Of course. It's not like I ran out and committed ritual suicide after watching TPM. I just walk out of the theater with a WTF attitude is all.
STAR WARS PREQUELS - a love/hate relationship
- Thread starter HAL.9000
- Start date
Of course. It's not like I ran out and committed ritual suicide after watching TPM. I just walk out of the theater with a WTF attitude is all.
Listen, don't start giving the ushers ideas.
I'd say he's got a point here. You know, in 1989 I went to see "Leviathan" in the theater, because it had Peter Weller in it and he was so great in "Robocop", you know? And it had Richard Crenna in it, and he was so great in the "Rambo" movies, you know? It also had Ernie Hudson from "Ghostbusters".
And the movie sucked eggs. I expected a quality product, and it was garbage! I was betrayed, I tell you! Betrayed! I don't know where or by whom, but I guarantee there was betrayal going on somewhere. That movie raped my childhood, my wife's childhood (and I hadn't even met her yet), and my dog's childhood. And my childhood's dog, just for good measure.
I mean, if we can say that sort of thing about a follow-up to a series that ended in 1983, we should be able to say it about just about anything.
Right?
Who ever claimed that changes were not made? No one, that's what makes it a strawman. The point is that wishful thinking doesn't serve as evidence that Lucas ever participated in this revisionism of Anakin's home planet.
CorporalCaptain said:
Yes, it not applying to Anakin at age 6 was truly a persuasive argument. In what PT film was Anakin age 6 again?
CorporalCaptain said:
Given that the exposition in this series is accomplished by opening crawls and character dialogue, you can't just throw out dialogue whenever you choose not to accept it. What about Beru? Is she TEH LYING LIAR too? By extension of this logic any dialogue in the films can be thrown out if it gets in the way of some agenda. The fact remains that Owen has a very good reason to tell Luke that he thinks Obi-Wan is dead, just as Obi-Wan has a good reason to tell Luke that Vader killed Anakin. Neither of them has any reason to lie about Anakin being from Tatooine.
Wrong, since it would reinforce the lie that Luke himself is from Tatooine, assuming they tried to make him believe that.
Yeah, but where does Luke believe he was born? Anyway, thanks for your feedback. Goodbye.
It doesn't matter. He knows he grew up on Tatooine with Owen and Beru. The idea is that Owen and Beru raised him because Anakin died. Even if Anakin had not been from Tatooine, Luke still would have ended up there when sent to Owen and Beru. Thus, if Anakin had been from someplace other than Tatooine, lying about that fact would serve no purpose at all. Similarly, in addition to there being no evidence that Luke was told he was born on Tatooine, there is also no necessity for such a deception. Even if Anakin was portrayed as a navigator on a spice freighter rather than a Jedi, he's not expected to have remained in one place his entire life.
P.S. I never suggested that Lucas ever wanted to change Anakin's home planet.
I only said that after the OT was complete, he would have been able to, and that it would have made much more sense if he had, given the way the OT panned out, no doubt differently from how he had originally intended before committing to make the first film.
Ooh! I want to go to the school where I get to shoot other students as part of a class assignment!
I was kind of surprised that they didn't have some sort of conversation between Anakin & Owen in Attack of the Clones just to lend some ring of truth to the bit where Obi-Wan talks about how Owen objected to Anakin's ideals. But then, there were a lot of things that Obi-Wan said that he seems to just be making up for Luke's benefit, like, "Your father wanted you to have this [lightsabre] when you were old enough."
And I think it's worth wondering just how much Owen & Beru know about what happened to Anakin. Owen's line, "That's what I'm afraid of," could go either way. Either he thinks that Anakin got himself killed by getting himself involved in the war or he knows that Anakin turned into an evil, genocidal tyrant.
When Revenge of the Sith ends, who all knows what really became of Anakin Skywalker? Of course, we know that Obi-Wan, Yoda, & Emperor Palpatine know. But what about Senator Organa? Since R2-D2's memory was never wiped, can we presume that he at least has some idea about what's going on? Exactly what public position, if any, does Darth Vader hold in Emperor Palpatine's administration? It's very unclear.
Of course, I think there's at least a few solid bits of evidence of George Lucas changing his mind and ret-conning certain things from the original trilogy based on changes he made in the special editions.
In the Luke/Biggs/Red Leader scene that was added in A New Hope, there's an awkward edit where they snipped out a line or two about Red Leader having known Anakin. (They hide the wipe edit by having another X-Wing pilot walk right in front of the camera in the middle of the scene but keep your eye on R2-D2 being lifted into the X-Wing in the background. He suddenly jumps 3 feet higher after the random X-Wing pilot walks past.)
There's also the lines added in the Emperor Palpatine scene in The Empire Strikes Back. As the scene originally plays, Darth Vader seems to have known since the beginning of the film that Luke was his son. After the 2004 additions, Emperor Palpatine is the one that tells Darth Vader that Luke is his son. Or at least Palpatine confirms it for him. Vader might have already known at that point and was just in denial or was trying to find some other explanation. Of course, considering the nonchalant way in which Palpatine delivers the news, it makes you wonder how long Palpatine has known about Luke, and why is he telling Vader now.
Please.
The Borgified Corpse said:
He most likely knows about what happened on Mustafar and could probably have inferred a lot of it just from how Obi-Wan showed up with Padme. He doesn't find out that Anakin survived as Darth Vader until Dark Lord.
The Borgified Corpse said:
That's a fair assumption. He knows that he came to Mustafar with Anakin and left without him, for example. He saw Obi-Wan come back from their battle alone. In the EU, he knows about ROTS events which he did not personally witness, as a result of hacking into the Jedi Temple security recordings.
I think I can speak to this one. This scene, even before the DVD alterations, was one of my favorites in the original trilogy. Vader has been searching for Luke already, as the opening crawl indicates. Surely he knows it is his son. He sensed him during the trench run and he has learned enough about him to confirm his name. It is likely that Vader was able to discover Luke's identity much faster than Palpatine. Remember in RotJ, Vader was able to sense Luke while Palpatine could not.
I have always believed (even before the DVDs) that Vader was simply pretending to be surprised by Palpatine's revelation. From the moment Vader suggested they try and turn Luke together there was an understanding between master and apprentice that they would each be trying to destroy the other, using Luke as the instrument. This is the Rule of Two in action. Vader's offer to Luke to share power after they destroy the Emperor lends credence to this theory.
With regards to Anakin being from Tattooine on the basis of Kenobi's line I think you can read it either way. "should have stayed home" doesn't mean that home=Tattooine, Owen/Beru/Anakin could easily have been from some other place.
The line is "should have stayed here" - "here" being Tatooine.
My biggest problem with RotS is that Lucas wastes half an hour of screen time spelling out things that we don't need spelling out because they will be revealed in the later trilogy. Any young fans being introduced to SW as children and watch the movies in number order will know for sure who Vader is and that seems like a terrible shame. They will also know that Leia is Luke's sister, albeit that revelation always seemed a bit random and unnecessary. Does the added scene in ESB also reveal this expressly - if so I despair even more - why ruin the best movie out of the six with such an unnecessary edit? Sacrilege!
Why does Palpatine need to rename Anakin as Vader? Why can't Anakin just be left burning on the side of the volcano, presumed dead? Why do we need to see the twins born? Why could we not have just had a brief conversation where Kenobi and Yoda suggest that the children will need to be split up for their own safety because they may have inherited their father's abilities and could be viewed as a threat or worse, a tool, by Palpatine? A brief comment that Padme won't like that notion, followed by Kenobi suggesting Anakin's mother's family as foster parents and promising to remain close by to protect him. No need to bring Senator Organa into it. NO PADME DEATH SCENE which bizarrely contradict's Leia's recollections of her mother in RotJ.
I'm begging somebody to re-edit this version of RotS - pleeease....
Jesus Christ, you make it sound like you bought a car...
I may be misremembering, but I watched the film too recently to do so again, so I'll concede the point.
The alternative is Padme dying off-screen between trilogies, which ends up sucking in a different way.
(To explain the Leia thing, there may be clues in TPM, ROTJ, and COTJ...
)
The alternative is Padme dying off-screen between trilogies, which ends up sucking in a different way.
(To explain the Leia thing, there may be clues in TPM, ROTJ, and COTJ...
Well, we don't need to see Padme die since Leia explains that her mother died when she was very young. Personally, I'm quite happy for her precise fate to remain unknown particularly since it doesn't then contradict Leia's recollections of her mother being very sad (as opposed to taking three breaths and dying for no medical reason). I'd rather imagine her dying a heroic death fighting the Empire at some later date.
I realise that the entire relationship was childishly cardboard and stilted but the death she got was terribly childish - she effectively died of a broken heart because her man turned bad. It just doesn't sound like the Padme we got to know in the last 3 movies. If they had split her character and made her a feeble delicate flower who needed her man for support while giving the strong-willed action heroine role to another character, it would have been easier to justify her just giving up on her children.
Padme also didn't look like she was about to give birth to one child let alone twins! But back to what you were saying I guess that means Bail Organa's wife was sad and died when Leia was young - or she had a photographic memory as a newborn. I guess with a high enough midiclorox count either scenario is believable in Star Wars Land.
Similar threads
