Darth Vader

Jack Lynt

Jack Lynt

SPOILERS BELOW.





In Revenge of the Sith, Darth Vader kills a room full of children (younglings). Mass murder. Mass murder of children. That's dark. Really dark. Not to mention really dark for George Lucas. And creepy.

What was George thinking?

Does it fit Star Wars?

Is it some sort of reaction to his critics who apparently long charged him with making Star Wars too naïve?

I don't visit the fan sites, but is there much, or any discussion of this?

The entire series is supposed to be about the redemption of Anakin.

Can he be redeemed after such an act?

What were you thinking when you first watched this? And later on? Or did it ever really make an impression?

Did the story adaquetly set up this heinous act? Did you buy it?

I don't think I ever really did.

Granted, for Darth Vader to be taken seriously, seriously as an evil guy, he ought to be really wicked.

But I've always thought this was somehow a false note.

How wicked or badass can he really be when what we're presented with is really a weakling of a person who does evil only because he's so susceptible to Sidious's manipulations?

I think that if I had been a producer or someone with some say-so, I would have said, nah, let's not go there, or at least not with the narrative as is.

Then, in the final fight, you have Obi Wan speaking to him, well, I would say in still lovey-dovey terms. Hey, dude, your "brother" just brutally killed a bunch of children, first degree, intentional homicide. And, not to mention the fact that, maybe, the filmmakers hadn't even "justified" that behavior psychologically with any kind of adequate backstory.

And yet, we have the ghost of Anakin smiling and happy, everything forgiven, I guess, at the end of the altered (mutilated) version of Episode VI.

Well, I tend to think only God forgives. And I also think we know He doesn't really forgive anymore than we do. Perhaps less.

So no, I'm not sure I want the ghost of Anakin smiling and happy at the end of Episode VI, any more than I'd want the ghost of Pol Pot smiling and happy.

Any thoughts?
 
Last edited:
In terms of the character, I think Hitchcock said that the more successful the villain, the more successful the picture. And, in "The Making of Star Wars", Jonathan Rinzler (if I remember correctly) also said that a hero is measured by the strength of his villain.

As for Vader killing little children, it doesn't take a powerful villain to do that, so I would agree. I think George Lucas was trying to show the story of Anakin's fall, but, unfortunately, he doesn't do a good job of it. George should have gotten a good character author to help him plot the downfall.
 
remember when vader blew up an entire planet? cause there certainly wasent any children on alderaan... right?
 
Who knows what he was thinking. Perhaps it was the point of no return (besides already killing a Jedi master).

Nothing screams bad guy like a child killer, right? (Yeah ok, there are heaps of other options but hey.....)

Did the story adaquetly set up this heinous act? Did you buy it?
Click to expand...

Did I? No. I understand it (Anakin turning to the dark side and all but a couple of Jedi to be killed off) needed to happen for the story to transition into Ep IV. To me it came across as rushed or clumsy. I see what he was trying to achieve, planting the seeds where the good guy is tricked past the point of no return. It just didn't turn out as well as I would have liked. But hey.... who am I to judge.
 
It's a cop out. he kills some kids we've never even seen before, no one we cared about
 
I liked it actually. I mean he's suppose to turn to the dark side, and that was a good way of having him do it. Really makes you see the character in a new light too. As far as too dark goes, well he is suppose to be working for war lord (The Emperor) isn't he?

I mean how do you think Hitler got to have a mass army wanting to take over the world, by being a not so dark, bad guy?

Plus in A New Hope, Darth Vader gives the order to fire, and blow up, a whole planet full of people, which is even more mass murder, than a room full of children, so the darkness is not raised in my opinion.
 
Well the point is, is that the OP said that Darth Vader was too dark in Revenge of the Sith, for murdering children. Where as in fact he is no more dark in the first film by allowing a planet to be destroyed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top