Vader/Anakin Ghost in Jedi

Then how is he redeemed? Because he finally did the right thing in the end? Because Luke 'made up' for his father's mistakes?

One, this is chronologically unsound, since Anakin WAS Vader, and thus 'grew up' with him.

Second, I guess Anakin doesn't 'come back' when he saves his son at the end. Who saved Luke then? Vader? You should realize that what Lucas was basically saying two years ago (with the OT DVD releases) was that Anakin didn't 'come back' (as was understood for almost 20 years); he had 'died' in ROTS, but couldn't apparently go to 'Jedi Heaven' until Vader's death.

This doesn't fit the films at all. Not the OT, or the PT. It wrongly assumes that Anakin 'died' at Mustafar, and not only ignores the evil he had already committed as Anakin earlier, but more importantly, it ignores the evil he committed just hours before on Coruscant and on Mustafar - already as Darth Vader.

No, the "Vader Horror Stopper" view only counts the evil he did after ROTS apparently, until he saves Luke some 20 years later. It's arbitrary. I'd say, as arbitrary as Obi-Wan's 'point of view' concerning his old friend. Only difference is, here Lucas is making that pov absolute.

 

As for the Official site quote:


"In many ways, Lucas says, the events of Episode III will change audiences' perspectives on the story told in A New Hope, The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi. "Watching the films starting with Episode I and ending with Episode VI will be a different experience," he says. "What drove me to direct Episodes I, II and III was the larger story about Anakin, who starts out as a good person but who becomes evil -- and, ultimately, is redeemed by his children. It's exciting to see it all come together."


Leaving aside whether Lucas really intends to include Leia in that 'equation' - does this mean that only Luke's actions towards Anakin/Vader have any efficacy? This seems to be what you're saying at least, in regards to GL's thoughts on the matter. That is, "Vader's action in ROTJ just stops the horror, it doesn't redeem; whereas Luke's action DOES redeem or 'save' ..........


Prior to all this, for about 20 years (1983-2003), the interpretation of ROTJ was that Anakin and Luke had 'saved each other', in a way. Nothing about Anakin's action having little effect..

Yep.

It is a problem (or rather, GL's 'explanation' is), because it 'forgets' the evil that 'Hayden' committed in ROTS.

If it 'makes no difference', PMT, why does George insist that the ghost now looks the way it does because it reflects "how Anakin was when he died in ROTS"?

And this still doesn't explain how Anakin's final deed ONLY 'stops the horror', but Luke's (and Leia's) action somehow makes 'everything right' (he says 'redeemed' by his son).

This is NOT a case of redeem as in 'forgiving, but not forgetting'. Apparently, going by the 'Hayden ghost', Anakin's actions in AOTC and more importantly, ROTS, ARE forgotten, but not his 'Empire era' ones. Why is that?

But this is forgetting the evil that he committed before he was in the 'oxygen suit'.

 

But this is forgetting the evil that he committed before he was in the 'oxygen suit'.

Very true, pre-suit Vader is still responsible for all those Jedi who died in Order 66. He was evil before he was put into the suit.

 

But this is forgetting the evil that he committed before he was in the 'oxygen suit'.

But is this what Luke knows? As I have been saying ALL along, Anakin is redeemed by Luke and by his beliefs.

 

I don't see what this has to do with anything. Anakin is not going to look the way he looks because Luke "wants" him to. Luke and Leia might be the only people that see the ghosts, but it's not like Anakin is going to appear the way Luke visualized him to be, no, Anakin is going to appear the way he *is.*

 

Leia can't see him, that much is clear. Only Luke could, the one who BELIEVED in him. However, everyone's interpretation may be different. Oh well.

 

The Shaw ghost makes us forget the evil that he committed throughout the OT. Back when ROTJ first came out in theaters, it was mentioned that a lot of people didn't like the idea of Vader being a good guy at the end of the film and that they wanted him to die like the vicious monster that he was when he made his first appearence in ANH.

Because Anakin DID die in ROTS briefly. If you listen carefully during the scene where the Darth Vader mask is put on Anakin's face, his heart stops beating until the helmet is put on.

Luke(and Leia)'s actions brought the end to both the Sith order and the 2-decades long civil war by being the root to Anakin's redemption. The discovery of Luke started the conflict within Anakin's soul and learning that Leia is his daughter (by probing Luke's mind) is what finished the conflict both physically (Luke defeating him) and mentally (Luke sacrifincg himself to the Emperor forced Vader to give up the Dark Side completely). Besides, what Anakin did in AOTC and ROTS is no different than what he did throughout his Darth Vader career so the Hayden ghost can still be seen as the "forgiving, but not forgetting" part of his redemption.

And the Shaw version tells us to forget the evil he committed AFTER he left the oxygen suit and his leftover body considering that the ghost is a fully regenerated body with hair, skin, and limbs all in place.

 

That's new, I'll try to remember to check it if i ever watch ROTS again. But anyhow, he lives on, and remains Anakin, doesn't he?

Can it? But how do you deal with his deeds in the suit then? Are those forgotten, or undone?

Nope. The Shaw version tells us to apply the same measure to the evil he committed before and after the suit. The Hayden version tells us to judge the 2 differently, for no good reason. (Unless you go with the split personality/lost soul nonsense, which you don't seem to, and that's not something I'd call a good reason anyway...or unless u say that wearing a life-support suite makes one irredeemable )

 

No, it acknowledges the person that died, but 'idealized' as it were, as Obi-Wan and Yoda's respective ghosts demonstrate. He was still Anakinthat whole time.

Yeah, and these same people probably had a problem with him being Luke's father, to boot. This isn't even germaine to the issue; it's a different discussion all together.

That's rather circular-reasoning.

Even if this were the case, then 'Vader' died 'along with' Anakin. Then, it would be rather abitrary to decide that subsequently only Vader was then 're-born'.....

O.K.

This admitts that Anakin was still there, after all....

He did NOT learn that it was specifically Leia. Only that he had a daughter.

Nonetheless, Vader/Anakin still had to choose whether to act to save his son, OR 'save himself.' Luke would have died a 'good Jedi', anyhow.

Ah...but it IS different, because judging by yours and Lucas's argument, those actions committed in AOTC and ROTS were when he still had 'free choice', unlike after Mustafar, when supposedly 'only Vader was left'.

Why shouldn't he appear this way, if he's 'redeemed'?

 

He did NOT learn that it was specifically Leia. Only that he had a daughter.

With all due respect Toshi, I believe actually, he DID read Luke's mind. Luke didn't think "my twin sister", he thought Leia and Vader read it, because Luke's thoughts betrayed him. "If you don't turn to the darkside perhaps she will". This would mean Vader knows exactly how to pinpoint her whereabouts. That's why Luke went to rage, he knew Vader knew and couldn't have it.

 

Although I haven't seen the OT in a while, I believe Vader did inidicate something that told us he knew it was Leia.

 

No such indication. If he knew, he could have said 'Tell Leia ...' rather than 'Tell your sister ...'

 

You're right. He NEVER even mentioned the name Leia, but he also never mentioned the name Yoda. He actually did not concentrate on Leia much, but could read his son's thoughts. At the same time, Luke's reaction to me tells me that Vader knew.

However, no need to mention her name, because he was not close with her. Luke's thoughts betrayed him. Luckily Obi Wan (who warned Luke that his insights could serve the Emperor) didn't, that's why no thought of Yoda creeped into Vader's mind. Vader also knew clearly that Luke had a TWIN sister.

 

Nothing can be forgotton or undone but it's unfair to say that the Hayden ghost is unacceptable just because its a reminder that he did evil before he went into the suit when the Shaw ghost reminds us that this guy has done much worse while he was in the suit.

The split personality part would make sense considering that Vader would never acknowledge the fact that he used to be Anakin Skywalker, hence the famous words he said to Luke: "That name no longer has any meaning for me!" Also, the Hayden ghost tells us that he could've been a very powerful Jedi had he not let PalpSidious trick him into using the Dark Side.

But it's still Anakin even when he looks young. A person's actions should not dictate how young or how old their ghost should look.

No, it's not because this is basically a double-standard issue. It's perfectly acceptable for everyone to see Darth Vader as a good guy at the end of ROTJ but it's a crime for his ghost to look like Hayden Christensen all because you think it ignores the fact that he turned evil? I don't believe that which is why I don't agree that Anakin's ghost shouldn't look like Hayden.

Not necessarily because this is a lot like Robocop...he too was remade into a cybernetic organism and yet, he maintained pieces of his memories about his human self. Darth Vader may have died and came back a cyborg but he still had pieces of his Anakin Skywalker memories.

Anakin was only starting to re-emerge within Vader once he heard about Luke.

But Leia is the only girl Luke was thinking about and I doubt that Vader would believe that Luke was thinking about someone else since there was no other girl on Luke's mind.

Indeed, Vader had to choose and he chose to save his son.

I doubt that Anakin had any free choice when PalpSidious has been twisting his mind since Anakin was 10. Ani had no chance at resisting the Dark Side even after he found out that his friend and big supporter is a Sith Lord.

Vader has been inside a mask for 25 years and hates everything associated with the name "Anakin Skywalker" unt

 

If anyone views Anakin and Vader as two different individuals because Anakin's ghost looks young, then that's a choice that the person in question has made for him/herself. I still see Vader as Anakin on the dark side. A young-looking ghost doesn't change that.
The fact that Vader chose to turn back from the dark side proves that he is Anakin. If he wasn't, he wouldn't have been able to turn back, because there wouldn't have been anything to turn back to.
The young-looking ghost shows that Anakin, as a good man, has lost 23 years of his life.





The dark side will take your soul
/Flames

 

PMT99, let me first re-iterate that I do not have a problem with the ROTJ Anakin Spirit change PER SE, but with George Lucas's particular explanation that it's "how he looked before he died in ROTS".

I'm saying that Lucas's remark not only tends to 'absolutize' Obi-Wan's unique pov concerning his old friend, but that it also ignores the evil that Anakin committed before he was in the suit. If the explanation were that "this (Hayden) is how Anakin would have looked if he hadn't turned to the D.S.", then I wouldn't have a problem with it.

I think you meant to say: 'the Hayden ghost is unacceptable because it forgets the evil he did before he went into the suit'......at least that's what we've been saying.

And we know why that is, PMT99. Thanks to Sidious, Vader believes that he, the 'weak and fearful' Anakin Skywalker, killed his own beloved.

A literal 'split-personality' is unnecessary here, in my view.

Is such a reminder that necessary, though? After all, Anakin did what he was supposed to, in the end. That's all that should matter.

Then, why is it more 'right' for him to look as his younger self as opposed to otherwise?

First, how is it a 'double-standard issue', when you reference a segment of the SW audience who were obviously misguided as to what Star Wars was ultimately about?

Second, it's not that the 'crime' of the Hayden ghost is that 'it ignores the fact that he turned to evil'. It's that it rather artificially and arbitrarily demarcates the 'point' at which he turned to evil in such a literal manner. It - or at least the 'official' Lucasfilm explanation - implies that Anakin didn't 'die' or become Vader until his defeat at Mustafar....

I wouldn't say that - ' shouldn't look like Hayden'. Remember, I just disagree with Lucas's 'explanation' for why he does.

Right, the difference being Alex J. Murphy wasn't 'Robocop' before his injuries. Anakin was already 'Vader' prior to his.

Right, that's why I said it's rather arbitrary to say that there was no 'Vader' until the cybernetic operation, or that 'Anakin' had 'died' on Mustafar or even Coruscant.

And he didn't re-emerge out of 'thin air'....

 

This debate is pointless because i really think any debate that turned to debating which of Lucas' conflicting quotes was the most recent has really lost it's integrity.

This one did that 30 or so posts ago.

Haden was put in because at the time that Lucas decided to do it, it seemed like a really good idea.

Today i would disagree with him, but i think it is simply in keeping with the way he wants to change the way we see Anakin and Vader into being in a way two different spirits.

He has decided that we should see Anakin as the good man that was Luke's father and Vader as the demon he became when he went to the dark side.

I see him as a better character if we accept that he's capable of being both because he's human.

Lucas talks too much, he should keep his double talking mouth shut a bit more, he creates contraversy.

I also think he should have left the scene alone, showing him as he would have been if he had not been injured, in jedi robes, was enough to show us the man who would be Luke's father.

A pretty boy that's younger than Luke is hard to swallow as the might Anakin Skywalker after all these years of seeing Shaw.

 

Well, Luke believed that the "young Jedi Knight" didn't fully turn. I always think of a young Jedi Knight (probably younger than Luke was in ROTJ), before the "turn" and that would be Hayden. Luke sees what he believed in.

 

Luke sees what he believed in.

Again, this isn't about what "Luke believes is what happens." This isn't Luke's imagination. Anakin was a man who went bad. Nothing more, nothing less. He didn't "die." He was lost. Lost within his own rationalizing, greed and power. Anakin was shoved down the deepest hole of that man's soul. The name "Vader" is only signifying the *change* that man went through. Not the *death* of that man.

 

Well, I did what I could.





/Flames

 

I still stand by my claim that it was done strictly for visual continuity. I can't think of any explanation that makes sense other than that. Anakin existed all those years, he wasn't "dead". Why would he revert and the others not? Why would Luke expect to see a young ghost? Would he even recognize him as a young man?

But, if the whole thing was done as a visual nod and to the reason is "just because", then it makes sense.

 

Exactly. I mean, Anakin's life was no different from that of Obi-Wan and Yoda....





Life - it lives
/Flames

 

i still say that hayden is more attractive than sebastian. gl is secretly in love with hayden.

 

And that has to do with any of this, how?