Star Wars General Discussion Thread

[bluntblade]

It doesn't need to just be Stormtroopers propelling the regime's collapse - they don't need to be the bulk of the Resistance's support, and you can also be running off resentment of the First Order/instability caused by their general vileness. And then the regime's control is weakened by, ooh, infighting between Hux and Ren perhaps...

 

[bluntblade]

WTF is Disney thinking? The Star Wars Holiday Special with....🤢

Click to shrink...

Well apparently there's time travel involved, so presumably they're thinking big up the old eras that some people are nostalgic for. After all, the only thing Star Wars knows how to do any more is to remind you of old Star Wars, because old Star Wars is real great...

 

[Renewal]

Eh, I think you're being preemptively uncharitable. Lego Star Wars has been a thing for ages and always wonderfully parodic, and lampooning the OG Holiday Special seems right up its alley. We'll have to wait and see of course, but I do think the concept is workable.

 

[bluntblade]

Eh, I think you're being preemptively uncharitable. Lego Star Wars has been a thing for ages and always wonderfully parodic, and lampooning the OG Holiday Special seems right up its alley. We'll have to wait and see of course, but I do think the concept is workable.

Click to shrink...

That's fair. Goodness knows I enjoyed what they did with the prequels of all things.

I do find I get really bummed out when I think of how, with a good Episode IX I'd have been ravening for just about anything new Star Wars that wasn't Solo. I'd be clamouring for an animated show set during the timeskip, I'd be eager for a Lego game for the new trilogy, etc.

Anyway, Lego. I will forever love their spin on Hoth, in particular. That whole level kicked so much arse.

 

[Zimmerwald1915]

Anyway, Lego. I will forever love their spin on Hoth, in particular. That whole level kicked so much arse.

Click to shrink...

Explain.

 

[Wateryblue]

Explain.

Click to shrink...

It was just a good level from what I remember

 

[bluntblade]

They gave it this huge scale and heft, it just felt really grand.

 

[TheColorPurple]

"Stay back! Find him... Find him... Fives... Find him! FIVES!"

God, I fucking loved this scene. Anyone else?

 

[bluntblade]

I wonder if they'll ever work some of the Clone Wars locations (and Rebels ones) into the Battlefront games. Figure Mandalore would be iconic enough.

One minor thing in Trevorrow's Episode IX draft that will always bug me is the bit where Luke shows up to argue "Jedi don't bone" with Rey. Partly it's odd because Trevorrow doesn't write a romance in which Rey has any real agency - he just has Poe turn more and more obnoxious and shouts in the screen directions that there's something more than friendship between them until she kisses him - so it feels out-of-place because she's not really pursuing romance, but also because I just find it hard to picture Luke giving that lecture. I mean, neither Yoda nor Ben told him about any celibacy rule as far as we're aware. And I'm prepared to bet that after Yavin IV there were a lot of people more than ready to jump his bones, let alone after Endor...

 

[RadiantPhoenix]

One minor thing in Trevorrow's Episode IX draft that will always bug me is the bit where Luke shows up to argue "Jedi don't bone" with Rey. Partly it's odd because Trevorrow doesn't write a romance in which Rey has any real agency - he just has Poe turn more and more obnoxious and shouts in the screen directions that there's something more than friendship between them until she kisses him - so it feels out-of-place because she's not really pursuing romance, but also because I just find it hard to picture Luke giving that lecture. I mean, neither Yoda nor Ben told him about any celibacy rule as far as we're aware. And I'm prepared to bet that after Yavin IV there were a lot of people more than ready to jump his bones, let alone after Endor...

Click to shrink...

Yoda and Ben most definitely didn't tell Luke about any kind of celibacy rule because there isn't one. [src]

Maybe Luke made one up for some reason (probably not ignorance, given Force Ghosts), but PT-era Jedi Knights aren't celibate, per Lucas, May 15th, 2002 -- the day before the US release of Attack of the Clones.

 

[bluntblade]

Yoda and Ben most definitely didn't tell Luke about any kind of celibacy rule because there isn't one. [src]

Maybe Luke made one up for some reason (probably not ignorance, given Force Ghosts), but PT-era Jedi Knights aren't celibate, per Lucas, May 15th, 2002 -- the day before the US release of Attack of the Clones.

Click to shrink...

If only any of this had been clear from just watching the films. For that matter, I still find it odd that Padme's the one being all "we shouldn't do this" when she's not bound by any rules.

And it should also be said that their romance needed badly to take a leaf from Han and Leia's. AotC doesn't have them get close in the midst of an adventure; the adventure grinds to a halt while they futz around and I guess they're in love now.

 

[RadiantPhoenix]

If only any of this had been clear from just watching the films. For that matter, I still find it odd that Padme's the one being all "we shouldn't do this" when she's not bound by any rules.

And it should also be said that their romance needed badly to take a leaf from Han and Leia's. AotC doesn't have them get close in the midst of an adventure; the adventure grinds to a halt while they futz around and I guess they're in love now.

Click to shrink...

Why do people assume Jedi aren't allowed to have sex? Why do people assume Jedi aren't allowed to love despite that being explicitly contradicted on-screen, in addition to being completely ridiculous and pointless?

The PT is about Anakin's fall to the Dark Side (in addition to the Republic's fall, and Palpatine setting up the genocide of the Jedi), and Anakin's fall is a direct product of him fixating on his fear of losing the people he's attached to, and later his attachment to his own choices when he can't face his mistakes without trying to justify them as not mistakes.

Trying to justify Anakin's choices by giving the Jedi draconian rules about sex, or forbidding them to love (without attachment or possession) in contradiction to what's said on-screen (albeit only once in the PT), or forbidding them to experience/acknowledge emotion despite that being the complete opposite of what they repeatedly say on-screen in the PT ('be mindful of your feelings'), is missing the point -- the point is that Anakin fucks up but can't admit it to himself.

There are reasons Anakin does what he does, but they don't justify what he does.

• The entire Council (TPM), then Obi-Wan (AotC) and Yoda (RotS) try to help Anakin with his fears, but he shuts them out every time. He has reasons, and they might even be sympathetic ones, but they aren't the fault of Jedi, and Palpatine is first implied then shown to be actively manipulating Anakin to get him to be even more resistant to opening up to Jedi. (PT)
• Anakin wants to put his exclusive, possessive relationship with Padme above both the galaxy and even Padme's own choices and agency, while still being trusted as a Knight with the fate of the galaxy in his hands. (AotC+RotS)
• Anakin desperately wants more someones to hurt/kill after his mother dies. (AotC)
• Anakin cannot think clearly when the people he is afraid of losing are in danger, and refuses to work to reduce his fear or improve his ability to handle fear. (RotS, at minimum)
• AnakinVader cannot face what he has done after he helps Palpatine kill Mace Windu -- he finds himself in a hole and keeps digging in the desperate hope that it will all have been justified and/or worth it. (RotS onward)

On the quality of the romance:

• The OT isn't about Han and Leia's romance, it's just a thing that happens, while the PT is about Anakin and Padme's mutual all-consuming obsession with each other and how it destroys them and everything they love.
• Anakin's poor communication skills are an important plot point in AotC and RotS. If Anakin were a cool, smooth speaking master of relationships and communication and feelings, the story wouldn't work.

 

[bluntblade]

Why do people assume Jedi aren't allowed to have sex? Why do people assume Jedi aren't allowed to love despite that being explicitly contradicted on-screen, in addition to being completely ridiculous and pointless?

The PT is about Anakin's fall to the Dark Side (in addition to the Republic's fall, and Palpatine setting up the genocide of the Jedi), and Anakin's fall is a direct product of him fixating on his fear of losing the people he's attached to, and later his attachment to his own choices when he can't face his mistakes without trying to justify them as not mistakes.

Trying to justify Anakin's choices by giving the Jedi draconian rules about sex, or forbidding them to love (without attachment or possession) in contradiction to what's said on-screen (albeit only once in the PT), or forbidding them to experience/acknowledge emotion despite that being the complete opposite of what they repeatedly say on-screen in the PT ('be mindful of your feelings'), is missing the point -- the point is that Anakin fucks up but can't admit it to himself.

There are reasons Anakin does what he does, but they don't justify what he does.

• The entire Council (TPM), then Obi-Wan (AotC) and Yoda (RotS) try to help Anakin with his fears, but he shuts them out every time. He has reasons, and they might even be sympathetic ones, but they aren't the fault of Jedi, and Palpatine is first implied then shown to be actively manipulating Anakin to get him to be even more resistant to opening up to Jedi. (PT)
• Anakin wants to put his exclusive, possessive relationship with Padme above both the galaxy and even Padme's own choices and agency, while still being trusted as a Knight with the fate of the galaxy in his hands. (AotC+RotS)
• Anakin desperately wants more someones to hurt/kill after his mother dies. (AotC)
• Anakin cannot think clearly when the people he is afraid of losing are in danger, and refuses to work to reduce his fear or improve his ability to handle fear. (RotS, at minimum)
• AnakinVader cannot face what he has done after he helps Palpatine kill Mace Windu -- he finds himself in a hole and keeps digging in the desperate hope that it will all have been justified and/or worth it. (RotS onward)

On the quality of the romance:

• The OT isn't about Han and Leia's romance, it's just a thing that happens, while the PT is about Anakin and Padme's mutual all-consuming obsession with each other and how it destroys them and everything they love.
• Anakin's poor communication skills are an important plot point in AotC and RotS. If Anakin were a cool, smooth speaking master of relationships and communication and feelings, the story wouldn't work.

Click to shrink...

Well, because the Jedi are coded as monks and that comes with certain traits in Western media, etc.

If the romance is at the very heart of the story, then that's all the more reason to have a proper connection and I never once felt that was there.

And as for Anakin being written how he was... yeah. But in my head that means the story should be drastically different, to fit that better character. The better and wiser Anakin is, the more tragic his fall - and the more sense Vader's final act will make.

 

[RadiantPhoenix]

Well, because the Jedi are coded as monks and that comes with certain traits in Western media, etc.

If the romance is at the very heart of the story, then that's all the more reason to have a proper connection and I never once felt that was there.

And as for Anakin being written how he was... yeah. But in my head that means the story should be drastically different, to fit that better character. The better and wiser Anakin is, the more tragic his fall - and the more sense Vader's final act will make.

Click to shrink...

... I keep hearing this 'coded as monks' thing, and I think it bears examining. Could you elaborate on what aspects of the Jedi you feel code them as western monks?

On Anakin and romance:

• The point is that the romance in the PT is flawed. It's not supposed to be cool.
• Please describe what you think of as "that better character" -- and keep in mind that anything that goes "actually Vader is a cool badass, not pathetic" is a non-starter.

 

[bluntblade]

... I keep hearing this 'coded as monks' thing, and I think it bears examining. Could you elaborate on what aspects of the Jedi you feel code them as western monks?

On Anakin and romance:

• The point is that the romance in the PT is flawed. It's not supposed to be cool.
• Please describe what you think of as "that better character" -- and keep in mind that anything that goes "actually Vader is a cool badass, not pathetic" is a non-starter.

Click to shrink...

Well, everything in the aesthetics and the way they behave. It's all over the place... and it's there in how they all seem to be single, brought up to have iron control over their emotions etc.

Well, if it's always meant to be bad then the date in Paris, rolling in the grass etc work against it. I don't feel these people falling in love, and that's a problem no matter how the relationship ends up.

When I say "better character" I mean the one Obi-Wan describes in Episode IV. That guy, the good friend and true hero.

 

[RadiantPhoenix]

Well, everything in the aesthetics and the way they behave. It's all over the place... and it's there in how they all seem to be single, brought up to have iron control over their emotions etc.

Well, if it's always meant to be bad then the date in Paris, rolling in the grass etc work against it. I don't feel these people falling in love, and that's a problem no matter how the relationship ends up.

When I say "better character" I mean the one Obi-Wan describes in Episode IV. That guy, the good friend and true hero.

Click to shrink...

So, not marrying, dressing like peasants, and not allowing your emotions to rule you = monks who never have sex and are also not allowed to love? Other than that, I'm not seeing a lot of elaboration on this.

Unmarried sex isn't some kind of weird eldritch thing from beyond the farthest stars, and neither is loving people without losing your fucking mind.

As for Anakin, what Obi-Wan actually says is:

Article:

Obi-Wan: He was the best star pilot in the galaxy, and a cunning warrior. I understand that you've become quite a good pilot yourself.

[sorrowfully]

Obi-Wan: And he was a good friend.

Source: A New Hope

Article:

Obi-Wan: [...] Anakin was a good friend. When I first met him, your father was already a great pilot. But I was amazed how strongly the Force was with him. I took it upon myself to train him as a Jedi. I thought that I could instruct him just as well as Yoda. I was wrong.

Source: Return of the Jedi

That's almost entirely descriptive of his powers and combat skills. The only thing he says that's even a little about Anakin's personality is that Anakin was a "good friend" (to him)!

 

[Arthur Frayn]

... I keep hearing this 'coded as monks' thing, and I think it bears examining. Could you elaborate on what aspects of the Jedi you feel code them as western monks?

On Anakin and romance:

• The point is that the romance in the PT is flawed. It's not supposed to be cool.
• Please describe what you think of as "that better character" -- and keep in mind that anything that goes "actually Vader is a cool badass, not pathetic" is a non-starter.

Click to shrink...

It's how they're presented in the films - visually they wear clothing that's evocative of Shaolin and Buddhist monks, but in the earth tone color scheme of Catholic orders like the Franciscans. They're a cloistered order that's overwhelmingly presented as male (yes, there obviously are women Jedi, but I don't think any of them have any speaking lines in the Prequels), who seclude themselves from worldly matters to focus on the spiritual.

It's the same as Leia or Padme being dressed in elaborate costume that reflect their status as royalty, Han dressing like a local grease monkey IN SPAAAAAAACE, Imperial uniforms reflecting the Nazis, etc. It's basic cinematic shorthand - the audience is presumed to be familiar with the real life counterparts (Nazi officers, Shaolin monks, drag racers, etc.), so the film can quickly establish the characters personality visually.

 

[bluntblade]

So, not marrying, dressing like peasants, and not allowing your emotions to rule you = monks who never have sex and are also not allowed to love? Other than that, I'm not seeing a lot of elaboration on this.

Unmarried sex isn't some kind of weird eldritch thing from beyond the farthest stars, and neither is loving people without losing your fucking mind.

As for Anakin, what Obi-Wan actually says is:

Article:

Obi-Wan: He was the best star pilot in the galaxy, and a cunning warrior. I understand that you've become quite a good pilot yourself.

[sorrowfully]

Obi-Wan: And he was a good friend.

Source: A New Hope

Article:

Obi-Wan: [...] Anakin was a good friend. When I first met him, your father was already a great pilot. But I was amazed how strongly the Force was with him. I took it upon myself to train him as a Jedi. I thought that I could instruct him just as well as Yoda. I was wrong.

Source: Return of the Jedi

That's almost entirely descriptive of his powers and combat skills. The only thing he says that's even a little about Anakin's personality is that Anakin was a "good friend" (to him)!

Click to shrink...

Also them raising children in apparent isolation from the outside world, living in a temple...

Yeah, and you know what else isn't eldritch to us? Marriage and monogamous relationships. It's weird to us that sex would be fine, but it those - which maybe says something twisted about us in Western society, but that's the way we tend to perceive the matter.

And it's the emotion there that matters - why would powers be the thing Obi-Wan remembers so fondly? The image I have of a great Jedi knight is an upright, brave and maybe a little reckless but also wise warrior. Robb Stark, Raleigh Beckett, those kinds of guys. Not a whiny, arrogant jerk.

 

[RadiantPhoenix]

It's how they're presented in the films - visually they wear clothing that's evocative of Shaolin and Buddhist monks, but in the earth tone color scheme of Catholic orders like the Franciscans. They're a cloistered order that's overwhelmingly presented as male (yes, there obviously are women Jedi, but I don't think any of them have any speaking lines in the Prequels), who seclude themselves from worldly matters to focus on the spiritual.

It's the same as Leia or Padme being dressed in elaborate costume that reflect their status as royalty, Han dressing like a local grease monkey IN SPAAAAAAACE, Imperial uniforms reflecting the Nazis, etc. It's basic cinematic shorthand - the audience is presumed to be familiar with the real life counterparts (Nazi officers, Shaolin monks, drag racers, etc.), so the film can quickly establish the characters personality visually.

Click to shrink...

They don't seclude themselves from the galaxy, though! That's the opposite of what they do!

This separatist movement,
under the leadership of the
mysterious Count Dooku, has
made it difficult for the limited
number of Jedi Knights to maintain
peace and order in the galaxy.

Click to shrink...

There is a 3:1 ratio of male to female Jedi Council members, but there is also roughly a 3:1 ratio of male:female Star Wars characters in general.
22498 Male characters: Males
7201 Female characters: Females

The gender ratio is clearly a GFFA / Star Wars / American thing, not a Jedi thing or a Monk thing.

And, as an aside: pod racing isn't drag racing, it's chariot racing. Thus the disconnected engines as space-horses.

Also them raising children in apparent isolation from the outside world, living in a temple...

Yeah, and you know what else isn't eldritch to us? Marriage and monogamous relationships.

And it's the emotion there. The image I have of a great Jedi knight is an upright, brave and maybe a little reckless but also wise warrior. Robb Stark, Raleigh Beckett, those kinds of guys. Not a whiny, arrogant jerk.

Click to shrink...

We get about two scenes with Jedi kids in the movies, one of which is them hiding during Order 66.

On sex, you're missing the point. The point isn't that marriage is weird, it's that it isn't the only way.

So... bascially it sounds like (certain) audience members just kind of getting attached to certain assumptions (marriage=necessary, Jedi as isolated loveless monks, Anakin must have been worthy of love somehow), and running with them beyond all reason in defiance of what's shown on screen.

... and then blaming the work itself for the assumptions they brought with them and don't want to get rid of.

 

[bluntblade]

The work is still failing to communicate how its setting works. I... struggle to communicate the nature and scope of that failure because it's something we almost never have to deal with. I watch Lord of the Rings, Fury Road, Altered Carbon, whatever, and I immediately get what those societies are about. By your analysis, I'm not absorbing several bits of core information about how the Jedi operate.

I see three Jedi over the course of the trilogy interacting with people who aren't soldiers or civilians. The children not being shown in any other situation is an issue because their appearance establishes a norm in our heads that is never countered. That says "cloistered existence" to me. The monk thing is so blatant that it's all over the place in discussion of the films, coupled with a visual presenstation which is profoundly unemotional and sexless.

And it's not marriage=necessary at stake here, it's relationships=possessiveness. That's hard for an audience to get its head around.

 

[RadiantPhoenix]

The work is still failing to communicate how its setting works. I... struggle to communicate the nature and scope of that failure because it's something we almost never have to deal with. I watch Lord of the Rings, Fury Road, whatever, and I immediately get what those societies are about.

I see three Jedi over the course of the trilogy interacting with people who aren't soldiers or civilians. That says "cloistered existence" to me. The monk thing is so blatant that it's all over the place in discussion of the films, coupled with a visual presenstation which is profoundly unemotional and sexless.

And it's not marriage=necessary at stake here, it's relationships=possessiveness. That's hard for an audience to get its head around.

Click to shrink...

Is the issue that Star Wars is a work that challenges the audience in a way that Lord of the Rings (the movie, at least) doesn't? Because if so, that sounds like what I was saying before: audiences going into a work with assumptions, rejecting anything that challenges those assumptions, and then declaring the work bad because it didn't do a "good job" of affirming their priors.

Also, holy shit, if an audience can't handle the idea of non-possessive relationships, that's a horrific indictment of that audience.

... on the cloistered bit: your "interacting with people who aren't soldiers or civilians" feels like I'm misunderstanding you, because what it looks like is absurd: "we only see three Jedi interacting with people who aren't (A or not-A)!". If you could clarify, that would be great.

I'd also like some side-by-side examples of "unemotional and sexless" Star Wars versus something else you think isn't that, because I feel like either I don't understand what you mean about that, or you're begging the question.

 

[bluntblade]

Is the issue that Star Wars is a work that challenges the audience in a way that Lord of the Rings (the movie, at least) doesn't? Because if so, that sounds like what I was saying before: audiences going into a work with assumptions, rejecting anything that challenges those assumptions, and then declaring the work bad because it didn't do a "good job" of affirming their priors.

Also, holy shit, if an audience can't handle the idea of non-possessive relationships, that's a horrific indictment of that audience.

... on the cloistered bit: your "interacting with people who aren't soldiers or civilians" feels like I'm misunderstanding you, because what it looks like is absurd: "we only see three Jedi interacting with people who aren't (A or not-A)!". If you could clarify, that would be great.

I'd also like some side-by-side examples of "unemotional and sexless" Star Wars versus something else you think isn't that, because I feel like either I don't understand what you mean about that, or you're begging the question.

Click to shrink...

But is it? Is it for the most part? Because the OT is a pretty straightforward tale that plays most of its tropes straight. If the PT is challenging the notion of romantic relationships as good, then it shouldn't be doing it to the sound of an achingly beautiful love motif by John Williams, setting the wooing scenes in fairytale-beautiful locations, etc.

Also, when I say "possessive relationships" I mean just about any of the healthy romantic relationships I see. There aren't any red flags until Anakin goes berserk on Tuskens, which is in reaction to a dreadful loss and therefore doesn't scan as "abusive boyfriend alert!"

Most every time we see a Jedi interact with anyone outside the Order, it's as part of their duties. Even Obi-Wan with Dexter, which is the only instance we have of a Jedi with a friend who isn't a colleague or student.

And look, I'm not about to go trawling through GIFs because it's not the kissing scenes I'm thinking of. I'm thinking of how the Prequels are notable for how kinetic and emotive the cinematic storytelling is not. The camera isn't making us feel the emotions that are meant to be boiling away, and I put that down to Lucas' disinterest or bad execution. For contrast, here's a scene from a Jane Austen adaptation which is just dialogue, and yet it gives you such a sense of the characters developing feelings for one another:


Furthermore the subsequent dance scene is charged in ways I did not know were compatible with Austen. It's on par with the Episode VIII hand-touch and Han and Leia's pre-kiss tension.

 

[Arthur Frayn]

Okay I'm gonna be honest @RadiantPhoenix, I feel like there's a fundamental breakdown in what you're arguing against. Other people, myself included, are analyzing Star Wars as a film using the language of analyzing film, while you seem to be coming at it either from the angle of Star Wars being somehow real and we're getting the facts wrong, or that actually the Prequels (presumably) are perfectly successful in what they're trying to accomplish and we're just too stupid to understand.

 

[RadiantPhoenix]

Okay I'm gonna be honest @RadiantPhoenix, I feel like there's a fundamental breakdown in what you're arguing against. Other people, myself included, are analyzing Star Wars as a film using the language of analyzing film, while you seem to be coming at it either from the angle of Star Wars being somehow real and we're getting the facts wrong, or that actually the Prequels (presumably) are perfectly successful in what they're trying to accomplish and we're just too stupid to understand.

Click to shrink...

You have that backwards.

It started with a discussion about the setting ("the angle of Star wars being somehow real"), which I know because I started it.

Star Wars:

1. The Jedi did not have it coming.
2. The prequel Jedi Order is fine and doesn't need "reform" (at least in the canon timeline). Most proposed reforms are to either do something the Jedi canonically already do, stop doing something they canonically don't do, or to "just do" something that is actually way more complicated and difficult than the author thinks (e.g.: end slavery: and who is going to keep it abolished?). Sometimes bad things happen to good people.
3. Most anti-Jedi rants, at least in fandom, (IC or OOC) are total fucking bullshit that exists to justify edgy protagonists doing edgy things.
4. The Jedi Council are not assholes, and are generally if not universally great people.
5. Sith are, in fact, The Worst.
6. Dooku, Anakin Skywalker, and Ben Solo are all responsible for their own decisions and also all know that they would be welcomed back if they chose to come back despite all the horrible things they've done. They just don't want to.
7. Jango Fett is a terrible person and people should stop putting "and then we put Jango in charge of Mandalore" on their bucket list. Obi-Wan's girlfriend doesn't need replacing, even in continuities where Jango is Mandalorian and not just a cosplayer.

Click to shrink...

Discussion then went something like:

Someone: "But the Jedi were forbidden to love."

Me: "They aren't, here's a George Lucas quote saying I'm right."

Bluntblade: "Well, George Lucas should said that in the films. Telling people not to get attached makes them sound cold."

Me: "It is literally stated in the films, here's the quote. Attachment isn't love, it's the inability to let go when the time comes."

Bluntblade: "Well, clearly Lucas did a bad job of storytelling if I didn't figure that out."

Me: "Revenge of the Sith is entirely about what attachment is, and Yoda explains it on-screen."

Bluntblade: "George Lucas is a terrible storyteller"

The setting discussion is the dog here and Lucas's filmmaking skill is the tail, not the other way around.

 

[bluntblade]

Attachment can mean a lot of things. The fact that I didn't go "oh, he means forming relationships which are totally toxic and people fail to disengage from in a way that causes huge damage!" from the off in Episode II testifies to that - as does the fact that millions of perfectly intelligent people didn't twig. I shouldn't have to wait until the next film to be told why the situation is bad!

Lucas' ability or otherwise as a storyteller is entirely bound up with the setting. Is he skilfully conveying how the setting works and making it feel like an actual world? For comparison, am I getting the equivalent of Gandalf rocking up in the Shire, and intuiting from the way that the Hobbits react that he's one of the few outsiders who comes here at all and that even then, respectable Hobbit society tends to hold its nose until he breaks out the fireworks.

Look, I'm loathe to unzip my fly here and waggle my expertise around, but I've watched hundreds of films. I've devoured books in similar quantities, I've written bloody stories of my own, some playing in the Star Wars sandpit. And as such I feel very confident in saying that George Lucas is not David Lynch, he is not weaving stories of mesmerising density and complexity. He's not even Christopher Nolan or Matt Reeves, operating at the upper tier of blockbuster filmmaking and weaving intelligent themes into populist fare. I refuse to believe that Revenge of the Sith is more difficult to decipher than Devs.

Addendum: I refuse to believe that Anakin was always meant to have been a total arse, and changing his character to be such makes his downfall vastly weaker as a tragedy.