The Rancor Pit Forum Index
Welcome to The Rancor Pit forums!

The Rancor Pit Forum Index
FAQ   ::   Search   ::   Memberlist   ::   Usergroups   ::   Register   ::   Profile   ::   Log in to check your private messages   ::   Log in

Disney to restore Sebastian Shaw as Force Ghost in RotJ
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> General Star Wars -> Disney to restore Sebastian Shaw as Force Ghost in RotJ Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Owner/Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 5514
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Tue Apr 01, 2014 11:41 pm    Post subject: Disney to restore Sebastian Shaw as Force Ghost in RotJ Reply with quote




When George Lucas altered Return of the Jedi for the 2004 DVD edition, millions of voices suddenly cried out in horror. For 10 years, Star Wars fans have not been silent in their complaining like whiny Skywalkers about the replacement of Sebastian Shaw with Hayden Christiansen in the Force Ghost scene. They argued that Obi-Wan and Yoda appear as they did when they died, so it doesn't make sense for Anakin's image to revert to how he looked 23 years earlier.

In an effort to make amends with fans before Episode VII is released, Disney has announced that it will re-release Episode VI on Blu-ray and provided a sneak peak at one of the instrumental revisions...








































Well, you wanted Anakin's ghost to look like he did when he died, right?

(He presumably is just floating there with severed arms and legs)
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration & Log-In Help
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Dromdarr_Alark
Commander
Commander


Joined: 07 Apr 2013
Posts: 426
Location: Boston, MA

PostPosted: Wed Apr 02, 2014 12:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

nice. But a day late.
_________________
"I still wouldn't have a roll for it - but that's just how I roll."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cheshire
Arbiter-General (Moderator)


Joined: 04 Jan 2004
Posts: 4421

PostPosted: Wed Apr 02, 2014 2:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Time and date stamp says it was posted on the first. Not by much of a margin, but technically...
_________________
__________________________________
Before we take any of this too seriously, just remember that in the middle episode a little rubber puppet moves a spaceship with his mind.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Barrataria
Commander
Commander


Joined: 28 Dec 2005
Posts: 295
Location: Republic of California

PostPosted: Tue Dec 09, 2014 7:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dammit Whill, I bit on this and it's 7 months old Embarassed
_________________
"A special effect without a story is a pretty boring thing"- George Lucas
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
cheshire
Arbiter-General (Moderator)


Joined: 04 Jan 2004
Posts: 4421

PostPosted: Tue Dec 09, 2014 8:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I forgot about this, started reading at the beginning of the thread. I didn't check the date stamp and assumed it was recent.

As soon as I saw the image I literally thought, "I roll to disbelieve."
_________________
__________________________________
Before we take any of this too seriously, just remember that in the middle episode a little rubber puppet moves a spaceship with his mind.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Owner/Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 5514
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Wed Dec 10, 2014 1:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Barrataria wrote:
Dammit Whill, I bit on this and it's 7 months old Embarassed

Good. Goood. Twisted Evil

cheshire wrote:
As soon as I saw the image I literally thought, "I roll to disbelieve."

Ha ha. I disbelieve all the fans that criticize the change to young Anakin with the so-called "logic" that Yoda and Obi-Wan appear to Luke as they did when he saw all of them die, so Vader should too. We want Anakin's ghost to appear as he did to Luke when he died, EXCEPT he should be (1) as if he still had hair, (2) as if he doesn't have a damaged pasty white melty face, (3) as if he still had his original arms and legs, (4) as if he wore Jedi robes he wouldn't have worn for at least 23 years. So it's ok for the presence of hair, the existence of limbs and clothes to change to what he had 23 earlier, but not his face to become younger?? How does that make any sense??

The other thing that purists don't register is that Sebastian Shaw wasn't right for the Force Ghost scene in the first place. Shaw was a whopping 76 years-old (going on 77) when he filmed his two scenes for Return of the Jedi. Seventy-Six! A full 30 years older than the character's canon age. Shaw may have been ok for the melty-face make-up scene, but not as the "whole again" Ghost image. The character of Anakin never looked liked a 76-year-old Jedi at any point in his life.

Even as a kid in '83 long before the prequels, I thought Anakin Skywalker looked very old to be the father of 20-something twins, but then again maybe Luke and Leia's mother was much younger. Then I thought about the extreme age difference between that old man and a typical child-rearing mother's age, and that was creepy. But then I just rationalized that maybe Star Wars technology has resolved infertility in aging women and stopped worrying about it... until '98 or '99 when Lucas unveiled the canon timeframes for the films and TPM character ages of Padme and Anakin. I quickly did the arithmetic and got Anakin's age at his death to be 46, and then it all came back - That Force Ghost with Yoda and Ben looks way too old to be Anakin Skywalker.

Fans suggest the reason Hayden Christensen's ghost doesn't make sense is because Luke would wonder, 'Who is that young Jedi with Yoda and Ben?' when Sebastian Shaw's ghost has me wondering, 'Who the hell is that septuagenarian Jedi? Grandpa Starkiller?' Maybe Anakin wasn't born of a virgin after all. Maybe Shmi had an encounter with Anakin Starkiller. and he erased it from her memory. No midi-chlorians needed to concieve Anakin Skywalker that way! Maybe Anakin Starkiller is the Shaman of the Whills who Qui-Gon learned the power to become a Force Ghost from. And Anakin Skywalker didn't become a Force Ghost because he never learned that power as a Sith Lord. (But then we would say, why is Grandpa Starkiller appearing to Luke?) Yes that sounds wacky but all that would make more sense than a 46 year-old man's Force Ghost appearing as a 76 year-old man!

It is obvious that purists are really disgruntled with (1) Hayden Christensen as an actor and his performance as young Anakin (2) the prequels in general and/or (3) change in general.

I created the picture and this thread as a comical "be careful what you wish for" to try to put an image to irrational arguments I've heard from fans. I think we all agree that Anakin's Force Ghost shouldn't appear as the demasked Vader, broken. I think we're all ok with him appearing as a Jedi because he is the titular Jedi who returned. Yes, changing the ghost to appear as Hayden Christensen did in RotS was changing his age to one 23 years younger than when he died (and thus a different standard than the appearance of Yoda's and Ben's ghosts to Luke). But that makes more sense than the ghost appearing to Luke as 30 years older than the age when he died, an age he never was at any point in his physical life. The only thing that maybe makes more sense than a younger-looking ghost is if they put old make-up on Hayden Christensen, but that would likely come off as more unnatural and not please anyone either.

I'm very glad the scene was changed. As far as the specific change they chose, I feel it is hardly something anyone should take issue with. Force Ghosts don't actually have physical bodies, and there is no indication that anyone else could see the three Force Ghosts but Luke (not even Leia who pulls him away from them to rejoin the survivors). So what is so hard with just saying Force Ghosts can appear any way they want to the corporeal living, so Anakin chose to appear as the Jedi he once was before he joined Sith, betrayed Yoda and Obi-Wan and became a broken machine-man? (And that Luke could just sense through the Force essense of the spririt that it was his father. Who else would it be?) Yoda and Obi-Wan would have no reason to appear different to Luke, but Anakin would. That's rational, right? Oh yeah, all the hatred of Christensen, prequels, change and the time-travelling ruination of everyone's childhood.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration & Log-In Help


Last edited by Whill on Sun Dec 14, 2014 10:23 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
DougRed4
Commodore
Commodore


Joined: 18 Jan 2013
Posts: 1803
Location: Seattle, WA

PostPosted: Wed Dec 10, 2014 2:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Good points, Whill. Though I have to admit I'd never thought that deeply about how old Vader actually appeared (back when it was Sebastian Shaw).
_________________
Currently running Villains & Vigilantes (campaign now 24 years old), d6 Star Wars, The One Ring, and occasionally Marvel Heroic Roleplaying
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
cheshire
Arbiter-General (Moderator)


Joined: 04 Jan 2004
Posts: 4421

PostPosted: Wed Dec 10, 2014 6:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Maybe when Sebbastian Shaw's character died, he should have regenerated as Peter Capaldi. That would make everyone happier.
_________________
__________________________________
Before we take any of this too seriously, just remember that in the middle episode a little rubber puppet moves a spaceship with his mind.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Owner/Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 5514
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Wed Dec 10, 2014 9:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DougRed4 wrote:
Good points, Whill. Though I have to admit I'd never thought that deeply about how old Vader actually appeared (back when it was Sebastian Shaw).

I never thought that deeply about it until I read all the fan vitriol and venom about the simple removal of the inappropriate septuagenarian actor playing Luke's father and replacement that, while not perfect, was still the most sensible solution with respect to the entire film saga. Anakin takes a form that he actually did once have in the past instead of one he never did (illogically aging him 30 years into the future but looking undamaged). The audience knows who it is (and it ties the trilogies together). Luke smiles so it is obvious to him who it is ("I am a Jedi like my father before me."). It's really such a minor thing, but it makes sense. But then again, we're talking about the same fans that cry foul over completely inconsequentiual things like the addition of rocks.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration & Log-In Help
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
DougRed4
Commodore
Commodore


Joined: 18 Jan 2013
Posts: 1803
Location: Seattle, WA

PostPosted: Thu Dec 11, 2014 12:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Totally agree about the (what seems to me to be) inconsequential complaints that some have.

The age issue to me that I have thought about is Obi-Wan Kenobi. If Obi-Wan is roughly 30ish in the Prequels (Ewan McGregor was 29 when TPM came out), and ANH is only about 20 years after RotS, that means that Obi-Wan is probably a lot younger than Alec Guiness (who was over 60 when the first movie was filmed) was during ANH. But it's not that big of a deal to me.
_________________
Currently running Villains & Vigilantes (campaign now 24 years old), d6 Star Wars, The One Ring, and occasionally Marvel Heroic Roleplaying
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Owner/Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 5514
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Thu Dec 11, 2014 2:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

DougRed4 wrote:
Totally agree about the (what seems to me to be) inconsequential complaints that some have.

The age issue to me that I have thought about is Obi-Wan Kenobi. If Obi-Wan is roughly 30ish in the Prequels (Ewan McGregor was 29 when TPM came out), and ANH is only about 20 years after RotS, that means that Obi-Wan is probably a lot younger than Alec Guiness (who was over 60 when the first movie was filmed) was during ANH.

The issue of Obi-Wan's age was actually the impetus for me adding years to the canon film chronology and altering some character ages for my personal Star Wars Universe. I've actually studied actor and character ages extensively.

When TPM was filmed, Ewan McGregor was about 26. In canon, Obi-Wan was 25. No problem there. In ANH, Alec Guinness was about 62 but in canon Obi-Wan is only 57. That doesn't jive with me. Alec Guinness not only was over 60 but looked it too (and Obi-Wan's ghost even ages visibly in the sequels). Qui-Gon Jinn, the Old Ben of TPM was supposed to have been 60 but the actor Liam Neeson was only 45. Think about the relative youthfulness and physical prowess of Qui-Gon in TMP, and then Guinness' Obi-Wan "I'm getting too old for this sort of thing" Kenobi who looks like he can barely even hold up the lightsaber prop. IMO, there is no way in a logical Star Wars Universe that Obi-Wan is younger in ANH than Qui-Gon is TPM. No way.

I feel that Obi-Wan needs to be the one who is 60 when he dies (and not Qui-Gon). The first thing I thought was what if I just made him 3 years older across the board. But that would make him 28 in TPM and that is beyond reason for a padawan who still hasn't been promoted Knight yet. To help even justify the age 25, the EU already had to establish that he wasn't chosen by a Jedi Knight to be trained as an apprentice until it was almost too late for him to become an apprentice (He was being sent off to the Jedi agricultural corp when Qui-Gon chose him). So Obi-Wan was too young in ANH and almost too old to still be a padawan in TPM, so my solution was to keep the canon age 25 for TPM (and 35 for AotC) but then add two years total to the timeline between AotC and RotS, plus add another year to between RotS and ANH, making Obi-Wan 40 in RotS and 60 in ANH. That works for me. And even though Qui-Gon is only in one movie, the character being 15 years older than the actor was just completely unnecessary, so I lowered Qui-Gon's age in TPM from 60 to 50 (thus only 5 years older than the actor instead of 15 years older).

Related to Obi-Wan's age is the age of two other characters who lived on Tatooine, Uncle Owen and Aunt Beru. Owen was established by the EU as being 20 in AotC, which would make him only 42 in ANH. 42?! The actor who played Owen in ANH was 60 when that movie was filmed. The logical thing to do would be to increase his age, right? Well Beru is a problem because even though that character's age has never been established by canon, the actor that played her in AotC was only 17 when that movie was filmed. I can see adding on a couple years but she was too young looking to make her too much older. If Owen gets significantly older then his relationship with the teenaged Beru in AotC gets too much of an ick factor for me.

I can raise Beru's age two years above the prequel actor to 19. Owen's actor in AotC, was 26, so I can raise his canon age from 20 to 25, and 25 doesn't seem so bad to have a 19 year-old girlfriend that he may have been dating for a year. With my added 3 years total in between AotC and ANH, that makes Owen 50 and Beru 44 in ANH. Even with those age increases, they are still significantly behind their actor ages (no not Sebastian Shaw to Anakin Force Ghost 30-year discrepancy level, but still). In my SWU, Owen is still 10 years younger than his actor in ANH (instead of 18 years), and Beru is 11 years younger than her actor.

What's this have to do with Obi-Wan? They all three lived on Tatooine, a desert planet which has very dry conditions and increased solar radiation from the two suns which could reasonably cause people to look older then they are. Owen and Beru could have lived there their entire lives and looked a good amount older than they were. Obi-Wan was a Jedi who are said to age more slowly, but he still lived on Tatooine for 20 years and looked a bit older than he was. The Tatooine factor could also explain the apparent age discrepancy of Luke to Leia. In my SWU the twins are a year older so going on 20 in ANH, but Mark Hamill is 5 years older than Carrie Fisher. Luke lived his first 20 years on Tatooine.

The added years to the timeline did cause me to have to shift some character ages up or down for some films, but it also makes the Empire going on 20 years old in ANH, which just sounds better to me.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration & Log-In Help


Last edited by Whill on Tue Dec 16, 2014 9:42 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Sovereign Protector


Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 12114
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

PostPosted: Thu Dec 11, 2014 2:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I never cared on the switch..
_________________
Confuscious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Zarm R'keeg
Commander
Commander


Joined: 14 Apr 2012
Posts: 481
Location: PA

PostPosted: Tue Dec 16, 2014 11:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Shaw's face is the only one that Luke knows for his father. In addition, Obi-wan and Yoda appear as their 'current' selves; as they died. If Anakin was truly redeemed at the end (and isn't that the whole point?), then he appears as exactly that- the redeemed Anakin, the moment that he became who he was meant to be (not the fallen, petulant, about-to-murder-children version on the cusp of monster-hood).

Advocacy for Hayden in the film is largely based on him 'appearing at the last moment Anakin was good,' in essence... as he was when Anakin ceased to be and Vader was born. But if episode III was the end of goodness and Anakin (hence why that's the state he reverts to when redeemed), then what the heck is the end of ROTJ about? How does he GET redeemed if Anakin/Good never comes back? Basically, it's an inconsistent premise to justify a prequel tie-in that doesn't follow logically or fit with the actors. (And again, an appearance that would mean nothing to Luke as well). So, having Hayden is 'the only thing that makes sense' to some people... but 'a thing that makes absolutely no sense at all' to others. It's an opinion, rather than an absolute fact. Presumably, those who object to the change are also those who don't find it so sensical (for reasons including, but not limited to, those above).

And yes, I think it's safe to say that '(1) Hayden Christensen as an actor and his performance as young Anakin (2) the prequels in general and/or (3) change in general' are elements... but so, too, is respect for Shaw, who originated the part. And while some might argue that he isn't 'right' for Anakin, he IS Anakin, and was long before Hayden. (2 years younger and I could've written 'before Hayden was even born!', a sentence which clearly packs more punch). Smile

Certainly, it is purists (like me) that are saying 'Yeah, he's the wrong age, but that's because the PT screwed up, since his age was already established and it was their responsibility to match that,' but whether you're saying 'Hey, he's too old' or 'Hey, he's as old as he should've been and the PT made him too young,' the truth is that Sebastian Shaw was the face of Anakin Skywalker. He originated the part, and whoever may have come afterwards, I think Shaw deserves respect for that. (Up to and including not being digitally replaced by a better-known newcomer). So I think that those who dislike the change have an element of this thinking as well.

Plus, for the sake of a self-contained movie, Shaw is the person we just saw, 5 minutes before, as Anakin. Having him there provides visual continuity and is a logical extension of his farewell scene to Luke, whereas Hayden introduces a visual disconnect, portraying the character as someone other than he was just portrayed as, and requires someone to have watched all six films (or at least episode III) in order to understand... which isn't very good filmmaking. Smile I don't think anyone who saw this movie was ever confused as to who 'grandpa jedi' is, because they just saw him in Vader's suit, dying in Luke's arms.

(And no, I'm not going to claim that a disdain for the character and acting of prequel-Anakin isn't an element, too.) Wink


In essence, I guess what I'm saying is... the folks who dislike the change have logical objections (and reasoning behind their position) which is just as concrete as that laid out in defense of the Hayden-change... and just as based in both subjective opinion, and reasoning outside of the narrow list of viewpoints supplied to them in crit-fic here. To them, Shaw is 'the only thing that makes sense' just as much as to you, Hayden is 'the only thing that makes sense.' So be nice, y'all. IDIC, to jump franchises. Smile It's not a 'ridiculous' position to hold... just one that's different from yours.

(No offense intended to anyone here- there just seemed to be a lot of one-sided trash talk about how silly 'those people' were, and speculations on what mindset they must hold; as one of 'those people,' I wanted to point out that the other side has their reasons, too... and don't want to fight about it, either... just spread a little understanding.) Cool


On a side note... Anakin is the Jedi that returned? I have never heard that interpretation. I rather see this (and have heard it discussed) as 'The Return of the Jedi (order, into the galaxy at large, in the person of Luke.)' Jedi being plural to indicate the class, rather than singular to indicate the individual. (Which is why I'd hate to see Episode VII, as some have suggested, making Luke a hermit who hasn't rebuilt the order... but that is a separate discussion). Wink I'm sure both interpretations could apply- I'd just never heard that one.
_________________
Star Wars: Marvels, the audio drama: www.nolinecinemas.com

Hard core OT, all the way!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Owner/Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 5514
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Tue Dec 16, 2014 10:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Zarm R'keeg wrote:
Anakin is the Jedi that returned? I have never heard that interpretation. I rather see this (and have heard it discussed) as 'The Return of the Jedi (order, into the galaxy at large, in the person of Luke.)' Jedi being plural to indicate the class, rather than singular to indicate the individual. (Which is why I'd hate to see Episode VII, as some have suggested, making Luke a hermit who hasn't rebuilt the order... but that is a separate discussion). Wink I'm sure both interpretations could apply- I'd just never heard that one.

It's not an either/or thing. Return of the Jedi does mean the Jedi order as a whole through Luke (who newly became the first in a new order of Jedi). It also specifically refers to good Jedi Anakin Skywalker (who had been suppressed by the Darth Vader persona) returning to destroy the Sith. Both meanings apply at the same time. The first time I watched the movie in as a tween in 83, the big twist in the movie's climax was Darth Vader becoming Anakin Skywalker again. No one expected that, and this was even from a time when Vader was only known to have betrayed and murdered the Jedi through dialogue only. The Jedi Knight returned to save his son. And the Creator of Star Wars has referred to Anakin as the specific Jedi who returned on many occasions, so it is a little more than just an "interpretation" - It's the meaning intended by the creator, along with the return of Jedi order in general of course. Funny, I hadn't heard of any Star Wars fan that didn't know that. Wink
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration & Log-In Help
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Whill
Supreme Chancellor (Owner/Admin)


Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 5514
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

PostPosted: Wed Dec 17, 2014 1:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Zarm R'keeg wrote:
Advocacy for Hayden in the film...

Certainly, it is purists (like me) that are saying 'Yeah, he's the wrong age, but that's because the PT screwed up, since his age was already established and it was their responsibility to match that,' but whether you're saying 'Hey, he's too old' or 'Hey, he's as old as he should've been and the PT made him too young,'...

I think it's safe to say that '(1) Hayden Christensen as an actor and his performance as young Anakin (2) the prequels in general and/or (3) change in general' are elements...

...portraying the character as someone other than he was just portrayed as, and requires someone to have watched all six films (or at least episode III) in order to understand... which isn't very good filmmaking. I don't think anyone who saw this movie was ever confused as to who 'grandpa jedi' is, because they just saw him in Vader's suit, dying in Luke's arms.

In essence, I guess what I'm saying is... the folks who dislike the change have logical objections (and reasoning behind their position) which is just as concrete as that laid out in defense of the Hayden-change... and just as based in both subjective opinion, and reasoning outside of the narrow list of viewpoints supplied to them in crit-fic here. To them, Shaw is 'the only thing that makes sense' just as much as to you, Hayden is 'the only thing that makes sense.' So be nice, y'all. IDIC, to jump franchises. It's not a 'ridiculous' position to hold... just one that's different from yours.

(No offense intended to anyone here- there just seemed to be a lot of one-sided trash talk about how silly 'those people' were, and speculations on what mindset they must hold; as one of 'those people,' I wanted to point out that the other side has their reasons, too... and don't want to fight about it, either... just spread a little understanding.)


Just to make this clear, I am not an "advocate" for young Anakin being in the film. I'm an advocate for 'live and let live'.

I joined the internet world in 2002, but I did not participate in Star Wars forums until after RotS. Before that, I came from a world where people did or didn't like Star Wars. Some SW fans did or didn't like some of the EU. Some fans did or didn't care for the Special Editions. Some fans did or didn't like the prequels. But there was an overall love for Star Wars, and no one ever got overly negative about anything. We can disagree about some things in peace. I was totally shocked at what I encountered online. Such extreme anger and hatred about updates to the films, the prequels, and (incomprehensibly) Lucas. Sadly, my experience has been that Star Wars fans online are by and large the Dark Side!

I don't care which version of RotJ anyone else prefers. I have just reacted to the extreme rage against the change in one of the multiple versions available, which like a lot of things is an overreaction regardless of your position. Yes, when I saw the change I thought, well, the ghost appearing 23 years younger makes more sense than 30 years beyond his physical death, actual past instead of never-to-be future. But I never set out to try to convince anyone else who didn't like it to watch the new version over the old. But I admit I would appreciate an alleviation to all the unnecessarily negative bashing out there, and that was the spirit of the Anakin-as-he-actually-appeared-when-he-died image in the OP of this thread.

I wish all the purists out there were like you, Zarm, but they're not. I try to be careful to not make absolute statements, but I have encountered a significantly large number of irrational and negative purists. When you say "the folks who dislike the change have logical objections (and reasoning behind their position) which is just as concrete" you seem to be generalizing all the purists as logical and rational as you and some of the other purists here. Have you honestly never encountered any irrational folks who didn't like the change? And you have never encountered extreme fanboy rage that happen to share your position (but lack your largely kind, rational demeanor)? Really?

"narrow list of viewpoints"? Thanks for chiming in on this thread to remedy that. But not despising young Anakin's ghost, and being an anti-purist SW fan in general, puts me clearly in the minority. Purist viewpoints are omnipresent on the internet. When I first joined the SW online community in 2005 or so, I lived in utter fear of expressing myself do to all the rampant hating going on for my favorite franchise. Even this great Rancor Pit melting pot used to be a lot more unforgiving for people that love the prequels. Frankly, I'm sick and tired of being viewed as a leper in the Star Wars fan community for liking the prequels and altered versions of the classic films. ALL the versions of ALL the FILMS are the primary media of the franchise and the basis of all the rest of it. It should be considered acceptable to like them all, but I'm the one who has to be crucified for not giving in to the Dark Side and conforming to the worldwide bash-fest. Anyway, there is certainly no purist quota to fill, here or anywhere on the internet. It's thriving quite well.

I realize that many people didn't like anything about the prequels, including the timeline and Anakin's young age. A lot of people probably don't understand what Lucas was going for, and of course many of the ones that do still don't care. The Jedi Order only adopting children who are young enough to not later remember their parents, and Anakin suffering from parental separation anxiety leading to fear of loss and the Dark Side are fundamental to Lucas' premise. Could there have been another backstory that worked and resulted in Anakin being in his 70s when he died in RotJ? Possibly, but that wasn't Lucas' story to tell. Write your own version of the backstory that you feel better conforms to the unadulterated classic films. I'd read it. I have a hard time imagining Anakin older than Obi-Wan, but I'd give it a fair shake.

But saying that Lucas' prequels should have conformed to the apparent age of the Sebastian Shaw's Anakin ghost is beside the point here. I have no disrespect for Sebastian Shaw. I have no problem with a 76-year-old actor playing the melty-face make-up unmasked Vader. And I never really had a big issue with the age of the Force Ghost until after I encountered all the Lucas-hating about it online. I like all versions of all Star Wars films. My main point was, it was not a such big deal that it changed for two versions.

"portraying the character as someone other than he was just portrayed as... requires someone to have watched all six films (or at least episode III) in order to understand... isn't very good filmmaking." Um, the film was made in the 80s, and the same actor who portrayed the dying Anakin portrayed his ghost. The Hayden-ghost version was not released until 2004, and everyone knew who he was from Episode II (2002). Film viewers not liking Hayden and not knowing him are two different things. So there was no bad filmmaking because Lucas didn't actually go back in time and insert prequel-Anakin into the original RotJ he made.

But maybe Force-sensitive Luke just intuitively feeling the presence of his father through the Force (and thus knowing that ghostly image was his father regardless of his apparent age) only makes sense to me. Regardless of what Luke should be able to just know, both versions of the Force Ghost scene are available (yes on DVD), so fans can still choose whichever version they prefer better. Again, there was no time-travel. No one's childhood was ruined by anthing external to themselves. All copies of the Sebastian Shaw ghost have not been erased from existence.

Zarm, I'm so glad it was you who provided an opposing point of view, but despite you being one of my favorite Pit users and not trying to offend anyone, I still find some of your statements offensive. I never said my view was the only one that made sense. I said it was more sensible (but please forgive me from not adding "to me" - I assumed that was obvious from context). "One-sided trash talk"? The "one-sided" comes from me only being one person, and you really characterize my writings as "trash talk"? Ouch. Ten years of trash talk is what I was responding to, and I never sunk to the level of all the haters out there. And I never described opposing views as "silly" or "ridiculous", so you saying that misrepresents what I wrote.

"So be nice, y'all. IDIC" indeed! "just spread a little understanding" indeed!
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration & Log-In Help
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> General Star Wars All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group


v2.0