PDA

View Full Version : "I haven't gone by the name Obi Wan..."



stillakid
10-08-2007, 09:11 PM
In ANH, Old Ben Kenobi says to Luke: "I haven't gone by the name Obi Wan since, oh, before you were born."

Cut to about 19 years earlier at the end of ROTS, when OBI WAN Kenobi watches the birth of Luke. No mention of the name BEN at any time prior to Luke's birth, during it, or immediately after.

So, exactly when did Old Obi Wan stop using the Obi Wan name and start using Ben? Either the Prequels f'd up the continuity again, or maybe the Prequel Worshipers would like to suggest that Old Ben is just lying to Luke some more. :rolleyes:

LTBasker
10-08-2007, 09:27 PM
Did anyone call him by name after the twins were born? I can't remember, but if they didn't then technically... ;)

Which reminds me, I can't believe Lucas didn't touch on the "Ben" thing in the prequels, well ok, I can somewhat believe it. If Lucas came up with it now, it'd probably be something like B'eghn. And his regular name would be O'bbeye Wyauhn.

Rocketboy
10-08-2007, 09:28 PM
In ANH, Old Ben Kenobi says to Luke: "I haven't gone by the name Obi Wan since, oh, before you were born."

Cut to about 19 years earlier at the end of ROTS, when OBI WAN Kenobi watches the birth of Luke. No mention of the name BEN at any time prior to Luke's birth, during it, or immediately after.

So, exactly when did Old Obi Wan stop using the Obi Wan name and start using Ben? Either the Prequels f'd up the continuity again, or maybe the Prequel Worshipers would like to suggest that Old Ben is just lying to Luke some more. :rolleyes:More shoddy OT writing.

bobafrett
10-08-2007, 10:08 PM
Sure pick apart my fun from my childhood by stating logic, and flaws.

Kidhuman
10-08-2007, 10:34 PM
Why is it so hard to acept the fact he dropped Obi-Wan and used Ben to hide

El Chuxter
10-08-2007, 10:44 PM
I think KH nailed it. He never used the name Obi-Wan after leaving Polis Massa.

...unless you've read the Last of the Jedi series.

stillakid
10-08-2007, 10:59 PM
Why is it so hard to acept the fact he dropped Obi-Wan and used Ben to hide

It's not... if you ignore the Prequels.

There are some definitive points of continuity established in the OT and some others which we can surmise. The question of why Obi Wan "becomes" Ben is one of those we can sort of safely guess at. Your answer above is likely the original reason for the change in name.

Given that justified assumption, one would then assume that a Prequel story (on screen or off....likely off) would have had Obi Wan change his name to Ben as an alias soon after his fight with Anakin as the Republic is crumbling around him. He and Anakin's wife (Padme in Lucas's version) sort of hide out until the twins are born and he can then take Luke to Tatooine to live with his (Obi Wan's) brother, Owen.

So the only way to make the statement "I haven't gone by the name Obi Wan..." work is if Padme does not give birth until well after the Anakin/Obi fight and, in the case of the films, well after the credits rolled.

Kidhuman
10-08-2007, 11:06 PM
The only one who calls him Ben is Luke really. Vader calls him Obi-Wan, Leia calls him Obi-Wan, I believe Yoda does as well. I dont think Owen or Beru ever say is name one way or another.

stillakid
10-08-2007, 11:21 PM
The only one who calls him Ben is Luke really. Vader calls him Obi-Wan, Leia calls him Obi-Wan, I believe Yoda does as well. I dont think Owen or Beru ever say is name one way or another.

And your point? :confused:

Vader calls him Obi Wan because that's the only name Anakin ever knew him by before and during the fight.

Leia calls him Obi Wan because that's the name her "father" told her...that's the name Bail knew him as when the allegedly fought in the Clone Wars together.... which is something else that didn't happen in Lucas's incorrect version of the Prequel stories.

Yoda calls him Obi Wan, again, because that's the name he used when the Republic was together.

You said yourself that Ben was likely an alias Obi used when he went into hiding so there is no conflict within the OT. The OT has solid writing. The Prequels decided to F with the established continuity and invite this kind of questioning.

Bel-Cam Jos
10-08-2007, 11:26 PM
He can tell people whatever he wants them to call him. If I'd felt that I'd failed not only a close friend but an entire order or even the galaxy, I might want to forget my past, too. So he might be ignoring his failures by refusing to go by his actual name. Ben could just be a simple name he chose, nothing more.

Rocketboy
10-09-2007, 12:07 AM
Does anyone actually say "Obi-Wan" after the twins are born? If not, then what Obi-Wan says can be considered true.
(I believe Yoda calls him "Master Kenobi" when he tells him about communicating with Qui-Gon.)

Besides, it was almost 20 friggin' years later when he says "I haven't gone by the name Obi Wan since, oh, before you were born." A few days/weeks really doesn't mean jack.

2-1B
10-09-2007, 12:12 AM
I remember back before ROTS came out, there was a "spoiler" on TFN that reported the opening battle sequence would have Anakin calling Obi-Wan "Ben" because it was his birth name...and then something about Obers scolding Anners for calling him by that name since he didn't like it.

Thankfully that wasn't in the movie.

stillakid
10-09-2007, 12:25 AM
Does anyone actually say "Obi-Wan" after the twins are born? If not, then what Obi-Wan says can be considered true.
(I believe Yoda calls him "Master Kenobi" when he tells him about communicating with Qui-Gon.)

Besides, it was almost 20 friggin' years later when he says "I haven't gone by the name Obi Wan since, oh, before you were born." A few days/weeks really doesn't mean jack.

Tell that to your mortgage company. :D

Seriously, there is no argument here and your attempts to spin the Prequels are feeble and amusing. Old Ben CLEARLY states that he hadn't gone by that name since [well] before Luke was born. That implies a time period of some length, far more than a few minutes or days. Seriously. I can't take much more of the lame attempts to defend the poor nonsense of the Prequels.

Rocketboy
10-09-2007, 12:57 AM
Seriously, there is no argument here and your attempts to spin the Prequels are feeble and amusing. As are your constant attempts to bash them.


Old Ben CLEARLY states that he hadn't gone by that name since [well] before Luke was born. The "oh" doesn't seem like a very clear thing to me. More like he was avoiding an explanation.
"I haven't gone by the name of Obi-Wan since shortly after you were born and I went into hiding to protect myself and watch over you...ummm...I mean...ummm...since oh, before you were born."


That implies a time period of some length, far more than a few minutes or days. Yeah, like 20 years ago, which is a very long time, especially when you've pretty much been alone in the desert. How exact are your memories from 1987?


Seriously. I can't take much more of the lame attempts to defend the poor nonsense of the Prequels.It is not our fault Lucas didn't properly plan ahead when he wrote the originals.

El Chuxter
10-09-2007, 01:24 AM
How exact are your memories from 1987?

I remember Appetite for Destruction.

And I remember thinking the lyrics to the best song were, "Woah, woah woah, sweet chariot, oooh-oh oh yeah!"

Mad Slanted Powers
10-09-2007, 01:40 AM
I concur with Rocketboy's statements. I don't believe we hear the name Obi-Wan after the birth of the twins. Yoda calls him Master Kenobi and then he takes the twins to Tatooine and assume the name Ben. I don't think anything Ben told Luke implied how long before his birth it was that he stopped using Obi-Wan, just that it was before. He didn't say he started going by Ben before Luke was born.

Remember the recurring line from TPM: "You assume too much."

JediTricks
10-09-2007, 03:26 PM
This is crap, when Kenobi is sitting there discussing the name with Luke, he's thinking back trying to remember how long it's been, and it's been so long that it's an era at least before Luke's birth. The problem with this isn't that the prequels didn't show him going by Ben right before Luke's birth, the problem is that the prequels didn't fit the established history from the OT (yet again) as clued in by the author in that movie. If he hasn't gone by his Jedi name since a period before Luke's birth, this is suggesting that Kenobi spent some notable period before Luke's birth in hiding around people who would know of him - and the prequels didn't show that at all, Luke is born a couple hours after the fall of the Republic and the Jedi.

This is one of the chief failings of the prequels, they stand in direct contrast to the POINT of Star Wars, which was that there was a history and we wouldn't know it, we'd know it was established and we'd get hints but that era would not be told so the audience would have to immerse in that OT universe like a newcomer. But the prequels take all these key points and says "you didn't define them, I'll push this as far to its limits as I can to deconstruct what already exists" - it's like your annoying little brother getting 2 millimeters from your face and then screeching how he's not touching you, he's not touching you!

Droid
10-09-2007, 03:47 PM
But the prequels take all these key points and says "you didn't define them, I'll push this as far to its limits as I can to deconstruct what already exists" - it's like your annoying little brother getting 2 millimeters from your face and then screeching how he's not touching you, he's not touching you!

Excellent comparison!

JON9000
10-09-2007, 03:51 PM
Are you dudes (JT and Stilla) gonna watch the television show? It may be more of the same. I can understand watching all of the prequels even if you hated the first one, since you were already invested at that point, but if you don't dig the prequels, watching the series seems like courting disaster.

JediTricks
10-09-2007, 03:58 PM
I'll give the show a chance, Lucas says he's not going to be dealing with main characters and main story arcs, so that alone should make it easier to bear.

stillakid
10-10-2007, 12:03 PM
I concur with Rocketboy's statements. I don't believe we hear the name Obi-Wan after the birth of the twins. Yoda calls him Master Kenobi and then he takes the twins to Tatooine and assume the name Ben. I don't think anything Ben told Luke implied how long before his birth it was that he stopped using Obi-Wan, just that it was before. He didn't say he started going by Ben before Luke was born.

Remember the recurring line from TPM: "You assume too much."

That's BS and you know it. Vader in ESB even uses the name Obi Wan when he tells Luke, "Obi Wan never told you what happened to your father." It isn't even implied. Ben says point blank that he stopped using the name Obi Wan for a significant length of time before Luke was born. Anakin obviously ONLY new Obi by the name "Obi Wan" and never Ben or else he would've used the name that Luke probably would have only known the old guy by, that being "Obi Wan." Which he did. Vader/Anakin only knew the name "Obi Wan" because that's the only name Obi used when those two knew each other (pre-fight). And clearly Obi used the name "Obi" for some time after the fight. Then sometime long before Luke was born, Obi began using the pseudoname, Ben, presumably as he went into hiding.

stillakid
10-10-2007, 12:13 PM
Are you dudes (JT and Stilla) gonna watch the television show? It may be more of the same. I can understand watching all of the prequels even if you hated the first one, since you were already invested at that point, but if you don't dig the prequels, watching the series seems like courting disaster.

I'll watch it, but the Star Wars stories have never ever been very effective or successful as television enterprises. (Sort of like the Muppets...the half hour TV show was brilliant, but it never really worked in a motion picture feature).

Like everything and everyone else, I give everything the benefit of the doubt until they prove themselves to be not worthy. The mis-informed assumption with that question above seems to be that people like me go into the theater, or turn on the TV, looking for problems to complain about. I go in expecting to be entertained. If it fails to do so, then I try to figure out why, and then "complain" after that. If it succeeds, I'm more than happy to praise it. The Prequels didn't live up to the OT standards and invited a lot of valid questions, not because I wanted to not like them, but because they inherently are flawed in a lot of ways. On the other hand, the Clone Wars animated series was fun and enjoyable for a lot of reasons and I have no problem giving the creators praise for it.

So, we'll see. I'm not going to blindly love anything Star Wars just because it has the Star Wars logo on it like many people do and I'm not going to blindly hate it just for kicks. Both are ridiculous concepts.

Rocketboy
10-10-2007, 12:17 PM
Ben says point blank that he stopped using the name Obi Wan for a significant length of time before Luke was born.How long is the period of time "oh?"


Anakin obviously ONLY new Obi by the name "Obi Wan" and never Ben or else he would've used the name that Luke probably would have only known the old guy by, that being "Obi Wan." Which he did.It seems obvious that Anakin doesn't know the name Ben. Why the hell would Obi-Wan start using a name that Anakin/Vader/Empire knows about when he goes into hiding?


And clearly Obi used the name "Obi" for some time after the fight. And where is that in the movies?

stillakid
10-10-2007, 12:18 PM
As are your constant attempts to bash them.
These aren't "attempts." They are just objective observations of the Prequel failures.


The "oh" doesn't seem like a very clear thing to me. More like he was avoiding an explanation.
What is your native language anyway?



Yeah, like 20 years ago, which is a very long time, especially when you've pretty much been alone in the desert. How exact are your memories from 1987?
Not bad actually.


It is not our fault Lucas didn't properly plan ahead when he wrote the originals.
So, that sounds like an admission that the Prequels are not faithful to the established continuity of the original films. Thanks for finally admitting that. I suppose to make people like you happy, Lucas should go back and reedit the OT to make it fit the new reality that makes videogame addict fanboys so happy.

Rocketboy
10-10-2007, 12:19 PM
I go in expecting to be entertained. If it fails to do so, then I try to figure out why, and then "complain" after that. How many times have you seen each of the Prequels? Do you own them all on DVD?

stillakid
10-10-2007, 12:22 PM
How many times have you seen each of the Prequels? Do you own them all on DVD?

Yes, I've seen them more than enough to evaluate them on their own merits. Yes, I copies of them reside under my roof. Are you suggesting that I haven't seen them enough to know what I'm talking about? Trust me, one viewing is enough for any intelligent person to recognize the problems.

Rocketboy
10-10-2007, 12:23 PM
So, that sounds like an admission that the Prequels are not faithful to the established continuity of the original films. Thanks for finally admitting that. I don't recall saying that. Ever. What I attempted to imply (poorly it appears) is that maybe the OT is flawed since the don't follow the continuity of the Prequels.


I suppose to make people like you happy, Lucas should go back and reedit the OT to make it fit the new reality that makes videogame addict fanboys so happy.Oh you know me so well!

Rocketboy
10-10-2007, 12:27 PM
Yes, I've seen them more than enough to evaluate them on their own merits. Yes, I copies of them reside under my roof. Are you suggesting that I haven't seen them enough to know what I'm talking about? Trust me, one viewing is enough for any intelligent person to recognize the problems.I just find it highly odd that someone would purchase and view something multiple times that didn't entertain them.
Was it just because it said Star Wars on it?

I saw the first two Lord of the Rings movies once. I thought they were amazingly dull and devoid of entertainment. I don't own them and have interest in seeing them again (or the third one ever).

darthvyn
10-10-2007, 12:29 PM
he also said that vader murdered luke's father. the only answer is that he's a senile old man who's heat-addled brain can't keep things straight anymore, or he's a lying bastard who just gets his kicks from telling people blatant lies and laughing about it later. i can just picture it:

obi-wan: "i told him i hadn't gone by that name since before he was born, and he TOTALLY bought it. i actually used that name for a good week AFTER he was born! ha!"

chewie: "graaaaaaaank"

obi-wan: "i know, right? i also told him that i don't like blue milk, when in actuality it's my favorite drink! what a maroon..."

anyway, he doesn't say "well" at all... the line is:

"I haven't gone by the name Obi-Wan since oh, before you were born."

i don't know where the usage of the word "well" in previous posts came from, but it seems like a feeble attempt to spin the dialogue to support the argument of the person who brought it up.

if you take out the "oh" he simply says "i haven't gone by the name obi-wan since before you were born" - that could be a year before he was born, or a minute before he was born.

stillakid
10-10-2007, 12:34 PM
I just find it highly odd that someone would purchase and view something multiple times that didn't entertain them.
Was it just because it said Star Wars on it?
Who ever said that I purchased them? You assume too much.


I saw the first two Lord of the Rings movies once. I thought they were amazingly dull and devoid of entertainment. I don't own them and have interest in seeing them again (or the third one ever).
Same here. The only expectations I had for LOTR were from people who loved the novels. When I saw the first movie, I left wondering what the fuss was about. For a number of reasons I found the film to be devoid of purpose and rather laborious and boring. To give the series a fair chance, I went to see #2 and left feeling even more curious as to why so many people worship the series. That led to me not having any interest at all in the third film. I think I eventually saw it in passing on HBO, but only because it was there, free, and I had nothing else to do. I don't remember much about it.

I am so disappointed in the Prequels because the OT films were A) great and B) had a significant impact on my life and the career I chose. Expecting follow-ups that were at least as good if not better is what most people wanted to see. When the Prequels turned out to be full of questions and holes, I and a host of other people were profoundly disappointed, wondering what went wrong. I watch them rarely if only to revel in the still superior production design and rare cool videogame moments. Otherwise, the stories are subpar at best and best viewed when drunk. A nap during the truly crappy Anakin/Shakespeare moments helps.

stillakid
10-10-2007, 12:41 PM
I don't recall saying that. Ever. What I attempted to imply (poorly it appears) is that maybe the OT is flawed since the don't follow the continuity of the Prequels.

You just admitted it again: The Prequels are flawed because they don't follow the established continuity of the OT.

Maybe you're not getting the fundamental truth here: ANH set the bar for continuity. ESB was beholden to the continuity established by ANH. ROTJ was beholden to both ANH and ESB. TPM was beholden to ANH, ESB, and ROTJ. AOTC was beholden to ANH, ESB, ROTJ, and TPM...in that order. ROTS was beholden all the rest, in order of production. That's the way it is unless the creator specifically admits that the earlier versions are "flawed" and that he is intentionally altering the continuity. This concept is not unique as Arthur C. Clarke did exactly that with his novel 2061 when he stated in very specific clear English that he knew he was altering the continuity of both 2001 and 2010 in order to tell this new story. Lucas did nothing of the sort.

Rocketboy
10-10-2007, 12:43 PM
Who ever said that I purchased them? You assume too much.Well, if I had received a movie I didn't like as a gift I would return it for something I actually like.

Rocketboy
10-10-2007, 12:45 PM
You just admitted it again: The Prequels are flawed because they don't follow the established continuity of the OT. Read it again. You just flipped what I said.
I said the OT is flawed because of the PT. Not vice-versa.

stillakid
10-10-2007, 12:46 PM
Well, if I had received a movie I didn't like as a gift I would return it for something I actually like.

You're diverting attention from the topic. How come?

And to try to answer your implied question, I don't like to run from things that confuse me or disappoint. I like trying to understand. The OT had a significant impact on my life so I like to investigate so I know how and why the new films are subpar. Running from something isn't a way to grow and learn.

stillakid
10-10-2007, 12:50 PM
Read it again. You just flipped what I said.
I said the OT is flawed because of the PT. Not vice-versa.

And you failed once again to read the whole response. Your basis is incorrect. The PT is beholden to the OT for it's continuity, not the other way around. The OT CAN'T be flawed because it set the standard. Your POV is inherently wrong.

El Chuxter
10-10-2007, 12:57 PM
So, in essence, if the entire weight of the US government suddenly comes down upon me and I go into hiding, and start using the name Fred, then if someone calls me by my real name twenty years later, that somehow implies I went by the name Fred for longer than I did?

I'm just not sure I get the point of this whole argument.

And so what if people called him Obi-Wan in the intervening time between the end of ROTS and the beginning of ANH? Does that one line, spoken more or less off the cuff, lead to the breakdown of the entire saga?

Rocketboy
10-10-2007, 01:06 PM
You're diverting attention from the topic. That tends to happen on the internet from time to time.

How come?Why would I want a movie I wasn't entertained by?

Running from something isn't a way to grow and learn.OK then, how the f*ck am I supposed to grow and learn from a sci-fi/fantasy movie I didn't like and only watched in hopes of being entertained?

And you failed once again to read the whole response. Your basis is incorrect. The PT is beholden to the OT for it's continuity, not the other way around. The OT CAN'T be flawed because it set the standard. Your POV is inherently wrong.No it isn't. Episodes 1-3 take place before Episodes 4-6. When watched in the director's intended order of 1-6, the continuity of 4-6 doesn't hold up to what is previously established in 1-3.

stillakid
10-10-2007, 01:19 PM
No it isn't. Episodes 1-3 take place before Episodes 4-6. When watched in the director's intended order of 1-6, the continuity of 4-6 doesn't hold up to what is previously established in 1-3.

If the intended order was 1-6, he would have began with #1, not #4. And if the intended order was 1-6, he wouldn't have built in cliffhangers and surprises into 4, 5, and 6. The way the Prequels are laid out, they give away all the surprises from 4, 5 and 6 and destroy the established continuity of 4, 5, and 6.

To play the Devil's Advocate and pretend that you are correct, it means that Lucas's redeux of the OT films in the late '90s prove that he is still a poor filmmaker in that he didn't "fix" the OT films properly given that new continuity that would become the Prequels. So, why didn't he fix the obviously bad flawed completely screwed up OT films when he had the chance? Why did so many people flock to the theaters between 1977 and 1984 to watch what must be such obviously terrible unwatchable movies? And why, if the Prequels are so perfect, do YOU own the OT DVDs? Why would anyone own something that doesn't entertain them? You should burn your copies of Episodes IV, V, and VI immediately before someone thinks you a hypocrite!!!!

El Chuxter
10-10-2007, 01:25 PM
Funny, I've gathered from Rocketboy's other responses over the past few years that he doesn't especially care for the prequels or think they're up to par with the originals, but thinks they're not necessarily horrible movies for it.

Droid
10-10-2007, 01:47 PM
Are you dudes (JT and Stilla) gonna watch the television show? It may be more of the same. I can understand watching all of the prequels even if you hated the first one, since you were already invested at that point, but if you don't dig the prequels, watching the series seems like courting disaster.

Though I was left out as one of the "dudes", I don't know if I will watch the TV show. I didn't watch the Clone Wars cartoon and bailed on the Young Indiana Jones Chronicles after the first episode (didn't like old Indy with an eye patch; I did watch the Harrison Ford episode).

I am frustrated that we have been told the TV show will be very cool and will be what the fans wanted the prequels to be. Well why weren't the prequels what we wanted them to be?

It seems the show may be about Boba Fett, which I think is dumb. They should have just left him in Empire and Jedi and not even had him in the prequels. He was cool because he was mysterious. Like Vader I didn't need to see Boba as a doofy little kid.

stillakid
10-10-2007, 02:00 PM
Though I was left out as one of the "dudes", I don't know if I will watch the TV show. I didn't watch the Clone Wars cartoon and bailed on the Young Indiana Jones Chronicles after the first episode (didn't like old Indy with an eye patch; I did watch the Harrison Ford episode).

I am frustrated that we have been told the TV show will be very cool and will be what the fans wanted the prequels to be. Well why weren't the prequels what we wanted them to be?

It seems the show may be about Boba Fett, which I think is dumb. They should have just left him in Empire and Jedi and not even had him in the prequels. He was cool because he was mysterious. Like Vader I didn't need to see Boba as a doofy little kid.

I've deliberately stayed away from any info about the TV show. In fact, all I really know about the TV show is that there will be one, aside from the bit of info you said above. I want to go into it without preconceived notions and will judge it on it's own merits, as I've done with the Prequels (which disappointed me and the Animated Clone Wars, which I enjoyed).

I haven't seen the EWOK TV shows for a long time, but I recall them being less than stellar. The Star Wars episode of Muppet Show left something to be desired (though there were a couple of moments that were funny). The Animated Clone Wars were actually a lot of fun and packed a lot of story into very short episodes. Dare I even mention the Star Wars Holiday Special which is likely one of the most unwatchable shows in the history of humanity.

So, traditionally, Star Wars hasn't translated well into the realm of television, but as always, I wait until something is delivered and allow it to prove or disprove itself. I absolutely hope to be thoroughly entertained. I miss the feeling of being excited by the chance to be entertained by a Star Wars story. I hope that the TV shows somehow overcome the legacy of the Ewok specials and the Holiday special.

We'll see.......

JediTricks
10-10-2007, 04:57 PM
Excellent comparison!Thanks, it feels "right", I've not been able to express it before that as well but I think it definitely will be the one I trot out from now on.



I don't recall saying that. Ever. What I attempted to imply (poorly it appears) is that maybe the OT is flawed since the don't follow the continuity of the Prequels.That's logically impossible, the prequels were made AFTER the OT, the story built up before the OT is threaded in ANH so whatever the incongruities between the PT and the OT must be the fault of that which came later - in this case, the PT.



if you take out the "oh" he simply says "i haven't gone by the name obi-wan since before you were born" - that could be a year before he was born, or a minute before he was born.Exactly the type of argument that fits the "I'm not touching you! I'm not touching you!" claim I made earlier. A minute earlier? Come on, that's totally ridiculous, nobody would say that, they'd say "about the time you were born" or "for about 20 years" or something closer to the reality of the situation.

And the "well, he lied about one thing, so he's a liar about everything" argument is unsupported as well, there's a logical reason given for the omission of Vader being Anakin, there's nothing to suggest he's BSing about anything else - by that argument, everything anybody says in any movie ever must be open to the claim that it's simply a lie on the part of the speaker despite it being our only clue to that fictional universe.



And so what if people called him Obi-Wan in the intervening time between the end of ROTS and the beginning of ANH? Does that one line, spoken more or less off the cuff, lead to the breakdown of the entire saga?Because that 1 line helps establish who Kenobi is at that point, it's not some throw-away line, it's explaining that he was once another man, he was once a man whose name was better known and then stopped using it for some reason in an era before our hero was even born. A lot can be said with a single word - that was the point of making the movie Episode IV and creating an unseen backstory to that universe, the audience isn't spoonfed everything, they have to figure out where they are and get by with a few crumbs as they're thrust into the next situation, like watching a foreign film with situations that feel somewhat familiar yet based on and calling to histories that you don't understand.



Though I was left out as one of the "dudes", I don't know if I will watch the TV show. I didn't watch the Clone Wars cartoon and bailed on the Young Indiana Jones Chronicles after the first episode (didn't like old Indy with an eye patch; I did watch the Harrison Ford episode).Yeah, Young Indy didn't work for me either, I really disliked grampa Indy sequences and just didn't feel it with the main story parts. I hung in for like 5 eps though.


I am frustrated that we have been told the TV show will be very cool and will be what the fans wanted the prequels to be. Well why weren't the prequels what we wanted them to be?Heh heh, good one! :thumbsup:

El Chuxter
10-10-2007, 07:08 PM
Yeah, but the argument seems to be that, if Obi-Wan was ever called "Obi-Wan" after the birth of Luke, the entire saga falls apart. It's not a throwaway line, but knowing that he ran into, say, Ferus Olin or A'sharad Hett (as much as I hate the recent stories about the latter), and they called him "Obi-Wan" because they didn't know he was now going by "Ben," it's not exactly a big deal.

Mad Slanted Powers
10-10-2007, 07:11 PM
The "oh" and the pause indicate to me that he had to think about it, since it was such a long time ago and the events were pretty close together.

2-1B
10-10-2007, 10:05 PM
Obi-Ben isn't a liar, of course he had to delicately phrase things for Luke in the scene about his father dying...but the death of his father also has a little something to do with Ben since he was there.

Ben should have just said "I haven't gone by the name of Obi-Wan since, oh, shortly after I cut off your father's 3 good limbs" and then we wouldn't have this problem. lol


Seriously. I can't take much more of the lame attempts to defend the poor nonsense of the Prequels.

Then why subject yourself to it ? ;)

Rocketboy
10-10-2007, 10:16 PM
And why, if the Prequels are so perfect, do YOU own the OT DVDs? Not so fast there Sparky. Where did I ever say the PT was perfect and I prefer it to the OT?
Oh, thats right - I never have.
Why?
Because I LOVE the OT and I only like the PT.
The OT is superior to the PT in almost every way.

And I own 2 copies of the OT on DVD (and numerous more on VHS)


Why would anyone own something that doesn't entertain them? That is what I want to know!


You should burn your copies of Episodes IV, V, and VI immediately before someone thinks you a hypocrite!!!!Yeah, I'll get right on that...:rolleyes:

darthvyn
10-11-2007, 09:53 AM
Exactly the type of argument that fits the "I'm not touching you! I'm not touching you!" claim I made earlier. A minute earlier? Come on, that's totally ridiculous, nobody would say that, they'd say "about the time you were born" or "for about 20 years" or something closer to the reality of the situation.

okay, so if it were to be a minute before luke was born, he'd have to say "i haven't gone by the name obi-wan since, oh, a minute before you were born"?

bottom line is, he's obviously goading luke into following him on his "damn fool idealistic crusade" and he was in a situation where he was dangerously close to revealing too much, like rocketboy said - "i haven't gone by the name obi-wan since yoda and i narrowly escaped the empire and hid you and your twin sister on separate planets so your mechanical maniacal father wouldn't know about you... i mean... uh... oh, before you were born."

i also see it as a kind of ironic statement on his part, since he was THERE when luke was BORN. a little chuckle to himself.


And the "well, he lied about one thing, so he's a liar about everything" argument is unsupported as well, there's a logical reason given for the omission of Vader being Anakin, there's nothing to suggest he's BSing about anything else - by that argument, everything anybody says in any movie ever must be open to the claim that it's simply a lie on the part of the speaker despite it being our only clue to that fictional universe.

i was mainly kidding about that, but at the same time, we know most of the stuff he said in that conversation was skewed to a certain point of view, so that he could convince luke to come with him. if he revealed too much it might scare him off, so he only lightly touched upon the aspects that he thought were possible deal-breakers, and quickly tried to distract him with laser swords and big balls of string and the like.

stillakid
10-11-2007, 10:33 AM
okay, so if it were to be a minute before luke was born, he'd have to say "i haven't gone by the name obi-wan since, oh, a minute before you were born"?

bottom line is, he's obviously goading luke into following him on his "damn fool idealistic crusade" and he was in a situation where he was dangerously close to revealing too much, like rocketboy said - "i haven't gone by the name obi-wan since yoda and i narrowly escaped the empire and hid you and your twin sister on separate planets so your mechanical maniacal father wouldn't know about you... i mean... uh... oh, before you were born."
That's bs, and I'm sure you know it. Old Ben didn't really get into his "convince Luke to come with me" thing until later. When the name issue came up, it was a genuine response to hearing a name that he quite literally hadn't heard in a long time. He wasn't f'ing with Luke by saying that he hadn't gone by name since "Oh, before you were born." That was genuine statement. The ONLY white lie he told was about Vader killing Anakin....that's it. And it wasn't Obi being terribly deceptive. It was what Obi really believed...that the personae of Anakin was dead. It wasn't really a lie, it was a perspective on the nature of a person. To Obi Wan, the good person who was Anakin was indeed destroyed and replaced by an evil personality that goes by the name of Darth Vader. And by the time Luke finds Old Ben, Ben absolutely believes that Anakin is LONG gone and the only hope for the Republic is for Vader to be killed outright. He doesn't believe there to be any good in him at all, so therefore Anakin is dead and Luke doesn't really have a father anymore. That was the point of the "lie" which wasn't a lie...for Old Ben. To Ben, it was truth which is why he explained it like he did later in ROTJ.

But everything else he ever said, like "oh, since before you were born" was a genuine answer. He clearly began using the name "Ben" at some point long before Luke was born...therefore the Prequel reimagining of the continuity is in error (again) over the established continuity of the saga.


i also see it as a kind of ironic statement on his part, since he was THERE when luke was BORN. a little chuckle to himself.
It's not "ironic." It's just wrong. ROTS ignored the established continuity in favor of fanboy-wank off moments.




i was mainly kidding about that, but at the same time, we know most of the stuff he said in that conversation was skewed to a certain point of view, so that he could convince luke to come with him. if he revealed too much it might scare him off, so he only lightly touched upon the aspects that he thought were possible deal-breakers, and quickly tried to distract him with laser swords and big balls of string and the like.
No, only one thing he said was from a certain point of view, which I explained above. And it wasn't "Skewed" in order to convince Luke of anything. It is what Old Ben really believed...that Anakin was really dead. He didn't believe that the personality of Anakin remained anywhere inside that body, so for all practical purposes, Luke's father had died long ago. It wasn't really a lie or deceptive at all. It was just what Obi believed to be true so that's what he told Luke.

darthvyn
10-11-2007, 11:51 AM
That's bs, and I'm sure you know it. Old Ben didn't really get into his "convince Luke to come with me" thing until later.

i'm pretty sure the entire conversation was leading up to ben convincing luke to go with him. he was softening him up, appealing to his sense of adventure and hinting at his father's past up until the time that they played back the recording of princess leia, and then drops the whopper on him - "you must learn the ways of the force, if you are to follow me to alderaan."


He clearly began using the name "Ben" at some point long before Luke was born...therefore the Prequel reimagining of the continuity is in error (again) over the established continuity of the saga.

there's nothing even remotely "clear" about how long obi-wan had been going by the name ben before luke was born. there's just nothing to support your stance on that except for you saying it over and over again. the only "reimagining" going on here is you adding implications to a statement that couldn't possibly be founded on context. just because you imagined obi-wan changing his name to ben 20 years before luke's birth doesn't make it fact. it makes it a figment of your imagination. and no amount of weird interpretation of the word "oh" will convince me otherwise.

2-1B
10-11-2007, 05:21 PM
It was what Obi really believed...that the personae of Anakin was dead. It wasn't really a lie, it was a perspective on the nature of a person. To Obi Wan, the good person who was Anakin was indeed destroyed and replaced by an evil personality that goes by the name of Darth Vader. And by the time Luke finds Old Ben, Ben absolutely believes that Anakin is LONG gone and the only hope for the Republic is for Vader to be killed outright. He doesn't believe there to be any good in him at all, so therefore Anakin is dead and Luke doesn't really have a father anymore.

Agreed, Luke echoes this as well later on when he says "then my father is truly dead." Luke has Hope in his old man while Ben doesn't.

Disagreed, however, on the issue of what length of time is denoted by "oh". Bill Clinton would be proud at such a breakdown of a 2 letter word, though. :D

JediTricks
10-12-2007, 11:02 PM
Yeah, but the argument seems to be that, if Obi-Wan was ever called "Obi-Wan" after the birth of Luke, the entire saga falls apart. It's not a throwaway line, but knowing that he ran into, say, Ferus Olin or A'sharad Hett (as much as I hate the recent stories about the latter), and they called him "Obi-Wan" because they didn't know he was now going by "Ben," it's not exactly a big deal.But it signifies something pretty big, that Kenobi is willing to give up his identity as a Jedi for certain reasons - some that we're not privy to - which help create that aura of mystery and wizardliness about him, as well as define where he really stands on some things like blind loyalty and devotion to the system vs to the ideals of the system.


okay, so if it were to be a minute before luke was born, he'd have to say "i haven't gone by the name obi-wan since, oh, a minute before you were born"?If he had enjoyed a psychotic break, perhaps. But no, nobody would talk like that, which is why I gave 2 believable examples of what they'd say in that position.



bottom line is, he's obviously goading luke into following him on his "damn fool idealistic crusade" and he was in a situation where he was dangerously close to revealing too much, like rocketboy said - "i haven't gone by the name obi-wan since yoda and i narrowly escaped the empire and hid you and your twin sister on separate planets so your mechanical maniacal father wouldn't know about you... i mean... uh... oh, before you were born."If he was entice Luke into following him, saying "since about the time you were born" because it's vague yet ties directly into Luke's interest zone without directly saying it's about Luke. Saying "oh, before you were born" takes Luke out of that equation and makes it less enticing by sounding like just an old shoe Kenobi had stopped wearing back in high school.


i also see it as a kind of ironic statement on his part, since he was THERE when luke was BORN. a little chuckle to himself. That's pretty revisionist to me, there's nothing like that in his expression or tone that suggests that's what was in mind when they filmed the scene. It's like the "come here my little friend" and "I don't remember ever owning a droid before" lines, thanks to the prequel's mismanagement and meddling they now mean something totally different to people who want to interpret things that way - as if Kenobi actually recognized R2-D2 specifically while the droid was hidden in the shadows. :rolleyes:

2-1B
10-13-2007, 02:29 AM
ESB was revisionist too because when they shot those ANH scenes, Old Man Guinness didn't know that Vader was Luke's dad.

JediTricks
10-13-2007, 02:59 AM
And "Darth" was a first name!

2-1B
10-13-2007, 10:52 AM
Exactly ! :D

And Dark Lord of the Sith was only mentioned in the printed word. And Ben Kenobi shoved Darth INTO a lava pit (unlike Tycho's "for the idiots" thread :crazed: ).

80's EU ruled. :cool: