Hermit's Journey Part III

[Robovski]

IMO the weakest aspect of EpIII is the wrap up, need to get everything tied up in a neat bow so we can move into A New Hope. That and the ''high ground''...

[ChiggyvonRichthofen]

On that note, something interesting - while Obi-Wan manipulated Luke with his "From a certain point of view" thing (really just Lucas retconning himself...but whatever), which was more or less an overt lie, Palpatine was much better in his execution - his lie was in fact the truth, but worded more effectively. Generally speaking - and, by necessity - Palpatine carefully avoided lying, if for no other reason than he spent a great deal of time around Jedi as Chancellor. Whereas Obi-Wan used a terribly constructed lie to motivate Luke - which wound up backfiring in his face, genius that he is - Palpatine used well-arranged truths to motivate Anakin to tear down literally everything he ever worked for. How's that for an interesting symmetry?

From an in-universe perspective, I wonder if Obi-Wan assumed that Vader couldn't be redeemed. In A New Hope he seems pretty resigned to the fact that he is "only a master of evil." The only way it makes sense for Obi-Wan to tell him that (and Luke takes the lie pretty well, honestly) is if he expects it to be a straightforward "kill or be killed" situation.

That being said, the whole, "Only a Sith deals in absolutes!" (facepalm) makes me always facepalm, EVERY time it is said, because it's such a terrible fallacy, that I award Obi-Wan Kenobi the 'Neelix' prize for the franchise. Obi-Wan is a Jedi Guardian, because the Force knows smarts aren't his strong suit.

I totally agree. I just hate that line on every level. There's also some more bad Anakin and Padme lines. The film definitely still has its flaws, but it has some great high points.

[SotF]

First off, one of the things that just jumped out to me in watching it was the bit about KFC, Taco Bell, and Pizza Hut.

The big thing with those three was that they're pretty much the same company, Yum! Brands...which is owned by Pepsi, who also had a pile of other things tied into Star Wars promotion. There was a lot of rumors there that I remember about the massive amount of Pepsi based advertising and promotions was because Lucas pretty much let them do what they wanted with the ads.

I thought the failure of the prequel trilogy had more to do with the loss of master editor Marcia Lucas than the personal changes in George himself.

Though I do think that George himself had at least one change of heart that ruined his potential vision: he spent far too much film time on special effects, and at least on the record, young George disagreed with that philosophy:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ykmZp5cgbkU

Edit: OK, I see that George's help on the original trilogy was addressed. I stand by my comment about George changing his philosophy about spending too much screen time on special effects, though. Unless that old interview was George bullshitting about a ideas he didn't really believe.

I agree.

It's the same thing that is somewhat happening with JK Rowling or . Lucas pretty much reached the point where he didn't have someone who could confront him when he goes to far in one way or another. He became the superstar where people were afraid and/or unable to confront him there.

Hell, it's the same thing covered with some of the early TNG reviews where there was pretty much the cult of Roddenberry that combined with some of the more insane ideas.

[bronnt]

IMO the weakest aspect of EpIII is the wrap up, need to get everything tied up in a neat bow so we can move into A New Hope. That and the ''high ground''...

There's quite a lot of things I fault with in EP III, despite it being the strongest of the 3 prequels. But you're right, there's a weird problem where Lucas didn't want any off-screen momentum, so everyone has to end the film in the exact place they start in ANH, despite it being 18 years later.

Redlettermedia's review of this one falls into nitpicks, but they cover a lot of my problems-Lucas wasn't able to write compelling dialogue or invest us in the characters enough. There's some thing sin the movie I really wanted to see-the final confrontation between Obi-wan and Anakin. But the dialogue is very unsatisfying and it leaves me feeling empty, like the eagerness to have them start fighting left words unsaid. And the fight starts off looking awesome, but, as others point out, despite how ridiculous and over the top it is visually, it drags on for so long that I actually get bored.

And really, the "fall" of Anakin from noble hero to murderous villain is too fast to get invested in. Sure, he's kind of callous for a heroic character, but he's concerned about the right thing, and then two scenes later he murders a room full of children. It's supposed to be an uncomfortable visual, I get that, but we really need to see decisions stacking on top of decisions following a pattern that finally puts him in that despicable place, not watching him flip a switch into evil.

The war is problematic too. Of course it's superficial to the plot, in that it's a ploy orchestrated by Palpatine in order to make his powerplay. But there's no investment in the war itself. I really have no idea what the issues are that are driving the galactic conflict, and how people are justifying all the death and destruction to themselves. This is the result, perhaps, of a weird writing decision that filled both sides with disposable shock troops-clones versus robots. I'm sure it's intentional and is meant to reflect the values of the people who would use disposable troops, but we're supposed to identify with heroes who never once thought critically about throwing clones into war. Yodo clearly thought about it for 15 seconds during Episode II, then said, "fuck it let's go," scooped up a bunch of them and ordered them into a bloody conflict which started the whole Clone War thing to begin with.

[GandALF]

Hell, it's the same thing covered with some of the early TNG reviews where there was pretty much the cult of Roddenberry that combined with some of the more insane ideas.

Nah, Roddenberry and Lucas had the opposite problems: Roddenberry's (TNG) ideas were antithetical to drama and would fight with his writers when they tried to make them part of an actual story rather than a manifesto. Lucas' ideas are entirely conducive to drama, but as the self-proclaimed king of wooden dialogue he has trouble implementing them on his own. Its demonstrated by the marked improvement with The Clone Wars where he has the same role as Roddenberry and has a team of writers supporting him.

[Fixer]

And really, the "fall" of Anakin from noble hero to murderous villain is too fast to get invested in. Sure, he's kind of callous for a heroic character, but he's concerned about the right thing, and then two scenes later he murders a room full of children. It's supposed to be an uncomfortable visual, I get that, but we really need to see decisions stacking on top of decisions following a pattern that finally puts him in that despicable place, not watching him flip a switch into evil.

The war is problematic too. Of course it's superficial to the plot, in that it's a ploy orchestrated by Palpatine in order to make his powerplay. But there's no investment in the war itself. I really have no idea what the issues are that are driving the galactic conflict, and how people are justifying all the death and destruction to themselves. This is the result, perhaps, of a weird writing decision that filled both sides with disposable shock troops-clones versus robots. I'm sure it's intentional and is meant to reflect the values of the people who would use disposable troops, but we're supposed to identify with heroes who never once thought critically about throwing clones into war. Yodo clearly thought about it for 15 seconds during Episode II, then said, "fuck it let's go," scooped up a bunch of them and ordered them into a bloody conflict which started the whole Clone War thing to begin with.

This is what bugged me about the prequels as well.
Alec Guinness managed to invest so much emotion into a few lines of dialogue in New Hope, where he reminisced with Luke about his old friend Anakin and the fall of Darth Vader.

We were expecting to see these two like the best of friends facing the galaxy together until Obi-Wan's failure in training him and Anakin's seduction to the dark side ended in tragedy. Instead Anakin is an awkward, whiny idiot in AOTC who resents Obi-Wan and then the two head off to different parts of the galaxy. In ROTS they have a brief heroic partnership together, then they head off to different parts of the galaxy.

There's no real relationship between the two or character investment. When Anakin takes his sharp left turn down into infanticide, it fails to both shock or to be a realistic character action. When Obi-Wan sees his fallen brother it's not as if his best friend and brother in arms has betrayed him. The whole thing lacks any real impact.

[1701EarlGrey]

The quote that really gets me is at the very end regarding time. Like "What was George supposed to do? Stop time itself?" No. What he was supposed to do was anticipate the passage of time (moving at the exact same rate it always moves) BEFORE he ran out of it. Maybe if he'd brought that other writer into the room and sat down together. Or maybe if he had just set himself an earlier deadline and actually stuck to it. The fact that he got it in by his ACTUAL deadline suggests that he could've done that. But he didn't. It's like waiting until the night before your mid-term to start studying... and then blaming your bad grade on the small number of hours in a single night.

Exactly! To put this into perspective; I was born in the same year in which "Return of the Jedi" was released. When "Phantom menace" was released, I was 16. Those 16 years was my entire life, and you telling me that in all this time Lucas couldn't come up with sensible movie script, or at the very least, hire someone to write it? Hogwash!

Same can be said about choice of child actor. Lucas wanted Jake Lloyd, so he got "Mannequin Skywalker". But child actor don't have to be terrible. Two words: Natalie Portman!. How young was she, when she started in "Léon: The Professional"? And yet she was great! So, either Luc Besson is much better at directing child actors, or Jake Lloyd was simply bad actor and George couldn't see this.

[Draco Dracul]

And really, the "fall" of Anakin from noble hero to murderous villain is too fast to get invested in. Sure, he's kind of callous for a heroic character, but he's concerned about the right thing, and then two scenes later he murders a room full of children. It's supposed to be an uncomfortable visual, I get that, but we really need to see decisions stacking on top of decisions following a pattern that finally puts him in that despicable place, not watching him flip a switch into evil.

The war is problematic too. Of course it's superficial to the plot, in that it's a ploy orchestrated by Palpatine in order to make his powerplay. But there's no investment in the war itself. I really have no idea what the issues are that are driving the galactic conflict, and how people are justifying all the death and destruction to themselves. This is the result, perhaps, of a weird writing decision that filled both sides with disposable shock troops-clones versus robots. I'm sure it's intentional and is meant to reflect the values of the people who would use disposable troops, but we're supposed to identify with heroes who never once thought critically about throwing clones into war. Yodo clearly thought about it for 15 seconds during Episode II, then said, "fuck it let's go," scooped up a bunch of them and ordered them into a bloody conflict which started the whole Clone War thing to begin with.

This is what bugged me about the prequels as well.
Alec Guinness managed to invest so much emotion into a few lines of dialogue in New Hope, where he reminisced with Luke about his old friend Anakin and the fall of Darth Vader.

We were expecting to see these two like the best of friends facing the galaxy together until Obi-Wan's failure in training him and Anakin's seduction to the dark side ended in tragedy. Instead Anakin is an awkward, whiny idiot in AOTC who resents Obi-Wan and then the two head off to different parts of the galaxy. In ROTS they have a brief heroic partnership together, then they head off to different parts of the galaxy.

There's no real relationship between the two or character investment. When Anakin takes his sharp left turn down into infanticide, it fails to both shock or to be a realistic character action. When Obi-Wan sees his fallen brother it's not as if his best friend and brother in arms has betrayed him. The whole thing lacks any real impact.

That's one of the reasons why I feel Clone wars (either of them) does a lot to buoy up RotS. It finally gives you those necessary character moments between Anakin and Obi-Wan. While Luke spends most of both Empire and Jedi separated from his companions, the big chunk of the movie he had with them in New Hope made it so you could still feel the connection between them. By both moving back the timeline and by splitting Obi-Wan and Qui Gon you basically robbed an entire film's worth of potential bonding between the two characters whose relationship should be one of the three pillars of the films, with the other being Anakin's relationship with Padme and his relationship with Palpatine (which is admittedly the only one the PT got right).

[rickgriffin]

And really, the "fall" of Anakin from noble hero to murderous villain is too fast to get invested in. Sure, he's kind of callous for a heroic character, but he's concerned about the right thing, and then two scenes later he murders a room full of children. It's supposed to be an uncomfortable visual, I get that, but we really need to see decisions stacking on top of decisions following a pattern that finally puts him in that despicable place, not watching him flip a switch into evil.

The war is problematic too. Of course it's superficial to the plot, in that it's a ploy orchestrated by Palpatine in order to make his powerplay. But there's no investment in the war itself. I really have no idea what the issues are that are driving the galactic conflict, and how people are justifying all the death and destruction to themselves. This is the result, perhaps, of a weird writing decision that filled both sides with disposable shock troops-clones versus robots. I'm sure it's intentional and is meant to reflect the values of the people who would use disposable troops, but we're supposed to identify with heroes who never once thought critically about throwing clones into war. Yodo clearly thought about it for 15 seconds during Episode II, then said, "fuck it let's go," scooped up a bunch of them and ordered them into a bloody conflict which started the whole Clone War thing to begin with.

This is what bugged me about the prequels as well.
Alec Guinness managed to invest so much emotion into a few lines of dialogue in New Hope, where he reminisced with Luke about his old friend Anakin and the fall of Darth Vader.

We were expecting to see these two like the best of friends facing the galaxy together until Obi-Wan's failure in training him and Anakin's seduction to the dark side ended in tragedy. Instead Anakin is an awkward, whiny idiot in AOTC who resents Obi-Wan and then the two head off to different parts of the galaxy. In ROTS they have a brief heroic partnership together, then they head off to different parts of the galaxy.

There's no real relationship between the two or character investment. When Anakin takes his sharp left turn down into infanticide, it fails to both shock or to be a realistic character action. When Obi-Wan sees his fallen brother it's not as if his best friend and brother in arms has betrayed him. The whole thing lacks any real impact.

By the time Revenge of the Sith rolled around, I was basically expecting the emotional arc of the movies to not even be remotely justified.

Okay so riddle me this: One of the major reasons Lucas wanted Anakin's childhood in episode 1 is because he needed a reason that the Jedi would actually train him. And the midichlorians are there because they need irrefutable evidence!

But being able to give a number is not anywhere near as good of evidence as, you know, things actually happening. I find it very odd that Lucas didn't even consider that maybe this kid (and let's age him up to 16 because there's basically no reason he should have been 9) was VERY force-powerful, but had neither been swayed to the light nor dark side. He'd done nothing of real consequence that they know of, except for killing a bunch of sand people for kidnapping his mother--but he tells NOBODY about this, except eventually perhaps for his mentor, long after his training is already started.

Why begin training him? Well it seems obvious that someone who is that powerful NEEDS TRAINING regardless of how old they are, because you risk them falling to the dark side. Like, it's not an absolute, but even with the wise council I could see a lot of the masters basically out-vote Yoda and say "it's too big a risk to let him go into the universe without training, he needs discipline"

Then, years later after Anakin confesses what he did to Obi Wan, they learn about the actual terrible stuff and this causes a lot of drama within the council. This ends up driving a wedge between the council and Anakin, who is convinced at this point they're going to basically throw him away if not outright assassinate him for something that was long in the past.

THAT is a much better setup for Anakin turning to the Dark Side. And I think the main issue is that Lucas didn't want the Jedi Council to come across as fallable. He went out of his way to make sure they were a bastion of absolute righteousness, like they were all nigh-omniscient angels or something.

Also also, with this setup, Anakin is still fighting on behalf of the republic, and the second-to-last beat of Episode III (or Episode II, given I'd basically phase current Ep I nearly out of existence, and that could leave all of the Anakin vs All The Jedi to Ep III) should have been the fight between Dooku and Anakin and basically exactly paralleled Return of the Jedi almost entirely--Anakin is there to fight Dooku and stop the war, but on Palpatine's goading--reminding Anakin of his position with the Jedi council and how he won't be considered a hero for any of this--joins the Dark Side.

Not the weird did-it-take-or-not half-joining-kinda that was at the beginning of RotS.

[GandALF]

THAT is a much better setup for Anakin turning to the Dark Side. And I think the main issue is that Lucas didn't want the Jedi Council to come across as fallable. He went out of his way to make sure they were a bastion of absolute righteousness, like they were all nigh-omniscient angels or something.

He did want them to come across as fallible. They believed the Sith were extinct for a start. At the start of II Windu finds the idea that Dooku would try to kill anyone ridiculous. Yoda outright states that even some of the older Jedi are getting arrogant which ties into Jocasta Nu's "if its not in the archives it doesn't exist" line which leads to Yoda using the kid's matter of fact "someone erased it" line to warn Obi-Wan that one of their own (i.e. Dooku) might just be behind it.

Its further expanded on in TCW in which the general public sees them as having failed in their role as peacekeepers and hold them partly responsible for starting the war, ultimately giving Palpatine cause for wiping them out.