Spartacus01

Immediately before dying, Luke heard Padmé calling him by his name from the netherworld of the Force.

The Jedi were hesitant to train Anakin, because he was attached to his mother, he missed her. And the Jedi, being against attachment and being used to start training children at a much younger age, just felt hesitant to train Anakin. That’s it. No further explanation is needed, everything is already explained in The Phantom Menace. Furthermore, the fact that Sidious and Plagueis were involved in Anakin’s creation was confirmed in the Legends novel Darth Plagueis. However, in the novel it is explained that it wasn’t something that they did voluntarily. Rather, the Force created Anakin as an automatic reaction to their unnatural experiments with the midi-chlorians. Basically, the Force was “pissed off” at the Sith because they were manipulating the Force itself, so it created Anakin to stop themm.

9/11 happened in my birth year.

Vladius said:

NFBisms said:

Vladius said:
What I mainly don’t like is all the insane real world baggage that gets dragged into it. The Jedi are like an ascetic Buddhist FBI that is also a fourth branch of government and also the leaders of the military and also diplomats and also bodyguards. The Republic is the Roman Republic but it’s also the United States during the Civil War and also the United States in modern times. The Senate is the Roman Senate and also the United Nations times a million. The enemies of the Republic are the Confederates from the Civil War and also modern international megacorporations. Anakin has aspects of Christ but is not perfect like Christ and ends up being the Antichrist.
All of the religion and philosophy in Star Wars is both Christian and Buddhist, Western and Eastern, per Lucas. Which means that it has both traditional good and evil, and suggestions of Yin and Yang “balance” stuff, without distinguishing between the two.
This all leads to confusion and really, really, really bad takes from fans about what it all means. Stuff like you should be equally good and evil, or that Anakin committing genocide on the Jedi was good and they deserved it. And then you have a bunch of EU writers, Disney writers, and Dave Filoni encouraging this.

I think this is actually the strength of the prequels as they are IMO.

Lucas challenges preconceptions of The Story with every subsequent movie starting from “I am your father” in ESB; where the PT contradicts the OT is intentionally in conversation. To me, what’d even be the point of these if the story were only the genre tropes and archetypes we could extrapolate from the OT? The “insane” real world baggage is what makes them worth handling in detail at all. It moves the needle from fairy tale to mythology. It’s not meant to be instructive.

Whatever analogues are in that mix shouldn’t be 1:1, otherwise then we would just be talking about Catholicism. Falling in line to real life historical or contemporary example is a hacky commentative form anyway; the only reality that demands consistency in fictional worldbuilding are the sociological and theoretical mechanics. Any philosophy or culture can be made up in that context, and should. That allows space to work with empathy / thought that real world sensitivities make difficult. If you’re looking for specific analogy, of course it’s incoherent. Of course all of this couldn’t really exist. But the exercise is about how something works, not what they are.

Your mileage may vary on what the difference is, but to articulate how I see the difference: Lucas isn’t writing about the United States or Christianity (just as examples). He’d be writing about hegemonic imperialism and the sociology of principled beliefs. From there your personal engagement is your personal engagement. The murkiness of What It All Means™ is a feature not a bug. I like that we can all have different perspectives about it.

My problem is the lack of different perspectives. The orthodox fan view right now is that the light side = no emotions, the dark side = strong emotions, and the gray side = emotions in check. The Jedi are a cult who kidnaps and brainwashes children into having no emotions. When you force people to have no emotions, the Freudian id takes over and makes them turn to the dark side and snap and commit mass murder, and that’s your fault. For these fans (most of them online), there is no other perspective. There’s no dialogue or moral ambiguity. They took black and white, introduced “gray”, then called the gray white and everything else black.
Never mind that gray is nonsensical and involves being half good and half evil. You can have a little bit of turning into a gray-skinned yellow-eyed genocidal cyborg monster, as a treat. (This is how they describe Anakin in the Ahsoka show.)
It’s blatantly false both in and out of universe, but there is no disagreement about it. This is the consensus. In Dave Filoni shows and other stuff, it’s canon. There’s no broader discussion of Christianity and Buddhism or exactly WHY monks do what they do. It’s all judged through the lens of 21st century hyper-individualistic modern western culture where everything is about sex and doing what you want, when you want, screw everyone else.

I don’t want to play the part of the devil’s advocate, but can you really blame the fans for this? I think that Lucas is to blame, not the fans. In the Prequels there is no indication whatsoever that the Jedi philosophy is not based on suppressing emotions. On the contrary, every time we see the Jedi do or say something in the Prequels, you always get the impression that repressing emotions is exactly what they do. Add to that the fact that the Jedi forbid marriage and romantic relationships, and you have the perfect formula for misunderstanding. If Lucas was not able to properly convey his message, then it’s not the fault of the fans, it’s Lucas’s fault. And even if Lucas had succeeded in conveying his message correctly, it doesn’t mean that people should not be contrary to the Jedi philosophy, because you can still be contrary to the idea of celibacy. I’m a collectivist and an anti-individualist myself, but I’m still contrary to celibacy.

It doesn’t bother me that the Jedi are portrayed as a bureaucratic institution tied to the Republic’s government. It doesn’t bother me that they are portrayed as a centralized Order that has a unified philosophy. It doesn’t bother me that all Jedi are military leaders during the Clone Wars. What bothers me is the fact that they are portrayed as an Order that encourages celibacy and abstinence, and forbids romantic relationships and marriage. Personally, I think that one of the biggest reasons of why people don’t really like the Prequel Jedi is because they forbid marriage. Most people are against forbidding such a thing, as everyone considers marriage and romantic love as something natural. Plus, the Original Trilogy itself never implied that the Jedi forbade such things.

The same can be applied to the “Jedi must begin training at a young age” thing. I mean… Okay, the Original Trilogy implies that the Jedi begin to be trained at a young age, but there is a difference between starting to train a Jedi at a young age and having him join the Order as soon as he is born. The fact that Yoda said Luke was “too old” to be trained does not imply that Luke should have started training as soon as he was born. You could find a middle ground and say that the Jedi are usually brought into the Order when they are 14 years old, or something. This way, Yoda’s statement would have made sense anyway, since Luke was 22 years old at the time.

If Lucas had retained the bureaucratic and centralized aspects of the Jedi Order without introducing the rules about marriage and training at a young age, and had found another reason to make Anakin fall to the Dark Side other than attachment, then I believe that no one would ever think of saying that the Jedi are bad. Plus, not introducing the Chosen One Prophecy and the Balance of the Force would have avoided a lot of confusion about how the Force really works, and would have made things like the return of the Sith after Episode VI to be perfectly acceptable.

Vladius said:

This is the fantasy I always have in my head. I really hate arguing with people about the prequel Jedi, balance in the Force, gray Jedi, Mortis, etc. when none of that crap existed before 1999. Jedi were so much more interesting. They could wear whatever they liked, go wherever they liked, serve causes they wanted to serve, could have families and children. They were much more like feudal knights or samurai. You could easily imagine different factions of Jedi, differing takes on Jedi philosophy and the Force, and non-Sith Jedi villains like C’baoth. There was no Chosen One prophecy, so Luke’s adventures after RotJ were just as eventful and important as anything before.

People who are into the prequel Jedi are easily impressed by what they think is Lucas subtly criticizing problems that he made up. They have no concept that their ideas are stuck in a box when compared with all the possibilities that were getting explored pre-1999. Even KOTOR takes the wild and crazy Tales of the Jedi era and crams prequel Jedi into it.

I do think Palpatine was intended to be a Sith, though. Once the Sith and the concept of Sith Lords existed, I’m fairly certain that Vader and Palpatine were integrated into it.

Even though I am a Prequel fan, I pretty much agree with this. I, too, would have preferred if the Jedi were depicted like in the pre-1999 EU, especially like in the Tales of the Jedi comics. No Chosen Ones, no Balance of the Force, no strict rules against marriage and romance in general, and no Mortis. Like, I don’t mind the Jedi being depicted as a centralized Order who participated in the Clone Wars, had a unified philosophy and served the Republic, but I think that the rule against marriage and the Chosen One Prophecy shouldn’t have been introduced, and that they should have found another cause for Anakin’s fall to the Dark Side. Without the Chosen One thing, the Balance of the Force and the rule against marriage and romance, I think that the Force and the Jedi in general would be way less controversial today.

Let me begin by emphasizing the positive aspects of this show. The characters are truly engaging and feel relatable, and the storylines themselves are consistently entertaining. I find that each episode holds its charm, including those from the initial season that might come across as a bit more youthful. There is a lot about this show that feels innately appealing, and watching it always manages to put a smile on my face. It is a show that I will always hold dear because it was my first Star Wars series after experiencing the films, and it brings back some wonderful memories. Yet, despite my deep enjoyment of the show and my genuine appreciation for its quality, I find it difficult to accept it as an organic part of the broader Star Wars universe.

To begin with, I struggle to align this show’s version of Anakin with his portrayal in the Prequel Trilogy. While I do not find the character himself unpleasant, the issue is that he feels misaligned with the Anakin from the films. There is a significant difference in how he is represented here, and I find it hard to reconcile the two versions. Ideally, to match his character progression in the movies, the show should have depicted a transition, beginning with traits from Attack of the Clones and gradually evolving toward his demeanor in Revenge of the Sith. Instead, we see Anakin being the same character we see at the beginning of Revenge of the Sith right from the outset, which, to me, feels abrupt and not entirely convincing. It is true that Anakin was not always easy to like in the Prequel Trilogy, but that is precisely what would have made a gradual transformation so meaningful. Showing how he shifted from his impulsive, somewhat unlikeable younger self in Attack of the Clones to the charismatic hero seen at the beginning of Revenge of the Sith would have added a layer of depth to his journey. However, the series skips that development, presenting him as an already fully-formed, likable hero. Although that is not inherently a flaw, it does stray from his cinematic characterization. Just as some fans refer to the Sequel Trilogy’s Luke as “Jake Skywalker,” Anakin in The Clone Wars could be seen as “Aniken Skywoka.” And let’s be honest, Mat Lanter’s voice does not resemble Hayden Christensen’s, which makes the character feel further removed from his film counterpart. In my opinion, The Clone Wars micro-series by Tartakovsky handled Anakin’s development more effectively. Early episodes reflect the young, hot-headed Anakin we see in Attack of the Clones, but as he becomes a Jedi Knight, he gains confidence and maturity, ending the series closer in personality to his Revenge of the Sith self — calmer, more heroic, and less quick-tempered. This gradual evolution felt more in line with what we see in the films, and it worked much better, in my opinion. So, while the portrayal in The Clone Wars is not necessarily poor, it lacks the nuanced progression that I believe was necessary to match the character’s cinematic arc.

Beyond Anakin’s portrayal, I also find the concept of Anakin having a padawan, Ahsoka, challenging to reconcile with the Prequel Trilogy. Ahsoka is not a poorly written character, and I have no objections to her as an individual. However, making her Anakin’s apprentice feels forced, as there is no suggestion in the films that he ever had a padawan between Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith. In Revenge of the Sith, there is no mention of Ahsoka by anyone, not even Anakin himself. Given how important the relationship between master and apprentice is, this omission seems notable. From an in-universe perspective, it feels unlikely that no one would be aware of Anakin’s apprentice by that time. Therefore, inserting Ahsoka into this role feels somewhat forced. A more fitting choice would have been to place her as Plo Koon’s padawan, only appearing in storylines involving that character.

Another aspect I found somewhat lacking is the show’s portrayal of General Grievous. While I understand that George Lucas wanted him to be more cartoonish, I feel there is a balance that could have been struck between comedic traits and an intimidating presence. Instead, The Clone Wars depicts Grievous as inept and cowardly, lacking any real menacing qualities. I believe an ideal portrayal would have combined the ruthless efficiency of Grievous from the 2003 series with his more stylized, villainous elements from Revenge of the Sith. This would have allowed for a competent yet humorously villainous character who retreats when plans fail.

Darth Maul’s return is another element I feel does not work well. I am not opposed to Maul being brought back to life, but I do think his reappearance in the Clone Wars era is problematic. In Revenge of the Sith, there is no mention of Maul still being active or ruling Mandalore, even though such events would likely be significant. Had Maul been reintroduced after the events of Revenge of the Sith, it might have felt more cohesive. For example, the Expanded Universe brings Maul back in a self-contained story set after Revenge of the Sith, where he confronts Obi-Wan on Tatooine and dies. This approach respects the timeline without altering established events. If the writers had wanted a powerful Dark Side figure to control a criminal syndicate and take over Mandalore, they could have used Savage Opress instead, assigning him the role Maul fulfills in the show.

Finally, I find the portrayal of the Clones to be another divergence from the films. In Attack of the Clones, they are presented as genetically engineered soldiers designed to follow orders without hesitation. The series, however, gives them individual personalities and emotional depth, which, while interesting, contradicts their depiction in the films. Remaining faithful to the films’ portrayal would have eliminated the need for the inhibitor chip plot device, making Order 66 more impactful. It would also highlight the manipulative nature of the Sith and expose the Republic’s moral failings for using an army of engineered, obedient soldiers. Such a choice would add layers to The Clone Wars era without diverging from the films’ established themes. While I do not dislike how the Clones are depicted here, I believe a more straightforward interpretation would have enriched the story even further.

Overall, The Clone Wars is an enjoyable and engaging series. As I mentioned, it brings a lot of joy, and I appreciate its quality on its own terms. However, I see it as more of an alternative really that stands apart from the main Star Wars universe because, in my opinion, it does not fully integrate with the continuity established in the films.

I’ve ultimately decided to stop using multiple timelines and instead focus on a single, cohesive timeline, which is the timeline I previously shared with my old account here.

of_Kaiburr_and_Whills said:

‘Star Wars: De-Incest Edition’

Leia is not Luke’s brother- snip out all the pieces of dialogue that say so.

At the top of my head only includes: Some of the stuff Ghost Obi-Wan tells Luke on Dagobah, some of what Luke says to Leia on Endor, and the baby Leia in Episode III (which I know isn’t OT, but still).

None of this would diminish Leia’s role in any of the films and would remove the incest-y details.

Wouldn’t it be simpler to just remove the kiss in ESB? This way, there isn’t incest and you don’t need to modify nothing but a single scene.

Nilbog said:

If starting from scratch: I’d use George Lucas’ story treatments.

Nah, they are terrible.

I perfer the PT lightsaber duels over the OT lightsaber duels.

I personally don’t like the idea. I think that Canon and Legends should stay separate. If someone wants to create a head-canon in which he mixes some Canon stories and some Legends stories, then that’s fine, but to take the two universes as a whole and try to merge them is a bad idea, in my opinion.

TiiN said:

RogueLeader said:

I don’t remember if it was someone here or on YouTube, but someone achieved this exact idea before, so it is definitely doable without voice Ai or anything.

EDIT: I did find a version of this idea. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GvpT_7BMAc

I can remember to this edit. The editing is nice and the idea is good.

But when Padme no longer has any meaning for him, why he ask about her?

I’ll quote myself:

The idea is that Vader’s reasoning is more or less like this: “Is she alive? Then I’ll keep her at my side and force her to agree with me. Is she dead? Then I can do without her.” Indeed, we see Vader reasoning like this already when he is on Mustafar, when he tells Padmé to join him and basically has no problem choking her. The Dark Side has twisted his mind so much that he no longer sees Padmé as a person, but as a mere object that he can use the way he sees fit.

Anakin and Aayla Secura would make a nice couple.

One of the most popular criticisms of the Prequels is that “George Lucas can’t write romantic dialogue and can’t create well-written love stories.” And while I partially agree with this criticism, I personally don’t see it as black and white as the majority of Prequel critics view it. Personally, I think that Anakin and Padmé’s love story has everything necessary to be a very compelling and well-written love story, it just needs to be refined and trimmed. The proof of this is the fact that you don’t need to rewrite the entire love story to make it work, you just have to create simple fan edits. And you don’t even need to modify the majority of the romantic scenes, you just need to modify a couple of scenes in order to make the love story to be more fluid, compelling, and likable. If Anakin and Padmé’s love story was bad at its core, then creating fan edits would not improve it at all. But that’s not the case, and creating fan edits is more than enough to improve it. This, in my opinion, proves that George Lucas is not entirely bad at writing love stories. He has the basics, he just needs someone else to refine what he has done.

RogueLeader said:

I don’t remember if it was someone here or on YouTube, but someone achieved this exact idea before, so it is definitely doable without voice Ai or anything.

EDIT: I did find a version of this idea. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GvpT_7BMAc

The scene is very good, but unfortunately the music is not the same, so I don’t think this scene could be used in an actual edit. We would need to change the whole score.

leftshoe18 said:

Why would he ask if she’s safe and then immediately dismiss it?

I think if you wanted to get that point across it would be better to just not address the Padme situation at all.

The idea is that Vader’s reasoning is more or less like this: “Is she alive? Then I’ll keep her at my side and force her to agree with me. Is she dead? Then I can do without her.” Indeed, we see Vader reasoning like this already when he is on Mustafar, when he tells Padmé to join him and basically has no problem choking her. The Dark Side has twisted his mind so much that he no longer sees Padmé as a person, but as a mere object that he can use the way he sees fit.

I had a very interesting idea.

My idea is to modify the lines that Vader says when Palpatine tells him that Padmé is dead. My idea is to modify the lines, so that it appears that the Dark Side has blinded Anakin so much, that he doesn’t even care anymore about whatever Padmé is alive or not. The Dark Side has twisted his mind so much, that he has completely forgotten why he joined the Dark Side in the first place: to save Padmé. Now saving Padmé is no longer his priority, all he cares about is power, ruling the Galaxy and doing things his own way. Therefore, I propose an alternate version of the dialogue between him and Palpatine at the end of Revenge of the Sith.

The dialogue would be more or less like this:

Vader: Where is Padmé? Is she safe? Is she alright?
Palpatine: It seems that in your anger you killed her.
Vader: [Pauses for a couple of seconds] Her name… has no longer any meaning for me.

We just cut the whole “NOOOOOO” thing, as well as Vader’s rage at the medical droids.

Do you think something like this could be achieved through AI?

Okay guys, I have managed to obtain the scene. If someone is interested, the scene is here:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1azu-BFUL_MLdbRpuk0-JuTlYhe5w33bd/view?usp=drivesdk

SparkySywer said:

This is in the Fanedit Care Package if you know where to find that

I don’t know…

A long time ago, someone had created a modified version of the scene in which Palpatine and Vader are on the Star Destroyer at the end of the movie, and they observe the Death Star. Instead of the Death Star, the creator of this edited scene had added a panoramic view of Coruscant, so as not to create contradictions with the Original Trilogy, and also to avoid questions like: “If it took them 20 years to build the First Death Star, why did it take them 2 years to build the Second Death Star?” Hal had originally included this scene in his personal edit, but he later removed it and put the original scene back on. However, I’m considering inserting the edited scene in my personal edit of Revenge of the Sith. A few days ago, I asked Hal if he still owned that scene, but he told me he doesn’t have it anymore. So, I’d like to know if any of you still have it.

A long time ago, someone had created a modified version of the scene in which Palpatine and Vader are on the Star Destroyer at the end of the movie, and they observe the Death Star. Instead of the Death Star, the creator of this edited scene had added a panoramic view of Coruscant, so as not to create contradictions with the Original Trilogy, and also to avoid questions like: “If it took them 20 years to build the First Death Star, why did it take them 2 years to build the Second Death Star?” Hal had originally included this scene in his personal edit, but he later removed it and put the original scene back on. However, I’m considering inserting the edited scene in my personal edit of Revenge of the Sith. A few days ago, I asked Hal if he still owned that scene, but he told me he doesn’t have it anymore. So, I’d like to know if any of you still have it.

RicOlie_2 said:

Saying you appreciate Stalin is like saying you appreciate Hitler…

As I said, “I’m not going to start a debate about this, because I have no intention to do so, and also because this is supposed to be a discussion about random stuff that people want to complain about, not a political thread.”

Superweapon VII said:

Spartacus01 said:

Superweapon VII said:

Spuffure said:

Sorry if this is too political (however it’s really not to start a debate) I said it before, but I really feel like I have no idea who to believe and who not to. The internet has made so many political ideologies present, I don’t know whether or not I should be left or right or centre or something else. Who is right? Who is wrong? Am I a bigot and don’t even know it?

Fuck tankies, fuck fash, and fuck liberalism, too. Libertarian socialism FTW.

I could be defined as a Tankie. Lol.

I’m not one of those guys who stamps everyone under the Leninist/Marxist-Leninist/Maoist umbrella a tankie. I’m not a fan of any of those strains of Marxism, but I don’t like demonizing individuals. So long as you’re not a Grover Furr-type Stalinist, I’m content to agree to disagree.

I’m not entirely Communist. I agree with the majority of principles of Marxism-Leninism, but I’m not philosophically materialist like classical Communists, as I believe in God. I still support the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc historically, though. And yes, I appreciate Stalin, but I criticize Grover Furr for some of his political views (though I appreciate his historical research). But I’m not going to start a debate about this, because I have no intention to do so, and also because this is supposed to be a discussion about random stuff that people want to complain about, not a political thread.

Edit: Double post