[J m HofMarN]

In the scene where Mace is somehow electrocuting Palpatine I think Chefelf brought up that it attempts to paralell ROTJ's scene.

What I don't get is that Vader made the wrong choice by saving Palpatine in ROTS, and this somehow led him to make the right choice in saving Luke? What? It would have made far more sense, and been a much better parallell, if Mace had been losing and begging for Anakin's help and Anakin had turned his back on Mace. This would give him a real motivation to save Luke in ROTJ. Instead it just seems to be a half assed nod to the OT.

[WalkingCarpet]

Yeah, then you could have had a really cold bit with a close-up of Anakin just watching on as Mace is getting force-lightninged to hell. Would have book-ended well with the close up of Vader's 'face' just before he rescues Luke.

And even Hayden couldn't have fucked that one up.......

[J m HofMarN]

But instead with the way it worked, this is apparently what Vader would be thinking in ROTJ:

"Well, last time I did this it kind of damned the galaxy to an age of darkness and got my wife killed, but hey, second time's the charm right?"

[Despondent]

Great point, J m.

[DarthTherion]

When I first read the initial post, I thought it was a really cool suggestion and that it would have worked well -- however, after giving it some thought, I've decided against it. Let me explain why:

The PT is designed to be the exact opposite of the OT (y'know...the OT was *good*, har har har...*rolls eyes*). Where the OT is about freedom of will, the PT is about destiny; where the OT is about humanity triumphing over the machine, the PT is about the machine triumphing over humanity. Etc, etc.

The biggest difference between the two trilogies is stark contrast between moral absolutism and moral relativism. In the OT, there were clear bad guys who did bad things; consequently, there were also obvious heroes. It was rather simplistic morality, but it worked -- Vader saving Luke was good because he was *saving* him. Saving someone is a good thing, right? Perhaps it could be contrasted to the way that Vader was killing all his underlings in Empire.

The PT deals with an internal conflict and, as such, needs to illustrate that the line between good and evil is alot thinner than we might think. Things that seem "good" can easily lead to the dark side, and things that seem "evil" can be made to serve "good."

The best thing about the PT is that it adds to the depth of the Star Wars universe by making this moral relativism explicit. The action of saving someone could be good or bad -- depending. Depending on what? State of mind.

When Vader saves Palpatine, he is acting mostly out of self-interest. When he saves Luke, he is acting mostly out of love for his son. He gives himself up and sacrifices himself, refusing the selfishness of the darkside.

Seemingly good actions can lead to tragedy. A hero who wants to preserve love can fall to the dark side. A democracy that wants to preserve security can slide into a dictatorship. A Jedi council that wants to preserve galactic unity can choose the wrong side in a civil war.

[J m HofMarN]

A moron who wants to balance the force can ruin everything. hehe

but in all seriousness that's an incredibly thoughtful and well-informed post, although by the time Anakin has killed Mace it's clear he's evil. I think it would have been much better for him to turn his back on Mace rather than straight up attack him. That makes the fall to the dark side a little more gradual.

[DarthTherion]

A moron who wants to balance the force can ruin everything. hehe

but in all seriousness that's an incredibly thoughtful and well-informed post, although by the time Anakin has killed Mace it's clear he's evil. I think it would have been much better for him to turn his back on Mace rather than straight up attack him. That makes the fall to the dark side a little more gradual.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks for the kind words, Jm. I'm not quite so sure Anakin is clearly evil yet at that moment, though -- he needed to do something sudden and violent...to show us (and himself) what he's capable of. Remember, he's off to slaughter children next!

I think the lack of a clear absolute evil hurt people's perception of the PT. For example, everyone expected the clones to "attack" the Jedi in Episode II, but Lucas chose to have the Jedi fight alongside the pre-Storm Troopers. A pretty clever choice, actually, but it left alot of viewers confused. Even the "bad guy" Count Dooku didn't seem all that evil -- and he wasn't. The darkness was growing from the inside during the entire PT.

Instead of classic good vs. evil, we got a pod race, a kid who yells "yippee," the beginnings of a civil war, alot of awkward love scenes, and no real discernable villains. The only true bad guy is Darth Sidious, whose plans are not laid out for the audience at all; the other bad guys have very little screen time...which was obviously a conscious choice.

I'm becoming more and more unsure how to feel about the PT. The more I think about it, the more I understand how it was made correctly -- a fall from grace told in three parts that invert the story of Luke's journey whenever possible. The PT is subtler, focused on moral relativism and internal choices made by characters and organizations. That's how the PT had to be.

[BobEPeru]

Thanks for the kind words, Jm. I'm not quite so sure Anakin is clearly evil yet at that moment, though -- he needed to do something sudden and violent...to show us (and himself) what he's capable of. Remember, he's off to slaughter children next!

I think the lack of a clear absolute evil hurt people's perception of the PT. For example, everyone expected the clones to "attack" the Jedi in Episode II, but Lucas chose to have the Jedi fight alongside the pre-Storm Troopers. A pretty clever choice, actually, but it left alot of viewers confused. Even the "bad guy" Count Dooku didn't seem all that evil -- and he wasn't. The darkness was growing from the inside during the entire PT.

Instead of classic good vs. evil, we got a pod race, a kid who yells "yippee," the beginnings of a civil war, alot of awkward love scenes, and no real discernable villains. The only true bad guy is Darth Sidious, whose plans are not laid out for the audience at all; the other bad guys have very little screen time...which was obviously a conscious choice.

I'm becoming more and more unsure how to feel about the PT. The more I think about it, the more I understand how it was made correctly -- a fall from grace told in three parts that invert the story of Luke's journey whenever possible. The PT is subtler, focused on moral relativism and internal choices made by characters and organizations. That's how the PT had to be.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It should have been this, and in many ways it was, but too much time in the PT is spent pandering to an audience that only cares about the story until the next Harry Potter film, or Shark Boy and LavaGirl comes out, and then I think he misreads that these folks wills still giveadamn about his story outside of what toys he might sell in the opening month. I think Yoda and the Yoda mechandise craze was the real ruining of Star Wars.