ummm, doesnt anikin always refer to Obi-Wan as being like a father...this makes less sense to me than Yoda... damn, i really need to see this, im supposed to go today
Hmmmm. "I never wanted to do this, but I'm just going to leave you there bleeding to death/dying from 3rd degree burns rather than put you out of your misery. That's how fucking noble the jedi are". Way to go, dude.
*sigh* The problem is not that it's a kids film. The problem (or should I say one of the problems) is that Lucas seems to have no concept of where humour is appropriate in a film. Take Phantom Menace (please, take it!) and the battle at the end with the droid army. Now I can tolerate Jar Jar, but what I can't tolerate is the way you have this huge battle going down and they keep cutting to comic Jar Jar moments. What the fuck? Where's the tension? Where's the drama? Can you imagine that happening during the battle on Hoth in Empire Strikes Back? Your friend was correct.
Agreed. I don't know why Obi Wan didn't finish off Anakin/Vader. It would've prevented him from either (1) dying a slow, painful death or (2) escaping, as he eventually did. Of course, it's completely implausible that he would've even survived, let alone thrived, after receiving such severe burns. Despite the great effects and virtually nonstop action, I think this movie was essentially a failure. The main story line was supposed to be Anakin's conversion to the dark side, and this was compressed to about 10 minutes out of the entire ~150-minute movie. One minute he's arguing that it would be unjust to kill Palpatine instead of arresting him, and the next minute he's slaughtering innocent Jedi younglings en masse. He supposedly sides with the emperor in order to avoid losing Padme, but it never occurs to him that becoming a murderous tyrant might possibly drive her away? Also, in episode 2, Anakin meets his half brother Owen on Tattooine, and they appear to be almost the same age. Owen should've been 10 years younger, which would've made him roughly 8 years old. Furthermore, why did Palpatine get totally disfigured by his blue electric shock waves in this movie, but Luke didn't in Return of the Jedi? Finally, after devoting years of his life to inflicting mass carnage throughout the galaxy, how was Vader so moved by compassion at the sight of Luke suffering?
I guess Obi Wan pulled it off because Darth Maul was so completely stunned and unprepared for such an impressive move. Darth Sidius is the emperor's Sith name. You're probably thinking of Vader's mysterious arrival on Lando Calrissian's planet well in advance of Han Solo and crew. That made absolutely no sense.
One more thing: Yoda's warmed-over Buddhism is tiresome. He tells Anakin not to even miss a dearly loved one who has died. How could such "detachment" (cold indifference) motivate the Jedi to fight for freedom and justice?
Ah yes, but in all fairness, you could argue that this is a sign that the Jedi have become a bunch of arrogant, detached fuckers, which would be exactly why they were too far up their own sphincters to notice the Sith quietly taking over the universe.
I think the problem with Anakin is that his ego got to him which easly made him turn to the dark side. He was confused that's for sure. Palpatine's disfiguration was a manifestation of evil. I thought the movie was superb.
Good point - not to mention their blindness to Anakin's utterly unstable personality! Besides Yoda's cold detachment, the whole theology of "the force" is screwy. They repeatedly mention "the will" of the force. Does this mean that the force is actually a cosmic personal being (i.e. God) rather than an impersonal energy field? Why would it elect a mentally unbalanced critter like Anakin to bring "balance" to itself? If it has a dark side, then what is inherently noble about its "good" side? Are good and evil both equally intrinsic to the essential nature of the universe? I wish Lucas had left out the psuedo-Christian concepts (the virgin birth, chosen one, etc.) and just stuck with silly New Age pantheism.
I think the problem is that George Lucas has all the social skills of a mouldy turnip, and so didn't really understand why Anakin would turn to the dark side
Did anyone find that Anikin turned to the dark side incredibly quickley?? It just seemed so sudden. And also, he was trying during the whole film to find a way of preventing Padmaes death and in the end caused it himself - i guess in a way it makes sence because it showed how much the dark side had got to him and that it makes you do things like that. But then again she didn't actually die until after child birth which is what Anikin kept dreaming about. BUT ... Darth Sidious tells Anikin at the end (when he is Darth Vader) that Anikin did indeed cause her to die, and said nothing about child birth at all. Plus those "twins" which she has are blooming big for new born twins - all i can say is ouch, no wonder the birth made her die. Sorry thats a bit harsh .... can anyone help me with my confusion anyway??
Yeah, I mean duh! Psycopath in the house! Yo! Jedi! Over here! I mean would he have to start yanking out Yoda's fingernails before anyone noticed he was a little bipolar?!? Oh yeah, and d'ya reckon the Jedi were the last people in the universe not to realise that Palpatine was a Sith lord? I mean, c'mon! Who stands to benefit most from the plotting of the dark side. Hmmmm. Could it possibly be that all-powerful unelected dictator? Y'know, the one with a whole galactic empire for the taking? Duuuuhhhh!!!!!!
If he was so easily turned after 10-20 years of training, then the Jedi were grossly incompetent. His corruption would've been a bit more believable if it hadn't happened so abruptly and if it hadn't been so largely motivated by his supposedly intense love for Padme.