The PT's central character

Now if that ain't the sound of one of you taking a bullet, then I'm outta here...

But before I go, and mostly because I've forgot and am tired of these short posts that you have to scroll back 4 pages to understand, who do you guys think is the PT's central character?

OB1 or Anakin.

Hmm fair point.

Do you think if Obi-Wan was unmistakably the main character, that the PT could have been better? (i.e fulfill your expectations more?)

For me the Pt already is great and yes, Anakin is the main character of the saga.

Originally posted by exanda kane
Hmm fair point.

Do you think if Obi-Wan was unmistakably the main character, that the PT could have been better? (i.e fulfill your expectations more?)

I think it could have been better then, although I will admit, I did like the PT, one of the few, as Makashi is as well. But just from the role OB1 played in the OT, it could have had the potential to be possibly better if OB1 was the main character.

I'm just thinking that it could have been better if Lucas portrayed the story as Obi-Wan speaks it in his hut on Tatooine, so that he sympathise with him more and really such the terrible things Anakin is doing.

Hmm, I wouldn't go that route, I prefer the events so that they are happening at the moment, and not someone reminiscing about them, then I consider the movie more biased.

Oh no, not Old Ben remniscing about the Clone Wars in a flashback, but I mean, keep the story of the PT as it stands now (all the allure and the excitement of the OT replaced with politics and taxation rows) but place more of an emphasis on what Obi-Wan feels. I never quite connect with Anakin and never really understand his motivations.

Alright, that sounds better, but the politics was too abundant in the PT, so not quite so much in the OT.

The politics was not too abundant in the PT.

And why should Kenobi have been the main character? Why stick with one character for 3 movies, only to kill him off in the 4th? Anakin was the logical choice, but again, i don't really think it was handled incredibly well.

Originally posted by Alliance
The politics was not too abundant in the PT.

And why should Kenobi have been the main character? Why stick with one character for 3 movies, only to kill him off in the 4th? Anakin was the logical choice, but again, i don't really think it was handled incredibly well.

The politics replaced the generic mythos of the original Star Wars. It might not have been explicitly abundant, but it's a bigger part of the trilogy than you might realise.

And personally, I'm not sure if I want Kenobi as the main character, but I am wondering if it would have been more effective. But as a thoughtful retort; why have Anakin killed off after the third movie (RotS)? Because lets face it, the OT Anakin has little to nothing in common with his younger self.

Thats because in the OT, the viewer is ignorant. The viewer isn't actuall given a choice about what is right and wrong...he is told in black and white. Politics is a huge issue in the saga, in the PT, whats going on is "showed."

Anakin isn't killed off, he transforms. Vader has little in common with Anakin, until he slowly gives up being Vader throughout the OT...😬

Can he really be considered to be Anakin with so few real parts?

Originally posted by Alliance
Thats because in the OT, the viewer is ignorant. The viewer isn't actuall given a choice about what is right and wrong...he is told in black and white. Politics is a huge issue in the saga, in the PT, whats going on is "showed."

Anakin isn't killed off, he transforms. Vader has little in common with Anakin, until he slowly gives up being Vader throughout the OT...😬

Alliance, I'd expect better from you than to lap up all the nonsense Lucas comes out with 🙄

But it still makes sense.

In the OT, we already see an establish Empire and Rebels fighting them for freedom, the PT had to explain, how that came to be, thats why there is allot of politics in the PT.

I believe a film on a taxation feud is a film wasted though.

Such a premise could have been conveyed much more concisely and enjoyably.

Originally posted by exanda kane
I believe a film on a taxation feud is a film wasted though.

Such a premise could have been conveyed much more concisely and enjoyably.

Exactly. It SHOULD have been conveyed as a test of Sidious' power, both militarily and politically.

Good think I thought of that and incorporated it into my fic.

Test of Sidious' power?

Explain 🙄

my EU theory being:

Sidious originally wanted to overwhelm the Jedi by brute force. when he thought he had found the chosen one, he invaded the planet, widening an already present civil rebellion weakening the planet until it split form the Republic, starting the Seperatist movement. however, the boy he thought was the chosen one dies and the overthrown of the pro-Republic government fails. Sidious regroups.

Then, year later, when Sidious thinks he has found the chosen one again, he invades Naboo. This time, he has a stronger Trade Fed and invades a planet that he can easily control. Hoever, Amidala proves to be quite adept despite the fact that she's 14. Palpatine pushes as far as Supreme Chancellor, but doesn't get the dictatorship he wants. Still, he can keep an eye on the chosen one and convert him, rather than the direct training he tried on iridonia.

Finally, Palpatine has more than enough political power and military force. however, this time instead of trying to villivy the jedi, he uses them in his own scheme to legitamize the war through the clones, enabling him to destroy the jedi, his enemies, and his allies, leaving just him at the top.