Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[Troy73]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

Get rid of JJ Binks and replace Hayden Christensen with just an average actor and you have significantly improved the prequels.

I thought Hayden Christensen was an "average" actor. That's why he sucks in the role.

If Jar Jar Binks had died on the battlefield in some clumsy yet heroic way I could have almost overlooked him and said not to bad. But no, this clown shows up to give the senate to the Emperor and F#cks everyone. His removal alone from the prequels would make them 50% better films. Leonardo DiCaprio would have made a kick ass Anakin Skywalker.

[Roonan]

Originally Posted by JamesKurtovich

For example, we care about what's happening during intense scenes in the OT. Not so much with any of the prequels..

"we care"? No, you care. People can only speak for themselves, not others.

[Ryan0503]

Originally Posted by octagon

My issue with that was more can The Force really be balanced when there are no Sith left?

I always thought the Jedi had a pretty self-serving idea of what constituted balance.

Luke wasn't a "traditionally" trained Jedi ... When Anakin killed Palpatine he ended up killing himself as well, thus destroying the last of the Sith and the Jedi ...

... if you wanted to go into EU ... Luke creates the New Jedi Order, isn't as black and white with his teachings as the Jedi Order was and openly takes a wife ....

... but just staying stricktly with the movies the last of the Jedi order (not counting Luke and Leia as they are not Jedi trained by the order) and the last of the Sith died with Anakin ... thus bringing balance to the force

That's my interpretation anyways

[Lantz]

Originally Posted by Sith

I disagree so much with what you said. First let me say I prefer the OT. But almost every paragraph you wrote I don't see what you mean.

You say it looks bad that in the OT OB1 considered him a "good friend" but in the PT he's a little !~@#$. In the PT OB1 says Anakin saved his life like 8 or 9times (I may forget the exact #). Anakin goes to Genosis to save OB1 and Anakin saves him from Dooku before he's going to kill him in Episode II. He caries his limp body off the ship in Episode III. Despite his immature behavior at times, loyalty, and always being there to save his Master would of course lead OB1 to call him a good friend.

As to the rest of your statements. Jedi don't get trapped by the Dark Side, they choose to turn. They choose the way of the Dark Side. At that moment the Jedi are the enemy, period. Killing the children in the temple is just being opportunistic and handling Sith business the way it is always handled. Ruthlessly, with no mercy.

The 'good friend' aspect is actually reinforced in the Clone Wars-series where Obi Wan and Anakin work as colleagues on countless missions. For those who do not know, Clone Wars is played out between AOTC and ROTS.

[insomniac013]

Originally Posted by Lantz

The 'good friend' aspect is actually reinforced in the Clone Wars-series where Obi Wan and Anakin work as colleagues on countless missions. For those who do not know, Clone Wars is played out between AOTC and ROTS.

We shouldn't have to watch an animated show to get that though.

They should've just played it out better in the movies! Not to mention, that show started airing way after the PT's release.

[Lantz]

Originally Posted by insomniac013

We shouldn't have to watch an animated show to get that though.

They should've just played it out better in the movies! Not to mention, that show started airing way after the PT's release.

Well, I suppose the six feature films only scratch the surface of the saga, and you could basically flesh out any aspect of it, which has been done in separate books, magazines and serials. As I understand it, a future live show is planned to show the events between ROTS and ANH, which in turn will flesh out the early career of Vader.

But I suppose one's acceptance of this depends on how one views Star Wars, as six films or as an 'expanded universe' pervading a range of different media. :-)

[Roonan]

Originally Posted by octagon

My issue with that was more can The Force really be balanced when there are no Sith left?

I always thought the Jedi had a pretty self-serving idea of what constituted balance.

The Sith were the ones causing imbalance. When they were destroyed, the balance was restored. It's simple.

[nycomet]

I was under the impression that George Lucas had originally planned to produce NINE episodes in the Star Wars saga. Will there ever be Episodes VII, VIII and IX?

[Show spoiler]
That's 7-8-9 for you excessively overweight young people who are clueless about Roman numerals and only exist to send text messages while driving, eat fast food, drink sugary beverages and live on Facebook. (no offense)

Now that Lucas is getting old and is now fatter than Jabba the Hutt, he doesn't have many years ahead of him. It seems to me that he will NEVER be able to do three more Star Wars movies to complete the saga as he originally planned.

Will he pass the torch to another producer/director to continue the series or have we reached the end of the line for Star Wars?

[Ryan0503]

Originally Posted by Roonan

The Sith were the ones causing imbalance. When they were destroyed, the balance was restored. It's simple.

That's not balance ... having only Jedi or only Sith is not balance

Thinking that destroying the Sith will cause balance is that "self servering" idea that destroyed the Jedi

[Roonan]

Originally Posted by nycomet

I was under the impression that George Lucas had originally planned to produce NINE episodes in the Star Wars saga. Will there ever be Episodes VII, VIII and IX?

No. The story he wanted to tell is already told.

Originally Posted by Ryan0503

That's not balance ... having only Jedi or only Sith is not balance

It's the balance of the Force, not the balance of the Jedi and Sith.

[Ryan0503]

Originally Posted by Roonan

It's the balance of the Force, not the balance of the Jedi and Sith.

Exactly ... the force is neither good nor evil ... it has two sides ... destroying one of those sides does not cause balance

[Roonan]

Originally Posted by Ryan0503

Exactly ... the force is neither good nor evil ... it has two sides ... destroying one of those sides does not cause balance

And who said you have to destroy one of those sides? The Sith are not the dark side. They use it, and that causes the imbalance.

[Monolithium]

Originally Posted by ozzsoad

It amuses how blinded a lot of people are by nostalgia.

Originally Posted by octagon

Ahhh, this takes me back to the first time I read this argument.

Good times.

MODs, feel free to lock this thread. Octagon has won!

[Ryan0503]

Originally Posted by Roonan

And who said you have to destroy one of those sides? The Sith are not the dark side. They use it, and that causes the imbalance.

That's your interpretation ... I believe its a little more complex ... light and dark need to be balanced ... the Jedi and the Sith were both using one extreme or the other ... in the end both sides were destroyed ... now Luke has the chance to build a NEW Jedi Order ... I dislike using EU as reference in this fourm but his Jedi Order was very different from what we saw in the movies ...

[Roonan]

Originally Posted by Ryan0503

That's your interpretation ... I believe its a little more complex ... light and dark need to be balanced ... the Jedi and the Sith were both using one extreme or the other ... in the end both sides were destroyed ... now Luke has the chance to build a NEW Jedi Order ... I dislike using EU as reference in this fourm but his Jedi Order was very different from what we saw in the movies ...

No, it's not my interpretation. You are making the wrong assumption that the Jedi are the light side and the Sith are the dark side (which is wrong). As I've said, it's the balance of the Force, not the balance of the Jedi and Sith. The Force has a light and dark side. The Jedi use the Force in it's natural state and are symbionts with it, thus not causing imbalance. The Sith on the other hand, use the Force through unnatural ways. They are like a cancer of the Force, thus causing imbalance.

And this is not about the EU (which is nothing more than a bunch of spin-off works). This is about the movies and how George views its universe.

[Ryan0503]

Originally Posted by Roonan

No, it's not my interpretation. You are making the wrong assumption that the Jedi are the light side and the Sith are the dark side (which is wrong). As I've said, it's the balance of the Force, not the balance of the Jedi and Sith. The Force has a light and dark side. The Jedi use the Force in it's natural state and are symbionts with it, thus not causing imbalance. The Sith on the other hand, use the Force through unnatural ways. They are like a cancer of the Force, thus causing imbalance.

And this is not about the EU (which is nothing more than a bunch of spin-off works). This is about the movies and how George views its universe.

If you would provide a source that that is how George explained it I'd be happy to read it ... otherwise I like my interpretation better

[Roonan]

Originally Posted by Ryan0503

If you would provide a source that that is how George explained it I'd be happy to read it ... otherwise I like my interpretation better

That the Jedi and Sith are not the Force is not open to interpretation. That the balance of the Force is not about the number of Jedi and Sith is not open to interpretation.

[Ryan0503]

Originally Posted by Roonan

That the Jedi and Sith are not the Force is not open to interpretation. That the balance of the Force is not about the number of Jedi and Sith is not open to interpretation.

I never said they were ... its all about how they use the force and the age old question of what is the balance of the force ... which has never been explained in the films and ... therefore ... is open to interpretation

[Roonan]

Originally Posted by Ryan0503

I never said they were ...

Your interpretation is based on that false premise.

[Ryan0503]

Originally Posted by Roonan

Your interpretation is based on that false premise.

Ok