourself to enjoy a film simply because it’s a film or simply because it’s related to Star Wars? Obviously to you this is a fairly large deal, and one you have a hard time rolling along with. Uhh, no, I already said in this thread that this issue isn’t a “fairly large deal” to me at all. In fact, I have stated the opposite a number of times now. For crying out loud, the first time I watched The Phantom Menace, I didn’t even notice the jumps were as high as they were! It was not until a later viewing that I saw how extreme they were and, sure, became somewhat bothered by them. But still, it’s not this important to me. It is nothing to debate to the extreme degree you apparently want to debate it. I’ve been trying to dispense with the issue for a number of my posts now. I already stated that they can work from a different point of view. Again, I misunderstood, my mistake.
Originally posted by: Tiptup
I imagine it to be like a force push. You can't just levitate yourself, but you could lessen your impact if you were falling. To me it looks like Zam Wessel's speeder was impacted by Anakin landing on it.Originally posted by: TiptupOriginally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
I think it's nonsense to question the logical veracity of Jedi that can jump twice as high as Luke. Hmm, once again, you have the arrogance to completely dismiss my point of view as “nonsense.” Is that what you call being open-minded Go-Mer? If so, then I’m impressed by your gall. It was only in response to your complete dismissal of the fact that light sabers aren't any more logical than Jedi being able to jump as high as they do. I was making a point about how light sabers go beyond what we know about in our own existence just as some of the more fantastic Jedi powers do, and you told me that the difference was that there was in inconsistency between the way Jedi jumping in particular had been portrayed in the prequels as opposed to the classic trilogy.
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Well we know Jedi have powers of telekinesis, it's not that illogical to me to assume that if they were falling, and they were concentrating hard enough on their landing, they could use that kind of telekinesis to help slow their fall before impact. In other areas where I can think of Jedi being far more fragile, they were falling from a great height while they were unconscious, which would handily explain this to me.
Hmm, that’s an interesting concept. I would ask, then, why cannot Jedi levitate? Or are you suggesting that Anakin used his telekinesis to alter the hover-car’s movement in order to lessen the impact? If so, then how come it doesn’t look like the hover car is being moved through telekinesis? And, either way, why doesn’t Anakin look as if he is concentrating on the force to use his telekinesis? I think it's nonsense to question the logical veracity of Jedi that can jump twice as high as Luke. Hmm, once again, you have the arrogance to completely dismiss my point of view as “nonsense.” Is that what you call being open-minded Go-Mer? If so, then I’m impressed by your gall. It was only in response to your complete dismissal of the fact that light sabers aren't any more logical than Jedi being able to jump as high as they do. I was making a point about how light sabers go beyond what we know about in our own existence just as some of the more fantastic Jedi powers do, and you told me that the difference was that there was in inconsistency between the way Jedi jumping in particular had been portrayed in the prequels as opposed to the classic trilogy.
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Again, the reason I had a small problem with the super jumps was because the previous films had given me a far more subtle concept of the Jedi in terms of their physical prowess. I’m glad that you are making me restate that so many times. Quite frankly, it’s not an extreme problem for me. My previous concept of the Jedi was not that important to me and I’ve stated that many times now. I am able to accept the new jumps and overlook my previous concept. Can we move on now? One gripe down, how many do we have left? Yes, I am sorry I thought you found this to be a problem.
I am altering it's meaning, pray I don't alter it any further. Again, the reason I had a small problem with the super jumps was because the previous films had given me a far more subtle concept of the Jedi in terms of their physical prowess. I’m glad that you are making me restate that so many times. Quite frankly, it’s not an extreme problem for me. My previous concept of the Jedi was not that important to me and I’ve stated that many times now. I am able to accept the new jumps and overlook my previous concept. Can we move on now? One gripe down, how many do we have left?
Yes, I am sorry I thought you found this to be a problem.Originally posted by: Tiptup
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Similarly to the way you pretend the logical problems with the concept of a light saber don't exist?
Similarly is an adverb. Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Forgive me, but I believe it's stupid to absolutely "assume" that Jedi in their prime wouldn't be able to jump as high as they ended up doing in the prequels.
Ahh, well I’m beginning to think that you are stupid for assuming that I “absolutely” believed Jedi couldn’t make super jumps. I never said that anywhere in this thread and I have even clearly denied that sentiment a number of times now. You have provided no reasons to accuse me of making such an extreme assumption and yet you keep accusing me of it. Why is that, Go-Mer? I don't know I'm just used to disagreeing with people who don't like the prequels I think. I appreciate your patience with me.
I think I have it now, but you never know. Forgive me, but I believe it's stupid to absolutely "assume" that Jedi in their prime wouldn't be able to jump as high as they ended up doing in the prequels.
Ahh, well I’m beginning to think that you are stupid for assuming that I “absolutely” believed Jedi couldn’t make super jumps. I never said that anywhere in this thread and I have even clearly denied that sentiment a number of times now. You have provided no reasons to accuse me of making such an extreme assumption and yet you keep accusing me of it. Why is that, Go-Mer?
I don't know I'm just used to disagreeing with people who don't like the prequels I think. I appreciate your patience with me.Originally posted by: Tiptup
I'm the one making "unfair" comparisons? I'm just illustrating what I find to be a huge double standard here.
Light sabers are not a double standard for me. There’s no valid reason you can provide to prove that I am being hypocritical here. (Though, if it is not obvious to you and you need everything to be clearly stated, I will say that you have so far tried to present many invalid reasons in your attempt to label me a hypocrite, but that I have now explained why those reasons are wrong. If you are unable to understand my explanations then I would certainly be willing to help clarify.) Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Here is what I was keying in on that you had said in response to me explaining that light sabers don't make logical sense, because lasers wouldn't just stop at one end like that without something to reflect or absorb the energy.
Thanks for guiding me back on track. Originally posted by: TiptupOriginally posted by: Go-Mer-TonicHere is what I was keying in on that you had said in response to me explaining that light sabers don't make logical sense, because lasers wouldn't just stop at one end like that without something to reflect or absorb the energy.
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Nonsense. Light sabers were always presented in a very logically beautiful way in the films. They were mysterious and magical weapons that somehow needed the force to work and, unlike what you claim, they were clearly different from the laser blasters in the film (please don’t make flippant points). All in all, light sabers are a very simple and acceptable subject from a logical standpoint, and very enjoyable from a logical standpoint as well. Now, if we were to have logically delved deeper into how light sabers supposedly worked in the films themselves and talked about plasma and shit like that, sure that might well have been an unsuccessful addition, artistically speaking. There’s no way for us to know though, since the films never went that route. Wow, so that’s where you were going with that? You’re so brilliant Go-Mer!
Of course, first let’s totally miss the fact that I have already communicated why light saber problems and my super jump problems are not similarly problematic, like fifty times. And, lets overlook the fact that I can overlook my problem with the super jumps, but let’s instead talk about how incredibly smart you are, Go-Mer. Stop it. Really, you're making me blush.
Oh wait, I think I see where my misunderstanding came from. You are saying that the reason why Jedi being able to jump a bit higher than Luke is not the same kind of issue as the concept of a light saber because there is a consistency with the way the light saber is portrayed within the films, whereas the Jedi jump has progressed to become more intense. I can see how you had an expectation for the Jedi to have similarly more subtle powers as Luke displayed, and understand how making them more extreme can approach "hoakie" status, I just think that the light saber is also fairly "hoakie" from the get go. It looks cool but there's really no logic behind it, it just is.
Originally posted by: Tiptup
I think you might need a lesson in logic, Go-Mer.Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Do I now? I would suggest that you could use a lesson in fantasy.
Yes I do actually think you might need a lesson in proper logic, in fact your last post was horrendous in this regard. And, I believe your suggestion is empty, since I am well versed in fantasy as a method, thank you. Nonsense. Light sabers were always presented in a very logically beautiful way in the films. They were mysterious and magical weapons that somehow needed the force to work and, unlike what you claim, they were clearly different from the laser blasters in the film (please don’t make flippant points). All in all, light sabers are a very simple and acceptable subject from a logical standpoint, and very enjoyable from a logical standpoint as well. Now, if we were to have logically delved deeper into how light sabers supposedly worked in the films themselves and talked about plasma and shit like that, sure that might well have been an unsuccessful addition, artistically speaking. There’s no way for us to know though, since the films never went that route. Wow, so that’s where you were going with that? You’re so brilliant Go-Mer!
Of course, first let’s totally miss the fact that I have already communicated why light saber problems and my super jump problems are not similarly problematic, like fifty times. And, lets overlook the fact that I can overlook my problem with the super jumps, but let’s instead talk about how incredibly smart you are, Go-Mer. Stop it. Really, you're making me blush.
Oh wait, I think I see where my misunderstanding came from. You are saying that the reason why Jedi being able to jump a bit higher than Luke is not the same kind of issue as the concept of a light saber because there is a consistency with the way the light saber is portrayed within the films, whereas the Jedi jump has progressed to become more intense. I can see how you had an expectation for the Jedi to have similarly more subtle powers as Luke displayed, and understand how making them more extreme can approach "hoakie" status, I just think that the light saber is also fairly "hoakie" from the get go. It looks cool but there's really no logic behind it, it just is.
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Ahh, but wait, you said that you believe that lasers “wouldn’t just stop at one end,” Go-Mer? Well, in that “keying” text you quoted of mine, I actually stated why that was a clearly stupid assumption for you to make. Light sabers are not laser guns! They’re light sabers! According to the story, according to the way they look, and according to the way they are used, light sabers are clearly designed to work like swords and not laser guns! Yeah, but light doesn't just stop unless there's something to absorb or reflect it. I think the only laser we see in the classic trilogy is the Death Star super laser. The blasters are firing some kind of energy bolt, there's more to it than just light.
On the other hand, my general concept of the Jedi and their physical capabilities does have a small degree of support in the actual films. Is it a super strong degree of support? No, and I never said that it was. Can I openly reject super jumps as illogical? No, I have never said that I could. I simply said that I don’t particularly like them from an artistic standpoint, not that I could reject them completely. I would hope that you can finally get that into your skull, Go-Mer.
Okay, so it's not that it doesn't make sense that the Jedi are more powerful than Luke, you just don't like that they are. It's not "artistically" pleasing to you. I'm sorry it took so long to understand that.Ahh, but wait, you said that you believe that lasers “wouldn’t just stop at one end,” Go-Mer? Well, in that “keying” text you quoted of mine, I actually stated why that was a clearly stupid assumption for you to make. Light sabers are not laser guns! They’re light sabers! According to the story, according to the way they look, and according to the way they are used, light sabers are clearly designed to work like swords and not laser guns! Yeah, but light doesn't just stop unless there's something to absorb or reflect it. I think the only laser we see in the classic trilogy is the Death Star super laser. The blasters are firing some kind of energy bolt, there's more to it than just light.
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Your light saber problems are not directly comparable to my small problem with the super jumps. Again, over a long period of time, the previous films gave an impression of what Jedi could do, and from that artistic standpoint, the super jumps seemed to be outside of those capabilities. (Nothing more, nothing less. I have no extreme opinion on this matter.) Your problem with light sabers on the other hand is based upon nothing in the films or anything in reality for that matter. Why don’t you focus on a more difficult, prequel problem, Go-Mer? Are you afraid that you can’t defend them with your straw-man arguments as easily? Absolutely terrified. I do see what you were saying now. I personally didn't assume Luke would be a reference for the full spectrum of what a fully trained Jedi in the prime of the Jedi could do, so that's why I don't think there's a problem with it, but I can see what you are saying, and I don't mean to imply it's invalid. It is just a problem that never came up for me is the best way to put it.
I agree. They don't get into the light saber concept enough to be able to disprove it's possibility in reality. That's why you and I were able to accept it at face value -without- over thinking it.Originally posted by: TiptupYour light saber problems are not directly comparable to my small problem with the super jumps. Again, over a long period of time, the previous films gave an impression of what Jedi could do, and from that artistic standpoint, the super jumps seemed to be outside of those capabilities. (Nothing more, nothing less. I have no extreme opinion on this matter.) Your problem with light sabers on the other hand is based upon nothing in the films or anything in reality for that matter. Why don’t you focus on a more difficult, prequel problem, Go-Mer? Are you afraid that you can’t defend them with your straw-man arguments as easily? Absolutely terrified.
I do see what you were saying now. I personally didn't assume Luke would be a reference for the full spectrum of what a fully trained Jedi in the prime of the Jedi could do, so that's why I don't think there's a problem with it, but I can see what you are saying, and I don't mean to imply it's invalid. It is just a problem that never came up for me is the best way to put it.Originally posted by: Tiptup
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
By not seeing anything there to reflect it, and knowing how lasers seem to work here on Earth, that's how I can assume that. Assumptions by their very nature rest on perception and limits of imagination, and are not dependant on facts.
That’s PRECISELY why you shouldn’t rigidly hold to your assumptions, Go-Mer. As I said in my previous post, sometimes it’s good to approach something with wonder and NOT have a clear perception for everything that you experience. I’ll state this once more: There was nothing in the films to intelligently support your assumption that light sabers were “lasers.” There were also no intelligent reasons in the film to support your assumption that anything concerning light sabers needed to be “reflected.” Therefore, to argue that light sabers have a problem on either basis is far from intelligent. Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
By not seeing anything there to reflect it, and knowing how lasers seem to work here on Earth, that's how I can assume that. Assumptions by their very nature rest on perception and limits of imagination, and are not dependant on facts.
On the other hand, my general concept of the Jedi and their physical capabilities does have a small degree of support in the actual films. Is it a super strong degree of support? No, and I never said that it was. Can I openly reject super jumps as illogical? No, I have never said that I could. I simply said that I don’t particularly like them from an artistic standpoint, not that I could reject them completely. I would hope that you can finally get that into your skull, Go-Mer.
Originally posted by: Tiptup
I think you might need a lesson in logic, Go-Mer.Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Do I now?
I would suggest that you could use a lesson in fantasy. I'm the one making "unfair" comparisons? I'm just illustrating what I find to be a huge double standard here.
Originally posted by: Tiptup
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Similarly to the way you pretend the logical problems with the concept of a light saber don't exist?
Originally posted by: TiptupOriginally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
Well we know Jedi have powers of telekinesis, it's not that illogical to me to assume that if they were falling, and they were concentrating hard enough on their landing, they could use that kind of telekinesis to help slow their fall before impact. In other areas where I can think of Jedi being far more fragile, they were falling from a great height while they were unconscious, which would handily explain this to me.
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
To me it's important to enjoy these movies as much as possible.
The focus of Revenge of the Sith to me is the manifestation of the grey area involved with good and evil. The morals of ROTS are very similar to the morals presented across the entire saga. That love is better than hate, and compassion is better than greed, but also that life doesn't always make the right choices very clear. On the one hand, saving Padme and Shmi are noble, compassionate things. Anakin strives to obtain the power to control these things, and is then consumed by the desire to control the plight of the entire galaxy, so he "can make things the way he wants them to be", but as Padme asks, "at what cost"? It's an examination of what's "right" for an individual and at what point that becomes less important than what's "right" for the greater good.
Also I'm not saying that I force myself to enjoy things that aren't enjoyable, I just strive to see what the filmmaker was trying to get across, and don't let my pre-conceived notions about "how it should be" get in the way of enjoying it for what it is. I don't spend a whole lot of time second guessing the film maker, and instead just enjoy what he has done as much as possible.Originally posted by: Tiptup
Otherwise, I see how you could enjoy that focus from the prequels. However, I have trouble seeing that focus in the films. How are you able to overlook the many times that the films are clearly hypocritical in regard to that focus? I see many times where the films display the fact that what’s “right” for an individual is what actually determines what is then right for the greater good more than anything else. To me that clear display seems to contradict the focus you enjoy. Therefore, how are you able to overlook inconsistency? Why is that seeming hypocrisy unimportant to you?
I really do want to understand your point of view, Go-Mer. Assuming you can act with a reasonable mind.
Originally posted by: Go-Mer-Tonic
I really don't see why you would say it's incoherent.
) Anyway, I don't see Anakin as a complete psychopath.When it comes to the Tusken Raider slaughter, Anakin knows what he did was wrong after he did it, so you could argue temporary insanity brought on by the trauma of having his mother die in his arms because of them.
As far as slaughtering the younglings and betraying the Jedi order, he did rationalize that even if only to himself:"I will not betray the Republic."
"My loyalties are with the Chancellor, and the senate, and with you."
"From my point of view the Jedi are evil".