Chefelf.com Night Life: Hayden At The End Of ROTJ - Chefelf.com Night Life

Jump to content

Star Wars Fan Convention

  • (5 Pages)
  • +
  • « First
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Hayden At The End Of ROTJ

#46 User is offline   Helena Icon

  • Basher Extraordinaire
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,327
  • Joined: 01-June 04
  • Location:UK
  • Interests:Current age: 22<br /><br />Current occupation: Auditor<br /><br />Interests: Reading, computer games, music, and Star Wars (obviously).<br /><br />Talents: Can't act, can't dance, can sing a little.<br /><br />Loves: Terry Pratchett's 'Discworld' series.<br /><br />Hates: Harry Potter. Surely I can't be the only one?
  • Country:United Kingdom

Posted 09 September 2006 - 08:55 AM

QUOTE (Kuma @ Sep 8 2006, 05:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I think some of the gripes about the change are sorta missing the point, being that George wanted the series to be about the Campbellian Hero's Journey.

Part of the importance of that journey is that it ultimately leads back to the "younger" or "childlike" self and the source of both conflict and resolution.

I believe that this "new" version of the scene brings that issue to close very well--it highlights the similarities--physically, emotionally, and spiritually--between Luke and Anakin. In some ways, this scene corrects the discordance begun in ESB when Luke discovered his own face inside Vader's helmet during his "failure in the cave."

Through his trilogy Anakin was constantly faced with choices and made wrong ones; Luke was faced with similar choices and made the right decisions; or, even if he made the wrong decisions, he let compassion and mercy override his anger.

Their faces and exp​ressions look very similar in this scene now, so one gets the impression of the "circle" being completed--Luke has become what Anakin hoped to be, and Anakin has also been saved. In some ways, they represent outwardly divergent yet ultimately convergent paths and opportunities in the same individual.

I also find it interesting that part of this resolution seems to be a partial acceptance of the dark side. I believe this also points to the meaning of the whole "balance to the force" issue raised in the prequels. In the end, Luke wears his black clothes and has his artificial hand...he is sorta a 1/4 Vader at this point. Anakin, who was 100 percent Vader, has been restored to his former state of wholeness, but, being Anakin, we know he too still carries part of Vader within. Both of them are now spiritually in balance with the Force.

So that's what I think it's about, and why I like the change--we realize, in the end, the similarities between father and son, and how both of them represent different stages in the evolution of the hero's journey, and how one of the lessons of that journey is not to simply denounce the dark side of oneself as the Jedi of old did, but to bring it into harmony with one's totality of being.

OK, let me ask you one simple question: if all the above is really true, why didn't Lucas just hire a young actor to play ghost-Anakin in the first place? Did he lack the technology for that as well? rolleyes.gif I'm sorry, Kuma, but you're in the wrong place here: you can make all the lame excuses for Lucas that you like, but there is no way you'll ever get any of us to believe that the guy who wrote the Anakin/Padme romance in AotC is capable of that kind of subtlety. To anyone who isn't a Lucas apologist, the reason he replaced Shaw with Christensen is obvious: it was a desperate attempt to create some sort of continuity between the two trilogies, given that he couldn't be bothered to do it through story and character development.
QUOTE
The sandpeople had women and children. We know this because Anakin killed them how could he tell? The children might be smaller but I never saw a sandperson with breasts. Did they hike their skirts and show him some leg or something?

QUOTE
Also, I can see the point of wanting to kidnap a human and use her as a slave, but they didn't. They tied her to a flimsy easel for a month. It's assumed they had to feed and give her water. What for? Was she purely ornamental? I can understand them wanting the droids, you can sell those for a lot of money, but a chick who's only skills are finding non-existand mushrooms and getting randomly pregnant, you're not going to get much.

- J m HofMarN on the Sand People
0

#47 User is offline   Despondent Icon

  • Think for yourself
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4,684
  • Joined: 31-October 03
  • Location:a long time ago
  • Interests:Laughter. Louis pups. Percussion. What binds us. Bicycling, Tennis.
  • Country:United States

Posted 09 September 2006 - 09:54 AM

Helena, you are so good with words. smile.gif
0

#48 User is offline   Helena Icon

  • Basher Extraordinaire
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,327
  • Joined: 01-June 04
  • Location:UK
  • Interests:Current age: 22<br /><br />Current occupation: Auditor<br /><br />Interests: Reading, computer games, music, and Star Wars (obviously).<br /><br />Talents: Can't act, can't dance, can sing a little.<br /><br />Loves: Terry Pratchett's 'Discworld' series.<br /><br />Hates: Harry Potter. Surely I can't be the only one?
  • Country:United Kingdom

Posted 09 September 2006 - 11:17 AM

Oh yes, one more thing, and this goes for everyone on the board: please don't resurrect long-dead threads that haven't been posted in for months or years. It crowds out the new threads, and it makes you look... slightly anal, to say the least.
QUOTE
The sandpeople had women and children. We know this because Anakin killed them how could he tell? The children might be smaller but I never saw a sandperson with breasts. Did they hike their skirts and show him some leg or something?

QUOTE
Also, I can see the point of wanting to kidnap a human and use her as a slave, but they didn't. They tied her to a flimsy easel for a month. It's assumed they had to feed and give her water. What for? Was she purely ornamental? I can understand them wanting the droids, you can sell those for a lot of money, but a chick who's only skills are finding non-existand mushrooms and getting randomly pregnant, you're not going to get much.

- J m HofMarN on the Sand People
0

#49 User is offline   Kuma Icon

  • New Cop
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 15
  • Joined: 03-September 06
  • Country:Nothing Selected

Posted 10 September 2006 - 12:33 AM

QUOTE (Helena @ Sep 9 2006, 12:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Oh yes, one more thing, and this goes for everyone on the board: please don't resurrect long-dead threads that haven't been posted in for months or years. It crowds out the new threads, and it makes you look... slightly anal, to say the least.


Hi Helena,

Thanks for your friendly welcome to the board! Glad to find some kindred spirits.

I'm sorry...unused to boards where threads 1/2 way down the first page are considered outdates, and I didn't check the date. Won't happen again!

As you can see, I'm pretty new here, though I've read and throughly enjoyed all of the Chef's gripes. Though I feel that ability to both dislike and then love again a series is the mark of a fan. I like to try to separate the good from the bad.

Despite the Basset Hound's enthusiastic support of your comments, I am not sure what you meant in your mystery sentence about GL needing to hire a young actor to play Anakin, as that is indeed what he did: hire a young unknown, that I have mixed feelings about. But we go with what we got.

I hesitate slightly to call myself a Lucas apologist, in fact I have a deep and abiding hatred for a lot of what he did to my favorite series. I disagree with your action of categorizing me offhandedly a Lucas apologist, as that's not what I am. I don't excuse his mistakes.I just don't think this is one of them. At least, not as I see it, and I guess that's what Star Wars is really about--one's personal interpretation. Call it a different perspective. Was rather hoping to find a home here.

I do think GL he has a pretty good understaning of mythology, which is not something you've replied to regarding my initial post--something I attempted to address in detail.

I also think GL's good with subtlety, or at least, was...the jury's still out with me at times. "Roger Roger!" and Palpatine's silly swordfighting faces makes me want to vomit, along with about 1000 other things.

But, there are a lot of little hints in the PT that make me think he has still got at least a shadow of himself in there somewhere.

Please read for comprehension before answering this time, as I'm not convinced anyone who's responded understood what I wrote in the above post. wink.gif

This post has been edited by Kuma: 10 September 2006 - 01:03 AM

0

#50 User is offline   Helena Icon

  • Basher Extraordinaire
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,327
  • Joined: 01-June 04
  • Location:UK
  • Interests:Current age: 22<br /><br />Current occupation: Auditor<br /><br />Interests: Reading, computer games, music, and Star Wars (obviously).<br /><br />Talents: Can't act, can't dance, can sing a little.<br /><br />Loves: Terry Pratchett's 'Discworld' series.<br /><br />Hates: Harry Potter. Surely I can't be the only one?
  • Country:United Kingdom

Posted 10 September 2006 - 07:51 AM

OK, Kuma: I apologise for the tone of my post, which was a little harsh considering you're new here, and I also apologise for calling you a 'Lucas apologist' if you're not - but I think most people here will agree that all the signs appeared to be there. What you have to realise is that this board is regularly beset by people who think the sun shines out of Lucas's arse, and would never, even under pain of torture, admit that the guy could possibly make a mistake. It didn't help that you chose to resurrect a four-month-old thread, thus giving the impression that you simply had to get your word in even though the discussion was obviously dead. (Yes, I realise it was an honest mistake, and I'm sorry.)

Believe me, I understood everything you said in the post above. What I meant by Lucas hiring a young actor 'in the first place' was 'back when he originally filmed Return of the Jedi'. Whatever the merits of your argument, it's clear that this was not what was on his mind back in 1983, and I don't believe he'd thought of it by 1994 either - he's not smart enough for that. Notice that Lucas himself never comes out with these complicated philosobabble explanations for everything he does; he just leaves his more intelligent fans to dream them up for him.

If you plan to stay, I'd ask you to bear one thing in mind: as you can see, discussions here tend to be very frank and open. Barring troll posts, flames and anything grossly offensive, you're pretty much free to say what you like. This means that if someone thinks you're talking bullshit, they're going to say so - and, of course, you're free to say the same to them. That doesn't mean we're constantly sniping at each other - in fact, we get on pretty well in general - but be warned that some of our debates do get quite heated.
QUOTE
The sandpeople had women and children. We know this because Anakin killed them how could he tell? The children might be smaller but I never saw a sandperson with breasts. Did they hike their skirts and show him some leg or something?

QUOTE
Also, I can see the point of wanting to kidnap a human and use her as a slave, but they didn't. They tied her to a flimsy easel for a month. It's assumed they had to feed and give her water. What for? Was she purely ornamental? I can understand them wanting the droids, you can sell those for a lot of money, but a chick who's only skills are finding non-existand mushrooms and getting randomly pregnant, you're not going to get much.

- J m HofMarN on the Sand People
0

#51 User is offline   Despondent Icon

  • Think for yourself
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4,684
  • Joined: 31-October 03
  • Location:a long time ago
  • Interests:Laughter. Louis pups. Percussion. What binds us. Bicycling, Tennis.
  • Country:United States

Posted 10 September 2006 - 08:03 AM

QUOTE (Kuma @ Sep 10 2006, 12:33 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Despite the Basset Hound's enthusiastic support of your comments,
All too infrequent, I assure you. And he's a Beagle. smile.gif

But this part sums it up the best:
QUOTE
To anyone who isn't a Lucas apologist, the reason he replaced Shaw with Christensen is obvious: it was a desperate attempt to create some sort of continuity between the two trilogies, given that he couldn't be bothered to do it through story and character development.

0

#52 User is offline   Kuma Icon

  • New Cop
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 15
  • Joined: 03-September 06
  • Country:Nothing Selected

Posted 10 September 2006 - 06:50 PM

Hi Helena and the Despondent Beagle,

I certainly agree that Lucas has lost much of his touch. I do think he retains some part of his smarts (but do we agree he's only 80% as powerful as he could have been? wink.gif Aside: I still think that when he wrote the volcano bit in ROTS, George Lucas's guilty mind made Anakin an analogy for himself. Obi-wan is the spectre of good directors past lambasting him for his greed despite his potential: "You were the chosen one! You were to be the greatest director ever!" to which a fiery, limbless (yet rich) GL responds, "My empire has become greater than you can imagine! I hate you!!").

That aside, unfortunately, I think he's also reoriented himself from having an independent and brilliant voice in moviemaking to the making of money at any expense, be it through midichlorians, yodafights, or fart jokes. In the process he managed to ruin a lot of people's dreams, including my own. If the PT was indeed the way he "always intended" the series to be, then wasn't the OT more like that? I mean, it's not like it would have taken impressive CG effects to make Greedo shoot first.

I for one thought and dreamt about the climactic battle between Anakin and Obi-wan for the past 25 years. Little did I know that much of it would be filled with useless backflips and that stupid scene where both Obi and Anakin twirl their lightsabers at each other for no reason whatsoever! Imagine my delight when they did!

However, in my eternal attempts to be an optimist in life, I try to see the good parts of the PT, the moments which make me think GL hasn't lost it all. I look for Star Warsy moments, if you will.

So I guess I'm not a GL apologist, nor am I a purebred hater. After all, he gave us the original series. And it *is* his intellectual property, though I really despise how he still seems to think it's purely his. It's sort of like the author of Cinderella showing up at every little girl's house who ever dreamed of her and saying in his bearded way, "Actually, Cinderella didn't go to the ball in a pumpkin-coach. That was just the way I did it back then, but I always imagined her traveling there three days dead, in a wheeled ashtray."

As for the changes to the DVD's, aside from the general digital cleaning and brushup of the whole deal, and more ships in a couple of space battles (which are still better than anything in the PT due to their relative coherence) Hayden as Anakin at the end is the only change I like, since for me it does indeed glue together the series. But as with most things I can see both sides of this, and fully understand why some people have a problem with it. It just works for me in the way I think about the series.

I hate the new Jabba scenes in ANH, I don't like the new Vader dialogue with the Emperor in ESB, and of course, I don't like how Greedo shoots first--or at the same time. In fact I think things would have been better if Greedo hadn't got a chance to shoot at all.

I am in abeyance that it would have made more sense if he had hired another young actor to play Anakin during the ROTJ days though. But for me Hayden can stay at the end, because I like to think that GL hasn't indeed lost it all.

This post has been edited by Kuma: 10 September 2006 - 07:13 PM

0

#53 User is offline   Lord Aquaman Icon

  • Legend
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,976
  • Joined: 19-November 04
  • Location:Atlantis
  • Interests:Movies, comic books, some mythology... basically anything that's larger than life.
  • Country:United States

Posted 11 September 2006 - 03:24 PM

Hayden has no business being at the end of ROTJ.
I am the Fisher King.

I'd like a qui-gon jinn please with an obi-wan to go.
0

#54 User is offline   KurganX Icon

  • Soothsayer
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 566
  • Joined: 06-June 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Country:United States

Posted 12 September 2006 - 02:03 AM

Even if you like the "restoration" (digitalizing) job on the trilogy, and the CG stuff, still, can you admit to liking the color timing and sound gaffes?

Hopefully not... I think if nothing else, SE gushers can admit that stuff sucks. At least the 1997 editions didn't have that problem!
0

#55 User is offline   barend Icon

  • Anchor Head Anchor Man
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Crappy News Team
  • Posts: 11,839
  • Joined: 12-November 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nieuw Holland
  • Interests:The Beers of Western Europe, Cognac, and constantly claiming the world would have been a better place if Napoleon had won.
  • Country:Australia

Posted 24 September 2006 - 09:43 PM

look, not to blow my own trumpet, but the points i made on page 3 really redundify any argument for the back-streets-of-bangcock-surgical insertion of Christiansen at the end of ROTJ.

i understand that Anikans life was made to mimik Luke's, save for the choices. i conceptually like this idea, mostly because it was the whole point. But it was so poorly exicuted.

Luke made one choice that yoda disagreed with, but had he not he would have found out Vader was his father at the worst possible time. finding out and escaping gave him time to deal with it, and return better prepared. This is really the closest Luke comes to making the worng choice...

Anakin, however just keeps making the wrong choice, over and over and against all probability and common sense. Luke at least rushes off because his friends are in danger, lashes out because and uses his anger because more of his friends are in danger. Anakin just fucks up on a whim, and as offten as possible with out taking a breath. THAT'S NOT the anaikn mentioned in the OT nor dies it realistically follow a parrallel. Anakin only needed to make one mistake for the story to work.

the other problem is that anakin is in his 50s when that helmet comes off... why would a ghost of him 30+ years younger turn up?

he's unrecognisable as lukes father. he's just some punk plonked in to, as helena said, give some visual reference to the PT, to tie the two trilogies like two empires with an arranged marrage.

even if the PT had been made to perfectly fit star wars, such a move is rediculous. like a man with a full head of hair wearing a mismatched colored tupe'

it's just so wrong.
0

#56 User is offline   Sailor Abbey Icon

  • Queen of the Harpies
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2,122
  • Joined: 29-March 05
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:the land of Huskies
  • Interests:Defending the forces of evil from the whiney forces of good; spreading awareness about violence and its ability to solve all problems - from the very smallest to the very stupid…est…; sticking up for the little guy, as long as the little guy shares my point of view or is willing to convert in exchange for some ‘sticking up for’; and of course, plotting world domination and putting and end to reality tv once and for all. <br /><br />Oh, and beautiful women.
  • Country:United States

Posted 25 September 2006 - 10:00 AM

I didn’t even know who it was at first. I thought it was Stuart Townsend or something.
0

#57 User is offline   Helena Icon

  • Basher Extraordinaire
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,327
  • Joined: 01-June 04
  • Location:UK
  • Interests:Current age: 22<br /><br />Current occupation: Auditor<br /><br />Interests: Reading, computer games, music, and Star Wars (obviously).<br /><br />Talents: Can't act, can't dance, can sing a little.<br /><br />Loves: Terry Pratchett's 'Discworld' series.<br /><br />Hates: Harry Potter. Surely I can't be the only one?
  • Country:United Kingdom

Posted 25 September 2006 - 10:48 AM

The worst thing about it is that it seems like Anakin is being rewarded for his fall to the Dark Side. Whilst Obi-Wan and Yoda are stuck with their creaky old-man 'bodies', Mr. Genocidal Planet-Destroyer gets to party with them and look like a 20-year-old for the rest of eternity. The 'it's his last Light Side incarnation' claim makes no sense, because he was redeemed before he died (and it's a really crappy argument anyway; why shouldn't he suffer the physical consequences of 20+ years of evil?)

And if it's confusing for the audience, just imagine what it must be like for Luke. Why on earth should he recognise this twentysomething pretty-boy, when the father he saw die ten minutes earlier was an old man? It was just an incredibly crappy idea all round, and like everything else he did with the SEs, Lucas rushed into it without thinking about the consequences. Not that I imagine he'd have cared if he had thought about them; all he cares about is stamping the old movies with the mark of his precious Prequels.
QUOTE
The sandpeople had women and children. We know this because Anakin killed them how could he tell? The children might be smaller but I never saw a sandperson with breasts. Did they hike their skirts and show him some leg or something?

QUOTE
Also, I can see the point of wanting to kidnap a human and use her as a slave, but they didn't. They tied her to a flimsy easel for a month. It's assumed they had to feed and give her water. What for? Was she purely ornamental? I can understand them wanting the droids, you can sell those for a lot of money, but a chick who's only skills are finding non-existand mushrooms and getting randomly pregnant, you're not going to get much.

- J m HofMarN on the Sand People
0

#58 User is offline   barend Icon

  • Anchor Head Anchor Man
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Crappy News Team
  • Posts: 11,839
  • Joined: 12-November 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nieuw Holland
  • Interests:The Beers of Western Europe, Cognac, and constantly claiming the world would have been a better place if Napoleon had won.
  • Country:Australia

Posted 25 September 2006 - 06:08 PM

wasn't getting his arms and legs back generous enough?
0

#59 User is offline   civilian_number_two Icon

  • Canada's Next Top Model.
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Head Moderator
  • Posts: 3,382
  • Joined: 01-November 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:In Your Dreams
  • Interests:I like stuff.
  • Country:Canada

Posted 26 September 2006 - 03:42 AM

QUOTE (Kuma @ Sep 8 2006, 11:14 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I think some of the gripes about the change are sorta missing the point, being that George wanted the series to be about the Campbellian Hero's Journey.

I apologize for coming into this so late, and to everyone who has heard all this before, I sort of apologize as well, though less sincerely.

Lucas did NOT have the "Campbellian Hero's Journey" in mind when he penned his first "series." First up, he had no "series" in mind. Early interviews with him prove that; he wrote each STAR WARS film in succession. With the prequels he must have had a basic idea for all three, but with the original trilogy he wrote one movie at a time, and retconned old ideas when he came up with new ones. The Luke/Leia romance-cum-displaced siblings-story has to be the best example of that.

Getting back to the first sentence, though, STAR WARS worked because it was an homage to science fiction ideas, old serials, movies Lucas saw in film school, and pop-culture favourites like Tolkien and WWII drive-in classics. It was new in terms of the attention to special effects, but it was fun and familiar in terms of having obvious but time-worn sources, borrowed from Asimov, Doc Smith, Alex Raymond, Frank Herbert, The Dam Busters, The Hidden Fortress, Lord of the Rings, etc. It could easily have failed for these reasons, and appeared derivative, but it didn't and we got the successful stand-alone film that we got. Lucas promised to follow it with a sequel, and had all sorts of ideas, many of which he hinted at in a Rolling Stone interview.

Today Lucas would say that he was just joking, and that he had a 6-part series planned from the beginning. He would also tell you that his sources were Ovid's Metamorphoses, Homer's Odyssey, Sophocles's Oedipus Rex, etc. You get the idea, but noone apart from this guy Campbell could possibly show how these works relate to STAR WARS at all, except in the generic way that many stories relate to one another ("This is the one where there's some kind of misunderstanding"). Finding relevant links between The Odyssey and THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK are virtually impossible, but it's pretty easy for a child to notice that the City in the Clouds is just like the city of the Hawkmen in FLASH GORDON. Lucas would like to say that his sources were all mythological, because to naive fanboys it makes him sound deep. But the fact is his sources were more direct, and visibly obviouis, and back in the days when he would admit them he seemed a pretty cool guy. Now, post-bullshit, he seems like a pretentious schmuck. It's like if Quentin Tarantino suddenly refused to acknowledge that all of his movies are just strung-together pop-culture references and most specifically quotes from or sly references to other films.
"I had a lot of different ideas. At one point, Luke, Leia and Ben were all going to be little people, and we did screen tests to see if we could do that." -George Lucas, in STAR WARS: the Annotated Screenplays (p197).
0

#60 User is offline   Jordan Icon

  • Tummy Friend
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,161
  • Joined: 31-October 03
  • Location:Mars
  • Interests:I have none.
  • Country:Ethiopia

Posted 28 September 2006 - 05:01 PM

That may be all true, civ. But the apologists will say that orginal films were modelled after "hero with a thousand faces".

Campbell himself had close ties to Lucas and apparantly from day one Lucas endorsed his book for the orginal films. He was close to campbell so it does lend credit to his end that he used his writings in his film making.

When you mention Flash Gordon, they'll come back with samurai literature and Campbell.

What's your retort to that? I think you have to meet them halfway and say "while some aspects of the film were of Campbell and old samurai stories, the vast majority is just a mix of Sci FI from his childhood that he saw on tv and heard on the radio."

(Isn't Campbells book just a broad view of hero culture and not really a good specific source. I mean, indirectly doesn't every movie of this genre some how relate to that book? )

This post has been edited by Jordan: 28 September 2006 - 05:04 PM

Oh SMEG. What the smeggity smegs has smeggins done? He smeggin killed me. - Lister of Smeg, space bum
0

  • (5 Pages)
  • +
  • « First
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5


Fast Reply

  • Decrease editor size
  • Increase editor size