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

"Obi-Wan Kenobi: Wacko Conspiracy Theorist?" Video

Discussion in 'Star Wars Saga In-Depth' started by DBrennan3333, Jun 27, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. DBrennan3333

    DBrennan3333 Jedi Youngling star 4

    Registered:
    Nov 5, 2004
    Many of you might remember a video posted to YouTube that I wrote and directed which explained how the PT was, by design, an allegory for real-world false flag terrorism and wars. The video was pretty "successful" (I reached my goal of 10,000 YouTube views pretty quickly; it settled in at around 13,000).

    However, I went back and re-made the video to fix a lot of the technical glitches, make it in (quasi) HD, and to improve the content. (I actually got some help from a couple of people here at TFN in digging up some old content.)

    Anyway, the new-and-improved video is here:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0fDUoudO7w

    Please feel free to ask any questions or make any thoughtful comments.
     
  2. DarthIktomi

    DarthIktomi Jedi Padawan star 4

    Registered:
    May 11, 2009
    Well, we all knew it was an analogy to real-world events. What's really scary is, I've seen right-wing blogs take on this Imperial image. Cheney has gladly been willing to take part in the Darth Vader comparisons. (Lucas says Cheney's Palpatine, but still?) And I've seen some right-wing blogs argue that the fact that Jedi weren't allowed to marry means the Sith were right.

    (Which of course, the EU still makes Luke the hero in the end.)
     
  3. DBrennan3333

    DBrennan3333 Jedi Youngling star 4

    Registered:
    Nov 5, 2004
    Do you have a quote where Lucas <i>literally</i> said that Cheney was Palpatine (both of their rises to power were very, well, insidious!) or were you extrapolating that from Lucas's other political comments?

    Also, what does the Jedi marriage code have to do with anything? Who presented those arguments and what were they? (I'm not trying to drill you, I'm just seeking clarity.)

    But I do agree with you that neo-cons do actually seem to flaunt and revel in their evil. It sounds trite, but they seem to have their lemming followers into a true might-makes-right mentality. (I can't think of good examples just now, but I've noticed it a lot lately.)
     
  4. DarthIktomi

    DarthIktomi Jedi Padawan star 4

    Registered:
    May 11, 2009
    It's an article by Maureen Dowd:

    Personally, I think the comparison is ludicrous. Anakin Skywalker was born a slave. George Bush was born?the grandson of a senator and the son of a future president.

    Of course, all of this can be taken too far. (Condi as Asajj Ventress?) But we can all agree that Rumsfeld is Grand Moff Tarkin, with his ludicrously expensive defense plans that ultimately don't accomplish much.

    And I personally think most of the government is Jar Jar.
     
  5. DBrennan3333

    DBrennan3333 Jedi Youngling star 4

    Registered:
    Nov 5, 2004
    I would most definitely guess that Lucas was saying that as a glib, sarcastic analogy - which would've been topical humor back then (I'm assuming that the interview was in '05 for ROTS).

    In all the 'Making Of' docs, it seems clear that Lucas has a somewhat dry sense of humor. As I read that quote, I just automatically envisioned Lucas with his playful smirk and monotonic voice saying that. I could be wrong, but as you pointed out, the analogy doesn't make sense in any context except as a joke.
     
  6. DarthIktomi

    DarthIktomi Jedi Padawan star 4

    Registered:
    May 11, 2009
    Yeah, Lucas does have that sense of humor. I mean, he made a ship called a B-wing that looks more like a T.

    Oh, I just remembered, I should point out that the clone army is canonically Sifo-Dyas' creation. Also, Palpatine actually never lies throughout the movies; he just doesn't tell the whole truth. And that is what makes him the greatest Big Bad of all time.
     
  7. DBrennan3333

    DBrennan3333 Jedi Youngling star 4

    Registered:
    Nov 5, 2004
    Although it's probably pretty dangerous to get into a whole discussion about Sifo-Dyas (because I remember back in the time of AOTC and ROTS every single thread, no matter what its original subject, seemed to devolve into frustrated speculation and confusion about him), he was effectively acting as a proxy for Sidious. I don't follow the EU material all that much, but I read at Wookiepedia that now the EU has Sifo-Dyas creating the army independently but then it's hijacked by Sidious. Well, in the original story (as documented by SHSW and many other sources), Sifo-Dyas was actually Sidious - hence the similiarity in the names. Apparently, the EU took it upon themselves to create some exotic backstory about (the new) Sifo-Dyas and retrofit the clone army's origin to coincide with that....but that just wreaks of EU desperately retconning: it makes little sense in the context of the movies' story nor in the origins of the Sifo-Dyas character. Therefore, as far as the movies go, I find that explanation implausible and wholly without merit. If some fans want to incorporate the EU's revisionist history into how they personally regard the story, that's their choice, just as it's mine to call it the retcon that it is and disregard it accordingly.

    In short, I don't pay much credence to EU material and its post-hoc "explanations" and "revelations" of the movies' characters and events. The EU could have a story saying that Anakin was actually angry because his mom molested him as a child. If they did, I'm sure that many fans would be demanding that the new EU material be universally accepted as "canonical" and that the movies now be seen in that light. But I'd never accept that, nor would I pretend that that was originally intended in the movies. That would be, like the Sifo-Dyas tale, a post-hoc explanation created entirely after the fact and an obvious retcon.
     
  8. DBrennan3333

    DBrennan3333 Jedi Youngling star 4

    Registered:
    Nov 5, 2004
    Darth Iktomi:

    For a great description of "Sifo-Dyas's" origins (indeed, Sido-Dyas was indeed merely a pseudonym for Sidious right up until re-shoots when they changed his name), I recommend Zombie's summation and analysis of the shooting script of AOTC:

    http://secrethistoryofstarwars.com/sifo-who.html

    A few other notes: (1) Dooku provided the Kaminoans with Jango Fett so, acting in cahoots with Sidious, he fostered both the clone army as well as the droid army. (2) The Jedi were clear in both the film and the script that the army was not created on their behalf and, in the script, they correctly sensed that the army was created by somebody from the Senate to foster. Mace Windu says to Yoda, "A clone army! Ordered by someone in the Senate perhaps... Someone's out to start a war." (3) In the script, Sifo-Dyas (actually "Sido-Dyas") was actually just Sidious, but even in the final movie we can deduce that Sidious orchestrated the creation of the army - in this final version, perhaps, entirely via Dooku rather than doing so in person, as in the original script - because the army's creation is perfectly timed with the emergence of the Separatist's army, miraculously forcing a situation where Sidious/Palpatine receives his tyrannical powers over the Republic.

    Again, my analysis stems primarily from the movies themselves (I'm only lightly acquainted with the EU; having read about six books and enjoyed perhaps three of those) and I simply don't subscribe to the EU's retcons and post-hoc "explanations" of events. That's not to belittle those that do, but the line has to be drawn somewhere, and for me it's drawn at the movies' intentions, not at the EU's latest-and-greatest retcon - "canonical" or not.
     
  9. Go-Mer-Tonic

    Go-Mer-Tonic Jedi Youngling star 6

    Registered:
    Aug 22, 1999
    I like this video. It seems so obvious to me what's going on in the political story of the Star Wars saga, but a lot of people just aren't looking deep enough to put it all together. It's nice to have a video like this that connects the dots for people.
     
  10. DBrennan3333

    DBrennan3333 Jedi Youngling star 4

    Registered:
    Nov 5, 2004
    Thank you. Your sentiments are exactly what I hoped to achieve in viewers, so that makes me feel good. (Although I still emphatically dispute your sentiments of Zombie's book!)
     
  11. Go-Mer-Tonic

    Go-Mer-Tonic Jedi Youngling star 6

    Registered:
    Aug 22, 1999
    Fair enough. I was pleased to agree with you on this one. :)
     
  12. Arawn_Fenn

    Arawn_Fenn Chosen One star 7

    Registered:
    Jul 2, 2004
    Except in this case the information came directly from Lucas. It's not revisionism or a retcon because it doesn't retcon the released version of AOTC. It conflicts with the early version of the script, which Lucas had already discarded prior to the release of the film. What reeks of desperation here is pretending that discarded material overwritten by the final version of the script and by the released film is still the canonical story.
     
  13. DBrennan3333

    DBrennan3333 Jedi Youngling star 4

    Registered:
    Nov 5, 2004
    Lucas wrote the EU story with the new background for the new Sifo-Dyas? Please provide the name of the story and show Lucas's writing credit for that specific tale.

    If your grander argument is that Sidious was not involved in the creation of the clone army as well as the fostering of the droids, then I suppose we can have a debate (and I'm pretty certain I'll win), but I'm not going to accept EU stuff as evidence or fodder for arguments.

    If you want to discount the shooting script of AOTC, fine. I can make the same point like this: Count Dooku - working directly in league with Sidious - created the clone army (by recruiting Jango Fett) and, obviously, was instrumental in creating the opposing droid army. Sidious is shown to be controlling Dooku, so we can use common sense and say from that alone that Sidious created both.

    Hey, if you want to incorporate EU material, then that's your choice. But my choice is to go by (a) what's in the actual movies, and (b) what's most logical. I don't want to get into a huge debate about the EU and what's "canonical" and all the rest of that stuff. My thoughts on all of that were made clear above: I draw the line at the movies and their intent. The EU writers can say that Luke is a latent homosexual, the clones are noble and heroic, and Anakin Skywalker can fly, and Lucasfilm Ltd. can then say that that's now "canon" and that it was always so. But I don't play along with that silliness.
     
  14. DBrennan3333

    DBrennan3333 Jedi Youngling star 4

    Registered:
    Nov 5, 2004
    By the way, I want to acknowledge that I'm kind of contradicting myself by saying that I discount the EU when, if you look, I actually gave Sate Pestage a little cameo in the doc. However, please don't make a big thing out of that: I only put him in there for aesthetic symmetry in that graphic (I wanted to have two characters on either side of Palpatine, and he was the only person I could think of for the fourth spot.)

    So I'll concede that I'm being a little hypocritical, and I hope we can just disregard it as a trivial matter.
     
  15. Arawn_Fenn

    Arawn_Fenn Chosen One star 7

    Registered:
    Jul 2, 2004
    In the final script and film of AOTC, Sifo-Dyas is a real person and not an alias for Sidious. I'm discounting the obsolete version of the script that was changed prior to the conclusion of photography and the release of the film. You're discounting the released version of the film in favor of a discarded non-canonical stage of the script.

    Dooku and Sidious being allied in no way contradicts the following scenario: "I read at Wookiepedia that now the EU has Sifo-Dyas creating the army independently but then it's hijacked by Sidious."

    Labyrinth of Evil is not contradicted by anything in AOTC.

    However, since I never said that, you'd be constructing a fictional "win" against an imaginary person. We have a name for that.

     
  16. DBrennan3333

    DBrennan3333 Jedi Youngling star 4

    Registered:
    Nov 5, 2004
    ArawnFenn:

    Your post was broken up into so many little segments and cryptic sentences that it's hard to make sense of it. I'll give it a shot.

    We agree that, after pick-ups and re-shoots changed the original dialogue (along with a CGI beard over Obi-Wan in original shots in which he said "Sido-Dyas"), yes, Sifo-Dyas became a separate entity from Sidious. I cited the character's original origin because it clarifies the point that Lucas wanted to have Sidious creating the army from the very start. The fact that, after first shooting the movie, Lucas chose to make the matter more mysterious with the injection of a new character doesn't change the fact that Sidious was involved in creating the clones, it merely makes AOTC into more of a detective story, which was the feeling that Lucas was striving for.

    You're now citing 'Labyrinth of Evil'. As I've indicated repeatedly in this thread, I give no credence to the EU. Your quote from Luceno can be construed in lots of ways. If you believe that inside of Luceno's quote was the claim that Lucas told Luceno that Sifo-Dyas created the clone army, I'll stipulate the point. But one way or another, it's the EU.

    You clearly are knowledgeable and enthusiastic about the EU. Similarly, I'm knowledgeable and enthusiastic about SW scripts. Personally, I believe that if we're looking for the true origins of the story and Lucas's true intent, that the screenplays are a better place to look than the EU. But I guess that that's a separate issue.

    Anyway, if the movies effectively have "Sifo-Dyas" (formerly "Sido-Dyas", a.k.a. "Sidious") as a red herring to confuse the Jedi about the origin of the clones, and if we know that the clones came from Dooku, and, in AOTC, we are told that Sifo-Dyas died before the clones were created (as Obi-Wan and the Jedi Council discussed in AOTC), then we can very comfortably infer that the Sidious/Dooku tandem created the clone army. You throw in "Order 66" and it becomes overwhelmingly obvious.

    Now, you appeared to qualify a lot of your arguments with a lot of "does not contradict". As if you were saying that, if one elects to go with the EU material, they're not directly going against the movies. Maybe. I mean, the Jedi were basically flying in the 'Clone Wars' cartoon (which we're now told is "canonical") and some people argued that that didn't contradict the movies. Like I said, that's their choice, and apparently yours, too. I choose to follow the movies and, when in doubt, look at the shooting scripts.

    I'm pretty certain - actually, I'm 100% positive - that the CW cartoon is eventually going to claim that the clones were in utter agony as they murdered the Jedi in ROTS. They also say that Anakin had a Padwan between AOTC and ROTS. I'm sure they're going to make a whole bunch of other changes. You might think that these are cool and that, your opinion, they don't contradict the movies. But as I said before, "if you want to incorporate EU material, then that's your choice. But my choice is to go by (a) what's in the actual movies, and (b) what's most logical. I don't want to get into a huge debate about the EU and what's "canonical" and all the rest of that stuff. My thoughts on all of that were made clear above: I draw the line at the movies and their intent. The EU writers can say that Luke is a latent homosexual, the clones are noble and heroic, and Anakin Skywalker can fly, and Lucasfilm Ltd. can then say that that's now "canon" and that it was always so. But I don't play along with that silliness."

    The bottom line is that the movies overwhelmingly suggest that Sidious was secretly orchestrated both the Republic's army as well as the Separtists'. Maybe the EU will one day claim otherwise (maybe they already are), but in the movies, that's the story.
     
  17. Arawn_Fenn

    Arawn_Fenn Chosen One star 7

    Registered:
    Jul 2, 2004
    Once again, I never disputed that Sidious was involved with the creation of the clones. You persist in arguing with a hypothetical person who is not present.

    No, it can't. The Sifo-Dyas material in LOE came directly from Lucas. That's what the quote says and it's unequivocal.
     
  18. DBrennan3333

    DBrennan3333 Jedi Youngling star 4

    Registered:
    Nov 5, 2004
    I guess we had our wires crossed. I'm sure that your writing was crisp and perfect and that the miscommunication was entirely my fault.

    Yes, it can. When Luceno says "The Sifo-Dyas background came entirely from Lucas", that sounds to me that Lucas told him about a character, not a story. If you want to believe that Lucas dictated to him both the new character and the new story, that's fine. But again....it's still the EU.
     
  19. Arawn_Fenn

    Arawn_Fenn Chosen One star 7

    Registered:
    Jul 2, 2004
    We know that Dooku supplied the prime clone. That doesn't mean Sifo-Dyas never contacted Kamino.

    That did not happen. We were shown that Obi-Wan was under the impression that Sifo-Dyas died before the order was placed. Impressions are not guaranteed to be accurate.

    Not all EU is created equal. As I've indicated repeatedly, in this case the material came directly from Lucas, so you're giving no credence to Lucas.

    Sifo-Dyas' story is all background by virtue of the character being dead by the time he is first mentioned.
     
  20. DBrennan3333

    DBrennan3333 Jedi Youngling star 4

    Registered:
    Nov 5, 2004
    Sure. If that's what you want to believe, that's cool.

    Sure. You can interpret the events in AOTC however you want.

    No, all EU is entirely equal: its importance is entirely up to an individual's discretion. I choose to lend it no weight, you lend it a lot.

    Again, I have zero interest in getting into a debate about what's "canonical" any more than I wish to get into a "basher-gusher" debate. You can do whatever you want with the EU. That's fine. Despite the fact that I actually have enjoyed some EU material, I separate them from the movies entirely. Okay?


    Umm, I guess. Luceno said that Lucas told him about the character. That could mean that he described his physiology and Jedi history (actually, that's sounding probable) or it could mean that Lucas told Luceno an entire tale involving a specific episode in this character's life. You don't know, I don't know. But again....it's the EU.

    -----

    Your splicing apart of quotes and arguing over trivial minutia (while again and again and again citing the EU) is not advancing this discourse at all. Honestly, I have no idea what you're trying to say other than that, in your mind, the EU's account of Sifo-Dyas is gospel. If that's your argument, then I'll concede it. Good for you (and I don't mean that condescendingly).

    But if you have a large argument that (a) materially effects the video, (b) is not premised upon highly interpretive elements of the story, and (c) does not involve the EU, please make it. Otherwise, save us both some time and drop the matter.
     
  21. Arawn_Fenn

    Arawn_Fenn Chosen One star 7

    Registered:
    Jul 2, 2004
    I said nothing here about any EU material that did not come from Lucas. Elements originating with Lucas in the movie novelizations, reference books, and other sources are defined to be G-canon, so ( for example ) the introduction to Shatterpoint is G-canon. Thus your belief in the equivalency of EU conflicts with Lucasfilm policy.

    I think you mean "while citing Lucas' involvement in LOE", because I didn't mention other EU.

    Since you didn't read the book you have no idea what you're talking about. Luceno said that the Sifo-Dyas background in the book came straight from Lucas, and that Lucas answered all his (plural) questions about Sifo-Dyas. It is nonsensical to assume that these questions did not involve anything about the ordering of the clone army ( the whole focus of the Sifo-Dyas material in both AOTC and LOE, which did not cover physiology in any way ) in favor of irrelevant queries about, say, what high school Sifo-Dyas went to. So: I know, you deny.

    I'm not buying that you missed every occurrence of the word "Lucas" in my posts.
     
  22. DBrennan3333

    DBrennan3333 Jedi Youngling star 4

    Registered:
    Nov 5, 2004
    Okay, so you're saying, yet again, that you like the EU's story of Sifo-Dyas and you incorporate that into your perception of the story. Conversely, I know the shooting script of AOTC - as well as all the hints that the PT drops - about Sifo-Dyas and the origin of the clones and that's where I draw my perception of the story.

    (And again, I'm not going to get into a debate about what's "canonical", Lucasfilm Ltd. policy or not. They've now deemed that the CW cartoon is "canon". Fine. They can say that Lucas had Ahsoka in mind when he wrote AOTC. Fine. I don't indulge any of that crap. The only thing "canonical" to me are the movies. For the 1000th time.)
     
  23. Arawn_Fenn

    Arawn_Fenn Chosen One star 7

    Registered:
    Jul 2, 2004
    You mean Lucas' story of Sifo-Dyas that appeared in the EU.

    The same can be said for the author of the book. Different people draw different conclusions from AOTC.

    I don't think anyone is saying that.
     
  24. DarthIktomi

    DarthIktomi Jedi Padawan star 4

    Registered:
    May 11, 2009
    I don't think anyone had Ahsoka in mind except for Dave Filoni. She's actually somewhat likable in the novels, but the Clone Wars cartoon is something else.

    Lucas does consult the EU to some extent. Dark Empire blending perfectly with Anakin's fall (including Luke crash-landing a Star Destroyer) can't be coincidental. And obviously Aayla Secura and the Outrider were shout-outs to the EU. Other times he just likes to mess with us, such as the Death Star. He knew we would spend half a decade retconning the damn thing.
     
  25. DBrennan3333

    DBrennan3333 Jedi Youngling star 4

    Registered:
    Nov 5, 2004
    The EU is, I'm pretty certain, LucasFilm's #1 source of revenue right now, so it's definitely a good bet that Lucas, as the owner of the company, is quite aware and active with it. Watching the 'Making Of' docs about the CW cartoon at StarWars.com, it's clear that Lucas has a hand in the show - in some episodes (such as 'Lair of Grievous') a pretty big hand.

    But I still split the two of them entirely. First, because the EU material is being written right now and so, by definition, it's all post hoc inclusion, at best, and dishonest retcons at worst. The material simply did not exist when the movies were made, and so while they might make nice complementary stories, the events and characters they talk about literally had zero affect on the movies themselves. Secondly, because a lot of the EU (in fact, most of it, in my opinion) is just plain dog----. In the video game world, games based off of movies are usually (not always) just horrible because (a) they're rushed to the market, often called "shovelware", and (b) they're not natural, organic creations. The game designers' imaginations and ambitions were restrained and coerced by the movie they were conforming their puzzle to. That's how much of the EU feels to me: like cheap, exploitative crap where they only true enjoyment one can get from it is the placating enjoyment of the quasi-familiar. Third, I have my own conceptualization of the SW characters and universe in my brain - and, no, Anakin never had a nubile Padawan prancing around in a midriff for him in my conceptualization - and I don't need a bunch of strangers, with their motives of greed or, perhaps, even worse (the overbearing propaganda vibe of the CW suggests there are darker forces at play) to tell me that my imagination is wrong and there's is right. No, it's all equal. (In fact, one could argue that fanfic and our own imaginations are actually more accurate because we've got no ulterior motive in telling our stories other than what makes sense and what feels right. On the other hand, Lucasfilm is trying to create items, first and foremost, that will make money and, secondly, conform to some nefarious pro-government message. But one way or another, the movies exist in a vacuum, in my mind.)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.