PDA

View Full Version : Free us or Die



Kidhuman
05-16-2004, 01:16 PM
Ok. I have watched agll three OT movies the last two days, so I have gall these things running through my mind.

Luke, calling himself a Jedi Knight in ROTJ, knowing what he learned from Yoda, tells Jabba "Free us or Die".

Yoda told Luke, a Jedi's weapon is his lightsaber. It is used for defense, not murder(attacking). Luke knew fully that Jedi were peace keepers. He pretty much planned the whole rescue of Han from Jabba's Palace. He had to know that the plan might end up in violence. So, he pre-meditated murder, a trait of the Dark Side. Luke started down that pgath in ROTJ with this, and he came really, regally close at the end of the movie. The only difference was he was able to stop short of Killing his Dad.

Anakin also pre-meditated murder when he killed the Tuskens after his Mom Died. It wasnt like he was trying to get away and had to fight his way out, he basically went out there and slaughtered them. he says so(in a horrible acting scene).

So, basically what I am saying is Yoda also said, once you start on the path of the Dark Side, you can not turn back. Luke started going down the path, does he turn back? or does he keep going. I know in EU he goes to the dark side and returns again, but what do you think of this mentally unstable boy we have grown to love called Luke Skywalker?

stillakid
05-16-2004, 01:46 PM
I've talked about this before. A friend of mine had a great insight along the lines you talk about above. It all depends on how seriously you take the line "Once you start down the darkpath, forever will it dominate your destiny."

Without a doubt, Luke started down the darkpath. Some might argue that his tossing the lightsaber aside and facing the possibility of martyrdom indicates the existence of free will and one's ability to change an apparent destiny. It certainly makes for dramatic fiction.

However, I'm personally of the belief that a person's fundamental nature cannot be altered. Essentially, once a jerk, always a jerk or whatever. So while Luke's intentions may be on the side of good, it's in his nature to take the shortcuts and dream of adventure and excitement just as Yoda said upon their first meeting.

So while ROTJ certainly ended giving us this impression that Luke had stopped the cycle of evil that might have plagued his bloodline, if we take that line about the darkpath seriously, it doesn't take much of a stretch to suggest that Luke's future would be one of unintentional evil. How so? Remember, Luke feels strongly that he is on the side of good throughout the Original Trilogy and rightfully so. But he is clearly positioned to take a lead role in the rebuilding of the Republic at the close of Episode VI. Being all-powerful with political strength and the desire to do away with the "opposing side" presents the temptation to do whatever it takes to achieve the end goal. So seemingly, just as Anakin supposedly feels that he indeed is on the "right" side of things, Luke could very well be blinded to the reality of his own actions merely because his ultimate goal is perceived as being good for all.

So anyway, if the saga did continue with this mindset, the only possible conclusion would put Leia in the position of having to stop Luke. He of course wouldn't really understand why she would do such a thing as his goals are the same as hers, but the method is the thing that is in question. War begets war and evil begets evil. Therefore the only path to stopping the cycle of evil in the Skywalker family is for Leia to illustrate her devotion to the cause of peace by achieving true martyrdom by Luke's blade. Only then, after the terrible deed had been done, would Luke see the path that he is on and realize that he travelled that dark path, however unintentionally. His only choice at that point would be to join his sister in death to show the galaxy just how committed to peace he was.

A bleak ending to the saga for sure, especially given the genre. But just as real life leaders like Jesus and Gandhi taught so well, the only way to true peace and justice is not through conflict. To lead by example is the ultimate way to a kind of utopia.

2-1B
05-16-2004, 04:19 PM
kidhuman, Luke did not in any way murder anybody in ROTJ. Yes, a lightsaber is for defense and how was it not being used in that way ? :confused: His friend was being held captive in a torturous way. He tried to make a deal with Jabba to free Han and when that attempt and even the "last chance" on the skiff were refused, Luke had no choice but to kill in defense of himself and his friends.

Anakin's AOTC slaughter of the Tuskens was not premeditated murder. Premeditation is often thought of as being "cold blooded" in that it requires conspiracy and the execution of that plan. Anakin just lost his mother and his rampage was in a fit of rage. At worst, it was 2nd degree murder. However, the point you made is just the same in that he went overboard in his use of the Force.
Luke did not start down the dark path with the Jabba scenario. It started when he began to use his anger while striking at Vader. Luke is in no way "destined" to continue down that path. He didn't even kill anybody !
Anakin, however, DID use his anger to slaughter those Tuskens and it is obviously a component in his fall to the darkside. Luke didn't even go NEARLY that far.

stillakid, we disagree that a person's fundamental nature can't be altered and that's fine. But I'm surprised that you cited Jesus in your post when one of that guy's main points was that people CAN change. :confused:

Kidhuman
05-16-2004, 05:21 PM
His plan included putting a lightsaber in R2. Why? Because if he was backed into a corner he would have to fight agnd kill people to get his friends out of there. If he didnt hagve to fight, then he wouldnt of used it. I believe Luke saw the vision of what would happen and where then "end" supposedly was to take place for him and his crew. How else would R2 know to be on Jabbas deck at that precise moment? It was all planned out thagt way, so he knew he would have to kill people and didnt have a problem doing it either.

dr_evazan22
05-16-2004, 06:27 PM
Not to get off subject, but I don't think R2 'knew' to be there at that exact time. I think R2 may've been programmed to get Luke's saber to him in case of an emergency. R2's being right there was more convenient story telling, IMO. R2 would've had to have influenced Ev-9D9 for the bartending position (since Luke obviously told R2 about his vision and how it would turn out).

I don't recall seeing Luke take any shortcuts in the movies. I do remember him saying something could be done when everyone else was saying it couldn't; I remember him going above and beyond his duty in securing Echo Base; and exemplafying (sp?) himself in combat and leading the more experienced pilots in the final run.

I also don't agree that Luke was trying to squash any opposition to the Alliance. He started out wanting to avenge his father, who was murdered by Vader. Then Luke discovers that the Empire, of which Vader is repersentative of, has murdered his only family (Owen and Beru). Other then trying to stop the tyranny and murder of the Empire, what opposition was he crushing?

C, I agree with your assessments of the Jabba situation and Ani's slaughter of the Tuskens.

2-1B
05-16-2004, 07:52 PM
His plan included putting a lightsaber in R2. Why? Because if he was backed into a corner he would have to fight agnd kill people to get his friends out of there. If he didnt hagve to fight, then he wouldnt of used it. I believe Luke saw the vision of what would happen and where then "end" supposedly was to take place for him and his crew. How else would R2 know to be on Jabbas deck at that precise moment? It was all planned out thagt way, so he knew he would have to kill people and didnt have a problem doing it either.


And ? :confused:

So what if he knew that he would probably have to kill ? That's not the point. The point is that he was ready to kill in defense of his friend. Just as a Jedi is allowed to do. :confused:

Was he supposed to just let Han die ? :confused:

B'Omarr Monkey
05-16-2004, 07:55 PM
Clearly Anakin was redeemed and seen standing among Yoda and Obi-Wan at the end of ROTJ, so that permanant attachment to the Dark Side might be a little scare tactic to use against the Padawans, or it could be like being an alcoholic. You may be sober for 30 years, but you are still an alcoholic.

Anyway, Luke was a pretty goody-two-shoes kind of guy, despite his choice in wardrobe. After all, why else would he have made a lightsaber that could pass through all of those guys working for Jabba, without actually cutting any of them in half?

Kidhuman
05-16-2004, 09:08 PM
And ? :confused:

So what if he knew that he would probably have to kill ? That's not the point. The point is that he was ready to kill in defense of his friend. Just as a Jedi is allowed to do. :confused:

Was he supposed to just let Han die ? :confused:


My point is it was planned out and pre-meditated murder. He knew it would come to it and he didnt care as long as he got what he wanted.

Rocketboy
05-16-2004, 09:16 PM
I've always seen the whole "Free us or die" thing as an empty threat, a foolish attempt to intimidate Jabba.

2-1B
05-16-2004, 11:04 PM
My point is it was planned out and pre-meditated murder. He knew it would come to it and he didnt care as long as he got what he wanted.

So then how would you define "defense" ? :rolleyes:

stillakid
05-17-2004, 12:27 AM
stillakid, we disagree that a person's fundamental nature can't be altered and that's fine. But I'm surprised that you cited Jesus in your post when one of that guy's main points was that people CAN change. :confused:


Just like the alcoholic comment, once an alcoholic, always an alcoholic. That doesn't mean that one will succumb to whatever problem he/she has, but it does mean that that individual must take extra measures to stop that behavior above and beyond what the ordinary person would. This applies to overweight people as well as the emotionally unstable.

I only referenced Jesus in terms of his martyrdom and its relevance to the topic. Far be it from me to speak for the Son of God ( :rolleyes: ), but I imagine he might have agreed with me that all people are not created equal. Some are nicer, some smarter, some more athletic, etc etc etc. Those who fall short in the "good" department have a longer row to hoe than the rest of us, so they must remain ever vigilant against treading down that "dark path." Point being here is that Luke Skywalker took a bite out of that proverbial apple and tasted the power of the darkside. He knew that he could win ultimately. But just like the smoker who proclaims that he "can quit anytime I want to," Luke might have continued on in the Post-quel with the same mindset...that the ends justify the means. Sure, sometimes the methods might enter that gray area, but it's only once...then twice...then a few times...hey, it's a bunch, but who's counting so long as the goal is valiant. Luke demonstrated time and time again his penchant for selfish gain while his sister Leia did quite the opposite and gave of herself for the greater good. It would be that Yin/Yang which would collide in Episode IX when the parallels to the great martyrs of Earth would appear on screen. Post-quel or not, Luke is doomed to repeat the sins of the father. It is the only story that makes sense. And in the same way, the existence of the sister...ergo the balance of the Force perhaps which is the only path to equalizing the universe. Why else is she in the story otherwise besides making a sexy Unleashed statue?

2-1B
05-17-2004, 01:26 AM
In that case, this whole Star Wars saga is a crock of **** because it clearly is not hinting at the end of ROTJ that Luke is in any way "doomed" to repeat his father's sins.

How depressing. :bored:

JEDIpartner
05-17-2004, 09:21 AM
My theory: Luke knew/foresaw that, in an attempt for the "heroes" to escape death, Jabba & his minions (hee hee hee) would end up biting it.

arctangent
05-17-2004, 09:52 AM
Not to get off subject, but I don't think R2 'knew' to be there at that exact time. I think R2 may've been programmed to get Luke's saber to him in case of an emergency. R2's being right there was more convenient story telling, IMO. R2 would've had to have influenced Ev-9D9 for the bartending position (since Luke obviously told R2 about his vision and how it would turn out)

if you read ev-9d9's story from the 'tales from jabba's palace' collection (although its been a while since i read the story and i can't remember exactly what happened) ev-9d9 is influenced by something/someone to assign r2-d2 to the sail barge and ends up being suprised by her own decision.

as for luke being a murderer, i had always thought that luke's statement to jabba came from the fact that luke had seen the future and that future contained jabba's death if he didn't free the prisoners - it was a statement of fact rather than a threat. lets face it, luke was hardly the most intimidating figure jabba has ever come across. jabba's own pigheadedness and self assurance lead to his death (ie. he didn't think luke and his friends were- as luke had forseen - and although luke killed several skiff guards in the fight to save his friends it wasn't him who killed jabba.

killing in itself obviously doesn't lead to the dark side - we know the jedi are trained to fight and have seen them fight and kill, therefore it must be the intention behind the killing that's the important thing - and luke was trying to do a good thing - save those who were important to him and the freedom of the galaxy.

stillakid
05-17-2004, 10:19 AM
In that case, this whole Star Wars saga is a crock of **** because it clearly is not hinting at the end of ROTJ that Luke is in any way "doomed" to repeat his father's sins.

How depressing. :bored:

Not really (a crock of ****). In fact, I think that continuing on that line (that Luke repeats the sins of the father) makes the story even more epic than it already is and ultimately gives it more meaning. Absolutely, ROTJ wrapped things up in with a nice little bow and one can easily walk away believing that all is well and they lived happily ever after. But if the saga were to continue, I think that following this line of reasoning is far more interesting and justifiable than all that other nonsense about cloned emperors and such.

dr_evazan22
05-17-2004, 04:29 PM
I agree with you on 2 points Stilla: That the way you state your case would make for a more interesting story (I was never really to pleased with Dark Empire et al myself, except for the cover art); and that Leia makes a sexy Unleashed fig.

I can think of a number of examples where Luke wanted to do something but didn't (like going to Tosche Station), but can't think of a time where he actually did do something selfish, not helping some family or friends. Just the opposite, in the movies it already shows Luke sort of pulling away to focus more on his spiritual / Force growth, the way he separates himself from the others, IMO.

As for the "Tales..." books... There are some folks on this site who liked them, but I'm not one of them. Fro the most part, I think they were some of the worst SW stories ever put in print (IG-88 was about to take over DS2? C'mon now!)

While we're on the subject of fiction, where (other then this thread) was there a story about Luke having visions of the outcome of the encounter at Jabba's?

B'Omarr Monkey
05-17-2004, 09:45 PM
if you read ev-9d9's story from the 'tales from jabba's palace' collection (although its been a while since i read the story and i can't remember exactly what happened) ev-9d9 is influenced by something/someone to assign r2-d2 to the sail barge and ends up being suprised by her own decision.

Way back between TESB and ROTJ, I think it was Ron Goulart who had a regular column in Starlog magazine speculated about some stuff hinted at in TESB. My favorite was that "the other" was R2-D2. His rationale? When Owen chooses R5-D4, we see R2 vibrating back and forth, then R5-D4 blows his motivator. That was an example of R2-D2 using the Force to get his way. It was done in tongue and cheek, but that little droid sure seems to always be several steps ahead of everyone else in the SW movies.

stillakid
05-17-2004, 09:49 PM
I can think of a number of examples where Luke wanted to do something but didn't (like going to Tosche Station), but can't think of a time where he actually did do something selfish, not helping some family or friends. Just the opposite, in the movies it already shows Luke sort of pulling away to focus more on his spiritual / Force growth, the way he separates himself from the others, IMO.


What I was getting at and didn't state very well was that Luke's primary motivation always revolves around himself and what he will get out of a situation, even when it involves helping others. His main throughline has more to do with satisfying his own sense of well being, whether it be avenging the deaths of his relatives or saving his father from eternal damnation.

Leia, on the other hand, has a much more "global" outlook on life. Her concern is for the greater good and doesn't seem to really give a rats arse what happens to her in any way.

But this is what good fiction is. A character doesn't represent a person per se. A fictional character represents a point of view toward the story. So in other words, while Leia illustrates the broad strokes of the battle against evil, Luke's character could be considered the fine brush in which we are able to witness the intricacies of the conflict, the more "personal" side of the battle if you will. Leia is our lens into the big conflict while Luke is our window into the intimate details which ultimately should affect our emotions and invoke empathy.

All that boils down to "Luke=Selfish" and "Leia=Not." It isn't meant to be derogatory toward either one of them, but merely exists as a function of literary fiction. With that as a jumping off point, it doesn't take much to follow the storyline through to the one suggested above in which Leia is willing to give her very life in order to show her brother just how evil he has become. Only until he witnesses her blood flowing by his own hand will he be jolted into the reality of what he has become and just how much like his father he really is.

Kidhuman
05-17-2004, 10:08 PM
Well put STillakid, well put. I couldnt agree more with you(sips Kool-Aid) on this topic.
Luke is very selfish. The only thing on his mind is"To be a Jedi like My father before me". And the way he went about it was just like His Father!! Slaughtering at Sarlaac, stopping at nothing to prove that he can be a Jedi. Putting his friends in danger by going on the mission to Endor. The only reason he went to fight Vader is because he had to, in order to prove his point. Was he scared? Yes. Was he fearful of it? Yes. Was he displaying anger when he couldnt get his way. Yes. Luke is destined to go to the Dark Side. If Lucas ever makes 7,8, and 9, he needs to exploit this fact.

dr_evazan22
05-18-2004, 12:20 AM
... Luke's primary motivation always revolves around himself and what he will get out of a situation, even when it involves helping others. His main throughline has more to do with satisfying his own sense of well being, whether it be avenging the deaths of his relatives or saving his father from eternal damnation.

Leia, on the other hand, has a much more "global" outlook on life. Her concern is for the greater good and doesn't seem to really give a rats arse what happens to her in any way.

...

All that boils down to "Luke=Selfish" and "Leia=Not." It isn't meant to be derogatory toward either one of them, but merely exists as a function of literary fiction. With that as a jumping off point, it doesn't take much to follow the storyline through to the one suggested above in which Leia is willing to give her very life in order to show her brother just how evil he has become. Only until he witnesses her blood flowing by his own hand will he be jolted into the reality of what he has become and just how much like his father he really is.

You make some good points, or observations there, but I'm still not in complete agreement there with you. In fact, I would say that both Luke and Leia's characters switch (in terms of selfish and not).

I think your observation is right on in the time period of ANH. I feel that in ESB they are basically in about the same place, caring for (and making decisions about) friends/family and the Rebellion.

But in ROJ I think it's Leia who is selfish, going after Han on Tat, going with Han to Endor, and maybe even when she tries to convinve Luke not to confront Vader. In contrast, Luke finishes his training with Yoda to help the Rebellion. Luke knows he has to face the Empire's #2 man, Vader, and that the Emp needs to be stopped. Luke was prepared to lose his life to stop the Dark Side from winning.

KH- No offense meant, but what's this nonsense about Luke slaughtering Jabba's goons, and having to prove some point about Vader turning?

Luke would've preferred to do it bloodlessly, I'm sure. But because of Jabba's nature, Luke was forced to use force. Hypothetically speaking- What if Charles Manson were to get out and kidnap someone at gunpoint saying he would never go back alive. Would it be wrong of the police to confront Manson even if they knew there was a really good chance it would end in Manson's death? It doesn't have to be Manson, but the point is the same no matter who is considered. It sounds like your saying it's just too bad han is in Carbonite but that's the way he'll have to stay.

And making a point... He was told that Vader had to be stopped. Obi meant he had to be killed (thinking that that was the only way to stop Vader), not even considering the fact that Vader could be turned back. It's possible that we'll see the motivation push Ani to the dark side as what brought him back: Family.

2-1B
05-18-2004, 02:07 AM
Well stated, Doc . . . seriously kidhuman, what are you talking about with this "point" of Luke's ? :confused:

His point was that his father was not dead and that there was still good in him. Even as Yoda and Obi-Wan pragmatically thought of Anakin as dead and gone, Luke kept a glimmer of faith and it proved to be the right thing.

That's not selfishness, it's selflessness. He showed up to DS2 willing to die for what he believed in . . . if he was selfish, he would have joined the Emperor, crushed the Rebellion, and lived like a king.

arctangent
05-18-2004, 05:11 AM
While we're on the subject of fiction, where (other then this thread) was there a story about Luke having visions of the outcome of the encounter at Jabba's?

i have certainly never seen it mentioned anywhere else but its what was always in the back of my mind that he knew what would happen. if he didn't, his threat to jabba is one of the least scarey threats in cinema history. no wonder jabba laughs at him and doesn't take him seriously lol !

stillakid
05-18-2004, 10:22 AM
That's not selfishness, it's selflessness. He showed up to DS2 willing to die for what he believed in . . . if he was selfish, he would have joined the Emperor, crushed the Rebellion, and lived like a king.

While you're essentially correct there, I think that the overall mission of Luke's in that specific instance wasn't to overthrow the Empire, rather to save his father. The Emperor's death was just a fortunate and unforseen bonus. In fact, I suspect that the second Luke tossed his saber aside, he assumed that both he and dad would perish soon enough. Then once Luke realized through the agony of lightning bolts that he had a few minutes left until death struck, he did the natural thing and called out for help. He could have gone the way of Mel Gibson in Braveheart, stoic, but that last ditch effort to get through the "armor" that Anakin had built around his psyche paid off.

It's that exact situation that Luke vs. Leia could reenact in an Episode IX, but it would take Leia's actual death to cut through Luke's emotional armor so he could see what he had become. It also occurred to me last night that the Skywalker clan is a bit of an anomoly anyhow. Being that Jedi aren't supposed to marry or mate suggests that the Skywalker children by all rights shouldn't even exist. So having Leia die a martyr and Luke do the Shogun thing (self impalement) for honor would restore everything back to the way it should be.

2-1B
05-18-2004, 11:40 AM
I disagree, stillakid.

When Luke spoke with Leia on Endor, he told her something like "If I don't make it back you're the only hope for the Rebellion."

He was concerned with both saving his father and toppling the Empire.

stillakid
05-18-2004, 12:41 PM
I disagree, stillakid.

When Luke spoke with Leia on Endor, he told her something like "If I don't make it back you're the only hope for the Rebellion."

He was concerned with both saving his father and toppling the Empire.


Ok, I'll give ... a little. Maybe he did have some concern for the overall conflict, but his overriding priority throughout the saga was for his own goals. Leia was the same way. Sure, she had moments of selfishness, but I don't believe for a moment that she would have dropped her committment to the cause for something so trivial as love (for Han). The rescue on Tatooine was conveniently scheduled so as not to interfere with the attack on the second Death Star, but I'm sure Carbonite Han would have still been hanging on the wall had Leia been forced to make a choice. It just so happened that Luke's personal mission (goal) conveniently revolved around and was in proximity to the lynchpin of the Empire. Leia managed to take out Jabba but his influence on the overall conflict was negligable at best. Luke's actions first saved his father from damnation and then as a ladle of gravy just happened to put a stop to the bigger conflict. I don't think that Luke had any allusions that he might actually kill Palpatine. If anything, he figured that the attack on the Death Star would succeed and he'd be blown into a ball of dust along with the bad guys. I think that his goal was to save Anakin's soul even though it meant that they'd all be frozen meat a few minutes after that. To accomplishthat, all he knew was that he had to go face the two bad guys and then play it all by ear from there. One could easily drop the Raiders dialogue into the Endor scene:

Luke: I have to go.
Leia: But why?
Luke: He's my father.
Leia: How will you stop him?
Luke: I don't know. I'm makin' this up as I go.

2-1B
05-18-2004, 01:31 PM
That's true - if Leia had to make a choice between saving Han and going after DS2, Han would still be a cube.

Of course, it's still for the best that the Alliance was in the process of assembling lol during the Jabba raid or else there would be a scene cut into the Ewok party in which Rebels storm the Palace and defrost Han in a montage like sequence . . . hey, that would be a great way to "rhyme" with the 3rd movie of the other trilogy, right stillakid ? ! :crazed:

dr_evazan22
05-18-2004, 09:40 PM
I was about to whole-heartedly agree with you stilla, but I'm not 100% sure that Leia would've gone to help with the DS2. She wasn't really needed, and went because Han was going.

Like I said before, I think your analysis of Luke and Leia's outlook in ANH was pretty much on target. But what I think they both learned (as well as Han) that there was more to fight for then their original outlooks...

Leia was determined to bring the Empire down because of it's moral and social injustices. But her motivation changed to fighting for love and family.

Luke was trying to right the wrongs done his family. He had deeply personal reasons to join the Rebellion. But Luke found a higher calling to fight for by training as a Jedi(and like you said, it conveniently included saving his fathers soul, or whatever you want to call it).

And Han went from completely selfish, to selfless.

And as far as 7,8, and 9, ... Well, we can agree to disagree.

stillakid
05-18-2004, 10:16 PM
I was about to whole-heartedly agree with you stilla, but I'm not 100% sure that Leia would've gone to help with the DS2. She wasn't really needed, and went because Han was going.
.


You're basing that conclusion on what actually happened on screen, namely that Han was there in the room. Had Han still been a popsicle, Leia might have been invited to lead the Endor invasion...or not. We'll never really know of course, but if we take the hypothetical situation in which she has the choice of aiding the Rebellion's strike against the Empire vs going to save Han at that moment, based entirely on her past attitude it isn't a stretch to see that she would leave Han hanging for a little while longer while they attacked the bad guys.

I'm not suggesting that this "Luke down the darkpath" is the only possible storyline for a Post-quel, but it seems to be the most logical and plausible given the rest of the story as we know it. Sure, geeked out storylines with cloning this and cloning that and all sorts of other nonsense is fine and seems to sell books without a problem, but for my money, I'd rather see some kind of plotline and character arc that has some kind of logic behind it.

Kidhuman
05-22-2004, 11:02 AM
OKi ay Caesar, your right with the selfish and selfless stuff. No matter how you look at it, he still took off for his own accord. He didnt think about anything really. Where did he first see Vader? DS1.... And now that there is a 2nd Death star, is it possible that Vader would be there? Why not? SOme JEdi instincts. Luke did what he wanted to do, for whatever reason. From the moment he felt his presence to the end of the DS2 he went totally on his own. He knew what he had to do. He abandoned his team to take care of a personal matter.(selfishness) He walked out and went AWOL. Han commanded the team, and he didnt even ask him what he thought.(selfishness) Luke was just like ANakin in that sense, disobeying commands, doing what he wanted to do, not caring what anyone else thought. Sure Leia asked him to run away and never come back, but he basically laughed it off. He had in his mind what he wanted to do.


Had Anakin jumped off that Gunship to save padme, who knows what would of happened? Luckily Obi-Wan was there to guide him, but it was still to late for him.

Luke's selfishness could have lead tothe end of the rebellion. Had he been on Endor, the sheild could of come down alot quicker. He could of sensed the trap that was about to happen. But instead he again, put his friends, and KNOWN SISTER'S life in Danger for his own personal quest.(selfishness.)

2-1B
05-22-2004, 02:17 PM
kidhuman -

You're a feisty little one, but you'll soon learn some respect. I have need for you on SirSteve's sail barge and I think you'll fill in nicely.

Well . . . actually I believe that Vader was on a Star Destroyer when they approached DS2 ("Vader's on that ship").
It doesn't really matter though since we disagree on how selfish Luke was really being. :)

Kidhuman
05-22-2004, 06:45 PM
kidhuman -

You're a feisty little one, but you'll soon learn some respect. I have need for you on SirSteve's sail barge and I think you'll fill in nicely.

I will not serve drinks, but I will make them, and strong too. Why strong? Because I am not selfish. :beard:

Kidhuman
07-16-2004, 01:01 PM
Okay, another thing I noticed while watching ANH the other night. When Luke got back to Owen and Beru after the troopers burnt them to a crisp, he did not mourn them. He looked to the side in disgust, like he had revenge on his mind. Almost the same look Anakin had when his mom died. He also never mourned them. He just went back to Ben and said he was going to Alderaan.

But when Ben was cut down,he got on the Falcon and was mourning this man he hardly knew really. Luke did not mourn his family, but he did a man he hardly knew. WHats up with that? He is evil I say, like his father before him.

Droid
07-16-2004, 01:53 PM
OK, I know I'm jumping in on this a little late. So forgive me if I repeat some of what has already been said.

1. Luke couldn't bear to look at the horror of his charred relatives. That
doesn't mean he didn't mourn them. Second, we don't know he didn't
bury them. But if he did not bury them it was the smart thing to do.
He's lucky there wasn't Imperials posted at the farm and he didn't know
the Imperials wouldn't be back.

2. I don't think there is any way that Luke will or would turn evil after Return
of the Jedi (and don't start quoting that stupid story where he turned
evil because a Clone Emperor convinced him to). He is not DESINTED to
turn evil. The point of the Star Wars Saga is a) redemption is possible
and b) that the son does not have to repeat the sins of the father. Luke
had some of Anakin's traits, displayed in A New Hope and in part Empire -
selfishness, a short temper, whininess. But he overcome those traits by
learning patience and growing up. Getting whooped by Dad and getting
his hand cut off taught him a lot.

3. Luke did not ignore the larger mission by going after Vader. The Rebellion
was well in hand. He believed that the Rebels would succeed in blowing
up the Death Star (and they did, without any help from Luke). But the
real mission was the balance of the Force. Remember that the Force is
bigger than planets, machines, or who is running the government of the
universe. Luke was the only surviving good force user and he had to
confront the Sith. "Stopped they must be, on this all depends." "Vader,
you must confront Vader." Luke told Obi-wan he wanted to learn the
ways of the Force and become a Jedi. That was his first priority before
he ever joined the Rebellion. And he followed that through to the end.
He faltered on that mission when he went to Cloud City, but he learned
from his mistake.

4. Yoda said, "Once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate
your destiny". He didn't say "once you start down the dark path you'll be
evil forever." Once Anakin became Vader he was never going to go back
to the way things used to be, but he was able to become good again.
Also, I don't think Luke EVER started down the dark path. He may have
stood at the beginning of the trail when he was hitting Vader, but he
CHOSE not to start down the path.

5. Luke didn't WANT to kill anyone. But the charge of a Jedi is not to AVOID
killing or using force at all costs. THEY ARE NOT PACIFISTS. If the only
way to save Han was to kill someone, then Luke could kill, without
violating the ethical boundaries of the Jedi or turning evil. He killed the
Rancor in self defense. He killed those on the skiffs and sail barge in self
defense. He had no choice. They were shooting at him and trying to
kill his friends. You could argue that the Rebels knew people would die if
they took their fleet to the Death Star or that Imperials would die if they
landed on the Forest Moon. But that doesn't mean the Rebels were all
turning to the Dark Side just because they fought back once the fighting
started. It is self defense even if you put yourself in the position where
you have to defened yourself.

Luke is the hero of the story folks. Get off his back.

stillakid
07-16-2004, 02:06 PM
Okay, another thing I noticed while watching ANH the other night. When Luke got back to Owen and Beru after the troopers burnt them to a crisp, he did not mourn them. He looked to the side in disgust, like he had revenge on his mind. Almost the same look Anakin had when his mom died. He also never mourned them. He just went back to Ben and said he was going to Alderaan.

But when Ben was cut down,he got on the Falcon and was mourning this man he hardly knew really. Luke did not mourn his family, but he did a man he hardly knew. WHats up with that? He is evil I say, like his father before him.


I heartily disagree with that conclusion. Luke didn't stomp around like a big baby like Anakin did. Chances are, Luke already had a pretty good idea what he was going to find while on his long ride from the burned out Sandcrawler to the homestead. Seeing the charred remains was just confirmation at that point. And he definitely showed disturbed emotion. What did you want him to do, :cry: ? Some people show that kind of pain in different ways. I could see that kind of overly theatrical reaction in a stage play (or in AOTC ;) ) but ANH played that stuff closer to the vest. Luke knew what he'd find, he saw it, turned his head because A) he was emotional distressed, and B) yeah, seeing your loved ones still hot off the barbeque would be a little rough.

For that matter, because of the time cut, we don't really know what he did after that shot. He might have buried them or not. We don't really know what he did to "officially mourn." So by the time he gets back to the gang at Jawa-burgers central, he's gone through his emotions and made the choice to take Old Ben up on the offer. After all, "there's nothing left for me here now." That wasn't just idle talk. It was truth.

Kidhuman
07-16-2004, 02:10 PM
But in going to after Han, the plan involved killing at one point. A Jedi can kill in defense, but he went along with the plan, full well knowing that we would have to kill. Why else would R2 of had his lightsaber? He planned it, knowing full well he would have to kill, and did it without a second thought.

Also Luke abandoned his post, and went on his own special mission. The same thing Anakin did through out AOTC.

Luke is very very much like his father and if 7,8, and 9 get made, he should turn to the darkside.

And to me, Vader is the hero, if he didnt toss Palpy down the chute, Luke would of died there.

Droid
07-16-2004, 03:47 PM
KH, you can't really be arguing that giving R2 his lightsaber was a form of agression and a sign Luke has evil tendencies? All Jedi carry lightsabers for the occasion where they have to throw down. Luke was on a gangplank, ready to fall into the Sarlaac. He used his lightsaber in defense. As I said, he put himself in that situation, but so did the Rebels when they attacked the Death Star in a New Hope, so did the Rebels when they went to the forest moon, so did the Rebels attacking the second death star. Just because someone will die does not mean a Jedi has to avoid a situation.

Luke tried to bargain for Han's life, then he told Jabba he was "taking Captain Solo and his friends" and offered to have Jabba profit from it, then Luke gave Jabba another chance to "free us or die." Jabba made the choice. Luke defended himself from Jabba's consistently agressive behaviors.

And Luke did not abandon his post. Luke was a part of the shuttle crew, not the strike team. Once they got on Endor, he had done his duty. And as I said before, Luke was a Jedi first and a Rebel second. He started down the road to Jedi before he became a Rebel. Did he abandon his post when he didn't rendezvous with the fleet after getting off Hoth? No, he did what he needed to in order to become a Jedi. Did he abandon his post when he went to Dagaboh after saving Han rather than meeting with the fleet? No, he kept his promise to Yoda. Luke always chose his duties as a Jedi before his duties as a Rebel EXCEPT when he went to Cloud City, which as I stated proved to be a disastrous mistake he learned from.

Luke is like the good part of his father seen in Phantom Menace, parts of Attack of the Clones, and at the end of Jedi. But he chose not to make the same choices his father did in embracing the evil that exists in all of us.

And Luke is the hero of the story. Anakin would have never turned good again if Luke hadn't shown him the way. Without Luke the first Death Star wouldn't have been destroyed. Without Luke, Vader and the Emperor might have escaped the Second Death Star. Without Luke, Han would have never gotten out of Carbonite. Without Luke, Vader would not have let the Rebels land on Endor (then again he might not have sensed something wrong with the shuttle if Luke hadn't been on it). Without Luke, Vader would not have been on the second Death Star and the Empire might have either won the battle or at least the Empire might have survived the battle of Endor with Vader in charge. Luke is the hero.

Kidhuman
07-16-2004, 04:16 PM
And my point is he fore saw what would happen and went to do it anyway. He knew he would have to kill in order to get "what he wanted" A bit selfish if you ask me. If he didnt want to kill anyone, he would of went into the palace with his lightsaber. Instead, he gave it to R2 and went about his way, killing and all. Why did he not use the saber against the Rancor? Because R2 had it. A Jedi's defense is his lightsaber, not a blaster, which brings up another question, if he is a Jedi(truly) why does he need a blaster?

And yes, he did abort his mission and went to save his Dad. His friends could have easily gotten into the bunker with him there, using the force and alot of fighters in space and on the ground would not have died. So in essence, his decision to go after his Dad, cost alot of people their lives, not what a Jedi is about. He went for his own personal goals.

And by your logic thgat he was part of the command crew, then why did Leia and Chewie fight. Would they have been wrong for turning their backs on the Strike team? He was the command crew, which means, he is a leader of the crew and he left, not even telling Han, "Who was in charge" of the mission. He basically went AWOL on his team. Selfishness yet again.

And who is to say, he didnt get permisssion to leave after Hoth from Riekaan or someone else? Just because we didnt see it doesnt mean it didnt happen.

There is no "I" in team, but Luke sure as hell found the "M' and the "E"

El Chuxter
07-16-2004, 04:41 PM
I don't think he foresaw that he'd have to kill Jabba. The saber was there just in case, but Luke tried to bargain with Jabba and gave him more than enough chances to say, "Oh, okay, you got me, pardner. Here's your friend."

He could've bargained upfront with Luke.

He could've bargained after Luke used his powers to swipe a blaster from across the room.

He could've bargained with him after he killed the Rancor.

He could've even said, "Y'know, this kid seems serious," when Luke demanded to be freed and gave him an ultimatum.

Whereas (going by a great line from the novelization which didn't end up in the final cut of the film) Jabba merely boasted about killing many Jedi in a time when "it meant something to be a Jedi." He deserved to go down, and Luke did nothing wrong.

Kidhuman
07-16-2004, 04:50 PM
I don't think he foresaw that he'd have to kill Jabba. The saber was there just in case, but Luke tried to bargain with Jabba and gave him more than enough chances to say, "Oh, okay, you got me, pardner. Here's your friend."

In case of what? He backed himself into a corner basically by leaving himself defenseless. He knew what would happen.



He could've bargained upfront with Luke.

He could've bargained after Luke used his powers to swipe a blaster from across the room.

He could've bargained with him after he killed the Rancor.

He could've even said, "Y'know, this kid seems serious," when Luke demanded to be freed and gave him an ultimatum.

He could of but didnt. And Luke knew he wouldn't. And then Luke force-stealing a blaster to shoot Jabba? Attack? I'd say so.


Whereas (going by a great line from the novelization which didn't end up in the final cut of the film) Jabba merely boasted about killing many Jedi in a time when "it meant something to be a Jedi." He deserved to go down, and Luke did nothing wrong.

So the basic fact that Jabba killed Jedi is a good enough reason for Luke to kill him? 2 wrongs dont make a right. :D

stillakid
07-16-2004, 05:00 PM
And my point is he fore saw what would happen and went to do it anyway. He knew he would have to kill in order to get "what he wanted"

As god as my witness, where did you come up with that? :confused: Luke foresaw? Huh?



A bit selfish if you ask me. If he didnt want to kill anyone, he would of went into the palace with his lightsaber. Instead, he gave it to R2 and went about his way, killing and all. Why did he not use the saber against the Rancor? Because R2 had it.
Yeah, you're right, he hid the saber inside R2 because he knew that they'd frisk him and the saber hilt would get overlooked inside a big tin can. No more to it, no less. He hid it there in case he'd need it and only pulled it out when he really needed it, after there were no other options.


A Jedi's defense is his lightsaber, not a blaster, which brings up another question, if he is a Jedi(truly) why does he need a blaster?Cuz Jedi Mind Tricks wouldn't work on the slug. Luke was being flexible as the situation changed fluidly. Had he "foreseen" anything, he would have known to look down before stepping on a metal grate in the middle of stone floor. Apparently, he didn't see that one coming.


And yes, he did abort his mission and went to save his Dad. His friends could have easily gotten into the bunker with him there, using the force and alot of fighters in space and on the ground would not have died. So in essence, his decision to go after his Dad, cost alot of people their lives, not what a Jedi is about. He went for his own personal goals. I won't argue that he went for his own personal goals...he did. But I think it's a perfectly valid argument to say that saving/destroying Vader and consequently killing Palpatine ultimately saved more lives in the long run. You might argue that the Death Star was going to explode anyway, but had Luke not gone into the dragon's lair, then Vader would have no reason to be there either. Palps might or might not have abandoned ship. There's no telling what could have happened, but Luke's choice to go to the fight put the principle villains in the direct line of fire and only their deaths would ensure that the galaxy-wide madness would stop.


And by your logic thgat he was part of the command crew, then why did Leia and Chewie fight. Would they have been wrong for turning their backs on the Strike team? He was the command crew, which means, he is a leader of the crew and he left, not even telling Han, "Who was in charge" of the mission. He basically went AWOL on his team. Selfishness yet again. Again, yes, he "abandoned" the crew, but not to go play tennis at the club. He merely re-defined his role in the overall struggle while leaving the surface battle in good hands.

Droid
07-16-2004, 05:08 PM
Love debatin' ya, KH. :) And so:

How was it selfish to kill others in order to free Han and make sure Leia, Chewie, Lando, and the droids got away from Jabba?

I don't understand what you mean by "if he didn't want to kill anyone he would of went into the palace with his lightsaber". And how do you know that Luke knew R2 would be on the sail barge? Maybe Luke went into the throne room, appearing to be defenseless and ready to compromise, but thinking R2 would be there. Then he saw R2 wasn't there and thought "Oh crap, no R2, guess I need a blaster."

Luke didn't have a lightsaber so he tried to use a blaster. I'm sure a Jedi can use any weapon, including a blaster, if he or she doesn't have a lightsaber handy. And Luke grew up using blasters, the Jedi of old didn't. It isn't surprising Luke would use in a pinch when he didn't have a lightsaber.

You say Luke's friends could have easily gotten into the bunker with Luke. But Luke knew he endangered the mission the second Vader sensed him on the shuttle. Vader knew Luke would come to him, but Luke did not know Vader wasn't looking for him. Staying with his friends endangered the mission and Luke did not want to continue to do that. They were trying to sneak up on the shield bunker. If Luke had been with them it might have been like a tracking device for Vader. You say that, "His friends could have easily gotten into the bunker with him there, using the force and alot of fighters in space and on the ground would not have died." But maybe if Luke had stayed with the others those on the ground would have had to deal with Vader and a squad of stormtroopers in addition to the forces already on Endor. (By the way, I would love to see Vader fighting on the ground during the Battle of Endor.) As far as Luke knew, if he had been with the others on Endor Vader would show up and then it just would have been the surprise attack blown and Vader fighting Luke anyway, except on the ground on Endor instead of above it.

You continue to avoid my argument that Luke was a Jedi first and a Rebel second. Leia and Chewie fought on Endor because they had nothing better to do, no higher purpose. Do you think the command crew (including Han and Chewie) shirked its duties by looking for Leia after the speeder bike chase rather than just pursing the overall mission? They sent the sqad ahead to the shield generator without them.

Luke did not report to Han and did not have to report to Han. Notice NO ONE in Jedi calls Luke "Commander Skywalker" anymore. There is no indication that as of Jedi he was still a part of or considered himself a part of the formal Rebel Alliance chain of command. C-3P0 called Han "General Solo". Luke was just "Master Luke." Perhaps in between Empire and Jedi Luke resigned his commisison. I don't think Han outranked or was in charge of Luke. And Luke was not serving HIMSELF by going after Vader. He was serving the dictates of the remnants of the Jedi Order and his Jedi Master. Yoda told him to confront Vader. He was following his orders and what the Force told him to do. It was not an act of selfishness.

You say, "And who is to say, he didnt get permisssion to leave after Hoth from Riekaan or someone else? Just because we didnt see it doesnt mean it didn't happen." By that rational Luke might have told Han he was leaving, though perhaps because he thought he was endangering the mission. True Han said, "Hey, what's going on?" right after Luke walked away, but he did not indicate that he did not know Luke was leaving. (Though I don't actually think Han knew Luke was leaving. It's just a response to your argument that Luke may have gotten Riekaan's permission to leave.)

Also, the Rebel Alliance is all volunteer. You're in as long as you want. There is no AWOL.

KH, I am taking off for the weekend. I look forward to picking this up with you on Monday. Maybe over the weekend you should let go of some of your anger and start lovin' the Luke!

JediTricks
07-16-2004, 08:21 PM
But in going to after Han, the plan involved killing at one point. A Jedi can kill in defense, but he went along with the plan, full well knowing that we would have to kill.By that take, EVERY Jedi who sees a possible future outcome is an evil killer. Always in motion is the future, Luke warned Jabba that if the fat slug didn't release the hostages, he would end up dead. Luke didn't even kill him, Leia strangled him to death and rightfully so, Luke merely took out the henchman trash on the skiffs and barge. Keep in mind, Star Wars' Jedi Knights are modeled after the samurai, killing is not a taboo, it is often their right and certainly a way of life, the Jedi may not be as hardline as that and have a little more nobility to some of the views on killing, but they still allow it. Luke's planned destruction of Jabba was also ridding the galaxy of a vile crimelord.



Luke is very very much like his father and if 7,8, and 9 get made, he should turn to the darkside. I still think it should be Leia who turns to the Darkside and Luke & Han who have to save her without destroying her.



And to me, Vader is the hero, if he didnt toss Palpy down the chute, Luke would of died there.Vader saved Luke, but if not for Luke distracting the Emperor in the first place, the Rebels likely wouldn't have been able to destroy the DS2 at all. By the time Vader sent his master down the shaft, the station was already doomed, so the heroics are more personal than grand IMO.

stillakid
07-16-2004, 10:16 PM
I still think it should be Leia who turns to the Darkside and Luke & Han who have to save her without destroying her.


Vader saved Luke, but if not for Luke distracting the Emperor in the first place, the Rebels likely wouldn't have been able to destroy the DS2 at all. By the time Vader sent his master down the shaft, the station was already doomed, so the heroics are more personal than grand IMO.


I'm with KH on this...Luke is the only logical one who would be on the darkside for a Post-quel. Leia's character setup simply doesn't allow for the possibility. It would be as strange as seeing C3PO become a Jedi. There's no setup for it...no foundation. Now Luke on the other hand has the built in character flaws (of his father no less) that make his turning to the Darkside (which he has already begun down that path which Yoda warned him about) entirely plausible. It just makes sense even with the "happy ending" of ROTJ. With Luke being the primary hero of the story, such a Post-quel would be even more poignant and lend depth to what otherwise would be a rather dull and "sci fiy" storyline.

I've already laid out my reasons in depth previously about why Luke is the obvious choice to continue down the darkpath and how that would end up, but I don't recall ever hearing the justification for having Leia be the one to turn bad. I don't mean to hijack the thread with that line of thought (and it does kind of fit in with the title...sort of), but I'd like to hear more about why Leia could be the bad guy in a Post-quel. :)

Kidhuman
07-16-2004, 10:52 PM
Droid,

First off, Vader didnt know Luke was going to come to him. Palps told him that he foresaw it and he should go to the moon and wait for him. Was he telling the truth? Possibly. If Luke didnt go AWOL, he would of showed up there anyway.(Which I thihnk would of been a better storyline). Either way Luke was going to meet Vader at the Bunker.

Back to Jabba's palace and the Sarlaac. The whole thing was a set up. It was pulled off with too much perfection. First Lando gets in, then the droids, then Chewie and Leia. Then along comes Luke, defenseless(and we all know why). He falls into the Rancor pit, kills the beast, gets cuffed and all. He could of escaped that night, but he didnt, he could of freed everyone in there and snuck out with his boys. But he didnt. He went to the Pit of Carkoon, and R2 is on the sail barge. 3PO bumps into him, tells him that Master Luke is about to be killed and R2 scurries off. Luke gives his signal and here comes his saber. Planned and pre-meditated murder in the eyes of this judge. :D

Why didnt anyone call him Commander SKywalker? We never see him address any of the rebel subordinates in the movie. When he gets to the rendevouz point, he says count me in too. Leia hugs him, Han says something, and the scene is then cut. He never addresses the Endor Solidiers in any way, so who is going to call him Commander? Leia, agnd Luke, never called Han general, but everyone else did. And yes, Luke should have reported to Han, because he signed up under his command for the mission.

Luke was never a Jedi until he confronted Vader again. When Luke said "So, I am a Jedi" Yoda sgaid no. He must confront Vader again, then and only then a jedi will you be. So, he went off to become a Jedi like his father before him. It was unfortunate that he had to basically Kill his dad to become a Jedi, but he did it anyway, for his personal status(maybe being a Jedi got him some extras in that world, I dunno), and that is selfish.

Stillakid, why didnt he sense he was going to be dropped in the Rancor pit? Maybe because Jabba isnt a force user and didnt give off the correct vibes for Luke to sense his actions. :D
I think Luke was to focused on his mission to sense what he was standing on. Plus the Palace is filled with scum agnd evil peeps, that he didnt pick up exactly what was going on below him.

And JT, I gotta know why you think Leia should become the evil one? I am with Stillakid, it should and must be Luke.

stillakid
07-17-2004, 09:25 AM
Stillakid, why didnt he sense he was going to be dropped in the Rancor pit? Maybe because Jabba isnt a force user and didnt give off the correct vibes for Luke to sense his actions. :D
I think Luke was to focused on his mission to sense what he was standing on. Plus the Palace is filled with scum agnd evil peeps, that he didnt pick up exactly what was going on below him.

For the record, I've never put too much faith in this "foresee the future" mumbo jumbo. We have Luke in ESB kind of "seeing" images of a possible future...feelings of his friends suffering...but hardly "foreseeing the future." At least nothing very definite in the way you seem to be describing as a play by play account of what will happen. Even when the Emperor "claims" to "have foreseen it," I don't buy it. For several reasons, but not the least of which his constant need to "one up" Vader's sensing of Luke, Palps probably just makes this crap up.

JediTricks
07-17-2004, 09:47 PM
Stilla, the reason I'd dismiss Luke as the falling Jedi is because it's too easy, it's too obvious, and it's yet another trilogy centered around Luke. Leia, on the other hand, has the most mysterious background of the Skywalker clan and has untold, unchecked Force abilities which could be coupled with her desire to save the galaxy could end up turning against her. From the EU, we know she eventually becomes a Jedi, and certainly being tortured at the hands of her own biological father could have left scars.


"There's no setup for it...no foundation."
- Except that we are told on-screen that Leia has Force abilities and is the last possible weapon against Vader & the Emp should something happen to Luke. This weapon could ultimately be used for the Dark Side even with the best of intetions because Yoda and Obi-Wan aren't around to give her the proper training.


"the Darkside (which he has already begun down that path which Yoda warned him about)"
What Yoda said was that if Luke starts down the dark path, forever will it dominate his destiny. Your interpretation is that Luke simply will slip into his dark side patterns again, but that is not the only way it could be interpreted; it could just as easily be that once he's tasted the Dark Side and beaten it within him, his teaching others how to destroy it could come back and bite him when they are not as able as he and his dark destiny is to stop the monster he has unintentionally created.


"I don't recall ever hearing the justification for having Leia be the one to turn bad."
Then your memory fails you, as I've already discussed that with you in at least 1, if not several, previous threads.

----

"He could of escaped that night, but he didnt, he could of freed everyone in there and snuck out with his boys. But he didnt"
How do you know that Luke could have freed himself and his friends? Luke doesn't take off the cuffs, the skiff guard does. In Jabba's palace, it's already proved that there's often someone watching and ready to nark 'em out and bust 'em.

"Planned and pre-meditated murder in the eyes of this judge."
First on this, Your Honor ;), I'd argue that we don't know what Luke's intent was, he DOES warn Jabba repeatedly that bad stuff is about to go down, perhaps he got a flash of this future and was trying to PREVENT it by having a multi-tiered plan. At every step after failing to free his friends through discussion, Luke warned Jabba that his actions would lead to his destruction.

Secondly, even if you don't accept that argument, Luke's companion was being illegally held in a state of near-death by a murderous criminal kingpin, and several nonlethal rescue attempts resulted in a hostage situation with life-threatening results -- Jabba the Hutt's actions were not just criminal, they were positively odious. Luke Skywalker and his compatriots had every right to kill the vile Hutt to save themselves, he was their captor and attempted executioner. Anybody who was killed over the pit of Carkoon was a casualty of their own doing, most wanted to harm Skywalker and his friends, and those who did not participate in those felonious actions still were culpable for their own deaths by aligning themselves with a known criminal organization -- their deaths were implied the moment they decided to side with vicious killer like Jabba the Hutt who already had numerous powerful enemies long before he met Luke Skywalker.



"It was unfortunate that he had to basically Kill his dad to become a Jedi, but he did it anyway, for his personal status(maybe being a Jedi got him some extras in that world, I dunno), and that is selfish."
I would argue that you are missing the point that Luke found a way to become a Jedi without killing his father. Yoda never said Luke HAD to kill Vader, only confront him. Luke stopped short of killing Vader, he beat him and took a robotic hand, but let him live; it was the backlash from his destruction of the Emperor that ultimately killed Darth Vader.

Kidhuman
07-17-2004, 10:09 PM
"He could of escaped that night, but he didnt, he could of freed everyone in there and snuck out with his boys. But he didnt"
How do you know that Luke could have freed himself and his friends? Luke doesn't take off the cuffs, the skiff guard does. In Jabba's palace, it's already proved that there's often someone watching and ready to nark 'em out and bust 'em.


Jedi mind tricks on them all. And yes, I do believe Luke could have removed the cuffs. By playcating Jabba, and making himself look weak and not escaping, it set his plan into motion even further. He foresaw the Pit of Carkoon as the battleground where he would murder and slaughter them all with his crew of rebels.




"Planned and pre-meditated murder in the eyes of this judge."
First on this, Your Honor ;), I'd argue that we don't know what Luke's intent was, he DOES warn Jabba repeatedly that bad stuff is about to go down, perhaps he got a flash of this future and was trying to PREVENT it by having a multi-tiered plan. At every step after failing to free his friends through discussion, Luke warned Jabba that his actions would lead to his destruction.


You see, I can not buy this multi-tiered plan theroy. Say this, if, IF, Leia would of gotten out with Han after she freed him, what about Chewie, and the droids. Lando could of walked out. He would of had to go back in there for Chewbacca and the droids. And even then, he would of had to kill to get them.


Secondly, even if you don't accept that argument, Luke's companion was being illegally held in a state of near-death by a murderous criminal kingpin, and several nonlethal rescue attempts resulted in a hostage situation with life-threatening results -- Jabba the Hutt's actions were not just criminal, they were positively odious. Luke Skywalker and his compatriots had every right to kill the vile Hutt to save themselves, he was their captor and attempted executioner. Anybody who was killed over the pit of Carkoon was a casualty of their own doing, most wanted to harm Skywalker and his friends, and those who did not participate in those felonious actions still were culpable for their own deaths by aligning themselves with a known criminal organization -- their deaths were implied the moment they decided to side with vicious killer like Jabba the Hutt who already had numerous powerful enemies long before he met Luke Skywalker.


But Luke put himself in the predicament to set the plan in motion. R2 is the key to it all with the hidden Saber.



"It was unfortunate that he had to basically Kill his dad to become a Jedi, but he did it anyway, for his personal status(maybe being a Jedi got him some extras in that world, I dunno), and that is selfish."
I would argue that you are missing the point that Luke found a way to become a Jedi without killing his father. Yoda never said Luke HAD to kill Vader, only confront him. Luke stopped short of killing Vader, he beat him and took a robotic hand, but let him live; it was the backlash from his destruction of the Emperor that ultimately killed Darth Vader.

Luke took a huge chance betting it all on Vader. He could of stood there and watched him end up like his step brother. If he would have done that, the Alliance still would have succeeded killing both of them when the DS2 blew up. And if that would of happened, it wouldnt of mattered if Luke became a Jedi or not. He basically had to defeat Vader and kill him. If he would have survived and gotten off the DS, how do we know if he would turn back to the darkside?

stillakid
07-18-2004, 09:38 AM
Stilla, the reason I'd dismiss Luke as the falling Jedi is because it's too easy, it's too obvious, and it's yet another trilogy centered around Luke. Leia, on the other hand, has the most mysterious background of the Skywalker clan and has untold, unchecked Force abilities which could be coupled with her desire to save the galaxy could end up turning against her. From the EU, we know she eventually becomes a Jedi, and certainly being tortured at the hands of her own biological father could have left scars.


"There's no setup for it...no foundation."
- Except that we are told on-screen that Leia has Force abilities and is the last possible weapon against Vader & the Emp should something happen to Luke. This weapon could ultimately be used for the Dark Side even with the best of intetions because Yoda and Obi-Wan aren't around to give her the proper training.


"the Darkside (which he has already begun down that path which Yoda warned him about)"
What Yoda said was that if Luke starts down the dark path, forever will it dominate his destiny. Your interpretation is that Luke simply will slip into his dark side patterns again, but that is not the only way it could be interpreted; it could just as easily be that once he's tasted the Dark Side and beaten it within him, his teaching others how to destroy it could come back and bite him when they are not as able as he and his dark destiny is to stop the monster he has unintentionally created.


"I don't recall ever hearing the justification for having Leia be the one to turn bad."
Then your memory fails you, as I've already discussed that with you in at least 1, if not several, previous threads.

----.

So your main objection to it is that it centers on the main characters? :confused: Isn't that why they call them "main characters"?

I do see your reasoning behind Leia, however from where I'm sitting, it's that idea that is "too easy." As you mention, the audience leaves ROTJ believing that Luke stepped back from the brink of disaster just in the nick of time thus saving himself and his father from eternal damnation of the darkside. Everybody goes home happy. :)

...But, over the course of the following 3 films...slowly....subtley...a different picture of Luke emerges. As the purge of Imperial influence advances and the reconstruction of the Republic continues, certain "difficulties" crop up now and again which are of particular consternation to Luke "the good guy" Skywalker. Recalling how just a little wee bit of nudging the boundries between the good and darksides resulted in him saving his dad and the galaxy, it's only natural for Luke to repeat those behaviors. The justification of course being that it's for the good of everyone. And besides, who'll notice? The begins a pattern that grows throughout the trilogy until it finally catches up to him as his own sister stands in his way. Luke is so focused on the perceived goal of reconstruction that he has failed to see the forest for the trees. Now Leia is there as a mirror to show him what he has become. Remember, way back when, Yoda did say "If you leave now, save them you could, but you would destroy all for what they have fought and suffered." One could take the short view and relate it solely to the events in ROTJ. Or you could expand upon the idea and realize that Luke's determination to undo the damage of his father ultimately takes hold of his own soul and leads him unwittingly down the same path of "the ends justifying the means."

Of course, this line of thinking really only works if Anakin is shown to join the darkside because he believes that it is the right thing. But as we know so far, he is just a big crybaby who isn't getting laid. :rolleyes: Hardly the lofty idealist that we were hoping for.

scruffziller
07-18-2004, 02:27 PM
He also never mourned them. He just went back to Ben and said he was going to Alderaan.

But when Ben was cut down,he got on the Falcon and was mourning this man he hardly knew really. Luke did not mourn his family, but he did a man he hardly knew. WHats up with that? He is evil I say, like his father before him.
I think it was just bad acting.:D

But that could start another thread. "What unintentional inconsistencies in the films become the power behind the story of Star Wars.(like Ben's saber fizzling out-"your powers are weak old man.")

Bosskman
07-18-2004, 06:06 PM
Interesting point about Leia JT, but I don't think she was justified in killing Jabba. That is the one thing that always bothered me about the OT. Leia murdered Jabba. He himself was of no immediate threat to her at all. He was basically a helpless tub of lard. She could have escaped without killing him.

Leia's main flaw IMO is that she cares so much for the "greater good" that she forgets that the greater is made up of individuals. Her story arc comes full circle when she realizes that relationships with people are what's most important, not her abstract political principles. Look how torn SHE is when she finds out that not only is Luke her brother but Vader is her father. I know that "hold me speach" of hers is one of the most cheesy lines in the whole saga but she really is broken up over Luke's revelations.

Droid
07-19-2004, 01:40 PM
KH, you said "It was unfortunate that he had to basically Kill his dad to become a Jedi, but he did it anyway, for his personal status(maybe being a Jedi got him some extras in that world, I dunno), and that is selfish." It was not selfish for Luke to do what Yoda and Ben told him to do, confront Vader. And facing the two most powerful sources of evil in the universe is not selfish. That's like arguing all martyrs are just in it for the glory and so a statue of them will be built later.

You also said, "And JT, I gotta know why you think Leia should become the evil one? I am with Stillakid, it should and must be Luke." I'm sorry, but if the only story that could have happened in the next three movies was for a major character to turn evil count me out. Is this really the limit of what can happen in the Star Wars universe? Skywalkers constantly rotating between a state of good and evil? I'm sorry. The story is done after six movies. We don't need more.

stillakid
07-19-2004, 03:40 PM
Luke took a huge chance betting it all on Vader. He could of stood there and watched him end up like his step brother. If he would have done that, the Alliance still would have succeeded killing both of them when the DS2 blew up. And if that would of happened, it wouldnt of mattered if Luke became a Jedi or not. He basically had to defeat Vader and kill him. If he would have survived and gotten off the DS, how do we know if he would turn back to the darkside?
I disagree with that. Luke's mission wasn't necessarily to "kill" Vader...well, actually it was...in the sense that he wanted to kill the personality of Vader while hopefully retaining the body and spirit of Anakin. So while he left the group to embark on a personal vendetta of sorts, it just so happened to have a two-fold benefit which was both good for his own psyche and equally as good for the Rebellion.


Leia's main flaw IMO is that she cares so much for the "greater good" that she forgets that the greater is made up of individuals. .
I don't know that I'd consider it a "flaw." Fictional characters are nothing more than "point of view" toward whatever theme the author is writing about. In this instance, Luke represents the intimate while Leia represents the broader scale. While some crossover is bound to occur, suggesting that each of them mimic the other results in a story which has identical characterizations. Leia's concern for the greater good is a lesson to all in the audience who dwell too much on their own personal well-being. But Lucas offered us Luke as an example of how a nobody from nowhere can achieve their dreams...but also a warning of how chasing those dreams so singularly can ultimately be destructive. Luke and Leia act as a balance.


Is this really the limit of what can happen in the Star Wars universe? Skywalkers constantly rotating between a state of good and evil? I'm sorry. The story is done after six movies. We don't need more.

While you make a respectable point (concerning maybe getting bored with it), the primary focus of any story remains around it's main characters and the changes they go through. A Post-quel that didn't center itself around "the Skywalkers" would be nothing more than glorified Expanded Universe material.

Besides, my suggestion (based on a friend's ideas) is the best conceivable avenue to follow given what we already know about the characters and situations. I'm sure that there are other extraneous stories relating to the rebuilding that could be told, but if we were to stick with the Skywalkers, then Leia has to be martyred in order to save the fallen son.

Kidhuman
07-19-2004, 07:56 PM
KH, you said "It was unfortunate that he had to basically Kill his dad to become a Jedi, but he did it anyway, for his personal status(maybe being a Jedi got him some extras in that world, I dunno), and that is selfish." It was not selfish for Luke to do what Yoda and Ben told him to do, confront Vader. And facing the two most powerful sources of evil in the universe is not selfish. That's like arguing all martyrs are just in it for the glory and so a statue of them will be built later.

You never know what runs through the minds of man. And yes, when he agreed to go on the mission with Han, he basically enrolled in a mission. He did not fufill his mission, but instead, left for his own personal mission. In which world is that not selfish? The SW universe?



You also said, "And JT, I gotta know why you think Leia should become the evil one? I am with Stillakid, it should and must be Luke." I'm sorry, but if the only story that could have happened in the next three movies was for a major character to turn evil count me out. Is this really the limit of what can happen in the Star Wars universe? Skywalkers constantly rotating between a state of good and evil? I'm sorry. The story is done after six movies. We don't need more.

Well, if it progressed in the "Life of Luke" this is what it must and should be about. Fast fowarding into the future would be dumb. Follow the story line. The only suitable EU story I would accept would be Zahn's trilogy.

Kidhuman
07-19-2004, 08:01 PM
I disagree with that. Luke's mission wasn't necessarily to "kill" Vader...well, actually it was...in the sense that he wanted to kill the personality of Vader while hopefully retaining the body and spirit of Anakin. So while he left the group to embark on a personal vendetta of sorts, it just so happened to have a two-fold benefit which was both good for his own psyche and equally as good for the Rebellion.

If Anakin was to have walked off the DS2, what kind of life would he of had? No one would of trusted him. I sure as hell wouldnt. The only one that would of given him the time of day is Luke. And then from there, we have father and Son ruling the galaxy. What a twist that would have been. He had no choice but to kill him or die and he knew it.

JediTricks
07-20-2004, 12:31 AM
You see, I can not buy this multi-tiered plan theroy. Say this, if, IF, Leia would of gotten out with Han after she freed him, what about Chewie, and the droids. Lando could of walked out. He would of had to go back in there for Chewbacca and the droids. And even then, he would of had to kill to get them.Chewie is not a main prize and the droids aren't important to Jabba at all, Lando probably could have freed Chewie and R2 could have freed 3PO all at once then. And it's "could HAVE", not "could OF". :p But the point is we don't know, we don't know what is in their heads on this, we can only go by what's on-screen and maybe what's in the script since that's where the motivation came from.



But Luke put himself in the predicament to set the plan in motion. R2 is the key to it all with the hidden Saber. That's not a response to what I said though, Luke was trying to save his friend who was a near-dead hostage from an evil gangster crime lord, and he has no duty to wander in stupidly and just start hacking people to bits with his saber only to get caught and squander his best chance at saving his friend. He could have had R2 slip him the saber at any time beforehand and tried to fight his way out from the center of the crime lord's palace full of cutthroats, thieves, and murderous bounty hunters but chose a more effective manner of saving Han and his other friends. And R2 holding the saber isn't the biggest key to the killing of Jabba and his criminal organization, the barge's main gun was -- Jabba brought the ultimate weapon over the Dune Sea with him.



He basically had to defeat Vader and kill him. Says who? That's YOUR assumption.


Luke took a huge chance betting it all on Vader. He could of stood there and watched him end up like his step brother. If he would have done that, the Alliance still would have succeeded killing both of them when the DS2 blew up. And if that would of happened, it wouldnt of mattered if Luke became a Jedi or not. That was Luke's intention, he said as much, it was to distract the Emperor long enough so that the Rebellion could destroy the Death Star with Luke, Vader, and Palpatine all on board.




So your main objection to it is that it centers on the main characters? :confused: Isn't that why they call them "main characters"? Well, that's not what I said, so no.



Recalling how just a little wee bit of nudging the boundries between the good and darksides resulted in him saving his dad and the galaxy, it's only natural for Luke to repeat those behaviors. I think you just slipped, first you claim that it is my reasoning that is too easy, then you go and say that it is only "natural"that Luke repeat these behaviors. Which is it, Leia's the obvious route or Luke is? You can't discount my theory with your claim since that right there undermines your entire claim that your theory ISN'T too easy. Like I said before, I definitely see where you were going, I just think it's too well-traveled, especially in the last few decades, too modern and increasingly-common a storyline for something that has been made to be timeless and evocative of pre-'60s cinematic notions. Just because the main hero falling plot is more in vogue now doesn't mean it has to be applied to Star Wars.

Plus, and this is mostly just personal taste, I've had enough of the Skywalker boys being the focus of trilogies, we need more Leia as the focus, an anti-hero who must be redeemed because it'd be too hard to witness her destruction for Luke & Han and the Galaxy might not be able to take it, politically. We know very little about Leia and tons about Luke and now Anakin, what better way to make her even more of a "big" character than to give her the villain role? :D




Interesting point about Leia JT, but I don't think she was justified in killing Jabba. That is the one thing that always bothered me about the OT. Leia murdered Jabba. He himself was of no immediate threat to her at all. He was basically a helpless tub of lard. She could have escaped without killing him. Well, if Leia hadn't killed him, he could have called for someone to immediately kill her. And even if she had still gotten away from that, he may have put a massive "dead or alive" bounty out on her head and all her friends' heads for their actions that day. Plus, he's a vile gangster, it says so right in the opening crawl ;) so in Lucas's simplistic viewpoint coming from the serials, the Hutt deserved ultimate justice for plenty of his actions. That last one is a little heavy-handed, but Leia never seemed like a "letter of the law over spirit of the law" type of gal to me.



Well, if nothing else, at least it's nice to talk passionately about Star Wars again.

Bosskman
07-20-2004, 05:09 AM
JT, I still don't agree. I hate to bring up LOTR (well actually I don't but, you know) but the whole situation smacks of Bilbo (and later Frodo and Sam) not murdering Gollum. He was of no immmediate threat to them, just like Jabba to Leia, and he definately sought revenge (as Jabba certainly would have had he survived), and Gollum, like Jabba, certainly deserved death (insert speech by Gandalf here) but the difference is that Leia took it upon herself to kill Jabba, which was not her right to do so. It never sat right with me, even as a kid. I don't think this was intentional character development by GL. I think he is pretty sloppy with his storytelling. In terms of the finished product of what the film is, though, it makes Leia out to be, as you said the "letter of the law" type, but she follows her own laws.

Leia seems to be to the OT what Mace and the Jedi council are to the PT: putting ideals before people. Though not a Jedi, Leia is like the old council, putting the rules before everything else so much that they don't realize their're only being tools of the dark side until it's too late. Luke is the only one in the whole Saga (with the possible exception of Qui-Gon) who realizes the importance of putting people first. Even Yoda and Ben think Luke should "follow the rules" so to speak. I know this is not how Lucas intended it, and he's trying to show that putting people before ideals is what caused Anakin's fall, but fortunately, I don't see this in the outcome of the films at all. These films have taken on a life of their own and that's why they're so appealing IMO. Lucas be dammed. Anyways, my point is, Leia is not the noble princess that people think (and Lucas wants us to think) she is. She, while good intentioned, is even more likely to give in to her anger than Luke. Luke didn't want to kill Jabba or his goons. He had to. They had his best friend prisoner and he had to be rescued. There is a big difference between killing someone who is trying to kill you NOW and killing someone who might try to have you killed later. If I were Leia, my first instinct might be to do just what she did, it would no be the right thing though.

stillakid
07-20-2004, 09:01 AM
If Anakin was to have walked off the DS2, what kind of life would he of had? No one would of trusted him. I sure as hell wouldnt. The only one that would of given him the time of day is Luke. And then from there, we have father and Son ruling the galaxy. What a twist that would have been. He had no choice but to kill him or die and he knew it.
I'm not saying that Vader would have walked off the Death Star. I honestly don't think Luke gave that a thought. He mostly figured that he would get blown to smithereens along with the rest of the joint. But that doesn't mean that he went there to kill Vader either. He wanted to save his father's soul. My guess, but he most likely figured that even if he did save daddy's soul from hell, Palps would have them both killed lickety-split. Luckily for him, in the process, Palpatine was killed as well as the Vader-personae. Most likely an unexpected, yet welcome, by-product. Once that happened, Luke saw an opportunity and dragged Anakin's dying body to the nearest taxicab. But what if Anakin had lived? Would anyone else care that "Vader" was gone? Doubtful, but then again, at this point Anakin was sincerely redeemed which also means that he accepted responsibility for all the terrible things he had done. He would have gone to trial willingly and not mounted any significant defense to get out of punishment. He would have died anyway. He most likely knew that which is why he didn't fight harder to stay alive.


I think you just slipped, first you claim that it is my reasoning that is too easy, then you go and say that it is only "natural"that Luke repeat these behaviors. Which is it, Leia's the obvious route or Luke is? You can't discount my theory with your claim since that right there undermines your entire claim that your theory ISN'T too easy. Like I said before, I definitely see where you were going, I just think it's too well-traveled, especially in the last few decades, too modern and increasingly-common a storyline for something that has been made to be timeless and evocative of pre-'60s cinematic notions. Just because the main hero falling plot is more in vogue now doesn't mean it has to be applied to Star Wars. .
Okay, so your main objection is because it's been done before? Should that necessarily negate the most proper storyline for this particular tale? I personally don't think so. Going against the grain "just because" is a lousy justification for writing anything. A story is what it is and trying to force it into a different mold just to be different is a recipe for disaster. Look at the Prequels... :ermm:


Plus, and this is mostly just personal taste, I've had enough of the Skywalker boys being the focus of trilogies, we need more Leia as the focus, an anti-hero who must be redeemed because it'd be too hard to witness her destruction for Luke & Han and the Galaxy might not be able to take it, politically. We know very little about Leia and tons about Luke and now Anakin, what better way to make her even more of a "big" character than to give her the villain role? :D.But there is NOTHING in the story thus far to lend justification for having Leia turn out to be the bad guy. As Bosskman points out as well, Leia's whole life has been for the greater good. She is willing to put herself in the line of fire just to advance the cause. That's called martyrdom and I don't suspect you'll find many "sith" travelling that road. Again, if you want to know more about Leia and how often she douches, I submit that the Expanded Universe arena is more suitable for those "get to know me" scenarios. But the primary story does center around the Skywalker boys. That's the way it has been set up and is the way it should continue. It shouldn't change "just because."





Well, if nothing else, at least it's nice to talk passionately about Star Wars again.
Yet here we are arguing over the direction of something that will never be. I'm sure Fat Rick M. would have a good chuckle over this one. lol ;)


Leia seems to be to the OT what Mace and the Jedi council are to the PT: putting ideals before people. Though not a Jedi, Leia is like the old council, putting the rules before everything else so much that they don't realize their're only being tools of the dark side until it's too late. Luke is the only one in the whole Saga (with the possible exception of Qui-Gon) who realizes the importance of putting people first. Even Yoda and Ben think Luke should "follow the rules" so to speak. Yes, except Leia hasn't and most likely never would be an unwitting tool of the darkside. When she had the chance to save her own planet (Alderaan) in exchange for giving up the Rebellion, she refused to do it. She must have known that they'd find nothing on Dantooine and then return to threaten Alderaan again. Even when Tarkin immediately decided to blow the place up, she still didn't retract and give up the good guys. She was always about the greater good and the lives of individuals were less important than the cause of the many.



Anyways, my point is, Leia is not the noble princess that people think (and Lucas wants us to think) she is. She, while good intentioned, is even more likely to give in to her anger than Luke. Luke didn't want to kill Jabba or his goons. He had to. They had his best friend prisoner and he had to be rescued. There is a big difference between killing someone who is trying to kill you NOW and killing someone who might try to have you killed later. If I were Leia, my first instinct might be to do just what she did, it would no be the right thing though. I'm torn on that one. Maybe Leia didn't have to kill Jabba, but you guys are assuming that she didn't have to. Maybe she did. Who knows? She wasn't free at that point if you'll remember. In fact she didn't know if anyone was going to come to unlock her. All she knew was that her friends were out there fighting off the enemy who had an elevated position on them. They needed help and NOW. So lacking a key or any other immediate means of escape, she realized that she first had to immobilize the slug so he couldn't stop her from looking for a way out. That was her motivation...not revenge or anger or anything. It was purely pragmatic. Again, for her, individuals are less important than the cause, so I'd wager that if she had to go down with the ship, she would have...except that this specific "cause" (Jabba's influence) wasn't as worthy to die for as the bigger picture, so getting out alive held more sway.

Droid
07-20-2004, 10:38 AM
So now Leia was wrong to kill Jabba? Come on people. This is not a story of pacifists. This is Star WARS, not Star I Will Not Fight Unless it Would Prevent My Immediate Death and it Wasn't my choice to be in this Situation in the First Place. If Leia isn't justified in using deadly force against Jabba, how bad do things have to get before the Alliance is allowed to use deadly force? If someone died when the Rebels stole the Death Star plans right before a New Hope were the Rebels no better than the Empire? Were the Rebels wrong to attack the Death Star, knowing full well how many people (both Rebels and Imperials) would die? Was Han wrong to enter the asteroid field knowing full well those poor TIE Fighter pilots (who Han probably knew were lesser pilots than he was) who followed him would probably crash and burn? Shouldn't Luke and Leia have tried to talk the Biker Scouts into joining the Alliance rather than so thoughtlessly KILLING THEM? The Biker Scouts weren't trying to hurt Luke or Leia. Matter of fact they were trying to GET AWAY and mean old Luke and Leia chased them down and KILLED them. Frankly I think everyone in the story is pure evil. Except maybe Jocasta Nu. She just liked her archives.

JediTricks
07-20-2004, 09:33 PM
Bosskman, I don't think you can compare letting Gollum live to killing Jabba, Jabba WAS an immediate threat as he could have called someone over to kill her, or worse regained composure over the situation and mounted a counter-attack which would have destroyed all the Rebs. Plus, Gollum wasn't a crime lord known for killing indiscriminately, he was a pathetic ring-junkie. ;) And in the long term, Jabba would have put bounties out on our Reb heroes so high they would have been killed eventually. Hell, Jabba had killed an innocent slave dancer only a few days before because she didn't want to dance for a minute, and then Jabba had Leia replace Oola as his slave girl prize - once she destroyed Jabba's console, she KNEW he'd kill her for it because the Hutt killed Oola for far less in the most horribly cruel way.


I'm not sure I agree with you about Leia putting rules before people, becoming a major figure in the Rebel Alliance is definitely putting the good of the people ahead of the rules. She proved in ANH that she would rather die for her ideals than betray the rebellion. We also never see her give in to anger except when allowing Chewie to strangle Lando.



at this point Anakin was sincerely redeemed which also means that he accepted responsibility for all the terrible things he had done. He would have gone to trial willingly and not mounted any significant defense to get out of punishment. He would have died anyway. I dunno about that, Vader only kills his subordinate officers, which he probably has been granted liberty to do so anyway and certainly those officers are of the very evil corrupt government system that the Rebellion itself sought to destroy. Vader's attack on the Tantive IV's crew was a military mission, though killing Capt Antilles probably is his biggest obsticle to overcome in such a trial (and I'm sure Luke would argue the case valiantly). There's probably a ton of EU stuff to take into account, as well as Ani's massacre of the Tuskens, but they're not REALLY people. :evil:



Okay, so your main objection is because it's been done before? Should that necessarily negate the most proper storyline for this particular tale? Not just that it's been done before, but that it's been done before A LOT lately for my tastes. If the story is going to have a mythological quality to it, it's got to feel fresh AND timeless, but this could not be at this time.



But there is NOTHING in the story thus far to lend justification for having Leia turn out to be the bad guy. Her desire to do good, to make the whole galaxy a better place, coupled with her newfound Force potential. Using the Dark Side for the best of intentions, even Luke faced that in ROTJ.



But the primary story does center around the Skywalker boys. That's the way it has been set up and is the way it should continue. It shouldn't change "just because." That's a poor argument, the first trilogy is about Anakin, the second about Luke, Leia's part of the Skywalker family too, she has just as much - if not more - right to be the focus of the 3rd trilogy based on that.




Frankly I think everyone in the story is pure evil. Except maybe Jocasta Nu. She just liked her archives. She is the worst one of all! It is her hubris that ultimately starts the Clone Wars prematurely, if she had not been so arrogant about her archives' infalibility, Obi-Wan would have been able to expand upon his investigation still on Corsucant. Damn that old woman, she is the real evil in the universe -- I bet she shhh'ed Ani one too many times thus pushing him to the Dark Side, too! :evil: ;) :D

stillakid
07-20-2004, 10:23 PM
I dunno about that, Vader only kills his subordinate officers, which he probably has been granted liberty to do so anyway and certainly those officers are of the very evil corrupt government system that the Rebellion itself sought to destroy. Vader's attack on the Tantive IV's crew was a military mission, though killing Capt Antilles probably is his biggest obsticle to overcome in such a trial (and I'm sure Luke would argue the case valiantly). There's probably a ton of EU stuff to take into account, as well as Ani's massacre of the Tuskens, but they're not REALLY people. :evil:
I think what I had in mind was his role in the early destruction of the Republic (which we haven't seen yet so I can't really provide details). We are led to believe that he helped sell out and massacre the Jedi and maybe even worse. Also, as a leader of the Empire, he is responsible for whatever terror that organization exacted whether he directly pulled the trigger or not. Our own Nazi trials would be a good parallel. But whatever his specific crimes, being a "new man," I suggest that our hypothetically alive Anakin would acquiese without question and accept his fate.


Not just that it's been done before, but that it's been done before A LOT lately for my tastes. If the story is going to have a mythological quality to it, it's got to feel fresh AND timeless, but this could not be at this time.

Her desire to do good, to make the whole galaxy a better place, coupled with her newfound Force potential. Using the Dark Side for the best of intentions, even Luke faced that in ROTJ.

That's a poor argument, the first trilogy is about Anakin, the second about Luke, Leia's part of the Skywalker family too, she has just as much - if not more - right to be the focus of the 3rd trilogy based on that.

From the looks of it, we're actually on the same page except that I'd have Luke go bad unknowingly while you'd have Leia knowingly take the Darkpath to justify her ends. In my version, she'd play as much a role as anyone else and probably more as our heroes became the primary focus in the rebuilding of the Republic. Fear not, Leia would be quite prominent...she just wouldn't be the one to go bad. It's not in her nature.

JediTricks
07-20-2004, 11:18 PM
No, I don't think I'd have Leia knowingly fall to the darkside, she'd just be acting without Yoda or Obi-Wan guidance trying to do the right thing, still a little confused and angry about Vader being her father, and ultimately the Dark Side would take hold.

Oh, and I don't think reformed Ani would get the death penalty, he'd get like life or 20 years. That's really more what I was going for, it happened in the Nazi war crimes tribunal as well IIRC.

stillakid
07-21-2004, 08:57 AM
No, I don't think I'd have Leia knowingly fall to the darkside, she'd just be acting without Yoda or Obi-Wan guidance trying to do the right thing, still a little confused and angry about Vader being her father, and ultimately the Dark Side would take hold.
So again, we're really on the same page except you're swapping out Luke for Leia...only that Luke's motivation would be for the sake of good (so the moral of his story is that the ends justify the means) while Leia's motivation is hinged on revenge of sorts.


Oh, and I don't think reformed Ani would get the death penalty, he'd get like life or 20 years. That's really more what I was going for, it happened in the Nazi war crimes tribunal as well IIRC.
Ok, maybe not Nazis. Let's wait to see what happens to Hussein. I'd wager it'd be more like him. I think that for as bad a guy as Saddam is/was, he most likely really...no, really, believed that what he was doing was the right thing for everyone. Just look at how all those various factions are competing already under our rule. Hussein likely saw the same kind of nonsense and realized that diplomacy wouldn't work with religious fanatics like that. So he ruled with an iron fist to keep everyone in line. This very much appears to be the way Anakin is meant to metamorphasize into the Vader personae and has everything to do with the way I see Luke travelling that same path.

JediTricks
07-21-2004, 05:56 PM
No, not revenge, also her desire to do good is what turns her. Here she is, once described as the galaxy's last hope should Luke fall, the last member of the Skywalker family that is powerful with the Force (which I guess explains why she's a crack shot in the OT ;)), and yet her upbringing is from the traditional way of the politician, making deals for the better good, trained to balance the issues and try to mediate a middle ground that works for everybody. Leia's only teacher in the ways of the Force is her brother who is a relatively inexperienced Jedi Knight and has had no chance to learn from mistakes in terms of teaching. And then she's probably haunted a little by the thought of her own birth-father, Darth Vader, having been her mortal enemy for years and even tortured her aboard the Death Star, that would probably have an affect on her. (and should she ever go to court for killing Jabba, she could just blame it on that and get off scott free ;)) But her motives would be to do good, not revenge.


If this were Palpatine on trial, I could see him being sentenced to death, but this is Vader and he's not the leader, so I suspect he'd be spared actual execution. Look at other war crimes tribunals, not as many executions as one would expect.

stillakid
07-21-2004, 10:52 PM
No, not revenge, also her desire to do good is what turns her. Here she is, once described as the galaxy's last hope should Luke fall....


Exactly! Stop right there. She is the last hope in case Luke falls. And since he started down the darkpath, it forever will dominate his destiny. And coincidence of coincidences, it's his own sister who will pop in to show him just how far he's travelled down the wrong road. Just as Luke did so many years ago, Leia will put herself in the line of martyrdom so that her brother may see the light. And he does...too late for Leia, but her sacrifice brings the "balance" the galaxy as the bastard children of the Midichlorian scourge finally die off. The end. :)

2-1B
07-22-2004, 03:50 AM
Leia "murdered" Jabba ? :confused:

What a bunch of nonsense . . . tied up on a chain, enslaved in a sex outfit, while her "helpless" captor DROOLS IN WAIT OVER THE IMPENDING EXECUTIONS OF HER FRIENDS THAT HE HIMSELF ORDERED . . . come on and get real here.

I'm all for debate and disagreement but come on, this is ridiculous. :D

Kidhuman, I still can't believe that you think Luke is a murderer. Man, I hope you don't let your kids watch Star Wars because it might give them a bad role model. Here I grew up thinking Luke was some kind of hero, whatever THAT is ? :p

Kidhuman
07-22-2004, 08:20 AM
Kidhuman, I still can't believe that you think Luke is a murderer. Man, I hope you don't let your kids watch Star Wars because it might give them a bad role model. Here I grew up thinking Luke was some kind of hero, whatever THAT is ? :p

Yes I do, and I show them how Anakin was led to the darkside and how Luke is headed down the same path. :D

2-1B
07-22-2004, 12:59 PM
Stop it. Right now.

Kidhuman
07-22-2004, 01:01 PM
Stop it. Right now.

Oh man that is hilarious. For some reason I can not stop laughing.

El Chuxter
07-22-2004, 01:05 PM
Y'know, I'd not dispute you one bit if you pointed out Luke getting red in the face and slashing at his pappy to your kids, saying he's going down the path of the dark side.

But in Jabba's Palace, I just can't see it. He's merely doing what needs to be done. He gave the slug plenty of chances to get away.

Is it any worse than Mace strolling into the arena to save his friends and killing Jango Fett, a reek, and countless Geonosians, as well as sending at least as many Clonetroopers to their deaths?

Kidhuman
07-22-2004, 01:09 PM
WEll yes, the Jedi were backed into a corner and did not put themselves in that corner. Especially when it was part of the masterplan anyhow that the Jedi arrive there.

El Chuxter
07-22-2004, 01:19 PM
"Do you want me to let them die?"

"If you honor what they fight for, yes."

This is coming from the guy who sent an army to rescue one Knight, one Padawan, and one Senator. The Republic and Jedi could've easily survived without them. There is the Battle Droid factory to consider, but it's still a tad on the rash side.

The Alliance could not have survived without Han and especially not without Leia. Luke rushes out on his training but, after confronting Vader, he tries to finish what he has begun (to quote Yoda again).

Is it better to leave two things unfinished, or to realize the folly of one's actions and try to finish one before returning to the other?

What if Luke went in without a hidden saber? He'd be dead. Period. He knew it was likely he'd have to kill Jabba, but not a definite.

Droid
07-22-2004, 01:23 PM
KH, are you telling us Mace couldn't have:

a) knocked Jango's weapons out of his hands using the Force
b) choked Jango unconscious using the Force
c) thrown Jango around the arena using the Force
d) chopped the hand holding the gun off and not decapitated him

How was Mace not turning to the Dark Side when he unnecessarily "murdered" Jango? Didn't you see the anger Mace displayed in the arena?

Kidhuman
07-22-2004, 08:39 PM
KH, are you telling us Mace couldn't have:

a) knocked Jango's weapons out of his hands using the Force
b) choked Jango unconscious using the Force
c) thrown Jango around the arena using the Force
d) chopped the hand holding the gun off and not decapitated him

How was Mace not turning to the Dark Side when he unnecessarily "murdered" Jango? Didn't you see the anger Mace displayed in the arena?


A) If he did he would of lowered his defenses and been killed by someone else
B) He'd be no better than Vader
C) see A
D) That he could have done.

I have discussed Mace earlier with his quick to behead Jango stuff. It was on another forum I do believe. ALl the speculation of Mace being "an undercover Jedi" and then him beheading Jango adds to the speculation. Either way I see it, it doesnt matter as Mace will die soon, either in EP3 or shortly after.


This is coming from the guy who sent an army to rescue one Knight, one Padawan, and one Senator. The Republic and Jedi could've easily survived without them. There is the Battle Droid factory to consider, but it's still a tad on the rash side.

In the transmission they got from Obi-Wan, all they knew is he was attacked by many. If and only if, the Jedi would of went in without the army, we would not be anticipating EP3


The Alliance could not have survived without Han and especially not without Leia. Luke rushes out on his training but, after confronting Vader, he tries to finish what he has begun (to quote Yoda again).

Yes, the alliance could have survived without Han, but we will never see that side of it, unless Lucas does some drastic changes. Luke left to "save" his friends on Bespin, but it cost him a hand. Stubborn was the Jedi that he had to leave his training to take care of a personal matter. Seems he does that alot.


Is it better to leave two things unfinished, or to realize the folly of one's actions and try to finish one before returning to the other?


If he never left Dagobah, nothing would have been unfinished. He could of met up with the alliance and then did what he had to do the right way. By actually using the force as an ally, instead of a weapon.


What if Luke went in without a hidden saber? He'd be dead. Period. He knew it was likely he'd have to kill Jabba, but not a definite.

He knew Jabba had to die, and by putting his friends in danger as well, by sending them there and making them follow every step of the plan is absurd. Would you want your friend to be tied to a fat slug?

And if he had gone in there with his saber, he would have been truthful, but he hid it, therefore mislead and lied. Not an honorable thing. Another darkside trait.

Bosskman
07-23-2004, 04:51 AM
I think my Gollum/Jabba comparison is valid in the sense that Gollum was WAY more of an immediate threat to Frodo & Sam than Jabba was to Leia. Gollum was not just some ring-junkie either. He was a murderer. He killed for the ring before and would do it again. He crawled through people's windows at night and ate babies out of their cribs. If that's not a murderer I don't know what is.

As for Jabba having Leia killed for wreaking his console: what about the other Hutts? Leia kills Jabba and the other Hutts just say "Oh well" and go on with their lives? While they bickered and fought among themselves, Hutts sought revenge on anyone who killed one of their kind. If Jabba was an immediate threat to Leia, he could have just rolled back and squashed her into pulp. He didn't because he couldn't. He was as helpless as a queen ant.

dr_evazan22
07-23-2004, 01:49 PM
Leia was always about the greater good and the lives of individuals were less important than the cause of the many.

"I like the forest, I just don't like trees."

For some reason, that was the first thing that popped into my mind when I read that.


Luke left to "save" his friends on Bespin, but it cost him a hand. Stubborn was the Jedi that he had to leave his training to take care of a personal matter. Seems he does that alot.

A personal matter? I would think leaving to get his dry cleaning would be a personal matter. Or going out partying and whoring. Leia and Han were all the family Luke had left in the universe. Luke's father was killed by Darth Vader (he still was under this impression at this point), and his aunt and uncle were killed by the Empire. He was selflessly going to do whatever he could to help them escape, not considering the consequences to himself. Selfless and heroic. I also think that his encounter on Cloud City did more to prepare him for becoming a Jedi then if he had stayed on Dag. Yoda and Old Ben (who, at this point in time fits nicely into the Jedi Council mentality of TPM) had an agenda (to stop the Emp and DV) and were too shortsighted to see more then the outcome that they saw.

The thought that ties Stilla's quote to this thing with Luke is that without INDIVIDUAL trees, there can be no forest.

Bosskman - I liked your comparison of Luke to Qui-Gon, following the Living Force.

JediTricks
07-23-2004, 07:52 PM
Exactly! Stop right there. She is the last hope in case Luke falls. And since he started down the darkpath, it forever will dominate his destiny. No, Leia *was* the last chance for the galaxy during the OT, but once Yoda died, there became nobody to train her except Luke, so if Luke falls, there is no way Leia could fulfill that claim. However, if Luke takes up the mantle to train the other that Yoda spoke of, and then that "other" (Leia) turns to the Dark Side while trying to save the galaxy, that also could be how the claim of the Dark Side dominating his destiny plays out.



Yes, the alliance could have survived without Han, but we will never see that side of it,HOLLLLLD on there, if Han was not part of the raid on Endor, the shield generator would not have been knocked out and the Rebellion would have been defeated over Endor once and for all.


Luke left to "save" his friends on Bespin, but it cost him a hand. But if Vader had not foreseen Luke coming to Bespin to rescue them, he might have been more brutal with his actions, and Lando might not have joined the Rebellion... and if that hadn't happened, the Rebels wouldn't have hung around the DS2 long enough to destroy it.


He knew Jabba had to die, and by putting his friends in danger as well, by sending them there and making them follow every step of the plan is absurd. Would you want your friend to be tied to a fat slug? You are basing a lot of your argument on the assumption that Luke not only knew precisely what was going to happen with Jabba, but that all the rest of Han's friends who went and tried to save him were following a direct plan that required that Leia be caught and enslaved by Jabba but only AFTER she defrosted Han, that Lando would NOT be caught, that Chewie definitely would be able to save Lando & Han at the Sarlaac, and that Han (who was blind and disoriented at the time, and had no way to know of the plan beforehand) would be able to stop Boba Fett seemingly by accident just in time to save Luke from being thwarted -- even Palpatine is not that much of a puppetmaster! I don't buy it, it doesn't fit with what we were shown previously about Force-users of any sort, and certainly that level of planning doesn't fit Luke's style.


And if he had gone in there with his saber, he would have been truthful, but he hid it, therefore mislead and lied. No, he strategized, he gambled that he could talk it out with Jabba first, and if not he had other options. If Luke had gone in with his saber, it would have either been taken away from him before he got to Jabba or he would have had to cut his way through all the henchmen that stood between.


Not an honorable thing. Another darkside trait. Like Obi-Wan in the cantina, right? This strict code of Jedi ethics that you seem to have assumed so much of doesn't hold so fast for Obi-Wan's actions in Mos Eisley, and wouldn't corrupting the mind of Sandtrooper also be less-than-honorable?




Gollum was not just some ring-junkie either. He was a murderer. He killed for the ring before and would do it again. As far as I know, none of our heroes actually knew this in LOTR, whereas in ROTJ Leia knew about Jabba killing lots of people, including the one she was forced to replace.


As for Jabba having Leia killed for wreaking his console: what about the other Hutts? Leia kills Jabba and the other Hutts just say "Oh well" and go on with their lives? EU not withstanding, who would have survived to tell these Hutts about Leia being the one who killed Jabba? Everybody at this little soiree was killed


If Jabba was an immediate threat to Leia, he could have just rolled back and squashed her into pulp. He didn't because he couldn't. He was as helpless as a queen ant. We don't know what type of damage he personally could inflict, I have to assume that Hutts actually have some level of lethality to them that we overlook by their fat, slug-like exterior or else how could they ever have started their criminal endeavours? But arguing that Jabba can't physically harm Leia (which I question), I still submit that he could have called over any number of people in the barge to come kill her.

stillakid
07-23-2004, 08:30 PM
No, Leia *was* the last chance for the galaxy during the OT, but once Yoda died, there became nobody to train her except Luke, so if Luke falls, there is no way Leia could fulfill that claim. However, if Luke takes up the mantle to train the other that Yoda spoke of, and then that "other" (Leia) turns to the Dark Side while trying to save the galaxy, that also could be how the claim of the Dark Side dominating his destiny plays out.

So with your vision of the Star Wars future, the only teacher left in the galaxy is a Jedi who unwittingly is headed down the darkpath (Luke) even though he (along with the audience) thinks he saved himself from that fate by his apparent selflessness in ROTJ. Therefore he being the only teacher left unwittingly teaches his primary student, Leia, incorrectly and despite both of their desires for a utopian society, they don't realize that they are using evil to fulfill their goals? In the end, you'd have two bad guys, both Skywalkers, who must be dealt with in Episode IX apparently by a brand new hero for the Post-quel.

Hmm, it could work... :ermm:

JediTricks
07-23-2004, 09:02 PM
Therefore he being the only teacher left unwittingly teaches his primary student, Leia, incorrectly and despite both of their desires for a utopian society, they don't realize that they are using evil to fulfill their goals? In the end, you'd have two bad guys, both Skywalkers, who must be dealt with in Episode IX apparently by a brand new hero for the Post-quel.No, while your interpretation of that IS somewhat interesting, that is not exactly what I getting at. Every time I respond to what you say on this matter, you take a few elements of what I said and twist it into something else claiming you're just interpretting what I said, maybe this is my fault for not making myself clear enough but it also feels like you're going off on other tangents on purpose. I'll just edit what you said to explain where I was going in the hopes that it'll make more sense and lead to less frustration...

"Therefore he being the only teacher left unwittingly teaches one of his earliest students, Leia, inadequately and despite both of their desires for a utopian society, they don't realize that Leia ends up unwittingly using evil to fulfill her goals for Galactic peace until she's fallen to the Dark Side? In the end, Luke as a hero and failing mentor must somehow stop Leia (shades of Obi-Wan & Vader which I didn't totally realize I was using until just now) but hopefully without destroying her.

Kidhuman
07-23-2004, 09:58 PM
HOLLLLLD on there, if Han was not part of the raid on Endor, the shield generator would not have been knocked out and the Rebellion would have been defeated over Endor once and for all.

How do you know someone else couldnt of taken down the shield? Because Lucas didnt write it that way? SO, by your theory, the alliance needed no one but Luke, Leia, Han ,Chewie, Lando and the droids.




But if Vader had not foreseen Luke coming to Bespin to rescue them, he might have been more brutal with his actions, and Lando might not have joined the Rebellion... and if that hadn't happened, the Rebels wouldn't have hung around the DS2 long enough to destroy it.

If Vader didnt foresee LUke coming there, he probably wouldnt of went there.


You are basing a lot of your argument on the assumption that Luke not only knew precisely what was going to happen with Jabba, but that all the rest of Han's friends who went and tried to save him were following a direct plan that required that Leia be caught and enslaved by Jabba but only AFTER she defrosted Han, that Lando would NOT be caught, that Chewie definitely would be able to save Lando & Han at the Sarlaac, and that Han (who was blind and disoriented at the time, and had no way to know of the plan beforehand) would be able to stop Boba Fett seemingly by accident just in time to save Luke from being thwarted -- even Palpatine is not that much of a puppetmaster! I don't buy it, it doesn't fit with what we were shown previously about Force-users of any sort, and certainly that level of planning doesn't fit Luke's style.


Great shot kid thats one in a million. Aint nobody that Lucky to gamble that much and win. Hell I'm bringing Luke to Vegas next week.



No, he strategized, he gambled that he could talk it out with Jabba first, and if not he had other options. If Luke had gone in with his saber, it would have either been taken away from him before he got to Jabba or he would have had to cut his way through all the henchmen that stood between.

By who, a few Gam Guards? Bib Fortuna? They would of fell for the mind trick earlier.


Like Obi-Wan in the cantina, right? This strict code of Jedi ethics that you seem to have assumed so much of doesn't hold so fast for Obi-Wan's actions in Mos Eisley, and wouldn't corrupting the mind of Sandtrooper also be less-than-honorable?

Well, then Luke was also wrong for slapping the mind trick on Bibsy in the palace. I had forgotten all about that until now. The way I look at it, is the mind trick is fun, like telling your six year old son to go get a bucket of steam.

stillakid
07-23-2004, 11:53 PM
No, while your interpretation of that IS somewhat interesting, that is not exactly what I getting at. Every time I respond to what you say on this matter, you take a few elements of what I said and twist it into something else claiming you're just interpretting what I said, maybe this is my fault for not making myself clear enough but it also feels like you're going off on other tangents on purpose. I'll just edit what you said to explain where I was going in the hopes that it'll make more sense and lead to less frustration...

"Therefore he being the only teacher left unwittingly teaches one of his earliest students, Leia, inadequately and despite both of their desires for a utopian society, they don't realize that Leia ends up unwittingly using evil to fulfill her goals for Galactic peace until she's fallen to the Dark Side? In the end, Luke as a hero and failing mentor must somehow stop Leia (shades of Obi-Wan & Vader which I didn't totally realize I was using until just now) but hopefully without destroying her.


No, I get what you've been trying to say. ;) You want to believe that Luke really didn't start down the darkpath because you're tired of that "same ol' storyline of late" and don't want to see it repeated in a Post-quel. You'd rather allow Leia to break character and go bad. But I'll ask you this: If Luke achieved the impossible and didn't go down the darkpath despite Yoda's warning that it would happen once you started, then what stops Leia from going too far? See, for me it's so...no, let me reiterate...it's SO unlikely and unbelievable that the Leia we already know could (and would) go bad in that way that I would be hardpressed to suspend my disbelief for 6 hours in that scenario. It'd be like watching a biography of George W. Bush in which the last hour showed him having a lovely afternoon of barbeque and volleyball with the Clintons. :sur:

Bosskman
07-24-2004, 02:09 PM
The word is SEQUEL.

stillakid
07-24-2004, 11:10 PM
The word is SEQUEL.

Yeah, but I'm being slightly facetious while simultaneously trying to be specific about which trilogy I'm referring to. I realize that your world is pretty rigid, but try to be a little flexible here. Thanks. :D

JediTricks
07-25-2004, 09:27 PM
How do you know someone else couldnt of taken down the shield? Because Lucas didnt write it that way? SO, by your theory, the alliance needed no one but Luke, Leia, Han ,Chewie, Lando and the droids.Solo led the rebels on Endor, it was Solo's cunning that ultimately got the shield bunker's back door open in time for the rebs to blow up the generator. Sure, *maybe* we could guess at who else *might* have led this assault team to victory, but we don't have enough info to know who that would have been and if they would have been successful in their attempt. In the battle scene we have in ROTJ, who else on the scene there would have gotten the job done? Leia? She was wounded. Chewie? He didn't seem to have any idea what to do. R2? Seriously damaged. I guess maybe the one-eyed alien or the old guy in scout trooper uniform could have done it, or perhaps Wicket could have slipped on an AT-ST pilot helmet and yub-yubbed his way into getting the Imps to open the door.


If Vader didnt foresee LUke coming there, he probably wouldnt of went there. That doesn't track, Vader went to Cloud City because he was following the Falcon, not because he "foresaw" Luke showing up.


By who, a few Gam Guards? Bib Fortuna? They would of fell for the mind trick earlier. By the myriad of denizens standing between the front door and Jabba's dais. Hell, Luke couldn't even fire a blaster at the giant slug crimelord without some jerk grabbing his arm and pointing the gun away, and that was Luke using the element of surprise, you're suggesting he goes in there with his weapon at the ready before he even gets to the crowd. Luke needed help just taking down a dozen baddies over the dune sea, how would he have fared against 5 times that many while his friends were being held hostage and could have been killed at any point in Luke's attempt?


Well, then Luke was also wrong for slapping the mind trick on Bibsy in the palace. I had forgotten all about that until now. So according to the patented "code of Jedi ethics" that you've written but somehow we're all supposed to accept even though you had nothing to do with making the film, controlling someone's mind is perfectly legal but killing an evil crime lord and his minions who were trying to kill Luke and his friends is bad, evil, wrong? And what about Obi-Wan hiding his saber until he sliced off someone's arm in the cantina, where does that fit in?


The way I look at it, is the mind trick is fun, like telling your six year old son to go get a bucket of steam. Just go to the source of the steam and turn the bucket over above it, and voila. I bet you have no problem tying doggie treats to a stick and then tying the stick to your dog's collar either. ;)



No, I get what you've been trying to say. ;) You want to believe that Luke really didn't start down the darkpath Um, no, that's already not what I'm saying, so you've flawed the foundation. Luke may have started down the dark path, but Yoda said that if he did, it would forever dominate his destiny and consume him, but Yoda didn't spell out how it would dominate his destiny and obviously the Dark Side didn't fully consume Vader as he was able to find redemption eventually.


then what stops Leia from going too far? Nothing initially, she's not disciplined enough to stop it once it starts to overtake her, this is why she ends up going to the Dark Side, she doesn't really know the warning signs, she wasn't taught with enough experience, and her role as a diplomat and policymaker becomes in conflict with Jedi abilities. How did Lando end up selling out Han to the Empire? Same thing, he wanted to do for the greater good and ended up making a deal with the proverbial devil, so Leia isn't "breaking" character when she tries to do the same, she's merely at a crossroads that came from the growth in her life from the passage of time and the events that transpired, where using just a little of the Dark Side for the greater good becomes too tempting to her.


See, for me it's so...no, let me reiterate...it's SO unlikely and unbelievable that the Leia we already know could (and would) go bad in that way that I would be hardpressed to suspend my disbelief for 6 hours in that scenario. Yet you already did with Luke in the OT, so you really don't know WHAT you're capable of until you get there.... just like Leia.

Kidhuman
07-25-2004, 09:38 PM
Solo led the rebels on Endor, it was Solo's cunning that ultimately got the shield bunker's back door open in time for the rebs to blow up the generator. Sure, *maybe* we could guess at who else *might* have led this assault team to victory, but we don't have enough info to know who that would have been and if they would have been successful in their attempt. In the battle scene we have in ROTJ, who else on the scene there would have gotten the job done? Leia? She was wounded. Chewie? He didn't seem to have any idea what to do. R2? Seriously damaged. I guess maybe the one-eyed alien or the old guy in scout trooper uniform could have done it, or perhaps Wicket could have slipped on an AT-ST pilot helmet and yub-yubbed his way into getting the Imps to open the door.

Guess we have to wait for the nifty editions )


That doesn't track, Vader went to Cloud City because he was following Leia & Han, not because he "foresaw" Luke showing up.

Then why set the trap for him. He used them as bait to lure Skywaglker there.



By the myriad of denizens standing between the front door and Jabba's dais. Hell, Luke couldn't even fire a blaster at the giant slug crimelord without some jerk grabbing his arm and pointing the gun away, and that was Luke using the element of surprise, you're suggesting he goes in there with his weapon at the ready before he even gets to the crowd. Luke needed help just taking down a dozen baddies over the dune sea, how would he have fared against 5 times that many while his friends were being held hostage and could have been killed at any point in Luke's attempt?

Thats cause he is a weak Jedi.


So according to the patented "code of Jedi ethics" that you've written but somehow we're all supposed to accept even though you had nothing to do with making the film, controlling someone's mind is perfectly legal but killing an evil crime lord and his minions who were trying to kill Luke and his friends is bad, evil, wrong? And what about Obi-Wan hiding his saber until he sliced off someone's arm in the cantina, where does that fit in?

Murder....control....not even in the same league. Obi-Wan acted in defense of a friend. Luke was about to get the shizzle beat out of him. Obi-Wan basically said dont F with us. Difference being, he didnt goin there with murder on his mind.


Just go to the source of the steam and turn the bucket over above it, and voila. I bet you have no problem tying doggie treats to a stick and then tying the stick to your dog's collar either. ;)

Thanks for the idea.

JediTricks
07-25-2004, 10:05 PM
Dang you're fast KH, I was still changing "Leia & Han" to "the Falcon" because I realized that Vader doesn't actually ever claim he knows who is aboard that ship while tracking it down when you posted your reply.


Guess we have to wait for the nifty editions ) Hee hee! It would go something like this:

INT BUNKER - CONTROL ROOM
Controllers watch the main viewscreen on which a vague figure of an Imperial walker pilot can be seen. There is a great deal of static and interference.

WICKET/PILOT (VO): Yub-nub. Yub-yub-nub. Yub-greetal-neechub. Grrr-nub-yeek-nabooch.

CONTROL ROOM COMMANDER: Um... what was that soldier? Say again?

SECOND COMMANDER: (snickering) Sir, I think he said something about your mother and the Emperor. Tee hee!


Then why set the trap for him. He used them as bait to lure Skywaglker there. But that's not why he went to Cloud City. You said that Vader foreseeing Luke going to Cloud City was the reason that the Sith Lord went there, and that if Vader hadn't foreseen his son going to Cloud City he likely wouldn't have bothered going either. "If Vader didnt foresee LUke coming there, he probably wouldnt of went there."


Thats cause he is a weak Jedi. So he's a weak Jedi, but according to you he can foresee every single event that later happened, such as described in post 76, to a degree which neither Vader nor Sidious/Palpatine have been shown to have. So which is it, is he a weak Jedi or the most skilled Jedi alive who can foresee every single thing that happened from the time he left Ben's hut to the time that Lando piloted the skiff away from the burning wreckage of the sail barge?


Murder....control....not even in the same league. They don't have to be, you just have to explain how mind-control is "right" compared to the things you have deemed Luke to be doing that are "wrong".


Obi-Wan acted in defense of a friend. Luke was about to get the shizzle beat out of him. Obi-Wan basically said dont F with us. Difference being, he didnt goin there with murder on his mind.Luke was acting in defense of his friends too. You claim Luke went in with murder on his mind, but the evidence doesn't prove that, Luke hid his saber in R2, Ben hid his saber under his robes; you claim Luke was able to foresee the cascade of events that led to the incident over the pit of Carkoon, yet you then say Luke was a weak Jedi, and you have yet to account for why Luke bothered with the repeated attempts for a peaceful solution with Jabba and then repeated warnings that Jabba's attempt to kill the rebel heroes would ultimately get him destroyed.

Kidhuman
07-25-2004, 10:23 PM
Hee hee! It would go something like this:
INT BUNKER - CONTROL ROOM
Controllers watch the main viewscreen on which a vague figure of an Imperial walker pilot can be seen. There is a great deal of static and interference.

WICKET/PILOT (VO): Yub-nub. Yub-yub-nub. Yub-greetal-neechub. Grrr-nub-yeek-nabooch.

CONTROL ROOM COMMANDER: Um... what was that soldier? Say again?

SECOND COMMANDER: (snickering) Sir, I think he said something about your mother and the Emperor. Tee hee!

LMAO


But that's not why he went to Cloud City. You said that Vader foreseeing Luke going to Cloud City was the reason that the Sith Lord went there, and that if Vader hadn't foreseen his son going to Cloud City he likely wouldn't have bothered going either. "If Vader didnt foresee LUke coming there, he probably wouldnt of went there."

He tracked the Falcon looking for Luke and his band of misfits. Luke wasnt there, so he set a trap for him. If he didnt foresee him coming, why set a trap?


So he's a weak Jedi, but according to you he can foresee every single event that later happened, such as described in post 76, to a degree which neither Vader nor Sidious/Palpatine have been shown to have. So which is it, is he a weak Jedi or the most skilled Jedi alive who can foresee every single thing that happened from the time he left Ben's hut to the time that Lando piloted the skiff away from the burning wreckage of the sail barge?

Basically, with all the talk of foreshadowing and foreseeing, it has to be there. We know Luke saw his friends in CLoud City, and the whole Jabbas palace thing, its a given. Things went too smooth. Even Palps say he can foresee stuff, and Yoda too. Yoda could not foresee what happened on Bespin because of Luke not making a decision on whether to go or not.


They don't have to be, you just have to explain how mind-control is "right" compared to the things you have deemed Luke to be doing that are "wrong".

Mind control has been around forever in the 2 trilogies. A Jedi planning murder as well, but only two of them, Luke and Anakin. Family trait....yeah!!!!


Luke was acting in defense of his friends too. You claim Luke went in with murder on his mind, but the evidence doesn't prove that, Luke hid his saber in R2, Ben hid his saber under his robes; you claim Luke was able to foresee the cascade of events that led to the incident over the pit of Carkoon, yet you then say Luke was a weak Jedi, and you have yet to account for why Luke bothered with the repeated attempts for a peaceful solution with Jabba and then repeated warnings that Jabba's attempt to kill the rebel heroes would ultimately get him destroyed.

JT, Luke foresaw everyting that would happen. He knew Jabba would say no and they would all end up at the POC. That is the difference. Obi-Wan kept his saber under his robes at all times, unless he needed it. Remember, he did not want to be found by the Sith or the Empire, and havving a saber on the outside is a dead giveaway. Luke hid his saber for deceipt.

JediTricks
07-25-2004, 11:19 PM
He tracked the Falcon looking for Luke and his band of misfits. Luke wasnt there, so he set a trap for him. If he didnt foresee him coming, why set a trap?I think your logic is flawed, you earlier said that Vader only went to Cloud City because he foresaw Luke going there and that Vader wouldn't have gone if he hadn't foresaw it, but I countered by saying that Vader went to Cloud City because he was chasing the Falcon. So you reply the above quote, and now I ask, how could Vader have foreseen Luke going to Cloud City to save his friends if he thought Luke was already with his friends in the Falcon before they got to Cloud City? Either Vader's foresight was wrong, or Vader didn't foresee anything and went to Cloud City without using his Force foresight at all.


Basically, with all the talk of foreshadowing and foreseeing, it has to be there. Why, why does it have to be there? Because you will it to be?


We know Luke saw his friends in CLoud City, and the whole Jabbas palace thing, its a given. Things went too smooth. Even Palps say he can foresee stuff, and Yoda too. Yoda could not foresee what happened on Bespin because of Luke not making a decision on whether to go or not. That is just your interpretation, Yoda says "difficult to see, always in motion is the future" and later proves this by tapping into the Force and incorrectly foreseeing the death of Luke's friends. By that measure, the most powerful Jedi master cannot even fully see the future, yet you expect us to believe that Luke - who hasn't completed his training and is, as you said, a "weak Jedi" - can? You base your entire argument on Luke KNOWING exactly what moves to make right down to the last little detail, yet if Luke didn't know, if Luke only suspected things might go bad, then your entire theory of Luke being an evil murderer goes right down the tubes.


JT, Luke foresaw everyting that would happen. He knew Jabba would say no and they would all end up at the POC. That is the difference. Obi-Wan kept his saber under his robes at all times, unless he needed it. Remember, he did not want to be found by the Sith or the Empire, and havving a saber on the outside is a dead giveaway. Luke hid his saber for deceipt.If he knew Jabba would say no over and over and not heed the warnings, then Luke's motivation is defending his friend just as Obi-Wan defended Luke. If he didn't know that Jabba was going to say no, then he couldn't have pre-planned all that knowing he would have to kill.

"Luke hid his saber for deceipt."
- Yes, but it's the SAME deceit as Obi-Wan's, Luke didn't want Jabba's goons to find him wearing the saber, he felt if he needed it at the end then it'd be better to hide it than have it taken away beforehand.

stillakid
07-25-2004, 11:42 PM
Um, no, that's already not what I'm saying, so you've flawed the foundation. Luke may have started down the dark path, but Yoda said that if he did, it would forever dominate his destiny and consume him, but Yoda didn't spell out how it would dominate his destiny and obviously the Dark Side didn't fully consume Vader as he was able to find redemption eventually.
Exactly, which is why Luke's redemption can only come through witnesses the martyrdom of someone close to him (Leia) in the same way Anakin found redemption by watching his own son nearly perish because of him.

And I think that it's safe to assume...very safe to assume that what Yoda specifically meant by "forever will it dominate your destiny" is that once a person fails to resist the tempation of the easy way (cheating, etc), then it just becomes easier and easier to justify doing things, even evil things, so long as the ends justify the means. Leia has neither the background nor the motivation to fall to the kind of temptation that Yoda described. It just isn't part of her character. While it would be a surprise to see her go that way as you describe, it would also be too unlikely as I've mentioned previously.


Nothing initially, she's not disciplined enough to stop it once it starts to overtake her, this is why she ends up going to the Dark Side, she doesn't really know the warning signs, she wasn't taught with enough experience, and her role as a diplomat and policymaker becomes in conflict with Jedi abilities. How did Lando end up selling out Han to the Empire? Same thing, he wanted to do for the greater good and ended up making a deal with the proverbial devil, so Leia isn't "breaking" character when she tries to do the same, she's merely at a crossroads that came from the growth in her life from the passage of time and the events that transpired, where using just a little of the Dark Side for the greater good becomes too tempting to her.

Yet you already did with Luke in the OT, so you really don't know WHAT you're capable of until you get there.... just like Leia.
I disagree. Luke was primed as a rash and naive youth who was primarily out for excitement. His motivations for joining the cause had little to do with "the cause" and more to do with fulfilling his own yearning for adventure. On the other hand, Leia wasn't on the Tantive IV for a cheap joyride. She put herself in the line of fire routinely because she believed in the greater good. She in fact would do whatever was necessary to further the struggle, but where she takes it from there is where we differ in opinion. You suggest that merely because of lack of training that she would succumb to tempation of evil. I suggest that her innate strength of personality and committment to doing what's right negates any possibility of her falling like Luke did. It was Luke's rashness which caused him to start down the darkpath. He let his emotion get the best of him. Leia isn't like that and never will be.

JediTricks
07-27-2004, 12:33 AM
Exactly, which is why Luke's redemption can only come through witnesses the martyrdom of someone close to him (Leia) in the same way Anakin found redemption by watching his own son nearly perish because of him.

And I think that it's safe to assume...very safe to assume that what Yoda specifically meant by "forever will it dominate your destiny" is that once a person fails to resist the tempation of the easy way (cheating, etc), then it just becomes easier and easier to justify doing things, even evil things, so long as the ends justify the means. Leia has neither the background nor the motivation to fall to the kind of temptation that Yoda described. It just isn't part of her character. While it would be a surprise to see her go that way as you describe, it would also be too unlikely as I've mentioned previously. According to YOUR interpretation, perhaps, but not mine.


She put herself in the line of fire routinely because she believed in the greater good. She in fact would do whatever was necessary to further the struggle..."[Leia] would do WHATEVER was necessary to further the struggle", and right there you just contributed to why I think it would be believable that Leia could fall to the Dark Side.


...but where she takes it from there is where we differ in opinion. You suggest that merely because of lack of training that she would succumb to tempation of evil. I suggest that her innate strength of personality and committment to doing what's right negates any possibility of her falling like Luke did. It was Luke's rashness which caused him to start down the darkpath. He let his emotion get the best of him. Leia isn't like that and never will be."You suggest that MERELY because...", no not merely, it is just part of the tapestry, just as Anakin's mother dying is not the ONLY cause of his descent to the Dark Side.

"He let his emotion get the best of him. Leia isn't like that and never will be", you mean like her outburst at Han in the Ewok camp, or her emotional reactions to Alderaan being destroyed or Han being frozen in Carbonite or letting Chewie choke Lando out for his collusion? Leia is a fictional character from just 3 movies, while we do get to know her some, we certainly don't know everything about her, that's what makes fiction great, you can fill in the blanks later, you can add more to the character. Leia choked Jabba the Hutt to death, this very thread deals with that issue, and while I feel it was a deserved murder, she still killed him with her bare hands -- if you can't see any wiggle room in Leia's character to slip just a little after that action, I suspect you simply do not want to.

stillakid
07-27-2004, 09:55 AM
"[Leia] would do WHATEVER was necessary to further the struggle", and right there you just contributed to why I think it would be believable that Leia could fall to the Dark Side..

You managed to lop off the second half of that sentence to twist it to your purposes. If you had continued reading, you would see that I did in fact illustrate that Leia could go either way depending upon your preferences. Yeah, she does have emotions. I never suggested she didn't. But take another look at the movies and the emotional outbursts you mention and you'll see that she never jeopardizes the cause of the greater good in order to make herself feel better. She essentially gave up Alderaan to protect the Rebellion. She resisted Han because she was so focused on the cause (until the end...or apparent end anyway). And she wasn't the one who grabbed Lando, but her anger at the guy was natural for anyone. Had she been prone to walking the darkpath, it would have been her who would have shoved the barrel of a gun in his face. It's just not her or what she stands for.

Luke on the other hand...

JediTricks
07-27-2004, 08:03 PM
You managed to lop off the second half of that sentence to twist it to your purposes.Ho ho, talk about the pot calling the kettle black.


But take another look at the movies and the emotional outbursts you mention and you'll see that she never jeopardizes the cause of the greater good in order to make herself feel better.And that's not what I'm talking about anyway, so it really has little bearing on the issue. I'm talking about Leia unintentionally using those feelings which lead one to the Dark Side in an attempt to do good, and that starts her down the Dark path just as it did Luke originally. And it took a major catalyst to snap Luke back to the Light side, what if he had not encountered that catalyst? He might very well have become a Dark Jedi without ever wanting to.


And she wasn't the one who grabbed Lando, but her anger at the guy was natural for anyone. Had she been prone to walking the darkpath, it would have been her who would have shoved the barrel of a gun in his face. She was completely complicit with Chewie choking Lando, she was even faced with the chance to stop the wookiee and chose not to. Just because you feel it was natural for her to do so doesn't mean it wasn't an act taken out of anger, and acting in anger is one of the main mentioned steps towards falling to the Dark Side. And don't for a minute think that she calmly was able to strangle the life out of Jabba.