Star Wars Episode III (Spoilers, Questions & Answers)

[MasterKiller]

Fortunately for my argument, only the lines that make it in the movie are canon.

Additionally, one could look at the prequel trilogy as an indictment of then current jedi practices. After all, the force is brought to balance by not one, but two children who were not trained in the limiting confines of the jedi temple from 2 years old, and Luke, who would generally looked at as far too old to train, is the only one who lacks the basic assumptions of the jedi about the sith that allow him to see that Vader is not beyond redemption.

Once to the EU side you go, forever will it consume your destiny.

I didn't mention anything EU in the above post that isn't covered in the movies, except the thing about the kids (and it was covered and then cut).

But you are right, the PT (prequel trilogy for non-SW afficionados) is an indictment of the Jedi's arrogance and isolationism. That's sort of the whole point of the PT.

[KC Elbows]

I didn't mention anything EU in the above post that isn't covered in the movies, except the thing about the kids (and it was covered and then cut).

But you are right, the PT (prequel trilogy for non-SW afficionados) is an indictment of the Jedi's arrogance and isolationism. That's sort of the whole point of the PT.

I was just kidding about the EU thing.

It doesn't preclude the logos comparison. While the stoics believed in mankind helping each other, it is still important to to keep in mind that they were ancient greeks and romans. So the idea of kids being taken by force(hadn't heard that in relation to the jedi before) would raise the question "is this good or bad?" The answer, for a stoic, might be "to teach them to live with the logos, and thus have a greater chance to be truly good, is good." I dunno. Aurelius main criticism of the martyring of christians was not that they were martyred, but that he felt their approach to being martyred had everything to do with the self, not the whole(if I recall correctly), so stretching the "helping humanity" idea too far for the stoics might be a bit much. Humanity to many of them might not have extended too far from their city-state or empire.

In the context of the overall series, I would say that Luke, unlike the jedi as you've shown they were at the time of the clone wars, is decidedly part of the rebellion for the overall good not because they allow him to live his religion, but because he is a part of them. So I would say there is not the same isolationism inherent there as with the jedi in the PT.

I would say that puts the end lesson still in the context of stoicism instead of chivalry. Yoda and Mace Windu do not see the betrayal of Dooku because of their attachment to him as a friend, they are attached to a way of training that they do not adjust for Anakin's special case so that his weakness of character can be tended to before the needs(attachment) the jedi have for him and his destiny, and they are wrong about Vader because they cling to a judgement that is mistaken. While Yoda chastises Luke for judging him on his size, Yoda judges Vader on a basis that proves equally wrong. The stoic would say that you should not necessarily expose yourself to harm from others, but you should neither judge others in a way that denies their inherent humanity, because then, you are harming yourself by failing to see that it is the connection we all share that makes us what we are. The Vader story has a lot of that in it. No matter what Yoda says, he is proven wrong about the consumption of Annakin to become Vader, to assume that is an exception is to be too attached to the old jedi's own assumption.

The one sense in which I'd say stoicism does not fit is in the disciplined preservation of the spirit that Kenobi, Yoda, and Anakin undergo. That is closest to the taoist idea of the spiritual embryo.

For the most part, it's not particularly close to buddhism, whatever the filmmaker's intention.

As an aside, in the OT, one of the officers tells Vader that he's the last devotee of his dying religion. Did they not know that Palpatine was a sith?

[Judge Pen]

As an aside, in the OT, one of the officers tells Vader that he's the last devotee of his dying religion. Did they not know that Palpatine was a sith?

No, other than Obi Wan, Yoda, Bail Organa, and Vader, no one knew. The common perception was that the Jedi attempted to assasinate the Emperor and Vader saved him and killed the traitors.

[MasterKiller]

No, other than Obi Wan, Yoda, Bail Organa, and Vader, no one knew. The common perception was that the Jedi attempted to assasinate the Emperor and Vader saved him and killed the traitors.

Correct-a-mundo.

[MasterKiller]

http://www.comicartcommunity.com/gal...ttiesYahoo.jpg

[@PLUGO]

Adam Hughs.... excellent artist.

[rogue]

So are the rebels in IV, V, VI a part and outgrowth of Count Dooku's rebellion?

[MasterKiller]

So are the rebels in IV, V, VI a part and outgrowth of Count Dooku's rebellion?

No. The Empire is the intended result of Dooku's rebellion. He wants a more powerful central government that can do away with all the politics and corruption. His original plan is to raise a huge army, blockade the Republic and stop shipping and force the Jedi into a battle they can't win by sheer numbers. Once the Jedi fall, the Republic will be helpless (no standing army, right?) and Dooku can force them to submit.

Once they learn about the Clone Army, they alter their plans somewhat, but the outcome is basically the same.

The Rebels in IV, V, and VI and fighting to restore the Old Republic back to it's condition before the corruption in the Senate became so intrusive.

[MasterKiller]

I told you guys Shaak Ti got killed by Grevious!

Check out these deleted scenes from the DVD.

http://www.aintitcool.com/images/deletedscenes1.jpg

http://www.aintitcool.com/images/deletedscenes2.jpg