Prequels more shakesperean in their very nature?

It's actually quite interesting. Last year in my english class I pretty much slept the entire time but we did talk about shakespere and I did pick up a few things...

It's interesting, because in their era all of the plays were re-hashes of classic stories. Everyone knew what was going to happen, they didn't go to see the plays to see what happens; they went to see how and why it happened.

It's interesting because the prequels are just like that. We knew what was going to happen, that is not what really gave us the anticipation; the anticipation was HOW and WHY it happens.

The plot is more mysterious and is truly a tragedy--very shakesperean.

The prequels also, in my opinion, are more artistically done than any of the OT films.

It's interesting to see how the PT really is so shakesperean; whether or not that is a good thing, I guess depends on the person!

 

Yes, absolutely.

 

Palpatine=Iago

Anakin=Othello

 

In my opinion?

Palpatine bears some resemblence to Claudius.

Anakin can resemble King Hamlet. Or King Henry V.

Does this mean that Obi-Wan is Sir Falstaff?

Could Luke be Prince Hamlet? Or Fortinbras?

Threepio and Artoo could be Rozencrantz and Guildenstern. Or the myriad of fools and clowns.

I'm not sure who Yoda is. After watching a few martial arts movies I figured he was an easy Pai Mei figure. But in Shakespeare? Don't really know. Perhaps he and Mace figure in as "Honorable men", shall we say?

 

Also, the prequels very closely follow ARISTOTLE'S TEACHINGS!

It's so fascinating truly.

 

It is more shakespearean. The language is also more proper.

 

PT=Tragedy
OT=Comedy

Tragedy=Shakesperean.

 

Don't forget that Shakespeare was lousy with paternal twins. Need a plot device? How about twins!

 

Well, Aristotle taught about tragedies and I had to write an essay about tragic characters according to his critique and it just made me realize how it is JUST like star wars...

 

Shakespeare was quite adept at comedy also, Tokyo. Its a thin line anyway between the two.

 

a comedy is those days didnt even have to be funny. as long as the story had a happy ending (ie. everyone didnt die) it was usually considered a comedy.

 

I know Severian, but he is best known for his tragedies. Nevertheless, I've could have been more specific, yes.

 

The prequels are somewhat Shakespearean in tone, but not in their very nature. There is a sense of impending tragedy in the pictures, but it is something which becomes much more apparent upon viewing them within the context of the larger saga. Through contrast and our familiarity with the OT films, the prequels consequently become Greek tragedies, in which the characters' fates seems more or less inevitable and predetermined. Shakespearean tragedy would seem to imply that the characters in the movies have an opportunity to change their destinies; because we already know what happens to them, it seems far less a matter of volition, but rather one of inevitability. What I feel to be one of Lucas' great accomplishments in Episodes 1 and 2, is that although we are intellectually aware of the story's outcome, it is imbued with a sense of dramatic immediacy that enables us, as viewers enveloped in the narrative, to think that the characters, whose fates are already sealed, do have the ability to extricate themselves from tragic circumstances. That is part of the power, and underlying melancholy tone which permeates these two films, and makes them so much more than straightforward space operas.

I think when we are able to view the saga chronologically (in terms of the story), then (particularly for the viewers who haven't seen Episodes 4-6 prior to the prequels) the Shakspearean nature of these films will develop more completely, and the Greek Tragedy aspect will become somewhat less salient. Each episode of the respective trilogies will comprise one act of a three-part opera; Episodes 1-3 will be more of a classical tragedy, while 4-6 will appear in a more redemptive, genial light, suggesting grand adventure. The films as they now stand are structured to unfold and develop over the course of their respective filmic arcs - therefore, the story makes more psychological sense if you can connect the events and character pieces from film to film.

 

Entire Prequel Trilogy would be Shakesparean, yes. But different episodes would be like this:

The Phantom Menace ~ Disneyish fairy-tale
Attack of the Clones ~ medieval romance and both detective movie
Revenge of the Sith ~ great tragedy

 

Lucas uses many elements of:

Shakespearian Drama**
Noh Plays
Greek Tragedy

Lucas draws more from Shakespeare more as 'found art' than as a structural template.

From 'A Midsummer Night's Dream' we have 3PO's adventures in the arena from AOTC - he all but quotes Bottom when he wakes from his adventures in Faerie:
Bottom: I have had a most rare vision!
C3PO: I've just had a most peculiar dream!

In Vader's unmasking we have the unmasking of Prospero - the powerful wizard/father who puts everyone around him through a redemptive adventure, including himself! He too was exiled for his misuse of supernatural powers - only after the big reveal does his daughter truly love him.

The Trade Federation's dogged quest to exterminate Padme mirrors the English desperation to put Joan Of Arc to death in Henry VI Pts. I-III.

Anakin/Padme is, obviously, reminiscent of "Romeo & Juliet".

...there are many more examples...

**I see this as distinct from Elizabethan Drama - like iconoclastic filmmakers such as Walt Disney, Shakespeare created his own genre.

 

there is also a hint of Faust (Goethe's version not Marlowe's I will explain the difference later on.) As you know Fasut was a doctor who saught infinite knowledge and power by making a pact with the Devil. In the case of Star Wars, Anakin is Dr. Faust, like Fasut Anakin seeks to gain great knowledge. To gain this knowledge he makes a deal with Palpatine (Mephistophles, the Devil) he wiil give Palpatine his soul for this power. Now in Marlowe's version of Faust, Fasut does not repent his dark deeds and even contemplates turning into animal to avoid being sent to Hell, but Anakin reminds me more of Goethe's Fasut in that the end Faust is redeemed as he dies and goes to Heaven (which in case of Star Wars would be what in ROTJ).

 

It is liked Shakesperean tradgedy, in some regards.
There can be ties made to Hamlet and Macbeth...even Romeo and Julliet.

-Seldon

 

I agree with Tyranus_the_Hutt's assessment above for the most part. I feel that the Shakespearian nature of the Tragedy of Anakin Skywalker (which must be distinguished from "The Saga" in its entirety, which must technically be regarded as a comedy due to the happy/joyous ending) is most apparent when the Saga is viewed as a whole. Other issues aside, the Shakespearian tragic hero MUST die (except for Timon of Athens, I suppose, but is that considered a Tragedy?) and that doesn't happen to Anakin until RotJ!

But a Shakespearian element? Definitely. We start with a noble youth who- through a mixture of outside circumstances and influences and a internal/personal fatal flaw (or flaws)- winds up falling into personal ruin that sweeps up and mortally (or at least critically) involves all those around him- practically all he touches. Culminating in the tragic hero's death, the story becomes a testimony/warning against the fatal flaw of the hero as well as the fallibility of the human race in general. This doesn't mean that the tragic hero is unaware of his predicament, indeed Othello realizes his mistake before killing himself and Hamlet remains aware of his failings throughout the play. Likewise, Anakin eventually realizes his mistake and- like Hamlet- finds partial, if not complete, redemption in the continuance of the story. (Of course, Anakin primarily finds repemption in the act of saving his son.)