Why does Padme's character change so much between TPM, AOTC, and ROTS?

NATIONALGREATNESS, I'm oppossed to horrible writing, poor-direction, unfinished plots, lack of continuity and head-scratching-excuses, err... quotes from the maker.

Other than that, I love the PT.

 

Thanks for the 411, we kind of got that over the years you have been posting on this site, and please refrain from expressing your opinions as absolutes, we should try to be respectful of other people's opinions. Film is a art form, and all art is SUBJECTIVE, I cringe when anyone tries to interpret art objectively, it basically defeats the purpose of why art was created, oh well

 

Then stop interpreting them as such.

 

Well, we all saw what he did when he even thought Padme and Obi-Wan were having... Something. In fact, that was an interesting subplot that unfortunatly got mostly cut from the movies, but was more obvious in the novel. It really showed just how paranoid and posessive Anakin was.

Actually, I was reading Dear Abby today (yes, I admit it. ) and she'd reposted signs of a potentially abusive spouse/signifigant other, and it was pretty interesting to see that Anakin fit almost all of them. So much so that I'm wondering if it may have been intentional to a point? To show just how off the deep end Anakin really was about relationships (all of them were odd, not just with Padme)?

 

Greatness,

From a relationship standpoint, she is immature. That's part of the point of their story. I mean, she is a newly elected queen at 14 years of age at the beginning of Episode I. What kind of relationships do you think she's had in those 14 years?

Flash forward 10 years and she's still very, very active in the Senate (ie, the leader of the opposition in creating an Army for the Republic). It's still quite clear that a personal relationship is a distance, distance second to her work as Senator of Naboo and fighter of the Republic.

Her decisions in the relationship department aren't farfetched at all because she's had no great experiences with it. Her only relationship that we know of is with a young man named Palo, at TWELVE!

That pretty much tells you all you need to know about Padme and her maturity on the relationship department.

And her use of the word "love" means nothing. Read between the lines but understanding the situation that both are in, through out the film. When on the eve of your certain death, people will confess anything.

 

I've always thought that Padme's character has been quite different in each of the films. TPM gave me a strong sense that Padme would be very much the fighter that Leia was. AOTC dented that thought after she was okay with Anakin killing sandpeople and then marrying him after hanging with him only a few days max. ROTS, well, she seems like a totally different person from the other two movies. Her voice... the tone she uses is so different from the way she talked in AOTC. The serious, level-headed (well, before Tatooine) Padme we saw became the weak, immature, and not-so-concerned Padme. I still have a problem with her a character being treated this way. It really makes it seem that Lucas was making up the story of the prequels as he went along, changing his characters' personalities at will.

The love story, well, is unrealistic. Yes, some girls and women fall for "bad boys" because of the thrill factor and feeling of being rebelious. It's typically a stage, though not always. So yes, it does happen, but based on how we are presented Padme and even Anakin before the sandpeople purge, we wouldn't associate them as having such qualities. So the love story for us isn't very valid. Had Anakin been more of a "chick magnet" of sorts as far as his looks and personality went, then the love story might be more plausible. But then again we must remember that neither Anakin or Padme have been in a serious relationship, so they might not know exactly how to treat it. It's supposed to be a bit awkward in that sense, but in the end, because of how it is presented, it comes out very fake and unbelievable.

 

I mean, it basically bought up how the males were able to change and evolve throughout the trilogy. Each of them had a somewhat significant role, whereas Padme and Leia, when they while they were in the spotlight in TPM and ANH respectively, become second rate characters during the next 2 movies.

 

It was and with Padme I certainly agree, though I think some of her points about Leia are incorrect.

 

Look at TPM. Padme was this newly elected queen ( although I don't see how a planet would place a 14 year old as queen) who basically was trying to get her people free. She even planned out their plan of attack near the end of the movie, and got to participate in it.

Fast forward 10 years later, and we have this woman who somehow has done a 180. Even though she is 5 years his senior, and he's a jedi, and she's a senator, she should have said " Anakin, whatever we had 10 years ag was just puppy love; I'm a senator, you're a Jedi. It just will not work." Even when He admits to killing a whole group of Tuskens, including the children, and the women, She doesn't even freak out on him; just says it'd be all right.

Then we fast forward to ROTS, where there is a war going on. A huge battle over the capital has just taken place, and barely a day or 2 later, Padme is combing her hair in a nightgown, talking about what they will name their baby. I'm all for relaxing after a hard day's work, but grooming one's self only a day or 2 after a war nearly destroyed the planet you were on?

 

My feelings exactly.

 

DARTH-SMELLY-FEET, in your opinion, was Padme's character, well written?
Do you feel that she was carefully-directed? Were her story-arcs completed? Were her actions and dialogue in-tune with the OT? And has Lucas said anything about Padme that has left you looking for aspirin?

 

Well written no, she went from being a 14 year old a*s kicking queen who'd die to protect her homeworld and all that live there to someone who thinks its ok for the man she loves to butcher a whole village of Tusken Raiders and then she dies of a broken heart.

From what i can see GL offered her no direction what so ever, there's a bit in the making of EP 2 when she's in the droid factory and she's trying not to get smashed. GL just stands there going "run through here stand there and BLAH BLAH BLAH. He was so bad portman thought he was taking the piss out of her and when she said something about it GL goes "dont worry we'll make you look good". As if to say we could put a banana there and thanks to the over load of CGI I can make it look cool. They are called actors for a reason and they are the reason the movie will be good not CGI.

Her arc was like i said above a strong 14 a*s kicker who turns into a quitter ( go figure ).
Were her actions and dialogue in-tune with the OT. As far as actions go i would say yes but only in TPM as she does get involved with the fighting etc. Her dialogue is so bad sometimes i want to puke when i hear it, cast your mind back to the fire place scene and pass me the bucket.

I cant think of anything GL said about her that was dumb but iii come back to you on that one.

 

I feel compelled to stand in opposition to the trend of this thread. Certainly we're all entitled to our opinions, so here's mine:

With the exception of Padme giving up her life at the end of ROTS, throughout the PT her character is well-formed as a person of integrity, courage and determination. This is established in TPM when she proves to be far more strong-willed, and perhaps more compassionate about the suffering of her people, than Palpatine could have surmised. This characterization is carried through AOTC when she bravely comes to Coruscant to vote on an issue she believes in; though she wavers after Corde is killed ("I shouldn't have come back"), this is a very human reaction and she puts herself right back on course the next moment. Her love for Anakin deepens throughout the film, to the point where she is brave enough to face all the challenges she knows their union will bring, even to the point of defying the Jedi rule about marriage, which is arguably unjust. As to her comforting Anakin in the wake of the Tusken slaughter, again her love for him has won out. Since the Tuskens are animalistic murderers, rather than human beings, it is at least understandable why he would have killed them in revenge for killing his mother. It is at least comprehensible that Padme would comfort him in the wake of his admission of his wrongdoing, rather than ladle on further pain by rebuking him, especially when he is admitting to doing wrong.

 

He justified his actions, and made excuses... plus, Skywalker showed NO remorse for slaughtering an entire camp of primitive people. Padme was pathetic for shrinking when faced with the truth of Anakin's perverse behavior. Padme CLEARLY regressed from when we first met her.

 

Some people believe in capital punishment. I personally do not, but it does not make those who do support the killing of killers reprehensible barbarians. It is an arguable position, even if I or you or the UN disagree.

Also, the Tuskens are inhuman monsters. How morally wrong would it be to, say, destroy a den of wolves -- or better yet, fantastical half-man-half-wolfen creatures -- who routinely raid human settlements, and kidnap and murder its inhabitants? "They're animals, and I slaughered them like animals!" These are not redeemable, rehabilitable human persons we're talking about.

 

I was disappointed at Padame's role in AOTC.

I don't think her role was unrealistic, however.

She was once in a position of power with hope; then she, like everyone else in the star wars universe, began losing that power...and hope... FURTHER she has lost her morals. She has succumbed to a relationship with an axe-murderering military intelligence operative essentially. She has become a liar. She has become selfish.

I've seen people become obsessed with the wrong people. I have seen people stay with the wrong people. It doesn't seem out of the realm of possibility that Padame would do the same.

OF COURSE that isn't what the story focuses on (and I don't know if Lucas could have told the story of Padame's codependant love all that well given his other experience). In the course of the three films, Padame's deevolution might be a worse tragedy than Anakin's; a politically brilliant and morally righteous leader becomes an unwed unplanned mother who rests her future on her self-indulgent self-absorbed husband.

 

LemmingLord, I tend to agree with that even-handed assessment, with two provisos: One, Padme and Anakin are not "unwed"; and two, her name is spelled Padme, as in the spiritual mantra 'Om Mane Padme Om'.

 

They're not human, but they are sapient.

 

You mean SENTIENT, right MS?

***

I take it that you are unfamiliar with Tusken history, biology, etc.?
Have you ever heard of the father and son Jedi with last name Hett? (Who were humanoid-Tusken, btw)
Tusken Raiders are far from a pack of wolves, or monkey's even... more like Aztecs and Incan warriors.

Anakin murdered a group of people who had their own culture, and way of life... just because they didn't speak basic people look at them like dogs. Anakin himself had to learn that lesson in the Clone War comics when A'Sharad Hett removed his Tusken mask... Skywalker was shocked.

Things are not always what we assume them to be...

 

I concede both points, my fellow PT posting "Padme" Protector.

 

SSS, as you might expect me to point out, those are of course EU tales and not necessarily in line with what the author's intent is in AOTC. I'm not dismissing them out of hand, nor am I rejecting outright the idea that the Tuskens are sentient beings with their own culture who deserve life as much the next species. However, the Tuskens are indisputably evil, and while as I said before I personally disagree with capital punishment, others support it, condone it or even engage in it, and I do not name them heartless murderers who should not be comforted in their moments of doubt or pain. Finally, I would ask you to consider that in ROTJ, Luke instructs Leia to point the laser cannon at the deck of Jabba's sail barge, and then destroys the entire entourage, which probably does not include innocent persons, but certainly contains lackeys who did not do personal injury to Luke or any of his loved ones. Yet we accept these killings as punitive for the villains' capture of Han Solo and their attempts to kill our heroes. The Tuskens actually did kill Anakin's mother, and again, it is understandable that he would be inspired to slaughter them; and -- more germaine to this thread -- it is defensible that the woman who loves him would comfort him during his confession of the act.

 

I did, I was checking Wookieepedia to see if Sentient is the right term and apparently the way the EU uses it is, but in the English language sentience is simply an awareness and the sensation of touch as most animals have rather than the ability to think and reason as in humans so technically it would apparently be sapient though Star Wars would dub them sentient.

...so yes.

Padme's reaction is definitely defensible as regardless of whether or not they are sentient/sapient, she has no idea that they even could be. All she knows about them is that they're bipedal "monsters" who killed Shmi. However, by the same token Anakin's referring to them as "the women and the children too" is odd as someone who killed a pack of wolves would never refer to them as such.

 

Why are they evil? Because they defend their tribal lands, their territory?
They are no more inherently evil than the native Americans who fought with the white man.
And if they were intrinsically wicked, why would there be any mention of women and children? Would they not simply be called Tuskens, like Rancors or Krayt Dragons?

Anakin did not slaughter a herd of Banthas, he slaughtered a TRIBE of indigenous humanoids.
Tuskens roamed the Judland Wastes for many centuries, long before the Lars-homestead was ever built. The fact is; EU or not, Skywalker murdered humanoids, blamed his mentor for his actions and his future wife didn't bat an eye at it. To see her cry over the younglings made no sense, and further illustrates how inconsistently she was portrayed.

Tuskens really are no different than Ewoks or Wookiees, they just aren't as cute.
Actually, they are most comparable to the Noghri, Kaleesh, and Trandoshans, IMO.

 

Padme was falling in love with Anakin, before he killed the Tuskens. You cannot help with who you fall in love with. She wasn't exactly justifying the killing of women and children. She was justifying why Anakin did it. His mother had been horribly mistreated and died. He did what people in this situation would normally do, act emotionally and on the first instinct that comes to mind. In this case, it is revenge. You hurt me, so I got to hurt you. Eye for an eye, blood for blood. The difference was that Anakin's anger and hate was so great, that before he knew it, he was the only one alive in that Tusken camp. It doesn't make her an idiot. An enabler, maybe. But love makes us do silly things. Look at the women who are abused by their husbands or boyfriends. They go around defending what was done to them, because in part they are afraid. And partly because they love the person. Anakin didn't abuse Padme, but she still loved him despite his actions. Despite what the Jedi Code said and what kind of political scandal would arise from their relationship. Anakin did what he did there out of hate. When he killed the Younglings, he didn't do it out of hate or revenge. He did it because he was ordered to. She could accept an act of revenge like it was three years earlier. She couldn't accept it because he wanted to do so. To become powerful. She's also a pregnant mother who is about to give birth. Her views are different. If he was willing to kill the children on a whim, then what about their children? When she saw him, she saw how different he was. He wasn't the same person that he had been before he turned evil. When Shmi died, he was angry, but he was still a good person. He regreted his actions. When she saw him on Mustafar, he didn't regret his actions. He felt totally justified in them and seemed to get a kick out of it. It didn't bother him at all as it had three years earlier.

 

So you think Tusken Raiders are like rabid dogs then?