- Time
- Post link
A common misconception these days is that resolution equals a happy ending and/or a protagonist's success. This is especially prevalent in Star Wars forums.
A common misconception these days is that resolution equals a happy ending and/or a protagonist's success. This is especially prevalent in Star Wars forums.
I prefer bittersweet endings, myself.
Same. There is an exception here and there. The triumphant ending in A New Hope worked because the lead-up was so excellent and earned. You always felt like the rebels were on the brink of destruction until that final explosion.
ROTJ's ending has the heroes dancing around a fire with Mary Sue Ewoks, topped off by a smiling family portrait. And ghostly guests who demean the nature of death in the universe. Zero price was paid, everything's golden. Does it even matter that Anakin died? Luke can invite his ghost over and talk whenever.
At least Obi-Wan in ANH had the dignity to be a still small voice.
Starlog magazine once did a poll about what kind of stories SF fans wanted to see, and one of the questions asked people whether they preferred triumphant endings or happy ones. Not everyone knows how those concepts differ.
EU notwithstanding, we don't know if the ghosts stuck around after that. Freed or avenged spirits appearing to the hero at the end probably dates back to ancient mythology.
I didn't see Corpsey or any of those dead rebel pilots or many Bothans in the ghost party.
I don't get how the Ewoks are a Mary Sue? George isn't that short or furry. ;)
Where were you in '77?
Well. Most Mary Sue's are self-insert ego trips.
I haven't broken this down into an exact science, but I'd guess that Triumphant Ending falls under the broad category of Happy Ending. Yeah, ANH is definitely uplifting at the end.
SilverWook, if we were only basing our conclusions on Yoda and Anakin's ghosts, then we could speculate they only appeared on that one occasion to smile at Luke and then never came back. But Obi Wan's ghost has been communicating with Luke for years (ever since the Battle of Yavin).... why would he all of a sudden stop appearing after the Battle of Endor?
If anything, he's only been getting less ghostly with the passage of time. He progresses from being just a voice in ANH, to being a ghost who fades in and out floating motionless in TESB, to actually walking around things and sitting down in ROTJ.
By Episode VII, he'll probably be getting skin grafts and building himself a hut and giving piggy back rides to Han and Leia's kids.
Perhaps because his work is finished, and Luke has to stand on his own now? Even in Heir to the Empire, Ben eventually said goodbye, and IIRC, he was only appearing in Luke's dreams at that point.
We also don't know if Obi Wan communicated with Luke between Yavin and Hoth. In Empire, Luke was injured and freezing to death when Ben first appears. He remains a voice again until Luke is about to leave Dagobah. Arguably, Luke's training makes it easier for him to see Ben at that point. Ben promptly fades away again soon after.
Jedi mucks all of this up a bit by having Ben walk around and sit on a log. But that could also be Luke's mental perception of his old mentor. It's like when you dream about someone who's died, and they're alive and well.
The SE tosses this all out the window with pasting Hayden in there of course. Luke could visualize his old man as a healthy venerable Jedi, but as a young man he never met and probably never had a photo of?
Has it ever been established non Jedi can see a Force ghost?
Where were you in '77?
Force ghosts are only shown appearing to Luke and Yoda. The fact that Leia doesn't seem to acknowledge the ghosts at the end of RoTJ and Han rides through Obi Wan's ghost on his Tauntaun seems to imply that they couldn't/didn't see the ghosts.
However, the fact that Han and Leia haven't been trained to use the Force doesn't have to be the only explanation for this. It could also be that the ghosts can choose to manifest themselves to specific people. But since they are "Force" ghosts, it makes sense that a person's sensitivity to the Force would also be a factor.
On a side note, regarding Luke recognizing Hayden Christensen: going all the way back to ANH, the movies repeatedly establish that a Jedi is able to "feel" someone's presence without needing to see their face. Vader knows that Obi Wan is on board the Death Star without needing to see his face, because he can "feel" his presence. Vader knows that Luke is with the small group of rebels who sneaked onto the Forest Moon, because he can "feel" him (while the Emperor, intriguingly, can't). In both TESB and RoTJ, Leia can "feel" Luke's presence without needing to see him.
So based on all of that, it's actually very well established that when Luke sees Hayden, he would be able to "feel" the presence of Anakin even though his physical eyes don't recognize the face. After all, one of the very first lessons Obi Wan gave Luke was blocking his vision with a helmet that had the blast shield down and telling him "Your eyes can deceive you, don't trust them."
Okay, I'm going to go violently throw up all my Thanksgiving dinner now. The insertion of Hayden into the ending of RoTJ is so hated by me that I can't even bear to watch it, and I'm beyond disgusted with myself for defending the logic of it in this post. I've also contradicted my previous posts, because elsewhere I have said that the insertion of Hayden makes no sense because Luke wouldn't recognize him, and I'm super reluctant to take that back, regardless of what I've said here. I feel like I just helped Palpatine kill Mace Windu and now I'm dropping to my knees crying, "What have I done?"
Maybe you just didn't cook the turkey long enough? ;)
Where were you in '77?
Nice try but I'm pretty sure this nausea is from hating myself ;)
I honestly don't know where that defense of the Hayden ghost came from... it just hit me as I was typing and I'm still in disbelief that I would actually have typed something in defense of such an awful desecration of the original film. But I can't say the logic isn't compelling....
Still, whether Hayden's ghost is logical or not, George Lucas will burn in hell for replacing Sebastian Shaw with Hayden Christensen.
And come to think of it, I only defended Luke's ability to know the ghost is Anakin.... there is still the issue of inconsistency created by Obi Wan and Yoda's ghosts looking they way they looked when they died, vs. Anakin reverting to a much younger version of himself (and no, Lucas, I don't buy your explanation that he returned to how he looked before he turned to the dark side, because he turned BACK to the light side before he died and that's why his ghost appears at the end in the first place).
Best not to think about it too much, especially after a large meal.
Where were you in '77?
If there are to be any Sith in the sequel trilogy, the Chosen One prophecy will have to be mentioned. Otherwise, there will be a huge contradiction.
Yeah, and hopefully the line about it will be:
"That prophecy about the Chosen One? Turns out it's just a big load of poodoo."
I always figured the prophecy was about Luke. The Son of the Suns.
“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.
SilverWook said:
Jedi mucks all of this up a bit by having Ben walk around and sit on a log.
?
Man, just how much of Return have I forgotten? ;-).
Back on topic; I can't see how they'll ignore half of the films, no matter how much I wish they would.
They can acknowledge the prequels without having to get into the nitty gritty of them.
J.J. might even mess with us by having an old Jar Jar cameo. ;)
Where were you in '77?
SilverWook said:
Jedi mucks all of this up a bit by having Ben walk around and sit on a log.
Well, some habits die hard. If you want to have a meaningful sit-down conversation, you would, well, sit down. Even if you're a ghost, the other one isn't. So I can forgive that. But yeah, dodging trees when coming out of forest, who knows... Maybe it's all in Luke's head, like you hinted.
And in the time of greatest despair, there shall come a savior, and he shall be known as the Son of the Suns.
Spook physics in films has always been little screwy. Patrick Swayze in Ghost has to learn how to manipulate solid objects, but never has problems with the floor or running up stairs. ;)
Where were you in '77?
Yeah, that one bothered me a lot more, haha.
And in the time of greatest despair, there shall come a savior, and he shall be known as the Son of the Suns.
SilverWook said:
The 'galaxy' from the original trilogy had a feel about it like it was still a vast expanse. Like a largely unsettled frontier. From Tatooine to Bespin to Hoth to Degobah to Endor....these places are inhabited but not overpopulated. There was still a sense of mystery.
The galaxy from the PT seemed like one giant congested metropolis with no secrets to hide. Crap.
Mythology comes from a time where the world/universe was largely unknown. The Hero myth in particular deals with journey and exploration. Not much mystery, exploration or unknown exists in the PT because it was all out there in the open. That, to me is why the PT was garbage. That above all minor technical issues or plot incongruence is what ruined it for me. The setting itself robs it of the fantasy half of space fantasy and puts it squarely into science fiction. That is why there is such a disconnect between the OT and the PT.
The OT speaks of a time long ago. An older republic. Yet this older republic looks more like the mundane over grown society of today. Where was the supposed glory of it all?
So yes, I hope the next trilogy ignores all aspects of the PT. Not only can it ignore, it should. The PT itself is an abomination. Why acknowledge or pay homage? I dont want to hear reference to the term 'Darth Sidious', I dont care to see Darth Maul. Dont care about retaining any of those characters or elements.
luckydube56 said:
The PT itself is an abomination.
Fixed.
I think that is what you meant anyway except you said OT which stands for Original trilogy. To bad there have been 4 cuts of the trilogy which is why everyone seems to state oot which stands for original original trilogy.
“Always loved Vader’s wordless self sacrifice. Another shitty, clueless, revision like Greedo and young Anakin’s ghost. What a fucking shame.” -Simon Pegg.
luckydube56 said:
The galaxy from the PT seemed like one giant congested metropolis with no secrets to hide. Crap.
skyjedi2005 said:
luckydube56 said:
The PT itself is an abomination.
Fixed.
I think that is what you meant anyway except you said OT which stands for Original trilogy. To bad there have been 4 cuts of the trilogy which is why everyone seems to state oot which stands for original original trilogy.
Thank you. Noted and corrected.
And as for the edits of the OT, you notice how Lucas went and crammed more things in those revisions? More people mostly.