PT "Anakin became evil too quickly"

It's interesting in how some fans are very emotional over Anakin's actions . . . more so than any other character in the saga. Is this because he had started the saga as an innocent nine year-old boy?

 

My main point in this response is with regards to your argument re these scenes in terms of the comparison with ROTJ, but before I move onto that I will address what I see as a disjoint between what is supposed to be foreshadowing (or as you describe it "a thematic pipework is laid illustrating Anakin's troubled psyche"). The problem, for me, is that the troubled psyche we are introduced to, the motivations for the problems that Anakin has are far removed from the persona of Anakin post "the turn". What we see within the 'foreshadowing' is a passionate young man who has trouble containing his emotions - who is lead by his emotions. But post-turn 'Vader' is an entirely different beast; here we have a cold, calculating killer. He cuts down children with a plan in mind. The troubles that Anakin has earlier are about his loyalty to others, he rushes in headlong because of his anger or his fear...much as Luke does in ANH and TESB (though not to the same extent). When we see him overstep the mark we see he is troubled by it...the realisation hits him hard (he is , it seems to me, truly shaken by what he did to the Tuskens...and his reaction after beheading Dooku is disgust at himself..horror even - it's interesting that these two scenes I think Christensen plays perfectly). To put it simply, what is supposedly 'foreshadowed' doesn't come to be.

All of that will become relevant in terms of the rest of my take re ROTJ. What you don't take into account when you point out the suddenness of Vader's choice in ROTJ is that it is a redemptive moment; it is the return of the Jedi...and that this aspect of the story the OT tells is little understood by those who suggest that there is no need for there to be a well-developed friendship between Obi-Wan and Anakin, or some notion of Anakin as a good man. To put it another way, the reason that moment may appear jarring in itself is because it seems out of character with PT Anakin...and that's kind of the point of the disjoint between the two trilogies that many brought up on the OT recognise. The OT sets the scene for a notional PT wherein Anakin is a good man; a little headstrong maybe, but essentially a good man, and a good friend of Obi-Wan's. But somewhere along the line this man let himself be lead by his emotions, began to believe in the spell that the Emperor weaved. He is troubled by the existence of his son, of the memories he stirs..but still he is under the spell. But a spell here is to be seen in its truest and oldest form; a story, a narrative he has built around himself. He has to justify the path he has chosen. His redemption comes about because Luke teaches him the piece of the puzzle he did not get. Luke does not allow himself to be lead by his anger and hatred....he very nearly does but he steps away...he sees where that leads - he sees that what Vader is he can become...that in fact (as he should have learned in the cave) Vader is not out there, he is in him.

So...we should expect, from the set-up of ROTJ, that Anakin's fall should be predicated on his giving in to his anger/hatred (as he does with the Tuskens)...but instead that is by-passed...that becomes merely a fore-shadowing; how can that be? It seems Luke could have cut down Vader in ROTJ, it would only be a possible fore-shadowing of a possible turn later. He really wasn't in danger of becoming Vader at that point? For those who saw these stories first....it is clear that this was a test of Luke's resolve, this was the test; the moment.

What we get instead is Anakin by-passing this tumult of anger and hatred and his fall being, instead, 'pledging' himself to some 'Faustian' promise.... There is a suspicion here that the author cannot bring himself to have Anakin actually be Vader, so instead has him "consumed by" - as a sort of magical possession - a 'demon' called Vader...the 'Sith eyes' conceit really hammers home that notion. Somehow Anakin doesn't become Vader.

All of the notions of the PT are, when one structures the movies in the format Lucas suggests, back-projected upon the OT and transform the story that was into a whole different beast. For those of us who followed the story as was, the idea that these are 'prequels' to that tale is an empty idea. That story has been swallowed and spat out as something entirely other, and in the process a great deal of the power and meaning of the original is lost; washed out.

For me, the prequels to those movies have yet to be made. As I have argued before the two stories work in entirely distinct conceptual spaces - the OT deals with a psychological perspective, the PT deals with events in a religio-magical paradigm. The one spoke of personal choice and responsibility, the other preaches of heroic saviours and magical, heavenly intervention. The one says 'choose', the other demands 'submit'.

 

Yet I see tons of build up and genuine reaction no problem at all.

There is no stronger build up of a character than Anakin in the entire saga.

It did connect with the audience though hence why it's one of the most successful movies of all time.

If it didn't I don't think it would be able to do that.

I did follow it as it was and I don't find it empty in the least. Totally fulfilling really.

The thing is though it's the meaning that each of those individuals gave to it. No one's story is exactly the same.

Now we have the actual story not individual conjecture.

They both to me are very clearly about choice. The choice of the two central individuals. Anakin's choice to join the Sith was his. If anything he went against what was supposed to happen. He was to destroy the Sith and bring balance to the Force not join them and leave it in darkness.

Vader chooses to save Luke not due to the prophecy but because he wants to save his son. In the end of course the prophecy is correct but not in anyway that anyone could have possibly thought.

 

Except that Lucas indicated in the story meetings for ROTJ and what was written in the script, that Anakin was seduced by what he saw with the dark side. Whereas Luke wasn't and thus he could resist at Cloud City.

OBI-WAN: "To be a Jedi, Luke, you must confront and then go beyond the dark side - the side your father couldn't get past. Impatience is the easiest door - for you, like your father. Only, your father was seduced by what he found on the other side of the door, and you have held firm."

So even at this point, it was more that Anakin was seduced by the idea of power and a willingness to embrace it, whereas Luke didn't want that power. The point of the duel in ROTJ is that Vader and Palpatine both tell Luke that by choosing to give into the dark side, will he become a Sith Lord. Choosing to using the dark side to save his friends was their only way out. Also remember that in ROTS, Obi-wan says that Anakin killing Dooku was when he became Palpatine's Apprentice. And note that that is when Anakin starts changing into Vader.

Anakin still becomes Vader, he just doesn't make the full transition until he is injured which was also part of Lucas's writing during the story meetings. The novelization has Obi-wan say that Vader was changed by his injuries. Lucas wanted to show the good man go away as a result of the injuries and the loss of Padme, leading him into the Vader of "Rebels" and the OT.

 

But what does it mean in this context to be a cold, calculating killer? Vader is not a born sociopath; the Anakin before him was a good man teetering closer and closer on edge. Becoming Vader was to be consumed wholly by the fear and anger that only troubled him prior, those destructive passions now manifesting a 'total state' of being. Fear and anger is not necessarily chaos. The behavioral instability of Anakin up to that point -- the outbursts and temperaments -- was the result of a good man in a constant state of struggle with his darker throes. As Vader, he gives in completely, no longer conflicted outwardly, behaviorally with the trials of right and wrong. What composure that follows is the very result of that full embrace. The calmness of the Sith mirrors that of the Jedi, yet sustained not by inner harmony or peace of mind but something deeply perverse. He's not a different beast, but simply THE beast, free from the shackles of good conscious. A caged wolf can be erratic. A free-roaming wolf can become purposeful.

Sure. Every mission carried out by Darth Vader from now on until the end of the saga is predicated on rationalization.

It does, but precisely because he's no longer troubled by overstepping the mark (at least not on the conscious surface).

Speaking just for myself, I would only ever suggest that Anakin 'the good man' and his friendship with Obi-Wan needed only to be expressed through effective inference and the specifics in presentation of any given scene rather than a weighted down, protracted narrative bent on repeating these points as points; three-act cinematically, not 12-24 episode televisually ...and that the finished films achieved as much.

But why? One does not logically follow the other. Why would a good man with a clean friendship who is merely a bit headstrong even allow himself to be undone by darker emotions and further seduced by the spell-sophistry of the Emperor in the first place? Where do these darker emotions even come from? The OT alludes to a past, yes, but in doing so can never penetrate beyond the simpler premises: Anakin the good man and great warrior; friend of Obi-Wan; seduced by evil. The PT goes on to paint that canvas in full, which also means exploring the story of Anakin in its thematic complexity instead of merely reiterating over three movies said premises.

Presuming that Anakin should have become Vader simply by failing where Luke succeeds, though technically not incorrect, is nonetheless equivalently reductive. Giving into fear and anger is the facilitation of the Dark Side yet by itself does not account for the storied circumstances as to how and why these two heroes have come to their respective crossroads. In short, you're skimming the details.

Anakin slaughtering the Sand People was isolated, not of any greater design (excluding fan theories, at least) and alternately was something that still proceeded from the initial act of rescuing an innocent loved one from savagery and injustice. And while beheading Dooku was at the goad of Palpatine, it was also still leveled somewhat by the general pretense of Dooku as a Sith lord antagonist of the Republic; what was then still the clear and designated "bad" in relation to the clear and designated "good". These acts illustrate Anakin's increasing inner-turmoil and forewarn audiences of the coming doom. They were disturbing to Anakin for reasons of conduct but were not yet the shattering of his world and of his perceived dichotomy, as would later occur with Windu and Palpatine.

His Faustian deal is only made after his uncontrolled act of violence that maims Windu; the two are not mutually exclusive. It's not as if there's only enough story space for one conceit. Anakin is addicted to the drug that is Padme—Padme filling an emotional, psychological hole; his one intimate and maternal sanctum. This obsession-possession coupled with the all-at-once, lighting schism consequence to his accessory murder of Windu marked the point of no return, but that immediate relent to fear and anger -- the very age-old, saga catchphrase, Jedi wisdom that Yoda cautions Luke -- was always there, permeated, never not part of the equation. Moreover, again, succumbing to the Dark Side is not simply giving into violent fear and anger once or twice, upon any given instance, but doing so while at the full mercy of the Emperor's subversive power and endgame intentions.

Even in light of the PT, Luke's trial at the end of Return of the Jedi holds true on its own terms specifically because it has its own terms. Vader is not to him what Dooku or the Sand People were to Anakin. Luke had by then fully committed to saving his father from the Emperor, not murdering him at the hands of. The latter would have been a complete reversal of Luke's virtue and convictions. It would have destroyed his soul, leaving what was left to be enslaved by the Emperor. The nature of his trial is not negated in meaning by the nature of Anakin's trial in Revenge of the Sith, or vice versa. They're just further thematically detailed and circumstantially distinct threads that make up a larger whole, paralleled by the more general, marquee lesson that heeds the dangers of compounding negative emotions.

I never got any of that. At all. It sounds to me like you just projected onto the PT an oversimplified tangent for the coming of Vader and in turn dismissed the results as a square peg for not meeting such preconceptions. I too grew up with the OT but never went into the following trilogy expecting from the story of Anakin's demise a cursory Xerox of that which tested Luke yet, at the same time, I don't see how personal choice and responsibility are not core factors of said demise. The Devil that lures Anakin and the stodgy Jedi orthodox that fails him cannot be denied, but nothing he does is automated or, even when it is, even when acting out of impulse or frenzy, how he proceeds afterwards is how he personally chooses to either reconcile or rationalize, to accept responsibility or blame others.

Asserting that all of this was swept aside in favor Judeo-Christian-like determinants is sort of missing the forest for the trees ...for both Star Wars and biblical stories. The characters speak in mystical terms (as they do in the OT) because they exist in a mystically functioning universe, and therefore theological references to "vergences" and "the Chosen One bringing balance to the Force" make contextual sense. But these agents never act in place of the personal responsibility of characters, only as exaggerated effects.

 

No, I agree. I've always viewed their romance in the same manner. Mine was not a slant against Padme herself, I was just speaking broadly. However, I also don't think she's without some accountability.

 

I agree that Padme bears some responsibility, and wasn't just a victim. She is accountable for starting a relationship (and marrying) Anakin despite her earlier protests and judgements ("could you live like that Anakin?"), and despite her knowledge of Anakin's instability and troubling (to say the least) behavior (such as wiping out the Tusken settlement…).

 

I don't Anakin's falls too quickly. It starts in TPM. He's taken from his mother, the person he's most attached to in the world, and even at that time, Yoda admits he's too attached to his mother, that there's danger in his training, and that he's too old to be trained. Then, when Anakin returns to save his mother 10 years later, he witnesses her die. Enraged, he slaughters an entire community of Sand People. It seems strange to me that people think Anakin's killing of the younglings goes too far; he already killed women and children in the last film and he wasn't even a Sith then and he had been through far much more by that time in ROTS.

I also think people have somewhat misinterpreted Anakin's downward path in ROTS. He's already partly down the path to the dark side. Anakin's character arc is not simply a good man becoming evil. Rather, at the beginning of the ROTS, Anakin is already conflicted and ambivalent. He's certainly not evil yet, but he's not totally pure either. He's actually pretty 3-dimensional. He makes courageous and selfless decisions. Rejecting Obi-Wan's suggestion, Anakin saves him from the buzz droids on the way to Grievous's ship. Later, he disobeys Palpatine's order and takes Obi-Wan with them as they try to escape the ship. At the same time, after the prodding and then a command from Palpatine, who after all is pretty much the president of the universe and a father-figure to Anakin, Anakin does kill Dooku, and I think his reaction to Dooku's murder is an ambivalent and complex one. He knows he shouldn't have killed Dooku, and he feels some shame, but at the same time, he's not overwhelmed by the guilt, leaving Anakin confused at the same time, and perhaps a little ashamed that doesn't feel as guilty as he feels he should. At the same time, this is also another step towards the dark side, as Palpatine strokes his ego for acting as he did, and reminds him that this is in-keeping with his past behavior, specifically his slaughter of the Sand People. At this point, Anakin is a mixture of positive and negative characteristics. He is angry, prideful, ambitious, arrogant, but also selfless, courageous, loving, and loyal, and many of these qualities are in conflict with one another, so it's not simply an arc that takes him from a good person to bad person. Rather, it is a character arc of someone who has conflicting impulses, and we see which of these impulses will win out.

To return to my original point, Anakin's fall also is far from too quick in my view. After killing Dooku, Anakin still displays admirable qualities -- risking his life for Obi-Wan. Then, when he learns of Padme's pregnancy, Anakin again shows conflict within him. At first he appears concerned, knowing that their children will ultimately reveal their secret relationship, but then he thinks of Padme and idea of being a father, and becomes more accepting. Quite soon after, dreams of Padme's death revives Anakin's issues with attachment, which were stoked by the loss of his mother in ATOC, and from Anakin's perspective, Yoda's advice is of no help. Then, Anakin's trust of the Jedi comes into question. After Palpatine asks Anakin to keep him informed about what the Jedi are up to (and should they really be plotting against an elected official?), the Jedi then ask Anakin to spy on Palpatine, which does seem like a treasonous request. Later, during the Opera scene, when Palpatine reveals he knows about Anakin's secret spy mission, Palpatine doesn't seem to intend to retaliate in any way -- again not the behavior of an evil man. Rather, he uses what he knows as a lesson for Anakin: the Jedi are really no better than the Sith. At this point, Anakin has no reason to show any greater allegiance to the Jedi than to Palpatine. In his mind, they are equivalent. This realization doesn't directly push Anakin more towards the dark side, but by making the Jedi appear power-hungry, Anakin's allegiance to the Jedi is weakened, making a group that has good intentions seem less attractive. (BTW, people often complain why Anakin doesn't figure out by this point that Palpatine is a Sith; the first thing on his mind is his wife, and by now, he doesn't particularly care who is the top Sith; the Sith don't seem much worse than the Jedi; in fact, the Sith might be able to save his wife's life.)

With Anakin's trust in the Jedi shaken, Palpatine then uses his ace in the hole. He reveals that the Sith have the power to cheat death. In addition to reinforcing the idea that the Jedi are keeping secrets from Anakin, the possibility of learning this power taps into Anakin's most primal ambition -- saving his wife's life. Then, almost immediately after the Opera scene, Anakin all but admits his attraction to the dark side. He tells Padme: "I'm not the Jedi I should be. I want more." Anakin recognizes he's not living up to his ideals -- he's power-hungry, he won't distance himself from his attachment to Padme, and he's willing to embrace a dark side power to save her. Finally, when Palpatine reveals himself as a Sith, Palpatine hardly acts how an evil guy typically would. Anakin tells Palpatine that he's going to turn him into the Jedi, and Palpatine agrees that that's the best course of action. In fact, he's so confident that Anakin will ultimately find the Jedi less attractive than the Sith that Palpatine encourages Anakin to reveal to them that he's a Sith (with a final reminder that the Sith can prevent his wife's death). Another great ploy that most people overlook in this scene: Palpatine never asks Anakin to convert to the dark side. He simply advises Anakin to learn both sides of the Force, as if he can keep what he likes from the light side while still embracing what he likes from the dark side as well. Then, after being excluded by Mace and left alone to contemplate the impending loss of his wife, Anakin returns to find Mace fulfilling exactly what Palpatine predicted -- a seemingly traitorous (or actually traitorous) Mace holding his lightsaber at the neck of the unarmed Chancellor of the galaxy before, moments later, deciding to murder this helpless and disfigured old man, who just might be able to save the life of Anakin's wife.

Jeez, I mean, really, what more do people want? After Palpatine reveals that he is indeed a Sith, I would have been fine if Anakin had decided there and then: "Oh, that's good that you're a Sith. The Jedi don't trust me. They won't share all they know. They want me to spy on you and are considering overthrowing you and taking control of the Senate. Besides, you might be able to help me save my wife, while they don't even care if she dies. Just tell me how to become a Sith and give me one of those cool Darth titles. I'm in!" Of course, the way it goes down in the film is far more dramatic, plus it makes Anakin more sympathetic as it appears he must act or lose his one chance to save his wife, and it's even better how slimy and manipulative it is that Palpatine has orchestrated this entire showdown to make Mace appear treasonous and then feigns weakness to play on Anakin's sympathies, but for me, Palpatine's confrontation with Mace only seals the deal -- that for Anakin, with his character flaws and from his perspective, embracing the dark side appears to be the most advantageous path. In fact, Anakin can't really go back if he wanted to. He's killed a member of the council; by acting in Palpatine's defense, Anakin would certainly be judged by the Jedi as a traitor.

By the end, when Anakin is force choking Padme, Anakin is completely under the spell of the dark side. Just the look on his face tells you he's lost it, and this is completely in keeping with the depiction of the dark side's addictive qualities in the OT. In ROTJ, Vader tells Luke: "You don't know the power of the dark side!" and "I must obey my master!" He even seems saddened by his realization of the dark side's power over him, telling Luke: "It's is too late for me, Son."

I think it is true that Vader is much more methodical than the angry Anakin of the PT, but he's had years of experience with the dark side by that point. Palpatine is incredibly methodical in his approach to things, and one of the few times that he lets his anger get the best of him -- when Luke refuses to join him -- proves to be Palpatine's undoing. If he weren't so angry, he could've just Force pushed Luke to his death. Instead, he let down his guard and wanted to have some sadistic fun torturing Luke. The old EU, especially the Darth Plagueis novel, really develops the idea that the Sith, while savoring their anger, must control it so that they can best scheme and manipulate others. Lucas, I believe, has talked about this idea too. It isn't directly developed in the Saga, but Anakin's transformation into the OT Vader, Palpatine's behavior, and some other elements (some that I mention above) show that the Sith savor anger but also must control it at the same time.

 

Well put, darth ladnar. Palpatine also shows compassion, fellow-feeling, and is a fatherly influence (his motives are almost certainly nefarious) to Anakin, which he seems pretty desperate for. We see Qui-Gon in the role of a warm, fatherly figure to Anakin, but his motives, I would argue, are out of compassion and striving to follow the will of the Force.

 

Were certain fans expecting a slow build up to Anakin's downfall in Revenge of the Sith only? Or were they expecting a slow build up throughout the entire trilogy? I can't really say about the 2005 film, but I did detect a slow build up to his downfall through all three films that finally paid off near the end of Revenge of the Sith.

 

darth ladnar My problem is that, as I tried to say in my last post, there is a disjoint between the questionable actions Anakin performs earlier and those he performs after his turn. It is that disjoint combined with the notion that Anakin's turn is predicated on his bowing before his master and pledging himself to 'evil', and the level of stupid he has to have taken on that shatters the illusion...for me personally.

First let me get a conceit out of the way (and it is, I think, telling that defences of the story so often have to resort to conceits to hold them together). You say;

"Anakin returns to find Mace fulfilling exactly what Palpatine predicted -- a seemingly traitorous (or actually traitorous) Mace holding his lightsaber at the neck of the unarmed Chancellor"

It is not "actually traitorous". If the FBI found damning evidence that the President had been working with an enemy leader in a war, that that President had actually instigated and perpetuated a false flag war, had given vital intelligence to the enemy then they would be within their rights - and indeed it would be their duty - to arrest the President. Within such a governmental system the leader is subject to the law as all others are.If said president then kills two of the agents sent to arrest him and attempts to kill the other, and while seemingly captive still poses a threat then it is not traitorous to kill him. As an action it is traitorous only to Sidious; not to the Republic (which Sidious is dismantling)not to the people of that Republic (upon whom Sidious is seeking to inflict bondage, and has already inflicted a needless and meaningless war). As an example....would it be fair to say that the efforts upon Hitler were actually traitorous?

But within this conceit lies the first of Anakin's seeds of stupid. You say (also) that this situation (Mace about to kill Sidious)

"Anakin returns to find Mace fulfilling exactly what Palpatine predicted........deciding to murder this helpless and disfigured old man"

Yes....it is not only what Palpatine predicted but.....that little piece of conversation makes little sense because - that is exactly what Anakin said he wanted to do. Why? Because upon learning that Palpatine is the Sith Lord they have been looking for Anakin knows what that means; that he was working with Dooku; that the whole war has been a lie. All the destruction, all the death has been committed for this man's own purposes. There are a couple of points to make here, about this. You say;

"The Jedi don't trust me. They won't share all they know. They want me to spy on you and are considering overthrowing you and taking control of the Senate."

Yes the Jedi want Anakin to spy upon Palpatine, and...they were right. Anakin objects because Palpatine is " a good man", "a friend"...but now he has learned that everything Palpatine has pretended to be to Anakin is a lie. Obi-Wan, his friend, was right - he should be careful of his 'friend' Palpatine.

And there is more. Palpatine was in cahoots with Dooku...and had Anakin kill him....That's a bad enough rospect in itself but...it also means that Palpatine was involved in the attempts on Padmé's life. Padmé, like every other person in the galaxy, is at risk because Palpatine has orchestrated a war. Palpatine does not care for the life of Padmé.

Now..I can sort of get that Anakin overlooks all of that in his selfishness, in his willingness to save Padmé but...here's where Anakin becomes even more stupid. Now...I've seen the arguments before; that Palpatine never actually says he knows how to save Padmé, that he doesn't actually lie but......

If Palpatine were a company and the company were selling a product called "Save your wife" then...the advertising claims made compared to the actuality of service would see them sued into bankruptcy. "Use my power, I beg of you, and save your wife from certain death" and "I have the power to save the one you love". Now, you've bought into that deal, you've paid a heavy price for this service and when you've asked for the product you're told "We don't actually know how to do it, but if you learn some other things - which you will have to pay a heavy price for - then we're pretty sure we can come through for you"...just how much of a mug would you have to be to carry on with this deal?

So, at that point..knowing what a manipulative liar this guy is, and a murderer ....no, he is responsible for essentially mass murder....does he not at this point think that the greatest danger to Padmé's well being is this monster being around?

So...even if I put all of that to one side, even if I accept that desparation, tiredness, confusion ...whatever, have made him the most stupid of stupids of all time, it is what comes after that absolutely makes no sense. Despite the further conceit of 'possession' (the Sith eyes)....that he is no longer Anakin but is 'consumed' by a demonic character called Vader; Upon his rebuilding after Mustafar we hear...Anakin. He asks how Padmé is...and throws a big hissy fit when he discovers that she is dead. He has lost everything. He turned a blind eye to all that he knew was wrng with this deal and he has lost everything........and then we find him, twenty years later, serving the Emperor and acting for the Empire with what appears to be incredible zeal.

What do I expect? I expect to see a Vader who can believe he gained something, something that the price he has paid he can consider in some way as having been worth paying. I expect to see Vader be the product of buying into the totalitarianism he acts for. I expect to see a man seduced by the darkside, not tricked into a last minute deal.

 

I enjoyed your entire post, but I'm isolating that part just to say, you certainly have a way with metaphors, Ingram!

Out of a cannon. Yes, indeed.

These two mini-essays, in my opinion, are exceptionally cogent character analyses.

Brilliant work!


* * *


Anakin is kind of cornered by Palpatine in the end. As you alluded to, darth ladnar, boy, do I love that evil grin Palpatine gives to Anakin at the end of the "reveal" scene:

"You have great wisdom, Anakin. Know the power of the Dark Side. The power to save Padme."

And it was possibly intuited/improvized by Ian McDiarmid himself:

Monday, July 14th, 2003
Location: Stage 7
Set: Int. Palpatine's private office
Scenes shot: 94 (Palpatine revealed as a Sith Lord)

"That smile at the end worked," Lucas says to McDiarmid.

(Rinzler, "The Making Of Revenge Of The Sith", p. 87)


* * *

That Anakin doesn't embrace evil in an open-handed or methodical way is part of the "shock" of the prequel trilogy -- in my opinion.

As Ingram has rhetorically asked, however, how could it really have been otherwise? The PT shows something messy and self-serving about committing to an iniquitous path.

The best way of looking at it, perhaps, is to remember that Anakin is seduced. And for every obvious cog being turned, there are four or five less-obvious ones. For everything overt, there is a more subtle architecture just below the surface.

And then, yes, things become rather dire for Anakin, after Palpatine implies there is no way out, no way back, and that he is moving down the only path that makes sense; which he also does to Luke in ROTJ. In fact, almost all politicians and authority figures behave and ensnare in that way.

Star Wars offers some rather pertinent lessons for mankind. And cool 'slposions, too, of course.

 

Yes, his power is the power of the dark side. As I've said, the man states that if Anakin were to learn to use the dark side, learn to use his power, then they can figure it out. He says, "Use my knowledge" and "Know the power of the dark side, the power to save Padme". He also said that Darth Plagueis could create life by manipulating the Midichlorians and lo and behold, here's a guy who was created by Midichlorians and his name is Anakin Skywalker.

That's why he plans to kill him once he's got what he wants.

Anakin already buys into the totalitarian regime before he's turned and again after. The picnic scene and when he's telling Padme that they can overthrow Palpatine were examples of him buying into that idea.

ANAKIN: "We need a system where the politicians sit down and discuss the problem... agree what's in the best interest of all the people, and then do it."

PADME: "That's exactly what we do. The trouble is that people don't always agree."

ANAKIN: "Well, then they should be made to."

PADME: "By whom? Who's gonna make them? You?"

ANAKIN: "Of course not me."

PADME: "But someone."

ANAKIN: "Someone wise."

PADME: "Sounds an awful lot like a dictatorship to me."

ANAKIN: "Well, if it works."


ANAKIN: "Don’t you see, we don’t have to run away anymore. I have brought peace to the Republic. I am more powerful than the Chancellor. I can overthrow him, and together you and I can rule the galaxy. Make things the way we want them to be."

As to gaining something, he has. Power of the dark side.

SlDIOUS: "Good . . . good . . . You have done well, my new apprentice. Do you feel your power growing?"

ANAKIN: "Yes, My Master."


ANAKIN: "You underestimate my power!"

He stays because he wants power and has gained it.

VADER: "Don’t be too proud of this technological terror you’ve constructed. The ability to destroy a planet is insignificant next to the power of the Force."

 

I'd say that Lucas didn't handle this well. I've explained this before. But Anakin shouldn't have been portrayed as an innocent nine-year-old boy. He was a slave and they should have shown how that traumatized him. Perhaps he should have been depicted as kind to his mother, but that could have been an exception to the rule. From Episode II to III, it doesn't seem like that much of a stretch for him to go in and kill Jedi children. It's horrible. He constantly embraces his dark side, and he would have fallen to the dark side without Sidious. Sidious just gave him a push and manipulated him. (Sidious had plenty to work with regarding Anakin. He had nothing to work with when it came to Luke, however.) Overall, the prequels could have been written better. If only Lucas hadn't thought he had to go it alone. I do think he took time and came up with better ideas for Episode III, but the dialogue still is annoying, especially in parts where it's not clear whether or not that Anakin knew that Palpatine had been behind the whole war and so on.

I don't think Anakin became evil too quickly. I think he was a damaged man who always had demons inside. He gradually found more reasons to embrace them. He always had greed, fear, anger, and hatred. He always tried to subjugate his emotions. Luke allows himself to cry. He accepts when people go, as he did with Owen and Beru and he later learned to accept his new close friends' mortality and not be enchained to his attachments. Luke lets the emotions flow through him. But Anakin tries to own them, to possess them, to let them fuel his power. That's what made him into Vader. It's not healthy to operate like that in real life, obviously, and that's why Anakin/Vader is similar to how many people are. He can't control his selfishness and fear. That leads to his agony.

 

My contention is that the main problem people have is a hero turning evil. There's a reason it's a very uncommon dramatic device, audiences doesn't like to see their heros fall. My question is, would it have been any more realistic if he became Vader straight after killing the Tuskens? How is that any less of religio-magic device? Exactly when and how will it feel realistic for a good guy like Anakin to start killing younglings?

His fall is realistic psychologically and Lucas put a lot of importance on showing that. What is unrealistic is the quickness of it. In real life good people can turn evil over time, but they don't do it in a few hours. So for me the dark side isn't magic, it's a device that accentuates a real life psychological state. Anakin is angry, and anger leads to hate. And once he gives into it it consumes him, takes over. In real life that can happen, but with the dark side it can happen much faster. Like a drug.

Also, as fans of the OT we have been conditioned to think of the Jedi as the ultimate good. So it becomes hard for the audience to relate to Anakin when he starts to hate them and consider them evil. And in that sense you might say that Lucas failed in getting the audience to understand Anakin, to get into his head. My belief is that the reality of the situation, with the OT being cherished for 20-30 years made it almost impossible to portray this realistically within a condensed time frame. I also think that is why the PT fails with the general audiences compared to the OT. The story about a hero turning evil just isn't very popular. It's not something most people want to see. And my belief is that it may be impossible to ever make a film like that that is universally loved. Peoples bias toward good is too strong. But since it is the back story to the OT he had to do it like that, and I commend Lucas for having the balls to go that route, to challenge his audience when he could have taken the easy route and remake the OT with new characters. It might not be perfect, but it is certainly unique.

 

He didn't do it alone. He worked with Hales, Stoppard and Fisher. He took feedback from his friends and made changes. It was never all a vacuum.

MACE: "A Sith Lord?"

ANAKIN: "Yes, the one we've been looking for."

He knew. That's why he told Mace. He knew from Obi-wan that Dooku told him that the mastermind behind the Naboo invasion is also the one who controls the Senate. And he also knows that this same Sith Lord is boss of the Confederacy.

 

And anyway...

What's wrong with going it alone? Yeah, film is a collaborative medium, and no man is an island, and all that jazz. But art should be, can be, and is a personal creation; when not interfered with or made by committee.

“Art is not a handicraft, it is the transmission of feeling the artist has experienced.”

-- Tolstoy

 

I have a number of contentions. With regard to this, the idea that people have a problem with a hero turning evil, I can only say that a part of what I was getting at in my previous post is that Anakin doesn't actually become Vader; that Lucas pulled out of having Anakin be Vader. In other words that Vader is a form of religio-magical possession of Anakin - so that the story treats them as two distinct personas and that it is Anakin breaking that magical spell that allows him to destroy the Sith.

Another aspect trhat I have a problem with is that ROTS is essentially telling the story of how a mass murderer becomes evil....re the Tusken slaughter. That, to me, is a turning point and yet Lucas pulls out of that idea. The contrivance of bowing before the devil and pledging yourself and becoming possessed is not a story that equates to "a hero turning evil", especially when that 'hero' is, actually, a petulant and immature mass murderer.

If we had seen early ROTS Anakin in the place of early AOTC Anakin then I could see a "hero" to turn bad. If his slaughter of the Tuskens was a first step, and his justifications of it and other actions lead to him actually buying into and believing Palpatine's world-view - ie Anakin actually becoming/being Vader - were the story then I could buy that, I would prefer that - that would be a story of how a good man comes to do evil. What we got was far removed from that. Good men don't come to do bad things because they buy into being evil and know it is evil, they justify it; they come to believe it is right. Not go along with it cos they pledged themselves and....oh, even though I've lost everything I'd best make the best of what I've got ...ho-hum; cue 20 years of mayhem and torture...

 

Possession? It's more like Magneto or Harvey Dent. Those two, in recent films, became oversimplified, horrible parodies of what they always were anyway. The same is true of Vader. Vader is the extreme, traumatized, suffering version of what Anakin was leading himself up to all along. His choices got himself there. While it is true that the dark side does amplify one's own negative traits, it does not possess them. He finally did the right thing when he thought things through in ROTJ and then chose to break free from his past choices and his past addictions to the dark side and certain insecurities.

 

I saw Anakin's slaughter of the Tuskens as a first step toward embracing evil. In the case of the Tuskens, Lucas morally muddied the waters by allowing them to commit acts that would lead to a negative reaction by Anakin - namely the kidnapping, torture and murder of Shmi Skywalker Lars.

Anakin managed to make this first step. Others came very close to making it. Obi-Wan's continuing duel with Maul was fueled by his rage over the latter striking down Qui-Gon. It was only after Maul had shoved him over the ledge that Obi-Wan allowed his anger to cool down. I'm still wondering what made him try to convince Luke to kill Anakin . . . even after the latter stated that he still sensed goodness within the Sith apprentice. Mace's decision to kill Palpatine, instead of arrest him, was fueled by his anger over the deaths of his Jedi companions by the Chancellor's hand and fear that the Senate might allow him to get away with being a Sith Lord. Yoda's decision to kill Papatine was fueled by his anger and grief the deaths of many Jedi, thanks to Anakin and Order 66. I think he tried to pretend that he was merely saving the Republic. But during his retreat from the Senate building, I think he finally realized he had made a mistake.

However, by ROTS, Anakin's decision to embrace evil was no longer muddied by moral ambiguity. His decision to help Palpatine kill Mace, his participation in the slaughter of the Jedi at the Temple and his murders of the Separatist leaders came from his fear of Padme's death and his willingness to do anything to acquire Palpatine's help in preventing her death.

I never saw Anakin as a borderline psychopath. I never thought he should have been portrayed as one. I've always seen him as I do the other major characters in the saga . . . sentient beings with the potential to do both good or evil.

 

Just posted this in another thread, but I think it warrants mentioning here-as it is very much the topic:


I think Anakin's turn was done very well. I feel his turn was more of him basically a "making a deal with the devil" kind of thing, and once everything blew up in his face, he finally gave in to the hate he'd been fighting back for so long.

"I sense great FEAR in you, Skywalker. You have hate, you have anger, but you don't use them!"

I feel that if Sidious didn't use his fear of losing Padme to entice him to the Darkside, he would likely have still turned at some point, considering how emotionally vulnerable he was anyway.

So seeing Sidious capitalize on Padme's possible death to convince Anakin to turn made sense to me. He knew Anakin would only need that little tip over the edge to turn, and he used Padme's fate as a catalyst to make it happen...

 

I understand where you are coming from with "becoming Vader". I'm just not sure the person you are describing could really be called "good". If Anakin had started to embrace evil acts while still a Jedi I think it would be counterproductive to what Lucas was going for. It would be more like a monster turning into a monster, not a good person being seduced. Coming from the OT I also understand that is the type of portrayal many expected and wanted to see, because that is what Darth Vader is. Evil, but also witty and cool. A sort of Han Solo slash Boba Fett like Jedi, cocky and arrogant. Edging on the side of dark from the start. This would certainly fit better with what people thought of Darth Vader from the OT, but I don't think it would work well for the theme the PT was going for, nor does it really fit Obi Wans description of a good man. More like a bad man with some good sides. Like Hitler.

Still I can't get comfortable with what you call magic possession. I think it depends on what the dark side is supposed to mean to us. Why exactly is it so dangerous? So quick? I don't have any immediate answers to that, but the explanation I choose to go with is the one I talked about in my previous post. Like a person flustered with emotion, imagine a soldier under fire, it feeds on fear and magnifies it. Making you do things you normally wouldn't, because your enormous fear and anger becomes so overpowering you just have to act on it. So you have the My Lei (spelling?) massacre. The mutilation of bodies by GIs in Iraq. The torture of suspects on Guantanamo. When you agree to let the dark side in, to use it consciously, the hate stays with you, fuels you. And very soon you become like an abused child, a psychologically shattered soldier, taking your hate out on others, whoever you can justify. The dark side just makes it much quicker and more lasting than to an ordinary person.

Lucas wanted Anakin to be a truly good person. Something I imagine none of us really think Maul, Dooku and Palpatine ever were. So you need special circumstances to make it happen. Some can't accept that and that's just how it is I suppose. I don't think Lucas could have done this particular version any better. All he could have done was make Anakin a fundamentally different person from the start. But then I feel we would lose much if not all of the tragedy. Not to mention the believability of him turning back to good.

 

There's a flaw in that which is why would Vader want to learn from Palpatine? Why would he obey him, just as why would Luke obey Palpatine or Vader? The answer is and always has been pledging themselves to the dark side. Again, that is why both men tempted Luke with the allure of the dark side. To swear loyalty to them and to learn from them. Anakin isn't exactly possessed as he is letting go of the good man that he was and letting go of all the restraint that he's placed on himself. And if you don't think that the possession aspect wasn't there, I suggest re-watching ROTJ and see how Luke reacts when he's starting to turn and then pulls back.

Luke was also petulant in the OT and he almost turned. He doesn't start to mature until ROTJ and even then, it won't be until TFA that we will see a completely mature Luke.

Except Anakin does buy into it. He's been buying into it the whole time. He's supported dictatorship since he was at least nineteen. He's used his anger from time to time to get what he wants. He dislikes the Senate and the petty squabbling. He supports Palpatine's continued acquisition of power from the Senate, while the Jedi think it is a bad idea. He wants more and more power, both from the Force and on a scale like Yoda and Obi-wan. He's just been afraid to embrace being evil until he chooses to do so.

 

Thanks for the response. I have more to say but I just want to address this particularly in the short time that I have now. It is this exceptionalism that I think is a part of what betrays what the original story, and the power of the final scenes in ROTJ. In light of the exceptionalism those scnes become about an exceptional case where Vader is actually a "good man" called Anakin, and all other 'baddies' are (therefore) by nature bad. That Anakin can only do what he does because he is this thing called 'a good man'. That misses the point entirely.

Vader in the original personified the conception of 'a bad man' and what Luke does....shocks because it is unexpected. You are meant to be rooting for Luke, this is the scene where he destroys the monster and yet...he falls short; he refuses. Why? Because the 'bad man' isn't out there; the bad man is within him - it is within us all. It isn't, in other words, about 'good men' and 'bad men' but about good choices; that what defines whether what we do is good or bad are our actions, in the moment. The fact that the exceptionalism of Anakin's position means we don't perceive Dooku, Maul etc as ever having been good is the problem. It is a narrowing of the story. That is the theme that was being addressed hrough Yoda's zen teachings; it is what Vader's redemption is about - that the man (the object) is not inherently bad (or good) but that the choices made define good and bad.

We have e tendency to objectify too much, and in that good and bad become objects...whereas they are process, they are action, not things.