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

Saga Unexplained errors or oversights??

Discussion in 'Star Wars Saga In-Depth' started by daveeek, Jun 22, 2011.

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

    TOSCHESTATION Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jan 17, 2003
    Also known as, "putting the cart before the horse".



    The 'supporting evidence' is the fact that at no point during the conception/production of the OT was a specific mechanism* proffered as an 'explanation' for the ubiquity of the Skywalker family in the saga. But then again, no explanation was needed. The audience was meant to accept it. Just like no explanation was given as to why ALL of the Jedi were gone from the galaxy EXCEPT 'one' (ie Ben/Obi-Wan Kenobi, SW), or 'two' (ie Yoda, TESB).

    *that is, unless one counts "Skywalker SR. had offspring who survived into adulthood" as that evidence. Speaking of 'Skywalker' and 'offspring', from the second draft of SW, there was an ancient man called "Skywalker" - who could "hear" the force "talking to him" (!) - fathered many children who became devotees of the "Ashla" or good-side of the force, and their descendants became the Jedi. However... it was still never explained what was so special about this "Skywalker" in the first place that the force would talk to him!


    "Why would the Force allow only two Jedi to survive the purge? And why Obi-Wan and Yoda, over other candidates?"



     
  2. Arawn_Fenn

    Arawn_Fenn Chosen One star 7

    Registered:
    Jul 2, 2004
    AFAIK Lucas never expressed actual support for the theory of Force nepotism in any era, including before the PT, but saying "ask Lucas" isn't an argument regardless of that fact.

    A lack of evidence is not supporting evidence. By its very nature, the "just because" theory is based on no evidence at all, which makes it less than compelling. Something that happens for a reason is better than something that happens "just because".

    You're not talking about the Soresu master - the "greatest of the Jedi" by Vader's estimation - and the "most devastatingly powerful foe the darkness had ever known" ( AKA the Jedi with the next highest midichlorian count after Anakin ) by any chance, are you?

    [ Only two, eh? [face_whistling][face_skull]:eek: But at least they're not related as far as we know... then you'd have that still unexplained and inconsistent Force nepotism thing again. And who said that the Force must "allow" everything that happens? ]
     
  3. TOSCHESTATION

    TOSCHESTATION Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jan 17, 2003
    "Putting the cart before the horse", in this instance refers to citing Lucas' "answer=midi-chlorians" as though he had the midi-chlorian concept in 1975 and that it became the sole impetus behind his decision to focus the story on the Skywalker family.


    But when the 'supporting evidence' of midi-chlorians happens to be in the last made movies of the series, the lack of evidence - which you call the "just because" theory - from the first three movies IS compelling.


    That may be, but when the 'reason' in question comes about years after the fact (ie the OT), it's at best an 'explanation' divorced from the original context, and thus remains an ad-hoc reason.



    (snips EU nonsense)

    Only "two", if one doesn't count Vader as a 'Jedi' by the time of the OT....


    How is that any less compelling or 'worse' than the Force being a convenient* deus-ex-machina?

    *this must be that vaunted Force/Jedi religion 'realism' again...[face_whistling]
     
  4. Arawn_Fenn

    Arawn_Fenn Chosen One star 7

    Registered:
    Jul 2, 2004
    Isn't there a source which says that he did? But the point is that he didn't explain it one way or another, making any theory only an assumption on the part of viewers.

    Calling that "EU nonsense" is kind of funny, given that it's a combination of information from only three sources: the ANH novel, the ROTS novel which was line-edited by Lucas, and TPM itself. Snipped or not, it is all consistent with the films. The films do not prove that Obi-Wan and Yoda are the only Jedi who survived the purge, nor that they could not have survived without Force favoritism. Their survival would reflect their own skills and other factors not indicative of special treatment by the Force.

    Because it's unnecessary and is an externally imposed interpretation with dubious logical implications.
     
  5. TOSCHESTATION

    TOSCHESTATION Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jan 17, 2003
    You're right. Rinzler's Making of Star Wars - in the "Lucas Expands His Universe" section - mentions (to LFL Vice-President (?) Carol Titleman/Wikarska) midi-chlorians, and this was in 1977 no less. However, the context in which he mentions it shows it to be an addendum*, and thus not the driving force (no pun intended) for constructing the story in which the Starkiller/Skywalker family would be prominently featured. ROTJ, by itself, with it's "The Force is strong in my family" aspect doesn't really change things all that much, imo. After all, even with Luke's father/Anakin = Vader, Luke is still the son of a Force user, like before.

    *not only does he say that certain creatures ** are known to have more midis in their cells, in the next line he goes on to say that "anyone" could learn to use the force, provided it would take years to master:

    "The Force is a perception of the reality that exists around us. You have to come to learn it. It's not something you just get. It takes many, many years."

    also,

    "Anyone who studied and worked hard could learn it."


    **more: It is said that certain creatures are born with a higher awareness of the Force than humans ."



    The ROTS novel I have to read again. The ANH novel? I'm not sure that I follow. How does all of those sources show Vader's awareness of other Jedi surviving the Purge? And, is this proclamation by Vader made by the time/era of ANH , in which most of the last vestiges of the Jedi were said to be gone?



    The films (the OT at least) don't 'prove' it, but as far as the narratives in question are concerned, they certainly make the assumption that Obi-Wan and Yoda are the only Jedi who survived the purge***. No doubt that skills and other factors would be in play, but "Force favoritism" was not meant to be an actual 'theory' that I'm claiming, but a corollary to the notion/assumption that, barring midi-chlorian based determinism, the prominence of the Skywalkers in the saga would be due to 'Force favoritism/nepotism'. Though, I don't see what would be so 'problematic' about such a notion.



    Because it's unnecessary and is an externally imposed interpretation with dubious logical implications.[/quote]
     
  6. TOSCHESTATION

    TOSCHESTATION Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jan 17, 2003
    Part II/edit:

    Right. However, your implication was that we should take Lucas' endorsement of midi-chlorians as the 'definitive' answer, and even beyond that, as the reason/explanation behind the OT's depiction of Jedi and the Skywalkers (iow, as the cause of said depiction, instead of being the result of it).



    The ROTS novel I have to read again. The ANH novel? I'm not sure that I follow. How do all of those sources show Vader's awareness of other Jedi (besides Ben and Yoda) surviving the Purge? And, is this proclamation by Vader made by the time/era of ANH , in which most of the last vestiges of the Jedi were said to be gone? As for the ANH novel: if you mean this - "With the Jedi Knights disbanded, disorganized, or dead, there were few to oppose Vader. Today they are all but extinct" - I'm not sure how that proves your point.


    The films (the OT at least) don't 'prove' it, but as far as the narratives in question are concerned, they certainly make the assumption that Obi-Wan and Yoda are the only Jedi who survived the purge***. No doubt that skills and other factors would be in play, but "Force favoritism" (re: Ben and Yoda alone surviving the Purge) was not meant to be an actual 'theory' that I'm claiming, but a corollary to the notion/assumption that, barring midi-chlorian based determinism, the prominence of the Skywalkers in the saga would be due to some bizarre 'Force favoritism/nepotism'. Further, I don't see what would be so 'problematic' about such a notion. After all, it appears that a 'chosen people/family' status for the Starkillers/Skywalkers seems to go back the second draft of SW, yet no concept on par with midi-chlorians was submitted in order to explain that phenomenon (though there was the whole Kaiburr Crystal thing).


    ***interestingly, in the same Rinzler/MOSW/Carol Titleman source, Lucas implies that "there may be more (Jedi left in the galaxy)" by the time of Star Wars. However, this is perfectly explainable considering the circumstances. Lucas' "there may be more" comment comes in the late summer of '77, by which time the movie had been in the public, and as the movie showed, he had Obi-Wan killed in the story, instead of surviving for the duration of the movie and for potential sequels, as was the case earlier. And though he still had the option of keeping Obi-Wan in the story as a disembodied Force voice, he was probably thinking of introducing another Jedi teacher in place of Ben. Lo and behold, this is where Yoda's character comes in. There's also the potential for spin-off material with that quote/comment as well.



    But the "midis-did-it" theory is an equally externally imposed interpretation - Lucas' endorsement of said theory doesn't render such judgement invalid (actually, it sort of reinforces that judgement). As for the "dubious logical implications", the Force as convenient-deus-ex-machina has it's fair share, if we're "counting points".


    Overall, I guess what I'm saying is that the midi-chlorians are currently being invoked to explain something (perta
     
  7. Arawn_Fenn

    Arawn_Fenn Chosen One star 7

    Registered:
    Jul 2, 2004
    Yes, the Force being passed down in a bloodline, which is deterministic and fits with midichlorians. This being necessarily for "no reason" or "mystical nepotism" is still an extraneous interpretation.

    That's clearly your assumption, but how do you claim to know the assumption of the narrative? In fact, by your own admission, the situation as envisioned by Lucas was different:

    That's more Jedi plural, so he specifically leaves the door open to there being others out there. And this is after the film was released, so it represents his assumption during the OT period rather than in some "early draft of ANH" stage.

    Theory, corollary, assumption, it doesn't matter what you call it.

    No, it isn't, because when I used the phrase externally imposed I meant something originating in the realm of viewer assumption and not coming from Lucas.

    It's a more logical reason than the suggested alternative, which is really just no reason at all.

    :confused:Those sources have nothing to do with that. They relate to the question of "why Obi-Wan and Yoda, over other candidates"? I didn't get into specifics about other survivors.
     
  8. TOSCHESTATION

    TOSCHESTATION Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Jan 17, 2003
    One, my point was as a rebuttal to the notion that ROTJ exclusively introduced the whole family notion of Jedi.
    Two, it's still in a broad continuum with elements going back to the second draft of SW, whereby the hero of the story is the son (or, one of the sons) of a great Jedi. However, in that version, and in the earlier rough/first draft, Jedi were said to teach their own sons the Jedi ways (iow, Jedi training was 'passed down' by family, not 'The Force'). But this didn't happen with SW. Instead, we had Luke being taught by Ben (and Yoda). But the Jedi-teaching-own-offspring concept being discarded by the third or fourth draft doesn't automatically mean 'midi-determinism' came into play once that happened.


    The same way anyone else could: by listening to and watching the movie(s).



    Yes. And Yoda/Minch in '77 makes "more Jedi plural", considering that this character didn't exist before late '77. The above scenario hardly amounts to the surviving Jedi going beyond Yoda and Ben (if you disregard Vader). At any rate, the notion* of a THIRD surviving Jedi (again, not counting Vader) may be feeding off of the the idea circa TESB treatment/first draft that the 'Other' (aka 'Neilith Skywalker', Luke's sister) was being trained somewhere "on the other side of the galaxy", which would imply the existence of yet another surviving Jedi - that is, if this 'training' was supposed to have been taken seriously at all.

    *and, not just an assumed notion/off-screen possibility but one that was actually going to be mentioned in the movie(s)



    It does, if accurately reflecting what your opponent is saying counts for anything.


    But like I said, Lucas proclaiming it doesn't make it any less 'externally imposed', when one considers that:

    a. he mentions it years after the OT, and in a different form than how he explained it in 1977.

    b. it 'explains' nothing about the OT's portrayal of the Jedi any more than the fact that Anakin had children who survived into adulthood and one of them actually went through Jedi training.


    It may be a 'logical reason' for how the Jedi in the PT could determine Anakin's Jedi potential considering that he was only nine-years old, but as I said earlier it explains nothing about the OT Jedi. And moreover, it's at variance with Lucas' description of the midi-chlorians in 1977, whereby they're a measurement of th
     
  9. Lt.Cmdr.Thrawn

    Lt.Cmdr.Thrawn Manager Emeritus star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Sep 23, 1999
    In addition to all that about the possible intents of the creators at the time, I would argue that it's possible to interpret Jedi in such a way that it doesn't necessitate Force nepotism at all.

    Ben says he and the Emperor knew any offspring of Skywalker could be credible threats. Luke says the Force runs strong in his family, that his father, he, and Leia have it.

    At this point, we had no biological explanation for how people interfaced with the Force. In fact it appeared to simply have a lot to do with belief and attitude ("You don't believe in the Force, do you?" "Unlearn what you have learned" etc.). Personality, in other words. Some of personality is nurture, but some of it is nature too. Though there is some controversy on exactly how those two force interact, I think the belief that personality comes from both is robust and widespread.

    So when Luke says the Force runs in his family, we might take him to mean that the right temperament to use the Force runs in his family.

    And that temperament would be strengthened when the person found out they were the child of an already-successful Force-user, and became inspired.

    From a viewer's point of view, ROTJ alone does not guarantee a solely biological/genetic basis for Force access.
     
  10. sith_rhino

    sith_rhino Jedi Master star 2

    Registered:
    Jul 9, 2007
    I think that one of the charms of the OT, and one of the things that set it apart from other sci-fi movies, is that it looked "used". In the PT everything is clean and shiny and looks like it was just built. Maybe that's an intentional departure by GL, but I do prefer the look of the OT, even though the PT is beautiful at times.
     
  11. Arawn_Fenn

    Arawn_Fenn Chosen One star 7

    Registered:
    Jul 2, 2004
    A belief may be widespread, but that doesn't make it accurate.

    That doesn't really make sense. As you said, the Emperor knew that any offspring of Anakin Skywalker would be a threat to him. That says absolutely nothing about "nurture", and is all about inherited potential. That this potential is passed down automatically in a family line regardless of nurture makes it somehow biological/genetic. When you take out nurture, you're only left with nature. If the theory that the "temperament" to use the Force ran in the Skywalker line were assumed to be true, this temperament would have to be the result of biologically inherited factors anyway. Otherwise it's nothing more than an attitude which would not be specific to their family in any way. Luke, Leia, and Vader had very different backgrounds. Luke's dialogue in ROTJ does not give the impression that he is saying anyone can have Jedi potential with the right attiude.

    As I already said, I used the phrase "externally imposed" to mean something not coming from either Lucas or creators working for the franchise. By that terminology, something proclaimed by Lucas cannot be externally imposed.

    It doesn't seem to say that there is at most only one more surviving Jedi out there, if one were to look hard enough. By saying that there may be more Jedi and not being any more specific than that, that opens the door to others besides Yoda, just not necessarily ones that Yoda has anything to do with. And then there's that interesting comment in the ANH novel about lightsabers still being used in certain galactic quarters...

    Well, the movies never say that Yoda and Ben were the only Jedi to survive the purge, so the rest is only your assumption.

    I never promoted such a notion myself.
     
  12. YodaDooDahDay

    YodaDooDahDay Jedi Padawan star 3

    Registered:
    Jul 20, 2010
    I think one of the charms of the PT, and the thing that sets it apart from other sci-fi movies, is that it looks "clean." Like from a civilized age. Before all hell breaks loose. Plus, it makes a contrast to the older, used look of the OT.

    To be honest, I think the "clean" impression is a huge misconception. The pod racers certainly didn't look clean. The TF tanks definitely had scrapes and grime. Maul's Sith infiltrator could've easily been an OT ship. Anakin's airspeeder had "guts" on the outside. Etc, etc.

    I think people immediately think "chrome spaceships" as representative of EVERY ship in the PT.
     
  13. -NaTaLie-

    -NaTaLie- Force Ghost star 4

    Registered:
    Nov 5, 2001
    And not everything is dirty and grimy in the OT. Look at the Cloud City's public areas, for example.
    And Tatooine is a junkyard in all the movies it appears in.
     
  14. YodaDooDahDay

    YodaDooDahDay Jedi Padawan star 3

    Registered:
    Jul 20, 2010
    Nice.

    Or the Tantive IV interiors, or the Death Star interiors, or the Mon Calamari Home One interiors...

    Behind almost every PT criticism is huge heaping pile of cherry picking.
     
  15. Lt.Cmdr.Thrawn

    Lt.Cmdr.Thrawn Manager Emeritus star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Sep 23, 1999
    You guys are right about there being used tech throughout the prequels also, but I think the perceived 'newness' may also have to do with the way Episodes II and III were shot (TPM overall, I think, has a quite nice look). I don't quite know how to describe the effect I mean... it might have to do with the colors, the contrast, the ways things move? There are three moments I'd use as examples of CG making the effects look... like the objects are made of plastic? Unrealistic? Less-than-believable? Not sure. (1) the tank blowing up on the crystal planet immediately before Ki-Adi Mundi is killed, (2) the way the Naboo ship blows up on the landing platform in AotC, and (3) the shot of the droid starfighter loading its missiles in the opening space battle in RotS. Compare just that last shot to the similar shots of droid starfighters from TPM and you'll see what I mean, I think.

    (Can't find those online so I'll use a different example.)

    [image=http://mikes-images.com/misc/phantom/images/phantom_mq_301.jpg] [image=http://mikes-images.com/misc/phantom/images/phantom_mq_302.jpg] [image=http://images.wikia.com/starwars/images/7/73/Ep3BatofCor.jpg] [image=http://images1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20091019154630/starwars/images/3/34/Spacebattle.jpg]

    Not exactly equivalent shots but you can see a difference. There are several points of divergence - one is done with models, one is CG, one has a lot of color, the other doesn't, one was shot on film, the other was done digitally.
     
  16. TheLucasAdvocate1992

    TheLucasAdvocate1992 Jedi Padawan star 2

    Registered:
    Aug 14, 2010
    ^ *shrugs* They all look "real" to me.
     
  17. YodaDooDahDay

    YodaDooDahDay Jedi Padawan star 3

    Registered:
    Jul 20, 2010
    Yeah, sorry, I don't see it either.

    Look, it's subjective. My daughter looks at the OT and thinks the ships all look like models. Because they are. In the prequels, she can see people inside the ships and see them hoping in and flying away in one continuous shot and she believes. Sometimes our ability to suspend disbelief is a matter of will. You could take many of the "believable" shots from LOTR, for example, and put them into a Star Wars film and someone would criticize it for being "fake." It's a matter of contrasts and expectation. Had Fellowship been made in the early 80s using motion control, models and cell animation, and then 20 years had passed before TT, the effects in TT would likewise seem "fake" and CG in comparison. They wouldn't seem as "real."
     
  18. -NaTaLie-

    -NaTaLie- Force Ghost star 4

    Registered:
    Nov 5, 2001
    It's a matter of taste and habit. There're still plenty of models used throughout the PT. But you seriously couldn't expect Lucas to forgo CGI in this day and age. If LOTR or Potter doesn't get criticized for using it, why should Lucas?
     
  19. Lt.Cmdr.Thrawn

    Lt.Cmdr.Thrawn Manager Emeritus star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Sep 23, 1999
    You guys really don't see a difference there? They may both look real, but they do look different from one another (at least, as far as I can tell)...

    I think I may be talking about two different things here, so I'll try to explain. One, is the occasional CG that sticks out. The First two of my examples in the previous post (the explosions) go here. There's also a shot of Anakin's N-1 approaching the droid control ship in TPM that jumps out at me, for whatever reason. This 'sticking out' is much more evident in motion than in stills.

    The second thing, though, is just the visual style of the latter two prequels. It might simply be that the films were shot digitally, as their colors seem different/more vibrant and the contrast seems bumped up. ROTS does an overall better job, I think, of emulating the style of the rest of the saga, than does AotC.

    [image=http://moviesmedia.ign.com/starwars/image/article/589/589902/star-wars-episode-iii-revenge-of-the-sith-20050222062840872.jpg] [image=http://savestarwars.com/images/goutcorrections/vlcsnap-2011-02-19-18h01m58s212.jpg]

    Again, not exactly the same (it's surprising how difficult it is to find nice screenshots from these films online), but close. The difference, to me, is that the ROTS screen looks so immaculate (not just because its picture here is in a higher resolution). It looks nice, taken by itself. But the original film was done with 'gauzy' focus and a documentary feel. Even Empire, which looks different than ANH and uses more color, doesn't quite look like AotC or (some of) ROTS:

    [image=http://27.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lkoxhidCjq1qc823io1_500.jpg]

    Now, the 'dirt' and differences in color palettes (throughout the films) might be the film stock (or lack thereof) or it might be deliberate choices by the filmmakers (can't be models or CG here, as all those shots are a guy in a suit in a set, though I do think the differences in palettes in the space battles has to do with what they could accomplish with CG vs. models).

    (The lighting looks different to me up there, though perhaps it isn't the absolute best example since 3PO is supposed to be shiny in one and beat up in the other. Maybe compare the throne room scene instead?)

    Are these subtle things? Sure. And I'm sure GL did some of them on purpose (especially as the DVD versions of the CT had their colors changed, presumably to better match the more vibrant look of the PT). But even if purposeful, these are differences. And apparently they aren't only reflections of a 'more civilized age,' since TPM (to my eyes) looks very much like the CT too.
     
  20. -NaTaLie-

    -NaTaLie- Force Ghost star 4

    Registered:
    Nov 5, 2001
    I agree that TPM looks closer to OT, and this is probably due to the film vs. digital than anything else (the actual environments become grittier in later prequels). Maybe it would be better if Lucas wasn't such a lover of new technology.
     
  21. DarthBandersnatch

    DarthBandersnatch Jedi Master star 1

    Registered:
    Jul 28, 2011
    People need to quit thinking that if CGI is used it means that no "real" models were involved. BOTH are used together for many shots. Often CGI is used for compositing or for difficult moves, sometimes it is used to clean up a shot in a way that couldn't have been done in 1977. But saying that the Prequels were "call CGI" and therefore look artificial is wrong. "It's ALL fake," as Lucas himself said on 60 minutes back in 1999.
     
  22. Lt.Cmdr.Thrawn

    Lt.Cmdr.Thrawn Manager Emeritus star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Sep 23, 1999
    I know that. But look at the shots I actually posted, though. One is greenscreened, with models (the behind-the-scenes videos for TPM show this), the other is CGI. It's not disparagement, it's fact.
     
  23. CoolyFett

    CoolyFett Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Registered:
    Feb 3, 2003
    The first too pics were not in the movie.....Leia kissed Luke to piss Han off...she had no sexual interest in Luke. She kiss him once on the cheek in ep 4 and on lips in front of Han in Ep3....two kisses both done by Leia.
     
  24. Arawn_Fenn

    Arawn_Fenn Chosen One star 7

    Registered:
    Jul 2, 2004
    You mean episode 5, not episode 3. If it happened in episode 3 that would have been weird.
     
  25. CoolyFett

    CoolyFett Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Registered:
    Feb 3, 2003
    Yes Beru didnt age well...and they gave her the wrong hair style in Ep 2..Owen looks fine...Beru looks older than Owen lol.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.