Do you feel Qui-Gon's importance in the film is necessary?

Discussion in 'The Phantom Menace' started by DarthTorgo, Apr 4, 2002.

?

Do you feel Qui-Gon's importance in the film is necessary?

Poll closed Mar 22, 2012.
Yes. 160 vote(s) 69.0%
No. 63 vote(s) 27.2%
I have no idea. 9 vote(s) 3.9%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Darth Geist Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Oct 23, 1999
    star 5
    Allow me to amend that, however, by saying that a strong climax doesn't neccessitate a weak beginning. Quite the contrary; a story's opening has the opportunity not only to lay the groundwork for the work as a whole, but to hook the viewer in while doing so.

    Hamlet begins with the hero's father appearing as a ghost to tell his son that he was murdered, and demand revenge. Romeo and Juliet kicks off with a full-scale street brawl, externalizing the families' feud--the story's central conflict--in a strong and immediate way.

    Now, after the opening hook, a story has more of a chance to slow down; the audience, having tasted the good stuff and been promised more to come, is more willing to play along in anticipation of the next big scene.

    Speaking as a storyteller, I'd rather have my audience think "Wow! Gimme some more!" then "Are we there yet? Are we there yet?"
  2. Plo_Koen Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 23, 2001
    star 4
    Darth Geist, I think I've underestimated you and I feel I've disrespected you in some earlier posts, let me clarify:

    * I acknowledge the importance of the question: why tell this story this way...?

    * The "absence of a main character"-theme: I did not mean the absence of action, I meant the 15 minutes that Obi Wan is actually totally offscreen, during the podrace...

    This happens in every episode, and it's always about 15 minutes:

    - afore mentioned Obi Wan and from a certain point of view Padme in TPM
    - Han in ANH (battle of Yavin)
    - Vader throughout the OT (shortest but sweetest in TESB, re-appearring on Bespin)
    - Han and Leia in ROTJ. (Dagobah sequence)

    (granted, there isn't any schwung to Obi Wan's re-appearance)

    Then you have the +/- 25 minute absences (some counted trans-episodal), which seem exclusive to the Skywalkers:

    - Anakin before his introduction in TPM and 3 times in the OT.
    - Luke and Leia between TESB and ROTJ.

    Then you have the rare 40 minute absence of Han between TESB and ROTJ, which almost imminently will be copied by Obi Wan between episodes III & IV.

    Above all that you have the 60+ episode skipping "background" main-characters: Yoda and Palpatine...


    But let me gain more from your wisdom,

    - Where exactly do you consider the climax of starwars to begin? (I consider it the arrival at Endor, which makes a perfect 1/10 of the story, counting 13 hours for the saga)

    - What do you think of the fact that Lucas disconnected TPM from the timeframe of the rest of the PT, which wasn't mandatory? (I think it's nice it divides the saga in 3 eras, making the saga a trilogy in itself)
  3. Plo_Koen Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 23, 2001
    star 4
    I meant: Why tell this story this way...? (intonation), sorry again.
  4. DarthBane93 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 11, 1999
    star 4
    Of course Qui-Gon was important to TPM and to the whole SW saga.

    He himself discovered the chosen one.

    Any Qui-Gon basher should just suck it up and accept it. Its GL's story, so I doubt he would include a character that isnt important.
  5. Plo_Koen Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 23, 2001
    star 4
    I've met some people who'll be glad to disagree with you...

    Indeed, it was not written in stone.
  6. DarthBane93 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 11, 1999
    star 4
    My conclusion is those who cannot understand Qui-Gon's importance are just Obi-Wan Kenobi gushers who are just whining and complaining that their fav character got less screen time. I love Obi too but its not my story to tell.

    End of story.
  7. Plo_Koen Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 23, 2001
    star 4
  8. DarthTorgo Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 17, 2002
    star 4
    << Date Posted: 4/13 2:10pm Subject: RE: Do you feel Qui-Gon's importance in the film is necessary?
    Of course Qui-Gon was important to TPM and to the whole SW saga.

    He himself discovered the chosen one.

    Any Qui-Gon basher should just suck it up and accept it. Its GL's story, so I doubt he would include a character that isnt important. >>

    I doubt that GL would do so purposely, but I find it plausible that he might do it by accident, or he might be too distracted by another aspect of the movie's production to notice. After all, he IS human and he CAN make mistakes. Especially when he returns to directing and writing for the first time in 20 years. It's not to hard to concieve that he may have been a liittle rusty with TPM. I suspect that AOTC will be a much better movie, due to the fact that he has gotten into the groove of things again. But I could be proven wrong (although I hope not).
  9. Duckman Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 21, 2000
    star 4
    Qui-Gon was needed for one thing: "Anakin Skywalker, meet Obi-Wan Kenobi". That's it, end of argument.
  10. Patrick Russell Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jul 9, 1998
    star 4
    "What do you think of the fact that Lucas disconnected TPM from the timeframe of the rest of the PT, which wasn't mandatory? (I think it's nice it divides the saga in 3 eras, making the saga a trilogy in itself)"


    I know you asked this of Darth Geist, but I've got some feelings on this one I'd like to toss out here.

    My feeling is that, while I understand that it's nice to have the PT spanning three separate eras, it lessens the drama of the PT overall by essentially providing it with a false start and then requiring that the second episode generate all of its own momentum. I assume we'll have to be re-introduced to most of the main characters in AOTC since they've changed so much since TPM (why, that young Skywalker chap looks like a different person altogether, doesn't he?) and there's really nothing that seems to carry over conflict-wise except for Palpatine. The Trade Federation is one of the dullest imaginable excuses for an apparent enemy, so it's not like we're thinking "Oooo... what are those nasty Neimoidians going to put our heroes through next?" the way we did with the Empire.

    IMHO, the secession movement should have been beginning already in TPM. Then you'd have had something significant besides Palpatine to thread the PT together conflict-wise.

    (And for those who insist that there was supposed to be no real conflict in TPM in order to show some "peaceful, golden age... remember the first words of TPM's opening crawl... "The Galactic Republic is in turmoil." My feeling is, kick down the phattie "turmoil" there, George!") ;)

    I think this might have helped the ten year gap to work a LITTLE better, at least. I still don't think it adds all that much, and I certainly don't feel that it was necessary to the overall PT story.
  11. DarthTorgo Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 17, 2002
    star 4
    GREAT points Patrick Russell. I agree completly. We have to be reintroduced to all the characters because they changed so much, we start off with a new conflict, etc, etc, etc. AOTC is truly the first in a two part prequel, and that's why I think AOTC will be better than TPM, because stuff actually HAPPENS. I just wish there was a fourth prequel movie to make up for this rough start, but it''s not likely. *sigh*

    Well, I'm looking forward to the beginning of the prequel duology. :) Now the prequels can start FOR REAL this time :).
  12. EnforcerSG Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 12, 2001
    star 4
    Hey, didnt i say that first? :p

    But you are very right PR. I have been saying for the longest time that in repects like that, TPM wasted time, and lots of it. Then again, it helps to make sure allot of good stuff happens in the next two films.
  13. Plo_Koen Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 23, 2001
    star 4
    I don't agree all main characters have to be introduced again, just Anakin, since he's performed by another actor.

    Other characters will be recognized and character development will appear automaticly in their actions and dialogue, without wasting any time.

    IMHO.

  14. EnforcerSG Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 12, 2001
    star 4
    You make a good point LuchCash, but the problem is that nothing has really happened. First off, I always liked ROTJ, it may have been the weakest of the OT, but it was still great IMHO.

    Sorry to sound so dissagrable, but just as you saw Vader turning back to Ani as lacking luster (may I use the word tacky?) I found the whole proficy thing to be in the same light.

    You are right about the lossing his family part, how that fear sort of brings it out. But I am worried that by giving all these reasons for why Ani turned into Vader, it will sort of make it ok. Like, he lost his family, it is ok that he is a little angry, it is not his fault. I find that to be annoying, and I hope that it does not come off like that.

    "Through the force, things you will see, other places, the future, the past, old friends long gone."

    I dont really see this one, if you could explain it?

    "Before the dark time, before the empire."

    I sort of see this one. Someone a while ago said that TPM should be concidered Star Peace instead of Star Wars. I can understand if you see this one, but i dissagree since there is slavery, coruption and what not in TPM.

    "She was very beutifue, kind, yet sad."

    Well, we have not found out why she is sad, and once we do in E3, with having to abandon her own childern and i am guessing die soon after, yeah, i would be sad. But my point is that that is NOT in TPM.

    But would any face do? Or does the white paint face for Padama/Ami work. Did it have to be the wonder-brat Ani, or will Hayden Christen (sp) do?

    If you understood this, more power to you, if not, dont worry, i am not the clearest of people.
  15. Plo_Koen Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 23, 2001
    star 4
    Wrong thread... (but relevant nonetheless)
  16. Patrick Russell Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jul 9, 1998
    star 4
    "I am worried that by giving all these reasons for why Ani turned into Vader, it will sort of make it ok. Like, he lost his family, it is ok that he is a little angry, it is not his fault. I find that to be annoying, and I hope that it does not come off like that."


    This is the concern I have too... that Anakin's turn to the dark side will be compromised by this whole "victim of circumstance" thing. He grew up in slavery, he was taken from his mother when he was too young, he was trained by a man who deep down wanted nothing to do with him... and on and on and on.
  17. Plo_Koen Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 23, 2001
    star 4
    mmmmm...

    He's gonna turn anyway, so what are the alternatives?

    A spontaneous turn, or a forced one? Or did you want an evil Anakin to begin with?

    I think there's no excuse (creatable in the PT) for what Vader does in the OT, so at least it can be made more understandable?


    (PS: "old friends long gone" = a.o. Mace Windu)
  18. Patrick Russell Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jul 9, 1998
    star 4
    Well, why give him all these "environmental" reasons why he becomes evil? He grew up in a sh***y environment, he was taken from Mommy at the wrong age, mean ol' Obi Wan didn't love him enough, his Jedi tighty-whities were too binding, etc., etc., etc....

    Why not just have him be a guy with a reasonably normal background (as opposed to trauma after trauma after trauma) and let his decision to turn to the Dark Side be completely due to his own personal failings rather than this "the poor guy never had a chance..." garbage?
  19. DarthHomer Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Apr 29, 2000
    star 5
    Well "environmental reasons" are very important in real life for determining why someone is well-adjusted or not. Obviously, in movies things are usually less complex. But since Anakin's life didn't seem that much worse than Luke's (as most bashers will agree, I'm sure) I doubt Lucas is going to have him turn to the dark side just because of an unhappy childhood.
  20. Patrick Russell Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jul 9, 1998
    star 4
    That Anakin's life didn't SEEM that much worse than Luke's is beside the point... Lucas clearly was trying to set it up so that it looked much worse than Luke's. Otherwise, why bother with the whole slave thing? Or the whole "trained by a master who doesn't want him" thing?

    No, I think Lucas was trying to make Anakin's life look harsher than Luke's. I just don't think he really succeeded in doing so. But the core elements are there (slavery, early loss of a parent, lack of acceptance by his mentor...) and I have a sneaking suspicion that even more will be heaped on top of that by the end of AOTC.

    It just seems to me as if Lucas is providing far too many justifications for Anakin's fall. As it stands, I think it'll be far too easy in the end to say "It wasn't really his fault... he just had a bad environment."
  21. Plo_Koen Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 23, 2001
    star 4
    You think Lucas failed in something he wasn't going for IMO, he can never win.

    I think Lucas tried to make Anakin's life comparable to Luke's:

    Anakin is a slave but ain't treated bad, Luke's no slave but is restrained by his stephfather.

    Anakin loses a parent, Luke loses his foster parents.

    scepticism of the second master: Obi Wan and Yoda.

    What Lucas is trying to tell here is: circumstances are no excuse, look at Luke, he's been in comparable situations and he didn't fall to the dark side.

    If Obi Wan's a professional he won't let his personal feelings towards Anakin influence his training.

    There's a scene in TPM where Anakin and Obi Wan display a strong nexus, I wonder what the function of that scene was?


  22. EnforcerSG Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Sep 12, 2001
    star 4
    Well, at this point, we could get into interprataions of ANH, like were Owen and Luke that close...ect... Lets not.

    I agree that Lucas may want to show that circumstances are no excuse, especally by the logic you gave, but he is doing a pitafull job with it. I mean, think about it. If Ani does something bad in the next two films, being such a good person, he will regret later. We feel sorry for him, but I actually think he is stupid, since he will oviously do more bad things and become DV. He wont truly regret things since he will keep doing bad things. He is a good kid deep down, according to Lucas. Why would he keep doing bad things other than his circumstances dictated it? Yet, circumstances dont matter? I wont feel sorry for Ani in any way if I am any bit right.

    "There's a scene in TPM where Anakin and Obi Wan display a strong nexus, I wonder what the function of that scene was?"

    What did you mean by that?

    What the heck does any of this have to do with Qui Gon's relevency?
  23. Plo_Koen Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 23, 2001
    star 4
    You started it, what the heck did your post have to do with Qui Gon's relevance? (sorry, couldn't resist)


    the nexus:

    - Qui Gon: "Anakin, tell them to take off!"
    - Anakin: "..." (just looks at Obi Wan)
    - Obi Wan: "Take off!"

    Bad scripting? or a subtle detail?

    <<<Why would he keep doing bad things other than his circumstances dictated it?>>>

    "You don't know the powers of the dark side."

    "Once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny."


    I think the whole reason for showing Anakin as a good kid lies in the end of ROTJ: to become good again means he had to be good once.



  24. Patrick Russell Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jul 9, 1998
    star 4
    I'm not saying that Anakin should have been evil from the beginning... I'm just saying that he WASN'T made out to be comparable to Luke. Luke was under his uncle's thumb, yes... but he wasn't a slave. He wasn't a piece of property. That Lucas made Anakin a slave is a lot more telling than you seem to be willing to admit.

    Also, the losses Luke incurred took place when he was a young man, not a small boy. He was never a small boy taken from his home and left in the charge of a man who didn't want anything to do with him.

    If Lucas truly were trying to make Anakin comparable to Luke, he'd have made him older. He made Anakin a small boy in TPM because of the approach he's clearly taking with the character and his eventual fall. I fully expect a very preachy storyline in the next two films about growing up in a bad environment.

    I hope I'm wrong.
  25. Plo_Koen Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 23, 2001
    star 4
    Me too, why do it so half-heartedly? He could have made Watto a cruel slavedriver, he could have made Anakin do hard and dirty labour...

    I think Anakin is even better off so far, compared to Luke:

    Luke never had real parents, at least Anakin had a mother.

    Luke had to stay twice as long on the boring dustball.

    I think the death of Owen and Beru must have had the same impact of what happens to Anakin (at the same age) in AOTC (spoiler?)

    oh, and Luke also loses a childhood friend (Biggs)

    I really don't see such a big difference (so far). Maybe Charles Manson was also a nice kid once?

    edit: VERY important detail: Anakin was not taken away, he went by choice.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.