Vaderisnothayden

Lucas has made huge amounts of money off Star Wars. I'm sure he could spare some. Particularly seeing as he's ruined Star Wars, so I don't think he's all that deserving of the money.

That stinks.

skyjedi2005 said:

At the same time Padme has to be the dumbest and most naive person ever to think backwater retard binks up to the task of being a senator from naboo.

Making Jar Jar a senator was incredibly dumb and is down to the general dumbness of the prequels.

DarkFather said:

"moral wisey wisey nicey nicey"

o_O ..... Moral? He was a disgruntled idealist. He was definitely one of the grayer Jedi. Wise? Somewhat. Nice? Partly, but I wouldn't say overall.

He blatantly cheated in the dice game with Watto. A goody-goody would've accepted fair play all around.

Qui-Gon was like the only one who reflected what the audience thought of Jar-Jar ("the ability to speak does not make you intelligent") and kept him in line (catching his tongue at the dinner table). A goody-goody would've probably smiled and played along with the antics, or acted like Jar-Jar was just like everyone else.

He cut off one of Obi-Wan's comradey joke to him about Anakin ("another pathetic life form") A goody-goody would've said something like "I think you'll see that he's a great kid once you get to know him!"

He was more than willing to draw lines with the queen ("no more orders from your highness today") A goody-goody would've said "Okay" right off the bat.

The only thing close to a "goody goody" in the PT was Lloyd's Anakin.

Those arguments fail to take into consideration the actual way the character came across. It's not just what he did, it's the psychology and mentality of how he did what he did and how it came across. Compare him to Alex Guinness's Kenobi. That Kenobi is so much more relaxed and at ease. He's not so pushed to be a good guy. He just is what he is.

Yes Qui Gon acted pushed to be moral. So what if he cut a few corners here or there or was harsher in some places, he still comes off as a character very much caught up in his moral code.

And It's also pretty clear that your definition of a goody goody is different from mine. Yet again, you're arguing with me based on totally misunderstanding what I'm saying. I don't see what's the point of that. We're talking about two totally different things.

And just because Qui Gon is not as mind-bogglingly uptight and rigidly moral as some of the other Jedi doesn't mean he wasn't still a goody-goody with a conspicuous moral hangup.

I know subtleties can be hard to see, but please try.

As for your last sentence, you need to take another look at the prequel Jedi and Padme and various other characters.

Going his own route doesn't mean he wasn't one of these goody-goodies the prequel era was full of. You could see him trying so hard at being this moral wisey wisey nicey nicey Jedi. Alec Guinness's Kenobi never made that sort of effort.

The OOT. Plus the Marvel comics. Some of the more recent EU is good, but it's not terribly important to me. Also, Liam Neeson's performance in The Phantom Menace, even if the film wasn't proper Star Wars and his character was one of these uptight goody-goody prequel-era Jedi.

Nanner Split said:

In regards to the "Tatooine being under the Empire's control" discussion, I always thought that it was outside of Imperial control, and the only reason the stormtroopers were there was because they were sent to hunt for the droids. Because ANH is the only film where we actually see any sort of Republic/Imperial troops on the planet, isn't it?

It's inside imperial control, because in the screenplay (and deleted scenes I think) Biggs suggests that the empire might take over the Lars farm. Biggs points out that the empire is nationalizing commerce in the core systems and says it won't be long before Owen is just a tenant slaving for the empire. This implies Tatooine is in the empire's area of control. If they were outside imperial territory they would be saying "Those poor fuckers in the empire will be all tenants soon, lucky for us that we're not in the empire." Luke says the empire won't bother with "this rock", meaning Tatooine is an insignificant planet (and on the outer rim) so the empire doesn't bother with it, hence the lack of significant imperial presence.

If the Hutts or some other government had an independent government going, independent of the empire, they wouldn't let imperial soldiers go around doing whatever they liked there.

There's no opportunity to show imperial troops on Tatooine in ROTJ, it's just Jabba's place that's shown. There's not going to be imperials there. And Tatooine isn't in ESB. Tatooine is outside the republic in the prequels, but that doesn't mean it's outside the empire in the OT. The empire is not bound to stick to the republic's boundaries. It can expand. Plus we don't know that Lucas envisioned the planet as being outside the republic when he was making the OT.

Janskeet said:

Well I think ALL 3 of the OOT movies are masterpeices, yes including ROTJ. I'm sick of people denouncing ROTJ like it is the OT ugly duckling. It was great. Just as good as the first two. I don't pay attention to any of the other SW stuff out there. 

I agree on ROTJ.

AxiaEuxine said:

I think the fact that Anaking goes to the Dark side becuase he doesnt want to loose his love, his wife is pretty epic.

My two cents...

No, it just preaches the message that love is a bad thing that makes you kill kiddies. As underlined by Yoda preaching against attachment and against caring when people die.

You can add in the 84-86 Marvel comics.

DarkFather said:

If Anakin were older in the prequels, there's a better chance we could have been spared from his ridiculous teenage tantrums.

Anakin was originally older in the backstory. When ROTJ was made Anakin was intended to be in his sixties at the time of ROTJ, which puts him at about 40s when Luke and Leia were born.

DarkFather said:

If only Lucas was so meticulous about the continuity of the films.

Hear hear.

Indy and Han Solo have distinctly different personalities. They're not the same character at all.

Long before the Dark Knight I thought Heath Ledger would have made a good Anakin.

I don't think Bale would have made a good Anakin, plus I find his acting insufficiently sympathetic.

Thanks for the article. :)

Did you catch that bit where he says people around Lucas should be brave enough to say "No" more often?

I fucking love ROTJ. And it was so great experiencing the feeling of celebration when that film came out. 

C3PX said:

Wow, that would be pretty sweet. The song could start off with singing, [opera voice]"Ouch! My limbs! You stupid son of a bitch, you cut off my limbs! I thought you were my brother, but I think you slept with my wife

Yeah, Kenobi did sleep with his wife. Which explains Luke and Leia. I mean, seriously, how could that Anakin wuss ever actually father children? Either it was Kenobi or it was Yoda or it was another immaculate conception.

The old comics are far more genuinely Star Wars than the Dark Horse comics. They come from the era of the films and weren't part of some big latter-day revisionist EU project the way the Dark Horse ones were. If you want the genuine OT comic tradition, go to the Marvel comics and the newstrip.

Well, clearly Lucas envisioned Tatooine as under the empire when he made the SE.

As for your interpretation that the empire wasn't in authority over Tatooine in ANH, I think the screenplay and novelization suggest that's a mistaken interpretation. They both have talk of the empire potentially taking over the Lars farm. That wouldn't be a risk if Tatooine was securely under the Hutts and not under the empire. Clearly the empire are in control here. They just are not very interested in Tatooine, hence the lack of a heavier presence. If Tatooine was really under the authority of somebody independent of the empire, the imperials would not be able to act like they're in authority there. The local authorities would object. Clearly the local authorities have to bow to the empire because the empire rules this area. Tatooine is merely on the edge of the empire's area of power, hence a far weaker presence.

If the empire didn't own the place they wouldn't be at risk of taking over Owen Lars's farm. Just because they didn't have troops based there doesn't mean they didn't claim the place. Tatooine is just so far out and minor that the empire doesn't bother with a regular presence.

And Tatooine being under the Hutts is not at odds with it being under the empire. Alderaan clearly had its own government too, but it was part of the empire. Plus I don't think Tatooine was intended to be under Hutt government when the OOT was made.

Davnes007 said:

.................yawn................

I, for one, am bored with repeating myself, so I'll allow you delude yourself into thinking you're being "perfectly reasonable". I'll let someone else disagree with your opinion so you can tell them you think they're 'wrong'.

I may chime in again...when you have something DIFFERENT to say.

LONG LIVE ELABORATE CLOTHES - ALL HAIL QUEEN AMIDALA !!!!!!

Um, you do realize that telling somebody you think their opinion is wrong is something everybody is doing every time they disagree in a discussion? If you're honest with yourself you'll recognize that. Stop giving me trouble for perfectly reasonable discussion. I think your issue is that my part in the discussion failed to entertain you (apart from you being offended by my standing up for my opinion in the face of being told I was wrong by a few people).

I may chime in again...when you have something DIFFERENT to say.

Oh yeah, what I have to say is no good as long as I keep to the same opinion. Sorry for not entertaining you.

Davnes007 said:

MY issue is that you've essentially been repeating yourself in EVERY post you've made in this thread.

No I haven't. I was sometimes forced to repeat some points because people kept repeating the same sort of arguments against them, but I introduced new stuff as well.

 Every time someone disagrees with YOU, you give them "trouble" for daring to disagree with YOU.

Factually untrue. I debated quite reasonably and reacted in a perfectly reasonable way to the sort of treatment I got.

Knightmessenger said:

C3PX said:

Vaderisnothayden said:

I'm not 100% sure I agree. They're celebrating, and really happy, but they celebrated and were happy at the end of 'Star Wars' also.

The celebration at the end of Star Wars was of a different kind with a different tone. The ROTJ celebration was an end-of-the-war it's-all-over we-don't-have-to-worry-about-the-future kind of celebration.

In other words, it was just like an Obama supporter's "Yes We Did!" victory party. The next day they wake up, take a look around, down a few pills for their hang over, and say, "What the fu... the stock market is still down? I don't get it? What went wrong?" Only in this case, they wake up next morning, down a few pills for there hang over, and realize, "My goodness, seems the Empire is still around! What do ya have to do to get rid of a damn Empire around here?"

I think the new ending theme gives a sense of finality while the yub nub makes it sound as if it's just one more chapter finished. Anyways, on one of the dvd commentaries (III maybe?) , Lucas states the empire can only be defeated when both sith are killed off. Which happens at the end of Jedi. So Jedi may have been thought of as just another chapter at one point but Lucas decided that he wanted to wrap it up with the third ot movie.

About the Obama thing. Anyone see the Onion video describing just that, supporters the day after.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3_95F5e-Ac

 

Judging by the novelization's version of things I think Lucas intended it to be the ending of the empire back in 83. Being open to having more films set after ROTJ doesn't necessarily mean planning to keep the empire alive after ROTJ. If I remember rightly, there was talk about the sequel trilogy being about ruling and politics and compromises, so it could have been about buildling the new republic rather than fighting the empire.

Also re the Obama celebration, in a celebration in the real world pepple can have a certain idea that the struggle is over when they celebrate and they can be wrong (though actually the struggle to elect Obama WAS over). But in the Star Wars OT you get what it says on the tin. The ROTJ OOT celebration gave the message that the war was over and I think it makes sense to take it at face value.

see you auntie said:

You know they added ropes around Han's feet in '97? *rolls eyes* It was a pretty silly situation in '83 but I guess they didn't have this 'rope' technology back then.

And as for the celebration scenes there has been discussion on the sudden uprising of the citizens on Coruscant and the significant population of Cloud City (didn't they flee?) which was also under control of the Empire (there wouldn't be much celebration if that was the case) but what about Tatooine?

Again it's been discussed that the planet is under control of the Hutts far from the reach of the Empire, why do they care? My problem is if I lived on a desert planet with two freakin' suns why would I be out partying in the middle of the street?

I liked when Mos Eisley was an under-populated backwater town reminiscent of a Sergio Leone western.

We saw in ANH that the imperials had plenty of authority on Tatooine. They acted like they owned the place. The imperial reach certainly extended there (and to space nearby -as in the Tantive IV battle). I think Lucas was thinking of them as being under the empire when he did the SE.

As for the sudden uprising of people on Coruscant, I think the thinking is that once the death star was blown up and Palpatine was killed the empire pretty much just ceased to exist everywhere. Not very realistic, but nor was teddy bears beating armored storm troopers with stones and that was the same film. Big discussion of this on another thread.

The "Wesa free!" in the Naboo celebration scene kind of underlines that idea, as does the ROTJ novelization finishing with "The empire was dead. Long live the rebellion." Pretty clearly that's the idea Lucasfilm had in 83 and Lucas had when he made the SE, despite the 90s EU continuing the empire.

I preferred the lonelier Mos Eisley too. Much more atmosphere.

CO said:

rcb said:

 and the redone ending makes so much more sense then the original.

I have to take issue with that, because I think it doesn't make any sense. 

If you are referring to a younger Anakin put in the ghost scene, that totally dispels the point of ROTJ.  ROTJ is about the redemption of Darth Vader, and how the older Anakin, is conflicted thoughout the movie, and finally saves his son by killing the Emperor.  By showing an older Anakin standing there next to an older ObiWan, you see the character come full circle, as his redemption is complete.

By changing the ending in the SE with Hayden in the ghost scene, Lucas says that Anakin died on Mustafar, which would totally contradict ROTJ since it was the OLDER Anakin who was conflicted, it was the older Anakin who killed the Emperor, and the OLDER Anakin who tells Luke, "Tell your sister you were right...." 

By saying Anakin & Vader are two different people misses the point of ROTJ because they are ONE person the whole time, and even though he went by Darth Vader throughout the OT, there was always was that part of Anakin, the good guy that never left. 

Even Lucas doesn't even understand the original story he wrote back in 1983, just so he could stick some gimmick in the 2004 DVD's and try to tie the trilogies together.

 

I agree with all of that.

Thanks. Seriously, that was a good thing to do, posting that here. Scary.

What if your windows didn't make an update in March. Does that mean you have the virus? What sort of automatic update is it supposed to make?

ROTJ was great. It was full of great moments. The Jabba section was marvellous. The Vader-Luke-Palpatine section was great. The redemption of Vader and Sebastian Shaw's performance were great. The Endor section wasn't the best part of any Star Wars movie, but it worked quite well enough. And Luke as a Jedi was so much more interesting than all the flashy Jedi tricks the prequels had. ROTJ was a beautiful movie and a great triumphant finale for the trilogy.