Is the character of Jar-Jar-Binks really neccessary to the story?

Discussion in 'Attack of the Clones' started by Ob1-Ob2-Ob3, Feb 7, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Hudnall Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Feb 23, 2004
    star 5
    So, from pure and good intentions, turns out causing dreadful repercussions.

    Again, that is a theme that already played out in TPM.

    And again, we are discussing a character who's role to the SAGA is now over - and more or less was over at the end of TPM.

    Bail had just as much political weight in the Senate as Padme. Possibly, more.

    And there is nothing to suggest that the script couldn't have been mildly tweaked in only two short scenes to achieve the desired effect. And none of us would have known otherwise, or missed otherwise.

    That's my opinion. And it is one that stems from my love of the 6 movie Saga, not one based on the OT, the PT, AOTC or a single character.
  2. Go-Mer-Tonic Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Aug 22, 1999
    star 6
    Well in my opinion, it makes boatloads more sense to have Jar-Jar make the motion.

    And that's based on my love for the complete 6 film saga.
  3. Shelley Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Sep 9, 2001
    star 5
    Bail had just as much political weight in the Senate as Padme. Possibly, more.

    Probably. Which is why he was a formidable opponent to the clone army, and why it would make even less sense for him to, for no apparent reason, change his mind and set into motion the plans he opposed.

    And there is nothing to suggest that the script couldn't have been mildly tweaked in only two short scenes to achieve the desired effect.

    Mildly tweaked? It would've had to completely overhaul Bail's character.
  4. Hudnall Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Feb 23, 2004
    star 5
    What character? You know nothing of his character now?

    for no apparent reason,

    Oh, you mean, no apparent reason like the impending attack of a Separatist droid army against the defenseless Republic? You mean the military overthrow of the Republic at the hands of the Dooku and the Trade Federation? That 'no reason'?
  5. Drako Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    May 22, 2004
    star 2
    i dont think its neccesary for him to be in ther for the aotc but wat ever it worked out
  6. MasterP Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 8, 2003
    star 7
    Is the character of Jar-Jar-Binks really neccessary to the story?

    I hate Jar Jar [face_plain]
    Someone should strap a nuke to his back and send him off into space

    [face_devil]


    MP
  7. Drako Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    May 22, 2004
    star 2
    id rather watch him choke on a apple
  8. Go-Mer-Tonic Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Aug 22, 1999
    star 6
    Be that as it may, Jar-Jar is really neccessary to the story George Lucas is trying to tell.
  9. Shelley Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Sep 9, 2001
    star 5
    Oh, you mean, no apparent reason like the impending attack of a Separatist droid army against the defenseless Republic? You mean the military overthrow of the Republic at the hands of the Dooku and the Trade Federation? That 'no reason'?

    And even with all of that, Bail still opposed the use of clones.

    So unless you overhaul his character (not make minor tweaks), there's no way to make him be the one who proposed emergency powers.

    I hate Jar Jar
    Someone should strap a nuke to his back and send him off into space


    I hope he survives Ep 3.
  10. Hudnall Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Feb 23, 2004
    star 5
    And even with all of that, Bail still opposed the use of clones.

    When in that scene did he say that?

    He said the Senate will never approve the use of clones and that the debate is far from over. He never said HE was.

    And those are TWO lines. That's what I call a minor rewrite.

    It might overhaul what little character he has from being "Greedo-shoots-first" Good Guy to someone with more conflict and personal background like "Han shot first."

    He would be MORE interesting to me. But I like characters with internal conflict, not children's characters.

    But like Go-Mer said, Lucas wants his good guys to be goody good and never make mistakes and never be 'grey'... so that is the story.
  11. Go-Mer-Tonic Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Aug 22, 1999
    star 6
    Well in Bail's case. When it comes to Lucas' main characters, there are a lot of grey areas.
  12. Darth-Stryphe Former Mod and City Rep

    Member Since:
    Apr 24, 2001
    star 6
    I hate Jar Jar
    Someone should strap a nuke to his back and send him off into space

    I hope he survives Ep 3.


    Speculation: Good money says he will, if you ask me. Think of all the characters that have to die in that movie. If GL starts killing those he doesn't have to, like JJB, then he'll turn Episode III into Hamlet, and I just don't see that happening.

    Anyway... I'm surprised more people aren't pleased with JJB's use in AOTC. JJB giving Palpatine his imperial powers? That's the best part of AOTC!
  13. Philip023 Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Aug 30, 2002
    star 3
    Is SW a comedy or is it a drama with humor mixed in?

    It surely isn't a comedy. But Jar jar giving palpatine emergency powers with no explanation for it is sheer comedy.

    And I'm not sure to what extent jjb provided humor to the extent that it added to the film in tpm. however, that is a different subject but your take was interesting.

    Alot of people are saying that bail making the motion for ep would have changed his character to the point of a total rewrite. Yet in the same breath they say that he had barely as much screen time as jar jar did in aotc. they would be right.

    Given this, I fail to see how he would be significantly altered. Additionally, he never says he is opposed to the clone army - he says the senate will never approve the use of clones. His position is unclear. And since he is part of the loyalist committee, it would be a reasonable assumption to assume that he would have acted in a manner that helped protect and preserve the republic - which would probably include granting emergency powers to palpatine.

    yet, this seems to be completely unacceptable to jar jar fans. Not sure why - perhaps it is because it would seem to eliminate the one act that jar jar actually provided to the story. However, we must look at the films not just as one film by itself but through the whole saga.

    Since we know nothing of jar jar in the ot, he has no connection to it - character wise. He seemingly adds nothing to the creation of the rebellion and is not mentioned even in passing. Yet Bail has an extraordinary link to the OT. Given this, if he were to make the motion, it would be completely relevant and meaningful in the grander scheme of things - particularly when we view the OT.
  14. Go-Mer-Tonic Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Aug 22, 1999
    star 6
    There was explanation for Jar-Jar making the motion for emergency powers.

    The Separatists were creating a huge army with the intentions of overwhelming the Republic, and they were worried that the Senate would never approve of a military creation act in time to stop the Separatist's attack.

    Seems like the explanation for Jar-Jar's actions to me.

    Bail was against the military creation act, as well as giving up democracy for a pre-emptive strike. This is expressed in the way he cuts off the other senator who states the debate is over. He tells him that the debate is NOT over, and that the senate would never approve of the use of clones.

    Jar-Jar, although having as much screen time as bail in AOTC, has plenty of screen time in TPM to show how simple minded and naive he can be. To get Bail to this point, we would have to take away his sensibilities, then return them to him later on in the film so he can pick up the mantle of originating member of the rebellion. There just isn't enough time in the saga to cover that. It would take precious time away from the real story involving Anakin, Obi-Wan, Padme, Yoda, and Palpatine. Jar-Jar enters AOTC already set up to be the fearful reactionary.

    So as you can see, Bail couldn't have done it without mucking up the real story, and Jar-Jar is already set up for this purpose.

    So once again, it is imperative that Jar-Jar be used in this way. It's more economical, less confusing, and more importantly, it requires far less ancillary exposition.

    This is why Jar-Jar is essential to the story Lucas is trying to tell.
  15. Hudnall Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Feb 23, 2004
    star 5
    Your basing your argument on Bail on one line of dialogue that could be rewritten in a matter of seconds and NOBODY would have known otherwise.

    10 years from now, we would get AOTC annotated screenplay - and everyone would say - "OMG, Jar Jar was going to make the motion! I can't believe that, how stupid would that be!"
    -------------

    I'm a Jar Jar fan, and his part in AOTC and the Palpatine power play is totally unnecessary.

    It actually cheapens Palpatine. Heck, even I could talk that Gungan into giving me emergency powers. What kind of statement does that make from a mythological perspective or symbolically - NONE. In real power struggles, real politicians get played, not standins.

    In real life, good men with good intentions get forced into compromising positions and make mistakes. That's a better story.
  16. Philip023 Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Aug 30, 2002
    star 3
    Here here.

    I've said what you said time and time again.

    Jar Jar making the motion cheapens the act! The galaxy crumbles because a bumbling fool gets duped! No one can see any seriousness in this act since jar jar cannot be taken seriously.

    And once again, gomer assumes things that are not there. We do not know if Bail is against the MCA - he says the Senate will never approve the use of clones. That's it!

    "it requires far less ancillary exposition"

    You mean, character development? There is no place for the jar jar character to go. It has been played out. there is no connection between him and the OT; with Bail, there is. And this ancillary exposition could have been done in less than one minute of screen time to elaborate on Bail's position.

    Politically speaking, you can apply the whole weapons of mass destruction argument in Iraq. Well meaning Senators from the U.S. voted for military action based on the intelligence they were shown. Since we still haven't found any, these same senators have decided to speak out against the war. Why can this not be the case for the emergency powers argument?

  17. Hudnall Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Feb 23, 2004
    star 5
    Politically speaking, you can apply the whole weapons of mass destruction argument in Iraq. Well meaning Senators from the U.S. voted for military action based on the intelligence they were shown. Since we still haven't found any, these same senators have decided to speak out against the war. Why can this not be the case for the emergency powers argument?

    Exactly. That's how it happens in the real world.
  18. Go-Mer-Tonic Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Aug 22, 1999
    star 6
    In the same way, Jar-Jar reacted to the "evidence" he was shown.

    It is already mirroring real events without having to take a detour from the main story just to explain the change in Bail's character.

    It's more economical from a narrative standpoint, it still gets the same meassage across, and it fits better with the way Jar-Jar was groomed for this purpose in TPM.

    To not have Jar-Jar make this motion would be just as silly as having someone else turn into Darth Vader after setting Anakin up for it from the beginning.

    It would simply make no logical sense from a narrative standpoint.
  19. Shelley Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Sep 9, 2001
    star 5
    When in that scene did he say that?

    He said the Senate will never approve the use of clones and that the debate is far from over. He never said HE was.


    Gee, and did you miss his grim face and his bringing his knuckles down on the balcony -- i.e., this course of action was NOT what he wanted?

    And those are TWO lines. That's what I call a minor rewrite.

    No, it is a major overhaul.

    It might overhaul what little character he has from being "Greedo-shoots-first" Good Guy to someone with more conflict and personal background like "Han shot first."

    Greedo shoots first does not overhaul Han's character, as I have already demonstrated. There are at least two other scenes which show Han being a cold-blooded mercenary far more effectively than him shooting Greedo first. I fail to see how him being shot at first changes him into a child's character with no internal conflict.

    He would be MORE interesting to me. But I like characters with internal conflict, not children's characters.

    But like Go-Mer said, Lucas wants his good guys to be goody good and never make mistakes and never be 'grey'... so that is the story.


    Lucas makes his good guys flawed human beings, with questionable pasts (Han), big mouths and hot tempers (Leia), and a penchant for getting into trouble (Luke). He made Vader into a complex villain, with all kinds of conflicts -- more of a gray guy than a bad guy.
  20. Trojan_Sock Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Feb 27, 2003
    star 4
    "Gee, and did you miss his grim face and his bringing his knuckles down on the balcony -- i.e., this course of action was NOT what he wanted?"

    No, it simply means he didn't like this action, despite its necessity.

    Bail doesn't state not wanting the army, and his concerns are simply that the Senate will never stop bickering over it. In the novelization, he even reiterates Jar-Jar's "position" as Padme's replacement in this decision, despite knowing full well what the consequences are.

    There are many times that we do things we don't like.
  21. Philip023 Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Aug 30, 2002
    star 3
    Shelley: lucas changed the han/greedo scene because he didn't want to convey Han as a guy that would shoot first. This is a fundamental character change!

    He's a mercenary, plain and simple. Greedo was after him to pay up after Han jilted jabba. The whole scene demonstrates the cold character tha Han has.

    If Lucas didn't want to change han's characterization, he would have left it the way it was.

    And Jar jar was not "bred" for the purpose of making the emergency powers motion. In fact, the way it seems in the movie, he puts Jar jar there as an afterthought. As if to give Jar jar something to do and to reap blame upon him to insulate the other characters.

    And who cares about economy? We're talking about a story here, not the environment. If ROTK can go 3 plus hours, why can't a SW movie?

    To not have Jar-Jar make this motion would be just as silly as having someone else turn into Darth Vader after setting Anakin up for it from the beginning.

    Unbelievable. jar Jar is not that important. he is ancillary at best, bothersome at worst. To say that jar jar has as much importance to the story as anakin or at least demonstrate it through comparison is totally without merit. A nip here, a tuck there, the movie would be completely stable without jar jar.
  22. Go-Mer-Tonic Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Aug 22, 1999
    star 6
    Not actually.

    In reality it would take a major overhaul, and would do a great disservice to the pacing, let alone the damage it would do to the main story, which would have to be deviated extemely to pull off this "minor" change you would have made.

    It still make a lot more sense from a narrative standpoint, as well as a storytelling standpoint to do it the way Lucas has.

    Just to be clear, I am not saying you couldn't do it the way you suggest, just that it wouldn't be as good as the way Lucas actually did it.
  23. Trojan_Sock Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Feb 27, 2003
    star 4
    "In reality it would take a major overhaul, and would do a great disservice to the pacing, let alone the damage it would do to the main story, which would have to be deviated extemely to pull off this "minor" change you would have made."

    "In reality"? Don't you mean "in my opinion"? This is quite the hypothetical situation, if I'm not mistaken. Your "proof" on this is what, exactly?

    Surely, Lucas is capable of rewriting his films without trashing them altogether, as you imply. He does it quite often.
  24. Go-Mer-Tonic Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Aug 22, 1999
    star 6
    That is exactly why he did it the way he did IMHO.
  25. Philip023 Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Aug 30, 2002
    star 3
    But he does change his films which is what trojan sock was eluding to. Meaning, he is not infallible. Nor are his changes solely the result of some limitation that was brought upon him by some outside phenomenon.

    It would require neither a major overhaul in script, dialogue, editing or direction or any associated special effects inherent in any scene with jar jar or bail that would detract from the film or displace Lucas' story arc.

    We know as much about jjb's position on emergency powers as we do about bail's position. the only scene that would need to be recut would be the throne room scene. JarJar is CGI so he could be eliminated with no problem. In fact, he has no dialogue in that scene.

    There seems to be some imaginary barrier that is being constructed that precludes the sensibility that Bail could just as easily have made the motion as much as Jar jar could.

    The advantage though, is a meaningful arc across the pt to the ot given what we know of Bail's future. Since jar jar's character seems to end or be eliminated at the outset or before the ot, there is no such arc - rendering his casting the motion meaningless to his character and detracting from the act itself.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.