CT The "RotJ sucks" meme

Neither is any more right or wrong than the other. It's also not necessarily the case that Luke killed the Gamorrean guards anyway.

However, the fact that Luke uses a technique that has only ever been seen used by Darth Vader in any of the films (including the PT) is obviously meant to indicate that he's playing with fire, just as Obi-Wan told him on Dagobah - "this is a dangerous time for you, Luke, when you will be tempted by the Dark Side of the Force." It's a simple association, nothing more.

There's nothing inherently wrong with a red lightsaber, either, but when Count Dooku first ignites his in AOTC, the fact that it's red is obviously meant to suggest that he's gone bad - because the only red lightsabers we'd seen previously were wielded by Darth Vader & Darth Maul. If the Sith Lords had used blue lightsabers, while the Jedi used red, you'd give Dooku a blue one. Still would have worked, the colour doesn't necessarily matter (although red's probably got more negative connotations than blue - danger, stop, blood, etc).

They're just quick, efficient ways of making a greater point without wasting screen time on long exposition. Over-analysing them misses the point. In SW, a lot of the time you just have to take things at face value and accept them.

 

It's interesting that you say that, because I think I absolutely took the OT at face value. I saw the movies when I was about 10 years old, and my perception of Luke was then and always has been that he was a Jedi, and his only real temptation, his only real moment of touching the Dark Side, was when he beat up on Vader. Force Choke, black clothes...again, on a very superficial level I understood that he was supposed to be fighting/succumbing to his father's influence, a case of history possibly repeating itself - but that's as far as it went. I never thought that his decisions to do those things reflected a brush with the Dark Side.

I'm glad that the whole red saber/Force choke thing was clarified, because that's exactly how I feel about these supposedly "Dark Side" attributes. They're just visual aids meant to help the audience understood who's bad and who's good that, when looked at closely, are not really inherently wrong or right (no matter what KOTOR would have you believe). Only problem is, I didn't feel that Luke using the Force choke on the guards was a 'bad' thing. Perhaps the real issue is that it was the first time I saw Luke using the Force to harm someone who wasn't Vader (excluding the faceless victims of the Death Star). Blasters, spaceships - we'd seen a lot of impersonal attacks that everyone else was engaging in. The Force choke was different, as was Luke busting out on everybody on Jabba's skiff with his lightsaber. It was one-on-one, face-to-face. And it wasn't against Stormtroopers (who may as well have been robots to me, since my mind - as well as the audience's, I would think - did not make the connection that they were humans, too, and I know we weren't meant to make that connection). I understood from the opening scene in ROTJ that Luke was different, but I understood that difference to be a bettering of his Jedi skills, not some wavering on the threshold of the Dark Side.

That's just my thought. Everyone has their own first impressions and revised opinions upon rewatches. I just never, not even once in all my viewings of the movie, saw his actions in ROTJ as being proof that he was edging close to the Dark Side. Only when he gave in to his anger at Vader did I see him stumble on his path as a Jedi.

 

I think we're arguing the same thing - as you mentioned, the only time he actually did succumb was when he wails on Vader towards the end, and I agree, but the outfit & the Force Choke are little hints of the temptation being there. You could say he's "edging closer" to the Dark Side, even if he's not there yet.

FWIW, neither Yoda nor Obi-Wan chastise him for straying too close, & you'd think they'd be aware of what he'd been up to. All they do is warn him of the danger.

I'd still be inclined to call a Force Choke a Sith or Dark Side technique that Jedi probably don't use, simply because we've never seen any actual Jedi Knights use it (Luke wasn't strictly a Jedi yet, Anakin only uses the technique after he's been dubbed Darth Vader). Same with Force Lightning.

 

In KOTOR, using a red saber crystal has no effect on alignment, nor does the use of dark side powers. But the approach to dark side powers is largely a function of "gameplay mechanics", while we have significant evidence from non-game sources that one cannot use the dark side with impunity and be in no danger of falling.

 

i am 20 years old and first saw the original trilogy in 1997 with the special editions. even though i own over 7 copies of the original trilogy. 1995/1997/2000/2004/ as well as the 1980 1992 versions of a new hope and the 1990 version of empire strikes back. i do like rotj and always will even after reading that article. i think most people who were born in the 90s and later love the prequels as well, i loved them as a kid. i hate them now, granted darth maul is my favorite character in all 6 movies.

jar jar is my least favorite character to ever appear in a movie.. i love all 3 of the original trilogy the same and don't think it would be complete without the 3 of them together. in my opinion esb>anh>rotj aotc>rots>tpm
i did think the love scenes were absolutely atrocious. but i like jango fett (not boba fett he is a p**sy.

(My last post on this forum was in march of 2010)

 

I'm a generation older than you Jack - and I gotta say with confidence that SW youngsters in the late 70's and 80's thought highly of the Fett Man.

He was often "co-featured" with Vader on pillow cases, lunch boxes, etc.

You say Lord Maul is your fave - I understand, because Boba Fett had the same "cache value" that Maul had for the PT generation.


If you just watch ANH, ESB, and ROTJ - I find it hard for any 10 or 12 year old boy to call Fett-Man a p*ssy ....

The PT showed us a greasy looking, punk kid who basically "copied" his father ...

Without the PT - Boba Fett is still so damn cool and got that "stuff" we all like.

Good to see this thread brought you back for a post Jack.

 

It helped that the original version of the action figure could actually shoot your eye out.

Even the figure was dangerous!

 

Thinking back I can say that I loved my Boba figure more than any of the others besides my Rancor and AT-ST. (The AT-ST went literally everywhere I did until I was six or so.)

 

The real joy of the toys was to have my Boba Fett hop on a speeder bike and chase Leia around. I remember he looked funny cause his knees could not bend ...

And also have Boba Fett (sometimes two or more of them) when it was friends playing - cause massive mayhem in the Ewok village.

In 1984 - it was a precursor to the Clone Army! Fett was the only figure boys mandated that THEY BRING TO THE TABLE, SANDBOX, BASEMENT, Etc)

"We need Yoda?" , "we need Han?" - nobody minded delegating that authority - but Boba was different ....

And Boba Fett was the only figure that gave the GI Joes a real tussle in that kid war. (If you guys ever mixed and matched)

For me, Boba Fett drove a Cobra Water Moccasin craft and kicked alot of butt back in the day.

 

I have mixed feelings about ROTJ.

When the film was released in '83, I was in middle school and loved the movie. I thought Jabba the Hutt was great, enjoyed the battle scenes, the DV/Luke Skywalker scenes & subsequent redemption sequence, and even liked the Ewoks.

In early '86 when I was in high school, the ROTJ VHS tape was finally released and I saw the movie again after almost three years. I didn't like it nearly as much as before, and felt many parts of it were childish, i.e. Han Solo's clumsiness and awkward comedic sequences ("Fly casual", etc.). And, I really disliked the Ewoks - IMHO their presence in the film really brought it down.

However, I guess it wasn't until early '97 when I saw the aforementioned article "50 reasons we hate ROTJ" that I realized that some others shared my views.

That all being said, there is a lot to like about ROTJ: Most of the JTH throne room scenes (minus the '97 SE revised dance/song sequence), the great scene & music leading up to the Sail Barge battle & the battle itself, The Speeder Bike chase (still looks good even after 30 years), the DV/Luke scenes, the incredible space battle, and of course the final, very poignant scene when Luke rejoined his friends on Endor, and saw the ghosts of his father, Ben, and Yoda (which was ruined by the 2004 ROTJ DVD).

My perfect version of ROTJ would be: The '97 SE without the new JTH throne room song/dance sequence & the added Boba Fett scenes with the dancers (i.e., the original Sy Snootles song/dance sequence should be kept). However, keep the added '97 sequences with Oola, the revised Sarlaac, and the added/improved scenes of the Sail Barge exterior (i.e., Banthas, etc.).

 

I didn't think ROTJ was the worst, but everyone in the movie seemed bored and uninterested. Lando and Sidious were some of the few charecters with consistant personality throughout this film to me.

 

Actually, that scene looks very dated to me. One thing that has remained constant: Endor looks like the last place you would ever want to operate a speeder bike. Unless you're filming the GFFA equivalent of Jackass.

 

But there's very much a distinction between Dark Side powers and Light Side powers. A blatant distinction. Yes, it's a function of gameplay mechanics (a function I thought was dumb - that "Force Storm" power or whatever it was called was straight up awesome, but it was a "dark side" ability, I'm assuming because it was quick and easy, which Yoda said belongs to the Dark Side. Whatevs. It was cool. It worked. And I still saved the galaxy while using it, so there). And I thought it *did* affect your alignment? No? Maybe it was just the conversation/action choices, then. But it's not the only time I've seen people/authors make that distinction between what's Light and Dark solely on categorizing certain Force abilities- and that all harkens back to the OT, when we were supposed to believe that the Force Choke was 'bad' just because Darth Vader used it. As I said previously, I never bought into that.

Re: the speeder bikes, I remember being on the edge of my seat during that scene, completely blown away. And even though the special effects have paled, I still get that feeling while watching it. It's still cool to me. Plus, you get to see Luke and Leia working together, perfectly in sync, being awesome. I always love reading Luke/Leia action scenes in the EU, because it taps into something far more basic than even the Force - the bond between family, and the especially close bond between twins. Maybe that's part of the reason I always enjoy the speeder bike scene so much. It's a rare glimpse into how amazing a Luke/Leia action duo would be.

 

For me, RotJ was the weakest of the three, but I love it very nearly as much as the rest of the original trilogy. I rewatched it a couple of years back and although I had seen it 100 times before, the length of time between improved the film for me, the twists, turns and emotional moments, even though I knew them all inside out, still had impact.

And how appropriate that we have this discussion, on this, today, the thirtieth anniversary of the filming of Return of the Jedi! I think I might celebrate by watching the Sandstorm deleted scene!

 

Yes, it was just the options chosen by the character when faced with the choice of how to treat others, NPCs and such. The Kyle Katarn Jedi Knight series of games ( I'm thinking of Jedi Outcast and Jedi Academy specifically ) are similar, in that you can use Force lightning literally all day without any risk to alignment, because there isn't an alignment bar, and it has no bearing on whether you get the dark side or light side ending in JA. At most, if you have selected more dark powers than light ones, you are gently warned of the potential danger of this in the Force power menu between missions. But this warning doesn't have any actual basis in the game mechanics, it's more of a nod to the aspects of the "in-universe" reality which were not programmed into the game.

 

The problem I find with this movie is not the ones usually cited by people which are the Ewoks, Death Star repeat, the weaker acting (Which I agree with to an extent, mainly on the parts of Ford and Fisher), etc. It's honestly the same problem I have with ATTACK OF THE CLONES, in which both bite off more than they can chew storywise. Both feelings rushed. It's the more I think about this kind of stuff the more I think maybe that I think if Lucas had actually planned everything he wanted out from the beginning, made them in closer time to each other, and honestly probably should have done it in more than 6 instalmments that the series could've been even stronger than it is (Still one of my favorite movie sagas despite this). And while the EU offers explanations for a lot of these, I'm talking from the standpoint of just the films. (Only fair as the RLM rule is that you can't use Expanded Universe to explain things)

Luke was the relatable character for the audience. He was the young man who got pulled into the adventure and struggled during it, and had trouble in his training. In this film he is way more confident and powerful than he was at the end of EMPIRE, being set only a year later and with no explanation given As it is even explicitly said that he didn't return to Yoda in the interim, who even says despite his words at the end of EMPIRE about his training not being complete that he is now a Jedi. (Was rock shuffling his final lesson?) And while I think Hamill does give a good performance I find his character's relatability and his story's credibility to be hurt by essentially mary sue-ing him (at least in regards to his training) within the last chapter. His temptation to the Dark Side is also like this. They set it up well in EMPIRE where he can feel it trying to embrace him, but they never really move it past that in this. And despite the throne room scenes being well made in the end the plan to turn him is pretty weak. It's all, "Oh it's your destiny. You have no choice." The Emperor at the start was even saying that his friends were going to be killed. I think that I may be able to give this the benefit of the doubt since the plan doesn't work. People still debate the credibility of Anakin's fall, but if it had been like this than I think it would've been worse. I like the idea of the Dark Side trying to influence someone to the Dark Side, but they should make the ultimate conscious choice to embrace it. Otherwise it is not so much a fall from grace as it is being put under a spell. And honestly I think these were some scene that from a story standpoint could've worked better if the PT had been fully fleshed or planned out beforehand. People debate whether the Jedi were portrayed good or bad in those films. While I don't think they were as evil as people often paint them out to be, I do think there is enough room to demonize them. Something I think would've been cool for Palpatine to do. I think Palpatine trying to turn Luke on the Jedi with things like "They used your father, they forbade your parents' relationship," etc could've been an interesting way to try and turn Luke to his side. By actually trying to appeal to him emotionally. There would actually be a believable and dramatic decision that would have to be made. Again the scenes are well made and acted, but do stretch credibility a bit.

The sibling plot twist wouldn't have been so bothersome if it wasn't so clear that it was unplanned from the get go and used as a deus ex machina to kill two bird with one stone. To more quickly resolve the love triangle as well as explain the identity of the other hope Yoda mentioned in EMPIRE. George claims that he had everything planned out from the beginning, but he wouldn't have two people he knew were siblings kiss twice.

The last sub-plot that doesn't really live up to what it could have was the defeat of the Empire, and not because of the Ewoks fighting them. I mean we're supposed to buy that such a powerful organization is dismantled because they lost the Battle of Endor. I mean

 

So we're now obliged to follow rules invented by completely random people?

Well, then here's my rule, also invented by a random person: you can use the EU to explain things.

Now explain why RLM's invented rule outweighs my invented rule.

 

No, my philosophy on it is whichever rules you use on some of these films, you should use on all of them. Otherwise it is just bias. Maybe I didn't make it clear enough, but I think the EU is a good place to go for stuff like that, but by the way with which you measure one trilogy you should measure another. I was more or less trying to say things from the perspective of his rules to show that there's a bias.

And I think I was getting to soapy at the end there with regards to whether they're actually good or not. I think I was being too hard on myself to thinking that perhaps my views were based on bias. At this point I'm still thinking about it.

 

Plus, why are "invented rules" pertaining to a piece of fiction any 'worse' than said fiction's creator/author disregarding* his own set 'rules' established in the films?

*also known as, 'ret-con'

 

Like I said above:

 

A retcon doesn't involve disregarding any "rules", unless the rule is "there can be no retcons". Looks like another random person invented another imaginary rule.

A retcon only changes facts.

Furthermore, Lucas retcons are a red herring in this context because they have absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand, which is the validity of the EU in an argument.

 

Luke was the relatable character for the audience. He was the young man who got pulled into the adventure and struggled during it, and had trouble in his training. In this film he is way more confident and powerful than he was at the end of EMPIRE, being set only a year later and with no explanation given As it is even explicitly said that he didn't return to Yoda in the interim, who even says despite his words at the end of EMPIRE about his training not being complete that he is now a Jedi. (Was rock shuffling his final lesson?) And while I think Hamill does give a good performance I find his character's relatability and his story's credibility to be hurt by essentially mary sue-ing him (at least in regards to his training) within the last chapter.


This is going to be one long rebuttal, so prepare yourself.

I am quite surprised by this argument - it's not one I've ever heard before, but is certainly interesting. IMO, we were led to believe that Luke's confrontation with Vader in ESB, his learning the truth about his parentage, was the catalyst for his enhanced Force skills. Remember, there were a few things holding Luke back during his training on Dagobah - fear and the lack of confidence in the Force. After the duel with Vader, Luke has faced those two faults. He has learned to let go of his fear - what else is there to tremble at after you've battled a Sith Lord who, oh, hey, happens to be your father? More than that, what is there to fear after you survived that encounter? The second holdup was his lack of confidence. Remember, Yoda said the main reason for Luke's weak use of the Force was that he didn't believe in its full power. Well, Luke took a huge leap of faith, quite literally, and the Force didn't let him down. It enabled him to call to Leia (and to survive that fall, I've always thought) and be rescued.
With those two obstacles gone, Luke was free to approach his self-training with a much clearer understanding of the Force and of his own capabilities. He could look back on all of Yoda's teachings with an, "Oh, now I get it," and thus begin to reach his potential.
Funny how his advanced powers in ROTJ seemed awkward to you when it seemed completely expected and natural to me.


His temptation to the Dark Side is also like this. They set it up well in EMPIRE where he can feel it trying to embrace him, but they never really move it past that in this. And despite the throne room scenes being well made in the end the plan to turn him is pretty weak. It's all, "Oh it's your destiny. You have no choice." The Emperor at the start was even saying that his friends were going to be killed. I think that I may be able to give this the benefit of the doubt since the plan doesn't work. People still debate the credibility of Anakin's fall, but if it had been like this than I think it would've been worse. I like the idea of the Dark Side trying to influence someone to the Dark Side, but they should make the ultimate conscious choice to embrace it. Otherwise it is not so much a fall from grace as it is being put under a spell. And honestly I think these were some scene that from a story standpoint could've worked better if the PT had been fully fleshed or planned out beforehand. People debate whether the Jedi were portrayed good or bad in those films. While I don't think they were as evil as people often paint them out to be, I do think there is enough room to demonize them. Something I think would've been cool for Palpatine to do. I think Palpatine trying to turn Luke on the Jedi with things like "They used your father, they forbade your parents' relationship," etc could've been an interesting way to try and turn Luke to his side. By actually trying to appeal to him emotionally. There would actually be a believable and dramatic decision that would have to be made. Again the scenes are well made and acted, but do stretch credibility a bit.

I do like your idea as to how Palpatine could have engineered Luke's fall. However, it was well established