Saga The story versus the story telling...

Discussion in 'Star Wars Saga In-Depth' started by DarthPoppy, Dec 22, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. TOSCHESTATION Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 17, 2003
    star 4
  2. drg4 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 30, 2005
    star 4
    ToschiStation: I can see that you nabbed a sneak-peek of the first five minutes of The Empire Strikes Back. Well, I just got back from a press screening, and I have to warn you: You ain't seen nothin' yet. By the time the credits roll, our beloved Ben Kenobi will have transmutated into a capricious, duplicitous, flat-out lying piece of...

    Trust me, don't finish Empire.
  3. Cryogenic Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 20, 2005
    star 4
    [face_laugh] [face_laugh] [face_laugh]
  4. TOSCHESTATION Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 17, 2003
    star 4
    Ben lying about what happened to Luke's father doesn't automatically entail him "lying" about his own Jedi training....nice deflection, though. [face_shame_on_you]
  5. Cryogenic Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 20, 2005
    star 4
    It opens a door, though. A huge, tremendous blast door. A whole galaxy of blast door. And really, what is worse here? Lying to or misleading someone about your own training purely on the basis of who trained you, or deceiving someone about their own father and last remaining parent and then using that false impression you create in their head as a carrot to get them to take up your cause ("idealistic crusade"), without them knowing or you having the balls to come clean in time for them to discover they've been tricked? Obi-Wan's "certain point of view" dialogue is just icing on a rotten cake.
  6. TOSCHESTATION Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 17, 2003
    star 4
    The point wasn't what is "worse", but what's the rationale behind taking the stance that Ben/Obi-Wan lied about 'everything' in the saga. (well?)

    And, specifically, I'm looking for answers* to the objections that I raised to d_arblay.

    *arguments please...no more deflections (drg4's humorous posts notwithstanding :p)

    speaking of:

    ESB didn't make him the "dirty-liar", ROTJ did!!!! :eek: remember? :p[face_laugh][face_whistling];)



  7. Cryogenic Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 20, 2005
    star 4
    There's no rationale because that's a strawman. [face_shame_on_you]

    And you know you won't find them. "There is no 'why'". [face_shame_on_you]

    Well, my argument would be that Qui-Gon is the "missing link" of the saga (or of Jedi tutelage); and Lucas contrived the PT, ultimately, so that it would come across that way.

    Lucas was pretty resolute on having Vader be Luke's father, or *a* persona of Luke's father, in TESB. TESB made Obi-Wan the "dirty liar", not ROTJ. As I conveyed in my last post, ROTJ merely tidied up the stitching.
  8. Darth_Pevra Chosen One

    Member Since:
    May 21, 2008
    star 5
    Yes. Instead of a carricature of gramps he suddenly becomes a darker and more three-dimensional charakter. I agree it was a retcon of a kind but a pretty good one. It added depth to Kenobis charakter.
  9. TOSCHESTATION Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 17, 2003
    star 4
    It may be a 'straw-man', but it was used nonetheless by someone else in this thread (it wasn't me)*...it was to that person, primarily, that I directed the above question.

    *Unless for some reason, you fault me for the fact that a "straw-man" - though a humorous one - was the response that I immediately received, instead something that actually addressed what me and d_arblay were discussing.



    Two things:

    1. It's not relevant to bring Qui-Gon into it, when my question ultimately was: "regarding the OT , what would make anyone think that Yoda wasn't THE Jedi Master who instructed Obi-Wan, but was just ONE OF SEVERAL?"

    2. If Lucas was contriving the PT to make that point, why did he have Qui-Gon as Obi-Wan's student , instead of his master, in the first draft of TPM? That would tell me that the 'contrivance' came later on...but you seem to be positing some sort of "Jedi (Master) Gap" that has existed since the OT. [face_thinking]


    1. Yes, yes. I was after all, having fun at drg4's 'expense'...;)

    2. Although true, the audience at the time didn't know for sure either way, and COULD (and some did) rationalize that Vader was lying (or that both were telling the truth, in some fashion). I fully realize that this audience-perspective hindsight about TESB doesn't mean that Lucas "didn't know" at the time of making ESB (the evidence says that he DID know, at any rate).
  10. Cryogenic Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 20, 2005
    star 4
    Er...

    I've searched the entire thread for the string "everything", which does, indeed, appear a few times, but in the context of this Obi-Wan discussion, you're the first person to have used it.

    1) It's relevant because Lucas has hinged off of Obi-Wan's line. In other words, I was acknowledging that TESB implies Obi-Wan had only one previous "Jedi Master".

    2) I said: "Lucas contrived the PT, ultimately" -- as in, eventually; not right away. I'm aware of TPM's (and, for that matter, the PT's) developing nature.

    1) I know you were having "fun", but you kinda believe it, too, don't ya?

    2) From my point of view, and knowing what I know about Lucas, it was more or less set in stone when Vader told Luke to "search (his) feelings"; and by virtue of the fact it came at the end of TESB, positioned as an intensely dramatic -- i.e., truthful -- revelation. Arguing other possibilities is just casuistry, IMO.
  11. TOSCHESTATION Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 17, 2003
    star 4
    The implication by drg4 was:

    since Obi-Wan lied about Vader killing Luke's father, then he also 'lied' about Yoda being THE (and not A) Jedi Master who taught him. As such, the usage of the word "everything" is irrelevant.


    Good. However, I'm not sure that d_arblay is aware.


    Well, yeah...as much as drg4 'kinda' believes that Obi-Wan lying about Luke's father being killed means he also 'lied' about Yoda being his only teacher.

    Iow, not really.


    I left my quote in above* so that everyone could see that I made it clear that the 'other possibilities' were just based on the audience's lack of future knowledge, and not based on what Lucas/Kurtz "originally wanted", as some have argued (not here). So yes, I know that it was 'set in stone' (at least by the second draft), and not 'postponed' until ROTJ. And I'm also going by the actual written evidence from that period to argue as such.

    *with added emphases
  12. Cryogenic Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 20, 2005
    star 4
    No, it's most relevant. You put it in quotation marks/inverted commas as if someone had said it; but no-one had said it. Perhaps you didn't intend to confuse, but it was at least a little misleading.

    And drg, I think, was saying that whatever else Obi-Wan may or may not have lied about pales into insignificance next to his lie/truth-distorting about Luke's parentage; and the manner in which he used that misinformation to his advantage.

    So, yes, to return to my original remark, what Obi-Wan said about Vader opens a door. If Obi-Wan could tell a highly selective truth there, it's probable he was telling one or two others, too; y'know, deception loves deception and is cognate with itself; which is what we now have to contend with; again, such as Lucas ultimately contrived the PT to have this (concomitant) effect (where Obi-Wan's mentorship was/is ultimately concerned).
  13. Arawn_Fenn Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jul 2, 2004
    star 7
    Which would be similar to the belief that Obi-Wan lying about Luke's father being killed means he also "lied" about Vader's age.
  14. drg4 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 30, 2005
    star 4
    Nah. It's just my way of saying: "A little perspective, please." After that old coot lied to his charge about the identity of his father--setting the poor kid up for a seismic mind-screw on Cloud City--why should anyone give two figs about anything as inconsequential as the Qui-Gon discrepancy?

    It's akin to shrugging off a politician's war crimes, while obsessing over his sexual indiscretions.
  15. TOSCHESTATION Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 17, 2003
    star 4
    I really don't - or I should say, I don't think Ben "lied" about Qui-Gon - I merely think that Qui-Gon being his master is an example of a writer not following his own already established story set-up.



    Except that I don't say such a thing. Besides ( granting for the sake of argument that "young Jedi" = early 20's guy), he can't be "lying" about Vader's "age", because:

    1. when he said it, Vader and Annikin/Anakin were two different people in the story.

    2. he never again referenced Vader's 'age' after that, especially after Vader and Anakin's characters had merged together.


  16. Cryogenic Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 20, 2005
    star 4
    So, wait...

    You've seen this little movie called "Star Wars"?

    And you've seen the one after it called "The Empire Strikes Back"?

    [face_plain]
  17. TOSCHESTATION Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 17, 2003
    star 4
    I really don't - or I should say, I don't think Ben "lied" about Qui-Gon - I merely think that Qui-Gon being his master is an example of a writer not following his own already established story set-up.



    Except that I don't say such a thing.

    Besides ( granting for the sake of argument that "young Jedi" = early 20's guy), he can't be "lying" about Vader's "age", because:

    1. when he said it, Vader and Annikin/Anakin were two different people in the story.

    2. he never again referenced Vader's 'age' after that, especially after Vader and Anakin's characters had merged together.


    edit to add:



    I amend my above quote to say:

    "I merely think that Qui-Gon being his (Obi-Wan's) master is an example of a writer GRATUITOUSLY not following his own pre-established story set-up."

    In contrast, I don't think that there was anything similarly 'gratuitous' about making Vader into Luke's father (or the same person as his father).

    Lest you think it's just a problem with the PT for me, I think that making Leia Luke's sister in ROTJ was also a gratuitous change, or at least a lazy way-out of 'solving' the romance 'love-triangle' aspect of the OT. [face_peace]

    and if I may add, I don't see what the 'problem' was with TPM's first draft for which the solution required switching Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon's roles in regard to the master-student relationship.
  18. Cryogenic Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 20, 2005
    star 4
    Fair enough.

    I've already been over my own thoughts on the Qui-Gon thing (i.e., I don't see it as gratuitious, but I see where you're coming from). No need for me to say any more about that and brow-beat you or anyone else. It's so subjective that there'd be no point. And it really isn't needed.

    On the twin thing: I can kind of agree. ROTJ does feel, in some senses, like a "race to the finish"; to me, anyway. I always liked the twin revelation, however, from the first time I saw ROTJ. It's only later -- perhaps with all the drubbing it's received -- I became a little cynical. But I think the PT has given it added poetry. Quite considerably, for me (i.e., the close of ROTS).

    Yes, in the main, and although this really goes without saying, I enjoy the saga as it now stands. :)
  19. Arawn_Fenn Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jul 2, 2004
    star 7
    Completely irrelevant. Vader and Anakin being separate people has been non-canon since TESB/ROTJ, so he "can" be lying about Vader's age for no reason at all ( from the PT we know he is not ). You act as if ANH is in a separate continuity from the other films. It is not. The TESB/ROTJ reveal retroactively applies to ANH as well. Face it: you lost Anakin and Vader being separate people when TESB came out, and you're not getting it back.

    So what? Is this some kind of newly-invented imaginary rule that says lies must be repeated a certain number of times to be actually considered lies?

    Not in this thread, at any rate:

  20. TOSCHESTATION Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jan 17, 2003
    star 4

    If you don't mind, Arawn, I'd like to continue this in the "NEW Official Hayden vs. Shaw" thread.....
  21. CoolyFett Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Feb 3, 2003
    star 4
    Here is the easy fix. Watch the ANH & ROTS in one sitting. Watch a PT & OT movie in one sitting they will all start to gel. Once you see all the movies numerous times equally you wont notice any differences because after a while you'll be immersed in the total story. Watch all the odd numbers....then on another day watch all the even numbers. Mix it up.
  22. CoolyFett Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Feb 3, 2003
    star 4
    This post is probably the most fair criticism of the PT on this entire forum....nothing trollish about it at all. The PT covers 13 years the OT only covers 4 years...even though there is 19 years between ANH & ROTS, both movie fit well together GL was really focused on CONNECTing AOTC & ANH. He did a good job at that. With ROTS being the fan favorite of the PT, ESB the fan favorite of the OT and ANH being the one that stared it all...those 3 films are the cream of the series. If I had to watch a trilogy?? It would be 3 4 & 5. EASY.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.