Discussion in 'Indianapolis, IN' started by Club_333, May 17, 2002.
not a single thing in it contradicts my theory that amidala & mon mothma are one & the same person!
except common sense
I will introduce the argument that Palpatine is a clone of(and controlled by) Darth Sidious, at the next meeting... ponder that for a minute, Pinky!
Well then I'll throw out my theory that it is Anakin who hides Luke on Tatoonie, giving Owen specific instructions to keep Luke away from Obi-Wan and (what's left of) the Jedi Order in order to protect Luke from them and himself (Anakin).
"Noooooo.... that's not true.... that's impossible!"
George - somebody in the Episode II Spoiler forum has a HUGE thread going about that very subject. It's really a great theory!!!
You know, Sebulba, that makes sense, in an odd sort of way... Maybe Anakin was unaware that Padme was carrying twins, what with him off being busy slaying Jedi and such.. but correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Episode III supposed to take place 6 months after Episode II? That would give Padme no time to crank out the kids...unless... LUKE IS A CLONE!! Of course! It all makes sense now! Leia is the natural child, that Vader never knows about, and Luke is the clone! Oh, what a tangled web of intrigue! I love this!
(and I think we've successfully hijacked this thread, too!)
Originally, Ep3 was supposed to take place 2 years after AOTC....however, in a recent interview GL thru out 4 years. Either way, plenty of time for a honeymoon to Viagra Falls.
My theory was completely abused and put thru many ringers before being dismissed in the Ep 3 forum. Just too many Ben Kenobi lines in the OT that didn't jive with it. Anyway, for some good bathroom reading, check this out: Contraian Speculation: What if it's Anakin that brings Luke to Tatoonie? ...beware though...it talks about the one scene that has been filmed for Episode 3.
Cool! 4 years would be better, on a symbolic level. Anakin would be 23ish years old, the same age Luke was in ROJ.
I had only heard the 2 year thing.
obi wan changes his name to ben.
anakin changes his name to darth vader.
someone gives luke to owen for safekeeping.
owen lies to luke about who and what his father was and how he "died."
amidala changes her name to mon mothma.
someone gives leia to bail organa for safekeeping.
her "very sad mother (who she thinks is her mother, possibly dorme)" dies.
the emperor, knowing that if he goes after mon amidala will incur vader's wrath, stays away from her.
darth vader= dark father
mon mothma= my mother
luke skywalker= lucas
quite frankly, mon mothma was never called by name in the movies nor was her supposed homeworld of chandrila. they are non canon. she is also one of the characters that lucas didn't want messed with or killed in the book line.
Padme is too beautiful to become Mon Mothma.
There. I said it!
C'mon - you know you were all thinking it...
Right on, Jedimama.
Remember a great of the truths we hold dear are from "a certain point of view". In all likelihood, Anakin that his family knew and loved does "die" during the clone war. In return, he evolves into the twisted human that is Darth Vader. Also, if you go to the credits of ROTJ, I am 99.9% certain that Mon Mothma will be listed as a member of the cast although I can't say for certain as it is still on VHS and I am reluctant to watch anything not on DVD for the last couple of years.
Sorry Anthony, I have to go with the group on this one. I think the odds of Mon Mothma being Padme are less than successfully negotiating an asteroid field.
But I have been known to make mistakes. From time to time.
I think Lucas is going to write himself into a corner. Episode III has to tie up all the loose ends, and answer alot of questions. If it doesn't then it'll be official - Lucas is suck ass storyteller. I know it's harsh but the whole saga has holes big enough to drive trucks through.
I'd like to know alot of questions. Who was the first Sith and why the hell does Palpatine want to control the galaxy anyway? What's his motive. You thought Anakin had some tramatic experiences, what the hell happened to Palpatine.
Why does Han Solo tell that guy on Hoth he'll see him in 'Hell' when Hell is more or less a religous term that wouldn't necessarily make sense for a galaxy far, far away in the past? Why does Han Solo call Jabba 'Human'? Why is 'Human' even a term in a galaxy far, far away in the past? Why is it that Lucas keeps adding more footage to the classic trilogy so we'll buy more versions of it? What species is Yoda? Who built the Death Star? Who designed it? Why does it take 20+ years to build the first DeathStar when they end up almost completing a second one in 3?
Now, all you about to answer...without the books, videogames and extraneous info from starwars.com, how many of these questions can you derive the answers to just from the films...........that's my point.
The Emperor keeps telling me I should understand at the end, but there are lots of problems. Hopefully Luke-us will throw me a bone and answer my 1,138 questions in Episode III: Return of the Sith
I love your idea Sebulba! And Obi-Wan is such a liar, it doesn't matter what he said in ANH.
"Who was the first Sith and why the hell does Palpatine want to control the galaxy anyway? What's his motive?"
While he could explain exactly what happened between the Sith and Jedi it's not necessary to this story. "At last we will reveal ourselves to the Jedi. At last we will have revenge." That line, coupled with "The Sith have been extinct for a millennia", tell us that the Jedi more than likely wiped out the Sith. Who the first Sith was doesn't matter in the same way that knowing who the first Jedi was doesn't matter.
Palpatine wants power and revenge. It's pretty simple motivation. The only one more common is love. Oh and it's just a movie.
"Why does Han Solo tell that guy on Hoth he'll see him in 'Hell' when Hell is more or less a religous term that wouldn't necessarily make sense for a galaxy far, far away in the past?"
Unless of course they believed in the same sort of religious ideals and theological structure that many of our own people believe in. Not uncommon by any means. There's also the fact that it is just a movie.
"Why does Han Solo call Jabba 'Human'? Why is 'Human' even a term in a galaxy far, far away in the past?"
Well, you can go with the obvious answer that Jabba was originally intended to be, and was, a human character interacting with him in the hanger. Or Han just felt like using a term that had obvious distate for Jabba and making a comparison between the two. Or you could remember that it's just a movie.
"Why is it that Lucas keeps adding more footage to the classic trilogy so we'll buy more versions of it?"
He's tying up loose ends and trying to make the penultimate edition of the films so that he can be done with it and move on to other projects. You don't have to buy it. He doesn't need your money. He's doing this for himself and the fans of the series that want to see the movies the way they are meant to be seen.
"What species is Yoda?"
Rick McCallum said just last week that this will be revealed in Episode III. Will it? Maybe. We'll just have to wait and see. If we don't then I'll have to refer you back to the fact that it's not important to the story either way and really doesn't need to be there. And, lest I forget, it's just a movie.
"Who built the Death Star? Who designed it? Why does it take 20+ years to build the first DeathStar when they end up almost completing a second one in 3?"
I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the Empire built the Death Star and that the Geonosians designed it. We don't know for sure yet but that was the impression I got from AOTC. We don't know whether they start building it right away or whether they wait for a while. We might see more of the Death Star but it's not necessary. We've seen the plans and we'll see the final product in ANH so we know what happens. Have you seen Contact? Perhaps they started building more than one at a time. Maybe the second death star was just started a bit later. Who knows? I am pretty sure we won't get an answer to that one. Oh..............right..............and it's just a movie.
I have to agree that Palpatine needs no particular motivation for wanting to rule the universe. There are examples ad nauseum in human history of people out for control of their villages, their countries, and pretty much any other territory they could get. These men (and they are usually men) did not necessarily have traumatic childhoods. They're just power-hungry. Such is the nature of humanity and life in general.
As for starting at the beginning, while the history of the Jedi and the Sith is fascinating, even I don't need every detail of it committed to film. I am fine with reading about it. I think even I might be bored by now if Lucas started at the very inception of everything. Yikes! I'm quite content to jump in in the middle. I didn't need to know what Romeo or Juliet ate for breakfast as children to enjoy their story once they met. (Ah, tragic tales of love....another reason I love 'Star Wars'.)
Anyway, I ramble. There are some questions I expect to have answered in the next movie, namely (for myself) who is Anakin's father and what happens to Padme as well as seeing the epic Anakin-Obi Wan duel. Outside of that, it's all icing on a cake I'm buying anyway.
Oh, and just for the sake of keeping on the topic of the thread, I doubt if Mon Mothma and Padme are the same person, but it's an interesting theory for certain. One never knows in this wacky galaxy we follow!
I have a little question/theory of my own:
Luke, in the beggining of ANH, lives with owen, whom he calls his UNCLE. But we know that Shimi never had any other children, except Anakin, seeing as she was a virgin. Or did she? I have 3 theories:
1. Ani read the AOTC book and tells me that Shimi marries. She and her husband could have had a son.
2. Owen is actually Shimi's husband, Luke's step-grandfather.
3. Owen is just some guy that took Luke in.
Shmi married a moisture farmer named Cliegg Lars. Owen was his son from a previous marriage. So technically he would be Luke's stepuncle.
"Now, all you about to answer...without the books, videogames and extraneous info from starwars.com, how many of these questions can you derive the answers to just from the films...........that's my point."
The Star Wars films ARE JUST FILMS...I realize that. I just wish they were less shallow. Sure you can throw a bad guy like Palpatine out there who wants to control everything, but without concrete motives and answers he becomes like every other movie badguy. I think Lucas is very passionate about his story. I'm just not convinced he's a very good storyteller, especially since he keeps going back and changing stuff. "Do or do not, there is no try" yet he keeps trying.
I get tired of people needing to have some backstory that Palpatine was abused as a child or that he grew up poor and that instilled this drive to the most powerful man in the universe. Evil in its purist form is evil that has no reason. It just is. A killer who kills for the hell of it. No rhyme, no reason. You can't see it coming. That is the scariest prospect you will ever encounter.
I've been working on a movie script off and on for several years. A horror movie about werewolves. In the same way that I've gone back and watched every Star Wars fan film ever made in order to figure out what cliches to avoid when we make one I have also gone back and watched as many horror films as I possibly can in order to do the exact same thing. Do you know what I've found? Evil is almost always explained. It's almost always given a face. It's almost always made quantifiable and tangible in it's explanation and, to me, it is always made less powerful. In my mind the most effective horror films that I've ever seen have never explained why the things happen and they have never gone to lengths to come up with some pat answer for the phenomena that occurs. That is what I'm going to do with my horror film and that is, to an extent, what Lucas is doing here.
Even better though, he's already given you the answer. I take this not from any EU book, comic, placemat, paper towel, Burger King glass, or tube of toothpaste. This comes from the man himself. Greed and lust for power. That is motivation enough. Revenge is something he used to inspire Maul, I don't think he really cares all that much. I don't think being a Sith means all that much to him, it is just a means to an end. He wants to control everything and everyone.
Giving motivation, however misguided, makes him someone you can sympathize with on some small level. Leaving him as he is, a malevolent and destructive force in the universe, makes him the ultimate bad guy. Vader is who we should feel for, not Palpatine. That is the whole point of not only the prequels but the entire saga. Vader met the ultimate darkness and it engulfed him. Palpatine is that darkness. In order for him to remain "the ultimate darkness" we must not see a ray of light.
Lucas is working in archetypes. Expect nothing but broad strokes.
Thank you, YodaFett, for clearing that up for me.
Palpatine is greed and evil distilled. He wasn't abused as a child, he didn't have poor roots. He got a taste of power, is just consumed by the desire to control and rule everything. All means are justified to satisfy his wants. His delving into the Dark Side fuels this hunger for ultimate power, in a vicious cycle of 'everything still isn't enough'. He fully embraces and relishes this, it isn't like he wants to chill out and retire to a quiet nerf farm somewhere, to watercolor and do needlepoint. He lives for the manipulation and destruction of others. I mean, think about it. He thinks he has Vader willing to kill Luke, if Luke doesn't want to serve him.. Sick twisted ****.. There ain't no sympathy for Palpatine.
I agree George. I think to apply real world motives in some "talk-show, tell me about your mother" attempt to understand SW characters is flawed. They are all symbolic, archetypes of common emotions, personalities and fears. SW is mythology & history retold with lasers and spaceships. What makes palpatine evil, well what makes yoda good? What makes Mace such a bad@$$. For that matter what made Ceasar, Napoleon, & Hitler make power plays. The story that AOTC is making, has played out countless time in our own history in coups, assasinations & ussurpations of power.
To try to apply our 2003 American sentimentalities to the star wars characters is to limit them in time & location. SW is timeless and just as popular around the world because of it's basic universal truths. Did GL try to explain what made han such a rogue, no and we all loved him just the same as kids.
If you want to understand SW characters do not look at the litteral, look at the symbolic, at what they psychologically represent in all man at an innate level.
Just my 2 cents.
A lot of you have touched on the thing that I am enjoying most about the prequel trilogy. Anakin is walking down the same path as Luke did in the OT. There lives are incredibly similar and they both live through a great deal of pain and hardship on the road to growing up and becoming a Jedi. The difference of course is that Anakin and Luke make different decisions that impact their life.
Umm....can I go on a rant here for a minute...?
I for one am sick of people whining about their life - how hard it was, how we should have understanding for those who have suffered and then done wrong themselves. It's crap IMHO and the SW films are proving that to a generation raised on the "tell me about your Mother" psycho-babble.
It's frightening how much kids are influenced by friends and TV and film. My son (9 years old)informed me that Anakin had the right to kill the Tuskens because of what they did to his mom. I tried explaining what was really going on, but my son cannot seem to grasp the basic concept that Anakin was becoming what it was he hated, that his actions were wrong despite what had happened to his mother. I think these films are just what a lot of kids need right now. Kids - and some adults, too - need to realize that
it doesn't matter what kind of hand you are dealt in life, you still have the choice to allow yourself to become angry and bitter or to turn your hardships into something postive.
But I'm going off on a tangent big time here, I know. I'm in that kind of mood today.
I like the simplicity of Star Wars. I couldn't care less what Palpy's motives are. He's cruel, he's evil, and that fall down the shaft in ROJ was far too nice of an end for him.
But that is my moi-moi humble opinion.
"Evil in its purist form is evil."
I think there's alot of evidence to support that Evil does indeed spawn from somewhere.
To just say evil is evil seems to be a copout in writing style. If you don't have to explain something, then you come up with ideas that just don't fit into the whole. By the time the work is finished you have a collection of stories that don't fit together.
I think the Star Wars Saga is good overall, but it's just not great. The fact that things don't have a plausible reason behind them is the biggest problem with movies today Star Wars Saga included. It's not hard to come up with a believable why, I just wish Lucas would. We're finally seeing how Anakin turns to Darth Vader after 25 years of waiting. That's where Lucas's focus is because really that's what this whole story is about. He's said it himself. What I don't think he's doing tho is giving enough credit and explanation to the world and events surrounding.
By Lucas creating Episode I, II, and III in the first place he's trying to come up with someting that's a little more then just "evil is evil" in Anakins case. I just wish he'd extend that to Palpatine or the Sith in general.
I'm just looking for some substance, some real character development, some actual quality storytelling that does the loose threads of the Star Wars nicely. Episode II is a step in the right direction, but Lucas has only one more movie to make it all work.
In the next few years he "is" in fact going to add more to the 'classic' trilogy so I think he knows he's writing himself into a corner and is attempting to plug the plot holes with 'Special Editions'.