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

Don"t forget Yoda knew this all happened and Qui-Qons voice was Scearming Anakin Anakin and then you hear Anakin Say NOOOOOOO! Then Yoda said to Mace Windu with tears in his eyes Pain,Suffering,Death Youg Skywalker is in Pain terrible pain. Then on the next day he brings his mothers dead body back. He then confues to padme that He killed not only the Men, But the Women, and the Childern to everything single one of them! And then Anakin Never comes back to tattoine!
Bu I think he comes back to try to free the slaves but Obi-wan In episode 3 says don"t let your persnol feelings get in your way! Anakin even said that One Day I Would Stop people From Dying!

 

EmperorNemesis, Rather than retyping everything, I think JG's post sums up my feelings on the matter quite well...

Anakin and his off-spring are the product of 'the living force', IE nature, passion, life in all it's messy glory... Boba and the clones are sterile, controlled...

As we finish up the "Shmi" discussion, we need to consider the next phase of the discussion, where shall we go? As a matter of please lets not go there again can we leave the Tuskin slaughter aspect alone? For some reason, that topic brings the scary posters out of the woodwork...

 

"You aren't on topic, Jedi_Waster."

Technically I was. I was commenting on how even if there was symbolism, it still doesn't disguise a bad story element.

 

You're off-topic because we're not discussing whether it's a good element or a bad element. We're not discussing opinions of the movie, so any comments about "it was a good element" or "it was a bad element" are off-topic. I don't think that was unclear in the beginning, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. I highly recommend that you don't try to derail the conversation again.

As to what's next, one I've had some fun on in smaller groups has been the shrouding imagery. Takers?

 

hmmm, the no emotions hypothesis ties in with my no sex theory.

That the Jedi aren't allowed to show any sort of emotion. This is intentionally shown on GL's part. In fact if they show any emotion such as anger, fear, sadness they will immediately turn to the Dark side. This stiltification of people's emotions, leads eventually to no sex.

Which is symbolized by the virtual clonification of Anakin, (I mean he's not a literal clone like the rest of the Jedi, and he's trying to turn away) and sealed by Shmi's death. Look at the OT, Vader is nearly dressed like one of the Stormtroopers/Clonetoroopers!

How about that?

Remember what Count Dooku said? This is only the beginnig. Beginning of what? The clonization of the Galaxy. I think this is a clever metaphor for the colonization that took place last century, that GL is trying to make a reference to.

Maybe Anakin represents both sides? A duality. But more clone than man.

 

Again, Vader is a negative image of the stormtroopers--an opposite.

Anakin isn't a clone--he's supernatural, maybe hypernatural; they're unnatural.

 

No! You mean to tell me you look at Vader and don't think he looks like a clone?

He looks like a Super-clone! He is the head clone in charge of them all. He's not their opposite. He wears black to designate rank! He is on top of the pyramid. In fact, it is to show how dark he is, while the other "normal" clones wear white. He is truely the most evil clone of all.

By Ep III he'll be completely clonified.

 

I think the significance of Anakin as Chosen One is that he is the natural one--the destruction of Anakin is the real coup d'etat of Palpatine's strategy, and the redemption of Anakin is Luke's victory.

Vader is a shroud that Anakin is wrapped in, a perverse imprisonment behind a mask. He's not "the most evil of all"--if he were, he couldn't have been redeemed. He's not wholly evil, even in ANH (that's why he's the one who defends the Force and by implication the Jedi against insult from the Imperial officer). That spark of who he really is remains.

 

I respectfully think you're wrong.

He is just using the force. He knows where his source source of power lies. To him it is a mean's to an end. Like most sith. He truly has to be evil for him to be redeemed. That is why Obi-wan wants him dead.

I could see a bit of duality working. But I still think he would have to be more evil than good.

He is just the exception to show, no matter how clonish/evil you become, you can always be saved.

 

That is why Obi-wan wants him dead.

The whole thematic point of RotJ is that Obi-Wan is wrong and Luke is right. Obi-Wan makes a lot of mistakes; that's probably the biggest of them. The whole point of that character is that he isn't fully evil.

At any rate, we're getting away from the symbolism here.

I don't think the clones are a symbol of evil, per se. They have no free will (which is another distinction between them and Anakin). Free will is essential for evil, and it's bred out of the clones, so they cannot be seduced by evil, though they can be agents of evil.

Anyone for discussing the symbolism of the clones, and how they do or do not intersect with Anakin's Hero's Journey?

 

[In which LucasCop expresses his disagreement with EmperorNemesis' theory.]

It is not permitted to flame another poster, no matter how vigorously you disagree with the position.

 

Lucascop it's meant in a symbolic metaphoric sense.

If you don't have anything to add to the discussion you should leave. We're talking aout symbols and I'm talking to JG.

This thread isn't for vigilante's.

 

You're talking to everyone, Nemesis, but other than that, I agree. LucasCop, that was way out of line taunting of Nemesis. I don't agree with the argument, but let's keep it literary--people have tried to prove weirder things on PhD theses.

Attacking a fellow poster is not allowed. Ever. If you have an argument to make, then make it. You didn't. You just ridiculed the one Nemesis was making. Saying "That's ridiculous" doesn't prove that it's ridiculous. Offer an alternative theory. Point out flaws in Nemesis' logic in a polite way.

But no ridiculing.

 

Symbolism ayy. Here's my huge exerpt of symbolism in AOTC with some help from ECHUTA and PadmeLeiaJaina

The Mythic symbols in Episode II are very dark, foreshadowing of the fall of the republic and the rise of the evil empire. The scene from the movie is in the beginning. The viewers are blessed with what appears to be almost untold beauty with the clouds. In this scene you begin to draw parallels between this and quite a few myths, the first one to come to mind would most likely be Asgard, the realm of the Gods in Norse mythology. While it is not this particular image that stirs the mind to come to this conclusion it is the state in which Coruscant is in.
A near pre-Ragnarok state if you could call it that, Ragnarok being, in the most simplified terms the end of the world. However, this is not just limited to Earth or Midgard as it was called, rather the end of Asgard itself and all the ruling powers that dwelled within. An interesting parallel that is not really seen in this is how they are both depicted as working societies, in Coruscants case; it is much like a democracy, which is indeed fleeting. In Asgard Odin technically rules over all matters, much like a democracy, however he does leave other gods or goddess to do the more menial of jobs that exist in Asgard, which of course makes Odin a dictator, something Coruscant becomes over time.
In Norse mythology Ragnarok is brought about by Surt, lord of the fire giants from the fire region known of Muspelheim and will lay waste to Asgard and Midgard. Later in the film the movie reaches it?s climax on the hellish planet Geonosis, this is almost a direct parallel to the battle that is fought is Muspelheim as the Norse gods and their slain warriors compiled by the Valkyries try to push the giants back. Geonosis and Muspelheim have many eerie similarities in that they both are very barren and are typically depicted with fire or the color red. Finally leading to the end of the film you can see the clone troops marching into transports with a very red sky as the backdrop now in Coruscant, again a parallel to Asgard during Ragnarok.
Referring back to the situation in general it may also be stated that like the gods of Asgard the Jedi really did not have any clue that they had an enemy on their own lines. In the scene where Palpatine is giving his speech to the rest of the representatives of him obtaining emergency powers the scene goes to Yoda and Mace talking about whether or not what is happening is indeed the right thing. In the case of Asgard it is Loki who brings about a terrible downfall to many a god in order to assume power within Asgard through trickery and deceit. In addition to this he also aids the fire giants just as Palpatine plays a dual role as Darth Sidious.
Whether it is the scene that seems inspired as a prelude to the coming destruction at the beginning or in the end where it seems like they are descending into the bowels of Muspelheim the parallels between Episode II and Norse mythology are strong and seem to play a strong role in its forging and symbolism together.


The Intellectaul Cuts in these films are awesome. In AOTC my favorite Intellectual Cut is when Anakin goes to the tusken camp, falls down, then it cuts to the massifs fighting for the bone agressively. Symbolizing his anger and rage. Another great one is when Obi wan is at Kamino and hes inspecting the clones in the corridor. They show the clones, they show the Boba Fett CLones (The Kids) with their blue suits and head sets. Then they cut to a red shirt from the older clone. But the first thing you see is read. So Kids Symbolize the future and when it cuts to the red(danger) we know the future is full of danger.

You cant forget the history aspect of these films too. I mean The rise of Palpatine is really close to how caeser, napolean and adolf hitler or hte miltarism in Japn in the 1930's came into power. they would turn to opportunitist dictators who promised easy answers. It's not the first time someone has done this. And the great thing About star wars is that the 2 tri

 

EmperorNemesis:

Ok, I don't quite follow you compleatly here... As I said before, I don't think Ani is a clone... However, I CAN see how Vader would become more like them... by donning the mask he loses his humanity....

 

I was thinking about this mise en scene. What this shot symbolizes.
[image=http://www.sgtfretsurfer.com/Grilled-Sarlacc/s/i/4047.jpg]

I dont know if its right but it can be debatable. Padme is on the left and c3po is on the right. This does symbolize is lack of space and closure. CLiegg just told him they better go indoors, its about his mom. And anakin knows somethings wrong. C3po is a key factor, c3po is a machine, and padme is on the other side. So it can symbolize that this is the start of anakin's transformation. This is where he will start heading towards the dark side and foreshadowing him being a machine from C3po. And with padme there, his diffuculty to control his emotions.

Also, right after this scene actually the next shot. we see Beru pouring a glass of red water or red something. Why did lucas put that there, it wasnt just for nothing.

[image=http://www.sgtfretsurfer.com/Grilled-Sarlacc/s/i/1115.jpg]

It was to symbolize that danger of the situation. And again, The color red. Showing anakins passion, emotion. that cut is important to symbolize anakins point of view.

 

Awesome, Drummer... I'll break that down a bit later (multitasking now), but thanks!

 

umm, looking at the very first post in this thread, some terms are used wrongly.

Immaculate conception does not refer to Jesus. It refers to the birth of Mary. She was conceived without the taint of original sin.

If you want to talk about Jesus and Anakin parallels, please, use the term virgin birth.

 

By the way, does anyone have any idea what crucifixion meant in the pagan Roman context? Why it would be chosen above one of their many other methods of execution?

<b>I believe the Romans learned of crucifixion from the Carthaginians. It was a toturous death that was reserved only for the lowest in society. Those with Roman citizenship could not be crucified.

 

Great thread, finally got all the way through it.

A couple of thoughts. Crucifixion, we don't know what that actually looked like. We have some idea about some forms of it, but Romans put a lot of thought into it,

St. Peter was crucified upside down. His brother, St. Andrew was crucified on a saltire cross, which you can see in the British and Scottish flag. An X shaped cross. Probably worse, but who knows?

You have to know that there is FILM imagery throughout these films.

I have always thought that QuiGonn's poncho in TPM reminded me not of Westerns, but of the slave costumes from Spartacus, particularly the big bulky poncho that Kirk Douglas wraps himself and the female star in. Grey, bulky homespun type cloth.

Check out that film to see those crucifixions. No nails in evidence, just rope. But the victims hanging from much smaller wood then we generally see.

Another image from another film. In Omen III The Final Conflict, there is a scene in which the AntiChrist goes to his crucifix. It is called a demonic cross, I believe, and the Jesus figure is draped over the cross in reverse, his body facing the poll, his head dangling over the crossbeam (It's like a capital T, not a small t, with a headpiece.)

The crucifixion in The Last Temptation of Christ is vastly different from any ever shown on film before. Willem Dafoe is contorted onto a tree.

There are cultural differences to Crucifixion. In one strain of Norse mythology, Odin was crucified onto the world tree for nine days.

Enough on the specifics of crucifixion. I think it was done to plant the idea, just in case people might miss the Pieta imagery. But that is quite blatant imagery, and you have to wonder about the meaning.

I never think about the positioning, but those who said the Pieta goes to the right, and Anakin and Shmi go to the left.

Latin terms that crossed over into heraldry bear noting. Things that go to the right go "Dexter."

Things that go to the left?

They go "sinister."

It is obviously the reverse image, and the reverse meaning of the Pieta (which means the Pity.)

No pity here. Anakin looks up with rage.

I saw a full size reproduction of the Pieta, and Mary is wearing a sash, which has words written on it.

No one believed Michaelangelo sculpted it, he just dumped it on a public square. But he snuck back to the scene one night and wrote on the sash, "Michaelangelo made me."

The signature flowed so well, people believed.

If Shmi has some kind of sash, I'd say that clinches the imagery. But it's obvious to me.

 

[In which DrEvazan expresses disagreement with the premise of the thread, and makes the observation that pieta imagery is used frequently in American cinema.]

You're trolling. I told LucasCop yesterday and I'll tell you today--I'm not putting up with it. THE END. -- JG

 

Amen.

Though I do find it interesting that people are seeing symbolism contrary to the gender of the symbol.

Christ=Man
Shmi=Woman

Besides, isn't Shmi already the Virgin Mary?

So Shmi's bound to a cross? That's standard torture procedure in Tusken culture , and an ideal position to put someone in if you want them to be uncomfortable.

 

Jedi_Waster and DrEvazan funny thing but I remember YodaJeff posting that if you don't see any Symbolism in the scene with Shmi or the movie not to post. This thread is not about what other motion pictures that scene was used in. This thread was started to talk about THE SYMBOLISM OF SHMI'S DEATH. It was then changed to talk about THE SYMBOLISM IN AOTC. I can't believe that people are trying so hard to talk this thread off topic. LET US TALK ABOUT THE SYMBOLISM. Posting things that have nothing to do with smybolism is off topic.



Though I do find it interesting that people are seeing symbolism contrary to the gender of the symbol.

So if I'm reading this right Jedi_Waster your calling the people who see smybolism blind. Do you see any symbolism at all? If not then please don't keep doing this. There are people that see symbolism in AOTC that's all they want to talk about. They don't want to keep talking about other motion pictures or the most cliched and most used images/shots in the history of cinema. Where here to talking about SYMBOLISM.

 

Yup, he sure did, anidan.

Yes, the symbol has been used a lot. Of course it has... and what does it mean, and why is it so powerful that directors feel a need to use it?

And the whole question is what the flip of positions means (the child holding the parent rather than vice-versa). The gender is irrelevant in that context.

Last warning: do not derail the conversation. This is not a basher thread (or a gusher thread). If you don't think there's symbolism, fine. Go start a thread on "When are symbols worn out and meaningless?"

 

if we acknowlede that there is indeed symbolism in AOTC (and the Shmi death scene), why cant we give our opinions of the use of said influence? or can we?

in truth virtually all movies have at least some sybolism. and fewer directors make it easier for the audience to identify said symbols than GL. not sure what the debate is about.