Chefelf.com Night Life: Observations on PT Plot - Chefelf.com Night Life

Jump to content

Star Wars Fan Convention

  • (2 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2

Observations on PT Plot

#1 User is offline   DarthTherion Icon

  • Mini Boss
  • PipPip
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 141
  • Joined: 05-May 05
  • Country:United States

Posted 05 May 2005 - 12:03 PM

Hi, everyone,

I stumbled on this site the other day and have been reading the "reasons for hating" the prequels with great interest. These movies certainly are not up to par with the original films (granted, *nothing* could ever compare to the original films), and it is alot of fun to see long lists of flaws that people find in them.

This being said, I think it's important at least to be fair with these new films. Let's criticize the things that deserve it, rather than dismissing every aspect of the plotline with semi-witty insults directed at Lucas. I'd like to observe a few things:

1) The folly of the Jedi -- The fact that the Jedi are arrogant,foolish, and generally incompetent is an essential aspect of the PT. They allow slavery to exist in the galaxy, they train children practically from birth to be fanatically dedicated to the order, and they fail to believe that a Sith threat has sprung up right under their noses. This last point is most important: the Jedi cannot admit that they are failures. They cannot even *fathom* that a Dark Lord of the Sith has gained influence in the senate, much less that one has been elected Grand Chancellor. The audience sees the threat clearly -- because the audience not only has foresight (which Jedi do *not* actually have, contrary to their claims), but becaue the audience is not composed of arrogant, foolish old Jedi.

When Count Dooku reveals the Sith plot to Obi-wan, it seems as if he is being serious. Like Vader thirty years later, Dooku wants to turn on his master and seize power for himself. When Obi-wan reports this to the other Jedi, they choose to ignore the problem and believe that Dooku is a liar. Seriously investigating this issue might just reveal how ignorant they have been, and the Jedi do NOT want this. They don't even want to inform the Senate that their ability to use the Force has diminished, nevermind the fact that they have been so utterly useless as to allow the Dark Lord of the Sith to manipulate the Senate for years. It's all about saving face and denial.

The Jedi eagerly accept the clone army and stand idly by as the Chancellor is given "emergency powers." They support the moves that will lead to their destruction. This is a combination of arrogance and the fact that the galactic republic has had *peace* for a thousand years. Hence, nothing like this has ever happened. The audience, familiar with the history of Earth and the particularly bloody 20th century that was marked by totalitarian regimes, immediately sees what Palpatine is up to. The Jedi do *not.* The battle of Geonosis also reveals that the Jedi are not soldiers or effective military leaders. Thirty years later, Yoda reflects "Wars make not one great." Perhaps he has learned something, and this is why his character seems so much wiser in the OT, after he has had time to digest the awful mistakes of the Jedi?

This leads me to....

2) Child of Prophecy -- Get ready for a surprise: the Jedi can't predict the future better than anyone else! "Always in motion the future is...clouded this boy's future is." Yoda is always copping out, because no one has the ability to see the future. Jedi have a *limited* ability to sense intuitively what is likely to happen in the very near future, which is what makes them so effective in combat (and pod-racing and starship fighting and other forms of individual confrontation)...but when it comes to large-scale planning, the Jedi are as clueless as anyone else (or even more so, from the looks of it).

The idea of a "prophecy" is very appealing for the PT, mainly because, for the audience, the future already IS set in stone. We know the boy is going to become Darth Vader -- but the surprise is that this is not the prophecy at all. Instead, it speaks of "The one who will bring balance to the Force." Hmmm. Balance?

The Force is not good. It is an impersonal energy field created by life that -- just like life -- has "positive" and "negative" aspects. It naturally seeks balance between these elements. The Jedi order overemphasizes the "good" of the Force and is growing lazy with their monopoly on all Force-sensitives in their jurisdiction. Something needs to restore cosmic balance.

Is it inconceivable (pardon the pun) that the Force would manifest an avatar to accomplish this necessary task? Anakin does indeed end up balancing the force -- he descends into darkness, destroys the entire Jedi order, and then emerges after slaying his master and himself, leaving his son as the head of a new order. Wipe them out, all of them, and go back to square one...talk about balance! The Force is ruthless sometimes, just like Nature.

The "virgin birth" may make everyone raised in our culture think of Christianity, but this is actually a mythological idea with roots *much* deeper. It's been with mankind in one form or another since the beginning of time. It emphasizes the purity of the boy as a direct emanation of the Force and a direct instrument of its will (will to balance, that is...the Force is *not* a conscious entity that wants "good," regardless of what the Jedi seem to think).

3) Midi-chlorians -- There are those individuals with the ability to tap into the Force and employ it, attuning themselves to it, using it to guide their actions, or simply exploiting it for their own selfish ends. Why are there some beings with much greater natural potential than others in this area? Why are the Jedi not allowed to have children? The answer is that the basis for being Force-sensitive is biological.

The Force is not "God." Many modern religions posit a "good" force that exists beyond the material universe, a force with a mind that has a specific goal for humanity. This force is often opposed to the drives of the material body. I repeat: The Force is not "God." The Force is not opposed to nature; rather, It is nature in its most exalted sense, an all-encompassing power that embraces the natural world. The Force is not something "out there," beyond the universe; rather, It is something that lives *within* everything. It makes alot of sense that there is a biological explanation for the ability to manipulate it. It also makes alot of sense that in the days of the Old Republic and the Jedi Knights there would be some understanding of this (albeit on a rather primitive level) and an ability to measure it with crude and rough approximations in numerical form.

The Jedi, of course, are dangerously close to positing the Force as a "God," and their condemnation of sexuality is a disturbing example of this. They obviously don't want Jedi families to become too powerful and exert control over the council, and their concern over this is mixed with their desire to eliminate the attachments of Jedi to anything except the order. The result: a cultish code of behavior that involves swearing off love. "Love" and "Obedience to God" were often in conflict historically. Does anyone know the story of Abelard and Heloise?

Perhaps it is another sign of hubris that the Jedi think they can measure the Force with science. It may be shame over this fact that prevents Yoda and Obi-wan from ever discussing it again.

None of this midi-chlorian stuff contradicts the OT, by the way.


4) Anakin's Fall -- It is a very valid observation that Anakin suddenly seems like an asshole in Episode II for absolutely no reason. Yet, this is exactly what happens when children become adolescent -- they act up, start talking back, and want to break away. For no apparent reason at all. Biology is the cause once again, and the surging hormones of young adulthood encourage disobedience of parental figures -- especially when parental figures are the backwards members of a decaying order. Especially when the parental figure won't let the child undergo the trials of initiaion into adulthood. Especially when the parental figures will not allow contact with loved ones.

Incidentally, the Jedi are not going to buy Anakin's mother and free her; their goal is to encourage the young boy to break his natural attachments. The Jedi order, with all of its pseudo-religious trappings, has taken a page right out of the play book of every world-denying religion -- it desires that its adherents break ties to everything outside the order.

Adherence to the Jedi code prevents Anakin from saving the life of his mother and forbids his love of Padme. Obi-wan is busy instructing Anakin on being "mindful of his feelings" and other stupid Jedi tag-lines, while Anakin already knows that his natural skills are much greater than his master's. The Jedi council never even wanted him trained...they permitted it simply as a gesture to honor the memory of Qui-Gon Jin, whom they all liked before he became a bit of a weirdo and started believing too literally in the Prophecy. Anakin feels unappreciated.

The entire time, the Jedi philosophy of suppressing emotions, being "mindful," being "good" is rammed down Anakin's throat while his life is falling apart.

Does anyone see why Anakin is so pissed at the Jedi? Wouldn't you be?

5) Bottom line -- there's alot to criticize about the PT. But let's criticize the things that are actually bad: pointless inclusion of characters from the OT, bad direction of actors, questionable dialogue, overuse of CGI.

The plot itself is very admirable. It's a wonderful story that has alot of potential. Whether the movies live up to this potential is quite open to debate, and it seems that Episode III will decide the question definitively.
0

#2 User is offline   xenduck Icon

  • Level Boss
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 328
  • Joined: 01-March 05
  • Location:Far, Far Away
  • Interests:to inspire you vast and cool intellects to regard Star Wars with more sympathetic eyes.
  • Country:United States

Posted 05 May 2005 - 12:30 PM

fantastic! i hate to sound like a syncophant but i am truly impressed. it has long been my postition that there is some bad dialogue and excessive special effects throughout the PT but as a whole it flows flawlessly as an extrapolation of the OT. im gald to see there are others out there not put-off by midichlorians or virgin births. those are instances of george adding on more eternal mythological themes. id like to think we have all read the hero with a thousand faces and can recognise that these movies not only have deep roots, but deepen the themes already put-forth in the OT. it is still yet to be seen just what the characters think the prophecy means and what george intends for it to mean.
that being said, i have to wonder about all this talk of the will of the force. if the force has a will then it is more than just 'mothernature'. or are the jedi speaking figurativly of the will of the force as being the reality of nature. the jedi seem to be under the assumption that if life creates the force, then the force will want to serve and promote life. hence, that which hinders life is evil and contrary to nature. they have forgotten that nature is at times self-destructive, that it cycles and seeks equilibrium. the old jedi order is arrogant and useless. the lightside may be stronger but the darkside will always have its day.
Officer! officer! quick! all my money was stolen by a man in flannel!
0

#3 User is offline   ernesttomlinson Icon

  • Level Boss
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 342
  • Joined: 28-September 04

Posted 05 May 2005 - 12:58 PM

It is an interesting defence of the indefensible. "Why do the Jedi in the prequels come across like an ossified conclave of noisome, arrogant a**holes with the perspicacity of a week-old bran muffin? Because George Lucas in his brilliance meant the Jedi to be an ossified conclave of noisome, arrogant a**holes with the perspicacity of a week-old bran muffin!"

You neglect to supply us with a reason that we should give a curse for a story of this sort.
0

#4 User is offline   Sagacity Icon

  • Mini Boss
  • PipPip
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 172
  • Joined: 24-January 04

Posted 05 May 2005 - 01:10 PM

It's difficult if not impossble to care. How much more powerful would the story have been if the Jedi were strong, vigilant, and healthy and they got outmaneuvered, over-extended, and over-powered? Keep swinging with everything you've got even though you're going down?
0

#5 User is offline   DarthTherion Icon

  • Mini Boss
  • PipPip
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 141
  • Joined: 05-May 05
  • Country:United States

Posted 05 May 2005 - 02:15 PM

What I find really interesting about this interpretation is that it really subverts the surface story -- the desired result is now the conversion of Anakin to darkness. Perhaps Lucas didn't even intend it to be quite so dark, but it really is the only way to interpret the new films.

None of it is obvious from watching the movies briefly. It is very, very subtle.

Of course, there is one very important issue:

QUOTE (ernesttomlinson @ May 5 2005, 01:58 PM)
You neglect to supply us with a reason that we should give a curse for a story of this sort.


Well, I think part of the lesson of these movies is that the decline of the Jedi order is the eventual fate of every spiritual organization. I hesitate to draw real world comparisons, but I'm sure we can all think of several examples from history and from the modern world.

If the Jedi were at the height of their power, I doubt the Sith would pose much of a threat to them. This is where the patience of the Sith becomes so important. They've waited a thousand years for this moment. "At last we will have our revenge."

This is the period in which both the Jedi order and the Republic crumble away, when the foolish choices of both become significant for setting up the stage for the OT and for imparting valuable lessons to the real world.

When a people trades freedom for security, tyranical regimes come to power, ones that often butcher national enemies en masse.

More reflections on fatalism and the nature of tragedy to come.
0

#6 User is offline   Sagacity Icon

  • Mini Boss
  • PipPip
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 172
  • Joined: 24-January 04

Posted 05 May 2005 - 02:26 PM

That still doesn't answer the question of "why should we care" if the Republic is crumbling, and if the Jedi are so weak they can be blown over in a strong wind.
0

#7 User is offline   Veer Icon

  • Mini Boss
  • PipPip
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 168
  • Joined: 30-April 05
  • Country:Canada

Posted 05 May 2005 - 04:11 PM

Hi Darth Therion, you make some good points, worthy of debate. However I would point out that the rationalization you have made of some of the problems of the PT are easy to come by once you accept the basic premise of the PT, which I have not (just FYI). I do not however hate the PT movies, while I found TPM a bit of a pain because of the bad acting and lack of action sequences to make up for it, AOTC was much more enjoyable. While not in the same league of the OT, the PT movies are exciting and have a high ‘coolness’ factor. On their own the PT movies are 2 hours of entertainment, nothing more. Their character is however completely different from the OT, it’s grasping that they all part of the same saga that creates problems. I will attempt to address some of your points, point-by-point.

QUOTE (DarthTherion @ May 5 2005, 10:03 AM)
1) The folly of the Jedi -- The fact that the Jedi are arrogant,foolish, and generally incompetent is an essential aspect of the PT. ….{snip]… They cannot even *fathom* that a Dark Lord of the Sith has gained influence in the senate, much less that one has been elected Grand Chancellor. The audience sees the threat clearly -- because the audience not only has foresight (which Jedi do *not* actually have, contrary to their claims), but becaue the audience is not composed of arrogant, foolish old Jedi.


Good point. In the PT the Jedi come off as stupid and foolish, and pretty much very different from what the Jedi are shown to be in the OT. This is particularly true of Yoda who I feel like kicking in the nuts every time he makes a smart-aleck remark in the PT. I can only wonder how Obi-wan had so much self control. This obviously rubs a lot of people the wrong way. Now, it is not told, much less explained to the audience of why the Jedi are fools, or even that they are. Instead we are left with that explanation being the only explanation based on their actions, or lack of thereof. Doesn’t endear anyone to the Jedi, and makes for bad storytelling. Also doesn’t answer the question of how the Jedi order managed to survive 1000 years, much less ensure peace in the galaxy, after being led by imbeciles. Why should we feel sad/sorry that the Jedi order falls when it does? Why should we even like the Jedi? We don’t, and when you don’t like the ‘good guys’ in a story, the story fails –if the story is good triumphing over evil.

QUOTE (DarthTherion @ May 5 2005, 10:03 AM)
When Count Dooku reveals the Sith plot to Obi-wan, it seems as if he is being serious. Like Vader thirty years later, Dooku wants to turn on his master and seize power for himself. When Obi-wan reports this to the other Jedi, they choose to ignore the problem and believe that Dooku is a liar. …{snip}… They don't even want to inform the Senate that their ability to use the Force has diminished…. {snip}….


Well, what was Dooku thinking? I have a hard time believing that Dooku wanted to overthrow Palps and rule himself, since no conflict of interest is developed anywhere in his character. We see the Dooku character only in the last half of AOTC, and I understand he is killed off early in ROTS. Hardly enough time for character development. I don’t accept the premonition that Vader was planning to kill the emperor in ESB either. It doesn’t make sense, and his actions don’t show it.
You also have to understand that many of the lines used by GL in the PT are cop outs. For example the line “our ability to use the force has been diminished” - what does this mean??? Cleary Yoda is still able to use the force to hop around like a mad bunny in his duel with Dooku. Not to mention Kit Fisto has no problems using ‘force push’. Even if it is true, and thus a plot point, the Jedi don’t really seem to care about it. So instead of GL showing us that the Jedi really can’t use the force, he just throws the line in there to further his story, and it makes no sense.

QUOTE (DarthTherion @ May 5 2005, 10:03 AM)
The Jedi eagerly accept the clone army and stand idly by as the Chancellor is given "emergency powers." They support the moves that will lead to their destruction. This is a combination of arrogance and the fact that the galactic republic has had *peace* for a thousand years. Hence, nothing like this has ever happened. The audience, familiar with the history of Earth and the particularly bloody 20th century that was marked by totalitarian regimes, immediately sees what Palpatine is up to. The Jedi do *not.*


The audience sees it because the audience has had the benefit of watching the OT and thus knows what WILL happen. The Jedi accepting, and leading into battle, a clone army based on the template of their enemy, and ordered by a Jedi dead for 10 years is hard to understand no matter how much you rationalize how stupid or arrogant the Jedi are. It’s a huge plot hole.

QUOTE (DarthTherion @ May 5 2005, 10:03 AM)
The battle of Geonosis also reveals that the Jedi are not soldiers or effective military leaders.


Duh! The battle is purely a result of ‘coolness’. After 5 movies of seeing 1-on-1 Jedi duels, how cool is it to see a couple of hundred Jedi fighting together?!!! Not to mention in an arena and getting their ass kicked to boot! Very Alamo-isque. Very cool. But makes no sense, and zero relevance to the plot.

QUOTE (DarthTherion @ May 5 2005, 10:03 AM)
Thirty years later, Yoda reflects "Wars make not one great." Perhaps he has learned something, and this is why his character seems so much wiser in the OT, after he has had time to digest the awful mistakes of the Jedi?


That is really the only explanation one is left with, that in the 20 years between the movies, the last two Jedi – Yoda and Obi-wan realize that they have been idiots and decide to learn new stuff. Gee, sounds like what happens between the PT and OT is pretty significant, why isn’t it in the movies then? Oh ya, not very ‘cool’ so see someone sitting in cave meditating, no matter how important it is to the saga/story. Also one must feel sad for Yoda. The guy is afterall 900 years old. To learn that everything you knew and worded for 860 years is wrong must be a low blow. No wonder he died in ROTJ.
0

#8 User is offline   Veer Icon

  • Mini Boss
  • PipPip
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 168
  • Joined: 30-April 05
  • Country:Canada

Posted 05 May 2005 - 04:12 PM

[quote=DarthTherion,May 5 2005, 10:03 AM]
2) Child of Prophecy -- Get ready for a surprise: the Jedi can't predict the future better than anyone else! "Always in motion the future is...clouded this boy's future is." Yoda is always copping out, because no one has the ability to see the future. …{snip}...but when it comes to large-scale planning, the Jedi are as clueless as anyone else (or even more so, from the looks of it). [/quote]


The Jedi can sense the future, but cannot predict it. More like there can see several futures, or possible futures, but can’t be sure which one will come to pass. Sort of like Elrod in LOTR.

[quote=DarthTherion,May 5 2005, 10:03 AM]
The idea of a "prophecy" is very appealing for the PT, mainly because, for the audience, the future already IS set in stone. We know the boy is going to become Darth Vader -- but the surprise is that this is not the prophecy at all. [/quote]


The whole ‘prophecy’ is another cop out on the part of GL. It’s useless and meaningless. GL only uses it to shove it down the audiences throats that Anakin is ‘special’ – we get it! What was wrong with Anakin being an ordinary Jedi who turns to evil? The prophecy isn’t mentioned at all in the OT, presumably because it is irrelevant and meaningless. So why have it at all? So GL uses it as a plot point which has the Jedi training Anakin, and ignoring his ‘sins’, even though he is clearly not Jedi material. *Yuck*

[quote=DarthTherion,May 5 2005, 10:03 AM]
Instead, it speaks of "The one who will bring balance to the Force." Hmmm. Balance?
[/quote]


Hmmmm indeed. What does ‘balance’ mean? The Jedi don’t know, the audience doesn’t know, I would be surprised if even GL knew. We don’t even know the force was out of balance to begin with. Another concept dropped in the OT. Another ridiculous and meaningless plot point.

[quote=DarthTherion,May 5 2005, 10:03 AM]
The Force is not good. It is an impersonal energy field created by life that -- just like life -- has "positive" and "negative" aspects. It naturally seeks balance between these elements. ….{snip}…. Something needs to restore cosmic balance. [/quote]


A worthy explanation, but doesn’t cut it. If the force at the time of TPM is overly balanced towards ‘good’, then Anakin can only bring in more bad, if ‘balance’ means an equal amount of Good and Evil. I highly doubt this is what the Jedi had in mind, even if they are really really dumb. This is beyond the Jar Jar scale. Not to mention what must happen to the poor force once the Emperor dies and Vader turns in ROTJ. All that hard work out of ‘balance’ again. Balance must clearly mean something else… most likely it means nothing. It’s just a useless plot point.

[quote=DarthTherion,May 5 2005, 10:03 AM]
The "virgin birth" may make everyone raised in our culture think of Christianity, but this is actually a mythological idea with roots *much* deeper…{snip}… It emphasizes the purity of the boy as a direct emanation of the Force and a direct instrument of its will (will to balance, that is...{snip}… [/quote]

Another cop out on the part of GL to show that Anakin is special. We get it. Not needed. Sidious being Anakins father would make more sense, or Shimi being Darth Plagueis would too.

[quote=DarthTherion,May 5 2005, 10:03 AM]
3) Midi-chlorians – {snip}…..Why are the Jedi not allowed to have children? The answer is that the basis for being Force-sensitive is biological. [/quote]

Good Question! If force sensitivity is infact hereditary, why are the Jedi forbidden to marry and have kids? This is a PT invention, nothing in the OT says the Jedi cannot have families, or love. If this were ture, the first order of business for any Jedi would be too have kids, preferably many of them. Imagine how powerful Mace or Yoda’s kids would be. But the problem with the midichlorians being hereditary, and the Jedi being forbidden to have families, and being whisked off to the Jedi temple at an early age would mean that soon their would be no Jedi left. They would be extinct.

[quote=DarthTherion,May 5 2005, 10:03 AM]
The Force is not something "out there," beyond the universe; rather, It is something that lives *within* everything. It makes alot of sense that there is a biological explanation for the ability to manipulate it. It also makes alot of sense that in the days of the Old Republic and the Jedi Knights there would be some understanding of this (albeit on a rather primitive level) and an ability to measure it with crude and rough approximations in numerical form. [/quote]

Sorry, but the ‘force’ needing a biological explanation is not needed, nor does it make sense. The ‘force’ is a mixture of many phenomenon seen in humans – hypnosis, telekinesis, psychic ability, etc. While the last two have not been proven to be possible, hypnosis is. Yet Hypnosis has no biological explanation – nothing about microbes in our blood stream or organisms in our brain. Hypnosis is most likely a psychological rather that physiological phenomenon. There is no need for the force to have a biological explanation, as the OT demonstrates.

The whole midicholrian deal is just another cop out by GL to demonstrate to the audience that Anakin is special. While in the original Star Wars, we learn that Luke is special in the use of the force because he does destroy the Death Star, in TPM GL cannot be bothered to show to anyone how special Anakin is, so he just throws in the midichlorian reference. It’s a cop out, plain and simple.

[quote=DarthTherion,May 5 2005, 10:03 AM]
The Jedi, of course, are dangerously close to positing the Force as a "God," and their condemnation of sexuality is a disturbing example of this. ….{snip}… with their desire to eliminate the attachments of Jedi to anything except the order. The result: a cultish code of behavior that involves swearing off love. [/quote]


Never understood why the Jedi are forbidden to love in the PT, nor is it explained either. We have to assume it. Another sign of bad story telling.

[quote=DarthTherion,May 5 2005, 10:03 AM]
Perhaps it is another sign of hubris that the Jedi think they can measure the Force with science. It may be shame over this fact that prevents Yoda and Obi-wan from ever discussing it again.
[/quote]


Maybe it’s because the OT has far better story telling, so doesn’t need cop-outs to demonstrate that someone is strong in the force or not. Their actions speak it.

Quote

4) Anakin's Fall -- It is a very valid observation that Anakin suddenly seems like an asshole in Episode II for absolutely no reason. Yet, this is exactly what happens when children become adolescent -- they act up, start talking back, and want to break away. For no apparent reason at all. Biology is the cause once again, and the surging hormones of young adulthood encourage disobedience of parental figures
.


Yes, we all must commend GL for giving us a very accurate portrayal of teenage agnst. However this is a movie, and if I wanted to watch teenage hormones on the rampage I would have watched Dawsons Creek instead. Imagine what the 6th Sense would have been like if Haley Joel Osment had acted like a typical 9 year old? Or (and I shudder to say this) how less enjoyable Home Alone would have been if Macaulay Culkin had acted like a typical 8 year old. This is a movie, and we can only imagine that GL showed us this side of Anakin because it’s important to the plot. But I can’t see how it is, instead it makes us like him less, feel no sympathy for his ‘fall’, and quite frankly couldn’t care less.

Quote

Quote

{snip}…especially when parental figures are the backwards members of a decaying order. Especially when the parental figure won't let the child undergo the trials of initiaion into adulthood. Especially when the parental figures will not allow contact with loved ones.
.


I actually feel sorry for the Jedi. Imagine being a Jedi Master and having to act as a single parent for child for 10-15 years. Must be a sad life. No wonder they gave up.

[i]

Quote

Incidentally, the Jedi are not going to buy Anakin's mother and free her; their goal is to encourage the young boy to break his natural attachments.
[i]

Don’t really get your whole point about the Jedi forbidding attachments. Cleary we know Obi-wan and the vast majority of other Jedi are balanced, normal people, though they must have gone through something similar to Anakin. Not to mention Anakin appears to have no friends at all (even Luke had a friend in Star Wars), and we know Obi-wan has friends - Dex for example. Clearly the Jedi do allow the development of friendships, but Anakin seems to only hang around Obi-wan, a guy 15 years his senior.

Quote

Adherence to the Jedi code prevents Anakin from saving the life of his mother and forbids his love of Padme.


The love thing I explained before, but nobody ‘forbids’ Anakin from visiting Tantoonie to save his mother. He seems to leave the moment he feels like it, even though Obi-wan ordered him to stay on Naboo. Even latter on, when the Jedi discover that Anakin is on Tantoonie instead of Naboo, not a word of discipline or anything.

*******
Phew! As I said before, if you accept the basic premises made in the PT, it’s easy enough to rationalize a reason for everything. However none of these points are clear in the movie, and the fact that they need extra imagination and rationalization is the effect of a poorly developed story. The PT could have been they very simple story about a young Jedi who is seduced to by the Dark side of the force, instead it is this hugely complicated socio-political story, in which we feel no love or attachment to any of the major characters. GL spent a lot of time in “pointless inclusion of characters from the OT, bad direction of actors, questionable dialogue, overuse of CGI” to give the movies a ‘coolness’, but sadly at the cost of the story and to the detriment of the Saga.

This post has been edited by Veer: 05 May 2005 - 04:16 PM

0

#9 User is offline   CowboyCurtis Icon

  • Soothsayer
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 800
  • Joined: 11-February 04
  • Location:Minnesooota
  • Interests:I lose interest in more things each and every day as things grow more and more mediocre and substandard...
  • Country:United States

Posted 05 May 2005 - 05:34 PM

The only way... I stress---the ONLY way I would have accepted midichlorians if the Republic was using them to identify Jedi potentials---and the Jedi were against it. It has been said that supposedly the Jedi are for peace, justice, etc... yet, using identification like this, and then taking the children away from their parents is extremely injust! This goes against the Jedi--as I know them. What we were taught about the Jedi was they were generally earthy, not bothered with high technology, more spiritual, more righters of wrong.

These PT Jedi are not Jedi Knights which have been invisioned in the last twenty years.. And I'm not the only one. The writers of novels, the EU, etc., whether you like them or not--whether you consider them canonical or not---all believed this, too.

At no point Lucas ever made an attempt to say--"hold on, that's not how I want the Jedi Knights to be presented, you've got it all wrong! You've got to change it."

At NO POINT was the presentation as we thought they would be was it corrected. Ergo, midichlorines are as valuable of a plot device as the poop Jar Jar steps in.

This post has been edited by CowboyCurtis: 05 May 2005 - 05:40 PM

Flying Ferret

Battle for the Galaxy--read the "other Star Wars"

All I know is I haven't seen the real prequels yet.
0

#10 User is offline   ernesttomlinson Icon

  • Level Boss
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 342
  • Joined: 28-September 04

Posted 05 May 2005 - 05:59 PM

"The old fairy tale makes the hero a normal human boy; it is his adventures that are startling; they startle him because he is normal. But in the modern psychological novel the hero is abnormal; the centre is not central." G. K. Chesterton. I've striven to live my life by his teachings (and failed miserably.)

This quote applies both Star Wars at its best and to the wretched prequels and your justification of them, DarthTherion. Star Wars is first and foremost a story about a young man, sometimes whiny and self-centred but essentially a good kid, who gets caught up in an adventure much bigger than he could imagine. He is living the "old fairy tale" that Chesterton talks about - and let me stress that neither to Chesterton, nor to Tolkien, nor to me does the term "fairy tail" have any negative meaning. The original Star Wars has a centre: Luke Skywalker.

The prequels, however, have no centre, just as Chesterton says, for exactly the reasons you enumerate. There is no normal character. The Jedi are stupid and arrogant. Qui-Gon and then Obi-Wan are just there to swing lightsabres and to deliver the occasional gnomic utterance ("be mindful of your feelings" is a favourite of Lucas's.) Anakin is either a little kid with scarcely any dialogue more significant than "Spinning's a good trick!" and who isn't even that appealing (look at his twisted, sour facial exp​ressions from time to time, especially in the final scene of Episode I) or a teenaged stalker and borderline psycho - and he's supposed to be the centre of the movie. It is possible to write a story in which the hero is psychotic - Taxi Driver is my favourite example - but first, you have to be really, really good (Schrader and Scorsese are, Lucas is not) to pull it off and second, you have to be clear about your intention. Lucas isn't clear. He wants to give us an old-style adventure story and also his stultified version of a psychological novel. You may call it clever; I call it muddled because he doesn't deliver on either.

You may think that the idea of the Jedi being some sort of corrupt bureaucracy is daring. I call it tired and predictable. The good, or at least the enjoyable, has infinite variety; evil is monochromatic. Self-important elders who can't see what's pushed under their noses and who turn up their noses at misunderstood youth - ho, hum, been there, seen it, bought the T-shirt.

And don't give me the "it's realistic" excuse. If I want reality I'll take it straight. There's enough of it around. It's like what I say to the "hard SF" fans - if I want realistic, painstakingly plausible science, I'll go to a science textbook and get the real thing, which is ten times as fascinating.

From Lucas I want a good adventure story. That's what Star Wars used to be about, not a botched-up attempt at a "dark", psychological melodrama nor a lifeless regurgitation of overgeneralisations about mythology from a Joseph Campbell book.

On "dark", incidentally - hoo, boy, you think the prequels are dark? That lightweight comic-booky stuff where "darkness" means a teenager's sociopathic snit? Watch Affliction or The Sweet Hereafter and you'll see what dark really is like.
0

#11 User is offline   Sagacity Icon

  • Mini Boss
  • PipPip
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 172
  • Joined: 24-January 04

Posted 05 May 2005 - 07:17 PM

Woo! You go, man! cool.gif
0

#12 User is offline   DarthTherion Icon

  • Mini Boss
  • PipPip
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 141
  • Joined: 05-May 05
  • Country:United States

Posted 05 May 2005 - 07:25 PM

Hello again, everyone,

Thanks for the replies to my message. I find it very interesting to think about this topic.

First off, I'm not trying to "justify" the prequels. I think everyone agrees there are some serious problems with them. These movies are not what we imagined they would be, and alot of it has to do with pointless inclusion of OT characters (making the universe much smaller than it ever should have been) and poor dialogue/direction of live actors.

However, I think it's very unfair to dismiss the entire plotline without giving it some consideration.

When I said that the prequels are "dark," I meant this: that it is Anakin's purpose in existence to do the things he is going to do in Episode III. The bright, happy ending of Episode I and the secret marriage at the end of II will take on a very ominous aura after we've seen Episode III (hopefully). After each of those movies, you know that it's going to end badly -- and ontop of it, it's *supposed* to end badly, part of the "will" of the Force.

I don't really have the time to make point-by-point responses right now, but I'll observe a few things:

1) It would seem that Jedi are not allowed to have children because it would lead to bloodlines claiming dominance over the order. They wish to avoid this. There is always "fresh blood" brought into the order, and this is a way of keeping out some corruption. Maybe that's a prime reason the Jedi have lasted for a thousand years. (One infers from the movies that there are always Force-sensitive children being born who are instantly recruited by the Jedi)

2) Obi-wan and the other Jedi are better adjusted than Anakin. This is undeniable. They were raised since infancy in the safe confines of the order. Anakin was a slave who very vividly remembers his mother and the beautiful girl he had a crush on as a young boy. He's possibly the only Jedi not raised entirely within the order. Don't you think that would screw him up pretty badly? (Add to this the fact that those female influences are vanishing from his life...and it is the *fault* of the order that has adopted him too late in life....)

3) The PT does give us a very different image of Jedi knights than we expected. Should we care about them? Should we care about Anakin? If the Force has fated everything to happen, what's the point of caring?

I think the answer revolves around the idea that tragedy shows us an image of individuals bearing the inevitable slings and arrows of fortune, enduring what must occur. The hubris of the Jedi will cause pain and suffering, most notably to Anakin and Padme. The PT is so dark because this *must* happen as part of the Force's nature. Just when you thought you knew the Force....

4) There are some who seem to think that every aspect of the PT is a "cop out" to show that Anakin is "special." Is that really the only purpose of the prophecy, virign birth, and midi-chlorians? I'm not saying no. It could be, and it may very well be that Lucas is really that stupid.

But stories -- myths -- have universal aspects to them that sometimes resonate on a deep level in the audience in ways their creators did not intend. Milton never intended Romantics to interpret his "Satan" as the hero of Paradise Lost.

Maybe Lucas just threw a bunch of cool shit together to make money. Maybe. Does that mean there cannot be meaning in it? Perhaps you only get out of the PT storyline what you put into it.

5) As a final note...midi-chlorians are a physical way of explaining the existence of a power that relies on a Pantheistic Force. It not only shows Anakin to be special, it demonstrates the knowledge the Old Republic had of such things before it was lost during the age of the Empire and the Jedi purge, and it possibly points to the hubris of the Jedi. That's quite a bit of depth right there.

Telekenesis or hypnosis in the real world don't always rely on a Pantheistic worldview. If they did, then there could very well be a biological explanation for such phenomena. This would not make them any less real or take away the "coolness" of them. It would just demonstrate that we know more about them than we do now.

Oh, and if it is revealed Anakin does have a father, my money is on Qui Gon Jin. happy.gif
0

#13 User is offline   CowboyCurtis Icon

  • Soothsayer
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 800
  • Joined: 11-February 04
  • Location:Minnesooota
  • Interests:I lose interest in more things each and every day as things grow more and more mediocre and substandard...
  • Country:United States

Posted 05 May 2005 - 10:30 PM

When I said that the prequels are "dark," I meant this: that it is Anakin's purpose in existence to do the things he is going to do in Episode III. The bright, happy ending of Episode I and the secret marriage at the end of II will take on a very ominous aura after we've seen Episode III (hopefully). After each of those movies, you know that it's going to end badly -- and ontop of it, it's *supposed* to end badly, part of the "will" of the Force.

And where is this "Will of the Force" aspect mentioned in the prequels? Where does it say that it's "suppose" to end like this? The "Prophecy?" It's not expounded upon... nobody explained it.

1) It would seem that Jedi are not allowed to have children because it would lead to bloodlines claiming dominance over the order. They wish to avoid this. There is always "fresh blood" brought into the order, and this is a way of keeping out some corruption. Maybe that's a prime reason the Jedi have lasted for a thousand years. (One infers from the movies that there are always Force-sensitive children being born who are instantly recruited by the Jedi)

And it says this WHERE in the prequels about the whole bloodline thing? I don't hear it mentioned anywhere along the lines of this. You are definitely inferring WAAAY too much.

The last part of your statement: "Force-sensitive children being born [randomly]" is an OT concept, and wouldn't work with the midiclorian concept.

2) Obi-wan and the other Jedi are better adjusted than Anakin. This is undeniable. They were raised since infancy in the safe confines of the order. Anakin was a slave who very vividly remembers his mother and the beautiful girl he had a crush on as a young boy. He's possibly the only Jedi not raised entirely within the order. Don't you think that would screw him up pretty badly? (Add to this the fact that those female influences are vanishing from his life...and it is the *fault* of the order that has adopted him too late in life....)

Why would it!? He wasn't FORCED into the Jedi Order---it was his CHOICE! "It's what I always dreeeamed of." Add to that the Jedi Order is about peace of mind, focus, disciplined.... and you're telling me under THOSE circumstances he was SUPPOSE to turn into a stalker-ish, psychotic, whiney bastard when he started out as a sweet, innocent, golly-gee child who "gives without thought of reward." Is this what you're saying? Sorry... it's like saying that a young, sweet, thoughtful boy who always wanted to be a priest becomes a stalker-ish, psychotic murderer just because he became a priest?


I think the answer revolves around the idea that tragedy shows us an image of individuals bearing the inevitable slings and arrows of fortune, enduring what must occur. The hubris of the Jedi will cause pain and suffering, most notably to Anakin and Padme. The PT is so dark because this *must* happen as part of the Force's nature. Just when you thought you knew the Force....

Again, inferring too much. I want you to post EXACT dialogue from the movie where it says this was "suppose" to happen---not your inferrence!!

4) There are some who seem to think that every aspect of the PT is a "cop out" to show that Anakin is "special." Is that really the only purpose of the prophecy, virign birth, and midi-chlorians? I'm not saying no. It could be, and it may very well be that Lucas is really that stupid.

Now you're getting what we're saying.

But stories -- myths -- have universal aspects to them that sometimes resonate on a deep level in the audience in ways their creators did not intend. Milton never intended Romantics to interpret his "Satan" as the hero of Paradise Lost.

Well... for me--and many others---nothing is resonating. There is a problem.

Maybe Lucas just threw a bunch of cool shit together to make money. Maybe. Does that mean there cannot be meaning in it? Perhaps you only get out of the PT storyline what you put into it.

LOL!! I love that argument. Please tell me my inner child is dead... go ahead... please.. it'll make my day.

Maybe there is no meaning because Lucas is being haphazard, random, and inconsistent with the prequels. He was lucky the first time because he had a clean slate. He was lucky the second time because he had a group of people who cared. He was mostly lucky the third time because it had the momentum of the first two.

5) As a final note...midi-chlorians are a physical way of explaining the existence of a power that relies on a Pantheistic Force. It not only shows Anakin to be special, it demonstrates the knowledge the Old Republic had of such things before it was lost during the age of the Empire and the Jedi purge, and it possibly points to the hubris of the Jedi. That's quite a bit of depth right there.

And people say I read too much into things. The Force as described in the OT was simple. The mechanisms for its use were simple, accessible. One did not need anymore than what was presented there. I challenge you when you watch TPM to fast forward through the "midichlorian scenes" and then watch the rest of the film. Then tell me if it affected anything. Just ignore it, and you'll notice----it had absolutely impact on the "plot" characters... nothing. Ergo, it is just something that should've been discarded. If a script doctor had come in to look at the script, he would've told Lucas that was the first thing that had to go.
The Midi's were not needed. The same things needed to be accomplished in the film could've been accomplished which was already established. They arrive on Tatooine, they sense a disturbance in the Force. They find Anakin, just like Vader sensing Luke in the trench run, Obi-Wan, Qui-Gon, whoever could've said, "This boy is strong in the Force." That's ALL you needed. Didn't need midiclorian count, didn't need to take a silly blood sample with a woman's shaver....just use a mechanism that was already established in the earlier films---sensing them. Period. What was the importance of complicating that?

Telekenesis or hypnosis in the real world don't always rely on a Pantheistic worldview. If they did, then there could very well be a biological explanation for such phenomena. This would not make them any less real or take away the "coolness" of them. It would just demonstrate that we know more about them than we do now.

Telekinesis is real?.. riiiight...Calling Amazing Randy...

Oh, and if it is revealed Anakin does have a father, my money is on Qui Gon Jin

Oh, now I know I can't take you seriously....
Flying Ferret

Battle for the Galaxy--read the "other Star Wars"

All I know is I haven't seen the real prequels yet.
0

#14 User is offline   DarthTherion Icon

  • Mini Boss
  • PipPip
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 141
  • Joined: 05-May 05
  • Country:United States

Posted 06 May 2005 - 12:25 AM

You're absolutely right, there is a great deal we have to infer from these movies. One of the main things that disappoints me about the PT is that many of the ideas and concepts that I've been expounding have not been overtly explored by the films.

A note on Anakin: he was not forced into becoming a Jedi, but I highly doubt he knew exactly what it would entail. Especially when he hit puberty and was confronted with commands from his superiors to detach himself from his feelings. As I noted, the Jedi mean well, but their methods smack of the techniques of a life-denying cult.

Is the PT a reflection on the dangers of suppressing emotion?

My larger point is being overlooked in all this hassle about particulars -- the plotline of the PT is actually not so bad, it's a pretty good story that complements the OT, and in a broad outline, has alot of potential. We will be better able to judge the other two PT movies on the 19th.

Telekenesis is not real, incidentally -- but since the analogy had been brought up, I felt compelled to continue it.

Edit: Oh, I just noticed this. Yes, your inner child is dead. Dead as a doornail. Just like mine. That's why I'm writing stupid posts about the mythological implications of a bunch of SF movies instead of running around having imaginary lightsaber fights. tongue.gif

This post has been edited by DarthTherion: 06 May 2005 - 12:49 AM

0

#15 User is offline   ernesttomlinson Icon

  • Level Boss
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 342
  • Joined: 28-September 04

Posted 06 May 2005 - 12:52 AM

Is the PT a reflection on the dangers of suppressing emotion?

No. It's a disorganised special-effects extravaganza. There's about as much reflection in the movies as there is in a broken mirror in a public restroom.

My larger point is being overlooked in all this hassle about particulars -- the plotline of the PT is actually not so bad, and in a broad outline, has alot of potential.

No it doesn't! As I said earlier, this stuff is old. If it weren't for misunderstood teenagers rebelling against repressed old fuddy-duddies Mercedes Lackey and Anne McCaffrey would have nothing to write about. The idea of the Jedi's suppressing their sexuality in the service of their magic was done in Tehanu - if LeGuin couldn't quite make it work am I supposed to believe that Lucas can?

Also I'd like you to show how Obi-Wan's comments from SW and Yoda's from ESB are congruent with the interpretation that the Jedi are life-denying cultists.
0

  • (2 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2


Fast Reply

  • Decrease editor size
  • Increase editor size