CT What is wrong with Hayden as Anakin in the end scene of Return of the Jedi

I suggest you find a more appropriate way to express disagreement with someone else's opinion. What I wrote (and what the maker of the SW saga chose to do with his story) is neither "ridiculous" nor "flat out false" nor "will it always be false". That is merely YOUR opinion. "False" is something that can be DISPROVED. That does not include personal opinions or preferences. "China is a country in Latin America" is an objectively false statement that can easily be disproved. "I prefer Hayden Christensen playing Anakin's Force ghost" however is NOT an objectively false statement and therefore a matter of opinion. Let's get this straight. I gave reasons why I thought it was the right choice. You may disagree all you want with my reasoning, but let's keep the tone neutral and civil and not resort to personal derision, insults or ridicule. If you have any hard proof that I am wrong please by any means show it. Otherwise you will just have to accept that not everyone shares your views on how a particular story should be told or which actor be cast in a movie.

In the context of the story and film-making circumstances this was the best possible choice. You seem to take offense with the word "necessary". What is "necessary"? It's not vital in a life-threatening situation, sure. But in this particular example the change makes perfect sense. That's why the word "necessary" came up. I stand by it. Yes, necessary from a storytelling and continuity perspective. Replace it with "reasonable", "logical" or "visually more effective" or whatever if that suits you more. But I'm sure you know what I mean. And if you don't like the change feel free to watch the 1983 version of ROTJ only!

 

You didn't give me reasons why you thought it was the right choice. You said it was NECESSARY for continuity and that IS flat out false - PT or no PT. BIG difference.

I've made it clear in my above statement that a case could be made for HC by drawing your own conlusions. It's GL's retro rationale of Anakin "dying" when he was young that is false and that CAN be proven by Anakin's last dying words to Luke:

You were right about me. Tell your sister, you were right.


This whole debate about when the real Anakin " died" boils down to that line and it leaves no room for interpretation. It's plain spelling it out to Luke and the audience that Anakin was ALWAYS THERE.

That's what Luke set out to prove to Obi Wan and Yoda. Him 'ceasing to be Anakin and becoming Vader' was only from Obi Wan and Yoda's point of view. "Certain point of view" is merely an interpretion. They thought he was too far gone and that's why they felt Luke needed to kill him. But that wasn't Luke's POV. He wasn't buying that so he wasn't going kill him. He knew there was still good in him. He felt it when he confronted him the first time and he just needed to bring him back. And he was right. In Anakin's own words.

I've said this many times but the key to good story telling is leaving things a little open for the audience to draw their own conclusion. This is one of the many times where GL should have just kept his mouth shut and let the audience do just that because his own movie just bit his explanation right in the butt

 

Did or did you not read my last post? Depending on your point of view and involvement in the storytelling process, some changes can indeed become NECESSARY. As I said, you can replace it with "logical" if you prefer that word!
YES, I did give reasons. So I'll try again. However, if you are one of those people who choose to ignore the prequels altogether then there is no point in further discussion.

FACT 1: Anakin Skywalker is played by 3 actors, Jake Lloyd, Hayden Christensen and, arguably, Sebastian Shaw, in the last few minutes he had between his return to the light side and death.

FACT 2: the Force ghost of "Anakin" we see in the earlier ROTJ NEVER EXISTED in this appearance, it was purely fictional. It reflected NOTHING of his original GOOD Anakin persona. This "Anakin" is even older than his master Obi-Wan. WHY would he choose to appear as an OLDER version of himself? He never lived until that phase in his life!

FACT 3: ALL other Force ghosts appeared at the age when they died (more or less), because they were JEDI, not SITH, therefore did not need redemption, and the "older" versions matched their Jedi identities at that time. Vader was no longer Jedi or Anakin when he changed into Sebastian Shaw. Why would he choose this form when there was no good in him except for the last couple of minutes in his life? The body he had at that point was not only deformed but "more machine than man". THERE NEVER ONCE EXISTED AN INTACT ANAKIN WITH SHAW'S APPEARANCE!!!! Shaw's appearance was only Sith, only Vader. Would it not make sense that Anakin would want to appear at the stage of his life when he was still a Jedi, a good guy?

Fact 4: We simply don't KNOW how the Force works, and how much freedom dead Jedi have in choosing their appearance as a Force ghost. Maybe for true Jedi it's fixed. Their appearance and spirituality are in harmony, so no need to make any changes in their ghost forms. Vader was an EXCEPTION, the ONLY Jedi turned SITH turned Jedi again in history who ever went back to the light side before his death. Such a character's situation is kind of unusual. It seems the Force allowed him to appear when he was still a true Jedi, which, like it or not, was portrayed be Christensen.

I know many die-hard fans don't like it, but I don't care. Hayden as the TRUE Jedi Anakin was the most logical for his appearance as Force ghost. You are free to disagree, but I accept the change!

 

Right and then Lucas believed that if people watch the OT first, they can then watch the PT and see the connection to the younger Anakin. Or they watch the PT first and then see the OT. And if they're confused, they can turn on the audio commentary or read the internet.

He did defeat Dooku, which is the heroic act. How he did it was meant to be questionable, since we know what went down, but everyone else doesn't. And yes, Palpatine is a Sith Lord, but he is also the Chancellor and to everyone else, it was a heroic act. Anakin's other heroic acts were saving Obi-wan multiple times, battling against Grievous and fighting in the war. You don't have to see multiple acts to know that he is or isn't good. There is enough to see that he was good, but also conflicted.

Stop Padme from being killed, rescued Obi-wan during the Coruscant chase, saved Obi-wan from a nest of gundarks, pursued Zam, went to Geonosis to rescue Obi-wan, fought in the arena and protected Padme, fought Dooku.

Lucas believes that people would watch the PT, if they started with the OT first. The history of Hollywood having numerous sequels, which often do well, kinda gives credence to the idea that people aren't going to stop at three films and not watch anymore.

YODA: "The boy you trained, gone he is. Consumed by Darth Vader."

OBI-WAN: "You were my brother, Anakin."

Said metaphor is in ROTS when Yoda describes Anakin as Vader and when Obi-wan is venting to him, he speaks of him in the past tense. Something that is often done when speaking of someone is no longer around.

 

Now you're taking words with very distinct and different meanings and trying to pass it off as semantics. Proponents of both sides gave very good logical reasons why either force ghost would work so neither is necessary. But I'll accept that that's not what you actually meant.

Almost. Sebastian Shaw was not "arguably" Anakin. He in fact played Anakin. Again, proven in-universe by his last words to Luke and credited as such in the list of cast and crew.

It's all purely fiction, and since no concrete guidelines have been made on force ghosts, then no explanation sounds any better or worse that the other. And the younger version in those robes never existed either. That being said, Shaw absolutely reflected the good Anakin. Paying the ultimate sacrifice by giving up his life for his son and saving him from the Emperor isn't good? So Anakin was never redeemed? The young Anakin certainly doesn't reflect the good one - quite the opposite. It immortalizes the moment he turned evil. You're also making assumptions that they get to choose how they look and that you know exactly what they would choose. Why aren't you applying that same logic to Obi Wan and Yoda? Why would they want to appear as their old decrepit selves? Just because that's how Luke knew them? I'm sure they like the kid but I doubt they like him that much. They're the ones that remained good their whole lives. Don't they deserve to spend the afterlife young and handsome like the jerk does?

Besides your assumption that they get to choose, how about wanting to show who he was when he finally redeemed himself for a lifetime of evil and murder? That's not good enough? How about wanting to appear as a proud father to his son? That seems like a good reason. Being a Jedi is about who you are inside. If you can make the case that he ceased to be a Jedi when he turned, then you can easily make the case that he ceased to be a Sith when he redeemed himself and became Jedi again. It gives another meaning to the title "Return of The Jedi". And Anakin's last dying words proved that he never truly died.

I will neither argue for or against this point as the guidelines have never been established on force ghosts and we will be doing nothing but trying to argue magic.

False, as his redemption and last dying words once again prove otherwise.

That's what the Shaw ghost does. Did you miss the part where he sacrificed his life for his son?

Finally we agree.

This is a direct contradiction to your earlier statement: "Shaw's appearance was only Sith, only Vader."


Your last line is purely preference. I would argue that he was never more of a true Jedi than in his last moments when he made the ultimate sacrifice. It also makes more sense if you care for the stoyline of him fulfilling the prophecy and destroying the Sith.

As is your right to do so!

 

Sebastian Shaw as the redeemed Jedi ghost of Anakin was the only version of good Anakin for more than two decades, not only in the 1983 version, but also the 1997 SE. So, the idea that the original version reflected nothing of the original good persona as Anakin is flat out wrong, as it represented just that in any version of the OT, and the Star Wars saga up until the 2004 DVD release. Lucas opted to connect the two trilogies with a number of changes, among them replacing Shaw with Christensen. Did this change alter the story in some way? I don't think so. People got the point in theatres in 1983, on VHS/laserdisc, and in theatres in 1997 long before this visual cue to the PT was included two decades after ROTJ and the redemption of Darth Vader became part of the Star Wars fabric. It's absolutely fine if some prefer the updated version, but let's not pretend the change was necessary in any way, as if people didn't understand the point of the original scene.

 

Actually it's Lucas' fiction and he made a concrete guideline in regards to Anakin so that is settled.

So why didn't he appear that way in ROTJ in the first place? He doesn't instead it's some other guy that never existed who was the wrong age and had limbs he didn't have anymore etc etc.

 

Once again, that was from "A certain point of view". Their point of view. Luke wasn't buying it because he knew better. He felt the conflict in Vader. If Anakin was truly "dead", there would be no conflict. So he set out to prove them wrong and prove them wrong he did as evidenced by his father's redemption and last dying words.

Wrong again. What you say in an interview has no bearing on the story. And his interviews directly contradict what happened in the movie.

 

dbl post

 

What's Lucas does in the movie is the final word. The word has been given.

Why this objection to the fact of the story I don't know.

By the exact same reasoning let's not pretend the change wasn't necessary as if people didn't understand the point of the original scene.

It's still the original scene. The characters and situation are the same.

 

That doesn't mean that is soul wasn't "dead". He can still find the good within him without his soul. A soul is a very difficult thing to ascribe rules to since there is no universal definition of what a soul is and how is should behave. After all, a soul could be a metaphor as well. There is a metaphorical explanation that fits within the notion of what Lucas did when he changed the ending.

"In addition to the Zen-like Force that "surrounds us and penetrates us...(and) binds the galaxy together," as Obi-wan tells Luke, another Eastern religious element can be found in Vader's resemblance to demons that, in the Buddhist tradition, were at one time human and, through the actions of Buddha or his followers, are freed from their demonic state.

They usually wind up dying and through death are released from their demonic state. Again, that's a parallel to Vader, who is only freed at the point of his death."

--Shanti Fader, USA Today article and "Star Wars And Philosophy."

The demonic state would be his outward appearance in the black suit, but it can also be fitting of his aged and burn physical form. And that when he dies, his spirit is freed and going one step further, instead of looking like Shaw, he looks like Hayden. Whereas Yoda and Obi-wan did not fall and thus they are as they were when they had died.

 

Exactly! Thank you for reiterating my point. Glad you agree!

 

Except the way it is done in the current version is not logical.
The previous films established a logic that a ghost looks the same age as when the actual person died.
The Hayden ghost breaks that logic and no explanation is given in the film.
The most "logical" explanation of this is to assume that Anakin REALLY died in RotS and Vader just was his animated corpse running around. But that is disproven by the death scene where Anakin says that Luke was right about him, that Anakin never "died" or went away, he was always there.

If you want to do this right, have Hayden do the unmasking scene, with heavy makeup and then do the ghost scene, with some make up to make him look a bit older.
That would be consistent and make logical sense.

And Shaw is the one who plays the redeemed Anakin, the Anakin that finally let go of his fear and anger. That let go of the problems that had plagued him most of his adult life.
That died at peace and accepting of death.

FACT! The ghost as it is now consist of Hayden's head, pasted on top of Shaw's body and wearing clothes that Anakin never wore.
This is a person that also NEVER EXISTED!
Also, since you want to bring Shaw's actual age into it, "Too old Shaw" is still IN the film, so how is this more consistent?
You have the same character played on one scene by an actor that is too old and then in another scene by an actor that is too young.
How is this better?

To me, what Shaw represented, was the Jedi Anakin was at the end of his life.
The one that had made the terrible mistakes and had gone to Hell but had managed to crawl back out and find redemption.
To me, he was a better Jedi in his final moments than he had ever been before.
Younger Anakin could never let go, he had not managed to control his fear or his anger and was always fighting change and death.
At the end, he let go of all that and accepted death and found peace.

Wait, are you saying that Anakin died as a Sith?
That on the DS2, he was still an evil sith lord?

I totally disagree with that interpretation.
Anakin at the end was a Jedi once more. The title of the film has a double meaning, both about Luke but also Anakin. He "returns" and is a Jedi once more.
Also did Shaw at the end need redemption?
When Anakin dies, he has redeemed himself. He let go of his hate, broke his chains and killed his evil master.
Are you saying that his redemption occurred after his death?

As I said, Anakin was a jedi once again at the end and he died as one, so therefore it is "logical" that his appearance matches the other two Jedi that died.

If you had Hayden in the unmasking scene then him being the ghost fits well.

Yes we don't know how the Force works but if Anakin's ghost had been in the form of a banana, then I think most people would have been confused.
That Anakin sees himself this way, that is the most logical explanation of this change.
For one, he has probably not seen his own face for over 20 years and he no doubt hates the Vader image.
So the "residual self-image" explanation does make some sense.
That the "Force did it", that is more iffy.
That Obi-Wan and Yoda looks old, that is the image they have of themselves and so their ghost reflect that.

And again, to me, Anakin was a true Jedi when he died.

[/QUOTE]

Had Hayden been in both scenes and this was done properly, then I might not have an issue with it.
But the cheap and lazy way this was done and that Lucas didn't even tell Hayden about it, that rubs me the wrong way.
This is, as yet, the final image of Anakin Skywalker.
And what we have is copy/paste job of two actors and neither of them knew they were filmed for this.
A little more effort would not have been out of place.

Bye for now.
Old Stoneface

 

Yes it does.

I won't waste my time reading quotes that don't reflect what happened in the movie. His dying words are the trump card that make the rest of that nonsense null and void.

 

Nobody needed an explanation why he appeared the way he did, because it was obvious. Anakin was redeemed, and so he appears healed before his son, with a face his son knows, namely the face of the father he witnessed a few scenes before. The fact that is father is whole in spirit, is a clear reflection of the fact that his father's soul is redeemed.

 

How do we know that this is true about souls? Have you seen one? Is there some documented evidence somewhere? You didn't read the quote, which shows that you don't understand metaphors. It isn't even from Lucas. Why don't you try reading it.

Two things.

1. What makes you think Luke is so stupid that he couldn't figure out that is his father as a young man?

2. Who is to say that Luke didn't look up his father on the HoloNet and found holos of him as a younger man, particularly after rescuing Chancellor Palpatine?

 

Actually, it's not arguable. Anakin is played by Sebastian Shaw in the last few minutes of his life.

Let's apply this standard to the young Anakin ghost then. Fact is, the young Anakin ghost NEVER EXISTED in this appearance. This is how his ghost looks: https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/683408055606771712/OZ_uPiV0_400x400.jpg
And this is how he actually looked: http://www.sonsofthesuns.com/reference/ROTS/Promo/images/promo14.jpg
Notice the different wardrobe.

How do you know he's older from a strictly in-universe point of view? Fact is, you don't! Appearance wise, there is nothing about Shaw-Anakin that looks older than Obi-Wan. Just examine this picture: https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-e5e607e76e04f62929db12cb98617c97-c
Maybe it's because of the lighting, but the Shaw ghost seems to have more blacks in his hair than the Guinness ghost. Also, his clean-shaven face gives him a younger look than Obi-Wan's classic white-bearded wizard appearance. The only thing that people point to is the out-of-universe age difference in the actors. But if you didn't know that, than there's a good chance that you may not even notice this.

Anakin was a Jedi when he died. The title "Return of the Jedi" can refer to both Luke and Anakin. Just as Anakin became a Sith upon deciding to kill Windu & join Palpatine, he also became a Jedi upon deciding to kill the Emperor & save his son....it's like poetry. And what do you mean, "no good in him"? Luke repeatedly states in the movie that there is good in him....and he ends up being right! The way I see it, Anakin from this point until this point, is a truly good person. So it makes perfect sense for the ghost to take on this form. On the other hand, Anakin from this point until this point ranges from morally questionable to full-on bad guy (y'know.....since he repeatedly & needlessly murders innocents or those who can't defend themselves). So why does it make sense for the ghost to take on that guy's form? The morally questionable troubled youth vs. the older more experienced Jedi who has matured & learned from his past mistakes....to me, the latter makes way more sense.

And again, this is not really a "fact", but rather your own rationale for why the change works for you...which is fine to do. But when arguing about what is a necessary change for continuity, head-cannon explanations just don't work. Like you said, we don't know how the Force works. So if the change had never been made, our explanation would be: Anakin simply took on the form of his older self, or the idealized version of himself as an older Jedi who has matured past his troubled youth.

You can accept it all you want. But, logically speaking, it wasn't necessary. Both ghosts can work with whatever head-cannon explanations we want to come up with. And I suspect that the true reason for the change was simply to throw in a prequel tie-in so that everything felt more like a cohesive saga. And I get that it works for a lot of people who like the prequels or those who grew up with them. But the argument that it was necessary in order for the story to make sense just doesn't hold much water.

 

That's beside the point. The scene in the SE works in the context of the saga, but from the point of view of Luke and the context of ROTJ as a stand alone film, I don't think, it's not the most logical choice. The question was, whether the change was necessary. I don't think so, as the scene was fine as as, and well liked for two decades, in the same way that Alec Guiness was great as Obi-Wan and didn't need to be replaced by Ewan McGregor in old people makeup. The change reflects Lucas' desire to visually connect the two trilogies, which is his perogative, but I don't like it, as I'm not a fan of altering classic films decades after the fact.

 

The thing is that as Lucas himself said, he had to make a film that would work on its own, but also work within a trilogy and within a larger saga. It did work on its own as it was, back in an era where he didn't have a much larger saga going on and he didn't have as much say in when it would be shown on television. Much less back before box sets became a common thing. But as time went on, these things changed and his statement during the making of ROTS became the deciding factor with that change.

As Luke's point of view, there is no reason that it wouldn't affect him at all. The point isn't so much that he looks young or old, the point is that he sees his father's spirit and it is with that of his friends and Masters. So for Luke, the end result is important.

 

Of course it affects Luke. Luke never met his father as a young man. Even from the point of view of the saga and the audience I would argue it's not the most logical choice. Anakin's life ever since we witnessed him as a young man in AOTC, was full of turmoil and dodgy choices. He was continually walking the tightrope between good and evil, until he finally succumbed to his desires, and became Darth Vader. When we witness the kind old eyes of Anakin just before his death, we finally witness a man at peace with himself. It is that man, the man that Luke personally saw with his own eyes, the man that the audience witnessed sacrificing his own life to safe the life of his son, that appears to Luke, next to the spirits of Luke's mentors in the shapes of the persons Luke knew personally.

 

He still met his father, young or old. As to the rest, the point is that he was still a good man as a young person. Even with the conflict in his life, he was still a good person who was trying to do the right thing. He's still found his peace when he dies. That doesn't change seeing him as a younger person.

 

Considering the reality, that many viewers found Anakin to be less than good before his official turn, I'm not sure I agree with you there. Even if it was Lucas' intent to show Anakin as a good man, I think an argument can be made he was well on his way to becoming Darth Vader long before he swore allegiance to Palpatine. As Anakin put it, he was not the Jedi he should be. He wanted more. It's the Anakin that dies in ROTJ played by Shaw, that fulfills his destiny, and let's go of his attachments.

 

Personally, I like Hayden in Jedi...I'm probably the minority here, but I liked the blu-ray changes that tied them to the prequels a little more...it's just fun...don't get me wrong, I like the pre-special editions as well, after all that's what I grew up with, but I still enjoy the small extra things...

 

Yes, he was becoming evil in the PT, but he was not all the way there yet until he chooses to become evil and then embrace it. He's not a perfect person, but there is still good within him up until it is suppressed/destroyed. His actions with the Tuskens and Dooku doesn't make him evil as in a full blown evil person, but that he has committed horrible acts. But he hasn't fully embraced the dark side. He hasn't fully turned his back on being a Jedi and his humanity. It is only in the moment when he does, that he truly becomes evil. This why Lucas said that he knew that the audience would have trouble understanding Anakin's reasoning, because they were very subtle and most would focus on the larger aspects of what he did, that they would not see the subtler implications.

 

Its a complex one because anakin had his arms and legs cut off so him being a force ghost of a much older anakin with his arms and legs back if fine but if he is gonna come back the way he looked once he dies then he probably wouldn't have regenerated arms and legs.

obviously lucas took anakin back to before he joined the dark side which is before he lost his limbs so it works in that regard.

Personally i have no issue with hayden there but i can see why to some feel it wasn't necessary.