PT Disconnect between TPM and AOTC/ROTS?

Your opinion is well taken and I can't say you are wrong in your feelings. Some people just have this feeling of disconnect, while others do not.

My reasons for feeling this way:

1. Anakin is a different actor, with a different screen persona. It's also weird to see Anakin and Padme "look" the same age in AOTC.
2. Qui Gon is dead.
3. Obi-Wan plays second-fiddle to Qui Gon in TPM, which throws off the feel in AOTC when he is in the main mentor role.
4. Jar Jar plays a large role in TPM, which is greatly diminished in the next two films (thankfully )
5. A more animated childish feel in TPM to me (battle droids, Gungans). AOTC seems to deal with more adult issues, particularly with Ani and Padme's relationship.

Just my $.02. I'm not saying anyone else is wrong, but these are some of the reasons I feel a disconnect with TPM. I digress.

 

One of the dominant thematic motifs of AOTC, in the opinion of the webmaster of the Lard Biscuit site, Donald Trull, is "the progression of roles, duties and responsibilities":

http://www.lardbiscuit.com/lard/shroud5.html

The characters have shifted quite a lot, and I think this graphic of his puts it across quite well:




It's no longer the same stage with the same players ( / the same players in the same roles).

There is a sudden leap forward.

TPM is more of your prologue / overture for the series as a whole.

It's part of the PT narrative, to be sure, but it's also a little less connected, in some basic senses.

Yet TPM and AOTC form as strong a pair as AOTC and ROTS (and TPM and ROTS). There is all kinds of doubling and rhyming in Star Wars.

Plus much in the way of alteration, digression, counter-posing, etc.

 

Interesting post, Cryogenic.

The graphic you provided definitely connects some of the dots.

 

Yes, I believe so.

The graphic beautifully exemplifies the maxim that "a picture speaks a thousand words".

For all the ingenuity of D. Trull's writing, one little JPEG can speak so much truth.

Interesting, too -- forgive my tangent -- that Star Wars can be dissected and reformulated with visual tabulations.

As an extremely-dense visual work of art, in a visually-driven mass-media culture, it is changing the state of things.

 

Those were your reasons? That's it? You're entitled to your opinions, but . . . hmmm, never mind.

 

Between TPM and AOTC, we all know there was a 10 year time period difference. There is not as big of a break between AOTC and ROTS. I feel like this could reveal some disconnect in TPM, but I agree with the above posts. TPM seems a lot more like a prequel prequel rather than the beginning of the PT. We needed to see TPM in order for everything else to fall into place.

 

This is the bit that is relevant to my initial point. Yes it is notional, and I don't disagree with the idea that Star Wars deals with issues notionally as a whole. The point being that the notion 'slavery' is a more general, fluid form in this notional sense. Star Wars deals with notions of 'enslavement' - as being 'hemmed in', feeling trapped etc.

Bear with me on this. I fully accept that that notion 'slavery' is an aspect of the PT. My point was, and this was really simple, that there isn't a depiction of slavery in TPM. TPM , or the PT does not set out to depict slavery; there is an introduction of the motif 'enslavement' but there is not a depiction of slavery in TPM. That is the whole of it.

 

the one thing that I'm sorry about with the jump in time is that we don't actually see Obi-Wan train Anakin.

 

Is that all you have to add? People like you are very irritating on discussion forums because your type rarely has anything worthwhile to add to the conversation. Instead, you sit on your high horse and criticize other people's ideas. If you want to critique something, fine. I think Cryogenic had an excellent critique in fact. But, condescending responses like this are very showing of your character.

Judging from your first post in this thread, you think this whole discussion is stupid anyway. But, apparently you need to get your post count up.


Sent from far away via R3-S12

 

Thank you, Pearlsaber.

I'll add that the dominant motif identified by D. Trull is very fitting of the milieu of the film generally, in that the Jedi are faced with a changing galaxy, and must confront the prospect of perpetually-waning powers and gradual obsolescence / irrelevance.

How they deal, or don't do deal with this, is, in many ways, the central thesis of the film. Will they adjust their thinking in time? The process of evolution shows that species are landed with a stark choice (one that is forever ongoing): adapt or die.

This sudden shift, in a way, puts us more in the shoes of the Jedi, first by discombobulating us, then by allowing us to intellectually identify -- if only tangentially -- with their growing predicament, even if they're not fully cognizant of it themselves.

Just another take on the TPM - AOTC divide.

 

I guess I just don't see it, but that is just me. I know what you are saying because I feel it between III and IV. But not with I and II.

 

Since TPM is my least favorite film in the Saga, I'm glad it is the way it is. Easier to ignore and jump right into Episode I - Attack of the Clones.

 

Not to make a simple "drive by" comment, but there are consequences to many things without certain things being repressive, y'know. If I spend my time at work on the boards (do not) and my boss catches me and warns, "I catch you again, you're fired," - am I working under a repressive Code?

My point, simply, is that being reminded (or shouted at, if you prefer) of "proper behavior" and consequences is not of itself "repressive" although it may seem so to the individual.

But overall, agree or not, Cryogenic does make a case for his interpretation, although I don't buy all of it.

 

Yeah, that's all I had to add. So what? I was too disgusted by what I had read to think of a reply.

 

Da. Seize means of production and smash bonds of capitalist oppression for to make glorious socialist utopia. Hail Lenin, comrade.

 

I don't feel that there is an excessive tonal shift between TPM and ATOC. To me, it seems to go from a mostly light action story in TPM, to a somewhat darker AOTC (mostly the stuff on Tatooine), to ROTS that progressively gets darker as it goes along. For me, if anything, there is a greater tonal shift between AOTC and ROTS, because at least in AOTC, after Anakin loses his mother, slaughters the Tuskens, and grieves, he sort of returns to good spirits pretty quickly and that middle part is sort of forgotten (just like Alderaan's destruction is sort of just forgotten about in ANH). I guess one thing that changed from TPM to AOTC is the reduction of the silly humor. I think GL intended Jar Jar to be background comic relief like C-3PO is in the OT, but too often Jar Jar takes over scenes. Since GL decided to reduce Jar Jar's role in AOTC, the only comic relief comes from the droids (most of all in the arena scenes), and their comic relief is less loud, more understated, less in-your-face silly.

 

I don't really have a problem with it. The PT is, after all, he story of the end of a once great, democratic civilisation and the beginning of an oppressive, totalitarian one. Somewhere along the line is the shifting point and so there has to be a contrast either side of that point. The characters evolve / devolve as the case may be, depending on their respective roles in this seismic societal shift.

 

I don't see that. That is true of the OT which really was a stand alone film followed by a duology which doesn't really fit very well at all when you really look at them.

So the PT really are prequels to that duology because going forward from the PT into "IV" really only works in broad terms. To go from the PT to V and VI is no problem as the basis of the story is the same. A IV that really followed from and came before the other films would be quite a different story.

 

I actually see a duology including Anh and Tesb and a quadrilogy including rotj and the prequels. The Vader father / shrinking universe quadrilogy.

 

I'm currently watching AotC right now, and have to say that I'm also not seeing/sensing any disconnect between it and TPM; quite the opposite, in fact. There are a substantial number of 'thematic echoes' from TPM in AotC, among them being the scene where Bail, Mas Amedda, Palpatine, and the Malastarian talk about hedging the Senate to approve the use of s Clone army and discuss proposing a measure that would give Palpatine himself the ability to approve an army (which echoes both the scene where Palpatine talks about Galactic politics and the Naboo invasion with Parke and the scene where Jar Jar briefly talks with Padme and unknowingly gives her the idea to take back her planet with the help of his people), the scene where Jar Jar proposes the very measure I just referenced (which echoes the scene where Padme calls for a vote of no confidence in Valorum), the scene where Typho discusses security affairs with Obi-Wan (which echoes the many scenes in which Panaka discusses security affairs with Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan), and the scene where Padme, Jamilla, and Sio Bibble discuss Galactic politics (which echoes the scene in which Padme, Bibble, and Panaka discuss Galactic affairs with Palpatine via holoconference).

 

I agree. There are things that link the three films together like Obi-Wan, Palpatine, the Jedi, Coruscant, Padme, but by and large, the feel of TPM versus the next two is quite different. Also, the PT does not seem to follow the overall formula of the OT, so the films themselves have a much different feel and a disconnect all of their own to the originals. Part of that is uncontrollable given the actual amount of time that passed between both trilogies, but a better job could've been done to link the two.

 

Obviously there is a disconnect between TPM and the other two prequels. TPM feels like a prequel to the prequels- you start with AOTC and miss nothing. It is enjoyable though, with Qui-Gon and Dart Maul and what not.

First off, Qui-Gon and Darth Maul are gone and Obi-Wan and Anakin are now the main characters (Obi-Wan didn't do much in the last film). So, instead of three movies to show their "friendship" (which was poorly portrayed IMO), we're left with two. Leading the Separatists is Dooku. He could have been in the last film, or Darth Maul could have been in this film.

Secondly, Coruscant is the central planet. Last movie we have Naboo, led by the 14-year-old Queen Amidala (who is now 24 BTW), but now we are expected to transition to the larger conflict on the galactic capital. TPM did a poor job of showing Palpatine's plans to use the Naboo conflict for his own gain, which is why I would have loved to see Plaguies in TPM (after the Luceno novel.)

Lastly, Anakin is a whiny brat after being a great kid in the last film. We don't really get to see his training, so the transition period form slave to Jedi leaves something to be desired.

All in all, TPM is disconnected from the other two films.

 

This is a neutral observation (in no way designed as a judgement), but: If you're indeed conviced you miss nothing when you skip TPM, this explains why you can't enjoy the PT as a whole. TPM is essential for both Anakin's turn and the Republic's downfall.

 

I never said I don't enjoy the PT. But seriously, how is it essential to Anakin's turn and the Republic's downfall?

 

Very essential.

1. You see Anakin's relationship with his mother and understand why he would seek vengeance for her death. And not just because it is his mother, but because he believed that one day he would come back and free her from Watto.

2. You see what it is that set the events of the fall of the Republic in motion. The Naboo invasion, Padme humiliating Nute and Palpatine becoming Chancellor.

3. You learn about Anakin's destiny as the Chosen One. See hints of a coming discord between him and Mace Windu. Seeing Anakin being recruited by Qui-gon and Obi-wan taking him on as his Padawan.