CT Why was Yoda so weak?

In the prequels, we see an 870-880 year old Yoda very capable of fighting and showing no signs of slowing down, but only 20 years later (I think that's only 2 years for his species) he's very frail.

 

He was already losing power in the Prequels, which is why he failed to capture Dooku quickly, and which is why he lost to Sidious.

 

Being "frail" doesn't make him incapable of fighting. In the PT, he's as "frail" as in the OT. He only allows himself to get some Force "mojo" when needed (again, just like in the OT).

 

Because you made the mistake of watching the prequels first.

The real Yoda didn’t need a lightsaber. He could effortlessly lift an entire ship out of a swamp with a simple wave of his hand. That’s how powerful he was.

“Wars not make one great.”

“Size matters not. Judge me by my size, do you, hmm? And well you should not. For my ally is the Force, and a powerful ally it is. Life creates it. Makes it grow. Its energy surrounds us, and binds us. Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter. You must feel the Force around you. Between you. Me. The rock. The tree. Everywhere. Yes. Even between the land and the ship.”

But more than that, Yoda had something far more important than power or the ability to wave a glowstick around. Yoda possessed wisdom, and as both Luke Skywalker and the audience learn over the course of the trilogy, being a Jedi is not about being all-powerful nor about waving a glowstick around. (“Adventure. Heh! Excitement. Heh! A Jedi craves not these things.”) It’s about attaining wisdom and serenity. That’s the essence of Luke’s journey throughout the story. That he goes from being a young, naïve and somewhat reckless and impulsive young farmboy to being a wise and mature Jedi Knight. It’s a true coming-of-age story and one of the best and most famous examples of one in contemporary culture. For me, this is the moment where Luke finally comes of age and becomes a true Jedi Knight:



No expository dialogue is necessary. Just by showing Luke finally attaining the wisdom and serenity that his father never achieved (at least not until the next scene), we see what it truly means to be a Jedi.

 

Source? There's no "real Yoda". And Yoda was a Jedi, and as one he needed a lightsaber.

 

Because his feelings were hurt from hearing his home be called a slimy mudhole.

 

"Sick have I become. Old, and weak."


From the newcanon RoTJ novelization: Beware the Power of the Dark Side:

​

​

In Which Luke Returns To Master Yoda​

​

Far away, on the swamp planet of Dagobah, Yoda waits.​

For hundreds of years, he taught Jedi younglings the value of patience.​

But it has not been easy for him to practice it these last few years.​

It is hard to be weak when you were once strong. Hard to move slowly when all around you is moving too fast.​

The Force is out of balance. As the Emperor spreads fear across the galaxy, the dark side grows more and more powerful.​

Yoda knows that it is Luke's destiny, not his, to fight back. Yoda - once a warrior, once the leader of all those who stood against the dark side - can do nothing but wait.​

And it has been a long, helpless wait. First he waited while Luke went to Bespin, then while Luke returned to the rebels, then while Luke went on that insanely risky mission to Tatooine.​

Using the Force, he has tried to keep watch over Luke, but he has only a sense of what his runaway pupil has been through.​

Yet now he senses that Luke is finally returning. And he is relieved. Because he could not have waited much longer.​

Already he has used the Force to prolong his life beyond what is natural. Beyond what is comfortable and almost beyond what is endurable.​

But he refuses to pass on.​

Not until he can play his last part in this great galactic struggle. ​

All he has left are a few pieces of wisdom that might help Luke.​

And now, the sound of an engine roars through the swamp, and Yoda knows the time has finally come. The wait is over.​

 

The real Yoda, as in the tactile Yoda that was physically placed in front of a camera, and not that Pixar/DreamWorks CG cartoon that bounced around like Sonic the Hedgehog.

Yet, Luke only managed to successfully become a Jedi by tossing his lightsaber aside.

 

Tossing his lightsaber aside was a mistake.

 

No, it wasn’t. Luke refused to murder a defenseless man in cold blood (a man who was also his father), and made a conscious decision to reject the dark side. Luke exhibited compassion, restraint and wisdom by tossing aside his lightsaber, as he finally realized and understood something the Emperor was incapable of figuring out and that his father probably realized for the first time in his life upon seeing Luke do that. Everything that we’ve seen throughout the entire trilogy (at least as far as Luke’s arc is concerned) builds to that moment. It’s a moment that I’ve long suspected was inspired by Tolkien.

Just as Bilbo Baggins managed to resist the evil of the One Ring by exercising pity and mercy, Luke Skywalker resists the pull of the dark side by exercising pity and mercy.

 

What about when faced with a being of equal or near-equal power? Or when caught by surprise? In that case, a lightsaber is the most direct and efficient way to defend yourself.

And watching the prequels first is not a mistake. It's the way the saga is intended to be watched.

 

The damn lightsaber didn’t seem to do much good for him against the Emperor. In short, so much for that argument.

Besides, even if caught by surprise, I doubt Yoda would be a great match for, say, King Kong or Godzilla, even if he did have a lightsaber. The Force is much more effective, as it levels the playing field.

If your goal is to preserve George Lucas’s intentions, then it’s not a mistake. If your goal is to watch a compelling story, then it is most definitely a mistake.

 

They were literally equally-matched. Utterly stalemated each other. Both in the Force and their skills with a saber. The only reason Yoda didn't fight until one of them perished is due to the fact that he knew he wouldn't stand a snowball's chance in Hell in defeating him when he was surrounded by thousands of Republic soldiers as well as fighting Sidious at the same time. After all, they are on Coruscant. Attempting to keep fighting would have been a waste and that instinct proved to be correct.

Ah. This conversation again. The talk of the "real Yoda". In many ways, I think Yoda, as he was in the Republic, reveals one of my favorite developments surrounding him ever since I finished watching the entire saga long ago. I adored the idea that what happened in Revenge of the Sith changed him. To an immense degree. Think about it. I'm not sure if you'll agree but at least try to understand my point of view here. Yoda had been trained by the Order for centuries and he has lived through all of its developments, meaning that he has developed a sense of tradition. The carrying of a lightsaber, the adoption of the (at the time) detrimental and increasingly paranoid ideals that the Jedi had begun to construct in fear (ironically) of the Sith's return and memories of grueling wars long past with them. It shows that, even in his old age, there is still wisdom to be found. Things to be learned. After all, sometimes we can gain a lot of wisdom from experience or differing viewpoints over a short period of time.

This was seen from mavericks like Qui-Gon Jinn (and Dooku, who took a darker path but still had a lesson the Jedi simply would not heed) who believed in a different way. I find the transition from PT Yoda to OT Yoda to be really emotional. He appears as a masterful warrior in the PT like many of his contemporaries but in the OT, he is a sage. In the twilight of the Clone Wars, everything he had hoped to prevent, that he had meant to protect, that he oversaw for centuries had come to pieces before his very eyes in a manner of mere decades. That is woeful. Traumatic. Humbling. In Episode V, his disdainful tone when he says "Wars make not one great", his lack of seriousness or pride when referred to as a warrior and telling Luke to not take his weapons into the cave. All of these things are gained from having lived those lessons from experience. Seeing the Jedi being ripped from the roles of scholars and peacekeepers to generals and soldiers, which spelled their doom, has taught him this. After all that loss, you see that, after two decades in complete isolation, he has finally looked inward and adopted a more worldly view rather than the martial and political one he possessed previously. He had learned the folly of his ways and those of his order when deception appeared victorious and ushered in the Dark Times.

Really, we can speak about execution as much as you'd like and we'd find some common ground but this idea that you seem to have of Yoda remaining the same person he was in the OT whilst in the PT is pretty lacking in storytelling potential as well. It's sounds totally unrealistic to me and nowhere near as impacting thematically. Especially since he passed on lessons that were developed as a sum of those experiences to Luke, who redefined what being a Jedi meant for the first time in centuries with a focus on learning to harness one's emotions for good rather than ignoring them entirely.

Your belief that this viewpoint is somehow infallible in a reality in which art can be interpreted in different ways amuses me. Again, we can definitely find some common ground when it comes to execution but this assured, smug statement is really something I've come to expect from you. Not to mention your constant need to make flaws in the PT that simply don't exist (comparing TPM to Song of the South, classic). like racism and support for slavery.

 

In which case, there was no reason for either of them to be using a damn lightsaber.

The problem is that most people do not undergo massive changes in their personal philosophy and outlook on life between the ages of 88 and 90, which is essentially the human equivalent of Yoda’s age throughout the story. For us, 20 years may seem like a long time, but Yoda probably views our perspective of time the same way we view dog years. Also, the older people get, the more calcified they become in their views.

Such a development works better for a character like Obi-Wan Kenobi than it does for Yoda. I can buy Obi-Wan’s philosophy and outlook radically changing between the ages of 40 and 60 as a result of what happened during the prequels. I don’t like how the prequels retroactively turn the Alec Guinness version of the character into a horrible pathological liar for no good reason (“Your father wanted you to have this [lightsaber] when you were old enough.” “Was I any [less reckless] when you taught me?[/]” “I thought that I could instruct him just as well as Yoda. I was wrong.”), but aside from that, the actual course of his development over the course of the films is pretty solid. You can argue about lines of dialogue and the fact that he really is never given much of a personality beyond the bare essentials (even if he is, by far, the second-most likable, relatable and sympathetic character in the prequels, behind only the Emperor).

Like I said, such an arc works better for Obi-Wan than it does for Yoda. Obi-Wan going from a young enthusiastic warrior to the wise old sage who tells Han Solo, “You can’t win. But there are alternatives to fighting.” certainly has some dramatic potential.

Making Yoda into a warrior kinda undermines the entire point of his character. The whole point is that both Luke and the audience are expecting Yoda to be this great, powerful, badass warrior. Sorta like a Frank Frazetta Conan painting. When he turns out to be this little frog-like creature, we’re being shown that being a great warrior has absolutely nothing to do with being a great and wise Jedi.

It’s hardly my fault if you can’t recognize the most obvious hyperbole when you see it. My point was that that whole subplot had absolutely zero dramatic or emotional impact because we’re just being calmly and politely told about it, rather than being allowed to feel it and relate to it. “Oh. So you’re a slave. I guess that really sucks. Oh, well.” Instead of eliciting horror or empathy or understanding, it elicits a shrug. And I still maintain that for such an allegedly traumatic childhood, the lighthearted tone of those segments really kills any point that’s being made. At least Disney movies are usually pretty good at establishing the proper tone. They know how to be lighthearted, scary, or exciting depending on the point they’re trying to make. With this, it’s sorta like, “Oh, yeah. I forgot he was a slave. Now that I think about it, I guess that probably did really kinda suck for him. I just never thought of that or realized it because that seemed to be when he was at his happiest.” Creating the proper mood and atmosphere to illustrate your point is part of a director’s job…and on that level, I’d argue that Lucas completely and utterly failed, at least as far as that whole subplot is concerned. And there’s a difference between completely failing to establish the proper atmosphere and employing an ironic dissonance (such as the ending of DR. STRANGELOVE, when that sappy Vera Lynn song plays over images of a nuclear holocaust).

When Stanley Kubrick wrote the foreword for the published screenplay of Krzysztof Kieslowski’s DEKALOG, he said that the writers “have the very rare ability to dramatize their ideas rather than just talking about them. By making their points through the dramatic action of the story they gain the added power of allowing the audience to discover what's really going on rather than being told. They do this with such dazzling skill, you never see the ideas coming and don't realize until much later how profoundly they have reached your heart.[/quote]” And to me, it almost seems as if George Lucas went out of his way to do literally the exact opposite of what Kubrick praised DEKALOG for doing. Instead of dramatizing the ideas, he just talks about them. Instead of making his point through the dramatic action of the story, the audience is never allowed to discover it for themselves, instead just being told certain things by exposition dialogue and being forced to assume, “Well, then I guess this is the case cuz the writer says so.” You can pretty much see everything in the prequels coming a mile away, even if you don’t go in knowing how it’ll all end (every single scene in ATTACK OF THE CLONES featuring Anakin consists of nothing but shouting at the audience, “See? See! See all these signs that he’s on the path to the dark side! See? See! See!”). And because there’s no drama and because everything is so heavy-handedly telegraphed, the films pretty much lack anything resembling an emotional impact.

I’m not claiming that the original trilogy was without flaw or that every frame of it was Kubrickian or Shakespearean brilliance. But overall, it did a great job of telling the story it was trying to tell. Sure, parts of it are kinda corny and hokey, some of the line deliveries are unpolished, and some of the dialogue is poorly written, but if the story is working and the characters are working, then that stuff is easier to forgive. And the original trilogy had a set of likable characters with their own little quirks and idiosyncrasies that made them relatable, and it had actors who, while not always polished, had quite a bit of presence and charisma. For the most part, the prequels are just boring. Any flaws that the original trilogy had are magnified tenfold here, but without the charm and appeal of the earlier films. Instead of likable archetypes who became three-dimensional due to the quality of the execution, we had characters who should’ve been complex and dramatically compelling but who were so poorly executed

Not to mention that if you watch it in Lucas order, the whole structure just completely collapses on itself becoming the absolute worst structured story in human history. To give Lucas some credit, he more or less did the best he could under the circumstances to make the prequels work for people who hadn’t seen the originals. The problem is that he did not make the originals in such a way to be watched after the prequels, and no amount of Special Edition tinkering can change that. Watching the prequels first doesn’t really improve or detract from that trilogy. It’s equally awful either way. But watching the prequels first has the unfortunate effect of also making the original trilogy suck. Literally, as EPISODE IV of a six-part epic, the first hour or so if the 1977 film is absolutely dreadful. As an introduction to STAR WARS, the first half of the 1977 film works brilliantly. It sets everything up quite nicely, it establishes the tone, and we get to meet the characters. But as EPISODE IV, it’s just absolutely god-awful, horrendous, atrocious storytelling because literally nothing happens. It’s 20 minutes of the droids walking around the desert for no reason followed by 40 minutes of a non-mystery that goes nowhere and adds nothing (who is Obi-Wan Kenobi), followed by Alec Guinness sitting down and giving us a bunch of boring exposition explaining everything we just got finished watching. Simply put, Lucas order is a disaster, and hopefully, most people are smart enough to show their kids the films in the proper release order, or else I fear that STAR WARS will disappear very quickly. It’s even worse than that chronological TV edit of THE GODFATHER.

 

The material that was used doesn't make the character real. It's a fictional character. Make belief. He's as real in the OT as he is in the PT.

No, by not giving into the dark side. It wasn't the act of tossing his lightsaber aside, but the fact of following the Jedi way by not killing a defeated opponent. The fight was over.

The lightsaber is still the Jedi's weapon.

 

I'll address the rest of your post later (really tired) but I just wanted to draw attention to this.

The **** was he supposed to tell him? "Oh, while your father was screaming his burning (lol) hatred for me whilst being immolated after I cut off his limbs in a duel that he instigated, I managed to grab his lightsaber so that I could give it to you."? Yeah, because that'll go over perfectly. Also, Yoda was the grandmaster so he must have given him some preliminary instruction at least (like he did for many very young apprentices). Also, don't forget that Obi-Wan was very nearly approaching knighthood in TPM and that he fought much more aggressively as an apprentice than he did when he became a fully-fledged Jedi Knight (also a general) and gradually honed his skills to an even further degree with a greater emphasis on defense and fortitude. He could have considered his early years and his style before being officially ordained in the trials as "reckless".

As for my opinion regarding the "exposition" scene, I think it's still pretty good if you watch it in order (which is, in large part, due to Alec Guiness). You can tell he is uneasy when recounting the events we saw in the previous films and when Luke asks, "How did my father die?", he hesitates. You can see his pain and his fear of destroying his chances of making Luke into a Jedi. It's changed from an exposition scene into something far more somber. The fact that he has to lie to this innocent young man in order to put him on the right path. It goes against his very nature but he must, regardless of how he feels. He doesn't lie because he wishes to. He takes no pleasure in it.

 

“Although your father sadly died before you were born, I know he would have wanted you to have this when you were old enough.” There. Done.

And my point had more to do with Obi-Wan’s claims of having been a reckless youth than his claim of having been trained by Yoda. Yeah, maybe he was reckless before we ever met him (those who are familiar with the EU can probably elaborate on this), but throughout the prequels, he's constantly shown to be the most level-headed, rational and clear-minded character of the heroes. And the whole idea of “I thought that I could instruct him just as well as Yoda. I was wrong,” certainly implies that he was still reckless when he was teaching Anakin. Yet the prequels clearly show that Anakin’s fall had nothing to do with Obi-Wan being reckless or impatient, and everything to do with Anakin being a rotten little punk who needed to be smacked in the face.

I agree that to the extent that it still works, it’s entirely due to Alec Guinness being a great actor. But that doesn’t account for alot of the other things that I mentioned.

Well, I’ll certainly make sure to remember this next time Sebastian Shaw is called “fake Anakin”.

And Luke could’ve simply holstered it. But he deliberately chose to cast it aside. As Yoda himself said, “Your weapons. You will not need them.” Yoda’s training centered around broadening Luke’s mind and teaching him mental discipline. It had nothing to do with the damn lightsaber. And no, deleted scenes don’t count, especially since Lucas himself repudiated those scenes during pre-production on RETURN OF THE JEDI. A truly creative artist can take the limitations that he or she is handed and turn them into assets (see Spielberg and JAWS).

 

Yoda was no more "weak" in the OT than as he's portrayed in the PT.

You see Yoda do nothing but sit for the vast majority of TPM, save walking at the very end...with the assistance of a cane. Yoda is extremely old when we meet him in the OT and his body is portrayed from prequel film one as being...extremely old.

He calls on the Force to assist him in great feats in TESB.
He calls on the Force to assist him in great feats in AOTC and ROTS.

Whether it's lifting an X-Wing, catching a mega-ton falling pillar, or energizing him for a lightsaber duel, Yoda is shown consistently from OT to PT.

The only difference? By the time we see Yoda in TESB he, and the state of the galaxy, are in totally different places. There's no need, nor any occasion, for Yoda to duel at that point in his life. His concentration after ROTS is mediating on things of the Force and, much later, training the son of Skywalker to finally defeat the Sith.

But the magical scene of Yoda lifting Luke's X-Wing reminds us that he is still enormously capable.

 

You try living on a swamp planet for 20 years. But seriously, Yoda was, what, 890 years old by this point? He also assumed the role of teacher/mentor for Luke, the last of the Jedi as far as anyone (except Yoda, apparently) was aware of. His place was no longer on the battlefields. It was to teach Luke how to defeat the Sith once and for all.

 

1) He did quite well against Sidious - we didn't see how but Yoda was constantly forcing Sidious back with his saber and Sidious eventually abandoned his lightsaber altogether. It did a lot of good for him.

2) King Kong and Godzilla have nothing to do with Star Wars.

3) A compelling story is subjective.

4) Why was your reply so confrontational in tone? If I said something that offended you I apologize but I don't think I did.

 

I believe Pablo Hidalgo hinted that Dagobah suffers from time dilation due to it being a massive bastion of the Force. This would explain why Yoda appears to be so frail and old by Empire and also nicely ties in how Luke seemed to train there longer than it took Han and Leia to get to Bespin. But, ignoring speculation, Yoda was defeated. Not just literally but mentally, physically. All of his closest friends and confidants were exterminated across the galaxy. He has lost against the greatest threat the galaxy had seen. I can't blame him for losing faith.

 

I love how people cite Empire Strikes Back as an example of how the Jedi were supposed to be more spiritual and wise than acrobatic fighters while empire strikes back is the movie that featured Yoda training Luke how to do jumps and flips...

 

Weak? The little green guy picked up an entire starfighter through the force effortlessly. If anything, I'd say he gained in strength.