main
side
curve
  1. In Memory of LAJ_FETT: Please share your remembrances and condolences HERE

PT How is Anakin's turn rushed?

Discussion in 'Prequel Trilogy' started by Padmes_love_slave24, Aug 8, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. StampidHD280pro

    StampidHD280pro Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jul 28, 2005
    Certain things like Anakin's distrust of the Jedi HAD to be in the work. The whole WHY thing, as we learned from Yoda, doesn't really matter. Sidious staging his own disfigurement to sway Anakin, I'm guessing wasn't part of the bigger vaguer plan, but it is a stroke of brilliance IMO.

    Yes, it does seem Lucas plotted the PT as, Anakin leaves his mom in the first one, gets married in the second one, and finally turns in the third.
     
  2. Ord-Mantell70

    Ord-Mantell70 Jedi Master star 3

    Registered:
    Mar 9, 2009
    1) Of course. He had to oppose them sooner or later. Problem is, to me, when the truth emerges and Palpatine's true identity is disclosed to him, only remains an actual strong but personal frustration regarding the Jedi Council, for denying him the rank of master (and OBW sort of "holding him back" in AOTC). Mainly due to Anakin's close relationship with "pre-Sidious" Palpy...

    2)A little more I had hoped...No ? [face_laugh]
     
  3. Cryogenic

    Cryogenic Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Jul 20, 2005
    Well, there ya go, then (bolded segment).

    One doesn't have to "hate" a thing to be biased against it, necessarily.

    I wasn't just referring to things Lucas wrote back in the late 60s and early 70s. I was talking about all SW-related notes he has written. It's just a guess on my part, but I suspect there are, or have been, at one time or another, a lot of scribblings out there. Whether Lucas has retained them all is another matter. But in any case, the author has never seen any of those scribblings. And neither have we. It is, in my opinion, far more unreasonable to presume they're immaterial -- or even, more absurdly, that they don't and have never existed -- than it is to presume there are some pretty interesting and important ones that HAVE existed and MAY STILL exist. Bottom line: we are blind to the vicissitudes of Lucas' thought processes, and given how major a thing Anakin's turn was and is to the PT, it is recklessly presumptuous to make such unwarranted conclusions based on such flimsy access to evidence.

    But even to say all of that is to miss the point; to, in fact, STOP the point from being addressed, by way of distraction and irrelevance. What's important, here, is not whether Lucas figured out Anakin's turn, and all the various reasons underpinning that turn, late in the game or not. What's important, here, is that the author wants the reader to think Lucas left it till the last minute and this makes ROTS less good than it might otherwise have been. Not only does the author have no evidence for asserting things one way or the other on this matter, but they've constructed a post hoc fallacy in the bargain: i.e., the author is trying to rationalize their disdain, and make others think there is something "objectively bad" about ROTS, and by extension, the PT, based on a particular reading that pivots on a subjective viewpoint and has little to no empirical evidence to "back it up" (and even if it did, it would still be a subjective viewpoint). It is just like my earlier post about Anakin turning based on an "architecture" motif. Only, that is less ridiculous, in my view, since I am not saying "THAT'S WHAT MAKES ROTS SUCK!" (or excel). Rather, I was simply offering one possible (positive) interpretation. A different kind of reasoning pervades SHOSW.

    I have done so, can and do.

    Fulsome and emotive writing is assiduously avoided in SHOSW, for the most part; at least, when charting the development of the PT. So, in that sense, the author is not expressing any particular distaste for the PT, no. On the other hand, the book is clearly stacked in favour of the original film, and this is made explicit at the end of the author's foreword: i.e., the book's opening passage of text, where the author, by way of this stylistic device, is talking "directly" to his or her reader. The foreword, then, betrays the author's real feeli
     
  4. Ord-Mantell70

    Ord-Mantell70 Jedi Master star 3

    Registered:
    Mar 9, 2009
    Thanks, I had noticed...

    It's not anti-PT biased. Maybe a little OT supportive at best.

     
  5. Cryogenic

    Cryogenic Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Jul 20, 2005
    Then what was the point of your earlier assertion?

    You say I can't; I say I can.

    It *is* anti-PT biased, in my opinion.

    You have your view; I have mine. [face_peace]
     
  6. Ord-Mantell70

    Ord-Mantell70 Jedi Master star 3

    Registered:
    Mar 9, 2009

    Ok, I see where the problem is :

    The point of the relevant assertion is, that, TO ME, you can't fairly say that this book is anti-PT biased.

    Do you understand now ? Is that proper enough ? Do you feel denied anymore ?

    Of course you can !!! You just did it before !!!

    "To me" is so evidently implied that I really don't understand the point of all this, and the way you seem to feel upset about...

    Relax. Nobody wants to deny you the right to express your opinion.

    Oh, my...:oops:

     
  7. Cryogenic

    Cryogenic Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Jul 20, 2005
    Well, okay. I didn't really know there was such a "problem", but thanks for identifying a source of contention and writing back.

    You set that sentence in its own paragraph and then you proceeded to make a series of objective-sounding statements.

    So, to me (yes, this phrase genuinely helps), it sounded like you were denying my view by way of (opposing) factual assertion.

    So, your snippy condescension and needless sarcasm aside, I am glad you felt invested enough in our discussion to clarify.

    Well, that is a relief. With so much intolerance and sniping at this place over the years -- and all boards where prequel-discussion has arisen or seemingly will arise -- it's nice to hear from people who are emphatic about clarifying any given set of remarks as merely being their opinion.

    Of course, no-one can actually deny me a different opinion, but they can try doing so in a declamatory fashion. Obviously, though, that wasn't what you were doing. And I wasn't even particularly aggrieved when I quoted that part and wrote back. I was just being forthright in response to your own directness. Yes, it did seem you were in a rush to "correct" me, but I was primarily focused on issuing a simple rejoinder: i.e., "you say toe-may-tah, I say toe-mah-toe".

    I just had to respond in that fashion, from my point of view, to make it absolutely clear that my take is a very specific conception of the book I have, acquired over a long portion of time (i.e., it isn't a position I just took up capriciously one day for the sake of having an argument). As verbose as I can be, I also recognize the importance and beauty of a simple retort, now and again.

    The basic idea, on my part, anyway, was NOT to sound annoyed or confrontational; to willfully avoid that outcome, in fact. I even wrote in the same post: "*Note: I mean that rhetorically, not aggressively. You are free to tell me what you like. And I welcome that." As in, don't be shy to share your thoughts; because you seem like a thoughtful and eloquent poster. So, really, there is no need to be condescending or sarcastic with me, as you've been in your last couple of posts, okay?

    Glad we're square. [face_peace]

    P.S. This is the Internet, so, admittedly, wires get crossed all too easily. We could probably both do with fine-tuning our remarks in places. Reading back, we both come off as we believe we're speaking from a factual base; in many a way, we're subjective and impassioned enough to believe we're right, which is fine, provided we account for that in our wording (a weakness in our posts, to some extent). Again, glad we're square.
     
  8. TragicHeroLover132

    TragicHeroLover132 Jedi Youngling star 3

    Registered:
    Dec 24, 2010
    I don't think his turn was rushed at all, because technically he started turning to the Dark Side in AOTC, after he murdered the group of Tusken Raiders. But if you were just looking at purely ROTS, then yeah, it was a little rushed.
     
  9. StampidHD280pro

    StampidHD280pro Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jul 28, 2005
    From personal experience though, I think haste is necessary in the story. Our darkest thoughts come from the moment. Yoda describes the dark side as not only the easier path but the quicker one. Anakin does things as Vader that he would have given more pause to. When he completely buys into his son-lover-protector-hero-messiah persona/obsession, he throws all caution to the wind and gets burned. Literally, he rushes into a precarious attack on his figurative big brother/father figure and falls down a burning hill.
     
  10. Pendulous_Dewlap

    Pendulous_Dewlap Jedi Youngling star 1

    Registered:
    May 21, 2011
    ROTS is a crudely assembled piece of ****. As spectacle, it is exciting to watch, but as narrative it's a complete and utter failure. Lucas wasted so much valuable screen time over the course of Episodes I and II that he needed to compress all of the events of Episode III into a relatively compact 140-minute (credits included) running time. Key events - Anakin's turn to the Dark Side included - were therefore short-changed in favor of a more economical running time.
     
  11. HevyDevy

    HevyDevy Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Apr 13, 2011
    I thought they did a good job. Whilst knowing the novel does help Revenge of the Sith make far more sense, I think the point is made by the movie alone. It definitely improves on further viewings, and there is alot going on between the lines. No offence, but "complete and utter failure" sounds like you are just not trying.

    I know exactly what you are saying, but I feel you are underrating the achievement made in making the movie turn with Anakin.
    The first half feels like an entirely different world to the second. I think this would be unable to be replicated even if they included some of the cut material. Sure, I see stuff they probably should have kept in, but with the finished product it would be hard to accomplish what they have with the way it is designed. The quick turn makes sense when you are witnessing Anakin selling his soul, and the shift in mood portrayed by the narrative is, to me, quit skillfull and clever. Also, this movie enhances all six of the movies in way that I feel is underrated by the critics. But to each his own...
     
  12. TOSCHESTATION

    TOSCHESTATION Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jan 17, 2003
    That's another way of saying that the thesis that Lucas planned Anakin's rapid d.s. turn in ROTS long before is unfalsifiable, iow it can never be disproved . Which makes the statements like "you weren't there" or "you can't get inside his head" not compelling/useless when faced with the documented 'circumstantial' evidence* shows that he didn't have Anakin's turn planned out in advance (or it was planned, but it was very different in nature).

    *In the first draft of ROTS, Anakin turns right after he kills Dooku; in the first editorial cut of ROTS, Anakin's motivation for turning has more to do with the getting more power than with saving Padme.



     
  13. Arawn_Fenn

    Arawn_Fenn Chosen One star 7

    Registered:
    Jul 2, 2004
    In either cut the setup for the "Padme dilemma" is present and precedes the turn.
     
  14. Ord-Mantell70

    Ord-Mantell70 Jedi Master star 3

    Registered:
    Mar 9, 2009
    "The only thing I hadn't thought through enough is the turn scene" - G.Lucas to Sam Jackson (The Making of ROTS by J.W Rinzler).

    Indeed indicates, although will always be more or less unprecise and ambiguous, that the turn scenes and therefore the whole turn issue, else the way it flows dramatically in the movie and the whole backstory, always remained pretty elusive. Guess Lucas thought it was not that crucial, and the most impmortant was elsewhere. Turning to the dark side at the OT era was anyway apparently purely symbolic and "mythical" (Evil lies in each of us and is hard to resist), although greatly dramatic, deeply tragic and fascinating on-screen (OT). Was really not a mean to an end, as it basically turns out to be in ROTS.

    It will always be pretty mysterious what exactly Lucas had planned and envisioned in terms of specific, at the end of the OT, when the rough backstory had been set so far (7-12 "treatment" by most reliable sources and Lucas statements). Very very little it seems. That's the one question I'd really like to ask G.Lucas himself !

    True. It was apparently always there, although more or less decisive.

    Not really surprising, as one of the few things that Lucas knew from the beginning, when crafting the PT arc in the early 90's, was that Anakin downfall would be linked to issues of possessiveness and the inability to let go.
     
  15. Cryogenic

    Cryogenic Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Jul 20, 2005
    In addition, the most the SHOSW author is able to do is speculate (reasonable speculation, but still speculation) on the matter of the original conception of Anakin's turn, and even they concede that Anakin may have originally killed Dooku no earlier than the middle of the film. In other words, Anakin's submission would, likely, still have happened at the same point, and been rooted in the same kind of fear and guilt that the character shows, and/or is implied to be sinking under, in the finished movie, with the re-worked Mace-Sidious-Anakin subplot (complete with awesome defenestration motif!*). So, in a way, to invoke an aphorism, it's really six of one, and half a dozen of the other.

    Yet it would be unreasonable of me not to acknowledge that Lucas did change things around and add depth and texture to Anakin's fall, and very late in the game, too. What I think it is probably fair to say is this: Lucas had the basic reasons for Anakin falling under the spell of the Dark Side already mapped out, but he didn't commit himself to the dramatic side of Anakin's turn -- the "how" versus the "why" -- until most of the other pieces of the puzzle had been solved. It's not some huge revelation. Lucas hints at this kind of working philosophy in various of his statements (way before ROTS, in fact), and he more or less admits, outright, that he only really finalized Anakin's turn after a rough cut had been assembled. Is this shocking? Yes and no. Ultimately, I think, it comes down to whether you like the aesthetics of a "Lucasfilm" (pun intended) or not. Personally, I find it edifying to sense that Lucas trusts in the "living" Force as much as the "unifying" one. Relying upon planning and foresight and not. Knowing the way and feeling the way. This is Star Wars front to back, left to right, beginning to end.

    What's more -- to bring this to a more mundane close -- I think it's pretty clear, whatever your underlying thoughts on the issue, that Lucas didn't care, or rather, didn't want to have to care, about Anakin's turn, until he really needed to. He refused to shackle himself to the reality of the film until absolutely necessary. In this way, he cleverly avoided using the Anakin character as some kind of crutch; instead, EVERYTHING ELSE was the crutch! Lucas devoted time to the film, rather than the plight of a single character in a sprawling narrative; so that, indeed, the bigger picture was worked out first, and Anakin's story integrated into that. And the elephant in the room is this: Anakin's turn was always going to be quick (quicker than some would have wanted, anyway; since, on this matter, there really is a great deal of evidence that points away from ROTS being some kind of ultra-intense chamber drama -- which, indeed, none of the Star Wars movies are). The great irony here is that Anakin's story became the throughline that Lucas clung to beyond a certain point, as if he were doing "Hamlet" or "Macbeth", and not "Flash Gordon" or a pop version of "2001". To Lucas, Star Wars is not a "character study", but one of the beauties of the series, in my opinion, is that it has become one in retrospect; as if the saga has, indeed, attained some kind of balance, between the epic and the intimate, but in an organic, emergent sense. That, to me, feels right, and it's rather gratifying to know it took Lucas the entire six-movie, thirty-year course to mentally get himself and his creation there.

    *About that motif: In the SHOSW book, there seems to be this protracted lament about the re-worked turn, and final constitution of the film, as if Lucas would have been better off sticking with the original-original conception (i.e., Anakin killing Dooku mid-way through -- perhaps,
     
  16. Arawn_Fenn

    Arawn_Fenn Chosen One star 7

    Registered:
    Jul 2, 2004
    People who complain about the turn often advocate for the original turn which was even more abrupt.

    It makes no sense to me.
     
  17. Pendulous_Dewlap

    Pendulous_Dewlap Jedi Youngling star 1

    Registered:
    May 21, 2011
    Yeah, I know. It's basically The Tragedy of Faust, with Ian McDiarmid as the intergalactic version of Mephistopheles.

    I give Lucas credit for attempting to do something more complex, more Arthurian, than one might expect in a space opera, but the fact remains that he fell well short of delivering a convincing portrayal of Anakin's fall from grace (I don't care how many Biblical allusions the PT contains). Yes, key passages in Episodes I and II help put Anakin's "fateful decision" into a larger context, but the sort of aesthetic being used - as it extends to both the acting and the dialogue - does not easily accommodate the level of nuance and complexity necessary to sell such an abrupt character shift (a "sharp right turn," as Lucas put it).

    The film's second hour is conducted with enough filmmaking brio to make the casual viewer overlook the movie's storytelling deficiencies. Sith is compelling to watch as the dark majesty of Lucas' vision takes form and Star Wars once again comes thrilling alive. And yet the plot feels dutiful, almost perfunctory, as though the director felt that spectacle and surges of emotion could conceal his weaknesses as a writer. Everything in the last fifteen minutes - Padme's death, the birth of the twins, the construction of Vader, the force ghost scenario, etc. - is crudely assembled in order to economize screen time and minimize the amount of lingering questions that more astute viewers might have.
     
  18. Cryogenic

    Cryogenic Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Jul 20, 2005
    Y'know, you do write rather a lot like, well, an old friend. 8-} [face_skull] [:D]
     
  19. Pendulous_Dewlap

    Pendulous_Dewlap Jedi Youngling star 1

    Registered:
    May 21, 2011
    A mutual friend?:p He likes the films, remember? I don't. (Except for Episode III which, despite some problems, at least managed to be entertaining).[face_peace]
     
  20. Cryogenic

    Cryogenic Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Jul 20, 2005
    Well, I think I understand your Threepio-Artoo avatar in a deeper way, now. :p
     
  21. HevyDevy

    HevyDevy Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Apr 13, 2011
    I appreciate your response. While I partially agree that the last fifteen minutes can feel forced, it works on another level for me. Destiny, will of the force, and Anakin and Padme's symbiotic relationship are dictating what happens here. Personally I have more problem with the quick speed of the events, than finding it crudely assembled on the whole. The "birth and rebirth" are intertwined in a way I think makes up for any shortcomings in the scenes. Seeing Alderaan for thirty seconds might seem cheap, but getting only a quick glance of the setting can make it more symbolic and mystic.
    I do regret that Qui-Gon and Yoda's conversation wasn't shown. But, like much of the movie, it rewards fandom and repeated viewings of the film. Sort of like we can see something the average movie-goer can't.
    Finally, I also know where you are coming from with your comment "but the sort of aesthetic being used - as it extends to both the acting and the dialogue - does not easily accommodate the level of nuance and complexity necessary to sell such an abrupt character shift". But it works for me. It is fast, I'll give you that, but this was intended. Anakin is giving into his fears when he stops Mace, and I sense a sort of quick release during this turn. He has chosen the "quick and easy path" afterall. The acting does seem to cater to children somewhat - particularly Sidious's "I'm too weak" - but it doesn't ruin the moment for me. The dialogue IMO does what it sets out to do. From Mace's simple but effective "Don't listen to him Anakin!" to Anakin's "I need him", the scene is sufficient in suspending disbelief for me. It easily remains one of my favourite movies.
     
  22. Cryogenic

    Cryogenic Force Ghost star 5

    Registered:
    Jul 20, 2005
    A fair reply, HD!

    And the both of you are so eloquent!

    Interesting that you say Sidious' "I'm too weak!" is catering to children. I am inclined to agree, in a fashion. But I also think it's Palpatine speaking through the mask of Sidious, as it were (an inversion of all the scenes leading up to this one). Palpatine, as a guy that appears as a weak, needy old man, ultimately, is sort of being killed off, here, by Sidious, in a moment of madness ("No, no, no -- you will die!"), because Sidious, from his point of view, no longer needs or acknowledges the "human being". It's rooted in this disdain for enfeeblement that I see coming from the character across the PT, especially in TPM (the founding installment, where everyone is "naked"). He doesn't like swamp life. He doesnt like seeing people held down, limited, not free. He may love the machinery of the Republic, but he doesn't like the sprawling and unpredictable mass of bodies -- people -- with their own wants and concerns; the blood flowing through the body. Human flesh is too weak and carnate for this individual. Notice how Anakin is his "Chosen One"; and Anakin is ultimately shut away inside a sarcophagus: a heavy, clumsy machine. No, Sidious would rather do away with all the funk and grime of warm, human, communal, touchy-feely stuff, including the Jedi, an especially egregious example of self-restriction and denial, and let the unfettered will of the individual -- his individuality -- dominate.

    Yet, ironically, what Sidious desires and effects comes at the expense of balance. His balance. By casting aside a part of himself -- by betraying and murdering Palpatine -- Sidious sows the seed of his own destruction. The frothy nature of the character's deliveries, here, are campy, I'll contend, but I would also contend they help underscore a critical transition. The frail and soft-spoken man is gone -- or oppressed almost to the point of oblivion -- by the wretched guise of the monster, mirroring the younger (adolescent) Anakin's descent into the hyperbolic (ultra-masculine) carapace of Vader. Sith Master and Sith Apprentice both seal their fates in this movie. Or so it appears. But Anakin will continue to cling to the small ray of hope that someone will come and save him from himself. That someone, of course, is Luke. And that someone, ultimately, is the wrench in the machinery of the Empire that makes all the difference. Sidious will damn himself by gripping those cold, hard, metallic surfaces of the Empire (look how he is still clinging to the chilly steel ring of the pod, to hoist himself to apparent victory, after Yoda has already lost his grip on the rostrum and fallen, to safety and surrender, after their duel in ROTS), while Anakin will literally end his life in a messy attack-defence gesture, casting one person to death while saving another (one who was actually vulnerable, lying in a fetal position -- as if Anakin finally sees Luke as his and Padme's offspring -- versus his tyrannical, snarling master, who only feigned weakness (ultimately) to draw arouse Anakin's fear and sympathy). Finally, it's the rhythms of life and creativity that matter; not the beep and boop of machines* and inflexible dogma.

    Its a complex tale, this. Yet with many poignant -- and identifiable -- patterns of meaning and modality.

    Just my 0.02 cents. :)

    *But to punch a whole in this thesis, consider how Artoo vouches for machinery -- or machines that go beyond machines. Always more to learn!
     
  23. StampidHD280pro

    StampidHD280pro Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jul 28, 2005
    "Don't kill me, I'm too weak." To me is the most brilliant moment of ROTS. Greed masquerading as fear. I almost consider that scene to be imagined by Anakin. His inner Jedi finally confronts his inner Sith. There's a monster inside Anakin pretending to be a sad scared little man. Think about it, when you feel the world has wronged you, selfishness can seem like righteousness. Everyone wants to protect that quivering little child inside, and most people let it control them. When you dedicate your life to greed and feel justified in doing so, you become a Sith.
     
  24. ezekiel22x

    ezekiel22x Chosen One star 5

    Registered:
    Aug 9, 2002
    ha, that's what I was thinking. The netherworld of the Force must be kind of a weird place.
     
  25. DRush76

    DRush76 Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jan 25, 2008
    I would agree that the OT, by its very design, has more of a "mythical" feel.


    Really? I would describe the entire six movie saga in that manner. The only difference is that the OT has a happy ending in which "good triumphs over evil" - something many love to see, whereas in the PT, we see the major characters make mistakes that end tragically or badly for them - something which happens . . . a lot in the real world.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.