PDA

View Full Version : You are part of the Rebel Alliance and a traitor!



stillakid
05-09-2005, 05:37 PM
Darth Vader says to Leia:


Darth Vader
You are part of the Rebel Alliance and a traitor.



Okay, so, what does this imply? To me, it suggests that Vader (in Episode IV) is extremely motivated by political concerns. This in turn logically implies that his turn from good to bad ("the good man who was your father" Anakin to the "he's more machine now than man, twisted and evil" Darth Vader) was CAUSED overwhelmingly by a desire for a political change in the Republic. To put it into more recognizable terms, it would be the same as somebody like Tom Hanks (undeniable "good man") seeing an injustice (as he perceived it...or as he was seduced to see it!) and turning bad (from our perspective). Imagine that Tom Hanks ran into somebody like Tom DeLay and Mr. Delay somehow preyed upon Tom's weaknesses and got him to see things his way. The two of them stage a coup upon the government and take over. Naturally, a rebellion of sorts would form to fight them. Now imagine that Tom's illegitimate daughter wound up in a confrontation with him (it's a whacky hypothetical, I know...bear with me :D ) and now what would he call her? Right, a traitor. Why? Because he now sees the world in a twisted and evil way, but entirely correct in his eyes. Politics plays the part of motivator thus becoming the reason he even brings up the word "traitor."

So, having established that our OT Vader was politically motivated, where is this occurring in the Prequels? Oh, our love struck Ani does have a fleeting moment in AOTC when they say:



PADMÉ
You really don't like politicians, do you?

ANAKIN
I like two or three, but I'm not really sure about
one of them. (smiling) I don't think the system works.

PADMÉ
How would you have it work?

ANAKIN
We need a system where the politicians sit down and
discuss the problem, agree what's in the best interests of
all the people, and then do it.

PADMÉ
That is exactly what we do. The trouble is that
people don't always agree. In fact, they hardly ever do.

ANAKIN
Then they should be made to.

PADMÉ
By whom? Who's going to make them?

ANAKIN
I don't know. Someone.

PADMÉ
You?

ANAKIN
Of course not me.

PADMÉ
But someone.

ANAKIN
Someone wise.

PADMÉ
That sounds an awful lot like a dictatorship to me.

A mischievous little grin creeps across his face.

ANAKIN
Well, if it works...

So now you're saying, hey, what's the problem? :confused: Clearly Anakin has this political thing you're talking about on his mind. Right? Well, yeah, it's on his mind, but so is getting into Padme's pants. While AOTC shoehorns that little nugget into their meadow frolic time, there is nothing about Anakin's political concerns that even remotely play into his growing anger (about Mom, about Obi Wan "holding him back" :rolleyes: ) or into anything Palpatine ever says to him.

So while Anakin should be turning into Vader because of political dissatisfaction (per the OT), instead he is becoming Vader because:

1. Mommy died and he wasn't there to stop it.
2. His crybaby perception that Obi Wan is holding him back (even though he freely admits that he is being unreasonable after being chastised by Padme).
3. Palpatine recognizes how easy it is to stroke Anakin's ego and is the only one telling him how great a Jedi he is.

Where are the political concerns that drive Anakin over the edge which would motivate him to call somebody a "traitor" later on? Did Lucas F this up or is there a way to rationalize this away as well? :confused:

Frizz_himself
05-09-2005, 05:43 PM
yes he learns the system, before he wanted power and thats it. so when he turns into darth vader he sees thats another way of power.

JediTricks
05-09-2005, 07:56 PM
I don't take it as political motivation, I took it merely as Vader's excuse to arrest her, kill everybody on board and set the ship adrift. Her being a traitor to the Empire is how Vader can justify taking the extreme actions he does, his accusation comes off like a cop claiming the Patriot Act as an excuse to torch a suspect's car. Vader seems totally disinterested in Senate issues and gubernatorial stuff, he seems to believe wholly in the evil solidity of the Emperor and his hold over the galaxy, Vader doesn't show any concern in stepping on bureaucratic toes when it comes to sending Imperial troops to Tatooine or blowing up Alderraan and Yavin IV.

stillakid
05-10-2005, 12:41 AM
Her being a traitor to the Empire is how Vader can justify taking the extreme actions he does, his accusation comes off like a cop claiming the Patriot Act as an excuse to torch a suspect's car.

Then, Vader being Vader, why would he bother saying anything at all? If he's just plain evil for evil's sake, then he doesn't need to concoct an audible excuse to rape the bi*** and torch the car. He'd just do it. But if he had an actual rationale behind the evil that he does, then the character begins to take on an interesting dimension which we just coincidentally see happen in The Empire Strikes Back.

The Prequels are setting Anakin up as just being bad because he doesn't get enough attention from the good guys. This implies that his multi-year rant through his 30s and mid-life crisis is just an extended payback time to the school bullies who wouldn't let him play ball with the cool kids. And if that's the case, why would it even occur to this punk adult with the stunted maturity to utter the political accusation of "traitor"? He'd just slap her silly and continue with his hobby of burning ants with his magnifying glass. :evil:

2-1B
05-10-2005, 12:53 AM
What was he chasing her for ? Not out of some political motivation, but rather because she was custodian of the Death Star plans. If the Death Star is destroyed, Vader will be homeless lol lol lol so what else is he going to do ? He can't just go off and kill her because then there is no chance of finding out from her where she hid the plans. That, and there is a hidden rebel base to locate.

He calls her a traitor because she puts herself out as being a loyal member of a puppet Senate but she is really working to usurp the Emperor's hold on the galaxy. That is a problem for whoever is in charge.

No matter what Vader's motivation was in "going to the Dark Side," it doesn't really matter here because the main thing is to keep his master in power.

:)

rbaumhauer
05-10-2005, 01:07 AM
I've said it before, I'll say it again - the PT comes off as mid-grade (or worse) EU, just EU that happens to come from the brain of George Lucas. The place we see in the OT just doesn't feel at all like it sprang from the events of the PT, no matter how many explicit connections George throws in. While he may have wanted to "turn the existing trilogy on its head", I'm never going to see the Darth Vader that walks onto the Tantive IV in ANH as having anything to do with the character from the PT - they just aren't the same guy, in any way, shape, or form.

While some are saying that ROTS may vindicate Lucas, I don't see it that way. Even if ROTS is absolutely fantastic (and advance word is very positive), Lucas has a problem entirely of his own making - he has insisted (for years) that we aren't dealing with 6 movies, but one movie in 6 parts. There's just no getting around the fact that the (chronological) first third of the "movie" is a huge mess whose failure to tell a coherent story that actually ties in seamlessly with the parts that follow has damaged the overall "movie" beyond repair. Even if the third chapter is fantastic, it's still building on the wholly regrettable characters and situations of chapters 1 and 2.

So, like I said, PT=EU :)

Rick

sith_killer_99
05-10-2005, 02:19 AM
Where are the political concerns that drive Anakin over the edge which would motivate him to call somebody a "traitor" later on? Did Lucas F this up or is there a way to rationalize this away as well?

SPIOILER WARNING!!!!







































In reading ROTS, this whole thing actually plays out quite nicely. Anakin is driven by a sense of devotion. He is devoted to Obi-Wan, he is devoted to Palpatine (Anakin and Palpatine have become close friends over the years). He is devoted to the Republic and he is devoted to the Jedi. The Seperatists represent the bad guys during the Clone Wars, they were attempting to divide the Galaxy, this comes into play big time for the PT and the OT. Anakin begins to believe that anyone who disagrees with Palpatine (Supreme Chancellor of the Republic) is "Talking like a Seperatist" or "Talking treason". He even goes so far as to tell Padme' she is talking like a Seperatist and accuses Obi-Wan and the council of teason.

Anakin becomes torn between his best friends Obi-Wan and Palpatine. That conflict stems from his undying devotion to those he loves, over compensating for the fact that he wasn't there for his mother. This plays on many different levels, not just with Padme'.

Ultimatly, it is Palpatines promise of Power that tilts Anakin towards supporting Palpatine. The promise to gain the power to save Padme'.

In a twist Palpatine orders Anakin to kill the Jedi, which drives a wedge between him and Palpatine, so all that's left is Palpatines "Power over life and death" that keeps Anakin in line, but by the end of ROTS, Anakin is already secretly wanting to destroy Palpatine.

The Clone Wars ends in Episode III and the Seperatists are destroyed. But the seeds of the Rebellion have been planted at the same time. So that by the time the OT rolls around Vader views the Rebellion the same way he viewed the Seperatists from EPII thru EPIII.

Hence his "You are part of the Rebel Alliance and a traitor." I think he honestly viewed her as a traitor.

Anakin/Vader wants to reunite the Galaxy as it was before the Clone Wars. In a way he kind of sees it as his absolution for the evil deeds he has commited over the years. This is evidenced by his comments to Padme' about how everything will be all right, he will save her and once he has Palpatines secrets he will destroy him and they can rule the galaxy (I am paraphrasing here). By the time Empire rolls around he decides that Luke is his best hope of reuniting the Galaxy. Hence his line "Join me and together we can end this destructive conflict and bring order to the Galaxy." I think Vader/Anakin actually believes what he is saying. He knows that he is too weak to stand up to Palpatine, but with Luke, he could really destroy Palpatine and set things straight.

At least, that's my little interpretation of how it played out.

stillakid
05-10-2005, 06:58 PM
In reading ROTS, this whole thing actually plays out quite nicely. Anakin is driven by a sense of devotion. He is devoted to Obi-Wan, he is devoted to Palpatine (Anakin and Palpatine have become close friends over the years). He is devoted to the Republic and he is devoted to the Jedi. The Seperatists represent the bad guys during the Clone Wars, they were attempting to divide the Galaxy, this comes into play big time for the PT and the OT. Anakin begins to believe that anyone who disagrees with Palpatine (Supreme Chancellor of the Republic) is "Talking like a Seperatist" or "Talking treason". He even goes so far as to tell Padme' she is talking like a Seperatist and accuses Obi-Wan and the council of teason.

Anakin becomes torn between his best friends Obi-Wan and Palpatine. That conflict stems from his undying devotion to those he loves, over compensating for the fact that he wasn't there for his mother. This plays on many different levels, not just with Padme'.

Ultimatly, it is Palpatines promise of Power that tilts Anakin towards supporting Palpatine. The promise to gain the power to save Padme'.

In a twist Palpatine orders Anakin to kill the Jedi, which drives a wedge between him and Palpatine, so all that's left is Palpatines "Power over life and death" that keeps Anakin in line, but by the end of ROTS, Anakin is already secretly wanting to destroy Palpatine.

The Clone Wars ends in Episode III and the Seperatists are destroyed. But the seeds of the Rebellion have been planted at the same time. So that by the time the OT rolls around Vader views the Rebellion the same way he viewed the Seperatists from EPII thru EPIII.

Hence his "You are part of the Rebel Alliance and a traitor." I think he honestly viewed her as a traitor.

Anakin/Vader wants to reunite the Galaxy as it was before the Clone Wars. In a way he kind of sees it as his absolution for the evil deeds he has commited over the years. This is evidenced by his comments to Padme' about how everything will be all right, he will save her and once he has Palpatines secrets he will destroy him and they can rule the galaxy (I am paraphrasing here). By the time Empire rolls around he decides that Luke is his best hope of reuniting the Galaxy. Hence his line "Join me and together we can end this destructive conflict and bring order to the Galaxy." I think Vader/Anakin actually believes what he is saying. He knows that he is too weak to stand up to Palpatine, but with Luke, he could really destroy Palpatine and set things straight.

At least, that's my little interpretation of how it played out.

Thanks for that. :) You know, after I read your post I thought about it for awhile. It all seemed so...logical. Imagine my confusion. Yeah, me too! I found myself actually liking the way it was playing out...and more than that, it actually seemed to WORK!

Ahh, but not so fast, I told myself. There must be something amiss, afterall, the rest of the Prequel story has been a disaster so why should this primary character arc get away scotfree. And it finally hit me. The problem comes with this dialogue from ROTJ:


VADER
You don't know the power of the dark side. I
must obey my master.

LUKE
I will not turn...and you'll be forced to
kill me.

VADER
If that is your destiny.

LUKE
Search your feelings, father. You can't do
this. I feel the conflict within you. Let go
of your hate.

VADER
It is too late for me, son. The Emperor will
show you the true nature of the Force. He is
your master now.

If Vader's/Anakin's primary motivation was in opposition to Palpatine as your passage suggests above, then Vader would be taking every opportunity to help Luke destroy Palps. He certainly wouldn't be leading the kid to slaughter. The way I see it, the ANH dialogue does imply political motivation on Anakin's part and arguably that loony exchange with Padme in AOTC backs that assertion up. However, none of the events that actually occur within the Prequels suggest that Anakin is turning bad for political reasons. Instead, he is turning because he's acting like a spoiled brat with entitlement issues. The point here is that his reasoning for turning bad is wholly internal and personal (however unjustified) whereas if he truly had political misgivings, those reasons would be external. Part of the problem is that the Prequels have utterly failed to show us a galaxy with inner dissatisfaction, at least to the level of causing a civil war. What did Anakin have to get so worked up about politically? Not one single solitary thing. Heck, by this reasoning, Padme should have been the one angry at the lack of useful government and SHE should have become Darth Vader! She had more reason to grow hateful of the system and unleash a 40 year tirade against the weak galaxy. Anakin? Well, we know he hated sand. At least that was a justified complaint on his part. :ermm:

El Chuxter
05-10-2005, 07:31 PM
Okay, I'm skipping the spoiler, but I never saw politics as a motivation for Vader. He obeys Palpatine, and a Rebel is Palpatine's enemy. Simple as that.

As for why he says anything at all, 1) Leia is a Senator, and the Senate isn't disbanded until a few scenes later, so she technically outranks him, and 2) how exciting for the audience would it be for him to say nothing?

stillakid
05-10-2005, 09:49 PM
He obeys Palpatine,

Ok, but why? Why does he obey Palpatine? Is Vader just an anonymous bad guy out to "rule the world," or is this a deeper character with actual motivation for choosing the darkside?

sith_killer_99
05-10-2005, 10:40 PM
Here's my take on it. Anakin knows he can't take out Palpatine after the Lava incident. He is greatly weakened and vulnerable to Palpatines dark side powers. He knows that Luke can grow into a powerful enough weapon to destroy Palpatine, but to get him to destroy Palpatine he needs Luke to turn to the dark side.

Vader dosen't really have political aspiration in the same sense that Palpatine does. He really could care less about ruling the Galaxy, in EPIII (as well as EPII) he admits he dosen't really care much for "politics". But remember he spent many years of his life fighting in the Clone Wars trying to reunite the Galaxy. Part of that stays with him, it's tough to give that up. The sense of loyalty and duty remains, but it's more internal than external.



VADER
You don't know the power of the dark side. I
must obey my master.

Here Vader as much as admits that Palpatine could whop his butt.


LUKE
I will not turn...and you'll be forced to
kill me.

VADER
If that is your destiny.[QUOTE]

A bluff, and Luke sees through it!

[QUOTE]LUKE
Search your feelings, father. You can't do
this. I feel the conflict within you. Let go
of your hate.

VADER
It is too late for me, son. The Emperor will
show you the true nature of the Force. He is
your master now.

Let's not forget that treachery and deciet are the way of the Sith! Vader believes that if he can turn Luke he will eventually be able to destroy Palpatine. Going back to what Vader tells Luke is ESB.

Vader
Luke, you do not yet realize your importance. You have only begun to discover your power. Join me, and I will complete your training. With our combined strength, we can end this destructive conflict and bring order to the galaxy.

Vader wants an end to the conflict, but he is less concerned with ruling the galaxy than he is with uniting with his son and taking down Palpatine.

I say Vader wants Palpatine dead. He resents the heck out of him for evrything that happens in EPIII. Unfortunatly he is left too weak to put an end to Palpatine, so he remains subserviant to him. He still has the desire to unite the galaxy, but it is more of a side issue for him, not his primary objective. Kind of like being a liberal Republican or a conservative Democrat. :crazed: ;)

2-1B
05-11-2005, 02:54 AM
stillakid, why the heck would Vader take every opportunity to help Luke destroy Palps when all it's going to do is get the evil-Vader killed as well ? As Sith Killer wonderfully pointed out, he tried to get Luke to turn in the last picture but it didn't work. So why when the good-Luke shows up, would the evil-Vader try to help him defeat the Emperor ? At that time, Vader was still Dark Side so even though he wants Palps' starting job, he's not going to sabotage the whole team to get it. :p

Really, why not wait another 8 days til ROTS is out, then you'll have plenty of ammunition to use in your arguments. Right now, you're asking questions like "What did Anakin have to get so worked up about politically?" and (this is not going to be a spoiler) according to the official statement, the Clone Wars have been going on for several years after AOTC and Ani is a part of that. Sounds political to me, since his butt is on the line fighting a war that was politically orchestrated (as shown in AOTC).

Seriously, just give it another 8 days and you'll be fine. Right now you've got SK99 illustrating things (beautifully, I might add :) ) with a working knowledge of E3 but it sounds like you're arguing against it based much on E2 . . . soon the Prequel Trilogy will be complete and then you'll have an endless supply of disappointments onscreen to prove your points. :p

P.S., will JT now be accused of rationalizing since he doesn't agree with you? Or does the fact that he does not care much for the prequels excuse him from having to wear the red letter "R" on his forehead ? lol lol lol

stillakid
05-11-2005, 09:18 AM
Here's my take on it. Anakin knows he can't take out Palpatine after the Lava incident. He is greatly weakened and vulnerable to Palpatines dark side powers. He knows that Luke can grow into a powerful enough weapon to destroy Palpatine, but to get him to destroy Palpatine he needs Luke to turn to the dark side.
:confused: This may be premature, but that would require that Haydakin know about baby Luke before the end of ROTS. Why? Because if all Haydakin is interested in is taking Palpatine down, then why doesn't he just do it prior to fighting Obi Wan? Afterall, Palps himself continually was stroking Ani's ego telling him he is the greatest Jedi ever. Why would Haydakin suddenly stop believing that to be true (in his own head) and wait for the day when just maybe his offspring might possibly also have Force potential and might possibly get pulled from his teenaged daydreaming to go train and fight Palpatine? Lots o' hoops to jump through there based on a longshot assumption. No?

I mean, doesn't it seem just a little silly to believe that Haydakin simply joins the dark team in order to defeat it sometime later on after his kid is old enough to help him? If he was REALLY against the dark team as is being suggested, then he would have simply thrown in his support with the Jedi instead of putting on the black jersey.


Vader dosen't really have political aspiration in the same sense that Palpatine does. He really could care less about ruling the Galaxy, in EPIII (as well as EPII) he admits he dosen't really care much for "politics". But remember he spent many years of his life fighting in the Clone Wars trying to reunite the Galaxy. Part of that stays with him, it's tough to give that up. The sense of loyalty and duty remains, but it's more internal than external.
That sounds like a cop out to me. Saying, well, he's kinda political, but not really, he is only in these situations when it's convenient to the story, but not over here where it might confuse things. Sounds an awful lot like GL has been learning a thing or two from W. :crazed:




Here Vader as much as admits that Palpatine could whop his butt.



LUKE
I will not turn...and you'll be forced to
kill me.

VADER
If that is your destiny.

A bluff, and Luke sees through it!


Bluff?! What? Not at all. Where did you come up with that? Vader is being rather blunt about this situation. In that entire ROTJ confrontation, Vader is essentially laying it on the line with Luke: either Luke agrees to join the dark team or Vader will be forced to kill him. Period. It's pretty clear. And this is just when Vader is telling Luke that "it's too late for me now, son" and "I must obey my master." The writing is on the wall. The "good man" who was Anakin (apparently, though the Prequels never show us this) is gone...the man who might have put family over his loyalty to Palpatine is gone...and if Luke chooses to resist joining Vader's team, then Vader won't hesitate to take Luke out. But not so fast...unlike Old Ben, Luke believes that there IS still good in him and that belief plays out later twice in the throne room. See, you're laying credit in the wrong place, SK. Luke isn't "calling Vader's bluff." Vader isn't bluffing when he tells Luke that he had better cooperate or he'll die. He's deadly serious. But what Vader doesn't realize for himself is that when the rubber meets the road, he won't be able to remain loyal to Palpatine. He thought he could and he thought he had to because of "the power of the dark side" as he explains on the gantry. But in the end, Luke proves Obi Wan wrong...and Anakin himself...when that glimmer of good that Luke hoped for comes out and saves his life.

It's a subtle difference to explain but massive in it's implications and speaks volumes about Anakin's motivations for being a bad guy in the first place.


Let's not forget that treachery and deciet are the way of the Sith! Vader believes that if he can turn Luke he will eventually be able to destroy Palpatine. Going back to what Vader tells Luke is ESB.


Vader
Luke, you do not yet realize your importance. You have only begun to discover your power. Join me, and I will complete your training. With our combined strength, we can end this destructive conflict and bring order to the galaxy.

Vader wants an end to the conflict, but he is less concerned with ruling the galaxy than he is with uniting with his son and taking down Palpatine.
Maybe...according to what was said above. But I can easily counter that by pulling out the ROTJ confrontation on the Endor gantry, which I did initially. If Vader really wanted to do what you suggest here, then he would have worked out a clever plan with Luke while they had some alone-time out there in the woods. Instead, he just threatens Luke and says basically that he is loyal to Palps and if Luke doesn't do what is asked of him, the father-son relationship has no priority. In the end, Luke nails himself on his own cross and it is the sight of that which pulls Sebastakin out from behind the mask, but up until then, nobody knew for sure what was going to happen. Anakin/Vader didn't think he had any good left in him. Obi Wan thought it was a lost cause. Luke HOPED that maybe he was right, but he didn't know for sure. Palps absolutely thought he had Vader by the balls. But in the end, Vader surprised everyone by turning his loyalty to Luke and killing off Palps...most importantly, he surprised himself. The point here is that he didn't turn away from Palps until that moment, thus the dramatic music and cool dolly-in on the helmet. If there was ever a moment of deceit with Luke, it was during ESB when he was lying about wanting to end the destructive conflict. Sure, he wanted to do that and bring order to the galaxy, but not by simply shutting Palps down and taking things back to square one the way they were in TPM. No, he wanted to continue what was going on only with Luke at his side. He knew he couldn't overthrow Palps without the kid (why? we don't really know), so in the meantime, Vader remains Palpatine's patsy. Palps starts to get the inkling that something is up with his number two guy and tells him point blank, "I hope your feelings on this are clear, Lord Vader." The writing is on the wall.

All the pieces fit beautifully thanks to Mr. Kasdan. The only thing missing from the Prequels is the political motivation on Anakin's part...the thing that should be driving him to join up with the opposing political party. Instead, his motivation is wholly internal...a way to whoop on the cool kids who wouldn't let him be captain on their team. So he retaliates like an immature schoolboy for the next 20 years.


I say Vader wants Palpatine dead. He resents the heck out of him for evrything that happens in EPIII.
Uh, well, that sounds half right. Certainly we get the idea that Vader wants Palps dead...sometimes. But really? Luke had the guy in ROTJ but Vader threw his lightsaber out there in the nick of time...Palps knew he would. So why would Vader do that when it could have all been over? I'll tell you why. :D Because of everything I said above. See, you're thinking that Vader never really had any loyalty to Palps all this time, yet the facts don't support that idea. Throughout the entire series so far, Anakin is intensely loyal to Palpatine up until that final climactic scene when he is watching Luke get barbequed. The turn away from Palpatine doesn't happen until then. Oh, Vader thinks about life without Palpatine starting sometime between ESB and ROTJ, but he still believes like Obi Wan that there is no hope for him left. He turns out to be wrong about himself.

Again, if Anakin really didn't like what happens in ROTS, then it makes no sense that he would stick with that team and go slaughter little kids and such. Makes no sense at all.


Unfortunatly he is left too weak to put an end to Palpatine, so he remains subserviant to him. He still has the desire to unite the galaxy, but it is more of a side issue for him, not his primary objective. Kind of like being a liberal Republican or a conservative Democrat. :crazed: ;)
Yeah, sort of. But Haydakin certainly could have taken Palps out before becoming "too weak." And certainly, Vader could have worked secretly from within to help bring the Empire down. Say, for example, if Vader was the one who let the Death Star plans get into Leia's hands or if Vader got the plans to the Bothan spies. Then, maybe, your idea would hold water, but at this time, no.

As for the desire to unite the galaxy statement, again, not really. Why? Because what does he care? This goes back to the political motivator that I said was missing in the Prequels. If all Anakin ever wanted was to end the conflict, he would have turned on Palps right away instead of lumbering around for 20 years killing off officers and doing other evil things. But we have no suggestion that Vader ever made a move to undermine the Empire during all that time so it can only remain an interesting EU concept. :)

stillakid
05-11-2005, 09:40 AM
stillakid, why the heck would Vader take every opportunity to help Luke destroy Palps when all it's going to do is get the evil-Vader killed as well ? As Sith Killer wonderfully pointed out, he tried to get Luke to turn in the last picture but it didn't work. So why when the good-Luke shows up, would the evil-Vader try to help him defeat the Emperor ?
Uh, it's sounds an awful lot like you're proving my point but not realizing it. :sur: Exactly, why would Vader try to defeat the Emperor? :confused: The OT shows us clearly (as I wrote above in the response to SK) just how Vader acts and believes and why. Vader's loyalty to Palptine arrives during AOTC and continues up until that very dramatic moment at the end of ROTJ. He has no designs to take out Palpatine on his own. The ESB gantry stuff is the lie and deceit, as Yoda warns about. But the tone is decidely different in the ROTJ gantry discussion. Vader isn't being deceitful at all up there. He's telling Luke point blank, "look, I'm too far gone and because of that, I will kill you if you won't cooperate." If he really wanted to overthrow Palpatine, he would have worked out something with Luke right there right then. But no. The movie doesn't support that idea.


At that time, Vader was still Dark Side so even though he wants Palps' starting job, he's not going to sabotage the whole team to get it. :p
Again, that's my point exactly. If Vader really had ambitions from the start (ROTS) against Palpatine then he would have thought nothing of "sabotaging" the team. That is, if he had altruistic motives as SK was insinuating. But as the movies illustrate clearly, Haydakin has no political bent during AOTC (and probably the same in ROTS) while ANH hints that there should be one. Then during ESB and ROTJ, we see quite clearly that Vader is loyal to Palpatine, though we never get a clear idea of why beyond the "dark side" thing. What I mean is that we never get a good idea just why Anakin became Vader in the first place beyond him just throwing a decades long temper tantrum against the cool kids who wouldn't let him play with them.


Really, why not wait another 8 days til ROTS is out, then you'll have plenty of ammunition to use in your arguments.
Because, in a few days and for weeks after that, fanboys will be too busy cleaning the gis out of their pants and won't have enough blood in their heads to talk about this stuff rationally and logically. I can see the writing on the wall right now. ANY disparate words against ROTS within 50 paces of opening day will be met with irrational scorn as people are still coming down from their adrenaline and sugar highs. I thought it best to get this question out into the wild before the walls of fandom shut out any reasonable discussion. :)


Right now, you're asking questions like "What did Anakin have to get so worked up about politically?" and (this is not going to be a spoiler) according to the official statement, the Clone Wars have been going on for several years after AOTC and Ani is a part of that. Sounds political to me, since his butt is on the line fighting a war that was politically orchestrated (as shown in AOTC).
Fighting in a war that is supposedly politically orchestrated and being motivated by the politics are two mutually exclusive things. You don't think that we have soldiers right now in Iraq who couldn't give a rats arse about the lies Bush told to put them there and instead just like shooting at people? Anakin goes to fight, I assume, not because of politics, but because his organization wants him to. He's a Jedi so he goes to fight. :ermm:


Seriously, just give it another 8 days and you'll be fine. Right now you've got SK99 illustrating things (beautifully, I might add :) ) with a working knowledge of E3 but it sounds like you're arguing against it based much on E2
I and II had the responsibility to set up the motivation for Anakin's turn to evil. So far all we have is that he's a whiny boy who didn't get to be captain of the team as soon as he wanted..and he had to impregnate the prom queen behind everybody's back. But beyond that, nothin'. Where's the political dissatisfaction that should be driving a rational decision to the opposing point of view? Why wait until the last second to toss that in, "Oh, and Anakin isn't happy with the politics...we now return you to the slaughter already in progress." :)



P.S., will JT now be accused of rationalizing since he doesn't agree with you? Or does the fact that he does not care much for the prequels excuse him from having to wear the red letter "R" on his forehead ? lol lol lol
No, he doesn't have to wear that. :) He just misinterpreted for a minute. I explained it all. :)

sith_killer_99
05-11-2005, 12:36 PM
This may be premature, but that would require that Haydakin know about baby Luke before the end of ROTS. Why? Because if all Haydakin is interested in is taking Palpatine down, then why doesn't he just do it prior to fighting Obi Wan? Afterall, Palps himself continually was stroking Ani's ego telling him he is the greatest Jedi ever. Why would Haydakin suddenly stop believing that to be true (in his own head) and wait for the day when just maybe his offspring might possibly also have Force potential and might possibly get pulled from his teenaged daydreaming to go train and fight Palpatine? Lots o' hoops to jump through there based on a longshot assumption. No?

No, no and ummm, no.

SPOILER ALERT!!!









































































First of all, the reason Anakin decides to side with Palpatine and take out Mace (while Mace's back is essentially turned on him) is because Palpatine tells Anakin that he can save Padme'. This was the deciding factor. It was the reason that Anakin decides to become Palpatines apprentice. Palpatine tells him the story of Darth Plaguis and how he had learned to create life from the force, thus mastering life itself! Palpatine reveals that he was Darth Plaguis apprentice and that Plaguis had shared the secret with him. This leads Anakin to believe that he can use that power to save Padme'. But in order to do so he has to become Palpatines apprentice.

Once Anakin becomes Palps apprentice Palpatine orders him to destroy the Jedi, then he tells him that Nute Gunray and his cronies are on Mustafar. After Anakin kills them all Padme' shows up, this is when he tells her that he will eventually destroy Palpatine and that everything he has done was for her. Surprise, Obi-Wan had stowed away on Padme's ship without her knowledge. Anakin thinks Padme' betrayed him and he goes off, Padme' gets hurt and Anakin ends up in a river of Lava. Palpatine swoops in to save Anakin.

So, Anakin never gets the opportunity to betray Palps before he becomes a weakened half machine who can barely breath. He spends the next two decades subserviant, a beaten man, "I must obey my master".

Once he realizes Luke is his son he gains real hope of destroying Palpatine. He knows Luke can destroy Palpatine...in time.


That sounds like a cop out to me. Saying, well, he's kinda political, but not really, he is only in these situations when it's convenient to the story, but not over here where it might confuse things. Sounds an awful lot like GL has been learning a thing or two from W

Well, that is your opinion and you are entitled to it, but I disagree. It's not soo far fetched afterall, W got to be President for 8 years!

Seriously, Anakins biggest thing in EPIII is living a happy normal life. That life was interrupted by the Clone Wars, more so than by the Jedi. Remember, Anakin does not turn against the Jedi out of jealousy (though that does seem to make it a bit easier on him) he turns because Palpatine offers Anakin something to save the woman he loves. He is also...oops gotta get back to work. To be continued. ;)

2-1B
05-11-2005, 01:51 PM
stillakid, I don't know what you are talking about. :D
You're asking why Vader doesn't team up with Luke right then and there to take out Palps when it's obvious that Vader first needs Luke on his side to do this. What good is taking out the Emperor when Vader won't get to rule anyway ? Remember, I'm saying this from the perspective he had BEFORE turning back to the good side.

NO, he is NOT lying to Luke about ruling the galaxy as father and son, which will sound VERY familiar in 8 days ;) when he


*spoiler

*spoiler

*spoiler


makes that same exact offer to Padme. ;) See, this is what I was talking about. You're slamming away at "Haydakin" :rolleyes: for not running off to take out Palps right away when, as SK99 has again beat me to it, he doesn't even get the CHANCE to do it thanks to Obi-Wan and that lava bath.

:)

El Chuxter
05-11-2005, 03:02 PM
Okay, I'm still trying to avoid the spoilers, but regarding why Vader obeys Palpatine in rooting out the Rebels, there are two lines from Return of the Jedi that sort of answer that:

"You don't understand the power of the Dark Side."

and

"I must obey my master."

stillakid
05-11-2005, 04:09 PM
No, no and ummm, no.

SPOILER ALERT!!!


Um, so, wow! :eek: What you're saying is that Anakin isn't seduced by the dark side at all. Instead, he's blackmailed into being Palpatine's #2, his patsy, his chump, his clay pigeon, his sucker, his doormat, his "born yesterday," his meat puppet.

Boy, Lucas has F'd this up even worse than I could have possibly imagined. :eek: Man, for a guy claiming to be telling his story his way, he sure has no clue what the Original Trilogy was all about. Somebody get Kasdan on the line... :sur:

stillakid
05-11-2005, 04:13 PM
stillakid, I don't know what you are talking about. :D
You're asking why Vader doesn't team up with Luke right then and there to take out Palps when it's obvious that Vader first needs Luke on his side to do this. What good is taking out the Emperor when Vader won't get to rule anyway ? Remember, I'm saying this from the perspective he had BEFORE turning back to the good side.

NO, he is NOT lying to Luke about ruling the galaxy as father and son, which will sound VERY familiar in 8 days ;) when he


*spoiler

*spoiler

*spoiler


makes that same exact offer to Padme. ;) See, this is what I was talking about. You're slamming away at "Haydakin" :rolleyes: for not running off to take out Palps right away when, as SK99 has again beat me to it, he doesn't even get the CHANCE to do it thanks to Obi-Wan and that lava bath.

:)

Okay, I'll slam him for a different reason then. If Haydakin is so adamently against Palps prior to taking a bath, why stick with him throughout the OT? Just because the ol' guy "saves" his life with the Iron Mask? I could see being, you know, grateful about it and all, but that's a far cry from participating in wholesale oppression of the galaxy. No?

JediTricks
05-11-2005, 07:43 PM
Then, Vader being Vader, why would he bother saying anything at all? If he's just plain evil for evil's sake, then he doesn't need to concoct an audible excuse to rape the bi*** and torch the car. He'd just do it. But if he had an actual rationale behind the evil that he does, then the character begins to take on an interesting dimension which we just coincidentally see happen in The Empire Strikes Back.Vader isn't just saying the line in the air, Leia is trying to use her standing in the Imperial Senate, the diplomatic mission to Alderran and some sort of "mercy mission", as defenses against her ship being seized, those things must have had some sort of weight or else she wouldn't have bothered trying to use that cover. Vader's response to that is that she's a traitor to the Empire, and thus none of those defenses will save her. The senate was the last political roadblock for the Emperor, Vader is told that holding Leia is dangerous and could lead to Rebel sympathies in the Senate, Vader responds that Leia is his only link to the Rebel base. How political could Vader really have been though when his further response is to fake the ship's destruction to the Senate and say that everybody aboard was killed?



Okay, I'm skipping the spoiler, but I never saw politics as a motivation for Vader. He obeys Palpatine, and a Rebel is Palpatine's enemy. Simple as that.

As for why he says anything at all, 1) Leia is a Senator, and the Senate isn't disbanded until a few scenes later, so she technically outranks him, and 2) how exciting for the audience would it be for him to say nothing? Yeah, I'm skipping the spoiler too, but that's how I see this politicizing as well. And what a great scene that would have been...


LEIA: Lord Vader, I should have known. Only you could be so bold. The Imperial Senate will not sit for this, when they hear you've attacked a diplomatic...

VADER: I know you took the plans.

LEIA: I don't know what you're talking about. I'm a member of the Imperial Senate on a diplomatic mission to Alderaan...

VADER: Nuh uh! Take her away!

COMMANDER: Holding her is dangerous. If word of this gets out, it could generate sympathy for the Rebellion in the senate.

VADER: Nah.

COMMANDER: She'll die before she tells you anything.

VADER: So?


Ok, but why? Why does he obey Palpatine? Is Vader just an anonymous bad guy out to "rule the world," or is this a deeper character with actual motivation for choosing the darkside? He's a serials-style villain. It's not like he's trying to fool the officers around there, he's ordering these guys to seize a diplomatic ship, capture and risk killing a senator, and lie to the Senate, he's a bad guy and they're bad guys who obey him.


I am kinda done with this thread for now, too many spoilers. Mods may end up moving it to "Ep 3 Spoilers", we'll see.

stillakid
05-11-2005, 08:12 PM
He's a serials-style villain.
I guess it does rather come down to that as you'll see once the spoiler-dam is allowed to be opened. I guess there's only one thing to say:


They're Pinky and The Brain
Yes, Pinky and The Brain
One is a genius
The other's insane.
They're laboratory mice
Their genes have been spliced
They're dinky
They're Pinky and The Brain, Brain, Brain, Brain
Brain, Brain, Brain, Brain
Brain.

Before each night is done
Their plan will be unfurled
By the dawning of the sun
They'll take over the world.

They're Pinky and The Brain
Yes, Pinky and The Brain
Their twilight campaign
Is easy to explain.
To prove their mousey worth
They'll overthrow the Earth
They're dinky
They're Pinky and The Brain, Brain, Brain, Brain
Brain, Brain, Brain, Brain
Narf!

Same thing we do everynight...we're going to take over the WORLD! :evil:


:rolleyes: That's great. Just great. One of the most "loved" villians in the world and the whole reason for him becoming that way is that he's just an immature *****. Perfect. lol

sith_killer_99
05-11-2005, 08:17 PM
Um, so, wow! What you're saying is that Anakin isn't seduced by the dark side at all. Instead, he's blackmailed into being Palpatine's #2, his patsy, his chump, his clay pigeon, his sucker, his doormat, his "born yesterday," his meat puppet.

Ummm, again no, it's more complicated than that. I would explain it further, but it's just not worth wasting any more time on.

For some people Star Wars began in 1977 and ended in 1983, and it will always be that way. Nothing else will ever live up to the OT and that's fine they are entitled to their opinion.

Personally, when I saw SW in 1977 I remember, as the credits rolled by, thinking NO, this can't be the end, it can't end, not ever.

Those in the first camp will always view things from the point of view that nothing else will ever live up to the original and everything else sucks!

Those who of us in the second camp just want more, books, films, television and on and on. We accept the fact that none of the other stories may ever live up to the original, but we don't let that stop us from enjoying the stories, we simply look at the OT as the crowning jewel of Star Wars, while enjoying the riches around it.

Just my 2 cents.

stillakid
05-11-2005, 10:09 PM
Ummm, again no, it's more complicated than that. I would explain it further, but it's just not worth wasting any more time on



For some people Star Wars began in 1977 and ended in 1983, and it will always be that way. Nothing else will ever live up to the OT and that's fine they are entitled to their opinion.

That's belittling everything I've been talking about as if I only ask questions because I automatically hate the Prequels just because they're not the originals. How silly. :rolleyes: While "living up to the OT" would be nice, I'd just be happy if the Prequels managed to stand on their own as solid storytelling. But unfortunately, it's impossible to even enjoy them on that level, nevermind how they interact (or not) with the OT.


Personally, when I saw SW in 1977 I remember, as the credits rolled by, thinking NO, this can't be the end, it can't end, not ever.
My experience was somewhat similar, but it played out a bit differently. I had a bookshelf next to my bed where I kept my favorite things. On it, between two bookends, I began my fledgling Star Wars novelization collection. A mere three sat there for the longest time. In my youthful mind, I imagined and looked forward to putting the rest of the saga in between those bookends. Well, of course Lucas put more movies on the backburner, and by that time, my interest in the saga was waning anyhow like most people.

Fast forward to just yesterday (no kidding) when that collection finally was complete. I had gone to order ROTS from Amazon when I realized that I had never purchased a copy of AOTC. They both came over the weekend and I was able to see the saga all sitting on my bookshelf (newer, 2500 miles away from the other one :) ).

I think that most people were looking forward to seeing Star Wars continue. But like this? I don't think so. Is it unreasonable to expect films on par with the originals or are we just supposed to enjoy whatever comes out that has the Star Wars moniker slapped on it? :confused:


Those in the first camp will always view things from the point of view that nothing else will ever live up to the original and everything else sucks!.
Again, you're belittling the critique by suggesting that I hate the films only because they aren't the first three. That's ridiculous! The new films had every opportunity to live up to the originals and even surpass them! I'm sure that I'm not the only one who not only was looking forward to that scenario, but also expected it. And then the other shoe dropped and TPM left a lot of people with a collective :( .


Those who of us in the second camp just want more, books, films, television and on and on. We accept the fact that none of the other stories may ever live up to the original, but we don't let that stop us from enjoying the stories, we simply look at the OT as the crowning jewel of Star Wars, while enjoying the riches around it.

Just my 2 cents.
You like everything that comes out no matter what just because it has the name Star Wars on it? :confused:

sith_killer_99
05-11-2005, 11:43 PM
That's belittling everything I've been talking about

I apologize if I cam across too stongly. I just got a bit frustrated when I read this:


Um, so, wow! What you're saying is that Anakin isn't seduced by the dark side at all. Instead, he's blackmailed into being Palpatine's #2, his patsy, his chump, his clay pigeon, his sucker, his doormat, his "born yesterday," his meat puppet.

and felt just a bit "belittled" myself.


You like everything that comes out no matter what just because it has the name Star Wars on it?

No, I don't recall saying that, that would be silly, I am not a mindless sheep. Some of it is prefectly horrible. But I do approach every film, comic and book with an open mind and wait to make up my mind about how good or bad the work is until after I have seen it. By and large, I have enjoyed most of it.

Sometimes it feels like you come way out of left field with some of your arguements about how EPIII will play out and how it will tie in to the OT. Perhaps I have not expressed myself well. It just seems like some of the comments you have made have no bearing on what I have read in the novelization of EPIII, or else you take a comment and run soo far with it that it defies reason.

I could sit around and type out long long post about this or that, but until you read the novel or see the film, to see how it all plays out I feel like I'm wasting my time, no offense, but it's difficult to explain all the little details that make up the big picture.

2-1B
05-12-2005, 12:16 AM
Okay, I'll slam him for a different reason then. If Haydakin is so adamently against Palps prior to taking a bath, why stick with him throughout the OT? Just because the ol' guy "saves" his life with the Iron Mask? I could see being, you know, grateful about it and all, but that's a far cry from participating in wholesale oppression of the galaxy. No?

I don't know if he is grateful. One of the new ROTS toy packages says Anakin was left full of self-hatred. lol


Is it unreasonable to expect films on par with the originals or are we just supposed to enjoy whatever comes out that has the Star Wars moniker slapped on it?

Personally, I would point to the Ewok films, the Holiday Special, the Droid and Ewok cartoons, 90% of the published EU, about half of the Clone Wars, and maybe 10 or 13 % of TPM and AOTC to prove that I, Caesar Aurealius, do not enjoy whatever comes out with the Star Wars logo. lol lol lol

stillakid
05-12-2005, 12:18 AM
I apologize if I cam across too stongly. I just got a bit frustrated when I read this:



and felt just a bit "belittled" myself.
Sorry bout that. If I belittle anything, it is ideas, not people. :)






Sometimes it feels like you come way out of left field with some of your arguements about how EPIII will play out...or else you take a comment and run soo far with it that it defies reason.
The devil is in the details. Seeing the minutia in things is a cross I must bear. :D


I could sit around and type out long long post about this or that, but until you read the novel or see the film, to see how it all plays out I feel like I'm wasting my time, no offense, but it's difficult to explain all the little details that make up the big picture.
From I and II, we can see what Lucas is probably intending, but the details don't support it. It's a lot like the physics problem of reconciling the laws of Relativity with Quantum mechanics. Each makes perfect sense on their own, but something gets lost when you try to see them together. What Lucas intends on the grand scale is clear enough even to me. But when we look at the details, which make sense on their own in a vacuum, they don't support the big picture. See?

Imperial Monarche
05-15-2005, 12:13 AM
Then, Vader being Vader, why would he bother saying anything at all? If he's just plain evil for evil's sake, then he doesn't need to concoct an audible excuse to rape the bi*** and torch the car. He'd just do it. But if he had an actual rationale behind the evil that he does, then the character begins to take on an interesting dimension which we just coincidentally see happen in The Empire Strikes Back.

The Prequels are setting Anakin up as just being bad because he doesn't get enough attention from the good guys. This implies that his multi-year rant through his 30s and mid-life crisis is just an extended payback time to the school bullies who wouldn't let him play ball with the cool kids. And if that's the case, why would it even occur to this punk adult with the stunted maturity to utter the political accusation of "traitor"? He'd just slap her silly and continue with his hobby of burning ants with his magnifying glass. :evil:

The problem I see in your logic is that you are taking one line out of ANH to justify Vader's entire reason for being bad. True, I do think there is some political backing to him calling Leia a traitor, but to me, she is a traitor to the Empire. Vader was just calling it as he saw it. Besides, he didn't just approach her and say that, they were engaged in conversation and that's the way he ended it. Story wise, the line showed how Vader is a pawn to the government in believing that Leia is a traitor to the Emperor, but not that he necessarily cares. Script wise, it was Lucas' way of setting up how backwards the time was that a good guy was considered a traitor.

The second part is how you are saying that this political power play being reason for Vader to be who he is is not being shown in the prequels like they should be. I heartily disagree because, Anakin is 19 yrs. old in AOTC and what 19 yr. old gives a crap about politics. They may have their opinions (i.e. the conversation in the meadow), but it doesn't drive them. The reaspons Lucas gives for Anakin's fall is very natural and does continue on into the OT.

-He sees Obi-Wan's guidance as a hinderance to his great powers (which was info that was filled in his head with the "Chosen One" stuff) and he generally feels that Obi-Wan is basically picking on him.

-The great life he was promised when he left home to become a Jedi has been, in his mind and actually kinda is, a disaster. His mother died and he couldn't help her...he must hide his love for Padme from everyone...things that will happen in ROTS that's too spoilerish for here.

-He wasn't born in the Jedi Temple and didn't make it there until he was around 10, so for 10 yrs. of his life he was a regular boy and never learning to suppress certain feelings like anger and aggression (sorry for the sp. mistakes, it's late and I'm sleepy). So, those are naturally going to take root in his life and will act out when they are tempted to come out of him.

Those are the things that drive him to the dark side, not political motivation. Those problems continue through the OT as well, seeing that his children were born and he never knew about them, being constantly praised by the Emperor, but yet, in the same time, being manipulated and belittled by him. So, I think that line in ANH was more of anger that this woman is betraying his beloved master.

Imperial Monarche
05-15-2005, 12:25 AM
That's belittling everything I've been talking about as if I only ask questions because I automatically hate the Prequels just because they're not the originals. How silly. :rolleyes: While "living up to the OT" would be nice, I'd just be happy if the Prequels managed to stand on their own as solid storytelling. But unfortunately, it's impossible to even enjoy them on that level, nevermind how they interact (or not) with the OT.


My experience was somewhat similar, but it played out a bit differently. I had a bookshelf next to my bed where I kept my favorite things. On it, between two bookends, I began my fledgling Star Wars novelization collection. A mere three sat there for the longest time. In my youthful mind, I imagined and looked forward to putting the rest of the saga in between those bookends. Well, of course Lucas put more movies on the backburner, and by that time, my interest in the saga was waning anyhow like most people.

Fast forward to just yesterday (no kidding) when that collection finally was complete. I had gone to order ROTS from Amazon when I realized that I had never purchased a copy of AOTC. They both came over the weekend and I was able to see the saga all sitting on my bookshelf (newer, 2500 miles away from the other one :) ).

I think that most people were looking forward to seeing Star Wars continue. But like this? I don't think so. Is it unreasonable to expect films on par with the originals or are we just supposed to enjoy whatever comes out that has the Star Wars moniker slapped on it? :confused:


Again, you're belittling the critique by suggesting that I hate the films only because they aren't the first three. That's ridiculous! The new films had every opportunity to live up to the originals and even surpass them! I'm sure that I'm not the only one who not only was looking forward to that scenario, but also expected it. And then the other shoe dropped and TPM left a lot of people with a collective :( .


You like everything that comes out no matter what just because it has the name Star Wars on it? :confused:

Any action figure with the super-duper "Action Feature" on it is definitely below my standards (I still buy them for collectors sake, though. You make a great point. I have always thought you have great opinions bout the prequals, even though I don't agree. You have never made it out like, the PT is not as good as the OT so it sucks. You actually come up with excellent reasons to back up why you don't like the PT, whether it be Lucas failed here or the plot doesn't make sense there, you are a very good debator. I enjoy reading your posts because they fire me up, boil my blood and make me want to spit out a venomous reply...which is the whole point of the forums. get people riled up to create great debates. Keep up the good work, stilla. ( I still like the PT, but that's my opinion). I can't help but think that no matter how great ROTS is, you will still find plenty of stuff wrong with it and I look forward to those debates as well.

stillakid
05-16-2005, 02:08 AM
I have always thought you have great opinions bout the prequals, even though I don't agree. You have never made it out like, the PT is not as good as the OT so it sucks. You actually come up with excellent reasons to back up why you don't like the PT, whether it be Lucas failed here or the plot doesn't make sense there, you are a very good debator. I enjoy reading your posts because they fire me up, boil my blood and make me want to spit out a venomous reply...which is the whole point of the forums. get people riled up to create great debates. Keep up the good work, stilla. ( I still like the PT, but that's my opinion). I can't help but think that no matter how great ROTS is, you will still find plenty of stuff wrong with it and I look forward to those debates as well.

Thanks! :) I appreciate the support. Really, and I mean this truly, I don't want to not enjoy these. I've invested way too much cash on the merchandise and way too much time in studying the stories to intentional seek out excuses to hate them. If that were the case, I wouldn't even bother being here or buying the toys. The fact is that I LOVE the Star Wars concept and believe that the OT set the stage for very cool Prequel and Post-quel scenarios. But Lucas dropped the ball big time and it's incredibly evident that he had no clue as to the story that Kasdan wrote for him. As frightening as it seems, I don't think it's out of the question to consider the possibility that Lucas is incredibly shallow and really thinks that audiences only are interested in gobs of meaningless eye-candy. After viewing ANH, it is hard to believe because of the underlying thematic elements there. But maybe he was just mimicking those archetypes and themes that he saw in his life and didn't truly comprehend them. Then enter Larry Kasdan who DID understand and built on it. Lucas, being preoccupied with pushing the limit on the visuals, paid little attention to what Kasdan was doing for him. So when we get here, to the Prequels, we can see how Lucas has spent more time pushing the visuals and pushing the 24P technology instead of investing time and concern over the story.

So as to the specific concern I have over Anakin's fall from grace, I'm not just pulling this one line out to justify my concern. I look at that line and then can see Vader's behavior throughout the OT relative to it and conclude that he isn't who he is because he used to be a whiny whoa-is-me teenager full of hormonal angst. That just ISN'T the Darth Vader of the OT in any shape of form. The Vader we get to know is decidely level-headed with a specific belief that this new government is the right one. There is no animosity toward the Emperor until the very last moment as his son is being barbequed. So while some teenagers may indeed experience those bipolar mood swings that we associate with Hayd-akin, it isn't a valid justification for having that characterization be the driving force for his fall to the dark side. This "fall" needed to have come from the clues established by the OT. And that just isn't happening.