Jedi Ping!
Let me know if you want on or off this list!
Posted on 07/04/2005 8:45:45 AM PDT by Teófilo
Folks, first the good news: I watched Star Wars Episode III: The Revenge of the Sith twice. I also read the excellent novelization of the script by Matthew Woodring Stover. Of course, this is a great saga, good story-telling almost 30 years in the making. I was there, 12 years old when the first Star Wars came out, standing on line on a stormy day in Ponce, Puerto Rico, and like many other fans, have watched the franchise grow and read uncounted novels involving the characters we all love.
Star Wars is a morality tale. One may see countless influences of the myths and stories that make up the fabric of Western Civilization, and many borrowings from other civilizations too. We can hear echoes of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table; of Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings, of Robin Hood, of the biblical David and Jonathan, of Rasputin, of Nietzsche, Camus, Buddha, Zen Buddhism, so many mythical, literary, and spiritual currents so intertwined that the dual Trilogy's meaning and message becomes universal, intelligible in all languages and cultures.
That doesn't mean that Lucas always gets it right. Particularly on this line that many pundits have interpreted to be a dig at President Bush:
ANAKIN: If you're not with me, you're my enemy.I hope you see the inherent contradiction, the disparity between Obi Wan's words and his subsequent actions. Ethical relativists in the Internet and the media have regarded Obi Wan's comeback with delight, but none of them reflect on the fact that Obi Wan "did what he must."OBI-WAN: Only a Sith Lord deals in absolutes. I will do what I must.
The only logical path open to Obi Wan's after stating that Only a Sith Lord deals in absolutes was for himself to replace his light saber in its holster, bow gently to Anakin, wish him luck on all his new endeavors and chosen path, get into the spacecraft, leave and—hell, why not?— marry Padmé.
In denying the existence of absolutes, Obi Wan had to accept implicitly Anakin's and Darth Sidious' earlier thesis that good and evil are morally equivalent "points of view," of equal validity and exempt from ethical condemnation of any kind. Obi Wan's actions, the "doing what he must" belied the fact that the Jedi also dealt in moral absolutes, and that when opposing absolutes clash, battle ensues. After careful analysis, I find the moral dissonance between Obi Wan's stated beliefs and subsequent actions grating.
But this is more than sloppy dialogue. It reflects Lucas'—and broader Hollywood's—penchant to moralize without careful reflection. In Star War's parlance, Lucas let himself "unleash his anger," the result being this sophomoric exchange between master and pupil, or brother and brother, where neither rose over the other, really.
Watch this movie, of course. Read the book. Wait for the DVD. But don't be seduced by facile philosophies and sloppy logic as you seek to use this movie as a key to interpret present realities. I am afraid that it is not good enough for that kind of task.
Enjoy your Fourth of July holiday!
SW3:RotS was simply bad moviemaking. The dialogue sucked, the action scenes were too fast to make real sense of what was going on, it completely failed to lead in to the next movie in the series (the original SW), and was inconsistent with story facts established in previous movies. The special effects were cartoonish and had the opposite effect of the special effects in the original - they took away from the story, they removed the suspension of disbelief.
OBI-WAN: Only a Sith Lord deals in absolutes.
Uh, don't look now Obi, but you just dealt in absolutes.
Anyway, the fact is that RotS was about Canada, not the USA. As evidence I present this:
| The Empire | Canada |
| Separatists are used as a reason to conduct an expensive war and to suspend democracy | Separatists are used as a reason to conduct an expensive advertising war and to prevent an election from being called. |
| Emperor controls the government and the courts with his Sith powers. | Prime Minister controls the government and courts though his appointment powers. |
| Emperor seduces a young, power hungry rookie to switch to his side. | Prime Minister seduces a young, power hungry rookie to switch to his side. |
| Emperor launches a massive government building project (Death Star) to hold onto power. | Prime Minister recklessly throws billions to special interests (NDP Budget) to hold onto power |
| Jedi Knights are demonized and attacked unfairly. | Conservatives are demonized and attacked unfairly. |
| News media is useless. | News media is useless. |
| Small band of rebels fight to bring down the Empire | Small band of conservatives fight to bring down the Liberals. |
| Democracy ends with thunderous applause | Avoiding an election brings a huge sigh of relief |
| Stormtroopers hunt down secretly made copy of their plans. | Media hunts after person who secretly taped Liberal's plans. |
| Rebels get one good hit, then are on the run again | Conservatives get one good hit, then are on the ropes again. |
| The Senate doesn't work | The Senate doesn't work |
Viva Quebec!
Viva Quebec!
You're smarter than I am. I figure if I paid 8 bucks for a movie ticket, I'll sit through it. I've never walked out of a movie, no matter how lousy it is. (And I've suffered through some stinkers.)
But this is what gets me, look at the movies that are out (or will soon be out), ie: Bewitched, Dukes of Hazzard, Star Wars Episode 3, Willy Wonka, all remakes or sequels. Can't somebody in Hollywood come up with a new idea?
ROFL!
-Theo
It ain't funny when you live here.
The trailer looks creepy.
Jedi Ping!
Let me know if you want on or off this list!
Further evidence...young Lucas was influenced by some of the animation and films coming out of the National Film Board of Canada according to one bio I read. The actor who plays Anakin who is the central figure in the whole saga is Canadian.
Yes, but closer to the original book.
I tended to think the Jedis were more on the liberal side (with their touchy-feely philosophy).
ANAKIN: If you're not with me, you're my enemy.
OBI-WAN: Only a Sith Lord deals in absolutes. I will do what I must.
Looking at it another way, Anakin represents the mass-murdering Moslem terrorists, who deal in their absolutes, while Obi-Wan represents GWB (and the US, historically), doing what he must. (':
But it is true that the Star Wars series is an example of really bad writing hitting it big because of special effects and degraded audience standards. :')
Actually, I think I'd prefer to see some Republicans go over to the Dark Side, as opposed to the "Limp Side."
See my link in message #11 of this thread:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1412667/posts
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.