|
   
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 05:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 00:49 |
|
|
Of course the whole mess with Zam is a metaphor for what will happen to Anakin when he pursues a relationship with Padme. Padme initially represents something good and life-affirming to Anakin, but before long all he is able to see when he looks at her face is the specter of death. Like I've said before, these two shots appear at roughly equidistant timestamps from the yin-yang in the sky at the film's midpoint:  Life transforms into death. Padme transforms into Shmi. Love transforms into hate. The good mother transforms into the bad mother. This isn't the only time correspondences like this occur. Taken together with the Ring Theory article and this blog post about structural symmetry in The Empire Strikes Back, I'd say there's a good chance that the filmic structure of Attack of the Clones was also designed to display properties of chiasmus. I'm not sure if it's perfectly rigorous, but there are a lot of paired shots/story beats that seem to correspond thematically to such a pattern:                       Note that these aren't quite just random correspondences. All the top shots in each pair are in chronological order, and all the bottom shots in each pair are in reverse chronological order. The two shots in each pair are at roughly equidistant time-stamps on either side of the shot of the yin-yang at the film's midpoint. In other words, the supposed pattern follows the rules of chiasmus, just like the pattern that blogger seems to have found in TESB. And there's more than just this. Some of it could just be looking too hard for a pattern, John Nash-style, like but I think it's kind of interesting anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 05:43
|
|
|
I love the mental gymnastics the two trolls have to go through to justify the existence of Zam Wesell. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 05:47
|
|
|
Vintersorg posted:I love the mental gymnastics the two trolls have to go through to justify the existence of Zam Wesell. What have I said specifically that you take issue with? I'd love to discuss it with you, friend Vintersong.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 05:50
|
|
|
Murishani Sleemo
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 05:58
|
|
|
Beefstew posted:SMG what do you think of the Holiday Special?  Above, we have full proof that Zam isn't a an evil body-snatching shape-shifter: she wears a veil. The conclusion is unavoidable: the human face is not a disguise at all. It is her actual identity. So when Zam is killed, we are not seeing her true face. We are seeing her being disfigured - defaced. So what Lucas does is very tricksy: he plays with the audience's assumptions about 'evil shapeshifters' in a way that reflects Obiwan's attitudes. Zam, through no fault of her own, evokes sexist fears of women as deceivers who use makeup to ensnare men, racist fears of 'race-mixing' and so-on. In light of all this, the following exchange is pretty hosed: Anakin: I think she's a Changeling. Obiwan: In that case be extra careful. "Be extra careful"? Why? Contrary to all those expectations Zam makes absolutely no effort to 'deceive' anyone. To Phylodox's chagrin, Zam is 'merely a woman' and not a Species/T3 predatory monster. This brings up a point that a lot of people have trouble with: as Darth Vader lays dying at the end of Episode 6, Luke pulls apart the Vader mask to reveal the human face inside. But isn't this the same disfigurement inflicted on Zam?  "When, at the end of Part III of the saga, Darth Vader asks Luke, his son, to take off his mask, so that he will see his father’s human face, this displaying of one’s face equals the ethical regression to the dimension of what Nietzsche called the “human, all too human.” In his final moments, Darth Vader desubjectivizes himself, turning into an ordinary mortal: what gets lost is Vader as subject, the one who dwells in the void behind the black metal mask (not to be confused with the human face behind the mask), the subject who resonates in the artificially resonating voice." -Zizek At the end of Jedi, we see Vader's face destroyed so that he can be replaced by the idiotic fascist Anakin. It is as though Vader has already been killed, and what we witness is an obscene death-twitch before his processes shut down completely. SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 06:03 on Jan 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 05:59
|
|
|
Krispy Kareem posted:I wonder if becoming an admiral is more difficult than being a general, because the Rebels will literally make anyone who shows the slightest bit of competence a general regardless of whether they can lead people. He's a giant fish, you gotta have him in the Navy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 06:01
|
|
|
Vintersorg posted:I love the mental gymnastics the two trolls have to go through to justify the existence of Zam Wesell. Cnut hasn't gone through any real mental gymnastics. He's pointed out a few thematic connections that pertain to Zam. Doing so has made her marginally more interesting, but, to my mind, hasn't really reconciled her with the needless addition of her shape-shifting abilities. Themes are, after all, only a part of the whole, and Zam doesn't really satisfy any emotional or narrative role that couldn't have been better served by either another character or by developing her more fully. She's an unsatisfying half measure.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 06:04
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:This brings up a point that a lot of people have trouble with: as Darth Vader lays dying at the end of Episode 6, Luke pulls apart the Vader mask to reveal the human face inside. But isn't this the same disfigurement inflicted on Zam? "It's all about generations, and issues of father and sons. It's a family soap opera, ultimately. We call it a space opera, but people don't realize it's actually a soap opera. And it's all about family problems." --George Lucas
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 06:09
|
|
|
I don't think I've ever quite appreciated what a gorgeous looking design this ship has. I'm not to familiar with aircraft, but I can help but feel this was meant to evoke an image of a specific real world plane. Is this perhaps a reference to a shot from another movie? Schwarzwald fucked around with this message at 06:15 on Jan 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 06:11
|
|
|
porfiria posted:"It's all about generations, and issues of father and sons. It's a family soap opera, ultimately. We call it a space opera, but people don't realize it's actually a soap opera. And it's all about family problems." That's not inaccurate. The ultimate conclusion of Star Wars is simply that family is the problem. Vader, the Christ-figure of Star Wars, is obliterated so that Anakin can reunite with the dumbass son he's never met. This regression leads us directly to the satirical faux-utopia of The Phantom Menace.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 06:17
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:That's not inaccurate. The ultimate conclusion of Star Wars is simply that family is the problem. If Vader and Luke didn't love each other the Emperor would have won.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 06:20
|
|
|
SMG has a distinct inability to relate to emotions like love, so he usually comes to the conclusion that it doesn't exist. Essentially the same logic as a Dopefish; if it cant see you, then you cant see him!
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 06:22
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:SMG has a distinct inability to relate to emotions like love, so he usually comes to the conclusion that it doesn't exist. Essentially the same logic as a Dopefish; if it cant see you, then you cant see him! "Love is evil" - Zizek
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 06:25
|
|
|
porfiria posted:If Vader and Luke didn't love each other the Emperor would have won. Untrue. Luke 'wins' by abandoning his father (and his sister, for that matter) to the dark side. It's a demonstration of his greater ethical commitment to pacifism. It is only through this greater gesture that Luke actually 'reaches' the superhuman Vader (who, it bears repeating, is not Anakin). Family doesn't factor into it. In fact, family is explicitly the temptation to be resisted.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 06:29
|
|
|
"But the point is and they asked me to sign a book and seeing them there I couldn’t resist the worst racist remark. When I was returning the books to them I told them you know, I don’t know which one is for whom, you know, you blacks like yellow guys, you look all the same. They embraced me and they told me you can call me nigga. You know when they tell you this it means we are really close." --Slavoj Zizek SuperMechagodzilla posted:Untrue. Luke 'wins' by abandoning his father (and his sister, for that matter) to the dark side. It's a demonstration of his greater ethical commitment to pacifism. Actually, just in case people didn't get it, Lucas awkwardly added in the "Noooooo" thing from ROTS to connect Vader's previous failure to protect his family to his action in Jedi. porfiria fucked around with this message at 06:34 on Jan 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 06:31
|
|
|
Do not attempt to engage SMG.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 06:37
|
|
|
porfiria posted:Actually, just in case people didn't get it, Lucas awkwardly added in the "Noooooo" thing from ROTS to connect Vader's previous failure to protect his family to his action in Jedi. Episode 3 is not at all about the virtue of putting familial ties above all else. Anakin and Padme are in a bad relationship from the very beginning. Anakin's obsession with protecting his family is precisely what makes him a bad person.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 06:39
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Episode 3 is not at all about the virtue of putting familial ties above all else. Anakin and Padme are in a bad relationship from the very beginning. I'd say more it was his inclinations toward totalitarianism, megalomania, and genocide.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 07:01
|
|
|
Soggy Cereal posted:This Zam thing is a good example of the confusing nature of the prequel dialogue. Something I've noticed lately is that a lot of the dialogue is not bad necessarily, it's just incomprehensible. Not really. The Star Wars movies have always assumed a world that exists outside the boundaries of the film where the characters are all familiar with the weirdness, and so don't need to go explaining things to the audience very much. What's a changeling? One of those. What's a Wookie? Big hairy guy. Why don't bars let droids in? Why is the Rebel fleet led by fish people?
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 07:14
|
|
|
Lincoln posted:I don't know if anyone's mentioned this, because I haven't carefully read every post --because this is a terrible thread-- but TFA doesn't necessarily mirror ANH as much as it mirrors ANH + the first third of ESB, when Luke arrives on Dagobah to start training with Yoda.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 07:15
|
|
|
Vintersorg posted:I love the mental gymnastics the two trolls have to go through to justify the existence of Zam Wesell. You know what helps conversation? Calling people who disagree with you "trolls".
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 07:18
|
|
|
Anakin wanting to protect his family doesn't make him a bad person. That's absurd. Anakin's fear of death, his belief that he and those he loves should be exempted from the order of the universe, is his tragic failing. Yoda tries to tell him the truth, that everything dies, but he won't hear it. His love is ultimately selfish and, therefore, destructive. It's only through sacrifice, the ultimate act of love, that he is able to redeem himself.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 07:18
|
|
|
Yeah, everyone knows Gnolls are the superior race.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 07:19
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:Anakin wanting to protect his family doesn't make him a bad person. That's absurd. As a very blatant example, Anakin murders an entire village of sandpeople because he loves his mother more than these 'animals'. And then, Padme reminds him of his mother...
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 07:35
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:As a very blatant example, Anakin murders an entire village of sandpeople because he loves his mother more than these 'animals'. He murders them because his mother just died and he doesn't have the emotional equipment to handle it properly. His love of his mother didn't cause that. His selfish desire for her not to die did. He throws a tantrum, not because he loved his mother, but because his wants have been thwarted. Shmi tries to tell him. Some of her last words are "Now I am complete." Hers is a life fulfilled. She dies without regret, but Anakin is too selfish to see it. The same is true of Padme. Anakin is given a premonition of her death, but...so what? We all know we're going to die. Anakin's childish refusal to accept that and be happy with the time they have hastens her end and leads him to fall to the dark side.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 07:44
|
|
|
Well now you're moving away from the point. If protecting your family is the highest good, then the genocide of the sandpeople is fully justifiable. It's as justifiable as killing the Emperor because he threatens your son. Luckily, Star Wars is not about 'family values'. It's about ethics.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 07:51
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Well now you're moving away from the point. Killing the sand people served no purpose other than revenge. Killing the Emperor saved Luke's life.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 07:54
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:Killing the sand people served no purpose other than revenge. Killing the Emperor saved Luke's life. The sandpeople posed an obvious threat to Anakin's stepfather and stepbrother. If protecting your family is the highest good, then the genocide of the sandpeople is fully justifiable.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 08:00
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:The sandpeople posed an obvious threat to Anakin's stepfather and stepbrother. If protecting your family is the highest good, then the genocide of the sandpeople is fully justifiable. Wow, you appear to have stumbled on a real problem. Maybe a Philosophy 101 student can help you with that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 08:03
|
|
|
I wholeheartedly reject the idea the genocide is bad because 'it serves no purpose'. The obvious flipside of that would be saying genocide is okay if it 'serves a purpose'. Of course, you don't actually believe that. That's why you're moving your stance away from 'protecting family' to 'overcoming selfishness' - which of course reaches its apotheosis in Christ, who teaches you to love thy neighbor.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 08:17
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:I wholeheartedly reject the idea the genocide is bad because 'it serves no purpose'. The obvious flipside of that would be saying genocide is okay if it 'serves a purpose'. I'm not moving my stance at all. I never said what you claimed I said, that protecting family is the highest good. But to say that Anakin fell to the dark side because of his love for and need to protect his family is to ignore a central aspect of his character; that his feelings were selfish and possessive. His views on death were unhealthy and they corrupted him. He didn't kill the sand people "because he loved his mother more than them". He killed them because they took away what he wanted.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 08:30
|
|
|
Lincoln posted:I don't know if anyone's mentioned this, because I haven't carefully read every post --because this is a terrible thread-- but TFA doesn't necessarily mirror ANH as much as it mirrors ANH + the first third of ESB, when Luke arrives on Dagobah to start training with Yoda. It has some serious structural problems (writing for the sequel, endless piling of action scene onto action scene), but I don't really mind because the cast is wonderful and the script serves to develop the characters as best it can. It's a solid movie I would enjoy showing a child who liked Star Wars.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 08:37
|
|
|
Watching the Auralnauts stuff made me go back and check some scenes in the PT. One of the things that bugs me is that because everything is CG & I guess they just told the jedi to 'do whatever and we'll put enemies in post' you get poo poo that looks like this This plays during a fight scene which is actually pretty good (Obi & Anakin vs Dooku part 2) in a sequence that for the most part is also good. Ewan doesnt even pretend like hes blocking anything and he kind of just...walks into the battle droid and does a half hearted little saber flick. Did we even need this poo poo in this fight? They aren't an impediment and the scene fails to sell any of it so whats the point of having the 2 droids there to begin with.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 08:47
|
|
|
CelticPredator posted:If you're on a bridge in Star Wars, poo poo's gonna go down. Ben tells han (and himself) who he is
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 08:58
|
|
|
Elfgames posted:Ben tells han (and himself) who he is Han tells Ben who he is as well. "You're my SON."
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 08:59
|
|
|
Jerkface posted:Watching the Auralnauts stuff made me go back and check some scenes in the PT. One of the things that bugs me is that because everything is CG & I guess they just told the jedi to 'do whatever and we'll put enemies in post' you get poo poo that looks like this I love how after the fight, Palpatine says that they need to hurry and get moving before more security droids arrive. Yeah, because droids have always been sooo dangerous.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 09:07
|
|
|
Phylodox posted:I'm not moving my stance at all. I never said what you claimed I said, that protecting family is the highest good. But to say that Anakin fell to the dark side because of his love for and need to protect his family is to ignore a central aspect of his character; that his feelings were selfish and possessive. His views on death were unhealthy and they corrupted him. In that case, you are losing track of the discussion. Let's go back to the beginning: "When, at the end of Part III of the saga, Darth Vader asks Luke, his son, to take off his mask, so that he will see his father’s human face, this displaying of one’s face equals the ethical regression to the dimension of what Nietzsche called the “human, all too human.” -Zizek This, the quote that upset people, is about the inhuman dimension of humanity that is the ultimate support of ethics: "In philosophical terms, this 'inhuman' dimension can be defined as that of a subject subtracted from all form of human 'individuality' or 'personality' (which is why, in today's popular culture, one of the exemplary figures of pure subject is a non-human - alien, cyborg - who displays more fidelity to the task, dignity and freedom than its human counterparts, from the Schwarzenegger-figure in Terminator to the Rutger-Hauer-android in Blade Runner)." -Zizek A subject is one who stays faithful to an existential choice, without any promise of material or spiritual reward. Vader the cyborg - as opposed to Anakin the human - has absolutely nothing to gain from his commitment to Evil. And also, as I had explained, Luke has absolutely nothing to gain from his commitment to pacifism. If Luke does it in order to be rewarded with his human father back - if it's all a big show in order to garner sympathy - then what he did was not ethical. So what went wrong with Anakin? Well, precisely what people got wrong with Luke: Anakin wanted to get his mother back, and Padme fit those coordinates: "All too often, when we love somebody, we don't accept him or her as what the person effectively is. We accept him or her insofar as this person fits the co-ordinates of our fantasy. We misidentify, wrongly identify him or her, which is why, when we discover that we were wrong, love can quickly turn into violence. There is nothing more dangerous, more lethal for the loved person than to be loved, as it were, for not what he or she is, but for fitting the ideal." -Zizek This is, of course, precisely Padme's fate. Anakin's actions cannot be dismissed as mere selishness, like 'he wasn't really in love'. Their entire relationship was a perfect overlapping of their respective fantasies: Anakin's fantasy of total subservience, and Padme's fantasy of empowering the poor, damaged child. As Lacan would put it: Anakin loves Padme but, inexplicably, loves something in Padme more than Padme - and, therefore, he destroys her. Anakin's passionate hatred of the sandpeople is, naturally, related. Your emphasis on Anakin's 'unhealthiness' gives the series an unseemly therapeutic structure. In your version, Anakin needs to 'redeem himself' after the (personal) failure to protect his family. Anakin saves Luke so that he can purge the 'corruption' from himself, become a father, restore his human face, and die happy.... In this view he is not only rewarded with the life of his son, but a place in the literally-existing Jedi afterlife. But, again, that's not ethics. That idea of 'purging the corruption' is an ideological fantasy directly related to the purging of the sandpeople: the purging of the inhuman. SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 10:24 on Jan 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 10:17
|
|
|
The lego droid tales is charmingly self-aware
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 10:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 00:49 |
|
|
Vintersorg posted:I love the mental gymnastics the two trolls have to go through to justify the existence of Zam Wesell. I promise you I am not trolling. Liking the prequels is not trolling.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 10:51
|
|
