*** Official STAR WARS Saga (episodes I to VI) Discussion Thread: Part 4 - Page 8

Obi picking up the saber was enough for me. A very poignant moment.

Carlo:

No, Obi-Wan picks up Anakins sabre as he walks away, actually right when Anakin burst into flames.

Obi-Wan works fine for me in ANH, because after ROTJ I knew the guy was just: a) protecting Luke from a screwed up family story; b) trying to get Luke to come to Alderaan.

What doesn't work for me is Vader's reaction to Obi-Wan in ANH. Seriously, "The circle is now complete" is not how I greet someone who walked away from me while I was on fire.

I thought Jedis didn't get married, were celibate.

Do we know if Jedi's got married, had children?

I don't think Jedi's believe in breeding for the next generation of Jedi's, rather, they relied on testing for them when children were very young.

It doesn't seem quite right - but Vader seemed to have more control over his emotions by then.

But referring to that scene, for anyone complaining about cheesy dialog in the prequels... "Only a master of evil, Darth!" is pretty silly.

Matt,
even though i didn't invest a lot of time coming up with it, it wasn't meant as a cheap shot.
your an official reviewer now- a man of postion and influence-a shaper of opinion- i'm just a little jealous and can't resist tweaking your chain a little - hence the the 'wink'.
remember-its only a SW thread.



the problem with SW is that there are several different versions floating around and some of these version now contradict earlier versions.
the purpose of the original (circa 1980) scene between the emperor and Vader was to inform Vader that Luke was taking steps to become a Jedi- that was the crucial bit of news that the emperor had to convey.
not the 'who' but the 'what'.
"the son of skywalker must not become a jedi" i.e finding him specifically has taken on a sudden urgency.
the emperor wants him dead- circa 1980, he was perfectly happy with Vader.
it's Vader who suggests trying to exploit him rather than kill him (and you can read into that maybe he still has some feeling for his son and doesn't want to see him dead)
"he will join us or die"
why would Vader make that offer(and why the hell would it be accepted) if there existed this basic Sith contract that there were only ever to be two - a master and apprentice- how does a third wheel fit into the equation and why would vader and the emperor both find it a good idea, if this is contrary to established Sith order? (because that 'order' wouldn't become canon unitl decades later).
frankly, i find that a real horseshit paradigm.
i realize its supposed to say something profound about the insular, paranoid nature of evil, but it makes very little sense.
why on earth would you ever even take on an apprentice, if that apprentice is ultimately going to canibalize the power structure?
it is illogical.
it would make a hell of a lot more sense if there were always a master and two apprentices- both in competition and opposition that would help preserve the 'head' as either threat would be pitted against each other and since they are invested more in themselves, it would be less likely that they would join forces to attempt to cut off the head.
Lucas fails to give the evil side a system of checks and balances for its own internal survival.
not well thought out.


this series was going in one direction in 1980 (a lot of you are to young to have seen it first hand from reading some of the posts). it got jerked in another direction in 1983, and then it got more slight course corrections in 1997 and 2004.
and i expect the next time they make it to video there will be still more changes.
discussing the OT w/ people amped up on the prequels is kind of tricky.

"Only a master of evil, Darth!" is pretty silly

^ yeah, there's Obi-Wan speaking in absolutes again!

I do like that Anakin calls Obi-Wan master during the duel, it does set up the "circle is now complete" line very well.

Watching closely, Hayden and George put together the change in speech and mannerisms very well in ROTS.

Actually, I didn't see Vader as nearly so bad, until AFTER the prequels, making it a lot easier to accept. He killed a few Rebels in the line of duty, but killed just as many of his own guys. HE didn't give the orders to blow up planets, nor did he murder any children in the OT. Throw Palpy next to him and he just didn't seem to be the ultimate evil, but more the ultimate evil's lapdog, raised to do its evil master's bidding.

Paul, all those events took place AFTER the Vader/Emp. conversation outside the asteroid field. It's only up to that point, that Vader was acting on his own. It's quite clear that Vader was pursuing Luke's friends (not the Rebel fleet as he should have been) to lure Luke into a trap BEFORE the Emperor told him about Luke Skywalker. Once his master gets the same idea, he becomes submissive again. He came dangerously close to his master discovering what he was up to. Once the Emperor had the same idea it was too dangerous to move against him. He thought he had the upper hand and knew something his master did not. He MAY have decided after Luke impressed him in the carbon freezing chamber to try to recruit him for himself anyway, but after he failed in ESB he must have completely given up on the idea. It would make sense since in ROTJ it seems like Palpy is keeping him on a much shorter leash. He was probably too afraid to move against him then.

EDIT: I see a couple people beat me too it, but I have been down this road before, back before the DVD's came out.

Paul

I saw the original ESB at the cinema and regardless of later changes they all start with the Emperor telling Vader "We have a new enemy" Why would the Emperor say this if for the past hour of the film Vader has been acting on the Emperor's orders to find Skywalker?

I agree, Paul, that the Sith "rule of two" was a silly and unneeded prequel plot device. It's natural that evil, greedy people will try to knock each other off anyway. And "there can be only one" was taken. It adds some more tension, perhaps, to the end of ESB by letting the audience wonder if Vader really wants Luke to join him or if he wants to kill Luke. Either of which will help to preserve Vader's life, but NOT turning him over to the Emperor as he's instructed (and does in the next film some time later.) He wasn't telling Luke at that time of ESB the Emperor would be his master, it was "join me or die".

Come ROTJ, Vader has no sense of self-preservation whatsoever, apparently. Either he really didn't care anymore as his "power-grab" moment escaped him. (If Luke chose death, over his father that's that. Let the Emperor try, (and then murder his son when he fails, or if he does seduce Luke, Vader's life is over, but it might as well be since his quest for ultimate power failed.)

However, if Vader considered himself ultimately doomed, it makes it a bit less noble that he saved Luke at the expense of his life: "Save my son, I die." "Let him join the Emperor, I die." "Don't save him, I live and call up Leia someday to see if SHE wants some power." Okay, so he chose his son's live over his lapdog life. Unless he hopes to bump into another very strong in the Force who his master doesn't sense before he does, that's what it boils down to.

Or, maybe Anakin thinks his master will bend the Sith rules. Afterall, Palpy said you shouldn't study only the narrow dogmatic vies of the Jedi, so perhaps being a kind of Force Renaissance man, he thinks Palpatine may violate the Rule of Two and not stick to the narrow, power-hungry views of the Sith. It WAS a lot easier to buy before the Rule of Two. However, Palpatine does back in 1983 ROTJ show his true colors and say "take your father's place at your side". And it's not like losing a hand was any big deal to Vader at this point. So that COULD support the rule of two, then. Or he just didn't want a father and son team working under him that might kick him out since he isn't blood. Maybe Vader thought Palpy might stretch the rule of two since neither of them were at full strength anymore, Luke was nowhere near the strength of most fully-trained Jedi's and they needed all the help they could get.

Vader seeing Palpy as a Renaissance force user might be the best interpretation. Surprisingly, from what we've seen (with the exception of some lies not revealed until later), Palpy was pretty much always good to Vader, so he may have believed that he would have gone along with Vader bringing a third Sith into the mix. Perhaps it isn't until the Emperor orders Luke to destroy Vader that Vader sees him as a truly Sith-only in nature. This revelation helps support his decision to turn against his master again at the last minute. He might have finally become disgusted with what he was. He may never have been up to that point which could have made all the difference. "You're a hideous monster with no feelings for me whatsoever, and now you're trying to kill my good, defenseless son, the son you told me I prevented from being born!! Take this!!"

Well, I think I've done my job of making a better case for everything than Lucas ever would or could.


The most significant line change in ESB to me is the "How is that possible." 2 non-exclusive interpretations come out of that for me:
1. Vader continuing to play dumb when he's known of Skywalker since the end of ANH or shortly thereafter. (Who me? I ain't been chasin' no Skywalkers.)

2. Pretending to question his master in a confused manner, when (to those who have seen Episodes I-III, or are watching ESB again) it's actually a barb thrown at his master--"But you told me Padme (and hence, my son) was dead." How is it possible that my son survived? You lying old bastard. The fact that Vader doesn't go apeshit on his master here should have been a clue to Palpy that he was actually ahead of the curve here. Perhaps he did call Vader on his plot later on and reprimanded him for it. "Half the O2 for you today, you bad boy!."

I'm actually starting to love that there's so much open to interpretation in the Star Wars films. Even though one person can interpret things in a way that it ruins the movies or series, and another can give the stories strength. It keeps you thinking about them a lot more than if everything was spelled out for you, and doesn't that make it more fun? Otherwise it's just "I've seen it, and I can forget it now." There wouldn't be any discussions like these.

I've decided ROTS must be pretty darned good, because I've been thinking about it A LOT. One of the hardest things to buy for me was Anakin pledging loyalty to Palpy after killing Mace and getting all psycho. (post the helpless, unarmed victim act that worked really well, even if it should be obvious somebody killed all the Jedi laying in the door.) BUT, Anakin does say he'll do whatever he wants if it will save Padme. AND when Palpy whacks out and Anakin sees all the damage he did to the Jedi and realizes he played in a role in it by disarming Mace, he had to have felt TREMENDOUS fear. Fear of Palpy AND fear of what would become of him if the Jedi knew the part he played. If he hadn't joined Palpatine, he'd have told the Jedi about his part in it, and who knows what would have happened to Anakin. So, the "What have I done?!" moment resonates nicely. Had to have created a big fear-to-dark-side adrenaline rush. At that point, Anakin figures he's already F'd up big-time, so might as well make it mean something by saving his wife's life. He signs on and gets the worst assignment ever!! And what does his new master assure him: "Do not hesitate. Show no mercy. It is the only way to save your wife!" So he does the unthinkable. For as much time as the film really took to deal with everything, Lucas really did try his all to get all the "reasoning" in there. And it does make you say "No....no." rather than "Ahh, I understand" (at least after the first time it's made clear why Anakin wants more power.) Which is dramatically effective. He also made the Emperor a million times more hateful since you see how he manipulates a very vulnerable Anakin. It's like watching bullies beat up on the little half-blind kid rather than tease a strapping young boy (I'd liken the Emperor torturing Luke to that.)

Carlos, it isn't a missed opportunity.. in fact, it enhances the OT even more, in my opinion.

You can see now that Ben is manipulating Luke... or to put it harshly, lying to Luke. Ben's goal is to get Luke out of his comfort zone of staying on his home planet, getting involved with the rebellion, and on the path to becoming a Jedi. What better way then to make his father out to be a hero who was betrayed? A hero who wanted his son to follow in his footsteps?

The truth would have devastated Luke.

In fact, if you look at things from "a certain point of view", Yoda is doing the same thing throughout Empire and Jedi. They filter just enough information to Luke, just enough he'll need to survive a battle against Vader and possibly pull at Vader's "heart strings" enough. Yoda knows why he fell to the dark side (recall his ROTS conversation with him). It was Vader's fear of loss, fear of losing his son, that brought him back.

I've always thought the rule of two made sense.

Sith are inherently egotistical and selfish. The want the most power they can possibly get and share with as few people as possible. However they recognize that having an apprentice available to do your bidding makes things much easier.

Being egotistical (which is really the core of the Sith philosophy) they assume that they are superior to their apprentice. If the Sith begins to think the apprentice is becoming too much of a threat then kill him and replace the apprentice- which is exactly what Palpatine does by swapping Dooku with Vader and later trying to swap Vader with Luke. If they miscalculate, then the apprentice kills and assumes the role of master and the line continues.

Tis the natural order of the Sith...

And if an outside party kills both the master and the apprentice at the same time, where does that leave the lineage of the Sith?

I always interpreted the rule of 2 as a Jedi rule of thumb based on what Kevin said:


Since it was only mentioned between the 2 "insider" Jedi, I thought they were just discussing a fact of Sith life. Either way, I believe Sidious needed Anakin to find the trick of eternal life. It was a wall that he hit, and he knew one other (QGJ) had done it and of course he wanted it too. I don't see Sidious interested in lineage, but in ruling everything forever.

Otherwise, why have an apprentice if it's widely known he's going to try and remove you?

I found it interesting that in the fourth draft of the script Palpatine actually says:

I thought Ewan was excellent as OB1 as usual, but even I wasn't too sure about that one line -- "I saw a holograph of him--killing younglings." I bet he broke into uproarious laughter when they said "cut." I don't think it's a take I would have used. Felt a little too silly and forced, bordering on insincerity. I wonder if it will be a different take come the DVD.
It was up there with the deleted scene from AOTC "I know who can identify this!" Otherwise, he was top notch. Maybe just trying to act in the same room with Portman takes down your skill level. I was fine with everything else that outside the SW universe might have seemed over-the-top.

My rankings:

#1 ESB--Don't know if anything could ever knock this out of the top spot. I wonder how new-age SW fans feel. Maybe the day will come when it wears on me and a newer SW film bumps it, but I think the odds are about equal that the newer film will lose its luster for me. So for now, ESB maintains the top spot. Tune in in 10 years!

!!Tie for # 2!!--Star Wars(ANH) and ROTS--I couldn't bring myself to put ROTS above the film that started it all. It's THE original film spectacle. It still has what is possibly the best space battle and some other great moments, but compare all that happens in SW to all that happens in ROTS and it's not much in the story department, save the important back"stories" told by OB1, and the best, timeliest, introduction to the Force. ROTS is not an imitation of previous Star Wars films, but it's own modern space opera, and I love it for that. Daring and unique in a number of ways. Can't wait to see it with my dad this weekend. Will be his 1st time, my 3rd. It was a different experience the 2nd time, not being in tears of joy, nor so incredibly on edge, but in a way I enjoyed being able to step back and take it in with less emotion. Yet, I still enjoyed it, and what I thought were weaknesses the first time, seemed much stronger to me having better taken in every word and moment without all the tension to cloud my mind.

#3 AOTC--Lucas getting things into gear after TPM.

#4 ROTJ--Lucas falling out of gear after ESB. If only Yak hair had been more affordable...Other things could have "fixed" this film as well, but the latest entry has adjusted my perspective a bit. Now I just wish the saga didn't go out on such a cutesy note.

#5 TPM-- Lucas having trouble getting the car out of park, save a few great runs within the film. Fortunately, his worst is better than a lot of rubbish out there. Why should he be any exception to the "this film pales to Star Wars" mindset? The good thins is it ages fairly well, and is still beautiful to look at (or at least the next DVD edition will be.)

I still can't tell if you're bsing me or insulting me

In any event, I'm quite happy with ROTS and with the Vader storyline through-out the saga. I see no sense in arguing my point further.

Wow. I just watched ANH and ESB. It's neat looking at things a bit differently now that the prequil is complete.

I know I've already asked this, but I haven't really go a sufficient answer yet so... what is the cave all about on degabah? I always thought it was the death places of some sith or something, and I was really expecting ROTS to explain it.
Also, I just wanna comment on the quality of the OT picture. How did they do it? i mean it was 20 years old when they restored it was it not? Yet it looks better than 99.9% of ever movie out there. It's not quite AOTC quality but that is only expected due to AOTC being digital, but it's far superior to TPM. what happened with that DVD? you think it would look atleast as amazing as the OT, and probably better cause it's new, but no go! It' just suprising that's all.

One more thing. Why are James earl Jones and Ian McDiarmid not in the credits of ESB? Hard to believe it was just an oversight.

Not sure where to post this, so I'll try this thread. Had anyone read the "New Jedi Order" books? Are they worth the read? I had heard that the whole storyline takes too long. Are there some that are must reads while I can skip some others? Is it worth it at all?

Ric

Ric, there's a new thread in After Hours that will give you all the information you need. I don't mean to sound rude by saying that instead of answering you, but Kevin's done a lot of work today and deserves to be read.

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htfo...hreadid=234338

Got it... I'll go check it out!

Ric

Thanks, Greg

IIRC, JEJ was always uncredited on the original releases. Ian wasn't credited on ESB, because he wasn't in it up until the recent DVD release, and I don't think they made new credits for that cut of the film.

As for the cave...it was a test. I'm not sure if that specific cave on Dagobah had any significance. Luke learned that by using aggression and anger, he will become what he's hunting and turn to the dark side.

Didn't something somewhere say that the caves powerful presence in the Dark Side shielded Yoda from discovery. I know I can't be making that up...

I remember hearing it too, but never in an official manner. I think it was either just a rumor, or part of some EU stuff.

I thought that was because Prowse was a known blabber-mouth, so Lucas gave him a script that said "Obi-Wan is your father", but had told Hamill the correct line and that he should emote accordingly.

But I'd take the view, Ben's "point of view" is metaphysicallly a valid one: when Anakin went to the Dark Side, the Vader part consumed and destroyed the light-side Anakin. Much easier to say than, "err, your father went to the Dark Side, we had a massive dust-up, and I left him for dead burnt by lava and he now needs that portable life support machine..."


It's been a while since I read the Dark Horse comic, but IIRC it has always been possible for the formal master and apprentice to have an additional underling (IIRC, Exar Kun being the master, someone else was apprentice, and a third fallen Jedi was the "third wheel"). In a sense, Dooku had recruited Asaj Ventress, also a Force-user, as a "third wheel".

I'd agree, though, it's a bit contradictory. The whole reason for just two was that with more, they'd plot and scheme against each other. With a third, the apprentice and "third" would scheme to get rid of the master so they could move up a notch each.

I wonder if Prowse was kind of slow too.

I can just see his reaction on the set:

Vader: "Luke, Obi-Wan was your father."

Luke: "Nooooooo! That's impossible."

Luke jumps off platform to his doom.

Prowse is sitting there thinking "WTF? Overreact much?"

Because Vader and Luke would overthrow the Emperor and there would once again only be two?

The Emperor wanted Luke to kill Vader and become his new apprentice and once again there were only two.

As soon as the Emperor told Vader to try to get Skywalker to join him, Vader knew his days were numbered. But if Vader managed to triumph over Luke then that means Vader was clearly stronger and still gets to be the apprentice for a while longer.

Vader can't confront the Emperor openly about it- Palpatine will just kill him outright. His best chance was to enlist Luke so the two of them could overthrow the Emperor.

The Sith system is a bit like Trial by Combat. If your new recruit can't hack it (ie doesn't survive) then clearly he wasn't worthy of being recruited.

I don't have a problem with this, and I don't have a problem with the fact that this would seem to contradict the rule of 2.

Firstly on the rule, we are not given in an official way, an explanation for how the rule of 2 came to be...it could be that there were a lot more than 2 Sith at one time, way back when but the fact that each of them got so power mad made it hard for much to be accomplished. I believe that's a paraphrasing of the EU explanation.

Plus, if you're Palpetine and you've been running the show for many years without a lot of challenge to your rule, you might just think to yourself...you know I'm so powerful that I'm gonna ignore this rule of 2 BS and do what I want...because I can.

But I always figured that if Luke would be converted to the darkside, that whomever was responsible for doing that be it Palps or Vader would win the prize of the apprentece and the other would be S.O.L.

So when Vader is saying he will join us or die: both he and the emperor may be thinking "and when he joins us you can kiss your sorry ass goodbye." That would also feed in to the lust for power that the Sith possess...they both want the new upgrade in technology so to speak and his name is Luke Skywalker.

So, does anyone know if Jedi's have to lead a celibate lifestyle? Or can they get married, and spawn?

Attachment is forbidden. That's why they're normally taken at such a young age. It's possible that Jedi have "fallen in love" before, etc, but I'm sure it's highly frowned upon. Remember what Obi-Wan said to Anakin when Anakin wanted to stop the ship and help Padme in AOTC...(paraphrasing) "You will be thrown out of the Jedi Order!"