STAR WARS Saga and Moral Compass

This "all SW have flaws" argument solely depends on what one depicts as a "flaw". Ofc one can nitpick every single scene looking for contradictory writing, directorial or technical problems, (such as acting or editing), but one can also look at the movie as a whole and criticise it in that manner. What the goal of the movie was and how did it achieve it. I think both ANH and ESB are flawless from a certain point of view.

Star Wars (or ANH) wanted to show the audience something brand new. A classic retelling of the old serials, but with a new visual setting. In the 50s, 60s sci-fi movies had a certain "clean-futuristic style". Even Stanley Kubrick believed that in the future everything is going to be clean and white. Lucas returned to the dirt, to grit, to grounded realism (until the PT, where he changed that). That, combined with classic characters and classic fairy tale, mixed with some depth along with one of the greatest soundtack ever, created one of the greatest stories ever told (yes, in regards of Star Wars I use "one of the greatest" a lot).
I think not only the movie achieved its purpose, but immensly exceeded it.
So, despite what some consider as "flaw" in ANH, I still think its a 10/10 movie with great cultural and historical value. No wonder why was it nominated for 10 oscars...

The "black-and white morals" argument is imo simply superficial. Even you contradicted yourself and acknowledged that Han is an ambiguous character. ANH never intended to have Tarkovsky-level depth, thats true, but I don't think ANH is a "black and white" movie in regards of morals. Only one that needed to be explored further and deeper (which eventually happened in the next movie). Had ESB be the same as ANH I think it would've been boring. And that is why ESB is also "flawless" imo, beacuse at the time when sequels usually failed, ESB extended and deepened the story and the characters. It greatly added to the lore and elevated a great action-fantasy series to a true classic.

This is some massive bonkers. Noone ever had any problem with moral ambiguity in Star Wars. Ironically, the only one who had problem with it was Geroge Lucas himself, who altered the now famous "Han shot first" scene because he thought a cold blooded killer as a hero (despite he did it in self defence) dosen't fit the saga.
Imo none of the fans have problem with an ambiguous Anakin. I think most people who criticise his character feel that his transition to the dark side just wasnt presented well. He went from a whiny teenager to whiny adult to suddenly muredring kids and friends he grew up with, and nothing in between explained how it happened. There is no build up. We get glimpses and hints regarding his sympathy for totalitarian dictatorship, but that was never explored any further. We get hints and glimpses about how he seeks power, but that was never explored either. All we get is a few lines of dialogue, but no deeds...

Anakin was a sociopath, a bad apple from the start who couldn't handle losing his beloved ones, and a smarter interesst tricked him into the dark side. He eventually comes off as a character who deserved to be eliminated, and never ever deserved redemption. He was a dangerous traitor and a childmurderer.
But that is not the hero who was tragically seduced by the dark side, as we were told about by Ben. He was never a hero. He was just a selfish tool with very serious problems from the start. Also, he constantly made contradictory and illogical decisions. Ep III wanted to present Anakin resenting the jedi, but it makes no sense. Despite what he thought and what Palpatine lied to him, he found out that the jedi were eventually right to suspect Palpatine as the sith lord, but betrays them anyway. So the resenting part is perfectly useless. It was all about Padme. But that doen't make sense either. He finds out Palpatine was lying about being able to save Padme, but stands by Palpatine after her death for no reason at all.

You can't really justify the bad writing of Anakin as an "experiment of ambiguity". Anakin was not really ambiguous. He was just a sociopath. Someone who needed professional help. He wasn't just someone who made "bad decisions"...
The prequels aren't some avant-agarde character studies. They are products carefully crafted for selling merchandise, and maybe experiments in digital technology. But outside of Anakin, the characters are one-sided and not developed at all. What did we get to know about Obi-wan as a person which wasn't already known before the PT for instance? Nothing much...

More like JJ, not Disney, as Rogue One had completely different characterisations. The characters of TFA are typical JJ characters inspired by ANH. Not much depth, but likeable and very energic.
Finn imo is nothing like Han. Finn is not a rogue, he is much rather someone who has to face his fears and weaknesses. There isn't really anything ambiguous in Finn's character, yet.

I couldn't disagree more. Kylo is the embodied ambiguity.

So far I've only read about how much better Jyn is as a character, how she's more like a Vivian Jones type of female hero and not a "Mary Sue".

Now this is just simply wrong imo. I think only Cassian "ditched his ambiguity", but the rest of the team not. They all did it for their personal reasons, mostly for revenge. When Jyn was talking to Krennic in the end, she seemed damn pleased with what she did, and how she succesfully beat Krennic. It was more like a deed of a selfish rogue, than a generous hero... She also wanted to beat/kill him on the ground as well, until Cassian persuaded her no to...

 

Aren't you contradicting yourself? You say in one sentence that Anakin's transition to the dark side just wasn't presented well but then you say that he was a sociopath, a bad apple from the start who couldn't handle losing his beloved ones, and a smarter interests tricked him into the dark side. This is as good a reason as any for justifying what he did so what else needs to be shown to make the fans happy?

Just like in real life, not every mass murderer, evil conqueror or sadist rapist has an ''awesome'' origin story. People these days tend to think that there always has to be this awesome backstory behind said peoples actions when many times we see that this isn't the case at all. Regular Joes who never gave their parents any trouble, had excellent grades in school and were considered very friendly by everyone that knows them suddenly fall in love with someone, things go bad in the relationship, the girl leaves him and said person grabs a gun and murders the girl and everyone that was close to her. Sometimes the nerdy comic book reader that couldn't hurt a fly turns up to be a nasty serial killer for the stupidest of reasons.

In this I think it was excellent how Lucas portrayed Anakin while a character like Finn was really badly written. We are supposed to believe that ever since he was a child and raised by the First Order, even if he was on sanitation duty, Finn had never ever heared or seen that the FO did bad things? What's worst, Finn seems traumatized when he sees a fellow trooper get killed but just minutes after that he's murdering his fellow brothers without remorse? I would say there that Finn's transition to the good side wasn't presented well at all.

 

Where is the contradiction? I never said he didnt have a personality or any reason for his transition. I just said it wasnt presented well. There is no contradiction there.

A well written character arc which is coherent with the existing lore, is beliveable, dosen't feel rushed or contradict itself.

Answer me these questions please.:

First off all. Anakin grew up with the jedi. He knew them for decades. Presumably he even liked them (though we never really get to see that). Yet he goes from being a man worrying about his wife to mass murderer and childmurderer from literally one minute to another... Is that how good writing looks like?

Palpatine said he can save Padme from dying. Anakin swears him his loyalty solely for this reason. Then Palpatine is stupid enough to tell him he can't save Padme (who gives birth in like the next day), yet Anakin still follows him for no reason and wastes valuable time for killing jedi and separatists, instead of trying to save Padme. Why?

Since there is absolutely no build up for the "Anakin resenting the jedi" arc in ep I and II, Ep III tried to shoehorn in the subplot. However, despite what he thought and what Palpatine lied to him, he found out that the jedi were eventually right to suspect Palpatine as the sith lord, but betrays them anyway and shouts that they are evil at the end of the movie when he saw evidence for the exact opposite. Why?

Why does he stay with Palpatine after Padmé dies? He turns to the dark side for one certain reason, then, after that fails, he still stays in the evil state he was before. His original purpose for becoming evil was gone, yet still continues to be for some reason... Sure, one can say that "once you step on a path there is no turning back" or some similar chlisé, but I think it just makes no sense from a character point of view.

He didnt need an awesome one, just a coherent and well built up one.

I never said that Finn was well written.

 

Very well here goes my answers:

1-Anakin was never seen to like the Jedi as a whole. Anakin was a scumbag that only cared about his own needs and when things didn't work out he blamed others and he didn't agree with how others thought. In the novel of TPM they left the scene with Anakin fighting Greedo just because he called him a cheater, right in the funeral of Qui Gon, Anakin was more worried about what was going to happen to him than being sad that the friend who had freed him from a life of slavery had been killed. In AOTC he blamed Obi Wan for his frustrations and he's practically a stalker that's obsessed with Padme as he pined for her ever since he was a little kid and couldn't stop thinking about her. He cared nothing for what the Jedi thought as he broke their rules to fit his wants. It was always his personal needs above everything else so when it came to him betraying the Jedi, it had already been well written and established that Anakin was a selfish jerk.

2-Two reasons here: First, as mentioned above,Anakin was a power hungry moron who cared little for the small details. He knew Sheev had power and he craved it. He was convinced (even after Sheev dropped the lie on him as you mentioned) that he could use Palpatine to further his ambitions. That's why he told Mace that he needed him. Then you can further see Anakin's evil ambitions when he tells Padme that he will dethrone Palpatine. The dork had just sworn loyalty to Sheev and murdered his comrades just a few hours ago and already the idiot was so power hungry that he was planning to take him down. How can anybody not see the power hungry guy who thought in nobody but himself? Then, minutes after, he's Force choking the very pregnant wife that he was obsessed with protecting and why? Because it was always about him.

3-See answers one and two. I'm sorry if you didn't see the build up for Anakin in TPM and AOTC yet I did see it and it was very clear to me. The small details were always there and it was always about him. His wants, his needs and the rest is trivial to him as he's willing to take out anything that stands in his way.

4-If you were a power hungry dude and just murdered, betrayed and lost everything you ever cared for and now you're a hulking dark armored cyborg at the command of the most evil being in the galaxy, what were you going to do? Tell him that you didn't want to stay there no more because your wife was dead? Do raise a Dewback farm on Tatooine? Become a Nerf herder? Do you even think that Palps would let Anakin go after having revealed his Sith master plan to him? As dorky as he was, I'm pretty sure Anakin knew this as well.

 

Well, I wouldn't say I had a problem with moral ambiguity but I do have concerns where it has taken us over the years.

IMHO, first we need to understand during what time Star Wars (ANH) was made. In the 1970's you almost only had films that were ambiguous and there weren't that much of real-life role models around. One of the driving forces to make Star Wars was Lucas' desire to create a modern fairy-tale, admittedly with black-and-white patterns to provide a moral compass, that somehow seemed to have gotten lost, then (regarding the "Han shot first" incident he exaggerated, IMHO).

From a realistic point-of-view life in itself is ambiguous, yet that ambiguity has somewhat 'stained' Star Wars to the point where fans ask us to take another and more favorable look at the totalitarian, fascist Galactic Empire and consider the Alliance to Restore the Republic as a gang of troublemakers and - worse - terrorists.

So it seems that we've come full circle and are back in the mindset of the 1970's George Lucas wanted to break from. I for one wouldn't mind a new Star Wars film with clearly discernible good and bad guys / behaviour (to re-adjust our moral compass in a manner of speaking, I think it's time), but I'm afraid that the Star Wars franchise has now trapped itself in ambiguity.

To provide a real world example: "Alternate News" is bull****, it's a euphemism trying to cover up a blatant lie. But apparently our craving for ambiguity has somewhat made it possible to let this pass, even though it's a classic example of Orwellian Doublespeak that should be denounced as totally unacceptable.

 

I can accept your reasoning of Anakin being selfish and a scumbag. Though in TPM he was idolising the jedi, and despite he had arguments with Obi-wan and disagreed with some of the jedi rules, he didn't seem to hate them. EP III is a different story though, but I think we can fairly say, that he at least felt like a part of their society to a certain extent.

Anyways, even if he's the most selfish Peedunky in the world, murdeing everyone still seems like a gargantuous stretch to me. I mean Palpatine was like: Kill all jedi. Anakin: Ok. Palpatine: Kill the children as well. Anakin: Ok. Then go and kill the entire Separatist Alliace Anakin: Ok. Who wasn't he going to kill?!

He agrees to murder everyone without any reservation... I'm sorry but noone goes from being a selfish guy worrying about his wife to a mindless killing machine. The duality is jarring. To me it feels like we missed at least an entire movie which explained his behaviour. I mean he's still a character with free will, emotions and ideas. Until the OT ofc.

Selfish or not, he was still trying to save Padme. The entire plot was written around this. He saw premonitions about her dying during childbirth and she gave birth in like the next day after he turned... Yet after Palpatine stupidly admitted he can't save her, instead of killing him for lying, Anakin still pledges loyalty, then wastes valuable time and forgets the entire "Padme in danger" aspect, because the plot needs him to hunt down the jedi... But he has no reason to!
I mean forget the friggin jedi, the guy lied to you and your wife gives birth in a few hours! Do everying you still can to save her! I mean bring her to a hospital, or something...

Im going to outline how it would've worked in my opinion: After Anakin let Palpatine kill Windu, He says the following: "Anakin, if you want to save Padme you first have to hunt down the jedi to me. Only that will give us the power needed for such feat. Do it with haste, as she has very little time" -or something like that. So, instead of giving up your ONLY weapon (namely, admitting he can't save Padme) he could've blackmailed him to do so. In that way there would've been at least SOME reason for him doing what he's done. And after Pamde died he could've say something like: Its your own fault, Anakin. I can't bring back people from death. I can only save the living." In that way Anakin would blame himself for losing a REAL opportunity (or at least he'd look at it as one) in his entire life, deepening his connection with the dark side... I think in that way Palpatine's could've even be cooler, as we could've speculated if he was lying or not.

In TPM he idolised the jedi. In AOTC he did disagree with some of their ideals, but he never openly resented them until ep III (and even there only the decisions of council, not the jedi as a whole, until the battle with Obi-wan, where he shouted things never set up in any of the movies...)

Simple: Kill Palpatine. Kill the liar and blame him for all the fault.

Anakin has no reason to follow Palpatine. He dosen't even know him... He only needed him for his goals. Now that its gone, there is no reason to continue the path. Its even dangerous for Palpatine. I mean who needs a servant who isn't following you by loyalty?

 

Anakin always was always more violent than other Jedi in the order. Him killing all the Separatist leaders makes perfect sense, as he'd always wanted to do so. Embracing these feelings had been encouraged by Palpatine throughout the war.

Palpatine was the father Anakin never had, Lucas even says so in the BTS videos. He has mentored, and comforted Anakin for years when the Jedi couldn't understand him.

Imagine this scenario: your father comes to you and tells you to kill the rest of your family, otherwise your wife will die tomorrow. Only your father has the power to save her life. Do you take a risk and kill him, or do you follow the easier route of slaughtering your family? It's not an easy choice.

Why does Anakin follow Palpatine after he's lost everything you ask? Simply put, he has nothing left but Palpatine and the Sith Order.

 

More violent dosen't mean an emotionless butcherer. Also, did he always want to kill the jedi as well? Including the children? From literally one minute to another?

Had this been in the movies I'd accept it. Also, he had a father figure. You know, the guy who he grew up with... Obi-wan.

But the exact opposite happened! Palpatine admitted he didn't have the power to save Padme! In just a day before she gave birth...

 

Obi-Wan viewed him more as a brother. That was a point of contention in the films. Anakin viewed him as a father figure, but Obi-Wan thought of him more as a brother. This was addressed in AOTC and ROTS.

But he said he'd been taught everything. Together they could learn the secret.

Yeah, that dialogue has irked me a little as well.

 

It was adressed in ROTS, but Anakin still looked at him as a father figure. He also had the entire Jedi Order. Plus, I'd say being a jedi was a huge thing in the Republic. He wasn't as lonely and desperate people are portraying him to be... Quite contrary, he had a very privileged position, many envied in the Republic (presumably).

It really makes no sense. Padme gives birth in a few hours after that dialogue took place. Was Anakin hoping to resurrect her or something like that?

 

Blah blah blah....

just kidding. Great post. I want to like this then unlike so I can feel the joy of liking it again.

 

Lying only does not make one a rogue imo.

Sorry, but have you read my response? I said she didn't ditch her ambiguity, not that she wasn't ambiguous (cause she certainy was).

I think that part isn't open for discussion, nor that it is a "belief". The PT was an experiment in digital technology. Lucas himself said it countless of times.
How he wanted to draw with colours, but all he had was a pencil... He was waiting for the technology to catch up with his imagination. I mean, this isn't a bad thing. It had its place in film history.

 

I'm not a prequel basher, I love the films, but Lucas shot himself in the foot. Watching those old web videos on the official site, Lucas always said that he wanted to advance digital tech so much so that he focused on that rather then other things. Its was a beautiful film for its time, but it could have been much better, if he focused more on the characters and story rather then the tech. Lucas turned from that creative director to pure business man. He was Luke and he became the Emperor.

 

I love the prequels dude take a chill pill relax were discussing films haha! Lucas did not create the films just to advance the tech, but if you watched the web videos that were on the official site leading up to all the prequel films, he stated and emphasized, several times that he wanted filmmakers to embrace this new tech.

It was suppose to be the wave of the future. Too much cgi ruins films because the audience notices it. You must use this tech artistically. Lucas used too much and it shows. I'm not here to bash the prequels. I enjoy those films. I watch them several times a year. They are not perfect films but visually they are fantastic.

I wish that Lucas focused more on the story and script rather then the green screen. He took the lazy route to save money on practical effects. I remember a web video with Lucas sitting around with the CGI artist in front of a computer monitor, laughing about how Yoda's mom is Miss Piggy and his father is Kermit the frog. He should have been working on the script for crying out loud HAHA