PDA

View Full Version : From the Mouths of Babes



stillakid
05-04-2002, 07:33 PM
So, as part of my (now) traditional preparation before seeing a new Star Wars film in the theater, I run a mini-film festival in the comfort of my own home. Starting at Episode IV, we watch them in order of production.

Happily this is the first year that my son is really able to sit and watch them all with me. Well, we've really just started and are actually in the middle of ANH as I type this.

Him being just 7 years old, his best memories are of TPM, as he was old enough to see that in the theater, but he did see the OT previous to that (when he was around 4 or so).

Anyway, all of that is important, because in the middle of the scene where Old Ben is explaining Luke's father, my son turns to me and says, "Why doesn't he mention Qui Gon?" For those of you that pay attention to my frequent rants on these boards, you'll know that that is one of my biggest problems with TPM. I've never mentioned that to him ever, so it made a dad proud that jr. figured it out for himself. If a 7 year old can see the obvious problem, why is it so difficult for all of the 30-somethings out there?


In a strange coincidence of fate, last evening, my wife and I caught one of the new commercials for AOTC on tv. It was the Obi Wan theme I think. Anyway, after it ends, she turns to me and says something to the effect of "what happened to Yoda being the one to train Obi Wan?" I swear I've never mentioned this stuff out loud here. Nobody would have paid attention to me anyway. But there you have it.

master jedi
05-05-2002, 10:07 PM
From what I know about Yoda and Episode 2 Yoda helps in training the younger kids that aren't quite old enough to become a Padawan to a Jedi Knight/Master. But this is just one thing I've heard.

OB1 probably didn't mention Gui-Qon to Luke because there probably no importance(sp?).

stillakid
05-06-2002, 12:57 AM
Originally posted by master jedi

OB1 probably didn't mention Gui-Qon to Luke because there probably no importance(sp?).

He didn't mention Qui Gon in Ep IV, V, or VI because the character wasn't invented out of thin air until the late 1990's. I've previously laid out all of the evidence that convicts George of not doing his homework and writing a bad script. I just wanted to post what my son said because it seemed so poignant.

LTBasker
05-06-2002, 01:54 AM
While it is understandable why Qui is in E1, I just wish everything wasn't gonna be left to E3 to connect the rest of the dots.

By understandable I mean: Obi-Wan and Anakin were supposed to be young, and it appears George wanted to save Yoda for E2 so he created Qui-Gon so that he would've been the one to find Anakin instead of padawan Obi-Wan who would've been alone with Yoda staying on Coruscant due to him being saved for E2. I'm guessing due to Obi-Wan's needing to be younger and a padawan was so he wouldn't have to be near Obi-Wan's age in ANH therefore not having to look nearly as much like Alec Guiness.

I guess though. :D

2-1B
05-06-2002, 02:07 AM
Stillakid,
being the fan of midichlorians that you are, I think you'll appreciate this. I was reading a report from Hayden Christensen's appearance at Celebration 2 and when a young child asked him what he had to do to become a Jedi like Anakin, Hayden asked the kid if he knew what his midichlorian count is. :D

bigbarada
05-06-2002, 02:49 AM
Personally, it's not that I don't see what you are talking about, I just don't agree that it's a problem, stillakid. Maybe the redone versions of the OT will fix any seeming continuity errors; which if you really think about can be easily explained.

It's not that GL didn't do his homework, he just decided to rewrite portions of the story. No big deal.

Jason B
05-06-2002, 06:45 AM
yes, that's basicly what he's doing. things don't line up now, but they will. this is going to be it, so he wants to make these movies as good as possible, and then he will go back and tweak the rest of them.

stillakid
05-06-2002, 10:31 AM
Originally posted by bigbarada
Maybe the redone versions of the OT will fix any seeming continuity errors


That's what I'm afraid of. But then again, I plan to do some significant re-editing on the OT Special Editions and TPM (EP II and III TBD) to make them into what I want them to be.;) You know, stuff like, take out screaming baby Luke, reinstate Vader's "Bring my Shuttle" line, reinstate "It's lucky you don't taste very good," Greedo doesn't fire first...etc. etc. All the stuff that makes no sense or wasn't as good. This is the digital revolution coming round to bite Lucas in the patooty!:D

ANAKIN_SOLO
05-06-2002, 04:16 PM
And something that bugs me, Ben asks like he dont know R2-D2 at all in ANH, when they ride around in the royal starship AND R2-D2 saves them all.

Dryanta
05-06-2002, 04:32 PM
Hey guys.Here's one that just happened.
My neighors 2 year old grandson just walked in and right up to my Bandai super premium Godzilla.He's two feet tall and four feet long.And VERY expensive!!!He says"Is this a giant dinosaur?"
I reply "sure is".He looks at me just as serious and says"Can I take him outside and play with him?"
Struck me really funny.of course the answer was no thank you,but it was funny none the less.

Bel-Cam Jos
05-11-2002, 06:52 PM
Today, I was in Target looking for AOTC figures I had yet to locate. I saw Dooku and Hanger Anakin, so I snagged one of each. I was searching for others (mainly Yoda), and a little girl was also looking, just to the left of me. Just as I was satisfied there weren't any others I didn't yet have, she said "I found Yoda! I found Yoda!" Apparently it was the one figure she wanted. Her mom told her she used to have the "original" Yoda when the movies first came out. Even though I didn't get Yoda, I felt good that someone was glad about a toy, not a collectible, and that parents and kids can relate about something. Great! :)

stillakid
05-13-2002, 01:32 AM
My brilliant son, who was the inspiration for this thread in the first place, just had a very busy weekend (birthday parties, baseball game, etc.). He was very tired, but being 7, refused to lay down for a nap.

We had to continue our AOTC prep, so I suggested we sit down and finish it off with a viewing of TPM. Now, to be fair, he was tired to start with, but the Tatooine sequence finished him off. He dozed on the floor until the final battle was beginning. The pacing of that desert stuff is just so bad it finally dropped someone I know into unconsciousness.

LTBasker
05-13-2002, 03:10 AM
I don't blame him, they needed less CGI, more droids and more fighting. It really doesn't make sense considering the only real security in ANH was the Empire's troopers and yet Dr. Evazan was able to get into bar fights without a second thought but with no armed security forces and several "moody" species around you'd think there'd be several background fights than just two CGI characters getting into it cause of Jar-Jar's hunger. :p

Sure there was the cutscene of Ani vs. Greedo but I'm glad they left that out, Lucas embarassed Greedo enough in '97. :frus:
Definitely should've left in Qui chopping the probe and him knocking Maul from the starship's boarding ramp.

bigbarada
05-13-2002, 04:34 AM
Originally posted by stillakid
My brilliant son, who was the inspiration for this thread in the first place, just had a very busy weekend (birthday parties, baseball game, etc.). He was very tired, but being 7, refused to lay down for a nap.

We had to continue our AOTC prep, so I suggested we sit down and finish it off with a viewing of TPM. Now, to be fair, he was tired to start with, but the Tatooine sequence finished him off. He dozed on the floor until the final battle was beginning. The pacing of that desert stuff is just so bad it finally dropped someone I know into unconsciousness.

I can't count the number of times ANH has put me to sleep. Same with TPM and ROTJ. ESB is the only one that holds my interest the entire way through. Not saying that those movies are bad; but once you've seen them several hundred times, it's kind of hard to be surprised by them anymore.

187-Maul
05-13-2002, 10:09 AM
bigb, that's one reason why I probably won't see E-2 several times in the cinema casue when I've seen it about 5 times and get it on video/dvd it's usualy not that good anymore when I see it
but when I've only seen it one or maybe two times it's way more exciting to see it again and pay more attention to the background and details

scruffziller
06-09-2002, 04:49 PM
Kids will learn things faster and hang onto something in their mind because everyting is a wonderment to them, for us older folks, things don't excite us as much as they do when we were children and as humans we only really remember things that we enjoy.

Jason B
06-09-2002, 04:51 PM
does this explain why I'm failing math? ;)

Jedi of the North
06-10-2002, 02:37 AM
Well hello, long, long time reader, first time poster.
IMO, The reason that Ben does not mention Qui Gon Jinn in ANH is, That information is really not integral to the curretn situation, lets back up a bit.
20ish years ago your apprentice whom is like a son/brother/best friend does the absolute worst thing he can do, go to the darkside. In a series of desperate decision you decide to save his wife and daughter on Alderaan, and watch over his son for 20 years on Tatooine.
Present: you finally come into contact with young Luke, who has a droid, R2 D2. This dorid has a hologram message from none other than his sister, Leia and we are thrust into the rebellion. Ben sees his chance to get the ball rolling on making things right and decptively manipulates Luke into coming with him to Alderaan. He cleverly answers Luke questions about his father and divulges nothing to detailed or accurate. So then why would he mention Qui Gon?, He doesn't mention Yoda either, or Mace, Just Anakin, Obi Wan and Darth Vader. He is trying to get Luke to come along, not giving Luke a lesson about the Skywalker family tree. Of course Qui Gon didn't exist in the 70's, but the fact that he does now, doesn't mean he ne=eeds to be mentioned in the OT. He plays no part in the story or the motivations of the characters, it made sense for 22 years, why would he need to be mentioned now?

stillakid
06-10-2002, 12:09 PM
Originally posted by Jedi of the North
Well hello, long, long time reader, first time poster.
IMO, The reason that Ben does not mention Qui Gon Jinn in ANH is, That information is really not integral to the curretn situation, lets back up a bit.
20ish years ago your apprentice whom is like a son/brother/best friend does the absolute worst thing he can do, go to the darkside. In a series of desperate decision you decide to save his wife and daughter on Alderaan, and watch over his son for 20 years on Tatooine.
Present: you finally come into contact with young Luke, who has a droid, R2 D2. This dorid has a hologram message from none other than his sister, Leia and we are thrust into the rebellion. Ben sees his chance to get the ball rolling on making things right and decptively manipulates Luke into coming with him to Alderaan. He cleverly answers Luke questions about his father and divulges nothing to detailed or accurate. So then why would he mention Qui Gon?, He doesn't mention Yoda either, or Mace, Just Anakin, Obi Wan and Darth Vader. He is trying to get Luke to come along, not giving Luke a lesson about the Skywalker family tree. Of course Qui Gon didn't exist in the 70's, but the fact that he does now, doesn't mean he ne=eeds to be mentioned in the OT. He plays no part in the story or the motivations of the characters, it made sense for 22 years, why would he need to be mentioned now?

Welcome long time listener, first time caller! :)

We've been through this before and ended up in circles. A quick review of the facts and the subsequent "results."

As you mentioned, Qui Gon didn't exist in the '70's.

Qui Gon wasn't mentioned anywhere in the OT.

The "understanding" by the audience from the OT is that Yoda trained/instructed Obi Wan Kenobi. (Several lines of dialogue throughout the OT support this)

-----

Ok, so at present, they DO conflict, the OT and the Prequels. Yoda was supposed to be Obi Wan's teacher (only teacher) as suggested in the OT and the Prequel's invented a new teacher for Obi Wan. You said it yourself, Qui Gon wasn't invented in the '70s. By nearly everyone's account, that's not in question. Ergo, a conflict.

What does this mean? You've suggested that it can be rationalized away because Obi Wan's explanation to Luke was entirely motivated by his desire to drag the kid along and get him involved. That's not true. Old Ben did "bend the truth" about Luke's father in order to save the youth the emotional pain at that particular point in time (and also because, in Obi's mind anyway, "Anakin" really was dead.)

But, this has nothing to do with the "who taught Obi Wan" question. Obi has no motivation to hide the truth (that Qui Gon was the actual teacher).

So why the conflict?

Perhaps Lucas left that bit out of the OT just to streamline the story? Maybe, but refer back to your own statement that agrees that Qui Gon didn't exist in the '70s. So that certainly wasn't the reason to leave out the Qui Gon reference. Ergo, once again, a conflict.

Perhaps there's a "story" reason that Old Ben wouldn't have told Luke about Qui Gon. I keep hearing this one: "well, he didn't have to." That's usually followed up by some convoluted ridiculous "made up" dialogue that attempts to "prove" this idea. Old Ben certainly DOES mention Yoda. And the specifics of that are the source of the conflict. In ESB, Spirit Ben tells Luke, "You will learn from Yoda, the Jedi Master who instructed me." Take note of the name "Yoda" and the word "THE" right before "Jedi Master who instructed me." Ergo, conflict.

My own 7 year old son, at absolutely no prodding by me, turned to me the last time we watched ANH and ESB, and asked why Obi Wan didn't mention Qui Gon Jinn? It's an obvious question that even a little kid has the wherewithall to ask.

But you do pose a good question in there: is the Qui Gon name "integral" to the situation at hand in the OT? I suppose not, but then why hide the info from Luke? Why "lie" to him about that? Remember, he wasn't really "lying" about the father thing because he really did believe that "Anakin" was dead, so that's not a reliable avenue for dispute. He could have easily said, "There you will learn from Yoda, a Jedi Master who instructed me." But then again, Qui Gon wasn't invented yet as you agree. Conflict.

So once again, I'll explain what I think happened in Lucas's mind to cause this problem. For unknown reasons, he decided to get no help in writing TPM anywhere in the process. Every other film that he's ever "made," perhaps with the exception of THX-1138, he had help writing. He admits that he hates writing (American Grafitti DVD, Making of Documentary). He admits that he screwed up TPM (Episode I, Making of Documentary). So he set about writing this story and needed a victim for his villain. He also decided that a young Obi Wan should be there to kill off the villain. So who should die. It either had to be a) an innocent bystander, b) Obi Wan's Padawan, or c) Obi Wan's teacher.

The problem with choice "a" is that the emotional investment by the audience and the subsequent emotional impact wouldn't be great enough for the climax of the film.

The problem with choice "b" is that Obi Wan is apparently too young to have his own Padawan. Plus, having the Padawan die might have the same problems as with choice "a." This would have been the best option for Lucas to have used and would have not have caused a conflict in regards to the "who is Obi Wan's teacher" question, but introduces a new set of problems as to when Obi Wan takes on Anakin as his Padawan. He says in the OT that "...but I was amazed at how strongly the Force was with him. I took it upon myself to train him as a Jedi. I thought that I could train him just as well as Yoda. I was wrong." That statement is chock full of proof that Qui Gon is a conflicting character. In particular to the choice "b" question though, we are led to believe that Obi Wan had only one Padawan and none before Anakin, so choice "b" is out. This assertion is also backed up by dialogue in AOTC. Dooka says that Qui Gon was his Padawan, and Dooka was Yoda's Padawan. The idea is that a Jedi teacher gets just one Padawan in his lifetime.

What about Yoda teaching the "younglings?" Maybe that's the "out." Maybe Spirit Ben's statement refers to Yoda as just one of his teachers? Maybe so, except that he says, "Yoda, THE Jedi Master who instructed me." So looking at it in pure terms based on this new "youngling" info, once again the conflict between the Prequels and the OT is evident as they don't mesh at all. In this case, Spirit Ben would be deliberately misleading the audience as to how his own training took place. In ESB, Spirit Ben tells us that his only teacher was Yoda, but based on TPM and AOTC, we know that this isn't true.

Choice "c" is obviously what is onscreen. Qui Gon travels through TPM doing the things that Obi Wan says that he did (in the OT). Obi Wan essentially has nothing to do in The Phantom Menace except wait around until he can avenge "somebody's" death. That somebody is his own teacher who has just done all of the "history" that we came to believe was Obi Wan's.

Just as with the Midichlorian problem, Lucas sat down to write this story and was looking for simple solutions to his desires without thinking them through entirely.

icatch9
06-10-2002, 01:13 PM
Riddle me this Batman...........

When Ben first tells Luke that Darth Vader killed his father we all believed it. Then we find out that Vader is Lukeís father. Some thought he was lying (James Earl Jones included), and others believed him. Then we find out for real that Ben was the one lying to Luke about his father. How come no one complains about that? I mean don't you think that GL could of changed his mind in the writing of Empire to make Vader Lukeís dad. So, he changed the original intent of Vader to make it more interesting. Then covered his tracks in Jedi by having Ben come clean to Luke.


You know why no one complains? It's because the OT is the holiest of all movies, and to say other wise is blasphemy. The PT (especially TPM) gets bashed time after time. Where as the OT is put on a pedestal so high that not even God can touch it. Realistically the OT is a great adventure, but it too has its flaws. Fan boys are all to blind to see them, but all to quick to point out every little thing that is wrong with the SE and the PT.

I like them all. Everything GL has done has been great. The additions and the subtractions are warranted. I cannot wait to see what he does with the DVDís I hope he add so much stuff that it turns the movie inside out.

If you donít' like the new stuff, then don't watch it. Every time a fan complains it kills the possibility of a new fan being born.

icatch9
06-10-2002, 01:21 PM
There are holes in the story that we don't know. Luke does not learn much about the days of the Rebuplic or the prime of the Jedi. He doesn't learn about Mace, Yaddle, or even his mother who Obi Wan clearly knows. Luke is told what he needs to hear. Obi Wan tells the truth, Yoda did train him. As Yoda trained every Jedi ever. It is his job to train all the Jedi at on time or another. Just like the kindigarden teacher at a small school (everyone has her and everyone loves her). Ben didn't need to tell him stories of his days swashbuckling across the universe with Qui Gon, it wasn't needed. Luke needed to know that Yoda could train Luke now, he didn't need to know that Qui Gon trained Obi Wan too.

Your looking to point the finger at Lucas and tell him he wrote his story wrong. We'll I don't think you'd like someone telling you how to raise your kid, now would you? Same thing? You can't accuse or tell GL he's doing it wrong, because you don't know the whole story. He does. Case closed!

stillakid
06-10-2002, 02:16 PM
Originally posted by icatch9
Riddle me this Batman...........

When Ben first tells Luke that Darth Vader killed his father we all believed it. Then we find out that Vader is Lukeís father. Some thought he was lying (James Earl Jones included), and others believed him. Then we find out for real that Ben was the one lying to Luke about his father. How come no one complains about that? I mean don't you think that GL could of changed his mind in the writing of Empire to make Vader Lukeís dad. So, he changed the original intent of Vader to make it more interesting. Then covered his tracks in Jedi by having Ben come clean to Luke.


You know why no one complains? It's because the OT is the holiest of all movies, and to say other wise is blasphemy. The PT (especially TPM) gets bashed time after time. Where as the OT is put on a pedestal so high that not even God can touch it. Realistically the OT is a great adventure, but it too has its flaws. Fan boys are all to blind to see them, but all to quick to point out every little thing that is wrong with the SE and the PT.

I like them all. Everything GL has done has been great. The additions and the subtractions are warranted. I cannot wait to see what he does with the DVDís I hope he add so much stuff that it turns the movie inside out.

If you donít' like the new stuff, then don't watch it. Every time a fan complains it kills the possibility of a new fan being born.

Case closed? Hardly. :)

This isn't Lucas bashing. This is looking at the original "intent" of the saga which was a galactic struggle. There were many elements to include in the telling of that story, including the Anakin downfall. But it wasn't the entire story nor was it meant to be.

The Prequels are not only rewriting the rules of the game, but changing the game itself! The OT is still in it's present form a bigger epic about a galactic struggle with many smaller elements helping to tell that larger story. The Prequels are focusing on one single element from the OT (the Anakin downfall) and trying to turn the entire saga into a story about that.

Therein lies the problem. So instead of resorting to insults upon those of us who take the time to look squarely at the issues for what they are, sit down and do a little thinking too.

icatch9
06-10-2002, 02:38 PM
I am not insulting anyone. I do think a lot about this and can see that this issue will never be agreed upon.

By your last post it seems to me that youíre missing the big picture. It is Vaderís/ Anakinís story. It always has been. Everything else is just in support of that story. It's not the galactic struggle, it's Anakin/Vaderís struggle. It's all about him, and George Lucas said that. . He said this in an interview before the Special Edition or the re-mastered THX version of the Trilogy (I cannot remember for sure).
So it has to be true. The rebellion, the clone wars, the pod race are all supporting elements to ad to Vader/Anakinís rise and demise.

I still don't know what all that has to do with Qui Gon not being mentioned in the OT. The answer to that is simple I think. Just as simple as why wasn't Mace or Padme mentioned to Luke. Obi Wan knew who they were and he didn't tell him. Why isnít' that a big deal?

My statement is clear and it answers everything that is in question. Ben told Luke only what he needed to know. Luke did not need to know about Benís old master that died 50 years ago no more than he needed to know what made the force work or whom Jar Jar was. Further more Ben lied about what happened to Anakin, so he could be lying to Luke when he says who trained him. From a certain point of view Yoda did train Ben, as did Mace, as did all the Jedi Masters. They all provided wisdom which is learning which is training.

Itís not like Ben and Luke where sitting around the fireplace trading war stories. Their time together was very limited as was their conversations. Plus, their minds and thoughts were on the present, not in the past on issues of unimportanceís.

I donít know any of this for sure, but it all makes sense to me and that is what is important. You can view the movies in your own way and Iíll view it in mine. For my money it all makes perfect sense and I find very little inconsistencies that cannot be explained rationally.

Jedi of the North
06-10-2002, 08:28 PM
Even with my previous post, I have to agree that there is a hole the story when it comes to who taught whom, but my statements before and those of icatch9, are for the most part, the way I think it works. Those holes are left for you to connect the dots, not everything has to said matter o'factly.
Ben's role in OT is a motivator and keeps the story moving along to the next level. A Jedi Master who instructed me is not nearly as convinving as The Jedi Master, and it makes Luke move on, as well as the story. There are many, many holes in the story that require you to make it work and everyone has their own unique way to put it together. I simply wanted to let everyone know why I think somethings are said and others left unsaid, at least in this case.

stillakid
06-10-2002, 10:22 PM
Originally posted by Jedi of the North
Even with my previous post, I have to agree that there is a hole the story when it comes to who taught whom, but my statements before and those of icatch9, are for the most part, the way I think it works. Those holes are left for you to connect the dots, not everything has to said matter o'factly.
Ben's role in OT is a motivator and keeps the story moving along to the next level. A Jedi Master who instructed me is not nearly as convinving as The Jedi Master, and it makes Luke move on, as well as the story. There are many, many holes in the story that require you to make it work and everyone has their own unique way to put it together. I simply wanted to let everyone know why I think somethings are said and others left unsaid, at least in this case.

Could you list every single one of those other holes in the story that you are speaking about? The one's requiring the audience to connect seemingly unrelated dots? :)

scruffziller
06-10-2002, 11:27 PM
I wonder if old Georgie put that scene in with Yoda and the Younglings to support his argument just for this fact. And when the Archival editions come out they will probably change it to "A" Jedi who instructed me.

stillakid
06-11-2002, 02:03 AM
Originally posted by scruffziller
I wonder if old Georgie put that scene in with Yoda and the Younglings to support his argument just for this fact. And when the Archival editions come out they will probably change it to "A" Jedi who instructed me.


According to most people here, those "little" problems aren't problems at all and everything fits together with a perfection unmatched in nature. So Lucas doesn't have to fix a single thing ever ever again. :) He is second only to God Himself and everything he does is intentional and perfect and beautiful. :) Far be it from any mortal to question anything he does.

Okay, so that's a silly generalization that I am fully aware is untrue for most posters here. :) But, dang, it's sure starting to feel like that's the growing mood.:rolleyes:

icatch9
06-11-2002, 08:33 AM
Sarcasim aside it's partly true. How can he make an error when it's his movie. You have to realize he's written this movie, and seen it a million times (that's probally not an exageration either), he knows all the ins and outs of it. He knows all the holes and it's up to him how they fit together. He can make a mistake, but it's not likely. You only find a mistake if you look for one. Sometimes these are made up in your own mind. This is true of all sorts of situations, not just SW related.

Perhaps the PT hasn't gone in the direction that you wanted it to, and that is to bad considering you are a real fan. Never the less, this is the direction that has been set in motion since befor the movie came out. Look at the prolog of the Star Wars: A New Hope novelization. It outlines the story of TPM perfectly (and was published in 1976). So, these storylines that seem to disatisfy some people are the ones that have beent there since the beggining.

There are always going to be nay-sayers, but there are also going to be just as many people who support these films and everything GL does to the bitter end.

Such is life............

Bel-Cam Jos
06-11-2002, 11:28 AM
I haven't read all the volumes typed in above (be brief for we short-attention span people please! ), so I'm sorry if this point's been made. Qui-Gon only trained Obi-Wan in a Master/Padawan relationship. Obi-Wan had the preliminary Jedi training already. Even if you don't read the EU stories, I think you've got to believe that aspect. So Yoda could easily have trained Kenobi.

LTBasker
06-11-2002, 12:32 PM
Originally posted by stillakid
So Lucas doesn't have to fix a single thing ever ever again. :) He is second only to God Himself and everything he does is intentional and perfect and beautiful. :)

I dunno...

God - George. :D

stillakid
06-11-2002, 02:23 PM
Originally posted by icatch9
Sarcasim aside it's partly true. How can he make an error when it's his movie. You have to realize he's written this movie, and seen it a million times (that's probally not an exageration either), he knows all the ins and outs of it. He knows all the holes and it's up to him how they fit together. He can make a mistake, but it's not likely. You only find a mistake if you look for one. Sometimes these are made up in your own mind. This is true of all sorts of situations, not just SW related.

Perhaps the PT hasn't gone in the direction that you wanted it to, and that is to bad considering you are a real fan. Never the less, this is the direction that has been set in motion since befor the movie came out. Look at the prolog of the Star Wars: A New Hope novelization. It outlines the story of TPM perfectly (and was published in 1976). So, these storylines that seem to disatisfy some people are the ones that have beent there since the beggining.

There are always going to be nay-sayers, but there are also going to be just as many people who support these films and everything GL does to the bitter end.

Such is life............

Funny you should mention the Prologue. :)

http://www.sirstevesguide.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=107694#post107694

icatch9
06-11-2002, 03:57 PM
Yes yes, I see how you would assume that his original inten is tell the story of the galactic struggle. But this was the back story he wrote to go along with the characters he created. Mainly Darth Vader. Frankly the original intent didn't even have Darth Vader in it or Jedi at all. It was more about rescuing LIea with an old man and a goup of boys being the heros. Frankly I don't even know what we are argueing about anymore. I don't care. I hope you enjoy what Star Wars provides for you and your family.

Tycho
06-11-2002, 06:57 PM
I got tired of reading this. It was the same argument that Stillakid brings up every single time: Qui-Gon (and the midi-chlorians).

I am sorry to post something negative, but its impact on me has been negative. I am tired of fighting about this issue that is not Stillakid's to decide - or his inherited purvue to make everyone agree with his opinion on this topic.

Stillakid, either

a) you find arguments the most intriguing aspect of being able to participate in forums: picking your controversial battles, and then baiting those (typically regulars like BigBarada, LTBasker, and myself) to debate you, and enjoying trying to "win these things."

or

b) You are Obi-Wan's greatest fan and some kind of zealous defender of his history and whatever YOUR personal vision and interpretation of the Force and the Original Trilogy is and nothing else can possibly be acceptable to you but the bear-bones outline of the prequels as identified in the OT. I strongly think Obi-Wan will have a new padawan in Episode 3 and Anakin will be through, having quit the Jedi Order, when the movie first starts. Since this padawan was never mentioned in the OT, I forsee you'll have a big problem with that.

Anakin Skywalker called Mace Windu his master "Yes Master" on the ship when told to stay put and protect the Senator. He could say "Mace Windu, the Jedi Master who instructed me" just like Obi-Wan described Yoda. He did not say "Yoda, the Jedi Master I was apprenticed to."

Also, FYI, Ki-Adi Mundi was also an apprentice of Yoda's. Presumably after Count Dooku.

But in either case, please explain to our listeners in psychiatric wards, why you keep making such a big case about this Qui-Gon issue? PLEASE.

JediTricks
06-11-2002, 10:15 PM
I can't speak for him, but in my mind, it's still an issue because Lucas never REALLY convinced me otherwise. Hell, the first drafts of Episode I don't even have Qui-Gon Jinn in them, how am I supposed to accept that he was always meant to be another instructor of Obi-Wan Kenobi, especially with some of the lessons Yoda taught Luke being similar lessons to those we saw Obi-Wan learn from Qui-Gon.

Here's an even greater question, why is it that so many claim these arguments are something they don't want to continue reading and then claim that the arguments are "negative" to them and "hurt Star Wars" for everybody? I don't see how that's possible - if you don't want to read it, DON'T read it; if your enjoyment of Star Wars is predicated so strongly on either some faith in Lucas or by how others view it, if your faith in your viewpoints is so weak that any disagreement with them causes you to lash out, then perhaps it's not really Star Wars that you're enjoying. IMO, differing viewpoints should be discussed or ignored, but not attacked.

Beast
06-11-2002, 10:22 PM
Originally posted by JediTricks
I can't speak for him, but in my mind, it's still an issue because Lucas never REALLY convinced me otherwise. Hell, the first drafts of Episode I don't even have Qui-Gon Jinn in them, how am I supposed to accept that he was always meant to be another instructor of Obi-Wan Kenobi, especially with some of the lessons Yoda taught Luke being similar lessons to those we saw Obi-Wan learn from Qui-Gon.
Well, since Count Dooku was a padawan learner to Yoda, and Count Dooku trained Qui-Gon Jinn, then of course there would be some similarity to the training and lessons that both teach. I am sure that the Jedi do have some guidelines to training, after all they have been around along time. It's just a continuation of the fact that alot of people can't stand the prequels so much, that they try to discredit them with silly arguments. Yes Yoda did instruct Obi-Wan kenobi, but Qui-Gon Jinn completed his training. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

stillakid
06-11-2002, 10:33 PM
Thanks for that, JT. :)

I keep bringing it up because I loath situations where something so wrong is accepted so easily. Clearly, I'm not going to convince any of the regulars who jump into the ring to prove me wrong time and time again, but for every denial that I'm confronted with, I have no choice but to respond so that it doesn't look like I've a)agreed with the "opposing viewpoint" and/or b) just given up. That's slightly psychotic on my part:crazed:. In my view, it's not an issue to decide to agree with or disagree with. It's not an "opinion" topic at all. It's just a fact. Choosing to see it that way is a matter of personal choice if a person wants to eek the details around enough to make it all appear to work out. After all, why believe in something if you don't think that it's true? :)

I don't bait anyone. I say what I have to say and have no control over the responses. I can't take responsiblity for how anyone else reacts. I can't recall the last time I actually began a thread that dealt with these topics. If I see a conclusion that doesn't make sense to me, I drop in my 2 cents. Unfortunately the "problematic" elements tend to hinge on the Qui Gon and Midchlorian aspects. A couple of the more recent examples deal with the question of revealing Vader in Ep III.

I look at the story as written and presented onscreen and make an evaluation based on that, not on my personal "favorites." But we've been through all of this before. :) No need to repeat myself...again.

stillakid
06-11-2002, 10:36 PM
Originally posted by JarJarBinks

It's just a continuation of the fact that alot of people can't stand the prequels so much, that they try to discredit them with silly arguments. '

That's an incorrect conclusion based on illogical reasoning. "We" don't discredit the prequels because we don't like them....rather, we don't like them because of the topics of the "silly" arguments. Don't attack the messenger just because you don't want to hear the message.

Beast
06-11-2002, 10:47 PM
I welcome hearing the message, and all of you do have some good ideas. But it's like many of you just ignore the whole ideas behind somthing, when someone posts a reasoning behind how what can be said in the OT, can fit in with the story of the prequels. That's like not seeing that Darth Vader is Luke's father, because it was said in ANH, that Vader betrayed and murdered Luke's father. Or arguing that Luke and Leia can't be brother and sister, because ANH and Empire didn't offer that to the viewers. And, I note that you only pointed out, and commented on the actual complaint, and didn't comment on the actual post. It's like ignoring the topic, and the idea completly, like you can't even see that as a possibility.

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

stillakid
06-11-2002, 10:51 PM
Originally posted by JarJarBinks
I welcome hearing the message, and all of you do have some good ideas. But it's like many of you just ignore the whole ideas behind somthing, when someone posts a reasoning behind how what can be said in the OT, can fit in with the story of the OT. That's like not seeing that Darth Vader is Luke's father, because it was said in ANH, that Vader betrayed and murdered Luke's father. And, I not that you only pointed out, and commented on the actual complaint, and didn't comment on the actual post. It's like ignoring the topic, and the idea completly, like you can't even see that as a possibility.

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks


I'm sorry, I really want to understand what you're trying to say, but grammatically, some of it just isn't making much sense to me. Could you please rephrase and use a couple of specific examples so that your message is not misunderstood. For some odd reason, suddenly I am under direct attack on many sides merely because I point out unpopular viewpoints. It is critical that I not misread someone's intentions at this moment. Thank you.

Beast
06-11-2002, 11:02 PM
I thought I explained it quite well, but I'll give it a go again. You love the OT, and you accept anything that is shown to you in the film 100%. But, then the prequels come about, and any small varience that can be found to attack them seems to be pointed out. Like the midiclorians, you have red blood cells that help deliver oxygen to your body, but do you have to be beaten over the head about it?

Everyone has midiclorians in the Star Wars universe, call it intuition or sixth sense, but if they arn't trained as a Jedi, then it is pretty useless anyway. Yoda and Ben no doubt know that Luke has a great deal of midiclorians so, why have to try to explain it to him. Jedi are thought of mystical beings, or nutcases thanks to their extermination, so why bother trying to scientifically explain things to Luke. That is one of the things, and I already explained the Yoda/Qui/Obi-Wan thing. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

stillakid
06-11-2002, 11:09 PM
Originally posted by JarJarBinks
I thought I explained it quite well, but I'll give it a go again. You love the OT, and you accept anything that is shown to you in the film 100%. But, then the prequels come about, and any small varience that can be found to attack them seems to be pointed out. Like the midiclorians, you have red blood cells that help deliver oxygen to your body, but do you have to be beaten over the head about it.

Everyone has midiclorians in the Star Wars universe, call it intuition or sixth sense, but if they arn't trained as a Jedi, then it is useless anyway. Yoda and Ben no doubt know that that Luke has a great deal of midiclorians so, why have to try to explain it to him. That is one of the things, and I already explained the Yoda/Qui/Obi-Wan thing. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks


Thank you! That is much clearer to me now.

Don't misunderstand my intention here. I don't want to dislike the Prequels. It's not my fault that there are problems with it that take the form of consistency issues in relation to the OT. I use the OT as the baseline because a) it was made first, b) it has no consistency problems of any plot significance, and c) it was written and produced quite well.

I do not attack the Prequel's because I have nothing better to do. I attack them because they provoke scrutiny. The general feeling is that "we" are "prequel haters" and then go looking for problems to back that up. No. "We" see problems and thenbring up the issues. Why is that such a difficult concept to comprehend?

Darth Sinister
06-11-2002, 11:18 PM
OK, here we go:

"But Master Yoda said I should be mindful of the future" say, Obi-Wan to Qui-Gon. Sounds like some instructing or words of wisdom to me.

And last but not least.......in case we all have forgotten....Yoda was the last living Jedi. The means, he is the only one who could fully train Luke. Now, given Obi-Wans ability to persuade Luke with his "certain points of view", this shouldn't be this big of a problem.

It is not stated that Yoda was his only trainer.....it was assumed by the audience. If Luke needs to be trained by someone...the choices are limited. Tell him what he needs to hear to get him to Dagobah.

In AOTC we see Yoda instructing young future Jedi......I am going to ((((ASSUME)))) he turns these young ones over to other Jedi Knights to fully train. Ben did not say Yoda trained him, he said he instructed him. Seems like Yoda did that for a lot of the Jedi order.

Beast
06-11-2002, 11:19 PM
But if that is the fact, why not complain about the fact, and deny that Darth Vader is Luke's father then. Since that wasn't a part of the OT, until Empire. Why not complain that Luke and Leia can't be twins, because there is no information in ANH or ESB that this is so?

That's the only thing, nothing that has been revealed in the prequels, have changed anything in the OT. All they have done is tell us how those things came about. It just seems to really be a case of being picky, 9 times out of 10.

The OT has just as many plot problems, acting problems, and writing and dialogue problems. But you grew up loving it, back when the blockbuster movie wasn't somthing that was as big as Star Wars. Not to mention you were a kid, and didn't care as much about such things. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

stillakid
06-11-2002, 11:21 PM
Originally posted by JarJarBinks
But if that is the fact, why not complain about the fact, and deny that Darth Vader is Luke's father then. Since that wasn't a part of the OT, until Empire. Why not complain that Luke and Leia can't be twins, because there is no information in ANH or ESB that this is so?

That's the only thing, nothing that has been revealed in the prequels, have changed anything in the OT. All they have done is tell us how those things came about. It just seems to really be a case of being picky, 9 times out of 10.

The OT has just as many plot problems, acting problems, and writing and dialogue problems. But you grew up loving it, back when the blockbuster movie wasn't somthing that was as big as Star Wars. Not to mention you were a kid, and did'nt care as much. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks


You know what, you're absolutely right! How could I be so blind all this time? Forgive my ignorance.

(now where's that "I give up" smilie?)

Beast
06-11-2002, 11:36 PM
I'm not saying at all that you're ignorant. I'm just saying that it just seems that there is a massive ammount of negative attacks against the prequels, just because little things don't seem to jive between the two trilogies. But then almost no complaints about small things that don't jive in the OT between chapters. I don't think there is anyway at all, that Lucas could offer you somthing you could be happy with, because of the difference in your age, and who you are, since you fell in love with the OT. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

stillakid
06-11-2002, 11:43 PM
Originally posted by JarJarBinks
I'm not saying at all that you're ignorant. I'm just saying that it just seems that there is a massive ammount of negative attacks against the prequels, just because little things don't seem to jive between the two trilogies. But then almost no complaints about small things that don't jive in the OT between chapters. I don't think there is anyway at all, that Lucas could offer you somthing you could be happy with, because of the difference in your age, and who you are, since you fell in love with the OT. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

Against my better judgment, I'll go out on a limb once again and ask what all of those inconsistencies were between Episodes IV, V, and VI. Inconsistencies so aggregious as to cause severe plot questions. (I say again because the last time I asked this there was absolutely no response. I apologize but I don't remember which thread it was in). There are numerous "coincidences" but no major inconsistencies that I can think of. I'd be most anxious to see that long list. Thank you.:)

Beast
06-12-2002, 12:09 AM
I don't pick apart any of the movies, so I am not the perfect person to note the problems of the OT. I'll list some, I am sure that Tycho or someone else can come up with more. And I know that alot of these are really nitpicking, becauser I am trying to prove a point. Anyone can turn any minor lil plot hole, into an attack against the movies.

Obi-Wan tells Luke, that his father was betrayed and murdered by a man named Darth Vader. Of course, come ESB and ROTJ, this is proven not so.

There is no info dropped that Leia and Luke are related, infact it seems that the thought of that is highly improbible. Yet, the revelation is dropped in ROTJ, that she is his sister, even though there is no evidence of this in the previous films.

Obi-Wan does some minor training of Luke, with a lightsaber and a seeker ball. Nothing that would help him actually learn to use and hone his abilities. Yet, in ESB he can call a lightsaber to his hand, even though there is no evidence of him being trained in that? Of course, that can be explained in two ways. 1. Luke was of course struggling to get free, and it just happened. 2. Or, like Obi-Wan said in ANH, that the force can partially control your actions, Luke's high numbers of midiclorians allowed the force to guide him twords what he had to do to get free. That's why he's not suprised that the saber leaped into his hand.

Luke, with absolutly no military training what so ever in ANH, suddenly has aquired the rank of Commander in Empire Strikes Back? I am sure that some people that put years of service in, would be a little miffed at that. Let's not even examine the fact that Han and Lando end up with General commisions?

C-3PO and R2-D2 both are members of the Rebel Allience, and the House of Alderaan's droids. Yet, somehow Luke Skywalker seems to end up with ownership of R2-D2? Sure, that can be explained that R2-D2 and Luke did so well in ANH as a pilot pair, that they were assigned together after that.

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

Beast
06-12-2002, 12:40 AM
Again, don't take it personal Stillikid. I'm pointing out really silly things to complain about in the OT, just to prove a point. I would like to actually see a list of everything that you don't like about the prequels, then I can see where you are coming from and offer an alternate way of looking at them.

I'm just making the point that people can find things to nitpick about, if they wanna prove to themselves that the prequels suck in comparison to the OT. Just like puppets and masks can look really bad on screen in the OT, yet get ignored most of the time. But the minute that CGI looks bad it becomes a case of ruining your childhood, and destroying the OT. The same examples can be brought up for writing, acting, and sets. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

Darth Sinister
06-12-2002, 12:43 AM
How many pilots made it back from the Battle of Yavin? I think the alliance was lacking in skilled pilots. The Alliance is made up of Rebels....they take people who are willing to fight for their cause. Thus, the best lead.....Luke was one of if not the best. As for Han and Lando being Generals.........uh, that's a good one. The only thing I can think of was that Han volunteered for the Endor mission and was given a field commanders rank of General. Lando should not have been a General...he had not proven his skills as a pilot.

The Droids may have been returned to Alderaan but that became impossible in ANH. As such, they should have been turned over to Leia....which appears 3PO was. R2 was only with Luke when he was flying the X-wing.....Yavin, Dagobah, Bespin...all other times were also in the presence of Leia

stillakid
06-12-2002, 01:18 AM
Thank you for the prompt response! :) Of the following, none are contradictions from one film to the next:


Originally posted by JarJarBinks
Obi-Wan tells Luke, that his father was betrayed and murdered by a man named Darth Vader. Of course, come ESB and ROTJ, this is proven not so.

Obi Wan told Luke that information in that way specifically to not emotionally burden Luke with the idea that the "body" of his father is still alive and walking around somewhere (Luke isn't ready to deal with the concept of "death of personality" as Obi Wan believes of Anakin's state of mind). This wasn't a "lie" as so many people want to believe, but rather the truth as Old Ben really sees it. To him, Anakin was betrayed and murdered by an alternate personality who took over his being. Certainly not a conflict at all and even if you don't believe that, in ROTJ there is an "out" for why Old Ben said it that way.



Originally posted by JarJarBinks

There is no info dropped that Leia and Luke are related, infact it seems that the thought of that is highly improbible. Yet, the revelation is dropped in ROTJ, that she is his sister, even though there is no evidence of this in the previous films.

It's not improbable in the least. Convenient maybe, but quite rational and not a bit contradictory in any respect. If you're looking for foreshadowing of the relationship to prove that it is a logical addition, that is another question. Foreshadowing of any new element isn't a requirement to make it an acceptable addition to a story. Again, not a contradiction in the slightest.


Originally posted by JarJarBinks

Obi-Wan does some minor training of Luke, with a lightsaber and a seeker ball. Nothing that would help him actually learn to use and hone his abilities. Yet, in ESB he can call a lightsaber to his hand, even though there is no evidence of him being trained in that? Of course, that can be explained in two ways. 1. Luke was of course struggling to get free, and it just happened. 2. Or, like Obi-Wan said in ANH, that the force can partially control your actions, Luke's high numbers of midiclorians allowed the force to guide him twords what he had to do to get free. That's why he's not suprised that the saber leaped into his hand.

Or choice C, that in the few years between ANH and ESB, Luke did a little practicing on his own. This would account for his slightly advanced abilities and is entirely logical. What would be illogical is if he didn't practice on his own after Old Ben died. This would also explain the lack of physical training (lightsaber and otherwise) that Luke goes through on Dagobah in exchange for the more "mental" lessons that Yoda puts him through. Luke has a tentative idea on how to manipulate the Force, but he must learn the emotional control to properly hone his shaky skills.

Once again, not a contradiction.


Originally posted by JarJarBinks

Luke, with absolutly no military training what so ever in ANH, suddenly has aquired the rank of Commander in Empire Strikes Back? I am sure that some people that put years of service in, would be a little miffed at that. Let's not even examine the fact that Han and Lando end up with General commisions?

Strange maybe if you're a military afficienado, but certainly not a contradictory problem in terms of the plot. :confused:


Originally posted by JarJarBinks

C-3PO and R2-D2 both are members of the Rebel Allience, and the House of Alderaan's droids. Yet, somehow Luke Skywalker seems to end up with ownership of R2-D2? Sure, that can be explained that R2-D2 and Luke did so well in ANH as a pilot pair, that they were assigned together after that.

Uh, convenience? I don't know, but it sure isn't a contradiction between films or anything. I suppose it's a minor question just like why Anakin and Padme take C-3PO with them in AOTC without even telling the Lar's family goodbye or anything. It's not so much a contradiction as just bad manners.



Originally posted by JarJarBinks

Again, don't take it personal Stillikid. I'm pointing out really silly things to complain about in the OT, just to prove a point. I would like to actually see a list of everything that you don't like about the prequels, then I can see where you are coming from and offer an alternate way of looking at them.

I'd love to offer you a list, but Tycho is sick and tired of hearing about them. You'll have to ask for permission for me to continue any farther. :)

If you don't wish to wait, my views are scattered across the forums. Thanks for asking. :)


Originally posted by Darth Sinister

How many pilots made it back from the Battle of Yavin? I think the alliance was lacking in skilled pilots. The Alliance is made up of Rebels....they take people who are willing to fight for their cause. Thus, the best lead.....Luke was one of if not the best. As for Han and Lando being Generals.........uh, that's a good one. The only thing I can think of was that Han volunteered for the Endor mission and was given a field commanders rank of General. Lando should not have been a General...he had not proven his skills as a pilot.

Perhaps in this galaxy far far away, they award rank very different than we mere mortal humans on Earth do. Afterall, they're not human, they have Midichlorians in their bloodstream, so ANYTHING is now possible. Maybe the new guys in this galaxy far far away get the high ranks and get demoted as time goes on and they get older. Who knows? :rolleyes: But the bestowing of seemingly unearned ranks doesn't appear to be the cause of any contradictions as far as I can tell.


Originally posted by Darth Sinister

The Droids may have been returned to Alderaan but that became impossible in ANH. As such, they should have been turned over to Leia....which appears 3PO was. R2 was only with Luke when he was flying the X-wing.....Yavin, Dagobah, Bespin...all other times were also in the presence of Leia

There's no way to know for sure if Leia actually had some kind of ownership of R2 or if he just happened to be conveniently on board the Tantive. Toss that in with Old Ben's not taking ownership of R2 (which thus far isn't a lie as R2 and Obi Wan in AOTC or TPM aren't joined by ownership) and Luke is free to own the little guy. But R2 is one of the heroes and they all stick together and stuff. There's nothing illogical about any of that as far as I can tell.

Beast
06-12-2002, 01:27 AM
Thanks Stillikid, but Tycho can ignore the thread if he doesn't wanna deal with them. I'm willing to discuss this with you, and maybe offer some viewpoints that could make you appreciate the prequels just as much as you do the OT. See, you have perfectly acceptable ways to deal with those bits in the OT, just like there are perfectly acceptible things that can fit the Prequels in with the Originals.

Like I brought up before, the midiclorian issue. The same way that Ben doesn't bother to explain what really happens to Anakin, can be used for why he doesn't bring up midiclorians. They exist in Luke in high numbers, and therefore he's a good candidate to be trained, why confuse the poor kid more by making it a science lesson. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

Tycho
06-12-2002, 03:16 AM
I was at a conference as part of my duties for my job. All this discussion happened while I was gone.

As to it bothering me? I have to admit I'm sucked in again. But JarJar and Darth Sinister are making points I would have and doing quite well at it. I'll speak up more when I can contribute something more to the discussion. But I am reading it.

Maybe we can "cure" Stillakid, LOL.

I do want to respond to something JediTricks said, but so much has happened in this discussion, that I have to go and look for it.

So I am reading, and I will be back.

Keep going boys. You're doing fine without me for now.

JediTricks
06-12-2002, 03:37 AM
Midichlorians do not exist in my view of the Star Wars universe, PERIOD. Until Lucas makes them solid as a rock in Ep 3, they can just be explained away in my mind as "Qui-Gon was wrong". In fact, a large number of the things in Ep 1 can be explained that way. (Of course, I have also started to adopt the theory that Qui-Gon was Anakin's father in a vein attempt to fulfill the prophecy.)

But this midichlorian thing works better and even has some back up on the official site, so pardon me while I build a theory on why Obi-Wan wouldn't mention Qui-Gon or Midichlorians to Luke (beyond the facts that neither existed until 20 years after the first Star Wars film was born).

My belief is that midis are not symbionts that help one communicate with the Force, rather their numbers are a byproduct of having the Force, like a high white bloodcell count is a byproduct of having an infection.

Qui-Gon Jinn was wrong about that, and he may have been wrong about "The Living Force", this is where the official site comes in: http://www.starwars.com/databank/character/countdooku/index.html
"A strong-minded man, Dooku's ideas were often out of step with those of the Jedi Council... His challenging views were often echoed by his former Padawan, Qui-Gon Jinn..."
http://www.starwars.com/databank/character/countdooku/eu.html
"Dooku had studied the ways of the Force for almost eight decades, becoming one of its most powerful practitioners, though his ultimate loyalty was not to the structured protocols of the Jedi order, but rather to his own intuitions and ideals."
http://www.starwars.com/databank/character/quigonjinn/
"Qui-Gon Jinn is a student of the living Force. Unlike other Jedi Masters, who often lose themself in the meditation of the unifying Force, Qui-Gon Jinn lived for the moment, espousing a philosophy of "feel, don't think -- use your instincts." Were it not for Qui-Gon's unruly views, he would have undoubtedly been on the Jedi Council."

If Qui-Gon is proven to be wrong about the Living Force -and- about Midichlorians in the eyes of Obi-Wan, then perhaps he would cast off the teachings that Qui-Gon gave him as his padawan master. This would leave only one true Jedi teacher in his life, Yoda.

Sure it's a bit thin right now, but when the prequels are done, this is how I will see it. It's a huge juggling act all to clean up what I perceive as mistakes that Lucas made, but it'll be my way of plodding through the least-necessary film in the saga.

Tycho
06-12-2002, 04:43 AM
JediTricks made some good points and reasoned them out well.

I still disagree with him, but his arguments are more logical than any I've read from his POV from either JT himself, or others expousing these opinions before.

Nicely done! But I still don't agree with it. JT has just written it well and backed it up with official information that pertains to SW and that makes his arguments merit consideration.

We'll finally, really know in 2005. Until then, I doubt any of us who are strongly in one position or another will change their point of views.

But again JT, nicely done.

Beast
06-12-2002, 04:49 AM
Agreed, well done. JT actually took somthing he didn't like about E1, and actually took the time to explain why it isn't mentioned in the OT. I don't agree with him either on this, but it's nice to see that he's trying to think out some ways that somthing he didn't like in the prequels can work.

Only reason I have to disagree, is the fact that Yoda also talks about Midiclorians. And he doesn't chastize Qui-Gon for his beliefs about the midiclorians in E1 either. It's just not somthing that needs to ever be brought up in the OT, because Obi-Wan and Yoda already know that Luke is strong in the force. But again, nice job. Definatly an A+ for effort. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

icatch9
06-12-2002, 09:08 AM
I chimed in this forum a while ago, before the big boys showed up. I resisted stillakids opinion too. That is not important. As Tycho said none of us will know until 2005. It is fun to discuss, but circles are everywhere in this argument.

All I have to say is that George is doing this on purpose. He's not going to forget something. He's seen these movies more than all of us combined. He is going to tie up all-important loose ends. We'll know about disappearing Jedi, midicloriants, and what ever happened to Qui Gon. These are things that he wrote in for a reason and thus he must have a plan for.

Youíre never going to convince each other of the others views. I know it is fun to discuss, but you may as well discuss what Sebulba should have done to win the race.

There is a serious issue with OT fan boys loving it to no end, and intern hating the PT. There are some physiological issues to be dealt with there. How one can love a movie so much that they see it blindly is amazing.

Good luck to you all. I hope this has a happy ending. :)

LTBasker
06-12-2002, 10:45 AM
I know what happened to Qui-Gon!!! He is now a tester for all the ash tray companies. :D

stillakid
06-12-2002, 12:29 PM
Originally posted by Tycho
JediTricks made some good points and reasoned them out well.

I still disagree with him, but his arguments are more logical than any I've read from his POV from either JT himself, or others expousing these opinions before.

Nicely done! But I still don't agree with it. JT has just written it well and backed it up with official information that pertains to SW and that makes his arguments merit consideration.

We'll finally, really know in 2005. Until then, I doubt any of us who are strongly in one position or another will change their point of views.

But again JT, nicely done.


It was a nicely done argument. However, all of mine have been based on the movies themselves. Does this mean that the movies are now NOT official and credible or reliable sources to draw conclusions from? If that is not the intent of your praise for JT and the outright dismissal of my arguments, then your statements need some clearing up.

Every contradiction I've mentioned is backed up in black and white in the screenplays, on celluloid on the big screen, or on your television at home in plain English (or translated in a multitude of languages across the globe).

I just don't get it.:confused:

2-1B
06-12-2002, 02:16 PM
If you guys are hoping for midichlorian references in Episode III, I don't think you'll get them ;) . . . I think he threw them into TPM as some sort of biological grounding of the Force, and the next 5 movies will go from there. I find it highly unlikely that we would hear nothing about midichlorians in AOTC and then come back to them in Episode III. We can ask "why aren't they in the OT?" but then we can also ask "why aren't they in ALL of the PT?" If all three prequel films were swimming in midichlorian references, only to have NONE of it in the OT, then I think the argument that they contradict is much more validated.

If you'll forgive the cut and paste, this is my current view on the midichlorians, I posted it in the heated "purist" thread. But I present it here for the consideration / evaluation of anyone who may not visit Gen Disc:

"I watched the commentary on TPM recently, and Lucas' comments on the midichlorians do hint at revisionism to me . . . but fundamentally I don't think he's contradicted himself. He does conveniently wax about how they were "always" intended and are hinted at in ANH but he never had time to fully explore the issues of the origin of the Force.
Yet, I do see some compelling evidence in the OT that the Force is hereditary and biologically influenced. Ben said that the Emperor knew (as Ben did) if Anakin had any children they would be a threat. Why would they be an automatic threat unless Anakin's potential had been passed on to them? - heredity.
Luke tells Leia "the Force is strong in my family" - heredity.
Vader says about Luke, "the Force is strong with this one" - I see the argument that Luke was now open to the ways of the Force, so that's how he could have triggered Vader's interest. But I always think of it with the knowledge that Vader is Luke's father, and that's where he gets his potential - heredity.
By itself, ANH does convey the idea that "Anyone" can access the Force, but the rest of the OT trilogy opens that up and suggests heredity in the case of the Skywalkers. It's not a matter of the "haves vs. the have nots", rather it's a matter of the "haves vs. the have mores". Everyone including Han, Chewie, Lando, Luke, have midichlorians . . . only Luke has more and is naturally more gifted.
Whew, that being said I can tell you that my personal preference would have been to leave Ani's Force potential in TPM as just being really obvious to Qui-Gon and leave it at that . . . but I can see how the midichlorians work in the storyline and I honestly don't think I am "rationalizing" it away."





Okay, I'm back from rereading my post and I have a new thought - if Jedi don't marry and raise families, heredity is obviously not the ONLY means of being force sensitive . . . . what do you think? Is it just a random thing? It has to be, IMO, and Anakin' conception is the fullest manifestation of it.
So when I speak about heredity in that quote, I do so only as it relates to Luke. I have no idea on Obi-Wan's "force facts" lineage :D

Tycho
06-12-2002, 02:54 PM
I think Jedi don't marry and have children because it raises too many ethical issues:

1) first, the continued breeding of Force-sensitives would 'naturally select' more and more people with high predisposition for control of the Force as their dominant genetic makeup, thus creating new Jedi more powerful than the experienced ones instructing the newer generations. This could make the youngsters a potentially dangerous threat. Especially if Jedi mated with other Jedi.

2) emotional attachments could be highly unpredictable as Anakin's need for vengeance, or justice administered on a personal level (for his mother and predicatably for the 'death' of his wife and unborn child). Thus marriage and offspring would distract a Jedi from their pledge of allegiance to serving the Republic without passion or prejudice. Obi-Wan's attachment to Qui-Gon was evident when he tried to avenge him by relentless attacking Maul to the point of recklessness (forgetting Maul could call upon the Force inspite of Obi-Wan being an even better swordsman). But to strike Maul down in vengeance would betray everything Qui-Gon taught him. I'm sure it is the hope of Jedi instructors that their charges obey their orders and lessons they've taught. Obi-Wan seems to remember one of them when he thinks of his master, then remembers that Qui-Gon's lightsaber remained as an available weapon to call upon the Force to use against his enemy, and that in self-defense.

3) Jedi offspring would most likely be Force-sensitive and need to be trained as well. Their parents might have inappropriately high expectations or unobjective concerns for their children's training. If they wouldn't insist on being their child's master themselves, they would undoubtedly interfere with their child's training, or at the least, bug the heck out of their child's master.

4) I think the Jedi 'discovery and adoption process' is more or less a service they provide to collect 'freaks and mutations' getting more and more common in the gene pool of all life in that galaxy as the millennia go on. I liken it directly to "Mutant High" of the X-Men Legend that Professor Xavier established for 'gifted children' so that they don't become persecuted or outcasts that join Magneto and use their powers for evil. The Jedi thus found themselves in the role of galactic policemen, because I'm sure some children go unidentified, and when some kid in school is causing children who pick on him to spontaneously combust or something, only a Jedi is actually capable of stopping him. In that sense, they're like the SWAT team, and the Sith are like organized crime versus the random killer with Force powers who is unaffiliated. However, in their service the Jedi mostly handle ordinary disputes that are better handled by beings with their resources and capabilities. So if you're born Force-sensitive, you almost would not have a choice: you'd either be a Jedi, or you'd have to be a good person. Any kind of Force-utilizing criminal activity, and you'd be meeting a Jedi anyway.


As to Stillakid's concerns, I will address them shortly. I have something I must do for work right now.

JediTricks
06-12-2002, 06:23 PM
I'm flattered you guys liked my arguments about the midis and the lack of mention of Qui-Gon Jinn in the OT, even if you don't agree with them.


by JJB
"Only reason I have to disagree, is the fact that Yoda also talks about Midiclorians. And he doesn't chastize Qui-Gon for his beliefs about the midiclorians in E1 either. It's just not somthing that needs to ever be brought up in the OT, because Obi-Wan and Yoda already know that Luke is strong in the force. But again, nice job. Definatly an A+ for effort."
I don't see anything of Yoda talking about midis, Yoda says to (chastizes) Qui-Gon about the presumption over his belief about the prophecy, "revealed, your opinion is." After that, Yoda goes on with a bit of a condescending attitude and slight disbelief with "Oh, trained as a Jedi, you request for him, hmm?" and when Qui-Gon claims that "Finding him was the will of the Force, I have no doubt of that" we see Ki-Adi-Mundi, then Yoda, then Mace Windu all roll their eyes and look to their left, before the scene ends with Mace sighing, shaking his head, saying in a disapproving way "Bring him before us, then" and when Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan leave the room, Mace and Yoda share a seemingly-displeased glance.

Later, Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon exchange dialogue where Obi-Wan shows that Qui-Gon has repeatedly defied the Jedi Council and Qui-Gon's response is "I shall do what I must."

Then we see the testing of Anakin, but nowhere does Yoda say anything about the midis.

A couple scenes later, we see Anakin, Qui-Gon, and Obi-Wan stand before the council where we're told that the Force is strong with Ani, but he's not to be trained. When Qui-Gon says "He IS the chosen one, you MUST see this!", Yoda responds "Clouded this boy's future is". When Qui-Gon suggests that Obi-Wan is ready for the trials even though he is headstrong and "has much to learn of the living Force", Yoda's response is "young Skywalker's fate will be decided later."

At every turn, Yoda simply evades the issues of the Living Force and Midichlorians.

Beast
06-12-2002, 06:41 PM
Yoda doesn't chastize Qui-Gon for the thought that Anakin was conceived by the Midiclorians though. So, Yoda obviously believed in them, and what they could possibly do. The only thing he chastizes him about, was about the fact that he seems to rush to judgement.

Yoda: Master Qui-Gon. More to say, have you?
Qui-Gon: With your permission, my master, I have encountered a vergence in the force.
Yoda: A vergence, you say?
Mace: Located around a person?
Qui-Gon: A boy. His cells have the highest concentration of midi-chlorians I have seen in a life-form. It is possible that he was concieved by the midi-chlorians
Mace: You refer to the prophecy of the one that will bring balance to the force. You believe it's this boy?
Qui-Gon: I don't presume to--
Yoda: But you do. Revealed your opinion is.
Qui-Gon: I request the boy be tested, Master.
Yoda: Oh? Trained as a Jedi, you request for him, hmm?
Qui-Gon: Finding him was the will of the Force. I have no doubt of that.
Mace: [sighs]Bring him before us, then.

And Yoda obviously mentioned midi-chlorians to Anakin as well, sometime during Anakin's testing. Because on the landing platform heading back to Naboo Anakin asks Qui-Gon what they are. Which leads into Qui-Gon's explanation.

Anakin: I heard Yoda talking about midi-chlorians. I've been wondering-- What are midi-chlorians?

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

JediTricks
06-12-2002, 09:58 PM
Originally posted by JarJarBinks
Yoda doesn't chastize Qui-Gon for the thought that Anakin was conceived by the Midiclorians though. So, Yoda obviously believed in them, and what they could possibly do. The only thing he chastizes him about, was about the fact that he seems to rush to judgement.
Whoa whoa whoa, someone DOESN'T verbally contradict a person so that "obviously" means he believes the same thing? That doesn't fit for me, just because I didn't respond to icatch9's comment about Lucas doing this on purpose doesn't mean I agree with that statement. Just because Nostradamus makes a prophecy doesn't mean I have to argue with it to disbelieve it. Mace is the one who answers that "midi-chlorians are his father" thing, and he doesn't terribly convinced either, it sounded to me like he's referring to a legend, not a stated fact; however IMO what none of us can state with any certainty or proof is that Yoda believes in the midi-chlorians at all, merely that he didn't say anything when the issue was brought up and Anakin claims he heard Yoda talking about them.


Originally posted by JarJarBinks
And Yoda obviously mentioned midi-chlorians to Anakin as well, sometime during Anakin's testing. Because on the landing platform heading back to Naboo Anakin asks Qui-Gon what they are. Which leads into Qui-Gon's explanation.

Anakin: I heard Yoda talking about midi-chlorians. I've been wondering-- What are midi-chlorians? Again, how do you see that he "obviously" mentioned it "to" Anakin? That seems like a mighty big assumption, for all we know, Yoda could have been saying to Mace "Believe Qui-Gon's midi-chlorian theory, I cannot" or "If midi-chlorians are with him, perhaps he is a threat to us all" or something else. In any event, I don't see a definite there.

---

stilla, my arguments were from the films themselves, I just backed them up with info from SW.com. My theories cannot yet be disproved by the films and haven't used any EU as direct basis (though some conjecture, but the fun part is, unless Ep 3 proves otherwise, that can NEVER be taken away from me ;)).

stillakid
06-12-2002, 11:36 PM
Originally posted by JarJarBinks
Again, don't take it personal Stillikid. I'm pointing out really silly things to complain about in the OT, just to prove a point. I would like to actually see a list of everything that you don't like about the prequels, then I can see where you are coming from and offer an alternate way of looking at them.


Ok, here it goes. I'm going to try to reconstruct the highlights of my objections here, but again, I have details scattered across a myriad of threads, so I may forget to include some detail and will have to later "explain" it. So please bear with me.

Objection #1: The existence of Qui Gon Jinn

1) We are led to specifically believe in the OT that Obi Wan Kenobi was trained by Yoda. We are also led to specifically believe in the OT that a young and inexperienced Obi Wan Kenobi, thinking himself to be able to handle the training of a new recruit, took it upon himself to train Anakin without a suggestion from anyone else. We are also led to believe in the OT that Obi Wan was the one person who actually found Anakin, realized his potential, and decided that he should be trained.

Episode I contradicts every one of those ideas by introducing the character of Qui Gon Jinn.

I can go into specifics about why this is positively true, but the last time I did, I backed my "opponent" into a corner and it came down to the annunciation of a single word in the ESB. That word in question was "the" as in "You will learn from Yoda, the Jedi Master who instructed me." Naturally, a further discussion ensued as to the flexibility of the English language and how there was enough "wiggle room" to allow for multiple teachers in Obi Wan's past.

I still maintain that a) Qui Gonn wasn't invented until long after the OT was completed, and b) the original intention was to have Obi Wan be the sole discoverer and "decider" to train Anakin.

The way I see it, the only reason to give Obi Wan a Master at all in Ep I was so that the villain (Maul) would have someone significant to kill. That then allows Obi Wan the opportunity to climactically avenge somebody's death for drama's sake. The entire rest of the movie (TPM), Obi Wan literally has nothing to do and is left sitting in the wings twiddleing his thumbs until Qui Gonn bites it.

Without calling upon the time-honored "wiggle room," or as Einstein labeled his own gray area, the "cosmological constant," as the OT and the Prequels stand at present, there isn't any way to marry the two without creating a problem. Now, if JT's theory comes to pass, and GL deals with Qui Gon in Ep III in such a way as to include him in Palpatine's plot in a highly significant manner, then we'll talk some more. :)


Objection #2: The introduction of Midichlorians

First, is this cause a contradiction of the plot between the Prequels (Episode I, really, since GL left any reference to them at all out of Ep II) and the OT? No. It does not appear to contradict the plotline in the way that the Qui Gon question did. So what's the problem?

Here it is in a nutshell:

I've always maintained that the Midi's are contradictory to the original intent of Luke's motivation as it was written in the OT. In several interviews, Lucas describes saga in a way like this:


George Lucas, the Creative Impulse, page 45
The story is really an action adventure, a fantasy hero's journey. It's aimed primarily at teenagers, the same audience as American Graffiti."

Now, you could take from that a sense that the saga is about Luke and his journey. In fact, the sub-title of the novelization is From the Adventures of Luke Skywalker. But as Joseph Campbell points out in an interview that took place at Skywalker Ranch:


Joseph Campbell, The Power of Myth, by Bill Moyers, page xiv
Campbell had lamented on other occasions our failure "to admit within ourselves the carniverous, lecherous fever" that is endemic to human nature. Now he was describing the hero's journey not as a courageous act but as a life lived in self-discovery, "and Luke Skywalker was never more rational than when he found within himself the resources of character to meet his destiny."


Specifically what this leads to is an understanding that we, and according to Lucas above, teenagers specifically, are meant to identify with Luke in such a way as to empathize with his situation and perhaps, as in the tradition of myth, find inspiration for our own lives. So the motivation to keep a hero of any story relatively familiar to the audience is profound.

Introducing a profound "specialness" like a symbiotic organism into the bloodstream of our hero, Luke, goes beyond the extra potential that mortal humans carry with them to be better at some things more than others. For example, sports or artistic ability aren't dependent upon any external sources of "power," rather internal genetic variances between individuals. Now that Luke has been altered into a kind of "superhuman" or not a human at all, it becomes more difficult for ordinary people to empathize with not only the primary hero, but everyone else in the story.

I've been accused in the past of wanting to be Luke Skywalker :rolleyes:. How silly. That seems like a last ditch effort to attack the messenger when the message makes too much sense. My argument here regarding Midichlorians has nothing at all to do with me personally. It is based on the contemporary view on how a hero figure in a fictional tale is written. Did Alex Rogan (The Last Starfighter) need Midichlorians? Did John McClane (Die Hard) need Midichlorians? Did Jack Traven (Speed) need Midichlorians? Did John Book (Witness) need Midichlorians? No. It was the strength of their character that helped them triumph over adversity, not silly magic crystals or symbiotic beings.

______________

Those two items are my main objections to TPM. There are other, concerns, but have more to do with plain ol' poor storytelling technique than any kind of actual contradictory element.

Just a couple of examples:

Poor pacing and plot structure, particularly in the Tatooine sequence. The goal is for the heroes to find a "part" which will allow them to continue their journey. The solution is extremely convoluted as to remind us of the late great Rube Goldberg (http://www.rubegoldberg.com). Yes, they find the missing piece of the puzzle that will allow them to continue on their way, but it didn't have to be so complicated. The way that it is done is long, drawn out, and boring. The entire sequence could have easily been "tightened" up by simply rearranging the order of events that Lucas wanted to utilize.

Another annoyance is the presentation of Darth Maul in the final battle. When those doors open and this strange character is standing on the other side, there is no reason in the world why the Naboo soldiers wouldn't have opened fire on him. What we see is everyone standing around looking very confused. The intent of Lucas was to be "dramatic" so that he could include what filmmakers call a "beauty shot" of Maul's blades igniting. Purely a gratuitious moment in order to show off the fx, ironically something that Lucas claims to be against. A better rendition of that scene would have had the doors open, Maul standing there waiting, the soldiers instantly firing a gazillion bolts at him, Maul deflecting the shots, then leaping through the air to dispatch some of the soldiers, then the Jedi going in for the kill, only for one of them to be surprised at the sudden appearance of the second blade as it ignites just inches from his face. That makes more dramatic sense and more effectively introduces the unique double-bladed saber into the story.

The "introduction of R2 D2." Blow the trumpets as his name is announced. I'd be hard pressed to find a more forced scene to introduce a character. The entire scene is written quite awkwardly, particularly the Queen's dialogue when she "commends" the droid. This was a very gratuitous sequence constructed for no other reason than to stir the nostaligic blood of long time fans.

AOTC: The use of the Swiss Family Fett
In the latest issue of The Insider, Lucas himself admits to using the Fett characters only because Boba had become such a fan favorite over the years. In my opinion, and in the opinions of many other fans and friends I've talked to over the years, Boba Fett was cool precisely because he was a mysterious character with a shadowed past. He came into the story (ESB) exactly when needed, not a moment too soon or too late. Going back into his past ruins that cool mysterious nature and diminishes that which made him so interesting in the first place. While he indeed has a past, it is better left to be explored in the world of the Expanded Universe rather than become a major part of the onscreen plot.

That's a quick rundown and summary of some of the topics that I've discussed in the past few months as you've asked for. I may have left some out as well as some pertinent details that back up my assertions. I'm sure that I'll hear all about it. :)

Beast
06-13-2002, 01:26 AM
1. Obi-Wan in the OT, only ever says that he was instructed by Yoda. The Prequel trilogy shows that this is so, Yoda trains all the younglings up until they are 7 or 8 and then they are taken as a padawan learner by a Jedi Master. Obi-Wan was instructed by Yoda, but completed his Jedi apprenticeship under Qui-Gon Jinn. Qui-Gon is dead by the time ghost ben has to send Luke to finish his training, so why bring up a dead Jedi Master that is useless, when Yoda is alive and can train Luke. :)
2. Everyone in the Star Wars Universe has midi-chlorians. You could have as much as Anakin did, but if you are never discovered and trained, all it gives you is a sort of sixth sense about things. The training is the big deal. Since Midi-chlorians seem to not be unique to any species, just like red blood cells arn't unique to just humans. Having a large ammount just means you have a higher potential to be a force user.

3. I doubt that these Naboo soldiers have ever seen a Sith Lord before. Plus it's obvious that Maul doesn't care about the Naboo or the Queen to attack them. Padme could have ordered them to open fire on him, but Qui-Gon says that they will handle it, and she chooses that since he seems to know best, takes the advice and leads her men off on an alternate route to the Viceroy. Maul was only there to deal with the Jedi, so that's why he just waited for them to step up. :)

4. R2-D2's introduction is fine. He's a matinence droid for a Starfighter/Starship. Where do you think he is going to come from? Through the entire OT R2-D2 saves the day in each movie. Without him there would be no rebel allience, and the Death Star never would have been destroyed. What is wrong with R2-D2 being heroic and saving the day in E1? Where did the Queen command R2-D2? She commands Padme to clean R2-D2? Doesn't he deserve a little attention for saving the day. Especially since the Naboo love everything clean and beautiful.

5. I like how Lucas decided to expand Boba's past. So many people for ages have wanted to know his story, and Lucas was kind enough to give it to us. We know from Empire that Vader atleast knows of Boba's reputation, even warning him..."No Disintigrations". Plus we haven't seen how Boba's story plays out in Episode III yet. It's better then the 3-4 different backstories that EU has given him. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

JediTricks
06-13-2002, 02:17 AM
Originally posted by JarJarBinks
1. Obi-Wan in the OT, only ever says that he was instructed by Yoda. The Prequel trilogy shows that this is so, Yoda trains all the younglings up until they are 7 or 8 and then they are taken as a padawan learner by a Jedi Master. Obi-Wan was instructed by Yoda, but completed his Jedi apprenticeship under Qui-Gon Jinn. Qui-Gon is dead by the time ghost ben has to send Luke to finish his training, so why bring up a dead Jedi Master that is useless, when Yoda is alive and can train Luke. :)
- Tut tut tut, in the OT, Obi-Wan also states:

"I took it upon myself to train him as a Jedi. I thought that I could instruct him just as well as Yoda." - Obi-Wan's spirit, ROTJ

Now, by that statement, either Obi-Wan trained Yoda (which we already know isn't true, "Yoda, the Jedi master who instructed me") or Obi-Wan chose to train Anakin in a manner that he thought would be as good as Yoda's. However, if Yoda trained Obi-Wan in a manner that Obi-Wan expected to treat Anakin, then where would Qui-Gon Jinn come into this? Either Obi-Wan took on Anakin as his "Youngling", or Yoda took on Obi-Wan as his "Padawan", but it seems to me that these 2 are not the same concept, not the same teachings, and since we are shown that Qui-Gon is the one who took Obi-Wan as his Padawan, where did Yoda fit in? In Obi-Wan's expectations:

Anakin is to Obi-Wan what Obi-Wan is to Yoda

That leaves Qui-Gon out of the equation IMO.


2. Everyone in the Star Wars Universe has midi-chlorians. You could have as much as Anakin did, but if you are never discovered and trained, all it gives you is a sort of sixth sense about things.... Since Midi-chlorians seem to not be unique to any species, just like red blood cells arn't unique to just humans. Having a large ammount just means you have a higher potential to be a force user.
Again, this is only what Qui-Gon believes, there is no DIRECT correlary evidence to prove this and he is the ONLY one who states these things. Just as we could say that the authentic Sifo-Dyas, Jedi Master, ordered the clones from Kamino and that this Sifo-Dyas was a leader of the Jedi Council, that doesn't make it true - we have only one character's word to take on this. Just because Lama Su says it does not make it true - Sifo-Dyas may have had nothing to do with the clones, he may not have even been a Jedi coucil member.

Beast
06-13-2002, 02:35 AM
No, it doesn't leave Qui-Gon out of the anything....he's dead. So why bring him up? Why should Ben sit there and explain everything that has happened 32 years prior to that point. Luke knows who Yoda is, so Obi-Wan was just trying to tell him what happened.

Yoda is one of the best Jedi Masters, and has trained many powerful Jedi's in his lifetime. Obi-Wan arrogently though that from his training under both Yoda and Qui-Gon and along with Anakin's abilites, that he could end up training him, just as well as if Yoda had done the job himself. I am sure that had it not been Qui-Gon's last wish before he died, that Obi-Wan train Anakin, that Yoda would have done it himself. He was honoring Qui-Gon's last wishes, both by not fighting the council on the training, and allowing Obi-Wan to do the training. Why waste screen time, and story time having Obi-Wan have to explain things to Luke that he wouldn't understand.

Not to mention, that Anakin's training had to start at the basics, somthing that Yoda would normally handle. But since Anakin was beyond the age usually that Yoda instructs them, Obi-Wan had to do that training. It was Yoda's mistake in allowing Obi-Wan to instruct Anakin, just following the wishes of Qui-Gon. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

stillakid
06-13-2002, 01:19 PM
Originally posted by JarJarBinks
1. Obi-Wan in the OT, only ever says that he was instructed by Yoda. The Prequel trilogy shows that this is so, ...

You contradict your own conclusion by continuing:

Originally posted by JarJarBinks

...Yoda trains all the younglings up until they are 7 or 8 and then they are taken as a padawan learner by a Jedi Master. Obi-Wan was instructed by Yoda, but completed his Jedi apprenticeship under Qui-Gon Jinn.

----------


Originally posted by JarJarBinks

Qui-Gon is dead by the time ghost ben has to send Luke to finish his training, so why bring up a dead Jedi Master that is useless, when Yoda is alive and can train Luke. :)

You're right. In that particular instance, on Hoth, while Luke is lying there freezing to death, it is not the time to bandy words. However, Spirit Ben does say definitively "You will learn from Yoda, the Jedi Master who instructed me." Not, "a Jedi Master who instructed me." That would have left the door wide open for Spirit Ben to either explain himself later or not. Either way, it would have made the Qui Gon character a plausible addition into the saga.


So what about later, on Dagobah, when Spirit Ben sits down for a chat with Confused Luke? Why not mention Qui Gon then? At that point, everybody is dead, so Qui Gon should be fair game to mention using your own logic. Instead of giving Luke a rundown of what really happened in Episode I...

"When I first knew him, my Master Qui Gon told me that he was already a great pilot and he was amazed at how strongly the Force was with him based on his high Midichlorian blood sample and Anakin's own boasting words. Of course, I didn't witness it myself. But Qui Gon thought that he could train him just as well as his own Master, Count Dooku. Unfortunately Qui Gon was murdered before Anakin's training could really begin, so despite my misgivings about Anakin, as I agreed with the Jedi Council that he was dangerous, I nevertheless promised my Master that I would train the boy. Only after that, did I begin to see Anakin's potential. Then I thought that I could train him just as well as Qui Gon taught me. I was wrong."


But instead, he says this:

"When I first knew him, your father was already a great pilot, but I was amazed at how strongly the Force was with him. I took it upon myself to train him as a Jedi. I thought that I could train him just as well as Yoda. I was wrong."

Which one of those above examples sounds more like Episode I? Now if you want to believe that Obi Wan is a flat out rat bastard manipulating liar, than, sure, I suppose you could make a case for him not being forthright and telling Luke everything. But again, at this point in ROTJ, Spirit Ben is spilling the beans on the Vader identity question, so why continue the ruse over everything else? Besides, we still have yet to see any behavior that would indicate that Obi Wan is a manipulative scumbag, so it would be quite out of character for him to suddenly become one in the OT.

Or you could make the case that Lucas wrote choice 2 above to streamline the dialogue for the sake of drama and pacing in a commercial movie venture. Ok, maybe. Choice 1 is quite drawn out and would most likely prompt Luke to start asking questions, like "who is Qui Gon", "who was Dooku" "where did you guys find my father"...stuff like that. But, since we're stepping outside the box to pose this question, it is fair to say that Lucas didn't even have the details of Ep I and II written at the time of Ep VI, so it would have been impossible for him to have written Spirit Ben's dialogue that way anyway. Which leads us back to Lucas's original intention which was to have Obi Wan's only Master be Yoda and for Obi Wan to have discovered Anakin, witnessed his piloting skills firsthand, and him making the choice to train Anakin as a Jedi.

The unfortunate conclusion is that either the OT is wrong in it's description (through Obi Wan) of the events prior to ANH, or the Prequels are wrong in reflecting the history as described in the OT. They are mutually exclusive at this time.



Originally posted by JarJarBinks

2. Everyone in the Star Wars Universe has midi-chlorians. You could have as much as Anakin did, but if you are never discovered and trained, all it gives you is a sort of sixth sense about things. The training is the big deal. Since Midi-chlorians seem to not be unique to any species, just like red blood cells arn't unique to just humans. Having a large ammount just means you have a higher potential to be a force user.


Okay. I get that, but it's not the process that I have an issue with, it's their existence in the first place. It's one thing to have a sixth sense, as indeed many humans here on Earth do, but it's another to create a Superman-like character who young audience members can never really aspire to be like. They can admire him, but know in their hearts that he has something that they can never have. Same with Spiderman. Unless I can get bitten by a radioactive spider, all I can do is watch a hero in action, but I know that he has an advantage that I can never really obtain. It's a question of either writing a heroic character who the audience can relate to or writing a heroic character who the audience can simply watch in action. I wholeheartedly believe, through Lucas's own words and history, as well as through the words of a guy like Joseph Campbell (who Lucas NEVER discounted and actually encouraged) that the original intention was to create choice A, a heroic character with whom the audience would empathize with. In one fell-swoop, Midichlorians erased the humanity and personal triumph that we all felt when Luke triumphed over evil using nothing more than his strength of character and perseverance.


Originally posted by JarJarBinks

3. I doubt that these Naboo soldiers have ever seen a Sith Lord before.

Exactly! This is a time of war and anybody that a soldier doesn't recognize, especially a guy looking like that, would be fair game for instantaeous action.


Originally posted by JarJarBinks

Plus it's obvious that Maul doesn't care about the Naboo or the Queen to attack them.

Of course he doesn't. He's really only interested in dispatching the Jedi, but he sees a bunch of guys standing there with guns. It would be insane to try to run through the soldiers and put his back to them in order to only take on the Jedi.



Originally posted by JarJarBinks
Padme could have ordered them to open fire on him,

In a time of war, when this group is obviously going to face an opposition force, do they really have to wait before shooting anybody?


Originally posted by JarJarBinks

but Qui-Gon says that they will handle it,

After a long drawn out pause while everybody stares stupidly at one another.


Originally posted by JarJarBinks

and she chooses that since he seems to know best, takes the advice and leads her men off on an alternate route to the Viceroy.

Her actual words are, "We'll take the long way."

This is another issue of poor writing because she whines about it later when they are trapped in a hallway upstairs somewhere. She says, "We don't have time for this, Captain." I just wanted him to turn to her and say, "Well, it was your stupid idea to go the long way. Why didn't we just blow that weird alien guy away down there and take the shortest route possible to the throne room?"


Originally posted by JarJarBinks

Maul was only there to deal with the Jedi, so that's why he just waited for them to step up. :)


Exactly. He wasn't in any particular hurry since the Nabooians or the Jedi didn't seem to be either. Poorly presented and forced beginning to a battle sequence.



Originally posted by JarJarBinks

4. R2-D2's introduction is fine. He's a matinence droid for a Starfighter/Starship. Where do you think he is going to come from?

Like I said, blow the trumpets. It's R2 D2. Bah ba ba BAHHH! (the crowd roars in nostalgiac approval.)

Where he comes from isn't the issue. It's the forced and blatant reading of his name that doesn't flow well. Think back to other films you've liked and how character names are introduced. Generally, the author drops the name within the flow of the story. Take this for example:

"I see, sir."
"You can call me Luke."
"Oh, I see Sir Luke."
"No, just Luke."

He doesn't stand on a podium and announce, "My name is LUKE SKYWALKER!" It's a lot more subtle than that. That's all I'm asking for.


Originally posted by JarJarBinks

Through the entire OT R2-D2 saves the day in each movie. Without him there would be no rebel allience, and the Death Star never would have been destroyed. What is wrong with R2-D2 being heroic and saving the day in E1?

Not a thing. It's great that the littlest hero is the "biggest" at the end of the day. And guess what? He didn't even need Midichlorians to do any of it! :)


Originally posted by JarJarBinks

Where did the Queen command R2-D2?

That's not what I said. The word is "commend," as in congratulate or recognize:


Originally posted by stillakid
The entire scene is written quite awkwardly, particularly the Queen's dialogue when she "commends" the droid.



Originally posted by JarJarBinks
[B]
She commands Padme to clean R2-D2? Doesn't he deserve a little attention for saving the day. Especially since the Naboo love everything clean and beautiful.



Of course! It's nice to have a spiffy looking droid around. :)


Originally posted by JarJarBinks
[B]
5. I like how Lucas decided to expand Boba's past. So many people for ages have wanted to know his story, and Lucas was kind enough to give it to us. We know from Empire that Vader atleast knows of Boba's reputation, even warning him..."No Disintigrations". Plus we haven't seen how Boba's story plays out in Episode III yet. It's better then the 3-4 different backstories that EU has given him. :)


This comes down to personal taste. I haven't read any of the EU stuff about him, so I can't judge how well it was handled. But, in my own opinion, it was that uncertain past of a rogue looking bounty hunter that made him so cool. POOF! gone. Just like that.


Thanks for listening! :)

Tycho
06-13-2002, 11:14 PM
JediTricks comments that Anakin hearing Yoda talking about midichlorians could have meant Yoda was referring to them in any of several different contexts are 'sustained.'

I am more inclined to believe what JarJar does, that high midi-chlorian counts are normal for Jedi and that this is typically a good thing, but JT is right in that there is no evidence one way or the other.


Now To STILLAKID:

First I'm starting at one of your later posts. I did not read all your previous ones because it is the same old thing with your objections to material brought up by the prequels. Furthermore, material brought up by the film doesn't make TPM film itself good or bad anyway. That's probably a separate discussion, but I'll go into it further if you've brought that up here. I'm starting with your objections to Qui-Gon. But one last thing before I do: JediTricks not only made new arguments in this topic arena, but he also normally doesn't even bother. This is a "Stillakid Agenda Item" with you - as evidenced by your many posts regarding this and most obviously by you starting the thread. That JediTricks had something new to offer the viewpoint that is on an opposing side of my own, is why I found it interesting. JT also brings up more difficult evidence to refute. As we will see, your case has a lot of holes in it.

On TO QUI-GON (per Stillakid's theories of his inclusion in the SW lore)

We are led to specifically believe in the OT that Obi Wan Kenobi was trained by Yoda.

TRUE. But he also could have gone to cooking school and been trained by Dexter Jettster. Should the Original Trilogy have presented Obi-Wan's academic transcripts to satisfy Stillakid? Operators are standing by!


We are also led to specifically believe in the OT that a young and inexperienced Obi Wan Kenobi, thinking himself to be able to handle the training of a new recruit, took it upon himself to train Anakin without a suggestion from anyone else.

FALSE. Obi-Wan did tell Luke everything Stillakid says, except he did not say it was not without a suggestion from anyone else. With your permission, Your Honor, I'd like to introduce evidence that Obi-Wan telephoned Miss Cleo on May 16, 1999 to ask her if he should train Anakin. He did not tell Luke that he did not request the advice of Qui-Gon, Miss Cleo, or Donald Rumsfield before proceeding. Please take note, that not all meetings that went on during the Enron debacle have been uncovered yet either. They're hearing testimony from everyone else, it will only be a matter of time before Obi-Wan Kenobi gets called before the judiciary committee.

We are also led to believe in the OT that Obi Wan was the one person who actually found Anakin, realized his potential, and decided that he should be trained.

FALSE. Obi-Wan did not describe how he was out camping by himself at a State Beach, then suddenly decided to drive more than an hour inland to stay out in the desert when he winded up finding a 9 year old boy staying with him. That's right! He was telling Luke how he lost his wallet and was searching for it, when he found this kid instead. No. Strike that. He didn't tell Luke he FOUND or DISCOVERED anything! That's hearsay.

The witness said: "When I first knew him, I was amazed how strongly the Force was with him. I took it upon myself to train him as a Jedi." He could have consulted with the Energizer Bunny who might have told him to push it upon Sifo-Dyas to train the boy, or he might have "decided myself" that the Catholic Academy was the best place to train the boy. Or Doctor Laura might have advised him to take it upon himself to train Anakin.

Meanwhile, he didn't discover anything, except that it's possible that Doctor Laura gives bad advice.

I can go into specifics about why this is positively true, but the last time I did, I backed my "opponent" into a corner and it came down to the annunciation of a single word in the ESB. That word in question was "the" as in "You will learn from Yoda, the Jedi Master who instructed me." Naturally, a further discussion ensued as to the flexibility of the English language and how there was enough "wiggle room" to allow for multiple teachers in Obi Wan's past.

FALSE / TRUE - you did not back your opponent into a corner because of the phrase "the Jedi Master who instructed me." True that wiggle room is provided around how you interpret "the": - as THE (only) Master to instruct him, or as the Jedi Master that (also) did instruct him. That detail is not important to get Luke Skywalker to train with Yoda, so more information is not given. You believe what YOU WANT that sentence to mean. Not what it explicitly does or does not mean. However I would like to introduce a new contradiction to illustrate my point:

In his Senate Testimony, Obi-Wan said that in the interests of protecting the Queen, he was unexpetedly brought into the Battle of Naboo conflict by virtue of being a passenger aboard her Royal Starship, THE ship that carried him into the conflict. However, since he was brought to Naboo from Coruscant originally aboard the Republic ship, Radiant VII, the Naboo ship is not THE ship that unexpectedly brought him into the Battle of Naboo conflict.

Oh, and what was THE Battle of Naboo Conflict? Was Obi-Wan part of the Gungan Army? No. Did he fly Naboo fighters? Well he was in the hanger. Why? To crew the Naboo fighters. So he was in the hanger to crew the Naboo's fighters but he did not fly? Yes. So how was he involved in THE Battle of the Naboo conflict? He was not? But he was assigned there to protect the Queen? No? He was there to discover the identity of the attacker. That was Darth Maul, right? Yes. Well was Darth Maul part of the Trade Federation? No. Then was Darth Maul part of the Battle for Naboo? Yes. But he was a Sith. Well why didn't Obi-Wan just ask him who he was? Why did it require the death of Qui-Gon as well as Darth Maul if Obi-Wan's mission was to just discover the identity of the Queen's attacker? Then why did he partipate in the Battle of Naboo? He could have just asked Maul for his driver's license!

Stillakid, I could do this for pages. The word "THE" is an article. Its place in the sentence from The Empire Strikes Back is meaningless without further explaination.



I still maintain that a) Qui Gonn wasn't invented until long after the OT was completed, and b) the original intention was to have Obi Wan be the sole discoverer and "decider" to train Anakin.

TRUE / FALSE. Qui-Gon was invented around 1997, not before.

FALSE - you can maintain whatever you want, but only Lucas knows if he always intended Obi-Wan to be the one to DISCOVER Anakin, and Lucas does have every right to change his original intention, because he had a new plan for Obi-Wan Kenobi that better explains why he could not make a Jedi out of Anakin. What is TRUE is that you don't like that plan, regardless of its origins, and you want to try to use logical arguments to state that it is contradictory to help sway people to see your opinion. All you actually CAN do is state that you don't like this. And while you're at it, please stop beating us over the head with it. That is why I question your motives and suspect you like to antagonize this issue.

The way I see it, the only reason to give Obi Wan a Master at all in Ep I was so that the villain (Maul) would have someone significant to kill. That then allows Obi Wan the opportunity to climactically avenge somebody's death for drama's sake. The entire rest of the movie (TPM), Obi Wan literally has nothing to do and is left sitting in the wings twiddleing his thumbs until Qui Gonn bites it.

So? It's a drama and something was done for the drama's sake? Again: so what?

And Obi-Wan has nothing to do? He's a padawan and it's being established that what a padawan should do is act as a PATIENT back-up for his master. We'll see how Anakin's relationship with Obi-Wan doesn't work. Why not see how a relationship is supposed to work so he can have something to compare it to? Finally, if Obi-Wan is a main character (he is) why not learn who trained him in a Master-Apprentice relationship? If he cannot vanquish Yoda's slayer for "drama's sake" why not make it someone else? (Yoda has to live, and Yoda would not make the controversial request that Obi-Wan 1) train someone who's too old to be trained and 2) train someone when he was not even a Jedi KNIGHT yet himself, let alone a master deemed ready for a padwan!) So either Kenobi is a failure, or a set of these 2 circumstances were given to him by someone he would be loyal to, but who was more fallable and could make more mistakes than Yoda could.

So you WANT Obi-Wan to have more to do because you like him better than Qui-Gon. Fine. But you also want him to be a bigger loser because circumstances 1 and 2 were either his fault, or Yoda's? That's not consistent. Like I said, you're some kind of zealous Obi-Wan fan or somebody that finds it difficult to adapt their childhood vision of Star Wars. Or - for your son's sake, any child's vision of Star Wars. So therefore I assume you'd say there should be nothing in there for adults to review the movie with at a later time and discover something deeper? Then I can't wait to see the CGI "stork" that brings baby Luke and Leia to Padme's bedside, because no one in the Star Wars universe can possibly have sex, and everything happens on screen, right? Or did I forget Episode 3.69 - Star Wars: The Porno?

Without calling upon the time-honored "wiggle room," or as Einstein labeled his own gray area, the "cosmological constant," as the OT and the Prequels stand at present, there isn't any way to marry the two without creating a problem. Now, if JT's theory comes to pass, and GL deals with Qui Gon in Ep III in such a way as to include him in Palpatine's plot in a highly significant manner, then we'll talk some more.

So if you lose this argument, you'll disappear in 2005, or you actually WANT to bother us with your tastes and preferences on this theory for three more years? Now folks, I like Stillakid and could consider him an internet friend. I'd like to meet him and go with him for a beer at a club close to a Toys R Us, but I have other friends with pet peeves that annoy me. I am not attacking Stillakid - but on this issue, I really DO want to shut him up!

(or just get him to say: "I don't like this (about the PT)." And then move on. There's so much more to talk about with SW.

Anyway, going on...


MIDI-CHLORIANS

Stillakid's main thing here (I think) is that he literally wants to BE Luke Skywalker (or did as a child) and now is miffed (still like a kid, pun definitely intended) that he must have midi-chlorians to feel the Force and be an everday-guy-turned hero.

I know he's home squinting his eyes and straining like he's constipated because he's still trying to levitate his compute while he's reading this. (Joke meant in the interest of HUMOR - maybe. I have wondered if Stillakid keeps trying to USE the Force privately, LOL)

Anyway, I maintain this because here is the crux of the problem as Stillakid states it:

Introducing a profound "specialness" like a symbiotic organism into the bloodstream of our hero, Luke, goes beyond the extra potential that mortal humans carry with them to be better at some things more than others. For example, sports or artistic ability aren't dependent upon any external sources of "power," rather internal genetic variances between individuals. Now that Luke has been altered into a kind of "superhuman" or not a human at all, it becomes more difficult for ordinary people to empathize with not only the primary hero, but everyone else in the story.

Of course I disagree with the primary argument, plus I point out that many people discover they have capabilities they never knew of before. I myself am in a black-belt program but was afraid of training when offered the chance as a child. 1) I discovered courage, 2) I discovered my athletic ablilities. No, I didn't discover my midi-chlorians, but I also can draw with a pencil and colored oil pencils pretty well. I believe there are things special about everyone. That's actually logical. So therefore, if Stillakid is so obsessed with this, he must want his own midi-chlorians because he is so concerned about identifying with Luke. It isn't enough that Stillakid and Luke just want to have adventures, save the girl, be a hero, be loved. Stillakid needs to be identical to empathize with Luke. Good luck flying that T-65 'kid. If it works when you get it out of your garage, come pick me up. I'd like to fly into space at least once with you! But I don't know if I could be seen by all the chicks while hanging out with you. That 70's haircut's gotta go. I know you need to empathize with Luke and all, but come on... just a little trim wouldn't kill your midi-chlorians you're growing, would it?

But now how in the heck do you lose empathy with other people in the story, too?

Everytime my head comes unattached from my body, I just totally am in step with what's happened to Threepio, you know what I mean?

And the Clones of my father really help me empathize with what Boba Fett is going through.

Of course, I am a Jedi and I actually do have midi-chlorians which are a big help when you get your head detached from your body. I simply whistle for them: "Here guys! I'm over here!" and they sort of roll my crown back over to me.

I've been accused in the past of wanting to be Luke Skywalker . How silly. That seems like a last ditch effort to attack the messenger when the message makes too much sense. My argument here regarding Midichlorians has nothing at all to do with me personally. It is based on the contemporary view on how a hero figure in a fictional tale is written. Did Alex Rogan (The Last Starfighter) need Midichlorians? Did John McClane (Die Hard) need Midichlorians? Did Jack Traven (Speed) need Midichlorians? Did John Book (Witness) need Midichlorians? No. It was the strength of their character that helped them triumph over adversity, not silly magic crystals or symbiotic beings.

First, I didn't even wait for my last ditch effort to attack your simply infallable arguments before I accused you of wanting to be Luke Skywalker. I just did again! Hah-ha. Come on. There's worse role models. I didn't accuse you of wanting to be Bill Clinton even if you do ever decide you want to become President.

But you're right. I think Star Wars' heroes should be just like all the other movies'. I think they should CGI a scene into Empire where Luke drives a bus. He's already proved he'd be good at video games if he can do the same thing in the gunner chair on the Falcon, but he hasn't gotten married in the movies yet, because I think he needs to rescue Mara from tall buildings just like John McClane. But the bus driving scene I definitely need to see. What does a Jedi do when everyone doesn't have EXACT CHANGE?

Now the TATOOINE SEQUENCE - established Anakin's love for his mother, a loyalty that needed to be in place to sympathize more with his loss of her. You know how they interacted for 9 years just about, versus that he could have been an infant that didn't remember her when he left for Jedi Training. While I agree the podrace was only there because Lucas HAD to do it, sometimes I enjoy it, sometimes I don't. It would have served a greater purpose about showing Anakin's darker nature had they left in the fight sequence with Greedo. However, it should NOT have been Greedo, but any other "nobody" because Greedo should have been too young to have been born yet if he is supposedly younger than Han Solo. (without more information about alien aging added on Rodians - which has absolutely nothing to do with anything).

As to Maul's appearance, I like the way Kid would have directed it, BUT, why would the Naboo fire at an unarmed man? Maul's lightsaber was in his cloak. His hands at his side. Oh, you know. I forgot. I saw this guy with a tattoo I didn't like, and I shot him the other day. It goes back to when a girlfriend of mine got a tattoo, and I hate tattoos on women personally, so I cut it out with an icepick and she died in the process. I guess the Naboo don't like Tattoos in Stillakid's version, and I EMPATHIZE with that. :)

The R2 nostalgia part: worked for me. There were tears in my eyes and most of the audiences I saw it with the first week started clapping and cheering. In fact, I started EMPATHIZING about when I was a droid. This happened the same time my head was detached, by the way. Of course, I was closely related to A MOUSE DROID, but you know... we're not discussing that at the moment....

As far as Boba Fett's myserious past being revealed and being upsetting to you, Congratulations! You now have Darth Maul! He is just as myserious with about as many lines and on-screen moments as the original Fett did. But uh-oh. They could ruin it all in Episode 3 if the rumors I heard about an adventure with Mrs. Maul and Daddy Maul spill the beans on all this. Apparently, there was a dispute about some money Maul still owed the guy from the Tattoo shop and there's a case going to small claims court unless Palpatine uses his emergency powers to pardon him....

I'm only telling you this because I know what a BIG DARTH MAUL FAN Stillakid is...

Anyway, Stillakid, I like you. I'm getting annoyed with your taste for this topic though. Take the jokes and strong attacks at your arguments and some personal jibes that are a contraversial call on my part, all with a grain of salt. So I already appologize to you for hurt feelings, but hope I will DESTROY your arguments or your unexplainable desire to pursue this every minute.

stillakid
06-14-2002, 02:26 AM
I quickly perused the last response, so I promise to delve into it further tomorrow.

Quickly though, I want you to take special note of the fact that I did indeed resist going through it again, but relented at the request of Jar Jar. Your continued opposition to hearing it is noted and was before I even began writing. So please, understand that and stop reading my posts concerning this if the topic bothers you that much. Nobody asked you to subscribe to this particular thread.


(I just deleted a bunch of stuff that was incendiary after carefully thinking it through. You can thank me later.)

Anyway, I'll sift through it all tomorrow. Thanks for the continued input. As always, I'll carefully consider every viewpoint and then come to a conclusion. It's what I've done from the start and continue to do even today. :)

Tycho
06-14-2002, 04:38 AM
Originally posted by stillakid
Quickly though, I want you to take special note of the fact that I did indeed resist going through it again, but relented at the request of Jar Jar.

Remind me to thank JarJar :rolleyes:


Your continued opposition to hearing it is noted and was before I even began writing. So please, understand that and stop reading my posts concerning this if the topic bothers you that much. Nobody asked you to subscribe to this particular thread.

So True, LOL! I just saw the topic of your post and KNEW that it would be this. It's so typical of you! I just started reading betting I had it all predicted, and there it was... :rolleyes:

Then it started getting me inflamed again. Yeah, I'm on a side in this and it's silly of me, too. But I think of all the kids that come in here as fun-loving and full of positive energy as I am and thought what a downer it must be to read your negative stuff all over these forums and it incensed me again.

I'm here having a great time and I love Star Wars. It's just like I'm 'still a kid' and I get into this stuff and strike up conversations in the toy stores with anybody and say things like "wasn't it awesome when Yoda opened up a can of Whoop-*ss on Dooku?" and "don't you think the Republic Gunship toy is going to be awesome!" You'd think I was 4 years old. I just don't look like it anymore (add 20 years or so and no more maturity mentally).

So who's Stillakid? Me or you? Geeze. Let me borrow your handle and you can be NotAKidAnymore, okay Grandpa?





(I just deleted a bunch of stuff that was incendiary after carefully thinking it through. You can thank me later.)

I'm thanking you already! LOL.


Anyway, I'll sift through it all tomorrow. Thanks for the continued input. As always, I'll carefully consider every viewpoint and then come to a conclusion. It's what I've done from the start and continue to do even today. :)


Awww. Not! You listened to your wife and son who provided you with an excuse or two to take this up with our forum members' bunch again or maybe just because you wanted to drive me nuts! (too late: I was nutty to begin with! That's 25 years of sniffing StarWars figures fresh out of their blister cards for you!)

But you have managed to inherit ME as your self-appointed therapist, so this ought to be interesting...

But don't worry. I'm going to cure you so you can have fun again.

Now lie back on this couch with your Mouse Droid and bring it closer to you. Take a deep breath and continue....

stillakid
06-14-2002, 10:43 AM
Originally posted by Tycho


Remind me to thank JarJar :rolleyes:

While I consider whether or not I'm even going to respond to your illogical rebuttal, a couple of the things that you posted here I felt deserved some immediate attention.


Originally posted by Tycho

So True, LOL! I just saw the topic of your post and KNEW that it would be this. It's so typical of you! I just started reading betting I had it all predicted, and there it was... :rolleyes:

It doesn't prove you're a genius, only that you can read a sentence or two. I don't believe that I posted any new ideas, but ones that have been discussed before. That was made crystal clear in my response to Jar Jar Binks.


Originally posted by Tycho

Then it started getting me inflamed again. Yeah, I'm on a side in this and it's silly of me, too. But I think of all the kids that come in here as fun-loving and full of positive energy as I am and thought what a downer it must be to read your negative stuff all over these forums and it incensed me again.

Don't read it. I'm not responsible for your personal happiness the last time I checked.

Your actions prove that you are not against negative thoughts about the films, but rather you are launching an attack on me for some unknown reason, otherwise you'd be all over this board like a plague:
Illogical Moments in AOTC
http://www.sirstevesguide.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=86599#post86599


Originally posted by Tycho

I'm here having a great time and I love Star Wars. It's just like I'm 'still a kid' and I get into this stuff and strike up conversations in the toy stores with anybody and say things like "wasn't it awesome when Yoda opened up a can of Whoop-*ss on Dooku?" and "don't you think the Republic Gunship toy is going to be awesome!" You'd think I was 4 years old. I just don't look like it anymore (add 20 years or so and no more maturity mentally).

That's wonderful that you enjoy it so well. I don't remember anyone asking you to stop.


Originally posted by Tycho

So who's Stillakid? Me or you? Geeze. Let me borrow your handle and you can be NotAKidAnymore, okay Grandpa?

Ahhhhh. Now I feel like we're getting to the crux of the problem. You really like my screenname and want to take it!

No, really, it's becoming clearer and clearer that it's not my message that you object to so much, rather it's me on a personal level. I can't help that, but if you feel the need to tie your personal dislikes of people into actual critiques of the films themselves, then there is no way to discuss anything rationally.



Originally posted by Tycho

I'm thanking you already! LOL.



While you may be getting a kick out of your suddenly belligerent behavior here, I'm not amused.



Originally posted by Tycho


Awww. Not! You listened to your wife and son who provided you with an excuse or two to take this up with our forum members' bunch again or maybe just because you wanted to drive me nuts! (too late: I was nutty to begin with! That's 25 years of sniffing StarWars figures fresh out of their blister cards for you!)

You want to believe that my thoughts are off the cuff, that's fine with me. It doesn't make it true, but if that's what you need to get you through the day, then have at it.


Originally posted by Tycho


But you have managed to inherit ME as your self-appointed therapist, so this ought to be interesting...

But don't worry. I'm going to cure you so you can have fun again. Now lie back on this couch with your Mouse Droid and bring it closer to you. Take a deep breath and continue....


You're doing the exact opposite, Mr. Therapist. You've taken a discussion of actual concerns from the saga and turned it into a personal vendetta against me. I'm afraid that you're the one who seems to be taking this far too seriously and making this not too much fun anymore. If your purpose is to drive away people who don't think exactly like you do and turn this into a Lucasfilm Worship Board, then your passions are seriously misguided.

Tycho
06-14-2002, 03:49 PM
I've stated many times before, I have nothing against you Stillakid. Actually I rather like you and find most of the other topics you contribute to as being ones I find interesting to discuss with you.

This singular topic is like a broken record though. I know, I know. I don't have to read it.

And I'm sorry that it all came out like a big personal attack. I've stated before that well....ok, see if this makes more sense:

It is a personal attack on the person who constantly finds the need to bash on the prequels because of Qui-Gon and Midi-Chlorians.

If you want to know an area that I might be less objective in and more impassioned giving me motive to this cause, Qui-Gon Jinn was my favorite character in TPM and Liam Neeson MADE that movie work. He created a character I cared about. While Obi-Wan is one of my all-time, all movie favorites in Star Wars, I wasn't enjoying Neeson's performance any less because I was going stir-crazy because Obi-Wan was stuck on the ship. I enjoyed TPM for what it was, a movie, and a Star Wars movie. Something I like.

As far as proving myself a genius, well you know...only other geniuses of my magnitude can actually bestow on me the title. Seeing none at this time, you'll just have to take my word for it. :D (and please do take my posts in this thread as lightly as I am when I'm adding them here.

Next, I do owe you an appology. But not for the same reasons that would first come to mind.

I appologize for making light of a discussion that I think you probably started looking for logical, rational, hard debate on these issue's you're impassioned about. I know I wouldn't like it in my Han's a clone theory threads or whatever, but your "Qui-Gon's illigitimate and midi-chlorians are ruining Star Wars" threads are likely more numerous and more inflammatory. That's because they're basically "new Star Wars sucks" threads.

And I just haven't had time to go into the illogical moments in AOTC thread yet. This did get personal (to you) in my posts because I went into this thread already predicting exactly what it was going to say. I'm getting a talent for predicting things lately.

Finally, I have no such desire to drive away people who don't think exactly like me - or even to make a ton of them agree with me on everything. I suppose my prequel hypothesizing is most important to me (in the E3 sections) and I've read a lot of good stuff that either doesn't agree with my own theories, or provides a 180 degree different direction from them which I've acknowledged are equally possible. The last thing I want to do is make you personally feel uncomfortable here, Stillakid. But I am giving you my very open and honest reaction to "another Qui-Gon, Midi-Chlorians" thread.

I've got a lot of work to do these days, so I'm the one that's going to drop back and try to stay out of these things a little more though I'll probably go to that AOTC thread and see if it's not a huge chore to get involved over there. And so long as I'm invited to, I'll respond over here.

But you asked me if my purpose in coming into this thread was to personally attack you - and I evaluated that and finally, honestly thought about it and decided that "Yes it was - but only on the basis of my seeing this same thing from you constantly and really getting annoyed with it," so I have to ask you what is your purpose in bringing it up all the time.

I think you already answered that in that JarJar asked for it. In which case, hey: you're more than welcome to post what you want. I can understand how the opinion of your family members, unprompted by your own reviews of TPM, popped up new inspiration to say "Hey I was right!" So OK, you did that, and you're right that you have free speech to do so. So do I, and that's my honest reaction to it: "Oh-No! Not again?"

And I'm sorry for any distress I caused for you. I'm not out of this thread, but I'll either keep my post count low here, or just debate a movie fact or two, if JarJar or JediTricks or anyone seems to miss something.

Tycho
06-14-2002, 04:17 PM
Now actually on to some moive facts and less personal, touchy-feely stuff:

I think I did prove my points that are opposite of yours in this post (http://www.sirstevesguide.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=109851#post109851)

(which is just a few lines up in this very same thread).

1) Nothing in the original trilogy proves Obi-Wan absolutely had to be trained by only Yoda. That was never said. Lucas did create the character of Qui-Gon only 5 years ago, but the story as it was presented in the 3 films prior to TPM allows for this new information to be put in.

2) Nothing in the original trilogy proves that Obi-Wan decided to take it upon himself to train Anakin without discussing it with anyone else, or a suggestion from anybody else. Obi-Wan merely is taking responsibility for his own actions. "With Qui-Gon's suggestion, I took it upon myself to train him." or "Without consulting anyone, I decided to take it upon myself to train him." There is room there for either story to be true.

3) Nothing in the original trilogy proves Obi-Wan was the one who "discovered Anakin." He never said how Anakin came into his life. Never. Never. Never. "When I first knew him" does not even refer to "when I first MET him," if you take words' definitions literally.

4) Nothing in the original trilogy proves that Lucas' original intention was to always have Obi-Wan a) discover Anakin, and b) decide to train him all on his own, or c) even have the authority to make that kind of decision on his own. During ROTJ we were kids upon its first release and we weren't thinking that Obi-Wan was once young and had a great teacher. We all assumed that would have been Yoda, and see, he was still involved: 1) with all younglings 2) with the training of Obi-Wan's master's master (Dooku), and 3) with guidance for Obi-Wan from finding Kamino to giving him advice on the training of Anakin in "his abilities have made him arrogant" conversation.

5) Nothing in the original trilogy proves Luke was just like everyone else without midi-chlorians making him speacial. He used instinctual skills brought to him with the Force to destroy the Death Star. He turned his targeting computer off. And "everyman" could not have made the lightsaber jump into his hand in the wampa cave. If midi-chlorians are a scientific reason for one having a heightened awareness of the Force, which is a trait already established as hereditary- or else Han could learn to telekinetically move things- there is no change to Luke's character with or without the explaination of midichlorians.


And there it is. The house of cards has fallen.

I maintain that as children we made assumptions given the information that we had, and thus developed expectations for what these new Star Wars films would show happen. (Yoda training Obi-Wan, him taking Anakin to be his student, etc.)

Stillakid is very disappointed that the prequels are not at all what he always expected.

They are not what I first expected either.

I read spoiler material before each movie so far and came to add new information like Qui-Gon's character's role into the mix of things well before I saw the movie. It felt familiar to me the second I first saw Qui-Gon on screen. By the time I was actually SEEING the movie for my first time, it was almost exactly what I expected of it. I think that's the reason for the leaks, spoiler material such as character descriptions etc. on the Official Site and in the Insider. To prepare people who have 180 degrees worth of wild expectations for things that just won't happen.

If Obi-Wan will have a new Padawan in Episode 2 (since Anakin quit for the 4 years that pass between E2 and E3) then watch the Lucasfilm propaganda machine start making a big deal about some new Jedi character with a possible jealous streak, and played by a young actor, and see it all played up early on with a lot of hints and no direct statement he's Obi-Wan's new padawan. That will start in a year or a little more (if I'm right).

But if you go into the movie cold, not expecting that, but expecting Obi-Wan to always be having Anakin as his padawan based on all the movies, even E1 and E2, then this kind of person will get real mad about it and grumble about the movie all over again - over a character with maybe 10 minutes of screen time!

But Stillakid, you were not told that points 1-5 above were going to happen exactly as you (and I) expected them to occur.

And of course they did occur quite differently than that.

There is nothing wrong, illogical, or inconsistant with E1 and E2 on these matters.

You are disappointed with the direction they took.

The direction is not a pleasing one (to you) but it is not a "wrong one" that breaks some golden rules about consistency with the Original Trilogy. No rules like that have been broken.

JediTricks
06-16-2002, 08:30 PM
Without taking the ideas of context and insinuation into this discussion, sure there is wiggle room on your 1 through 5. However, there IS strong insinuation and the matters of context, Obi-Wan's ROTJ line about Anakin is proof of this, if you put it together from how you've chopped it up, you have direct insinuation and context flow.

"When I first knew him, your father was already a great pilot. But I was amazed how strongly the Force was with him. I took it upon myself to train him as a Jedi. I thought that I could instruct him just as well as Yoda. I was wrong."

This is a complete concept, not just several random sentences thrown together, and the flow is as suggestive as the concept - both of which you take out of context when you claim you've knocked down this "house of cards". We made assumptions based not just on whim, but upon what the films said and showed us; only once does Lucas specifically pulls the rug out from under us with the Vader being Luke's father and thus Obi-Wan being not entirely truthful about Anakin.

However, this is done in a sequel and really only twice ever, it takes what has been built upon and uses that against the characters - and through them, the audience. But with these "prequels", Lucas doesn't get that same sequel-luxury because he's claiming these are not building on top of the foundation he built with Star Wars, he's claiming they're building UNDER that foundation. Thus, ONLY the audience is getting used there, the characters simply dance around the issues that were built up by the originals. (Of course, if Lucas did what I suggested about Obi-Wan and Yoda casting off Midichlorians and Qui-Gon as bad influences, then that would at least be a reasonable foundation for the characters and their actions, IMO.)

Now, if Lucas were more honest about it and at least confirmed that he is indeed making sequels that build off of ANH rather than claiming TPM was the "true" foundation, then at least he'd be allowing the audience the luxury of honest foresight rather than this gray area he's currently created.

wedgeA
06-17-2002, 08:36 PM
JediTricks and Stillakid,

Why is the Qui Gon issue such a big deal. Let's assume these two points previously asserted are true:

1) Qui Gon was created during the writing of the TPM script for the purposes stated by Stillakid (drama, etc)

2) This creates an inconsistency with the original trilogy.

My response would be "so what". The inconsistency is not that major, IMO, considering it does not mesh well with a couple of lines of expository dialogue, but not a major plot point. If GL felt that creating this new character makes for a better film in TPM, I don't have problem with it. I liked the character and the movie overall, so I think it was done for the better.

From your arguments, it seems that you don't like Qui Gon simply because he is an inconsistency, I have not seen any major qualms that he was a poor acted/developed character. If am wrong about this I apologze, but IMO you guys are making too big a deal about continuity.

stillakid
06-18-2002, 01:02 AM
Originally posted by wedgeA
JediTricks and Stillakid,

Why is the Qui Gon issue such a big deal. Let's assume these two points previously asserted are true:

1) Qui Gon was created during the writing of the TPM script for the purposes stated by Stillakid (drama, etc)

2) This creates an inconsistency with the original trilogy.

My response would be "so what". The inconsistency is not that major, IMO, considering it does not mesh well with a couple of lines of expository dialogue, but not a major plot point. If GL felt that creating this new character makes for a better film in TPM, I don't have problem with it. I liked the character and the movie overall, so I think it was done for the better.

From your arguments, it seems that you don't like Qui Gon simply because he is an inconsistency, I have not seen any major qualms that he was a poor acted/developed character. If am wrong about this I apologze, but IMO you guys are making too big a deal about continuity.

That is a really good question! I mean it. In fact, I'm not even sure that I've ever really thought about it from that angle before.

As a writer, inconsistencies within films are inexcusable to me and most audiences are able to pick up on them immediately. Because this saga is so spread out, with plot points occurring over vast distances of time (and space!), it takes a little more attention to detail to pick up on some of the subtler points. So, because this is indeed (going to be) a six part story, it is still supposed to be one cohesive plot and from that standpoint, I look at it as one big story that should be consistent throughout.

That should be enough for anyone. But lo, apparently not. Whatever. Doesn't bother me. To each his own.

Poorly acted/developed character? Now that you bring it up, yeah, I've seen Liam act before this and I know that he's is far better at what he does than what I witness in Episode I. Very wooden. I won't lay that all at his feet though. I just heard or read an interview with Ewan where he was talking about the direction that they got for TPM. They were apparently instructed to be "proper" and "formal." Something like that anyway. (Ewan didn't like it either) Well, I suppose if that's what they were supposed to do then they all did a bang up job. Whatever point Lucas was trying to make with that kind of direction got lost with me, however. The performers all just looked extremely bored to me. And I didn't get a real sense of why Lucas would have wanted to include a Qui Gon character into the mix in the first place. As stated, unless he is fleshed out a ton in Ep III, there really wasn't much point to him being inserted in Ep I in the first place. I fail to see what that character contributes to the saga. I'd be happy to see that detailed explanatory list. Perhaps someone could enlighten me. Perhaps not. But, as always, I'm open to the possiblity! :)

Tycho
06-18-2002, 02:26 AM
Enlighten you? I just did. In one of my threads. I guess it got lost when I took some cheap shots at you Stillakid, because I felt exhausted by this issue with you, as I still do. So I'll repeat the ideas (on Qui-Gon's purpose) in a second.

First to their acting (Jedi, including Qui-Gon, Obi-Wan, Mace, even Yoda. No others really had speaking lines in TPM and Ki-Adi Mundi wasn't noteworthy really).

From the Jedi Code first seen written in "Outlander," the Dark Horse Comic. (and I'll handle the expected objection to that in a moment. First, the code:)

There is no emotion; there is peace.
There is no ignorance; there is knowledge.
There is no passion; there is serenity.
There is no death; there is the Force.

They were supposed to be rather emotionless, not characters like Luke "They're coming in too fast!" or Han "We're going to have company!"

Qui-Gon is more stoic than Obi-Wan and simply states the facts as they are. Occasionally he smiles and even laughs "Anakin Skywalker, meet Obi-Wan Kenobi." While Obi-Wan is a little younger and needs to make cute comments, "The negotiations were short!"

Note Obi-Wan has changed a little when he's around Anakin in E2, but not too much "Why do I think someday you're going to be the death of me?"

Mace was completely emotionless, "No he will not be trained."

And when Qui-Gon did break from this, it was substantially obvious "No? But you must see it? The boy IS the Chosen One!"

Yoda is only light when he's with Anakin. This pattern continues in E2 when he's teaching the kids.

That is Jedi discipline. In the GQ interview (I think it was) Ewan told the reporter that they were instructed to frown a lot and look serious, or relentlessly dutiful. But not showing humor, or passion unless specifically told to. You can argue that they had to actually "act" less, or you can argue that the actors acted more because if they even laughed or smiled, they'd have to reshoot the scene.

Darth Maul is even more disciplined for the most part. He doesn't even waste the words talking, but he's rather just a man of action.

So because the Jedi Code isn't in the movie, all this (including Ewan's words about his directing and the "Jedi frown" are all discounted? And Liam didn't do a good job in the movie? "[He] didn't kill anyone I know, did [he]?" (smile with a twinkle in the eyes toward Anakin). That was chemistry shown, not told.

It was either interpreted by the actors, or it was directed. No Stillakid, you can't see that ANYWHERE in the script. It's not there. You have to watch the movie.

Meanwhile, what purpose did Qui-Gon serve? (this is a repeat that was not responded to):

Obi-Wan's a padawan and it's being established that what a padawan should do is act as a PATIENT back-up for his master. We'll see how Anakin's relationship with Obi-Wan doesn't work.

Why not see how a relationship is supposed TO WORK so we can have something to compare it to? [Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon]


Finally, if Obi-Wan is a main character (he is) why not learn who trained him in a Master-Apprentice relationship? If he cannot vanquish Yoda's slayer for "drama's sake" (as Stillakid suggested, and quite correctly though 'drama' was only half the reason) why NOT make it someone else (who dies)?

(Yoda has to live, and Yoda would not make the controversial request that Obi-Wan 1) train someone who's too old to be trained and 2) train someone when he was not even a Jedi KNIGHT yet himself, let alone a master deemed ready for a padwan!) So either Kenobi is a failure, or a set of these 2 circumstances were given to him by someone he would be loyal to, but who was more fallable and could make more mistakes than Yoda could. So Obi-Wan would not have been a failure with training a padawan, had there been a more appropriate candidate and he himself had trained for longer.

If not: Obi-Wan is a bigger loser because circumstances 1 and 2 were either his fault, or Yoda's? That's not an attractive alternative.

wedgeA
06-18-2002, 02:34 AM
stillakid,

Point taken and thank you for the explanation. I guess that for me, in a long running film series, such inconsistencies come with the territory, and I'll put up with some of them. I loved Wrath of Khan in lieu of the infamous Chekov gaffe.

I personally liked the more sterile nature of the SW universe in TPM, but I am in the minority there. As for the reason for the Qui Gon character, I really don't know, your explanation is probably correct (drama device). I just liked the character and I thought it was interesting to be introduced to Obi Wan as an apprentice, rather than a seasoned Jedi.

While I did love TPM, my biggest gripe was the introduction of the midi-chlorians for the same reasons you stated.

stillakid
06-18-2002, 02:49 AM
Originally posted by Tycho
Enlighten you? I just did. In one of my threads. I guess it got lost when I took some cheap shots at you Stillakid, because I felt exhausted by this issue with you, as I still do. So I'll repeat the ideas (on Qui-Gon's purpose) in a second.

First to their acting (Jedi, including Qui-Gon, Obi-Wan, Mace, even Yoda. No others really had speaking lines in TPM and Ki-Adi Mundi wasn't noteworthy really).

From the Jedi Code first seen written in "Outlander," the Dark Horse Comic. (and I'll handle the expected objection to that in a moment. First, the code:)

There is no emotion; there is peace.
There is no ignorance; there is knowledge.
There is no passion; there is serenity.
There is no death; there is the Force.

They were supposed to be rather emotionless, not characters like Luke "They're coming in too fast!" or Han "We're going to have company!"

Qui-Gon is more stoic than Obi-Wan and simply states the facts as they are. Occasionally he smiles and even laughs "Anakin Skywalker, meet Obi-Wan Kenobi." While Obi-Wan is a little younger and needs to make cute comments, "The negotiations were short!"

Note Obi-Wan has changed a little when he's around Anakin in E2, but not too much "Why do I think someday you're going to be the death of me?"

Mace was completely emotionless, "No he will not be trained."

And when Qui-Gon did break from this, it was substantially obvious "No? But you must see it? The boy IS the Chosen One!"

Yoda is only light when he's with Anakin. This pattern continues in E2 when he's teaching the kids.

That is Jedi discipline. In the GQ interview (I think it was) Ewan told the reporter that they were instructed to frown a lot and look serious, or relentlessly dutiful. But not showing humor, or passion unless specifically told to. You can argue that they had to actually "act" less, or you can argue that the actors acted more because if they even laughed or smiled, they'd have to reshoot the scene.

Darth Maul is even more disciplined for the most part. He doesn't even waste the words talking, but he's rather just a man of action.

So because the Jedi Code isn't in the movie, all this (including Ewan's words about his directing and the "Jedi frown" are all discounted? And Liam didn't do a good job in the movie? "[He] didn't kill anyone I know, did [he]?" (smile with a twinkle in the eyes toward Anakin). That was chemistry shown, not told.

It was either interpreted by the actors, or it was directed. No Stillakid, you can't see that ANYWHERE in the script. It's not there. You have to watch the movie.

Meanwhile, what purpose did Qui-Gon serve? (this is a repeat that was not responded to):

Obi-Wan's a padawan and it's being established that what a padawan should do is act as a PATIENT back-up for his master. We'll see how Anakin's relationship with Obi-Wan doesn't work.

Why not see how a relationship is supposed TO WORK so we can have something to compare it to? [Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon]


Finally, if Obi-Wan is a main character (he is) why not learn who trained him in a Master-Apprentice relationship? If he cannot vanquish Yoda's slayer for "drama's sake" (as Stillakid suggested, and quite correctly though 'drama' was only half the reason) why NOT make it someone else (who dies)?

(Yoda has to live, and Yoda would not make the controversial request that Obi-Wan 1) train someone who's too old to be trained and 2) train someone when he was not even a Jedi KNIGHT yet himself, let alone a master deemed ready for a padwan!) So either Kenobi is a failure, or a set of these 2 circumstances were given to him by someone he would be loyal to, but who was more fallable and could make more mistakes than Yoda could. So Obi-Wan would not have been a failure with training a padawan, had there been a more appropriate candidate and he himself had trained for longer.

If not: Obi-Wan is a bigger loser because circumstances 1 and 2 were either his fault, or Yoda's? That's not an attractive alternative.

Now that you put it that way :), it makes sense. I can see what you're saying about the "this is the way it's supposed to be" (in TPM) contrasted with Anakin's disobedience in AOTC. That makes sense. Unfortunately, I think that as with me, that idea got lost on a lot of people because the vehicle itself wasn't inherently interesting enough to carry the message. It's kind of like if you made a movie about how boring it might be to live in the Texas panhandle, and used a slow and plodding directorial style to "highlight" the main theme. You might get the message across, but the audience would have left the theater en masse before it was finished. That's a risky move on a filmmaker's part, to try to sell that kind of idea to an audience without coming out and explaining it somehow. Off the cuff, I have no ideas on how it could have been handled more effectively, but I can tell you what doesn't work. ;)

Thanks for the explanation. I'm beginning to see some layers in the Prequels that weren't visible to me before.

JediTricks
06-18-2002, 05:31 PM
wedgeA, the Chekov character COULD have been on the Enterprise when Khan was first discovered, just not as a bridge officer in any scene we saw. Yeah, it's thin, but it's not impossible. :D Besides, that Chekov gaffe isn't the fault of The Original Series, it's the fault of a later tale - if the TOS episode Space Seed had been made with no Chekov after ST2:WOK, then it'd seem more like a glaring mistake (to me, anyway).

Why is Qui-Gon a big deal to me? While Stilla's comments seem very well thought out, mine will be my "short version": because the character seems to add nothing to Episode I or the Star Wars story beyond a quick, poorly-fleshed-out screen life and pointless death - he lives and dies in a VERY short timespan and everything else seems like stuff that was originally was left to Obi-Wan's part (I thought that even before I read the Art of SW book and learned the character wasn't in the original drafts).


Tycho, once again, you're using the EU to support movie theories. That's great for you, but it doesn't fit what we saw of Yoda and Ben in the first films or in Episode I. Sure, they were the last Jedi left in the OT, but they hardly seemed like they had "lost the touch", so why would they be more lively 32 years later? Mace wasn't emotionless IMO, he has a bunch of disapproving looks in Ep 1 - I just thought he came off like a poorly-acted character. Ewan was among the actors who originally said that working with all the bluescreen without a lot of direction was very trying and hampered his performance, then in later interviews he sorta backpeddled that statement but it still sounded like he meant that.

The Jedi Code can't be as simple as those 4 lines, I think, since Mace claims that the code forbids Qui-Gon taking on a second padawan at one time, and Obi-Wan claims that if Qui-Gon followed the code, he'd already be on the council.

"Finally, if Obi-Wan is a main character (he is) why not learn who trained him in a Master-Apprentice relationship? If he cannot vanquish Yoda's slayer for "drama's sake" (as Stillakid suggested, and quite correctly though 'drama' was only half the reason) why NOT make it someone else (who dies)?"
Ok, in this I really have to protest - I believe the classic trilogy implies that Obi-Wan learned this master-apprentice relationship from Yoda, but either way you slice it, Obi-Wan has never shown any "revenge" or "personal loss" in his character (beyond Anakin, which he treats more as a burden and a personal failure than a quest), he was written as a noble wizard/warrior, so why must he have started his Jedi career by this turn of events? Does the Obi-Wan of the classic trilogy seem driven by or built upon the foundation of the destruction of a major foe?

Tycho
06-18-2002, 06:44 PM
JediTricks, you simply DON'T LIKE what was done. That much of your opinion, feelings, etc. I can make some sort of factual statement on.

You can't prove that it is WRONG based on any treatment of the Classics as some sort of bible, and I'll go into that now.

Tycho, once again, you're using the EU to support movie theories. That's great for you, but it doesn't fit what we saw of Yoda and Ben in the first films or in Episode I.

I don't understand that comment at all. Read my whole post before you respond to that though. I think I know what you're implying by it. But please check to be certain.

Next, while you cite reasons that Mace wasn't emotionless, and I said that most of the Jedi seemed that way moreso than characters like Luke and Han that I compared them to, I'll rephrase my point as a question.

Were Luke, Leia, and Han more emotional than characters with formal Jedi Training? (this includes Old Ben, and Yoda, as well as prequel Jedi). Were they?

Did Luke, Leia, and Han yell more? Did they exclaim more? Did they argue more? Did they complain more? Did they make more sarcastic comments?

While this could be that there is less "wit" written into the prequels, could it also be that there were more formally trained characters written into the prequels? Could it be possible?

Does Anakin Skywalker at age 9 show emtions? Does Vader for that matter? Does JarJar? Are they loud and extreme? Are they moreso than Obi-Wan in ANH? ESB and ROTJ? Yoda?

Is it possible that this is intentional? Even if it is intentional, is it possible you would still not like it? Directly answer this question in its context please.

The Jedi Code is probably close to that, as well as having a lot of extra lessons contributing to it. A code should be something very simple. The Marine Corps is "Unit, Corps, God, Country," at least as presented in a movie. In Karate, we learned a lot of lessons, not all just physical. But we were taught a code as for how to handle emergency situations:

It is better to check than to hurt;
It is better to hurt than to maim;
It is better to main than to kill;
For all life is precious and it can never be replaced.

This implies that if I was carjacked or mugged, the person desperate enough to do so, would generally not be someone who pays $250 a month for blackbelt training 6 days a week. (I've cut back due to time reasons and financial constraints brought on by my boat payments, but nevertheless, most would-be street thugs would not have this kind of training). My studio is required to document to the State of California my level of training and any advances I make (uh...which will still be a while forthcoming I think). I must take that into account before I'd decide to kill someone for attempting to carjack me (at gunpoint or not - because I'll fight if they make a mistake with a gun and I have an opportunity). Anyway, what does "It is better to check mean?" It means to not show fear, but take an insult, or talk yourself out of a situation if you can, or even lose face if it does not infringe upon your right to justice if any of that means avoiding the purposeful harming of someone less prepared to fight than you are.

But it doesn't say all that in my code? It just says something about a check? So fine, I should be legally able to give you a voided check from my bank account and then break your F'n arm! I'm fine with that. :D

It didn't say I couldn't in my code. And I did give you a check.

If you excuse my sarcasm, a code does not lay out specific instructions. It serves as a simple, hopefully-all-encompassing reminder of what you've learned and the morals you're pledged to follow.

Movie posters even showed another code:

A Jedi shall not know anger;
A Jedi shall not know hate;
A Jedi shall not know Love.

Or something like that. So there's a lot of codes probably. My teaser poster's still in the tube it shipped in. Have no space to hang it, so I haven't had it matted yet.

Ok, in this I really have to protest - I believe the classic trilogy implies that Obi-Wan learned this master-apprentice relationship from Yoda

Yeah, implies. I thoght that too. But the OT did not state that as a matter of fact. In the Empire Strikes Back, then, Obi-Wan would say, "You will go to the Dagobah System. There you will learn from Yoda, the ONLY Jedi Master who instructed me." I think the article "the" as in "the Jedi Master who instructed me" can be taken 2 different ways. You can't prove anything by interprettting that. It's interpretation.

There is one FACT here: you don't like it being different from what it implies or what you thought it would be as a kid.

Fine. You have every right to dislike it. Stillakid has made it a case that it is WRONG, or against the bible that is the OT. It's not. I've already posted this so I will copy and paste it into every single one of my replies it seems:

1) Nothing in the original trilogy proves Obi-Wan absolutely had to be trained by only Yoda. That was never said. Lucas did create the character of Qui-Gon only 5 years ago, but the story as it was presented in the 3 films prior to TPM allows for this new information to be put in.

2) Nothing in the original trilogy proves that Obi-Wan decided to take it upon himself to train Anakin without discussing it with anyone else, or a suggestion from anybody else. Obi-Wan merely is taking responsibility for his own actions. "With Qui-Gon's suggestion, I took it upon myself to train him." or "Without consulting anyone, I decided to take it upon myself to train him." There is room there for either story to be true.

3) Nothing in the original trilogy proves Obi-Wan was the one who "discovered Anakin." He never said how Anakin came into his life. Never. Never. Never. "When I first knew him" does not even refer to "when I first MET him," if you take words' definitions literally.

4) Nothing in the original trilogy proves that Lucas' original intention was to always have Obi-Wan a) discover Anakin, and b) decide to train him all on his own, or c) even have the authority to make that kind of decision on his own. During ROTJ we were kids upon its first release and we weren't thinking that Obi-Wan was once young and had a great teacher. We all assumed that would have been Yoda, and see, he was still involved: 1) with all younglings 2) with the training of Obi-Wan's master's master (Dooku), and 3) with guidance for Obi-Wan from finding Kamino to giving him advice on the training of Anakin in "his abilities have made him arrogant" conversation.

5) Nothing in the original trilogy proves Luke was just like everyone else without midi-chlorians making him speacial. He used instinctual skills brought to him with the Force to destroy the Death Star. He turned his targeting computer off. And "everyman" could not have made the lightsaber jump into his hand in the wampa cave. If midi-chlorians are a scientific reason for one having a heightened awareness of the Force, which is a trait already established as hereditary- or else Han could learn to telekinetically move things- there is no change to Luke's character with or without the explaination of midichlorians.


Now finally, since both of you dislike this aspect to the the way the movies presented Obi-Wan's past, is it necessary to make posts about this every time a prequel subject comes up and start this debate all over again? I'm asking this question be answered on a non-personal level.

My point is that there is a lot of rambling garbage that comes up with hatred of the PT, possibly because the movies don't excite you like they would a child and you don't like what you've become yourself these days: an adult? It happens to the best of us...;)

Now even if Stillakid's son questions the validity of Qui-Gon, etc. he first, has not seen E3 yet, and second, probably was viewing the Original Trilogy since before Phantom came out. Once you become a fan of something, it's easy to create expectations for it and take it way too seriously.

JediTricks, you brought up Star Trek. If it were suddenly shown in a new movie that Commander Riker is a transvestite who had an operation so he could marry Deanna, and she is really a lesbian who loved him when he was a woman, would that alter all Star Trek continuity? No. I would hate that plot twist myself, but no episode of TNG ever asked if Riker had been born a girl. They never said he'd been born a boy. What if Kirk had been a girl? Than "she" would have been the first Star Trek female captain to have their own show, long before Janeway.

This is not a ludicrous example for Star Trek, because any one of them could have always been a changeling or a Trill. So there.

When something is not your intellectual property, watch what you take for granted to be the facts!

Sorry to post so much, but I don't have the time to come back here that often, and like the rest of you, feel I surrender my point if I don't continue to argue it.

Bel-Cam Jos
06-19-2002, 05:16 PM
"Put it in the ground,
where the flowers grow. (Ah ah)
Gold and silver shine-i-ine.
Shiny, happy people holding hands..."
:) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)

JediTricks
06-20-2002, 03:49 AM
Originally posted by Tycho
JediTricks, you simply DON'T LIKE what was done. That much of your opinion, feelings, etc. I can make some sort of factual statement on.
- Gee, thanks for telling me that my opinion is single-faceted and shallow. I simply don't like what was done, why didn't I realize that before and simply change my entire outlook? Because that's crap and I'll appreciate you not making snap-judgements about my opinions. I stated a fact and you retort with a demeaning statement summarizing my entire outlook on the prequels - that's pretty weak.

BTW, thanks for the inflammatory "bible" statement you keep repeating, that's a real mature discussion tactic. :rolleyes:


Originally posted by Tycho
Tycho, once again, you're using the EU to support movie theories. That's great for you, but it doesn't fit what we saw of Yoda and Ben in the first films or in Episode I.

I don't understand that comment at all. Read my whole post before you respond to that though. I think I know what you're implying by it. But please check to be certain.
What's confusing? I stated a fact that you used the "Jedi Code" from a DH comic to support your theories of the actions and emotions of characters in the movies. How in the world is that NOT you using EU to support movie theories? And it doesn't fit Yoda and Obi-Wan's characters in the movies, they are emotional. And Qui-Gon was emotional AND passionate!



Originally posted by Tycho
Were Luke, Leia, and Han more emotional than characters with formal Jedi Training? (this includes Old Ben, and Yoda, as well as prequel Jedi). Were they?

Did Luke, Leia, and Han yell more? Did they exclaim more? Did they argue more? Did they complain more? Did they make more sarcastic comments?

While this could be that there is less "wit" written into the prequels, could it also be that there were more formally trained characters written into the prequels? Could it be possible?

...Is it possible that this is intentional? Even if it is intentional, is it possible you would still not like it? Directly answer this question in its context please.
If you think this is all there is to emotions, then perhaps you need to look deeper into the concept. Yelling and being excited aren't the only emotions, complaining isn't an emotion at all, and Obi-Wan and Yoda certainly had their fair share of sarcasm and wit. It sounds like you're either making an excuse for characters being 2-dimensional or excusing those characters for not sharing the same reactions as everybody around them. Not everything has to be hit-in-the-face unsubtle.

So to answer your question, it's possible it's intentional, but that would simply be a limited writer giving characters the lack of depth no human being could survive with. If it's intentional, it's sloppy crap that sells both the characters and the audience short - even Flash Gordon serials knew enough to give human characters human emotions to let the audience experience the movie as a tale of interest instead of some stiff, dry-reading. It's a movie, not a stenographer reading off the last minutes.

From the point of "The Jedi Code is probably close to that" on, it looks like you're just projecting... something you accuse me of even though I stated cinematic methods of conveying information to an audience to back my comments, which I had even STATED were my opinions to begin with.

Millions have died in others' vein attempts to expand upon simple concepts like peace and love because they project their opinions into the words of others. Your karate code there is a series of sentences, however you and those who taught you are the ones who interpret them into any meaning beyond them. A philosophy can begin with a single truth or a single assumption, yet either philosophy can twist the original meanings. If a tree falls in the woods, it vibrates the air causing what we would call sound - the question is, are those vibrations sound if nobody hears them? If "no" is the automatic answer, then perhaps egotism drives the philosophy.

Since we have no authority to teach us how this Dark Horse comic's code is to be turned into a philosophy, I submit that you can only project your OWN personal beliefs onto that code, thus turning your beliefs, not the code itself, into the philosophy.


Originally posted by Tycho
This implies that if I was carjacked or mugged, the person desperate enough to do so... Anyway, what does "It is better to check mean?" It means to not show fear, but take an insult, or talk yourself out of a situation if you can, or even lose face if it does not infringe upon your right to justice if any of that means avoiding the purposeful harming of someone less prepared to fight than you are.

But it doesn't say all that in my code? It just says something about a check? So fine, I should be legally able to give you a voided check from my bank account and then break your F'n arm! I'm fine with that. :D
An implied statement, you use this implication to your benefit to strengthen your point, yet...

Originally posted by Tycho
Ok, in this I really have to protest - I believe the classic trilogy implies that Obi-Wan learned this master-apprentice relationship from Yoda

Yeah, implies. I thoght that too. But the OT did not state that as a matter of fact.... You can't prove anything by interprettting that. It's interpretation.
Now, even though above, you use your implication of your karate code to expand it's simple statements into a philosophy you were taught, used here, implication is taboo? That's not logical, either we learned from the movie about the context of the implications of Obi-Wan's and Yoda's words, or we learned only straight facts in which case your karate similie holds absolutely no water. You cannot have it both ways, either the context-driven implication is an acceptable information-giving tool or it's not. Which is it?




Originally posted by Tycho
JediTricks, you brought up Star Trek. If it were suddenly shown in a new movie that Commander Riker is a transvestite who had an operation so he could marry Deanna, and she is really a lesbian who loved him when he was a woman, would that alter all Star Trek continuity? No. I would hate that plot twist myself, but no episode of TNG ever asked if Riker had been born a girl. They never said he'd been born a boy. What if Kirk had been a girl? Than "she" would have been the first Star Trek female captain to have their own show, long before Janeway.
Well, first off, Trek has made these sorts of mistakes many times and fans call TPTB out on them all the time. Secondly, IIRC the TNG ep "The Outcast", Riker is quite clear about the physical sexual orientation he was born into while he's explaining to a member of an androgenous race about his species sexual reproductive situations, so indeed it would alter Trek continuity. Look at Dr Bashir, when his character had written in that he was genetically altered, it indeed changed the Trek universe as well as several implications about it - just because none were major does not mean they didn't exist. Same thing with Sisko going back in time and having to take the place of a peacemaker that changed the future, same with the Enterprise-E going back in time and riding along with Cochrane on his warp flight, the only way Trek got around these was by being sneaky and they had to acknowledge that at nearly every turn.


Originally posted by Tycho
This is not a ludicrous example for Star Trek, because any one of them could have always been a changeling or a Trill. So there.
Er... except for all those physical examinations EVERY Trek show talks about all the time. We've been told time and time again what race is what and what limitations changlings have, so it very much WOULD change continuity of Star Trek.



Originally posted by Tycho
When something is not your intellectual property, watch what you take for granted to be the facts!

Sorry to post so much, but I don't have the time to come back here that often, and like the rest of you, feel I surrender my point if I don't continue to argue it.
You need to step back and take a look at what you're saying, I think you're losing perspective. Let me count the ways in the statements above. First, you claim that others need be careful what they take for granted as others' facts when you yourself do the exact same thing taking facts for granted over and over. Again, you can't have it both ways. Second, you are implying that even if you concede nothing and never say another word here, you feel as if you've "lost" your point. Take a week off this thread just as an experiment, see if anybody actually believes you've changed your mind on ANYTHING seven days later.

Tycho
06-20-2002, 06:14 AM
I can't take a break on this thread just yet, because there are things I still disagree with, and things I don't understand. I'll ask that those be clarified.



[

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JediTricks
[B]
- Gee, thanks for telling me that my opinion is single-faceted and shallow. I simply don't like what was done, why didn't I realize that before and simply change my entire outlook? Because that's crap and I'll appreciate you not making snap-judgements about my opinions. I stated a fact and you retort with a demeaning statement summarizing my entire outlook on the prequels - that's pretty weak.


The intention was not to tell you that your opinion is single-minded and shallow.

When you said you stated a fact, and I retorted, you lost me about what "fact" you stated.

If you do not dislike the prequels, (your "summarized entire outlook on the prequels" reference) I'm sorry, but I did not pick up on that from what you've posted. If you did not dislike them, or one movie or the other, does it imply something else other than the logical opposite approach to attempt to describe your opinion of them? I would not guess so. But I am confused here.

The logical opposite approach means that you liked them, the opposite of disliking them. We are talking about generalities regarding the overall movies, not specifics like a speeder chase etc. Just "are there more positives or negaitves?"




BTW, thanks for the inflammatory "bible" statement you keep repeating, that's a real mature discussion tactic. :rolleyes:
It seems to be the argument that the prequels should not disrupt the expected continuity of the OT's descriptions of times before the OT took place. Therefore the OT acts like a character bible, but rather a plot outline bible to the PT - or you suggest that it should. If it should not, Qui-Gon is ok, in other words.

I hope you didn't think I was making any reference to the bibles of religions. No. Then you misunderstood. I'm not sure about that, so I am asking if you mistook what I meant?





[
What's confusing? I stated a fact that you used the "Jedi Code" from a DH comic to support your theories of the actions and emotions of characters in the movies. How in the world is that NOT you using EU to support movie theories? And it doesn't fit Yoda and Obi-Wan's characters in the movies, they are emotional. And Qui-Gon was emotional AND passionate!
I agree with you. But if there was bad acting and directing of the actors, how are you still able to determine that Qui-Gon was passionate about something? What qualifies Mark's or Carrie's or Harrison's performances as better than Ewan's, Liam Neeson's (especially), or Frank Oz's (and the animators / script for Yoda - other than how real or unreal the puppet looked or the CGI looked).







If you think this is all there is to emotions, then perhaps you need to look deeper into the concept. Yelling and being excited aren't the only emotions, complaining isn't an emotion at all, and Obi-Wan and Yoda certainly had their fair share of sarcasm and wit. It sounds like you're either making an excuse for characters being 2-dimensional or excusing those characters for not sharing the same reactions as everybody around them. Not everything has to be hit-in-the-face unsubtle.
Yes, but why are the characters 2-dimensional in your opinion?



So to answer your question, it's possible it's intentional, but that would simply be a limited writer giving characters the lack of depth no human being could survive with. If it's intentional, it's sloppy crap that sells both the characters and the audience short - even Flash Gordon serials knew enough to give human characters human emotions to let the audience experience the movie as a tale of interest instead of some stiff, dry-reading. It's a movie, not a stenographer reading off the last minutes. A very insightful answer, JT. However, I don't think the characters lack depth myself, but if they did, your reasoning is very sound here and I'd agree with it.



From the point of "The Jedi Code is probably close to that" on, it looks like you're just projecting... something you accuse me of even though I stated cinematic methods of conveying information to an audience to back my comments, which I had even STATED were my opinions to begin with.
I stand corrected.





Millions have died in others' vein attempts to expand upon simple concepts like peace and love because they project their opinions into the words of others. Your karate code there is a series of sentences, however you and those who taught you are the ones who interpret them into any meaning beyond them. A philosophy can begin with a single truth or a single assumption, yet either philosophy can twist the original meanings. If a tree falls in the woods, it vibrates the air causing what we would call sound - the question is, are those vibrations sound if nobody hears them? If "no" is the automatic answer, then perhaps egotism drives the philosophy.
Very insightful! Very true about interpretations about religion, the US Constitution, and a lot of things in this world.





Since we have no authority to teach us how this Dark Horse comic's code is to be turned into a philosophy, I submit that you can only project your OWN personal beliefs onto that code, thus turning your beliefs, not the code itself, into the philosophy.


An implied statement, you use this implication to your benefit to strengthen your point, yet...

Now, even though above, you use your implication of your karate code to expand it's simple statements into a philosophy you were taught, used here, implication is taboo? That's not logical, either we learned from the movie about the context of the implications of Obi-Wan's and Yoda's words, or we learned only straight facts in which case your karate similie holds absolutely no water. You cannot have it both ways, either the context-driven implication is an acceptable information-giving tool or it's not. Which is it?


I think I understand what you're saying, but I'm not sure.

I'll give this a crack:

The founder of our Karate studios is still alive and practicing the arts. He can explain the code and exactly what it means.

Lucas has characters that do not tell the protagonist the truth, or even the Whole Story at any given point. Lucas himself does not come on screen and explain to Luke Skywalker what is going on. Nor does Lucas explicitly tell us in interviews exactly what he inferred with lines in ANH, ESB and ROTJ.

He did say that Qui-Gon was not in the original drafts of TPM and he was made up and added later in 1997, not 1983 or prior. Maybe there was another character he'd thought of in that role such as the concept character represented by Mace Windu who was thought of long before Sam Jackson was cast. Maybe there was not. If there was not, your concept that Lucas did INTEND for there to be only Obi-Wan apprenticed to Yoda directly etc, is correct. But he gets away with having Qui-Gon train Yoda, because the movies still do not explicitly say Yoda trained Obi-Wan (only) with enough certainty to not make this "new version of the truth" acceptable. So finally we are left with the question of do you like Qui-Gon in the movie? Do you like him enough to let him be Obi-Wan's master (if given a choice)?

I would guess your answer to be "no." This is what I meant by saying you don't like the PT (of which TPM is 33.33% of)




I agree with your points about Star Trek. I made a bad comparison. You countered it alright.

stillakid
06-20-2002, 10:54 AM
Originally posted by Tycho
But he gets away with having Qui-Gon train Yoda, because the movies still do not explicitly say Yoda trained Obi-Wan (only) with enough certainty to not make this "new version of the truth" acceptable. So finally we are left with the question of do you like Qui-Gon in the movie? Do you like him enough to let him be Obi-Wan's master (if given a choice)?

I would guess your answer to be "no." This is what I meant by saying you don't like the PT (of which TPM is 33.33% of)




I'd have to say, "yes," there is more than sufficient evidence to support the idea that the OT intended Obi Wan's only teacher to by Yoda.

Your previous assertions that I must be an Obi Wan lover always confused me as my arguments were always founded on the specific dialogue as written by Lucas (and/or Kasdan, which would make me a Lucas/Kasdan lover!). Anyway, it became all too clear the real sticking point with all of this when I read:


Originally posted by Tycho

If you want to know an area that I might be less objective in and more impassioned giving me motive to this cause, Qui-Gon Jinn was my favorite character in TPM and Liam Neeson MADE that movie work. He created a character I cared about. While Obi-Wan is one of my all-time, all movie favorites in Star Wars, I wasn't enjoying Neeson's performance any less because I was going stir-crazy because Obi-Wan was stuck on the ship. I enjoyed TPM for what it was, a movie, and a Star Wars movie. Something I like.



It's not that I'm a Obi Wan lover or Lucas hater at all. It's that you have an emotional investment into a character that you really enjoy and love...enough so to defend him to the last no matter what is thrown in front of you.

Enjoy away. That's cool. Whatever. But there is simply no way to contort the OT dialogue away from it's original intent without restorting to severe leaps of faith in Lucas's ability (or desire!) to maintain continuity throughout the saga as it currently stands. As with the rumored Bail Organa addition to the OT DVD's, I foresee some type of Qui Gon mention to be shoehorned into the foundation of the saga.

Beast
06-20-2002, 01:03 PM
It's just becoming a silly argument. You have many teachers in your life, from school, college, etc. But they still are the people that instructed you. The existance of Qui-Gon changes nothing of the fact that Obi-Wan was originally trained as a child by Yoda, and then taken by Qui-Gon to complete his training. Why would Obi-Wan mention Qui-Gon at all to Luke, when he's dead. He can't train Luke, only Yoda is alive to do that. "You must go to the Dagobah system. There you will learn from Yoda, the Jedi Master that instructed me. I would send you to Qui-Gon, but he's dead." Now tell me why, since he's dead, is it even neccissary to mention him in the OT. We know that Obi-Wan says things, from his own point of view. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

stillakid
06-20-2002, 01:14 PM
Originally posted by JarJarBinks
Now tell me why, since he's dead, is it even neccissary to mention him in the OT. We know that Obi-Wan says things, from his own point of view.

"When I first knew him, your father was already a great pilot, but Iwas amazed at how strongly the Force was with him. I took it upon myself to train him as a Jedi. I thought that I could teach him just as well as Yoda. I was wrong."

There can be no doubt from that complete thought just what Lucas had intended at the time it was written. It is too definitive of a statement to have license to be taken any other way.:cool:

So to answer your question...no, it wasn't necessary to mention Qui Gon at the time the film was made because he didn't exist. So the dialogue was written in such a way as to point directly at Yoda as being THE teacher of Obi Wan and having Obi Wan be THE discoverer and decider (?) as to whether or not to train Anakin.

2-1B
06-20-2002, 01:28 PM
Hmmm, as many of you know I am pro Qui-Gonn and pro "wiggle room" ( :D at stillakid), but I can't believe you guys are passing on the following line,

Obi-Wan to Yoda - "Was I any different, when you taught me?"

Now, that's the line I have to work around the most, I'm fine with the Hoth quote and the line that stillakid just quoted - well, I have no problems with it because I saw Obi-Wan take it upon himself (as in take away from Yoda) and the little bit on the Naboo ship about how Obi-Wan also feels the disturbance on Tatooine illustrates what Ben said on Dagobah in ROTJ.

But back to:

Obi-Wan to Yoda - "Was I any different, when you taught me?"

The issue for me here is that while it can technically work, (according to TPM and AOTC) Ben is equating himself at age . . . . whatever age the kids are before Yoda gives them up . . . let's say 12 or whatever . . . to a 20+ year old Luke in ESB! :D

I'm just throwing that out there to see reactions, it's the only line that I remember from my recent OT marathon viewing which made me second guess this stuff.

Beast
06-20-2002, 01:30 PM
Originally posted by stillakid
"When I first knew him, your father was already a great pilot, but Iwas amazed at how strongly the Force was with him. I took it upon myself to train him as a Jedi. I thought that I could teach him just as well as Yoda. I was wrong."

There can be no doubt from that complete thought just what Lucas had intended at the time it was written. It is too definitive of a statement to have license to be taken any other way.:cool:

So to answer your question...no, it wasn't necessary to mention Qui Gon at the time the film was made because he didn't exist. So the dialogue was written in such a way as to point directly at Yoda as being THE teacher of Obi Wan and having Obi Wan be THE discoverer and decider (?) as to whether or not to train Anakin.
When Obi-Wan first knew him, he was already a great pilot. That is proven in the prequels. And I'm quite sure that he was amazed at how strongly the force was with him. Just look at Obi-Wan's comments in AOTC's. "His abilities have made him arrogent." Yes, he did take it upon himself to train Anakin, when it should have been someone with more ability. But since Qui-Gon died, and asked Obi-Wan to train Anakin, he demanded it of Yoda and the Council.

Obi-Wan has to start at the beginning of training, with things that normally Yoda would teach. Because Yoda trains all the children, up until their of age to be taken by a master. Since Anakin is to old, to start out with normal training, the lessons that Yoda would normally teach, fall to Obi-Wan to instruct to Anakin. Obi-Wan thought that he could do that teaching, just as well as Yoda, and was wrong. The existance of Qui-Gon changes nothing in the OT.

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

stillakid
06-20-2002, 01:31 PM
Originally posted by Caesar
Hmmm, as many of you know I am pro Qui-Gonn and pro "wiggle room" ( :D at stillakid), but I can't believe you guys are passing on the following line,

Obi-Wan to Yoda - "Was I any different, when you taught me?"

Now, that's the line I have to work around the most, I'm fine with the Hoth quote and the line that stillakid just quoted - well, I have no problems with it because I saw Obi-Wan take it upon himself (as in take away from Yoda) and the little bit on the Naboo ship about how Obi-Wan also feels the disturbance on Tatooine illustrates what Ben said on Dagobah in ROTJ.

But back to:

Obi-Wan to Yoda - "Was I any different, when you taught me?"

The issue for me here is that while it can technically work, (according to TPM and AOTC) Ben is equating himself at age . . . . whatever age the kids are before Yoda gives them up . . . let's say 12 or whatever . . . to a 20+ year old Luke in ESB! :D

I'm just throwing that out there to see reactions, it's the only line that I remember from my recent OT marathon viewing which made me second guess this stuff.

Damn, you're right! I never thought of that one. Probably because I always saw the rest as sufficient. But, I'll mull over this line today and try to anticipate the inevitable "wiggle" :rolleyes: that's to come.

Beast
06-20-2002, 01:36 PM
Originally posted by Caesar
Obi-Wan to Yoda - "Was I any different, when you taught me?"

The issue for me here is that while it can technically work, (according to TPM and AOTC) Ben is equating himself at age . . . . whatever age the kids are before Yoda gives them up . . . let's say 12 or whatever . . . to a 20+ year old Luke in ESB! :D
Caeser, just look at how Luke acts. He's impatiant, annoying, whiny, difficult, all those things that usually are associated with a child. Sure, that line is a little harder to wiggle around, but it's possible if you consider how Luke acts. Luke's been stifled his entire life on Tatooine by his Uncle. Just remember what also Yoda says.

Yoda: "Long have I watched this one. All his life as he looked away, to the future, to the horizen. Never his mind on where he was, what he was doin'."

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

2-1B
06-20-2002, 01:38 PM
Originally posted by stillakid
Damn, you're right! I never thought of that one. Probably because I always saw the rest as sufficient. But, I'll mull over this line today and try to anticipate the inevitable "wiggle" :rolleyes: that's to come.

Yeah, I know I'm right, that's why I've been sitting on that nugget for a few weeks now! :D Ugh, I hate having to throw in a valid counter to something that I argue in favor of . . .

Oh, I can "wiggle" alright, it just seems a bit silly to me, that's all.
I mean, we see Luke, a grown (though not totally mature) man who indeed has some issues regarding his training. Understandable, right?

Ben understands, because in effect he is saying, "hey Yoda, remember when I was a pre-teen? Luke's the same way!" :sur:

Unless Ben was talking about "when you taught me" from his chair on the Jedi Council . . . :rolleyes: :D

Wiggle it, just a little bit . . . :happy:

stillakid
06-20-2002, 01:39 PM
Originally posted by JarJarBinks

When Obi-Wan first knew him, he was already a great pilot. That is proven in the prequels. And I'm quite sure that he was amazed at how strongly the force was with him. Just look at Obi-Wan's comments in AOTC's. "His abilities have made him arrogent." Yes, he did take it upon himself to train Anakin, when it should have been someone with more ability. But since Qui-Gon died, and asked Obi-Wan to train Anakin, he demanded it of Yoda and the Council.

Obi-Wan has to start at the beginning of training, with things that normally Yoda would teach. Because Yoda trains all the children, up until their of age to be taken by a master. Since Anakin is to old, to start out with normal training, the lessons that Yoda would normally teach, fall to Obi-Wan to instruct to Anakin. Obi-Wan thought that he could do that teaching, just as well as Yoda, and was wrong. The existance of Qui-Gon changes nothing in the OT.

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks


Linear order is important here.

"When I first knew him, he was already a great pilot..." we take as happening first, since it's the first thing he says.

"But I was amazed at how strongly the Force was with him..." comes next. We can conjecture that perhaps he was amazed because of the piloting skills that he witnessed. Maybe not. But if that was the implication, then TPM definitely contradicts because Obi Wan was holed up on the Queen's ship during the pod race and he definitely didn't witness the Naboo accident (he didn't take off or "crash" into the Federation Ship on purpose).

Anyway, the third thing he says is..."I took it upon myself to train him as a Jedi." He says this after being amazed at how strongly the Force was with him. It only makes sense to want to train somebody as a Jedi after first witnessing their abilities. Being that Obi Wan didn't witness anything of the kind, except Qui Gon's dying wish, it makes little sense. Of course, it was a favor to Qui Gon that makes Obi Wan take on Anakin, but that contradicts back with the original dialogue from the OT which points directly at Yoda.

Any way you slice it, they just won't match.

2-1B
06-20-2002, 01:40 PM
Originally posted by JarJarBinks

Caeser, just look at how Luke acts. He's impatiant, annoying, whiny, difficult, all those things that usually are associated with a child. Sure, that line is a little harder to wiggle around, but it's possible if you consider how Luke acts. Luke's been stifled his entire life on Tatooine by his Uncle. Just remember what also Yoda says.

Yoda: "Long have I watched this one. All his life as he looked away, to the future, to the horizen. Never his mind on where he was, what he was doin'."


True, but Liam and the other scamps of the AOTC Bear Clan seemed pretty disciplined! :D

Beast
06-20-2002, 01:50 PM
Originally posted by Caesar
True, but Liam and the other scamps of the AOTC Bear Clan seemed pretty disciplined! :D
Obi-Wan is similar to Qui-Gon though. He's got a rebellious streak in him. You can see it really well in E1, but not as much in E2. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

Tycho
06-20-2002, 03:35 PM
If Qui-Gon was dead, Obi-Wan didn't have to honor his promise or anything that his master had requested of him. There would be no diciplinary trial if he left Anakin to a Naboo adoption agency.

But he took it upon himself to train the boy to be a Jedi.

It makes perfect sense.


I don't understand why JediTricks and especially Stillakid have so much invested in having the PT laid out exactly as how the OT seemed or did intend to have it.

Stillakid, yes: I think Qui-Gon was an awesome character. I immediately thought he looked cool and that Liam Neeson held a presence as a powerful Jedi warrior from the first non-moving images I ever saw of him in costume. His acting did not disappoint, and he was the center character experiencing things in TPM for me - trying to figure out stuff as I was. I identified with that even though I'm not a 50 year old seasoned Master who's "seen it all, just about." And when he was killed, I wanted Maul but wasted good for revenge for that. Obi-Wan did not disappoint and I like even more for being the only Jedi to waste a Sith on screen!

I think in this post I'm getting away from arguing a little (JediTricks, please still respond to my last post), but there is still wiggle room: "Was I any different when you taught me?"

I THINK that the first thing Jedi children are taught is how to control their emotions and be impassionate. They are forbidden the parent-child attachment kind of love and over-estimating (of their abilities) and trained without passion or prejudice (because their teacher is not their parent). Luke (nor Anakin) ever had this training rooted in them since they were 3 years old or sooner (with Force calming techniques). Luke at 21 years of age could very well act like Obi-Wan when he was 10. Luke always whines until Return of the Jedi. Yoda taught him to "be at calm. Peace. Passive. A Jedi uses the Force for knowledge and defense."

That could be implied to relate to non-violent situations as well. If you can't go to Tosche Station to pick up power converters and you're not allowed to leave the farm to join the Academy, you search within yourself to find your balance and adapt to your situation. You might "hear the calling to run away from home and join the Rebellion" but it would be inappropriate for a trained Jedi to whine about it or argue with someone. Anakin made the decision without the words. "Where are you going?" "To find my mother." He did not argue with the Larses that nothing could be done. He centered on his abilities at this point and did not throw a tantrum first. Luke definitely would have before he was trained. I bet Yoda trains the younglings because he's so powerful in the Force that he can use it to calm others and put them at ease. Especially the children. Kind of like a doctor when they tell you "this is not going to hurt." ;)

This is all speculation, but it helps me understand and enjoy the movies the way I want to. That is not wrong. It also still allows for wiggle room on "Was I any different when you taught me?"

Stillakid, the best evidence that Yoda was intended to be Obi-Wan's original teacher is the TPM art of book, or annotated screenplay (within it?) - I didn't want that book and haven't looked at it thoroughly.

There's still enough wiggle room that Lucas does not have to change dialogue in the Classic Trilogy -either by omission or creation - to make the prequels work.

It is not bad the way they are written and Qui-Gon is quite good and cool.

Stillakid and JediTricks, You still won't like it for any reason that I do, but you have to vent a lot about this and/or like putting your thoughts out to people who will disagree with you on this. I'm not sure why:

1) to influence others (and there are kids here, so that's not impressive)*
2) to try and out-debate others (you're smart, there's no question about that. Why do you want to prove it here?)
3) to prove what an independant critic you are (if you think for yourself, that's good. I already know you do. Who do you want to tell? Why is that important to tell people you think for yourself. I think for myself, but it's just something I do. I don't care whether people know that about me. They'll find out when I disagree with them. If I agree with them, they don't have to know why, outside of the issue at hand. At least it doesn't do anything for my ego.
4) because you can't let this go and SW is moving on without you** (I'll explain below these reasons).
5) to get a rise out of people because you know it will - that's cruel because these forums are for fun. There are enough people who are TPM haters or Classic Purists in general. Why not preach to the choir? LtBasker and JarJarBinks agree with me more often than other people here. BigBarada sometimes, too. Jedi Clint also. They all think for themselves and don't agree with me because of anything I said. They think whatever it is that's similar to my thoughts, before they ever talked to me. All I like to do is share my feelings of appreciation for SW with them, because they are happy to discuss it too. I think you want to have empathy from others that hate this new stuff moreso than not, and you should start a thread for the hate club. I won't go in there. I've heard it before and that's all fine if that's what you want to do...

but now see my footnotes:

*It's inappropriate for you to influence children here that "dad" had the best trilogy and that's the one you should like. Let kids love JarJar the way I've seen some people do. Let women love him as well, like that mom I met at the TRU store when she bought 4 JarJar figures for kids screaming for it. (And I'm like thinking "good - get them off the pegs! THANK YOU!)" But I hope you don't think it's your job to "raise correct Star Wars fans." This feels like the Jews telling their children it is incorrect to appreciate the New Testament because it is not in the Torah. Let people have free will. I myself am not influenced by the New Testament, but I am by the New Trilogy. Why? I feel good about the latter. I love the prequels and am glad there is something new in Star Wars after all these years and an EU that is half the time as bad as the other half of the time people can document how much I enjoyed it. (EU has not been a smooth ride. A worthwhile one, but not a smooth one).

I am not accusing anyone of trying to be an influence as I described above. I am merely stating it is possible, or it could be an unintentional side-effect.


**What I meant by "Star Wars is moving on without you" is that you don't like the PT, yet you do want to find companionship in SW fandom because the OT is something you really like, but you are overwhelmed by finding way too many fans who want to praise the PT and discuss Qui-Gon or Dooku etc. and things that don't sit right for you. You think that these fans might swallow anything Lucas sells them and you feel like you are losing touch with a lot of people who would have had the same feelings for the OT as you did, back in April 1999 or whenever (especially when spoilers were not known for E1). Perhaps I was similar to you in 1997 and we are definitely not now. There's nothing I can do about that. But I do get bored with having only the classics. That's why I like the EU to continue Luke and Han's adventures. So were all things equal, set back to 1997 and you and I were discussing SW, about the time they make approximatley 75 more classic trilogy figures that I want (which aren't done now - but just assume we already had Djas Puhr and all the other great Classic stuff we got), I'd get those 75 figures like J'Quille and Lando in smuggler's attire and I'd be out of here. One thing's for sure, the forums might be a lot less crowded after there was nothing left to discuss with classic StarWars. It would continue with prequel "predicting" though we wouldn't have those movies to love or hate. The sequels are either the EU, or what a non-EU fan wants them to be (in movies). So then there would be that split (and there is) that wants there to be a Jaina and Jacen Solo, and those that don't. Or don't want it to happen the way it did.

Something that is clear is that I have my tastes and those opposed to Qui-Gon, midi-chlorians, JarJar, or anything else in the PT have never said anything to make me question them.

If Mon Mothma turned out TO BE Luke and Leia's long lost mother, I would have a hard time adapting this to my taste (as it is not.) Neither is Padme being alive after ROTJ. If some tasteful way is done to make her still be breathing and explain everything, and still respect the EU (which is important to me - and I'm only talking about my tastes here) then I will accept it.

-Tycho

JediTricks
06-22-2002, 03:32 AM
Tycho, I'll answer your questions in #82 but that'll be it, I think there are too many obsessed posts in here, not enough discussion and too many personal assaults.


Originally posted by Tycho
When you said you stated a fact, and I retorted, you lost me about what "fact" you stated.
Well, perhaps it was "Tycho, once again, you're using the EU to support movie theories." but since it's been 3 days, I don't remember exactly which I was referring to.


If you do not dislike the prequels, (your "summarized entire outlook on the prequels" reference) I'm sorry, but I did not pick up on that from what you've posted. If you did not dislike them, or one movie or the other, does it imply something else other than the logical opposite approach to attempt to describe your opinion of them? I would not guess so. But I am confused here.
My outlook on the prequels isn't that "I dislike the prequels", it's "I dislike much of what makes up the movies that have made up the prequels thus far", and it's a big difference to me. I have individual beliefs that shouldn't be quantified in such a simplistic statement as "you simply DON'T LIKE what was done", it's NOT "simply" that I don't LIKE it, some of it I might like but it bothers me, but your comments certainly feel like they're putting me into this stupid "prequel-hater" niche, as if I hate them simply because I hate them without personal beliefs or reasoning.


It seems to be the argument that the prequels should not disrupt the expected continuity of the OT's descriptions of times before the OT took place. Therefore the OT acts like a character bible, but rather a plot outline bible to the PT - or you suggest that it should. If it should not, Qui-Gon is ok, in other words.

I hope you didn't think I was making any reference to the bibles of religions. No. Then you misunderstood. I'm not sure about that, so I am asking if you mistook what I meant?

If that's what you meant, then I misunderstood, but I still have reservations about your statement.

ESB had to use ANH for a "bible" (in your usage), the original trilogy not only SHOULD be a foundation for the prequels, but it is - these prequels didn't spring from the ether, they are sequels to the original Star Wars no matter what time period they take place in. They may not chronologically continue the stories of that universe, but they are true continuations none the less.


Yes, but why are the characters 2-dimensional in your opinion? I didn't say they WERE, I said "It sounds like you're either making an excuse for characters being 2-dimensional or excusing those characters for not sharing the same reactions as everybody around them."


The founder of our Karate studios is still alive and practicing the arts. He can explain the code and exactly what it means.

Well, I was actually saying that your founder there was simply another chain in the philosophy link as I thought you said he wasn't the original author of that "code", but yes.


Lucas has characters that do not tell the protagonist the truth, or even the Whole Story at any given point. Lucas himself does not come on screen and explain to Luke Skywalker what is going on. Nor does Lucas explicitly tell us in interviews exactly what he inferred with lines in ANH, ESB and ROTJ.

He did say that Qui-Gon was not in the original drafts of TPM and he was made up and added later in 1997, not 1983 or prior. Maybe there was another character he'd thought of in that role such as the concept character represented by Mace Windu who was thought of long before Sam Jackson was cast. Maybe there was not. If there was not, your concept that Lucas did INTEND for there to be only Obi-Wan apprenticed to Yoda directly etc, is correct. But he gets away with having Qui-Gon train Yoda, because the movies still do not explicitly say Yoda trained Obi-Wan (only) with enough certainty to not make this "new version of the truth" acceptable.
Er... that is a pretty convoluted statement, so I'll have to say "I don't know" since I am having a hard time piecing what you're getting at together while still trying to avoid reflecting it against my original statement (since I'd need a solid statement to say "yes" or "no" to on your first question to do so).


So finally we are left with the question of do you like Qui-Gon in the movie? Do you like him enough to let him be Obi-Wan's master (if given a choice)?

I would guess your answer to be "no." This is what I meant by saying you don't like the PT (of which TPM is 33.33% of)
Err... ok, I don't dislike Qui-Gon as a character, I don't particularly like him as the lead role of the film, and if I had to toss out what Yoda and Obi-Wan discussed in the original trilogy, I still wouldn't buy that the man Obi-Wan becomes in Episode II and the OT comes from Qui-Gon Jinn. I've given that a lot of thought because I believe that all of us are products of genetics, parental guidance, AND societal influence, but if Qui-Gon is a parental figure in Obi-Wan's life, I don't see how Obi-Wan becomes who he becomes as it stands now. Obi-Wan seems to neither be following in Qui-Gon's footsteps nor rebelling against Qui-Gon's teachings - both would be logical outcomes for this type of thing, but neither can be applied to Obi-Wan Kenobi.

JediTricks
06-22-2002, 03:45 AM
Originally posted by Caesar
Hmmm, as many of you know I am pro Qui-Gonn and pro "wiggle room" ( :D at stillakid), but I can't believe you guys are passing on the following line,

Obi-Wan to Yoda - "Was I any different, when you taught me?"

Now, that's the line I have to work around the most, I'm fine with the Hoth quote and the line that stillakid just quoted - well, I have no problems with it because I saw Obi-Wan take it upon himself (as in take away from Yoda) and the little bit on the Naboo ship about how Obi-Wan also feels the disturbance on Tatooine illustrates what Ben said on Dagobah in ROTJ.

But back to:

Obi-Wan to Yoda - "Was I any different, when you taught me?"

The issue for me here is that while it can technically work, (according to TPM and AOTC) Ben is equating himself at age . . . . whatever age the kids are before Yoda gives them up . . . let's say 12 or whatever . . . to a 20+ year old Luke in ESB! :D

I'm just throwing that out there to see reactions, it's the only line that I remember from my recent OT marathon viewing which made me second guess this stuff. This one never phased me because I always thought of Luke as being in the "padawan" stage (though I never had a title for that stage), he had already grown into being a molded person and required unlearning his ideas of impatience and such to move on to knighthood.

This also doesn't fit with the prequels IMO because Obi-Wan is talking about anger and impatience Luke has within him equating to the impatience Obi-Wan had within him when he learned at the feet of master Yoda. However, I have rarely known very young pre-teens to have impatience and anger that could be related to an adult's actions. So if Yoda taught an impatient, angry Obi-Wan Kenobi and Obi-Wan was able to recognize this impatience and how it equated to Luke and his upcoming lessons from Yoda, it doesn't seem like there's much of a correlation at all if Obi-Wan is supposed to be referring to his earliest teachings with Yoda at a very young age.

Tycho
06-22-2002, 04:20 AM
Originally posted by JediTricks
Tycho, I'll answer your questions in #82 but that'll be it, I think there are too many obsessed posts in here, not enough discussion and too many personal assaults.

So is that the end of it? Or can we resolve what remains that each of us doesn't understand insofar as what the other is saying?

I'm going to try to stick to that and go on with it.



Well, perhaps it was "Tycho, once again, you're using the EU to support movie theories." but since it's been 3 days, I don't remember exactly which I was referring to. Me either. Let's drop that part of it. :)



My outlook on the prequels isn't that "I dislike the prequels", it's "I dislike much of what makes up the movies that have made up the prequels thus far", and it's a big difference to me. I have individual beliefs that shouldn't be quantified in such a simplistic statement as "you simply DON'T LIKE what was done", it's NOT "simply" that I don't LIKE it, some of it I might like but it bothers me, but your comments certainly feel like they're putting me into this stupid "prequel-hater" niche, as if I hate them simply because I hate them without personal beliefs or reasoning. Sorry about that. You don't qualify for those incorrect-stereotypes anyway. You've always been citing reasons whether or not I agree or disagree with them. I'm still not sure what you're saying about the films in general. I have trouble recollecting "positive posts" about E2 (or E1 of course) and do find so much posting on the negative side.

Now I'm not sure I post on the positive side. In topics I start or really enjoy participating, I'd guess you call them the speculation side. I did think the speeder chase was awesome for example, but I've never started a thread saying that. I did say the dialogue seemed forced and sort of awkward the way it was acted (and probably written) for that scene, too. From that point, I guess I probably sounded like those I think are too negative. But overall, my complaints were burried in posts about how great I thought the film was in general. I suppose if you only read my original stuff I wrote, you could think I don't like the speeder scene, but that wouldn't be true. Is this a similar stereotype that you feel you've been a victim of? I can understand that.



ESB had to use ANH for a "bible" (in your usage), the original trilogy not only SHOULD be a foundation for the prequels, but it is - these prequels didn't spring from the ether, they are sequels to the original Star Wars no matter what time period they take place in. They may not chronologically continue the stories of that universe, but they are true continuations none the less.

OK, here I disagree. Here I think Lucas can start all over and make Palpatine female if he wanted to, as long as all things end up meshing with whatever will be said in 4,5,& 6 - so long as they can then be rationalized to be "right" with these films in their fictional, historical future. Whatever's been changed from his intent in 1975 or whatever's been changed from what we interpretted from 1977 to 1983 doesn't matter. To me they are not continuations, they are the foundation factors that will change how the OT will be interpreted. We should agree to disagree. But this is a matter of opinion, not fact, as it has been presented at some points in this debate (not necessarily referring to you, JT).




I didn't say they WERE, I said "It sounds like you're [b]either making an excuse for characters being 2-dimensional or excusing those characters for not sharing the same reactions as everybody around them."

I don't know where you came up with that one, because I wouldn't think these characters are 2 dimensional, just less passionate, intentionally. Let's drop this one because we obviously very badly misunderstand each other's point.




Er... that is a pretty convoluted statement, so I'll have to say "I don't know" since I am having a hard time piecing what you're getting at together while still trying to avoid reflecting it against my original statement (since I'd need a solid statement to say "yes" or "no" to on your first question to do so).

What you referred to here kind of repeats my idea that's been expressed above in this post: that Lucas can change the interpretation of the future (though hopefully not the dialogue in the movies) by changing the events of the past. I don't mind if he re-writes this. It's not "wrong." There are preferences, pros and cons at play here. I think he's making the story richer myself.



Err... ok, I don't dislike Qui-Gon as a character, I don't particularly like him as the lead role of the film, and if I had to toss out what Yoda and Obi-Wan discussed in the original trilogy, I still wouldn't buy that the man Obi-Wan becomes in Episode II and the OT comes from Qui-Gon Jinn. I've given that a lot of thought because I believe that all of us are products of genetics, parental guidance, AND societal influence, but if Qui-Gon is a parental figure in Obi-Wan's life, I don't see how Obi-Wan becomes who he becomes as it stands now. Obi-Wan seems to neither be following in Qui-Gon's footsteps nor rebelling against Qui-Gon's teachings - both would be logical outcomes for this type of thing, but neither can be applied to Obi-Wan Kenobi.

That I'll agree with you on. I'm not sure Lucas put any thought into doing what you suggest would be more natural for Obi-Wan or not. Obi-Wan is embarassed that Qui-Gon won't follow the rules in E1. I know I try to be the opposite of my parents in many ways, actually. But sometimes I find myself acting like them, too.

Right now, I like Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon in the prequels, independently of whether I can see a natural character progression with Obi-Wan's growth considering his environment and instructors. That being said, I will give this more thought.