[selowitch]

Especially in light of the events of Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith, many elements of the Darth Vader/Anakin Skywalker character have continued to bother me. My central question is: How is his redemption at the end of Episode VI: Return of the Jedi at all plausible? Consider the evidence. Vader committed the following crimes, among others:

1. Participated in the mass murder of presumably millions or perhaps billions of innocent people on Alderaan;
2. Murdered perhaps a few hundred younglings in the Jedi Temple, up close and personal, with a lightsaber;
3. Helped the Emperor hunt down and destroy the Jedi Knights, although we are not told specifically how or when he did this, unless you count the aforementioned slaughter of the younglings;
4. Participated to an unknown degree in a war that killed many millions of sentient beings, and enslaved millions more.

So how is all of that criminality redeemed by killing the Emperor, and why should it be rewarded with a return to the Light Side of the Force? Killing the Emperor was not an act of altruism; it was something he had be plotting since the very beginning (he spoke of it to Padmé in Epsiode III, tried to get Luke to join him in toppling the Emperor in Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back, and was also following a time-honored Sith tradition of offing one's Master and taking his place).

As for his motives in saving Luke, sure he had compassion for his son, but one could also dismiss his unwillingness to see Luke die as little more than parental vanity. Also, Anakin's later status as a green-glowing apparition of the Force seems to be a special state reserved only for the most powerful and virtuous Jedi. It's one thing for Anakin to be posthumously reinstated into the Jedi Order, but quite another for him to join the ranks of the best of the best.

Such a strenuous effort was made in the scripting to emphasize that there was "still good" in Darth Vader. Padmé believed it, and so did Luke. That's fine. But it still doesn't justify this complete turnabout, and even if you argue dramatic license, it just falls apart for me.

[residentEvil]

it's a movie?

get over it?

don't worry be happy?

can't we all just get along?

[Stogieman]

You forgot #5 - He got his ass kicked by Picard.

[selowitch]

Originally Posted by residentEvil 

it's a movie?

get over it?

don't worry be happy?

can't we all just get along?

Sorry, but I hate comments like that. Obviously, if I was "over it," I wouldn't have posted my rant.
Where did the Jean-Luc-punches-Darth clip come from? I assume it's various shots of Vader from Star Wars grafted into a Star Trek: TNG episode, right?

Anyway, back to topic, anyone?

[residentEvil]

but why do you let a movie work you up so much? is the life of darth vader that important? liking or disliking a movie aside; why would you need to rant about it?

[selowitch]

Originally Posted by residentEvil 

but why do you let a movie work you up so much? is the life of darth vader that important? liking or disliking a movie aside; why would you need to rant about it?

I take it you don't care about the topic. So why are you posting to this thread, if it's so insignificant? Again, I really dislike this-thread-is-stupid posts. Stop being a damned troll!

[residentEvil]

i do care; i care when people get so worked about things like this. i want to understand. so far, you haven't explained it.

[selowitch]

Originally Posted by residentEvil 

i do care; i care when people get so worked about things like this. i want to understand. so far, you haven't explained it.

Well, I'm a devoted fan of Star Wars. I really hated the scene where Vader kills the Younglings. I thought that was way over the top, totally gratuitous. I think Lucas was trying to underscore how evil he was, but he lost me with that one. It's too precipitous a drop from the conflicted young man at the beginning of Episode III to the raving lunatic we see at that point.

BTW, how do you know if I'm "worked up"? Maybe I'm saying this all with complete calm. And again, why do you care if I'm worked up or not? You gonna massage my shoulders and neck?

[residentEvil]

so in order to enjoy the movies, you need more understanding of the characters then what was written/acted on the screen? you need better resolve than what lucas gave you?

that is all you had to say. and, for any lucas film to date (and his changes to those he already done) i don't think you can have any resolve. so hence my state; it is just a movie...get over it? people still go on and on about other movies too...not just you and this post. to all of them, get over it. i'd rather worry or rant about real things, not movies

and BTW, rant = worked up (from MW: 1 : to talk in a noisy, excited, or declamatory manner). you said the word rant, not me.

[el chupacabra]

I don't remember Vader vaporizing or whatever when he died like a jedi is suppose to do. Is that them becoming 'one' with the force? Maybe he wasn't completely redeemed.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Stogieman 

You forgot #5 - He got his ass kicked by Picard.

Pfft.. Vader would have kilt Pictard.

As far as the topic goes, maybe the "Force" follows Christian ideals.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Kevin 

As far as the topic goes, maybe the "Force" follows Christian ideals.

That's what I was thinking. The "Force" would seem to transcend typical human concepts of justice and assume that anyone can be forgiven of any transgressions simply by repenting them.

[design219]

Originally Posted by Kevin 

maybe the "Force" follows Christian ideals.

I always thought the Borg collective was a metaphor for Christianity. You know, assimilate or die.

[d4nth3m4n]

maybe lucas didn't really think it through all the way while he was writing it? i doubt he could have guessed the series would take off the way it did.

[Jawbone54]

Originally Posted by design219 

I always thought the Borg collective was a metaphor for Christianity. You know, assimilate or die.

As a student pastor, I feel obligated to say this...

 

[andreas_g4]

Originally Posted by Stogieman 

You forgot #5 - He got his ass kicked by Picard.

Where does that come from?

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by d4nth3m4n 

maybe lucas didn't really think it through all the way while he was writing it? i doubt he could have guessed the series would take off the way it did.

I think this is the case as well.

V

[analogue SPRINKLES]

Originally Posted by andreas_g4 

Where does that come from?

I think it is from "Best of both worlds" where Picard punches out a Borg and someone just put vaders helmet over it.

You can also tell if you look at the frames that it is a obvious stunt double playing picard

[OAW]

Originally Posted by selowitch 

Especially in light of the events of Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith, many elements of the Darth Vader/Anakin Skywalker character have continued to bother me. My central question is: How is his redemption at the end of Episode VI: Return of the Jedi at all plausible?

Because it's in the script. That's it. There is no more.

This is Lucas' story. Or that much of it that he could fit into the theatrical release and not end up on the cutting room floor. You may want to check out the various books that describe the Star Wars Expanded Universe for more details.

OAW

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

That's what I was thinking. The "Force" would seem to transcend typical human concepts of justice and assume that anyone can be forgiven of any transgressions simply by repenting them.

Maybe ... but it's probably more like..

Originally Posted by d4nth3m4n 

maybe lucas didn't really think it through all the way while he was writing it? i doubt he could have guessed the series would take off the way it did.

Yeah that passionate kiss between Luke and Leia in Empire?

Ewww

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by OAW 

You may want to check out the various books that describe the Star Wars Expanded Universe for more details.

THOSE AREN'T CANNON!1

[Chuckit]

I think the basic element that is supposed to make Vader's sacrifice worthy of redemption is the fact that he basically had a good shot at immortality as a Sith, but instead he chose to sacrifice himself to save somebody else. It's the selfless sacrifice that got him the brownie points. Now, the idea of what constitutes "enough redemption" is very much a matter of opinion. It's really hard to quantify that sort of thing — you can't just say, "You brutally killed two puppies, but you also stopped two puppies from falling into a river and drowning, so your karma is now balanced." So you may agree with the moral universe Lucas presents or you may not.

As for whether it's actually a continuation of Darth Vader's stated goal to "rule the galaxy as father and son," again, the self-sacrifice element is the unique part. He had previously just been looking to further his position and become the ruler himself, but at the end of Return of the Jedi, he chose to throw that ambition away and do something for somebody else. You can describe his feelings for Luke as "parental vanity," but that's not really canon. I think we're meant to believe that he genuinely loved his son and that's why he would give everything up for him — he found his humanity again.

[SirCastor]

Here's my take on it:

The light and the dark side aren't special clubs that you get to be part of. They're paths. You start walking down one, it's going to take more effort to walk back down to get to the other side. Vader did tons of really awful things. At the end of Empire, after Luke rejected him, he began to question his dark side practices. Killing the Emperor was huge because he wasn't killing him to replace him and take an apprentice, he was killing him to stop the cycle and save his son.
His final acts were good acts, with intent of light side things. Thus, his life is ended on the light side of the force.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Kevin 

Maybe ... but it's probably more like..

Oh, I don't know about that. It was pretty obvious in eps 4 and 5 that he had done some rather unforgivable things.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by Kevin 

THOSE AREN'T CANNON!1

They are actually. LucasFilm first authorizes them as cannon, although there have been a few retcons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Star_Wars_books

"This is a list of Star Wars books. All books listed are a part of the official Star Wars canon, unless stated otherwise."

[selowitch]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

I think the basic element that is supposed to make Vader's sacrifice worthy of redemption is the fact that he basically had a good shot at immortality as a Sith, but instead he chose to sacrifice himself to save somebody else. It's the selfless sacrifice that got him the brownie points. Now, the idea of what constitutes "enough redemption" is very much a matter of opinion. It's really hard to quantify that sort of thing — you can't just say, "You brutally killed two puppies, but you also stopped two puppies from falling into a river and drowning, so your karma is now balanced." So you may agree with the moral universe Lucas presents or you may not.

As for whether it's actually a continuation of Darth Vader's stated goal to "rule the galaxy as father and son," again, the self-sacrifice element is the unique part. He had previously just been looking to further his position and become the ruler himself, but at the end of Return of the Jedi, he chose to throw that ambition away and do something for somebody else. You can describe his feelings for Luke as "parental vanity," but that's not really canon. I think we're meant to believe that he genuinely loved his son and that's why he would give everything up for him — he found his humanity again.

That's interesting and I certainly respect that point of view; however, I still don't find myself in agreement.

I think the slaughter of the younglings went too far. It was a ghastly thing for Lucas to do, and something his younger fans should not have to watch. Even without "showing it", the startled Padawan taking a step back as Anakin ignites his lightsaber is awfully frightening. Maybe someone said to Lucas, "Vader isn't evil enough in the eyes of audience. You have to make him worse."

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by selowitch 

I think the slaughter of the younglings went too far. It was a ghastly thing for Lucas to do, and something his younger fans should not have to watch. Even without "showing it", the startled Padawan taking a step back as Anakin ignites his lightsaber is awfully frightening. Maybe someone said to Lucas, "Vader isn't evil enough in the eyes of audience. You have to make him worse."

The prequels are absolute brain damage and I honestly don't think you should evaluate the original three movies in the context of those. You can evaluate the new ones in the context of the original three since they came later, but it's obvious that Lucas hadn't planned the series out nearly as much as he wants us to believe.

And yeah, Anakin going from this sensitive emo wuss who feels bad about killing Count Dooku to murdering children within the course of a few days didn't ring true at all.

[exca1ibur]

Originally Posted by selowitch 

That's interesting and I certainly respect that point of view; however, I still don't find myself in agreement.

I think the slaughter of the younglings went too far. It was a ghastly thing for Lucas to do, and something his younger fans should not have to watch. Even without "showing it", the startled Padawan taking a step back as Anakin ignites his lightsaber is awfully frightening. Maybe someone said to Lucas, "Vader isn't evil enough in the eyes of audience. You have to make him worse."

I thought it was necessary to show just how far he had gone. Through out you see him confused on which path to take until he converts over and tells the Emperor that he is with him, we saw to what extent. Obviously you agree it was far, and I think that was the point. For someone to do that, you can tell that was extreme as possible. Plus they wanted to destroy the entire line of Jedi. So it was strategic as well. Less Jedi, the less chance of rebellion now and in the future. Which is also why he was never told he had kids. He could try try to convert them but it was doubtful he could convert everyone, so its a pure case of... you are with me or you aren't. If you aren't... case closed. (Order 66) Why should certain Jedi be exempt? In the end it could haunt you, as it did. (See Return of The Jedi).

[Railroader]

Although I don't share your your enthusiasm or zeal for the movies... I do appreciate it.

I agree that after the way Ep I and II were marketed towards children I think the actual showing of the violence against the younglings was way overboard. It was shocking and unnecessary. And I also think that Lucas didn't know how big the movies would come and didn't plan very well for the prequels.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by goMac 

They are actually. LucasFilm first authorizes them as cannon, although there have been a few retcons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Star_Wars_books

"This is a list of Star Wars books. All books listed are a part of the official Star Wars canon, unless stated otherwise."

I was hoping the !11 wouldn't indicate I was joking.

[Jawbone54]

Canon, everyone. Not "cannon."

On topic: Lucas pretty much did what he wanted to, especially during Episodes I-III. That's why I pretty much dismiss them for the most part. Too many inconsistencies and horrible dialogue.

I think there was definitely some Christian-style redemption that can be found in Vader's final turn from evil to good. I think it's worth noting that it's a very human perspective as well. Someone can be horrible to you for years, but with one heart-felt apology, it's possible to be moved enough to forgive them, especially if you know they're truly a good person somewhere underneath their hardened shell. I think that's why Luke was so quick to forgive.

It really seems that Lucas didn't do a whole lot of planning for Vader's eventual return. The only moment that Vader seems to hesitate and struggle with his conscience in IV-VI is the scene on Endor when Luke "turns himself in." In the original and Empire, Vader is just pure evil. No remorse. No feelings. RotJ is the only one where he seems fairly human. Hayden Christensen being the least believable actor of all-time didn't help bring any humanity to Vader as a young man either.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Railroader 

I agree that after the way Ep I and II were marketed towards children I think the actual showing of the violence against the younglings was way overboard. It was shocking and unnecessary.

Agreed there.

[Laminar]

Nerds.

[Madison]

Hayden Christensen being the least believable actor of all-time didn't help bring any humanity to Vader as a young man either.

Thank you.

Tom

[aristotles]

Originally Posted by design219 

I always thought the Borg collective was a metaphor for Christianity. You know, assimilate or die.

I thought the Borg Collective was a metaphor for Islam. We are given two choices, convert to Islam or die. See any suicide Christian bombers lately? No, you will not because not only does Christianity teach that indiscriminate killing is wrong but suicide is wrong as well.

Consider this, the Crusades were called after 4 centuries of attacks against European and Kingdoms in the middle east. That's 400 years. Name any modern nation that would not attack within a months of being attacked. Name one that would endure a decade of attacks. Name one that would endure just one century.

If you want to start calling the European Christians of the Crusade era evil, what pray tell do you call our modern society? People living in glass houses should not through stones.

If you did not get it yet, we have no right to judge.

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by aristotles 

Consider this, the Crusades were called after 4 centuries of attacks against European and Kingdoms in the middle east.

Consider this: those European kingdoms in the Middle East were only there because they'd attacked and stolen the land from the Arab kingdoms that had previously controlled them.

Who wouldn't, during 400 years of occupation, fight back against their oppressors?

[design219]

Originally Posted by aristotles 

I thought the Borg Collective was...

Well, I was talking about attitude with the whole everlasting bit, not physical death (you know, believe like us or die everlasting in hell), so I guess you could apply that to many other religions as well.

Bless you.

[analogue SPRINKLES]

[QUOTE=aristotles;3368221No, you will not because not only does Christianity teach that indiscriminate killing is wrong but suicide is wrong as well.[/QUOTE]

Ya no christian has ever killed anyone in the name of god.

Nor have any committed suicide, killed gays or abortionists.

The crusades are ok because it was a long time ago.

[Razgriz]

I do think ur getting a little worked up about this but i hated it how anikin just gave up and killed Windu.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by aristotles 

I thought the Borg Collective was a metaphor for Islam. We are given two choices, convert to Islam or die. See any suicide Christian bombers lately? No, you will not because not only does Christianity teach that indiscriminate killing is wrong but suicide is wrong as well.

Consider this, the Crusades were called after 4 centuries of attacks against European and Kingdoms in the middle east. That's 400 years. Name any modern nation that would not attack within a months of being attacked. Name one that would endure a decade of attacks. Name one that would endure just one century.

If you want to start calling the European Christians of the Crusade era evil, what pray tell do you call our modern society? People living in glass houses should not through stones.

If you did not get it yet, we have no right to judge.

Leave that for the Political Lounge. Both Christianity and Islam give you the choice between conversion or death. And, in any case, I don't recall any Borg suicide bombers (a bigger nerd than I might be able to prove me wrong)

[aristotles]

Originally Posted by nonhuman 

Consider this: those European kingdoms in the Middle East were only there because they'd attacked and stolen the land from the Arab kingdoms that had previously controlled them.

Who wouldn't, during 400 years of occupation, fight back against their oppressors?

Crack open a book sometime. History is full of nations conquering nations over thousands of years. Prior to those Arab kingdoms, some of those lands had been conquered by the Romans and before that, they belonged to the Jewish Kingdoms. Get over it already.

Oppressors? You don't know the meaning of the word. Stop using big words that you have no personal or even cultural connection with.

Finns lived under oppression of their Swedish and Russian neighbours from the fall of the northern kingdom at around 1100 AD until 1918 and yet you don't see them crying about oppression do you? No. Some of my ancestors may have been in forced labour constructing various castles and some of them may have been drafted into fighting in far off lands by the Czar of Russia. It is all water under the bridge.

Quit your snivelling over matters that did not even concern your ancestors.


To put things in perspective, the "atrocities" supposedly committed by the Crusaders were nothing in comparison to what the American soldiers have done in Vietnam and Iraq.

Didn't expect that did you biatches eh? Like I said, you have no right to judge the Crusades. We also do not have many records about the atrocities committed that prompted the Crusades in the first place. What we do know is that the invasions by the Muslim empires were called the Islamic Crusades and they did not just attack Christian kingdoms in eastern Europe but they also attacked the holy land and pilgrims travelling there.

What's next? Are all going to start calling for Spain to give up their land to the Muslims?

PS. The body counts (even taking population growth into account) of civilian casualties in the past 50 years dwarfs the crusades. Get real people.

[Laminar]

From Star Wars to the crusades and religious bickering. Bravo, MacNN lounge, bravo.

[aristotles]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

Leave that for the Political Lounge. Both Christianity and Islam give you the choice between conversion or death. And, in any case, I don't recall any Borg suicide bombers (a bigger nerd than I might be able to prove me wrong)

I did not start it. Take it up with the guy that started it. But you are posting FUD in an attempt to make it appear as if you are not taking sides. Stop painting us all with the same brush.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by aristotles 

Quit your snivelling over matters that did not even concern your ancestors.

[aristotles]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

From Star Wars to the crusades and religious bickering. Bravo, MacNN lounge, bravo.

This is not about bickering. It is about not letting people get away with FUD. If someone spreads FUD, I will call them on it.

[aristotles]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

Stop posting pictures and contribute something intelligent or GTFO. Actually, I'm just blocking you Asshat.

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by aristotles 

Crack open a book sometime. History is full of nations conquering nations over thousands of years. Prior to those Arab kingdoms, some of those lands had been conquered by the Romans and before that, they belonged to the Jewish Kingdoms. Get over it already.

Oppressors? You don't know the meaning of the word. Stop using big words that you have no personal or even cultural connection with.

Finns lived under oppression of their Swedish and Russian neighbours from the fall of the northern kingdom at around 1100 AD until 1918 and yet you don't see them crying about oppression do you? No. Some of my ancestors may have been in forced labour constructing various castles and some of them may have been drafted into fighting in far off lands by the Czar of Russia. It is all water under the bridge.

Quit your snivelling over matters that did not even concern your ancestors.


To put things in perspective, the "atrocities" supposedly committed by the Crusaders were nothing in comparison to what the American soldiers have done in Vietnam and Iraq.

Didn't expect that did you biatches eh? Like I said, you have no right to judge the Crusades. We also do not have many records about the atrocities committed that prompted the Crusades in the first place. What we do know is that the invasions by the Muslim empires were called the Islamic Crusades and they did not just attack Christian kingdoms in eastern Europe but they also attacked the holy land and pilgrims travelling there.

What's next? Are all going to start calling for Spain to give up their land to the Muslims?

PS. The body counts (even taking population growth into account) of civilian casualties in the past 50 years dwarfs the crusades. Get real people.

You started by saying how much better Xtianity was than other religions. Now you've completely refuted that by demonstrating how everyone is just as bad as everyone else. :slow clap:

OT: Maybe Anakin got into the green shimmeries club just becuase of his mad midi-chlorian infection

[aristotles]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

You started by saying how much better Xtianity was than other religions. Now you've completely refuted that by demonstrating how everyone is just as bad as everyone else. :slow clap:

OT: Maybe Anakin got into the green shimmeries club just becuase of his mad midi-chlorian infection

Bye. *Block*
Either you have reading comprehension problems or your comprehension is just selective like selective hearing.

[aristotles]

The Vader story does borrow from Christianity. It has certain parallels to the story of Paul who went around killing early Christians but was converted by a vision he saw on the road to Damascus.

The entire Star Wars story borrows a bit from Christianity/Judaism, some elements from Buddhism and some from various pagan mythology such as tree spirits etc...

Note, its called Christianity, not Xtianity. I show enough respect for other faiths to use the proper terminology, its a mark of respect for others to use the proper terms. Buddhists are named after Buddha and Christians are named after Christ.

[Laminar]

And Christmas is sometimes called X-mas, which has decidedly Christian roots. But I guess you won't be seeing this. I apologize for you not having a sense of humor.