Why Does the Disney Sequel Trilogy Hate Anakin?

[Winter]

Okay, that's a bit of a joke as I doubt anyone in this Trilogy went in with the mindset of "Let's render Anakin's Entire character arc meaningless" but it does sometimes feel like that.

Anakin's entire character arc was about him trying to save his family and atoning for his past sins and in the end he saves his son, his daughter and lays the ground work for the restoration for the Jedi Order and the return of the Republic and kills the man who ruined his life. And then TDST kills his entire family, including his grandson who had the EXACT SAME CHARACTER ARC AS HE DID! Destroyed the Jedi Order and the Republic, left the future of the galaxy in the hands of a bunch of screw ups who are more interested in the past then they are the future and all of this was the result of Palpatine who survived being blown up!!!

It's often argued which character got the most screwed over in TDST with some even noting that Rey was also done dirty because of the films refusing to give her an actual character but I think Anakin is a real contender for Original Trilogy character who the films really screwed over. Lucas recognized the potential in Vader even though he started the series as a minor character with only 9 minutes of screen time but he ended up helping shape the whole series into what it is today. Darth Vader/Anakin Skywalker is the MOST iconic character in this series so, why work to render his arc completely pointless in what is (for the time being) the grand finale of the saga?

[CharlesPhipps]

Disney doesn't hate Anakin. It loves Vader.

Also, let's try and avoid the, "If peace isn't eternal and forever that it isn't valuable."

Kylo Ren is also a very appropriate character as someone WHO COMPLETELY MISUNDERSTANDS ANAKIN and that is arguably the biggest and more interesting part of the character. The problem is the movies became so enamoured of Kylo Ren they forgot he was a school shooting loser.

[phantom000]

Why Does the Disney Sequel Trilogy Hate Anakin?

I feel like there is no way to answer that question without being cynical. It seems that all Disney wanted was to do the first trilogy over again, except they had only a vague idea of what made the original trilogy work. It reminds me of "Maximum Clonage" and how it was supposed to be 'Onslaught for Spiderman' except they completely missed what made "Onslaught" successful. I think this is what happened to TDST, it's the original trilogy done badly.

One could argue that without Palpatine and the Empire what would they do for a sequel? To me this is very limited thinking when you consider that lots of franchises have created new enemies for their sequels, some have even become more popular than the original. Look at The Borg, which were created as a villain for Star Trek: The Next Generation and would become a major force in the franchise. Mobile Suit Zeta Gundam also created a new threat which forced both sides from the original series, Amuro, Char and Bright, to join forces while mentoring the new generation.

[Winter]

Disney doesn't hate Anakin. It loves Vader.

I get what you mean but I think more accurate phrase would be, "Disney loves the Shadow of Vader." Hence when they try to capture lightning in a bottle twice while trying to be different, while trying to subvert Vader's arc, while just copying Lucas' notes on the Original Trilogy. It's like when Disney made it's Hercules film, there ARE a few key details that line up with the original story but it's clear that no one study Greek Mythology. Not to say that I dislike Disney's Hercules but it is a case of trying to be to much so it loses it's own sense of identity along the way.

Also, let's try and avoid the, "If peace isn't eternal and forever that it isn't valuable."

My issue isn't that the conflict continued (I am a fan of the Thrawn Trilogy after all) it's that everything Anakin died for was all for nothing. The Jedi could have continued, the Republic could have been a major play and the Skywalker/Solo clan could have stayed alive and Palpatine SHOULD have stayed dead and there still would be conflict. The Sith were destroyed and balance was restored but that doesn't mean it would last as the Dark Side is still around and there will always be people who seek to bring harm to others. But by doing things the way TDST did it rendered the first two Trilogies pointless. What is the point in re-watching the first two parts of the Skywalker Saga if the third part makes at all meaningless?

Kylo Ren is also a very appropriate character as someone WHO COMPLETELY MISUNDERSTANDS ANAKIN and that is arguably the biggest and more interesting part of the character. The problem is the movies became so enamoured of Kylo Ren they forgot he was a school shooting loser.

Fair enough but my biggest issues with Kylo IS that he's just Vader again. He's someone who was once on the side of good, was turned to the Dark Side thanks to an evil overlord, hunted down and killed all the Jedi, was obsessed with the Trilogy's main hero who eventually redeems him and he dies after turning his back on the dark side. The second issue is he has no central motivation. In one film he wants to be as strong as Darth Vader, in the other, he wants to let the past die only to then want to take over the galaxy because -

1W7c8QghPxk

And then he wants Rey because that's now been his main motivation. There is no consistency, he just does whatever the plot demands until he dies in a way that makes his entire arc pointless.

And finally, he's to pathetic. You can a villain that is pathetic and still make them threatening. Catra, Felix (Red vs. Blue) and even Vader himself were all to one degree or another pathetic people yet they are all also intimating and were capable of carrying out their threats. Kylo is someone who had trouble with the Janitor and only started to be able to match someone who had no training in the Force after he had trained for a whole year.

These are all just my opinions but I think Disney was so focused on trying to make the next Darth Vader that they looked to what made Vader iconic instead of looking at what made him work as a character. Zahn understood this and made one of the best Star Wars stories of all time that is only rivaled by TOT in terms of influence and popularity.

[phantom000]

Disney doesn't hate Anakin. It loves Vader.

I get what you mean but I think more accurate phrase would be, "Disney loves the Shadow of Vader." Hence when they try to capture lightning in a bottle twice while trying to be different, while trying to subvert Vader's arc, while just copying Lucas' notes on the Original Trilogy. It's like when Disney made it's Hercules film, there ARE a few key details that line up with the original story but it's clear that no one study Greek Mythology. Not to say that I dislike Disney's Hercules but it is a case of trying to be to much so it loses it's own sense of identity along the way.

Yeah, of all the animated films Disney put out in the 90's Hercules feels the most generic. Not bad, just kinda bland. While the other films like Aladdin and Beauty & The Beast found a different angle to explore, Hercules seems like its just checking stuff off a list.

Also, let's try and avoid the, "If peace isn't eternal and forever that it isn't valuable."

My issue isn't that the conflict continued (I am a fan of the Thrawn Trilogy after all) it's that everything Anakin died for was all for nothing. The Jedi could have continued, the Republic could have been a major play and the Skywalker/Solo clan could have stayed alive and Palpatine SHOULD have stayed dead and there still would be conflict. The Sith were destroyed and balance was restored but that doesn't mean it would last as the Dark Side is still around and there will always be people who seek to bring harm to others. But by doing things the way TDST did it rendered the first two Trilogies pointless. What is the point in re-watching the first two parts of the Skywalker Saga if the third part makes at all meaningless?

Yeah, its never a good sign when the sequel basically undoes the last film. That is a complaint I had with The Dark Knight Rises and Alien 3.

The Legend of Korra works because it doesn't try to undo ATLA, but explores some possibilities left over from the previous series. Each of the villains is based on a different aspect of the world so they don't feel intrusive. Kuvira is an exception, but she is more bland than intrusive.

Mobile Suit Gundam Is also an example of creating new enemies out of previous established lore. Zeon, the bad guy faction from the original series, never comes back, but many of the new enemies introduced later are connected to the original Zeon, without actually being Zeon. From fanatical hold outs who still believe in it, to ordinary citizens disillusioned with the Earth Federation.

You could easily use both approaches for SW, and lots of people have in the EU but it seems that would take too much creativity.

Kylo Ren is also a very appropriate character as someone WHO COMPLETELY MISUNDERSTANDS ANAKIN and that is arguably the biggest and more interesting part of the character. The problem is the movies became so enamoured of Kylo Ren they forgot he was a school shooting loser.

Fair enough but my biggest issues with Kylo IS that he's just Vader again. He's someone who was once on the side of good, was turned to the Dark Side thanks to an evil overlord, hunted down and killed all the Jedi, was obsessed with the Trilogy's main hero who eventually redeems him and he dies after turning his back on the dark side. The second issue is he has no central motivation. In one film he wants to be as strong as Darth Vader, in the other, he wants to let the past die only to then want to take over the galaxy because -

1W7c8QghPxk

And then he wants Rey because that's now been his main motivation. There is no consistency, he just does whatever the plot demands until he dies in a way that makes his entire arc pointless.

And finally, he's to pathetic. You can a villain that is pathetic and still make them threatening. Catra, Felix (Red vs. Blue) and even Vader himself were all to one degree or another pathetic people yet they are all also intimating and were capable of carrying out their threats. Kylo is someone who had trouble with the Janitor and only started to be able to match someone who had no training in the Force after he had trained for a whole year.

These are all just my opinions but I think Disney was so focused on trying to make the next Darth Vader that they looked to what made Vader iconic instead of looking at what made him work as a character. Zahn understood this and made one of the best Star Wars stories of all time that is only rivaled by TOT in terms of influence and popularity.

[/quote]

One thing to keep in mind, is that a villain can be a character but they can also be a plot device. Take She-Ra and the Princesses of Power as an example. Consider Catra and Horde Prime, both are very much villains, Catra is more of a character while Horde Prime is more like a plot device. Catra is given a great deal of characterization, her goals and motivations are explored and we see lots of different sides to her, even before the final season we get a clear idea of who she could have been in different circumstances. Horde Prime, gets almost no characterization and is basically there to move the plot forward, placing our heroes in dire situations where they must grow in order to succeed.

Vader was originally just meant as an enemy the heroes have to fight but then Lucas tried to make him into a character, but with mixed success. I think this is kinda the issue with Kylo Ren in that they couldn't decide if he should be one or the other and the results just kind fall flat on their face.

[CharlesPhipps]

I dunno, I kind of reject Kylo Ren's redemption because it was made abundantly clear in THE LAST JEDI that he's an unrepentant monster who genuinely doesn't want to be redeemed. He has no regrets about what he does and Rey trying to save him fails miserably because, in the words of Thor, he's just "the worst."

He's not a copy of Vader because he's got no motivation to turn evil other than he likes it.

But I have other issues there.

As for the Jedi, Luke trained Rey and Leia who also trained Rey so he did save the Jedi. He also found those old books.

[McAvoy]

It's not about them hating Vader or even loving him.

It comes down to Abrams. The first two movies didn't really do anything to destroy Vader, though they did destroy Luke.

What destroyed Vader's arc was bringing back Palpatine. Then killing off his grandson and then having Palpatine's own granddaughter take up the name Skywalker. That was in the last movie.

[Winter]

I dunno, I kind of reject Kylo Ren's redemption because it was made abundantly clear in THE LAST JEDI that he's an unrepentant monster who genuinely doesn't want to be redeemed. He has no regrets about what he does and Rey trying to save him fails miserably because, in the words of Thor, he's just "the worst."

He's not a copy of Vader because he's got no motivation to turn evil other than he likes it.

(sigh) I get what you mean but TLJ made it clear that Kylo DID regret killing his father with Snoke stating that he can still sense conflict within him. Maybe it was Kylo masking his thoughts but we don't get any evidence of that. But the greater issue for me is that even if he's not a carbon copy of Vader I still see him as a copy of Vader.

Ignoring Rise of Skywalker and pretending that Duel of the Fates is canon Kylo's story ALWAYS ended with him redeeming himself and said redemption costing him his life. And it's always for shallow reasons. In ROS it's because he just decides to stop being evil after Rey saves his life (again) and in DOTF it's because Leia calls him and tells him to knock it off and stop being evil.

I'm sorry to keep bringing this up but She-Ra did this so much better. After her fall from power and being confronted by Double Trouble on how she has no one but herself to blame for her everyone leaving we get 6 episodes focused on Catra turning from the Horde and joining the Rebellion and the rest of the series is her doing her best to become a better person.

She-Ra even handled the idea of realizing that you can't save someone from themselves so much better in Season 3 when after 3 seasons of trying to convince herself that she could redeem her Adora realizes just how toxic Catra is chooses to not put up with her BS anymore.

And this is not a case of the show having a longer run time as Season 3 and the first half of season 5 are both about 2 and a half hours long and they still managed to pull off the idea that you can't save someone from themselves AND show how someone can save themselves and how we can be there for them.

As for the Jedi, Luke trained Rey and Leia who also trained Rey so he did save the Jedi. He also found those old books.

Okay, this is something that's been bugging me since TLJ came out and that is one we NEVER saw Luke training Leia to be a Jedi until ROS and outside of her Mary Poppins herself back to her ship which given this Trilogy's mishandling of the Force doesn't prove that Luke trained her (and that scene WAS a case of Kennedy wanting a scene of Leia using the Force and Johnson doing his best with what he had). And the second thing Luke didn't teach Rey ANYTHING!

Luke spends the whole film refusing to teach Rey and instead goes on about how much the Jedi Suck and how they need to end. The most we get is teaching her how to connect with the Force which is something she could already do as shown in The Force Awakens so it hardly counts.

Even the deleted 3d lesson wasn't teaching Rey about the Jedi and honestly that deleted scene just further highlights to me that Johnson didn't understand the Jedi as Luke makes a point how a Jedi wouldn't get involved in conflict except that's the whole POINT of the Jedi. Regardless if you watched the first two trilogies in release or chronological order the first time we see a Jedi is them GETTING involved in a conflict to save lives. Obi-Wan even kinda mocks the idea of not getting involved given his tone of voice when he talks about Owen not wanting Anakin to get involved in the Clone Wars.

Also, WHY did Luke want the Jedi to end. He screwed up once and Kylo escalated things and killed everyone who wouldn't join him. The Jedi order and it's core beliefs had NOTHING to do with that.

I know that TLJ wanted to make Luke's arc about him loosing faith in the Jedi and finding a new hope for the Jedi but Luke WAS Suppose to be that Hope. He's the New Hope AND the Return of the Jedi. Both titles have a double meaning that refer to Luke.

[McAvoy]

Rian Johnson either didn't understand Luke or he did but went his own way for his own movie. Or worse, he did it intentionally to subvert expectations.

As been said before, ANH was Luke. Luke was the Return of the Jedi. That's even ignoring the implications of him being the Son of the Chosen One. He went out of his way to redeem his father, who in the previous movie freaking terrorized him and his friends before cutting off his hand.

So we are supposed to believe The Last Jedi Luke is the same person as the one from the Return of the Jedi? All because he got a tingly feeling his own nephew may go Dark Side? So he tries to kill him. This is literally the opposite of Return of the Jedi Luke.

I will admit Abrams did leave RJ a bit of predicament in explaining why Luke was isolated from the rest of the Galaxy. One of Abrams mystery boxes...

[phantom000]

Okay, this is something that's been bugging me since TLJ came out and that is one we NEVER saw Luke training Leia to be a Jedi until ROS and outside of her Mary Poppins herself back to her ship which given this Trilogy's mishandling of the Force doesn't prove that Luke trained her (and that scene WAS a case of Kennedy wanting a scene of Leia using the Force and Johnson doing his best with what he had). And the second thing Luke didn't teach Rey ANYTHING!

Luke spends the whole film refusing to teach Rey and instead goes on about how much the Jedi Suck and how they need to end. The most we get is teaching her how to connect with the Force which is something she could already do as shown in The Force Awakens so it hardly counts.

Even the deleted 3d lesson wasn't teaching Rey about the Jedi and honestly that deleted scene just further highlights to me that Johnson didn't understand the Jedi as Luke makes a point how a Jedi wouldn't get involved in conflict except that's the whole POINT of the Jedi. Regardless if you watched the first two trilogies in release or chronological order the first time we see a Jedi is them GETTING involved in a conflict to save lives. Obi-Wan even kinda mocks the idea of not getting involved given his tone of voice when he talks about Owen not wanting Anakin to get involved in the Clone Wars.

Also, WHY did Luke want the Jedi to end. He screwed up once and Kylo escalated things and killed everyone who wouldn't join him. The Jedi order and it's core beliefs had NOTHING to do with that.

I know that TLJ wanted to make Luke's arc about him loosing faith in the Jedi and finding a new hope for the Jedi but Luke WAS Suppose to be that Hope. He's the New Hope AND the Return of the Jedi. Both titles have a double meaning that refer to Luke.

Yeah Rey using the force in TFA is basically a middle finger to Luke and Anakin since both could only use the force in a very basic manner and it was clear that they were supposed to be unique, not just talented but unique as in this was something no one was so ever supposed to be able to do. You could say its meant as a hint that Rey is not normal, but it feels more like lazy writing. They needed a way for Rey to escape and they had to show she had the force so she uses the force to escape, even though she shouldn't be able to!

Personally, I never liked the Jedi because they were always so rigid it seemed stupid. It's like they will follow their code right off a cliff without question and anyone who does is clearly not a Jedi. I played a Jedi on SWTOR and found it both frustrating and boring, so I made a 'noble Sith' and had some of the most fun I ever had on an MMO. The point is if every Jedi, or Sith, has to follow the exact same pattern, it gets very boring because it is essentially the same story over and over again.