Ahsoka has to die sometime, right?

It doesn't have to happen a week before Ep3. For all we know the CW show could come to a close a few months or even a year before Order 66.

 

Anakin's behaviour at the beginning of ROTS resembles that of someone who's padawan has been sent off on a mission far away thus freeing himself up with some much sought after time with his beloved Padme...alas a reunion in which he cannot hide his disappointment at discovering her pregnancy...

 

She doesn't have to die in the last episode of TCW, or that close to ROTS. She can be killed by someone like Bane and TCW can have a season dedicated to Anakin hunting down Bane or whoever killed Ahsoka.

 

Then how could they explain Ahsoka not being mentioned in RotS?

Right... And after he kills Bane everything is okay and "Here's where the fun begins!"...

I'm sorry if I find that hard to believe...

 

22 episodes dedicated to that? I personally think that?s a bit much. One or two episodes at most would be sufficient. The earliest I can see her disappearing is the final arc. Ahsoka's death isn't a cliff-hanger it's a conclusion, we know how everything else goes.

 

If you sit down and think about it, no matter what happens to her, the fact that there is no mention of Anakin's Padawan in ROTS makes it difficult for pretty much any fate she has.

 

Well, if let's say Ahsoka died in the series, that problem could be taken care of. I don't see any reason for Anakin to bring up Ahsoka in ROTS if she died in the series. Also, it would make a little more sense since Ahsoka wasn't created back when ROTS was being created.

 

JediMaster1511 I already said as much.

 

I really don't understand why people insist that it makes no sense whatsoever for Ahsoka not to be mentioned in Ep3, and for Anakin to be all happy-go-lucky at the start of the movie. Unless Ahsoka is killed by Dooku, Grievous or Sidious and Anakin knows it, there's just no reason for Anakin to bring her up or be sulking about her passing.

Take ANH for example. Biggs, Luke's childhood friend, gets blown to smithereens by Darth Vader. And right afterwards Luke is all smiles during the celebration cerimony, not a care in the world. Later on he has several encounters with Vader, murderer of his best friend, and does Luke ever bring the subject up? Nope. Did anybody EVER complain about this? Nope. So why would Anakin be yapping throughout Ep3 about this padawan he had, which met an unfortunate end some time ago? If her fate is not related to any of the ongoing events, he can just let the issue rest.

 

You mean Ahsoka meant nothing for Anakin? One could say he learned to not be affected by attachments.

Well, we know that much. The TCW guys are the ones who need to come up with a fate that can explain her lack of mention in RotS.

 

He didn't say Ahsoka meant nothing to Anakin, only that there would be no need to mention her if she had died some time previously.

Well, read my post above on this subject. But I'd like to know, which ROTS scene just begs for Anakin to suddenly say: "So, yeah. Ahsoka, my late padawan, she was a terrible loss. I just can't believe she's dead!" ?!

 

Yeah, but one could say Luke isn't as whiney as Anakin. Anakin is the equivelent to a whiney teenager. Luke starts out immature, but manages to grow into a relatively ideal Jedi.

with Luke being happy after Biggs dying, the fact that he just won the battle for the rebellion would make him happy. I'm sure in WWII the soldiers that stormed Normandy were happy that they won, only to have the somber fact that they just lost many fellow soldiers to take over after the effect of winning was over.

Luke, being a more mature person than Anakin, probably had his superior officers explaining what Biggs sacrifice meant. Not to mention Obi-Wan probably helped in this fact.

But Anakin being the way he is, yes, would not want to talk about something like Ahsoka dying.

 

Well, I'm not sure who's the bigger whiner, but Luke is certainly a great contender. But you're turning my argument on its head. My point is not that Luke should have been crying over Biggs' death, but that this is an example of how the death of someone close to you can go unmentioned due to the circumstances.

 

My mistake.

Still, that same argument can be used if someone like Grievous did it. That was part of my case on reasons why Grievous can be a potential killer with my debate with alexrd.


I also feel that if Palpatine did it, Anakin may not care. If Palpatine could keep his involvement secret, by the time Anakin would find out he would already be Vader and not really care by that point. If it happened that way.


I don't know if you can compare Anakin's whining to Luke's. Luke will get over something he whines about. Anakin sulks about it for what seems to be forever.

 

I don't think Grievous as the killer would work. Not if Anakin knows it. When Anakin faces Grievous in Ep3 he's very casual about it. It would be very weird for there not to be some pent up anger and lust for revenge.

As for Sidious, I guess it would be OK as long as Anakin didn't find out about it until after he'd turned. After he became Vader he wouldn't really care much about it, probably just adding Ahsoka to the pile of "Jedi traitors that had to go".

 

I know he didn't said that, but it's somewhat implicit since Anakin's main problem which led to his downfall was his strong attachments.

None. But it's a big hole in the whole narrative of RotS. Anakin trying to prevent the deaths of his most beloved people.

 

Padme was the only biggest factor.

He lost his mother in AOTC, and now he's going to loose Padme. He did mention that in ROTS.

 

Yes, but previous deaths like Qui-Gon Jinn and Shmi helped a lot.

Precisely. He mentioned her mother, why not mention Ahsoka if it was a more recent event?

 

Yeah, but Palpatine mentioned Anakin's mother in ROTS. I think it was the scene where they are in the operabox looking thing. So his mother is mentioned to him. But that doesn't nessescarily mean Ahsoka would need to be mentioned in the movie.

 

Erm... You seem to forget the part where Anakin tells Padmé that he won't loose her the way he lost his mother.

 

Shmi, yes, for Qui-Gon, though, meh. Anakin mentioned him but it wasn't a "top" factor which led him down.

Why would he? Besides the fact ROTS would have to be changed, I don't see the point of making Anakin mention Ahsoka in ROTS. No point in doing so. A random mentioning of her would make it seem odd.

No, Palaptine mentioned his mother after the death of Dooku onboard the Invisible Hand. "He cut of your arm, you wanted revenge. It wasn't the first time, Anakin. Remember what you told me about your mother and the sand people?"

Basically in the prequels, Anakin's downfall was his mother's death and his vision of Padme's death after giving birth. Those two factors led him to the dark side, as it was the only way to save Padme and stop her death. Anakin doesn't want to loose Padme, since his mother already had died.

 

Technically, he didn't lose Padme the way he lost his mother.
But all kidding aside, would he need to mention everything he's lost to illustrate the point that he doesn't want to lose Padme?

 

What Anakin meant by that is he doesn't want another important person in his life to die. We don't know for sure if Ahsoka's fate will play into his downfall. It might, of course, since apparently he's attached to his Padawan. If there's one person in his life that he wanted to save, that is Padme. It's all in ROTS, too. His mother had died, and so he can't afford to loose another important person.

 

Not "top" factor, but a factor nonetheless. We see that in the micro-series.

Because it would make his behaviour more consistent.

I'm not saying RotS would have to be changed. I'm saying that because RotS will not be changed, TCW team must opt for a way to make the events in RotS more consistent with TCW. Killing Ahsoka wouldn't make sense because of Anakin's behaviour and narrative in RotS, in my opinion (and hopefully on theirs too). I'm also not saying Ahsoka should survive order 66 and still live during the Dark Times.

Exactly.

 

I know, I was kidding.

The point I was trying to make was why would he sit there and mention everything he lost, when Padme would understand from just one reference what he was talking about.