Originally posted by Master Crimzon
I'm so glad Obama won.Even though I'm foreign an' all. Damn, why can I not vote?
oh i dunno, you did just write:
Even though I'm foreign an' all.
but regardless, i still voted for mccain. The abortion issue was the biggest one to me. but i'm planning on giving obama all the support that the office of president deserves. For 8 years i was angry because no one seemed to give the office of the united states any respect.
You can hate the man, but Bush is still the president. Respect the office. IF you have any pride as an american at all, you should have at least waited until he was out of office to blast him all the time.
I'm not going to do the reverse with Obama. He's going to be the president, he's going to have my respect and support. (i'll admit its hard not to match fire with fire there, but someone has to be the bigger man, or its all going to be a downward spiral forever anyway)
Originally posted by truejedi
oh i dunno, you did just write:but regardless, i still voted for mccain. The abortion issue was the biggest one to me. but i'm planning on giving obama all the support that the office of president deserves. For 8 years i was angry because no one seemed to give the office of the united states any respect.
You can hate the man, but Bush is still the president. Respect the office. IF you have any pride as an american at all, you should have at least waited until he was out of office to blast him all the time.
I'm not going to do the reverse with Obama. He's going to be the president, he's going to have my respect and support. (i'll admit its hard not to match fire with fire there, but someone has to be the bigger man, or its all going to be a downward spiral forever anyway) [/B]
1. It's a joke.
2. You're a pro-lifer? Imonna put you on ignore now.
Okay, no, I'm not gonna do that. But, honestly, if anything, the abortion stuff is what made me deeply, deeply hate Sarah Palin. I'm as pro-choice as you can get.
Originally posted by truejedi
Anyone else think that Cutler Beckett is among the most badass of film villains?
Nah, he sucks. He's Pirates of the Caribbean's worst 'big villain'. Barbossa is, however, teh badassness.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
Nah, he sucks.
He really isn't. Hell, he shares so many similarities with Palpatine that you might as well consider His Imperial Majesty a joke.
He's Pirates of the Caribbean's worst 'big villain'.
He's by far the best, actually. Bill Nighy lost my interest in the trilogy when he began gnawing on the scenary. The drool and saliva from his ranting and raving hit me at home.
Barbossa is, however, teh badassness.
He's up there, yeah.
Originally posted by Gideon
He really isn't. Hell, he shares so many similarities with Palpatine that you might as well consider His Imperial Majesty a joke.
Well, no, I kind of disagree with that. I guess that his concept is supposed to be a Palpatine-styled character, but there are some stuff dragging him down. Some part of him... I can't put my finger on it, exactly. Other than his sadistic control of Davy Jones, he really didn't have the 'cold, evil tyrant/manipulator' edge to him, I guess. Plus, whoever plays him <<<<<<< Ian McDiarmid.
Originally posted by Gideon
He's by far the best, actually. Bill Nighy lost my interest in the trilogy when he began gnawing on the scenary. The drool and saliva from his ranting and raving hit me at home.
Jones was pretty cool, IMO. That being said, though, the way he can so easily be made totally incompetent takes away from him.
He was also WAY too easily manipulated by Calypso. I guess that he was something of a dumbass.
Originally posted by Gideon
He's up there, yeah.
He's second only- and perhaps equal- to the great Jack Sparrow within that franchise. The two make the coolest pirates ever.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
Well, no, I kind of disagree with that. I guess that his concept is supposed to be a Palpatine-styled character, but there are some stuff dragging him down.
He shares many similarities with the Emperor, actually.
- Both of them possess a prejudice against a specific assortment of characters; Palpatine hated the Jedi, Beckett hated pirates.
- Both of them are dictators of all-encompassing regimes; Palpatine with the Galactic Empire, Beckett with the East India Trading Company.
- Both of them are incredibly capable manipulators and capable strategists of political and psychological currents.
- Both of them employ chilling, fear-inducing, murderous enforcers; Palpatine had Darth Vader, Beckett had Mercer (Mercer is the ultimate badass of the films, in my opinion).
- Both of them manipulate political proxies; Palpatine used Padme Amidala, Beckett used Governor Swan.
- Both of them actively put themselves in dangerous situations routinely without any true fear or regard for the consequences; Palpatine in the Battles of Coruscant and Endor, Beckett all throughout At World's End.
- Both of them use proxies via blackmail; Palpatine to Ferus Olin, Beckett to Will Turner.
- Both of them exploit supernatural resources to their advantage; Palpatine with the Force, Beckett with Davy Jones.
- Both of them make use of superpowerful vessels; Palpatine with the Death Stars, Galaxy Gun, World Devastators, Beckett with the Dutchman and Endeavor.
- Both of them were betrayed by those in their employ; Palpatine by Vader, Beckett by Jack Sparrow.
- Both of them were destroyed by the same principle character flaw: hubris.
Some part of him... I can't put my finger on it, exactly. Other than his sadistic control of Davy Jones, he really didn't have the 'cold, evil tyrant/manipulator' edge to him, I guess. Plus, whoever plays him <<<<<<< Ian McDiarmid.
In terms of chilling sadism, both of them are about as evil as you can get. It just manifests differently. Both of them had a need for games of the psychological and political stripe. Palpatine just revels in his need for them and, while always patient and brilliant, became even less tolerant of free will. He was visibly angry by Skywalker's refusal to join him in RotJ. He was cold and calculating more throughout the prequels. Meanwhile, Beckett is the very definition of icy. Murders countless individuals, including a child, and all he has to say is "finally." Never loses his cool.
Jones was pretty cool, IMO. That being said, though, the way he can so easily be made totally incompetent takes away from him.
He was quite cunning. He was just no Beckett or Sparrow.
He was also WAY too easily manipulated by Calypso. I guess that he was something of a dumbass.
He was in love.
He's second only- and perhaps equal- to the great Jack Sparrow within that franchise. The two make the coolest pirates ever.
Depp's overhype and fanbrigade annoy me. He truly underlined and personified the rogue hero and relied on manipulation, a trait usually reserved for villains. But he was hardly the most talented actor. He had rivals in Geoffrey Rush, Bill Nighy, Tom Hollander, Jonathan Pryce, and David Schofield.
Originally posted by Gideon
He shares many similarities with the Emperor, actually.- Both of them possess a prejudice against a specific assortment of characters; Palpatine hated the Jedi, Beckett hated pirates.
- Both of them are dictators of all-encompassing regimes; Palpatine with the Galactic Empire, Beckett with the East India Trading Company.
- Both of them are incredibly capable manipulators and capable strategists of political and psychological currents.
- Both of them employ chilling, fear-inducing, murderous enforcers; Palpatine had Darth Vader, Beckett had Mercer (Mercer is the ultimate badass of the films, in my opinion).
- Both of them manipulate political proxies; Palpatine used Padme Amidala, Beckett used Governor Swan.
- Both of them actively put themselves in dangerous situations routinely without any true fear or regard for the consequences; Palpatine in the Battles of Coruscant and Endor, Beckett all throughout At World's End.
- Both of them use proxies via blackmail; Palpatine to Ferus Olin, Beckett to Will Turner.
- Both of them exploit supernatural resources to their advantage; Palpatine with the Force, Beckett with Davy Jones.
- Both of them make use of superpowerful vessels; Palpatine with the Death Stars, Galaxy Gun, World Devastators, Beckett with the Dutchman and Endeavor.
- Both of them were betrayed by those in their employ; Palpatine by Vader, Beckett by Jack Sparrow.
- Both of them were destroyed by the same principle character flaw: hubris.
You're right on multiple counts here, but still, there are a few very notable differences:
-There exists a significant difference between Jedi and pirates. Jedi are an inherently 'lawful' order that strives to protect the weak and maintain order/justice within the galaxy- pirates are a group of murderous, pillaging bandits. Can you really blame Beckett for hating them? Just because we're treated to 'good' pirates doesn't change the fact that the acts truly commited by pirates are violent and harmful in nature.
-The Galactic Empire dominates every single aspect of life within the world- the East India trading company is not the ultimate regime, nor does it only cause evil and destruction. It's a 'trading company' that exists as the primary economic force of the era- it doesn't exist to dominate all life and cause suffering.
-Who has Cutler Beckett ever successfully mind-****? When has he ever truly converted a person to his cause, destroyed them morally, or rallied multiple people under his leadership because of an idealogy? If anything, Cutler's minions were drawn to him because of greed. Palpatine controlled and dominated his minions psychologically- and he actually made the democratic force of the galaxy chose him as the leader.
-Davy Jones and Vader carry multiple similarities, yes. But Cutler controls Davy Jones via a physical weakness. Sidious destroyed Vader morally and virtually turned him into an instrument with no real free will.
-Mercer went out like a punk. He is therefore not badass.
-Beckett was an idiot to trust Jack Sparrow- the bond between Cutler and Jack is not even similar to the bond between Sidious and Vader.
-Cutler Beckett was never truly shown to be a full-fledged sadist. He was never depicted to outright enjoy human suffering in all of its forms.
Originally posted by Gideon
In terms of chilling sadism, both of them are about as evil as you can get. It just manifests differently. Both of them had a need for games of the psychological and political stripe. Palpatine just revels in his need for them and, while always patient and brilliant, became even less tolerant of free will. He was visibly angry by Skywalker's refusal to join him in RotJ. He was cold and calculating more throughout the prequels. Meanwhile, Beckett is the very definition of icy. Murders countless individuals, including a child, and all he has to say is "finally." Never loses his cool.
Beckett murdered pirates specifically. He didn't cause meaningless genocide, and he- unlike Sidious- is never fully shown to take the same pleasure in watching a human being suffer. Yes, his pleasure at watching pirates die is sadistic, to some extent, but Palpatine's sadism goes deeper, darker, and crueler. To enjoy watching a child being hung is different than morally destroying countless individuals and looking at people as meaningless tools.
Originally posted by Gideon
He was quite cunning. He was just no Beckett or Sparrow.
I guess.
Originally posted by Gideon
He was in love.
Yeah, he was. Still, a compelling villain should never be that easily dominated by any individual.
Originally posted by Gideon
Depp's overhype and fanbrigade annoy me. He truly underlined and personified the rogue hero and relied on manipulation, a trait usually reserved for villains. But he was hardly the most talented actor. He had rivals in Geoffrey Rush, Bill Nighy, Tom Hollander, Jonathan Pryce, and David Schofield.
Well, yeah, he's not singularly the greatest actor- it's just that his character is extremely iconic and is very, very well written.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
You're right on multiple counts here, but still, there are a few very notable differences:
I am always right.
-There exists a significant difference between Jedi and pirates. Jedi are an inherently 'lawful' order that strives to protect the weak and maintain order/justice within the galaxy- pirates are a group of murderous, pillaging bandits. Can you really blame Beckett for hating them? Just because we're treated to 'good' pirates doesn't change the fact that the acts truly commited by pirates are violent and harmful in nature.
Don't confuse me with a pirate apologist or one of Johnny Depp's legions of fangirls. The problem is thus: best of intentions or not, the Jedi became shackled to a corrupt government and chose to defend it blindly. The Revenge of the Sith novelization makes it quite clear that the Jedi weren't immune to corruption either; they had become complacent, arrogant, and dealt in outrageous moral absolutism. Does that make them on a class with pirates? No. It's quite clear that the Jedi were a positive force and benign in nature; but they were flawed and their flaws contributed to the decay and death of the Republic.
-The Galactic Empire dominates every single aspect of life within the world- the East India trading company is not the ultimate regime, nor does it only cause evil and destruction. It's a 'trading company' that exists as the primary economic force of the era- it doesn't exist to dominate all life and cause suffering.
We're not discussing the real life British East India Company. We're discussing the fictional East India Trading Company, which was out to dominate every aspect of the globe.
-Who has Cutler Beckett ever successfully mind-****? When has he ever truly converted a person to his cause, destroyed them morally, or rallied multiple people under his leadership because of an idealogy?
Norrington.
If anything, Cutler's minions were drawn to him because of greed.
And Palpatine's weren't? That's a particularly profound example of revisionist history.
Palpatine controlled and dominated his minions psychologically- and he actually made the democratic force of the galaxy chose him as the leader.
Let's be clear about this. While Palpatine is a galactic-class manipulator, while he did use understanding of psychology to force the democratic galactic government to willingly hand him power, you make it sound as though he mentally dominated all of his subordinates and peers. That's a lie, proven demonstrably false throughout the saga. Grand Moff Tarkin, who mentions to Vader in Rise of Darth Vader that he "only wishes to please" the Emperor (prompting Vader to identify that as Sidious's "real power"😉, entertains the idea of training the Death Star's superlaser on Coruscant as a means of supplanting him. Grand Moff Trachta, who is "one of the Emperor's oldest friends," leads a coup to murder him and Darth Vader. Darth Vader, who possesses an Oedipal love and hate for his master, constantly plots to betray and kill him. Kadann, the highest of the Emperor's Prophets of the Dark Side, attempts to use a dark side warrior by the name of Azrakiel to kill Palpatine and supplant him. Jerec, a dark Jedi who outranks the likes of Sedriss and Kadann, intended to use the knowledge of the Dark Side Compendium to betray and kill the Emperor; later on, when ordered by dark side mage Cronal to secure the Valley of the Jedi, Jerec intends to use this omnipotence against the reborn Emperor. Luke Skywalker intended to betray and kill him from day one on Byss. Vergere, his wayward dark side adept, also attempted to assassinate him. Sarcev Quest and others of the Interim Ruling Council (including the Emperor's own personal physicians) arranged for the destruction of the genetic source material of his clones (implied at the behest of Lumiya -- one of his own Hand's!), resulting in his death.
The Empire itself was fractured to an enormous degree by warlords after the Emperor's first death. The only time that the warlords reunited was once Palpatine returned -- they feared his wrath, but they, in the end, did not share his ideology or desire for order. In the Empire, regardless of Palpatine's considerable charisma, ambition became the currency of the day. Not loyalty.
-Davy Jones and Vader carry multiple similarities, yes. But Cutler controls Davy Jones via a physical weakness. Sidious destroyed Vader morally and virtually turned him into an instrument with no real free will.
Don't lie. Vader's will kept popping up all throughout the saga. And Sidious also kept Vader in line by threatening to exploit the weaknesses of his suit. See Rise of Darth Vader.
-Mercer went out like a punk. He is therefore not badass.
- Mercer murders Captain Hawkings and cleverly traps Governor Swan.
- He's a sniper with a pistol.
- Mercer murders Sao Feng's bodyguards, who were each capable of defeating trained Company troops with sheer athleticism. He shot one directly between the eyes and eventually killed the other one -- after she stabbed him in the chest.
- He could have killed either Sao Feng or Will Turner in Singapore.
- He dueled Barbossa, who is canonically second only to Turner in swordsmanship, to a standstill.
- Sao Feng, who is the most feared of all the Pirate Lords, grabs a hold of Mercer in an aggressive, threatening manner. Mercer just looks at him, and Feng removes his hand and backs away.
- He taunts Jones.
Yes, he is a badass. Moreso than Darth "LOLZ I R EMO AND KUTT MY RISTS!" Vader.
-Beckett was an idiot to trust Jack Sparrow- the bond between Cutler and Jack is not even similar to the bond between Sidious and Vader.
Where did Beckett trust Jack?
And, as I recall, Sidious was killed twice due to vulnerabilities established by trust: Vader and the Ruling Council.
-Cutler Beckett was never truly shown to be a full-fledged sadist. He was never depicted to outright enjoy human suffering in all of its forms.
The reluctant hero.
Beckett murdered pirates specifically. He didn't cause meaningless genocide, and he- unlike Sidious- is never fully shown to take the same pleasure in watching a human being suffer.
No, he murdered pirates and anyone who ever associated, directly or otherwise, with one -- including a child.
Yes, his pleasure at watching pirates die is sadistic, to some extent, but Palpatine's sadism goes deeper, darker, and crueler. To enjoy watching a child being hung is different than morally destroying countless individuals and looking at people as meaningless tools.
Yes, because Beckett was never shown to visibly enjoy Will, Elizabeth, Governor Swan, Jones, and Norrington being in his thrall.
Did you watch the movies?
Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11
Where did Beckett trust Jack?On his ship right after the scene with the dead krakken and right before he escapes via cannon. He starts talking about teaming up with jack for some odd reason I forgot about because i haven't seen the movie in a while.
He didn't trust him. He was double dealing with Will, too.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
1. It's a joke.2. You're a pro-lifer? Imonna put you on ignore now.
Okay, no, I'm not gonna do that. But, honestly, if anything, the abortion stuff is what made me deeply, deeply hate Sarah Palin. I'm as pro-choice as you can get.
I would say i'm the opposite end of the spectrum.. I did my own research on it i order to form an opinion, and it is, in a word, genocide. I will not compromise the issue, nor debate the issue. In my mind, its settled. So no, you won't get an apology from me.
on the topic of pirates: barbossa always struck me as the top villian of that movie. imho a more rounded individual. The problem with Beckett was that he never actually got control of the situation. he did some very amazing things to try to make it happen, but it wasn't actuallly HIM that was manipulating the situation.
He got the heart of davy jones almost completely by accident. and THAT was his greatest manipulation of the series. To be honest: Norrington came closer to killing the main characters of the movie then Beckett ever did.
on a side note: something i've always wondered. What happened to the armada? whole armada of british war ships that completely outnumbered the pirates just disappears after the flagship goes down?
Originally posted by Gideon
I am always right.Don't confuse me with a pirate apologist or one of Johnny Depp's legions of fangirls. The problem is thus: best of intentions or not, the Jedi became shackled to a corrupt government and chose to defend it blindly. The Revenge of the Sith novelization makes it quite clear that the Jedi weren't immune to corruption either; they had become complacent, arrogant, and dealt in outrageous moral absolutism. Does that make them on a class with pirates? No. It's quite clear that the Jedi were a positive force and benign in nature; but they were flawed and their flaws contributed to the decay and death of the Republic.
We're not discussing the real life British East India Company. We're discussing the fictional East India Trading Company, which was out to dominate every aspect of the globe.
Norrington.
And Palpatine's weren't? That's a particularly profound example of revisionist history.
Let's be clear about this. While Palpatine is a galactic-class manipulator, while he did use understanding of psychology to force the democratic galactic government to willingly hand him power, you make it sound as though he mentally dominated all of his subordinates and peers. That's a lie, proven demonstrably false throughout the saga. Grand Moff Tarkin, who mentions to Vader in Rise of Darth Vader that he "only wishes to please" the Emperor (prompting Vader to identify that as Sidious's "real power"😉, entertains the idea of training the Death Star's superlaser on Coruscant as a means of supplanting him. Grand Moff Trachta, who is "one of the Emperor's oldest friends," leads a coup to murder him and Darth Vader. Darth Vader, who possesses an Oedipal love and hate for his master, constantly plots to betray and kill him. Kadann, the highest of the Emperor's Prophets of the Dark Side, attempts to use a dark side warrior by the name of Azrakiel to kill Palpatine and supplant him. Jerec, a dark Jedi who outranks the likes of Sedriss and Kadann, intended to use the knowledge of the Dark Side Compendium to betray and kill the Emperor; later on, when ordered by dark side mage Cronal to secure the Valley of the Jedi, Jerec intends to use this omnipotence against the reborn Emperor. Luke Skywalker intended to betray and kill him from day one on Byss. Vergere, his wayward dark side adept, also attempted to assassinate him. Sarcev Quest and others of the Interim Ruling Council (including the Emperor's own personal physicians) arranged for the destruction of the genetic source material of his clones (implied at the behest of Lumiya -- one of his own Hand's!), resulting in his death.
The Empire itself was fractured to an enormous degree by warlords after the Emperor's first death. The only time that the warlords reunited was once Palpatine returned -- they feared his wrath, but they, in the end, did not share his ideology or desire for order. In the Empire, regardless of Palpatine's considerable charisma, ambition became the currency of the day. Not loyalty.
Don't lie. Vader's will kept popping up all throughout the saga. And Sidious also kept Vader in line by threatening to exploit the weaknesses of his suit. See Rise of Darth Vader.
- Mercer murders Captain Hawkings and cleverly traps Governor Swan.
- He's a sniper with a pistol.
- Mercer murders Sao Feng's bodyguards, who were each capable of defeating trained Company troops with sheer athleticism. He shot one directly between the eyes and eventually killed the other one -- after she stabbed him in the chest.
- He could have killed either Sao Feng or Will Turner in Singapore.
- He dueled Barbossa, who is canonically second only to Turner in swordsmanship, to a standstill.
- Sao Feng, who is the most feared of all the Pirate Lords, grabs a hold of Mercer in an aggressive, threatening manner. Mercer just looks at him, and Feng removes his hand and backs away.
- He taunts Jones.Yes, he is a badass. Moreso than Darth "LOLZ I R EMO AND KUTT MY RISTS!" Vader.
Where did Beckett trust Jack?
And, as I recall, Sidious was killed twice due to vulnerabilities established by trust: Vader and the Ruling Council.
The reluctant hero.
No, he murdered pirates and anyone who ever associated, directly or otherwise, with one -- including a child.
Yes, because Beckett was never shown to visibly enjoy Will, Elizabeth, Governor Swan, Jones, and Norrington being in his thrall.
Did you watch the movies?
Sorry, my argument last night was kind of shitty, probably because I had just completed four hours of brain-frying math work and it was 1:00 AM. So, anyways, I'm gonna round up my points. NOTE: Some of them are purely opinion and personal taste.
And never say never.
-Beckett's intense hatred of pirates- unlike Darth Sidious similar contempt for Jedi- is understandable and, if looked at from a certain point of prespective, even heroic (although the absolute genocide of pirates is an exagerrated, evil method). Pirates murder, steal, destroy, and rape. Hating them is understandable, and PotC could easily be retold into making Jack Sparrow and his cronies villains and Cutler Beckett an anti-hero. Indeed, can there be any denial that the world would be a better place without pirates? They're not guardians of the peace. Jedi may be fallible, prone to corruption, and an imperfect organization, but they aren't law-defying bandits.
-When has the East India Trading Company been proven to be a dictatorial organization designed to dominate every single aspect of life in the world? I'm not saying you're wrong, but just give me the exact quote, please. Funny enough, I haven't seen At World's End since it was in theatres. If you're unable to prove that claim, then we can simply look at Beckett as an agent of a commercial organization who possesses extreme hatred of pirates.
-Beckett manipulated Jones, that much is true. But he did that purely by attaining an object that makes Jones helpless against him- he may have taunted or relishded tormenting Jones, but it was certainly not due to his own prowess in mental games/power.
-All- and I repeat, all- minions attracted to Beckett were either because he kept them in check via a supernatural force (The Dutchman) or because they were interested in wealth and power. Perhaps it's a fault of the film, but the people who joined him did not do so because they hated pirates. Palpatine inspired deep, almost unwavering loyalty, and often times, assassination attempts on him were 'part of the plan'. Indeed, his charisma is proven by his rallying of the senate and achieving the control of the Republic via idealogical machinations and manipulations.
-Beckett's sadism, while I'd give you that it exists, simply doesn't go to the same extent as Palpatine's sadism and cruelty. First off, he did visibly display pleasure at torturing Jedi, causing genocide and murdering every single Jedi or 'traitor' in the Republic. By I'd say his sickest cruelest act is getting the most promising Jedi in history to help him by crushing his morality. Indeed, note the sick smile on Palpatine's face when he sees Vader in complete agony after hearing about his wife's death. He also simply did not have any sort of compassion- even after supposedly befriending, courting, and assisting Vader for dozens of years, he only cared about Vader's lost power, treated him as a mere thug he enjoyed taunting and messing around with, and was eager to encourage Vader's own son to kill him. This degree of sadism and uncaring for human life goes beyond what Beckett displayed, even if he did similar traits. He also had no problem letting another apprentice die. He didn't just treat the force he opposed (Jedi) like that- he even enjoyed crushing and torturing his own allies and virtually every single being in existence.
You can go ahead and give me his treatment of Jones, but that's difference. As much as he fought zealously against piracy, part of what Beckett represents is the imperialization and the taming of the seas. Pirates exist as a chaotic force that disrupt the order Beckett attempts to tame- Jones also acts as something of a chaotic force of nature which disrupts balance and order, and so, for Cutler, he can be seen as another obstacle in his path.
-I don't know. Maybe it's Beckett's demeanor, his physical appearance, his voice... something about that kind of prevents him from being compelling. I can't quite put my finger on it.
-Mercer never truly duelled Barbossa as far as I can remember. In fact, I even fished this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JabaZUb-I6Q&feature=related.
Clearly, Barbossa fought Mercer for about five seconds and constantly held the upper hand, including kicking Mercer in the gut and knocking him down. And Mercer actually ran away from him.
Plus, a bad death undermines a character entirely- Mercer died like a punk.
Next time I watch World's End, I'll play closer attention to his character, though.
... and I take it that it is your favorite movie of the trilogy?