Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I watched Star Wars all over again and realise that Episode III's focus on Anakin's story (as admitted by George Lucas himself) is actually not doing justice to the other elements of the saga, and on the contrary does not contribute to its holistic continuity.

The Invisible Seeds of Rebellion
The original trilogy has an essential backdrop of the Rebel Alliance fighting against the Empire, with the story of Luke finding his destiny in redeeming his father and becoming a Jedi. The decision to remove Padme and the Rebel Alliance series from Episode III gives a loophole in the continuity of the saga, as it would be important to actually at least established that there were significant opposition to Palpatine's rule, they who would later rebel against the Empire. Episode IV would then makes more sense with its beginning reflecting this situation.

Yoda's Exile
Even the last shot of Yoda landing on Dagobah was removed for it would disrupt the focus on the thread of the children, as said by Lucas.

Backdrop Established even with Anakin's Story in EP I, II
Even if the prequel trilogy was to be the story of Anakin and the original trilogy that of Luke's, there is no reason to compromise other essentials of the saga in favour of Anakin's turn.

For one, Episode I does elaborate on the backdrop of the trade federation's aggression but still essentially include the re-emergence of the Sith and the founding of the alleged Chosen One. Episode II too details the inner workings of the Sith on the Republic's fate thru the separatist movement and still include Anakin's love and lost of his mother.

Padme and the Droids Compromised for Vader
Episode III while it explains the fall of the Republic and including Anakin's turn, becomes too exclusive in the latter, not only compromises the continuity of the saga as a whole by excluding the seeds of rebellion, it also does not do justice to Padme's character by cutting off her continuity. In the previous Episodes we see her as a respectable diplomat of influence in the Republic, but Episode III only focuses her as a wife and childbearer of the children. The supposed dark theme also virtually removed C3PO and R2D2 from the film, they who were so significantly portrayed in the OT.

Thus even if Episode III is supposed to focus on Anakin's turn to become the infamous Vader, the virtue of the original trilogy itself proves that the character of Vader was but one of the many essentials of the entire saga.

I would definetly have thought the Rebellion seens should have been included, they are something the auidence has identified with for the last 30 years, and this familiarity would only have helped the story.

The very notion of a stagnant Republic being defended by a bunch of jedi and clones is nothing to a small group of Rebels fighting a tryannous Galactic Empire, it embodies alot of human aspiration and emotion, which can't be said of the Clone Wars era, which just leaves us confused. I feel if the original themes were picked up more in the PT, it could have been a much more enjoyabale trilogy.

And where would you have put this? The movie was too damn short as it was.

Cyber, seeing as Star Wars is the story of Anakin Skywalker, ROTS should have been mainly about him.

Like i said, i feel the exclusion of some essential elements of the saga would not only dissappoint longtime fans, but do not do justice to the retelling of the 6 films as one whole story, as intended by lucas himself. The virtue of the Rebellion vs the Clone Wars is an interesting comparison.

Furthermore, i feel that "star wars being the story of Anakin Skywalker and of Darth Vader" is actually a new interpretation, driven by the popularity of the vader character in the OT by fans. The story was never intended to only centre around vader, like lucas said in the dvd specials - "Vader became such an iconic figure, more than was intended".

I'm not sure, but how far can we argue that the focus on Anakin in the PT was contributed by the fact that Darth Vader of the OT was the all-time favourite of fans?

It is all about Anakin (and about OB1), just like the OT was about Luke (and about Han/Leia).

Point is, Anakin is not a sympathetic character and that is why you feel it's rather too much too soon. Has nothing to do with the amount of Anakin time, but with the quality of it.

Originally posted by queeq
It is all about Anakin (and about OB1), just like the OT was about Luke (and about Han/Leia).

Point is, Anakin is not a sympathetic character and that is why you feel it's rather too much too soon. Has nothing to do with the amount of Anakin time, but with the quality of it.

Definetly. Anakin has alot of traits of one of the classical greek heros, seemingly noble birth (if you read between the lines), handsome, strong,
yet with a fatal flaw, in this case his arrogance. I don't know whether it's just that those kind of heroes are outdated (although other films would prove otherwise) or just the writing is so misguided, it really makes no effort in making Anakin sympathetic.

I say the writing is misguided... or flawed.

Star Wars is the about the fall and redemption of Anakin Skywalker, thats what the PT and the OT are about. Everyone else is secondary.

ROTS should be about Anakin. He's the rason the PT was made.

Many of the secondary plots were adequately covered....many were not.

Lucas simply puts too many restraints on the length of the film...cutting out necesary content to achieve an (arbitary) 150 min time limit.

And if Lucas actually said that Yoda on Degobah was "removed for it would disrupt the focus on the thread of the children"... I say eff him because he interupted the Skywlaker Kenobi Duel with the Sidious Yoda duel REPEATEDLY...which I thought was a flat out horrible decision.

Originally posted by ((The_Anomaly))
Star Wars is the about the fall and redemption of Anakin Skywalker, thats what the PT and the OT are about. Everyone else is secondary.

Well in essence, the OT was "changed" to as Vader's part became more primary. The OT will always be about Luke Skywalker to many; it was what it was written as and it works best that way.

I would have liked a slow montage at the end of the movie wrapping up all the loose ends. There wouldnt be any talking and it would have the the imperial march quietly playing in the background to signify the end of the Republic. It would have Yoda landing on Dagobah, Mon Mothma (sp?) and the seeds of Rebellion, perhaps a shot of Kenobi retiring to his hut on Tatooine, the shot of Vader and Sids and finally the shot of the twins. Personally I think that this could have been very well done and have been the link between the two trilogies. Cut all the bu''sh*t about the focus being on the twins.

Originally posted by Rampant ox
I would have liked a slow montage at the end of the movie wrapping up all the loose ends. There wouldnt be any talking and it would have the the imperial march quietly playing in the background to signify the end of the Republic. It would have Yoda landing on Dagobah, Mon Mothma (sp?) and the seeds of Rebellion, perhaps a shot of Kenobi retiring to his hut on Tatooine, the shot of Vader and Sids and finally the shot of the twins. Personally I think that this could have been very well done and have been the link between the two trilogies. Cut all the bu''sh*t about the focus being on the twins.

jawdrop an entire post with not a word about christopher lee???????? *dies of massive heart attack*

I would have started episode 2 as episode 1, then that would have left room for the necessary expansion on all these events.

More expansion on all these events??????? It's a story, not an encyclopedia!!!!

I would consider an a 12 minute segment on how the war stresses Anakin to be more worthwile than a 12 minute podrace on Tatooine.

However, Anakin as a child should be in the films.

I agree, but then have him in the Clone Wars or whatever... Although Anakin always strikes as a little stressed. hehehehe

Before AOTC, I always remember going back to ANH and wondering, "The f*ck are the Clone Wars?"

The main goal of TPM was to introduce Anakin, Obi-Wan, Padme, the Sith and the Jedi all before the Empire. But the plotline of the Trade Federation's invasion, the Tatooine scenes (which, IMO, were utterly pointless) and even Naboo itself, are all fillers in the SW timeline. They acted only as a means of introduction for principle characters.

If it had been about the Secession movement right off the bat, Padme being a Senator right from the beginning, and Anakin's discovery, (even on Tatooine I don't mind, minus the podrace) all of that in Episode I, then the Clone Wars could have been the focus point of Episode II, and the rise and fall of the Empire and Anakin respectively in Episode III. This may well have allowed Lucas to be more in depth about everyone's characters, the beginning of the Rebellion, and the overall continuity of the films without sacrificing his movies up to flashy effects to cover bad acting and rushing to tie down loose ends.

I agree somewhat...Seperatism should have been a major issue right off the bat. All the political stuff should have been set for the attack on Padme's shttle by the end of one. Put the rhetoric on the decline of beuarcracy and seperatism in TPM.

ROTS had too many planets. Stick on one, get some action. I would have loved it if Lucas went into the moral issues surrounding the clones. THis would have given more light to the stormies, the later Republics tactics, and the war in general. I think there is a lot of material there that proved useful...moreso than characters like Grievous.

Originally posted by PVS
jawdrop an entire post with not a word about christopher lee???????? *dies of massive heart attack*

Lol, I was tempted. I think it would have been far better to have a funeral for Dooku at the end of ROTS instead of one for Padme. Have huge crowds all dressed in black to remember the phenomenon that was Count Dooku. It will also be on his home planet of Sereno.

The camera slowly zooms in on the Counts pale, lifeless face. Even in death it has a look of class and dignity. His robes are perfect and he has his infamous saber hilt clutched in his hands. The camera continues to zoom in on Dooku. All of a sudden his eyes flick open. Count Dooku is back in action. Credits Roll.

Now that would be an ending!!

Originally posted by Rampant ox
Now that would be an ending!!

Except it is totally not Star Wars.

Originally posted by Alliance
Except it is totally not Star Wars.

Sacrifices must be made...

Not to bring back secondary villians

Well personally I think it would be more interesting that Padme's funeral march. To me that whole scene was pointless, the only part of significance being the carving Anakin had made for her.

It was closing off a plotline...it was a long closing...but she was supposed to be a fairly main character.

Fair enough. However I think there were more important things that could have been put, the start of the Rebellion being one of them. Maybe cut Padme's seen a bit and add in something more important, not neccessarlily Dooku's funeral, but something...

I'm with you 100% on the rebellion.

THose scenes are on the DVD folks

But the Rebel Alliance series were the deleted scenes. I dunno bout the dooku's funeral, but i feel the padme funeral was appropriate and heartfelt, with her still clutching the gift anakin gave her till the very end, reflecting her undying love and sheer heartbreak.

The podrace while exhillirating was done clearly to add colour to the movie, but was admitedly a turning point of Anakin's live for he was freed upon his victory (though not known by him).

The plot for Episode I was intended to illustrate Sidious's orchestration of events and how by choosing Naboo as the victim made the Senate sympathise with their case hence voting Palpatine as Chancellor, though it was definitely rather too elaborated and vague. But i agree that perhaps Episode II separatist movement and the clones could have been given more focus.

Does this then mean that truly the success of Episode III lies with the fact that is was focused on Anakin? Imagine if they remove Episodes I and II, would Episode III still be the epic film that it is, comparable to the OT?

I've wondered whether the introduction and death of General Grievous was necessary. In my opinion, Dooku is a much more interesting character and should not have been killed so flippently in the beginning. The original saga copes with only a few villains, yet Lucas somehow felt composed to create many in the PT, Jango Fett (arguably) and Dooku probably the only neccesary ones.

Originally posted by exanda kane
I've wondered whether the introduction and death of General Grievous was necessary. In my opinion, Dooku is a much more interesting character and should not have been killed so flippently in the beginning. The original saga copes with only a few villains, yet Lucas somehow felt composed to create many in the PT, Jango Fett (arguably) and Dooku probably the only neccesary ones.

I agree 411%. Also you cant forget Sidious, the most evil mofo to set foot in the SW Universe.

Originally posted by Rampant ox
Lol, I was tempted. I think it would have been far better to have a funeral for Dooku at the end of ROTS instead of one for Padme. Have huge crowds all dressed in black to remember the phenomenon that was Count Dooku. It will also be on his home planet of Sereno.

The camera slowly zooms in on the Counts pale, lifeless face. Even in death it has a look of class and dignity. His robes are perfect and he has his infamous saber hilt clutched in his hands. The camera continues to zoom in on Dooku.


*coffin tips over and dooku's head falls out and rolls through the center of the procession.*

Originally posted by queeq
THose scenes are on the DVD folks

Yeah, but they weren't important enough to put into the actual film? Come on.

Originally posted by exanda kane
The original saga copes with only a few villains, yet Lucas somehow felt composed to create many in the PT, Jango Fett (arguably) and Dooku probably the only neccesary ones.

The OT deals with Vader...who is a "major bad@ss." In the PT there is no glaring sign saying "I AM THE VILLAN." The PT is about where evil is. There is a non-stable network....the Empire doesn't exist. Therofor having multiple villians makes excellent sense, but they are just not treated correctly.

Maul was a triumph of character design.
Dooku was a major missed opportunity.
Jango was perhaps the only vaguely developed villian.
Sidious becomes central, I don't really need more of him.
Grievous could prove interesting if he was portrayed as a brtue and not an asthmatic dumbass with a AHNOLD accent. His character was totally abandoned in ROTS.

It should have been clear from the beginning that Sidious=Palpatine though...

And I agree about Dooku. But if that was better developed, Maul would have bcome obsolete.

Maul was like an attack dog, which was dissappointing...Hes one of the few characters in the SAGA that bade me go...."Geez, I'd really like to know more about him."

Originally posted by Alliance




The OT deals with Vader...who is a "major bad@ss." In the PT there is no glaring sign saying "I AM THE VILLAN." The PT is about where evil is. There is a non-stable network....the Empire doesn't exist. Therofor having multiple villians makes excellent sense, but they are just not treated correctly.



I think Maul fits the "I'm a villain" slot, granted he's more of a lapdog, but so much attention was on him, we never quite felt a sense of foreboding when they say "Was he the master or the apprentice?".

I still do not think many villains warrent a good story, because that way they will have weak characterisation, for instance, the majoiryt of the PT villains.

Originally posted by PVS
*coffin tips over and dooku's head falls out and rolls through the center of the procession.*

Originally posted by exanda kane
we never quite felt a sense of foreboding when they say "Was he the master or the apprentice?".

No, because its a stupid line that we all know the answer too...not to mention the cheesy closeup of Palpatine the followed.

Not only a stupid line, it was a stupid question too. If there can be only two, and one dies, the one that remains IS the master. Lucas didn't think that line through very much. Or the Jedi are just plain dumb and deserved to be wiped out.

Wait...Lucas can't tight dialogue for sh*t?

The Jedi are stupid and dogmatic, and yeah...certainly deserved, from some standpoints...to be wiped out.

Originally posted by Alliance And if Lucas actually said that Yoda on Degobah was "removed for it would disrupt the focus on the thread of the children"... I say eff him because he interupted the Skywlaker Kenobi Duel with the Sidious Yoda duel REPEATEDLY...which I thought was a flat out horrible decision.

He interrupted pert-near every final battle in every movie. Fast cuts between battles & scenes are everywhere, not just ROTS, fercryinoutloud.

TPM: Cuts between Space Battle, lightsaber duel, Gungan ground battle and Padme diversion.

AOTC: Same battle really but involve Yoda, Obi & Anakin ship, & Mace's ship.

ROTS: Mustafar & Senate battles

ANH: Only one battle, but 3 different settings.

TESB: Lightsaber battle and Lando, Chewie & Leia chase.

ROTJ: Space battle, Endor ground battle, throne room battle

They all have an aspect that the heroes are doomed, but then they pull it out. Great cliffhanger stuff in all 6.

True, but in the OT the moments for cutting were much more natural. In TPM for instance (apart from having FOUR battles simultaneously) it seemd quite abritrary.

Cutting in the most epic battle of all time: OB vs. Anakin, that should be done with great care... And one can argue how well that was done.

Originally posted by queeq
Not only a stupid line, it was a stupid question too. If there can be only two, and one dies, the one that remains IS the master. Lucas didn't think that line through very much. Or the Jedi are just plain dumb and deserved to be wiped out. Yeah, why would Yoda consider a sith master going on a mission to kill the queen or jumping into action trying to kill two jedi, while the apprentice stays at home making dinner.
The apprentice would at least assist if the master would expose himself and do something rash and stupid.

Apart from that, it doesn't matter. The one that remains is the dangerous one because he's the master of the next Sith.

ya that's true. Aniwae windu did mention in AoTC that the jedi's "ability to use the Force have diminished", having not seen the creation of the clone army. I think thats why they cant even make an intelligent guess on whether maul was the apprentice or master.

Originally posted by overlord
Yeah, why would Yoda consider a sith master going on a mission to kill the queen or jumping into action trying to kill two jedi, while the apprentice stays at home making dinner.
The apprentice would at least assist if the master would expose himself and do something rash and stupid.

Have you ever had Sith cooking....its amazing...and nothing hits the spot like fresh nerf off the grill after a long day of meaningless slaughter and endless babbling

Originally posted by queeq
Cutting in the most epic battle of all time: OB vs. Anakin, that should be done with great care... And one can argue how well that was done.

Well, I do with they'd have shown Threepio saving Padme from the falling lava on the Mustafar landing platform. As I've written before it would have been cool to see Threepio have a heroic moment. But hey, how long do you want the movie to be?

How can it be the biggest battle of all time, when both participants live to fight another day? It was your expectations of the battle that killed it for you. Perhaps you let the hype for the movie build up such a huge house of cards that finally no film could satisfy you.

Originally posted by chinabing
Well, I do with they'd have shown Threepio saving Padme from the falling lava on the Mustafar landing platform. As I've written before it would have been cool to see Threepio have a heroic moment. But hey, how long do you want the movie to be?

How can it be the biggest battle of all time, when both participants live to fight another day? It was your expectations of the battle that killed it for you. Perhaps you let the hype for the movie build up such a huge house of cards that finally no film could satisfy you.

How is it possible not to have such high expectations of it when Lucas and co. themselves were heralding it as the greatest fight scene of all time. I was very sceptical about that comment, but my opinion of it after leaving the cinema was sheer indifference.

HEhehehe.... Let's face it, it WAS supposed to be the most epic battle of the whole saga. It was nicely done, but I still prefer the not-so-well choreaographed fights in the OT, simply because they're dripping with drama. The PT ones feel indifferent indeed.

Yes it was...it's still good, if you look at everything idividually it really should be an amazing scene, but for some reason you just sit there, not really caring at all, not particularly drawn into the story.

This may because we already know the outcome of course, which possibly marred most of the PT.

Yes, that's why people are so hard on the PT, they already know how it turns out!

Its definately a major factor.

I dunno... I have seen the OT films dozens of times... and it still gets me... I would say that I'd know the outcome by now..

When you start thinking to yourself *oh, I love this part* just before it happens, you've seen it enough.

I know them by heart... the OT that is...

No, but the OT has that wonderful replay factor, a sense of adventure that you just do not get in the PT. If you watch the PT on a regular basis you don't do it for that adventure, you just skim through until you find another CGI fightscene.

Not ture. For ROTS thats easy to do. I think TPM and AOTC have good replay value as well.

Originally posted by exanda kane
No, but the OT has that wonderful replay factor, a sense of adventure that you just do not get in the PT. If you watch the PT on a regular basis you don't do it for that adventure, you just skim through until you find another CGI fightscene.

That's me!

TPM's only good scene was Maul's fight, AOTC's was the Arena Fight, and ROTS's Battles/Lightsaber fights

That makes ROTS more watchable because the fights take longer. hehehehe

Perhaps, but it makes the rest of that movie 1000% less bearable.

I dunno... it was the first PT movie that had the OT feel again. I prefer to the other two.

Oh I definetly prefer it to the other two PT films, still no cigar for me though

It's a strangerwatch RotS, seems to change pace awkwardly, I mean, the opening scenes and battles are all very fluid, but it feels like it's been prodded to be faster, and I couldn't get into it. A

s they get back to Coruscant I have to say I began to daydream a little, the only redeeming moment for me was Order 66. I just felt that that was a success, the music, the effects all culminated, and that bit was rather moving for a CGI epic.

I'm not one of those people who watch films only for fight scenes, typically I'm not one for action films, but there really isn't alot else to watch in the PT.

Yea I can see what youre saying, but RoTS DID have more of the OT feel to me as well. Not as much or as good but mos def better than Eps 1 and 2. TPM just plain sucked. Like said before, the Maul/Ob1 fight was the saving grace of that film. And really, to me anyway, the only reason is the ferocity that Ewan and Ray fought with. I dunno, AOTC was better but nowhere near the level expected from a SW movie.

To me, had Sith not been so "rushed", it could easily contend with the OT. Not overshadow them, but be in their rankings. My personal fav is ESB, and Sith (with order 66) gave it that dark feel, and i think the music really helped capture the mood and feeling of the film.

ESB rules!!!

I think Lucas should have deleted the more obsolete and boring scenes in the TPM and allow a bit more character development. At least we would have wanted to know how the story ends.

Originally posted by queeq
ESB rules!!!

I think Lucas should have deleted the more obsolete and boring scenes in the TPM and allow a bit more character development. At least we would have wanted to know how the story ends. It'd just be a 20 minute film then, I'm not paying 12 bucks to go see that.

ya i've always pondered what could possibly make the PT (except maybe RoTS) not as good as the OT, when its 'suppossed' to be better i guess.

TIME magazine during the release of RoTS states that "the first three Star Wars (the OT) were epic. The next two (EpI, II), not really." Isn't it sad.. why do we have to wait two movies to get to an epic Ep III.

Originally posted by Tangible God
It'd just be a 20 minute film then, I'm not paying 12 bucks to go see that.



Yes, that is dilemma... hehehehe


And it is sad cybervader, but that is the way of Lucas I'm afraid.

I think maybe we star wars fans are just too hard on the PT. Lucas attempts to give major or minor sneakpeaks wherever possible in the PT which links to the OT. One would have thought a real fan would welcome such gestures with thumbs-up.

EpI = Anakin builts C3PO, stuck in Tatooine, Jabba the Hutt at the Podrace

Ep II = Goes to the Lars residence, meets Owen and Beru, Clone Wars

You can't be blinded by the dark side of fandom though

A good movie is a good movie, Ep1 and Ep2 just aren't good movies for me.

everyone who finds positives in the PT is not automatically a fanboy.

True, but we do have to be honest with ourselves. The PT has its moments, but unfortunately that is all.

I don't think thats true.

Originally posted by Alliance
I don't think thats true. What else do you see in it then?

Hmmm...

Originally posted by queeq
True, but we do have to be honest with ourselves. The PT has its moments, but unfortunately that is all.

I agree..

Sometimes i feel fans attacking of PT is merely a demonstration of a dissatisfaction that cannot be satisfied no matter how Lucas would have tried.

I doubt that. If Lucas had paid more attention to story and had surrounded himself by some critical story folks, it could have been great. I think Peter Jackason proved that with LOTR, that too had a vast group of people scrutinising his work... and yet, he had a homerun. Lucas did not.

Originally posted by Tangible God
What else do you see in it then?

I see great films. There is more than just moments that are worth watching.

There is a lot of depth and artistic vlaue in the PT...it has a scope that the OT couldn't attempt (mostly becuase of technology). I also find that while the PT lacks well developed main characters, the background characters are much more intriguing.

Guess I saw another film, hehehehe.

EPIII is allright, well worth watching again. THe others... hmm... not so much.

grrr...ROTS has the least replay value...to me, well....besides ROTJ

Disagree... the Vader/Luke/Palpy scenes are excellent.

Originally posted by Alliance
I see great films. There is more than just moments that are worth watching.

There is a lot of depth and artistic vlaue in the PT...it has a scope that the OT couldn't attempt (mostly becuase of technology). I also find that while the PT lacks well developed main characters, the background characters are much more intriguing. The PT is visually amazing, I won't argue that. But no freakin' way does that make a movie.

It's not the charcters or their backgrounds that I don't like about the movie, it's the dialogue and the actors speaking them. Specifically Hayden and Natalie. Remove or drastically alter them and I'd be all for AOTC.

In short: the entire characterisation of these potential characters sucks!

Yes =-)

By the way, I must also say that I really, really did not like the way the Force was portrayed in the PT.

From growing up watching Star Wars the whole world tends to think of the Force as some kind of mystical, ehtereal energy, it seemed otherworldly in almost all respects. But with the PT, that whole philosphy was crushed into some weird anime-esque video game culture. Now, in EU novels, Force Push is a pro-noun aswell as other uses of the force, I mean it's like reading a screenplay from Tekken or some fighting game, not a novel. This way of describing the Force really destroys alot of that mystique.

I really wish the PT hadn't over elaborated with these uses of the Force.

The distancing from the Force having a 'mystic value' in the PT because it kinda show how bureaucratic the jedi order had become.. they even judge the potential of a jedi from their midi-chlorian count. Or worst, they choose jedis that way.

Nonetheless the existance of the midi-chlorians do haf a certain mystic feel to it, because they mysteriously "talks to you".

I think the force is cronically underused in the OT, becasue no one understands it.

Which was its strength.... it was so vague, you could go anywhere with it. But everyone understood what is was about, and hardly anything was said about it.
The PT just turned that whole Force speech ("Hate agression, fear, they lead to the Dark Side) into some mantra: just repeat it and it makes it more tangible. Lucas tried to give it more words, but he just gave it the same words and some lame midichlorians.

But its use is still superior...i never liked the midichlorions...i much prefer the abstract descriptions...like shatterpoints etc. Seeing though the force should be like beer goggles...it should change your perception entirely.

I agree... not expanding too much on the Force was outstanding. But then there are many thing took a different approach with in the PT.

yea, but like i've said before, as far as midicholians, that was just Lucas trying to give a scientific explanation for something that is beyond science. The way OB1 and Yoda descibed the force to Luke will always be the best ways. Too many holes in the midichlorian route. With a single pprick of blood, they were to gather that Anakin had a count over 20,000 which would be based on a ratio, but when he got cut up, he lost power??? No way, you cant reduce a ratio by eliminating limbs. By that logic, if Yoda was a foot taller, he would a signifigant gain in power...or anyone bigger than Yoda should have more than him...i hate it...OT force all the way.

That is reading too much into it. It shows a RATIO, not an absolute amount. So if Anakin's ratio of midichlorians is even highre than Yoda's, taht would say he could communicate with the Force better. Losing an arm doesn't change that.

But writing this down, makes me feel all icky about those midi's... hehehehehe.

no its not reading too much into it, i'm just explaining how it cantradicts itself....

gp queeq. If its density, then amount doesnt matter.

In that way it doesn't contradict itself. Because otherwise bigger force sensitive creatures would be stronger in the force than smaller, because they have less blood. Yoda's high midi count proves that for our little green friend.

but still, how exactly does these midichlorians 'talk' to the jedi? anyways if they do then it does explains the jedi quick reflexes doesn't it.

I am not that interested in the details of midichlorians...

Originally posted by Cybervader
but still, how exactly does these midichlorians 'talk' to the jedi? anyways if they do then it does explains the jedi quick reflexes doesn't it.

make up your own answer.

I disagree a lot with Lucas' perception of the force. You can too.

Just forget about those midi's... who needs them.

Apparently force users.

But how can we ignore it, after all it came from lucas doesn't it. So unfortunately MIDI-CHLORIANS are very canonical indeed.

i still wanna know how it talks to jedis.

By phone.

Have you even watched these movies?

Its by telegraph. The midichlorions read it.

I always figured the midi's burned excess fat cells and made smoke signals.

Originally posted by Alliance
make up your own answer.

I disagree a lot with Lucas' perception of the force. You can too.

You know what's funny? Lucas invented his version of the Force, so for you to disagree with it is laughable.

Yup. As far as i am concerned, when i watched Episode I for the first time i was actually lightened and interested to know more about the midi-chlorians. At least now Lucas attempts to 'explain' some of the jedi qualities thru the PT, and how their powers or senses actually 'work'.

I find the 'generic vs mystic' virtue of the Force debate quite relevant at first, but then i realise that the issue of the midichlorians do have the mystical quality to it as well, despite being allegedly generic.

I preferred Yoda's description in ESB, myself...

Jedi are like monks... you don't want them to explain to you the biological foundations of their faith, do you? It's a mystical energy field, I suggest Lucas keeps it that way.

Yoda's description if vague...as is Lucas' conception of the force.

Indeed.

Frankly I preferred it vague.

Same here, alot more to read into vague

It just gets worse...

I have two thoughts about that piece:
1. WHy is Lucas trying to tell us all the time that everything in the PT and OT were invented all before ANH came to the screen. Fact is: he didn't and he's making things up as he goes along... which, honestly.is fine. But I'm not buying he came up with the midichlorians in the 70s and thought up the two-schools-theory. Honestly, Qui-Gon did not exist before he started wrinting the PT.
2. I hate all this explaining stuff... WHY this urge to EXPLAIN the Force. No one tries to explain God, do they? They only argue whether he exists, just like Luke and Han do about the Force in ANH.

I Agree Queeq (yet again it seems)

Ditto.

Originally posted by queeq
2. I hate all this explaining stuff... WHY this urge to EXPLAIN the Force. No one tries to explain God, do they? They only argue whether he exists, just like Luke and Han do about the Force in ANH.

Yes, they do. Its an interesteing construct...so many people have their vision own of it based off of what we know.

I agree that it seems highly suspicious that GL keeps maintaining that he had the whole thing planned out. It looks as though he's trying to establish himself as the omnipotent creator free from inconsistencies.

The fact is, even if he had a general idea of the entire saga before hand, making 6 movies with a story line and ideals that flow would almost definitely overlook inconsistencies here and there.

I disagree though that people dun try to explain God. They do all the time. His existance, His virtue, His nature. Same goes for those wishing to 'understand the Force'. While evidently many disagree with the science of the Force, then we could always stick to what appeals to us best, such as the vague or mystical Force.

Ultimately God is what one makes out of Him, and lets just say it goes the same for the Force as well.

Exactly, they try to explain his existence, virtues and nature, but they do not do this with a fictional gene test. And the old testament being one of the most popular reads ever must tell us something about storytelling..

Originally posted by Cybervader
I agree that it seems highly suspicious that GL keeps maintaining that he had the whole thing planned out. It looks as though he's trying to establish himself as the omnipotent creator free from inconsistencies.

The fact is, even if he had a general idea of the entire saga before hand, making 6 movies with a story line and ideals that flow would almost definitely overlook inconsistencies here and there.

I disagree though that people dun try to explain God. They do all the time. His existance, His virtue, His nature. Same goes for those wishing to 'understand the Force'. While evidently many disagree with the science of the Force, then we could always stick to what appeals to us best, such as the vague or mystical Force.

Ultimately God is what one makes out of Him, and lets just say it goes the same for the Force as well.

Bravo, someone who says the word.
That's why I hate people fighting over religion!!!!!!

I love fighting over religion!!

So who explains God? They may give arguments for his existence, but EXPLAIN???? Who explains who one persone believes in God and why the other doesn't??? Well, not biology at least... upbringing maybe, personal experience yes... but not some hardware explanation for faith. That is rather lame...

The nature of the Force is explained at a biological level, a physical, tangible level. God is only theorised at a spirtual, mental level.

What I said...

. . .

How eloquent

sir eloquence

Ultimately God is what one makes out of Him, and lets just say it goes the same for the Force as well!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

But in the films we aren't given the choice; we are told that Force is determined by a genetic statistic. Only through the EU do we hear that there was some difference of opinion between certain Jedi.

"Anakin has turned to the dark side of the force"

Translation: He converted to another religion.

But there are only two: good and bad.

You're right Exanda, and to add to that: EU sucks. hehehehe

Some EU is alright of course, but the movies is really where the stories should shine (for example the OT). There is a hell of a lot of decent PT EU material around, some interesting characters, but not much that really shines out in the PT, with the exception of RotS in some ways.

I do feel now I'm repeating my anti-PT rant a little too much now

That's allright. I've enjoyed my share of EU, but it's no point of bringing it into a debate on canon SW.

Originally posted by Alliance
"Anakin has turned to the dark side of the force"

Translation: He converted to another religion.

Hmmm. Whats interesting is that in ANH, when Vader told Tarkin about him feeling the presence of Obi-Wan, Tarkin said, "Obi-Wan Kenobi?... You (Vader) is the only one left of their religion".

Note that Tarkin considers Vader to be still part of the jedi "ancient religion". So did anakin really converted to another religion, or was he merely in the perverted side of the Force.

Does seem strange that Tarkin would be so casual about the way he referred to the Force and Jedi/Sith, after all he'd been in a high position for quite a few decades. Of course he could just be teasing Vader, you would expect the Grand Moff to know between Sith and Jedi.

Most people do see the Sith and the Jedi as the same group remember.

Just like Christians and Satanists...

Exactl- huh...Oh sorry, phone call...carry on

Originally posted by Cybervader
I watched Star Wars all over again and realise that Episode III's focus on Anakin's story (as admitted by George Lucas himself) is actually not doing justice to the other elements of the saga, and on the contrary does not contribute to its holistic continuity.

The Invisible Seeds of Rebellion
The original trilogy has an essential backdrop of the Rebel Alliance fighting against the Empire, with the story of Luke finding his destiny in redeeming his father and becoming a Jedi. The decision to remove Padme and the Rebel Alliance series from Episode III gives a loophole in the continuity of the saga, as it would be important to actually at least established that there were significant opposition to Palpatine's rule, they who would later rebel against the Empire. Episode IV would then makes more sense with its beginning reflecting this situation.

Yoda's Exile
Even the last shot of Yoda landing on Dagobah was removed for it would disrupt the focus on the thread of the children, as said by Lucas.

Backdrop Established even with Anakin's Story in EP I, II
Even if the prequel trilogy was to be the story of Anakin and the original trilogy that of Luke's, there is no reason to compromise other essentials of the saga in favour of Anakin's turn.

For one, Episode I does elaborate on the backdrop of the trade federation's aggression but still essentially include the re-emergence of the Sith and the founding of the alleged Chosen One. Episode II too details the inner workings of the Sith on the Republic's fate thru the separatist movement and still include Anakin's love and lost of his mother.

Padme and the Droids Compromised for Vader
Episode III while it explains the fall of the Republic and including Anakin's turn, becomes too exclusive in the latter, not only compromises the continuity of the saga as a whole by excluding the seeds of rebellion, it also does not do justice to Padme's character by cutting off her continuity. In the previous Episodes we see her as a respectable diplomat of influence in the Republic, but Episode III only focuses her as a wife and childbearer of the children. The supposed dark theme also virtually removed C3PO and R2D2 from the film, they who were so significantly portrayed in the OT.

Thus even if Episode III is supposed to focus on Anakin's turn to become the infamous Vader, the virtue of the original trilogy itself proves that the character of Vader was but one of the many essentials of the entire saga.

Episodes I and II were too much about Obi-Wan

Which kinda saved them....

Originally posted by exanda kane
Of course he could just be teasing Vader...
Most people do see the Sith and the Jedi as the same group remember.

Thru Tarkin's words its actually evident that he considers the Sith and jedi as 'one family', or religion for that matter. Imagine, given how anakin turned, vader would have strong views about the distinction between the Sith and Jedi. He would jolly well be offended if Tarkin was indeed teasing him.

Most people really consider the sith and jedi the same? Really? I can only think of Palpatine, when he told Anakin "the Sith and Jedi are similar in a lot of ways". Then again he said that to seduce and confuse Anakin.

Indeed.

Although it's an EU source, Knights of the old Republic and its sequel all carry a sequence where a Jedi or force sensitive will talk about how most people in the galaxy have not even seen a jedi, and cannot even make a distinction between a jedi and a Sith.

Although there is no specific proof that this was still true in the PT era, we can at least make a good assumption that it is.

Originally posted by Alliance
"Anakin has turned to the dark side of the force"

Translation: He converted to another religion.

Well, I see it more as changing his vision!

Like in many religions there are more views of that particular
religion>Christians have Baptists, Lutherians, Reformed, CATHOLICS
etc....
Same goes for Jewism, Islam, Boeddhists, Hindu(last two are not really
religions, but views on life in itself).

And like I said, I was raised with religion, but I see it different than my neighbour with the same religion.
I am spiritual, but not attached to any religion!!!
That's what I mean with making God how one thinks about him....and the
Force to add!!!!!

But there were thousands of JEdi in the universe and only TWO Sith at a time. No wonder no one makes the disticntion. It's like having the whole world Catholic calling themselves Christians and then two protestants show up and calling themselves Christians. No wonder people may view them as the same. It's just the believers that make the distinction.

Yeah lol

Originally posted by Cybervader
I watched Star Wars all over again and realise that Episode III's focus on Anakin's story (as admitted by George Lucas himself) is actually not doing justice to the other elements of the saga, and on the contrary does not contribute to its holistic continuity.

The Invisible Seeds of Rebellion
The original trilogy has an essential backdrop of the Rebel Alliance fighting against the Empire, with the story of Luke finding his destiny in redeeming his father and becoming a Jedi. The decision to remove Padme and the Rebel Alliance series from Episode III gives a loophole in the continuity of the saga, as it would be important to actually at least established that there were significant opposition to Palpatine's rule, they who would later rebel against the Empire. Episode IV would then makes more sense with its beginning reflecting this situation.

Yoda's Exile
Even the last shot of Yoda landing on Dagobah was removed for it would disrupt the focus on the thread of the children, as said by Lucas.

Backdrop Established even with Anakin's Story in EP I, II
Even if the prequel trilogy was to be the story of Anakin and the original trilogy that of Luke's, there is no reason to compromise other essentials of the saga in favour of Anakin's turn.

For one, Episode I does elaborate on the backdrop of the trade federation's aggression but still essentially include the re-emergence of the Sith and the founding of the alleged Chosen One. Episode II too details the inner workings of the Sith on the Republic's fate thru the separatist movement and still include Anakin's love and lost of his mother.

Padme and the Droids Compromised for Vader
Episode III while it explains the fall of the Republic and including Anakin's turn, becomes too exclusive in the latter, not only compromises the continuity of the saga as a whole by excluding the seeds of rebellion, it also does not do justice to Padme's character by cutting off her continuity. In the previous Episodes we see her as a respectable diplomat of influence in the Republic, but Episode III only focuses her as a wife and childbearer of the children. The supposed dark theme also virtually removed C3PO and R2D2 from the film, they who were so significantly portrayed in the OT.

Thus even if Episode III is supposed to focus on Anakin's turn to become the infamous Vader, the virtue of the original trilogy itself proves that the character of Vader was but one of the many essentials of the entire saga.


So what are you saying?


You would rather have it called Star Wars Episode III The Revenge of Binks


Because he could have added an extra 10 minutes on that guy if he wanted to.

Let it go, its over, move on

make your own 6 part saga if it makes you feel better and you can focus on whover you want to.

Originally posted by OB1-adobe

You would rather have it called Star Wars Episode III The Revenge of Binks


There was no mention of Jar Jar Binks at all when i started the thread.

Your shallow interpretation inspires me to start another one saying "Star Wars Fans too focused on Anti-Binks Sentiments ".

Yeah, where is binks??? More Binks more Binks!!!



j/k

Originally posted by Cybervader
There was no mention of Jar Jar Binks at all when i started the thread.

Your shallow interpretation inspires me to start another one saying "Star Wars Fans too focused on Anti-Binks Sentiments ".


Then I'l start a thread called:


'Star Wars fans that are too focused on stupid crap because they have nothing better to do'

That's funny. That is what this whole forum is about... ;-)

The reasion GL made the PT is to tell what happend to Anakin/darth vader before EP 4 . Thats why its too focused