Star Wars "boring political talk" Makes it More Real
- Thread starter VulcanJedi
- Start date
Agreed--that great, necessary scene gave the conflict a face and motivation--much like most of Tarkin's scenes. It was not just some dull guy trying to act brutal (Anakin) or a wicked wizard cackling and shooting lighting bolts for two hours. Since that time, you have a certain faction within Star Wars fandom that thinks its boring if not all about "badass" Sith / waving glow sticks, space battles that cannot possibly be exciting after seeing the same 30,000 times before, and anything associated with Boba Fett, or the (thankfully jettisoned) EU.
That genuinely turned Star Wars into the cartoon critics have always accused it of being--only now, they are right.
Good point, but still to deal with issues of piracy and general lawlessness or even small scale wars (I believe that dude said there hadn't been a full scale war since the formation of the Republic) it seems like the Republic would've benefited from having peacekeeping forces at the least.
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Stark_Hyperspace_War
Granted its expanded universe and no longer considered canon or semi-canon, but at least at this point the Star Wars creatives had introduced the idea of smaller conflicts.
And even if there hadn't been any full scale war since the formation of the Republic, after the Trade Federation blockade, I could see Padme coming to see the need for a Republic military to prevent another situation like that happening to Naboo in the future or another member world.
Last edited:
Hey, some of the best Star Wars comes from the cartoons (microseries and Clone Wars, jury is still out for me on Rebels)
, but I do get your larger point. However I am fine with badass Sith and the expanded universe. I got a creeping suspicion that Force Awakens will not be as good as some of the stuff the EU gave us. I definitely share your distaste for Boba Fett though. Way overrated.
The story was fine. What was needed were some targeted revisions to Lucas' dialogue, directing of actors, and editing.
Still, for me anyway, those flaws didn't make the politics at all "boring." In fact, plausible or not, I quite enjoyed most of the scenes involving the political aspects of the story. Personally, I was bored more with the sections of AOTC with Anakin and Padme on Naboo and Obi-Wan at Kamino (his verbal sparring with Jango notwithstanding).
Still, for me anyway, those flaws didn't make the politics at all "boring." In fact, plausible or not, I quite enjoyed most of the scenes involving the political aspects of the story. Personally, I was bored more with the sections of AOTC with Anakin and Padme on Naboo and Obi-Wan at Kamino (his verbal sparring with Jango notwithstanding).
And that's what the best speculative fiction's supposed to do.
Apart from the issues Sci mentioned, I just can't wrap my head around the notion of a single-government known galaxy in the first place, unless it's tyrannical by default. So some planets or systems want to opt out of the Republic... why is that a problem? Opting out of a federal government is one thing, and waging war against said government is another thing entirely.
That was painfully clear; many times during production clips, whether it was during an editing session, storyboard session, and especially anything involving the approval of FX or creature design, the expressions on the key personnel faces around him practically screamed, "heh-heh, we agree with everything you say!! Aren't we just like you? heh-heh...everything is great!"
That kind of kiss ass mentality contributed much to the prequels being so awful.
Can you name a single director who had an underling tell them no and they actually listened to them?
Well, it's my understanding that the Galactic Republic did not literally have jurisdiction over the entire Galaxy Far Far Away. Just most of it -- just like the United States of America does not literally contain all of North America, for instance.
As for secession -- one of the things the films strongly imply (and which the novels make more explicit) is that the Separatists are not really representing public opinion; the Separatist movement is dominated by large corporations that are seeking a weaker interstellar regime that won't be able to regulate them and which will therefore create a more profitable interstellar climate. And, of course, those same corporations -- the Trade Federation most explicitly -- are themselves puppets of Darth Sidious. So essentially Palpatine was running both sides of the civil war for his own personal power and profit; had the conflict arisen naturally, it's hard to know what the balance of power would have been.
Gary Kurtz was that man in Lucas Land. However, by the time of the Special Editions and Prequels, Kurtz was long gone, and you were never going to find a person of such integrity at LFL--only the grinning fanboys Lucas surround himself with from the 1990s - forward--the yes-men Reverend referred to.
Lucas's take on the abilities of children, at least in Star Wars, goes beyond their eligibility to rule and represent certain planets, at least when it comes to children with Force abilities. Anakin was a skilled pilot, and incidentally Watto didn't seem to think it was too peculiar for a child --Force abilities or no-- to be able to do that, and Yoda marveled at how wonderful and uncluttered children's minds are, and incidentally also didn't seem to limit the applicability of his remark to Jedi Younglings. Going over to the OT, in the 1977 film, Luke and Leia weren't old either, 19 and barely young adults (by American standards). Leia was a Princess and active secret agent, and had probably begun training years before, whereas Luke went from moister-farmer-in-training to Death Star blower-upper in just a few days, himself having learned to fly well enough to go up against the Empire by messing around with his friends.
I'm not so sure about the implication you talk about Sci. When you do add the novels, comics, and perhaps even the Clone Wars cartoon into it, it's more complicated. I do think there are some Separatist planets that are rebelling for greater freedom from the Republic or due to Republic corruption or weakness, and not simply to enrich themselves. Even in the opening crawl of Revenge of the Sith it even says there are heroes on both sides. Though the films don't show Separatist heroes. I do agree with you that Palpatine was running both sides of the war.
When did Kurtz ever tell Lucas no? Somehow I think people confuse Lucas with Steve Jobs
^
Good point about wisdom not necessarily being tied to age, however I have to disagree with some of your points. The British monarchy is hereditary. And it's likely that any young monarch has adults who advise him/her or serve as regent until they are of an age that is considered appropriate for them to rule. Naboo's monarch was an elected position. So was Padme the most qualified in a planet of likely millions of humans (not counting the Gungans)?
From what we did see Padme is compassionate, dedicated, willing to fight and die for her people, she's noble and is committed to democracy, all good things. I'm not sure she was the best, but for story's sake she's the best the Naboo got.
Arguably Padme being young and perhaps more rash got more Naboo citizens killed during the Trade Federation's repression. If she had signed the treaty the Trade Federation might not have killed Naboo citizens in an effort to get her to knuckle under. I mean her plan to return to the planet on a flimsy hope to ally with the Gungans to somehow defeat the Trade Federation wasn't the wisest move and it almost ended in disaster. Even the Jedi didn't send a lot of backup to support her.
Good point about wisdom not necessarily being tied to age, however I have to disagree with some of your points. The British monarchy is hereditary. And it's likely that any young monarch has adults who advise him/her or serve as regent until they are of an age that is considered appropriate for them to rule. Naboo's monarch was an elected position. So was Padme the most qualified in a planet of likely millions of humans (not counting the Gungans)?
From what we did see Padme is compassionate, dedicated, willing to fight and die for her people, she's noble and is committed to democracy, all good things. I'm not sure she was the best, but for story's sake she's the best the Naboo got.
Arguably Padme being young and perhaps more rash got more Naboo citizens killed during the Trade Federation's repression. If she had signed the treaty the Trade Federation might not have killed Naboo citizens in an effort to get her to knuckle under. I mean her plan to return to the planet on a flimsy hope to ally with the Gungans to somehow defeat the Trade Federation wasn't the wisest move and it almost ended in disaster. Even the Jedi didn't send a lot of backup to support her.
Kurtz was the one who was a strongest guiding arm through most Lucas films up to TESB, being careful to keep the production (and stories) on a sensible path (not referrig to cost overrun). He did not grin and pretend to be "George Lucas Clone" like the giddy fanboys of the prequels productions (just look at rhe BTS minidiocs widely available).
For example, read this passage from a Los Angeles Times article on Kurtz:
Before Lucas tried to turn himself into some bastardized Disney, Kurtz prevented that desire from turning Star Wars into what is now the dominant face and material of the franchise: overflowing merchandise unlike anything seen before and cartoon theatrics (as of the prequels). When Lucas was too much to deal with--i.e. adamant about his vision for ROTJ, Kurtz left. You do not see that kind of conflict or resistance with the grinning fanboys from the prequels productions at all.
The Jedi weren't allowed to help Padme and the Gungans ahd their army were Checkov guns. It was a risky move on Padme's part but it made a new peace between her people and the Gungans. The end of the scene was cut but Palpatine smiled after Padme left telling him she was going to return to Naboo.
I agree with DarKush: Inherited versus elected. No one expects a person 6 days old to directly rule. But you do expect an elected person to rule. But arguing the fiction is a little besides the point for me. I tend to think in terms of the reality - that being George Lucas who is creating the fiction of a young queen, ostensibly because he sees wisdom in youth or maybe it's just marketing demographics. But with his his predilection for stuffed animal characters and advancing youth in his stories ahead of their maturity on our terms, reading this now, I wonder if it's a little like an absurd fantasy of putting prepubescent girls in beauty contests.
