PT "Anakin became evil too quickly"

My apologies. I work long hours, my job is mentally taxing. I will respond as best I can...if I'm faced with a wall of text..I will respond as best I can within the time I have - and as pertinently as possible. It is not meant as disrespect, I assure you.

The only evidence Mace has is Anakin's testimony? Really? Is this like "that incident on Cato-Neimodia"? Does the fact that Palpatine has brandished a lightsabre, killed three Jedi, tried to cut up Mace and then tried to fry him with lightening not count? You claim that Mace's motives are "impure" because it is only about saving the Jedi.....but this is based on the fact that Mace says he senses a plot to destroy the Jedi - which there is. And...why would Palpatine want to destroy the Jedi? Because with the Jedi out of the way, and the clone army in his pocket...he has the galaxy all sewn up. The fate of the Jedi and trhe fate of the Republic are intertwined. Mace also says...just before Palpatine pours forth his first burst of lightening - "The oppression of the Sith will never return". This is not just about some narrow idea of saving the Jedi. There is nothing "impure" in Mace's motives.

The idea of this "impurity" is best revealed by simply stating the facts of what Palpatine is and has done.....which is known to both Mace and Anakin because this is the Sith Lord..."the one we have been looking for". Mace knows what Palpatine is about...and so does Anakin. That's why Anakin would "very much" like to kill Palpatine when he rerveals himself as a Sith...No. As the Sith Lord. The one they have been looking for.

Do I need to explicate to you what Palpatine has done? And then, the idea that it is "doubly" "impure" because Palpatine is apparently weak. Mace knows he is not. Palpatine is feigning his weakness for Anakin's benefit. Mace even says this; "He is too dangerous to be kept alive". And he is right. If you want to overlook those details (ie how the actual story is unfolding) then...there really is no discussion to be had. If you want to place a false narrative in the place of what is actually going on..that the story is about judicial oversight or...that Anakin cares about Mace killing Palpatine (actually) because it isn't the Jedi way. The scenes work in conjunction...the one follows the other. They are not separate events...sooo..

The rumination scene; Anakin is engrossed in thoughts about Padmé. There is NOTHING else on his mind in the rumination scene. Palpatine's voice tells him that, if he should die then so will the secret of how to save Padmé. That is the reason he races to the Chancellor's office. That has set the scene - we know why Anakin is there. At the moment of stress Anakin reveals his true motivation for saving Palpatine; it is because he needs him; because he wants the secret power to save Padmé. After Palpatine jumps up and fries and then chucks Mace out of the window, what does Anakin do? Does he let out a sigh of relief and thank the heavens that he stopped that dastardly Mace from going against the Jedi Code? Does he look meaningfully at Palpatine and say "I knew the Jedi were trying to take over. It's a good job I got here when I did."? No, he bemoans "What have I done?"

And then what? He kneels...broken, desultory, before Palpatine...look upon him with disgust and declares "I will do anything you ask. Just help me to save Padmé"

All that you are doing here is what I am referring to when I say "refractive semantics"; you want to break down every moment as if they occur within a vacuum - as if each moment, each event is an event unto itself, unrelated to the scenes and events surrounding them.

You keep going on about this emotional state that Anakin is in...and then claiming I haven't addressed what you have said. So...let me repeat he point I made earlier. I am willing to accept that Anakin is not wholly of sound mind. He is under great stress. That his decision making is not entirely rational is not an idea I have in any way ignored or rejected. Where we really differ is that you claim that this emotional turmoil is because " Before the pledge scene Anakin has many emotional strains weighing on him."



whereas the narrative has only one thing he is grappling with. The rumination scene is all about Padmé. He reveals, in his moment of stress, his true reason for saving Palpatine (which we know anyway is the only reason he is in the Chancellor's office, because the rumination scene set that idea up) when he says "I need him". And, after he is bull-whipped by the murder of Mace Windu he pledges himself to Palpatine's teachings on the (sole) basis that he help him to save Padmé.

You say that he " fears he's been asked to act traitorously"..which he may have believed prior to Palpatine revealing himself as the Sith Lord they have been looking for. The same Sith Lord that Anakin "would very much like to" kill...because he knows now who the traitor really is.

The idea that he is concerned by the idea that "he sees the #2 Jedi willing to break the Jedi code by attempting to murder a head-of-state who appears totally helpless" is to place that scenario hopelessly out of touch with what follows...and what Anakin knows already. He's not simply a "head of state" - he's the Sith Lord they have been looking for; he's just watched him blasting Mace with lightening for crying out loud....and after he stops Mace (because he needs him...which the rumination scene has already spelled out) what follows would disavow him of any belief that Palpatine's appearance of weakness was real. There is no sense in which any of this could still have meaning for him....nor is there anything in the dialogue to suggest he cares; about anything except saving Padmé.

But then you subtly switch the argument....and hold the pretence that it is the same argument; so you want to claim that Anakin may actually (on notions that we know he cannot seriously hold to) believe in what Palpatine has told him to then enquiring as to whether...under stress..might he..mightn't any of us rationalise what he is doing....

If he believed in what Palpatine has told him then...why would he need to rationalise it?

But the whole point is....the pay-off of this take on the Faustian pact is what Lucas talks about with the tear on Mustafar. The pathos, the pay-off, is that Anakin doesn't believe that what he is doing is in some way right; it is in fact that he knows that what he doing is wrong.......that is the conflict - to save Padmé he must do what he knows is wrong, evil. There is no pathos and no pay-off if he believes in what he is doing.

 

Well, you're not answering the questions I've directed at you, so until you do, I'm not really interested in continuing this discussion. It seems like you're purposely trying to talk past me. I don't reject your interpretation. I simply say that there are multiple interpretations that could explain what's going on in Anakin's head during his fall. You don't seem able to accept this simple fact. For some reason, when it comes to understanding other people's perspectives you run into a mental block. This isn't a film with narration or a novel written from 1st person or 3rd person omniscient POV. We, as viewers, have to imagine what's going on in Anakin's mind. It's impossible to ever know precisely what's going on his mind. This is what opens what's happening in Anakin's psychology to multiple interpretations.

Again, I'm willing to continue this discussion, but only if you answer the questions I asked you. I think answering these questions would allow you to better understand other perspectives than your own. Since I can accept your interpretation and you seem to reject my interpretation as absolutely and unquestionably impossible and I feel these questions would better help you understand the perspective behind my interpretation, I don't see how it would make sense for me to continue a discussion with someone who refuses to do what I think it takes to understand where I am coming from.

 

I am addressing the questions you are raising. You appear to want me to answer them in some pre-ordained (by you) narrative structure..for what purpose I do not know.

It's not that I don't understand your narrative...it is that as far as I can tell, it simply doesn't make sense with the actual scenes, or the actual story that is being told..but that's actually the point - that you are having to ignore the structure of the story to back-project some notional subtext into the scenes.

Some simple examples; You claim that when Anakin makes his pledge he is confused by the notion that hhe has seen Mace try to kill a "head of state" who "appears to be defenceless". Neither before or after he cuts Mace's hand off can Anakin consider that Palpatine is (simply) a head of state. He knows he is the Sith Lord they have been looking for (and who, for that reason...and for all that that entails he "would very much like" to kill)...and has just witnessed him blasting Mace with lightening. After Mace has been fried and discarded out of the window Anakin can not be under any illusion that Mace was about to kill a defenceless man. You want to somehow argue that Anakin believes in Palpatine prior to his turn and also that in his emotional turmoil he comes to rationalise and comes to (by means of that rationalisation) believe in Palpatine's ideals..these are not ideas that can be linked by AND, functionally they represent two possibilities of an OR gate.

"I have always liked Picasso's work" and "I never really thought much about Picasso's works but have come to see a certain charm in them over time" are not commutative statements.

But...fundamentally you ignore that...there is no pay-off if Anakin believes in Palpatine's ideas. There is no pathos. He cannot know that what he is doing is wrong, that what he does is evil if he believes in those things.

 

only one kenobi, I apologize. When I read over your last post, I missed at the very top that you said that you'd be responding to my questions.

I'm not trying to force you to see the film through my own pre-ordained narrative structure. I fully accept your perspective. I simply think your answering these questions would better help you understand mine.

I'm sorry that you're busy right now and I also understand that you have multiple discussions ongoing on this topic in this thread, so please don't feel obliged to go through what I've posed to you immediately. Just whenever you have time.

I also agree that when you bring in GL's quotes about Anakin's fall, particularly his tear on Mustafar, then it does seem to be more problematic and there's a greater sense of contradiction. Personally, I don't let an author's interpretation define mine, especially one who has a history of saying contradictory things. In the case of the tear on Mustafar, I think you would admit that viewers might have different interpretations for why Anakin cries at that point than precisely what Lucas tells us is motivating Anakin then. However, if one wants to factor in Lucas's perspective, then I agree that his statement here makes the consistency of Anakin's fall more problematic.

 

The above is all true.... about the first draft of SW.

Unfortunately, however, that's not what Lucas was talking about when he said he "always intended Anakin's turn" to be about Padme/the Faustian pact, going back to "1973".

 

It's sad when people sling such casual contempt a person's way without offering anything further.

Saves you the effort of having to construct an intelligible argument, though, I suppose.

And that's just my point: that that story is is the build-up.

From my POV, anyway.

You're clumsily conflating fact with fiction. Lucas re-shot the turn scene, but it's not clear who he showed the original version to, or if he didn't re-do it by dint of his own reasoning, relatively independent of external input. You might have skipped over it, but I actually did provide quite a bit of evidence in my last-but-one post here (thread post#190), concerning the chronology of the altered turn.

There is a myth that has sprung up concerning the turn: that Lucas clearly altered it after seeking advice, as if he knew he was in a hole and sought guidance for getting out of it. The chronology I supplied, straight from the "Making Of" book, doesn't really support that myth. He seems to have re-engineered the turn relatively off his own bat, several months before (March 2004) the first rough cut was screened for ILM employees (June 2004), after which Lucas showed it to Spielberg.

After the first rough cut screening, Lucas seems to have begun doubting himself a little, because, by his own words, some of the ILM crew "were having a hard time with the reason Anakin goes bad" (p. 188), and that they "had strong opinions about things that were contrary to the way (Lucas) was going." Lucas, therefore, showed it to Spielberg to assess the reality of the cut; and was assured by Spielberg that "most of everything was working". Lucas concludes in that passage by asserting, "I had to make a decision, and I decided that I'm not going to alter the film to make it more commercial or marketable."

The broad picture that emerges from studying the chronology, therefore, is that no substantial alterations were made, and that Lucas had to trust that a mass audience would roll with his decisions, even if some of his ILM crew were disenchanted or confused by what he'd done. The re-jigged aspects of Anakin's turn, where he reports back to Mace, waits in the council chamber, then flees back to Palpatine's office in an airspeeder, were all added concurrently back in March 2004, three months before the first rough cut screening, three months before Lucas apparently sought Spielberg's assurances.

Now, Lucas did work -- as I also stated -- to punch up the scene of Anakin rescuing Palpatine from Mace and making his final pledge, during re-shoots in August 2004, but that's just one scene. A rather crucial one, albeit, but Palpatine also had to have done most of his dirty work on Anakin by then; so accrediting it with too much significance means attributing more weight to it than it can rightly bear. The whole deal with Anakin wanting to save Padme was obviously made stronger with Lucas' alterations stretching back to March 2004, but he's still coming under the spell of the Dark Side long before that.

Indeed, if you've read the "Making Of" book in full (have you actually done this?), you would know that Lucas shot critical scenes between Anakin and Palpatine, revolving around the idea of Anakin being desperate to save Padme's life, in what Lucas himself dubbed "the marathon week" of July 14th to July 21st 2003. Take note of the year: 2003. Almost a whole year before the first rough cut screening, more than a year before re-shoots, and still a good eight months before Lucas amended Anakin's reaction to Palpatine announcing his identity in March 2004. In that week back in 2003, as documented on pages 87 to 98, Lucas filmed Palpatine's reveal scene, the fight between Mace and Palpatine, with Anakin intervening (or at least stood by), and the scene at the ballet, where the tale of Darth Plagueis is proffered to Anakin as a means of his being able to save Padme from death. That is pretty Faustian by definition; or so I should have thought.

I'm not sure when Lucas conceived of the Plagueis hook, but pages 40 to 42 in the "Making Of" book give a summary of the fifty-five-page rough draft, under the entry dated January 31st 2003, in which it is stated, on page 41, that "Anakin is awakened by a nightmare in which Padme is consumed by flames" (this seems to take place roughly where he has his first nightmare/vision in the completed film), and on page 42, "Thanks to promises of power that would save Padme from death, Anakin gives in to temptation" (after Palpatine confesses in his office that he "arranged" for Anakin's conception). Lucas had the Faustian arc in place well before it seems he possibly consulted anyone and made some reputedly dramatic reversal.

So where, exactly, is the evidence backing your assertions? Lucas hadn't shot a yard of HD tape and yet he already had the basics of Anakin's fall ready to build a movie around, including a fairly fleshed-out outline (the rough draft) that matches up quite well (based on the summary of it in the "Making Of" book) with the finished movie. Anakin's tragic fall, from the beginning, is centered very purposefully on Padme and his fear of losing her. All Lucas could possibly have done was emphasize some aspects and de-emphasize others as he worked on the film. But already, in January 2003 (and obviously, given the nature of the material, Lucas had been working on it a while; so we can infer that these ideas clearly go back to 2002 or even earlier), he had Anakin tormented at the propsect of Padme's loss, and Palpatine manoeuvring around Anakin to offer him a Faustian bargain.

The burden is on you and other anti-prequel interlopers to provide evidence that supports your narrative and counteracts my entirely reasonably one: one that I think I have the right to call "reality". Go ahead. I'll be waiting.

Irrelevant. You took it upon yourself to take implicit ownership of those remarks in service of your own argument.

And so there's no confusion, I was talking there, and am talking now, about Lucas' "Faustian pact" remark, which you have made reference to several times, already.

Let me repeat that last part: you have referred to those same remarks in the DVD commentary multiple times in this thread -- as if they are sufficient to argue your case and all other remarks and perspectives are negated.

Indeed, I myself take a rather prime view of that aspect of Anakin's turn, but not to the exclusion of all else, and I don't hold to the view (maintained in error, in my opinion) that Lucas brought that plot aspect in out of the cold in the 11th Hour.

No, it's a matter of opinion. There are also reasonable opinions and less reasonable ones. No substantial re-write, that I know of, took place. You keep acting like one did.

If you want to consider the story irrevocably altered based on a handful of adjustments (most of which you can't adduce any evidence in favour of, anyway), by my guest.

You are trying to pretend that the other movies don't count based on specious reasoning. I called you on that and then you come out with some oblique football reference.

It's the Dark Side turning Anakin moderately insane. Whether you buy the conceit or not is up to you.

And the specific dialogue exchange you are alluding to -- where Anakin says he should have known the Jedi were plotting to take over, and that, from his point-of-view, the Jedi are evil -- was actually written and filmed mere days before the altered pledge scene, and long after you allege Lucas was compelled to originally modify it. Page 201, in the "Making Of" book, under the entry dated August 24th 2004, clearly documents Lucas coming up with that dialogue on-the-fly, "having been inspired during his drive from London this morning".

I suppose this is what happens when one gets all their information from Zombie's book: a factually-challenged prequel-bashing manifesto. I'm sorry you don't like fact-checking and prefer to remain duped by a false narrative ignorantly skewed to the narrative. You're still free to hate the dialogue, of course; but you are not entitled to your own version of the facts. And those are the facts, which you would know if you'd read the "Making Of" book or had it to hand.

They're not "insane and out of place"; at least, not in the manner you've been arguing. You are asserting things at will, without a) a proper regard for the facts, and b) an open-minded sensitivity to the nature of story-telling.

My own position is quite simple: the build-up colours the submission. When Anakin sinks to the ground and finally pledges to Sidious, he isn't doing it for one reason, but a multitude of them.

That's okay if you think differently, but arrogantly acting like your view is the law -- and, regrettably, when you are confused on some pretty basic facts -- is quite obscene, in my view.

The words following the conjunction "because" read more like a statement of fact: as if you have pressed a factual statement into service to support a subjective view of why you think something in a different film doesn't work. Yes, a different film, but one intimately bound with five others.

Maybe it was just hastily written on your part. You're certainly correct that a statement like, "Anakin hadn't spent enough time being a sympathetic character", is a personal opinion only.

You seem unable, or possibly unwilling, to feel or ferret out any subtlety from the narrative. I feel it is pointless to keep engaging you -- least of all after a sarcastic, hostile barrage like the following:

"So...what is the basis of this pathos, what is the basis for the pay-off of this particular take on the Faustian pact? It is the conflict that Anakin is experiencing. Do you need time to digest that? Let me pull some more of that quote out of my **** to emphasise what that conflict is"

I don't appreciate being spoken to like that; and I don't know what you hoped to accomplish in adopting such a tone. It's ungracious and uncalled for. What makes you think you can condescend to people like that and still believe you're having an argument?

The brute fact is that Anakin was shown to be conflicted in the OT. In ROTJ, Luke senses conflict in Vader, and calls him on it more than once, and also suggests to him that being in conflict was the reason he couldn't bring himself to destroy Luke in TESB.

In fact, in TESB, at the end of their clash, when Vader is appealing to Luke, he literally reaches across the void and urges Luke to join him, so that they can "bring order to this destructive conflict". Ostensibly, Vader is referring to the wider galactic conflict and its destructive effects; but the line is also suggestive of Vader seeking a way to end an internal conflict he has been in the grip of for many years. And the film then shows the viewer Vader sparing Piett at the end; in contradiction with how he earlier dealt with high-ranking Imperial officers who let him down.

I said before -- and other people in here have argued similarly -- that Anakin does not fully believe in Palpatine or his actions at any point. But he does believe there is something to them, something to be gained by following an evil path. When he has time to pause and reflect, however, he is afflicted with the sense that there is something amiss with his rationalizations, and that he has chosen poorly.

But, not only is Anakin somewhat fatalistic -- and yes, this, by the way, goes back to AOTC, at least, when he apologizes to Padme and says he has "no choice" but to go and rescue his mother -- he is also under the spell of the Dark Side. When he meets back up with Padme on Mustafar, his thinking shifts gears, as we see the Dark Side carving him up like a Xmas turkey. Where he formerly stewed in self-pity and grief, he now suggests that he can overthrow Palpatine, and that he and Padme can rule the galaxy together. Again, this is the Dark Side getting to him. It doesn't allow him to remain crippled in doubt. He never credibly examines his choices; he goes power-mad.

If nothing else, Anakin's cocktail of conflicting emotions is meant to represent the variegated tapestry of the human condition: the malleability of human consciousness (through varying experiences, drugs, stress, hormones, chemical imbalances, etc.), the transient nature of happiness and sorrow, and the plastic and somewhat dangerous notion of identity. Lucas simply gives it a tragic inflection. He suggests, in a way, that people are capable of being reasonable and having deep insights, but that these experiences can be lost in a fog of emotions and self-contradiction.

How he told Anakin's fall was very profound, in my opinion. But you are entitled to your view.

 

Lucas started day to day work in 1994 and that continued until the final film was done in 2005.

Always had in mind does not mean had it locked down to the last scintilla from the start now does it?

Lucas' own thoughts such as he shared are covered quite well in various interviews but also The Making of ROTS.

Never mind the actual way his movies have always worked from the start see that other Star Wars trilogy he made.

The thing that perplexes me is why 10 years on are you still going on about it?

Obviously myself and other people have various intepretations of the fall and the scenes which for some reason you seem to be unable to accept as actually something that we can possibly think. Despite the fact that we do.

You have your interpretation. Great.

Why you seem to be stuck on your own level of sympathy for the character which is your own and not others I really don't know.

 

You're taking him a bit too literal. When he's saying that, he's talking about the origins of the story. He isn't going to lay out the whole evolution of the storyline, which he doesn't formally start doing until "Empire Of Dreams". He always intended the fallen Jedi character, whether his name was Anakin or Valorum, to have turned because of a pact. He wanted something and was given something in return. The nature of that was never defined until he went to work on the PT, but he always knew what was the motivator and that was Faust.

 

I am clumsily conflating fact with fiction? Not simply conflating fact with fiction? You do like your adjectives don't you? So...you say that he made his own decision mostly on his own input and....

So...yes. Now, what did I say? Did I say that Lucas altered the scenes due to outside influence? Am I arguing for some myth that may or may not have sprung up? What I have said...

"The story was headed one way (Anakin actually becoming Vader) but Lucas (with the input of his friends) decided it didn't work and so changed the story completely. "

"The grand arc that Lucas had in mind didn't work, and so he changed the tale of Anakin's turn. "

"Unless you are going to claim that Lucas didn't shoot a different turn, which he showed to some whose advice he sought and.....after acknowledging that his own discomfort with it was reflected by those advisors, re-shot the turn."

So...you seem to have written an awful lot in order to dissuade me from an argument I have not made. You are arguing a strawman. I have not suggested that Lucas changed the story to please others - only that he has changed the story. The furthest I have gone is to say that others whose opinion he trusted agreed with his own doubts.

And...you talk about the Opera scene as if it is intact as originally filmed. But that was one of the scenes that was altered and added to in reshoots - including some of the dialogue. Here you are attempting to portray the scene as a-priori complete..and as evidence of the 'Faustian-pact all along'. Not so. That one must resort to such omission to support an argument....??

So.....
what changes, exactly were made?

We cannot know for certain, but we can infer quite a bit. Lucas compressed the story, re-focused on Padmé as the bait.

The evidence is...the scenes as they now play (as opposed to how they were originally to play...the remnants of which are left, haphazardly and jarringly, within the dialogue) and what Lucas has to say about the turn.

So...in order that you can follow this. You say that

" All Lucas could possibly have done was emphasize some aspects and de-emphasize others"

And indeed it is that emphasis and de-emphasis that is primary. He emphasises Anakin's desire to save Padmé and de-emphasises Anakin's 'buying into' Palpatine's ideals.

How could I possibly know that, you might ask... Well.....there are some odd moments of dialogue. Jarring phrases that jump out from left-field and make no sense. So, for instance

"I agree. The Jedi's next move will be against the Senate"

Sorrry...err, what Anakin? There is nothing within the scenes as they play up to this point to support Anakin believing this. Nothing.

And then, later

"I should have known the Jedi were trying to take-over"

and

"...from my point of view the Jedi are evil"

This is from nowhere...this makes no sense in terms of what Anakin knows. None.

It also makes no sense in terms of Anakin who awakens in the suit...and gives not two figs about his new Empire, but is in fact distraught that he has lost everything.

When Mace flies out of the window, Anakin doesn't declare "good riddance to that treacherous scum" ut instead despairingly bemoans "what have I done?"

And so we come to what Lucas has said about the tear on Mustafar. You wish to reduce it's impact and meaning as "ad-hoc", as in some way irrelevant but it actually defines what has been emphasised and what has been de-emphasised within Lucas' new story arc - the Faustian pact that Anakin's turn has become.

The idea of Anakin 'buying into' and believing Palpatine's lies are de-emphasised...to the point of being no longer relevant. In fact he cannot buy into Palpatine's ideas because otherwise there is no pay-off; there is no pathos. He has to know that what he is doing is wrong for the pay-off.

That's why Lucas talks about that moment, as it being pivotal in understanding what those scenes are about - what the narrative driving those scenes is.

So....why did Lucas emphasise Anakin's turn as resolving to saving Padmé, and de-emphasise all that the previous movies had been foreshadowing? Lucas tells us when he talks of that scene. There was no pathos in the story as he originally conceived it and filmed it. There was no pay-off. That could only work if Anakin didn't buy into Palpatine ideas and knew that what he was doing - in order to save Padmé - was wrong. Evil.

You see the title of the thread?

Yeah.

And...if you feel the issue has been discussed to death already then...you are at liberty not to take part in the discussion. Quite why you consider your own opinion more pertinent ten years on than mine...??

 

I wrote "clumsily" to give you the benefit of the doubt: that you're not so much lying or incapable of being reasoned with as confused. Perhaps I shouldn't have bothered.

I haven't suggested Lucas changed the story to please others, or suggested that you were saying that, either. But quite clearly, as you've just reiterated in plain sight, you believe that a) he massively altered it -- "changed the story completely" -- and b) he did so based on on the input of others (friends, colleagues, advisors, what have you). Both these charges are found wanting for facts.

As far as I can tell, all of the material between Palpatine and Anakin, at the ballet (to use the official production nomenclature), was gathered during principal photography, in July 2003. Including the tale of Darth Plagueis. The "Making Of" book, on page 93, describing shoot day 15, dated July 18th 2003, makes this fairly explicit: "The next scene on the schedule is at the opera (though, again, production notes technically list it as "ballet"), where Palpatine continues his seduction of Anakin, recounting the story of Darth Plagueis." Page 94 reports Lucas saying at the end of recording, "That was amazing, absolutely amazing. Everyone was glued to the monitors." Which I include as circumstantial evidence that Lucas was congratulating Ian McDiarmid for the way he tells the story.

I think you're confused because Lucas added it late into the principal photography shooting schedule. The scene was written out already, but the location was a last-minute switcheroo from Palpatine's office. The "Making Of" book captures Lucas explaining, on page 96, that he knew he had a meaty scene, and was compelled to change the staging of it very late on after running it down for real: "During rehearsal, I said, 'My God, this is a four page scene -- I've had five scenes in this office already -- how am I going to do this?' So I put it in an opera house, watching a ballet -- 'Squid Lake' -- which worked out great." As a result, there was a scramble by the art department to come up with appropriate chair props for the actors to perform the entire scene on, with everything else being added months later.

On the first day of additional photography, August 23rd 2004, Anakin running up the big staircase was filmed, and the little inset with Lucas and his daughter, where Lucas appears as a blue-skinned baron character, elegantly leaning on his cane, was filmed on November 2nd 2004. This was one of the final live action pieces shot for ROTS. The "Making Of" book documents the former, while "The Final Chapter" -- a free PDF -- covers the latter. It is probably Lucas' wilful propensity for reshoots that has created some level of confusion here. The opera scene is a good example of how everything came together in stages, with the "interior", the core of the scene, shot first, and the outer pieces added later.

What can we infer? As I've said several times, now, Lucas added a trio of scenes where Anakin departs Palpatine's office -- reporting him to Mace, waiting in the council chamber, and running back to Palpatine by boarding on airspeeder -- in March 2004. That is certainly a long time after principal photography, but quite ahead of the first rough cut screening in June 2004. The already-quoted passage that covers the rough cut screening, or the fallout from it, has Lucas saying that he won't alter the film to make it more commercial, and that there's a thirty-year vision he is determined to stick to.

Two further details corroborate this, at opposite ends of the book. On page 205, on the date of August 27th 2004, when the re-done fight scene (where Palpatine transforms into Sidious) is being filmed, Lucas says, "the only scene I hadn't thought through enough is the scene we're reshooting today." Meaning, he had given considerable thought to practically everything else, and was presumably happy with the way Anakin's story plays out. Indeed, he consciously chose to make Anakin the focal point of the film very early on. Page 40, the date of January 31st 2003, where the rough draft is summarized, yields a very clear quote on the matter: "Having toned down the other characters and the tempting tangents, Lucas can sum up the focus of the revised but still-evolving story in one word: 'Anakin'."

I will remind you that a Faustian pact is solidly in place in the rough draft, since the summary makes mention of the fact that Anakin has a terrible nightmare and later submits to Sidious "thanks to promises of power that would save Padme from death". Anakin was never going to turn to the Dark Side and become Darth Vader without his fear of losing Padme. She is the bait from the beginning. Lucas may have felt he lost track of that a little after he began assembling the film and looking at what he'd shot after principal photography: more or less the total opposite of what you've been claiming (that the Faustian pact was a late addition to beef up Anakin's fall like some hastily patched-in solution). Hence the new scenes in March 2004: which put added emphasis on Anakin being tormented about losing Padme if he lets Mace arrest or strike down Sidious.

It's true, I think, that Anakin has to be shown to be more in need of Palpatine/Sidious in the reshoots, but Palpatine snagged him in that regard early on. Again, I refer you to the rough draft, from January 2003, not to mention the scenes I previously described being filmed in July 2003, including the ballet/opera scene. The reshoots, concerning Anakin, were just a case of Lucas embellishing what he already intended to show. He added a bit more blue to the canvas, so to speak. The idea that he titanically altered the whole course of the narrative is extremely far-fetched and not borne out by any facts that I am aware of. You can't even infer such a thing. The existing facts point away from your fanciful hypothesis.

It is fine for you to have that opinion. But what you earlier stated outright -- and are still, at the least, implying -- is that those lines (the latter two, anyway) are jarring because they were not changed to reflect Lucas' alleged alterations to Anakin's turn. That is factually incorrect. Those latter lines were written (as I said in my last post) very late in the game, in August 2004, right before Lucas filmed that exchange between Anakin and Obi-Wan. Zombie alleges different in his book, but the "Making Of" book flatly contradicts him. You seem to be drawing your beliefs from Zombie, but you aren't honest enough to admit this.

I will pass on the other line. I'm not sure when Anakin's "senate" remark was filmed; and I'm not even sure that it matters. It has been explained to you why he might say such a thing at such a time, but you seem keen to go on complaining about it. So... complain away.

I'm not reducing its impact and meaning as "ad hoc". I'm simply not pinning the entire meaning of the film on it as you seem to be doing. There's a difference.

I don't know why, but everything seems black-and-white in your world. The point of that scene is to show that Vader's life is a grand lie and that Anakin is "a pawn in the entire scheme", to quote Lucas from elsewhere in the "Making Of" book. This is not the apex of his fall, but it adds considerable meaning.

Anakin is somewhat aware of having been deceived, or letting himself be deceived, in that moment. But he also thinks it is useless to turn back. And after the next batch of events on Mustafar, it is quite clear -- to me, at least -- that the lies corrupt him.

The traumatic nature of his encounter with Obi-Wan leaves him twisted and bitter. Yes, he is regretful about Padme, after he awakens, but that weakness is soon forgotten after he learns he killed her.

And as I've also said (and I'm not the only one), Anakin did buy into Palpatine's shtick on some level. By the time-frame of AOTC, he seems to believe, even if not super-seriously (or not), in the idea of a dictatorship, provided it is maintained by "someone wise".

It might be more accurate to say that Lucas is pursuing a slight see-saw effect in Anakin's fall. "What have I done?" mutates into "I have brought peace, freedom, justice, and security to my new Empire" one hour later.

Lucas is reflecting something about the labyrinthine nature of the human condition. Or not. Depends on your tastes and sensibilities, I suppose. He's very much doing that for me, however.

 

His turn seems justified when put into the context of the movies. You see his issues and Episode II fallout that were setup in Episode I (his mother and such). Then you take that troubled character and have him go through a war. The outcome we see in ROTS seems perfectly emplaced if you think to yourself before the movie starts "Okay, wow. The Clone Wars have started and he probably went through a lot of ****, it is war after all."

From the movies we get that he is a troubled man with emotional issues who is trying to deal with an extraordinary life who just went through a war. Combine that with the stupidity of the Jedi council in the previous films, and you can see where Anakin's frustration comes from. Even more so if TCW is put in that perspective. (Ahsoka, Obi-wan faking his death/not being supportive, etc.)

 

ANAKIN: You can't kill him, Master. He must stand trial.

MACE WlNDU: He has too much control of the Senate and the Courts. He is too dangerous to be kept alive.

One of the heads of the Jedi Council just attempted to assassinate the Chancellor. This is after the Jedi Council asked Anakin to commit treason and spy on the Chancellor for the crime of being too popular with the Senate. Based on everything he now (thinks) he knows, he makes the educated guess that the Jedi will strike next against the Senate. Because that's the direction the Jedi Council has been subtly headed in for a long time. As evidenced by the fact that they actually were plotting to take over the Senate.

Again. They were plotting to take over.

PALPATINE: Good is a point of view, Anakin.

Anakin's sense of morality is now based entirely on his own point of view. The points of view of all others have become irrelevant. The Jedi are evil because they disagree with him. They are either with him, or they are his enemy.

It's all in the movie.

There's such a thing as being ambivalent. Anakin does buy into Palpatine's ideas on one level, but on another level, he knows he's doing terrible things. He can believe both things. The human mind isn't as simplistic as you want to make it out to be. And these are not simplistic movies.

What exactly do you think is going on in this scene from RotJ?

LUKE: Search your feelings, father. You can't do this. I feel the conflict within you. Let go of your hate.

VADER: It is too late for me, son. The Emperor will show you the true nature of the Force. He is your master now.

Why does Vader say "It is too late for me" in a regretful tone, and then in the same breath expound on the power of the dark side and the greatness of the Emperor? According to you, this sort of mind-state represents an impossibility of the human condition, and is indicative of poor writing.

 

Commendable insights. I very much admire you taking note of the war factor -- it is, after all, the first diegetic word of ROTS.

Too few seem to consider the impact this has on all the characters' psyches, especially Anakin's.

Very perceptive. Vader has more or less accepted his fate in ROTJ, and it is, indeed, a paradoxical position he finds himself in.

And you're right, these are not simplistic movies. A simplistic movie would be a bunch of talking heads telling you exactly how they feel, or what the next piece of the plot is.

Which is apparently all that someone wish that Star Wars was. We're meant to read into situations, just a little. Human beings aren't entirely logical and often harbour multiple feelings.

That's exactly what the mask of Vader is all about. Anakin is hiding away inside, where he can keep his face from the world and deny his conflict. Luke correctly senses it, and Vader's words, as above, betray the prison he is languishing within.

Anakin kind of has to be the most powerful, the most complex character in the saga. He is the central character. The saga is an episodic tapestry about the vicissitudes of being human, disguised as pulp space opera.

I continue to marvel at all the subtleties and complexities therein.

 

Great post but this one sentence is everything.

It really is all there.

Lucas' dialogue is entirely character building and brilliant and yet for some reason some people get hung up on it in some odd way whereby they want it to be the same old, same old "modern and edgy" that most everyone else does!

Being with the rest of the crowd is edgy and going out by yourself isn't.

You can't do that. Don't do that. Don't you dare to point out that Lucas actually understands the character he created!

Anyone else but him gets it.

Star Wars is simple and direct.

Multi-layering of the characters need not apply.

We all want simple straightforward characters that we can read in seconds.

 

Snark doesn't do your argument any favors..

 

It seems pretty cut and dry that Anakin had no problem adapting to Palpatine's political worldview, when they went out of their way at times (sometimes a bit heavyhandedly,IMO) to point this out. (He has no problem's with a dictatorship,the Jedi's political maneuvering makes him feel "dishonest",etc) At the end of the day, I think he's only fooling himself for Padme's sake to get this "magic cure". He knows he's doing wrong,but he's able to justify it from his own "point of view".

 

i think what i said before about going to mustafar first still makes sense the most. Anakin would have had much less compunction about going to kill the Neimodians then to abruptly go kill younglings. Obi-Wan could have still gone to find out what happened in Palpatine's office and lead into a confrontation.

 

Have to agree.

 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

And, there's a difference between a story/plot that's "complex", vs . a story/plot that's muddled, or has "too many ideas syndrome" (thank you only one kenobi)

 

The part that you can empathize with Anakin is that his desire to protect his loved ones is a grand and somewhat noble gesture. Where you're not supposed to empathize is that he actually chooses to make the Faustian pact, rather than reject it. That's why Lucas put an emphasis on wanting the audience to see why he would choose the dark side over the light. That he's a good man, but he's got more issues than a comic book store. And worse, because of both sides actions, he doesn't know who he can really trust and feels as if he's been used this entire time. In fact, in many ways, he's been used his whole life.

 

As far as I can tell, it's only "muddled" or has "too many ideas syndrome" according to people who failed to understand it. A lot of people fail to understand good movies. I reject the argument that that's a reflection on the quality of the movie itself.

This is one of the fairer points made in this thread, but I'm going to have to disagree anyway. Anakin is only able to kill the Younglings because he sees it as the first step on the path to total victory over his inner demons. This is evident from the direction Lucas gave Christensen for his first scene following the slaughter. Christensen thought Anakin should have been extremely emotionally affected by the act, but Lucas pointed out that he's actually still in a pretty good mood. Which makes sense; if he was already having serious doubts about things, he would never have killed the Younglings in the first place.

It's only on Mustafar, after he slaughters the Separatists, that Anakin has the time and space to really think about things. Unlike the Younglings, the Separatist leaders were arguably all pretty bad people. Traitors, war criminals, corporatist plunderers. Now the war is over, Nute Gunray and his cohorts are dead, the droids have been deactivated, and the Empire is ascendant--but Anakin still hasn't achieved the emotional catharsis he's been expecting. It just never came. So what was the point of doing all the things that he did? Why did he kill the Younglings? These fleeting realizations are what bring a tear to Anakin's eye. But it's too late for him to turn back. So he instead has to embrace what he's done, all the while knowing deep down that he's become a monster.

 

According to the above reasoning, then, there's really no such thing as movies with convoluted plots or "TMIS"??? This never happens?....no, it's "just people failing to understand". Am I reading you correctly here? (hint: it's your use of the word "only" in your post). Your whole point of rejecting the argument that it's a reflection of the quality of the movie itself kind of hinges on this reasoning.

There were many criticisms of the OT from non-fans* (movie goers, critics, etc), but "TMIS" was NOT one of them, that I can recall.

*leaving aside fan criticism(s) of ROTJ for the moment

 

According to the above reasoning, then, there's really no such thing as movies with convoluted plots or "TMIS"??? This never happens?....no, it's "just people failing to understand". Am I reading you correctly here? (hint: it's your use of the word "only" in your post). Your whole point of rejecting the argument that it's a reflection of the quality of the movie itself kind of hinges on this reasoning.

There were many criticisms of the OT from non-fans* (movie goers, critics, etc), but "TMIS" was NOT one of them, that I can recall.

*leaving aside fan criticism(s) of ROTJ for the moment


Edit:

only one kenobi - and myself, and others - are trying to make sense out of Anakin's portrayal in the films. This is nothing to do with your unwarranted assumption that we're portraying the human mind as simplistic as "we make it out to be".

This cop-out/get-out-of-jail-free card needs to be put to bed already.

The above works as drama, if nothing else. And there is a pay-off (ROTJ). Granted, it might seem to not connect all that well with TESB's Vader*, but it's at least consistent within the single film it's in. In contrast, even if Anakin does buy into Palpatine's lies, it's all undermined by what happens at the end of ROTS, when he wakes up in the suit. If the PT's Anakin had actually become Vader in an organic fashion, then it would be a different story. But it doesn't happen, because of the cop-out that is the Faustian pact. With all of that in mind, I think it's misguided to use "ROTJ did it too" as a rebuttal to an argument that takes issue with Anakin-Vader's portrayal in ROTS.

*there were some viewers who took issue with Vader's portrayal in this film, who thought it didn't connect well with the Vader of TESB.

 

You are not reading me correctly. If a movie's plot is literally incomprehensible through any reasonable effort of human cognition, then sure, that's a problem. But that is not the case with the prequels. Detractors have to resort to ignoring lines of dialogue, and even entire scenes, in order to make their points. By my reckoning, that's a pretty good indication that the argument doesn't have much merit--not in this case. You don't get to claim a movie's plot is too hard to understand just because you didn't bother to pay attention. Maybe you can say you personally found the movie too boring to bother actually watching it--but that's a different claim, requiring different lines of argumentation.

"The above works as drama, if nothing else." What an empty, meaningless non-rebuttal. Can I borrow it?

Anyway, the above scene, by the reasoning of the detractors in this thread, is in fact not consistent with the single film that it's in. Darth Vader is evil and he serves Palpatine. Yet he regrets serving Palpatine. Yet he continues to serve Palpatine. How does that make sense? I thought people were only capable of holding one, single, monolithic view in their head at any given time.

Hint: it actually does make sense. But if you admit that, then you'll have to allow that Anakin's arc in Episode III also makes sense, and we can't have that. I'm afraid you're just going to have to admit that the final film in the hallowed Original Trilogy actually contains a huge, movie-ruining flaw in the characterization of one of its primary characters.