Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith
Gaudiya Repercussions > Life Beyond ISKCON > Entertainment: Books, Music, Movies, TV, Games, Art
Dhyana
This Sunday, I watched the last part in the Star Wars series -- The Revenge of the Sith (that is, Part III). I am not a Star Wars fan, but I watched the original movies back in the 80s when they were released, and enjoyed them of course! lgpopcorn.gif

With this last movie, it struck me how strong reminiscences the plot gave me to ISKCON and how/why it lost many devotees to other groups.

The "old" Star Wars movies had a clear dichotomy of good and evil, the good side and the dark side of the Force, with only isolated hints of a more complicated picture. The Jedi are the good guys in those old movies. But in The Revenge of the Sith, where the Jedi Anakin turns against the Jedi order and becomes Darth Vader, a Sith, the picture is different. I found it fascinating! Of course Anakin has his own weaknesses, like arrogance and craving for control. But what this movie shows well, and what felt so very familiar to me, was how the Jedi order, by their extreme doctrine of detachment and their attitude of "we know all that is there to know", alienate Anakin, making him easy for the "bad guys" to entice. Some dialogs there felt like cut and pasted from ISKCON gurus or Prabhupada's Godbrothers.

Have any of you watched the movie? Did you have similar associations?
Homer
QUOTE (Dhyana @ Jun 15 2005, 04:12 AM)
This Sunday, I watched the last part in the Star Wars series -- The Revenge of the Sith (that is, Part III). I am not a Star Wars fan, but I watched the original movies back in the 80s when they were released, and enjoyed them of course!  lgpopcorn.gif

With this last movie, it struck me how strong reminiscences the plot gave me to ISKCON and how/why it lost many devotees to other groups.

The "old" Star Wars movies had a clear dichotomy of good and evil, the good side and the dark side of the Force, with only isolated hints of a more complicated picture. The Jedi are the good guys in those old movies. But in The Revenge of the Sith, where the Jedi Anakin turns against the Jedi order and becomes Darth Vader, a Sith, the picture is different. I found it fascinating! Of course Anakin has his own weaknesses, like arrogance and craving for control. But what this movie shows well, and what felt so very familiar to me, was how the Jedi order, by their extreme doctrine of detachment and their attitude of "we know all that is there to know", alienate Anakin, making him easy for the "bad guys" to entice. Some dialogs there felt like cut and pasted from ISKCON gurus or Prabhupada's Godbrothers. 

Have any of you watched the movie? Did you have similar associations?
*


Interesting. I had similar thoughts too. The story seems to be the very old one of how power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

I found the effects boring, they were dominant at the neglect of character development.

The bit with the lake of lava was visually exciting but if you have ever actually experienced being near a lake of lava, as I have in Hawaii, you would know that being within a kilometre would be fatal due to the radiated heat and the toxic fumes.
authority
The darth vader guy always reminded me of a guru or something like that.

You know, wearing special clothes and trying to be something he is not.

He reminds me of Hansaduta kind of. A real self absorbed slob.

Love,

YOURMASTER the AUTYORITY
Dhyana
QUOTE
The bit with the lake of lava was visually exciting but if you have ever actually experienced being near a lake of lava, as I have in Hawaii, you would know that being within a kilometre would be fatal due to the radiated heat and the toxic fumes.

It irritated me, too. biggrin.gif Another thing that fascinates me is how in all action movies, the heroines go through incredible hardships without a single hair on their head looking disheveled!


QUOTE
Interesting. I had similar thoughts too. The story seems to be the very old one of how power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

I thought for example about Anakin's attempt to surrender to the wisdom of the Jedi to help him in his crisis. He goes to Yoda and tells him about his nightmares (of his wife dying in childbirth). All Yoda has to say is to basically quote the Gita about letting go of attachments as a way to get rid of fear. Welllll. Yeah. Just stop worrying about the fate of your wife and your children, right? Such a smug, pat answer. It was obvious to me that Anakin would never try to find a solution to his problems in the Jedi doctrine again.

And then there is his dialog with Palpatine in the theater (?), where my first reaction was: Oh, Anakin is getting misled too easily. But a moment later I could understand why: he was so alienated by the Jedi that he simply had to follow his inner voice telling him that things just might be radically different than the truths he had been taught. In that frame of mind it is easy to ask yourself whether the "bad" teachings aren't true after all. And, just like many disicples of gurus who "fall", Anakin had no patience to wait and try sorting things out for himself, he urgently needed to find another guru.

I had to laugh when Palpatine asked Anakin whether he had heard the story of XXX (don't remember the name of that Darth). Anakin answers in negative, and Palpatine comments: "Of course, the Jedi do not like to tell this story..." It made me think of all those wielding their own Puranas, or those telling Prabhupada's disciples, "He did not tell you everything, you haven't gotten all the teachings you need to achieve perfection..."
Oneiros
QUOTE (Dhyana @ Jun 15 2005, 03:50 PM)
I had to laugh when Palpatine asked Anakin whether he had heard the story of XXX (don't remember the name of that Darth).
*

That would be Darth Plagueis.
Homer
QUOTE (Dhyana @ Jun 16 2005, 03:50 AM)
And then there is his dialog with Palpatine in the theater (?), where my first reaction was: Oh, Anakin is getting misled too easily.


I was amazed Anakin did not seek some sort of assurance that Palpatine could deliver on his claim concerning saving his wife.
Oneiros
QUOTE (Dhyana @ Jun 15 2005, 03:50 PM)
I thought for example about Anakin's attempt to surrender to the wisdom of the Jedi to help him in his crisis. He goes to Yoda and tells him about his nightmares (of his wife dying in childbirth). All Yoda has to say is to basically quote the Gita about letting go of attachments as a way to get rid of fear. Welllll. Yeah. Just stop worrying about the fate of your wife and your children, right? Such a smug, pat answer. It was obvious to me that Anakin would never try to find a solution to his problems in the Jedi doctrine again.
*

Yoda's answer is certainly not very helpful to Anakin. Anakin is full of feelings, sincere feelings, and all that Yoda advices is that he stiffle them. That is not helpful, nor would it be possible for Anakin to follow it in his state of mind at the time. Yoda does not seem to understand Anakin or his feelings at all.

QUOTE
And then there is his dialog with Palpatine in the theater (?), where my first reaction was: Oh, Anakin is getting misled too easily. But a moment later I could understand why: he was so alienated by the Jedi that he simply had to follow his inner voice telling him that things just might be radically different than the truths he had been taught. In that frame of mind it is easy to ask yourself whether the "bad" teachings aren't true after all. And, just like many disicples of gurus who "fall", Anakin had no patience to wait and try sorting things out for himself, he urgently needed to find another guru.
*

The thing is that there are problems with the Jedis and Palpatine's critique of the Jedis is not without merit. Anakin could see all this and found it confirmed when Mace Windu was about to kill Palpatine, a move which Anakin found to be in violation of what a Jedi stands for.

Some interesting thoughts here.

Oh, and, "Everything is going as I have forseen." smile.gif
Oneiros
QUOTE (Homer @ Jun 15 2005, 08:27 PM)
I was amazed Anakin did not seek some sort of assurance that Palpatine could deliver on his claim concerning saving his wife.
*

It is not that Palpatine had to deliver. The real issue is the idea that Anakin himself would be able to connect with a power that would enable him to save his wife and unborn child, an idea that Anakin already believed in, but had found himself unable to manifest within the Jedi order.

Actually, Palpatine could probably have kept Padmé alive. He was, after all, the student of Darth Plagueis and had most likely learned this art from him. It was also him who kept Darth Vader alive after the duel with Obi-Wan Kenobi.
Dhyana
QUOTE
The thing is that there are problems with the Jedis and Palpatine's critique of the Jedis is not without merit. Anakin could see all this and found it confirmed when Mace Windu was about to kill Palpatine, a move which Anakin found to be in violation of what a Jedi stands for.

True. Anakin had protested earlier, when Palpatine himself made him perform the same dishonorable act: kill Dooku after he was defeated and disarmed. Palpatine said, "He is too dangerous to be kept alive." The same sitatuion, and the same line, later comes from Windu. And Anakin, who felt bad about having killed Dooku, this time does follow his conscience and intervenes.

Watching this gave me another association to ISKCON and the GM movements: they blame one another, but they are quite similar in their dynamics. True brothers.

QUOTE
It is not that Palpatine had to deliver. The real issue is the idea that Anakin himself would be able to connect with a power that would enable him to save his wife and unborn child, an idea that Anakin already believed in, but had found himself unable to manifest within the Jedi order.

Good point.

Actually, if he was the disciple of Plagueis, then he may be the one who murdered him! ph34r.gif
sarasvati_river
I think Padme could have kept herself alive at that point. As they said, there was nothing wrong with her, she just lost the will to live. And the Jedis couldn't even step into the room and try to talk her out of dying? Sheesh.
Milla
I finally saw Star Wars, I had been very busy with exams. I am not so impressed. Many reviews said that it was the best of the prequel and had the magic of the old trilogy, but somehow I didn't sense it. I didn't exactly like the boy who played Anakin, he wasn't convincing and tried too hard to look evil. His dialog with Yoda was a very good plot twist, and it indeed reminded me of the preaching I have heard in the temple, but still it wasn't enough to explain Anakin's distrust of the Jedi and his blind faith in the Sith. And the duel on the vulcanic planet was simply lifted from Lord of the Rings (Mount Doom).
Maryada
QUOTE
It irritated me, too.  biggrin.gif Another thing that fascinates me is how in all action movies, the heroines go through incredible hardships without a single hair on their head looking disheveled!


The you'll have a field day at:

http://www.intuitor.com/moviephysics/

Where they talk all about why bullets don't flash, explosions in space should not make sound, the average machine gun's 30-bullet clip empties in 2 seconds, and lots more. I must have spent half a day on this site, reading it all.

Don't forget their movie reviews. And whoever has seen The Core will immediately understand why they chose it as the worst physics movie ever.
Milla
I recently saw another movie that was very thought provoking and had many parallels to ISKCON in its most rigid incarnation, A Price Above Rubies with Renee Zellwegger. I think she made it not long after Jerry MacGuire. There is something in her that I don't quite like, her voice maybe or her looks, but she is a very serious actress. In this film she plays a young Jewish woman who grew up in a conservative Hassidic community in New York and after a series of unfortunate events relaizes that this secure, close knit community, is too small for her and is breaking her spirit. It was very interesting to see her inner struggle, she knew since she was a young girl that she was different and needed something else, but didn't know what exactly that something was because she didn't know any other life than that of an ultra-religiousl Jew.

There were many small things in the film which were so poignant, like when she spontaneously stretches her arms to embrace her husband but he doesn't respond because he has to say first some prayers before engaging with her in religious sex in the dark, with their clothes on. Or the scene in the school where her husband teaches young boys the Torah and says to them that God gave the Torah to the Jews because they were the only people on earth who wanted to hear it (the Europeans and the Americans were not interested). I heard that many Jews complained that their community wasn't portrayed accurately in the film, but it defnitely is not a caricature.
extranjero
You know, it had been really bad if you are seeing ISKCON-ness even in Star Wars. smile.gif I have yet to see The Revenge of the Sith. I liked the original series much better anyway. Jedi are not trying to hide the truth about the dark side. They know it is much more powerful. Their worries is that no one can really handle it. Indeed, the goal of dark siths is to achieve political subjugation of the Galaxy. There couldn't even be more that two Siths at the same time, otherwise they fight and kill each other.

However, the Republic's positive values are not so clear cut that the opposite views are also interesting to read:

QUOTE
http://theweeklystandard.com/Content/Publi...01/248ipzbt.asp

The Case for the Empire
From the May 16, 2002 Daily Standard: Everything you think you know about Star Wars is wrong.
by Jonathan V. Last
12/26/2002 12:00:00 AM
 

Jonathan V. Last, online editor

STAR WARS RETURNS today with its fifth installment, "Attack of the Clones." There will be talk of the Force and the Dark Side and the epic morality of George Lucas's series. But the truth is that from the beginning, Lucas confused the good guys with the bad. The deep lesson of Star Wars is that the Empire is good.

It's a difficult leap to make--embracing Darth Vader and the Emperor over the plucky and attractive Luke Skywalker and Princess Leia--but a careful examination of the facts, sorted apart from Lucas's off-the-shelf moral cues, makes a quite convincing case.

First, an aside: For the sake of this discussion, I've considered only the history gleaned from the actual Star Wars films, not the Expanded Universe. If you know what the Expanded Universe is and want to argue that no discussion of Star Wars can be complete without considering material outside the canon, that's fine. However, it's always been my view that the comic books and novels largely serve to clean up Lucas's narrative and philosophical messes. Therefore, discussions of intrinsic intent must necessarily revolve around the movies alone. You may disagree, but please don't e-mail me about it.

If you don't know what the Expanded Universe is, well, uh, neither do I.

I. The Problems with the Galactic Republic

At the beginning of the Star Wars saga, the known universe is governed by the Galactic Republic. The Republic is controlled by a Senate, which is, in turn, run by an elected chancellor who's in charge of procedure, but
has little real power.

Scores of thousands of planets are represented in the Galactic Senate, and as we first encounter it, it is sclerotic and ineffectual. The Republic has grown over many millennia to the point where there are so many factions and disparate interests, that it is simply too big to be governable. Even the Republic's staunchest supporters recognize this failing: In "The Phantom Menace," Queen Amidala admits, "It is clear to me now that the Republic no longer functions." In "Attack of the Clones," young Anakin Skywalker observes that it simply "doesn't work."

The Senate moves so slowly that it is powerless to stop aggression between member states. In "The Phantom Menace" a supra-planetary alliance, the Trade Federation (think of it as OPEC to the Galactic Republic's United Nations), invades a planet and all the Senate can agree to do is call for an investigation.

Like the United Nations, the Republic has no armed forces of its own, but instead relies on a group of warriors, the Jedi knights, to "keep the peace." The Jedi, while autonomous, often work in tandem with the Senate, trying to smooth over quarrels and avoid conflicts. But the Jedi number only in the thousands--they cannot protect everyone.

What's more, it's not clear that they should be "protecting" anyone. The Jedi are Lucas's great heroes, full of Zen wisdom and righteous power. They encourage people to "use the Force"--the mystical energy which is the source of their power--but the truth, revealed in "The Phantom Menace," is that the Force isn't available to the rabble. The Force comes from midi-chlorians, tiny symbiotic organisms in people's blood, like mitochondria. The Force, it turns out, is an inherited, genetic trait. If you don't have the blood, you don't get the Force. Which makes the Jedi not a democratic militia, but a royalist Swiss guard.

And an arrogant royalist Swiss guard, at that. With one or two notable exceptions, the Jedi we meet in Star Wars are full of themselves. They ignore the counsel of others (often with terrible consequences), and seem honestly to believe that they are at the center of the universe. When the chief Jedi record-keeper is asked in "Attack of the Clones" about a planet she has never heard of, she replies that if it's not in the Jedi archives, it doesn't exist. (The planet in question does exist, again, with terrible consequences.)

In "Attack of the Clones," a mysterious figure, Count Dooku, leads a separatist movement of planets that want to secede from the Republic. Dooku promises these confederates smaller government, unlimited free trade, and an "absolute commitment to capitalism." Dooku's motives are suspect--it's not clear whether or not he believes in these causes. However, there's no reason to doubt the motives of the other separatists--they seem genuinely to want to make a fresh start with a government that isn't bloated and dysfunctional.

The Republic, of course, is eager to quash these separatists, but they never make a compelling case--or any case, for that matter--as to why, if they are such a freedom-loving regime, these planets should not be allowed to check out of the Republic and take control of their own destinies.

II. The Empire

We do not yet know the exact how's and why's, but we do know this: At some point between the end of Episode II and the beginning of Episode IV, the Republic is replaced by an Empire. The first hint comes in "Attack of the Clones," when the Senate's Chancellor Palpatine is granted emergency powers to deal with the separatists. It spoils very little to tell you that Palpatine eventually becomes the Emperor. For a time, he keeps the Senate in place, functioning as a rubber-stamp, much like the Roman imperial senate, but a few minutes into Episode IV, we are informed that the he has dissolved the Senate, and that "the last remnants of the Old Republic have been swept away."

Lucas wants the Empire to stand for evil, so he tells us that the Emperor and Darth Vader have gone over to the Dark Side and dresses them in black.

But look closer. When Palpatine is still a senator, he says, "The Republic is not what it once was. The Senate is full of greedy, squabbling delegates. There is no interest in the common good." At one point he laments that "the bureaucrats are in charge now."

Palpatine believes that the political order must be manipulated to produce peace and stability. When he mutters, "There is no civility, there is only politics," we see that at heart, he's an esoteric Straussian.

Make no mistake, as emperor, Palpatine is a dictator--but a relatively benign one, like Pinochet. It's a dictatorship people can do business with. They collect taxes and patrol the skies. They try to stop organized crime (in the form of the smuggling rings run by the Hutts). The Empire has virtually no effect on the daily life of the average, law-abiding citizen.

Also, unlike the divine-right Jedi, the Empire is a meritocracy. The Empire runs academies throughout the galaxy (Han Solo begins his career at an Imperial academy), and those who show promise are promoted, often rapidly. In "The Empire Strikes Back" Captain Piett is quickly promoted to admiral when his predecessor "falls down on the job."

And while it's a small point, the Empire's manners and decorum speak well of it. When Darth Vader is forced to employ bounty hunters to track down Han Solo, he refuses to address them by name. Even Boba Fett, the greatest of all trackers, is referred to icily as "bounty hunter." And yet Fett understands the protocol. When he captures Solo, he calls him "Captain Solo." (Whether this is in deference to Han's former rank in the Imperial starfleet, or simply because Han owns and pilots his own ship, we don't know. I suspect it's the former.)

But the most compelling evidence that the Empire isn't evil comes in "The Empire Strikes Back" when Darth Vader is battling Luke Skywalker. After an exhausting fight, Vader is poised to finish Luke off, but he stays his hand. He tries to convert Luke to the Dark Side with this simple plea: "There is no escape. Don't make me destroy you. . . . Join me, and I will complete your training. With our combined strength, we can end this destructive conflict and bring order to the galaxy." It is here we find the real controlling impulse for the Dark Side and the Empire. The Empire doesn't want slaves or destruction or "evil." It wants order.

None of which is to say that the Empire isn't sometimes brutal. In Episode IV, Imperial stormtroopers kill Luke's aunt and uncle and Grand Moff Tarkin orders the destruction of an entire planet, Alderaan. But viewed in context, these acts are less brutal than they initially appear. Poor Aunt Beru and Uncle Owen reach a grisly end, but only after they aid the rebellion by hiding Luke and harboring two fugitive droids. They aren't given due process, but they are traitors.

The destruction of Alderaan is often cited as ipso facto proof of the Empire's "evilness" because it seems like mass murder--planeticide, even. As Tarkin prepares to fire the Death Star, Princess Leia implores him to spare the planet, saying, "Alderaan is peaceful. We have no weapons." Her plea is important, if true.

But the audience has no reason to believe that Leia is telling the truth. In Episode IV, every bit of information she gives the Empire is willfully untrue. In the opening, she tells Darth Vader that she is on a diplomatic mission of mercy, when in fact she is on a spy mission, trying to deliver schematics of the Death Star to the Rebel Alliance. When asked where the Alliance is headquartered, she lies again.

Leia's lies are perfectly defensible--she thinks she's serving the greater good--but they make her wholly unreliable on the question of whether or not Alderaan really is peaceful and defenseless. If anything, since Leia is a high-ranking member of the rebellion and the princess of Alderaan, it would be reasonable to suspect that Alderaan is a front for Rebel activity or at least home to many more spies and insurgents like Leia.

Whatever the case, the important thing to recognize is that the Empire is not committing random acts of terror. It is engaged in a fight for the survival of its regime against a violent group of rebels who are committed to its destruction.

III. After the Rebellion

As we all know from the final Star Wars installment, "Return of the Jedi," the rebellion is eventually successful. The Emperor is assassinated, Darth Vader abdicates his post and dies, the central governing apparatus of the Empire is destroyed in a spectacular space battle, and the rebels rejoice with their small, annoying Ewok friends. But what happens next?

(There is a raft of literature on this point, but, as I said at the beginning, I'm going to ignore it because it doesn't speak to Lucas's original intent.)

In Episode IV, after Grand Moff Tarkin announces that the Imperial Senate has been abolished, he's asked how the Emperor can possibly hope to keep control of the galaxy. "The regional governors now have direct control over territories," he says. "Fear will keep the local systems in line."

So under Imperial rule, a large group of regional potentates, each with access to a sizable army and star destroyers, runs local affairs. These governors owe their fealty to the Emperor. And once the Emperor is dead, the galaxy will be plunged into chaos.

In all of the time we spend observing the Rebel Alliance, we never hear of their governing strategy or their plans for a post-Imperial universe. All we see are plots and fighting. Their victory over the Empire doesn't liberate the galaxy--it turns the galaxy into Somalia writ large: dominated by local warlords who are answerable to no one.

Which makes the rebels--Lucas's heroes--an unimpressive crew of anarchic royals who wreck the galaxy so that Princess Leia can have her tiara back.

I'll take the Empire.
Satyabhama
QUOTE
It irritated me, too.  Another thing that fascinates me is how in all action movies, the heroines go through incredible hardships without a single hair on their head looking disheveled!


I would have liked to see Padme gain/lose 30 pounds and sleep all day with a blanket over her head.

QUOTE
I thought for example about Anakin's attempt to surrender to the wisdom of the Jedi to help him in his crisis. He goes to Yoda and tells him about his nightmares (of his wife dying in childbirth). All Yoda has to say is to basically quote the Gita about letting go of attachments as a way to get rid of fear.


Krishna had more patience and concern for Arjuna's wellbeing than this Yoda jerk had for Anakin. biggrin.gif Krishna halted the whole battle and sat and talked soothingly to Arjuna who was veritably curled up in the fetal position crying in the bottom of the chariot. Such behavior by a modern army soldier, I assume, would not be met with such patience. wink.gif At any rate, Yoda could have at least given Anakin a hug and smooch and speak some words to soothe the heart. Oh well. rolleyes.gif This is a very strange conversation. smile.gif
Dhyana
QUOTE
In Episode IV, after Grand Moff Tarkin announces that the Imperial Senate has been abolished, he's asked how the Emperor can possibly hope to keep control of the galaxy. "The regional governors now have direct control over territories," he says. "Fear will keep the local systems in line."

So under Imperial rule, a large group of regional potentates, each with access to a sizable army and star destroyers, runs local affairs. These governors owe their fealty to the Emperor. And once the Emperor is dead, the galaxy will be plunged into chaos.

In all of the time we spend observing the Rebel Alliance, we never hear of their governing strategy or their plans for a post-Imperial universe. All we see are plots and fighting. Their victory over the Empire doesn't liberate the galaxy--it turns the galaxy into Somalia writ large: dominated by local warlords who are answerable to no one.

Which makes the rebels--Lucas's heroes--an unimpressive crew of anarchic royals who wreck the galaxy so that Princess Leia can have her tiara back.

I'll take the Empire.

Interesting article, extranjero! Most points I do not accept -- I think they are made in jest -- but the final one, quoted over here, has stopped me in my tracks! Thank you! balloons.gif
extranjero
This reminds me of Foundations series by Isaac Asimov where Hari Seldon, much to embarrassment of many erudite professors, proves his theory that Star Wars despite all excavated paraphernalia was a fantasy story and not an actually history of bygone ages.

Anybody watches these TV series of sci-fi soap operas these days? You know, new Battlestar Galactica opening credits start with the Brahma-gayatri mantra sung in the background. tongue.gif
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2013 Invision Power Services, Inc.