Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

Palpatine's Death.


Maaruin's Avatar


Maaruin
03.12.2014 , 09:07 AM | #21
Quote: Originally Posted by AlrikFassbauer View Post
I guess that you are of a younger generation ?

People of my generation (40+) are viewing movies differently than the post-MTV-generation, which has grownj up with a completely different style of movies.

You expect everything to be far more dramatic, because the MTV-style of movies have trained you to expect this.
Slow movies don'tg get any watchers nowadays, because EVERYTHING must be fast, furious and dramatic.
You'll be utterly bored by movies that got the Oscar 30 years ago ...
Not true. I'm part of the younger generation as well, and the Palpatine-Vader-Luke scenes on the Death Star are my favorite moments in the entire Star Wars universe.

Oh, and look up this review from 1983:
Quote:
The film's battle scenes might have been impressive but become tiresome because it's never certain who is zapping whom with those laser beams and neutron missiles. The narrative line is virtually nonexistent, and the running time, though only slightly more than two hours, seems longer than that of "Parsifal." [...] "Return of the Jedi," which has been rated PG ("Parental Guidance Suggested"), contains some battles that are more busy than violent and one death scene that evokes no emotional response whatsoever.
Which sounds surprisingly similar to your criticism of today's movies, but is about the very movie we are talking about.

Here is another negative review from that time, complaining that RotJ "renders the long-delayed character climaxes with a chilly indifference."
I don't want to say that back then everyone thought it was bad. Instead I purposefully took the two reviews with the lowest score to show that preferences differ. If one likes or dislikes this scene doesn't depend on when he or she grew up, but on personal preference.
So please don't overgeneralize.


(And now I can't resist to offer my two cents about this topic.)

I'd say from a dramatic perspective, Sidious isn't the Sith Lord in that scene. Vader is. He was the antagonist for all three movies and he gets the intense duel with Luke. A duel that extends from the physical level and becomes about falling to the dark side or returning to the light.
In all this, Sidious is more of a representation of the dark side than an individual character. The point of this scene was Vader rejecting the dark side. And I think throwing the Emperor down a bottomless pit fits that better than another long duel.

To some degree I can see your point. If you immerse yourself in Sidious (through Prequels and Expanded Universe material) it is a bit anti-climactic.
"I was one of many. We were servants of the dark side… Sith Lords, we called ourselves. So proud. In the end we were not so proud. We hid… hid from those we had betrayed. We fell… and I knew it would be so."
-Ajunta Pall

sell-dog's Avatar


sell-dog
03.12.2014 , 09:08 AM | #22
Quote: Originally Posted by AlrikFassbauer View Post
I guess that you are of a younger generation ?

People of my generation (40+) are viewing movies differently than the post-MTV-generation, which has grownj up with a completely different style of movies.

You expect everything to be far more dramatic, because the MTV-style of movies have trained you to expect this.
Slow movies don'tg get any watchers nowadays, because EVERYTHING must be fast, furious and dramatic. You'll be utterly bored by movies that got the Oscar 30 years ago ...
Right, people under 40 adore The Godfather series and list Rocky as among their favorites. Let's also not forget that A New Hope not getting Best Picture is considered one of the biggest snubs of all time and what started this huge franchise we all love. I guess people under 40 are too busy checking what they type for spelling mistakes to watch movies from 30+ years ago

MTV-style of movies? Do you mean like Bring It On? Or are you criticizing movie companies for taking advantage of advances in special effects technology? A New Hope was a huge example of raising the bar on special effects so let's not act like older movies didn't try to wow audiences and were just completely dependent on delivering a great story.

Anyway I was completely fine with Palpatine's Death in ROTJ as like someone previously said, the story is focused on Vader and once the prequels are thrown in the mix it is ironic that Palpatine's death comes at the hands of his trusted ally. Palpatine comes back later so his death here shouldn't be that big of a deal
"What's the difference between hot and cold doughnuts?"
"The difference is: cold ones I can eat 8, hot ones I can eat 48!"

Aurbere's Avatar


Aurbere
03.12.2014 , 01:03 PM | #23
Quote: Originally Posted by StarSquirrel View Post
Yeah, kinda sad right?

Remember Naga Sadow? He just ran away and died of old age... Or what about Plagueis, stabbed in his sleep...
True, true. The list of 'non-epic' deaths in Star Wars is pretty long.
Added Chapter 66 to The Shadows Fall
"Your only hope to survive is to give in to the rage boiling within you, to acknowledge the Dark Side you deny, and tap into it!"--Darth Tyranus

jaytdasme's Avatar


jaytdasme
03.12.2014 , 01:10 PM | #24
Quote: Originally Posted by AlrikFassbauer View Post
I guess that you are of a younger generation ?

People of my generation (40+) are viewing movies differently than the post-MTV-generation, which has grownj up with a completely different style of movies.

You expect everything to be far more dramatic, because the MTV-style of movies have trained you to expect this.
Slow movies don'tg get any watchers nowadays, because EVERYTHING must be fast, furious and dramatic.
You'll be utterly bored by movies that got the Oscar 30 years ago ...
Actually i was quite content with the movie as a whole. (tho looking back now the effects are a tad cheezy but still entertaining). Just that one part annoyed me. In fact of the entire collection i actually fell asleep on episode 1. twice....

But you're right too some extent. The flow of the movies were quite a bit more story oriented than it was aesthetically pleasing and fast paced. (Luke blowing up the death star was fairly boring i must say even though it was a really big deal). I'd speculate that if technology (and Lucas's budget) were up to par with today's standards it, may not have been the case. which can probably be said about a lot of older movies. So it's not necessarily the case that the older generation like Story oriented, slow pacing more, it's just you didn't have much of an option and have movies cramming explosions in your face as an infant. I bet if i went back in time to the 70s and showed a group of people transformers it would blow thier mind. Ironically, my generation is a lot less impressed with the effects but really hope they have a decent story base or we trash it like we did with( transformers 2-3 which i kinda liked but got bad reviews.)

Quote: Originally Posted by Maaruin View Post
(And now I can't resist to offer my two cents about this topic.)

I'd say from a dramatic perspective, Sidious isn't the Sith Lord in that scene. Vader is. He was the antagonist for all three movies and he gets the intense duel with Luke. A duel that extends from the physical level and becomes about falling to the dark side or returning to the light.
In all this, Sidious is more of a representation of the dark side than an individual character. The point of this scene was Vader rejecting the dark side. And I think throwing the Emperor down a bottomless pit fits that better than another long duel.

To some degree I can see your point. If you immerse yourself in Sidious (through Prequels and Expanded Universe material) it is a bit anti-climactic.
Hmm good point.. this actually makes a ton of sense. I suppose the movie predates Palpatine's lore and build up and watching it before learning about how much of a big deal he was, wouldn't have as much of an impact. It was Luke and Vader's trilogy. I'm sure knowing what we no now, Lucas might not have brought down Sidious in his movie in the same exact fashion, even if you take present day effects and budget out of equation.

But it then creates a bit of a paradox... Showing Vader nearly effortlessly toss his Sith master like that really begs the question; why didn't he do that long ago? That couldn't possibly have been his only viable opening... Which pretty much forces the Sidious build up to be created and making him out to be such a bid badazz so he could in a sense, keep Vader on a leash. If Vader feared to challenge him, it would undoubtedly leave us to assume that Sidious is more powerful and thusly ending him they way he did still makes little since even if the newer data on Sidious is moot. Again, Your right.. not his movie, not about him.. but still... they could have done it better. lol
“Do or do not. There is no try.”

Wolfninjajedi's Avatar


Wolfninjajedi
03.12.2014 , 02:39 PM | #25
Quote: Originally Posted by jaytdasme View Post
But it then creates a bit of a paradox... Showing Vader nearly effortlessly toss his Sith master like that really begs the question; why didn't he do that long ago? That couldn't possibly have been his only viable opening... Which pretty much forces the Sidious build up to be created and making him out to be such a bid badazz so he could in a sense, keep Vader on a leash. If Vader feared to challenge him, it would undoubtedly leave us to assume that Sidious is more powerful and thusly ending him they way he did still makes little since even if the newer data on Sidious is moot. Again, Your right.. not his movie, not about him.. but still... they could have done it better. lol
There are some factors to consider as to why it was rather easy for Vader.

1. Palps was completely focused on torturing/killing Luke.

2. He thought Vader couldn't be turned from the darkside, so he had no reason to think that Vader was gonna turn against him.
"There is one lesson you've yet to learn. How to become one with the Force!"
―Cin Drallig to Darth Vader

Maucs the Tauntaun King, former SWG player.

jaytdasme's Avatar


jaytdasme
03.12.2014 , 03:11 PM | #26
Quote: Originally Posted by Wolfninjajedi View Post
There are some factors to consider as to why it was rather easy for Vader.

1. Palps was completely focused on torturing/killing Luke.

2. He thought Vader couldn't be turned from the darkside, so he had no reason to think that Vader was gonna turn against him.
1. Someone of Palpatine's caliber doesn't get to where he was by letting his guard down that much. Jedi and sith as a rule tend to not conentrate on one thing and ignore the rest of their surroundings. That's why we oftensee fights where they are fighting like a dozen droids at once. So, unless the were like literally shoulder to shoulder i suppose you could argue he didn't quite have enough time to react.. then.. maybe. but it doesn't see clear to me how close Vader was. But any movement at all should have Sparked Sidous's attention/reaction. At the very least a "hey, what are you doing!?.. Sto...ahhhhh..."

2. Again this is speculative vs then and now knowledge. We now know that Vader spent a lot of time plotting to overthrow and defeat Sidious.. and Sidious was fully aware of this as it is the way of the Sith. But, at the time of the Movie's production, the exact degree of this relationship was vague at best. So possibly....
I'm not necessarily debating what happened. Just, how it happened.
“Do or do not. There is no try.”

Maaruin's Avatar


Maaruin
03.12.2014 , 03:23 PM | #27
Quote: Originally Posted by jaytdasme View Post
But it then creates a bit of a paradox... Showing Vader nearly effortlessly toss his Sith master like that really begs the question; why didn't he do that long ago? That couldn't possibly have been his only viable opening... Which pretty much forces the Sidious build up to be created and making him out to be such a bid badazz so he could in a sense, keep Vader on a leash. If Vader feared to challenge him, it would undoubtedly leave us to assume that Sidious is more powerful and thusly ending him they way he did still makes little since even if the newer data on Sidious is moot. Again, Your right.. not his movie, not about him.. but still... they could have done it better. lol
You are right, it is a bit of a paradox I hadn't noticed before. I do have a somewhat mystic explanation, but it is only partly based on the movie and partly based on speculation:

Sidious was more powerful than Vader, but not extremely more powerful. (If Luke had joined Vader in ESB they could have defeated the Emperor together.) While Sidious does have strong force abilites, his primary edge is his foresight. He claims that he has predected and planned all the events until Vader brought Luke to him.
Because he is so good at this, he would be prepared for every betrayal from Vader's side and able to fend it off. But Vader turning back to the light side, that was something he could not predict. Even Yoda and Obi-Wan wanted Luke to kill Vader, not redeem him. All of them thought bringing Vader back to the light was impossible. Only Luke clung to this foolish hope.
So when the Emperor tortured Luke, he had one blind spot in his foresight. And this blindspot allowed Vader to kill him.

(When Vader had Sidious in his grasp, Sidious did try to defend himself. And Vader did collaps from the damage the lightning did only moments after throwing him down. So with his surprise attack Vader seized the advantage for a short time, but this time was just enough.)

It's a little similar to Lord of the Rings (SPOILERS by the way): Sauron lost because (a) he couldn't imagine anyone would try to destroy the ring instead of using it and (b) he hadn't thought Hobbits where important, so he didn't bother looking for the Ring among them.
Sauron and Sidious were evil and could comprehend good only to a certain extend, which allowed others to exploit a weakness they hadn't noticed.


But as I said, mostly speculation. I'm not sure if the EU supports this.
"I was one of many. We were servants of the dark side… Sith Lords, we called ourselves. So proud. In the end we were not so proud. We hid… hid from those we had betrayed. We fell… and I knew it would be so."
-Ajunta Pall

jaytdasme's Avatar


jaytdasme
03.12.2014 , 03:47 PM | #28
i get what you're saying and i totally agree. But, Good or Evil, either way he should have at least at some point expected a betrayal. Even if it wasn't for the sake of returning to the light, Sidious shouldn't have completely ruled out the possibility Vader might just back-stab him then finish Luke off himself. Again... it's the nature of the sith. An endless Cycle of usurping the reigning master by betrayal. Granted, Sidious (like most of them) didn't plan on being overthrown and wanted to live and rule forever, but he knew what he was getting into the second he became a dark lord and murdered his own master. Seems like Sith 101 to me: trust no one. especially not your apprentice.
“Do or do not. There is no try.”

Maaruin's Avatar


Maaruin
03.12.2014 , 04:07 PM | #29
Quote: Originally Posted by jaytdasme View Post
i get what you're saying and i totally agree. But, Good or Evil, either way he should have at least at some point expected a betrayal. Even if it wasn't for the sake of returning to the light, Sidious shouldn't have completely ruled out the possibility Vader might just back-stab him then finish Luke off himself. Again... it's the nature of the sith. An endless Cycle of usurping the reigning master by betrayal. Granted, Sidious (like most of them) didn't plan on being overthrown and wanted to live and rule forever, but he knew what he was getting into the second he became a dark lord and murdered his own master. Seems like Sith 101 to me: trust no one. especially not your apprentice.
And that's the point where I have nothing to offer. The Sith's endless circle of usurping the master hadn't been thought of when the original trilogy was made. Personally, I don't like that concept that much. Betrayal should happen more often among Sith, but did it need to become their preferred method of succession?

One could argue that Palpatine was prepared for typical Sith betrayal through his foresight. If Vader had tried to use the moment for that, he would have seen it moments before it happened. But his dark side powered skills of precognition simply didn't work when predicting turns to the light side.
The decision to rely entirely on foresight to protect him was unwise, but in his arrogance he thought that it was enough.
"I was one of many. We were servants of the dark side… Sith Lords, we called ourselves. So proud. In the end we were not so proud. We hid… hid from those we had betrayed. We fell… and I knew it would be so."
-Ajunta Pall

jaytdasme's Avatar


jaytdasme
03.12.2014 , 04:43 PM | #30
Quote: Originally Posted by Maaruin View Post
And that's the point where I have nothing to offer. The Sith's endless circle of usurping the master hadn't been thought of when the original trilogy was made. Personally, I don't like that concept that much. Betrayal should happen more often among Sith, but did it need to become their preferred method of succession?

One could argue that Palpatine was prepared for typical Sith betrayal through his foresight. If Vader had tried to use the moment for that, he would have seen it moments before it happened. But his dark side powered skills of precognition simply didn't work when predicting turns to the light side.
The decision to rely entirely on foresight to protect him was unwise, but in his arrogance he thought that it was enough.
Ah i see.. So he uses his darkness for anticipating more evil, but since Vader's intent wasn't for evil's sake, Sidious wasn't prepared for his assault.. makes sense i suppose.

Not a fan of the Dark side Infighting either but the more i think about it the more i get it.. It was Bane's understanding that As a Sith lord you train an apprentice who will one day be stronger than you and take your place and then that Sith lord with train an appreciate to kill him and so on and so fourth making each more powerful than the last until you have One supreme Sith who's too powerful to be overthrown and rules indefinitely. Obviously everyone embracing the darkside is power hungry so they will always have infighting for rule. But this at least attempts to have some sort of control and not have 2 weak sith lords team up and kill the reigning master and then get taken out by superior jedi or a flock of underlings. In theory this sort of works out as we see with Palpatine.

A bit bitter for my tastes.. I personally wouldn't want to join knowing i'd likely be murdered before old age and in a constant state of paranoia.. but i get the system.
“Do or do not. There is no try.”