PDA

View Full Version : Who is the main hero of this movie, & who are the galactic "good guys" here?



JediTricks
05-29-2005, 09:45 PM
First off, who is the main hero of this film? It seems like the story is spread across the core characters of the film that there is no main hero or heroes to me, nobody seems to be the focus. I suppose the closest to the focus is Anakin since a lot of the time he's not doing anything or on-screen, someone is still talking about him, but he's certainly no hero of this picture.

Secondly, we have a war between the Republic and the Separatists, both sides being secretly controlled by Palpatine, and when Anakin and Padme are discussing the 2 sides, Padme asks if he's ever thought that they might be on the wrong side. However, the Separatists are taking over worlds by force left and right, they may not be as corrupt as the government of the Republic but they seem to have just as ignoble motives - how can Padme consider that Nute Gunray and the evil Count Dooku's fellow evils are the superior philosophies to that of the corrupt Republic? So it seems like the only philosophies at play in this movie are the Galactic Republic who we are shown to be corrupt and evil as well, the Confederation of Separatists who are shown to be evil and run by a corrupt organization, the Jedi are the closest thing to the "good guys" but they are not a universal philosophy that someone like Padme or Bail Antilles can follow, they are a religious order.

stillakid
05-29-2005, 11:21 PM
Hmm. A lot to ponder there. If I have anything to add, it would be that George seems to be trying to make the very point that your question brings up. That being that it's all a matter of perspective when it comes to judging what is good and what is evil.

The OT gave us a very clear deliniation regarding who was good and who was bad. But the Prequels, and specifically ROTS, more or less try to express (in a very weak manner) that it isn't always so clear which side one should be on. I think that was the point Lucas was trying to bluntly get across with Padme's line about sides and Anakin's line about the Jedi being evil. Nobody is quite sure what the motives on each side are anymore nor why there is a war...much like some of us in the audience. ;)

So after looking back at ROTS with this question in mind, if there is any sense of perspective in it, it appears as though the story is being told from the point of view of Obi Wan more than anyone else. While we merely watch as Anakin mopes around making bad choices, it is with Obi Wan that the audience can get a sense of empathy with as he appears to be the only one getting a grasp of the situation before anyone else. He takes the personal time to talk with Anakin more than Mace or Yoda. He flies around the galaxy finding the pieces of the puzzle. The only secret that he isn't privy to first is the secret identity of Palpatine, yet he does suspect it before anyone else seems to.

So if I had to pin the label of "story hero" on anyone in ROTS and/or the Prequels in general, it would be Obi Wan. This is much more HIS story than Anakin's. Then once ANH roles around, he hands the torch off to Luke and it becomes Luke's story. So in the end, not a shred of this is really about Anakin at all. He winds up just being another interesting character in the overall saga of a Republic gone bad.

Bossk77
05-29-2005, 11:58 PM
I think it really depends on the scale that you look at issue at. At one level you could say that Sidious is the central charater in his quest to return the sith empire of old to power. Outlining the ways and principles of his faith and interworkings throughout the new trilogy. On another level you could say that there is no main hero.. that it is really a conglomerative effort to tie loose ends and set the stage for the original trilogy. On a third level you could say it was a statment of the American people and the world againt a man named Bush Jr.

It all depends on perspective. as has been said but tempered with the abilty to be open minded to other angles and potienal views.

One thing still bothers me though. Kashyyyk. It was my understanding that the Transoshans sold the wookies into slavery to the Empire. Does not make sense now with the way he did ep. 3. But the clone wars were supposed to be inclusive of the Mandalorian forces, and it was not.... The man baffles me sometimes.

2-1B
05-30-2005, 12:29 AM
Anakin is a hero for the first half of the movie while Obi-Wan and Yoda are heroic throughout.

Bossk77
05-30-2005, 12:34 AM
Anakin is a hero for the first half of the movie while Obi-Wan and Yoda are heroic throughout.

You said Anakin for the first half... In your eyes, does he then become an anti-hero from that point? Or does he become a delusioned hero due to his rebirth in Ep 6?:classic:

Kidhuman
05-30-2005, 01:12 AM
I dont think there is a hero. It basically sets up the birth of the Hero(Luke) for the OT. Obi-Wan could have been a hero if he would have finished Anakin and not left him for dead. It could have ended there basically.

MaquisWarrior
05-30-2005, 01:47 AM
There is no main hero because this SW is like the first three an ensamble cast/story.

Now to the funny stuff:
If this was a true Samuel L. Jackson movie: the M-F word would have appeared at least five times; when he is KA he speaks only Jive and Ebonics (ie. Dig it! I'll bust a cap!); college graduate and the way he is off screen SLJ makes an appearance while wearing his trademark glasses and backwards golf cap; more m-f words come out; he KA some more; and he saves the universe and gets Amidala at the end!

plasticfetish
05-30-2005, 04:20 AM
There is no main hero because this SW is like the first three an ensamble cast/story.You should have stopped there. ;) That's pretty much what I was thinking.

The thing that I like about the OT, is that there are these different story lines running along that cross every now and then. You get many heroes and villains, and sometimes characters like Han (back when he'd shot first anyway) assume kind of a duel role.

The first two films from the PT got away from this, but it's obvious that Lucas really forced himself to revisit this way of story telling for ROTS. To me, there is only one real villain all along -- Palpatine. Other than that, we have a variety of characters that all see themselves as doing the "right thing," but it's not until episode IV that we see a "true" hero -- Luke.

MaquisWarrior
05-30-2005, 05:33 AM
I think it really depends on the scale that you look at issue at. At one level you could say that Sidious is the central charater in his quest to return the sith empire of old to power. Outlining the ways and principles of his faith and interworkings throughout the new trilogy. On another level you could say that there is no main hero.. that it is really a conglomerative effort to tie loose ends and set the stage for the original trilogy. On a third level you could say it was a statment of the American people and the world againt a man named Bush Jr.

It all depends on perspective. as has been said but tempered with the abilty to be open minded to other angles and potienal views.

One thing still bothers me though. Kashyyyk. It was my understanding that the Transoshans sold the wookies into slavery to the Empire. Does not make sense now with the way he did ep. 3. But the clone wars were supposed to be inclusive of the Mandalorian forces, and it was not.... The man baffles me sometimes.

B77, techincally the Mandalorians are the clones because they like the Sith were just dwindled down to Jango Fett and possibly Durge who are Mandalorian in name only. It's like Klingons on Star Trek or Cylons from the original Battlestar Galactica. The Mandalorians conquered many systems and imposed their culture on those planets. Through many factors actual Mandalorians are extinct. There was an SW Insider this year that covered it; the one with Clone Wars on the cover. To everyone else, you think of Palpy as Dubbya because of the scene where he become Emperor for the "safety of the Republic" and the line "So freedom ends with applause"(paraphrase) is thrown out by Padme. This is because FREEDOM DAY (9/11) is still fresh in our minds. Also notice that Padme almost looks like the Statue of Liberty, or the "walking liberty" woman on the old $1 coins in that scene.

So my fellow Americans, if you haven't done this by now, every day should be Memorial Day. Everytime you write in this forum, or go to work, drink beer, watch Star Wars ad nasuem or whatever floats your boat, a fallen hero is there with you. A soldier from any war, an FDNY firefighter, or even the guy who said "Let's Roll" on THAT DAY is on your shoulder wearing a giant smile sharing in your happiness because he/she knows you are here enjoying your life and theirs too. There is no greater force than that. That is probably what GL meant when Obi-Wan appeared to Luke in ESB and ROTJ.

sith_killer_99
05-30-2005, 08:02 AM
Personally I see Obi-Wan as the hero of the film and Anakin as the bad guy.

Obi-Wan, stays the course. He has great personal conflict in the film and does what is right despite his personal feelings. He confronts Anakin after he has turned to the darkside and ends up defeating him. He wins the battle but loses the war. This gives Obi-Wan the greatest personal conflict, aside from Anakin, yet he overcomes it without falling to the darkside.

Anakin on the other hand turns to the darkside and slaughters countless Jedi, including kids. He gives in to his feelings and is consumed by the darkside. He has personal conflict and ends up becoming evil. He is certainly no hero.

Sure Palpatine is the baddest bad guy, but ultimatly the story is about Anakin.


The OT gave us a very clear deliniation regarding who was good and who was bad.

I disagree somewhat. Sure Luke saves his father from the darkside, making him a hero. However, it is Vader/Anakin (the "bad guy") who destroys the Emperor and in doing so saves Luke. I see Vader/Anakin as the hero in ROTJ. Otherwise Luke would have died and the Emperor probably would have won.

As for the War, it's all politics and there is really no clear good or bad on either side, just large doses of both. Certainly both sides have corrupt leaders. Like I said, it's all politics. ;)

2-1B
05-30-2005, 12:06 PM
Well stated SK99. :)

In ANH and ESB we see Vader choke some b**ches and have people killed but in ROTJ he is certainly set up to be the heroic character.

Bossk77
05-30-2005, 12:28 PM
Well stated SK99. :)

In ANH and ESB we see Vader choke some b**ches and have people killed but in ROTJ he is certainly set up to be the heroic character.

Which brings up an interesting sub-point. ANH and ESP set Luke up as the Hero, but in ROJ the table is set for Vader's redemption and closure to his character arc, taking away from the overall impact of Luke as the uber hero. Luke turns from Hero to the instrument of Vaders salvation. In a parallel kind of like Raziel in the Legacy of Kain series Deception chapter. where Kain is Vader and Raziel is Luke. Think about it.:classic: I think Ceasar will get it.

2-1B
05-30-2005, 12:38 PM
Luke is certainly a hero of ROTJ, and not just for rescuing Han. :p

Had he not held such heroic ground against the Emperor and just given in, then he wouldn't have been the living example of Vader's old self, his child and the family he prevented himself from enjoying.

Luke's a hero, Vader's a hero, Rocky Balboa's a hero, everybody's a mother ****ing hero ! ! ! :crazed:

Bossk77
05-30-2005, 12:43 PM
I am actually surprised that Lucas didnt have Luke and Leia hook up and give re-birth to the British Monarchy. Going old English school.... Keep it in the family. :crazed:

2-1B
05-30-2005, 12:47 PM
talk about a linear bloodline. :crazed:

Kidhuman
05-31-2005, 12:55 AM
Imagine the Midi count from their kids....

JediTricks
05-31-2005, 05:40 AM
For ROTS, I want Obi-Wan to be the hero, but I don't think the film makes him the main hero, from what I got out of it he's not the main hero focus anyway, he's just another piece in the story until the end. Yet he and Yoda both take on the duel roles, the way ROTJ ends with Han being the hero of one battle while Luke is the hero of another - but in ROTJ Han is really the secondary hero who is doing a crucial job while Luke is the one that actually slays the ultimate villain, while in ROTS Yoda and Obi-Wan seem equally engaged in levels of battle, they both taken on a Sith, one loses and the other wins (more or less) but it seems like they are both the focus heroes there - yet earlier in the film, we have Obi-Wan being the secondary hero to Anakin and then a side-hero to the main plot, while Yoda is a side-hero throughout the first half of the film. To me, it seems like there isn't as much of the classic "hero arc" that the OT, and the serials it was based upon, relied on.

I disagree that Vader is the hero of ROTJ, Vader is the villain who defends Palpatine and baits Luke, it is the humanity of Anakin Skywalker which Luke's selfless act and subsequent suffering has awakened that ultimately destroys the Emperor, but this merely makes a hero, not the MAIN hero, because the story arc has him the villain right up until that last moment.


Doesn't seem like anybody touched upon my second question though, the "galactic good guys" were plain as day in the OT and it's part of what made the OT what it was, Luke and the Rebels dealt in absolutes, we were told from the very first words on the screen that the Empire was evil and therefore those who fight against the "evil galactic empire", such as Rebels, must be good. However, in ROTS, Padme says she wonders if they're on the wrong side of the war, but never follows that up with the counterpoint that the other side of the war has shown itself to be of equal evil, perhaps Padme should either have talked about a third option, sewing the cinematic seeds for a rebellion against the evil Emperor, or pointed out that it feels as if "hope is lost" or something like that (which would have also tied in with the title of Ep 4 quite nicely), but alas she - or more specifically Lucas through her - does neither and so it seems like there is no "galactic good guy" team at all and not even the idea of hope being out there somewhere, if even conquered for a time (I have no idea how the deleted rebellion formation scene would have fit into this, so I can't comment on whether it would have filled this void). I dunno, I think this element is an important part of the cinematic Star Wars story and is somewhat lacking in this film, even in Ep 1 and 2 we get a sense of who the story feels we should root for but here it doesn't.

The Overlord Returns
05-31-2005, 09:22 AM
I think the idea in ROTS is that we're meant to feel the manipulation that these characters have gone through. As it turns out, people and aliens are complex things, prone to different and chaging viewpoints throughout the course of major events. Palpatine has left people not knwing wether they are coming or going, which of course leads to Padme's disillusionment with the republic. Her musing about being on the wrong side is fairly valid, and perceptive, regardless of how unscrupulous the separatists may have been at some point, they are fighting for their freedom from an oppressive dictator who did a great job of "disguising" his empire as a defender of democracy and freedom around the galaxy. At least, that's how they feel. What the separatists do not know is that they are being conned by the same dictator machine that they are fighting to be rid of.

sith_killer_99
05-31-2005, 12:29 PM
but in ROTJ Han is really the secondary hero who is doing a crucial job while Luke is the one that actually slays the ultimate villain,

What ultimate villain does Luke slay?


Vader is the villain who defends Palpatine and baits Luke, it is the humanity of Anakin Skywalker which Luke's selfless act and subsequent suffering has awakened that ultimately destroys the Emperor, but this merely makes a hero, not the MAIN hero, because the story arc has him the villain right up until that last moment.

You are right, to a point. But as Bossk77 said:


Luke turns from Hero to the instrument of Vaders salvation.

Ultimatly, as Geroge Lucas has said, this is the story of Anakin Skywalker. Luke brings about the redemption of Anakin Skywalker.

Luke is a hero, I never said he wasn't, but ultimatly it is Anakin/Vader who saves Luke's life and destroys Palpatine. It is Anakin/Vader who finally fulfills his destiny. The Sith are destroyed and the good guys win, Luke is the instrument of Anakins salvation, but it is Anakin himself who makes the ultimate sacrifice.


Doesn't seem like anybody touched upon my second question though, the "galactic good guys" were plain as day in the OT and it's part of what made the OT what it was, Luke and the Rebels dealt in absolutes, we were told from the very first words on the screen that the Empire was evil and therefore those who fight against the "evil galactic empire", such as Rebels, must be good.

It is the Jedi who are the "good guys" but both sides are tainted with the darkside, because Palpatine is in control of both sides. The war wasn't about civil unrest, it was about destroying the Jedi, and to that end the bad guys win, for the most part.


However, in ROTS, Padme says she wonders if they're on the wrong side of the war, but never follows that up with the counterpoint that the other side of the war has shown itself to be of equal evil, perhaps Padme should either have talked about a third option, sewing the cinematic seeds for a rebellion against the evil Emperor, or pointed out that it feels as if "hope is lost" or something like that (which would have also tied in with the title of Ep 4 quite nicely), but alas she - or more specifically Lucas through her - does neither

Actually, Padme does offer another option when she asks Anakin to go to the Chancellor and re-open negotiations. This is further explored in the novel, unfortunatly the entire sub-plot (and there was actually quite a bit of it) was eliminated from the film due to time constraints. :( The novel shows the seeds of the Rebelion firmly planted.

As I said, it is the Jedi who are the "Galactic good guys" and the true war was with them, but Palpatine set up the ultimate Jedi trap and they couldn't escape.

2-1B
05-31-2005, 12:37 PM
It's like the opening scroll says, "There are heroes on both sides. Evil is everywhere."

Some of those separatists (and I don't mean those humps on Mustafar) probably are very sincere in their desire to leave the Republic for good reasons, afterall we the audience do know that Palpatine is working both sides. I like that idea for this movie, I don't WANT it to be clearcut because otherwise there wouldn't be that aspect of Palaptine pulling the strings and effing everything up. lol Anakin wants the war to end which is a good thing, even though he's fighting for the very guy who was playing both sides. That doesn't mean his intention of ending the war (think of the exchange in the briefing room with Obi) isn't any less sincere.

And by the way, Nien Nunb was the hero of ROTJ. lol lol lol

JediTricks
05-31-2005, 08:20 PM
What the separatists do not know is that they are being conned by the same dictator machine that they are fighting to be rid of.But Padme does know a Sith Lord commands them, if she paid attention she'd know there were 2 Sith involved there in fact, so how can she look at that fact and still feel it's the superior side?



You are right, to a point. But as Bossk77 said:

Luke turns from Hero to the instrument of Vaders salvation.Ultimatly, as Geroge Lucas has said, this is the story of Anakin Skywalker. Luke brings about the redemption of Anakin Skywalker.

Luke is a hero, I never said he wasn't, but ultimatly it is Anakin/Vader who saves Luke's life and destroys Palpatine. It is Anakin/Vader who finally fulfills his destiny. The Sith are destroyed and the good guys win, Luke is the instrument of Anakins salvation, but it is Anakin himself who makes the ultimate sacrifice.Lucas didn't say that until well after the OT was complete, IIRC. Also, Bossk77's point isn't totally valid, is Obi-Wan not a hero in ANH anymore once he sacrifices himself so that Luke can escape? I would argue that it makes him even more a hero, Luke succeeded in distracting the Emperor long enough for Lando and Wedge to blow up the DS2 and destroy Palpatine, Luke expected to die there thus making the ultimate hero's sacrifice, it could be argued that Vader is the unintentional instrument of Luke's actions. Bottom line, Vader did something heroic at the end, but he alone did not defeat the Emperor and it wasn't his intention to make this move up until the last second.


It is the Jedi who are the "good guys" but both sides are tainted with the darkside, because Palpatine is in control of both sides. The war wasn't about civil unrest, it was about destroying the Jedi, and to that end the bad guys win, for the most part. My problem with that is that the Jedi aren't shown as the galactic good guys, they're they galactic FBI but they're not a group which Padme or Bail can align themselves with because they are a religious order defined by skills and powers.


Actually, Padme does offer another option when she asks Anakin to go to the Chancellor and re-open negotiations. This is further explored in the novel, unfortunatly the entire sub-plot (and there was actually quite a bit of it) was eliminated from the film due to time constraints. :( The novel shows the seeds of the Rebelion firmly planted. How is that another option? It's just another avenue between the same 2 options. It's too bad that sub-plot was cut I suppose as it really is the 3rd option which this part of the story needs.



It's like the opening scroll says, "There are heroes on both sides. Evil is everywhere."

Some of those separatists (and I don't mean those humps on Mustafar) probably are very sincere in their desire to leave the Republic for good reasons But "there are heroes on both sides" is never shown in the movie as "good guy" heroes, though we do see evil heroes for the separatists like Dooku and Grievous. Also, we're never shown any separatists that aren't corporate baddies, they're all Trade Federation bad guy types, which would be fine if we were dealing with a story which showed the audience solid characterizations of that side but it's certainly not.


afterall we the audience do know that Palpatine is working both sides. I like that idea for this movie, I don't WANT it to be clearcut because otherwise there wouldn't be that aspect of Palaptine pulling the strings and effing everything up. I sharply disagree here, you're assuming that the story only has to be told from the good guys' point of view, but the original Star Wars lets the audience in on the "bad guy" motivations of the villains time and time again without the good guys knowing these things. The prequels do little more than pay lip service to the villains at work here leaving the audience to scratch out their own reasonings in this area.

Bossk77
05-31-2005, 10:33 PM
But Padme does know a Sith Lord commands them, if she paid attention she'd know there were 2 Sith involved there in fact, so how can she look at that fact and still feel it's the superior side?


Lucas didn't say that until well after the OT was complete, IIRC. Also, Bossk77's point isn't totally valid, is Obi-Wan not a hero in ANH anymore once he sacrifices himself so that Luke can escape? I would argue that it makes him even more a hero, Luke succeeded in distracting the Emperor long enough for Lando and Wedge to blow up the DS2 and destroy Palpatine, Luke expected to die there thus making the ultimate hero's sacrifice, it could be argued that Vader is the unintentional instrument of Luke's actions. Bottom line, Vader did something heroic at the end, but he alone did not defeat the Emperor and it wasn't his intention to make this move up until the last second.

My problem with that is that the Jedi aren't shown as the galactic good guys, they're they galactic FBI but they're not a group which Padme or Bail can align themselves with because they are a religious order defined by skills and powers.

How is that another option? It's just another avenue between the same 2 options. It's too bad that sub-plot was cut I suppose as it really is the 3rd option which this part of the story needs.


But "there are heroes on both sides" is never shown in the movie as "good guy" heroes, though we do see evil heroes for the separatists like Dooku and Grievous. Also, we're never shown any separatists that aren't corporate baddies, they're all Trade Federation bad guy types, which would be fine if we were dealing with a story which showed the audience solid characterizations of that side but it's certainly not.

I sharply disagree here, you're assuming that the story only has to be told from the good guys' point of view, but the original Star Wars lets the audience in on the "bad guy" motivations of the villains time and time again without the good guys knowing these things. The prequels do little more than pay lip service to the villains at work here leaving the audience to scratch out their own reasonings in this area.

Ok, now i am kinda confused now... I didnt bring OBI into my point. Obi is a whole different ball of wax. Obi's failing as you would may see it, makes him more along the lines of a tragic hero. He has to sacrifice everthing in order to help mentor and guide Luke along to Lukes destiny/Anakin's destany. It cannot be said that Obi's wisdom may have allowed him to prevail over Vader's Strength. But it is his ultimate sacrifice that allows him to trully fullfill his promise to Qui-Gon. Luke becomes again an instrument to this end, bringing Anikan back to the light and fullfiilling Anakins destiny as the "chosen one". Please... Stop and think about it from that point of view for a few. Think from ep1 through 6 and you will see what i mean. :)

stillakid
06-01-2005, 12:50 AM
And by the way, Nien Nunb was the hero of ROTJ. lol lol lol

And 2-1B was the hero of ESB. Without him, Luke would have DIED and the Empire would never have fallen. :)

Bossk77
06-01-2005, 12:58 AM
And 2-1B was the hero of ESB. Without him, Luke would have DIED and the Empire would never have fallen. :)

Sorry to correct you, but the firemen who pulled Hamill out of his car and the surgeons who reconstructed his face are the real hereos. They saved Mark's life ect after the car accident durring ESB.lol

2-1B
06-01-2005, 02:07 AM
And 2-1B was the hero of ESB. Without him, Luke would have DIED and the Empire would never have fallen. :)

Now that's something we can agree on ! Cheers mate ! :)





JT, there surely are "good guy" heroes on the side of the Republic, there names are Obi-Wan Kenobi and Anakin Skywalker. :)

sith_killer_99
06-01-2005, 06:21 AM
How is that another option? It's just another avenue between the same 2 options. It's too bad that sub-plot was cut I suppose as it really is the 3rd option which this part of the story needs.

Well, I hate to say it, but you really need to read the novel to understand the significance of her plea and how it relates to being a third option.

You see in the novel the Jedi as well as several members in the Senate believe that Palpatine has gained too much power and that the war is being draged out needlessly. The Senators are afraid to go to the Jedi, because they are unsure where their loyalties lay, afterall, Anakin has just saved Palpatine. Bail and Mon Mothma go to Padme' and speak to her about petitioning Palpatine to put an end to the war and relax his emergency powers. In the novel she and several other Senators actually have a meeting with Palpatine while Anakin is in Palpatines office. Anakin stands with Palpatine, which only goes to further the Senators fears that the Jedi are becoming Palpatines private police force. :crazed:

It gets really complicated.

dr_evazan22
06-02-2005, 01:29 AM
Luke is certainly a hero of ROTJ, and not just for rescuing Han. :p

Had he not held such heroic ground against the Emperor and just given in, then he wouldn't have been the living example of Vader's old self, his child and the family he prevented himself from enjoying.

Luke's a hero, Vader's a hero, Rocky Balboa's a hero, everybody's a mother ****ing hero ! ! ! :crazed:


ROTFL!!!!!

I was going to say that also about Luke.

JediTricks
06-02-2005, 02:49 AM
Ok, now i am kinda confused now... I didnt bring OBI into my point.I know, I was making a correlation.


Obi is a whole different ball of wax. Obi's failing as you would may see it, makes him more along the lines of a tragic hero. He has to sacrifice everthing in order to help mentor and guide Luke along to Lukes destiny/Anakin's destany. It cannot be said that Obi's wisdom may have allowed him to prevail over Vader's Strength. But it is his ultimate sacrifice that allows him to trully fullfill his promise to Qui-Gon. Luke becomes again an instrument to this end, bringing Anikan back to the light and fullfiilling Anakins destiny as the "chosen one". Please... Stop and think about it from that point of view for a few. Think from ep1 through 6 and you will see what i mean. :)I think you're smoking too many of Jabba's hookah frogs. :p I honestly don't see the connecting points here, it's too out there for me, are you saying that only by Obi-Wan letting himself get killed and eventually getting Luke to face Vader does Obi-Wan finally complete Anakin's training?



JT, there surely are "good guy" heroes on the side of the Republic, there names are Obi-Wan Kenobi and Anakin Skywalker. :) Except they are on the side of the Jedi, who are pledged to the good of the Republic, but the Republic itself is "bad". Bail and Padme also are shown to be serving the Republic but apparently recognize that it is "bad".



Well, I hate to say it, but you really need to read the novel to understand the significance of her plea and how it relates to being a third option. That sounds to me like you're saying the movie is not a "whole story" on its own. Either way though, the movie is canon, the book is not. For me, the movie is the "story", the book is written by someone else to suppliment the movie with Expanded Universe material, fine for the book, but I have no interest in a movie requiring any sort of homework. I should be reading the EU for the movies because I want to, not because the movie fails to tell the story correctly.

As for what you described from the book, it sounds too convoluted and I don't really see how it leads anywhere else. (Please don't go all Dianetics on me and just parrot "read the book" in response :crazed: - a reference to a commercial which I hope at least SOME of you will get)

2-1B
06-02-2005, 03:19 AM
JT it is because of the Chancellor that the Republic is bad, even though everybody in the story doesn't know all of it . . . The Jedi are suspicious of the Chancellor and while yes they do technically fight for a corrupt Chancellor, they don't like it when he interferes with Jedi affairs and such.

Obi-Wan says that his allegiance is to the Republic, to Democracy, and that means with or without Palpatine in charge. Anakin makes the mistake of serving Palpatine's version of the Republic.

It's debatable, your claim that The Republic is "bad." From the viewpoint that Palpatine is in charge and has manipulated so many Senators, yes it is bad. From the viewpoint of Obi-Wan who is allied with what I just referenced above, I don't think The Republic is totally "bad."

In need of a good scrubbing ? That's for sure. :D

sith_killer_99
06-02-2005, 11:17 AM
That sounds to me like you're saying the movie is not a "whole story" on its own.

Not at all, the film is a story told froma certain point of view. Which is to say, as with any other story that there are always things going on in the background that the audience was not privey to. GL obviously did not feel it was significant enough to cover it in depth. Though, it is hinted at from time to time.


Either way though, the movie is canon, the book is not. For me, the movie is the "story", the book is written by someone else to suppliment the movie with Expanded Universe material,

Actually the novel was written using the actual filming of ROTS. GL had the author come in and sit down watch what they had filmed so the author ended up writting cut scenes into the novel at the same time he consulted GL. I guess this is proably why it felt like a more complete story to me, it was like...this is what GL would have shown us, if he wasn't constrained by time. In an interview I read with the author he said it was extremely difficult because GL kept re-editing and moving scenes around. LOL

Yes, this is written word, and hence EU, but to me it feels more like the story GL wanted to tell.

BTW, the whole "Canon vs. EU" issue brings up an interesting point....

What about the television series? Will it be canon? EU? It is on film, but GL didn't direct, but then GL didn't direct the best Star Wars film to date either...that's ESB in case anyone was wondering. LOL ;)