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

Symbolism in Attack of the Clones (currently discussing shrouding and obscuring)

Discussion in 'Archive: Attack of the Clones' started by Shelley, Jan 13, 2003.

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

    Shelley Jedi Youngling star 5

    Registered:
    Sep 9, 2001
    No I didn't.

    You mean aside from declaring as fact that TPM was not a good movie, not a SW movie, and most fans were disappointed with it?

    I started one with a Gary Kurtz interview but the LFL employee one was TrueJedi.

    I was referring to the LOTR one actually. And you acted like the LFL employee interview was proof that Lucas is surrounded by yes-men, just like you acted like the Gary Kurtz interview was proof of it.

    And you were the one who made it inflammatory.

    And unlike you, I went back and changed my post so it wasn't inflammatory.
     
  2. hawk

    hawk Jedi Knight star 5

    Registered:
    May 3, 2000
    4. Lucas wasn't attempting symbolism, however, on an unconscious level we may include imagery that we have seen in the past or common images such as the crucifixion. But I don't think it was a motivation to show Shmi crucified. Write in to StarWars.com and ask I suppose.
     
  3. Shelley

    Shelley Jedi Youngling star 5

    Registered:
    Sep 9, 2001
    Good idea. Maybe I will write into SW.com and ask.
     
  4. Bjorn75

    Bjorn75 Jedi Youngling star 1

    Registered:
    Aug 8, 2001
    I for one totally support
    1. The discussion on symbolism, whether it was intentional or not. For all we know, there was no Oidipal references intended about Vader slicing off Luke's swordarm at Bespin, but that doesn't make the reference, or any discussion about it invalid. For me, it greatly enhances the quality and value of the films.

    2. The symbolism in this particular scene. If you ask me, there is no way it can be unintended. I agree with what has been said before in this thread, about the Pieta and crucifixion. I don't think anybody has mentioned this, but doesn't Shmi say: "Now I am complete." That is a reference to Christ, if I ever saw one.

    I don't think we can suck too much meaning from the crucifiction reference though, I get the feeling that GL basically wanted to point our minds in that general direction, but invert the whole situation. Good-Evil. Mother-Son. Redemption-Damnation. I don't see how GL actually wanted to have us think that Shmi died for our sins.

    Oh one last thing: One cool thing about the reference is that it enhances Anakin's fatal mistake - Holding on to things. Christ defeats death by letting go, give up his powers, dying, and being resurrected. Anakin defies death by refusing to accept it, and commits himself to gain enough power to keep people from dying. That's the key thing of the PT, for me at least.

    //Björn
     
  5. anidanami124

    anidanami124 Jedi Master star 6

    Registered:
    Aug 24, 2002
    Oh one last thing: One cool thing about the reference is that it enhances Anakin's fatal mistake - Holding on to things. Christ defeats death by letting go, give up his powers, dying, and being resurrected. Anakin defies death by refusing to accept it, and commits himself to gain enough power to keep people from dying. That's the key thing of the PT, for me at least.

    There something else with that scene. Someone else said it on this thread. If you look at the scene Shmi dies in Anakin's arms which is giving him another push to the dark side. Which at some point in Ep3 something will happen to Padme and he will go all the way. But this is not the thread to talk about this. Ok back to what I was saying. Anakin truns form the Dark Side back to the Light when Luke is holding him near the end of ROTJ. So Shmi dies in his arms it helps send him to the dark side. But when he saved and dead in Lukes arms he was saved. Because he was final able to do what he always wanted to do keep his loved one safe.
     
  6. Lady_Sami_J_Kenobi

    Lady_Sami_J_Kenobi Jedi Master star 6

    Registered:
    Jul 31, 2002
    Bhorn75,

    That's a very good way of looking at it. That's how I interpret it as well. Refusing to let go, refusing to accept change, including death. Trying to control too much.

    Lady Sami
     
  7. ShaakRider

    ShaakRider Jedi Master star 2

    Registered:
    Nov 14, 2002
    "But I don't think it was a motivation to show Shmi crucified."

    Agree with this, I can. However it seems plausible that it was a design to bring up this imagery.
     
  8. DarthBreezy

    DarthBreezy Chosen One star 6

    Registered:
    Jun 4, 2002
    1. The discussion on symbolism, whether it was intentional or not. For all we know, there was no Oidipal references intended about Vader slicing off Luke's swordarm...

    Getting TECHNICLY OT but SO much more interesting than the mini fire war...

    In the Star Wars Insider (I believe it was the one with the Ackaley on the cover) there was a whole section on the different 'forms' of Light-saber technique, discussed were the 'disarming' tactics (mostly Sithly) and the significance of Vader slicing Luke's hand off at Bespin... also, in ANH, Obiwan did his fair share of 'disarming' (alright, just one but still...) It is supposedly a symbolic casteration...
     
  9. Shelley

    Shelley Jedi Youngling star 5

    Registered:
    Sep 9, 2001
    Yes, that's a good point. Lucas may have brought in the crucifixion/Pieta symbolism, or a reasonable facsimile thereof, to point us in the direction of Anakin being unable to let go, thus being the inverse of Jesus.
     
  10. Hell_Sith666

    Hell_Sith666 Jedi Youngling star 1

    Registered:
    Oct 31, 2002
    So your saying Anakin is the Anti-Christ? That's pretty deep symbolism for a kids flick.
     
  11. anidanami124

    anidanami124 Jedi Master star 6

    Registered:
    Aug 24, 2002
    That's a very good way of looking at it. That's how I interpret it as well. Refusing to let go, refusing to accept change, including death. Trying to control too much.

    Which at the end of his life he final does. There is something that I have always thought aobut and it this:

    You have Shmi, Qui-Gon, Padme, and then Luke and I guess you can say Leia. But any ways I have always looked at Shmi, Qui-gon, and Padme as pillers holding Anakin up in the Light side. If lets say Shmi and Qui-gon would have lived I don't think Anakin would have fallen because Padme would have had more help. But with the tow of them gone it was left up to Padme. But what ever happens to her in Ep 3 which will be bad it will send Anakinover. It then takes Luke to brign him back. Luke rise up as another piller of Anakin which give him a push back to the dark side.
     
  12. Bjorn75

    Bjorn75 Jedi Youngling star 1

    Registered:
    Aug 8, 2001
    Hell_Sith666: So your saying Anakin is the Anti-Christ? That's pretty deep symbolism for a kids flick.

    That's exactly the point - Part of what makes Star Wars great is that it works on quite many levels. I even remember this kind of discussion going on on the newsgroup rec.misc.starwars something or other many years ago, where it was argued that Leia was "symbolically" raped when Jabba captured her and C3PO said "Oh, I can't bare to watch".

    An explicit reference would not have gone well with the kids but the symbolism flies over their heads. In the end, it works for those who see it, and doesn't bother those who don't.

    Thanks for your kind remarks on my post, folks. Good thread.

    //Björn
     
  13. Hell_Sith666

    Hell_Sith666 Jedi Youngling star 1

    Registered:
    Oct 31, 2002
    Bjorn, I think you can see symbolism in anything if you really try to. If I remember correctly Lois Lane died in same position in Superman arms in Superman The Movie, then she was resurected.
    If you look hard enough at clouds you can sometimes make out shapes in them.
     
  14. jaja7799

    jaja7799 Jedi Youngling star 1

    Registered:
    Jul 29, 2002
    Looking to hard into something is nothing but troubling. Not to say that there isnt any here, but if one wanted too they could find anything on a subconsious level about anything
     
  15. EmperorNemesis

    EmperorNemesis Jedi Youngling star 1

    Registered:
    Dec 14, 2002
    I don't think Shmi's death was a reference to Jesus's death.

    George wouldn't include any intentional religious references in his film. What I mean is, explicit religious symbols. He would include vague spiritual references though such as the force. Therefore I believe it is not an explicit nod to the pieta.

    Too many other movies have also had the same death motif. Specially old westerns and melodramatic b/w serials, where the hero comes too late to save his father or comrade. He comes to a dark room where his father is tied up. Has a last few words with him, and the person dies in his arms. Nothing very christian. That symbolism has been done to death in many other movies.

    What I am postulating is that Anakin being born as a clone, means Shmi's death symbolises the death of all good things in that galaxy. The time of mechanization has begun.

    Actually if you think about it, it could be some form of nod to Lord of the Rings. With Anakin being some form of Uruk Hai. More will be revealed in Ep III.

    What do you people think?

    It's a rather new take on the underlying meaning of the scene.



     
  16. Armaria

    Armaria Jedi Youngling star 1

    Registered:
    May 5, 2002
    I think we're reading too much into this scene. ;)
     
  17. EmperorNemesis

    EmperorNemesis Jedi Youngling star 1

    Registered:
    Dec 14, 2002
    You don't agree with the symbolism I've put forth?
     
  18. anidanami124

    anidanami124 Jedi Master star 6

    Registered:
    Aug 24, 2002
    I think we're reading too much into this scene.

    No one is reading to much into it. I have asked this before in here. Is ther something wrong with people wanting to talk about symbolism in the AOTC movie.
     
  19. EmperorNemesis

    EmperorNemesis Jedi Youngling star 1

    Registered:
    Dec 14, 2002
    Right on.

    Think of the possibilities of Luke and Leia being clones of each other.

     
  20. anidanami124

    anidanami124 Jedi Master star 6

    Registered:
    Aug 24, 2002
    Right on.

    Think of the possibilities of Luke and Leia being clones of each other.


    I know you want to see the symbolism in Luek and Leia but that a bit more of any EP3 thing. it's also something that not ever oen really likes the idea of. The reason for that is that some people don't like the idea of ever charater having a clone.
     
  21. EmperorNemesis

    EmperorNemesis Jedi Youngling star 1

    Registered:
    Dec 14, 2002
    No! No! No Ep III.

    The seeds are being planted in this movie. Or even since TPM. More developments are to come in the future movie. I believe George Lucas is paying homage to Aldus Huxley's "A brave new world".

    The religion angle would be too cliche'd.
     
  22. LucasCop

    LucasCop Jedi Master star 2

    Registered:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Emperor Nemesis, with all due respect, I think you're out in left field.

    First of all, how in the heck can Luke and Leia be "clones of each other"?! A clone is an exact replicant of another being. Therefore, Leia should not have breasts and her name should be Luke 2.

    Secondly, how can the death of Shmi symbolize the onset of mechanization if her very own son was a product of that mechanization (ie. Anakin was a clone)? Instead, the birth of Anakin should be this transition of which you speak.

    I think you currently have a bit of a fixation on this whole cloning business simply because the Empire was born out of this Republic Army of clones. The clone aspect of the saga has now been told. No where in the OT is there even a word of clones other than Kenobi's recalling of the "Clone Wars" which we are seeing now.

    Please, stop this madness.....Oh, brother. So I guess Han is a clone. Biggs is a clone. Lando is a clone. Wicket is a clone. Dak is a clone. Luke and Leia are clones (oh wait! you actually DID say that!).
     
  23. YodaJeff

    YodaJeff Manager Emeritus star 7 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Oct 18, 2001
    This thread is for discussing the symbolism of Shmi's death, not whether or not Luke and Leia are clones.

    I'm not going to remind everyone to stay on topic again.
     
  24. EmperorNemesis

    EmperorNemesis Jedi Youngling star 1

    Registered:
    Dec 14, 2002
    Shmi's death is a metaphor...Just not a religious one.

    Her death is used as an allegory or symbol of the dying of the old republic.

    And I'm betting my money, that it was because of Palpatine. It was Palpatine/Sidious who had the Kaminoans abduct Shmi, and the embryo implanted in her body. And then, later had her killed to arouse Anakin's anger. This would logically complete the story circle of the old republic.

    You may disagree, but I'm sticking to what I belive about her death.
     
  25. LucasCop

    LucasCop Jedi Master star 2

    Registered:
    Nov 20, 2002
    The death of Shmi may be interpreted as the transition toward the Empire only in that we know that Anakin turns to the Dark Side, helps the Empire hunt down and destroy the Jedi Knights, and remains Palp's right hand man in the Sith partially because his love and loss of his mother leads him to do naughty things.

    Whew......

    In that respect, you are correct.

    But Anakin was conceived by the Force according to the prophecy of the Chosen One. To believe otherwise misconstrues the myth laid out by Lucas in TPM.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.