Star Wars: The Complete Saga (1977-2005)

[SymbioticFunction]

Originally Posted by KaineKinetic

Actually, in his own twisted way, he felt he was getting revenge upon the Jewish for how they treated the Germans for thousands of years.
I'm not excusing what he did, but just showing that there are two sides to everything.

Thousands of years?? That aside. Sorry but there really are no two sides to that piece of history. One man's paranoid delusions are no excuse - some people are bad as well as mad. He also murdered gay people, the handicapped, political opponents and their families, and other races too. Basically anyone who didn't conform to his skewed views on Germanic perfection, not just the Jewish. Please don't think that I'm criticising or trying to attack you here, I'm just posting my honest thoughts on the issue.

Originally Posted by octagon

Not really.

Godwin's Law has more to do inappropriate/hyperbolic Hitler comparisons or Nazi analogies.

A Hitler mention or two in a conversation about a dictator seizing power doesn't seem all that out of place.

Thank you.

Plus Palpatine tried to exterminate every single member of a long established religious order. He almost succeeded. That's called genocide. As you say, comparing Palpatine to an infamous fascist leader is hardly inappropriate. It's quite obvious that Lucas drew inspiration from prior fascist dictatorships and regimes when he created the Galactic Empire. I originally only mentioned Hitler to counteract the odd "Palpatine was legally given power" statement that seemingly argued that the rebellion against the Empire was an unfair or inappropriate act that should merely be regarded as terrorism.

This is what wikipedia says about the Galactic Empire:

"Star Wars creator George Lucas sought to make the Galactic Empire aesthetically and thematically similar to Nazi Germany and to appear to be fascist. Like Nazi Germany, the Galactic Empire is a dictatorship based on rigid control of society that dissolved a previous democracy and is led by an all-powerful supreme ruler. The Empire, like the Nazis, desires the creation of totalitarian order and utilizes excessive force and violence to achieve their ends.

The name of the Empire's main soldiers, the Stormtroopers, is somewhat similar to the name given to Hitler's Sturmabteilung (SA) paramilitary bodyguards. The visual appearance of Darth Vader in his all-black uniform combined with his devout obedience to the Emperor has allusion to the black-uniformed Nazi Schutzstaffel (SS). The uniforms of Imperial military officers also bear resemblance to uniforms used in Nazi Germany as well as nineteenth-century Germany's ulans (mounted lancers)—who wore a tunic, riding breeches, and boots like the Empire's officers wear—as well as the Imperial officers' cap resembling the field caps historically worn by German and Austrian troops.

In addition to Nazi Germany, there was also at least one portion of the Galactic Empire that was based on the Soviet Union, which is the various military personnel and TIE Fighters are flying in formation as Palpatine arrives on the Death Star in Return of the Jedi. George Lucas admitted in the commentary that he based it on the May Day military parades in the Soviet Union. Palpatine's rise to power, and transforming a democracy into a dictatorship has been related to those of Julius Caesar, Augustus, Napoleon Bonaparte, and Adolf Hitler."

Hitler being mentioned is this discussion of Palpatine and the Empire hardly seems inappropriate.

[chip75]

Originally Posted by octagon

Godwin's Law has more to do inappropriate/hyperbolic Hitler comparisons or Nazi analogies.

I thought the mention was appropriate.

Originally Posted by KaineKinetic

Is he laughing or crying?
I can never tell.

He's revelling in the situation. His fellow astronauts world's have gone to shit and he's finally enjoying himself, he fits right in! It's a bit of a maniacal laugh. Taylor wasn't exactly much of a people person.

[SymbioticFunction]

Originally Posted by chip75

I thought the mention was appropriate.

Are you surprised that Palpatine has been compared to Hitler?

Edit: I would also expect that dictator to be mentioned in any sizeable Lord of the Rings thread (Sauron or Saruman) even though the supposed references aren't anywhere near as overt as in Star Wars.

[BillieCassin]

Originally Posted by SymbioticFunction

Palpatine was democratically voted emergency powers and that government was lawful in it's initial creation, but the Senate didn't realise that they would be completely disbanded, and that all of their home planets would subsequently be under threat of complete obliteration by a giant death machine. Alderaan was completely destroyed for mere demonstration purposes. Absolutely no-one would like to live under a reign of terror like that, dictatorship or not. Therefore it's actually quite easy to label the Galactic Empire as straightforward "bad guys" and a classic cinematic representation of pure evil.

What you are missing is the fact that most average Imperial citizens wouldn't know that. They would be told that Alderaan was about to do something awful, etc. and the Empire used it's might to stop them (and to deter more folks from trying to hurt the government). They would be told it was to defend them.

That's the head-twist I see folks not being able to make - if Star Wars were made post-2001, the accurate term for them and what they probably would have been called would have been the T-word, because they precisely fill the definition. Leia stole confidential plans, and Luke blew up a military installation - hellooooo LOL.

It's a silly discussion, obviously they are intended to be the big villain and no one is defending them, but if you are going to have the discussion - it's a lot less black and white when you really break it all down. We saw the fringe of life in the Empire - you are talking thousands and thousands of worlds, and as I said previously - many of them very well were probably a lot less well off post-ROTJ than before. The Empire wasn't coming after you unless you were a threat (or again, a Wookie, LOL) - so as long as you played nice and by their rules, the average Imperial citizen was fed, housed, and left alone. Post-ROTJ when the stability was completely rocked, it wasn't like the broke-ass Rebels would have been able to defend the fringe colonies from Pirates, or reinstate supply lines for law-abiding citizens, etc.

It's something I am sure will be addressed in the new films. It was in the EU to some extent. The entire Galaxy would have been turned to chaos - yes, those that opposed the Empire would have been happy but chances are the quality of life for the average Imperial citizen dropped dramatically. Think about Luke's family - they'd still be sitting safely at that moisture farm if R2 hadn't wandered there with secret government plans - they weren't in chains, they seemed just fine. Probably complained about their taxes, but who doesn't.


Now, Disney, will you please start teasing that big box set we know is coming? LOL we need something new to talk about!

[SymbioticFunction]

Originally Posted by BillieCassin

That's the head-twist I see folks not being able to make - if Star Wars were made post-2001, the accurate term for them and what they probably would have been called would have been the T-word, because they precisely fill the definition. Leia stole confidential plans, and Luke blew up a military installation - hellooooo LOL.

Sorry, personally I really don't see the rebels as terrorists. I feel exactly the same way about them, as I do of the French Resistance movement in nazi-occupied France. btw a "military installation" that destroyed a whole planet and threatens to do exactly the same to numerous others, should quite obviously be blown up - there's simply no way to defend the existence of such a nefarious device.

[Geoff D]

Not to excuse anything perpetrated by [insert real or fictional dictator and/or idealogical cause here] but there's a saying that goes 'One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist'. Depends which side of the line you're on.

To actually get back to Star Wars, one of the thematic successes of the prequels IMO was how the Separatists were actually the rebels of that story, yet we were supposed to always be rooting for the Republic. octagon mentioned upthread how he thought that the moral lines being blurred was something that the prequels missed out on, but I thought it was something that came off rather well. The discussion in the meadow between Anakin and Padme in Ep II has that great bit when they're discussing politics and he says that "people should be made to [conform]". She thinks he's teasing her but it's deeper than that, and it's carried on into Ep III when he accuses her of sounding like a Separatist.

Lucas deliberately obfuscated that aspect of the OT - that of the black-and-white nature of Good Rebels and Bad Empire - when making the prequels, to show how a democracy turns into a dictatorship, and that good and bad are somewhat nebulous concepts when people are going to war ("There are heroes on both sides. Evil is everywhere"). David Ayer's Fury also has that sort of vibe to it, of good people doing bad things and vice versa.

[SymbioticFunction]

Yeah, it's been mentioned that the Lucas prequels "didn't play the moral ambiguity card hard enough". But if some people seem to think that Palpatine was somehow hard done by, it seems apparent that it's really not the case at all. I've heard the 'One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist' line before. But my personal take on terrorists, is that I connect them with using attacks that deliberately target the civilian population, in order to achieve their goals through "terror" or shock tactics. And that terrorism description actually precisely covers exactly what the Empire did to the Alderaan planet.

[Geoff D]

Yeah, but when the morality and/or legality of the Allies' firebombing of Dresden is still called into question after all these years, where do you draw the line at who the terrorists are? And I'm not some hand-wringing leftie apologist, I'm bloody glad we won the war(s), but again it calls into question how we define those values of what is 'good' and 'evil', and how (like a lot of stuff in life in general) it's not nearly as clear cut as that.

In some ways that's perhaps one of the PT's greatest strengths but also its fatal weakness. Lucas' attempts to show the slow, insidious process of how the Republic was ousted by the Empire certainly worked for me, but because it's done almost 'behind the scenes' without an overtly villainous presence (a la Vader in the OT) it means that there isn't a propulsive narrative driving the movies onward, which robs them of the momentum and fun which made the OT such a joy to sit through.

[BillieCassin]

Originally Posted by SymbioticFunction

But if some people seem to think that Palpatine was somehow hard done by, it seems apparent that it's really not the case at all.

No one said any such thing. It seems the discussion simply isn't within your realm of understanding.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

octagon mentioned upthread how he thought that the moral lines being blurred was something that the prequels missed out on, but I thought it was something that came off rather well.

It's not so much that they missed out on blurring the lines. That's not really what I was trying to say.

I agree that Lucas did a really good job with that stuff but only in an isolated, scene-by-scene sort of way. Some of the scenes with Palpatine and Anakin were pure gold. Palpatine's sympathetic 'the Jedi are asking you to spy on me, aren't they' was great and his 'good is a point of view' delivery dripped snake oil and was a great mirror to Alec Guinness' 'true from a certain point of view' bit in Empire. Some of this stuff was really, really good.

The missed opportunity was that not only did it never really go anywhere, it was completely overshadowed by the melodramatic 'save my wife' subplot.

And don't get me wrong. I know these weren't Fincher movies. This wasn't All the Chancellor's Men or Three Days of the Jedi. These aren't political thrillers, they're Star Wars movies.

I get that.

But it's frustrating that Anakin's fall didn't really ring true and it doubly frustrating because there were pieces in place that kind of almost sort of worked.

[SymbioticFunction]

Originally Posted by SymbioticFunction

Yeah, it's been mentioned that the Lucas prequels "didn't play the moral ambiguity card hard enough". But if some people seem to think that Palpatine was somehow hard done by, it seems apparent that it's really not the case at all.

Originally Posted by BillieCassin

No one said any such thing. It seems the discussion simply isn't within your realm of understanding.

https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...ostcount=50426

Did you think I was talking about you? Is that why you're being so rude?

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by octagon

It's not so much that they missed out on blurring the lines. That's not really what I was trying to say.

I agree that Lucas did a really good job with that stuff but only in an isolated, scene-by-scene sort of way. Some of the scenes with Palpatine and Anakin were pure gold. Palpatine's sympathetic 'the Jedi are asking you to spy on me, aren't they' was great and his 'good is a point of view' delivery dripped snake oil and was a great mirror to Alec Guinness' 'true from a certain point of view' bit in Empire. Some of this stuff was really, really good.

The missed opportunity was that not only did it never really go anywhere, it was completely overshadowed by the melodramatic 'save my wife' subplot.

And don't get me wrong. I know these weren't Fincher movies. This wasn't All the Chancellor's Men or Three Days of the Jedi. These aren't political thrillers, they're Star Wars movies.

I get that.

But it's frustrating that Anakin's fall didn't really ring true and it doubly frustrating because there were pieces in place that kind of almost sort of worked.

Sure. As I said, all those storylines never really get carried through to fruition and aren't properly knitted together which is one of the PT's biggest failings (although Clones Wars S6 fills in a HELL of a lot of gaps), but if we're talking purely about Anakin's fall then I totally buy it, always have.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by ORFF

I made a video of the difference between the theatrical DVD and the Blu's color. See if you can tell a difference:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUEy...ature=youtu.be

If it means anything to anyone here the stills for the issues of Cinefex (#2 & #3) from 1980 are VERY blue.

[Thomas Guycott]

Recording a television screen isn't exactly the best way to do a comparison.

And the OT DVD and BD's blue color timing bias has been well established for years.

[Blu-21]

The OT DVDs were ported from the Definitive Edition Laserdisc masters which themselves had a strong red tint applied to them. Pre the Definitive Editions, reds or blues weren't as aggressive.

[Falaskan]

Originally Posted by ORFF

I made a video of the difference between the theatrical DVD and the Blu's color. See if you can tell a difference:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUEy...ature=youtu.be

Yes, you did the same thing in a LOTR thread.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Geoff D

...(although Clones Wars S6 fills in a HELL of a lot of gaps),...

That should be in my mailbox this afternoon. If I can just go three or four more days without spoilers I should be golden

[The Fallen Deity]

Originally Posted by ORFF

I made a video of the difference between the theatrical DVD and the Blu's color. See if you can tell a difference:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUEy...ature=youtu.be

The colour timing differences have been well documented over the last 10 years.

Lucas intentionally had the colour palette of the movies altered along with changes to the brightness and contrast levels.

The colour changes don't really bother me that much.

After all they're not the original theatrical versions of the movies anyway.

I'd be pissed though if the Theatrical Cuts were colour timed like that.

[Thomas Guycott]

Originally Posted by Blu-21

The OT DVDs were ported from the Definitive Edition Laserdisc masters which themselves had a strong red tint applied to them. Pre the Definitive Editions, reds or blues weren't as aggressive.

If you're responding to my post, I was referring to the initial 2004 DVD release, which shares the same color timing as the BDs (since they're both from the same Lowry masters).

[Geoff D]

Originally Posted by octagon

That should be in my mailbox this afternoon. If I can just go three or four more days without spoilers I should be golden

I hope you dig it as much as I did. It answers so many PT questions that Lucas left hanging, and it even informs certain events in the OT. I'm not sure I could even watch a Saga run-through without including S6 in there, and the great thing is because it's so prequel-specific in terms of the storylines you don't even need to have have watched S1-5 beforehand. AFAIC it's Episode 2.5.