Saga Prequels or originals?

See, THAT, I think... that is the problem right there.

Point-blank dismissiveness. A refusal to even see a basic observation or musing as having any validity whatsoever.

Is it really that stupid that Anakin might have a slightly inflated view of himself?

Sometimes, anakinfan -- kind of an ironic name, given your bluster in this thread, donchathink? -- you don't seem willing or able to try and understand the character at all. At least, not on this fundamental issue.

Take AOTC. You claim it's ROTS that fumbles the ball, craps in the pot, or whatever, but Anakin's maladies begin to take form in that movie. Blame AOTC for mangling Anakin, not ROTS.

In his first scene alone with Padme (or almost alone), Anakin says that he feels that "in some ways, a lot of ways", he's "really ahead" of Obi-Wan, after just praising Obi-Wan for being as powerful as Mace and as wise as Yoda.

Maybe he hasn't mulled over the implications of what he's saying in that scene, and maybe it's a bit of frustration mixed in with adolescent bravado, but he basically puts himself above the strongest / most notable Jedi in the entire order to which he belongs.

He's kinda saying, "I don't belong here! I'm better than ALL of them."

Later on, in the garage confession, he vows that, someday, he'll be the "most powerful Jedi ever". At his mother's grave, he regrets that he "wasn't strong enough" to save her, then adds, "but I won't fail again".

Pretty clear indicators, I should have thought, that he at least feels he's in line for better things, if only the world would open up to him and let him be the kind of godly individual he imagines he could well be.

Also, I think Anakin is an enlarged metaphor for the fragility of the human being, in all its splendour and regrettable repugnance. Lucas merely uses abstractions like Anakin being "the Chosen One", him having a higher "midi-chlorian" count, and the idea of him being "destined" to "bring balance" to a meta-abstraction like "the Force", as components that emphasize the specialness and potential inherent in *all* human beings. The prequel story is an allegory: a parable about the many ways, subtle and gross, that human beings can and do go wrong.

Like his special origins, and consistent with the extra power(s) he is meant to be imbued with -- again, ultimately enforcing the specialness of all people, all beings -- Anakin likewise has very enlarged and dramatic dreams, or visions. His being driven powerfully by a crippling fear of the future, a presumed and perturbing glimpse of death, could also be seen as a metaphor for all the ways and means in which human beings are driven crazy. Watching Padme die is the same as wooing her at a fireplace: the troubling intersection of eros and thanatos in the psyche of mankind.

Anakin is being propelled by a strange and unshakeable sense of a possible future, one in which only pain and loss can be imagined. The future shapes his present, just as it does in the lives of so many of us. All of us, really. Of course, there are better and worse ways to go about things, but all our lives are really a matrix of what we presume lies in store, and how best to cheat that future by building a present that can sometimes (ironically) fatalistically bring it about. That's what defines Greek tragedy.

I presented this poem by Russell Edson in another thread. Here it is again -- I think it captures the existential doom of Anakin perfectly:

The floor is something we must fight against.
Whilst seemingly mere platform for the human
stance, it is that place that men fall to.
I am not dizzy. I stand as a tower, a lighthouse;
the pale ray of my sentiency flowing from my face.

But should I go dizzy I crash down into the floor;
my face into the floor, my attention bleeding into
the cracks of the floor.

Dear horizontal place, I do not wish to be a rug.
Do not pull at the difficult head, this teetering
bulb of dread and dream . . .

(I like to envision this as a poetic description of Anakin's inner workings after his intense nightmares, looking to a distant horizon, in AOTC and ROTS).

BTW...

How did this thread get off the rails?

Prequels or originals? Nah, let's just talk about what an idiot Anakin is in ROTS again.

 

Seriously? Without evidence that something doesn't exist, assume that it does?

In that case, I've got to get to work making me some money!

 

Thanks for clarifying.

I agree with your take, actually.

Something much darker seems to take hold of him in ROTS.

I think there are several scenes that quite obviously speak to this. Though, you may have a different take (chiefly, right after he kills Count Dooku, and when he confides in Padme that he wants more, but knows that he shouldn't), and maybe that's another discussion for another time.

Heh.

I'll return you to your former paragraph. In particular:

You're equating a character's lack of fortitude, intelligence, or moxie with ... animal droppings.

In my book, that's a metaphor.

Plus, the whole Star Wars thing, sounds in space, sweeping, romantic music, bickering robots, laser swords, the Force...

Very obviously non-literal. Very obviously poetry, very obviously art.

Oh, well.

Now that you've put it that way, you're maybe his greatest fan -- waving the banner of non-almost-corrupted-into-Darth-Vader Anakin, a fan of the "before" and the "after", but not the crazed slayer in-between.

I understand, I think. I just don't have the same disregard. I agree that his final fall is a little fast, a little contrived, and a little stretched, but in spite of that, I think his descent (when looking at the bigger picture) really works. We may just have to agree to disagree.

 

So.. we should all disbelieve everything other people tell us, until we receive proof that what they say is true?

There's a word ( or words ) for that. It's called being a "pathological contrarian".

If only there were a middle ground between these two extremes.

Being able to save someone else from dying is not the same as being unkillable.

Dead. It's almost as if ROTS never said Plagueis was going around making people immortal, and only used the term "immortality" to refer to a Force ghost.

No, it would only make the assumer someone who believes that if you can use a Force power on an object or another person then that means you must be able to use the same Force power on yourself. But I guess that's what we're defining "idiot" to mean in this context. An "idiot" is therefore someone who thinks: "If Yoda can levitate a rock, then he must be able to fly!"

No, by the Yoda logic, the "idiot" would be someone who thinks: "If you can save others from death, you must be able to save yourself from death, even while you're sleeping!" So if we're also calling people who don't believe that "idiots", then we've now extended the "idiot" label to cover literally everyone. And thus its functional meaning or significance has been reduced to precisely nothing. ( Though we were really already there with the implication that only idiots believe in such creatures as surgeons. )

I take it you've never heard of religion?

 

This is probably not the forum for my thoughts on religion.

 

I concur in that I don't want to discuss religion here, either, Yak. I've seen enough to have the sense to be very select with whom I discuss such a vital topic.

 

Yeah, let's not bring any religious discussion into this.

 

"Did you ever hear the Tragedy of Darth Plagueis the Wide?"

 

"He was so powerful he could prevent those he loved from dieting."

 

Anakin was possesses by the Devil. Works for me! Wizards on giant lizards, laser swords, princesses who are Senators...I'm cool with that.

This is the stuff I *love* about Star Wars!

 

I for one am entirely comfortable with the idea that because it's set in space and features sci fi and fantasy elements we should not bother expecting a coherent plot or characters.

 

To sum up this endless Anakin debate:
- being impulsive: stupid
- being desperate: stupid
- desperation makes one emotional, not rational: stupid
- taking previous experience into account: stupid
- believing medicine can fail: stupid
- being selfish: stupid
- believing in invention and discovery: stupid
- etc.

My only conclusion can be:
- being human: STUPID!

And it shows in this thread, imo

 

Totally agree, the idea that genre films don't need a coherent plot or characters that makes sense is a false one.
To be sure, there have been sci-fi/fantasy films where the characters are cardboard cut-outs that say and do whatever the plot needs them to.
To me, that a be a bigger break of suspension of disbelief, if a characters acts in ways that don't make sense or runs counter to how they otherwise acts.

In sci-fi/fantasy we kind of have to accept many fantastical things, magic, dragons, laser swords, sound in space etc.
That often doesn't bother me.
What can bother with this is if the film/TV-show/book/comic has set up some rules and then breaks those rules without explanation.
Ex. in ST:TNG a big deal has often been made about how they can't beam through the shields. Whole episodes have been about that factor.
Then in one episode they can beam through the shields without problem and no explanation is given why they can suddenly do something that was said to be impossible before.

But consistent and believable characters are on the whole more important to me. That what the characters says and does is understandable or relatable to me.
To pick on Star Trek again. In early TNG, Gene had decided that humans in the future no longer mourned or experienced grief.
So there was one episode where a young child became an orphan and the original writer wanted to show the child being sad and trying to flee from his grief. But Gene said no, none mourns anymore, not even children. Everyone accepts death as a part of life instantly.
To me that makes it hard to write compellign drama plus it makes the characters unrelatable to me.

Bye for now.
The Guarding Dark

 

Well it's a rational story for me. Coherent enough characters for me.

But I don't expect *real* people to always behave rationally or coherently. Hence drama.

 

Yeah, it really annoys me that there's a group always trying to make it look like they're the ones looking for a "coherent story", dismissing others as "unexacting", when, in reality, we've just different views on the comprehensibility of Anakin's actions.
I could call that stupid, but: I won't.

 

I just comprehend that people do incomprehensible things. It's in our nature. Why that's a stupid assumption, in a live action cartoon, much less in real life; I cannot comprehend.

 

I always find flawed characters interesting.

Royal's character in the Royal Tenenbaums is positively confounding. I love that movie!

 

Just stop little quoting comments Samnz.

Gets later too old.

 

So, the new propaganda is that Anakin was stupid, instead of a homicidal maniac.

People make stupid, irrational and/or dangerous mistakes, due to their own emotions. This is part of human nature. And this has certainly been the case with most of the major characters, including the so-called "wise" Yoda. What's the problem here? Fictional protagonists are not allowed to be flawed or make mistakes? Is that the literary rule now?

But he did . . . in the end. So what's the problem? You're angry that Anakin chose evil? Everyone knew this would eventually happen when the PT movies were released. What's the problem?

There is nothing special about Anakin's road to evil. Just about any character was capable of choosing a similar road. Count Dooku did. Are you upset over the idea that anyone can become a monster, given the right circumstances? Is that it?

 

It upsets me more that Anakin is completely redeemed by his one single act of throwing an old man down a hole.