PT Darth Binks- The Real Phantom Menace?

Fair enough.

 

I personally despise Jar Jar and hope we never see him again. There are many theories rampant on the net (which is great since it gets people to continually talk about Star Wars), but some are just off base. At least I hope

 

Jar Jar is the key for all this.

 

Heck, Robot Chicken was onto it ages ago!

 

Oh, yes. Well done to you and CIS Droid from the former page.

I meant, even older. Some people fantasized about Jar Jar being a Sith or "Dark Jedi" back when TPM came out.

It's a fun idea, if preposterous. I prefer seeing Jar Jar as uniquely removed from the black-hat/white-hat theatrics, myself.

 

Also, we have some articles taking down this theory. Basically it sums up my feelings of how fan theories can be fun, but people do seem to take them too far (though admittedly I like the Palpatine killing Padme one, not sure how well it holds up but at least it's an interesting idea that fits in with the story).

 

It is a fun idea. Ive always liked Jar jar (i was actually pretty sad when i started to understand people hated him) but i can enjoy these type of theories if noone actualy starts to belive them. Sadly some people have.

 

Nice links.

I see that the Slate article paradoxically defends a benign Jar Jar while attacking Lucas and the prequel trilogy.

Some choice remarks:

If Lumpawarroo’s take seems unusually sticky, it’s partially because of its perversely redemptive qualities. The Jar Jar we know represents a crass attempt to appeal to children, and in the process he reminds us that Lucas’ ideal audience has always been a juvenile one. Making him evil lets us believe that the films were mature all along, about and for the grown-ups we’ve become.

That's more or less what I tried to say. There is an attempt with this essay to wash away the hated immaturity of the prequels to purge negative emotion and create a delusional belief in its place.

And there is also a back-door attempt -- which I also agree with this author on (though I'm not sure they make this notion fully explicit) -- to both affirm an existing narrative (that Lucas is a "screw-up") and create a new one that softens that perception (in order to allow the installation of a delusional belief):

Perhaps the theory also seems credible, then, because it fits with our collective impression of George Lucas as a borderline incompetent doofus who never truly understood what made his series great. Given that this impression was fed by the prequel trilogy in the first place (though we probably should have known from the start), “fixing” Jar Jar by making him evil simultaneously squares with our sense of Lucas as a screw-up and promises to undo the things that let us see him that way.

The author continues and calls out the contradiction:

If you believe this narrative, Lucas was far subtler, and far more devious, than anyone realized, even as he remained almost comically clumsy. Lumpawarroo thereby leaves us with Schrödinger’s Lucas, a creature suspended in creative superposition, simultaneously brilliant and foolish.

He then rounds off with a big shot at Lucas -- which may be fatuous, but is, nonetheless, quite interesting:

But in reality, George Lucas has always been a good-natured idiot who stumbled into something larger than himself, screwing it up along the way but still getting to join in the celebration when it’s all over. This is, of course, also the role that Jar Jar plays throughout the prequel trilogy.

I certainly don't think that Lucas screwed anything up, but the author has given me something new to think about.

Jar Jar could be an elegantly inelegant metaphor for the artist organically and haphazardly knitting their way to the finish line. Jar Jar's domain is the subconscious (underwater), but he also accompanies the Jedi on a sweeping quest. And he ultimately helps birth the Empire: the big construct representing Lucas' need for order and control as a relatively aloof filmmaker who has very firm convictions and exerts massive control over the assembled elements in the editing room.

Jar Jar is Lucas' more scattershot side. As Lucas once said, there's a lot more of him in Star Wars than he cares to admit. In "The Beginning", we see Lucas squirming slightly as he impishly confesses at the end of a rough cut screening, "I may have gone too far in a few places." This statement itself, ironically, refers partly to Jar Jar rather directly (his actions in the battle and the overall editing of that sequence are what Lucas' remark encompasses: where Jar Jar is at his most extreme), but that very recognition by Lucas also links him with Jar Jar in a broader sense as a creative individual performing a high-wire act, indulging in his passions, and trying his best to get it all to come out right. Film-making, I imagine (I'm not a maker of films myself), is a bit like going off to war, and Jar Jar is appropriately (or inappropriately depending on your point of view) trying to keep his head, while fighting for a larger cause: a greater goal.

I'll remind that author, and the reader, that "idiot" is an old insult from Ancient Greece (which, incidentally, is a period in history the prequel trilogy draws rather richly and unflinchingly from). In its purer form, it refers to someone (if I can retroactively bolt some Freud onto it) wrapped up in their own "id"; one who is essentially non-integrated and removed from the concerns of wider society. Someone who, basically, refuses to go along with convention or do what is expected of them. In this regard, Lucas is certainly a bit of an "idiot", and a mighty fine one. And if we take Lucas at his word, then he never predicted the breakout success of Star Wars. He turned into the "Star Wars" guy and decided to burrow into his mythology to teach the world something and more fully express himself. Jar Jar is Lucas smiling affectionately at himself; and at anyone else who wants to savour the funny side of life and keep some of their most fragile aspects of their youthful and inchoate personality intact. Tragically, Jar Jar is manipulated by Palpatine -- the "controlling" side of Lucas -- in Episode II and gets punked. But Star Wars is also cyclical, offering damnation and redemption in equal measure. Jar Jar is George Lucas. Jar Jar is you. Jar Jar is me. Jar Jar is the elastic representation of consciousness itself.

 

For anyone who still doesn't believe this theory (despite the overwhelming amount of evidence in support), would you humor me and explain why this happened:

...and keep in mind, someone (or a team of animators) probably spent weeks either directly animating or motion capturing Jar Jar's body language and lip movements to sync with Padme and her guard. In the second scene, Jar Jar is behind the wall so QuiGon can't see him, but we can.

 

The Reddit theory is so close but misses the point. In fact, it was Watto.
On some good authority, Watto might was the Sith lord all along. If you re-watch TPM very closely, examine his subtle facial expressions and how he responds to QGJ, you'll begin to realize that he wanted to lose Anakin from the beginning. From an early age, he was grooming this youth of exceptional abilities. It is even possible that through Watto's manipulation of the Force, he is actually responsible for the immaculate conception. He knew about Anakin's sensitivity to the Force. Ani couldn't hide his abilities (building the pod, being the only human who could race). Watto was not only shrewd in business. He has the perfect cover of a degenerate gambler/slave owner hiding out on a planet controlled by the Hutts. In fact, he was orchestrating the rise of the Sith. If he were merely a slave owner, he would never enter into that gamble with QGJ and risk such a valued mechanic/talent. He did so because it was time to let the Jedi train him, paving the way for Palpatine (clearly Watto's subordinate) to get control of him. It was perfect timing. By never splitting them up, he allowed a strong relationship to grow between Ani and Shimi. He knew that could be exploited later. He also permitted Ani to disobey him and have an independent streak. Then in Episode II, he is exactly where Anakin left him, ready to point him in the direction of the Lars homestead, leading to the inevitable confrontation with the Sand People. When you re-watch, you'll realize that Watto (not Jar Jar) is clearly the most powerful figure in the galaxy. Lucas (like Kubrick) is not going to spell it out for us. If you examine the evidence, you start to piece it together. It goes back to Joseph Campbell and mythic motifs.

See Reddit/Internet, anyone can make such a circumstantial, unverifiable claim. I fully anticipate this theory goes viral.

 

Don't forget that Mind Tricks don't work on him either...

 

Sorry to dredge up an old thread, but I love this theory. I'm with Elle-Wan in that Jar Jar was an animated character and therefore there were no mistakes or subtle movements by the actor that made his lips move or hands gesture in a certain way in the film than what was absolutely intended. Jar Jar is shown making specific hand gesticulations toward characters at major plot points, the most obvious being in TPM when he tells Amidala, "wesa got a grand army" in a shot that shows only her face and his hand motioning behind her. The video below is about eight minutes long, but outlines the theory pretty well. I've really enjoyed watching all of the movies, but especially TPM, through this filter.

 

I still get a good kick out of anyone who ever brings this up. Classic reddit.

 

Wait, you mean a character made gestures with their hands while speaking??? This changes everything! There's no other possible reason the animators could have made Jar Jar do such a thing. It's not like hand gestures are a normal and natural part of human communication or anything.

LOL. This is a parody post, right?

"Watch Jar Jar in this video. See his head? It goes back, and to the left. Back, and to the left. Back....and to the left!"

 

What if Jar Jar Binks is a "This" Lord?

What's this?
A local.

 

I disagree. It's an illusion that people talk about him when referring to Darth Jar Jar as "good"

Why? Denial and false realism. Darth Jar Jar is more mainstream because fans want him to become a negative entity, which is something Jar Jar isn't.

 

Indeed. It's a "jarring" interpretation.

You're also echoing Ahmed Best himself there. From the very worthy visual blog of Alexrd:

Whether you think Jar Jar is cool or not is completely subjective. There are people out there who try to justify their ideas of Jar Jar, but it’s an opinion developed in the constructs of the prejudice they have in themselves. It has absolutely nothing to do with reality. By the same token, there are people who just didn’t like Jar Jar as a character. And that’s completely valid. But as far as Jar Jar being a negative creature, no, he wasn’t.
— Ahmed Best, The Making of Revenge of the Sith
http://swprequelnotes.tumblr.com/post/108163930681/whether-you-think-jar-jar-is-cool-or-not-is

 

Is this is supposed to be a joke? Because it´s not funy.

 

That's one of the main reasons I can't completely disregard this fan theory. Of course Darth Jar Jar is hilarious to think of, and gives a whole new layer of depth to the PT, but it is at the end of the day a ludicrous theory. However, there's a quote about movies/TV/anything manufactured for entertainment and it's that if it's there, it's supposed to be there. This is TPM, the hype and anticipation around it alone motivated the team to do their very best with the CGI (no matter how corny it looks to most fans) yet they made this slip up. Jar Jar is basically completely CGI + motion capture, even if the actor at the time had been say, chewing his lip, they COULD still edit it out and WOULD probably catch it. Yet, there Jar Jar is, Sith Eyes and all, basically whispering words we do not hear come from his mouth...

 

Asajj Ventress was actually considered to be a new villain in Attack of the Clones, but was discarded when Christopher Lee was cast as Dooku. I don't agree with the theory (even if I did, I doubt Darth Jar Jar would be his Sith name, thats worse than "Ben" Kenobi), but the evidence suggests that Dooku was added fairly late, as well as the details of exactly how Palpatine "seduces" Anakin in Revenge of the Sith.

 

i would have lovvvved ventress instead of dooku. man.

 

When I heard the Ep. VIII title I made this but posted it elsewhere, unaware of this thread:



What I enjoy about this theory is that I've not seen anyone able to say it's wrong based on any in film facts. That article linked to earlier in this thread does not pull apart the theory, it just identifies why people like it.

I'm not expecting this theory to be borne out in the remaining films, but I'd love it if it did.

 

Clearly Captain Panaka was the true Sith Lord. He and Palpatine had both been planning galactic domination for ages, and they agreed they would take different roles in subservience to the government as they both slowly worked their way to power. Palpatine would be senator and Panaka would be bodyguard to the monarchy.

Panaka's position of security enabled him to provide critical information to help the Trade Federation breach Naboo's defenses and invade the planet.

When Qui-Gon suggested landing the ship on Tatooine, Panaka was very adamant against it. "You can't take Her Royal Highness there!" Clearly this was because Panaka wanted them to land the ship at a system controlled by the Trade Federation so that they could recapture the Queen.

Also, the film never explained how Darth Maul was able to trace the ship to Tatooine, but this is clearly because Panaka secretly sent a signal to Maul.

After Palpatine is nominated following the vote of no confidence, he and Panaka agree that the Trade Federation is no longer needed in their scheme, hence why Panaka helps the Queen retake Theed.

 

Ever seen a scene where actors are mouthing along with the lines of their fellow co-actors? Yeah, that happens quite a lot after they've shot multiple takes. If anything, this is an inside joke among the animators, having fun with the mouthing phenomenon. Especially since they are all just random lines. What kind of evil plan would require Padmé saying "I don't approve"?

 

First of all it doesn't sync up. What we are seeing is the animators putting certain idiosyncrasies into the character of Jar Jar to make him more life like. Jar Jar constantly moves his mouth, why he does it? I dunno. Maybe his mouth gets dry and he is movign it around to spread out saliva?

It's like having watto itch his foot, or Lama Su pick lint off his clothing. They are just little things that make the character look more lifelike rather than just standing there doing nothing lifeless and like a stick. If you watch people in real life, they just don't stand there. They are usually doing something, touching their hair, wetting their lips with their tongue, fidgeting with their clothing, etc etc..

This was just the animators adding life to Jar Jar..