The Real Problem with Return of the Jedi were not the Ewoks

The real problem was how the emperor was a Sith sorceror. The silliness of this decision robbed the series of realism, and it made the prequels two-dimensional in the plot. And of course, Kevin J Anderson came along and enshrined the magic bits with his series and here we are.

Imagine instead, the Emperor is a beleaguered bureaucrat trying to hold the galaxy together, there is a real existential threat maybe an alien invasion which makes disunity unacceptable. Darth Vader is a tragic hero, not someone who is twisted by the dark side (I hated so much how as soon as you use the dark side you are automatically evil) so much as someone who has been embittered by life experience. Obi Wan Kenobi and Yoda are aloof mystics and the Jedi order has problems with arrogance and fanaticism. Basically, giving the antagonists plausible motivations instead of simply being evil.

 

Nahhhhhh, it was definatly the Ewoks.

 

Ewoks +1

 

Nah, I don't like it. Your problem with "Jedi" is having a problem with the saga as a whole. Not only are we so far beyond the point of changing anything, we're fortunate that "Star Wars" is not what you're suggesting. This would equal a result so far different than what we know and love that I doubt most of us would love it.

It has been the staple of storytelling since the first story was told for there to be a clear face and heel. This "space drama" about a gray area that people live in within our real lives is not a story that people would like to be told. Not for "Star Wars" anyway.

 

ROTJ is the best Star Wars movie.


/thread

 

No, the problem with RotJ is Jabba's Palace. It did wonders for the EU, but it totally breaks the movie, the trilogy and the Saga. If it wasn't for 3PO, I'd skip the whole thing every time.

 

The real problem was how the emperor was a Sith sorceror. The silliness of this decision robbed the series of realism, and it made the prequels two-dimensional in the plot. And of course, Kevin J Anderson came along and enshrined the magic bits with his series and here we are.


This does not make any sense to me. "STAR WARS" has never been another "BATTLESTAR GALACTICA". What realism are you talking about?

 

Ewoks +3.


No, the problem with RotJ is Jabba's Palace. It did wonders for the EU, but it totally breaks the movie, the trilogy and the Saga.

?? What specifically ? The architecture ??

 

Maybe he means that Jabba's Palace takes the Saga on a weird tangent ...

Slave Girl Leia -- Music Number -- Luke fighting Rancor -- etc.

Some might have wanted more Vader, Palps, and Yoda. Since the preceeding 5 movies put alot of emphasis on the whole Jedi/Sith conflict.

That's all I can think of, why someone does not like Jabba's Palace/Sail Barge.

But remember, ROTJ is Luke's story, so watching him strut his stuff - without the aforementioned Big 3 - is fine with me, and makes it a fun, great way to get the film rolling.

 

Oh, the Jabba's Palace opening is my favorite from the whole saga. It was great for the film in my opinion. Sure, it was a little different than the previous two, but it wasn't all that radical.

 

Realism of motivations.

This is why I hated the prequels so much: the villains are 2-dimensional in their motivations.

I mean, Palpatine orchestrates a galaxy-wide war for the sole purpose of...sitting as emperor? and no one notices? and anakin isn't conflicted? these things bugged me throughout the prequels, made them less enjoyable.

 

In retrospect, I don't really like the Throne Room scene after having seen ROTS. In ROTS, Anakin's turn is a lot more methodical on Palpatine's part. He gets Anakin to question his convictions, gets the Jedi to betray theirs, etc. In ROTJ, Palpatine just taunts Luke to kill him. He makes the Dark Side out to be an addictive drug, such that if Luke kills in anger, he will taste the Dark Side and succumb to it forever.

I also think the rehash of a plot involving construction of the Death Star was just unnecessary and lacked imagination. Though at the same time I think the attack on the Death Star was the best sequence in the film. I think they could have just as well made it an attack on the Executor and accomplished the same things.

 

I have to agree. I remember when RotJ originally hit the theater in 1983, and all anyone in my town could talk about was Jabba the Hutt. I heard one or two mentions of "And you get to see Darth Vader without his mask!" but the rest of it was how cool Jabba the Hutt was. Except for Han and 3PO's lines, and Leia choking Jabba, I could have done without those scenes altogether. They were necessary as far as showing Luke, Leia and Lando rescuing Han, but they could have been cut by two thirds and still gotten the point across for me.

 

For me the idea behind the Ewoks was interesting....ie a primitive culture overcoming technological forces. They just weren't pulled off very well. They were too cuddly, allowed for too much slapstick and they overcame Palpatine's "best troops" way too easily. However, I loved them as a kid and I'm sure most kids still do.

The real problems in ROTJ were...

1 - GL was clearly rushing to close up story threads originally intended to either play out differently or for use in other SW sequels.

2 - The SE's juvenile addition of "Jedi Rocks" completely undercuts the seriousness and threat of Jabba's palace. Not to mention it's totally out of place with the whole saga, even the PT.

3 - Aside from Mark Hammill, many of the actors didn't seem to be as into their roles anymore.

4 - Because of the deletion of some scenes - fleshing out of some areas was lost. We lost a lot of footage relating to the battle on Endor and the space battle. We also lost a sandstorm scene where Han & Lando spoke of and reconciled events from ESB. As it stands it's simply like a convenient "reset" button was pushed on their relationship and they are simply just good ol' buddies again.

5 - The Deathstar bit was just repetitive and lazy. They at least could have had multiple Deathstars (as in early drafts) or maybe a different type of deadly space station.

 

Guys.



GUYS.



The REAL problem with RotJ?


[image=http://media.ebaumsworld.com/picture/GNOMER43/lukeandleia.jpg]


Duh.

 

I thought all the incest happened in ESB.

I liked the Ewoks. I really liked seeing Palpatine's "legion of best men" get their butts kicked by a bunch of cute cuddly teddy bears.

 

In retrospect, I don't really like the Throne Room scene after having seen ROTS. In ROTS, Anakin's turn is a lot more methodical on Palpatine's part. He gets Anakin to question his convictions, gets the Jedi to betray theirs, etc. In ROTJ, Palpatine just taunts Luke to kill him. He makes the Dark Side out to be an addictive drug, such that if Luke kills in anger, he will taste the Dark Side and succumb to it forever.

Yeah, 13+ years to turn Anakin, but tries to turn Luke in 13+ minutes.

 

In the prequels there is no real case made for Palpatine's case. He's basically an evil necromancer the entire time with no redeeming value. Furthermore, Anakin's abrupt turn is ridiculous. He accidentally kills Mace Windu and discovers that the war that he's been fighting for the past 10-20 years is a farce -- and he decides to follow the man? Then murder dozens of Jedi toddlers? Because the Jedi are a threat somehow? How?

It should be obvious: the Republic is the Empire. There should have been a legitimate threat and not a "phantom menace" and so on. Utterly unbelievable plot ruined the prequels.

 

Imagine instead, the Emperor is a beleaguered bureaucrat trying to hold the galaxy together, there is a real existential threat maybe an alien invasion which makes disunity unacceptable. Darth Vader is a tragic hero, not someone who is twisted by the dark side (I hated so much how as soon as you use the dark side you are automatically evil) so much as someone who has been embittered by life experience.


I feel that this scenario does not really work, since if it were to be implemented then probably the whole of the OT would have to be changed rather than just the Emperor in ROTJ.

Vader has been shown to be high up in the Imperial structure, but actually outside of the military and political ranks. He answers to the Emperor directly. Vader is not running the show, and he is also not controlling the Emperor. The conclusion of the story then would have to be a confrontation between Luke and Vader, with Vader being the main villain even though he's not actually in charge of the Empire or the military and so his defeat does not alter either of those things.

So you'd have to rewrite more than ROTJ to make an alterative version of the Emperor work. If it followed on from ANH then it might not work because Vader ends up being simultaneously more powerful than everyone else, but at the same time not actually in control of anything. He should be controlling the Empire and the Imperial forces, but he does not. In the actual OT that is because he is Palpatine's apprentice, but if the Emperor is different then Vader's role also needs to be different - ie he needs more of a solid role in the Empire to make him the main antagonist.


However, as you may know, before the Emperor was seen in TESB his character was not necessarily a Sith, or a Force user. The ANH novel describes him as a man who gained power through alliances with power-hungry individuals and commerce organisations. However, once in office he became controlled by those very people who had helped him gain power.

I feel this idea resurfaced in the PT but was kind of spilt up because Palpatine had been established as a Sith lord in the OT. So part of it became the story of the corruption in the Republic and the beleaguered Supreme Chancellor being unable to control those forces and part of it became the story of Palpatine/Sidious using those commerce groups as part of his own plans to gain power.



I mean, Palpatine orchestrates a galaxy-wide war for the sole purpose of...sitting as emperor? and no one notices?

The reasons why no one notices are that firstly, Palpatine was a popular leader who managed to turn the system against itself. And secondly because the process happened incrementally, gradually eroding people's rights and liberty until the Republic became the Empire. The thing to remember is that the Empire is not a force that invades and takes over the Republic - it is the Republic, that has been reshaped into another form which serves Palpatine's ambitions. That is why I think the PT is more complex than you give it credit for.

The story in SW is about the galaxy being at war with itself - the political moves that leads to the civil war and then the war itself. A story about an external threat would be much more simplistic and black and white. Having the Republic rot from within due to the ambitions of Palpatine makes it more complex than just being a war against an outside foe. It brings in the politics of the situation of how such a dictatorship comes about but also adds in the SW touches like the light/dark sides of the Force and groups like the Sith who want to rule the galaxy. So it's got some realism and complexity in that sense but it is in the context of the sci-fi/fantasy setting.


In ROTJ, Palpatine just taunts Luke to kill him. He makes the Dark Side out to be an addictive drug, such that if Luke kills in anger, he will taste the Dark Side and succumb to it forever.

I feel that it would not be that simple if Palpatine's plan had worked. Luke would have experienced t

 

Ezekial, it appears you've missed a couple of salient plot points in ROTS. First, Anakin's turn is anything but "abrupt". Palpatine has been coddling, encouraging and confiding in Anakin for many years now. Anakin has been on a slippery slope toward the dark side at least since he slaughtered the Tuskens. Second, Anakin chooses to serve Palpatine in order to save his wife from death. That part is key, and is clearly represented in the dialogue of ROTS. Third, the Jedi are now a threat because they will move against the Senate (which the Jedi do indeed discuss doing) and try to take Palpatine out of power. I fail to comprehend what is so contradictory or unclear about this.

All that said, and moving on to the topic at hand (and in the correct forum!), I find ROTJ's Throne Room sequence is also perfectly explained. Once Luke feels the thrill of destroying Vader through the power of aggression and anger, Palpatine reasons, Luke will be putty in his machiavellian hands. The idea goes: 1. Taunt Luke into attacking him (Palpatine). 2. Vader blocks blow, fights Luke. 3. Luke wins via dark side powers, taunted into hatred by Palpatine. 4. Luke, now firmly on the path to the dark side (aided by the death of the Rebellion) is seduced to the dark side and becomes Palpatine's apprentice.

Again, it's all very clear and I lack understanding as to why people profess confusion at this elegant plot point.

 

This is the first time I've ever written the following: Stop blaming ROTJ for that which was established in TESB. Monkeywoman Emperor put an effective end to the bureaucrat Emperor. Now, if you want to kvetch about the shift from icy, calculating sorcerer to cackling, Walt Disney sorcerer, then ROTJ is fair game.

 

Because compared to ROTS, I do not see anything elegant about it. Anakin's turn is very abrupt, but it is essentially abrupt. Palpatine had fed Anakin lies and half-truths for a long time, but still Anakin really didn't buy into it. He didn't buy into it until he was an accomplice in Mace's murder.

Generally speaking, evil people don't see themselves as evil and have some sort of justification for what they do. Anakin knew what he did to Mace was wrong. He wanted to do the right thing and have seemingly defenseless Palpatine arrested, and then he wanted to interrogate Palpatine to learn the power to save Padme. Instead Palpatine succeeded in goading Mace to try and kill him. It forced Anakin to make an immediate choice, and he chose to attack Mace on faith that Palpatine knew how to save Padme. He knew what he did was wrong (hence: "what have I done?!")

But at that point he had two choices He could do the right thing: take responsibility for what he had done to Mace, alert the Jedi about Palpatine, and leave empty-handed (referring to the power to save Padme). Or he could do the wrong thing: accept Palpatine's lies about the Jedi after the fact, justify his actions against Mace by believing the idea of a conspiracy, and continue to follow orders on the belief that it will lead to his ability to save Padme.

There was nothing elegant about the attempt to turn Luke. I lacked any sort of planning or manipulation. For one it operates on the assumption that Vader, who wanted to turn Luke for his own ambitions, is compliant in Palpatine's grand scheme that involves Vader getting himself killed by Luke. It also doesn't challenge Luke's convictions as it did with Anakin. There was no catalyst by which Luke would start to see doing the wrong thing as being good. It would have been a just act for him to strike down Palpatine. Mace was going to do the exact same thing and it's highly unlikely he would have turned to "putty" after killing in anger.

Vader redeemed himself by killing Palpatine to save his son whom he cared about. How is it that Luke would do the exact opposite and condemn himself in trying to kill Palpatine in order to save his friends? Anakin killed the innocent (Mace) because he believed the lie of an evil manipulator who put himself in a position in which he appeared helpless. Anakin then changed his frame of mind to twist Mace into the villain to justify continuing on down the path of the Dark Side. There is a master plan in motion when Palaptine gets Anakin to turn. With Luke it was a much more clear cut choice. Kill the evil man to save the good guys. That somehow killing Vader and watching his friends die was going to make Luke want to kneel down to the guy that had orchestrated it, there's no brilliance in that.

 

Fixed.

Sorry; couldn't help myself.

 

hardly. Vader did the selfish thing in killing palpatine. he would not have done so with someone else.

if he had lived, he would still have been the ruthless SOB. ROTJ set the stage for the suckiness of the prequels. Without the requirement that Palpatine be an evil Sith lord from the start, the story would have been much more interesting with more suspense at least.

 

Thank you, TaradosGon. The popularity of the ROTJ temptation has always mystified me, as there is nothing particularly "soul-rending" about it. Sadly, in rendering Luke the veritable white knight for the duration of ROTJ, Lucas and Kasdan wrote themselves into a corner.

I'm no writer, but it seems to me that when you're crafting a tale of seduction, the hero should be somewhat flawed.