PT How times change: PT now seems to be the fan preference...

Sick people. They "train" followers, children without an opinion of their own. That's the way dictatorships work.
I even prefer those obsessed fathers trying to prevent their children from knowing THERE ARE actually prequels :-D
However, I think they are greatly over-represented in the internet.

 

I've seen a few people on the internet brag about how they won't allow their kids to watch Eps I-III . And I'm one of the few fans out there who did not find the "How To Talk To Your Kids About Star Wars" thing amusing.

--MissPadme

 

I've actually seen this in other forums: a PT critic boasts how he only shows his kid(s) the OT--as if it were a friggin' intervention--and the other posters congratulate him for said effort.

It's been said that the more ardent gushers and bashers are equally deranged, but I cite this "protecting-the-children" predilection as proof that the latter group nabs the derang-o top prize.

 

As if the kids couldn't make their own decision either.

 

I can see where they come from with Anakin. Heroes are there to look up to, to emulate them. But Anakin's a mass murderer after all as well as the hero and emulating him doesn't seem like a good idea.

That said if I ever have kids I'd rather explain things to them instead of ordering them what to think. They should learn to form their own opinion, not parrot everything someone else says like many adults do.

 

So he generalized a little. That's a bit sloppy but at the same time it's pretty harmless. He's only talking about a fictional charakter.

 

Sure, but just reflect on the sheer absurdity here: grown men--and make no mistake, they're all men, as no woman could possibly be this pathetic--withholding a newer batch of space-wizard movies because they don't match up with the older space-wizard movies.

Could you imagine the conversations?


"So Timmy, how'd you like the movies?"

"They're great, Dad! I can't wait to see the other ones!"

"...What do you mean?"

"The new ones!"

"...Uh, they don't exist."

"But my friends said there's six of them!"

"Your friends are mistaken, son."

"But I saw a commercial..."

"SHUT UP! THERE ARE ONLY THREE STAR WARS MOVIES!"

"Daddy, why are you being so mean?"

"THERE IS BUT ONE HOLY TRILOGY!!! NOW EAT YOUR @#$%&* CEREAL!"

 

My parents did that when I was little (in the 80's and 90's). They were against the fact that there was more than just the original Star Wars movie, and were of the mindset that all sequels were unneccessary-and so they never let me see ESB or ROTJ. They felt there should have been only one, so they only let me SEE one...I had caught bits of ROTJ over time, but I didn't see ESB all the way thru until the '97 special editions! By then, I was a Sophomore in high school!

I think the enhanced attention on the Prequels forum could be due to some younger members that have joined here in the last 3 years or so(since ROTS came out). It's important to remember that, just as episodes IV-VI were a defining part of people's childhood in the past, episodes I-III are also a huge part of people's lives from THIS generation, in the same way. Makes sense when you think about it like that IMO. Now, I am one who happens to sit right in the middle of those two generations: it was in the '90s that I started getting into late grade school/high school and started getting into movies and music and whatnot. I think that is part of why I enjoy both as much as I do.

 

I can see where they come from with Anakin. Heroes are there to look up to, to emulate them. But Anakin's a mass murderer after all as well as the hero and emulating him doesn't seem like a good idea.


Why should anyone bother to "look up or emulate" heroes? Why do we need heroes in the first place? I think the whole idea is ridiculous. To me, Anakin Skywalker and the other characters in the saga are merely avery interesting and complex fictional characters.



Makes sense when you think about it like that IMO. Now, I am one who happens to sit right in the middle of those two generations: it was in the '90s that I started getting into late grade school/high school and started getting into movies and music and whatnot. I think that is part of why I enjoy both as much as I do.


It's funny how people labeled STAR WARS fans in regard to the trilogies. I was a kid when I first saw the OT. I love both trilogies, but when I became an adult, I found it easier to like the PT than I did as a kid for the OT.

 

Same. That said, "heroes" exist for complex psychological reasons, rooted both in society and the individual. And it's interesting that Anakin is ostensibly the main hero of the PT, but one who treads a strange path and ends up the main villain of the OT -- and, of course, one of the most famous antagonists in movie history.

If it weren't for the PT, I might be inclined to think the OT is adolescent pablum; albeit, entertaining adolescent pablum, even for adults. However, the PT, being the way it is, has compelled me to look at *all* of Star Wars -- and George Lucas himself -- rather differently. Whether you love or hate the prequel installments, there's one thing everyone seems to agree on (generally speaking): they're the films that won't go away.

 

I'm not saying I'm doing this or I'm particulary concerned about kids emulating some TV or movie stars. But yes, the hero can be an identification figure.

Why do we need heroes? Good question. Probably because we need someone to follow out of low self esteem or whatever. I prefer to follow my own ideals personally, but those also had to come from somewhere...

 

"Identification". Good word. TFN's Jedi_Ford_Prefect wrote a terrific essay on AOTC last year, which he has a link to in his signature. I'd like to quote a relevant bit here:

Source: http://wondersinthedark.wordpress.com/2010/04/08/bob-strikes-back-at-attack-of-the-clones-naysayers/

In SW fan circles, it does, of course, remain unpopular to speak positively of Hayden Christensen or the Anakin Skywalker character, but I'm glad someone with JFP's eloquence has seen fit to recognize and espouse the draw of these individuals, real and half-real, for a great many.

"Heroes" come in all shapes and sizes (which the ROTS crawl tips its hat to), so it's worth remembering that a "whiny punk", "creepy stalker", "fascist" and "mass murderer", as some are wont to label Anakin, can hold unsung appeal, just as much -- if not more -- than he might more obviously have the capacity to embarrass or repel. In fact, when the issue of "heroes" crops up on a large scale, you tend to get this extreme polarization as a norm.

 

Consider the little red riding hood. Some stories are about the hero paying for their bad decisions. The prequels are a warning.

 

i sort of grew up on the OT, but i enjoy the prequels more now. there's a larger story going on there. i cannot stand older fans that bash the PT. you know the simon pegg's of the world

 

As an agnostic who perceives history as the chronicle of a slaughterhouse, I grasp onto the exemplars of heroism to stave off a very real, creeping despair. I have to know that in the morass of corruption and mediocrity that is the world, there exists men and women who sincerely try to make the right choices. They're trapped in this Darwinian jungle too, but rather than play the domination game, they act in defiance. They say ?no? to exploitation, suffering, and even death. That means everything, regardless of success.

There's something affirming in meeting, say, a teacher who works with the disabled, or reading about a labor-union activist in an impoverished country. (And who's to say their courage couldn't be infectious?)

 

The children in question are probably also going to be brainwashed into their parents' religion and political affiliation anyway. Why not go whole hog and instill trendy PT hate as well?

 

I find it difficult to see these man-boys following an ideology or religion, as it would require having placed an emotional investment in the world. That kind of stuff cuts in on Playstation time.

 

You know why? Because kids would simply enjoy the spectacle and wouldn't mind Jar Jar and the "kiddy stuff".

 

Not really... it only requires emotional investment or time if you actually think about it. Just blindly following/parroting what your parents say doesn't require too much thought or investment, and therefore doesn't cut into game time too much.

 

As an agnostic who perceives history as the chronicle of a slaughterhouse, I grasp onto the exemplars of heroism to stave off a very real, creeping despair. I have to know that in the morass of corruption and mediocrity that is the world, there exists men and women who sincerely try to make the right choices. They're trapped in this Darwinian jungle too, but rather than play the domination game, they act in defiance. They say ?no? to exploitation, suffering, and even death. That means everything, regardless of success.


Well . . . I can admire them for sticking to their own moral code. But that doesn't mean I'm going to label them as "heroes".

 

In a lot of ways, I think my point of view has subtly changed on this aspect. Rather than Christensen playing him in a way that audiences can't identify with, I think his Anakin is rather a figure whom certain people identify with so much that they'd frankly rather reject altogether. Lucas' handling of the Once-And-Future-Sith is less the fabled "Father Skywalker" that fans had grown up expecting, some kind of mature and magnificent villain of epic proportions like Shakespeare's tragic heroes. Instead, he's more of a sullen, introverted kid who can't make friends, wears a black trenchcoat and only finds acceptance with just the wrong crowd.

They were expecting a Macbeth, an Othello, a Hamlet. Instead, they got a Holden Caulfield, a Shinji Ikari, a mixed-up kid in over his head. Instead of some magical role-playing character they wanted to aspire to, they got somebody who looked too much like them, hit too close to hime. Like Luke in the tree-cave, once the mask came off of Vader, they didn't like what they saw.

 

The disparity reminds me of that haunting passage from Oliver Stone's masterpiece Nixon, wherein the defeated president ambles down a White House corridor, looks up to the brooding JFK portrait, and muses, ?When they look at you, they see what they want to be. When they look at me, they see what they are.?

 

Thanks for the updated thoughts. I believe, however, they are concomitant with what you wrote last year in that essay. Anakin is somewhat messed-up, stunted, like a plant without enough light or water, yes (the yellow vehicles he pilots in the PT call this aspect to mind -- for SW is heavily inspired by Frank Herbert's "Dune", of course, and Dune has its share of Arabic/Islamic symbolism; with green associated with fecundity and prosperity, while yellow, conversely, is associated with decline and sickliness; probably echoing leaves in nature). On the other hand, Anakin's weak and wearied "emo" nature, and his whole chip-on-the-shoulder demeanour, mixed with his growing status as a Jedi padawan on the cusp of knight-hood, make him a figure of some envy and acclaim. For, on some level, despite the knowing trajectory of the narrative, Anakin is also a kind of un-Earthly vagabond (he is, after all, the SW equivalent of a demigod), trapped in an all-too-worldly system, and this kind of brooding, solitary figure, thrust into such a position, invariably holds a strong appeal.

In many ways, Anakin Skywalker is the "Byronic hero" of the PT. Consider the following criteria, which I've ripped from the wikipedia entry:

Or, in other words, Han Solo, Jr.

Naturally, Han Solo is more dashing and palatable to a certain portion of the SW fanbase -- and maybe, dare I say, a general audience? -- but that does