Full Series Reconciling "The Last of the Jedi" with Rebels

If you go by the newcanon Darth Vader comic - he's already giving Vader rivals right after ANH, even if the intent to replace, might not be entirely serious.

 

You miss the details, Iron_lord. Nowhere in the comic does Sidious intend to replace Vader as his Sith apprentice, that is explicitely stated.

 

I'm not sure killing Vader was a necessity. Vader's behavior between ESB and ROTJ was different. In ESB he's talking about ruling the Galaxy as father and son. In ROTJ, he tells Luke he must obey his master, and that Palpatine will be his new master, etc. And he protects Palpatine from Luke. And even after Palpatine attempts to betray him, and Luke does not fall, Vader gets back up, stands at Palpatine's side, and is conflicted over who to side with.

I mean, away from Palpatine's eyes, Vader may have had some ambition and gotten a little ballsy, but so close to Palpatine, it seemed like he was so afraid of Palpatine that he wouldn't dare challenge him, even after Palpatine tried to betray him.

Had Vader been spared, I'm not sure he'd have been any more likely to turn on Palpatine. Especially now that Palpatine sort of has his son as a hostage. It seemed like he was all talk in ESB.

Plus, if you consider the fact that the whole point was to freeze Luke and deliver him to the Emperor, that conversation of ruling the galaxy as father and son never would have occurred had things gone to plan, and had Luke not proven more skilled than expected (thanks to Yoda). I think Vader was expecting to walk in, dominate him, freeze him, deliver him to Palpatine, and then that would have been the end of it. Palpatine would have turned him and betrayed Vader.

 

Vader has simply undergone character development between TESB and ROTJ. He's done some soul-searching and realized that even if he would rule on the throne, he would not be any happier for it. He had all that power and still felt somewhat unfulfilled before Luke came along. That's a depressing, crushing realization, and this of course is coupled with his reawakening conscience that must also be driving him nuts. Vader was impervious to all the suffering he caused during ANH and TESB, but that doesn't seem the case anymore in ROTJ. Now, he cares. He cares that his son suffers and sacrifices his life to make it stop. Compare that with TESB where he had Luke chose between life and death and then cut his hand off. What a great change!

I don't think that Vader is ever the type for "empty words", but after TESB his motivations, his priorities, greatly change and his dream to rule the galaxy has become a hollow one. He doesn't find the drive, the energy anymore that he had for all those decades.

You kill traitors, especially powerful ones. Of course it's a necessity, Palpatine can't take that kind of chances.

You really think Vader would have kept his word and brought him before Palpatine? Why if he can claim that Luke eluded him and bring him to some secret place to turn and train him? If Luke is carbon frozen, it makes the treachery all the easier. Vader's line about the Emperor's prize is obviously a lie.

 

I get that Jedi have the Force on their side and that gives them the advantage. But this is fiction after all. And if Batman,who is as mortal as the day is long,can train himself to peak mental & physical perfection as to stand toe to toe with incredible adversaries, I don't think it too far fetched that there could be an alien species or perhaps even dedicated humans with the abilities to confront the Jedi in battle without getting totally shut down.

 

I think the perceived change in attitude has more to do with Vader just knowing that Luke would not join him.

 

When did Vader betray Palpatine (that Palpatine knows about)? Vader had been talking about backstabbing Palpatine two decades earlier when he threw the idea out there to Padme, that didn't seem to affect their ability to work together for the past 24 years. Maul was trying to raise armies against Palpatine, yet after defeating him, the last word on the matter seems to be that he's no longer a threat.

There's no real evidence to the contrary. He could have come right out of the gate telling Luke who he was and everything. Instead he tries to freeze him, that fails, and it's only when Luke is cornered and unarmed and in a dangerous position that Vader tries to talk him down by telling him that he's his Father, telling Luke how powerful he is, and they together they can destroy the Emperor.

But when Luke voluntarily comes to Vader in ROTJ, and the two have a moment away from the ears of other Imperials, there is no more of that talk. Instead it's all Vader stressing that he must obey Palpatine.

 

His offer towards Luke? It is entirely possibly that Palpatine found out about Vader's betrayal, but didn't find out about what he said on Mustafar (Obi-Wan was the only living witness there). I'm guessing that Vader made more preparations than just try to turn Luke, becoming an Emperor is a difficult and ardous process.

As for Maul, Palpatine had him imprisoned, so he clearly did consider him a threat that should not be allowed to run free. He just underestimated the forces Maul collected, as he is prone to do.

Vader stated his exact motives, yet you tell me that there's no evidence that Vader's statement about the Emperor's prize was a lie? Wait what?
You're more willing to believe a throwaway line rather than the lines that define the character?

Telling Luke out of the gate who he is won't have the impact that Vader is trying to achieve. If Luke is beaten down, weak, humiliated, and Vader is playing his trump card then, just how unsettled and unstable will Luke be? Very, which makes it all the more likely that he'll take Vader's offer in his confusion.

Again, character development. It happens even in Star Wars.

 

Yeah, lets chart Vader's progression through the OT shall we:

-ANH-He's basically an enforcer getting crap done. He Force chokes ONE guy, solely for questioning the very existence of The Force, and he's much more tolerant of his subordinates expressing their views/opinions. Plus he's taking orders from Tarkin and there's no mention (in the film itself) of him being Sheev's personal apprentice. Also, people aren't afraid to mock/back-talk to him (Leia and Motti both do it).

-ESB-He's now running the show on the ground. Is much less tolerant of failure/willing to kill his subordinates. Now they're all scared crapless of him and he's shown to be even more ruthless/single-minded. Plus he de-hands his own son with no hesitation. And he's talking to Luke about "ruling the Galaxy as father and son.

-ROTJ-He Force chokes no one, the most he ever does is give the Death Star commander a somewhat stern talking to. He's cow-towing to Sheev much more, and seems in places to be much more conflicted by what he's doing. His conversation with Luke on Endor being the most prominent example. And then of course he finally turns on Sheev in order to save his son's life.

So yes, it's pretty clear if you watch the films that Vader went through character growth over the three films. He begins in one-pace, is in a very different place in the middle, and ends in a completely different place still.

 

im just patiently waiting for them to begin a new series of what other Jedi might have survived. If they do show this I'm sure whatever Ahsoka was doing for 15+ years after her departure I'm sure she ran into many survivors. It just blows my mind on how close the SWR show is to ANH, really brave move on the company's part but I'm sure they have a plan and have a general idea on how they'll end the show to connect to OT....I hope..

 

I would've rather it were more about the rebels, minus the jedi or with jedi five years after ROTS during the purge. It would've avoided this mess.

 

Key word: possible.

There's no evidence so far as I am aware that he ever did. And regardless, it's to be expected. When Dooku subjected Savage to Sith training, hatred of the apprentice towards the master was encouraged. When Palpatine speaks to Maul, he refers to Maul no longer being a Sith since there can only be two, and he is no longer the apprentice - having been replaced. An element of hostility between master and apprentice seems to be the way of the Sith. Ergo Paplatine should have anticipated that Vader would try to pull something if he put Vader near Luke, hence I would think that if there were Inquisitors still around that he would have been better off trusting them to bring Luke in instead.

So either:

1. There are no Inquisitors left and he just has to trust Vader.
2. Or Paplatine is just so confident that Vader is so afraid of him and so far under his thumb, that Vader wouldn't dare disobey him. That what we see in ROTJ is not character development, it's merely the very real fear Vader has for his master, and the way he behaves in his master's presence.

"You, like your father, are now mine!"
"You don't know the power of the Dark Side! I MUST obey my master!"

"He will come to you, and then you will bring him before me"
[Vader does this without question]

"It is too late for me, son. The Emperor will show you the true nature of the Force. He is your master now."

I'm leaning more toward option two. I.E. What we see between ESB and ROTJ is not character development at all. It's the exact same character. Palpatine had Vader under his thumb and he knew it. So Palpatine commands that Vader bring Luke to him in ESB. Why should I believe that Vader wouldn't do this? Because he makes some offer to Luke about ruling the Galaxy as father and son? Because he's trying to talk his son down from a position where the alternative is destroying him? When that dialogue is only even coming out since Luke was a more powerful combatant than Vader anticipated?

And I'm not going to pretend like the OT and PT and new continuity fit all together seamless. The Rule of Two didn't exist in the OT. Things like the Inquisitors likely never existed in Lucas' mind. In ESB, it seems clear to me that the intent at that time was that all three - Palpatine, Luke, Vader - could coexist (but the retroactive creation of the Rule of Two makes the dialogue between Palpatine and Vader awkward almost a declaration of war). To say that the Rule of Two was discarded by the OT, makes its invention pointless. There's been so much revision and new ideas that it's pretty darn clunky just to watch the films, let alone to include TCW where post-Rule of Two we see characters like Asajj, and whatever is going on in the comics these days.

I mean, pre-TPM, when I grew up watching the OT, I never interpreted Palpatine as wanting Vader dead. Luke and Vader fought, Vader was defeated and yielded to Luke. Palpatine pretty much compliments Luke on his victory and extends the offer for Luke to be his apprentice. Luke rejects the offer. Palpatine attacks Luke. Vader gets back up and stands at his master's side. Paplatine never tells Luke to strike Vader down (there's no equivalent of "kill him. Kill him now"). Vader gets back up and stands by his master, there's no real indication there like Vader got backstabbed. I always kind of felt like if Luke became Palpatine's new apprentice, it would make Luke Palpatine's right hand man and be a demotion of sorts for Vader. But there was never any explicit command for Vader to be killed.

Then when you throw the Rule of Two into the picture, Palpatine wanting Vader to die becomes implied. And questions get raised like, why would Vader protect Palpatine. Or why would Vader be OK with Palpatine being Luke's master if that's pretty much a death sentence to Vader, etc.

And this leads to overly complicated theories like Palpatine told Vader he was doing away with the Rule of Two, even though he really wasn't.

But before the PT, it was so much simpler. It's two guys, with no stupid Rule of Two, saying (obviously paraphrased heavily)

Vader: "hey, there's this third guy that's really powerful in the Force and he could really help us out if we turn him."

Palpatine: hey, you're my loyal servant, and also this guy's father, we can probably exploit that connection (or else why tell Vader Luke's his son?)"

Vader: "Sure, I'll give it my best shot, and if he doesn't go for it, I'll kill him."

Luke: "I'll never join you."

Vader: "But I'm your father. And this war is just so messed up. And I hate the Emperor too. So I want him gone too. But if you join me, we can take him out and end the war. How does that sound? Or else I have to kill you.

Luke [ROTJ]: "Dad, how about you leave with me instead?"

Vader: "Nope. The Emperor is your master now."

Just in no part of that did Vader's offer sound sincere to me. Nor does Dooku's to Obi-Wan in AOTC, for that matter. They are appealing to the desires of these people in a really lazy attempt to turn them. I mean, when Palpatine turned Anakin, it was a drawn out thing and about waiting for the opportune moment. When Dooku "attempts" to turn Obi-Wan, it's basically

Dooku: "hey, let's destroy the Sith (a completely insincere offer, since Dooku himself was Sith)."
Obi-Wan "No."
Dooku "OK, well then I'll let the Geonosians kill you."

Vader: "Hey Luke, I just chopped off your hand, and I got you cornered. But I'm your dad, and if you join me, we can kill the evil Emperor and end the war."
Luke: "WTF, no."
Vader: "Don't make me kill you."

These are like the lamest attempts at turning someone. I mean, there isn't even a moment where it seems like Luke is even remotely tempted. Whereas when Palpatine tries to turn him, he doesn't do it with promises of making the galaxy a better place, he does it by provoking Luke's negative emotions and getting him to experience rage, and in the end we can see that as he tastes the power, it is harder for him to control himself and his ultimate triumph is being able to reject the temptation.

With Anakin, Palpatine had to bribe him. But ultimately that bribe was just to get him to commit heinous acts (like slaughtering the Jedi) and those heinous acts then seemed to be what sealed the deal into making Anakin bonkers and having warped delusions, whereas initially he was just doing it to save Padme's life. But somewhere in there he starts going off about his new Empire and how the Jedi are evil.

But I'm supposed to think that telling Luke to join him because they can destroy the Emperor was really his best effort and a sincere offer?

Now again, things are so convoluted anymore, that the powers that be can really do whatever they want. The next issue of one of the comics might introduce three more Darths and confirm that the Rule of Two was abandoned since TCW for all I know.

But I don't see Vader in ESB and ROTJ as fundamentally different. It's the same character in two different situations.

When away from the Emperor, Vader gets to play mini-Emperor to his own subordinates. But when the Emperor is near (which is established in the very first scene of ROTJ - that the Emperor is coming) Vader turns into a wimp. And when he is that spinelss as we see in ROTJ, I do not see any kind of realistic opportunity for him to get Luke, sneak him away, train him, get him near the Emperor, and then overthrow him. You would think that the Emperor would be up to date that the Empire occupied Bespin and that a confrontation occurred there between Luke and Vader, and if Vader just falls off the radar for weeks while he trains Luke in some undisclosed location that Palpatine would know about it and have a contingency plan (or again, why the hell would he entrust Vader to confront Luke, or even tell Vader about Luke in the first place, when in doing so he's simultaneously reminding Vader about the good man that he was, while also admitting indirectly that he lied about Anakin killing Padme on Mustafar).

Or it could merely be that Palpatine realizes that if Vader succumbs to love for his son, that it will weaken him, and thus the pair will never be able to overcome him. While Palpatine's strength is in not caring for Luke and having no attachments. That if Vader confronts Luke and kills him, that would be the smart thing (from Palpatine's perspective), since he would be eliminating the competition and eliminating a link to any compassion or love that Vader might have felt as Anakin Skywalker. But if he succumbs to love and begins to identify as Luke's dad, that he will become weak in the Dark Side and that any attempt to challenge Palpatine will be doomed. So it's win-win for Palpatine.

In retrospect there's just so much awkward about the implications of the dialogue between Palpatine and Vader in ESB. When, IMO, one would suspect that if he wanted to turn Luke and suspected Vader of being disloyal, and if the Rule of Two was still in play, that Palpatine would send as many Inquisitors as was necessary after Luke without telling Vader (and we know Vader was already looking for Luke on his own), and that it would be a race as to who got to him first. I just don't see the logic in Palpatine sending Vader after Luke, unless Palpatine either was convinced 100% that Vader would serve loyally, or if this was yet another test, complete with contingency plan for Vader, should Vader not comply. I would think Palpatine would be very cognizant of how angry Vader's going to be when he realizes that Palpatine lied about Padme, and how conflicted Vader might be about killing his son (whom he already thought he had killed before birth), and also giving Vader first access to Luke, without intervention, when Luke had been anticipated to have the potential to destroy the Emperor.

You would think that Palpatine would have one hell of a backup plan, and that Vader would be smart enough to know that Palpatine had one hell of a backup plan.

To tie this long winded spiel back to Rebels: whether that backup plan is a secret apprentice (that we may or may not see). Or whether it's unleashing every Inquisitor against Vader. Or whether Palpatine has some kind of leverage over Vader that we don't know about (like a kill switch for Vader's suit that ensure loyalty), etc. I don't know.

And for all I know, secret apprentices and backup plans might factor into the plot of Episode VII.

But Vader seemed to have an intense fear toward Palpatine that it drove him to hand Luke over to Palpatine, even though it is implied that doing so meant certain death for Vader. Or maybe it's just more of that "there are some things more frightening than death" kind of attitude.

 

Is it really all that surprising that Palpatine would use manipulation to try to turn someone, and Vader would use brute force? Look at their characters, and their personalities. Palpatine is a politician and a manipulator. That is his greatest skill. Vader is a warrior, and a brute. He doesn't think, he just does.The way each of them tries to convert Luke reflects their characters.

I believe Vader's offer was 100% genuine. I just also think he does not believe he can overthrow his master on his own. He also knows that Luke is not going to join him.

The way of the Sith is for the apprentice to kill the master when they show weakness. Palpatine certainly expects Vader to try to overthrow him, and he is probably perfectly fine with it because if Vader succeeds he deserved to be overthrown. The apprentice plotting to kill the master is expected, and even encouraged.

 

It is option 2 but not in the way you are thinking and only up to ANH. In the recent novels, Vader is depicting as admiring his master. He wants to serve his master and please him and believes that Palpatine is the greater of the two.

As for Vader's betrayal. Why do you think the scene is even in the movie if Vader doesn't want to betray Palpatine? What would be its purpose? It would only create confusion. But as it is, it has a place, because it does tell us about his true motives and ambitions. Also, you are overlooking another fact. Vader doesn't even tell Palpatine that he is hunting for a "Skywalker", as we see in the holoconference, the Emperor thinks that Vader doesn't yet know about this new enemy. Vader is keeping secrets and that clearly points to his treachery.

I would say that Palpatine wanted all three to coexist, I agree. But Vader wanted to see Palpatine dead and why is explained in the new comic books.

Palpatine sounds so sarcastic and mocking even before that point, though only in ROTJ, never in TESB. That's why I think he may have found out about Vader's treachery in the meantime, but your explanation also works.

You're acting as if it was Palpatine who took Luke over the edge, but it was actually Vader with his sister comment. Both Sith worked in tandem to turn Luke because Vader doing it alone failed.

What was so bad about the attempt? Luke was really desperate and weak, a man in his position can easily make a wrong choice. If you are frightened, often you just obey the evil man giving you orders.

Vader could simply tell Palpatine that Luke died on Bespin. He has successfully lied to him before.

Palpatine isn't as smart as you seem to think he is. He fried Luke in front of his father and was surprised when the conflicted Sith turned on him.

No, the plan was simply to turn Luke together. Vader didn't know that Palpatine would betray him too, though he probably suspected it. Vader's show of loyalty on Endor is probably exactly that, a show. Just like his talk about the Emperor's prize was, or his bowing down to him in TESB and how soft his voice suddenly was. Vader is a man whose words you can't trust, because he's far more manipulative than people think.

 

It's interesting to see post-PT takes on the OT scenes - in, for example, The Rise & Fall of Darth Vader:

"Strike me down with all of your hatred," the Emperor spat, "and your journey toward the dark side will be complete."
Using the Force, Luke snatched up his weapon, activated its blade, and swung fast at the Emperor's head. But Vader moved faster, activating his own lightsaber to deftly block Luke's attack. The sight of Vader and Luke crossing lightsabers excited and amused the Emperor, and he cackled with perverse glee. Vader recalled that Palpatine had laughed the same way over two decades ago, when he had ordered Anakin Skywalker to kill Count Dooku.
I was the victor then, Vader thought as he used his lightsaber to drive Luke away from the Emperor. And the Force is with me now!
As their duel carried on throughout the throne room, the Dark Lord sensed that Luke was drawing from his own anger to fuel his attack. From his throne, the Emperor said, "Good. Use your aggressive feelings, boy! Let the hate flow through you."
My Master wants Luke to win, Vader realized with some resentment. I will not give him that satisfaction. I will not be —
Unexpectedly, Luke deactivated his lightsaber and said "I will not fight you, Father.
"You are unwise to lower your defences." Vader said, as he brought his lightsaber up fast. With incredible speed, Luke reactivated his weapon to parry Vader's attack. Soon, Vader was breathing hard through his respirator. I can't let Luke defeat me, Vader thought. I won't let the Emperor have him!

 

^^^ Mmmm, I'll have to get that book. Another Star Wars book to search for at the library!

Regarding the OP, I'm wondering if Filoni said that stuff mainly because saying 'Oh no, they're gonna die' would constitute a major spoiler and possibly make people not want to bother getting invested in the characters? Guys like Kenobi have a determined death, but with these guys it's unknown, and any episode has the potential to be a character's end. I'm betting the two Force-users will die, but one could easily turn just as well and the other sacrifices himself just to stop him. Or, one dies, and the other (I'm suspecting Ezra) could turn, since he's already brushed with the Darkside in the short time Kanan has been training him.

 

I find it hard to believe they'll have Ezra turn to the Dark Side,at least long term.( On the other hand,why not? They play fast and loose with the canon as it is. Yoda probably didn't mean it when he said "Once you start down the Dark path,forever will it dominate your destiny.")

 

Making Ezra become a dark jedi for good would sure solve the issue. Even if he is somehow still alive during the OT, he would not be counted as a "Jedi" anymore. I do think Rebels would benefit with an Anti-Imperial darksider, instead of the darkside only coming in the form of Vader and the Inquisitors.

Though If they really decided to turn him dark, the writers should have the guts to make it permanent. And unlike Anakin, Ezra does not get redeemed.

 

The point isn't "Filoni can work around Luke being the last Jedi", the problem is; Filoni's work around of Luke is the last Jedi, takes away depth from Luke being the last of the Jedi.
Many people here have indeed proven the Filoni can get away with having Jedi in the Rebels time line.
The problem is it takes depth away from the OT.
It opens controversies like, "Was Yoda lying?" or "If there were Jedi, why weren't they teaching Luke?"
It especially takes depth away from Luke's plight. By the time of ROTJ, it's up to Luke at this point to save the ways of the Jedi and defeat the Sith. Although we all agree that Luke was the only one that could save his father, if there where other Jedi out there why didn't they at least try to help Luke?
They don't help because (there aren't any ) it would take away from Luke's conflict.
In the Star Wars movies, Luke truly is the last of the Jedi.
Now with this new canon, they could've avoided the mistake of the old EU.
But no, they make the same mistake right off and undermine the movies.
Either all of the Jedi in Rebels will die or they will stop being Jedi (or in other words, die).

 

Sorry to go back a few weeks, but I thought your post was interesting.

Well, maybe it's just that, unlike Ahsoka, Luke's just that important. No messing around with someone like this kid. You send the biggest weapon in your arsenal to get the job done and worry about the fallout later.


Alright, alright -- before anyone reads this and freaks the hell out or complains that we're picking on poor little 'Soka again -- take it easy, it's joke.

Well, the part about Tano is a joke. What's funny is that of course, we would eventually learn that Luke really would turn out to be that instrumental to Palpatine's downfall (and not in the way anyone could have foreseen, at that).

Now, I read your post and immediately responded. Apologies if you guys have already covered this, but I haven't caught up with the topic yet.

Anyway, you're right: That is interesting.

My first thought -- as you say, if they even still exist -- would be that perhaps Sidious did try sending a series of Inquisitors after Luke without ever informing Vader. And when the Inquisitors continually come back either dead or empty-handed, perhaps the Emperor has no other recourse than to inform Vader of Skywalker's existence and gauge his reaction? Of course, Vader already knows of Luke (but Palps doesn't know that) and has his own plans for the boy, so-on and so-forth.

 

I kind of feel like Sheev already knew/suspected who Luke was. He seems to be well aware of it when he and Vader have their little holo-chat in ESB. His dialogue, either version of it, makes it pretty obvious:

"We have a new enemy, Luke Skywalker."

Or

"We have a new enemy, the young Rebel who destroyed the Death Star. I believe him to be the child of Anakin Skywalker."

 

The problem though is Ezra is shown to be important. Ahsoka even states they break protocol because of him.

 

LOL Dave! The movies might as well be non-canon.

 

Because other Jedi are not aware of Luke's Jedi-ness. Simple.

When Luke joined the Rebel Alliance, there was not a checkbox in the registration form for Jedi-ness.

Sent from my Xperia SP using Tapatalk

 

Ok, so you're saying other Jedi wouldn't help Luke because they don't know about him (it took me a minute to figure out what you were implying). Sure Jedi Bob on some quay forsaken planet probably doesn't know about Luke. But, Jedi in the Rebel Alliance would, like for example, (if she survives to the point were Luke blows up the Death Star) Ashoka.
His registration checkbox was blowing up the Death Star.
You'd also think Luke's feat would attract as many Jedi as possible to the Rebel Alliance, except there aren't any.