SW character thingy...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hey JCM, shall we: http://forum.halforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=6763&p=223018#p223018

\"JCM\" said:
Yeah, just like the prequel must have been about Obi-Wan, right? :slywink:
Read what i said again and stop obsessing about who had more screen time...

Yeah, we forgot all about him asking Luke to betray his master, his struggle with the Dark Side and his family, his discovery that Luke had a sister, his having to choose death and killing the Emperor and overcoming the Dark Side, because Luke, like Obi-Wan, was used as a narrative to tell his story.
Dude, all those happen in the 2 moments i pointed out (well he asks Luke to join him against the Emperor again at some point as i recall in Jedi, but that's nitpicking). I think you just read too much EU where Vader gets a more in-depth look at. During the actual movies we only get a few glimpse's of his state of mind, and important as they are they're hardly enough to take over the whole story.

Yes, it's easy to argue that he had better development, but that doesn't make him who the movie is about anymore then it does Han.

\"JCM\" said:
Luke was a protagonist, just like Vader (in a clever antagonist-protagonist twist) and Han Solo, and with the prequels out, the original trilogy is just a continuation of Vader's story, but now with Luke, instead of Obi-Wan, to carry the saga along.

Not that your view is wrong, as movies are bound to have different impressions than that of the creator, heck until I was 14 I always thought that SW was about the droids.
Hey, i never said that Lucas doesn't have the right to change his mind about his own story, but that doesn't mean he can just retcon reality and say he always planned it this way...

The OT was not made with Vader in mind, as proven by the early drafts, and imo is pretty obvious from the films unless you're actively looking to make it Vader's story because Lucas said so... and that would also work for Han and even the droids... all they would need is a prequel about them... SW IS R2's STORY... :aaahhh:
 
J

JCM

We have a new forum? Damn, makes it 8 pvp-spawned forums Ive been in since the freeboards.
@Li3n said:
Read what i said again and stop obsessing about who had more screen time...
What, I cant share your obsession?

@Li3n said:
Yeah, we forgot all about him asking Luke to betray his master, his struggle with the Dark Side and his family, his discovery that Luke had a sister, his having to choose death and killing the Emperor and overcoming the Dark Side, because Luke, like Obi-Wan, was used as a narrative to tell his story.
Dude, all those happen in the 2 moments i pointed out (well he asks Luke to join him against the Emperor again at some point as i recall in Jedi, but that's nitpicking).
My suggestion, watch the movies, maybe its been too long that you havent watched them and are counting several scenes as just two, or you are confusing Vader with The Emperor, who only had a few scene.
Lian said:
Yes, it's easy to argue that he had better development, but that doesn't make him who the movie is about anymore then it does Han.
But of course its episode 4-6 of a 6-part movie showing the rise and fall of Han Solo, right? My bad.

Its not my fault you are arguing that Luke had good character development :rofl: after your screen time and intention arguements failed, maybe you can try and argue its about Leia or something.
Lian said:
JCM said:
Luke was a protagonist, just like Vader (in a clever antagonist-protagonist twist) and Han Solo, and with the prequels out, the original trilogy is just a continuation of Vader's story, but now with Luke, instead of Obi-Wan, to carry the saga along.

Not that your view is wrong, as movies are bound to have different impressions than that of the creator, heck until I was 14 I always thought that SW was about the droids.
Hey, i never said that Lucas doesn't have the right to change his mind about his own story, but that doesn't mean he can just retcon reality and say he always planned it this way...

The OT was not made with Vader in mind, as proven by the early drafts, and imo is pretty obvious from the films unless you're actively looking to make it Vader's story because Lucas said so... and that would also work for Han and even the droids... all they would need is a prequel about them... SW IS R2's STORY... :aaahhh:
Yeah, a retcon that was in his first script, expanded Universe bible and etc, I said, its a fanboy's world, feel free to interpret it your way, or imagine retcons where there none, after all, creators cant control people's interpretation.

The prequel would've been better if Lucas had done what he did with V-VI, and let someone else direct and help with writing, because the reason why Vader's story was great was because it was told through other people, and thats what made Vader the most popular of all SW characters.

Instead in the prequel, we got him whining. I understand your point of view, and yes, the original trilogy can be seen as Luke's story (or Han Solo's, etc), but what Lucas originally planned, what was given to the Expanded Universe writers and what we got with the prequel was 6 movies chronicling the rise, fall and redemption of Anakin.
 
My 2 left feet disagree...

My suggestion, watch the movies, maybe its been too long that you havent watched them and are counting several scenes as just two, or you are confusing Vader with The Emperor, who only had a few scene.
I mean 2-3 scenes where Vader actually has some development besides "he's badass and can choke you with his mind", not 2-3 scenes in total in the movie...

But of course its episode 4-6 of a 6-part movie showing the rise and fall of Han Solo, right? My bad.
See, that's the whole thing, without ep. 1-3 you wouldn't even think of making the argument that it's all about Vader... and as i pointed out, having prequels wasn't the plan from the get-go at all: http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Adventures_of_the_Starkiller,_Episode_I:_The_Star_Wars , no matter how many times Lucas says it or how many EU books that came after the 1st film (now known as Ep.4) have to say the fact remains that one the the intermediate drafts was called: Adventures of the Starkiller, Episode I: The Star Wars

Its not my fault you are arguing that Luke had good character development :rofl: after your screen time and intention arguements failed, maybe you can try and argue its about Leia or something.
i never said Luke had GOOD development, but that he had development... whether it was good or bad is rather immaterial.

Lucas has been on record millions of times about how Luke had that whole monomyth thing going, it's even on wikipedia on the monomyth page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monomyth#George_Lucas_and_Star_Wars

Yeah, a retcon that was in his first script, expanded Universe bible and etc, I said, its a fanboy's world, feel free to interpret it your way, or imagine retcons where there none, after all, creators cant control people's interpretation.
Except that it wasn't... the character named Annikin in there was way closer to how Luke turned out then how Vader did... and Vader WAS IN THE DAMNED THING AS A ANTAGONIST TO ANNIKIN. Read the link dammit.

The prequel would've been better if Lucas had done what he did with V-VI, and let someone else direct and help with writing, because the reason why Vader's story was great was because it was told through other people, and thats what made Vader the most popular of all SW characters.
At least we can agree on that...
 

ElJuski

Staff member
Everyone's arguing is cute and all, but Luke Skywalker is the main character of Star Wars. Just because the story details a certain character doesn't make him the main character; Annakin's devolution might be the overarching focal point of the original trilogy but Obi-Wan certainly is the character through whom we observe the dynamics of it all, before sending it off to Luke, who is the central, cohesive piece to the six-chapter epic arc.

But the arguing is absolutely adorable.
 

ElJuski

Staff member
By the way, /Hero With a Thousand Faces/ is an awesome book that I really have to re-read so I can more retain the stuff that happened therein.
 
@ElJuski

Ridiculous... Frodo is the main character of SW... him and the hobbits are just in a furry phase...
 
J

JCM

See, that's the whole thing, without ep. 1-3 you wouldn't even think of making the argument that it's all about Vader... and as i pointed out, having prequels wasn't the plan from the get-go at all:
Wrong again. Because while some hang on to child memories of Luke (who was basically for kids), the whole world remembers mostly Vader.

Some of us moved on to the EU, and then the prequels, and noticed its all about Vader, heck, even in post-film SW Luke is just the guy who is around to lead everyone´s story.


And while some hang on to the memories of watching Luke as a kid, almost every Vader scene brought development and revealed story. Whether it was him telling about the emperor and showing the power of the force and revealing he was Obi-Wan´s apprentice in epI, to epII´s struggle and wanting to betray the emperor, to all the development in epIII, Vader didnt have a single wasted scene that didnt bring development.

Again, watch the films, let go of the memories.
i never said Luke had GOOD development, but that he had development... whether it was good or bad is rather immaterial.
Another failed arguement of your, I see. First one "Luke is the main character because of screentime" then "Luke is the protagonist because of character development", both which Luke fails in.

And again, with the new trilogy, no matter what your childhood memories tell you, SW has become about Vader.
Monomyth!!
Youre confusing Star Wars (with at least 2-3 main characters) with Indiana Jones, because while Lucas took Luke and copied off the typical monomyth for the kids, Star Wars has always had 2-3 protagonists, whether its the movies or novels, Star Wars has rarely been "hey, its a story about just one guy", but a saga with countless stories unfolding.

Mind you, there are exceptions, like Force Unleahsed.
 
Wrong again. Because while some hang on to child memories of Luke (who was basically for kids), the whole world remembers mostly Vader.

Some of us moved on to the EU, and then the prequels, and noticed its all about Vader, heck, even in post-film SW Luke is just the guy who is around to lead everyone´s story.
Because the world was impressed with Vader all the stuff you're talking about happened...

That's my point, that in the OT it wasn't about him, even if it was later retconed that it was, and it shows in the films (ep. 4-6).

And while some hang on to the memories of watching Luke as a kid, almost every Vader scene brought development and revealed story. Whether it was him telling about the emperor and showing the power of the force and revealing he was Obi-Wan´s apprentice in epI, to epII´s struggle and wanting to betray the emperor, to all the development in epIII, Vader didnt have a single wasted scene that didnt bring development.
Development to the story, not to him... which is exactly what a villain is supposed to do.

Again, watch the films, let go of the memories.
Another failed arguement of your, I see. First one "Luke is the main character because of screentime" then "Luke is the protagonist because of character development", both which Luke fails in.
Ahem:

The straw man fallacy occurs in the following pattern:

1. Person A has position X.

2. Person B disregards certain key points of X and instead presents position Y.
Thus, Y is a resulting distorted version of X and can be set up in several ways, including:

1. Presenting a misrepresentation of the opponent's position and then refuting it, thus giving the appearance that the opponent's actual position has been refuted.[1]
2. Quoting an opponent's words out of context — i.e. choosing quotations which are intentionally misrepresentative of the opponent's actual intentions (see contextomy and quote mining).[2]
3. Presenting someone who defends a position poorly as the defender, then refuting that person's arguments - thus giving the appearance that every upholder of that position (and thus the position itself) has been defeated.[1]
4. Inventing a fictitious persona with actions or beliefs which are then criticized, implying that the person represents a group of whom the speaker is critical.
5. Oversimplifying an opponent's argument, then attacking this oversimplified version.

3. Person B attacks position Y, concluding that X is false/incorrect/flawed.
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious, because attacking a distorted version of a position fails to constitute an attack on the actual position.

EXAMPLE:

* (Hypothetical) prohibition debate:

Person A: We should liberalize the laws on beer.
Person B: No, any society with unrestricted access to intoxicants loses its work ethic and goes only for immediate gratification.

The proposal was to relax laws on beer. Person B has exaggerated this to a position harder to defend, i.e., "unrestricted access to intoxicants".


One last time, Vader doesn't have enough screen time for Ep.4-6 to be mainly about his redemption.

And you started the Luke didn't get developed, but you're just saying his development was bland and uninspired and then equating that with no development, which is why i showed you the monomyth thing that Lucas is on record acknowledging, which is what Luke's development is all about, no matter how crappy it was.

And again, with the new trilogy, no matter what your childhood memories tell you, SW has become about Vader.
Exactly, with the new trilogy... but without it it wouldn't be... if you agree with that then there's no need to argue.


Youre confusing Star Wars (with at least 2-3 main characters) with Indiana Jones, because while Lucas took Luke and copied off the typical monomyth for the kids, Star Wars has always had 2-3 protagonists, whether its the movies or novels, Star Wars has rarely been "hey, its a story about just one guy", but a saga with countless stories unfolding.
You're totally right, i mean it's not like Lucas even had a book written about it, made a documentary, had an exhibition in a museum about it or anything:
http://ffh.films.com/id/11017/The_Mythology_of_Star_Wars_with_George_Lucas_and_Bill_Moyers.htm

http://www.nasm.si.edu/exhibitions/StarWars/sw-unit1.htm


And the monomyth doesn't imply just one character, just ask Gilgamesh, who was bloody first as far as we know atm.
 
J

JCM

So a long copypasta of strawman after your screentime arguement, not enough development, and then ITS ONLY A MONOMYTH! seems a bit confusing.

Do stick to the topic. [;)]

One last time, Vader doesn't have enough screen time for Ep.4-6 to be mainly about his redemption.
I said he was just a protagonist. Just like EpV-VI is NOT about Luke, its not only about Vader, but about 4 characters which the film chronicles.


Exactly, with the new trilogy... but without it it wouldn't be... if you agree with that then there's no need to argue.
And thats exactly where we disagree. You are stuck with EpIV, which was about Luke, in which Lucas didnt think he´d get to do any sequels, yet had a 9-movie layout, with the complete trilogy, in which Luke ended up becoming just one protagonist, and Han Solo, Leia and Vader were pushed foward as equally important main characters.

"Star Wars" as in EpIV was like Indiana Jones, V and VI were like Ocean´s Eleven or the first Xmen, with many main characters. And EpI-III turned it all into just one long narrative about Vader.


Yes, some people will stay stuck in the past (heck, like the Marvel threads on Bucky is DEAD!!) but just like Bucky is alive, the two Star Wars trilogies are all about Vader.


You're totally right, i mean it's not like Lucas even had a book written about it, made a documentary, had an exhibition in a museum about it or anything:
http://ffh.films.com/id/11017/The_Mythology_of_Star_Wars_with_George_Lucas_and_Bill_Moyers.htm

http://www.nasm.si.edu/exhibitions/..., who was bloody first as far as we know atm.
Nothing about "its a story about Luke!!!" there.... "Star Wars" as in monomyth was the movie which is now called a New Hope.

The second article doesnt even work, so again, lets not confuse "Star Wars" as in ep IV with the trilogy.
 
J

JCM

lol wut? The monomyth works for the entire original trilogy. Seriously, JCM.
lol bad reading comprehension?

Star Wars aka New hope was the classical hero´s journey. It was all about Luke, then with ep V and VI it wasnt Luke´s story anymore, yes, Lukes monomyth continues, but there are other characters who share the spotlight with Luke dont quite follow the monomyth model-

Luke is basically a walkthough ste-by-step the of monomyth model for the kids, but ep V and VI pushed forth Leia, Han Solo and Vader, who had rather complex relations and history that ran away from the traditional hero model (smuggler who wants to get money + girl, rincess who doesnt need to be rescued and instead fights, evil lord who betrays his master and redeems himslelf), so its as idiotic to say that the trilogy is all about Luke just because SWIV was about him, just as it is to say that he as better development than Vader, or that screen time decides what makes one a protagonist.
 
A

Andromache

is it just me or is JCM getting gentler in his old age?

/in before JCM mistakes that for a vicious ad hominem.
 
I said he was just a protagonist. Just like EpV-VI is NOT about Luke, its not only about Vader, but about 4 characters which the film chronicles.
And you're saying that Luke isn't one of those 4?!

Again, i'm not arguing that Han, Leia and Vader didn't have their own stories told in the OT, but that the movie was clearly structured with Luke's story as the main one, and not Vader's as you claimed.

And thats exactly where we disagree. You are stuck with EpIV, which was about Luke, in which Lucas didnt think he´d get to do any sequels, yet had a 9-movie layout, with the complete trilogy, in which Luke ended up becoming just one protagonist, and Han Solo, Leia and Vader were pushed foward as equally important main characters.
Oh for crying out loud... you actually believe him that he had 9 films planned from the start... even after all those links to the original drafts that where clearly about the rebellion against the empire and a young guy becoming a bad ass Jedi like his dad (who was still alive in the beginning of the story).

Sure, Han, Leia and Vader had important parts in the movie, but it never went that far as to eclipse Luke, except maybe in quality (which doesn't make them more important as you seem to be claiming, just better characters).


You're just suffering from Draco in leather pants syndrome, as is Lucas and most fans... Vader's cool and all.

\"Star Wars\" as in EpIV was like Indiana Jones, V and VI were like Ocean´s Eleven or the first Xmen, with many main characters. And EpI-III turned it all into just one long narrative about Vader.
Dude, if you think all the X-Men films weren't about Wolverine you must be smoking something...

Having a big cast with sub-plots for a lot of characters doesn't mean it can't be mainly about 1 of their stories... and the OT was mainly about Luke... and it still is until Lucas re-remasters it with more Vader in it... you know that he will.

Yes, some people will stay stuck in the past (heck, like the Marvel threads on Bucky is DEAD!!) but just like Bucky is alive, the two Star Wars trilogies are all about Vader.

Nothing about \"its a story about Luke!!!\" there.... \"Star Wars\" as in monomyth was the movie which is now called a New Hope.

The second article doesnt even work, so again, lets not confuse \"Star Wars\" as in ep IV with the trilogy.
Bucky being alive is a retcon, just like SW being about Vader is... if you agree with that then we agree with each other...

Also, the link that worked is from 1999 and mentions the "SW SAGA", no bloody way they're only talking about just the first film.


is it just me or is JCM getting gentler in his old age?

/in before JCM mistakes that for a vicious ad hominem.
Nah, as you get old your brain gets more worn out, so he's just not as good at it as before.... my cunning plan is to have this go on for years until he gets too old to remember to post a rebuttal.

Or maybe he's just trolling out of boredom... whatever.
 

ElJuski

Staff member
lol bad reading comprehension?

Star Wars aka New hope was the classical hero´s journey. It was all about Luke, then with ep V and VI it wasnt Luke´s story anymore, yes, Lukes monomyth continues, but there are other characters who share the spotlight with Luke dont quite follow the monomyth model-

Luke is basically a walkthough ste-by-step the of monomyth model for the kids, but ep V and VI pushed forth Leia, Han Solo and Vader, who had rather complex relations and history that ran away from the traditional hero model (smuggler who wants to get money + girl, rincess who doesnt need to be rescued and instead fights, evil lord who betrays his master and redeems himslelf), so its as idiotic to say that the trilogy is all about Luke just because SWIV was about him, just as it is to say that he as better development than Vader, or that screen time decides what makes one a protagonist.
Kind of like how Harry Potter is about Harry's coming of age and dealing with Voldemort because there are other characters with other plotlines? They are called subplots, JCM, and as much as you'd love to try and make some abstract case that their stories matter oh so much more, when we're talking of the scope of the original trilogy films--and even the prequel trilogy films--the main arc is about the redemption of the Skywalker family line through the journey of the son. Luke Skywalker, being that son, being the protagonist and fitting the heroes' motif, following conventions of the epic up to and including the third film of the original trilogy, is the central character and the key to the whole damn thing.

I don't care how many other characters and how many other stories they have and how "in depth" the side characters are; it's inconsequential when it comes to the central argument of, in the main, whose story it is. If you want to talk in more general terms, well YES, they are all PART of the long epic story. But you shouldn't assume that Luke isn't the central character.
 
J

JCM

Of course you dont care, specially with the terrible Harry Potter example (Harry Potter gets 90% of screentime, Luke barely makes a third in ep V-VI) because its exactly whats wrong with "Its ALL ABOUT LUKE", Ep IV was about Luke, with ep V and VI it became about the whole group, with I-II it became about Vader. Again-

Luke is basically a walkthough ste-by-step the of monomyth model for the kids, but ep V and VI pushed forth Leia, Han Solo and Vader, who had rather complex relations and history that ran away from the traditional hero model (smuggler who wants to get money + girl, rincess who doesnt need to be rescued and instead fights, evil lord who betrays his master and redeems himslelf), so its as idiotic to say that the trilogy is all about Luke just because SWIV was about him, just as it is to say that he as better development than Vader, or that screen time decides what makes one a protagonist.

Star Wars isnt a monomyth, but a story in which a monomyth, along with other classic mythology stories patterns, are told. Ep IV, and only ep IV, was all about Luke.

For dummies, one could say ep 4 was like The Hobbit, the whole story follows just Bilbo, with the odd chapter talking about other characters-


But by ep V-VI it turned into this, many main characters, a fleshed out world, and equal screentime for the main characters including Frodo-


But hey, ITS ALL ABOUT FRODO! Because the Hobbit was all about Bilbo.[;)]
Again, i'm not arguing that Han, Leia and Vader didn't have their own stories told in the OT, but that the movie was clearly structured with Luke's story as the main one, and not Vader's as you claimed.
Newsflash. Its 2009. I-III were made, ep V-VI, so the original trilogy just became another movie with many protagonists at V-VI, and just a chapter of the Vader story with I-III.

Luke now is just another Obi-Wan, who carries Vader´s story along.
Oh for crying out loud... you actually believe him that he had 9 films planned from the start... even after all those links to the original drafts that where clearly about the rebellion against the empire and a young guy becoming a bad ass Jedi like his dad (who was still alive in the beginning of the story).
Who Lucas decided to kill and put in a previous movie?

"For crying out loud", who will I believe, the creator, who in interviews said over and over he wanted 9 films, but then gave Timothy Zahn the right to do post-film canon stories, who kept "epIV" in the first Star Wars, and who for decades prohibited any extented Universe story about Vader´s past as he still wanted to film it, or you?

Cmon, the creator (plus shitloads of interviews, the Extended Universe gidelines created in the late 70´s), or a trol who has now taken to adhominems? I´ll take George Lucas, thank you.
Ad hominems
Yep, like I said, there will come the adhominem from the fanboy.

Really L3an, let it go, you pathetic attempt at ad-hominems after trying to tell us that Star Wars is what you want it to be, not what Lucas has said for decades, makes you look like a pathetic anonymous troll in Luke Skywalker Jammies who writes Luke fanfiction. See how nice it is when someone else uses ad hominems and attacks you instead of the arguement?

[/COLOR]
is it just me or is JCM getting gentler in his old age?
Nah, he was burying himself.. I mean-

-Screentime?
-Luke has more development?
-Ep IV was all a monomyth, so that means ep V-VI must only be about Luke?
-That George Lucas, after naming it ep IV, prohibiting writers from touching Vader´s past for 3 decades because he wanted to do it, is wrong and for some reason, because Lian says so, it must be all about Luke, even through epV-VI changed it to about the group, and EpI-III turned the original trilogy into a continuation of Vader´s story?

But now that he´s shown his true colors and taken to ad-hominems, well, I might as well have fun with the troll, who by the might of the Luke Jammies, will reply, as Troll depend on that. :p

Awaiting life-support post in 3... 2.... 1...
 

ElJuski

Staff member
The real terrible example is using the Hobbit which is like a prequel to the Lord of the Rings, much like how the Prequel Trilogy is to the Lord of the Rings.

But, if you can't get your head out of your ass about the writing aesthetic that places the center of the story around the son Skywalker redeeming his father Skywalker, then you can feel free to believe whatever notion you have. Not worth the e-time.
 
J

JCM

I still dont understand English, and now am trying eak insults since my "ITS ONLY MONOMYTH!" arguement fails with ep V and VI
God, nobody is saying epIV is the Hobbit? God, cant you read?

Episode IV = like Conan (since you cant understand "The Hobbit" was used as an example of a story about 1 character, its about Luke, ony Luke


Episode V and VI


But if you cant learn just one fucking language enough to read it, and are still stuck to childhood memories of epIV, well, go ahead and make up some other arguement for me to laugh at, fanboy. And do learn simple English.
 
T

ThatNickGuy

Hey, you know what I think of Star Wars? (insert obligatory "No!")

They're light, fun action sci-fi flicks that I'm entertained by and think little about them.

In other words:

NERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRDS!!!!
 
J

JCM

Yep. Sadly fanboys get too attached, I mean, its funny to hear a fanboy tell me that "I shouldnt believe what Lucas says about his own characters".

Im not even going to get to the subject of fanfiction.
 
Does the new Hithchiker's book written by that Eoin Colfer fellow count as fan fiction?

Cause...y'know... it technically is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top