Just to add to this - the first thing that sprang to mind when I saw this scene was Matt LeBlanc in Charlie's Angels:

"Damn you, Salazar!"

It really is that OTT.

SG

Mods, this thread could do with a cleanup.

IMO the Mace/Palps fight scene as a whole was good. Really good. It was the sabre fighting that wasn't that impressive (though the window breaking was sweet). Looked a little clumsy and reminisicent (sp?) of the AOTC Ani/Dooku duel (lots of close-ups with twirling sabres).

I have to admit, I kinda smirked during 'Frankenvadar', but I also smirked when Luke was getting zapped during ROTJ because he sounded so much like Eugene Levy during his SCTV days when he would do similar yells.

Still, Frankenvadar worked for me because of the fact that he just got new legs, was still crispy, and likely a little disorientated.


Oboe, avatar free

done.

btw - good review Biggs - ive always viewed Padme as being Anakins most significant motivation for turning by far as a result of Shmi

hope to see more posts with more insight on any remaining grey areas after you see it a 2nd time

Ill be seeing it again a week today at the marathon showing, im sure ill notice a lot. oh meant to mention, you can hardly see GL in his cameo role..but he is there, on the left hand side of the screen, at the bottom, outside the theatre (or in the lobby)?

Can you go into a bit more detail regarding calling it "Frankenvader"

I'm worried this important moment is playing real dumb.

What makes it Frankenvader? Does he walk like a zombie or something.

I had no problem with the scene.

Vadar just walks a little clumsy, looks a little bit like Frankenstien when he steps off the table. Trust me, it doesn't make the scene dumb at all. It's a very powerful scene.

As a sidenote, I just got the Electronic Press Kit here at work. It is 5 beta SP tapes, with the following titles:

Jedi Action
Burning Questions
Costumes
Skywalker Ranch Scenics B-Roll
Birth of Darth Vadar

Looks like each one contains a small report on the titled subject, along with film clips (doesn't initially look like anything we haven't seen), soundbites from the actors, some behind the scenes b-roll, and cover video from the previous films.

I'll post more if requested, and I get a chance to get to them.

Sith is indeed better than any SW film since Empire.



I don't know where you read that, but when I talked to George for my article in Wired, he told me this:

"...Everyone says the second trilogy was a slam dunk. But there was a lot of controversy around here about the fact that I wasn't doing the obvious -- I wasn't doing the commercial version of what people expected. People expected Episode III, which is where Anakin turns into Darth Vader, to be Episode I. And then they expected Episodes II and III to be Darth Vader going around cutting people's heads off and terrorizing the universe. But how did he get to be Darth Vader? You have to explore him in relationships, and you have to see where he started. He was a sweet kid, helpful, just like most people imagine themselves to be. Most people said, 'This guy must have been a horrible little brat -- a demon child.' But the point is, he wasn't born that way -- he became that way and thought he was doing the right thing. He eventually realizes he's going down the dark path, but he thinks it's justifiable. The idea is to see how a democracy becomes a dictatorship, and how a good person goes bad -- and still, in the end, thinks he's doing the right thing."



The equation is more Hitler = Palpatine I'd say, and in the interview I linked to above George talked about the Nazis, but the references in Sith felt much more current to me than Hitler.



Have you seen Sith too? If not, see it and be your own judge. I wouldn't assume anything.

the only difference between Hitler/Palps is that Hitler was a sick fuck, whereas Palpatine is one smart motherfucker with a well thoughout plan to dominate the entire galaxy.

Bah...that sucks about the whole QGJ thing. Bad decision.

I have only read the script and spoilers and whatnot also, but I'd agree that the film parallells many things that are going on right now. Palpatine is, of course, much like Hitler, blaming the Reichstag(or whatever) fire on the communists(which didn't start the fire) so that people would think them evil and ally themselves with Hitler. Doing bad things yourself then blaming them on other people to make yourself look better, along with starting a war for a reason that is entirely different from what the public thinks it is are both things Palpatine does. Palpatine also took advantage of an emergency to increase his power and pursue his own crazy schemes, and is said to have remained in office far longer than he should have.

though this is what has been done in the past MANY times before, and arguably isn't exactly what is going on now, only what people are fearing is going on now.

IMHO people are reading into this too much. Are there some similarities with what people feel Bush is trying to do in the White House? Sure. Though what he is doing is no different than what other leaders through history have done during times of crisis (immediately following 9/11) and let's not forget that not even most of the situations turned into a change of government.

Lucas had to show the rise of the emperor. All he did IMHO was take the most common scenario in which an autocracy is born. Is what is happening in America post 9/11 the same way a autocracy can be born? Yes, but at the end of it Bush won't end up taking over as emperor and we will just go on to the next president.

and if you think about it, Lucas started this plot and palpatine struggling to gain power back in 1997, while Clinton was in office. What say you to that? Was he predicting in 1997 that bush was going to take power?

It is quite interesting that many times dicussions like these turn into a Bush vs. Clinton, GOP vs. Democrats or conservatives vs. liberal argument. I guess Lucas thinks in different scales, in megatrends. Like, which political processes in general endanger democracy; how influential is the "military-industrial complex"; how much is the political decision making in the White House influenced by the Pentagon; etc. But maybe I am completely wrong.

is this for real? - i like....it is exactly what i was hoping....i mean, there's something so old-school Vader about Anakin doing something like this, i dunno....

Borghe, with all due respect, you haven't seen the film. Once you do, the specific parallels to current events will be more obvious. The fact that Lucas conceived of the trilogy while Clinton was president will seem less relevant.




I can't get into this right now, but ROTS specifically points to the dangers of a situation where a crisis is exploited by a top executive to take over both the Senate and the courts. That particular concentration of power in all three branches of government is very relevant to now, though I of course agree that the situation in ROTS-- being true art, and not single-sided propaganda -- evokes many different historical situations at once.



Excellent points, Der Graf -- and elaborated on by George at the moments in my interview with him where he talks about Fahrenheit 9/11 and how he sees himself as a different type of filmmaker than Michael Moore.

let's take a closer look at phantom menace. Sidious created a war, blamed it on someone else, and then used that time of crisis (for the naboo people) to give himself greater power. in actuality, all he did in Episode 2 was LITERALLY a larger scaled version of what he did in Episode I. And to that end, all he does in Episode III is a still yet larger scale of what he did in Episode 1 and 2.

and I have read the book, script, etc. No I have not seen the movie, but what you are talking about are not additions. they are well known plot arcs and dialogue. I am not saying they don't ring a little true to events of the world for the past 4 years. But being that lucas has repeated the EXACT SAME CYCLE for the last three movies (including ROTS), and started that cycle 3 years before bush came into office and 4 years before 9/11, I just don't buy into it other than coincidence of the direction Lucas decided to go and the way the world decided to go.

part of this argument though is that I am more conservative than liberal, and I don't think Bush is aiming to be emperor. Has he grabbed some extra power while in office? Sure, but come 2008 I believe we will see a liberal government in place, especially in light of the missteps this adminstration has taken. all of that being said, I really feel this is nothing more than an example of life immitating art. Had TPM gone in a completely different direction and then turned 180° and headed back to palpatine assuming power in 2002, I would be much more inclined to agree with you. But all Palpatine has done in ROTS is the exact same thing he did in TPM and AOTC. Just on a much grander scale.

in response to der graf - now THAT is entirely more plausible and would be about par for the course for someone who is trying to get back to his "rebel" filmmaking days. the political climate in the world in general is certainly heading more towards that way and has been for over a quarter century now. it certainly would make more sense if Lucas was critiquing world politics as a whole and not just the anti-bush agenda some believe (not just you force, but others as well).

Though I still say that most of it is just Lucas choosing the most convenient path for a dictator to assume leadership and is doing little but critiquing that role.. the fact that it is relevant in so many areas today just points to the timelessness of the story, like all good stories should be.

9-11 is not SW, and has nothing to do with it. thank you stfu and continue thread.

So for you folks who have seen the film, and possibly read the published screenplay, would you know what exactlly was in the screenplay that has been cut from the final film?

"borghe", as mentioned in my previous post, try to think in megatrends. I'd really like to recommend this book; the historian Chalmers Johnson literally predicted 9/11 and the book is a direct reaction to those events. Another interesting read is this one, written by the former head of the CIA's Osama bin Laden unit...

Off topic - The guy in the "i beat anorexia" shirt is my hero.

yes, I do agree what you say is plausible. more plausible IMHO than a thinly veiled modern day domestic critique. All I am saying is that I "believe" that Lucas just took the easy way out getting the emperor to power. the fact that it resonates with the modern geopolitical climate is nothing more than life imitating art IMHO. I think the direction he went (as with all the previous movies) is simply timeless because parts of the political landscape in the movies can be attributed to anytime in world politics, such as all timeless movies should do (be relevant during any time period). Again though, these are just my opinions.

I do agree though that your theory is plausible as well. But we are both just issuing guesses until/unless he comes out and says definitely why he did it.

There's a big difference in saying elements of ROTS are a warning against absolute rule in times of crisis and saying that ROTS is anti-Bush, as some reviews have ACTUALLY stated. Or saying that ROTS is a critique of the current administration as some have implied here.

Basically it all boils down to your world view.. if you're a bleeding heart liberal, you're going to see Lucas giving a harsh criticism of the Bush administration. If you're not, you're going to see a Star Wars movie and a conclusion to a Star Wars movie that was set up 6 years ago, possibly much longer.

I'm sure it's only a matter of time before some liberal writer does a complete editorial piece on the fact ROTS is an anti-Bush piece, then Yahoo will plaster it all over their news like they usually do with this sort of thing... but it's just a product of someone's world view and they're going to see it exactly how they want to see it.

I'm liberal and I know that the movie isn't meant to be any sort of comment on today's political world. Even if Lucas did infuse any little hidden meanings in the PT(I don't know if he did), I'd, of course, know that these Star Wars movies are meant to be, above all, Star Wars movies. It's fun to think that Lucas intentionally put things in the movie that subtly comment on today's times(I enjoy thinking that), but I'd never say(as someone would be crazy to do) that these moves are anything but Star Wars moves that are meant to entertain and tell the stories of its characters.

Then it's Lucas himself who's crazy, because he was quite clear in his interview with me that part of his artistic process is to embed deeper stories, including reflections on the larger world outside of Star Wars, in the stories of his characters. That's what this part of the interview is about.

I agree that liberal audiences and conservative audiences might take away different, even seemingly opposite, lessons from the films -- that's a measure of their artistry -- but thinking that Star Wars might be addressing current political realities is not crazy at all, nor some "bleeding-heart liberal" media plot.

For those who have seen it, what can you tell me about Saleucami, Mygeeto, and Cato Neimoidia? How do they look? I'm dying to know anything about Saleucami.

What's the thing, you are constantly hinting at, that is so important about the current political reality, that, while it doesn't aply to any other situation in history, just had to be put in Star Wars even if lacking an universal, historical meaning?

Or are you just trying to say that it's possible that Lucas hid an additional message in the movie: "Among other events throughout history this aplies also to the current political situation"?

That's what I'm trying to say, Ascovel.

But wouldn't that still be a bit of an unnecessery "folk artifact" by Lucas standarts (By the way, great article!), although a very subtle one ?

Again I think that saying this is a political statement regarding current US politics is a bit narrow minded.

These political themes recurr throughout history in all countries. George is basically delivering these themes to the screen in a way the modern audience can enjoy and appreciate. He's doing tried and tested stories of politics, heros, life and delivering them in a new way that grabs our interest.

The Star Wars audience is huge, spanning the whole world; we will all find things that we can liken the political situation to. Everyone will have their own interpretation. Regardless of whether of not Lucas was making this film with the intention of making a political statement about US politics, there are plenty of people around the world who don't give a damn about US politics but will find their own interpretation. That is purely because it is a timeless and recurring political theme everywhere.

It seems irrelevant to insist it is just the US when the whole world has beaten the same drum at some point. What you are doing is grabbing the thing closest to you and identifying with it, which I think is what George artistically wants the viewer to do.

the only true link between star wars and politics is their ability to be at complete polar opposites from each other. one being sw which is engaging, interesting, and enjoyable. the other being politics which has achieved a level of boredom and disinterest that can only be surpassed by those on forums talking about the link between star wars and politics.

Why do people have to find allegory in every fucking piece of fiction? Can't ROTS just be about the Star Wars Universe, without being fucking allegorical? Its called "escapism". Come on people, there's enough politics in the prequels without having to try applying real life political crap to a movie that's supposed to be happening "A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away...". Just enjoy the movie.

I don't think I chose my words as well as I could have; what I meant to say when I said someone would be crazy to assume Star Wars was anything other than Star Wars was that someone would be crazy to think Lucas is making these movies as 50% Star Wars, 50% Bush-bashing films. Ed Gonzalez from Slant Magazine said that some fans may not be ready for the film's "anti-Bush diatribe". I was trying to say that such comments are crazy, as there is nothing in the films that scream anything at anyone. I personally like to think Lucas has put something extra in his movies, like political statements, so I of course don't think it's crazy that he would consider such a thing(if he did).

I am certainly not doing this. Obviously, being a myth, with true and deep mythological power, Star Wars is relevant for all places, all cultures, and at all times. That was George's point in the interview, and it's my point too. But that doesn't mean that George never uses elements of the current political situation to draw from when creating his myths. Only Sith deal in absolutes.


Jonny, escape all you want, but Star Wars is deeper than that. It's a myth, as George says. And myths have a way of speaking directly to your life -- of, in fact, drawing you more deeply into your own life -- which is the opposite of escapism. Feel free to ignore whatever levels of the story's mythical content you don't want to deal with, but that doesn't mean that those levels are not there.

And I hear ya, AnonyJones.

It's like with Return of the Jedi. George said that he was fascinated by the ability of a primitive people (the Ewoks) to fight back against a technologically superior enemy (the Imperials). He cited Vietnam as an example of this, but this is a theme that is there throughout history. George wants to deliver this theme to get people to think about history and current affairs that are relevant to them. His intention was not to deliver Vietnam to the screen. Nor is his intention with ROTS to deliver US politics.

The whole "from a certain point of view" thing as well, I still don't know whether it was a nifty way of getting round a plot hole, or a way of telling people to be more objective in how they see the world?

Thanks for the interview by the way...interesting read!

Guess I gotta do some backin up. I have no problem with viewing the saga as mythological. In fact, that is the thing I love about it the most. I love mythology. I just don't understand why some of us have to start trying to use some of the plot points as a way to support a current political arguement. I don't think George spent all of the time and money making Episode III so that liberals could say, "see, George Lucas doesn't like Bush either". It seems crappy to me. Maybe I'm just so fed up with politics in this country that it feels like some want this to be one more turd on the pile of political shit that gets thrown around on both sides. It just kinda bothers me because I feel like Star Wars, a mythology I have grown up with and loved all my life, is above that. Don't degrade it by turning into yet another peice of cannon fodder for for the seemingly endless onslaught of anti-Bush commercials.

Thanks, Bespin -- and yeah, that's very well said about Jedi.

I totally agree with you, Jonny, and in fact, that's what I'm trying to say too. Star Wars deals with political realities by considering them mythologically -- by getting "above" the usual bullshit polarized back-and-forth chatter that passes for political discourse.

If you're tired of anti-Bush commercials, just switch on Fox News.

force, you're straddling both sides of the fence. On one hand you keep agreeing with the people who say, hey it's just Star Wars, don't degrade it. Then you say stuff like:



Unless you were told specific off the record things from Lucas, then I think you're making a lot of assumptions based on your interview with regards to the above comment.

It's seriously OLD NEWS that Star Wars' mythology is based on "something other than what it's really about". This was revealed, oh I dunno, probably somewhere around 1978. To make that point like it's something brand new is ludicrous.

Are there parallels to ROTS and the "current political climate"? In your opinion, yes, cause that's your world view. You see Bush as using 9/11 to gain absolute power. However, I'm willing to wager the majority of people don't agree with you. So are they really parallels or aren't they? In your world view yes. In someone else's, there are no parallels because Bush isn't Emperor Palpatine.

So was Lucas intentionally trying to make these parallels to make liberals everywhere giddy? I have no idea. And unless you were told specifically by Lucas then I think you're making assumptions that might not necessarily be there. Which in your line of work can be a bit irresponsible.

I'm a very responsible reporter, Phod. But you don't have to trust me. I have over 15 years of journalism behind me, and I have never been accused of misrepresenting a source -- and my sources have included everybody from modern-day Nazis to FBI agents to radicals to... well, George Lucas.

You're reading a lot into my posts that I didn't say, and you also haven't seen the film. The film will tell you what it wants to say, and I don't have to add any more than that. We can talk after you see the film.

The reason these movies are timeless is they tap into so many things. Current and past events, religion, ancient history, mythology, any number of things. As was said before, each person will have his own point of view, and will interpret these movies based on that. I love Star Wars because of this, and I don't necessarily equate everything in Star Wars with current or near past events. We all see parallels, but history repeats itself far more often than most of us realize.

I think ROTS rocks already, and I haven't seen it yet, only read the script, read the book and consumed a whole LOT of spoilers. Sorry if this is all I can contribute. This thread just went all Amtrak

Lucas has been saying, for years now, that part of the story of Eps. I-III was how a democracy can fall into an empire -- how people can actually choose such a fate for their society. If some people see similarities between the mythology Lucas used to create these movies and both historical and current events, that simply illustrates the ability of Lucas to portray a mythology that can be applied universally. Whether or not people agree with the conclusion that current events are similar (to whatever degree you like) to events in ROTS, it isn't unreasonable to suggest the possibility that Lucas used current events to influence some of the details of the mythology he portrayed in the movie.

No, it isn't unreasonable. And that's very well said, EP.

For example: look at the already-famous shot of the burning Jedi Temple -- a huge building with plumes of smoke rising from it, in the middle of a vast city of glittering skyscrapers. Bring anything to mind?

Note: I am not saying, "OMFG, George is drawing a parallel between the Sith and the al Qaeda! Open your eyes, people!!!"

That's just frickin' stupid. But was George visually inspired by the burning World Trade Center? Well, you'd have to ask him. (I never asked him, on or off the record, by the way.) But it wouldn't be unreasonable to wonder whether or not he was.

And yes, Freewalker, brilliant.

I'm not sure how I'm reading more into your posts.. You said ROTS has parallels to current events that are "obvious".

I address this in my post. I never said you think ROTS is the F-911 of science fiction. You're smarter than that. But I do say that you see "parallels" just as you have claimed.

My point is, given your obviously liberal world view, you're going to see parallels because that's what YOU think is happening right now. Another person may not agree with your world view and see it differently.

If your point is that ROTS is revealing the danger of making a country more secure at the expense of freedom, then as people have pointed out, that was what Episode 1 and 2 were about as well.

If TPM came out in 2005 instead of 1999, you'd be posting here how the Naboo crisis and Senator Palpatine's securing more power for himself because of it is a complete parallel to today's political climate.

Is that point a "parallel" to current events? Not necessarily.. it's pretty much a parallel to the ideas of liberty vs. totalitarianism from the beginning of a formed government.

True, I haven't seen the film but I have friends who have, I've read the script, I've read the book, I've spoiled myself completely, and unless there's something added to the movie not in the screenplay then I doubt I'll agree with your subtle implications.

I mean this is a spoiler thread like all others, why don't you post and discuss specific lines and scenes in the film that, in your words, "parallel" current events that, we can assume from your post, are more relevant today than in 1999.

And it's funny how you point out the parallel between the burning Jedi Temple and the WTC, but make sure to point out that the Sith aren't Al Qaeda, that's not what he's saying... how do you know? You dismiss this as a possibility but make entirely new implications. Instead, you're assuming that he's saying Palpatine is Bush. By saying the Jedi Temple = WTC, then Palpatine is using the fears and security concerns from the destruction of the Jedi to gain absolute rule an applauding republic. Just as the implication is Bush is doing the same with regards to the WTC.

Phod, for the record, you have already demonized me as having an "obviously liberal world view." That's fine, but you're already oversimplifying.

Case in point: Wouldn't you think that an "obvious liberal" would have been standing up and cheering after Fahrenheit 9/11? In fact, I didn't much like the film, saw it as one-sided, oversimplifying propaganda, and I don't trust Moore as a filmmaker.

One of the things that George said in our interview that really resonated with me was this:

"If you could look at these issues more open-mindedly -- at what's going on with the human mind behind all this, on all sides -- you could have a more interesting conversation."

That's an accurate description of my personal politics. I'm interested in seeing what's going on with the human mind, on all sides.

That said, I was surprised at how much Sith resonated with current events. Forgive me, but until everyone here has seen the film for themselves, I'm not going to get into my specific interpretations of specific lines, though I'll be happy to afterwards. That's a kind of meta-spoilage I'm not comfortable with.

Freewalker, thanks so much.

Oh, I didn't mean to imply that Sith is better than A New Hope! I meant better than Clones, Menace, or Jedi.

After seeing Sith, I can't wait to see A New Hope again.

(I loved parts of Jedi, but I'm not a huge Ewok fan.)

Hey guys, please, stop the political arguing. It's getting fucking boring, now. What was fun with this thread is that we could get answers from some people who had seen the film. But now it's full of your politics bullshit and we lost the only thread where we could get our questions answered.

If you wanna discuss political matters, please start a new thread. I ( and i'm sure there's a lot of people thinking like me ) am getting pissed off by your endless arguments.

I'm definitely going to chill on the political angles, RP. I hear ya. As I said, I'm not comfortable discussing that stuff until everyone's seen the film.

But I think a lot of what's been said here about politics-versus-mythology, or propaganda-versus-mythology, has been quite interesting, with several very thoughtful posts. So thanks guys. Talk to ya after the film.

Hopefully this won't get caught in the middle of a heated political debate. I ask again: What are the Clone Wars planets like? I'd like to know what Saleucami is like especially. Much appreciated.