PT Jar Jar Binks - Force User Theory and the real Phantom Menace

Trump was the REAL Phantom Menace!!! Oh man, here comes the Reddit theories....

 

At least he is not the Zodiac Killer.

 

In my opinion it is a good theory to read, is it true who knows, I think George Lucas is the one who can answer that and I wish he would! I found it an entertaining read.

But you have to ask yourself why Ahmed Best, the man who played Jar Jar made this comment on the redidt article:

food for thought, he should know more than any of us wouldn't he if it were true?

Also, I never understood that small minority of prequels basher....I never waste time talking about a film I hate, because its just that....a waste of time...

I think why this is the fact is that OT fans have had 16 plus years of imagining what the PT was supposed to be in there minds...that when the films came out....it went against their 16 plus year of "what if".

Here are the world wide totals for the film earnings in their day

May 19, 1999 Star Wars Ep. I: The Phantom Menace $1,027,044,677
May 16, 2002 Star Wars Ep. II: Attack of the Clones $648,200,000
May 19, 2005 Star Wars Ep. III: Revenge of the Sith $848,998,877

Looks like successful numbers to me overall....and I know people say "we still went because we love star wars"....if I hated a film...I wouldn't see its sequels.....but that's just my opinion.

 

I think that that remark simply represents Ahmed basking in the moment and having some fun on Twitter.

After all the derision that Jar Jar has endured, why wouldn't he revel in a wacky theory that suddenly had everyone talking about his character again?

If you found it an entertaining read, that is completely your right. It's certainly creative.

And on another note, I think your thread deserves better than snide put-downs.

I see no reason why the theory can't be discussed, and in a civil way.

 

Cryogenic, I agree...The thread was meant to spark up a civil discussion...It wasn't meant to cause controversy....and I wasn't aware there was a similar thread.

I think it would be nice if George Lucas would comment on it....but maybe he can't.

as a side note...I am unable to reply with quotes...I find it strange that I can't ...lol

 

There are threads for almost everything on here.

This one might stay as it is or be consolidated into the existing one.

Anyway, yes, if people want to be short, that is their right. But there's a fine line between that and rudeness.

Lucas has barely commented on 1/100th of what is in these movies.

He leaves it down to interpretation.

Must be Jar Jar.

 

I just find Jar Jars blunders advance major plot points in the story...one of them is his proposal to forfeit the powers of the senate to Palpatine....which like it or not, it is the seed of the beginning of the Empire under Palpatine. Most of the time he is always around Palpatine.

When Yoda first appeared, he appeared as a silly bumbling old crazy Kermit the frog before he revealed himself to Luke as the Jedi Master....

Also, when episode 1 came out in 1999....I didn't believe back then that the Phantom Menace was Darth Maul or Palpatine...because I already knew Palpatine was the emperor and Darth Maul was obvious. You can argue that Palpatine/Sidous worked in the shadows I guess.

After seeing Episode 3, I initially thought Darth Plagiues the Wise might have been the real Phantom Menace...Supreme Leader Snoke (He is Wise) = Darth Plagiues the Wise......but that's another theory

Something fun to watch

 

Maybe one of the truest statements I've ever read. Trump is an insult to Jar Jar even.

 

Jar Jar proposing that Palpatine should have emergency powers. Well, that hardly makes Jar Jar malign. Foolish, perhaps. Worse is constantly done in our world.

Here's a quote on the matter I've presented before:

Jar Jar is a representation of the less serious, animalistic side of humanity. Yes, he is designed for children, but at the same time, if you follow his development (in role as well as speech), it is much like the domestication of animals, or perhaps the domestication of humanity from pure, innocent human to a ?socialized? human under the control of the Demi-urge (because it is Palpatine in Ep 2 that suggests that Jar Jar put forth the motion that eventually leads to Palpatine becoming Emperor). So his childish nature (at least in Ep 1) is a representation of the child or innocence of untamed humanity.

-- Jon Headlee, April 18th 2005
Source: https://web.archive.org/web/2005050...l/2005/04/18/revenge-of-the-sith/#comment-180


And he's around Palpatine some of the time, but not that much. Why conclude that that represents anything dark on Jar Jar's part? It's an artifact of storytelling, and beyond that, might just as well signal some misguided loyalty on Jar Jar's part (they both come from Naboo), or the requirements of the job (Palpatine's the Chancellor and Jar Jar becomes Padme's and Naboo's Representative).

Indeed, the Jedi also linger around Palpatine, as does Anakin. Are they automatically corrupt? Well, you could argue that their proximity to Palpatine represents their unconscious alignment with power; but you would, at the least, have to say it about them as much as Jar Jar. Palpatine seems to bilk everyone in the PT. But Jar Jar is the real master? I remain skeptical.

I'll point you in the direction of my Freudian reading of Jar Jar. If Jar Jar is pure "id", then he is neither good nor evil. Rather, he has the potential for both, as we all do, in every given moment, and it's merely his environment that determines a) how tolerated he is, and b) how beneficial his energies and abilities will be to that environment and any future ones.

Yoda really is a Jedi Master. He was testing Luke's patience. The opposite side of that coin are matriculated Jedi -- Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan -- encountering an actual "fool" and showing him no patience. Yoda's charade strongly hints that there are such creatures in the universe that might test a person's patience. Hence Jar Jar.

Jar Jar is his own "Jedi Master". His masterfulness does not lie in being possessed of guile in the conventional sense, but precisely in having an unconventional relationship with his environment and himself. Jar Jar: clone jars that contain all the secrets of the universe (cf. Pandora's jar). Jar Jar is the one who jars and the jar (or jars) itself (or themselves). He may also be the energy within the jar(s); or the potential for that energy to be unleashed. His transcendence lies precisely in his immanence. He is not a ne'er-do-well.

The subtitle of Episode I could refer to anything in the film: a character, a situation, a contingency, a theme, an idea. Anything. For instance, the blockade and invasion of Naboo suggest "something else" to Qui-Gon, and even Obi-Wan feels there is something more "elusive" at work to begin with, despite Qui-Gon cautioning him not to centre on his anxieties. The TF, it turns out, are being manipulated by Sidious, and the invasion is a dress rehearsal for the Clone Wars: a much bigger storm to come.

Is Jar Jar, as you seem to imply, *the* phantom menace? Well, I prefer *a* phantom menace, like everything else. There actually isn't one menace: there are a series of overlapping menaces and maladies. "The" is something of a red herring. But you can sort of pick them out one at a time and imagine they constitute the whole Star Wars universe and that they are the ultimate source of woe. A waterfall made from a million tears. It's kind of a neat thought experiment.

The ultimate phantom menace is "the phantom menace". The title!

Watch for the elusive obvious.

Including Jar Jar.


Further reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandora


According to the myth, Pandora opened a jar (pithos), in modern accounts sometimes mistranslated as "Pandora's box", releasing all the evils of humanity—although the particular evils, aside from plagues and diseases, are not specified in detail by Hesiod—leaving only Hope* inside once she had closed it again.

The Pandora myth is a kind of theodicy, addressing the question of why there is evil in the world.


*Hope = "A New Hope"

 

now that's cool too!

For me, Darth Plagiues would have been a cool puppet master

 

Truer words have not been spoken.

 

Ah! Too kind.

 

My brain...


(I agree with you btw)

 

You found a very appropriate GIF!

Of course, I'm not saying that Jar Jar is Pandora's jar, per se.

I'm just trying to indicate, as in the earlier myth, that he embodies the subconscious, or perhaps the realm of the "id", and that without proper care and handling, the "id" can lead things astray, and be highly corruptive of life.

Jar Jar seems like a benevolent helper character in TPM, and a figure who brings terrible change to the galaxy, helping Palpatine get his emergency powers, in AOTC. This is rather different from contending that Jar Jar is inherently bad.

The prequels are an imaginative visual essay on the interplay of civilization and the primal elements of nature. An early scene sets the tone quite well: a red-decked, frill-necked queen remaining firm and telling a red-eyed reptilian man to "Beware!"

And we watch as it all goes horribly wrong and the story takes us to the broiling, volatile, hyper-masculine world of Mustafar, full of smog, and cinders, and geysers that flare up like errant spurts of blood from an open wound.

Improper integration of the "id". That is the problem as greed grows in both the "macro" story of the fall of the Republic and the "micro" story of the fall of Anakin. By the time we get to Mustafar, the "id" of the galaxy, the "id" of the Force, has literally taken on explosive dimensions; the meek and gentle Jar Jar has grown beyond a playful abstraction and become written into everything.

One might almost say the "id" actually leaves Jar Jar as the story progresses. Jar Jar is just a shell of his former self by the end of the PT. Innocence is left to ponder its own demise. There are no straight answers, just Sisyphean mysteries.

 

I've read the theory and I'll try and give my unbiased opinion on it. I'll preface this by saying that I love the prequels in their current state and I've never had a problem with Jar Jar's character.

Now, while I don't appreciate the underlying tone of the essay (indirect prequel bashing; whether intended or not), I can't help but see it's merit.

I'll start with the points I disagree with:

1. Implying that Palpatine was never the phantom menace. This is blatantly wrong considering the movies were intended to be seen in episodic order. I personally know people who've seen the prequels before the originals and were genuinely shocked by Palpatine's reveal.
2. Jar Jar jumping 20 feet in the air. This is a common trait for Gungans. Nothing compelling here.
3. Jar Jar's Wushu fighting style doesn't imply in any way, shape, or form that he's a Sith Lord. A more logical explanation is that this is the fighting style of all Gungan species.
4. A bunch of other minor quibbles. In many instances, the author stretches the truth in order to align with his thesis.

Now on to the points that I find particularly compelling and have trouble rationally disputing:

1. Jar Jar being Yoda's counterpart in the prequels. We're all familiar with the Ring Theory and how much George enjoys drawing parallels between the OT and PT. I loved this quote of George's:
2. Jar Jar's animation. Back in 1999, CGI animation was not cheap. Every minute movement from a CG character is deliberate and time-consuming. I don't see why the animators would be instructed to animate intricate mouth movements that mirror other characters' dialogue, if not for a greater purpose. Seems like a waste of time to me. Admittedly, I doubt any casual viewer could spot this given it's subtlety.
3. This quote from George:
   Combined with this quote:
   However, these quotes are highly questionable (especially the first one) and might have been taken out of context given that I can't find a credible source. I also can't see George sincerely saying the last sentence in that first quote.

That about sums up my thoughts on this whole "Darth Jar Jar" situation. Personally, I'm indifferent. However given that we already have three amazing movies which establish Jar Jar as nothing more then comic relief, I have my doubts towards the validity of this theory. The only thing that would convince me otherwise is an official statement from George, which isn't going to happen any time soon.

-Darth Plagueis

 

This is what many have said....all CGI character actions are thought out and planned......the surprise attack scene is one often sighted where the battle droid fire on jar jar position to the left of Qui-Gon....and then he lands to the right of Qui-Gon and you can see the droids turn his head towards Jar Jar

I couldn't find a better video...start it at 1:50 and pay attention to the droid




I can't see how this is nothing but deliberate...human actors can make mistakes....I am not convinced with CGI characters making mistakes

 

Good rebuttals.

I think you're taking the quote too literally or too narrowly. "Master thing" could be just about anything.

In Jar Jar's case, he turns out to be a masterful mediator, counselor, and guide; as well as acquitting himself well in battle. His talents are mostly latent and unconscious.

Not everyone in the story is meant to be as powerful as Sidious or Yoda.

Jar Jar's mouth movements don't really mirror the dialogue too well. But it might take a few views to decouple yourself from your initial astonishment. Something insidious about it.

In the Panaka clip, if you watch closely, Jar Jar loosely mouths "The Queen wishes it", but only loosely. It seems to be more of an unconscious act of mimicry on his part: like a kid trying to learn language. But when Jar Jar turns his head to Qui-Gon, and Panaka continues, "She's curious about the planet", there is really no comparison between Panaka's clear speech and Jar Jar's languid lip/jaw movements in that moment. If Jar Jar is meant to be ventriloquizing Panaka's speech, he does a haphazard job.

You'll notice that, if you study Jar Jar carefully, especially on Tatooine, he actually smells and tastes the air at several points, which is what leads to that unfortunate moment between him and the Eopie, amongst other things. Given his animalistic aspects, we're meant to appreciate that Jar Jar has a greater connection to the physical world, with more developed senses, and a somewhat greater appetite, than the humans he accompanies.

Another idea is that Lucas had Jar Jar making those initial lip movements as a "mistake"; as if he were a human actor which the camera caught mouthing the lines of another actor. Harrison Ford does exactly that in TESB when Leia tells him to let go of her in the Falcon while they're hiding from the Empire. The line it occurs on is "Captain, being held by you isn't quite enough to get me excited", and the relevant passage in the following clip is 1:34:



The second example -- Jar Jar appearing to complete Padme's words to Qui-Gon: "Well, I don't approve" -- as Padme slumps impetuously outside of Watto's shop is, again, rather loose-fitting. He does pucker his lips as if he's saying the last word ("approve"), but I'm not sure what that's meant to **cough** prove. Again, Jar Jar sometimes makes these sorts of movements with his lips and nostrils, which don't connect directly to anything being said. Rather, these little tics seem fairly arbitrary on Jar Jar's part, as he's lost in his own little world, and not rigidly bound to the propriety displayed by the other characters.

And even if Jar Jar perfectly mouthed every word every character said, or even just complete sentences (which I still see no direct evidence of), what would that prove, exactly? Seems, to me, that anyone trying to argue that Jar Jar is the Ultimate Hidden Badass still has all their work ahead of them. I mean, I think he is a bit of a badass, but not a heartless one.

Also, it is manifestly the case that Jar Jar makes all manner of subtle movements throughout the movie. It's no wonder a tiny handful were found and painfully emphasized to desperately sanctify this thesis. Jar Jar is constantly in motion in TPM. And yes, it is rather startling that they point that much effort into animating him, but they clearly did. In all areas. One of my favourite little moments is when they're at the dinner table in Anakin's hovel. When Qui-Gon wearily asks of Shmi, "Is there anyone friendly to the Republic that can help us?", watch Jar Jar's reaction as Qui-Gon leans forward with his broad shoulders and somewhat coldly says the word "friendly" (this is all quite subtle by the way). He slightly recoils, as if he was momentarily afraid of being struck. Just not something I see a malign Jar Jar doing.

The second quote is authentic and comes from "The Beginning". Relevant part is 2:22:



The full quote is:

"Jar Jar is the key to all this. If we get Jar Jar working, 'cos he's a funnier character than we've ever had in any of the other movies before."

Lucas' second sentence (arguably) puts a limit on the first.

The first quote, however, is complete bunk. I'm not aware of Lucas having ever said any such thing.

The nearest quote I can think of that's even remotely comparable is when Lucas says the following. Note that he expresses the exact opposite sentiments to those conveyed in the one you have:

AP: Do you pay much attention to fan reactions to your choices?

Lucas: Not really. The movies are what the movies are. ... The thing about science-fiction fans and “Star Wars” fans is they’re very independent-thinking people. They all think outside the box, but they all have very strong ideas about what should happen, and they think it should be their way. Which is fine, except I’m making the movies, so I should have it my way.

Source: http://www.today.com/id/6011380/ns/...ment/t/lucas-talks-star-wars-trilogy-returns/

Lucas has always been resolute on pursuing a personal vision for Star Wars and sticking to his ideals. I have not once heard him say anything remotely like the quote you presented.

Indeed, to my way of thinking, that would be very out-of-character, even if he did buckle to fan complaints; which, for the record, I don't think he did.

Yep.

Lucas isn't in the business of confirming or denying mad-hat fan theories.

I will say that it is exceedingly unlikely, in my view, that he meant for Jar Jar to be a villainous character.

One core plot element many fans still refuse to accept in TPM is the concept of midi-chlorians and the commensurate theme of symbiosis; or "lifeforms living together for mutual advantage". That makes me even less inclined to buy into any boilerplate essay that seeks to undermine the basic plot and character relationships of TPM.

Some would rather do anything else, it seems, than acknowledge what is right there in front of them. Ironically, they're a bit like Jar Jar flopping around in battle, trying to shake off the droid they are entangled with. TPM happened. But many people still seem to want to pretend it didn't.

 

I agree with the above point whole heartedly

I always took that comment about Jar Jar being the "key" as the key to getting his special effect working correctly to pull it off as being authentic.....much like Yoda in Episode 4...I never took that comment to mean anything else.

 

I like the theory because it creates the opportunity to look at events from a different point of view. That was one of the best things about the TV series Babylon 5: When you thought you knew it all, it was revealed that there was actually much more to a certain issue or aspect.

It may not be what Lucas intended (yet, most likely he did read Assimov's Foundation series and one character that's impossible to forget is the Mule - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mule_(Foundation)
- but it's noteworthy that you can argue for the theory based on what actually happened in the films.

But, of course, I don't believe for a second that Disney would dare to feature Binks in an upcoming film as a Force user. That would be very bold - and boldness doesn't seem to be something they've been after recently...

 

I also believe that George Lucas read Assimov's Foundation series with the unforgettable character of The Mule...its too similar...lol....

I do believe Disney does not have it them to make a bold film...they will play it safe as they did with TFA (I hope i am wrong with Episode 8 and 9). But I do believe that LucasFilm will take certain elements of Lucas' ideas and morph it into something else.

Star Wars is nothing more than a contemporary view of ancient Myths...watch the Bill Moyers interview where Lucas says that himself.

We have Ben Solo, the grand child of Vadar...so they did keep certain ideas of Lucas about the ST being about the grandkids of Darth Vadar....I mean you can say they took the Idea of Darth Plagius The Wise and morphed it into Supreme intellect "He is Wise" Snoke.....kind of like what Peter Jackson did with the LOTR by putting dialogue of one character and it being delivered by another character in the films in comparison to the books.

Will Disney bring back Jar Jar...no way...but they cannot ignore the popularity of the clone wars...which most of my friends like that more than Rebels. The PT still brings in money.

 

Here are more quotes from Asimov about Star Wars:

Similarities between the two:

Foundation
Han Pritcher
Trantor
Galactic Empire
Bail Channis

Star Wars
Han Solo
Coruscant
Galactic Empire
Bail Organa, Bail Antilles

The Mule = Palpatine or Jar Jar or Both???.................good question.

 

"The Mule is a fictional character from Isaac Asimov's Foundation series.[1] One of the greatest conquerors the galaxy has ever seen, he is a mentalic who has the ability to reach into the minds of others and "adjust" their emotions, individually or en masse, using this capability to conscript individuals to his cause. Not direct mind-control per se, it is a subtle influence of the subconscious; individuals under the Mule's influence behave otherwise normally - logic, memories, and personality intact."

Assuming Palpatine is the "Mule" in SW would explain a lot of things, especially Anakin's turn to the dark side in RotS, which otherwise begs for too many explanations, IMHO.

Jar Jar only had to see to it that the senate gave Palpatine the powers of emergency. Question remains how many senate members would have required "adjustment"...

 

bump

 

Well what do ya know, we did have one after all