PT Padmé Amidala in Episode III: Emotional and vulnerable character or weak and whiny plot device?

It widely agreed upon that out of the three films of the Prequel Trilogy, Episode III – Revenge of the Sith is the greatest one. Although it still has its fair share of criticism (Anakin's turn, CGI, Dialogue, etc), one of the most oddly popular ones I've seen floating on the internet is the role Padmé Amidala takes within this film.

If you don't know what I'm talking about, basically a large margin of audience viewers were disappointed that Padmé, who was shown in TPM and AOTC as a very intelligent, idealistic, perfectly dedicated and heroic woman, became a passive and submissive pregnant wife. Some really angered by this go as far to say she has become completely unlikeable in the film, saying she became a worthless, pathetic, hopeless, helpless, weepy, timid, simpering, wimpy and whiny plot device who's only relevant action in the film is giving birth and dying.

Now, am I saying one of those people? Of course not! I'm on her side , becoming more emotional and vulnerable with human reactions to her situations within the movie. There's also the point that her pregnancy would dismiss her role in the plot since Star Wars is an action-adventure film and I don't know many women who would go into open battle while 9 months in with twins. Because of that, I fully accept the direction of her character other than maybe her death scene.

Now there's also story ideas and concepts of what Padmé could have done in the movie before they were cut to save time for Anakin's plot. Those you can find here:

https://www.gamesradar.com/the-orig..._source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer_sfxtw

If you're too lazy to watch/read, the short version was Padmé was going to plant the seeds of the Rebel Alliance and attempt to kill Anakin on Mustafar just before she knew she couldn't and Anakin would choke her and the movie stays the same from there.

Now this would have been great but I believe there were two reasons they were cut:
1) The official reason was that George Lucas wanted to focus more on Anakin since this is his most important film. The original cut of Revenge was revealed to be four hours long and that was trimmed so that Anakin's turn would be the main plot with everything else sadly being discarded.
2) This is one is more of a theory but as we know, Jar Jar Binks was...let's just say not very popular and because of that, he went from being one of the central characters for Phantom Menace to background character with some plot relevance in Attack of the Clones to cameo with only one word in Revenge of the Sith, meaning Lucas listens to the criticism of the fans and rewrote his plot to please them. As we also know, another famous Prequel criticism is politics and the amount of "walking and talking" or "sitting and talking" in them. This makes me believe that when Lucas was cutting Revenge, he thought the fans would have found the Padmé scenes dull and boring and decided to remove them in favour of the Utapau subplot which is very action-pack but in all truth, not important to film other than getting Obi-Wan away from Anakin and giving a reason why the Separatist council is on Mustafar, leading to the passive role Padmé takes.

So what do you guys think? Did you find Padmé likeable in III or saw it as an absolute betrayal of her character? Would you have wanted her rebellion subplot or did you think it was unnecessary?

 

I agree with @devilinthedetails . I would have liked to have seen her planning the Rebellion like in the deleted scenes. The only thing i didn't like was the "run away with me while you still can" line, although she was probably just coming to terms with the younglings thing.

 

the book had a scene where Palpatine is planting seeds in Anakin's head about Padme and Obi wan being seen together. It made Anakin's jealousy seem a bit more justified, where in the film it kind of came out of nowhere. Wish they had included that in the film.

 

I can see why some may think the character got a shorter end in ROTS. I also do think that trimming some things helped the movie.

I would've preferred more seeds of the rebellion being sown with Padme as well. This doesn't mean I think she's unreasonably weak and whiny.

 

Like I said before, I don't agree with a lot of what I wrote about her being "whiny, timid, etc" those words are just adjectives I found online that was used to describe her character. I thought they did her character lovely in Revenge and I would change only this:

My ideal ROTS Padmé would have included the original rebellion scenes plus a few more scenes of her relaying her feelings towards Obi-Wan and possibly Bail about what Anakin was becoming. She also would have suspected something after Anakin raided the Temple and tells her the Jedi have betrayed the Republic. When Obi-Wan tells her the truth, instead of thinking he's wrong, she knows what he said is true but doesn't want to believe at all. Then she confronts Anakin and is little more assertive and firey, saying she will forgive Anakin as long as he stops right now. A more angered Padmé would make Anakin believing that she brought Obi-Wan to kill him more believable. He force chokes her, the duel happens, Anakin is defeated and Padmé gives birth. If she has to die, have it be from the force choke causing medical complications but because of what Leia said in ROTJ, she should survive but just barely. The twins are split up, Luke with Obi-Wan and Leia with Padmé and she would live for 3-5 years before her death (suicide, Imperial assassination, Vader finishing the job, you name it).

In the end, these are George Lucas' films and if he wanted Padmé to take a more passive role, I shouldn't be angered by that. He has his reasons, even if I would have liked something else.

 

I never found her "weak" or "whiny" (apparently one the haters' favorite words; they also love to use it to describe Hayden). Considering all she has been through (practically throughout the prequels), it's surprising she didn't break down sooner. Sure, her part could have been a little longer, but what is there is really good. Natalie is just as perfect as Padmé as Hayden is as Anakin. No complaints here whatsoever.

 

Padmé's evolution as a character, from strong leader, to a passive woman in the middle of a tragedy, also helps to sell the "she's lost the will to live" idea. If she had had an active role during the movie, or a purpose other than caring about Anakin, her death would not have been believable, in my opinion.

The criticism about Padmé's role in ROTS comes, in my opinion, from not understanding character evolution, and wanting to see the same character from the previous films: "she was a strong leader in TPM, therefore, she still has to have the same energy in ROTS." They forget that the characters are supposed to evolve through the trilogy, and that neither Padme, nor Anakin or Obi-wan are the same as they were in the previous films.

A similar criticism was directed towards Leia and Han's roles in ROTJ, because their characters weren't as "cool" as they were in ANH/ESB. Again, the fact that their characters had evolved throught the trilogy seems to go over many fans, because they just wanted the "old Han and Leia" back.

 

Good point!!

 

First, I'm happy the love triangle was dropped in ROTS. Anakin being jealous of Obi-Wan in a romantic sense seems out of nowhere given Episodes I and II. I much like the idea that Anakin can't trust Obi-Wan not to tell the Council and he sees Obi-Wan as a possible obstacle in his quest to save Padme. "You brought him here to kill me!" I see Anakin's concern about Obi-Wan after his second vision as worrying he knows she is pregnant at that point.

The love triangle is one of the aspects of the OT that has aged poorly to me. Even in ROTJ, when we know Luke and Leia wont get together, Han still comes off as paranoid about them which spoils a bit of the friendship that is supposed to be clear at this point.

For Padme, I'll analyze it this way. She is still a complex and developed character in ROTS as she was in AOTC, despite the less narrative involvement.

In ROTS, we see Padme able to get through to Anakin at times. She scolds Anakin for almost exposing their relationship in public and brings him back to his senses. This is why I think she sees a possibility that she can get through to Anakin. Not to mention, she is aware of Anakin's reasoning for falling when it comes to her fate, so she had a reason to believe she could use that to her advantage. She just didn't understandably realize like the audience that Anakin is more concerned about power.

We also learn more about her wants for the future: living back on Naboo near the lake. We see that she accepts the possibility of having to leave the Senate while raising a baby, and we see her opinions on the state of the Republic and the war. Not only that, but there are subtle aspects of her character too. First, Padme asks Anakin what happened to Obi-Wan, implying whether or not the Jedi have become traitors, she still cares about Obi-Wan, and we see that when she allows Obi-Wan into her apartment despite him being a war criminal by the Empire. She also keeps Captain Typho back from going to Mustafar. Now, you can see that as her not wanting him to expose their relationship, but I see it as Padme keeping him away just in case Anakin has become a Sith. "This is personal."

Not to mention, she explains Palpatine's speech to Bail Organa, which shows her political awareness and investment.

In terms of her reaction to Anakin's fall, I think it's incredibly reasonable for her to be upset. I never liked Leia's underreaction to finding out Darth Vader is her father, so I think it was interesting Padme is in a moral dilemma to expose her husband's location for the greater good or at least try to find Anakin before Obi-Wan gets to him first.

Padme telling Anakin to run away is a parallel to ROTJ where Leia tells Luke to run away from Vader. And we know Padme knows there is still good in Anakin, so that was her trying to reach out to the part of him she knows is still there. Now, maybe that sounds delusional to the audience, Obi-Wan, and Yoda, but the same can be said about Luke's investment in Vader. And we all know in the end, given ROTS being made 22 years after witnessing Anakin's face-heel turn into goodness, that Padme is essentially right and it isn't just some "poor, sad, delusional woman who is reaching to hard to justify her husband's actions."

The Rebel Alliance subplot would be nice, but its hard to execute when you are still 20 years before ANH. As it stands in the deleted scenes, it doesn't end up going anywhere. After the Delegation of 2000 is shot down by Palpatine, there are no more scenes of a formal rebellion taking place after. So, Padme would still be shown as "weak" to many people, since the talk of a rebellion is dropped after Palpatine tells them to leave. On the other hand, how much the Alliance can get involved is also questionable. I never saw the Galactic Civil War in ANH as a long-raging 20 year war, but something that has recently been stirred. Plus, ROTS is supposed to end with a sense of despair that everything is lost, until the last two shots of Luke and Leia. Having a huge battle between the Rebels and Empire on Mustafar or Coruscant would take away from that. So, it is a Catch-22 in that department. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

And given Padme has only three movies, she has more complex and dynamic character development than Leia in six films, with Leia in the ST being in Padme's ROTS role for 3 films.

 

I think the issue with that subplot is that it doesn't weave in with the rest of the film. Padme does it on her own without telling anyone, and then Anakin apparently finds out, but then nothing happens with it. Were there any other scene's that just weren't finished and thus never shown to the public. Seems weird that Anakin would find out that Padme is against the Chancellor, but then does nothing with that information.

 

Hopeful.

The robots do not understand her death.

Natalie Portman is stunning in this film.

 

This is a really good point. The "seeds of the Rebel Alliance" subplot doesn't really plant any seeds. As you say, the subplot is limited to the firs half of the movie, and doesn't lead anywhere. The second half of the movie is a huge tragedy, the fall of everything we've known, and any "hopeful" subplot would be totally out of place. The ending of the movie basically says "we have to lay down and wait for the right time", clearly hinting that Luke and Leia will be their "new hope", once they are old enough. In ANH, there's no mention of Bail Organa (except for a mention of the planet Alderaan), or of Mon Mothma, so there's nothing referring to that subplot either.

The more relevant purpose of the "seeds of the Rebel Alliance" subplot is to underline the idea that many senators are against Palpatine, which would be nice to have. But in the end, I don't think they are necessary.
(And Padme is still a very passive character in those scenes, so it wouldn't really make her character stronger).

 

I think this is astute stuff, even if some people wouldn't be ready for that comparison to Leia. Padme goes through very distinct stages in this trilogy -- coming of age, young fiery young adult, mature adult. In each stage she shows initiative, intelligence, and a growing sense of the importance of the decisions she finds herself making. Revenge of the Sith, in particular, needs a character who takes time to simply mourn the darkness surrounding the characters in that story.

Honestly, I think Portman struggles a bit with some of the material in Revenge of the Sith, like I think Christensen has some "almost" moments in Attack of the Clones, but I chalk it up to their youth and the style of acting training I assume they received. The experienced Brits just crush it over and over again, at any rate. But in neither case do I think their occasional near-miss obscures the impact of the material. Padme and Anakin are very rich, fully realized characters with well-developed psychologies. All of that comes across. I'm not sure what makes people suggest otherwise, other than perhaps viewing them as unsuccessful analogues to characters in the previous movies when they are very much their own thing.

 

I think Padme’s transition is rather realistic from AOTC to ROTS. She is a fiesty Senstor with s blaster, but once she is pregnant, she transitions to the child(s) in her womb being priority. She sees that the Republic is rotting, Padme tells Anakin:
“ What if the democracy we thought we were serving no longer exists, and the Republic has become the very evil we have been fighting to destroy?“
Padme is very observant here and showing her shrewd politicsl acumen. Anakin’s response is, “You’re beginning to sound like a Separatist!”

Padme is not feeble, she faces off with the cruelest politican of all, Anakin. In the deleted scenes she is with Senator Bail Organa and other senators plotting to confront the power hungry Chancellor Palpatine. It is a shame that footage didn’t make it into the final cut of the film.

 

I tend to disagree on the "leads nowhere" part. I would say that those Scenes serve many purposes and lead into the declaration of the empire with Padme realizing how far and deep all has gone. In the cutscenes she is passive indeed. That is because she is torn between beeing loyal to Anakin and Palpatine both of which who supported her and befriended her and her loyality to the republic and democracy and her ideals. The Scenes are short but they are reffered to in some Scenes which made it to final cut like her comment about demcarcy to Anakin and the final Scene of her in the Senate.

Beside that Bail would have been introduced to the movie earlier and they would have shown that he is against Palpatine and is rule too.

AND finally it would have been great to see those scenes in context with TCW, Rebels and RO where Bail, Mon (and Padme for TCW sake) Play huge parts and the development of the Rebellion is been shown in great detail. So it would have come full circle!

I agree and wished the Scenes would be included into the film to. Its the only regret I have over the movie!

I've made a thread about the Delegation of the 2000 and did put all Scenes in contect of the movie. Maybe ist worth a read for some:
https://boards.theforce.net/threads/birth-of-the-rebellion-the-delegation-of-2000.50052109/

 

I get what you mean, but in the context of the film, the Delegation of 2000 is never mentioned again after Palpatine says he will do what is right, which leads to unfortunate implications that the Delegation of 2000 failed completely and the formal rebellion we know from the OT wont exist for awhile. While I would like those scenes, especially for continuity with RO, and I like Padme's increasing antagonism with Palpatine, I much prefer the conflicted aspect of her character over Obi-Wan and Anakin. Plus, I like the film cut where Padme already seems to have lost faith in Palpatine when she talks to Anakin. For me, her strongest scene is when she confronts the Chancellor which is historically the first confrontation between the Rebel Alliance and the Galactic Empire funny enough.

Plus, Bail Organa is introduced early in the film with Anakin and Bail talking about looking for Grievous and Bail praising Anakin for his heroics.

 

i didn't like that. Considering Anakin turns dark to save her it doesn't make a lot of sense to throw that in there.

There were 3 'rebellion' scenes they left out and i really wish he had left the first one in. GL has said a few times he had a lot of stuff for III but when it came down to it he had to make it Anakin-centric.

 

One of the aspects of Padme I have always loved his her political acumen. Her line, “so this is how liberty dies? With thunderous applause,” is so powerful it gives me chills. Natalie Portman was the right choice to play Padme Amidala/Skywalker.

 

The issue with the DELEGATION scenes is that there's no climax to them. You don't need some grand scene in the senate chamber either, just a confrontation between Padme and Anakin. Just show them having a marital argument about Padme going up against Palpatine after the meeting in his office.

INTERIOR: SKYWALKER APARTMENT-LIVING ROOM

Anakin enters the living room, passing Threepio and Artoo.

ANAKIN: (stern) Where is she?

Threepio motions, about to answer.

PADME: (from elsewhere) I’m here.

Anakin stops halfway through the living room. He turns to Padme in the kitchen. Artoo sighs. Anakin starts toward his wife.

ANAKIN: How could you do that to me? Don’t you realize how embarrassing that was for me?

PADME: What were you even doing there?

ANAKIN: What were YOU doing there?

INTERIOR: SKYWALKER APARTMENT-KITCHEN

Anakin enters the kitchen.

PADME: Senator Mothma asked me to speak on behalf of their delegation. She felt Palpatine would be more inclined to listen to a former colleague.

ANAKIN: And be disrespected by one?

PADME: Disrespected? I stated nothing more than the honest truth in that meeting. And as hard as it was, I was polite about it.

ANAKIN: We are to be loyal to him.

PADME: I am loyal to our Republic. And with Palpatine placed as a dictator our democracy is falling apart.

ANAKIN: Palpatine is holding our crumbling Republic together with his bare hands.

PADME: Let me make this perfectly clear, Anakin Skywalker. Supreme Chancellor Palpatine was gifted unconditional authority by the senate. He has been using that authority to rewrite our constitution so that he never has to give up that power. Now, he might not be acting from the shadows, but just because he’s open about it doesn’t make him right. And just because this delegation I’m now a part of has been acting in secret doesn’t make us wrong.

ANAKIN: We should all be focused on the same goals; ending the war! But instead you’re off conscripting not so subtle threats directed at our head of state. No one is communicating…

Anakin gets cut off.

PADME: Oh, you want everyone to be open with one another? I just sat in a room where myself and a group of senators were very up front about our qualms; laid everything out on the table.

ANAKIN: And what if your little group is under the influence of the Sith? The one the Council has been looking for. The one trying to undermine our government.

PADME: If a Sith Lord is trying to maintain what little is left our Republic’s constitution; what does that say about Palpatine? At least we came forward with our intentions. I don’t see the Jedi informing the Chancellor about their comings and goings. They've been trying to route out this phantom Sith Lord behind everyone's backs; the Chancellor and the senate. If you want to keep being a hypocrite, you go right on ahead.

Anakin turns and leaves the kitchen; heading for the apartment door. Nelith tries to calm herself by leaning on the counter.

THREEPIO: Mistress?

PADME: I’m fine, Threepio.

 

Lots of great stuff in here! Im in agreement with those that found her character perfectly good in ROTS. Once you take into account everything she's been through and the circumstances she held it together pretty damn well. Just watched this movie last night(in the midst of the yearly marathon ) and as usual her losing the will to live is tragic and gets me emotional every time. Although she doesn't have the gravitas of her daughter in the grand scheme of female characters in Star Wars, she's still a "rock" IMO and a very important/well-loved character.

Padme was more logic-centered than Anakin which might give the impression of being weaker. Anakin as all emotionally-driven(hence he made a good Sith ) whereas Padme tended to be grounded in reality. She was emotional of course but was able to think clearly and reign her husband back in as needed. I will say that some of the extra dialog either from deleted scenes or the post above mine(Fight of the Forgotten) are intriguing and would have added some development. But, Im satisfied with what we got from her character over the three prequels.

 

To hell such "fair" criticism. This is for idiots

 

I would have loved to see the Rebel Alliance scenes in the movie somehow but I'm not sure how they would have worked for the movie's pacing.

Still, perhaps one of my few issues with the movie is that we don't see nearly enough politics when this should be the most politics-heavy film of the trilogy. But I understand why it wasn't in there. Regarding the thread question, I didn't get either an "emotional and vulnerable" or "weak and whiny" vibe from Padmé. She may have been in a state of denial towards the end on Mustafar but I wouldn't call that emotional and vulnerable.