Full Series The Clone Wars: Episode 217: Bounty Hunters Discussion Thread (Spoilers Allowed)

People keep saying these are not "bounty hunters". How are they NOT bounty hunting?

 

WedgeWalker: I stand corrected, I do now rememeber Obi-Wan's suspicion of the farmers.

What exactly did Obi-Wan say about helping the farmers? I recall a lot of "we can't help them"

And how would being a Traviss fan make my opinion more justified?

 

Bounty Hunter n.
1. One who pursues a criminal or fugitive for whom a reward is offered.

Mercenary n.
1. One who serves or works merely for monetary gain; a hireling.
2. A professional soldier hired for service in a foreign army.

Bodyguard n.
1. A person or group of persons, usually armed, responsible for the safety of one or more other persons.


Where would you fit Sugi's band? Out of those three options, certainly not the first one.

 

Bounty hunting? That was certainly not present in the episode. You are confusing that term with "bounty hunter." The episode did not show these "bounty hunters" bounty hunt at all. They weren't hunting down a bounty, they were protecting or acting as bodyguards, which isn't bounty hunter-like at all.

 

How are they bounty hunting?

 

What you don't seem to recall is his explanation of why they can't help them.

You should read some of her books and her view of the Jedi.

 

Again, you're looking short term. He was looking long term. He's saying "can you help us in the short term so we can do this important thing that will help you in the long term?" That's different.

But, did you notice that in that very act he also tried to help the farmers? Kenobi said he'd pay Hondo more than he'd get selling the farmers' crop. He was both negotiating for a way off the planet, and for the farmers to be left alone.

But, the Jedi didn't have the authority, legal or moral, to do such a thing. Yes, the Jedi are "look at the big picture" people. But they also don't seem to be (by in large anyway) "the ends justify the means" people. Killing people who aren't enemy combatants and aren't at the moment doing anything illeagal would be wrong. So even if it would help the Jedi, it wouldn't be allowed.

1. Alexrd pointed out very well that you appear to be splitting hairs here regarding your statements about Obi-Wan's view of the farmers.

2. If he has some disdain for those who live a life motivated by greed and not morality, compassion, or honor, how's that bad? He still needs to have compassion ("unconditional love") for them. And I believe he does. But he can look down on their profession. Love the sinner, hate the sin, as people sometimes say in the real world. And you seem to be ignoring the fact that he is suspicious of them initially because they appear to be "extorting farmers" (his words). He is concerned about the innocent.

3. Regarding the semantics of what to call these people: By the reasoning you use then a journalist who is between jobs, and is doing something else that is related but not identical to journalism, ceases to be a journalist. And it's incorrect for anyone to call that person a journalist. If you want to go that direction, it's your choice. But, and this is just how it feels to me, it seems like you're just wanting to hold on to a criticism (regardless of how small, or objectively true) because you want to, not because that's where the truth is leading you.

4. One more thing: Obi-Wan, who you seem to dislike, actually refers to them as mercenaries. The term you like. It's the chief farmer who first calls them bounty hunters. (My guess would be Kenobi sees them acting more like mercenaries. Figures that's what they ware. Then the chief farmer, knowing who he hired, informs them that they are in fact bounty hunters...despite the nature of their current job.)

Does he help them fight (which you denied earlier, by the way, but are now acknowledging) only because his original plan was unworkable? Yes. But since he explicitly said he wanted to help the farmers, and since both the solution he originally wanted and the solution he's forced into both are designed to help the farmers, I don't see how this is such a big deal. He wanted to help them long te

 

Cos they are being paid by the farmers to defend them.

 

That's not bounty hunting.

Edit: Sorry, corrected.

 

And that's bounty hunting?

 

Of course it is! You cant see that?

 

Allow me to correct myself, that's not bounty hunting.
Bounty hunting would mean that a bounty hunter would take a mission from his employer and to hunt down their target and either bring him or her back, depending on what the employer wants. In the end, the bounty hunter will get payed. The payment is the "bounty" that was placed on the target's head.

Sugi's band of mercenaries are not bounty hunters, as far as I'm aware of.

 

I was just thinking...

The drama about Obi-Wan thinking big picture and not feeling it wise to drop everything and help the farmers with the pirate problem when he needs to remember the CIS is the bigger threat...

This kinda goes back to what the newsreel in the film suggested, and Satine said (as well as the Filoni, I think), that the Jedi aren't able to be peacekeepers since they are busy fighting a war.

We as an audience want these Knights to, when they come upon people in a little village being opressed, stand up for those who can't stand up for themselves. I mean, that's what a Knight does (even Michael Knight). We want Kenobi to be all about helping (or at least I do).

But the practical reality is that he's now a general, and has to think of things from a general's perspective. A good Knight would think long term anyway, but with the war there are way more long term consequences to deal with. And, given that it was his mission as a General to deal with the CIS threat there, he has to be the one who's responsibility it is to deal with it. He doesn't have the 'luxury' anymore of just being a Knight.

That seems to be the problem the Jedi Order faces. Just the fact that there's a war would complicate things if they were just doing their regular job. But it's more than that. The fact is they don't even get to do their regular job as much these days, since they are now forced to be Generals and Commanders in that war.


Some of us are sympathetic to that awkward position they are in. Some aren't. But I think we all have to admit, they are in an awkward position.

 

Again: Bounty hunter - One who pursues a criminal or fugitive for whom a reward is offered.

Sugi's band pursue nobody. There's no reward on Hondo's head. They just act as hired mercs or bodyguards for the village.

 

see above post. But a Bounty Hunter is not limited to only that, surely.

 

It's true, they are basically guns for hire in this episode, not bounty hunters, but in a lot of the old Westerns bounty hunters were often hired to do other types of work as needed. So they could still be bounty hunters but just picked up a little extra work.

Kind of weird that they called the episode bounty hunters, though.

 

Pretty much the entire season 2 featured no bounty hunts.
The tagline for the season should have been "Rise of the mercenaries" or something similar.

 

Yes, a bounty hunter can operate as a bodyguard or merc at times, just like an architect can design a logo or something. However, bodyguarding is NOT bounty hunting, and Sugi's band could very well not be bounty hunters and nothing would change.

The only examples in the series that actually approach "true" bounty hunting are Cad Bane going after Bolla Ropal and the Force-sensitive babies.

 

The episode's title would make no sense.

 

We gonna have to agree to disagree here. But a "Bounty Hunter" is clearly not limited to someone going after a prisoner. Sure thats what it means in ESB. But by definition a "Bounty" is a reward for a service, normally a payment. How is that ONLY applicable to capturing a prisoner. It really isnt! Besides it seems Lucas and Filoni dont agree with you either. Have a look at a dictionary, you cant really dispute what one says, can you?

 

It's not only in ESB; it seems you're unfamiliar with the EU. A bounty is a reward, but it's a mark that once placed on a target's head. A bounty hunter would be employed to hunt down the target and do whatever the employer wants. The payment is the bounty that was placed on the target's head.

A bounty hunter may do other things to gain credits, but again, as I was saying, it's very un-bounty hunter like. They specialize in "bounty hunting," not personal bodyguards.

 

Holy guacamole folks


As to whether they were bounty hunting in this episode, it clearly hinges on how one defines bounty. Some people want to define the term narrowly, as a technical term meaning the reward paid for apprehending or killing a person (criminal, ex-wife, etc.). That is a valid dictionary definition. Others want to define the term more broadly, meaning any reward or premium for something done. That also is a valid dictionary definition. It has been demonstrated a few posts up. For further proof: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/bounty

So, using one definition they aren't. Using another definition they are. But since both definitions are valid, this debate is invalid. Neither side is objectively right or objectively wrong. It's a matter of semantics, and either definition is right. Thus both sides are right, and both sides are wrong. If you want to continue arguing you should be arguing that people should use the term "bounty" in the way you do. You can have that argument if you like. But neither side will have any real proof.


But here's the thing: To solve the question of whether or not they should be called bounty hunters, we don't need to come to agreement on what "bounty" means. What their occupation is does not depend solely on what they are doing for the couple of days of their lives that we see them. It is possible for them to be bounty hunters, and yet at the moment not be hunting bounty. They could be between bounty hunting jobs. Acting as mercenaries or guns for hire to make a little cash to get by.

So, what evidence do we have about their lives outside of this episode? Not much. But the chief farmer, who hired them, and knows who he hired, calls them bounty hunters. That, at least to me, suggests they are bounty hunters.

In the end, I'm going to refer to them as bounty hunters, since...
1) Depending on definition, what they are doing in this ep can be considered bounty hunting.
2) We don't know what the nature of their usual work is outside this episode (it could be bounty hunting in the tradtional limited sense)
3) A character who knows their occupation refers to them as bounty hunters.


Those of you complaining can continue to complain if you wish. It's your right. You can criticize the writers and PR people for disappointing you with pre-season talk of lots of bounty hunters but only giving you a few 'mercenaries' instead (Cad Bane, Cato whats-her-head, these four). You can criticize the writers for not using the definition of 'bounty' that you prefer.

But of all the things to blow a gasket about...

 

You are applying this meaning in a very limited way. I am sure the Bounty Hunters in Star Wars were influenced by Bounty Hunters in Westerns like the Leone ones (as many other parts are). In these movies Bounty Hunters are seen performing all sorts of acts to secure the payment. Bounty Hunters are literally Reward/Payment Seekers, whatever the act is, they are seeking a payment. If that is bodyguarding or capturing people, its all performing a service for a reward.

BTW you claim they clearly ARE Mercenaries. They are the same thing! Since you are suggesting a contrast would you care to tell me what a difference is?

 

You're completely misunderstanding me. I'm going to have to drop out of this conversation, as it's going absolutely nowhere. Clearly, you may think there are different meanings as to what a bounty hunter is, but I have to go by what the EU shows.