ST Palpatine "Gran Palpa" Discussion Thread

I suspect the reason he wasn't fully formed is to say that 1 clone alone was difficult to produce. I'd guess if they could produce a better clone of Palpatine, he wouldn't be a zombified mess. My guess is that was the cache on his survival.

To be fair, i think the idea is that his resurrection after the force drain made him more powerful. Since he shot lighting into the sky a few moments earlier. so presumbably he vaporized himself because of how powerful he was at that time.

 

We don't know because it's never explained or rationalised in the film. Maybe he was the 5th clone of Palpatine... or maybe even the 1st, who'd lived for circa 30 years, but had degraded over the previous 30 years? Maybe he'd been cloned straight into the 90 year old version of himself? Point is, IMO, they never thought it through... and in reality, fans have spent longer trying to make sense out of it than Abrams ever did.

I agree that the dyad made him potentially stronger... which is a bad concept in and of itself (does Abrams only know how to 'develop' characters by them being 'levelled up'?)... but that should also (by virtue) make him less easy to kill... Not just that, but Palaptine has been through this before right? Has he learnt nothing? Does more power = more stupid?

 

Fwiw I got the impression it wasn’t just the lightning being reflected back but also the Skywalker sabers charged by Rey and the past Jedi. I say this because the lightning keeps coming from her sabers for a few seconds after he stops shooting lightning, and the fact Rey gets up for the last deed then dies… to me illustrates she was on borrowed power to even be able to do this after earlier being drained.

 

Palpatine’s state of semi-aliveness made sense, as others have suggested.
If he had to be brought back, the body not being able to fully contain him was the way to go.

 

yeah

 

But by that logic Rey, or any future Jedi protagonist, can just get their sabre charged by all the Jedi and smite their enemies down.. be it Sith Lords, crime syndicates or Death Star's. I'm in no doubt that Abrams intention was to show Rey channeling God like powers from the Jedi, but the point is that it's not underpinned by internal logic... and more specifically, there's nothing established to state that Rey channeling these powers definitively means that Palpatine could never return... after all, the Chosen One could not guarantee that... it just took a poor filmmaker to decide that Palaptine had somehow returned.

 

I think that showdown’s leaps of logic were made to solidify this movie as the end of the Skywalker saga.

The filmmakers wanted to have the last word on the conflict of Jedi and Sith by having those two characters represent the entirety of the two orders, and the sides they represent, and showing the light winning in the end.

It’s not graceful storytelling in execution, but it does tie to the movie’s theme of legacy and connecting with one’s heritage/ancestors as a way to fully come into being as a new generation. So there was some setup there that also ties to wider themes in the sequels.

But I don’t love the execution, nor do I think it comes even close to how well Return of the Jedi did this. It was the same concept thematically, but Return just worked on many more levels. It was personal and quiet and focused, yet it contained the power to serve as a perfect emotional and story climax to the movie and the series. And it didn’t require any leaps in logic or storytelling shortcuts. It felt more logical and organic.

 

Yeah but let's face it...Star Wars fan don't care about execution or Graceful storytelling.

 

I don’t get what you mean?

 

It took fans ages to appreciate the storytelling of the PT. Because people often were spiting it for not being what they wanted it to be.

 

Palpatine in TROS is the Cheat Death Code version, dark side and unnatural, which is he looks so messed up. I don't see anything that implies that he's done it before or would be able to do it since (because he starts the movie looking arguably worse off in TROS than he looks in the PT or the OT). There's the added bonus that Rey and all the Jedi are striking down Palpatine and all the Sith. Unless they start making movies set past this time period, he's meant to be destroyed.

 

Unfortunately, once you use the cheat death code...you can always use it again. That's the problem with digging up the dead, desperately, as a last resort.

 

Not like they ever explained how Palpatine came back- just dark science, unnatural abilities, secrets that only the Sith knew, so there's nothing to say this death will be any more final than the last one. If they had shown something like a special artifact or location or ritual that brought him back they could have more definitively written him out, but not like they care about that.

He was meant to be destroyed during RotJ, and we've seen how much the sequels respected that plot point, so no reason to expect they'll leave Palpatine alone when they write themselves into another corner.

 

Nice explanation of how TLJ affected the overall arc of the ST, including climax of episode IX and sense of fulfillment. What a wasted opportunity to miss the development of a master plan.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Storytelling was good, the execution was flawed. George focused too much on the visual effects, having this time access to more technical capabilities to realize his vision, unlike in the OT. But he lost his touch in the scripting and cast performance. PT has some of the most forced lines and non convincing performances of the saga (in my opinion).


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Yeah. There was actually a PT story at the core to appreciate in value over time. Some fans - I suppose - have managed to overlook the dialog and the screenplay, and can enjoy the narrative over three movies, as well as, the era, and how it connects to the OT. And no matter how 'bad' the PT may be, it doesn't ruin the OT characters.

I think this is largely fundamentally impossible for the ST. For while they took great care with the dialog, the acting, the effects, etc, they forgot the story. And for many fans, the beloved OT characters lay in ruins.

End of day, the ST is not the PT. Just because one - in theory - has aged well, doesn't mean the other will.

 

I'm having difficulty reconciling the view that the ST is better written, acted or directed than anything TBH... I believe the ST is pretty meagre on all those levels. I do think the PT has more examples of stilted dialogue and delivery... but not sure that objectively equates to inferior... although it's certainly more apparent. I find most of the dialogue in the ST to be less stilted, but largely non-sensical and not serving a wider story/narrative... "somehow Palpatine has returned" kind of summing up the ST for me. I do think the ST's dialogue tends to have more purposely light wight/funny moments, which land better than the comedic moments in the PT, which were more visually led than dialogue driven.

 

People who watch the PT for the first time today don't see the execution or dialogue issues that were criticized for so long once upon a time.

 

The PT is far more exciting in general. Its dated badly for OT nostalgia but has actually dated well by todays bright and coulorful standards.

But then people who watch the 3 ST film for the first time won't have enough time to set their own standards. As many people today with the PT. They won't feel any ownership over where the next part goes.

 

I'm not even sure it's so much that the 'details in execution don't matter nearly as much', but that they have been over exaggerated to the point that some believed the hyperbole... and I fully acknowledge that can be applied to the ST too (although I wouldn't agree of course).

I watched TPM last weekend (as part of the run up to Obi-Wan), and I haven't watched it since the 4K versions first came out... but I was struck at how engaging the film actually was (it's never been my favourite)... and how inoffensive, and actually sweet, Jake Lloyd was... how good Neeson is as Qui-Gon... how Maul actually makes for a tangible threat etc. etc. There's still some very stilted dialogue and delivery (and if I were Lucas I would have edited out about 30 mins), but it's still a 'good' SW film IMO.

 

While the PT hate has fairly washed away, you do tend to get the odd article like this, which feels very outdated now. But it certainly is abit of a flashback

It's Time to Forgive Hayden Christensen for the Star Wars Prequels
https://time.com/6177355/hayden-chr...tm_term=entertainment_movies&linkId=165937857

Now on twitter there is a huge amount of support AGAINST this article. But once upon the time, that wasn't the case.

 

I would still have a hard time sitting through the prequels. I feel like there were a lot of grand ideas and neat concepts, but I don’t think Lucas got the best performance out of his actors.

I’ve not seen Hayden or Ian in anything outside of Star Wars, but Ewan, Liam and Natalie I all think are great, in OTHER films. TPM and AOTC in particular I think are very stiff, so much so that when Anakin has his outbursts it almost feels out of place to me when juxtaposed against the other performances and dialogue.

RotS is the only one I found genuinely good from a performance standpoint, but it just feels rushed.

The sequels on the other hand I think is the other side of the coin. I think the performances are largely excellent. Its the story that meanders too much and leaves much to be desired. Force me to choose either trilogy to watch all the way through and I’ll choose the sequels more often than not. I might wine and complain about what are IMO ridiculous creative decisions, but Im not bored by them. Even if Im frustrated or rolling my eyes, I’m at least engaged.

With the prequels I felt like what drew me in the most was the world building and all of the EU that surrounded the prequels, not the films themselves.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk