PDA

View Full Version : Qui-Gon could have bought Shmi's freedom



Kidhuman
01-07-2007, 05:52 PM
As we know, Qui-Gon attempted to free Shmi by betting on the race and Watto said no. Qui-Gon then fixed the roll of the die by using the force to free Anakin. After the race Watto told Qui-Gon he was broke and ruined. A few scenes later we see Qui-Gon hand Anakin a bunch of money from selling the pod. If Qui-Gon wanted Shmi free, he could have used the money to buy her freedom from Watto at that point.

bigbarada
01-07-2007, 06:23 PM
That and about a million other scenarios could have gotten both Anakin and Shmi off of Tatooine.

Qui-Gonn could have just as easily scanned Anaking and Shmi's bodies for the tracking device, as he scanned for midichlorians. It only had to be sophisticated enough for the slaves not to be able to discover it.

It makes the characters seem like they are only acting as a function of the plot and not actually driving the plot.

2-1B
01-07-2007, 08:15 PM
No way KH, I totally disagree because Qui-Gon did not need that baby mama drama. :(

El Chuxter
01-07-2007, 08:22 PM
But Qui-Gon could've had a little Shmi on the side if he'd bought her freedom. You don't think she'd be grateful enough to repay him in any way he desired? The code only says Jedi can't love. It says nothing about a little afternoon delight.

Slicker
01-07-2007, 08:37 PM
That's one thing I never understood.

How could Watto be broke when, in essence, he got to keep ALL of the winnings from the race? He got to keep all of the winnings, minus the cost of the parts. He already had the parts so he didn't have to spend any money out of pocket so he kept every penny credit of the race stakes.

CaptainSolo1138
01-07-2007, 09:18 PM
That's one thing I never understood.

How could Watto be broke when, in essence, he got to keep ALL of the winnings from the race? He got to keep all of the winnings, minus the cost of the parts. He already had the parts so he didn't have to spend any money out of pocket so he kept every penny credit of the race stakes.But he bet so heavy on that lil' bastard Sambuca that he went broke paying his debt off.

Droid
01-07-2007, 09:21 PM
I think Watto bet so heavily on Sebulba (against other gambler's, maybe at a Hutt casino) that he lost a great deal.

Shmi getting left never made a lick of sense to me. I always thought that given Anakin's role in getting them off Tatooine and then liberating Naboo he could have said, "Hey Queen, how about sending old Captain Pancakes back to Naboo with enough money to buy my mom?" And old Padme woulda probably said, "Well sure Anakin, the Naboo royalty has enough to get Watto to do anything we want."

And the Jedi may think attachment is forbidden, but Obi-wan couldn't have seen his way clear to go back and try to free a slave?

And if Palpatine was buddying up to Anakin so much, how come Anakin didn't try to get his friend the CHANCELLOR to do a little something about slavery on Tatooine, or at least get a little Republic dough to buy his mom back?

Yes, it was really, really poorly written.

JON9000
01-07-2007, 09:26 PM
It made for an okay dramamtic moment, if not entirely convincing and somewhat morally off-kilter.

Qui-gon could have freed her with force, but he didn't. Why, because of property rights? Because doing it by force was unfair? What about when he manipulated the chance cube? Yep, this is a problem, but I thinkof it as only a minor quibble!

shammykenobi
01-07-2007, 09:58 PM
Has anyone considered the fact that the jedi council would have been even less likely to train anakin if qui-gon had bought shmi along for the ride? Qui-gon intended for anakin to be trained as a jedi and believed that he was the chosen one. Bringing along Shmi would not have proven that anakin had no further attachments and was a good candidate for training. As a matter of fact Ki-adi even sensed that anakin's thoughts were on his mother. So if she had been along with them, that would have really caused more conflict and made the jedi council even more unlikely to train anakin.

bigbarada
01-07-2007, 11:40 PM
Has anyone considered the fact that the jedi council would have been even less likely to train anakin if qui-gon had bought shmi along for the ride? Qui-gon intended for anakin to be trained as a jedi and believed that he was the chosen one. Bringing along Shmi would not have proven that anakin had no further attachments and was a good candidate for training. As a matter of fact Ki-adi even sensed that anakin's thoughts were on his mother. So if she had been along with them, that would have really caused more conflict and made the jedi council even more unlikely to train anakin.

And what's this deal about the Jedi snatching children away from their homes and forcibly cutting off all contacts with their family? Should we believe that these are the actions of good, moral organization? Or are we to believe that any parent would willingly give up their child forever based on the results of a blood test?

Galaxy far, far away or not, that's just ridiculous.

Kidhuman
01-08-2007, 06:17 AM
It made for an okay dramamtic moment, if not entirely convincing and somewhat morally off-kilter.

Qui-gon could have freed her with force, but he didn't. Why, because of property rights? Because doing it by force was unfair? What about when he manipulated the chance cube? Yep, this is a problem, but I thinkof it as only a minor quibble!


But on the same hand, Qui-Gon freed Anakin with the force in the game of chance didnt he? So why not use the force ot free her?

stillakid
01-08-2007, 08:13 AM
You know, every once in a while I'll see an old house and think about buying it. I look inside and begin rearranging things and doing improvements in my head. Thoughts like, I"ll take that wall down there, I'll move the front door to here, I'd expand that room out that way....and on and on and on until the true answer for the problem is really to just knock the whole thing down and start over again.

As I mentioned time and time again when these Prequels first came out, once a plot element is introduced, it is the catalyst for an entire chain of events that builds on it. A domino falls and it drops every one of them after that. TPM began on very shaky ground and rest of the story and the two films afterwards had no choice but to continue on that path. So we could sit around (again) and try to "fix" individual elements of the story, but the end-game is that no one problem in the script is to blame. The entire thing is a shambles from opening crawl to the end of ROTS. The only way to fix the prequel story that the OT established is to start all over again.

JediTricks
01-08-2007, 05:12 PM
I read somewhere that Qui-Gon tried to use the money he got from the sale of the podracer to buy Shmi, but that Watto was so angered by losing Anakin and losing all those bets due to the shenanigans that he flat-out refused to sell Shmi as well. This makes a little sense, though these slaves are really just status symbols in that society and being broke has no status, but ultimately when George didn't show it the movie failed to deliver on that, and made Qui-Gon out to be a selfish egomaniac who thought his opinions and interpretations of prophecy were more important than those of his fellow Jedi masters.


As for the chance cube, it was rigged in Watto's favor and Qui-Gon used the Force to swing it back to his favor, that is part of why Watto reacts SO strongly when he sees the results (Lucas hints at the rigged chance cube thing in the movie but doesn't say it, I think that's ok here), Qui-Gon's actions there don't seem "wrong" to me in any way.

stillakid
01-08-2007, 06:18 PM
I read somewhere that Qui-Gon tried to use the money he got from the sale of the podracer to buy Shmi, but that Watto was so angered by losing Anakin and losing all those bets due to the shenanigans that he flat-out refused to sell Shmi as well. This makes a little sense, though these slaves are really just status symbols in that society and being broke has no status, but ultimately when George didn't show it the movie failed to deliver on that, and made Qui-Gon out to be a selfish egomaniac who thought his opinions and interpretations of prophecy were more important than those of his fellow Jedi masters.


As for the chance cube, it was rigged in Watto's favor and Qui-Gon used the Force to swing it back to his favor, that is part of why Watto reacts SO strongly when he sees the results (Lucas hints at the rigged chance cube thing in the movie but doesn't say it, I think that's ok here), Qui-Gon's actions there don't seem "wrong" to me in any way.

I've always been bothered when Qui Gon says, "We didn't come here to free slaves."

Well, that's precisely what he's doing with Anakin, only it's okay to free slaves when he has a selfish purpose for it, isn't it? Shmi had no value evidently therefore she wasn't worth the effort to free her.

So it isn't so much the more than obvious "Force" rigging of the chance cube roll that shows Qui Gon to be an unfair individual. It's the entire situation that illustrates his true colors.

2-1B
01-08-2007, 07:04 PM
Qui-Gon said in the movie that he tried to free Anakin's mother "but Watto wouldn't have it."

Droid
01-08-2007, 07:22 PM
It really bugged me that the prequels failed to show the Jedi as romantic knights and rather as pompous idealogues who couldn't see beyond the walls of their ivory tower. They died in the prequels because they were so set in their ways they couldn't see the change around them. I would have much rather they died because of their attempt to save everybody, to right every wrong, and because Palpatine manipulated circumstances to turn the very populace they tried to protect against them.

Ben and Yoda of the original trilogy both had big hearts and seemed full of whimsy and humor when the time allowed. Give me one moment that did that for any Jedi introduced in the prequels other than perhaps Qui-Gon.

El Chuxter
01-08-2007, 07:28 PM
Ben and Yoda of the original trilogy both had big hearts and seemed full of whimsy and humor when the time allowed. Give me one moment that did that for any Jedi introduced in the prequels other than perhaps Qui-Gon.

Kit Fisto and his Mighty GrinTM.

Kidhuman
01-08-2007, 07:54 PM
And when Mace said this party's over.(after he did 4 keg stands and 6 jello shots)

Droid
01-08-2007, 09:23 PM
I actually agree on Fisto.

I think the rest of the Jedi, including Obi-wan (who did have some wry comments), played like freaking Vulcans. In the original trilogy Ben and Yoda warned against anger and fear, dark emotions. They never said don't love, don't feel happiness, don't laugh. All of the Jedi, including Master Windu, were so GROUCHY. (Or grumpy as Anakin said).

stillakid
01-08-2007, 11:35 PM
Qui-Gon said in the movie that he tried to free Anakin's mother "but Watto wouldn't have it."

I guess Watto doesn't get turned on by space cowboys. :sad:

2-1B
01-08-2007, 11:52 PM
I guess Watto doesn't get turned on by space cowboys. :sad:

Some people call him the Gangster of Love.

Kidhuman
01-09-2007, 06:06 AM
Does this mean Maces real name is Maurice?

El Chuxter
01-09-2007, 10:02 AM
I dunno, but Sy Snootles definitely sings of the pompetus of love.

JediTricks
01-09-2007, 09:15 PM
It really bugged me that the prequels failed to show the Jedi as romantic knights and rather as pompous idealogues who couldn't see beyond the walls of their ivory tower. They died in the prequels because they were so set in their ways they couldn't see the change around them. I would have much rather they died because of their attempt to save everybody, to right every wrong, and because Palpatine manipulated circumstances to turn the very populace they tried to protect against them.

Ben and Yoda of the original trilogy both had big hearts and seemed full of whimsy and humor when the time allowed. Give me one moment that did that for any Jedi introduced in the prequels other than perhaps Qui-Gon.
Totally agreed!!! I've always felt this way about the prequel Jedi and their downfall.