PT According to George Lucas, Padme is the Central Character in TPM

Well I decided to put on the TPM Blu-Ray with the Blu-Ray only commentary on, and Lucas said about Padme, "She is ultimately the central character, and the story they're telling is about her."

Thank you for clearing that up, George.

 

Yay! Affirms what I've been telling other people who quote the RLM bit.

 

Okay. I always wondered.

 

That actually makes perfect sense. The main conflict in the film has more to do with her than any of the other major characters.

 

He even said that in a 1999 or 2000 interview. The character of Anakin overshadowed that as the interviewee was concentrating on Skywalker related questions and merely brushed that answer a side if you will.

 

I thought this was always obvious.

 

Makes sense, since her situation is the most pressing to getting resolved. Her planet was taken hostage by the Trade Federation and it is through the help of two Jedi, a Gungan and a nine year old boy to retake it.

 

The protagonist in a film is someone who:

1) has a goal
2) actively struggles against the forces of antagonism to achieve that goal

That is screenwriting 101. A central character must be the master of their own destiny in pursuit of their desire. I fail to see how anyone could argue Padme is the central character of TPM, when she was such a passive character who allowed the entire plot to be dictated to her.

 

She starts out passive but in the third act she goes aggressive (doing something even Palpatine didn't expect) returning to Naboo, forming an alliance with the Gungans and kicking the Trade Federation out of her Palace.

 

But the third act an entire movie does not make. The protagonist is introduced in the first act, and then at the end of the first act something happens to them that gives them a goal, the main goal they have in the movie. All through the second act they are striving to obtain that goal. That is really the meat and potatoes of a story as they say-- what happens in Act 2?

 

What the hell sort of scholarly article are work are people like you quoting from? Like I said in another thread, there really isn't any screenwriting or storytelling 101. There is no sure fire way to tell a story, especially since each medium of storytelling has to have different elements in play to tell a story effectively. Your view seems to be self-limiting.

 

Act One: Padme is introduced as a Pacifist leader. She escapes Naboo after the Trade Federations invasion.

Act Two: Padme tries to resolve the crisis peacefully in the Senate, which ends in failure and she resolves to return to Naboo to confront the Trade Federation (a turn of events even The Phantom Menace doesn't expect)

Act Three: Padme returns to Naboo, forms an alliance with the Gungans and aggressively confronts and defeats the Trade Federation.

That's the way I've always seen the film? Maybe I'm wrong but it "works" as well as any other movie, IMO.

There are several problems with TPM but this isn't one of them.

 

Just the analysis I was going to post myself! Nice one!

 

Right, that's how the "formula" goes, as taught to first day film students. Actual storytellers usually don't give a **** what's "supposed" to happen at the end of act 1, or where the inciting incident occurs. They tell a story based on their mastery and alteration of the formula. The breaking of it.

 

Somewhat adroitly summed up in the following epigram:

"Rules are for wimps!"

Or if you want a slightly longer-winded explication:

"Story is about principles, not rules. Anxious, inexperienced writers obey rules. Rebellious, unschooled writers break rules. Artists master the form." -- Robert McKee

A few more excellent McKee quotes here:

http://www.chrisjonesblog.com/2014/07/screenwriters-storytellers-filmmakers.html

And I'm going to have to include this -- just because the first line is a Star Wars reference:

http://tiffanywismer.com/artists-master-the-form/

 

@Cyrogenic

I have read McKee's book many, many times. I am a screenwriter myself. You'll also find in Story where he specifically talks about protagonists taking an active role in the pursuit of their object of desire. Again, that is screenwriting 101.

 

How does Padme not take an active role? She tries more than once in different methods. She even joins in on the battle herself

 

The first thing Amadala does of her own volition in the entire movie is when she returns to Naboo later in the film, correct? Everything before that she is just doing what other people tell her to do. That's passive. And even then, when she joins the fight, is she the means by which her side wins? If you ask yourself, who of all people contributed the most to the good guys winning in TPM, is Padme really the answer? Sure she helps in a supporting role I guess, but I wouldn't call her the person who drives all the action.

 

You don't need to drive the action to be the main character. In ANH Luke is a follower, not a leader.

 

She has a reserved, abnegating quality in the earlier acts, but she also shows tenacity and gumption.

For instance, she expresses a firm desire to not escalate to war in her first proper scene, tells Gunray she will not co-operate with his demands, cues the decoy queen to trust in Qui-Gon and take the riskier path of running the blockade and fleeing Naboo ("We are brave, Your Highness"), stealthily hooks up with Jar Jar as they divert to Tatooine, and gets Panaka to do something close to a Jedi Mind Trick on Qui-Gon, as he tells Qui-Gon that the Queen wishes for Padme to accompany him out of curiosity for the planet.

The scene where she chooses to return to Naboo after a dispiriting time on Coruscant, followed by her summoning Jar Jar for assistance, in defiance of both Qui-Gon and Panaka who express incredulity at her apparent desire to reclaim Naboo, though occupied by a "battle hardened Federation army", and especially, the scene of her revealing her identity and pledging herself and the fate of her people to Boss Nass -- with a mixture of reactions from her recently-acquired travelling companions -- also prove she was always operating under her own steam.

Ultimately, while Padme starts off a little uncertain, the last act of the film makes clear that she just needed a bit of time to acquire sufficient disillusionment and find her own voice. Which is one of the most "Star Warsian" themes of all. The tenor of the approach may be different (it's Episode I, after all, not Episode IV: "a more civilized age"), but that doesn't invalidate Padme's arc. Like Luke in the original film, she leaves the familiar for the unknown, acquiring allies, encountering obstacles, and finds firmer footing along the way. A Hero's Journey: they apply to naive young queens and whiny farmboys alike.

 

That.... makes so much more sense than Anakin being the lead.

 

... Yes. She completely is. She cuts through the red tape bull**** the Federation were tying the blockade up with, she lead the retaking of the palace herself and it was her actions that bought human/gungan relations forward and made military action possible. She is by far the most proactive figure of TPM. Not only does she fly in the face of Sidious' predictions she outright defeats him, albeit temporarily.

 

Defeats him, routes him, surprises him.

Though, she also enables him to get elected, which is what he really wanted.

 

I wouldn't say that.
Qui-Gon has a very proactive role, first on the TF ship, then on Naboo, then on Tatooine, then on Coruscant pushing for Anakin to be trained.
Padme's first really proactive choice is returning to Naboo. While it is proactive it also makes zero sense.
She didn't know that the blockade was gone so as far as she knew, she would get blown up or captured before she could even land. If she wanted to die a martyr then maybe it makes sense, otherwise not.

Bye for now.
Blackboard Monitor

 

Eh... Qui-Gonn didn't do anything particularly proactive until he found Anakin. Until then he was simply doing his job. He had been told to try and resolve the Naboo crisis and that meant keeping Padme alive. And while Padme does cause Palpatine to eventually get elected he would have been ANYWAY in the end. He simply intended to ride the sympathy from her tragic death to power.