You're really reaching about something silly. If you're trying to spare the Anakin character and thus the story from bad movie-making, then this instance is bottom of the priority list. The film may not directly state "Anakin murdered children, he's bad" but it does heavily... heavily imply that he did via the inclusion of Vader and only Vader marching up to the temple, Vader activating his saber in front of the children, and the sudden transition from Yoda and Obi-Wan's observation to the butchering of the Separatist Council by Vader. Lucas sucked at making his prequels, but it would take an absolute retard who has been living on Mars his whole life not to understand what is being conveyed. That or the worst nitpicker since... well since nitpicking began.
__________________ Recently Produced and Distributed Young but High-Ranking Political Figure of Royal Ancestry within the Modern American Town Affectionately Referred To as Bel-Air.
Registered: Jun 2010
Location: Hey, Mikey likes it!!
Account Restricted
Anakin was a great character with so many emotional senes. wouldn't you kill some random black guy to save your pregnant wife and unborn child? Once ur @ that point, there's no going back ether. The jedi would have had his head. Had 2 get rid of tehm all.
I did, and I don't know what you're trying to prove. Vader was the only lightsaber-wielder on the Empire's side attacking the Jedi. Unless you're suggesting that the scene from the movie is meant to imply that another Jedi turned on the younglings... I really don't know what the point of this is.
__________________ Recently Produced and Distributed Young but High-Ranking Political Figure of Royal Ancestry within the Modern American Town Affectionately Referred To as Bel-Air.
What? No. It simply says in the novelization that Anakin wasn't actually the one killing the children, and nothing from the movie contradicts that.
I admit I am reaching, and I'm doing it purposely in order to better fill in the story around Anakin's ridiculous fall. Its a theory, i'm certainly not expecting you to take it as canon gold.
According to Wookiee that cites something called Star Wars Rebellion #6: The Ahakista Gambit, Part 1, after slashing Drallig, the Clone Troopers gunned down the group of Padawans he was protecting.
The film, however, clearly states there were younglings (don't argue about whether they were all children or whether it was "just that one" Yoda was inspecting and he wasn't really a child) that were killed by a lightsaber. That group was lieing far too close to each other for one of them to have been killed by Vader while the rest were all shot a foot and a half away from him. And unless those tricky cubs hiding in the Council chambers were wily enough to actually get past Vader...
Seriously, this is silly. The book makes his fall all the more believable as it is.
__________________ Recently Produced and Distributed Young but High-Ranking Political Figure of Royal Ancestry within the Modern American Town Affectionately Referred To as Bel-Air.
"stood aside" definitly fills in the gaps on that, if that is a theory I want to play with. No way to prove it, but no way to disprove it either, subjectivity reigns. Clearly ROTS was trying to paint a picture where Anakin did the killing, BUT... if we can make it fit better without defying canon, why not?
Because frankly it does defy canon. Defies the movie. At least one is confirmed killed by Vader, and common sense (and I'm stressing this; defiance of the movie's very clear implications is delving in to HWKN's waters) dictates he killed like a dozen others too.
We don't need to remove the Younglings deaths at his hands to make his character likable and sympathetic. The novel won me over well before Knightfall, and continued after it too. Movies (canon Vader kills children)=shite. Novels (no specific mention of said killings)=brilliant.
__________________ Recently Produced and Distributed Young but High-Ranking Political Figure of Royal Ancestry within the Modern American Town Affectionately Referred To as Bel-Air.
And I just remembered the prelude to Kenobi's and Yoda's talk: "Not even the children survived." "Killed not by clones..."
__________________ Recently Produced and Distributed Young but High-Ranking Political Figure of Royal Ancestry within the Modern American Town Affectionately Referred To as Bel-Air.
First, where is the confirmed kill of a Youngling by Anakin? Back that up?
We have a confirmed kill of 3 PADAWANS by anakin. I am just asking for the youngling evidence. You haven't provided it yet.
This isn't HWKN's waters, he would be claiming it was fact until you disproved it, I think its just interesting to think about. Sometimes I like to discuss star wars.
Also: I already addressed the Kenobi Padme conversation, did you even read the thread so far? Kenobi would have been LYING in order to get Padme to tell him where Anakin is.
Its interesting is all. I'm in no way trying to claim its factual.
and... how is that not out of character? when has a jedi ever directly made a bold faced lie, for the sake of "suiting their purposes"? because hell if obi-wan really wanted to know where anakin went he could have just mind tricked her.
also, theres just as little evidence pointing to him lying as there is to anakin not killing younglings. youre making one hell of a double standard.
Registered: Jun 2010
Location: Hey, Mikey likes it!!
Account Restricted
But the shorty goes "master skywalker, there's too many of them, what are we going to do?"
KSZHZHZHHHHH *lightsaber turns on*
then "killed not by blaster, these padawans were, killed by lightsaber!" Obi-Wan "Who could have done this?"(obviously talking in horrific tones as if children had been killed)
later to padme: "There was a security footage of him killing younglings *breaks up*"
Jun 6th, 2010 04:00 AM
I think its just interesting to think about. Sometimes I like to discuss star wars.
when has a jedi ever directly made a bold faced lie, for the sake of "suiting their purposes"? because hell if obi-wan really wanted to know where anakin went he could have just mind tricked her. 
