The Point of Qui-Gon Jinn

[Slowpokeking]

Shmi's importance undermines your argument; everyone forgets about her until she shows up again, a decade later, having been not only freed by Watto, but having married and having been kidnapped by Sand People. That's a lot of crap to happen to the poor woman without the rest of the universe noticing, despite that she's the supposed Chosen One's mother.

 

Also, thanks for pointing out another inconsistency -- Vader's never going back to Tatooine in search of Luke.

 

Most of the people don't believe or even know the prophecy, not even some Jedi like Dooku when he told it to Plagueis and Sidious. Also it's totally logical that Plaptine would keep an eye on her.

 

So you admit it's a plot hole of OT?

 

 

[quote=Invictos;4414769You are missing the point. Again. Episode I robs Anakin of agency. He's too young to understand what's going on, and too young to move as a character. From a narrative perspective, it's a waste of screen time to put Anakin in the back seat for the entire duration of the first prequel. Unsurprisingly, that curious narrative decision comes back to bite Lucas in Episode III; Anakin's fall seems every bit as abrupt and stilted as his romance with Padme was in Episode II (another aspect of the story that could have been done better if there were more screen time).

 

So to recap for the last time: It's ok that Qui Gon is a new character. It's even ok that he has a prominent role in the story. It's not okay that the entire first movie is devoted to Qui Gon as protagonist. The difference between the original trilogy and the prequel trilogy is that the originals were made piecemeal. When Lucas shot Episode IV, he had no reasonable expectation that he'd be able to continue the story, so he made a fun stand-alone romp. By the time Episode V rolled around, Lucas was in a much more stable position to develop the story arc. (He also had lots of help with the writing and the direction of Empire. It's no coincidence that Empire is widely considered the best of the six Star Wars movies.)

 

The prequels, by contrast, were designed from the ground up to be a trilogy. Everyone, including the public, knew that the story was to be Anakin's. But somewhere along the way, Lucas lost the plot; he sat down to write Episode I and ended up with a rambling, CGI-infested mess that almost went out of its way to ignore the main subject of his trilogy. There's no excuse for that.

 

To the extent that the OT had inconsistencies, they're much more justifiable than the inconsistencies in the prequels.

 

Anakin was quite important in EP I. He didn't play that importantly like Luke did in EP IV but he was characterized ok, and there were tons of EU stuff to introduce his life after the became a Jedi. The reason they made him a kid in EP I was to let people know well his thoughts and goal well before he became the Jedi. It's not like EP IV, GL got the "Hidden Fortress" as model and a typical hero saga, he needed to let people understand Anakin and portray his downfall well. Sure you can say it got flaws, but it also got some good points.

 

Yes it's an Empire, but in EP IV's novel

 

Once secure in office he declared himself Emperor, shutting himself

away from the populace. Soon he was controlled by the very assistants and

boot-lickers he had appointed to high office, and the cries of the people

for justice did not reach his ears.

 

Having exterminated through treachery and deception the Jedi Knights,

guardians of justice in the galaxy, the Imperial governors and bureaucrats

prepared to institute a reign of terror among the disheartened worlds of the

galaxy. Many used the imperial forces and the name of the increasingly

isolated Emperor to further their own personal ambitions.

 

So you are saying that a direct retcon is better than something could be explained well?

[Slowpokeking]

You can't have it both ways. Either Palpatine chose her because she would be easy to manipulate, or she was an excellent ruler in time of crisis. In fact, there is no evidence that Padme is an excellent ruler in Episode I. Her most significant decision as ruler isn't her decision at all; she does Palpatine's bidding and gets Chancellor Velorin (sp?) ousted.

 

Palpatine got exactly what he wanted out of her. It was only through a combination of dumb luck and lots and lots of good advice and aid (from the Jedi, from the Gungans, the alliance with which she wouldn't have even imagined if it weren't for the Jedi introducing her to JarJar) that Padme oversaw the end of the siege of Naboo.

 

Also, bonus points for invoking a double standard: It's ok for you to mention the US when you feel it bolsters your point, but suddenly when I use your own example to rebut your argument, I'm off topic.

 

What I meant is in people of Naboo's eyes, she was good enough, and as a young girl, she did better than most of the people we saw in real life. Later Naboo people asked her to stay as queen but she refused.

 

In Palpatine's eyes, she was easy to control, but in Naboo people's eyes, age wasn't that important, she was a beloved queen. Both sides thought it was ok.

 

Well I use US to explain there even was examples of very young people elected as mayors, not saying they are exactly the same.

 

NVM, I am gonna drop it and celebrate Chelsea's triumph.

Edited May 20, 2012 by Slowpokeking

[RDeanOU]

So what? Naboo is not US. They didn't have such law against that. And unlike real world, we saw a girl in SW's world could handle it well, even in a crisis. If we want to explain, before they had election, there were similar figure, young but able to rule the nation well, so this gave them some confidence, along with Palpatine's help and Veruna's corruption, we got Padme.

 

Padme did not "handle it well." She was a terrible ruler. Palpatine manipulated her and used her planet like a toy. She stood there and took it. Honestly, that could all be forgiven if she had inherited her position and was doing the best she could, but the fact that she sought office and that the people elected her with that complete absence of maturity and ability makes her character kind of unsympathetic. Actually, it isn't clear to me at all that the Trade Federation would have been any worse at ruling Naboo. Maybe they were the good guys of episode 1 after all.

[RDeanOU]

What I meant is in people of Naboo's eyes, she was good enough, and as a young girl, she did better than most of the people we saw in real life. Later Naboo people asked her to stay as queen but she refused.

 

In Palpatine's eyes, she was easy to control, but in Naboo people's eyes, age wasn't that important, she was a beloved queen. Both sides thought it was ok.

 

Well I use US to explain there even was examples of very young people elected as mayors, not saying they are exactly the same.

 

NVM, I am gonna drop it and celebrate Chelsea's triumph.

 

We can tell age isn't important to the people of Naboo. The problem is that it isn't believable that a planet full of people would be so stupid as to undervalue age and maturity as qualifications for being a head of state. Remember we aren't talking about a young adult at 18-20 holding a small office like mayor. We are talking about a child running the entire planet. This simply isn't credible or believable.

 

Also, you keep referencing information about her rise to power from the EU. That stuff isn't presented within the movies and can't therefore be used to prove that the writing of the movies was less than awful. For the majority of viewers this stuff was all kind of confusing. The characters appear to be acting in ways that make no sense at all.

[Slowpokeking]

Padme did not "handle it well." She was a terrible ruler. Palpatine manipulated her and used her planet like a toy. She stood there and took it. Honestly, that could all be forgiven if she had inherited her position and was doing the best she could, but the fact that she sought office and that the people elected her with that complete absence of maturity and ability makes her character kind of unsympathetic. Actually, it isn't clear to me at all that the Trade Federation would have been any worse at ruling Naboo. Maybe they were the good guys of episode 1 after all.

 

Too bad the people of Naboo didn't agree with you.

 

Sure she was under Palpatine's manipulation, but her people like her a lot.

[RDeanOU]

Anakin was quite important in EP I. He didn't play that importantly like Luke did in EP IV but he was characterized ok, and there were tons of EU stuff to introduce his life after the became a Jedi. The reason they made him a kid in EP I was to let people know well his thoughts and goal well before he became the Jedi. It's not like EP IV, GL got the "Hidden Fortress" as model and a typical hero saga, he needed to let people understand Anakin and portray his downfall well. Sure you can say it got flaws, but it also got some good points.

 

 

The EU stuff doesn't matter in this conversation. The movies weren't packaged with the information from the EU. It's shamefully bad writing to require novelizations and stuff from the EU just to make sense of the actual movies. They should stand alone like the Original trilogy did.

 

The entire point here is that people would have understood his character and thus his downfall better if we had spent more time with him and less with Qui-Gon Jinn. Why are his thoughts and goals as an 8 year old important toward understanding his downfall? That stuff isn't necessary. If he had just been a Jedi Padawan in EP 1 and the romance plot with Padme had begun there along with his friendship with Obi Wan we would have had more time to develop all of those plots. Things wouldn't have seemed so forced and abrupt. Look at the OT and the romance between Han and Leia. It begins with their flirtations in EP 4, but we don't see it really bloom fully until right near the end of EP 5. It takes a while to establish and develop that plot and it feels natural when it happens. There is nothing natural about Anakin and Padme's romance in EP 2. We are hit over the head with it like a hammer. Same thing with Anakin's murder of the sand people women and children. Instead of developing his character and showing his pride and impulsiveness as weaknesses that could ultimately be exploited we get, "Anakin MAD!!! Must kill Sand People! GRRR!"

 

There is no subtelty or nuance in the way either the romance or Anakin's fall are portrayed. It comes across so heavy handed that it feels like it was written by a teenager.

[Slowpokeking]

We can tell age isn't important to the people of Naboo. The problem is that it isn't believable that a planet full of people would be so stupid as to undervalue age and maturity as qualifications for being a head of state. Remember we aren't talking about a young adult at 18-20 holding a small office like mayor. We are talking about a child running the entire planet. This simply isn't credible or believable.

 

Also, you keep referencing information about her rise to power from the EU. That stuff isn't presented within the movies and can't therefore be used to prove that the writing of the movies was less than awful. For the majority of viewers this stuff was all kind of confusing. The characters appear to be acting in ways that make no sense at all.

There were even younger queen elected before her. So in their eyes its not that important, also Palpatine could build a good image for her against the corrupted Veruna. Also there were many people who helped her rule the nation.

 

EU is part of SW, you have to accept it if you truly want to understand it. Such as you have to read the books to really understand the world of LotR, rather than saying "How come Gandalf, as a wizard, rarely use his magic against the enemy"? The movie really didn't give an answer.

[RDeanOU]

Too bad the people of Naboo didn't agree with you.

 

Sure she was under Palpatine's manipulation, but her people like her a lot.

 

Yeah, it is too bad. If the people of Naboo had come across like believable reasonable people it would have actually made sense. As it is, they seem like a planet full of idiots. You have to wonder how they could operate machinery or dress themselves if they aren't smart enough to understand that children shouldn't be the head of state.

[westraz]

I made a few jokes in this post about how it seems the op say the point of qui gon is too fell a polt hole... but come one take out he the Master of Ob-1 and made it that one can become a force ghost (how did any one do it before hem I mean right??) and then what is the point of Qui-Gon... more or less he just there some dude with a light sword, that has one good fight, AKA he pointless

[Slowpokeking]

The EU stuff doesn't matter in this conversation. The movies weren't packaged with the information from the EU. It's shamefully bad writing to require novelizations and stuff from the EU just to make sense of the actual movies. They should stand alone like the Original trilogy did.

 

The entire point here is that people would have understood his character and thus his downfall better if we had spent more time with him and less with Qui-Gon Jinn. Why are his thoughts and goals as an 8 year old important toward understanding his downfall? That stuff isn't necessary. If he had just been a Jedi Padawan in EP 1 and the romance plot with Padme had begun there along with his friendship with Obi Wan we would have had more time to develop all of those plots. Things wouldn't have seemed so forced and abrupt. Look at the OT and the romance between Han and Leia. It begins with their flirtations in EP 4, but we don't see it really bloom fully until right near the end of EP 5. It takes a while to establish and develop that plot and it feels natural when it happens. There is nothing natural about Anakin and Padme's romance in EP 2. We are hit over the head with it like a hammer. Same thing with Anakin's murder of the sand people women and children. Instead of developing his character and showing his pride and impulsiveness as weaknesses that could ultimately be exploited we get, "Anakin MAD!!! Must kill Sand People! GRRR!"

 

There is no subtelty or nuance in the way either the romance or Anakin's fall are portrayed. It comes across so heavy handed that it feels like it was written by a teenager.

 

It did matter, like I said about LotR.

 

Yeah it did matter, such as he was willing to help people, as a slave he wanted to be a hero, he didn't want things he loved to change. These were all important factors in his later downfall. Compare to an adult, it's better to show these things earlier, in his home, and before the Jedi training. Just like we know Luke's persona before he took the Jedi training.

 

Are you kidding? Anakin said to Padme in EP I about "Are you an angel? " "I will marry you."

 

Actually there was very little conversation between Han and Leia in EP IV, they started to argue a lot in EP V and didn't grow much affection until like they escaped to that asteroid field.

 

Also how should Anakin react when his mother was badly tormented to death?

Edited May 20, 2012 by Slowpokeking

[Slowpokeking]

Yeah, it is too bad. If the people of Naboo had come across like believable reasonable people it would have actually made sense. As it is, they seem like a planet full of idiots. You have to wonder how they could operate machinery or dress themselves if they aren't smart enough to understand that children shouldn't be the head of state.

 

Well, Padme helped them went through this crisis and they don't understand those powerplay, so why isn't it logical for them to like her?

[RDeanOU]

There were even younger queen elected before her. So in their eyes its not that important, also Palpatine could build a good image for her against the corrupted Veruna. Also there were many people who helped her rule the nation.

 

EU is part of SW, you have to accept it if you truly want to understand it. Such as you have to read the books to really understand the world of LotR, rather than saying "How come Gandalf, as a wizard, rarely use his magic against the enemy"? The movie really didn't give an answer.

 

Yes, please try to focus so you don't keep missing the point. I know there were younger queens elected before her. That is precisely the problem. It seems like a tradition that would only exist in the daydreams of a 10 year old. It isn't a believable tradition because children aren't qualified to be rulers. The movies don't show us anything that makes that belief change so we are left wondering what in the heck is wrong with the idiots inhabiting Naboo that they seem to elect people based on how good they look in makeup and dresses instead of because of their qualifications to govern.

 

The EU is part of the EU. It isn't part of the movies. 95% of the people who watch the movies are totally oblivious to what goes on in the EU. You can't make a confusing muddled mess of a movie and ask the audience to read a library of other novels in order to make sense of it all. That's now how movie making is supposed to work. Stories are supposed to stand on their own and these just don't.

[Slowpokeking]

Yes, please try to focus so you don't keep missing the point. I know there were younger queens elected before her. That is precisely the problem. It seems like a tradition that would only exist in the daydreams of a 10 year old. It isn't a believable tradition because children aren't qualified to be rulers. The movies don't show us anything that makes that belief change so we are left wondering what in the heck is wrong with the idiots inhabiting Naboo that they seem to elect people based on how good they look in makeup and dresses instead of because of their qualifications to govern.

 

The EU is part of the EU. It isn't part of the movies. 95% of the people who watch the movies are totally oblivious to what goes on in the EU. You can't make a confusing muddled mess of a movie and ask the audience to read a library of other novels in order to make sense of it all. That's now how movie making is supposed to work. Stories are supposed to stand on their own and these just don't.

 

If you want to understand SW you have to know the EU, and until now almost everything could be explained.

 

OK you want to throw out the EU? Then how did you know Padme was 14 and she was elected when she was 13? Isn't it from EU?

 

Surely it made sense, a lot better than a bunch of Ewoks beat the crap out of elite Imperial troops with AT-ST.

[RDeanOU]

It did matter, like I said about LotR.

 

Yeah it did matter, such as he was willing to help people, as a slave he wanted to be a hero, he didn't want things he loved to change. These were all important factors in his later downfall. Compare to an adult, it's better to show these things earlier, in his home, and before the Jedi training. Just like we know Luke's persona before he took the Jedi training.

 

Are you kidding? Anakin said to Padme in EP I about "Are you an angel? " "I will marry you."

 

Actually there was very little conversation between Han and Leia in EP IV, they started to argue a lot in EP V and didn't grow much affection until like they escaped to that asteroid field.

 

Also how should Anakin react when his mother was badly tormented to death?

 

This is pointless. You can't see nuance and subtlety so it is no wonder you liked the refuse pile that was the prequels. See, the romance subplot that started in EP 4 between Han and Leia was subtle. They were sparring verbally and there was a hostility that betrayed an attraction. We get scenes like Leia calling Han a "mercenary" and wondering if he cares about anyone. Han is clearly annoyed by her, but also clearly attracted to the fact that she doesn't put up with his crap. It's subtle and it is so much better writing than anything we see in the prequels. Han didn't say, "Derp! You look like an angel, I'ma gonna marry you someday purdy lady." Those lines come across as pained. The audience kind of wriggles and writhes in their seats when Anakin says that because it is awkward and forced.

[RDeanOU]

If you want to understand SW you have to know the EU, and until now almost everything could be explained.

 

OK you want to throw out the EU? Then how did you know Padme was 14 and she was elected when she was 13? Isn't it from EU?

 

Surely it made sense, a lot better than a bunch of Ewoks beat the crap out of elite Imperial troops with AT-ST.

 

I know that because she is clearly about 13 years old in the movie. I don't have to be told because I know a child when I see one. That didn't require someone to read a book. They just had to watch the movie and know what a child is and what an adult is.

This quote:

If you want to understand SW you have to know the EU, and until now almost everything could be explained.

is a pretty damning criticism of the prequels. You are essentially admitting that the prequels have no ability to make sense or stand on their own. They are only accessible or sensical if you are someone who already loves the franchise and is willing to read a library of other material.

 

Of course, I think they don't make sense even with all of that stuff from the EU, but that's not really the point.

[Slowpokeking]

This is pointless. You can't see nuance and subtlety so it is no wonder you liked the refuse pile that was the prequels. See, the romance subplot that started in EP 4 between Han and Leia was subtle. They were sparring verbally and there was a hostility that betrayed an attraction. We get scenes like Leia calling Han a "mercenary" and wondering if he cares about anyone. Han is clearly annoyed by her, but also clearly attracted to the fact that she doesn't put up with his crap. It's subtle and it is so much better writing than anything we see in the prequels. Han didn't say, "Derp! You look like an angel, I'ma gonna marry you someday purdy lady." Those lines come across as pained. The audience kind of wriggles and writhes in their seats when Anakin says that because it is awkward and forced.

 

So what? Most of these were not affection at all. Even GL didn't decide to make them a couple for sure at that time.

 

Because Han was not a 10 years old slave boy, he was a mercenary. If Anakin talks something like Han, there must be something wrong with this boy. I remember when Luke saw Leia's hologram he also said something like "She's beautiful I'm gonna save her." That's what naive boys talk to girls.

[Slowpokeking]

I know that because she is clearly about 13 years old in the movie. I don't have to be told because I know a child when I see one. That didn't require someone to read a book. They just had to watch the movie and know what a child is and what an adult is.

This quote:

 

is a pretty damning criticism of the prequels. You are essentially admitting that the prequels have no ability to make sense or stand on their own. They are only accessible or sensical if you are someone who already loves the franchise and is willing to read a library of other material.

 

Of course, I think they don't make sense even with all of that stuff from the EU, but that's not really the point.

So you just assumed she's 13 and started this? Natalie Portman was 17 at that time.

 

To be fair, EP I was the first SW movie I've watched and I liked it a lot, when I went to see the 3D a few months ago I can see some flaws, but it also got many good points.

[RDeanOU]

So you just assumed she's 13 and started this? Natalie Portman was 17 at that time.

 

To be fair, EP I was the first SW movie I've watched and I liked it a lot, when I went to see the 3D a few months ago I can see some flaws, but it also got many good points.

 

She looked like a child, she talked like a child, and she acted like a child. It wasn't difficult to detect that her character was supposed to be a child.

 

I'm not surprised Ep 1 was the first one you saw. Had you grown up with the original trilogy you would realize how badly you were cheated by being exposed to that garbage first.

[Slowpokeking]

She looked like a child, she talked like a child, and she acted like a child. It wasn't difficult to detect that her character was supposed to be a child.

 

I'm not surprised Ep 1 was the first one you saw. Had you grown up with the original trilogy you would realize how badly you were cheated by being exposed to that garbage first.

 

I don't see that, she wasn't a mature leader, but surely not acting like a 13 years old, espeically when she was in the queen's identity.

 

NO, I watched EP IV-VI later, it's great, better than EP I and II, but those 2 both got enjoyable parts.

Edited May 20, 2012 by Slowpokeking

[RDeanOU]

I don't see that, she wasn't a mature leader, but surely not acting like a 13 years old, espeically when she was in the queen's identity.

 

NO, I watched EP IV-VI later, it's great, better than EP I and II, but those 2 both got enjoyable parts.

 

She very much acted like a child trying to lead a country. She sat around pretty much just doing what everyone told her to do until very near the end. That's why I correctly figured out she was supposed to be a child. It was pretty clear to me that the character was being portrayed to be 13-14.

[Invictos]

She very much acted like a child trying to lead a country. She sat around pretty much just doing what everyone told her to do until very near the end. That's why I correctly figured out she was supposed to be a child. It was pretty clear to me that the character was being portrayed to be 13-14.

 

She's also clearly a child because otherwise the romance doesn't make sense. As (mostly) earnest and well-meaning people, we in the audience must give Padme the benefit of the doubt that she's not a borderline pedophile in Episode II. We must assume just from (the lack of change in) her physical appearance and from the tone of the romance that she's no more than about 5 years older than he is. If Anakin is 8-9 years old in Episode I, Padme is therefore 13-14 -- certainly well below the generally accepted standard of adulthood at 18.

 

The Episode II romance, which is already ridiculous by dint of terrible writing and direction, would be even more LOL-worthy if Padme were pushing 30 as she's clumsily wooed, and eventually won, by a puling 16-18 year-old Anakin. Even as it stands, the Naboo-romance sequence in Episode II makes me question whether George ever met a young woman. As painful as Anakin's lines are (and wow, are they painful) they're at least a plausible approximation of what a precocious and sheltered boy might say in the midst of his first crush. The problem is that an older woman (and particularly an accomplished and ambitious older woman) would never fall for those lines. And the older she is, the more implausible her receptiveness to his childish approach becomes.

[Wolfninjajedi]

She's also clearly a child because otherwise the romance doesn't make sense. As (mostly) earnest and well-meaning people, we in the audience must give Padme the benefit of the doubt that she's not a borderline pedophile in Episode II. We must assume just from (the lack of change in) her physical appearance and from the tone of the romance that she's no more than about 5 years older than he is. If Anakin is 8-9 years old in Episode I, Padme is therefore 13-14 -- certainly well below the generally accepted standard of adulthood at 18.

 

The Episode II romance, which is already ridiculous by dint of terrible writing and direction, would be even more LOL-worthy if Padme were pushing 30 as she's clumsily wooed, and eventually won, by a puling 16-18 year-old Anakin. Even as it stands, the Naboo-romance sequence in Episode II makes me question whether George ever met a young woman. As painful as Anakin's lines are (and wow, are they painful) they're at least a plausible approximation of what a precocious and sheltered boy might say in the midst of his first crush. The problem is that an older woman (and particularly an accomplished and ambitious older woman) would never fall for those lines. And the older she is, the more implausible her receptiveness to his childish approach becomes.

 

Umm....no? Their ages were not that far apart.

 

TPM: Padme is 14, Anakin is 9

 

ATOC: 10 years pass, this would make Padme 24, and Anakin 19

 

ROTS: 3 Years pass, so this would make Padme 27 and Anakin 22.

[Captain_Zone]

Umm....no? Their ages were not that far apart.

 

TPM: Padme is 14, Anakin is 9

 

ATOC: 10 years pass, this would make Padme 24, and Anakin 19

 

ROTS: 3 Years pass, so this would make Padme 27 and Anakin 22.

 

Proof that Anakin knows of The Oakridge Boys and their classic "Older Women Are Beautiful Lovers".

[Wolfninjajedi]

Proof that Anakin knows of The Oakridge Boys and their classic "Older Women Are Beautiful Lovers".

 

Lol, but point being is that their ages and romantic involvement is fine. Hell there are far bigger age gaps in RL, with some married couples.

[Captain_Zone]

Lol, but point being is that their ages and romantic involvement is fine. Hell there are far bigger age gaps in RL, with some married couples.

 

I never said it wasn't. Giggity.