Official Star Wars Thread

If you distribute power equally then the 'evil' will always make more use of it, so in some respects balance is wiping out the dark. That is most likely the way the Jedi deemed it and imho the way that the original trilogy was pointing it, Anakin brings balance to the force by (eventually) destroying the sith completely. Maybe Lucas deserves more credit than we thought and decided that balanced meant equal distribution and this is what the prequels were about, rectifying this incorrect perception. Doubt it though :P

The black and white attitude has certainly not always been there, there were always grey jedi - Windu himself was pretty grey tbh. It's quite possible that like the Sith created the rule of two to help their advancement, the Jedi also adjusted their rules to include the no love etc so they could ensure that the traditional movie villain "Kidnap the girlfriend" type thing couldn't be used against them ;) The EU certainly has a lot of grey jedi and flipflopping jedi alike, look at Revan for one thing. The Old Republic era was definitely full of it.

The EU has some great stuff in it, but also some ridiculous stuff... I've not read any of the books really but going off wiki's and forum discussions I've seen, I think Starkiller was pretty OTT for one, and the post-trilogy stuff sounds kinda stupid as well, Luke becoming a god etc. Hell Luke was meant to be like the most powerful Jedi ever and is apparently described as "mastering light sabre styles in mid fight" against Vader... whereas to me it looks like he's just angry and flailing like a kid with a heavy sword that he can't control ;p I think there's a very mixed reaction to things like Bobba Fett's EU as well.
 
In the films themselves, it was shown mostly in his willingness to kill Sidious straight up. Anakin was correct that the laws and such stated he must stand trial (as much as I agree he needed to die) and that it wasn't a decision the Jedi were allowed to make.

If I recall correctly Windu's sabre style was meant to be one that channeled rage into the attacks or something, and Jedi weren't meant to have anger >.>
 
I think the point of it being said anyway is to show that Obi Wan and the Jedi are arrogant and self-centered.

Edit: And hypocritical is another word I was looking for.
 
Somehow, I've always thought the movie was too bad and took itself too seriously to include that sort of subtlety. And I still think so. Why? Because Obi-Wan says that to Anakin after the latter says something to the effect of "either you're with me or against me" (I don't remember what exactly it was), and it was just pushing the Manichean George W. Bush stereotype. It wasn't a clever hint or a hidden reference, it was blatantly shoving it down your throat. I have a lot of trouble believing there would be the kind of subtlety you are suggesting after that.
 
While I recognize what you say, bluntless in one line doesn't necessarily exclude subtlety in a different line. I mean, the Jedi arrogance is a recurring theme throughout the EU, and even the films. Take Yoda vs Sidious. Darth Sidious tells Yoda that Yoda is blinded and arrogant, and right away lands a surprise Force lightning shock. Yoda was arrogant - he wasn't prepared to be taken by surprise. Windu, expects Anakin to just stay where he is, and he has a history of recklessness, while Windu deals with Sidious. Yet another display of the Jedi arrogance, which leads to Windus death and the execution of order 66.
 
I admit that the one doesn't exclude the other, but the crude writing of the entire film simply doesn't speak for it. I do get the point about Jedi arrogance, but it isn't sufficiently explored in the films. It should be apparent for someone who is not familiar with the Expanded Universe (like me) in order to make the films enjoyable. Since we are supposed to hate the Sith, we should not take their word on anything, least of all anything concerning the Jedi. In that sense, we have no reason to believe the Sith claiming that the Jedi are arrogant. But the film does not really tell us much more than that. Much of what you attribute to arrogance (Yoda being taken by surprise, Windu having wrong expectations from Anakin) could just as well be the result of naivety or the decrease in the ability to use the Force that is being mentioned in one single line somewhere in one of the movies and never spoken of again. The movies have to show us these things. If we are expected to take a villain's word on it, somebody really missed a great chunk of Filmmaking 101.
 
I agree that the Jedi arrogance is poorly portrayed in the movies - There is no way for me to argue against that. I maintain my stance on that the theme is explorered, but poorly, because it requires too much reflection, and might only be obvious from experience with the EU.

About naivety vs arrogance. I think this may purely be semantics.
 
I think it only is obvious from experience with the Expanded Universe. It wasn't at all obvious to me, at least.

I'm not sure if you can argue that "naivety vs arrogance" is a matter of semantics, though. The two things are too different for that. Fact is, from what is shown in the films, it could be either, and it is not conclusively explained to the audience.

So what we are essentially saying is that the films are bad. ;)
 
Of all the things you wanna say the films are flawed for THAT's the one you choose? :P

How about failing to even make the prequel and trilogy stories fit together? Leia states memories of her mother, yet Padme dies after childbirth etc.

I've seen a discussion on the 'absolutes' thing before and the meaning behind it, that the statement itself WASN'T absolute but no idea where it was or what the points made were lol. I wouldn't call Yoda arrogant with his getting caught off guard by Sidious, but I would call Sidious arrogant (and rightfully so, he's the villain, he's meant to be).
 
Crimson Idol said:
How about failing to even make the prequel and trilogy stories fit together? Leia states memories of her mother, yet Padme dies after childbirth etc.
Click to expand...

When the great big dramatic structure of the film fails, when it fails to construct a coherent story, when it fails to follow its own rules and when it fails to make any sense, those are details that don't matter.
 
IMO, the prequel failed the moment the Jedi Council knew that Obi-Wan was training Anakin. That's just me. I had always pictured Obi-Wan training Anakin in secret somewhere, for whatever reason.
 
I do think the prequels showed the Jedi had "strayed" over time. Yoda seemed to make several references to it, I had always seen the fall of the Jedi order and supposedly a later rebirth as part of the balancing of the force. Strictly from a movie perspective, all that was left was Obi Wan and Yoda.
 
bearfan said:
I do think the prequels showed the Jedi had "strayed" over time. Yoda seemed to make several references to it, I had always seen the fall of the Jedi order and supposedly a later rebirth as part of the balancing of the force. Strictly from a movie perspective, all that was left was Obi Wan and Yoda.
Click to expand...
This is it indeed.
 
Re: Balance
http://darthsanddroids.net/episodes/0146.html (Not a bad comic in general, stumbled across it a few days ago)

Many people have considered the idea of bringing "Balance to the Force" as silly, because that (they assume) would mean balancing the Light Side and the Dark Side. In other words, increasing the amount of evil in the Galaxy, since during The Phantom Menace it is mostly still good. Obviously, if this was what was intended by this phrase, that's just stupid.
According to George Lucas, in a documentary released before The Phantom Menace was made:
Anakin Skywalker, a young boy who is destined to be a significant player in bringing balance back to the Force and to the Republic. [...]
Which brings us up to the films 4, 5, and 6, in which Anakin's offspring redeem him and allow him to fulfill the prophecy where he brings Balance to the Force by doing away with the Sith and getting rid of evil in the universe.
— quoted in Wookieepedia.​
So it is meant to be the existence of evil that is the imbalance, and restoring balance involves defeating and eliminating the evil. Which makes a whole lot more sense. Unfortunately the choice of phrasing turned out to be ambiguous and easily misinterpreted.
Click to expand...
 
Honestly, I always felt the movies should make sense on their own, without any knowledge of the expanded universe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top