PT Plot Holes and Inconsistencies in the Prequel Trilogy

Hi. I've only just started reading a lot of this fascinating debate, but I wanted to jump in with one thing.


I saw where you said Self-Discipline cannot be taught, it has to be self-taught. And I couldn't disagree with that more.

It CAN be self taught. But it absolutely can and NEEDS to be taught.

Especially in extremely talented individuals. Kids who excell in anything, from athletics to art to academics desperately need to be worked with to instill ideas of self-discipline because they are at much greater risk of not learning it on their own.

Kids who struggle or perform at average or slightly higher levels can learn to regulate how much practice/training/research/study they need based upon their needs and their level of desire to succeed. Kids that can achieve great things without feeling like they are trying, really really struggle later when their activities start to get harder. I know a great deal about kids who have been "off the charts" academically in elementary school only to struggle mightily when math and basic algebra turns to advanced algebra and Trig. They simply don't know how to study or moreso lack the compusure it takes to "make yourself" study.

With Athletes its also very similar. "Naturals" and "Born" athletes tend to really hit a wall when they hit the high school level or even college. When their level of competition finally starts to approach their own, they struggle with knowing how to do the work to stay on top.

Anakin needed extra attention, first and foremost because of his late entry into the order of course, but also because of his ridiculous power. Every Hall of Fame athelete played mostly for coaches and teachers who were never even close to their level of talent, yet they still learned a great deal from these coaches and would never have been able to make the Hall of Fame without this learning.

Just my thoughts.

-T

 

Food for thought - just curious, how would one teach self-discipline?

 

I've found that you get in trouble with the idea of "The Value of Work" Which often gets thrown around as some kind of respect thing. And you hear a lot of jokes about fathers and grandfathers saying "When I was your age...." and "You've got it easy" etc.

You have to teach kids that there is value to them in the work and practice and not just in the results. Its hard to do. But even in the smallest cases its important. My son Luke (yeah, thats right) is only 3 1/2 but he loves his letter blocks so much that we are already working on spelling 3 and 4 letter words. He's advanced, but certainly not a reading prodigy or anything. But when he sounds out a word. I've already begun to give compliments like "Thats good work" rather than "You're so smart" This is, admittedly a small thing, but its symbolic of something bigger. Kids get 15+5=20 really fast, without ever having to be taught to add the 5s and carry the one. Its important to show them that it ok to do that. These kids always run the risk of getting bored and becoming impatient. This is nothing new. But its desperately important that they learn patience here. Learn to pay attention and listen to the rules and how things get done.

Same in sports. Especially with conditioning. Ken Griffey Jr. being an example of a "natural" Who was unbelievably talented and in the Major Leagues at 18. When he hit 30 he started getting injured regularly and struggled to finish an entire season any year until he retired. His former manager said that he knew he'd struggle later because he had really bad physical fitness habits. That he'd never had to worry about it and didn't appreciate what it meant to play a kids game with a 30 year old's body.

I don't know. Im kinda talking out of my ass I guess. Im not trained in any of this specifically, but I have coached and tutored and am raising two small kids and have done a lot of reading.

 

Well, other than a cat, I've nothing and no one to teach, but certainly helping someone "want" to do something via encouragement or whatever method works best is the goal.

I hated reading as a kid - see Jane, see Spot, see Jane see Spot. Hated reading.

Then I discovered Fairytales of the World which pushed me into older books which pushed me into Laura Ingalls Wilder - and guess who was a bookworm in elementary school and forever on? I wanted to read, I lived to devour books.

Math, now, never did quite grasp it and never found the "want" to get beyond that but had someone helped me understand what I had a blind spot to - well, who knows.

 

Here is an article - http://ruby.fgcu.edu/courses/80337/Watson/RESEACH.html

 

That's the problem. Anakin's already got her six feet under/charred to ash in his mind. The task was to prepare himself to accept that they will die if it is their time. To not dwell on the negative. I knew that the people in my life were going to die, but I learned to not dwell on it all the time, otherwise I'd drive myself crazy. It wasn't an easy process. But it was doable and when it came time to face that loss, I was able to deal with it far more efficiently if I hadn't.

That came when Obi-wan began training him.

He was already afraid before going to the Temple. He was afraid when he was told that Shmi wouldn't be able to go.

Because he told him what he wanted to hear. It's also because he knew that Palpatine would not say the things that the Council would say. He would sweep under the rug the mistakes Anakin made, whereas Obi-wan would lecture him like Qui-gon had with him. Obi-wan screwed up with his Lightsaber by leaving it ignited while underwater on more than one occasion, until he finally learned his lesson. Anakin screwed up by losing his grip on his Lightsaber and Obi-wan has to keep lecturing him about it.

I was talking about in AOTC.

Obviously not. He knew that Anakin wasn't 100% fine after his outburst in the Council chambers, but he didn't know the depth of his problems.

 

But it is their psychological makeup that effects how they use the Force. Even when a normal person goes through a mental breakdown, they would only hurt themselves. They don't have the power to inflict the amount of geological damage that a Jedi or Sith can cause.

But that's like asking the gods of Mt. Olympus to live like normal people. If they had, the earth would suffer a disaster of biblical porportions just like the galaxy suffered the same kind of disaster when Anakin joined the Sith.

Anakin wanted to leave and he wanted to be a Jedi. It never occured to him that his mother wouldn't be coming with him until Qui-Gon told him so and if Anakin wanted a family with Padme, then he should've quit his service to the Jedi Order. Instead, he wanted to have it both ways so that IS being selfish. To quote Spock, "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one" and that is the motto the Jedi live by for their primary concern is the galaxy, not themselves but Anakin didn't respect that.

He has EVERYTHING to do with that conversation because he's manipulating Anakin into forsaking his jedi principals just so he can be with Padme. As for Anakin being the same person, I really don't believe that because in TPM, he was a sweet, loving boy who knew nothing of greed or power but by AOTC, he's angry and bitter over having Obi-wan as his master and he's under the delusion that he's already surpassed Yoda in terms of power and swordfighting skills.

I'm telling you Anakin has indeed changed and that's due to PalpSidious's influence.

Even before PalpSidious made that "more powerful than Yoda" comment, Anakin tells Obi-wan that very same thing as they were chasing Zam Wessell on Coruscant. That major event that you spoke of shows you how far PalpSidious's influence has warped Anakin's mind to the point where he becomes power-mad...hence, why he tells Padme that he'll be the most powerful Jedi ever.

He never met Anakin until after Padme freed her home planet Naboo from the Trade Federation. As for the Jedi, they may not have made a great 1st impression but they never treated Anakin like an unwanted pet. In AOTC, the Council gave Anakin his first solo assignment and we see both Mace and Yoda defending Anakin when Obi-wan disapproved of their decision. Of course, the roles were reversed by ROTS with Obi-wan defending Anakin while the Council rejects him due to his loyalty to PalpSidious but Anakin regained the

 

I have a personal theory. To me the Jedi in the PT seemed afraid. They feared the dark side and all the emotions that could lead to it. So they tried to block or supress them. But they forgot that FEAR of dark side itself and as long as they were afraid, the dark side could still snare them. Perhaps that is why they could not sense Palpatine, they feared the dark side so much that they had gotten blind to it.
A jedi that can truly face his fears, even the fear of the dark side, would have no risk of falling. He or she could see the dark side for what it is, accept it and see beyond. They would not fear those emotions but at the same time know not to give in to them or loose hope.
And hope is what the PT Jedi seemed to lack when it came to the dark side. From what is said it seems that they thought that turning was a one way ticket, once you turned you could never turn back.
But Luke and Anakin showed otherwise, you CAN break free and reject evil and embarce the light again. Noone is totally damned, there is always hope. And perhaps that is what bringing balance to the Force is, showing that a person can turn and still turn back, that it is never too late. The dark side is not forever, light can exist within the darkness.

A person that has access to weapons can do quite a bit of harm and if this person has weapons of mass destruction they can do far more than a Jedi ever could.

If Anakin had just quit the order to marry Padme, his Force powers are still there. He can still get overcome by his emotions and fall to the dark side. Leaving would not change this unless you think that as soon as a Jedi leaves the order they are suddenly immune to the dark side.

I would say that his weapon and all his training to use that weapon made the difference and not so much his Force powers. Anakin has had ten years of training to use that weapon, the other farmers are just that, farmers, not warriors. A skilled warrior with superior weapons can manage to kill a larger force, esp if he has the element of suprise.

Not really, what brought the galaxy down was Palpatine. And his plan for domination did not really rely on Anakin much. If Anakin had not been around then little would have changed. Palpatine would still become chancellor, order the clone army, start the war, get the extra powers and issue order 66.
He still would have won and there would no be less hope for the galaxy.

I think you are grossly overstating the power of the Jedi. They are not gods and they are not Superman.
A Jedi can be killed, as AotC show

 

Because of his abilities.

QUI-GON: "They have Podracing on Malastare. Very fast, very dangerous."

ANAKIN: "I'm the only human who can do it. Mom, what? I'm not bragging. It's true. Watto says he's never heard of a human doing it."

QUI-GON: "You must have Jedi reflexes if you race Pods."

To which Qui-gon demonstrates by catching Jar Jar's tongue as he uses it to snatch another piece of food. It's also confirmed in his conversation with Shmi.

QUI-GON: "He can see things before they happen. That's why he appears to have such quick reflexes. It's a Jedi trait."

Otherwise, Anakin would've crashed and burn long ago. Fatally.

That's what the Sith believe is the reason why the Jedi reject the dark side. There may be some truth in it, but maybe not.

The dark side was already growing stronger, which made it difficult to sense in him. Do note that Palpatine cannot sense Luke's arrival at Endor, nor does Vader sense Luke on the Death Star. I think that owes more to familiarity with someone in the Force.

In part, that is a balance. Though part of the reason that Luke succeeded was that he still loved his father and his father loved him. It is notable that the EU fallen Jedi who do turn back, do so because of love.

The visions would only come if he continued to put himself in a situation where he would turn. After all, because of the fact that he killed Dooku like he did, did he start having those visions. His focus determined his reality and that reality was that he was going down a dark and dangerous path. The visions were a warning to not continue on this road. If he took himself out of the conflict within the galaxy, then he wouldn't have turned.

It wasn't attachment that brought Vader back, it was the unconditional love and compassion for Anakin that did it. Luke didn't surrender to Vader just so that he could kill him. He came there to turn him back and kept showing that he forgave him for everything. Obi-wan came to Mustafar to kill Anakin, though he did try to show him how wrong he was. But in the end, Obi-wan let his training take over. Attachment is where the love becomes selfish and self-serving. In the ROTS novelization, it is said that Mace had an attachment to the Republic and that was his down

 

You're thinking of Christianity. Anakin didn't literally make redemption possible.

"Showing that a person can turn back" isn't what the balance of the Force is. The balance of the Force is a balance between the light and dark sides of the Force. Bringing balance to the Force is reversing the ascendancy of the dark side.

"Showing that a person can turn back" is just showing, it doesn't change the condition of the Force.

 

That's a truly excellent point - don't know if that was tried, whether it would have worked or not, but, yeah...agree.

 

It's not just your theory, it's also one of Matthew Stover. Here's a conversation between Luke and (I think) Kar Vastor.

 

It comes down to motivation and what is in your heart. Anakin wanted to stop Padme from dying because of a selfish desire to not be alone. It was all in about how this loss would affect him and not what she wanted. Note that Padme repeatedly says that she doesn't need him to do that, she just needs him to love her. Anakin refuses to sees things from her view and that is what pushes him along. When Luke is faced with losing his friends and sister, he also fights back against the idea of this loss. He feels that he isn't ready for the task at hand, due to his own reckless behavior. Luke ultimately doesn't turn because he doesn't want revenge on his father for all the years of suffering that he had caused. To himself, to Padme, to Leia, to Obi-wan, to the Jedi and the Republic at large. All he cares about is helping a man who needs help and he would rather die, than give up everything in order to keep the ones that he loves. This is what brings Vader back. He sees someone care for him the way he should have cared and once upon a time, he had done so. His sacrifice is to give up his own life, for his son's since he is thinking about him for once and not himself.

 

Oh, I like that. I do.

I'd always wondered if his anti-Sids move was for himself (to save his son) or for his son's sake (to save Luke) - not that it affects the final result, but the motivation - self or other motivated.

 

Lucas confirmed it on the ROTJ commentary.

"It will be about how young Anakin Skywalker became evil and then was redeemed by his son. But it's also about the transformation of how his son came to find the call and then ultimately realize what it was. Because Luke works intuitively through most of the original trilogy until he gets to the very end. And it?s only in the last act?when he throws his sword down and says, ?I?m not going to fight this??that he makes a more conscious, rational decision. And he does it at the risk of his life because the Emperor is going to kill him. It?s only that way that he is able to redeem his father. It?s not as apparent in the earlier movies, but when you see the next trilogy, then you see the issue is, How do we get Darth Vader back? How do we get him back to that little boy that he was in the first movie, that good person who loved and was generous and kind? Who had a good heart."

--George Lucas, Star Wars Trilogy VHS Boxset 2000


"You learn that Darth Vader isn?t this monster. He?s a pathetic individual who made a pact with the Devil and lost. And he?s trapped. He?s a sad, pathetic character, not a big evil monster. I mean, he?s a monster in that he?s turned to the Dark Side and he?s serving a bad master and he?s into power and he?s lost a lot of his humanity. In that way, he?s a monster, but beneath that, as Luke says in Return of the Jedi, early on, ?I know there?s still good in you, I can sense it.? Only through the love of his children and the compassion of his children, who believe in him, even though he?s a monster, does he redeem himself."

--George Lucas, quoted in J. Windolf, ?Star Wars: The Last Battle,? Vanity Fair, 2005

No, he cannot make up for the large number of sins that he has committed, but Anakin does stop anymore atrocities from occurring.

This is why Palpatine staged the first kidnapping attempt, put the second in motion and then did what he did afterwards by appointing Anakin to the Council. He succeeded in creating mistrust in the Jedi, including Obi-wan, thus barring Anakin from going to him for help. That's why he gets upset when he finds out that Obi-wan was in Padme's apartment and later on, before he sees him.

The two are intertwined.

 

Darth Vader was not redeemed in the end, not even from a moral or philosophical perspective. Had he lived, he would've served the emperor even rule. He only turned against his boss to save his son. I'm not saying that "darth vader becoming good at the end didn't make up for the bad things he did", because it's obvious. No, being redeemed doesn't nessecarily mean making up for the bad things you do, trying to fix them, or becoming totally guilt free. It means having a change of heart.

So, if a tyrant has a 2nd in command, who betrays him to save his son, does that give him a change of heart for all the bad things he did? Absolutley not. Everyone has a human side to them-even evil people. Vader saving his son's life does not redeem him at all.

Another flaw from the prequels is if Padme lived, would anakin turn back to the light side, 23 years earlier.

 

How is that a flaw? If Padme lived and turned Anakin back to the light then it would contradict the entire OT.

 

I understand that. You can't contradict the originals. That's not what I meant. It would've been terrible to include that and a totally different universe. Not what I meant.

What I meant was, was Luke the only way that Vader could turn back to the light side? Did Padme's death postpone it by the 23 yrs between ROTS AND ROTJ, if she could have turned him back? I thought that Vader could only turn back if someone close to him was in danger.

 

Another plot hole- Padme should have joined Vader and ruled the galaxy at his side, together. Vader wouldn't have been as harsh and cruel as ruler as Darth Sidious. He just wanted peace to the galaxy.

 

I don't think you know what a plot hole is. Or a story flaw. I really hope you're just trying to get a rise out of people. The alternative it too scary to contemplate.

 

I actually find the story to be confusing. Yes, every story has plot holes, even good ones. If padme joined him, she would live and not lose the will to live, anakin wouldn't go mad for 2 decades in the darkside out of grief of her loss, and the Empire would be cruel, like the Emperor was cruel. Padme would've made Anakin a more kind ruler, and she would have been a kind ruler too.

I'm not saying that should have happened. It would contradict the original trilogy, and would be a totally different story and a waste of time for a movie, obviously, a big waste of time and money.

What I'm saying is, there should be reasons, good reasons, why something Didn't happen.

 

Okay, given your lack of direct answer, I'm going to go with the latter. Ergo, I'll not be replying to any of your insane ramblings from here on in.