Vader's words to Luke in ROTJ

Luke never came across as the power-hungry type. I doubt that approach would have worked very well, hence Palpatine's other angle of approach.

I just saw ROTS on cable the other day and tried to watch it with an open mind. It's been years since I last saw it, so I didn't remember everything about it. Aside from Hayden's horrible acting, I do see the intended breadth of his character. He was between a rock and a hard place. Any decision he made would have contradicted some sense of duty in him, either to the ones he loved or the republic he served.

I do get it, really I do.

So, what does Anakin decide? To turn to the dark side, thereby alienating himself from EVERYTHING he held dear. Padme couldn't follow his path. Had the republic been saved by the Jedi and Palpatine removed from power, Anakin would have been cast out of the Jedi and lost everything anyway. Surely Anakin could have made a better choice. By becoming a Sith, he destroyed everything for which people had fought and suffered. This shows a serious weakness in his character and person. Is this tragic? Depends on who you ask. Personally, I found it just dumb and selfish. Your results may vary. I mean, where was the absolute guarantee that his dream of Padme's death was going to come true? Maybe if it were inevitable, a little less blame could be put on Anakin for his decision. But a dream? Really weak plot element, in my opinion.

 

Perhaps you forget that the same thing happened to his mother...

 

it was inevitable. it happened just as it did to his mother. what anakin didn't realise in this case though was that the inevitable scenario he was seeing would be the cause of his own reaction to the vision. it was a warning not so much of the future but his own failings... or a test if you will. from the moment he broke the forbidden jedi codes and attached himself to padme he committed them both to an unhappy fate. if thats not complex enough for you, i dont know what is.

it should also be said that acting on the dream - or vision of the future - is something that was first written into ESB. you insinuate its weak plotting for anakin's downfall to be sourced by the same type of vision luke nearly suffers for acting on in ESB. was that weak plotting too?

 

You forget that Jedi can, at times, glimpse the future through the Force. Anakin already saw his mother dying through the Force, and was too late to save her, so that meant he took his visions about Padme extremely seriously.

So this was way more than a "bad dream."

 

Well, except the trajectory towards hitting Luke with his friends has been established across two movies. In ESB, Vader tries exactly what you suggest Palpatine should try. "Join me!" etc. It failed miserably - Luke would rather face death than accept power. In ROTJ, Luke's passion for his friends as a weakness is continually exploited: Ben warns him to bury his feelings deep down, because they could be made to serve the emperor. And then, in the very first exchange with the emperor, the two antagonists immediatly identify each other's weaknesses. The weak points are on the table, the question that remains in the scene is how the two will try to play them.

Well, but big-budget movies are hardly known for their great levels of storytelling sophistication. From my pov, the achievements of ROTS are rather more indicative of the general poverty of blockbuster/commercial movies, regardless of genre. But, of course, for the person who is only habituated to such movies, these examples can come across as fairly advanced...

Ah. But this might result because Lucas failed making Anakin sympathetic in your eyes. I.e. for the tragedy to become a succesful cathartic experience, the audience must become so emotionally attached with the character that they really do not want him/her to fall. That's the dramaturgical model for tragedies since the Greeks developed the form. Lucas clearly failed in reaching out to you in that regard. He failed with me to - I just saw Anakin as a whiny and somewhat dumb brat, an impression established in AOTC that the sympathetic moments in ROTS could not sufficiently dispel for me. So, ROTS is a tragedy, just not a very expertly delivered one.

 

Very good point. I didn't care about Anakin. My mind was just saying "bring on Vader, bring on Vader!"

Seriously, there was an enormous opportunity here for George to give us the same emotional impact as "I am your father."

ROTS was a story written in a connect-the-dots fashion. If only George could have focused on making us like and/or identify with the characters more. Oh well, it's all water under the bridge now.

 

Thank you, timmoishere, as the "It's just a bad dream!" quibble is the strangest I've heard in regards to the PT.

Imagine this: You're set in a galaxy far, far away. There's a band of warrior monks who, among other talents, can levitate objects, dash at high speeds, perform mind tricks, and see things before they happen. You're supposedly the strongest of these monks. Over a short span of time, you had recurring nightmares of your mother, centering around her torture. Kinda unsettling. When you finally opted to check up on her, you discovered that she had, in fact, been held captive and tortured. Alas, you were too late to prevent her death.

Three years later, you suddenly have the same nightmares about your pregnant wife.

You know what you'd do? Freak the @#$% out!

 

Exactly...

Padme: It was only a dream.
Anakin: I won't let this one become real.

 

you know if a similar fall from grace was done in the same manner in a programme such as The Wire, we would be talking it up as wonderful psychological assessment of the flaws in human nature. because its a star wars prequel movie directed by George Lucas, people seem to take it on its most shallow level and look to fault-find at every turn. you insinuate that any viewer who found anakin's turn to be complex was only used to watching conventional, unsophisticated blockbuster movies. i dont agree. i would find it as interesting and admirable in any movie, be it Star Wars or City of God, for example. im not saying its the most sophisticated, subtle study of a character's demons, no. but it has its merits alone in the fact star wars is essentially a big blockbuster movie for all ages. given the restrictions inherited by such movies, i think the way anakin's journey was told should be applauded. its by far and wide more complex than anything else in the six movies for me.

its not just tragic depending on how you feel about Anakin. Its tragic if you care about Padme, about Obi-Wan, about the Jedi Order itself. Anakin's status as a prophecised chosen one and saviour of the Jedi in some-sense gives the fall as much weight in the viewers mind as it would any sympathy for the character. i'm not sure we are meant to see Anakin as sympathetically as you insist we should for it to be a successful story development. anakin was written the way he was written - to have flaws.. to be impatient.. to be "whiny". he was never meant to be an angel. he was never meant to be the everyman of the story. that was Obi-Wan if anyone. such a character so quickly falling to the dark side would be a much more difficult thing to believe than one with obvious flaws that are allowed to slowly build over the course of the two most recent films. luke was flawed too of course. he was equally "whiny" in ANH and impatient in ESB. personally I like Luke as a character more, but I find Anakin the far more interesting.

 

The "basher" reply would be to say that if XYZ appeared in any other movie, the viewers would find it shallow and crude, but because it's in a Lucas directed Prequel is celebrated as genius and the epitome of cinematic depth. Is there cause to be concerned about projection? About conditioning yourself to like a movie more because you really like to? Sure, there is.

Let me first note that it's not the themes of the PT I have a problem with - it's the execution.

I can only speak for myself when I say that I was really trying hard to like these for precisely the above reasons, but the flaws I found in spite of myself were simply to big to ignore. I also tried watching the movies back to back to really see if I was wrong - maybe the dialogue/acting/directing was of the same standard throughout the Saga. That just re-affirmed my negative opinion. This is just to explain that I have tried, I have compared very cautiously and found the PT lacking in spite of not wanting it to be so. For me, at least, projection has been more of a factor with regards to other blockbusters that I later discovered to be more flawed than I initially thought - LOTR comes to mind.

Now, I haven't actually seen the Wire, so I wouldn't know.

Ok. Then we just have to agree to disagree.

You are, of course correct - not only Anakin is badly affected by his fall. But you still have to care for those characters to find the situation tragic. It is also true that Luke was whiny in ANH, and frankly I find Han Solo a more interesting character than Luke in that movie. Note also that a character that is flawed can still be found sympathetic. Indeed, it's much easier to sympathize with a protagonist that is flawed than one that isn't. The latter will just be found to be unbelieveably cheesy - see discussions on "Mary Sues" and "Gary Stus" in the Fanfic forums - only amateur storytellers would present the audience with a protagonist without flaws, really.

The tric

 

hang your head in shame!

agreed as I've already said a few times, I never intended this thread to be hijacked into some PT vs OT thing. I just wanted it to explain another example of how I believe certain things tie together across the saga (one specific thing I had not previously noted). that was all. the PT vs OT thing has been done to death and none of us can offer up much in the way of original conversation. i think we best leave it where it is. we all know where we stand. personally, i hardly acknowledge any divide between the trilogies. for me its just one long movie. if others dont feel that way, its a shame, but you cant please everyone. one thing i know is that im absolutely certain of my own position, even through my own most cynical eyes. and if you are as certain in yours, there's really little point dredging it all up over and over again. hopefully for the sake of diplomacy we can agree to that too.

 

Ok. It's hanging...

Of course. As long as we can agree that I'm right and you're wrong.... That was a joke. Ehm.

Seriously, though, it was good spotting - there is a lot of stuff, themewise, in the Saga, and I'm sure there are connections between the two trilogies that Lucas thought of and placed here and that's still there for us to discover.

One of the things I've been thinking about is the storytelling balance of things. As a director, you want to be both clear and subtle with the thematic material you use, both in terms of visuals (Anakin wears darker Jedi clothes than the others) as well as dialogue ("save" a loved one) and action (killing Dooku) and juggle these in a way that produces a powerful narrative. The problem is to get that balance right, so that some of these cues do not obfuscate others, and I think that the debate on how these different cues are employed throughout the Saga will keep us busy for many years to come. Which is a great deal of fun!

 

he didnt kill her.. directly, she "lost the will to live"

 

I agree. I think it's very interesting to see the similar methods that Palpatine used to manipulate both Anakin and Luke to the Dark Side. (Although "threatening to scratch his ship" cracked me up. ) It's also interesting to see why Anakin fell for Palpatine's tricks and Luke didn't. Yes, Palpatine could have used another trick on Luke, heck, he could have just threatened to kill him if he didn't turn, or played on Luke's compassion by threatening to kill Vader.)

I don't know what Luke's "test" would have been regarding an equivalent to Anakin killing the Younglings. I sort of see him making Luke blow up Endor after Han and Leia and Lando were no longer on it.

It should also be noted that Palpatine and Vader had different purposes for wanting Luke to turn. Palpatine would want Luke to kill Vader and rule with him; Vader would have, likewise, wanted Luke to kill Palpatine so they could "rule the galaxy together as father and son." In ROTS, Anakin told Padme that he wanted to kill Palpatine and rule the galaxy with her.

Luke was able to save his father because he is his mother's son. He saw the good in his father, and he refused to cave to the darkness and corrupt power and overthrow the galaxy and rule with him.

 

So I understand I'm new to this board and that some might view this as cliche, but...

"Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate..."

Didn't take the whole quote, as I'm sure you all know where this is going. But I thought the path to the darkside began with fear... Anakin fears losing Padme like he did his mother, which Palpatine plays into. Whether Anakin was ever going to get the power to save her is irrelevant -- because it simply did not exist. It was a trick, trap, ploy, whatever you want to call it. But because Anakin FEARED losing her he was very easily seduced.

Furthermore doesn't Anakin develop a hesitance towards the Jedi way? He feels they are not treating him as the great 'Jedi' he has been told he is and/or will become. On top of that, before Padme turns on him he says they will kill Palpatine and "rule the galaxy together" just like he tells his son in Empire. To me this says that Anakin just wants to rule the damn universe, period.

There can only be two Sith, one master and one apprentice? So if Luke was to join him either Vader himself or Palpatine would need to die right? Seems to me that Anakin wants to rule the universe first with his secret wife, then his daughter, and finally his son.

BUT... the path down this road would not even be possible if Anakin did not fear losing Padme. It was because of the FEAR that Palpatine successfully recruited him.

 

Whether it exists or not is in the end irrelevant, you're right. But one cannot say for certain whether the power exists and whether or not Palpatine actually knew it. That he never intended to give it to Anakin regardless, I wouldn't deny. But we just don't know if it exists... and it really makes no difference in the end. Anakin was seduced by its concept, coupled with the relatively free reign all the other aspects the dark side afforded him... including the power to "make things the way we want them to be" which is at the root of his desire to control the galaxy, whether it be with Padme, Luke or Leia.

The sad thing is I truly think Anakin thought Padme would agree this was the right thing to do. And lets say Padme had agreed to Anakin and her ruling the galaxy. How would that have turned out? Would Padme have been a reluctant, yet crucially benevolent dictator? Or put it this way, more good than Palpatine surely? Or would she have been corrupted by her power like so many others? Interesting hypothetical... though I know "what ifs" are frowned upon so its maybe best not to consider. I just sometimes wonder if Padme's refusal to go along with Anakin, although absolutely correct in principle, might have done more damage to the galaxy in the grander scheme of things. The way things worked out, without her, Anakin's very soul regressed even further into self-tormenting oblivion where, with Padme by his side, he may yet have been more instantly retrievable (in the same way Luke would later retrieve him).

Anyway, I'm rambling. Probably worthy of another thread in its own right

 

I've brought up these very points many, many times.

Ugh...I know...don't remind me...

 

There was an excellent fan fic on these boards about 10 years ago which addressed something similar to what you described. It was a rewrite of ESB in which Padme, who was still alive but imprisoned, was freed and rejoined Vader; they conspired to overthrow Palpatine.

I think Anakin genuinely believed that Padme would go along with him, and I understand why he thought so. She had made comments about the Republic no longer functioning, had very recently made the comment about the Republic no longer being what they thought it was. I think Anakin believed that she would go along with having dictatorial power so that she could use her power for good, in spite of the glib conversation they had in the meadow during AOTC.

I found it interesting that Anakin had barely turned to the Dark Side and was already conspiring to overthrow Palpatine. Such is the nature of the Sith.

I didn't know that "what if's" were frowned upon, I find them interesting. As far as Padme, I believe that power would have corrupted her. She and Anakin would have been more benevolent rulers than Palpatine, but in order to even go along with the idea of "ruling" the galaxy, Padme would have had to sacrifice part of herself. It is not in her nature to thirst for power.