Archivist99

G&G-Fan said:
Broken child? He goes “Yippee!”.

Ah. I’m out.
This comment is indicative of the fact that I am falling on deaf ears, and that you are ignoring the events of the films.
And that’s the strangest thing about the whole “complaining about the PT” community. The movies are literally exactly what you guys want, almost to a tee, especially story wise (CGI heavy aesthetic is a separate issue). The complaints just arise from not paying attention to the films…
You would have twice the amount of movies to like if you actually just took them as they are.
It’s very clear that while he is a slave, his mother gives him a certain level of peace. Once he leaves her, is where he starts to break apart (and of course we see that he has a chip on his shoulder about being slave as well, that informs his later life).
It’s also why him being 19 when he leaves wouldn’t be the same, that’s the age to leave the nest anyway.
Don’t reply with more counterpoints, i’m not going to look at them. Because you don’t even attempt to look at the films honestly.

G&G-Fan said:

Archivist99 said:

I just don’t agree. Blowing up a planet is more what you are describing, evil but calculated. As for the board room scene, I disagree. Those guys seem like some of the biggest guys in the Empire, given the discussion. Vader personally might have no use for Motti, but Tarkin clearly does.

Vader is second in-command. Literally the only person that supersedes him in rank is the Emperor.

Whatever. Agree to disagree on this issue.

Micheal Corleone also had a very different childhood. Anakin was the slave son of a single mother, Michael was the child of a powerful family. Your idea of Anakin being like Michael Corleone doesn’t really jive with anything i’d want for the character. Also, Corleone isn’t really anything like what you seem like you wish Anakin was, either. I haven’t seen those movies in a while, but Michael doesn’t really have the Vader traits that you have mentioned before, other than being less hair trigger than Anakin in the films.

Anakin’s past was worse then Michael’s, therefore he has more of a reason to have a colder, hardened personality. He was a slave. He represses his emotions because he has to look tough to hide the fact that on the inside he’s an emotional mess.

He was a slave, but he was the only child of an exemplary mother. There is a warmth there (and part of losing that warmth at 9 is what goes wrong). Michael was the youngest (?) child of a crime lord.
Anakin doesn’t act tough by repressing as much as by having a standoffish/confident quality, which is well needed given the people he hangs around. Sebulba, Watto, various scumbags like that. He’s not going to be “reserved”, he is going to puff out his chest. Michael by contrast, could lay low and observe in the shadow of privilege. He’s reserved because he can afford to be.

That’s the thing that’s so weird to me. Anakin’s supposed to be this guy that represses his emotions, but instead he’ll go on long emotional rants to the first person who will listen. His second conversation with Padme he’s ranting about Obi-Wan when she didn’t even ask.

“Supposed to”, according to who? He represses certain destructive instincts, but when it comes to communicating, again, he is very forward.

Also Michael was in the military and was desensitized to his family’s business since he grew up around them, which is part of why he’s so cold.

Michael Corleone is so much like Darth Vader it’s crazy. He’s cold, collected, calculating, ruthless, reserved, confident, authoritative, possessive, and loves revenge and getting back at people he hates. And his anger is a lot like Vader’s. Michael does lose his cool sometimes, but it’s in a lot of the same way Vader would: short bursts. He will yell when he’s extremely stressed, like at Tom Hagen when he finds out about the “miscarriage”. Or when he yells about the ambush on his home to Pentangeli. A lot like Vader barking at his troops in the beginning of ANH.

But if he is already like Vader before the turn it is a boring, predictable story that doesn’t involve interesting character change. What you are suggesting is what JJ Abrams would have done. Basically the cliche Clone Wars version of Anakin, except nastier.
Plus, as I said, I do not agree that Michael even is what you are describing. He is a short, quiet man who occasionally gets coldly angry. All those other things you described are not within him the same way they are within Vader. He does all the things that he does not out of an embrace of power and conquest for the nebulous reasons given to Vader in the OT, but out of a loyalty to his father that congeals into a thirst for power, but it never goes as far as Vader and the characters are just too psychologically different. Michael isn’t shooting his commanders in the meeting room then cracking wise about it.
Anakin’s story is the story of a broken child who turns into a deranged serial killer who acts more machine than man.
Michael’s story is the quiet, straight-laced child of a crime family decides to take the path of revenge and becomes more cold and heartless in the name of “the family”. Michael loses much less of his soul than Anakin, hell he still talks to his ex wife and has a somewhat quasi normal (compared to Vader) relationship with his larger family at Vader’s age.
No potential prequel trilogy fits this. Even if you made Anakin more like what you are describing, he would still be a huge hulking man compared to Michael, and one who is much more overtly mean spirited than Michael.

I also would not change Anakin’s ages in the films. The story is about Anakin’s insecurities being the cause of his issues. Luke’s struggles were lesser by design as the story isn’t about Luke turning evil.

You can’t have Anakin be a 19 year old slave who’s mom dies? Then a 22 year old Jedi Knight at the beginning of the second movie (Luke was already a great high ranking rebel soldier at the beginning of ESB) who then descends towards the dark side slowly?

You’re acting like Anakin has to be young to have the same insecurities.

I think the story wouldn’t work nearly as well, no. As I said, Luke’s struggles are lesser due to his story not being about turning into Darth Vader. Also Luke being so high ranking in ESB never made sense to me. The opening crawl of that movie says he is in command of Echo base, for god’s sake.

That isn’t who he tries to be though. “I want more, but I know I shouldn’t”. That side of himself only truly comes out once he stops trying to fight it. He’s arrogant, but he is also aware that a lot of his thoughts are problematic and tries to rise above them. Until he doesn’t.

That’s a good element of the character, but we should see him giving into that more, even if he feels guilty. That need to be dominant and have power should become greater and greater as he loses himself more and more.

That’s exactly what happens.

It’s less drastic than Luke between 5 and 6 honestly.

Nah, because Luke is still a pretty collected guy capable of leading troops at the beginning of ESB. He just has to overcome his recklessness. And he has at the beginning of ROTJ, but not entirely. He still gets himself stuck in the Rancor pit and lashes out at Vader.

It might seem like he’s completely transformed when he first appears but as time goes on it’s pretty obvious he’s still the same guy.

Yeah but how did he overcome his recklessness? He didn’t go back to Yoda, he seemingly didn’t talk to Ben, and Yoda predicted that Luke going to Bespin would be bad for Luke, not lead to character growth. Luke in RotJ is approaching Qui Gon levels of Zen, whereas in ESB he’s still basically a farm boy who went off to war.

Because of the rule of two, as well as the fact that Sidious who is rather exceptional as a Sith who is very much a long term planner, allowed Vader to flourish in a locked down galaxy that is perfect for a violent broken man like Vader.

Regardless, Vader’s anger never gets in the way of the job. Even in ESB when he kills two officers, there’s always someone to take their place.

That’s my point though. It would if he didn’t have such stable surroundings. Heck, he would have killed Motti (?) if Tarkin hadn’t stepped in.

Of course, and that’s part of the horrible situation that Anakin finds himself in. But he already sold out Palp to the Jedi and tried to do the right thing once. He makes his choice in the scene in the council chambers to side with Palp rather than do the right thing for the second time.

The net loss is far too great if it turns out Plagueis’ secret isn’t real. Anakin doesn’t consider that if he commits genocide and even kills his best buddy Obi-Wan, only for Plagueis’ secret to either be lost or not even exist, then there was literally no point to anything.

What, he definitely considers it. When Palp says his whole “I know we can discover the secret” thing, you can see on Anakin’s face that he loses even more hope.

Channel72 said:

Sometimes Vader sounds a bit impatient - it’s kind of funny when some Officer has to bother him when he’s inside that meditation chamber, and Vader is like “What is it, General?” You can hear slight impatience in his voice. But he never rages or loses his temper. He’s the complete opposite of Kylo Ren. And definitely way more subdued than Anakin, who was constantly flipping out in both Episode 2 and 3. We can make excuses for this personality difference by saying that over the years Vader became more mature as a Sith and learned to channel his anger in more constructive ways or whatever, but honestly the reality is that Anakin’s portrayal just kind of sucks.

What makes you say that last line? Why wouldn’t ruling the galaxy for 20 years, having settled into your choice to take wrong path lead to a less “flipping out” personality? The “flipping out” was all due to his internal struggle between his better angels (Obi Wan) and the devil in his ear/his baser desires (Palpatine). The struggle is over after he ends the Jedi and loses Padme. He has nothing left but his delusions about bringing order to the galaxy and overthrowing Palpatine (both of which he tries to sell Luke on, and neither of which involve turning away from the Sith path).

One telling moment for me is when Anakin tries to “reason” with Obi Wan one last time, and Obi Wan just tells him he is lost. When Anakin says “This is the end for you, my master” that is pure Vader. Monotone, emotions tamped down, the whole bit. My point being, Vader is the side of Anakin that lives in denial. Anakin starts to come back in Return of The Jedi, and for my money, the man that Luke starts getting through to acts exactly like Hayden.

G&G-Fan said:

Archivist99 said:

IMO, Tarkin wouldn’t do that, those Vader moments were hot headed (the gus comparison is different, Gus was trying to frighten his enemies in a setting where they had no status, Vader is basically throwing a punch in a CEO earnings report). Plus, part of what you’re describing, even if I agreed with it, would just be age. a 19/22 year old isn’t going to be as level headed as a 45 year old.

I could. Tarkin blows up a planet.
Vader is far above Motti in rank. Vader had more power in that scene then Gus. Gus needed Walter to cook. Vader needs Motti for nothing. He’s a fodder officer.
And once again the point of the scene was that Vader was trying to intimidate Motti by showcasing his power.

I just don’t agree. Blowing up a planet is more what you are describing, evil but calculated. As for the board room scene, I disagree. Those guys seem like some of the biggest guys in the Empire, given the discussion. Vader personally might have no use for Motti, but Tarkin clearly does.

Michael Corleone was 25 in Part 1. It’s not unreasonable for someone to be cold when they’re that young. I’ll forever maintain that one of the biggest mistakes of the prequels was Anakin being so young for 2/3 of it. His age in the three movies should’ve been the same as Luke’s respectively.

Micheal Corleone also had a very different childhood. Anakin was the slave son of a single mother, Michael was the child of a powerful family. Your idea of Anakin being like Michael Corleone doesn’t really jive with anything i’d want for the character. Also, Corleone isn’t really anything like what you seem like you wish Anakin was, either. I haven’t seen those movies in a while, but Michael doesn’t really have the Vader traits that you have mentioned before, other than being less hair trigger than Anakin in the films. Also, when we do see Michael more at Vader’s age in Godfather 3, he has mellowed out, not gotten nastier.
I also would not change Anakin’s ages in the films. The story is about Anakin’s insecurities being the cause of his issues. Luke’s struggles were lesser by design as the story isn’t about Luke turning evil.

I say patience was indeed a joke, self deprecating humor about the fact that he is usually the impatient one. Pre dark side, I don’t see why Anakin’s humor would be obnoxiously dominance based.

Because that’s who he is as a person? He loves being dominant and in control. Superiority complex and all.

That isn’t who he tries to be though. “I want more, but I know I shouldn’t”. That side of himself only truly comes out once he stops trying to fight it. He’s arrogant, but he is also aware that a lot of his thoughts are problematic and tries to rise above them. Until he doesn’t.

Is headcanon out of the norm for this series though? Every movie in it jumps years ahead and has us infer character change.

Well yeah, but there’s a certain degree to which it’s believable.

It’s less drastic than Luke between 5 and 6 honestly.

The Sith usually don’t get very far, that’s what the rule of two is for, trying to cope with the problem of them all killing each other all the time.

Vader and Palpatine did.

Because of the rule of two, as well as the fact that Sidious who is rather exceptional as a Sith who is very much a long term planner, allowed Vader to flourish in a locked down galaxy that is perfect for a violent broken man like Vader.

Palpatine’s words could be lies, but at this point Anakin trusts the man, and his story aligns with how the Sith crave power and never “let go” like the Jedi do. And once Palp reveals himself as a Sith, it follows that even if he doesn’t know that power, he surely craves it.

Good point about Palpatine craving it too. But whether he craves it is different from whether the power actually exists and whether the dark side is a path to it.

Of course, and that’s part of the horrible situation that Anakin finds himself in. But he already sold out Palp to the Jedi and tried to do the right thing once. He makes his choice in the scene in the council chambers to side with Palp rather than do the right thing for the second time.

NFBisms said:

Chris Stuckmann still put the work in that most audience reviewers definitely didn’t. He has 2million subs on YT, you don’t have to respect it to realize that’s not really a normally attainable thing

I don’t really see what that has to do with quality though, beyond things having an agreeable personality or good presentation. What about 2 million subs makes his opinion better than mine or yours? Popularity and quality are not closely related. Transformers 5 made plenty of money but I wouldn’t let that movie tell me what movies to go see.

NFBisms said:

I think the critic/audience distinction on RT is completely unproductive and should be abolished, but I think the fact that a critic’s knowledge of film isn’t cursory is what gives them more weight. It’s just populist snobbery to construe that as “elitist” just because they have more education or put the work in to have that engagement IMO. If anyone could be one then we’d all be

I’m saying it is cursory and that we all could do it. Chris Stuckmann is literally a man off the street and he’s a top critic on RT.

StarkillerAG said:

WitchDR said:

StarkillerAG said:

But what if you think Rey was already a good character? I certainly did, at least until the whole “you are a Palpatine” fiasco. But I feel like a major goal of this movie is to rationalize and streamline some of the messiness of TROS, bringing the sequels’ reception back to the mostly-positive outlook pre-2019.

Remember, both TFA and TLJ had a more than 90% positive critical reception, and I feel like the audience score would look the same way if sequel hate wasn’t weaponized during the Trump-era culture wars. People liked the sequels before TROS, Disney just needs to figure out how to make people like them again.

For one I wouldn’t take payed critics opinions seriously

You lost me here. Anyone who seriously says to ignore the opinions of professional critics and trust obviously review-bombed audience scores instead is not worth paying attention to.

Just food for thought- Chris Stuckmann is a top critic on RT, and he’s literally just Joe Blow with a YT channel. “Critics” are just people, and I don’t see why their opinions hold any more weight than someone who has at least a cursory knowledge of film.

Fullmetaled said:

Archivist99 said:

Fullmetaled said:

Archivist99 said:

fmalover said:

Archivist99 said:

fmalover said:

The problem is that dialog between Owen and Beru suggests they were well acquainted with Anakin, but AotC reveals that they only met once and barely had any interaction at all, making their concerns about Luke being like his father odd.

Like I said, I think the PT paints a different picture than what you might think, but not one that actually contradicts anything.
Owen is concerned in that scene, while Beru doesn’t seem as concerned or concerned at all by the comparison. Which could fit with what they both took away from what they could glean transpired to allow Anakin to get his mother back. They also briefly met his wife, and also spent years with his mother who we know talked about him, Owen says so. They would know that he was a good but intense man who may or may not have fought his way through a horde of Tuskens to rescue his mother.
They also know that either Luke’s father is dead, or that he is Vader (highly unlikely), so either way, being a Jedi ended poorly for him.

Furthermore Obi-Wan tells Luke Owen and Anakin strongly disagreed on matters. How would Owen know anything about Anakin’s convictions if he barely said “hello” to him?

“Didn’t hold with your father’s ideals thought he should have stayed here and not gotten involved” and “wouldn’t allow the lightsaber to be given idealistic crusade etc” are the only lines I remember given, and they are both easy. Owen is a practical man, a family legacy farmer. Anakin going off to be a Jedi ultimately left his mother alone, and got him (and her in a way) killed. He doesn’t say “convictions” he says “ideals” meaning the Jedi way, the fool idealistic crusade way. Ultimately the Jedi all got wiped out for their crusade, so why would Owen let Luke down that path?

We don’t need to see Obi Wan and Owen discussing the above quotes in the PT, it is fine that we hear them in Episode 4. It’s all one story.

My issue is yoda says luke is reckless and obi wan says so was I if you remember the relationship is vastly different sounding from the prequel presentation with this dialogue in mind. The took upon myself bothers me because it seems like he felt obligated because of qui gon not because he actually took it upon himself. qui gon as great of a character as he is being the most ideal Jedi but he makes obi wan a complete liar. I can accept some of his lies as protecting Luke or if you had one the deleted scenes restored the father revelation was kept from him because of yoda.

Well I’m not arguing that the lines given in the OT are what Lucas had planned for a PT, just that they all pretty much technically don’t break anything. Obi Wan displays reckless behavior in the PT, which probably didn’t begin in adulthood. Telling Yoda he’ll train Anakin without the approval of the council comes to mind.
I don’t think Qui Gon existing makes Obi Wan a liar, he just simplified his story. “I decided to train Anakin and thought i’d be better at it than I was”.

So how much continuity issues can be waved away like this then and what would need tweaking?

Really the only thing that sticks out to me off the top of my head is Leia remembering her mother but Luke not. You COULD make that work through handwave-y “Leia is more sensitive to others’ presence in the force (as arguably seen through the OT) than Luke, so an infant force memory combined with Bail possibly talking about and showing her pictures and videos of Padme could account for why Luke doesn’t remember but she does…”

BUT, that is far too tortured and Lucas really just decided to allow that to be an error for the sake of a tighter final act that doesn’t involve watching Padme die on Alderaan with Leia some time after she gives birth (which I believe was the plan at one point IIRC).

G&G-Fan said:

Archivist99 said:

I just watched the arm scene. It wasn’t primarily calculating IMO. He was going to end the battle before, then Luke gets in a good hit, then Vader has an incoherent yell of rage and cuts his hand off.

Yes, he uses his anger. For a calculated act to end the conflict with Luke. That’s what I mean, he wields his anger like a blunt weapon.

And while the choking of an officer might be making a point, it is still quite hotheaded. Imagine if Tarkin choked out that same guy if that guy called him frail or something in a meeting.

The guy was insulting his power in the force and so he showed it to him.

Also I could totally imagine Tarkin doing that.

Villains attack their underlings to show their strength all the time. Like Gus killing Victor in Breaking Bad. Gus may be mad but he remains collected and cold.

And that’s the difference. They use their anger with cunning in a way that always furthers their interests.

Well I think the thing is, the dry wit that he displays in the PT would only congeal into the nastiness of Vader after he gives himself to the dark. I think of moments like “If you’ll excuse me!” or “I say patience.” as the kind of humor that would become nastier in Vader.

“I say patience” was not a joke.

You make a fair point about his sense of humor. I think the disconnect comes from the fact that he never jokes in a way that asserts dominance over another person. “We would be honored, if you would join us.” is such an awesome and funny line because he’s dryly lording over Han, gloating that he has them trapped. It’s such a great showcase of his wit.

The mature Vader persona of the OT isn’t yet complete in the PT, we are left to fill in the gap from freshly traumatized ex Jedi to comfortable middle aged Sith lord. Which i’m fine with, but I think some fans are not. This is also why I think the volatile, “whiny” nature of his PT character isn’t incongruent, Vader in the OT and the Sith in general are basically what happens when you just let your worst, immature impulses take the wheel. Don’t like this underling? Kill him. Don’t like Obi Wan reminding you of the past? Kill him. Don’t like the Rebels pooping on your party? Kill them all.

That’s the issue. The audience is forced to head canon 20 years of character development instead of just having Anakin be more like Vader.

I don’t even mind a younger Vader being a bit more emotional. He is that way in the 2017 Marvel comics by Charles Soule and I love his characterization in that series. But he’s still mostly cold and never explodes.

I agree that the Sith are about giving into their worst impulses, but if they constantly let their anger overcome them and stab themselves in the foot they wouldn’t get very far.

People say this, but I disagree. Going off that scene, Anakin clearly has a pretty clear understanding of the Sith ideology (as taught by the Jedi at least). If the Jedi are about letting go, the Sith are about holding on, so holding onto your life in perpetuity seems like something a Sith would attempt.

That should’ve been explored in the movie itself. We know the Sith attempted to cheat death from EU novels but not the film. And I’m talking about something other then Palpatine’s words which for all we know could be lies. Maybe Anakin even finds a Sith holocron Plagueis created that teaches the power but he can’t open it until he indulges enough in the dark side. So he opens others and learns the ways of the dark side, gradually being seduced by it’s power.

IMO, Tarkin wouldn’t do that, those Vader moments were hot headed (the gus comparison is different, Gus was trying to frighten his enemies in a setting where they had no status, Vader is basically throwing a punch in a CEO earnings report). Plus, part of what you’re describing, even if I agreed with it, would just be age. a 19/22 year old isn’t going to be as level headed as a 45 year old.
I say patience was indeed a joke, self deprecating humor about the fact that he is usually the impatient one. Pre dark side, I don’t see why Anakin’s humor would be obnoxiously dominance based.
Is headcanon out of the norm for this series though? Every movie in it jumps years ahead and has us infer character change.
The Sith usually don’t get very far, that’s what the rule of two is for, trying to cope with the problem of them all killing each other all the time.
Palpatine’s words could be lies, but at this point Anakin trusts the man, and his story aligns with how the Sith crave power and never “let go” like the Jedi do. And once Palp reveals himself as a Sith, it follows that even if he doesn’t know that power, he surely craves it.

Fullmetaled said:

Archivist99 said:

fmalover said:

Archivist99 said:

fmalover said:

The problem is that dialog between Owen and Beru suggests they were well acquainted with Anakin, but AotC reveals that they only met once and barely had any interaction at all, making their concerns about Luke being like his father odd.

Like I said, I think the PT paints a different picture than what you might think, but not one that actually contradicts anything.
Owen is concerned in that scene, while Beru doesn’t seem as concerned or concerned at all by the comparison. Which could fit with what they both took away from what they could glean transpired to allow Anakin to get his mother back. They also briefly met his wife, and also spent years with his mother who we know talked about him, Owen says so. They would know that he was a good but intense man who may or may not have fought his way through a horde of Tuskens to rescue his mother.
They also know that either Luke’s father is dead, or that he is Vader (highly unlikely), so either way, being a Jedi ended poorly for him.

Furthermore Obi-Wan tells Luke Owen and Anakin strongly disagreed on matters. How would Owen know anything about Anakin’s convictions if he barely said “hello” to him?

“Didn’t hold with your father’s ideals thought he should have stayed here and not gotten involved” and “wouldn’t allow the lightsaber to be given idealistic crusade etc” are the only lines I remember given, and they are both easy. Owen is a practical man, a family legacy farmer. Anakin going off to be a Jedi ultimately left his mother alone, and got him (and her in a way) killed. He doesn’t say “convictions” he says “ideals” meaning the Jedi way, the fool idealistic crusade way. Ultimately the Jedi all got wiped out for their crusade, so why would Owen let Luke down that path?

We don’t need to see Obi Wan and Owen discussing the above quotes in the PT, it is fine that we hear them in Episode 4. It’s all one story.

My issue is yoda says luke is reckless and obi wan says so was I if you remember the relationship is vastly different sounding from the prequel presentation with this dialogue in mind. The took upon myself bothers me because it seems like he felt obligated because of qui gon not because he actually took it upon himself. qui gon as great of a character as he is being the most ideal Jedi but he makes obi wan a complete liar. I can accept some of his lies as protecting Luke or if you had one the deleted scenes restored the father revelation was kept from him because of yoda.

Well I’m not arguing that the lines given in the OT are what Lucas had planned for a PT, just that they all pretty much technically don’t break anything. Obi Wan displays reckless behavior in the PT, which probably didn’t begin in adulthood. Telling Yoda he’ll train Anakin without the approval of the council comes to mind.
I don’t think Qui Gon existing makes Obi Wan a liar, he just simplified his story. “I decided to train Anakin and thought i’d be better at it than I was”.

fmalover said:

Archivist99 said:

fmalover said:

The problem is that dialog between Owen and Beru suggests they were well acquainted with Anakin, but AotC reveals that they only met once and barely had any interaction at all, making their concerns about Luke being like his father odd.

Like I said, I think the PT paints a different picture than what you might think, but not one that actually contradicts anything.
Owen is concerned in that scene, while Beru doesn’t seem as concerned or concerned at all by the comparison. Which could fit with what they both took away from what they could glean transpired to allow Anakin to get his mother back. They also briefly met his wife, and also spent years with his mother who we know talked about him, Owen says so. They would know that he was a good but intense man who may or may not have fought his way through a horde of Tuskens to rescue his mother.
They also know that either Luke’s father is dead, or that he is Vader (highly unlikely), so either way, being a Jedi ended poorly for him.

Furthermore Obi-Wan tells Luke Owen and Anakin strongly disagreed on matters. How would Owen know anything about Anakin’s convictions if he barely said “hello” to him?

“Didn’t hold with your father’s ideals thought he should have stayed here and not gotten involved” and “wouldn’t allow the lightsaber to be given idealistic crusade etc” are the only lines I remember given, and they are both easy. Owen is a practical man, a family legacy farmer. Anakin going off to be a Jedi ultimately left his mother alone, and got him (and her in a way) killed. He doesn’t say “convictions” he says “ideals” meaning the Jedi way, the fool idealistic crusade way. Ultimately the Jedi all got wiped out for their crusade, so why would Owen let Luke down that path?

We don’t need to see Obi Wan and Owen discussing the above quotes in the PT, it is fine that we hear them in Episode 4. It’s all one story.

fmalover said:

The problem is that dialog between Owen and Beru suggests they were well acquainted with Anakin, but AotC reveals that they only met once and barely had any interaction at all, making their concerns about Luke being like his father odd.

Like I said, I think the PT paints a different picture than what you might think, but not one that actually contradicts anything.
Owen is concerned in that scene, while Beru doesn’t seem as concerned or concerned at all by the comparison. Which could fit with what they both took away from what they could glean transpired to allow Anakin to get his mother back. They also briefly met his wife, and also spent years with his mother who we know talked about him, Owen says so. They would know that he was a good but intense man who may or may not have fought his way through a horde of Tuskens to rescue his mother.
They also know that either Luke’s father is dead, or that he is Vader (highly unlikely), so either way, being a Jedi ended poorly for him.

Fullmetaled said:

Can fan edits fix continuity errors with the original trilogy like Owen Lars fearing luke being just like his father, obi wan saying he took it upon himself to train anakin as a Jedi, dialog in empire that sounds like obi wan and yoda’s relationship was master and apprentice even though that wasn’t the case etc.

Owen fearing Luke would turn out like the man he saw in the prequels, while Beru saw the same man and came away with a less negative impression works perfectly with the PT IMO. Anakin showed a dark side with his rescue of his mother, but he also did a valiant thing (saving his mom).
Beru and Owen are in like 10 minutes of one of the 3 OT movies, and they die offscreen. I’m not sure why some fans think they should have been big players in the backstory.

Obi Wan did take it upon himself to train Anakin as a Jedi. We just also see the events that preceded that.

Yoda did train Obi Wan, from a certain point of view.

The PT outright clashes with almost none of the OT, it merely recontextualizes some lines. But the OT does that to itself all the time as well. The father twist alone mangles Obi Wan’s earlier words much more than the existence of Qui-Gon does.

I think the problem is Star Wars being a megacorp IP now, that has to make it look like it is doing well as a company. Not building off the ST is like Apple scrapping a product line because something in that line was disliked. It never looks good (although companies do scrap things all the time so maybe my analogy sucks) to admit that you poured money into something the public didn’t ultimately embrace.

“Vader gets mad, but he never flies off the handle. He wields his anger like a blunt weapon. Vader chokes an officer to make a point. Amputating his son was a very calculating move to end the conflict swiftly. Vader’s just a much colder person.”

I just watched the arm scene. It wasn’t primarily calculating IMO. He was going to end the battle before, then Luke gets in a good hit, then Vader has an incoherent yell of rage and cuts his hand off.
And while the choking of an officer might be making a point, it is still quite hotheaded. Imagine if Tarkin choked out that same guy if that guy called him frail or something in a meeting.

“I can think of a couple times, sure, but nothing to the degree of, “Apology accepted, Captain Needa”, or “We would be honored if you would join us”.”

Well I think the thing is, the dry wit that he displays in the PT would only congeal into the nastiness of Vader after he gives himself to the dark. I think of moments like “If you’ll excuse me!” or “I say patience.” as the kind of humor that would become nastier in Vader. Interestingly, Stover gave Anakin some snarky Vader-like lines in the novelization when he was killing the Sep council, but I think the movies are structured in such a way that he wouldn’t joke like that yet. The mature Vader persona of the OT isn’t yet complete in the PT, we are left to fill in the gap from freshly traumatized ex Jedi to comfortable middle aged Sith lord. Which i’m fine with, but I think some fans are not. This is also why I think the volatile, “whiny” nature of his PT character isn’t incongruent, Vader in the OT and the Sith in general are basically what happens when you just let your worst, immature impulses take the wheel. Don’t like this underling? Kill him. Don’t like Obi Wan reminding you of the past? Kill him. Don’t like the Rebels pooping on your party? Kill them all.

“He’s smart until he believes Palpatine about saving people from dying.”

People say this, but I disagree. Going off that scene, Anakin clearly has a pretty clear understanding of the Sith ideology (as taught by the Jedi at least). If the Jedi are about letting go, the Sith are about holding on, so holding onto your life in perpetuity seems like something a Sith would attempt.

Mocata said:

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.

What makes you think that wasn’t intended by George? Filoni claims it is, and he spent a decade with the man.

I’ve only made an account here to post a thread elsewhere, but since i’m here I might as well chime in.

I think the PT is equally well/poorly made as the other 3 films Lucas has directed (not talking about the OT, but Lucas himself).
But mostly I’ve read this thread and just want to comment that I think that Anakin as a character was one of the very best parts, and that he has a lot more in common with Vader than some people here are saying. Vader wasn’t a hothead? In the OT, he chokes people in a board meeting, flies off the handle and amputates his own son after said son scores a good hit, etc.
Anakin also has plenty of dry humor in the prequels.
He’s bold, very bold. Look at the fireplace scene. Look at him in battle. Bold in words and actions.
He’s also very developing a domineering and presenceful (word?) aspect post youngling slaughter when he talks to Padme (which makes sense as the dark side is starting to rule him).
He’s also much smarter than people give him credit for (but that could be a whole nother post).
But my main thing about Anakin in the PT and Vader in the OT is that to me, Vader in RotJ feels more like Hayden than the preceding two films. I think Lucas had nailed down more of the man behind the mask for that film (since the mask was coming off, literally and metaphorically).

But no, Hayden never did put his hands in his belt buckle the way Vader did.

Also, I’m mostly responding to a post a few pages back, the quote function was giving me trouble.

Let me just get something out of the way first- I love the prequels and generally find them to be very well made, at least as well made as any of Lucas’ other films. So the idea of this thread is not to condemn the reshot version of AotC, but more to wonder… why?
On to the point…

One of the big things I’ve noticed after watching Episode 2 many times and researching the making of the film, is how extensively, through reshoots, Lucas changed the nature of Anakin and Obi Wan’s relationship.
In the script, all the way through the principal photography period, Obi Wan seems much more fed up with Anakin, and there is much less of Obi Wan being kind, or them displaying a sense of brotherhood.
Examples include
-no elevator scene at the beginning
-harsher tone and dialogue outside of the Outlander Club
-tells Mace Windu and Yoda that “I see now what you and Yoda realized from the start. The boy was too old.”
-no “good call my young Padawan” on Geonosis

These and other little moments here and there, ESPECIALLY the “I see now…” line mentioned above, really seems like more than just Lucas softening up the relationship up in reshoots. It seems like him changing the trajectory of the story. It almost seems like, combined with things like the initial version of Episode 3 having Anakin turn sooner and for more political reasons (the AotC script also gives Anakin a line where he is politically annoyed by the Jedi’s deference to the senate by the way), that Lucas had a whole different arc designed that he went back and rejiggered.
Makes me wonder why, and the only reason I can think of is that he thought fans would be mad that Obi and Ani were never really “good friends”. But then why write and shoot it that way initially? And is there any info out there that sheds light on this?

P.S.
I largely think that the version of 2 and 3 that actually exist are improvements, but some of what I have outlined above seems quite interesting if you ignore how it might clash with the OT…