Sign In

What do you think of The Prequel Trilogy? A general discussion. — Page 7

Author
Time

I find the whole ‘Qui-Gon would have saved Anakin’s soul’ theory so bizarre. Not even doubting that it was the intention, but it is just stupid regardless. Anakin was raised by a group of emotion-repressing monks, an organization that instantly declared him dangerous but took him on anyway, after separating the boy from his only family and apparently doing nothing to help her despite knowing she was a slave. Anakin’s problems wouldn’t have been magically solved by a slightly nicer monk. Likewise, it’s ridiculous to say he needed a father-figure. Perhaps he needed his mother.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Anakin had two father figures. The problem is the bad father Palpatine won out, not Obi-Wan. Because Palpy told him what he wanted to hear and encouraged all the things the Jedi denied him, all the things that make us human. Instead of controlling his anger they taught him to be afraid of it and to never get angry, instead of teaching him love is positive they taught him to suppress his feelings. So he turned his anger inward. Vader makes sense in that regard, but you cannot make excuses for his murdering the Sand People, Dooku or the younglings.

Attachment is so forbidden they cut Anakin off from his mother and left her a slave. Because they steal children because they don’t have children get married and have families, because you know attachment.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Servii said:

Had Qui-gon Jinn lived to train Anakin, he would have had a chance.

We never hear Qui-gon say or show that he’s against the no-attachment rule. That’s just fan conjecture. I’m still not convinced that Lucas viewed the Jedi’s rules on attachment as an unhealthy thing.

And this is one of the main reasons the PT is so disliked. Lucas seems to think the way he portrayed the Jedi in the PT would meet with approval from fans!!! But they came off as cold, unemotional assholes. Yet it seems Lucas felt we would admire them!!

Lucas seems to have interpreted Buddhism (clearly the inspiration for the Jedi, especially in the PT) the same way as Nietzsche; but whereas Nietzsche was against it, Lucas seems to be for it. Essentially the Jedi cut themselves off from what Jung would have termed “the shadow self”. Nietzsche and Jung would have said you have to integrate that “darkness” into your being to have a full life. The Jedi actually even go beyond this - I mean forbidding relationships and having children is as anti-life as you can get.

Can we draw a link between George’s real life infertility and how he portrayed the values and norms of the Jedi?

In the OT Luke was his avatar, by the time the PT came around it was Mace Windu. Yikes.

“It is only through interaction, through decision and choice, through confrontation, physical or mental, that the Force can grow within you.”
-Kreia, Jedi Master and Sith Lord

Author
Time

The celibate monk thing goes back to the 1974 screenplay but was dropped in the actual movies and the EU. Only to be recanonized contexualized in the prequel. Like midi clorians being too similar to the Kaiburr Crystal as a way to describe the force. its something that should have not been revisited.

My opinion.

Author
Time

JadedSkywalker said:

The celibate monk thing goes back to the 1974 screenplay but was dropped in the actual movies and the EU. Only to be recanonized contexualized in the prequel. Like midi clorians being too similar to the Kaiburr Crystal as a way to describe the force. its something that should have not been revisited.

My opinion.

The weird thing is, I recall an interview from the early 2000’s where George stated that Jedi actually aren’t technically celibate. They’re just not allowed to have emotional relationships, but it’s technically okay for them to have sex. Which is weirder to me. I need to find where he said that.

But we can’t turn back. Fear is their greatest defense. I doubt if the actual security there is any greater than it was on Aquilae or Sullust. And what there is is most likely directed towards a large-scale assault.

Author
Time

Servii said:

JadedSkywalker said:

The celibate monk thing goes back to the 1974 screenplay but was dropped in the actual movies and the EU. Only to be recanonized contexualized in the prequel. Like midi clorians being too similar to the Kaiburr Crystal as a way to describe the force. its something that should have not been revisited.

My opinion.

The weird thing is, I recall an interview from the early 2000’s where George stated that Jedi actually aren’t technically celibate. They’re just not allowed to have emotional relationships, but it’s technically okay for them to have sex. Which is weirder to me. I need to find where he said that.

The thing is that I feel the PT movies make it clear that this harsh Jedi way with no attachments is directly responsible for Anakin’s fall. That and they are blind to Palpatine and his influence. I think that is the real point of Qui-gon. While he is as aloof as any Jedi in the PT, he is not as harsh as Mace. He’s not as bound by tradition as Yoda. He was a student of Dooku who fell to the dark side. Obi-wan comments that he would be on the council if he just conformed. It is that non-conformity that I think Anakin needed to be successful. He needed the tools to deal with his issues where the main Jedi order was telling him to not have issues. It is like telling a drug adict to quit vs. sharing with them the tools to do it. I think Qui-gon is the only Jedi who had the tools Anakin needed. I thought that even before I heard that this was how George was thinking (Duel of the Fates - so it dates to TPM).

Author
Time

yotsuya said:

Servii said:

JadedSkywalker said:

The celibate monk thing goes back to the 1974 screenplay but was dropped in the actual movies and the EU. Only to be recanonized contexualized in the prequel. Like midi clorians being too similar to the Kaiburr Crystal as a way to describe the force. its something that should have not been revisited.

My opinion.

The weird thing is, I recall an interview from the early 2000’s where George stated that Jedi actually aren’t technically celibate. They’re just not allowed to have emotional relationships, but it’s technically okay for them to have sex. Which is weirder to me. I need to find where he said that.

The thing is that I feel the PT movies make it clear that this harsh Jedi way with no attachments is directly responsible for Anakin’s fall. That and they are blind to Palpatine and his influence. I think that is the real point of Qui-gon. While he is as aloof as any Jedi in the PT, he is not as harsh as Mace. He’s not as bound by tradition as Yoda. He was a student of Dooku who fell to the dark side. Obi-wan comments that he would be on the council if he just conformed. It is that non-conformity that I think Anakin needed to be successful. He needed the tools to deal with his issues where the main Jedi order was telling him to not have issues. It is like telling a drug adict to quit vs. sharing with them the tools to do it. I think Qui-gon is the only Jedi who had the tools Anakin needed. I thought that even before I heard that this was how George was thinking (Duel of the Fates - so it dates to TPM).

Agreed, and I think Palpatine sensed and foreseen that, so he made sure Darth Maul killed the master Jedi Qui-Gon.

Author
Time

CarboniteSolo said:

yotsuya said:

Servii said:

JadedSkywalker said:

The celibate monk thing goes back to the 1974 screenplay but was dropped in the actual movies and the EU. Only to be recanonized contexualized in the prequel. Like midi clorians being too similar to the Kaiburr Crystal as a way to describe the force. its something that should have not been revisited.

My opinion.

The weird thing is, I recall an interview from the early 2000’s where George stated that Jedi actually aren’t technically celibate. They’re just not allowed to have emotional relationships, but it’s technically okay for them to have sex. Which is weirder to me. I need to find where he said that.

The thing is that I feel the PT movies make it clear that this harsh Jedi way with no attachments is directly responsible for Anakin’s fall. That and they are blind to Palpatine and his influence. I think that is the real point of Qui-gon. While he is as aloof as any Jedi in the PT, he is not as harsh as Mace. He’s not as bound by tradition as Yoda. He was a student of Dooku who fell to the dark side. Obi-wan comments that he would be on the council if he just conformed. It is that non-conformity that I think Anakin needed to be successful. He needed the tools to deal with his issues where the main Jedi order was telling him to not have issues. It is like telling a drug adict to quit vs. sharing with them the tools to do it. I think Qui-gon is the only Jedi who had the tools Anakin needed. I thought that even before I heard that this was how George was thinking (Duel of the Fates - so it dates to TPM).

Agreed, and I think Palpatine sensed and foreseen that, so he made sure Darth Maul killed the master Jedi Qui-Gon.

I think Palpatine is behind more in the PT than it appears.

Author
Time

SparkySywer said:

Palpatine can be behind as much of the PT as you want so long as you’re okay with writing outright fanfiction

Not if you are only looking at the PT films.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

The idea that Qui-gon would have been a true mentor, and that whole Dual of the Fates thing, seems like an attempt to make TPM more interesting than it is. At best John Williams, as usual, was trying hard to elevate the material.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Qui-Gon was more friendlier and talked to Anakin like his equal. Anakin could tell he actually cared for him.

Whereas Kenobi who thought Anakin was this lower life form, just like Jar Jar. He ONLY trained Anakin because it was his master’s last dying wish. Had he not said that, Kenobi would have brought him back to Tatooine.

Kenobi did not treat him as an equal, but rather a student who didn’t deserve it. He would tell his student everything he was doing wrong, but never did he praise him, treat him fair, like Qui-Gon would have.

Author
Time

CarboniteSolo said:

Qui-Gon was more friendlier and talked to Anakin like his equal. Anakin could tell he actually cared for him.

Whereas Kenobi who thought Anakin was this lower life form, just like Jar Jar. He ONLY trained Anakin because it was his master’s last dying wish. Had he not said that, Kenobi would have brought him back to Tatooine.

Kenobi did not treat him as an equal, but rather a student who didn’t deserve it. He would tell his student everything he was doing wrong, but never did he praise him, treat him fair, like Qui-Gon would have.

This calls into question why prequel Obi-wan is such a well liked character, in the first place. In the movies, he doesn’t really become likeable until RotS.

But we can’t turn back. Fear is their greatest defense. I doubt if the actual security there is any greater than it was on Aquilae or Sullust. And what there is is most likely directed towards a large-scale assault.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Servii said:

JadedSkywalker said:

The celibate monk thing goes back to the 1974 screenplay but was dropped in the actual movies and the EU. Only to be recanonized contexualized in the prequel. Like midi clorians being too similar to the Kaiburr Crystal as a way to describe the force. its something that should have not been revisited.

My opinion.

The weird thing is, I recall an interview from the early 2000’s where George stated that Jedi actually aren’t technically celibate. They’re just not allowed to have emotional relationships, but it’s technically okay for them to have sex. Which is weirder to me. I need to find where he said that.

Sounds like a post hoc justification to keep the Jedi “cool”. Otherwise, Padme being pregnant with Anakin’s kids wouldn’t be this terrible secret they’d have to keep from the Council. They could explain it away as the result of a one-night stand.

90% blue, 10% pink.

Author
Time

Personally, I feel the prequels as they are would’ve led to a somewhat more radical version of the original trilogy. Think the originals mixed with the sequels and you’ll have a rough idea.

Ol’ George has the GOUT, I see.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

The Prequels were written in such a way that I’m often really not sure if certain actions are just the result of George Lucas being weird and out of touch, or the result of Lucas actually trying to send a message to the audience. The behavior of the Jedi is probably the most significant example. Many fans take it for granted that Lucas intended the audience to see the Jedi order as incredibly flawed, particularly in regard to their overly dogmatic fear of attachment. But the movies never really explicitly confirm this. There’s no “reckoning”, no scene where Yoda or Mace Windu says something like “oh my God we were wrong about that attachment thing”, etc. Certainly, you could interpret the fact that Anakin fell to the dark side, in part because the Jedi forbade him to see the people he loved (his mother, Padme, etc.), as evidence that the film is telling us the Jedi are extremely flawed. But you could just as easily interpret the movies to be suggesting a failure on Anakin’s part. That is, if only Anakin had learned to properly forgo attachments, he wouldn’t have fallen to the dark side - thus his fall vindicates the Jedi dogma. I mean you could interpret the whole plot of ROTS as vindication of the no-attachment rule.

If we take Return of the Jedi into account, we remember that Luke’s love/attachment to his father ultimately saved the day. But ROTJ was written before the anti-attachment rule even existed in Lucas’ head, so I’m not really sure if the ending of ROTJ is supposed to (retroactively) condemn the old Jedi order. And then we have ESB where Luke’s attachment to his friends results in a disaster.

Anyway, I’m like 60% certain that Lucas meant to portray the Jedi as highly flawed, but it’s by no means obvious to me by the way the stories are written.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

For me, the PT has aged way better than I expected it to. When I first saw it, the story of how the Republic became the Empire didn’t really work for me. Now that I have the “It could happen here” sense, it’s more compelling.

Channel72 said:
And then we have ESB where Luke’s attachment to his friends results in a disaster.

He flies off to Bespin, loses an easily replaceable hand, and learns a painful secret. Seems a bit excessive to call it a “disaster.”

 

Time is running out for the Rebels. Antilles upcourt to Skywalker. He’s being paced by Darth Va— the bone-jarring pick by Solo! He came out of nowhere! Skywalker’s open from way outside, he launches at the buzzer... Good! It’s good! The Rebels win on a sensational buzzer beater by Luke Skywalker! Let’s take another look at that last shot. He just does get it off in time. Wow, what a shot. That’s why they call him Luke Legend.

 

That may be the most exciting battle I have ever been privileged to broadcast. Certainly the most dramatic finish. We’ll get you an update on the Artoo Detoo injury situation in just a moment. Right now let’s go courtside where SuperShadow is waiting with Chewbacca.

 

Author
Time
 (Edited)

cap said:

For me, the PT has aged way better than I expected it to. When I first saw it, the story of how the Republic became the Empire didn’t really work for me. Now that I have the “It could happen here” sense, it’s more compelling.

Same, and The Clone Wars cartoons really helped a lot. The thing about the Prequels is, conceptually, on a general big picture basis, I think the story works. The political conspiracy with Palpatine, the clone army and battle droids, all of it works once you have all the information (which unfortunately comes from supplementary material over the films themselves). The main problem with the prequels is the execution, especially acting.

The reason Episode II is the weakest prequel for me is that the love story between Anakin and Padme is supposed to be half of the focus of that movie and yet it’s almost completely unbelievable. The actors are TRYING their hardest to make the characters sound as good as possible but that damn Lucas directing just renders it impossible, resulting in some very cringe and even creepy scenes. Half the time, Anakin looks like an obsessive stalker rather than a lovestruck yet charming young man. Part of Anakin’s demeanor is intentional but you have to sell to the audience that Padme isn’t out of her mind for falling for this guy and it really failed.

The other half is interesting and engaging with Obi-Wan discovering the clone army and everything, yet gets hampered by lack of information, again thanks to bad execution by George. To this day, general audiences have no idea what the hell the deal with Sifo-Dyas was (if they even remember him at all) and it took a cartoon that came out years later to even sort of explain it (as well as the brilliant Darth Plagueis novel).

Of the two, TPM and RotS are the best of the trilogy because they both functionally work even if TPM drags and makes ridiculous comedy at times. RotS is the closest to a good movie the prequels ever come though it falls short a bit with some bad acting takes as well.

Ultimately, I genuinely love the prequels for the world they created to complement the OT and explain the rise of the Empire, but I don’t love them for THEM. I love them for what other people did with that concept in cartoons, videogames and comic books.