PT Did Mace Windu really defeat Palpatine?

I wonder how many of these have crashed and burned since oh five?

 

It's clear that Lucas' intention was that Mace was to win the duel. Both him AND Samuel L. Jackson confirm this.

 

I see what you are saying, but I'm not sure I agree. His quote is "But this part where he, he pretends to lose his power and be weak was something that I added later, 'cause this is, it moved the point where Anakin turns down to this moment right here, and you can see now, that it's very clear that he's, he, he wants him to go on trial so he can pump him for information about how to get these powers. " He is comparing this to the earlier version of the scene. In that earlier version of the scene, Palpatine just keeps shooting at Mace and they're both making arguments to try to convince Anakin while Mace is blocking. It's a total standstill. Anakin then intervenes b/c he finds Palpatine's arguments more convincing. Since in the older version, Palpatine could maintain his Force lightning during the whole scene, then it stands to reason that when he stops using his Force lightning against Mace is what GL is referring to when Palpatine is faking weakness. Also, that he springs back to full Force the instant Mace is disarmed also suggests that Palpatine has not exhausted his ability to use Force lightning and that he is just pretending to be exhausted until Anakin intervenes.

Well, I understand your argument here, and I think it is a valid interpretation of the scene. I go with the "judge me by my size" POV. I think that Yoda's size just doesn't matter. Since he's got a higher midi count than Mace, the strength of his grip should be stronger than Mace. However, if Yoda was speaking more metaphorically and less literally when he said that, then you could be right about Mace's grip. About your 2nd point here, I first thought it occurred the way you describe it, but watch the scene again. Yoda has landed on the senate pod and he is fully ready for Palpatine. Also pay attention to the lightning strike Palpatine uses. It appears more linear, thicker, and more concentrated than the one he uses against Mace. I even compared the sounds of the too. It makes a louder sound. (The things you do to waste time when you've thrown your back out and have a broken toe!) Of course, the difference in the special effects may have just been result of the decisions of a special effects specialist, so these differences probably don't really matter.

You're probably right about what the poster meant when he posted it, but you know how discussions go off topic in threads. I've been arguing with this other guy who clearly thinks that GL definitely wasn't referring to the duel when he says "Mace overpowers Palpatine" and that Mace would have definitely without a doubt killed Palpatine no questions asked, and he thinks this even though GL clearly says that only the Chosen One can destroy the Sith, and at the time, killing Palpatine would equal destroying the Sith. So, that's clearly breaking the prophecy. I know some people don't like the prophecy, but those are GL's words. But again, I agree with you that Mace may have won the duel. I understand why you take GL's "Mace overpowers Palpatine" statement on face value. I think understanding a speaker's intention is very important to understanding what people say, and because of the context, I think GL's intention isn't trying to to explain what's happening in the scene but to describe and compare what happening vs. an earlier version. But I can't know GL's intentions, so you may be right about your interpretation of GL's words.

I'm also not in the "Palpatine has to be the most powerful guy ever" camp. Yes, he's really powerful, but that's not what makes him such a great villain. What makes him so great is that he's so darn smart, and if Palpatine created that situation by revealing his identity to Anakin and he wasn't prepared to survive a situation he created, then that would make Palpatine an idiot and that wouldn't be true to his character. In fact, he would have been especially scrupulous to do everything right in this situation b/c this confrontation is so pivotal to his agenda: it involves both turning Anakin to the dark side and providing evidence to justify the Jedi purge. So, I'm perfectly willing to accept that Palpatine lost the duel. It turns out to happen at a very coincidental time, so that makes me suspicious, but coincidences do happen. (Heck it could've even been the will of the Force that it occurred in such a coincidental fashion. I don't know. Anakin's discussion with the Father on Mortis makes it clear that Anakin has to become Vader and do the horrible things he does so that he can ultimately fulfill his destiny, so maybe the will of the Force intervened to create this coincidence.)

I would also point out one other thing. I think wookieepedia is correct to use GL's interpretation to clear up any debate. They'd just be overwhelmed by complex ongoing arguments if they didn't. However, I take what happens in the films over what GL says. Here's an example. GL has said that Vader didn't know that Luke is his son when he's talking to the Emperor in TESB b/c the name Skywalker is common in the galaxy. However, here's what Vader knows before he speaks with the Emperor. He knows that Skywalker is Luke's last name, he knows that he's Force sensitive and that being Force sensitive is incredibly rare, he knows that he's been hanging around with Obi-Wan, and he's been desperately searching for Luke behind the Emperor's back. Sorry, GL, with all Vader knows about Luke, Vader knew that Luke was his son. Maybe you can say that the Emperor erased the last bit of doubt or denial, but the way GL makes it seem when talking about it (at least in the quotes shown to me) suggests that GL is saying that Vader really didn't have a clue. So, in a case like this, I take what the films tell me 1st and what GL says 2nd.

Now, again, I'm not trying to use this dismiss what you're saying. Your interpretation IMO doesn't conflict at all with what occurs in the film. It merely requires a coincidence. However, those who go further and say that Mace would've killed Palpatine go into the territory of conflicting what we know to be true from the films: that Palpatine is a genius who wouldn't purposely place himself in a position in which he's likely to die; that Anakin, being the Chosen One, is the only who can destroy the Sith; and that Palpatine's unmatched power of precognition fails him just when he needs it the most.

I'm sure we'll have more discussions in the future (or continue this one), and I enjoy analyzing GL quotes about the films, but my interpretative standpoint places the films above GL, like in TESB example. I get the feeling that you take the opposite approach, but of course you can correct me if I'm wrong. I think both are legit interpretations. I just go with the text over the author myself.

 

Like I said before. This is not a debate, you have no argument because George resolved this issue long ago. This is the equivalent of me being in a debate with a guy that claims Mitt Romney is going to beat Obama. The issue was resolved, there is no debate here. George said Mace beat Palpatine, and that's it for you and your argument..

 

Skelter,

Let me ask you something Skelter. If George Lucas said that Yoda was 25-year old woman that looks like Katy Perry, would that then mean that that Yoda is not a 2 foot tall green pointy-eared creature just b/c GL said so?

You might think that is a silly question, so I'll ask you another one. GL says that Vader did not think that Luke was his son at the beginning of TESB. At the beginning of TESB, Vader knows that Luke's last name is Skyalker, he knows that Luke has been hanging around with Obi-Wan, he knows that Luke is Force-sensitive and he knows that being Force-sensitive is very rare, and Vader has been sending out 1000s of probes to find Skywalker, and all of this is obvious just by watching the beginning of the film. So, based on this evidence in the film, would you conclude that Vader thinks that Luke is his son or would simply accept GL's statement as gospel and ignore all the evidence from the films? (Come on. I really want to hear your answer.)

The point is that what happens in the films trumps what GL says about the films, and I provide 5 arguments that make a convincing case that the films present evidence contrary to what you think GL is saying. The fact is you can't refute my arguments, so you just go back to saying GL said, GL said, GL said...

Well, even the people on this thread who take GL's words "Mace overpowers Palpatine" at face value all agree that GL is only talking about the duel when he says this, not Palpatine defending himself with Force lightning. So, no one here even agrees with you on that point. 2nd, GL says that Palpatine quote "pretends to lose his power and be weak" when he acts as if he can't defend himself any longer with Force lightning. Those are GL's own words. Palpatine is pretending to losing his power, so if he didn't pretend to lose his power, he'd be able to hold Mace off just as he was (which was preventing Mace from KILLING him). 3rd, GL also says that only the Chosen One can kill off the Sith, and if Mace can kill Palpatine, then that would be in direct contradiction with what GL is saying. You simply can't choose to ignore this point b/c you don't like prophecies or it contradicts your view that Mace can kill Palpatine. Mace is not the Chosen One, so Mace cannot kill him. Period. You may not like it, but those are GL's words. So, you are the one who is ignoring GL's words, not me.

However, in the end, I don't need somebody else to tell me how to intrepret a scene or a movie or a film franchise. Though some may not be able to do this, I am smart enough to come to an understanding on my own. However, in this case, it doesn't really matter if I'm going by my own interpretation or GL's interpretations because what GL says and I say match up perfectly. And BTW, I know that Obama won the election. I follow politics very closely, and on the day of the election, I was exactly correct in my predictions about which candidate would win each an every state. I was 50 for 50. 100% correct. Just as I am here. So go ahead and keep saying GL says, GL says, GL says (when ignoring other things that GL says, GL says, GL says) because it simply shows that you can't argue your position yourself.

 

Yah, this is not getting us anywhere dude. I follow what Gl said. You follow what YOU THINK GL said. I take it at face value, and you distort it in order to satisfy your biased feelings on the matter...Agree to disagree bro, no biggie. Carry on.

 

Skelter, you take 1 thing GL said at face value, and you ignore 2 other things GL said completely. Other than that I argree with you. As I said in an earlier post, this isn't going anywhere b/c unlike chess the loser in a debate never realizes he's actually lost. And BTW, from the beginning, I had no problem with what you said. I had a problem with how said it. I've been debating Arawn here, also, and even though we have clear disagreements and he is a notoriously tough arguer and he actually makes coherent arguments that he can defend, it always remained civil between the 2 of us.

 

Palpatine was manipulating to some extent.

 

It's not as big evidence as all that. Vader knows there's a connection between him and "Skywalker" but not what it is. Because he accepts the presentation of Padme as having died pregnant.

The addition of the "How is that possible?" line in ESB, was to reflect that.

 

Eh? He was playing Sith Apprentice right there. He didn't need to search squat, he already knew the truth.

 

The point is that what happens in the films trumps what GL says about the films,
--------------

not in this scene it doesn't, everything that Lucas says actually happens on screen.

For months before the DVD came out I was arguing the whole time that Palps faked it all and could have kicked Windu's behind at any time, but I listened to what Lucas said and what he says is EXACTLY what happened, it was my choice to see it differently, I was corrected.

 

I always assumed Palpatine could have taken care of Mace (although he was a worthy opponent), but instead played for time until Anakin's arrival, going as far as falling into the victim position when Anakin enters the chamber.

Now, there's one aspect to take into consideration about GL's explanation: He originally shot the scene with Anakin being present throughout the entire office duel. In that case it sounds more logical that Mace managed to overpower him in that scenario, since it'd be harder to believably fake a sudden decline in fighting skills with an onlooker present.

But even then, what sense would it make from a filmmaking standpoint to show the galaxies biggest villain being overpowered by an opponent halfway into the movie, when he still has a huge showdown with Yoda ahead of him?

 

But even then, what sense would it make from a filmmaking standpoint to show the galaxies biggest villain being overpowered by an opponent halfway into the movie, when he still has a huge showdown with Yoda ahead of him?
-----------------------

that is what makes the scene work.

It goes against the rules of film making.

The whole point of Palpatine's character is that he uses a situation or event to his advantage, it is no different in this scene, Palps gets knocked over and cornered, yet by the end of the scene he's on his feet and his opponent who had him cornered was dead.

That was by using his head, not because he was physically more powerful than Windu

 

this question is still being asked.
lol

 

Sistros and Iron_lord,

Please ignore my tone in my former conversation with one specific individual on this thread. He was rude from the get-go and continued to be in every post. I'm perfectly willing to have a polite conversation about this. I understand where you're coming from about the "Mace overpowers Palpatine," and if that refers to the saber duel, then I have no complaints about that interpretation. However, I have a few comments followed by questions, and I'd hope you'd answer them.

There are 2 other quotes by GL that are important in this discussion.

When Palpatine is defending himself with the Force lightning, GL says this in the ROTS commentary: "But this part where he, he pretends to lose his power and be weak was something that I added later, 'cause this is, it moved the point where Anakin turns down to this moment right here, and you can see now, that it's very clear that he's, he, he wants him to go on trial so he can pump him for information about how to get these powers." So, according to GL's words, Palpatine is pretending not to be able to keep up the Force lightning in his defense. That's what "he pretends to lose his power" must mean. His acting "weak" must mean that he is faking it when he says "I can't hold out any longer" and he's not using his Force lightning only because he is choosing not to. The second that Mace loses his lightsaber gives visual proof to this. He bursts back to life and fries Mace with at least as much power as he was using before, and since he was holding off Mace with his Force lightning before then it stands to reason that he would have kept holding him off if he hadn't pretended to lose his power. (The novelization actually says Palpatine loses his power the instant before Mace was about to be overwhelmed by the lightning, so since he was pretending to lose his power as GL says, he even stands to reason that Mace would have lost and been fried if Palpatine had continued further.) So, wouldn't you agree with my interpretation of the scene that Palpatine could have held Mace off (or even defeated Mace as suggested in the book) and how this is fully backed up by GL's statement that Palpatine "pretends to lose his power and be weak"?

(Also GL's statement that "Anakin wants to him to go on trial so he can pump him for information" goes along with this. Anakin believes that Palpatine really can't defend himself. So, when he disarms Mace, he thinks they'll just take a helpless Palpatine into custody. Only after Palpatine bursts back to life does Anakin realize he was mistaken and that he has been complicit in Mace's murder.)

I would also point out another set of quotes that GL has said, and I'd like to hear your views on them. I won't post the quotes word for word because they're long and that'll take a lot of cut n' pasting. However, this is what GL has said about the prophecy of the Chosen One. He states that only the Chosen One can bring balance to the Force (he's really that specific about it), and he says that bringing balance to Force means destroying the Sith, and he says that Chosen One prophecy is valid prophecy. Since it is a valid prophecy, that means that Mace cannot kill Palpatine at this point since killing Palpatine would kill off the last of the Sith and only Anakin, the Chosen One, can destroy the Sith according to Lucas's own words. So my argument that Mace cannot overcome Palpatine's Force lightning defense is backed up GL's words in this respect too. I know many people don't like the Chosen One prophecy, but these are GL's words. Since only Anakin can kill Palpatine at this point (since there is 1 Sith left), that means that Mace can't do it given that it would violate the prophecy. So, would you disagree with my interpretation here, and if so, why?

Also, I would add that personally I place what happens in the films over what GL says. I have a very complex argument based solely on what occurs in the films. I think going with the authorial intent approach of GL says this or that is totally legitimate way of interpreting films, but I don;t think it's the only way. I also think going with a text based what-happens-in-the-films approach is equally valid. (Among other reasons, making films is a cooperative effort, so co-screenwriters, editors, special effects guys can add stuff that GL isn't even aware of or doesn't totally understand.) In the case of the Palpatine vs. Mace scene, what GL says and my interpretation of the films are very close together, but what I'm saying is that, in the end, it is perfectly fair for someone to use his own arguments if they can be strongly back up with what occurs on screen and that that way of interpreting a film should not be dismissed as being worse than the authorial intent approach, instead that way of interpretation should simply be seen as equal but different. (That's why I do reject GL's interpretation of the TESB scene between Vader and the Emperor, and so, when Vader says "How is that possible?" I think Vader is faking ignorance about what he really thinks about Skywalker (and he has been searching for Luke behind the Emperor's back, so he is clearly not being totally honest), or I think that Vader is highly, highly, highly suspicious that Luke is his son and that the Emperor's words only move him from being 99% sure to being 100% sure.)

(BTW my "likes" to posts ratio is getting decimated by this thread! )

 

This was the bit in The Rise and Fall of Darth Vader, that showed Vader's thoughts on the subject, some time before ESB.

Even while inspecting his nearly completed flagship, the Super Star Destroyer Executor, at the Starship Yards of Fondor, Vader could not get Luke Skywalker out of his mind. He silently chewed on the name, and considered the fact that the boy had been born three years after the death of Shmi Skywalker. To the best of his knowledge, Anakin Skywalker had been his mother's only living blood relative.

Could there have been other Skywalkers from Tatooine? Vader allowed the possibility. After all, it wasn't an entirely uncommon name in the galaxy.

But Anakin and Padme Amidala had been expecting a baby nineteen years ago.

Nineteen standard years.

It's not possible, Vader thought. I killed Padme. The baby died with her.

Not for the first time, he wondered if the Emperor had told him the whole truth about Padme's death. But I remember choking her ... seeing her collapse on Mustafar. I was so angry with her. And yet ...

Luke Skywalker exists.

Vader refused to believe the notorious Rebel's surname was merely a bizarre coincidence. If he had possessed any other name, Vader would not have hesitated to report what he had learned to the Emperor. But for purely selfish reasons, Vader kept the young Rebel's name to himself. To him, Luke Skywalker was more than a mystery to be solved.

He is ... an opportunity. As strong with the Force as he may be, he is an opportunity ... an opportunity for even greater power.

But who is he? Who were his parents? Could he have been Obi-Wan's son? But then why was he named Skywalker and raised by the Lars family? Or was he merely trained by Obi-Wan?

Because Obi-Wan Kenobi, Shmi Skywalker, Owen and Beru Lars, and Padme Amidala were dead, there was only one way Vader could discover the truth. He would have to ask Luke Skywalker himself. All he had to do was find him.

 

I have not read any of GL's stuff or listened to any commentary. So my opinion is based on the actual scene itself, and as I have said before I believe Mace beats Palpatine in the lightsaber duel, then he fakes weakness when Anakin is there to make Anakin believe Mace is killing a helpless person.

 

Thanks for posting this. This was written after GL's comments, and I think it does a good job of reconciling GL's comments and what you know from TESB. I only wished that novel included more of Vader's story outside of the films. It mostly addresses what we see in the films if I remember correctly and doesn't do much with the periods of time between them.

Interested to hear what you think about the other 2 GL Palpatine vs. Mace comments that I mention and interpret in post #90 on this thread.

 

I still believe that Sidious could have defeated Mace in a heart beat in the lightsaber duel if he wanted to, he just held back to manipulate what had happened to Anakin.

 

Going from what you see in the films alone, I find it highly coincidental that Palpatine was disarmed just at the perfect time, just before Anakin enters the room, when it make it seem as if Mace is traitorous and has his weapon drawn against an unarmed man. Coincidences do happen, so this interpretation is possible. But considering that Palpatine encouraged Anakin in their previous scene together to tell the Jedi that Palpatine is a Sith and he did this because it would allow him to find the truth of whether the Jedi are treasonous or not, and considering that Palpatine being disarmed just before Anakin enters the room shows Anakin just that, it seems more likely to me that he threw the fight rather than it being a coincidence.

 

True- though it does go into a bit more depth with the Splinter of the Mind's Eye scene- Vader vs Luke & Leia, set between ANH and ESB. As well as having a scene of Anakin and Shmi arriving on Tatooine.

Based on the Lucas quotes, the impression I get is that Mace is a slightly better lightsaber duellist- but that Palpatine was keeping the fight going long enough, for Anakin to show up.

 

I see your point Ladnar. But I just find it hard to believe that Palpatine could just mess around with Mace, the second baddest Jedi around?. I mean if he was going to mess around why not take on one of the lesser Jedi's?. I always go back to the point of Palpatine blasting Mace with lightning, Anakin knew how powerful lightning was (Dooku blasted him with it in AOTC) so if Palpatine wanted to appear weak and helpless, why throw a lightsaber fight then use lightning?.

 

That was how both myself and my friend read it at the time. It was all a pure set up. Sidious had no fear of any Jedi. Yoda couldn't beat him so Mace had little chance. It was the best way to see if Anakin would be turned. If not then he simply would have killed both of them.

The novel version though takes the tact that Anakin saves Sidious as Mace was about to destroy him.

Interesting but then it was also Lucas' intention that people understand that Han was acting in self defense when he shot Greedo but just about everyone thought that Han was a cold blooded killer because he didn't give the bad guy an "even chance" hence the Greedo shoots first change to make it clear.

That may have been the intention though it does make everything super co-incidental even for adventure movies like Star Wars especially since we have Sidious with all the planning and setting up he's done for decades to suddenly throw that away. Also the way Ian McDiarmid plays it Sidious' helplessness comes off as feigned. Just another trap.

I'm going to watch it once again soon so I'll try to see the other perspective but of course Sam Jackson would say that was the way it was as if not then it kind of makes Mace just a puppet on a string.

 

I don't think he was messing around in the saber duel, and like I said, I think it could've been a coincidence that Anakin came in at just the right time. I think from watching the film the other option is possible too--that he was just playing defense and just let himself be disarmed b/c he sensed Anakin was an instant from entering the room. One thing I'd point out is that it's often easier to play defense if you're not going for the kill in a lot of martial arts. In MMA, fighters really skilled in wrestling use tactics called "lay and pray" and "wall and stall" to put their opponent in a position where they can't hurt them but at the same time those wrestlers can't hurt their opponents either. So, Palpatine may have just been putting all his mojo into defense and none of it into his offense.

In regards to Palpatine acting helpless, I would suggest looking at films. Palpatine does a really good job of faking weakness. He lets his Force mask down that conceals his real appearance, making it seem as if he's disfigured. (You know it's really his real appearance b/c his fingernails grow long, his eyes change color, and his teeth look different.) Palpatine also does a bang up job of pretending to weak and pitiful. Anakin seems so convinced that his argument to Mace is: "he must stand trial!" And for those who care about GL's interpretation, GL says at that point in the film that Anakin "wants him to go on trial so he can pump him for information about how to get these powers." So, Anakin honestly thinks that Palpatine is exahausted and that if he intervenes, they can simply take him into custody. That's why Anakin is so shocked when Palpatine bursts back to life and blasts Mace full force with lightning (which in itself shows he was faking weakness), and that's why Anakin says "what have I done!" after Mace is killed. He never thought that Palpatine was just holding back and pretending to be weak, so he never thought the scene would end with Mace's death, and because of Mace's death he can never turn back.

Oh, and about your question, why didn't he choose to fight one of the other Jedi instead of Mace. There are a few reasons:

• Palpatine isn't all-powerful and the other Jedi are easier to kill.
• Mace often treats Anakin with little respect while Palpatine is almost like an uncle-figure to him.
• Mace (in the novel) is the one who basically says that treason is okay.
• Also, in terms of sheer movie making it's better to have Palpatine fight someone the audience knows instead of one of the other guys who only fans of EU know about.

 

One thing you may notice is George changes his story a lot. Personally I could take his comments or leave them (usually leave them).