logo Sign In

The Merits of the Prequel Trilogy and the "Saga" — Page 9

Author
Time
Post link
Jumpman, George Lucas in the Annotated Screenplay pg. 168:

"In the kind of movies I make, I tend to stress the plot side of things. The nature of the characters are archetypes to such a degree that its not necessary to go into a lot of detail because I am not dealing with psychological problems. My films are storytelling movies, not character movies. So with that in mind, I try to get the cleanest, to the most simple way of portraying things."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What trilogy does that sound like? That is the OT to a tee, basic, yet more depth than most fantasy movie, but not to indepth. The PT is not the way Lucas makes movies, cause SW is more of a macro thing that people love. People love the character, the lightsabers, the action, the mythology, the special effects, they don't go to see it as a character study like the movie Raging Bull, that is a dramatic movie that needs time to flesh out the true motivations of the character for the audience to truly understand it.
Author
Time
Post link
Um, good morning, gentlemen.

Oh, how I wish I could see Anakin's pathetic and absurd transformation to Darth Freaking Vader as well-established, genuine and moving. The points made in the P.T.'s favor (RotS's in particular) are interesting to read, but I don't find them convincing in the least.

With all that's been posted between CO and Jumpman this fine morning, this sums it up beautifully for me:
Originally posted by: CO
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
zombie,

First off, you're correct. But, for me, I can buy the Anakin character and the love story in Episode II. That's why Episode III works wonders on me.

I can see where people HATE the Anakin character in Episode II. Luke was the same way in Episodes IV and V, but not to Anakin's level. Essentially, Anakin wants to be more than what he is now and he feels he can be more...hence the whining. I can buy that. It doesn't make him likeable but I understand it. Where I find Anakin likeable in Episode II is his story with Padme and his arc with his Mother. He's a good kid. It's just that he's also a teenager who wants more than wants being given to him at the time...and that's not enough. It's especially not enough when some one else, Palpatine, is telling you the exact opposite to what your mentor and superiors are telling 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
CO,

You're right. But, clearly in those sixteen years between Episode VI and Episode I, Lucas was trying for something else. And again, we have some that get it and actually like it to love it. But we also have some that despise the character study angle he went with.

I just find it funny that critics say Lucas is all style and no substance when it comes to character and yet here we are talking about how Lucas may have made a mistake choosing a character study over a style that made the Original Trilogy and Star Wars what it was....

I just feel that Star Wars shouldn't be defined as one way. That's my whole point.

But CO, you have to see the trap Lucas was going to fall into if he kept it the same. He keeps it the same, he gets crucified for not doing something new and original. Now, he's getting crucified for straying too far way from what made Star Wars, 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
Originally posted by: Jumpman
zombie,

First off, you're correct. But, for me, I can buy the Anakin character and the love story in Episode II. That's why Episode III works wonders on me.

I can see where people HATE the Anakin character in Episode II. Luke was the same way in Episodes IV and V, but not to Anakin's level. Essentially, Anakin wants to be more than what he is now and he feels he can be more...hence the whining. I can buy that. It doesn't make him likeable but I understand it. Where I find Anakin likeable in Episode II is his story with Padme and his arc with his Mother. He's a good kid. It's just that he's also a teenager who wants more than wants being given to him at the time...and that's not enough. It's especially not enough when some one else, Palpatine, is telling you the exact opposite to what your mentor and superiors are telling you.


Jumpman, the greatest travesty of the PT was those ten years when Anakin is a cute boy and now he is a whiny teenager, what happened? Lucas does the correct thing with TPM and makes Anakin innocent to throw the viewer with preconceived notions that Darth Vader was always bad. But AOTC, begins, and he is a different person, and the viewer is supposed to assume he is has gotten arrogant, just like we should assume he is great friends with Kenobi, just like we should assume Palpatine & Anakin have developed this great relationship behind the scenes. The starting of AOTC makes the viewer assume alot has gone on in 10 years, I say, "SHOW US THIS ON SCREEN!!!!"

Anakin should have been likeable in AOTC, he should have been a hero, this great jedi, with this great personality, so when he falls in ROTS the viewer says, "A waste of talent." -From A Bronx Tale. There is nothing more depressing then having an athlete as a role model who is totally likeable and just see them crumble later in life.

Pete Rose my idol growing up, EVERYONE loved him. I loved the way he played, the way he talked in interviews, I loved his arrogance, I wanted to be Pete Rose everytime I played Baseball. Now 20 years later, I see the man as a tragic figure, he bet on baseball, he bet on his own team, he got convicted of tax evasion, I just see him in interviews now as this pathetic man who was my idol as a kid.

Anakin was not likeable in AOTC, so why should I want to be like him? Every fan should have wanted to be Anakin, this guy who was powerful, had alot of charm and personality, and was a take charge guy, but his one flaw was he didnt know when to stop for power. Just like Pete Rose, he had it all as one of the greatest hitters of alltime, he was now a manager, but he couldn't stop betting on baseball.

When Anakin was burning up, I said, "Thank God, put him out of his misery." That is the problem with the way Lucas portrayed Anakin in the PT.

Author
Time
Post link
Wow, zombie, I'd not heard of all that re-jiggering in Sith to accentuate the Padme storyline. Interesting stuff.

But whereas you find that decision brilliant ... I think that storyline blows, is complete weak-sauce, and makes Anakin's turn to the dark side a laughing matter that I couldn't buy into for a heartbeat.


To each his own. I'm glad that worked for some people.


For me, I'm not sure the 'original' version would have fallen flat. Quick ... somebody do a fan edit - restoring the film to its initial plotline - so I can see if I'd like the prequels' grand finale any better.


.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Jumpman
CO,

You're right. But, clearly in those sixteen years between Episode VI and Episode I, Lucas was trying for something else. And again, we have some that get it and actually like it to love it. But we also have some that despise the character study angle he went with.

I just find it funny that critics say Lucas is all style and no substance when it comes to character and yet here we are talking about how Lucas may have made a mistake choosing a character study over a style that made the Original Trilogy and Star Wars what it was....

I just feel that Star Wars shouldn't be defined as one way. That's my whole point.



I am not saying the OT characters had no style or substance, remember their my favorite movies ever, so I am always going to take George's back on those three. The point is the way he makes SW movies, and the reason they succeed is that they are fun, yet they have a deeper meaning in each movie, and that is why it appeals to a huge amount of fans rather than your typical action/fantasy fanbase.

But the way SW succeeded set up a formula, and Lucas didn't follow that for the PT. It isn't about the different time period, or the different characters, I have had no problems with that, it is about changing the focus on JUST Anakin and his story. Anakin turning to the darkside should have been a plot point, just like Order 66, instead of the main plot for the PT, and I believe there would be many, not all, but many more that would have liked it.

Author
Time
Post link
zombie,

"Jumpman, the greatest travesty of the PT was those ten years when Anakin is a cute boy and now he is a whiny teenager, what happened? Lucas does the correct thing with TPM and makes Anakin innocent to throw the viewer with preconceived notions that Darth Vader was always bad. But AOTC, begins, and he is a different person, and the viewer is supposed to assume he is has gotten arrogant, just like we should assume he is great friends with Kenobi, just like we should assume Palpatine & Anakin have developed this great relationship behind the scenes. The starting of AOTC makes the viewer assume alot has gone on in 10 years, I say, "SHOW US THIS ON SCREEN!!!!"

Yes, Episode II makes the viewer assume alot. And it's a risk. And see, this is why I can also see a version of the Prequels with Anakin as a teenage in Episode I. But, as you said, Lucas does the correct thing with Episode I and makes Anakin innocent to throw the viewer preconceived notions that Darth Vader was always bad. But, I also feel you loose alot of you make him that age in Episode I. The viewers preconceived notions would still be there if he was a teenage in that film.

But, I don't think the assumptions are hard to pick up on or figure out. But, it does merit your statement of show us on screen. I think he does enough of it in Episode II...which is mostly through dialogue if you can believe it. I think he more than makes up for it in the first hour of Episode III, with the likeablity factor, the Palpatine relationship factor, and the friendship between Anakin and Obi-Wan factor.

But as you say and some others, you felt it was too little, too late. I just don't personally feel that way but I see what you're saying though.
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,

Well, that's obviously where you and I differ. For me, the main plot point was Palpatine's rise to power. I mean, his story is the one that keeps the films moving. Every move Palpatine makes keeps the films moving forward. Our anchor is Anakin.

But, yes, I can definitely understand the notion of keeping it the same. And I didn't mean to state that the Original Trilogy has no substance. It has plenty. It just doesn't have as much as the Prequels, but if you were to go by most critics, some would've said it had none at all. It had plenty, you just may not have liked it. There's a difference.

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,

Above you quoted the Annotated Screenplays. I wish to God I could find that quote of Lucas back in early 80's about what he would do with the "backstory" if he ever made it because he essentially said he was going this route...a route that many of you don't like.

I'm not saying you're wrong with that quote above, but the quote I've read about "if he made the backstory" is even more telling and why I like the Prequels.
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

But CO, you have to see the trap Lucas was going to fall into if he kept it the same. He keeps it the same, he gets crucified for not doing something new and original. Now, he's getting crucified for straying too far way from what made Star Wars, Star Wars.



I agree with this fully Jumpman, and that is why I will always say less is more. Lucas didn't have to do the PT, I was fine in 1985 with the OT, just as I was fine in 1995 with the OT. When I found out about the PT, of course I was excited, which SW fan wasn't?

But that doesnt mean they had to be made, and I believe cause Lucas never envisoned a linear 1-6 story, it would be alot tougher to marry when finally seeing them. That is the ironic thing, is I was a PT fan before 1-6, when it was 1,2,4,5,6. After buying the SE in 2004, with the exception of turning my face when Anakin would appear as a ghost in ROTJ SE, I actually enjoyed the saga thinking of what would come in ROTS. Then ROTS came, I watched them 1-6, and all of the sudden it didn't work, and I thought it was me, maybe I was being too hard, maybe I was older, all the things the PT gushers had said. Then I thought, wait a second, this a story of Anakins character arc now, that is why I don't love it, I am just not a fan of the Anakin Skywalker story as to the macro story of the PT, and that is the backdrop to Anakins story, rather than the main story.

Now of course, if Lucas kept doing the same thing with the PT, he would have been exposed that way by the fans, but it is a lesson to me about Prequels, or even more movies, DONT DO THEM!!! The more movies you make in a series, the more chance you have of dilluting the product except for the real real diehard fans who love everything.

I feel ROTJ is where Lucas started running out of ideas, and if you look at the big picture now, I think he definitely should have stopped after ROTJ, cause the flaws IMO are very apparent in 1983, and they continue with the SE, and the PT. The dialogue started getting a little shoddy in ROTJ, alot of the humor seemed forced in ROTJ, the characters seemed to be going through the motions in ROTJ, and the way Lucas tied things up makes you question if it even makes sense in ROTJ? This all continued with the PT, all these problems on a larger scale, cause Lucas was the only one making decisions now.

Not do take a shot at my beloved ROTJ, but does Lukes plan to save Han in Jabba Palace make any f***in sense?

That is where I feel Lucas started to go through the motions, and I just think he lost his hunger as an artist that he had with ANH & ESB, and being a corporation, he knew if it was good enough, it would sell, and he was right. But that doesn't mean many fans don't notice the quality drop.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Jumpman
CO,

Above you quoted the Annotated Screenplays. I wish to God I could find that quote of Lucas back in early 80's about what he would do with the "backstory" if he ever made it because he essentially said he was going this route...a route that many of you don't like.

I'm not saying you're wrong with that quote above, but the quote I've read about "if he made the backstory" is even more telling and why I like the Prequels.



I agree the backstory had to be different, but Lucas doesn't proclaim it to be a backstory anymore, a backstory is something you watch after you see the real story. Lucas proclaims the story is 1-6, a character arc of the tragedy of Anakin Skywalker. He plainly states this on the ROTS DVD Commentary as soon as the credits roll.

A backstory is an interesting part you take out of major event in the real story. The Godfather II has parts that are a true backstory, it is how Vito rose to power, just like Anakin, but the difference is you are not watching it linearly. Yet, Coppola tried that in 1977, as my brother had those VHS of the reedited version where everything is told in order, and it just isn't as good, is just isn't as compelling, and if you notice, that version never made it to DVD, cause the fans rejected it. The best way to watch the Godfather, is Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3 if you have some time, but I wouldn't recommend it, it is average.

The PT should have been a seperated story that in a sense ties in with the OT, as per Anakins story, but not 1-6, and that is what turns so many fans off including me, I just can't see it as a 1-6 story, and I have tried, but it doesn't work, it it were a true backstory, told in a different way, and I could watch 4-6, and then go back 1-3 without the context in the way Lucas made it, I probably would feel differently.

Lucas's biggest mistake was putting those damn Episode #'s in, it locked him into something he couldn't change.

Author
Time
Post link
CO,

Less is always definitely better. But, I guess Lucas wanted to show more of the Star Wars universe. I can't fault him for that. Clearly, he has a much more invested interest in Anakin than Luke. And because I've always been a Darth Vader guy than a Luke guy, I can watch them numerically.

And to this day, I'll give Return of the Jedi the benefit of the doubt. I'm telling you if Lucas had the money, time, and technology to pull of Kashyyyk and the Wookies, Jedi wouldn't be getting crucified as it does now. The Han situation, along with the Ewoks is interesting, because Lucas took alot of criticism after Episode V was released for it not being as fun as Episode IV, hence the feel of Episode VI.

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,

Less is always definitely better. But, I guess Lucas wanted to show more of the Star Wars universe. I can't fault him for that. Clearly, he has a much more invested interest in Anakin than Luke.

And to this day, I'll give Return of the Jedi the benefit of the doubt. I'm telling you if Lucas had the money, time, and technology to pull of Kashyyyk and the Wookies, Jedi wouldn't be getting crucified as it does now. The Han situation, along with the Ewoks is interesting, because Lucas took alot of criticism after Episode V was released for it not being as fun as Episode IV, hence the feel of Episode VI.


But Ewoks are not the major problem with ROTJ, they are just a sympton of the problem. Money had zero to do with ROTJ being average, it was ideas. Say Lucas had money to do Coruscant, the throne room scenes would have been shot in there, and they would still be great as they are in the death star.

I don't want you to take this the wrong way, but you guys think, more money = better movie, and I disagree. Lucas got creative on ESB, look out Cloud City, Lucas could have done something much more stylistic now with the technology he has to make Cloud City look like Kamino, but that still doesnt mean it would be better. Cloud City is alright, but what happens in Cloud City sells the movie, and makes it a classic. The last 40 minutes of ESB are probably some of the greatest on film, and this is coming from a fan who favorite movie is ANH. The problem with the PT, is Lucas worried too much about how things looked instead how things got executed. Cloud City is just a basic design, and if you watch the O-OT version, there aint much to this city in the clouds, but what happens inside this city is the reason I love ESB.

Author
Time
Post link
Heheh, with CO posting, I feel no need to write anything.






Carry on.
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: zombie84

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.
.



Great stuff Zombie, and it does make sense now why the greedy Anakin thinking the jedi are evil and the anakin wanting to save Padme don't mix well in ROTS, there are two different versions! I know in the commentary, Lucas did say he refilmed the turn scene, and that was a red flag, because that whole scene should have been written in 1995, and work his way out to the macro stuff. The fact that Lucas did not have the turn scene set in stone even in 2003 when shooting ROTS, really makes you wonder if he really does make this stuff up as he goes, Literaly!
Author
Time
Post link
I think Luke's plan in Jedi is to get everyone inside the palace and then roll with it. If Han can be spirited away by any one of the gang, great. If not, hopefully Jabba will follow tradition and take them out in the open to be killed. He does. If they have to fight their way out a la Death Star detention block, so be it. The Rancor was a rookie mistake. There was even a cut line about getting Han "in the open". I don't think Jedi needed more money, it needed a better Endor battle and a better part for Han and Lando. And better looping (seriously, it was the first movie they looped and mixed themselves and it made some of the performance seem worse than they are.) Endor needed a Spielberg-type who was good with "live" action scenes. Just look at Raiders, and imagine the forest battle like that, with Han actually involved in it.

Back to Anakin: Seeing Anakin say "what have I done?" in one scene, and slaughter children in the next threw people a little. I think we're meant to infer that once he got a taste of the dark side he liked it, and that was all she wrote. He merely uses Padme and the Republic as justification for everything after that. I'd love to see the first version of "the turn" just to compare.
Author
Time
Post link
CO,

I never once believed that more money=better film.

Part of Jedi's problem is popularity and story threads. You can't not go and get Han sometime during the storyline of Episode VI. You can't not find out if Vader truly is Luke's father. You can't have the Rebels not pursue the final battle with the Empire. Those threads need to be closed.

But back to Anakin, his idea that the Jedi are greedy and evil has more to do with the fact that it's the Dark Side dominating him for than having two versions of Episode III. His dialogue means squat because he's obviously out of control and dominated by the Dark Side of the Force. Hell, Anakin and Obi-Wan's dialogue while lava surfing was part of reshoots where he refilmed Anakin's turn...

zombie is partly right that Lucas had two different versions but he makes it work with the idea of the Dark Side dominating Anakin's actions and words. That's the reason he lost that fight with Obi-Wan. It had nothing to do with Obi-Wan being better.

As for having the turn set in stone, he had it when he started shooting. He just rethought the idea.
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

But back to Anakin, his idea that the Jedi are greedy and evil has more to do with the fact that it's the Dark Side dominating him for than having two versions of Episode III. His dialogue means squat because he's obviously out of control and dominated by the Dark Side of the Force. Hell, Anakin and Obi-Wan's dialogue while lava surfing was part of reshoots where he refilmed Anakin's turn...

zombie is partly right that Lucas had two different versions but he makes it work with the idea of the Dark Side dominating Anakin's actions and words. That's the reason he lost that fight with Obi-Wan. It had nothing to do with Obi-Wan being better.


But Jumpman, for whatever we both think of the turn, it makes perfect sense now why the dialogue from Anakin about the jedi comes so out of left field in the film, and why killing the younglings as his first act just seems weird and unconvincing 5 minutes after he says, "What have I done."

I couldn't put a handle on it, but Zombie really made so much sense, I am starting to realize why I have a problem with ROTS and the whole way the turn was handled, it is not only a reshoot, but a reshoot with a different context for the reason why Anakin turned.

Jumpman, I understand what you're saying about the darkside dominating him later in the movie, but it just comes off as forced, because it doesn't dominate him at the inital turn, and those scenes now to me originally have two different contexts.

If Anakin turned in the original version, more for power, more for wanting to get back at the jedi for screwing him over, and then started spewing about his empire, and he always knew the jedi were plotting to take over, you would atleast understand he was feeling the darkside in him because it was there from the initial supposed first turn scene.

The problem is 'what have i done,' it just doesn't jive with the idea that the darkside is eating him up, because that always told me he knew what was going on and he was following Palpatine not cause he was indebted to him, which would be the first version Zombie says, but only following him cause he has this trick to save Padme. So I keep saying to myself through the movie, he doesn't really believe that the jedi were always plotting to kill Palpatine, or he wouldn't have said, "what have I done,' he would have killed Mace on the spot, and pledged his allegiance to Palps right there.

Again Zombie, great post, I have finally been able to understand why the hell ROTS never worked for me when it comes to the whole turn scene.


Author
Time
Post link
CO,

First off, "What have I done?" was a reshoot. Second, even if the Dark Side isn't taking over him in that office, that doesn't matter. Palpatine holds the key, or so he thinks. And even with that knowledge, he knows that Palpatine is also a bastard. But, Anakin can't take that chance. He blames himself for his Mother's death eventhough he had nothing to do with it. What person blames himself of his Mother's death when he had no control over the situation? Either way, he does and he makes a promise to not let anything of this nature happen again. Palpatine's offer is the only thing he can grab onto and he can't risk not taking it, even if it's true or not. He has to go forward. He's already committed a sin against his Jedi brothers by help taking out one of the Jedi Masters. He has no choice but to go forward for himself and for Padme. And that's why I think everything after that point is extremely sad.

He would go THIS FAR to save the woman he loves. And by giving into that FEAR, the Dark Side begins it hold over him. Remember, "fear is the path to the Dark Side." And that's the reason Anakin makes absolute no sense, in terms of dialogue, in the rest of the film. Lucas just changed the context when he changed the turn.

Admittedly, it didn't make sense to me either until I saw the film a second time and understood what was really going on. And despite the fact that from the turn toward the end of the film was concieved differently, Lucas made it work, obviously from where I stand.

Lucas just felt that Anakin turning out of feeling disrespected and betrayed fell into that trap of thoughts many assumed would happen when he eventually got around the Prequels.

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
The FEAR comes from believing he'll lose the one he loves. The ANGER comes from Obi-Wan revealing himself on Mustafar and thinking his wife and Obi-Wan had betrayed him. The HATE comes from him literally telling Obi-Wan that he hates him. The SUFFERING comes from being burned, realizing that he's responsible for the death of his wife, and the fact that he's trapped in that suit and is forever a slave to Palpatine.

It's a gradual process.
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

What person blames himself of his Mother's death when he had no control over the situation? Either way, he does and he makes a promise to not let anything of this nature happen again.
q]
__________________________________________________________________________________________


Many people feel guilt by just not being at the side of a family member when they die, that IS normal. How many people have I talked that didn't have the greatest relationship with someone who died in their family, and say, "If I only had more time with that person, I would have done things differently."

It goes to the old saying, "You don't know what you got til its gone." Now sure, Anakins was the extreme, but as I said, after AOTC, I bought the story by then, I was on board, because it was logical for Anakin to feel that way, even if it was extreme.

As for the way Anakin turned, I read in the Vanity Fair Article in April 2005, and Lucas all but says what happens when Anakin turns, and I thought, "That is pretty cool, I like that he is turning for Padme." I liked he was going with something different then power, but as with the PT, the devil is in the details, and it is the execution that drives me up a wall.


Author
Time
Post link
I wish that original version had come out better, because it always should have been Anakin wanting more power that turned him to the dark side. The Emperor's seduction of Luke was based on the principle that once Luke tasted that power, he would have to have more of it. He would want it enough that it would seem worth it to subject himself to the Emperor and turn his back on everything he loved. But we have Anakin doing everything for love, which I never liked. I think it should have been a symptom but not the only driving force. Because after Padme is gone, he has no reason to keep serving the Empire or Palpatine. If he's not really into this and knows he's doing wrong and knows he totally screwed everything up, the logical choice of action would follow something Oedipus's route. Self-imposed exile. Maybe even suicide.

But thanks to zombie, I totally see how the two halves of the movie don't sync up, and now I understand why.

And I hate the route that Anakin is the victim. That completely rules out any semblance of tragedy. A tragic hero has to be the agent of action, not the patient of action. He has to be intelligent enough to see the ethical implications of his actions, and to be able to determine the probably outcome of those choices. Anakin just seems to be a dumbass who never considers anything and never seems to have enough intelligence to question why he's doing what he's doing.

There is no lingerie in space…

C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don’t exist… then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks… and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming… Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.

Author
Time
Post link
Gaffer,

" He has to be intelligent enough to see the ethical implications of his actions, and to be able to determine the probably outcome of those choices."

That's the Padme Rumination scene and him crying on the balcony on Mustafar....

And the reason he does serve the Emperor after Padme is gone is because he has nothing else, but the Emperor. He's a shell of his former self so he can't beat the Emperor. He doesn't have Padme any longer. What else is he going to do?

He starts as a slave. In a roundabout way, he's a slave as a Jedi. And at the end of it all, he's Palpatine's slave. Only when he has compassion and love for his son does he set himself free and end the horror that he has created.
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

And the reason he does serve the Emperor after Padme is gone is because he has nothing else, but the Emperor. He's a shell of his former self so he can't beat the Emperor. He doesn't have Padme any longer. What else is he going to do?


Like I said, exile or suicide. At the end of Sith, he doesn't strike me as the guy who willingly dedicates his life to serving the Empire and its Emperor. The prequels don't give him that kind of dedication. Like you said, he's left with NOTHING. He has no reason to stay with Palpatine.

There is no lingerie in space…

C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don’t exist… then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks… and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming… Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.