Originally posted by queeq
In what way is he different then? I don't see it. The only difference is that he has yellow eyes and is called Darth.I keep saying this: adult Anakin is an angry, arrogant, self-serving, power-hungry murderer of men, women and children in AOTC. And he still is at the end of ROTS. What is the bloody character arc here? And place has nothing to do with it...
As I said, place in terms of character. And the difference is that Anakin resists, or tries to resist, these dark thoughts. This is most obvious when he kills Dooku in RotS. By the end of the film, he has fully embraced this darkness. It’s an arc… A huge arc.
Originally posted by queeqThis has been exp,aimed to you so many times and just because you don't acknowledge it that doesn't mean it wasn't in the movie.
I dunno. ESB comes very close.And can someone tell me what "arc" they think Anakin has in ROTS? How is he different at the end than at the beginning? He's angry man wanting more power at the beginning, and at the end he is still that. I say: NO ARC!
Originally posted by Khazra Reborn
👇ESB has nothing on either of those. Bill the Butcher is probably the best character in cinema history.
Maybe, but the OTHER characters are pretty fast in Gangs... And it's a long movie and Bill cannot hold it up alone.
Good movie, but hardly a masterpiece. It's no Goodfellas, Taxi Driver or Wolf of Wall Street.
Originally posted by quanchi112
This has been exp,aimed to you so many times and just because you don't acknowledge it that doesn't mean it wasn't in the movie.
It is NOT explained. His character doesn't change!
To say he resists his character first and then at the end he doesn't resist it anymore (see Ares834) means: his character doesn't change, only a little bit of behaviour changes i.e. the resisting bit. But he kills men, women and children before he gives up his resistance and justifies himself (tuskens) and he does the same after the fall (jedi, younglings, Padme). So in TWO movies we get a little itsiebitsie bit of character change.... too flimsy for a genuine arc.
Han Solo has a bigger arc as supporting character in ANH.
^ Of course he frigging changed.
If killing Tusken men and children was the same as killing human men and children, then I doubt Padme would have married Ani after that. Remember when he kills Jedi children she can't believe it, and rejects him when he admits it.
So Tuskens are obviously closer to animals than to humans.
Ergo Anakin wasn't flat out evil until his character arc went there in ROTS. Prior to that we saw him willing to risk his life to save his friends, and even clones. Dark Side Anakin/Vader wouldn't do that. He would kill his friends, and kill any trooper that displeased him.
Originally posted by queeqHe did change. It was obvious to everyone and has been explained to you. If you think him becoming a Sith Lord obsessed with power was the same as when the film began then I can't help you. He was a Jedi arguing with Palpatine in the beginning and he was his compliant servant by the films end. He kills men, women, and children who were there when his mother died. He didn't attack the Jedi who he fought along side. In the beginning of the film he wouldn't leave Kenobi behind when Palpatine said to but by the films end he was trying to kill him. Just stop with this nonsensical theory he didn't change at all by the films end. It's silly and you just hate the prequels. That's fine but don't try to pass your opinion which isn't a fact.
Maybe, but the OTHER characters are pretty fast in Gangs... And it's a long movie and Bill cannot hold it up alone.Good movie, but hardly a masterpiece. It's no Goodfellas, Taxi Driver or Wolf of Wall Street.
It is NOT explained. His character doesn't change!
To say he resists his character first and then at the end he doesn't resist it anymore (see Ares834) means: his character doesn't change, only a little bit of behaviour changes i.e. the resisting bit. But he kills men, women and children before he gives up his resistance and justifies himself (tuskens) and he does the same after the fall (jedi, younglings, Padme). So in TWO movies we get a little itsiebitsie bit of character change.... too flimsy for a genuine arc.
Han Solo has a bigger arc as supporting character in ANH.
Iyo not mine.
Originally posted by queeq
It is NOT explained. His character doesn't change!To say he resists his character first and then at the end he doesn't resist it anymore (see Ares834) means: his character doesn't change, only a little bit of behaviour changes i.e. the resisting bit. But he kills men, women and children before he gives up his resistance and justifies himself (tuskens) and he does the same after the fall (jedi, younglings, Padme). So in TWO movies we get a little itsiebitsie bit of character change.... too flimsy for a genuine arc.
Nope. That’s a change. Is it a complete 180 of the character? No, of course not. But it is a change and an arc.
Originally posted by queeq
Han Solo has a bigger arc as supporting character in ANH.
Nope. He starts off with a heart of gold and at the end he follows that heart of gold. That’s not a change!
Err... Han Solo started out as a pirate that shot first, went for money only and changed into someone with a small but warm heart.
Originally posted by Darth Thor
If killing Tusken men and children was the same as killing human men and children, then I doubt Padme would have married Ani after that. Remember when he kills Jedi children she can't believe it, and rejects him when he admits it.
Does she? IN the movie I saw, she DOES marry him!!!!! All he did in between that psycho scene and the marriage is screw up: he screwed up the rescue and he screwed up his fight with Dooku. He didn't do anything that she would have fallen in love for. His only moment of vulnerability was in that garage. Darth Psycho revealing himself.
Originally posted by Darth Thor
So Tuskens are obviously closer to animals than to humans.
That's a judgement call on your account. From a Jedi perspective the Force is an energy field created by ALL living things. ALL live is precious, tuskens and humans alike. We even hear QGJ shout "Anakin! NOOOOO!" from the netherworld. Clearly that was a very very NO GO area from a Jedi perspective. Killing is killing...
Originally posted by Darth Thor
Ergo Anakin wasn't flat out evil until his character arc went there in ROTS. Prior to that we saw him willing to risk his life to save his friends, and even clones. Dark Side Anakin/Vader wouldn't do that. He would kill his friends, and kill any trooper that displeased him.
Well, I disagree. All I see Anakin do is stuff he THINKS he should do, for himself. That the flat out evil isn't visible to anyone is not an argument. I don't see any visible evil in Palpatine until he reveals himself to Anakin... or not even then. He just SAYS he's evil, we SEE him as evil when he attacks Mace and his slow buddies. Yet, we all agree that Palpy was evil at the beginning of TPM, and even before that.
And the saving of the clone is one of the weirdest thing ever... the first time he sees clones (in AOTC) he doesn't care if they get wiped out by the dozens. And anywhere else clones are clearly considered disposable. And then... on a very important mission (saving the CHANCELLOR, head of the ENTIRE Republic) he decides to save one measly clone... Total inconsistent writing crap... makes no sense at all.
Originally posted by quanchi112
He did change. It was obvious to everyone and has been explained to you. If you think him becoming a Sith Lord obsessed with power was the same as when the film began then I can't help you.
To counter your argument, I will simply quote Anakin himself from AOTC responding to Padme's question (You're not all powerful):"I should be, some day I'll be the most powerful Jedi ever!"
And then he starts blaming OB1 in exactly the same way he did at the beginning of AOTC, saying that OB1 is holding him back. Which tells me: he already felt this way, that is why he was complaining to Padme... But now he's angry... he doesn't control his anger, he acts on it and feels no guilt. "Once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny." Anakin went down that path some time between TPM and AOTC. All we see is that his evil is cloaked by some form of taught goodness (maybe he doesn't realise it himself, and is that his arc, but even then... the realisation of evil doesn't do much for him either... he just blames OB1 again).
This guy in the garage is clearly an unstable, power hungry murdering psychopath i.e. Darth Vader. Except Vader was much more controlled in the OT.
So, there. There is no real, significant change... and if there is some minor change, it's only in appearance and in any way, way too small for two movies.
Originally posted by quanchi112
Just stop with this nonsensical theory he didn't change at all by the films end. It's silly and you just hate the prequels. That's fine but don't try to pass your opinion which isn't a fact.
The reason I dislike the PT is BECAUSE there is no arc to any of these characters, because despite all the flashy CGI, these movies are pretty dull, with inconsistent storylines and shallow characters that have no arc.
Why do YOU think the PT movies are liked the least of all the SW movies. If we go by IMDB and Rotten Tomatoes... And that's quite a lot of movie loving folk!
You see he had a lot of immaturity and flaws that there was a clear difference as I already pointed it out. We see his selflessness by waiting for Obi instead of worrying about saving himself to the end of the film speculating on overthrowing Palpatine and trying to kill Kenobi. You didn't like the a character arc but it was there despite your opinion.
It was minute. Most of his so called 'selflessness' was talked about.
'Waiting for OB1' is selflessness??? Wow... some major act of selflessness...
And yes, I didn't like his character. I think he's one of the worst SW characters ever designed. He's not well written. And in paraphrasing Anakin himself: "He should be. He should have been the greatest SW character ever." And he's not. Unfortunately.
Originally posted by queeqSo you admit that was selflessness which was completely different to how the film ended up. I agree Hayden was awful in the display of acting we witnessed but he did have an arc. I really, really enjoyed Rots but it was far from perfect but most movies are. I enjoyed it and to me it's that simple when watching a movie. Very high rewatch ability factor.
It was minute. Most of his so called 'selflessness' was talked about.'Waiting for OB1' is selflessness??? Wow... some major act of selflessness...
And yes, I didn't like his character. I think he's one of the worst SW characters ever designed. He's not well written. And in paraphrasing Anakin himself: "He should be. He should have been the greatest SW character ever." And he's not. Unfortunately.
Well no. I don't see a selfless Anakin in AOTC or ROTS. I saw a selfless Anakin in TPM, but he was a completely different character when we meet him in AOTC.
The whole conversation in the elevator with OB1, his arrogant and impudent behaviour in the convo with Padme, his talk with OB1 where he makes himself more important to OB1, his whining about OB1 with Padme in her bedroom... all I see is an arrogant, selfish brat. They few minute moment that could be interpreted as selflessness pale in comparison to there scenes.
An I also disagree that Hayden was awful, he had awful material to work with (i.e. no character arc, lousy line, green screen and only Lucas to tell him how to say his lines). Maybe he isn't one of those great actors that can make cupcakes out of turds, like Ewan finally managed in ROTS. Took him two movies though...
Originally posted by queeqWe see he's an immature kid dealing with issues for three films. He's arrogant and someone they should be worried about and finally goes fully dark side by the end which is different than the cocky, bratty Jedi.
Well no. I don't see a selfless Anakin in AOTC or ROTS. I saw a selfless Anakin in TPM, but he was a completely different character when we meet him in AOTC.The whole conversation in the elevator with OB1, his arrogant and impudent behaviour in the convo with Padme, his talk with OB1 where he makes himself more important to OB1, his whining about OB1 with Padme in her bedroom... all I see is an arrogant, selfish brat. They few minute moment that could be interpreted as selflessness pale in comparison to there scenes.
An I also disagree that Hayden was awful, he had awful material to work with (i.e. no character arc, lousy line, green screen and only Lucas to tell him how to say his lines). Maybe he isn't one of those great actors that can make cupcakes out of turds, like Ewan finally managed in ROTS. Took him two movies though...