PDA

View Full Version : Really going to be disappointed in Episode 3



Tycho
11-11-2003, 02:03 AM
TFN revealed some scenes where Hayden (playing Anakin) is shown awakening after his tragic fight with Obi-Wan, and realizing what's been done to his body (to keep him alive) and what he's done to Padme and Obi-Wan.

This is gratuitous pandering to fans who want to see Darth Vader "get made."

1) I would have used another character to be "a pupil (of Obi-Wan's) before he turned to evil" to help make Darth Vader's identity ambiguous until Yoda confirms it in ROTJ, preserving the shock in ESB, when you never thought Anakin was still alive.

1a) Give Obi-Wan a new padawan, who is jealous, or has other greivances with Anakin, and who ends up MIA - probably dead, but possibly on the Dark Side.

1b) If General Grevious is a Cy-Borg, have him serve Obi-Wan first, as an advisor into how to defeat droid minds, and then have him turn on Obi-Wan, but escape, so that he could possibly be rebuilt into Darth Vader...

2) Leave Anakin for dead after the tragic fight with Obi-Wan. The new Dark Lord can be obsessed with finding Padme, but it can skip the details on exactly why he wants to know the fate of her and her unborn Skywalker child.

3) Introduce Vader as a mystery: the Emperor's new enforcer. Possibly General Grevious or possibly that new Padawan of Obi-Wan Kenobi's.

Do not show Hayden's face while he wears "the suit."

Make the whole darn thing play out like a 12 hour movie! Don't spoil the surprises.

Don't reveal there are twins, either...

I may learn to hate Episode 3.

And I love the prequels.

Wouldn't it suck if the middle chapter of this whole thing turned me off?

I mean right smack in the middle of watching all these films in episode order?

If Lucas is intending to make the movies watchable in order, he's going about it wrong. 4,5,6 and then 1,2,3 seem to be the way to view them.


The experience we had watching these films will no longer be timeless, as everyone will know who Darth Vader is before Luke does.

Sucks to be a fan right now...

2-1B
11-11-2003, 02:39 AM
No Tycho, what sucks is that you clung to these hopes of not seeing anakin turned into Vader when Lucas and his lackeys have been TELLING us for YEARS that we are going to see Anakin become Vader.

There will be no surprises about Vader or the twins. It was not part of the plan since pre-TPM so you shouldn't have held to those hopes.

And as far as I'm concerned, I don't care about preserving any surprises. I had to see these in order of release so if some new generation of fans comes along and can somehow be introduced to SW without any background knowledge (YEAH, RIGHT :rolleyes: Hell, all of the people I know who aren't even familiar with SW STILL know the "I am your father" thing). Anyway if some possible new fans do come along, then let them watch them in the same order I did. Screw them, I don't care about their "experience."

Episode III may very well suck but it's going to be due to crap like General Grievous being in the movie and Padme dying.

That's what I'm worried about, none of the "surprise" nonsense which has never even been a possibility since Lucas decided to go back and do the prequels.

Jedi Tech
11-11-2003, 03:54 AM
No Tycho, what sucks is that you clung to these hopes of not seeing anakin turned into Vader when Lucas and his lackeys have been TELLING us for YEARS that we are going to see Anakin become Vader.

There will be no surprises about Vader or the twins. It was not part of the plan since pre-TPM so you shouldn't have held to those hopes.

And as far as I'm concerned, I don't care about preserving any surprises. I had to see these in order of release so if some new generation of fans comes along and can somehow be introduced to SW without any background knowledge (YEAH, RIGHT :rolleyes: Hell, all of the people I know who aren't even familiar with SW STILL know the "I am your father" thing). Anyway if some possible new fans do come along, then let them watch them in the same order I did. Screw them, I don't care about their "experience."

Episode III may very well suck but it's going to be due to crap like General Grievous being in the movie and Padme dying.

That's what I'm worried about, none of the "surprise" nonsense which has never even been a possibility since Lucas decided to go back and do the prequels.

Much agreed on all of the above.

Beast
11-11-2003, 06:24 AM
Agreed. The whole 6 movie saga is supposed to be the story of the life of Anakin Skywalker. From his early days as a slave on Tatooine, his discovery by Qui-Gon, his training by Obi-Wan, his eventual fall to the Dark Side and battle with Obi-Wan. And then his rebirth as Darth Vader. Then his eventual repetence of the things he's done.

Why play tricks and nonsense to clog up E3 with a bunch of useless red herrings. Everyone pretty much knows the "Luke, I am your father" deal. It's ingrained so deeply in public culture, that it won't likely be a suprise for anyone anyway. Besides, I've said time and again the only real changes is how people will feel about Ben's lies to Luke in ANH. And the revelation in ESB.

But instead of feeling nothing when Kenobi is lieing to Luke, we'll feel great sadness most likely for Obi-Wan. His Padawan, his student, someone he cared for, turned to evil and he had to deal with him. And then instead of the personal shock for the reveal in ESB, we'll instead feel worse for Luke. Because we know that everything that he's come to know about his father is a lie. It works still, just on a different level. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

plo koon 200
11-11-2003, 09:53 AM
Also in EV we have Luke heading down the same path and it makes it seem all the more likely that Luke may turn evil.

billfremore
11-11-2003, 10:11 AM
Now has anybody considered the possiblity that all of these "facts" that TFN and other sources have given us are possibly false?

We've got a year before we even see a trailer for this thing.
I plan to reserve judgement until then.

plo koon 200
11-11-2003, 08:49 PM
I've considered for a while that they are fake but there is considerable evidence builiding up that says it is not fake. With all the evidence I must believe the majority of what I have heard, most unfortunately.

stillakid
11-11-2003, 08:55 PM
But instead of feeling nothing when Kenobi is lieing to Luke, we'll feel great sadness most likely for Obi-Wan.


sigh, he wasn't "lying." He really did believe that Anakin was dead. sigh. No wonder movies are so crappy anymore. There is an entire generation growing up that is incapable of cognitivly recognizing subtlety. Bring on some more Yu-Gi-Oh! :(

Beast
11-11-2003, 09:11 PM
That is you're personal opinion of what Obi-Wan says. He plays it off as being 'His own point of view'. But a lie by any other name, still is a twisting of the truth. The belief that he lied is 'my certain point of view', a view that many people agree with.

Remember, "Many of the truths we cling to, depend on our own point of view." Which is Kenobi's cheesy work around for why he lied to Luke in ANH. In my opinion the only person who believes Anakin to be 'dead' is Anakin himself.

And don't be such an ***, talking down to me like I can't recognize subtle things in movies. You're not that much older then I, bub. So don't play the 'Yu-Gi-Oh! crap on me. It's assine and demeaning. And only helps to hurt any argument you could convey for your opinion and point of view. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

derek
11-11-2003, 09:31 PM
stillakid,

maybe i missed it, but have you outlined how you would of liked the pre-quils to have been? if not, could you start a thread about it,as i'm curious to see what you would of liked to have seen.:)

personally, i have no problem with us seeing anakin become vader. i'm with caesar...screw the future generations. if they want to watch the movies and be suprised, they can watch them by their release dates. i don't understand why anyone who knows anakin is vader cares if some future generation is suprised by vader's revelation to luke.

i think having the audience know that is anakin skywalker come thru the door on leia's ship at the beginning of episode 4, watch as his daughter's homeworld is blown up, and chase his son down a death star trench while trying to kill him makes darth vader a real three dimensional character, instead of some generic bad guy in black.

and like jar jar said, what would be the puropse of having 5 different people "die" in episode 3 and have one mystery man emerge as vader? i wish george would instead focus on the finer points of the story, like making anakin and padme's relationship even kinda believable.

Tycho
11-11-2003, 11:10 PM
5 different people die?

Let me count them...

1) Obi-Wan's new padawan (not confirmed death on screen)
2) General Grevious
3) Anakin Skywalker
4) ?
5) ?

You only need one of the first two to obscure Vader's identity.

Padme's eventual death really has nothing to do with the whole secret of Vader thing.

Unfortunately, I'm starting to get used to the idea of seeing everything (happen to Anakin in becoming Vader) and watching the OT from the perspective of knowing Vader is Anakin.

I'm thinking that Anakin is going to really have to do stuff that makes us hate him, or Vader is lessened as a villain.

Think about the Blockade Runner scene:

STORMTROOPER: "The Death Star Plans are not in the main computer."

VADER: "It's just not fair! You're holding me back! Where are those transmissions you intercepted? What have you done with those plans?"

CAPTAIN ANTILLES: "We intercepted no transmissions. We're a counselor ship on a diplomatic mission!"

VADER: "The closer I get to you, the more agony I'm in. I can't breathe. I'm haunted by the plans you never should have stolen. But I'm giving up trying to argue with you. You know, I couldn't really find an interrogation strategy I really liked - one with the right speed capabilities. But I promise you I won't fail again! So now, if this is a counselor ship, then where is the ambassador? "

[to stormtrooper]: "Commander, the biggest problem in the universe is that people don't help each other. Now tear this ship apart until you find those plans, and bring me the passengers. I want them alive!"

stillakid
11-12-2003, 08:24 AM
That is you're personal opinion of what Obi-Wan says. He plays it off as being 'His own point of view'. But a lie by any other name, still is a twisting of the truth. The belief that he lied is 'my certain point of view', a view that many people agree with.

Remember, "Many of the truths we cling to, depend on our own point of view." Which is Kenobi's cheesy work around for why he lied to Luke in ANH. In my opinion the only person who believes Anakin to be 'dead' is Anakin himself.

And don't be such an ***, talking down to me like I can't recognize subtle things in movies. You're not that much older then I, bub. So don't play the 'Yu-Gi-Oh! crap on me. It's assine and demeaning. And only helps to hurt any argument you could convey for your opinion and point of view. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

No, it's not my personal opinion. It's the way his character is written. At no point in the saga, even in the Prequels that you hold dear, has Obi Wan demonstrated a need for or skill for outright ratfink lying as you suggest. A lie occurs when one person deliberately hides the actual truth from another person with specific intent to deceive. Old Ben did not deliberately hide Vader's alterego personality from Luke as Old Ben did not really believe that the Anakin personality really existed anymore. Ergo, not a lie. Everything Old Ben says and does in the OT supports this and nothing in the rest of the saga supports the notion that Obi Wan/Ben is a manipulative liar. Nothing. So, what Obi Wan said is absolutely true at face value...He believed Anakin to be dead and gone with no hope of coming back, so when he told Luke that "a young Jedi named Darth Vader" killed his father, it was so very very true...to Obi Wan, which is where the "point of view" angle comes in. "Point of view" is not a euphamism for "LIE" as so many people choose to believe.

Now, it could be, if you choose to look at a story in its most superficial light and refuse to look at the deeper complexities, and that's where my Yu-Gi-Oh! comment becomes relavent. For anyone who has watched (endured) an episode of that program, you'll know that there is more talking about everything (the plot, what characters are thinking, etc) than you can find in an entire season of Dawson's Creek. I will relent and allow for the possibility that you (and others) continue this notion that Obi Wan is a ratfink liar for other reasons than what I've suggested, but at present I can't conceive of what they could be. I'd be happy to entertain those ideas if anyone would like to share. :)

stillakid
11-12-2003, 08:35 AM
stillakid,

maybe i missed it, but have you outlined how you would of liked the pre-quils to have been? if not, could you start a thread about it,as i'm curious to see what you would of liked to have seen.:)
.


Thanks for your interest. :) However, there isn't really much to tell. I only wanted to see what George promised us, via his established continuity and suggestions that he made in interviews from the 1980s. The vast majority of my comments about the saga come not from what I would have liked to have seen, rather from a critical examination of what we have in front of us. As in the example in the post above, it's not about my "opinion." I liked what George and Company put together from 1975 to 1983 and would have liked to see that same level of committment to story and quality continue. That's the extent of it.

Now, as we talk and debate this stuff, there have been a couple of instances where what I thought would have been better ideas have popped up. The last one I recall was regarding this notion of a new bad guy for Episode III. After thinking about it, I realized that the saga would have been better off had Darth Maul been written less like an impulsive pit-bull, and instead been written with more depth so that he could have carried the duties of Dooku as well. This way, Obi Wan could have witnessed his padawan get run-through by a Sith, then been present as this bad guy fought off Anakin, then watch as Anakin exacts his revenge (a Sith trait) against the guy who took off his arm.

As I've mentioned many times before, I don't think that George is far off with what he wrote for the Prequels. But these scripts are in terrible need of a polish or rewrite...just like his OT attempts were. The man can't really write and history has shown that he needs help. I'll direct you to some of the early drafts of The Star Wars for all the proof you'll need to see that it is not my "opinion." It really is a wonder that anyone agreed to greenlight Star Wars at all. :)

The Overlord Returns
11-12-2003, 11:27 AM
It is unfortunate that we will see Anakin clearly shown as Vader, mainly because it is unnecessary.

Anakin seemingly dies after duel with obi wan

Obi wan takes Padme and yoda to there eventual hiding spots. Twins born.

Emperor seen presiding over a grand ceremony to mark the birth of the empire. Perhaps in a scene with young Moff Tarkin he presents the new "Dark Lord of The Sith" a man dressed in heavy Black armour. An imposing figure known only as Darth Vader.

Obi Wan disembarks from his ship and onto the sands of tatooine. He looks down at the face of a small boy, and we get a wide angled shot ogf him walking into the desert. End film.

2-1B
11-12-2003, 11:59 AM
Just so I'm clearly understood, I certainly do think it's possible to go TOO far with the Ani-Vader thing. I definitely don't want to see a big RoboCop type construction scene or anything like that. :)

I don't think Obi-Wan lied to Luke, I think Obers really did believe that Anakin was dead. Luke even picked up on this even though he was trying to save Vader. I liked his ROTJ reverse psych of "then my father is truly dead." :)

billfremore
11-12-2003, 12:09 PM
No, it's not my personal opinion. It's the way his character is written.

I see.

So you know this for a fact then?

Can you please provide me with written documentation that shows irrefutable proof of Obi-wan's character traits?

Please show me where this happens and shows that it's not open to interpretation, debate or discussion and only you have been able to see this?

I THINK Obi-wan lied to protect Luke from the truth until a point when he would be ready to face it in his life.

That's my opinion. Please feel free to share your opinion with me. :)

stillakid
11-12-2003, 07:09 PM
I see.

So you know this for a fact then?

Can you please provide me with written documentation that shows irrefutable proof of Obi-wan's character traits?

Please show me where this happens and shows that it's not open to interpretation, debate or discussion and only you have been able to see this?

I THINK Obi-wan lied to protect Luke from the truth until a point when he would be ready to face it in his life.

That's my opinion. Please feel free to share your opinion with me. :)


http://www.geocities.com/cwbosken/swscp.html

http://www.bus.miami.edu/~jdavis/Starwars/esb.html

http://www.bus.miami.edu/~jdavis/Starwars/jedi.html

http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/3188/script1.html

http://showcase.netins.net/web/ssinc/starwars/AOTCScript.shtml


There you go, in black and white. I'll also direct you to Amazon.com where you can purchase movie versions of the above scripts. :)

Beast
11-12-2003, 07:18 PM
Sorry Stilla. The Scripts don't prove anything. Whether Kenobi lied to protect Luke, lied so that Luke wouldn't be upset with Obi-Wan, or really believes what he says is open to each person's own interpretation. And if he really believes the lie that he tells Luke, then that's a whole nother can of worms about Obi-Wan's mental state. ;) :D

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

The 'Xir
11-13-2003, 01:33 AM
Well, in regard to the overall topic, I have to allign myself with Tycho! I like to think that it is possible to hide the identities of Vader and the twins to keep the "suprise" factor for future generations!
Yes, the "I am your father" line is ingrained in our culture, but it isn't going to be on the tip of peoples tounges 50years from now, because they'll be watching some cool new hip sci-fi thing and have dedicated sites and fourm boards speculating about that movies' details!
So 50 60 years from now, when someone mentions how cool they think Star Wars is, in passing to someone who has never heard of it before, when that person is interested enough to sit down and watch the movies in order, they will be just as suprised by the ESB revelation as we were 23years ago!
Call me a hopeless romantic, but I stll got faith in ole georgie boy! If he spills everything then oh well, it won't detract from my enjoyment of the films!

"You may say that I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one"-- Lennon.

Tycho
11-13-2003, 02:41 AM
Let me make my position clear, as there might be some misunderstanding:

I'd like a 12 hour masterpiece saga that you watch in episode order, and revelations of each movie come upon the viewer at certain points.

I don't need fan pandering to show exactly how Anakin is saved, and how the Vader suit gets made. This isn't the Learning Channel.

True, I'm not writing this, but I'd have written elements like this:

1) Shmi lied: no one ACTED as a father to Anakin, but Dooku actually contributed the genetic material. Perhaps he was involved in stopping pirates on the Outer Rim when he was a Jedi, and he rescued Shmi, only to have her fall in love with him. Unable to remain and always protect her, she was captured as a slave after they'd had a young son together. To protect Dooku, who as a Jedi was not supposed to be having children, she lied - especially to Qui-Gon, who from her brief time with Dooku, she already knew of and knew how much like a son Qui-Gon was to Dooku, so she didn't want to taint his reputation, but felt that maybe Qui-Gon would be as good as Dooku was to her, and free her. He did - but only Anakin.

2) Anakin doesn't know. He kills Dooku in cold blood. Palpatine informs him what the Jedi hid from him, and Anakin feels - well how would you feel if you always wanted a father, you train all your life to make it into the CIA and you end up being used to assasinate someone, you complete your mission, and then you learn the guy you killed was your own father! - and everyone else knew, but they didn't tell you! Anakin is going to take some swings at Mace and Obi-Wan over this!

3) Because the Jedi didn't want Dooku to interfere in Anakin's training, being that he was the boy's father (explaining why Anakin was so strong in the Force - and the reason why Jedi are not supposed to have children), Dooku and Mace hatch a plan to infiltrate the Sith, knowing Palpatine would like to exploit Dooku's wealth he had (from his family inheritence before ever being taken to be trained as a child) and perhaps because Palpatine knows Dooku's relation to Anakin. So either Dooku was a good guy all along, who in the line of duty (undercover) he got pushed with his back to the wall and Geonosis happened, and it all got out of his control - or he got corrupted during his under-cover operation, as Palpatine knew would happen all along - the reason he allowed a Jedi Master to become a Sith Lord in the first place. So Anakin thinks the Jedi lied and betrayed his trust, and that his real father was aligned with Palpatine (who Anakin reveres anyway) all along.

Now let's just say this is all true...pretend for a moment, will you?

All of the sudden, subtle looks by Shmi towards Qui-Gon, knowing nods between Mace and Yoda, all this adds in to make TPM and AOTC great films on much deeper levels - just like in ANH the line that Luke's just too much like his father is something Owen is afraid of (but we didn't know why at the time).

So again, pretending all this is true, it enhances E1, and E2, while makes E3 a great surprise-shocker we'll be talking about forever, right?

But again, pretend this is true, and now you know it all goes down this way - the movie won't be THAT much fun to discuss anymore, will it. Because it would be like talking Empire to death in 1979, leaving only going to spend (what was it?) $5 to go see it leftover in 1980.

Instead of cheating our children and grandchildren out of our own 1980 experience with ESB, why not let new fans of SW enjoy it as it was originally meant to be seen, just as you could still enjoy a few surprises in Episode 3 (pretending if what I described above 1-3) was all true?

Imagine the fun you'd have sharing Star Wars with someone new who doesn't know Anakin lived, and is Vader - Luke Skywalker's dad.

I think it's selfish to want "the Learning Channel special" on how to make a portable life-support suit.

Unfortunately, many of you who do want this, look like you're going to get your way.
:rolleyes:

2-1B
11-13-2003, 09:42 AM
Tycho, your theory definitely does not sound like The Learning Channel . . . . it's more like Lifetime. :p :p :p

Oh please, if they show Anakin turned into Vader it will only take up a few minutes.

Speak for yourself - I was only 2 years old when ESB came out and ****I**** never had the "pleasure" of what you call "our own 1980 experience with ESB" anbd you don't hear me complaining. :rolleyes:

Here's a thought - if you're so hung up on the '80 ESB experience for future lil Tychos, then why wouldn't you want the same 77 ANH / 80 ESB / 83 ROTJ experience for them thus making them watch the OT FIRST ? :confused: Same thing . . .

As for you and your desire to watch all of them in a row, having already seen the OT you yourself know what's going to happen in the prequels already - so go ahead and watch them all in order if you like.

You know, all this talk about "fanboy pandering" is almost laughable when compared to the staunch anti-Vader/revealed sentiment among SOME fans. What's the big deal ? ? ? :confused:

billfremore
11-13-2003, 10:35 AM
http://www.geocities.com/cwbosken/swscp.html

http://www.bus.miami.edu/~jdavis/Starwars/esb.html

http://www.bus.miami.edu/~jdavis/Starwars/jedi.html

http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/3188/script1.html

http://showcase.netins.net/web/ssinc/starwars/AOTCScript.shtml


There you go, in black and white. I'll also direct you to Amazon.com where you can purchase movie versions of the above scripts. :)


Thanks, but I've seen the movies once or twice :rolleyes: :D

These are the scripts and are open to people's individual interpretations. My argument is not against your opinion, it's against you saying these things are facts.

I respect your opinion.
I do not appreciate somebody telling me that said opinion is fact.

I believe what I believe.
So you can bury me under as many links for scripts as you want, my opinion is as right as yours.

Anakin2121
11-13-2003, 11:44 AM
Hmm, I don't know. The only people that will be able to watch all 6 films in order without already knowing about the "I am your father" thing, are, essentially, unborn kids. And with modern TV and video games, kids are having shorter and shorter attention spans, and more and more cravings for action scenes, visual effects, and general eye candy. So a kid that watches the prequels first will be astonished by the action scenes and then bored by the relatively slower-paced OT.
Plus, it's not really until ANH, when Ben tells Luke about the Force, that we really know how it is that the Jedi are able to do the things they do. In the prequels, the Force is mentioned but we aren't really told WHAT it is, so if you're watching the prequels first, you're basically just left to assume that all the Jedi are just people with superhuman fighting powers, and then in ANH, we suddenly learn the truth about it.
I mean, if TPM was the first movie you watched, then when you first see Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon cutting their way through battle droids, you'd be like, "Who the heck ARE these guys and how are they able to do it?"

Tycho
11-13-2003, 12:36 PM
That's why you watch the films to learn more about them.

But you made a good point. I'm half talking to myself here, but I want to reflect on how you learn about the Force in episode order...

I think you rightly pointed out an oversight that Lucas made without explaining it, but I have to be sure...

"Keep your mind here and now in the present. Be mindful of the Living Force, young padawan." - doesn't tell you what it is, but implies it's a mystical or intuitive warning system built into the nerves of the Jedi.

"The Ambassadors are Jedi Knights I believe" - tells you who these guys are with special abilities (besides the title scroll-up)

"Have you ever encountered a Jedi Knight before?" - ditto.

"He can see things before they happen. That's why he appears to have such fast reflexes. It's a Jedi trait." - OK - that points out to an ability.

"Without the midichlorians, we would have no knowledge of the Force." - describes the biological conditions a being must have to tap into the nervous system and be forewarned, or be able to act on future occurances.

The telekinetic ability seems to be just shown and taken for granted that it is a Jedi ability.

The same with Force lightning. It was never explained.

I think Obi-Wan does explain it best - and Yoda, in E4 and E5.

Good point you brought up there.

stillakid
11-13-2003, 01:28 PM
Thanks, but I've seen the movies once or twice :rolleyes: :D

These are the scripts and are open to people's individual interpretations. My argument is not against your opinion, it's against you saying these things are facts.

I respect your opinion.
I do not appreciate somebody telling me that said opinion is fact.

I believe what I believe.
So you can bury me under as many links for scripts as you want, my opinion is as right as yours.


Ironically enough, I was just watching the An Evening With Kevin Smith DVD's last night. If you're not familiar with them, it's essentially a compilation of his appearances at universities around the country. Anyhow, at one point, a young woman comes up to the mic (students from the audience ask him questions) and lays into him about the portrayal of lesbians in his film Chasing Amy. He stops her right away as her initial "conclusions" about his "message" were entirely erroneous. In fact, no matter what he said to dissuade her and educate her as to his actual motivation to what he was really trying to say (which was 180 degrees opposite of what she was getting at), she refused to believe him.

My point? Most storytellers enter the process with something very specific to say. Whether the end result accomplishes the mission successfully enough is open for debate, but regardless, this means that not everything you see on the page or on screen is fodder for audience interpretation. Despite claims to the contrary, there are instances of hard and fast fact when it comes to elements in a story.

So, I base my conclusions regarding a great many things in the Star Wars saga from looking both at all the minute details as well as observing how they all work together (or not) within the broader scope of the tale. No, I haven't discussed any of this personally with George, so there is always the distinct possibility that I'm wrong. However, with the overwhelming evidence to support my conclusions, I highly doubt it in this case. Obi Wan Kenobi has never outright lied nor manipulated anything or anybody in such a way as to support this ludicrous claim that he "lied" to Luke. Luke obviously felt that way as well, but Spirit Ben took screentime to explain very carefully his "point of view." As I stated before, "point of view" is not synonomous with "lying" no matter how people try to twist it. More than that, I can't even wrap my mind around the motivation of people to want to turn Obi Wan Kenobi into a ratfink manipulative liar, as opposed to just a guy who let his ego get out of control for a moment when he decided to train Anakin.

stillakid
11-13-2003, 01:42 PM
What's the big deal ? ? ? :confused:


On a scale of "being absolutely necessary for human survival" and "it doesn't matter at all," not one thing in Star Wars even approaches necessity. :D

With that in mind, "the big deal" in my mind is for a writer to create a cohesive story that can be read/watched in chronological order. Why? Why not, I say. We count in order (one, two, three, and so on) so one could expect that if they were living under a rock and happened upon this 6 part DVD set at Blockbuster Video in the year 2010, they should be able to start at Episode I and enjoy a linear story until the end of Episode VI.

But just like a great mystery novel that is ruined by some bone-headed literature reviewer in the newspaper who gives away the identity of the murderer, what's the difference between that and destroying all the mystery and intrigue that Lucas, Huyck, Katz, Kasdan, Kershner, and Marquand spent so much time and energy creating 20-some years ago?

The argument against preserving the surprises in these earlier episodes is "well, everyone already knows it all and F**K anybody that doesn't." While an admirably selfish sentiment for sure, I don't quite understand the inherent need for such a superficial thrill at the expense of the integrity of the project as a whole. Yeah, I know all about Anakin and you do too as do millions of other currently living humans on planet Earth, but wouldn't it be nice to be able to put the Episode I DVD in and enjoy a 6 part story in which the drama and suspense built minute by minute every time you watched them, even though you already know the story? Look at it this way: Pick your favorite film that isn't Star Wars that you like to watch multiple times. For the sake of picking an example, I'll pull Monster's Inc off the pile. Okay, so the mystery there is that the boss is the bad guy. On first viewing, you don't know this until about an hour or so in. But using your argument above, what's the point in watching it ever again? You already know the secret. In fact, now that the cat is out of the bag, Pixar should just go back in and reedit the thing so that we see the boss manipulating his nefarious scheme from the get-go. Now we can enjoy the story in a whole new light. Right?

Wrong.

stillakid
11-13-2003, 01:54 PM
Sorry Stilla. The Scripts don't prove anything. Whether Kenobi lied to protect Luke, lied so that Luke wouldn't be upset with Obi-Wan, or really believes what he says is open to each person's own interpretation. And if he really believes the lie that he tells Luke, then that's a whole nother can of worms about Obi-Wan's mental state. ;) :D

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks


Well, first see my Kevin Smith example above to dispel this interpretation nonsense.


But you do bring up an interesting question that I haven't really seen dealt with before, that of how "Jedi" are perceived and identified after taking upon that second "Darth" name. Clearly, with Obi Wan's perception that Anakin was really very dead and replaced with this new personality called Darth Vader, we can draw a conclusion that perhaps this was the common belief among Jedi, that when a comrade "fell," the "good man" is destroyed and the body is taken over by this new "evil" personality.

I've suggested before that Anakin is (at best) bi-polar as evidenced in AOTC, so this course of events (his split personality) certainly follows in a very logical way. It doesn't go to explain Palpatine's, Maul's, or Dooku's motivations to shed the "good" personalities, but not everyone needs to become evil for the same reasons I suppose. But your idea that somehow Obi Wan is on the loopy side again makes no sense.

So, please answer for me, why do you and others feel compelled to gun down Obi Wan and his credibility? What did he ever do to you?

Tycho
11-13-2003, 02:00 PM
I strongly agree with Stillakid on these points.

The place where I disagree was not brought up in his latest comments, but that's the part where I LIKE the prequels, and where I THOUGHT they were headed, and approve and enjoy the additions of Qui-Gon Jinn and midi-chlorians, and the way Anakin became Obi-Wan's apprentice.

As to what Obi-Wan told Luke, there can be no argument that as far as Obi-Wan knew, the Jedi that existed as Anakin Skywalker WAS no longer - else he'd have kept his allegiance to the Jedi, and protected those he loved - like Padme and Obi-Wan himself. But instead he turned on them for things (I've guessed at) that were not really their fault. This is somewhat Stillakid's point.

Now if Dooku somehow can still turn out to be Anakin's dad, Obi-Wan never knew it! Come on, if they didn't share this information with Qui-Gon, why would they have told his young apprentice who only became a Knight with his own apprentice because he said, "I will do it whether you allow me to or not!" Proof Obi-Wan was as stubborn as a child when he took on Anakin as an apprentice, especially when he'd held the opposite position when Qui-Gon was still alive and everyone (including Anakin) knew it.

Beast
11-13-2003, 02:14 PM
So, please answer for me, why do you and others feel compelled to gun down Obi Wan and his credibility? What did he ever do to you?
And why do you feel compelled, to bolster Obi-Wan and his credibility. His reasons for not telling Luke the whole truth, are up to the individuals interpretation. If he truely believed what he told Luke in ANH, why would he be so uncomfortable with talking about Luke's father. He even pauses, as he tries to word it a certain way. If he believed what he was saying, he should have been able to just rattle off what he says with no pause.

As for Kevin Smith, he's a fine director and I'm a fan of his stuff. And I have that DVD. But still, that was her interpretation of the message of the movie. While Kevin set her straight (no pun intended), that he put the words in the mouth of the guy (Banky) that is wrong the entire movie. The 'Archie Bunker' method, in other words. That is the writer/director's fact. Where as with Obi-Wan, Lucas has not stated one way or another.

You yourself are the one that is always complaining about on-screen evidence. But in this case your reaching for the scripts and any lil point you possibly can grab, in attempt to salvage Obi-Wan's credibility. When Count Dooku became Darth Tyranus, they didn't stop calling him Count Dooku, did they. Infact Dooku's own Master (Yoda), calls him Dooku when he enters the hanger. ;) :D

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

Beast
11-13-2003, 03:26 PM
To Tycho and all the folks that are worried about keeping the mystery of Vader really being Anakin. Why worry so much about it, these movies are about the life, rise, fall, and redemtion of Anakin Skywalker. As well as the Skywalker family against a backdrop of a Galactic War. Not Scooby Doo, where they pull off the mask to reveal Darth Vader is really old man Anakin. And he would have gotten away with it, if it wasn't for those meddling rebels. :D

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

stillakid
11-13-2003, 03:41 PM
And why do you feel compelled, to bolster Obi-Wan and his credibility. His reasons for not telling Luke the whole truth, are up to the individuals interpretation. If he truely believed what he told Luke in ANH, why would he be so uncomfortable with talking about Luke's father. He even pauses, as he tries to word it a certain way. If he believed what he was saying, he should have been able to just rattle off what he says with no pause.

First, you haven't really answered the question. You managed to deflect it back in order to avoid describing why you hate Obi Wan so much as to paint him in such a bad light.

As far as why you perceive me bolster him up, I'm doing nothing of the sort. Had George written the character as an axe murderer, then I would comment from that perspective. I can only talk about what is really there, trying to not let my personal "interpretations" get in the way as you have done for this unspoken reason you refuse to explain.

In terms of the "uncomfortableness" that you describe, it is clear that he is still smarting from the pain of both losing a friend and losing a Jedi to the Darkside. If that wasn't bad enough, he has to tell the son about it. There is bound to be a pause in there, to Alec's credit. He wasn't giving a history lesson on a chalkboard, so this "rattling" off of events is just plain ol' silly. People have emotions and despite this tragic near-death of Anakin, Obi Wan was hurt as well.


As for Kevin Smith, he's a fine director and I'm a fan of his stuff. And I have that DVD. But still, that was her interpretation of the message of the movie. While Kevin set her straight (no pun intended), that he put the words in the mouth of the guy (Banky) that is wrong the entire movie. The 'Archie Bunker' method, in other words. That is the writer/director's fact. Where as with Obi-Wan, Lucas has not stated one way or another.
That's the point really. Both Smith and Lucas took pains to say very specific things in their movies, but despite their best intentions, certain audience members still insist on mis-interpreting despite clear evidence to the contrary. In the Chasing Amy example, that girl was obviously viewing the film from an "insiders" perspective of being a lesbian, so instead of taking a really good look at ALL the details in the movie, she latched onto the most superficial elements and drew an erroneous conclusion. While I can't really say from what perspective you and others are viewing Star Wars from, I can say with confidence that I'm sure you're wrong. Perhaps An Evening With George Lucas is the only thing to lay this to rest. :)


You yourself are the one that is always complaining about on-screen evidence. But in this case your reaching for the scripts and any lil point you possibly can grab, in attempt to salvage Obi-Wan's credibility. When Count Dooku became Darth Tyranus, they didn't stop calling him Count Dooku, did they. Infact Dooku's own Master (Yoda), calls him Dooku when he enters the hanger. ;) :D

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

Yes, the scripts bear out the proof still. As far as your Dooku example goes, there's no proof that any of the other Jedi have made that link between the Dooku identity and the Tyranus identity, that I can recall. But even if they did, this still doesn't disprove Obi Wan's personal belief that the Anakin personality was very very dead. What I said before about a Jedi-wide belief about Sith identity was pure conjecture. Anakin's case may be a self-contained portrait of good turned to evil. How so? While we have little information to go on, in Palpatine's case, we can guess that he is out to the control the galaxy for power's sake. It isn't political power he craves, rather he uses the politics to get what he wants in the end, which is total control. Why? We can only guess. Maul is just raised to be a bad guy. No gray areas there. Dooku appears to have a bit of that power-grab motivation that Palpatine does, but it does appear as though his motivations lean toward the purely political. There's no way to know for certain though.

But Anakin is being painted as a guy who goes off the deep end (waahh) because nobody likes him. :cry: (violins) He's got power and is being "held back." (violins) This wasn't Obi Wan's "failure." Nobody could have properly taught that brat how to grow up and stop behaving like a 3 year old. But Obi Wan did see himself as the cause (as told by the OT, but not borne out in the Prequels). Anyhow, we are led to believe (by the OT) that at some point, Obi Wan and Anakin were dear friends (though there doesn't seem to be time left to show any of this). Presumably between TPM and AOTC, Anakin wasn't this crybaby bipolar brat and was actually somebody we could all consider "GOOD." We join his downfall already in progress during AOTC. So once this theoretical "good" Anakin that we don't see much of dips into the Darkside of the Force, the good man that was Luke's father is destroyed leaving only some abomination inhabiting his body.

It really doesn't get much simplier than that. Why is it so difficult to see and accept? Again, what do you have against Obi Wan?

stillakid
11-13-2003, 03:49 PM
To Tycho and all the folks that are worried about keeping the mystery of Vader really being Anakin. Why worry so much about it, these movies are about the life, rise, fall, and redemtion of Anakin Skywalker. As well as the Skywalker family against a backdrop of a Galactic War. Not Scooby Doo, where they pull off the mask to reveal Darth Vader is really old man Anakin. And he would have gotten away with it, if it wasn't for those meddling rebels. :D

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

Like it or not, that's exactly what it is. The entirety of the OT leads up to that moment or else Vader's identity would have been given away far sooner. The BIG CLIFFHANGER question at the end of ESB is exactly that: Is Darth Vader Luke's father? Great movie-serial stuff!


So to just hand over that information all willynilly just to give some fans a cheap thrill completely undermines that goal of suspense and intrigue. Again, this is sooooo easy to see. I don't understand why so many people don't care. :confused: I understand that this is a Hollywood movie, but this is also a kind of literature as well. I fear for our future if this is the laisse-faire attitude people will have toward good writing.

Beast
11-13-2003, 03:54 PM
Stilla, you don't need to be an 'axe murder' to lie. I like the Obi-Wan character a whole lot. Infact he's one of my favorite Prequel Characters. If you follow Obi-Wan's wordings so close, then you can't claim that you know why Obi-Wan said what he did as a fact.

"A lot of the truths we cling to, depend greatly on our own points of view." Basically, our opinions are skewed by how we see things. You are the only one claiming you know something is a fact. And have no evidence to support it. You are again, as you always do, claiming your opinion as divine fact.

Yes, Smith and Lucas are very similar. But you have Smith on record with what his intentions are. But this isn't the same thing. Banky says what he says, because he's the idiot character of the peice. He doesn't know better. I surely hope you're not claiming that Obi-Wan is an idiot and doesn't know any better.

And while the evidence may be clear to you, other evidence may be clearer to other people. It's opinion and points of view again. Until Lucas states exactly what was intended by Obi-Wan's words, it is all conjecture on your and my parts. Opinion and theory, until we know otherwise.

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

billfremore
11-13-2003, 03:57 PM
Ironically enough, I was just watching the An Evening With Kevin Smith DVD's last night. If you're not familiar with them, it's essentially a compilation of his appearances at universities around the country. Anyhow, at one point, a young woman comes up to the mic (students from the audience ask him questions) and lays into him about the portrayal of lesbians in his film Chasing Amy. He stops her right away as her initial "conclusions" about his "message" were entirely erroneous. In fact, no matter what he said to dissuade her and educate her as to his actual motivation to what he was really trying to say (which was 180 degrees opposite of what she was getting at), she refused to believe him.

My point? Most storytellers enter the process with something very specific to say. Whether the end result accomplishes the mission successfully enough is open for debate, but regardless, this means that not everything you see on the page or on screen is fodder for audience interpretation. Despite claims to the contrary, there are instances of hard and fast fact when it comes to elements in a story.

So, I base my conclusions regarding a great many things in the Star Wars saga from looking both at all the minute details as well as observing how they all work together (or not) within the broader scope of the tale. No, I haven't discussed any of this personally with George, so there is always the distinct possibility that I'm wrong. However, with the overwhelming evidence to support my conclusions, I highly doubt it in this case. Obi Wan Kenobi has never outright lied nor manipulated anything or anybody in such a way as to support this ludicrous claim that he "lied" to Luke. Luke obviously felt that way as well, but Spirit Ben took screentime to explain very carefully his "point of view." As I stated before, "point of view" is not synonomous with "lying" no matter how people try to twist it. More than that, I can't even wrap my mind around the motivation of people to want to turn Obi Wan Kenobi into a ratfink manipulative liar, as opposed to just a guy who let his ego get out of control for a moment when he decided to train Anakin.


Like Jar Jar I also own the Kevin Smith DVD and I am very familiar with the scene you describe

I think you have not addressed my point.

You are perfectly entitled to give your opinion, I find a lot of what you have to say interesting and occasionally thought provoking.

My problem with what you had said before was when you said:

"No, it's not my personal opinion. It's the way his character is written. "

Unless you and Lucas are buddies and he's told you that was his intention I don't think you can say what he intended for Obi-wan's character motivation to be.

I don't think you should be passing your opinions off as hard-cold facts.

That's all I'm saying.

Beast
11-13-2003, 04:05 PM
And funny, I thought the entirety of the OT is Anakin's son growing and bettering himself. And about the redemption of a man, due to a father's love for said son. Not some cheesy Scooby Doo reveal. Cause it never came off that way to me. The mask may come off, but it's only a symbol of him letting go of the darkness that once held sway over his soul. His rejection of Darth Vader.

And how is the information being handed over willy-nilly. Luke certainly doesn't know his father is Vader, until the reveal. And that works in a serial manner also. And as I always said, it shifts the focus of shock from us feeling our own shock. To empathize more for Luke, and his shock that this man was his father. The audience knowing shocking information the characters don't know is a commen storytelling method. It's even in Shakespeare. :)

Oh, and drop the high and mighty 'I feel bad for the future' type of attitude in relation to people and writing and movies. It's really demening to people, to act like they have no class, or understanding of how stories should play out, just because you personally don't agree with that method. It's rude, assinine, and downright insulting. :(

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

James Boba Fettfield
11-13-2003, 08:53 PM
Perhaps An Evening With George Lucas is the only thing to lay this to rest.

That's the only way we're ever going to know. When Lucas clearly states it one way or the other. Until then, I think it's all open to personal interpretation.

stillakid
11-14-2003, 03:31 AM
Stilla, you don't need to be an 'axe murder' to lie. I like the Obi-Wan character a whole lot. Infact he's one of my favorite Prequel Characters. If you follow Obi-Wan's wordings so close, then you can't claim that you know why Obi-Wan said what he did as a fact.
Yes, I can and have. :) You like the Obi Wan character in the Prequel's a lot, as do I, however from your "interpretation" of the character in the OT it is apparent that you do not like that version of him. Why the disconnect? For if we are to entertain this notion that absolutely every word and image is open for viable interpretation no matter what the creator intended as you continue to claim, then you are making the conscious choice to "dis" Old Ben Kenobi when there is ample opportunity to give him the benefit of the doubt. So, once again I'll ask, what do you have against Obi Wan Kenobi. Or more specifically, Old Ben Kenobi?


"A lot of the truths we cling to, depend greatly on our own points of view." Basically, our opinions are skewed by how we see things. You are the only one claiming you know something is a fact. And have no evidence to support it.
And that's where you're wrong. I do have plenty of evidence to back up my "point of view" and have written it here many times. You either skimmed over it too quickly and missed it or didn't bother to comprehend it. Either way, if nothing else, the proof of my "point of view" exists in the Prequel version of Obi Wan that you admit to liking. If we are to believe that Old Ben is a ratfink liar, then we should also expect to see some hint of this character trait in him at some point in his past. Ergo, we should see him manipulate the truth or outright lie to someone in the Prequels. As we haven't and have no reason to suspect that he'll start in Episode III, it only follows that his character is not a liar by design and it would make little to no sense to assume that the Old Ben version is any different. Add that to the fact of his explanation for why he told Luke what he did (and take it at face value), and we are left with the only possible conclusion which says that Obi Wan truly believed Anakin to be dead and that he was not lying to Luke even a little bit. He told Luke exactly what he himself believed to be true. No more. No less. I'm still very perplexed at how (and why) any other conclusion could be drawn and have yet to hear anyone step up to explain this alternate "interpretation."

So be as offended as you wish, but it takes little more than critical thinking skills to work out the "proofs" in regards to this question even without confirmation from Mr. Lucas. I have no doubt that you (and others) are intelligent people, but can only assume that your "opinion" and "viewpoint" of the saga is being colored by other influences which prevent you (unconsciously) from seeing the one truth of it. This is pure conjecture on my part, but I believe that you're allowing your desire to find no fault with the Star Wars Saga override a true objective examination of what is really there. As I've said before, I really like the Star Wars idea, but I refuse to let that get in the way of critiquing the thing honestly, even when it hurts to do so. I didn't go into this looking for mistakes. They just jump off the screen. What do you want me to do? Ignore them? Rationalize them away? Pretend that it's all just my "opinion" even though I know that many many others (many of which do not bother with boards like this) have drawn the same exact conclusions? I don't get it.

Lucas has proven that he knows how to find the best scraps of pop culture and mythology to weave into his big quilt, but he has little to no idea on how to sew them together properly. History shows us convincingly that he needs significant help in writing a screenplay which makes sense and for some reason, he decided to forgo that part of the collaborative process when creating the Prequels. So they are less for it. Does he care? No, not really. But the audience does and many are disappointed in what he is creating lately. I know you respond to my missives because I am probably the most outspoken about his mistakes, but take another look through this thread and many others and you'll see that I really am not alone in this. I'm not just a loud minority shouting out my "opinions." Hell, I didn't even start this pretty pessimistic thread. I, for one, am starting to look forward to Episode III. How? Because I've decided to file the entirety of the Prequels under the Expanded Universe category where continuity is of little consequence and fanboy dreams can become a reality. Would it be cool to see Vader flying around slaughtering Jedi's? Hell yeah! Does is belong in the features film series? Not even a little bit, but it makes for some really cool EU material. So looking at the Prequels from that "point of view," not one bit of this matters and we can all sit back, munch on our large popcorn with butter flavor, and enjoy Star Wars on the big screen one more time. :)

Beast
11-14-2003, 09:18 AM
People can change a lot over 18 years. And also, I never once said he was a ratfink liar. He lies to Luke about his father, he bends the truth so that it's productive to ensure that Luke doesn't run off whining about his dad. It was a necissary lie. For Luke's own good.

Obi-Wan clearly knows that Luke is emotional and whiny, just like dear old dad. So he lies to him, merely to protect him. He's not being a ratfink liar, he's being gentle about a topic that could send Luke away. And destroy any chance that Luke could be 'The New Hope' for the Galaxy.

In short, Luke wasn't ready to know about his father. Even Yoda supports that he wasn't ready to know. "No. Unfortunate that you rushed to face him. That, not ready for the burden were you." So again, on screen evidence points to the fact that Luke was lied to, to protect him. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

billfremore
11-14-2003, 11:28 AM
So be as offended as you wish, but it takes little more than critical thinking skills to work out the "proofs" in regards to this question even without confirmation from Mr. Lucas. I have no doubt that you (and others) are intelligent people, but can only assume that your "opinion" and "viewpoint" of the saga is being colored by other influences which prevent you (unconsciously) from seeing the one truth of it. This is pure conjecture on my part, but I believe that you're allowing your desire to find no fault with the Star Wars Saga override a true objective examination of what is really there. As I've said before, I really like the Star Wars idea, but I refuse to let that get in the way of critiquing the thing honestly, even when it hurts to do so. I didn't go into this looking for mistakes. They just jump off the screen. What do you want me to do? Ignore them? Rationalize them away? Pretend that it's all just my "opinion" even though I know that many many others (many of which do not bother with boards like this) have drawn the same exact conclusions? I don't get it.

So how is it exactly my "opinions" and "beliefs" are any different than yours?

You claiming that yours are "truth" is pure arrogance on your part.

You have also not provided me with any such proof other than your "opinions" being thrown at me again and again.

Please find me the others like yourself who believe the same things.
Find and show me the posts by others that back up that statement.

If you want me to believe what you claim to be the truth, you show me HARD, COLD, DOCUMENTED facts that cannot be disproved.

Before you cited a comment made by Kevin Smith from his Evening with Kevin Smith DVD about how the lesbian questioned his meaning behind Chasing Amy and then he explained it. George Lucas has not done this, so until he comes out and says what his intention was for Obi-wan's character, what you are claiming to be fact is mearly your impression.

And please, just because I have a different view on the movies does not make me blind to it's faults, I just choose not to harp on them.

I have my own opinions of the way you look at them too but that doesn't make me more right than you.

And with that I'll leave you with a line from Jay & Silent Bob Strike Back:

"This is a site full of militant movie buffs: sad b*stards who live in their parents' basements, downloading scripts and trading what they believe to be inside info about movies and actors they despise yet can't stop discussing."

stillakid
11-15-2003, 10:06 AM
People can change a lot over 18 years. And also, I never once said he was a ratfink liar. He lies to Luke about his father, he bends the truth so that it's productive to ensure that Luke doesn't run off whining about his dad. It was a necissary lie. For Luke's own good.

Obi-Wan clearly knows that Luke is emotional and whiny, just like dear old dad. So he lies to him, merely to protect him. He's not being a ratfink liar, he's being gentle about a topic that could send Luke away. And destroy any chance that Luke could be 'The New Hope' for the Galaxy.

In short, Luke wasn't ready to know about his father. Even Yoda supports that he wasn't ready to know. "No. Unfortunate that you rushed to face him. That, not ready for the burden were you." So again, on screen evidence points to the fact that Luke was lied to, to protect him. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks


Thank you for that. I appreciate it. :) So you don't believe that Obi Wan (Old Ben) really believed Anakin to be dead despite his adamant claims all the way through ROTJ? ("His more machine now than man...twisted and evil") You believe that he was just lying to keep Luke around? If so, then why keep up the ruse even when Luke was already waist-deep into the conflict later on?

stillakid
11-15-2003, 10:12 AM
If you want me to believe what you claim to be the truth, you show me HARD, COLD, DOCUMENTED facts that cannot be disproved.


Did I or did I not say above that I could be wrong? It appears that you too have a distinct problem actually reading and comprehending what is written, which would explain why you can't seem to find anyone else who agrees with me. It would also explain why you can't seem to understand my entire argument. I can't explain my "point of view" any better than I already have (ad infinitum), so unless you plan on skimming back through previous posts (from me and others) I can't really help you anymore. I'm sorry. :( See, I don't believe that you really want to understand what I'm suggesting. I can see from your attitude that you really really like Star Wars and loath seeing any suggestion of negativity towards it. I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news and inflict it upon you. I'll try to tone it down in the future just for you. :kiss:

2-1B
11-15-2003, 10:51 AM
I was thinking about that line in ROTJ when Ben says "he's more machine now than man, twisted and evil." and to me that that has always meant that Ben really did believe Anakin to be dead. He was "killed" by Vader (from a certain point of view). :)

stillakid
11-15-2003, 05:43 PM
I was thinking about that line in ROTJ when Ben says "he's more machine now than man, twisted and evil." and to me that that has always meant that Ben really did believe Anakin to be dead. He was "killed" by Vader (from a certain point of view). :)


Thank you. Exactly. This is really all I'm saying. Everything about Old Ben/Spirit Ben supports his initial claim that Anakin is dead...to him, which is why A) Ben is not lying and B) Luke's eventual "victory" is so much more poignant because he refused to believe that his father was completely gone ("There is still good in him!"). It was exactly that smalltown, farmboy naivite which allowed him to believe that a glimmer of hope existed for his father's soul. And it came down to martyrdom in order for that sliver of Anakin's "good" personality to break through. In the end, Ben wasn't lying...he was just wrong but entirely justified in believing what he did and telling Luke his story...from his point of view.

billfremore
11-17-2003, 09:13 AM
Did I or did I not say above that I could be wrong? It appears that you too have a distinct problem actually reading and comprehending what is written, which would explain why you can't seem to find anyone else who agrees with me. It would also explain why you can't seem to understand my entire argument. I can't explain my "point of view" any better than I already have (ad infinitum), so unless you plan on skimming back through previous posts (from me and others) I can't really help you anymore. I'm sorry. :( See, I don't believe that you really want to understand what I'm suggesting. I can see from your attitude that you really really like Star Wars and loath seeing any suggestion of negativity towards it. I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news and inflict it upon you. I'll try to tone it down in the future just for you. :kiss:

*Sigh*

I really wish you would get off the "bash the people who don't bash star wars wagon"

If I choose to defend it, please stop telling me I'm blind to the truth and wearing rose-coloured glasses in regards to star wars.

IT'S MY OPINION.
My opinion is my own and not for you to tell me it's wrong any more than I can tell you yours is wrong.

All I ask is that you give me some proof instead of claims that all of this has been said before and many many people who don't visit this board feel that same way. Sheesh :rolleyes: I can claim that too.

I do understand what you were suggesting, all I really wanted was for you to admit that what you were saying is your opinion and not the "truth"

I realize that you and I have never really seen eye to eye here on these boards as our opinions differ widely. I do want to listen to what you have to say and frequently enjoy what you have to say. :)

But please stop telling me and others like me that we're wrong.

What the heck makes you so right?

arctangent
11-17-2003, 10:22 AM
you all seem to have forgotten that the five star wars films released so far and the sixth one due in 2005 are JUST FILMS. they have been made for people's ENTERTAINMENT! you go the the cinema and for a couple of hours you are in a galaxy far far away. why overanalyse them? everyone has their own opinions and views of characters which are all equally valid but at the end of the day if you analyse any film or series of films you will find holes in the plotlines and continuity errors in the storyline (there is a fantastically basic story error in T3 that means that john connor wasn't born until after the war against the machines, thus rendering either the whole of T2 or T3 wrong but it doesn't stop you being entertained by the film). does it really matter? is there any joy left in the films for a fan when they are analysed to the nth degree? stop thinking about the films so much and just enjoy them.

billfremore
11-17-2003, 11:02 AM
I agree with you. I think overanalyzing anything takes the fun out of it.

But I'm not overanalyzing, I'm defending my right to have my own opinion.

stillakid
11-17-2003, 11:11 AM
I do understand what you were suggesting, all I really wanted was for you to admit that what you were saying is your opinion and not the "truth"
All I wanted was for you to admit that you realize that you are choosing to interpret the story as you wish despite evidence to the contrary. :)


I realize that you and I have never really seen eye to eye here on these boards as our opinions differ widely. I do want to listen to what you have to say and frequently enjoy what you have to say. :)

Thank you. As much as it doesn't seem so, I do listen to what others say and frequently try to incorporate differing points of view when applicable. It's just that in this case (the Lying through His Teeth Obi Wan scenario), there isn't any leeway for "opinions" or "interpretation." George's intentions for that character and his motivations are pretty cut and dried and the screenplays and films spell it out pretty clearly. Truly, Obi Wan had plenty of reason to lie to Luke as it could be beneficial and ultimately get the kid involved in the conflict, so the theory that Obi Wan is lying to Luke at that point (in ANH) certainly could seem valid as long as you don't look to closely at the rest of the story. But the fact is that the rest of what happens...what Obi Wan says and does...all lead to the idea that he wasn't lying even one bit.

He REALLY believed that Anakin was DEAD. Yes, it definitely helped the greater cause to not give Luke all the gory details at that point in the kid's naive young life, but it still wasn't lying...withholding details isn't the same thing. It would have not benefited the Rebellion for Luke to be angry with Obi Wan at that point, especially (as we're learning in the Prequels) when it is becoming very clear that it wasn't Obi Wan's fault at all. Anakin Skywalker is just a big crybaby who doesn't get his way. Obi had nothing to feel guilty about at all, but, as others have suggested correctly, at that point, Luke most likely wouldn't have understood the subtle nuances of what Obi Wan was telling him and then wouldn't have followed him into the conflict and maybe would have gone looking for his long lost daddy. But as we all know, and as Obi Wan surely did, that kind of effort would have been in vain and Luke would have either wound up dead or turned to the Darkside.

So, yeah, Obi Wan certainly had motivation to lie to Luke, but the plain and simple truth is that he didn't...and more importantly, he didn't have to. Serendipitousy they ran into the burned out Sandcrawler which then led Luke back home to find that the Empire's icy grip had destroyed his hearth & home security blanket. Obi didn't have to lie to get Luke on the plane...the Empire (Vader himself, really) did that job for him.



But please stop telling me and others like me that we're wrong.

What the heck makes you so right?

Careful examination of the filmmaking process aided by years of personal and professional experience within the industry itself. As "arctangent" suggests, some people are content with not delving very deeply into the story at all and enjoy the splashy effects and cool stuff just fine. I have chosen to not do that. My "fandom" extends beyond the toy collecting (which is a sickness in and of itself :rolleyes: ...my wife would just as soon I quit ;) ) and into the finer points of the screenplays and the filmmaking process, which is what I do for a living. I don't know what you do for a living, but it would be a safe assumption that you could run circles around me in explaining what it is and how to do it. I'd probably have a million questions about why you do things a certain way which you could then roll your eyes at me about and tell me to just sit back and let you do your job. :)

Look, art is art, so much of it is open for some amount of interpretation, but honestly, most writers sit down with some very specific ideas about what a character is supposed to do for a story and what things are supposed to mean. Can an audience impose their own personal interpretations upon everything the artist does? Of course. Does that make them right? No, not always.

So, to get back to the original question, will Episode III "suck?" Well, that's definitely an matter of opinion. For instance, while I "thought" that the dialogue for Anakin in AOTC pretty much sucked and was a major contribution to that film's problems, other people like Caesar heard the same dialogue and enjoyed it. Taste is on thing, character motivation and plot development is something else, which is where I try to contain the vast majority of my discussion as it is rather pointless to go in circles about "opinions."

billfremore
11-17-2003, 11:24 AM
We are talking in circles. :)

You think I'm wrong, I think you're wrong. No amount of posts or typing is going to make the other person agree with the other.

I say let's agree to disagree.

Fair enough?

arctangent
11-18-2003, 03:26 AM
I agree with you. I think overanalyzing anything takes the fun out of it.

But I'm not overanalyzing, I'm defending my right to have my own opinion.

your opinions are yours bill and you shouldn't have to justify them to anyone - everyone has a right to their own opinions. i have my own opinions on this matter and i don't give a monkeys uncle what anyone else thinks of them.

its just that you and stillakid are going round in circles. you are just going to have to agree to differ on this one as there is only one person who actually knows the motives behind everyone's actions and he is busy making episode iii.

2-1B
11-18-2003, 03:38 AM
its just that you and stillakid are going round in circles. you are just going to have to agree to differ on this one as there is only one person who actually knows the motives behind everyone's actions and he is busy making episode iii.

Indeed . . . I'm sure Rick McCallum will clue us all in when he gets time from his busy schedule. :p :p :p :p :p :p :p :p

billfremore
11-18-2003, 08:14 AM
your opinions are yours bill and you shouldn't have to justify them to anyone - everyone has a right to their own opinions. i have my own opinions on this matter and i don't give a monkeys uncle what anyone else thinks of them.

its just that you and stillakid are going round in circles. you are just going to have to agree to differ on this one as there is only one person who actually knows the motives behind everyone's actions and he is busy making episode iii.

See my post above

Thanks for trying to play peacemaker. :)

arctangent
11-18-2003, 08:46 AM
See my post above

Thanks for trying to play peacemaker. :)

no probs bill. this is supposed to be fun after all.

billfremore
11-18-2003, 09:17 AM
no probs bill. this is supposed to be fun after all.

Agreed, but sometimes we do get a little heated in here. That always happens when you get people with differing opinions and stubborn attitudes (like mine :))

stillakid
11-18-2003, 10:47 PM
We are talking in circles. :)

You think I'm wrong, I think you're wrong. No amount of posts or typing is going to make the other person agree with the other.

I say let's agree to disagree.

Fair enough?


Sure, but I'm not trying to convince you to change your opinion. I'm just telling you what I feel very confidently is the truth. It's up to each individual to decide for themselves what they are going to believe it or not. If there's anything I've learned in this 30-some years of mine is that you can't ever really change a person's mind once they've made the choice to have one viewpoint or another. Even when hard and fast evidence is tossed on the table (whatever the topic), people will still find a way to "spin" it so that their pet-opinion remains intact. So believe what you want to. I honestly don't care. In fact, whatever you choose to "interpret" is fine with me so long as you enjoy the hobby that much more. :)

Back in the day when religion was a fair topic of discussion, I asked one of the resident born-again Christians the question, if God Himself came down today and told you that you were wrong and I was right, would you then believe me? His answer was "no." Why? Because he figured that if somebody (even supernatural) did that, it would have to be the Devil because he knew that he was right and I was wrong. Can you believe that? This born-again Christian would tell God Himself that he was full of sh**. See, I don't think, in this case, that if George Himself appeared on SSG and told everyone that Stillakid was right about it all that anyone would believe him. People are too wrapped up in their "interpretations" that enable the saga to remain enjoyable, for if they saw fallibility in any of it, the high gloss sheen would tarnish quickly and the fantasy would come crashing down. It's kind of like when Wile Coyote runs off the cliff, but doesn't fall until he realizes where he really is...It's that sudden awakening to the harsh reality which spells certain doom. Look, I'm all for rationalization if that's what ultimately makes someone happy, just so long as they realize that that is what they are doing.

2-1B
11-19-2003, 02:38 AM
Having watched 8 chapters of the goofy Clone Wars, I now realize that Episode III could not possibly be remotely as bad as the cartoon so I'm not worried about being disappointed anymore. :D

arctangent
11-19-2003, 03:15 AM
People are too wrapped up in their "interpretations" that enable the saga to remain enjoyable, for if they saw fallibility in any of it, the high gloss sheen would tarnish quickly and the fantasy would come crashing down.

and you are not wrapped up in your own "interpretation"? what makes your interpretation more valid that anyone else's? unless, of course, you are george lucas in disguise.

2-1B
11-19-2003, 04:44 AM
See, I don't think, in this case, that if George Himself appeared on SSG and told everyone that Stillakid was right about it all that anyone would believe him. People are too wrapped up in their "interpretations" that enable the saga to remain enjoyable, for if they saw fallibility in any of it, the high gloss sheen would tarnish quickly and the fantasy would come crashing down.

Easy there, that's a broad statement (and overly dramatic). I think I am like most "prequel lovers" in that we are honest about what we like, what we don't like, and WHY we do or do not like it. In all of my loving posts about AOTC, I've taken it to task on several points I don't like about it. I'm not saying that your description up there doesn't apply to anybody, I just mean that you shouldn't use that to prop up your reasons as to why many people don't agree with your views. :)
Some people feel the need to defend the movies at every turn but in my experience, most people are able to enjoy the fantasy while still finding some fallible elements.

And besides, if George Lucas DID come down from On High and told YOU, stillakid, that YOU are "wrong", well I'm quite certain that you would be the first to tell Lucas he doesn't know what he's talking about. :p

;)

billfremore
11-19-2003, 08:24 AM
Sure, but I'm not trying to convince you to change your opinion. I'm just telling you what I feel very confidently is the truth. It's up to each individual to decide for themselves what they are going to believe it or not. If there's anything I've learned in this 30-some years of mine is that you can't ever really change a person's mind once they've made the choice to have one viewpoint or another. Even when hard and fast evidence is tossed on the table (whatever the topic), people will still find a way to "spin" it so that their pet-opinion remains intact. So believe what you want to. I honestly don't care. In fact, whatever you choose to "interpret" is fine with me so long as you enjoy the hobby that much more. :)

I feel like I'm being baited here :)

But I choose not to argue.

stillakid
11-19-2003, 11:13 PM
And besides, if George Lucas DID come down from On High and told YOU, stillakid, that YOU are "wrong", well I'm quite certain that you would be the first to tell Lucas he doesn't know what he's talking about. :p

;)


:D Quite possibly. :) I highly suspect that if the opportunity arose in which to discuss these matters with Mr. Lucas himself, I would encounter the same kind of rationalizations presented by others. What are you going to do. :rolleyes:



and you are not wrapped up in your own "interpretation"? what makes your interpretation more valid that anyone else's? unless, of course, you are george lucas in disguise.

No, I'm not "interpreting." I'm "evaluating." There is a difference. :) So my "interpretations" are definitely not more valid than anyone else's. But in regard to some of the things we talk about here, not everything is open for wild random interpretation despite the many claims to the contrary. Some story points are specific. Of course, the viewer is free to ignore whatever he/she wishes, but it doesn't change the intended purpose of the artist. To prove my point, I'll use myself as a prime example. I now choose to view the Prequels as derivative Expanded Universe material. Of course, I recognize that George himself doesn't see it that way so I am essentially wrong in my "interpretation." (Despite the proof that supports my viewpoint, but that's a different discussion).

stillakid
11-19-2003, 11:19 PM
I feel like I'm being baited here :)

But I choose not to argue.


For the record, I don't bait anyone. It's your choice to respond or not. I'd just as soon you agree with me and call it a day. :D

2-1B
11-20-2003, 01:25 AM
stillakid's always been a master baiter. :)

Just so we're all clear, stillakid, you quoted arctangent up there but my name is attached to his quote. Just wanted to clear that up. :)

arctangent
11-20-2003, 03:00 AM
stillakid's always been a master baiter. :)

Just so we're all clear, stillakid, you quoted arctangent up there but my name is attached to his quote. Just wanted to clear that up. :)

nice one. i like that first line! and that was my quote about interpretations. i chose the word 'interpretation' because that was the word that stillakid used in the post that i was replying to. the word evaluate actually means 'to find a numerical expression for' so to use it in the context of analysing and debating star wars is gramatically incorrect.

and stillakids comment about people accepting that he is right only goes to show he has no respect for anyone who's opinions don't match his own.

stillakid
11-20-2003, 10:44 AM
nice one. i like that first line! and that was my quote about interpretations. i chose the word 'interpretation' because that was the word that stillakid used in the post that i was replying to. the word evaluate actually means 'to find a numerical expression for' so to use it in the context of analysing and debating star wars is gramatically incorrect.
e·val·u·ate ( P ) Pronunciation Key (-vly-t)
tr.v. e·val·u·at·ed, e·val·u·at·ing, e·val·u·ates
To ascertain or fix the value or worth of.
To examine and judge carefully; appraise.

You're wrong. Try again. :)


and stillakids comment about people accepting that he is right only goes to show he has no respect for anyone who's opinions don't match his own.
I wholeheartedly am offended by that assumption. :mad: That was a flippant comment (by me) and I would have expected you to read it as such. I even almost changed it to be clearly, because I feared such a misunderstanding, but I had more faith that it would be taken in the proper manner.
That was a mistake of assumption on my part.

You are confusing what is fact with what is fodder for opinion. Fact can be backed by proof, which I have done repeatedly regarding several points. Opinion is the only option available when the topic is subjective. For instance, the whole "was Obi Wan Anakin's teacher as described in the OT" thing is a topic which can be discussed based on facts. On the other hand, my other question regarding whether they were "good friends" is a question of opinion because the definition of "good friend" will vary between individuals. I implore you to recognize the difference and cease the personal attacks. I have every respect for opinions which vary from my own when indeed the topic has room for such interpretation. But someday, you'll have to come to terms with the concept that there are hard and fast truths whether you like them or not.

Look, this is all fluff anyhow so on the grand scale of things, who gives a sh**? :rolleyes: ;) But like I've said before, I can't understand the continual need that people have to prop up George and his decisions (right or wrong). I know that you don't see it as that. You claim that George made RED and that's what you choose to see. I see that George made BLUE but is calling it RED. Some other people seem to have conceded a bit and say that George may have made BURGUNDY which requires a little bit of rationalization to see it as RED and that's okay with them. But it's the continual insistence that there is nothing wrong with the films and/or George's choices that is both confusing and to a certain extent, disturbing. If a character says he did something in the past, then the filmmaker then uses a flashback (or a Prequel) to actually show that past, then one should logically expect that the two events will match. When they don't, isn't it fair to call him on it? Or should we all be expected to "wiggle" our "interpretations" enough so that we give him the benefit of the doubt? If so, why?

stillakid
11-20-2003, 11:06 AM
stillakid's always been a master baiter. :)

Just so we're all clear, stillakid, you quoted arctangent up there but my name is attached to his quote. Just wanted to clear that up. :)


Sorry about that. It only goes to show that I am not infallible. :) I've edited the post so that it is now correct.

And still, I do not "bait" people. Don't care, really. Questions are asked, I respond, and others choose to take issue with them, so I further expand on my thoughts when asked. Eventually, when it becomes clear that I'm not backing down and the rose colored view of the saga is in danger of being scuffed up, the personal attacks begin. Kill the messenger in other words. But we've all been through this before. The pattern is well established and I'm getting used to it. :)

Maybe it would make everyone happy if I suddenly did agree that everything was open for wild interpretation! :cool: How about if I said that I thought that Sy Snootles was obviously a Rebel Spy. By arctangent's definition, that's a fair and accurate interpretation. I don't even have to back up my interpretation with any facts. I can't possibly be wrong. Or even better, what if I choose to interpret that lil' Ani really hated his mother. He left her there to remain in slavery, didn't he? I mean, how could he really love her that much if he just chooses to go pursue fame and fortune? How could my interpretation possibly be wrong? It's all fair game, right? In art, there are no hard and fast truths and if believing that Anakin hated his mother makes the whole story work in my mind, then where's the error in that? Clearly George left that possibility open because he never really comes out and says that Anakin didn't hate his mother in TPM. What about this one: Qui Gon knocked up Schmi. It wasn't an Immaculate Conception parallel at all. Even if we don't see any mention of this in Episode III, it's still possible that Qui Gon sneaked onto Tatooine, found some random slave and impregnated her with the express knowledge that he would become so chock full o' Midichlorians that he would eventually become a savior. That's a fair interpretation so long as it makes sense to me. Right? Right?

Beast
11-20-2003, 12:57 PM
No one is attacking you Stillakid. We're attacking your attitude. Instead of just stating your opinions, you present them in a manner that is holier then thou. And present them as fact, when there is a lot of interpretations to the so called facts. It's not a case of rose colored glasses. If that was true, those of us that present pro-prequel arguments wouldn't be able to find any flaws at all in any of the films.

And that's BS, because there are things about all the films in the saga that many of us don't like. Like the fact I think that ANH is the worst film in the saga. It's not rose colored glasses, and to say that it is, is evidence that you don't even consider anyone that likes the prequels as having anything beyond a corrupted opinion, and being Lucas worshipers. Sorry Stilla, that's why people get so ticked off at you.

There's no wild interpretation on our parts, and for you to say there is, is wild interpretation as well. We use on-screen evidence, just as you do, to lend credibility to our arguments about our opinions. Whether you agree with them or not, is not the point. The point is, your opinions are no more or less valid then anyone elses. But that is exactly the way you come off, as if your opinions are fact on stone tablets from on high.

As for your smart arsed comments about there being proof that Anakin hated his mother. Now were just being silly. I know your trying to be a wise arse, cause that's how you feel were coming to these conclusions. But there is plenty of evidence that he loved her. But since your just being snarky, I'll save my comments.

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

2-1B
11-20-2003, 01:10 PM
stillakid, I wasn't seriously accusing you of baiting . . . I just wanted to take the opportunity to call you a master baiter. :D

stillakid
11-20-2003, 10:53 PM
No one is attacking you Stillakid. We're attacking your attitude. Instead of just stating your opinions, you present them in a manner that is holier then thou. And present them as fact, when there is a lot of interpretations to the so called facts. It's not a case of rose colored glasses. If that was true, those of us that present pro-prequel arguments wouldn't be able to find any flaws at all in any of the films.

And that's BS, because there are things about all the films in the saga that many of us don't like. Like the fact I think that ANH is the worst film in the saga. It's not rose colored glasses, and to say that it is, is evidence that you don't even consider anyone that likes the prequels as having anything beyond a corrupted opinion, and being Lucas worshipers. Sorry Stilla, that's why people get so ticked off at you.

There's no wild interpretation on our parts, and for you to say there is, is wild interpretation as well. We use on-screen evidence, just as you do, to lend credibility to our arguments about our opinions. Whether you agree with them or not, is not the point. The point is, your opinions are no more or less valid then anyone elses. But that is exactly the way you come off, as if your opinions are fact on stone tablets from on high.

As for your smart arsed comments about there being proof that Anakin hated his mother. Now were just being silly. I know your trying to be a wise arse, cause that's how you feel were coming to these conclusions. But there is plenty of evidence that he loved her. But since your just being snarky, I'll save my comments.

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

No, I wasn't being snarky, whatever that means. I was being entirely serious. You are suggesting that anything and everything written or filmed is open for valid interpretation. I'm telling you that you're wrong. I can even prove it right here.

You just got done saying:

We're attacking your attitude.
See, I just looked up the word attitude and remembered that the definition is

The orientation of an aircraft's axes relative to a reference line or plane, such as the horizon.


So clearly, you have a problem with the way I'm steering my airplane. What that has to do with any of this discussion, I can't tell, but I'll let you know that I have to keep this airplane going in this direction or else I'll hit those mountains off in the distance.

So, was my "interpretation" of your statement correct or not? Or are you willing to admit that there are absolutes on occasion when it comes to someone's intentions? For if that is true, then I'll take your concession and assume that you now are calling your own viewpoint "fact" based on your own evaluation of the evidence. But now suddenly, you will have become me and won't have that argument to fall back on anymore. You'll have to purely rely on the strength and validity of your own evidence to support your claims and viewpoints, which is really the discussion I'd like to have anyhow. Instead of merely shrugging off my "point of view" by choosing to define it as "opinion," why not state your own conclusions and back them up with a mountain of evidence? See, because you either haven't or can't, it has become far easier to attack me personally and my "approach" than deal with the topic(s) themselves.

stillakid
11-20-2003, 10:54 PM
stillakid, I wasn't seriously accusing you of baiting . . . I just wanted to take the opportunity to call you a master baiter. :D

Yes, it's true. But I'll have you know that I am also a cunning linguist. :p

Tycho
11-21-2003, 12:13 AM
Can we talk about religion and politics now?

arctangent
11-21-2003, 03:55 AM
e·val·u·ate ( P ) Pronunciation Key (-vly-t)
tr.v. e·val·u·at·ed, e·val·u·at·ing, e·val·u·ates
To ascertain or fix the value or worth of.
To examine and judge carefully; appraise.

You're wrong. Try again. :)

actually stilla, i am not wrong. my definition of evaluate came from the concise oxford english dictionary, which reads: evaluate, v.t. Ascertain amount of; find numerical expression for. So -ation n.

i am not launching an attack on you. i just don't like your attitude towards other people and their views.



I wholeheartedly am offended by that assumption. :mad: That was a flippant comment (by me) and I would have expected you to read it as such. I even almost changed it to be clearly, because I feared such a misunderstanding, but I had more faith that it would be taken in the proper manner.
That was a mistake of assumption on my part.

i am not launching a personal attack on you. i just don't like your attitude towards other people and their views. if your comments were meant to be flippant i didn't spot it because all of your posts seem to be written in that vein and read the same way. i view all the star wars films as entertainment. by analysing everything to the nth degree, you seem to be attempting to suck all the enjoyment out of these films.

2-1B
11-21-2003, 04:34 AM
Can we talk about religion and politics now?

Sure !

I want George to run for Governor against Arnold. Rick will be his Lieutenant Gov. :)

George will insert Life Day into California's state consitution and you must all kneel before the Holiday Special twice yearly. :)
Bea Arthur will be our deity.
Worship her.

arctangent
11-21-2003, 05:21 AM
QUOTE=stillakid]See, I just looked up the word attitude and remembered that the definition is

The orientation of an aircraft's axes relative to a reference line or plane, such as the horizon.
[/QUOTE]

you seem to berate me, stillakid for questioning your use of the word evaluation (although i have stated that the definition i gave is the only one in my dictionary) and now you are doing the same thing. in common useage and dictionary definition attitude means:

disposition of figure, position of body (as in strike an... ), settled behaviour indicating opinion, settled mode of thinking, posture.

like your views on certain issues regarding star wars, you have taken one piece of meaning and ignored other equally valid meanings in an attempt to belittle someone. and yet you don't like it when it is done to you.

stillakid
11-22-2003, 11:38 AM
QUOTE=stillakid]like your views on certain issues regarding star wars, you have taken one piece of meaning and ignored other equally valid meanings in an attempt to belittle someone. and yet you don't like it when it is done to you.


You are entirely correct in saying that any one thing can be viewed from a variety of different points of view, whether it be a scene in a film or the definition of a word.

What I'm getting at is that while there may be 2 or a hundred possible "definitions" or "interpretations," typically only one (1) is correct within the given context of its usage.

So, while one might look at that "attitude" sentence and clearly see JJB's actual meaning, I facetiously was taking your side and implying that ALL the available definitions are valid, when clearly they are not.

In the same way, one might look at this issue of whether Obi Wan was lying in ANH and suggest that he was or was not, while arguments can be made for both, only one true possibility exists. Clearly, the only way to really know for certain which is the true point of view is to ask George, or Willard Huyck or Gloria Katz, but because that option is not readily available to us, we are forced to look at and evaluate the material itself. And I use the term evaluate in exactly the sense you implied earlier. Certain events and statements are quantifiable within the context of the entire story in order to lead to the most likely conclusion. I think that you are assuming that I haven't at least considered the other options (regarding many of the "controversial" questions) before reaching my conclusions, but I indeed have. Often times, they can be dismissed rather quickly, at others it might take a little more "nitpicking" as JJB likes to call it.

Either way, I know that most writers attempt to say very specific things with their work and to imply that everything said and done is open for valid interpretation by those who read (or see) it is just incorrect. The viewer may make the conscious choice to interpret something in a way other than the intended meaning in order to appease their own requirements for enjoyment or what have you, but it doesn't make it "correct" in terms of the author's original intent.

arctangent
11-25-2003, 04:26 AM
stillakid, i have not seen you present much irrefutable evidence to back up what you say, you are still only stating your opinions, which are as valid as any one else's and you obviously put a lot of thought into them, but they are still only YOUR opinions. as you say, only the author knows exactly what was meant so anything else is pure conjecture, unless, of course, something is stated in the films as an absolute fact, ie 'the millenium falcon did the kessel run in less than twelve parsecs'.

Beast
11-25-2003, 10:55 AM
They explained away the Kessel Run thing though, even though we know it was originally a mistake. The Kessel system has an area of space that contains a lot of black holes. So most ships have to take a path around them. Han actually flew through the area, cutting his travel time down to twelve parsecs. Let's go to the Jedi Council, and the head librarian, Jocasta Nu for the details. :)

Q: Han claims that the Falcon made the Kessel Run in less than 12 parsecs -- but a parsec is a unit of distance, not time. What's the deal?

A: While Captain Solo is known to make boastful claims that seem to defy the basic laws of space-time physics, in this particular case, an understanding of the mechanics of the Kessel Run illuminates this statistic.

The Kessel Run is a contest of speed and endurance for smugglers. Those who undertake it must deliver specified cargos (usually illicit in nature) to a series of divergently moving transport vessels. The smuggler must deliver the cargo before the transports wander out of the free trade lanes into restricted Imperial space.

Solo's record is impressive, since the transport vessels covered less than 12 parsecs of distance during his hurried run between them, a testament to his piloting and the speed of the Millennium Falcon.

There is more than one way to smuggle spice out of Kessel. According to one tale, Solo left out the middleman and ferried the stolen goods himself, skirting dangerously close to the Maw Cluster, a baffling congregation of black holes. In doing so, he shortened the distance for the run, achieving an impressive record of under 12 parsecs.

Using either methodology allows Solo's claim to stand, but there are many, including the Jedi Obi-Wan Kenobi, who felt that the Corellian captain was just blowing hot air.
http://www.starwars.com/community/askjc/jocasta/askjc20020221.html

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

stillakid
11-25-2003, 10:35 PM
stillakid, i have not seen you present much irrefutable evidence to back up what you say, you are still only stating your opinions, which are as valid as any one else's and you obviously put a lot of thought into them, but they are still only YOUR opinions. as you say, only the author knows exactly what was meant so anything else is pure conjecture, unless, of course, something is stated in the films as an absolute fact, ie 'the millenium falcon did the kessel run in less than twelve parsecs'.


Our problem is with the defining of terms. I'm not simply stating random opinions. I'm stating the most likely conclusions based on evaluation of factual evidence from the films and scripts themselves. So, if you want to consider the idea that nothing could ever be considered a fact (ie. like "life" itself, because we can't ever really talk to our own creator) then sure, I'll bite and say that EVERYTHING is open for interpretation and anything ever said constitutes an "opinion." But I'm more optimistic than that and feel that if a given argument can be supported through to a most likely conclusion with the most obvious "interpretations" of the factual evidence, then that most likely conclusion is most likely the "fact of the matter," even if the "creator" isn't available to talk about it. So as it stands, for many many months now I've left a trail of posts strewn across SSG which contain the evolution of my conclusions, which, I might add, many others have agreed with. So if you're looking for me to repeat myself, I apologize because I just don't have the time to run through all the topics and dig out the "proofs" all over again. The "irrefutable" evidence is sitting right there, but it is IMPOSSIBLE to see if you don't wish to believe it because it doesn't agree with what you want to believe.

arctangent
11-26-2003, 04:14 AM
Our problem is with the defining of terms. I'm not simply stating random opinions. I'm stating the most likely conclusions based on evaluation of factual evidence from the films and scripts themselves. So, if you want to consider the idea that nothing could ever be considered a fact (ie. like "life" itself, because we can't ever really talk to our own creator) then sure, I'll bite and say that EVERYTHING is open for interpretation and anything ever said constitutes an "opinion." But I'm more optimistic than that and feel that if a given argument can be supported through to a most likely conclusion with the most obvious "interpretations" of the factual evidence, then that most likely conclusion is most likely the "fact of the matter," even if the "creator" isn't available to talk about it. So as it stands, for many many months now I've left a trail of posts strewn across SSG which contain the evolution of my conclusions, which, I might add, many others have agreed with. So if you're looking for me to repeat myself, I apologize because I just don't have the time to run through all the topics and dig out the "proofs" all over again. The "irrefutable" evidence is sitting right there, but it is IMPOSSIBLE to see if you don't wish to believe it because it doesn't agree with what you want to believe.

as you have managed to prove on the 'anakin not seen as vader' thread you do not examine evidence, you ignore facts that are right in front of you in the actual lines spoken in the films and you twist what people write to suit your own view point, whilst missing the actual point they are trying to make.

as i said in that thread, debating with you is an excercise in futility. you bang on about evaluating and examining evidence and ignoring what is right in front of you. you talk about 'irrefutable' evidence but when you wish to ignore such evidence because it does not agree with what YOU believe is right, what do you do? you ignore it. so i am afraid you are no different to the people who you look down on.

stillakid
11-26-2003, 12:12 PM
as you have managed to prove on the 'anakin not seen as vader' thread you do not examine evidence, you ignore facts that are right in front of you in the actual lines spoken in the films and you twist what people write to suit your own view point, whilst missing the actual point they are trying to make.
.


Wha..>!? How on earth did you come up with that conclusion? Just because I refuse to believe in your interpretions and conclusions? :confused: I DO examine evidence, I DON'T ignore facts and DON'T twist anything. It is impossible for me to back anyone into a corner that they themselves haven't walked into of their own volition. I definitely DO see the points that people are trying to make and DON'T deny the fact that with a certain amount of willingness to justify and rationalize, those points of view can be construed as acceptable. I don't choose to take that path, but that doesn't mean that I'm outright ignoring what other people are saying. This isn't a ****ing contest of who's right and who's wrong. You are saying that you choose to view the story in one way, I choose another. That's all. Enjoy it any way you see fit.

Beast
11-26-2003, 12:21 PM
Damn, wrong thread. Never mind me. :D

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

arctangent
11-27-2003, 03:46 AM
Wha..>!? How on earth did you come up with that conclusion? Just because I refuse to believe in your interpretions and conclusions? :confused: I DO examine evidence, I DON'T ignore facts and DON'T twist anything. It is impossible for me to back anyone into a corner that they themselves haven't walked into of their own volition. I definitely DO see the points that people are trying to make and DON'T deny the fact that with a certain amount of willingness to justify and rationalize, those points of view can be construed as acceptable. I don't choose to take that path, but that doesn't mean that I'm outright ignoring what other people are saying. This isn't a ****ing contest of who's right and who's wrong. You are saying that you choose to view the story in one way, I choose another. That's all. Enjoy it any way you see fit.

oooh, thanks, mr condescending, i will.

billfremore
11-27-2003, 10:39 AM
Don't make me get the hose out for you two... :)

stillakid
11-27-2003, 12:03 PM
oooh, thanks, mr condescending, i will.

I'm sorry you "interpreted" that last post as "condescending." It wasn't in the slightest, but it only goes to show how easily an "audience" can take things the wrong way when they want to without realizing it. :)

arctangent
11-28-2003, 03:16 AM
I'm sorry you "interpreted" that last post as "condescending." It wasn't in the slightest, but it only goes to show how easily an "audience" can take things the wrong way when they want to without realizing it. :)

sorry, its how you come across. i am sure you are a lovely person really!

stillakid
11-28-2003, 12:37 PM
sorry, its how you come across. i am sure you are a lovely person really!


Believe me, I'm the first person to recognize that I come across as an arrogant sob sometimes. I do try to temper the delivery, but I do find that when I refuse to back down, that's when the problems start. It isn't because of how I'm saying something, it's what I'm saying that bothers people.