PDA

View Full Version : Greedo Shooting First



Jayspawn
03-24-2003, 01:06 AM
I know this has come up before, but to get some oppinions right off the bat. I was reading an old Star Wars Insider (about the Special Edition era) and the magazine was saying that..."Greedo was always meant to shoot first...." So here's the question...

Does anyone buy this?

I don't. There is NO WAY that Greedo would have missed. And at such close range. Greedo is not a nice guy, if he would have shot first- he would have killed Han. Now lets get to Han. He's not a bad guy but certainly not a nice guy either. They fact that Han shoots first doesn't make him cold blooded. He knew Greedo was going to shoot him and he was smart enought to do it first.

So anyways, I had to rant for a minute because of this article. I think George should have left the scene the way it was.

LTBasker
03-24-2003, 01:38 AM
I never heard the Greedo was always supposed to shoot first, until now, I always heard it as they didn't want Han to seem like such a bad guy. I dunno what he meant, cause I never heard of it being a problem when I was younger, it was just Han's personality to shoot first because he didn't have time for BS.

Kidhuman
03-24-2003, 07:25 AM
Thats why it says that he couldn't hit the broad side of a Bantha and was a wanna be bounty hunter.

JediTricks
03-25-2003, 11:55 PM
I honestly have absolutely no belief in this statement and find it a little insulting that Lucas would even let it out into the real world. This isn't like the "lost" Jabba scene from ANH where for 20 years Lucas mentioned over and over in books and interviews how he wanted to fix that scene - there's JACK SQUAT to imply that Lucas wanted Greedo to fire first, and more importantly, unlike Jabba there was NO reason Lucas couldn't have done this with the original version of the film if he truly wanted it.

stillakid
03-26-2003, 12:05 AM
Originally posted by JediTricks
I honestly have absolutely no belief in this statement and find it a little insulting that Lucas would even let it out into the real world. This isn't like the "lost" Jabba scene from ANH where from 1983 till 1997 Lucas mentioned over and over how he wanted to fix that scene - there's JACK SQUAT to imply that Lucas wanted Greedo to fire first, and more importantly, unlike Jabba there was NO reason Lucas couldn't have done this with the original version of the film if he truly wanted it.

I agree. The FACT is that Greedo was pointing his weapon straight at Solo's chest. IF Lucas is telling the truth even a little bit, the Solo storyline would have ended right there and then. There is absolutely no logical way Greedo could ever have fired his weapon first and allowed Solo to live.

But you don't have to take my word for it. Pop in the untouched original version yourself for verification. Then watch the SE to see how GL poorly got around the obvious problem with his rationale. The errant shot not only is stupid and illogical, but it also doesn't match the trajectory of Greedo's barrel.

No, Lucas simply decided in his parental years that he wanted to soften and "kittify" (meow) the films so that his own kids wouldn't look up to a "killer" like Solo as a rolemodel. Much like Spielberg taking out the guns in ET. And now, with so much of the continuity of the saga in question and Lucas's nonchalant attitude toward "fixing" his "mistakes" without any real thought, I shudder to think of how he will make adjustments in the Super-Nifty Editions of the Original Trilogy films. If nothing else, he might get another couple Razzies out of it. :D

Deoxyribonucleic
03-26-2003, 12:58 AM
I don't believe it at all.

Man, GL seems SO absolutely embarrassed of the OT before the Special Editions that he always makes weird statements like that, kinda like his statement about the hyperspace lines from the cockpit not being in any of the prequels. It's a darn shame Lucas treats the OT as these terrible movies as they are IMO truly works of art!

QLD
03-26-2003, 01:13 AM
Maybe while we are in Iraq, we'll find the people who kidnapped G. Lu's brain as well........

JediTricks
03-26-2003, 01:48 AM
Here's what else I don't get about this: what is so bad about Solo blasting Greedo? Han has no reason NOT to kill the little squirt, the Rodian is pointing a weapon at his chest - if the pre-SE version of events was taken to court, Han would get off scott-free claiming self-defense. Sure Greedo is a pipsqueek who probably wasn't going to kill Han right then and there, but so what? He was gonna put Han in harm's way whether he blasted him right there or not. George should have more faith in his younger self - that younger guy made a great movie and didn't need this scene monkeyed with.

QLD
03-26-2003, 07:31 AM
Maybe greedo invoked the old "force-field" rule that so mant kids are fond of when playing.....

El Chuxter
03-26-2003, 01:02 PM
I remember prior to the release of the SE's, Lucas said that the scene would be from a slightly further angle, so there was no question that Han was in danger. That wouldn't have been bad at all, I think.

However, I remember nothing about him shooting first before seeing it in the theater.

Deoxyribonucleic
03-26-2003, 01:07 PM
on top of it being stooopid that he made greedo shoot first, it also looked ridiculously ridiculous!!! :zzz:

keith koth
03-26-2003, 02:22 PM
I hate to criticize anyone, but what difference does it make who shot first? I mean, does that action really affect the rest of the stroy?

So George decided to change that tid bit...that is his prerogative to do so.

I think it makes more sense with Greedo shooting first (because good guys defend themselves..they do not take offensive action), but it doesn't matter, because the outcome was the same.

Deoxyribonucleic
03-26-2003, 02:27 PM
Originally posted by keith koth
I hate to criticize anyone, but

See, now what's this??? If you hate to criticize anyone, why did you go about doing it anyway????? :confused:


:crazed: :crazed:

Fulit
03-26-2003, 02:32 PM
Well, whenever I've been shot at before, jerking my head to the side a little always foiled the shot. Because I'm so quick, see?

Plus everyone knows Rodians have shaky hands. If your fingers were twice their normal lenght and had suction cups on the end, you'd be no marksman either.


<<sigh>> Theres no two ways about it. Greedo missing a point-blank shot and Han's CGI-jerking head are the black eye on the OT. And that damned hollering Luke in ESB.

keith koth
03-26-2003, 03:09 PM
Originally posted by Deoxyribonucleic
See, now what's this??? If you hate to criticize anyone, why did you go about doing it anyway?????

I said "I hate to do it"...not "I never do it"

Besides dna, I find it entertaining to irritate you...no one else...just you.

Greedo shooting first, Luke screaming like a little girl...who cares. Neither one of those changes affected the outcome of the story...not in the slightest way.

If you do not like the Special Edition Trilogy, then go back and watch your crumby original cut of the Trilogy...I hear rumors that it is available in beta, vhs, and laserdisc. :stupid:

QLD
03-26-2003, 07:37 PM
I think it does effect the story, as well as damage our perception of a character.

I mean, it IS G. LU's perrogative to do as he wishes, since he owns the films. I mean, look at the crummy prequels as a perfect example how he can use his whims to ruin a good movie franchise.

But I digress......

I mean, if he had Ben Kenobi step on bantha poodoo and fall down the generator duct instead of sacrificing himself......it wouldn't change all that much......but would THAT be aceptable to you? I mean, it IS G. Lu's perrogative.

stillakid
03-26-2003, 08:39 PM
Originally posted by keith koth
I hate to criticize anyone, but what difference does it make who shot first? I mean, does that action really affect the rest of the stroy?
The story? Um, not necessarily. The character arc of Han Solo, however, is unquestionably altered. For good or bad is of course open for discussion and I'll touch on that below.


Originally posted by keith koth
So George decided to change that tid bit...that is his prerogative to do so.
Yes it is his choice, however it doesn't make it right. Even the creators of works of art or other things are fallible.


Originally posted by keith koth
I think it makes more sense with Greedo shooting first (because good guys defend themselves..they do not take offensive action), but it doesn't matter, because the outcome was the same.
Your thought process is exactly what George is apparently thinking. However the outcome is definitely NOT the same. While Greedo does in fact die in the end, the character arc of Han Solo is altered from the original (and mass audience) interpretation. When we first meet Solo in the original cut of the film, we are meeting a selfish rogue who is operating as a loner. Doing what he needs to do to get by. Throughout the course of the three films, his life is undeniably wrapped up with other people that he can't help but begin to care about. By the end of the story, that selfish personality is all but gone. Just as Luke, Leia, Threepio and most importantly, Vader, have all grown and changed throughout the course of the trilogy, so too has Han Solo who now cares deeply for people who also care about him.

Cut to the SE and a character who ISN'T that selfish rogue. He's already a nice guy who would never ever pull such a stunt like shooting first. While he still has a little distance to go to become the wholly lovable Solo that we see at the end of ROTJ, the essence of that character arc is pretty much gone. He's already a likable character, albeit a little smartalecy. There's a big difference between that and being a selfish out for himself rogue pilot.

And just one decision can change a character that quickly. A good writer would have picked up on that immediately and raised a flag. A good director would have seen that as well and put a stop to it. Lucas is proving himself to be neither. A visionary he is...a writer/director he is not.

Darth Jax
03-26-2003, 10:41 PM
very well said stilla. i always liked the idea that solo shoots first. never thought he was a bad guy for it.

stillakid
03-26-2003, 11:01 PM
Originally posted by Darth Jax
very well said stilla. i always liked the idea that solo shoots first. never thought he was a bad guy for it.

Thanks! But he was a bad guy for it. That's the point. The Han Solo we see in ROTJ would never blast Greedo that way. By that time, he's a changed man...presumably for the better...unless you like your men to have an itchy trigger finger. ;)

El Chuxter
03-27-2003, 01:05 PM
Originally posted by stillakid
Thanks! But he was a bad guy for it. That's the point. The Han Solo we see in ROTJ would never blast Greedo that way. By that time, he's a changed man...presumably for the better...unless you like your men to have an itchy trigger finger. ;)

Exactly. It's character development that's been altered. It's sorta like C-3PO: in ANH, he says he's not good at telling stories, but by ROTJ, he's a master. Or Leia. She starts out pretty tough, and gets in touch with her feminine side, so to speak, because of her love of Han. Imagine if C-3PO is reciting The Odyssey at the beginning of ANH, or if Leia is a damsel in distress on the Death Star (if not for her, Luke and Han were dead meat a few times over). It would seriously hurt the overall storyline.

keith koth
03-27-2003, 01:29 PM
What if...in the original cut of ANH Greedo would have shot first...then during the special edition GL had changed it so that Han shot first...Would you all still be complaining?

I DOUBT IT!

So, it changes your character perception of Han...well, it doesn't for me. If it means that much to you, then why don't you just blink for that 1/2 second change!

The nice thing about this situation is that GL will never change it back to Han shooting first. This fact gives me great enjoyment, because I can just sit back and watch many of you whine about something that you will never get back...just like childern do.

TheDarthVader
03-27-2003, 05:30 PM
posted by Q.L.D. "I mean, look at the crummy prequels as a perfect example how he can use his whims to ruin a good movie franchise."

What?! Compared with the other crap that is in the movies these days, the prequels might be the last of the "decent" space fantacy fiction stories! I would rather watch the prequels 1,000 times than some of these boring "supposed" super comedy or some of the "chick" flicks. :)

El Chuxter
03-27-2003, 05:39 PM
Originally posted by Jayspawn
I know this has come up before, but to get some oppinions right off the bat. I was reading an old Star Wars Insider (about the Special Edition era) and the magazine was saying that..."Greedo was always meant to shoot first...." So here's the question...

Does anyone buy this?

I don't. There is NO WAY that Greedo would have missed. And at such close range. Greedo is not a nice guy, if he would have shot first- he would have killed Han. Now lets get to Han. He's not a bad guy but certainly not a nice guy either. They fact that Han shoots first doesn't make him cold blooded. He knew Greedo was going to shoot him and he was smart enought to do it first.

So anyways, I had to rant for a minute because of this article. I think George should have left the scene the way it was.

That's the topic at hand, guys. Stick to it.

This isn't a contest from a bad 80s teen flick, so watch it. Kids may be reading.

THX

keith koth
03-27-2003, 05:44 PM
I've been censored :mad:

keith koth
03-27-2003, 05:54 PM
How do you know that Greedo would not have missed Han from such a close range?

Before that point, we never saw greedo shoot anything. He could have been half blind, shooting with his bad hand, etc. But to say that it is a certainty that greedo could not have missed from that range is a bit of a stretch.

Oh well, the scene is there to stay, so I am happy! :)

TheDarthVader
03-27-2003, 06:02 PM
El Chuxter, I have just edited my post :)

Keith, right on!
Has anyone ever seen greedo's really long fingers wrapped around a gun? Would it not be hard to shoot if you have to use part of your finger that is not supposed to be used to shoot in a comfotable manner? We humans shoot with the tip of the finger. It would probably be more difficult if you used the very inside of your finger etc etc...you would be more accurate using the tip of the finger to pull the trigger. Greedo's fingers are very very long.

sith_killer_99
03-27-2003, 09:50 PM
Before that point, we never saw greedo shoot anything. He could have been half blind, shooting with his bad hand, etc. But to say that it is a certainty that greedo could not have missed from that range is a bit of a stretch.


Has anyone ever seen greedo's really long fingers wrapped around a gun? Would it not be hard to shoot if you have to use part of your finger that is not supposed to be used to shoot in a comfotable manner? We humans shoot with the tip of the finger. It would probably be more difficult if you used the very inside of your finger etc etc...you would be more accurate using the tip of the finger to pull the trigger. Greedo's fingers are very very long.

Good points, but isn't Greedo supposed to be a Bounty Hunter? Wouldn't a Bounty Hunter have the appropriate "tools of the trade" such as a blaster that he could shoot straight. Maybe he wasn't a very experienced Bounty Hunter, which makes him much less menacing and detractes from the suspense of the scene.

Just my 2 cents.

stillakid
03-28-2003, 01:03 AM
Originally posted by keith koth
How do you know that Greedo would not have missed Han from such a close range?

Before that point, we never saw greedo shoot anything. He could have been half blind, shooting with his bad hand, etc. But to say that it is a certainty that greedo could not have missed from that range is a bit of a stretch.

Oh well, the scene is there to stay, so I am happy! :)

Believe what you want to, it won't make it truth. But like I said, you don't have to take my word for it. The barrel of the gun is approximately 3 feet away and pointing directly at Solo's chest. Despite this, the laser blast somehow magically hits the wall off to Solo's left side. The only two explanations for this would be that Greedo's weapon has a bent barrel or that this is a magic laser blast capable of altering it's own direction much like the bullet that killed Kennedy.

And your hypothetical regarding if GL had had Greedo fire first in the original edit is a moot point. The fact is that he didn't. Your supposition is based not on the film, but rather on the concept that we enjoy complaining about the films and the problems. You couldn't be further from the truth. I can't speak for anyone else, but I'd much rather these films and the Prequels were spotless and worthy of unfettered critical praise. But they aren't and they won't. It's really wonderful that you find pleasure in the saga as it stands, but that doesn't preclude the fact that there are indeed problems big and small in each of the films.

keith koth
03-28-2003, 10:47 AM
Originally posted by stillakid
And your hypothetical regarding if GL had had Greedo fire first in the original edit is a moot point.

Moot point? Maybe, but so is yours and most everyone else's, because it will never get changed back. It don't get more mooter than that!

2-1B
03-28-2003, 02:59 PM
Originally posted by stillakid
Thanks! But he was a bad guy for it. That's the point. The Han Solo we see in ROTJ would never blast Greedo that way. By that time, he's a changed man...presumably for the better...unless you like your men to have an itchy trigger finger. ;)

I respectfully disagree. :)

Not about how goofy it is that Greedo shot first . . . just the idea that Han was a 'bad guy' for killing him. The guy had a blaster just a few feet from his face ! I don't think he's a bad guy for blowing Greedo away, it was just self-preservation. :)

Speaking of ROTJ, what about when Han threw that charge at the Imperial Officer (insert Wilhelm here :crazed: ) in the bunker and toppled him? That was pretty harsh. :D

My problem with "Greedo shooting first" is not that it affects Han's story arc, I just think that it is so poorly done and foolish looking, and quite unneccesary.

keith koth
03-28-2003, 03:53 PM
My problem with "Greedo shooting first" is not that it affects Han's story arc, I just think that it is so poorly done and foolish looking, and quite unneccesary. [/B]

Maybe GL will change the scene to make it look more realistic, but one thing is for sure: From now until the end of time Greedo will shoot first...and I like it that way!

TheDarthVader
03-28-2003, 10:25 PM
True, the scene is here to stay and I am okay with that. Like I said (about Greedo's long fingers) there could be more reasons why he missed. Reasons that we might roll our eyes at (like what I said) but still could affect the manner in which he aimed his pistol. (additional information) With Greedo getting the warning that he would come to a bad end in TPM, it links the prequel with original trilogy, which is cool.

Exhaust Port
03-28-2003, 11:08 PM
Originally posted by keith koth
Maybe GL will change the scene to make it look more realistic, but one thing is for sure: From now until the end of time Greedo will shoot first...and I like it that way!

Not for those of us the still have copies of the Original OT. Han was a "Take no *$%#" space traveler who didn't screw around. Blasting some punk bounty hunter right there set a perfect tone for his charater and it's development over the next 2 movies. I liked most of the additions in the SE OT but that is one that will always disappoint me. :cry:

stillakid
03-29-2003, 01:56 AM
Originally posted by Caesar
I respectfully disagree. :)

Not about how goofy it is that Greedo shot first . . . just the idea that Han was a 'bad guy' for killing him. The guy had a blaster just a few feet from his face ! I don't think he's a bad guy for blowing Greedo away, it was just self-preservation. :)

Speaking of ROTJ, what about when Han threw that charge at the Imperial Officer (insert Wilhelm here :crazed: ) in the bunker and toppled him? That was pretty harsh. :D

My problem with "Greedo shooting first" is not that it affects Han's story arc, I just think that it is so poorly done and foolish looking, and quite unneccesary.

Okay, I agree with you. Maybe "bad guy" is overstating it a bit. But he certainly wasn't the swell guy that we see in ROTJ. In the original cut of the saga, there is a definitive change in who Han Solo is. The SE waters his personal growth down so that there really isn't much left.

stillakid
03-29-2003, 01:59 AM
Originally posted by Exhaust Port
Not for those of us the still have copies of the Original OT. Han was a "Take no *$%#" space traveler who didn't screw around. Blasting some punk bounty hunter right there set a perfect tone for his charater and it's development over the next 2 movies. I liked most of the additions in the SE OT but that is one that will always disappoint me. :cry:

I'm with you. :cool:

dr_evazan22
03-29-2003, 10:42 PM
From Stilla

I agree. The FACT is that Greedo was pointing his weapon straight at Solo's chest. IF Lucas is telling the truth even a little bit, the Solo storyline would have ended right there and then. There is absolutely no logical way Greedo could ever have fired his weapon first and allowed Solo to live.

From fulit

Well, whenever I've been shot at before, jerking my head to the side a little always foiled the shot. Because I'm so quick, see?

Ya know, it took me at least a year to finally see Greedo shoot first. I mean, I saw the smoke and all from the blaster bolt AFTER it hit the wall, I just never really saw the BOLT!

Now I learn that Han moves his head?!
:crazed:

LTBasker
03-30-2003, 02:37 AM
It did change the story, it makes Han look gutless. Come han, before he moves his head it was like a foot off, then he adds another foot to it, if he was so calm in knowing Greedo would miss, there's no point in his dodge. He just looks like a coward like that, I guess it's to represent George's cowardness in creating another Star Wars in fear that people won't flock to it because it doesn't have uber-cool special effects or uber-ships making all these huge explosions everywhere.

TheDarthVader
03-30-2003, 09:38 PM
I disagree. Even if it did make Han look like a coward, we hear princess leia say in ANH "He sure is brave." Luke "It's a wonder he don't get himself killed." And that makes up for any "cowardness" that you labled Solo as having. He yells and runs after a squadron of Stormtroopers. That is not a coward. Yes, I know, he turns back, but only after seeing like 200 of them. And they do fire at him several times.

stillakid
03-31-2003, 11:32 AM
Originally posted by TheDarthVader
I disagree. Even if it did make Han look like a coward, we hear princess leia say in ANH "He sure is brave." Luke "It's a wonder he don't get himself killed." And that makes up for any "cowardness" that you labled Solo as having. He yells and runs after a squadron of Stormtroopers. That is not a coward. Yes, I know, he turns back, but only after seeing like 200 of them. And they do fire at him several times.

I'll partially agree with this. At this point in the story, he is indeed displaying a sense of bravery, but what's even more important than that at that juncture was the selflessness that was shown. The simple line "Get back to the ship!" as Han dashes into a potentially suicidal sprint isn't something he would have done even a couple hours previous. The only reason he left the control room was for the promise of untold wealth as a reward for the rescue. But after that, we begin to see the change in him piece by piece. He still displays his arrogant swashbuckling independent side, but he can't help but get attached to Luke and then Leia as the adventure continues.

BUT, if he only shoots Greedo in self-defense, then we all know from the get-go that he's not such a bad card after all. Not only is his "journey" towards being a good guy become diluted, it barely exists at all.


Original Edit
ANH Han Solo = self-absorbed rogue
ROTJ Han Solo = caring member of the team

SE Edit
ANH Han Solo = a really nice guy with a couple debts causing undo stress.
ROTJ Han Solo = caring member of the team


Original Edit
ANH Luke Skywalker = whiny dreamer
ROTJ Luke Skywalker = introspective and in control of his destiny

SE Edit
same...EXCEPT for the girly-scream as he falls from the Cloud City gantry. Luke was clearly upset by the news of Vader being his father...however, he didn't just leap or fall in the midst of that. There was a very clear moment when Luke "grew up" and realized the implications and the choices he had laid out in front of him. Adding "the scream" cheapened Luke's decision and more importantly, delays his "growing up" until an undefined moment that exists between Ep's V and VI.


Original Edit
ANH Princess Leia = selfless heroine, cause greater than herself is more important
ROTJ Princess Leia = same, but not as battle-hardened as she learns to love and think more of herself


Prequels
TPM Anakin Skywalker = slap-happy little boy from Andy Griffith Show

AOTC Anakin Skywalker = whiny teenager, bordering on bi-polar as his moods change instantaneously and he launches into unjustified tirades against Obi Wan Kenobi.

EP III Anakin Skywalker = TBD

ANH Darth Vader = Angry, arrogant, on a mission to destroy the Rebellion

ESB Darth Vader/Anakin Skywalker = Arrogant, mission to destroy the Rebellion begins to be diluted with knowledge of a son. Shades of doubt begin to cloud his once clear goals.

ROTJ Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader = Humbled, more introspective, not nearly as arrogant. His ANH "mission" to destroy the Rebellion has all but been replaced by questions regarding his son and the confusion that results.



So, change in character (the character arc ) is part and parcel of any well-told story. The character has to start in one place and end up someplace completely different to make it interesting and worthwhile. But starting Han out at exactly the same place that he ends up is a waste of time.

aceguide
04-01-2003, 09:32 AM
I am in the "Han first" crowd.

He was a pirate/smuggler/crook. Granted it was, for the most part, against the Empire. But don't fool yourselves, he was in it for profit (GREED). He knew he was in trouble, and wasting Greedo was the easiest way out.

At the end of ANH he sees the error of his ways, an important development in his character arc (well put stillakid).

JediTricks
04-01-2003, 06:55 PM
Lucas originally called the Millennium Falcon a "pirate ship", which would make the original Han Solo a pirate-like character.


Here's one thing between AOTC and ANH that I don't like about Anakin/Vader's character arc. In ANH, Vader is a lap-dog to the Emperor and head thug to Tarkin, but besides those 2, he's an authoritative character even in the beginning, he uses his "big boy voice" constantly. However, in AOTC, there are only a few moments where Anakin seems like he's trying to be authoritative and he never puts on any sort of "big boy voice" or backs it with steadfastness so he comes off pushy, moody, and weak in his positions.

For me, Han not shooting first and Luke's scream during the big leap change their characters for me in that same way.

PoggleTheGreater
04-01-2003, 08:55 PM
Anakin was imature, and naive when he was younger. When he matured he became more composed, less afraid, and less reckless. He came of age in the way of the dark side, and accepted that it was his destiny to be evil. His younger evil came from fear and anger; his older evil came from conviction. I like that his character changes drastically.

PoggleTheGreater
04-02-2003, 06:17 AM
Han Solo's character wasn't really changed for us. Think of it as if Robert Zemekis took us and GL for a spin in his time machine. GL somehow altered the past and chaged the course of events. When we arrived back at the cantina, the space time continuem was changed and resulted in Han shooting first. We, Zemekis and GL knew how the original event happenned but the rest of the galaxy didn't. Even though future SW fans and Han himself might be unaware of what he did in the alternate past, we know that he would've shot first if destiny wasn't altered.

stillakid
04-02-2003, 11:15 AM
Originally posted by PoggleTheGreater
and accepted that it was his destiny to be evil. His younger evil came from fear and anger; his older evil came from conviction.

I'm not so sure that anyone beyond Palpatine really recognizes that they are becoming "evil." Turning someone to the Darkside is not an event...it's a process of seduction. Slowly, piece by piece, the "victim" is made to feel like they are doing the right thing, even though those outside the box can clearly see the sadism in those actions. Palpatine had the perfect candidate: someone who was strong with the Force and also who was fundamentally weak with very low self-esteem. It doesn't take much to stroke that kind of faltering ego and bring it around to your way of thinking.

So, what we've been seeing thus far is a childish Anakin who believes fully in what he's doing, as completely bipolar and unjustified as it is to the outside observer. It is only later, when he is figuratively slapped in the face, with the knowledge of a son from a woman he had tremendous love for (well, lust if nothing else), that he begins to see himself from a different point of view. "Maybe," he thinks, "maybe I haven't been doing the right thing. Maybe Palpatine was lying to me." Those are the thoughts that undoubtedly crossed his mind between ESB and ROTJ which prompted The Emperor to ask, "Are you sure your feelings on this matter are clear, Lord Vader?" Even Palpatine knows at that point.

PoggleTheGreater
04-03-2003, 04:07 PM
I meant that he accepted what he was, that it was his destiny, and that it was evil, after he became evil under Palpatine's influence.

As Vader, he was ruthless, and unafraid of consequenses until he realized that he still may be the "chosen one" and not destined for the Dark Side.

Some people who become evil for one reason or another know that they're evil, but don't change because they beleive that they can't be redeemed.

It was Luke's destiny to help redeem Anakin so that he could fulfill his destiny and bring balance to the force.

stillakid
04-03-2003, 05:01 PM
Originally posted by PoggleTheGreater
I meant that he accepted what he was, that it was his destiny, and that it was evil, after he became evil under Palpatine's influence.

As Vader, he was ruthless, and unafraid of consequenses until he realized that he still may be the "chosen one" and not destined for the Dark Side.

Some people who become evil for one reason or another know that they're evil, but don't change because they beleive that they can't be redeemed.

It was Luke's destiny to help redeem Anakin so that he could fulfill his destiny and bring balance to the force.

Okay but...

what in tarnation does this mean: "chosen one" and "bring balance to the force"? Those phrases are completely useless in any discussion because they've never been explained sufficiently onscreen. Not only that, the OT never mentions anything of the sort so this is a Prequel concotion through and through. Therefore, Anakin/Vader can't really be considering his "fate" based on knowledge that he's the "chosen one" or whatever because it's a meaningless term.

I don't think Anakin realized that he was "evil" until he became aware that he had offspring. Even then, it wasn't a moment of discovery. It was a lengthy process of realization then acceptance. We can see his obvious angst over this self-discovery out on the gantry on Endor. Then, it is only at the end, with his son near death, does he gather the internal strength to change his ways...not out of any allegiance to being this "chosen one" nonsense, but because his son believed in him enough to die for it.

keith koth
04-03-2003, 05:31 PM
I once thought that Anakin/Vader did fulfill the prophecy of the "chosen one" who would "bring balance" to the force (i.e., harmonic balance between the light side and the dark side).

However, after deep meditation...I realized that if anything, Vader/Anakin did just the opposite. By virtue of killing the Emperor and then dying himself, the galaxy was rid of the Sith...yet there was still a Jedi (Luke) in the galaxy, which would throw the whole balance thing out of whack (100% Jedi...0% Sith).

From my perspective, I believe that the only true balance would be a 1:1 ratio of Jedi to Sith.

It would be nice if GL would explain the whole prophecy thing a little more...but I doubt we will ever see it.

PoggleTheGreater
04-03-2003, 06:34 PM
what in tarnation does this mean: "chosen one" and "bring balance to the force"? Those phrases are completely useless in any discussion because they've never been explained sufficiently onscreen. Not only that, the OT never mentions anything of the sort so this is a Prequel concotion through and through. Therefore, Anakin/Vader can't really be considering his "fate" based on knowledge that he's the "chosen one" or whatever because it's a meaningless term.

I disagree that terms from the PT are irrelavent in the OT. The SW Saga is now (or will be) all six episodes. I don't think GL said to himself one day, "I'm going to change my story and add things that have nothing to do with anything else." He developed the story rather. The SW Saga can be percieved in several ways: the OT and the PT; or the OT, the PT, and the SWSaga as a whole. The two trilogies are differebt types of movies (PT is more character driven, less mythalogical [the PT is the myth of the OT], and focuses more on Anakin. The OT is more plot driven, more mythalogical, and focuses on Luke. They both combine to tell the epic of how Anakin was good, became evil, then good again in the end. Your perception on the Saga depends upon your acceptence of both trilogies.

The chosen one/balance of the force: I guess the force wants to be good. It's the force's nature to balance itself out in favor of good. When it becomes unbalanceed with evil, it affects the medichlorians and through destiny balances itself out toward good. I guess.

Because it's not explained onscreen, doesn't mean it should be dismissed.


I don't think Anakin realized that he was "evil" until he became aware that he had offspring. Even then, it wasn't a moment of discovery. It was a lengthy process of realization then acceptance. We can see his obvious angst over this self-discovery out on the gantry on Endor. Then, it is only at the end, with his son near death, does he gather the internal strength to change his ways...not out of any allegiance to being this "chosen one" nonsense, but because his son believed in him enough to die for it.
I agree with most of this except that Vader didn't chose to be the chosen one, the "force" chose him.

stillakid
04-03-2003, 10:05 PM
Originally posted by PoggleTheGreater
I agree with most of this except that Vader didn't chose to be the chosen one, the "force" chose him.

So the Force is a sentient being now?

PoggleTheGreater
04-03-2003, 10:12 PM
It's an energy field created by many sentient beings. Maybe the balance of good and evil in the force is relative to the amount of good and evil in the population. Maybe it's in the nature of the force to "choose" to do things to keep it in balance.

stillakid
04-03-2003, 10:27 PM
Originally posted by PoggleTheGreater
It's an energy field created by many sentient beings. Maybe the balance of good and evil in the force is relative to the amount of good and evil in the population. Maybe it's in the nature of the force to "choose" to do things to keep it in balance.

So it's a sentient being that has it's own independent thoughts?

PoggleTheGreater
04-03-2003, 10:40 PM
"Choose" in a sense, not literally. The force is a phenomenon not unlike air pressure with properties witch cause it to equalize according to the balance of the organic beings that create it. I would guess.

stillakid
04-04-2003, 12:23 PM
Originally posted by PoggleTheGreater
"Choose" in a sense, not literally. The force is a phenomenon not unlike air pressure with properties witch cause it to equalize according to the balance of the organic beings that create it. I would guess.

Ok, so what does "balance" mean in this context?

PoggleTheGreater
04-04-2003, 03:22 PM
The amount of good or evil being used through the force is balanced to equal the good and evil in the people and aliens and everything else that creates the force.

stillakid
04-04-2003, 04:37 PM
Originally posted by PoggleTheGreater
The amount of good or evil being used through the force is balanced to equal the good and evil in the people and aliens and everything else that creates the force.

Ok, so let's take a hypothetical population of 100 people.

Those 100 all contribute to "creating" the Force.

Assuming a bell curve of good vs evil people in that population, we'd expect to see around 5% at the bottom (entirely evil), 5% at the top (entirely good), and the other 90% in a sloped gradation in between.

Since we're in the Star Wars Universe, let's also assume that everyone has Midichlorians, but only a few of these people have enough to "tap into" the Force. Based on what we've seen onscreen thus far, it's probably a safe bet to say that no more than 10% of the population can really "tap into" the Force. That means that only 10 people out of our hypothetical population of 100 can truly affect this "balance" in the Force. (For the purposes of simplification, we'll assume that ALL of those top and bottom 10% good and evil people are capable of tapping into the Force, while NONE of the middle 90% can do it.)

Now taking those 10 people and applying a similar bell curve to find the ratio of good vs evil, we should find just 1 or 2 truly evil people in the population at any given time in addition to the 8 others who use the Force primarily for good purposes.

So out of a population of 100 people, only two will tap into the Force to use it for evil. This scenario is "balanced" mathematically. If those two "evil" users were removed from the population, the equation would then be "out of balance."


So, what was this whole "bring balance to the Force" thing supposed to mean again?

PoggleTheGreater
04-06-2003, 07:45 PM
I guess in the eyes of the Jedi, the force or manipulation of the force should be completely good. So from their point of view, when some of the force is being used for evil, it is unbalanced. From an objective point of view, the force would only be balanced if it were 50% good and 50% evil. Maybe "balance" isn't the right word, but from "a certain point of view," it is.

stillakid
04-06-2003, 11:34 PM
Originally posted by PoggleTheGreater
I guess in the eyes of the Jedi, the force or manipulation of the force should be completely good. So from their point of view, when some of the force is being used for evil, it is unbalanced. From an objective point of view, the force would only be balanced if it were 50% good and 50% evil. Maybe "balance" isn't the right word, but from "a certain point of view," it is.

;)

From a "certain point of view" the Prequels are all F'd up! :D

PoggleTheGreater
04-07-2003, 12:06 AM
:)

Darth Jax
04-07-2003, 12:06 AM
from a certain point of view all your posts are argumentative stillakid. but that's the whole reason i read them.

i don't buy the argument that greedo was always meant to shoot first. if that was the case then that's the way GL would have filmed it the first time. it's not like trying to put jabba in the scene with han at the docking bay. that was limited by the special effects. if han's blaster can be done, so could greedos. GL simply grew a conscience or some such nonsense, can't have the heros committing what could be construed as an 'evil' act. so he changed it. i wonder why GL worried about han appearing to make a 'bad' move by shooting first. he has to make anakin become the 'evil' darth vader and then become 'good' once more. is anakin the only one allowed to change his spots?

stillakid
04-08-2003, 11:22 AM
Originally posted by Darth Jax
from a certain point of view all your posts are argumentative stillakid. but that's the whole reason i read them.
ALL of them? ;)


My posts, of this nature anyway, are based solely on logical examination of the events and/or background of the films and/or GL's stated intentions themselves. In no way do I attempt to inject my own personal prejudices or desires into the conclusions.

Also, no animals were harmed during the making of this post.

Written entirely on location in California.

Typed in Microsoft

Rated G

notafinga
04-14-2003, 03:43 AM
if Lucas takes that Greedo shooting first bit out for the future installments of the SE i would be pleased as punch.

some things are better left the way they are..

or were.