Chefelf.com Night Life: No Attachments, No Interest - Chefelf.com Night Life

Jump to content

Star Wars Fan Convention

  • (4 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4

No Attachments, No Interest My beef with the PT

#16 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 07 May 2006 - 06:48 PM

QUOTE (Gerhard @ May 6 2006, 02:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
smile.gif
In my opinion the "no attachment" policy was brought to the PT to give more drama to Anakins turn, something that Lucas is a master at, make things as he go's.

The no attachments policy was only in place to prop up the "forbidden love" device. The couple is drawn together because their relationship is against the rules.

There's no other rational explanation why she would want him.

Anikan's rise to the most hated character really does happen before our eyes! What a fabulous story arc! Great going, George! (Sorry Hayden.)
0

#17 User is offline   jariten Icon

  • making the nature scene
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,845
  • Joined: 18-August 04
  • Location:in the bin
  • Country:Nothing Selected

Posted 08 May 2006 - 07:56 AM

QUOTE
But that is not the point, Yoda does not want Luke to go because his not ready to face Vader. Yoda does not imply he should not care for his friends. Just make a sacrifice, at this time, for more important things.


Like his training! Exactly the thing he abandoned in favour of Han and Leia. Then he loses it again in RotJ, mirroring Anakin losing it in AotC. again because of his attachment to Leia (the same as Anakin with his mother).

QUOTE
Palpatine and Vader explored the emotional side of Luke in order to turn him to the dark side using Leia and his rebel friends. But that exploration does not base on the fact that Luke cared for his friends, but for the hate it may generate inside Luke to protect them.


Of course its based on his caring for his friends. If he didn(t care about them, why would he become hateful to someone who was trying to hurt them?

QUOTE
I never saw any hint in the OT that Luke should not have any attachments to protect himself from dark side.


I think I mentioned a couple of them above.

Remember as well that the creed isn't "dont care", its "dont get attached".

The jedi care. Obi cares about Qui Gon and Anakin. Qui cares about everyone it seems. Care, but learn to let go when you need to, like both Luke and Anakin should obviously have done.

Attachment is wanting to possess things, even to the extent where your behaviour becomes irrational or hateful. Look at Luke when hes going apeshit on Anakin, hes tasting the darkside power and loving it, and wanting it to protect Leia.

What I really like about the rule is the way that Lucas breaks it. The only two jedi to succumb to these attachments in some way are Anakin and Luke, both the respective heroes of their trilogies and both the 'human' connect to the audience. I get attached to things, because like them, i'm a human with good old human feelings. I would run off to save my friends even when I know in my heart that im irrationally acting off impulse, and I'd be protective (even physically so) if they were threatened.
These must of been the kind of ideas Lucas was thinking of when he decided to explore the "no attachments" idea more fully in the PT.

QUOTE
The no attachments policy was only in place to prop up the "forbidden love" device


But it works so far outside of that though. Anakin being unable to let go is the main reason he goes down.
0

#18 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 08 May 2006 - 10:55 AM

QUOTE (jariten @ May 8 2006, 07:56 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
But it works so far outside of that though. Anakin being unable to let go is the main reason he goes down.

It's really a weak execution for the basis of a SAGA, isn't it? I'll agree with you that Anikan is a helpless, pitiful character.
0

#19 User is offline   Gerhard Icon

  • Mini Boss
  • PipPip
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 164
  • Joined: 24-June 05
  • Location:Lisbon, Portugal
  • Country:Portugal

Posted 09 May 2006 - 09:43 AM

QUOTE (jariten @ May 8 2006, 01:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Like his training! Exactly the thing he abandoned in favour of Han and Leia. Then he loses it again in RotJ, mirroring Anakin losing it in AotC. again because of his attachment to Leia (the same as Anakin with his mother).


I can't see any mirrors.

Luke stops his training because he senses Han and Leia were in trouble.
Anakin took 10 years to go and save is mother because of bad dreams, even thought she was a slave during those 10 years.

Luke choose to fight Vader to protect Leia
Anakin joined the dark side because of vague promises that the dark side saves people from dying, and ironically the first task is to kill a bunch of innocent kids.

There is no way in my mind, of a mirror between the skywalkers actions in each trilogy.
Luke's actions we all can relate too, Anakin's action's? pathetic to say the least.

QUOTE (jariten @ May 8 2006, 01:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Of course its based on his caring for his friends. If he didn(t care about them, why would he become hateful to someone who was trying to hurt them?
I think I mentioned a couple of them above.


But the point is that never in the teachings of Kenoby or Yoda there was a hint that he should not be attached to is friends.

QUOTE (jariten @ May 8 2006, 01:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Remember as well that the creed isn't "dont care", its "dont get attached".

The jedi care. Obi cares about Qui Gon and Anakin. Qui cares about everyone it seems. Care, but learn to let go when you need to, like both Luke and Anakin should obviously have done.


I don't think other Jedi's attachments have at all been explored.
in the OT is visible that Obiwan cares about Luke like a son. I'm sure he would save Luke's live at any moment (wasn't him there for 18 years or so to look after Luke?)

QUOTE (jariten @ May 8 2006, 01:56 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Attachment is wanting to possess things, even to the extent where your behaviour becomes irrational or hateful. Look at Luke when hes going apeshit on Anakin, hes tasting the darkside power and loving it, and wanting it to protect Leia.

What I really like about the rule is the way that Lucas breaks it. The only two jedi to succumb to these attachments in some way are Anakin and Luke, both the respective heroes of their trilogies and both the 'human' connect to the audience. I get attached to things, because like them, i'm a human with good old human feelings. I would run off to save my friends even when I know in my heart that im irrationally acting off impulse, and I'd be protective (even physically so) if they were threatened.
These must of been the kind of ideas Lucas was thinking of when he decided to explore the "no attachments" idea more fully in the PT.
But it works so far outside of that though. Anakin being unable to let go is the main reason he goes down.


But Luke also did not let go and did not join the dark side, why?

maybe this no attachments thing will be explored in future changes of the OT smile.gif
0

#20 User is offline   jariten Icon

  • making the nature scene
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,845
  • Joined: 18-August 04
  • Location:in the bin
  • Country:Nothing Selected

Posted 09 May 2006 - 04:50 PM

QUOTE
Luke stops his training because he senses Han and Leia were in trouble.
Anakin took 10 years to go and save is mother because of bad dreams, even thought she was a slave during those 10 years.


MIRROR: Luke abandons his training because his friends are in trouble/possibly dying.
Anakin abandons his mission/the Jedi because his mother is quite probably dying.
QUOTE
Luke choose to fight Vader to protect Leia
Anakin joined the dark side because of vague promises that the dark side saves people from dying, and ironically the first task is to kill a bunch of innocent kids.


MIRROR: Luke fights to protect the ones he loves and to keep them safe whatever the cost (killing your own father and going to the darkside in this case)
Anakin fights to protect the ones he loves and to keep them safe whatever the cost (going to the darkside in this case).

Honestly, you can use as many negative sounding verbs as you like, it doesn't change that this is what happened.

p.s And, as you (hopefully) well know, Anakin wasn't interested in saving people from dying, but Padme. Wheres the irony?

QUOTE
But the point is that never in the teachings of Kenoby or Yoda there was a hint that he should not be attached to is friends.


Really? Didn't Yoda tell Luke to abandon them?

QUOTE
But Luke also did not let go and did not join the dark side, why?


Because, looking at himself on the verge of murdering his father (when he did "let go" as you put it and bascially was about to become Anakin mk. 2) and seeing what hes becoming, he steps back and stops, even knowing he'll be killed by Sidious. I'm sure you watched RotJ as many times as I did and know this already. Luke does it for Leia. Anakin did it for Padme (and his mother).
0

#21 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 May 2006 - 06:55 PM

Just go right along dragging down the OT by assimilation. I've put up my force blinders.
0

#22 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 09 May 2006 - 07:06 PM

not really entering this argument, but just a couple things...

QUOTE (jariten @ May 9 2006, 04:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
MIRROR: Luke abandons his training because his friends are in trouble/possibly dying.
Anakin abandons his mission/the Jedi because his mother is quite probably dying.


Anikan is guarding padme and SHE flies to tatooine, remember?

EDIT: actually... woops, sorry, retraction... that was later when they go after obwain wasn't it.

QUOTE (jariten @ May 9 2006, 04:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
MIRROR: Luke fights to protect the ones he loves and to keep them safe whatever the cost (killing your own father and going to the darkside in this case)
Anakin fights to protect the ones he loves and to keep them safe whatever the cost (going to the darkside in this case).


Luke was sent to kill his father but chose not to, infact he had no intention of killing him, he was there to convert him.

Anakin fights to protects the ones he loves...?
he always treated obiwan with mistrust and jelosy, he chokes his wife, steals a droid from his brother, and even tells palpatine he would like to kill him.

QUOTE (jariten @ May 9 2006, 04:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
p.s And, as you (hopefully) well know, Anakin wasn't interested in saving people from dying, but Padme. Wheres the irony?


that he killed all those people and she killed herself tongue.gif

This post has been edited by barend: 10 May 2006 - 01:30 AM

0

#23 User is offline   Gerhard Icon

  • Mini Boss
  • PipPip
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 164
  • Joined: 24-June 05
  • Location:Lisbon, Portugal
  • Country:Portugal

Posted 09 May 2006 - 08:19 PM

QUOTE (jariten @ May 9 2006, 10:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
MIRROR: Luke abandons his training because his friends are in trouble/possibly dying.
Anakin abandons his mission/the Jedi because his mother is quite probably dying.


Anakin was 10 years knowing that is mother was a slave in a ruthless planet and did nothing about it.
It did not make sense to me.

QUOTE (jariten @ May 9 2006, 10:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
MIRROR: Luke fights to protect the ones he loves and to keep them safe whatever the cost (killing your own father and going to the darkside in this case)
Anakin fights to protect the ones he loves and to keep them safe whatever the cost (going to the darkside in this case).


Lucas stated in the dvd comentary that Anakin, after helping sidious kill Mace, he had no other option but to join Palpitine and turn to the dark side.
It did not make sense to me.

The point I was trying to reach when I said I saw no mirrors,was that I can relate and understand Luke's decisions, I can't understand any of Anakin's actions.

QUOTE (jariten @ May 9 2006, 10:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
p.s And, as you (hopefully) well know, Anakin wasn't interested in saving people from dying, but Padme. Wheres the irony?


Following the lack of logic in Anakin's actions, you may have a point there.

QUOTE (jariten @ May 9 2006, 10:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Really? Didn't Yoda tell Luke to abandon them?


hum, as I said, Yoda told him to sacrifice them ("if you honor what they fight for, yes") not because he should not have any attachments or friends or family, but because he was not ready to challenge Vader.

In the PT there is a RULE where Jedi's cannot have attachments, it's like midiclorians, chosen one, Vader's wife dying at birth, Anakin building C3PO, Fett father as clone template that were not even thought during the OT Time. That's the problem.
0

#24 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 10 May 2006 - 01:52 AM

exactly, his friends wanted to overthrow a government and he was the only one who had a chance against their leader. a task that yoda felt he needed more training to complete this task. and the idea there was that by abandoning his training he might save them but the one person he was there to save them from was the one person he was not yet ready to contend with.... and should he fall, his friends were fucked either way.

i'm starting to realize that the only reason people don't mind the PT is becasue the never understood the OT.

i know there's a space battle and glowing swords and shit, but if look closley theres a story there...
0

#25 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 10 May 2006 - 01:52 AM

exactly, his friends wanted to overthrow a government and he was the only one who had a chance against their leader. a task that yoda felt he needed more training to complete this task. and the idea there was that by abandoning his training he might save them but the one person he was there to save them from was the one person he was not yet ready to contend with.... and should he fall, his friends were fucked either way.

i'm starting to realize that the only reason people don't mind the PT is becasue the never understood the OT.

i know there's a space battle and glowing swords and shit, but if look closley theres a story there...
0

#26 User is offline   Commodore Icon

  • Mini Boss
  • PipPip
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 121
  • Joined: 30-April 05
  • Location:Wisconsin
  • Country:United States

Posted 10 May 2006 - 06:22 PM

I don't understand this whole idea that "the OT is just as shitty as the PT, you guys just don't realize it!" The OT has flaws, but seriously...just watch the movies in sequence and it should be obvious which trilogy is more elegant...
0

#27 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 10 May 2006 - 07:12 PM

thankyou....

it's like, i like a piece of shit, so i'm going to proove the thing you compare it to is shit, so i don't look so bad for liking it.

jesus, at least people who listen to shit music half the time end up admitting its crap, but crap they like...
0

#28 User is offline   jariten Icon

  • making the nature scene
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,845
  • Joined: 18-August 04
  • Location:in the bin
  • Country:Nothing Selected

Posted 10 May 2006 - 07:12 PM

QUOTE (Commodore @ May 10 2006, 06:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I don't understand this whole idea that "the OT is just as shitty as the PT, you guys just don't realize it!" The OT has flaws, but seriously...just watch the movies in sequence and it should be obvious which trilogy is more elegant...


You're right about that. Overall theres no doubt in my mind that the OT is the better of the two trilogies. I like to think of them as one set, all the same.

What I mean to say is that the PT often gets critisised in areas that have existed in SW since the beginning. I'd still love for Chefelf to be a sport and go through (say) ANH with the same fine tooth comb he went through RotS with just to see what happens.
0

#29 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 10 May 2006 - 08:07 PM

Two and half reasons to hate Empire Strikes Back?

laugh.gif
0

#30 User is offline   Revan-47 Icon

  • The Prophet
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Former Members
  • Posts: 1,276
  • Joined: 09-June 05
  • Location:Indiana
  • Country:United States

Posted 10 May 2006 - 08:14 PM

Actually, the only two movies that dont have any flaws at all are A new hope and the empire strikes back.
"Life is too important to be taken seriously."
0

  • (4 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4


Fast Reply

  • Decrease editor size
  • Increase editor size