G&G-Fan

Channel72 said:

Yeah, but like… nobody wants to see this. And there’s no reason Anakin had to be written this way. Lucas decided to portray the Jedi as a weird cult that suppresses familial bonds and romantic attachments, but there’s no reason they had to be written that way. I always imagined Anakin as this well-adjusted, somewhat brash ace pilot. Not “roguish” like Han Solo, but just confident and principled. Yeah, it’s just my personal preference, but I would argue that this portrayal would benefit the story way more than what we got, because the entire point of Anakin’s arc is that he was supposed to be a good man who fell from grace. But the Prequels instead portray him as this emotionally unstable hormone explosion with homicidal tendencies from the very moment we first meet him. (Not counting Episode 1, which features an entirely different Anakin.)

The funny thing is that the Jedi aren’t actually supposed to be that, Lucas just makes them look that way because they’re written in the most boring, flat way possible and he never explains what he means by “attachment” (which is the Buddhist definition, the inability to let go of things).

Also hard agree there. Not only was Vader clearly not an explosive character, thus creating disconnect, but he’s also just not likable at all. Your audience needs to care about your main character to get invested in their arc.

Lucas seemed to think that portraying Anakin initially as this cherubic, innocent little child would produce such a stark contrast with Vader as to sufficiently fulfill the “fall from grace” narrative. Except the whole point of a “fall from grace” narrative is to track the character transformation as it plays out via personal choices. A little kid doesn’t even have a brain developed enough to make any dramatically interesting choices.

Bingo. If someone peaked when they were 10 then there’s literally nothing to save. They’re not a good person at all. Hell you can even be a mean kid who steals the other kids toys and pulls the girl’s hair and then be really mature and well-adjusted as a teen and adult. Nobody gives a shit, the first 12 years of your life are basically just a free trial.

Michael Corleone would have been a useful model when writing Anakin, in a broad sense. I wouldn’t want Anakin to be as serious or as emotionally reserved - I mean it’s a Star Wars movie, it needs to be snappy and upbeat most of the time. But Michael Corleone provides a good template for the general arc required here - somebody that makes a series of individual choices, initially with honorable intentions, but slowly becomes more and more of a monster. Michael Corleone activates full Sith mode when he kills his brother-in-law and then coldly lies about it to his widowed sister.

Yep, and Michael also has that cold, collected, commanding demeanor that Vader has. He’s like the perfect template to to the point where I can’t help but think there wasn’t some inspiration from him when OT Vader was written. Coppola and Lucas were great friends after all.

StarkillerAG said:

I do think “he’s just not a good guy” could be a potentially interesting route, but I’m worried that it would lead to Vader’s redemption not really feeling earned. If he was always a psychotic narcissist deep inside, is it really a “redemption”, or just a deathbed conversion?

My ideal take on Anakin’s turn would combine a desire for power with the “save Padme” thing from the original movie. He starts out with seemingly noble intentions (although his real motivations are more narcissistic), but the more dark things he does in his wife’s name, the more he realizes how good the dark side feels. By the end, he’s become fully mad with power, to the point where he makes his visions come true by choking his wife to death, and doesn’t even realize the irony of it afterwards.

No matter what, though, the “Palpatine gaslights Anakin into thinking the Jedi are evil” plotline has to go. It’s possibly the worst aspect of the original movie. Anakin should be an intelligent person who was seduced by attachment and the promise of power, not a moron who fell for the most obvious lie in the history of the galaxy.

I agree with this 100%. This this this. All about this.

Vader does love the dark side in the OT. He loves punishing those he hates, even Imperials like Motti, Ozzel and Needa. He even makes sadistic jokes about it. But deep down he does have guilt because there’s a good person buried deep down. He just keeps giving into his lust for the power of the dark side and his hatred.

Funnily enough ANH Luke still feels more like someone that could become OT Vader then AOTC Anakin.

That cold angry stare when witnessing his uncle and aunt’s deaths feels like how a younger Vader would react to the death of a loved one. Luke was even able to stay collected and focused after the loss of his best friend.

It isn’t just based on the quote lol, it’s also based on the very clear fact that the Vader we got has elements of Kane’s character, who was the father of the character who’d become Luke, a rogue Jedi (Vader is a Jedi turned Sith), and a cyborg.

none of the links work

First of all, I’m not claiming that Kane and General Vader were combined into one character in the early drafts, nor did I ever say that. I’m saying that the Vader we ended up getting post-ESB is basically a combination of those two characters (though from your previous post it seems he was also combined with Prince Valorum). Vader always being Luke’s father is technically correct as the current character of Vader is basically half Kane, who was a rogue Jedi cyborg and father of Annikin (Luke). There’s even the part where Kane sacrifices himself to save the heroes, just like ROTJ Vader.

Second of all, I think it’s very obvious that Lucas is talking about Kane and not Annikin in that quote. He likely mixed them up. As I already said.

Just a random comment, but I don’t really get it when people say Obi-Wan should’ve been the protagonist of the prequels instead of Anakin. Obi-Wan’s a great character, but if executed well, Anakin’s arc is easily way more interesting.

It feels like making Hank Schrader the protagonist of Breaking Bad instead of Walt.

What I said was really simple. The Darth Vader we know and love today is basically Kane Starkiller and General Vader combined into one character. Kane was a rogue Jedi cyborg and Annikin Starkiller’s father (who became Luke). Darth Vader in the original drafts was simply a general for the empire. The final incarnation of Darth Vader is second in command of the emperor, a Sith lord who broke away from the Jedi, a cyborg, and Luke Skywalker’s father.

So yes, from a certain point of view, Vader was always gonna be Luke’s father. Or at least, there was always an element of “rogue Jedi cyborg is the protagonists dad”.

I’m assuming when Lucas said it was about Annikin and his kids, he probably either misspoke, mixed up the characters, or he said that for convenience because he didn’t want to have to go on and explain who Kane was.

Regarding the thing about Vader always being Luke’s father, I found some info about why Lucas might have said this.

Originally, in the very early drafts, there were two characters. Kane Starkiller/Akira Valor/The Starkiller, a half-machine/half-man and Jedi-in-hiding, who is the father of the main character Annikin Starkiller (who’d later go on to be Luke Skywalker). And Darth Vader, a general for the Empire. The two characters later became combined into one.

George Lucas said:

“Well, to be very honest with you, when I wrote the very very first script it was about Annikin Starkiller and his two kids. And, uh, he was a rogue Jedi, and there were remnants of that [draft] that found its way into the final Star Wars.”
-MovieFone Unscripted, 2005

So from a certain point of view, Vader was always gonna be Luke’s father. It was just discarded but then we ended up getting something that more resembled the original idea.

I like rearranging it so Anakin feeling slighted by the Council and being told to betray Palpatine before the dream so they have weight in his fall. Emphasizing Anakin’s authoritarian political beliefs and a genuine lust for power beyond just saving Padme is, IMO, really the only way to make Anakin’s fall somewhat work with just a fan-edit, without a full rewrite (which would be ideal, but you can’t really watch it). It makes him feel more like the same person as Darth Vader from the OT.

It would be really beneficial if you tried to make a point of Anakin being addicted to the dark side and basically subconsciously looking for an excuse to fall, kinda like Walter White. Having the dream be more of the straw that broke the camels back then the sole reason makes it slightly more believable that he would commit genocide over it.

Bro really just reduced The Godfather, a cinematic masterpiece, to “a mafia movie”. 💀

Also socially awkward nervous teenagers don’t speak in weird Shakespearean poetry.

regularjoe said:

General Grievous.
Hey Jar Jar Binks was an awful character, can you guys come up with something even worse?

Nah General Grievous is kinda one of the better parts of the movie IMO. He’s a cowardly mustache twirling baddie and I love em. He funni

I’m like one of the few people who prefers that portrayal. Just making him “cold badass cyborg Jedi slayer with tragic backstory” is too much like Darth Vader. Let Vader be Vader and the other villains stick out.

fmalover said:

I posted elsewhere that when writing the PT George Lucas should have used Michael Corleone as the basis for young Anakin Skywalker.

Based, I wanna see that now.

1. The Mandalorian
2. The Clone Wars (2008)
3. Andor
4. Clone Wars (2003)
5. Tales of the Jedi
6. The Bad Batch
7. Obi-Wan Kenobi
8. Book of Boba Fett

Between ROTS and ESB Yoda ran a ketamine drug ring with Shaggy, Kermit the Frog, Shrek, Joe Swanson, and Barack Obama.

I have a lot of nostalgia for this film and still find it really entertaining for how spectacular it is, but it’s not held up. I used to be one of those “ROTS is ESB tier” people, but I’ve come to accept more of the flaws of the film.

The biggest problem is Anakin’s rushed turn. It’s a good starting point, but Anakin just blindly believes Palpatine’s word about cheating death and betrays everybody he loves. Not to mention, he’s still not enough like OT Darth Vader for most of it.

The movie is better in separated portions. The last half, from Anakin being Knighted Vader (such a chilling scene, even if not earned) to the ending is actually quite stellar. It’s easy for me to got lost in the apocalyptic imagery and operatic music. I like the first half too, especially the opening. But the problem is, they shouldn’t be the same movie.

The first half should be the beginning of the second movie, the second half should be the last half of the third movie. There should be a whole movie in-between exploring Anakin’s turn, having him gradually be seduced by the dark side via the usage of Sith holocrons or something. Have him lose himself more and more in the war. Then have him turn.

But this is what happens when you spend a movie with Anakin as a child and then another with him on a romantic vacation I guess.

I do think this movie is genuinely better then the other two though in some ways. The characterization and pacing is far better. It feels a lot more alive. Obi-Wan is a great character. Then you have Ian McDiarmid too, who’s amazing.

So overall this movie is flawed but enjoyable for me. Not OT level, but fun.

Superweapon VII said:

Don’t forget the trademark belt grip.

I wanna see that so bad now.

Michael Corleone from The Godfather is a better young Darth Vader then the actual young Darth Vader.

The Prequels miss so much of the nuance that made Vader so great in the OT. His sadistic humor, his boldness, his cold, domineering presence, how calculating he was. In the Prequels, he’s a hot-head that flies off the handle. OT Vader got mad, but he wielded it like a blunt weapon. OT Vader is like Michael Corleone, but PT Anakin is like Sonny Corleone (at least in terms of temper; Sonny was never intolerably whiny). And that doesn’t mix. They’re two different characters.

Jedi122 said:

If you really are that invested in Star Wars to begin with, then what’s stopping you from WANTING to learn more about it?

But I do read and watch supplemental material. But that doesn’t mean the original movie shouldn’t stand on it’s own.

Jedi122 said:

You might as well say the same about “The Clone Wars.” How else would we have known about the ultimate fate of Sifo-Dias, and why the clones did a complete 180 on their loyal Jedi generals so suddenly?

The Prequels relying on The Clone Wars for important plot details (and important character development) is also bad.

The Prequels are just as guilty of overreliance on supplementary material as the Sequels are.

Considering “Shadow of the Sith” is basically just “plug in the plot holes for The Rise of Skywalker” I feel like hardly anyone was excited for it anyway.

You could also remove a lot of Anakin’s whiny behavior and as a result make him act more like Darth Vader, that sounds like it’d kill two birds with one stone 😃

Worley is a very spiteful and egotistical person, and a lot of things he says don’t make sense.

Saying that it doesn’t matter that Greedo shoots first because in both versions Han is shooting in self-defense doesn’t work, the change makes Han less sleazy and sly of a character.

Vader saying Noooo in ROTJ being a parallel to ROTS does not excuse it. First, the entire problem with how Anakin/Vader was depicted in the Prequels is that he’s too whiny when Vader was a very stoic character in the OT. Second, creating a parallel should not be an excuse for making the scene itself worse.

He says both Noooos are brilliant because they call attention to the similarities between the scenes, but the issue (and also how he excuses the prequel dialogue) is that it’s too on-the-nose. Good filmmakers know the audience will get this parallel without it. The scene was way more powerful when Vader was quiet.

He says that Jedi Rocks isn’t any more cheesy then Lapti Nek, which is a riot.

Even though both Drew and Worley seem to agree that Obi-Wan’s new call from 2011 sounds like a Boga from ROTS, I still, for the life of me, cannot hear the similarity. The Boga sounds like a bird, while Obi-Wan’s call sounds like a monkey.

Worley seems to miss when Drew points out that there are some shots in Cloud City where the new CG backdrop isn’t in continuity, which is correct. This is especially noticeable in the scene when Vader captures Han, Leia, and Chewie.

Worley trying to excuse Luke’s scream as “It’s just editing the sound mix guys!” is also hilarious. Something like that changes the meaning of a scene.

Yes, the added Vader shots in Cloud City do ruin the pacing of the sequence. It literally cuts from the Millennium Falcon being pursued to a boring shot of Vader boarding a Star Destroyer.

The thing about Anakin’s force ghost is that Vader turned back into Anakin when he redeemed himself by killing the Emperor, so him in ROTS was not when Anakin died. He died as Anakin in ROTJ.

Worley sometimes make good points. Like when he points out that it doesn’t make sense for them to have built the ship models for the Prequels. And also when he talks about how George was way more involved in ESB and ROTJ then most people think. But the base argument and most of his points don’t make sense.

For a movie edit (or at least anything trying to fit with the traditional style of Star Wars) it wouldn’t work 'cause Lucas Star Wars don’t do flashbacks or time skips, but with something like the mini-series idea where it puts a different spin on the format it could work. If you want it to be more like the BCS flashbacks I’d recommend crushing the blacks a bit more.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

George I had faith in you!!!