Comment Stream

Search and bookmark options Close
Search for:
Search by:

Total Found: 917 (Showing 1-25)

Next ►Page 1 of 37
Set Bookmark
Peter G.
Fri, Jan 19, 2018, 12:11am (UTC -6)
Re: TNG S2: The Dauphin

@ William B,

If it sounded like I was chastising your old comment that's not how I meant it. My intent was to suggest that it's an episode so easy to dismiss that the viewer is almost lulled into doing so. I've seen it many times over the years and until this watch-though I never thought it meant much of anything, so I was certainly not singling you out but was at the very least including myself in the tend of people surmising that it was a mostly vacuous hour of TV. Now that I've seen it again my new estimation is that it's only moderately vacuous :)
Set Bookmark
Peter G.
Fri, Jan 19, 2018, 12:08am (UTC -6)
Re: DS9 S7: What You Leave Behind

@ Rahul,

Good call on the comparison to Lord of the Rings, I hadn't thought of that before. It makes the scene better in my opinion, if anything.
Set Bookmark
Peter G.
Fri, Jan 19, 2018, 12:04am (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S1: Despite Yourself

@ Jammer,

Love your observation of the backwards tone of the 'evil' universe being lighter and the 'good' universe being grim. It reminds me of the series The Lexx, in which

SPOILER

the heroes discover after some time in a horrific life that the universe in which they grew up was the 'good' one out of the two! The sardonic humor abounds as they eventually have to leave that living hell in order to enter the 'dark zone'.
Set Bookmark
peter swinkels
Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 2:33pm (UTC -6)
Re: TOS S2: The Ultimate Computer

(a)
Set Bookmark
Peter Swinkels
Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 2:33pm (UTC -6)
Re: TOS S2: The Ultimate Computer

Okay, this is good episode. The computer going crazy and murdering, and it’s creator (Daystrom) going insane could easily be misconstrued as “ai = evil”, but was probably meant as a warning.
Set Bookmark
Peter G.
Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 2:31pm (UTC -6)
Re: TNG S2: The Dauphin

Watched this one again yesterday and thought I'd reply to a few comments from the thread. This one's a necro from an old William B comment:

"Is the fact that Salia is a shapeshifter such a shock that it needs to be saved for the episode's end? Or do we have to wait 20 minutes before *we* find out that Anya is a shapeshifter and the crew does? Notably, the fact that Anya and Salia are shapeshifters doesn't affect the core plot at all -- which is that Wesley falls for a princess whose duty is to Her People and who can never have a normal life, which would be exactly the same whether she's humanoid or not. "

Sometimes we take the plots of these simple episodes too literally and miss that they're in the process of crafting a Trek world for us while also creating connections between Trek and Trek viewers. Does it materially matter to Wesley, or to Picard for that matter, that Salia is a shapeshifter? Not really. It's irrelevant in context of the literal story in terms of why she can't be with Wesley. It's not because she's a shapeshifter, but because she's on a diplomatic mission (to Alderaan). Right? Well, let's take a closer look. Throughout the episode Wesley's courting of her takes on a peculiar form. He's not just crushing on her as we might expect, but is suggesting very specific things to her about what she'll be able to see with him in the future. It looks like nothing much is going on - just some romantic talk and hope, but I don't think that's the core of it.

What's really going on is that, despite having grown up in sub-optimal conditions having lost his father, Wesley is depicted as being completely innocent, sheltered, and unaware of anything other than life in Starfleet facilities. It's not just that he's naive regarding being an adult, but he's naive as well regarding what life is like in the universe if you don't live on the Enterprise. Multiple times in the episode Wesley makes comments that, if misinterpreted, could come off as creepy, such as "One day you'll get to see all this for yourself", implying it will be with him. But where I think he's coming from is he sees life as being an adventure where the galaxy is at your fingertips and technology frees you to see the wonders. He has no comprehension that some people don't have the technology, or the society, or otherwise have obligations or obstacles that make it impossible to do anything they want. His naivete is a sort of nod to how a Trek viewer might view Trek, which would be to see utopia and think that in 300 years life will be paradise for all. Sisko and Eddington raise the same objection in DS9, that not everyone has it so easy, and one is quick to forget that while cruising around in a fancy starship. It could even be seen as an allegory for people living in first-world countries with so-called 'first world problems'.

This leads me back to Salia being a shapeshifter and why it's important. She may look like the humans on the Enterprise, and come across as kindred to those who don't know better, but in reality every part of her life (including her biology) is so different that they are really total strangers to each other. She does seem to love, and to dream, so there is that in common (another Trek theme), but otherwise Wesley and she have nothing in common. She can't have the life he has, nor even the choices he has. Someone like her needs to adapt to survive her situation and can't just be anyone she wants to be. Being portrayed as a shapeshifter is relevant in showing that she and Anya are required to shape themselves to suit their needs, rather than their wants. Wesley is free to just be Wesley (something it takes him until S7 to learn) but Salia needs to be someone *for others*, not of her own choice. And I think saving the surprise for the end is important too, because it's a way for the meta-narrative to say "Surprise, audience, not everyone is like you and has what you have. Your assumptions about others may not be correct, so be careful in deciding for them what they should or shouldn't be able to do." I don't think this episode is exactly Shakespeare, but there's more going on here than just a lame teen-crush episode with a surprise twist.

And @ Sean Hagins,

"You also have to remember that a lot of kids my age watched Star Trek, and to be honest, it is always a thrill for tweens and early teens to have someone close to their age on a TV show and for them to be the brilliant one whilst the adults are hopeless. "

This is something DISC fans are going to have to grapple with, which is that Trek used to appeal to people of all ages and was a show to grow up with. That was as true of TOS as it was of TNG and VOY, despite occasional bad moral unintentionally being portrayed in VOY. One doesn't even need a literal teenager to act as a proxy for a young, wonder-filled viewer. The ship itself and the people on it can exemplify that innocence, like Data does, and like any of them do when acting as explorers. But the Riker/Guinan scene here is a good example of giving the audience both sides of it: the young love-struck side, and the adult side where kid stuff is a nuisance getting in the way of the 'good stuff'. Part of TNG's appeal is even that the kid stuff and the adult stuff were often entwined or even the same thing, and that's a feat. TNG did that better than DS9, although DS9 certainly had some of it (Odo spinning as a top, for example).

What DISC gains in terms of keeping up with the market in fast pacing and dark themes it'll lose tenfold over in not being a show anyone can grow up with. At best it'll appeal to adults who have already been formed and are consuming it as yet another channel for entertainment. An episode like The Dauphin could never exist on that show, and although many TNG fans may consider it to be sub-par, it's still a good example of programming that deals with the issues in a delicate way while keeping light on its toes and not getting too down in the muck with existential crisis. The better parts of the episode resonate, but don't drag you down with them. The ending of the episode is arguably sad, but it's a happy sadness, because it highlights the hopeful fact that no amount of technology will take away from us the simple pleasures and pains of growing up and losing things we care about. TNG is about how even though everyone may experience those pains they can still emerge from them an enlightened, Federation person. Contrast that with DISC, where the tone of the show seems to suggest that when you go through bad stuff you end up permanently messed up and misunderstood forever. Granted, that does happen in real life so we can't call that premise unrealistic. But is it the message young people need to hear?
Set Bookmark
Peter Swinkels
Thu, Jan 18, 2018, 1:46pm (UTC -6)
Re: TOS S2: The Ultimate Computer

Just a general observation that is only somewhat related to this episode’s theme: I sometimes get the idea that people who are derisive and dismissive about technological advances are only too happy to embrace technology that used to be an advancement in the past, before they were born that is. I’m not saying that one shouldn’t be careful when adapting new technologies however.
Set Bookmark
Peter G.
Wed, Jan 17, 2018, 10:32am (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S1: The Wolf Inside

@ Plain Simple

"Possibly a bit off-topic, but why do think there is ether, despite the fact that there doesn't seem to be any requirement for it in any of our current scientific theories (to the best of my knowledge)? "

The universe is expanding, and/or the ruler is shrinking, at an accelerated rate. The massive objects within it aren't the source of expansion, so something else is. The current buzz-word is 'dark energy', which is a pretentious way of saying "we have no idea." The simplest solution to me is that the main substance of the universe has properties we don't understand. Also, it would simplify a lot of quantum observations; for instance, quantum fluctuations wouldn't have to be seen as emerging 'from nowhere' if space itself was a fluid.
Set Bookmark
Peter G.
Wed, Jan 17, 2018, 12:05am (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S1: The Wolf Inside

@ LJ,

It's easy to confuse which parts of Trek of totally made-up and which are closer to being theoretically possible, and which are in the hazy middle which 'could' exist but we have no reason to expect for now. TOS, TNG and the rest have each had their share of each, but I think it's lazy to lump everything together and just surmise that Trek 'science' has always been nonsense. I firmly do not believe that to be the case. But there are exceptions: the transporter is a blatantly made-up idea whose original purpose was just to avoid using models for landing; it was a budget issue in TOS. Based on what we know today that tech should be impossible, hence the 'Heisenberg Compensators.' Naturally that became the signature tech of the series, but there are many other aspects of it that make far more sense. We had a discussion about this recently in another thread and I don't want to rehash all of it, but suffice to say that the warp drive idea contains a mix of the possible, the probably, and the very unlikely. Matter/antimatter as a power source is highly probable for future use; note that the matter/antimatter energy has nothing to do with warp drive, it's just the power source for the ship. Using crystals to channel charged particle? Theoretically possible, and highly likely in some way, shape, or form. Other options include containment fields (which the Enterprise also uses), or some other non-reactive chamber. Of course the benefit of the crystals is the lattice structure, which perhaps we'll be able to re-create in novel ways, so that while we may not use crystals per se it might end up being some artificial structure that uses the molecular arrangement to channel particles, but that's close enough to count for me.

Then you have the 'warp bubble', which heck if I know what it really does. So that's not something I can address.

But getting to subspace, which does seem necessarily as a premise in Trek, it's not without theoretical backing. Previous to Einstein physicists regularly referred to the "ether" as being the medium through which EM waves traveled, as they surmised (perhaps correctly) that all waves require a medium. By the 30's it had been concluded that whether or not there's an ether normal mechanics measurements could be made even while ignoring it, so it was deemed superfluous as a concept, which *isn't the same* as stating that there is no ether (which there may be). In fact I think there is one, but that's no matter. The point is that if 'space' was in fact not empty space but rather a substance of some kind, then of course a corollary of that would be that this substance must exist against some backdrop, i.e. that there must be some kind of reality behind the ether; some structure, or even just a rule-set. We could easily enough just call that something 'subspace'. Why not? All we'd need to do is to suppose that the light speed limit is determined by the ether, and that in order to bypass it we'd need to bushwhack through the ether or part it like the Red Sea or something. If it really is a 'something' then surely it can be manipulated. So no, I would definitely say that subspace is a safe sci-fi concept insofar as it certainly could exist, and there's certainly no reason to suppose that it doesn't, provided there really is an ether. And if there is no ether, I might add, it would be most curious that bozons such as photons would all obey some strange principle causing their speed to always be fixed, neither faster nor slower. The most likely candidate as far as I can tell to govern their uniformity ought to be some principle about how their propagate, which surely must be related to that in which they propagate.

But enough about fun theorizing, the main point some are trying to make isn't that there are prominent theories out there hypothesizing the existence of subspace; of course there aren't. But it's one thing to imagine something that surely could exist and in fact would make total sense if it did, and quite another to suppose a sci-fi concept that beggars belief and actually sounds ridiculous. I do believe the argument being made is that the spore network is neither likely, nor suggested by any conceivable reasoning, nor would it even make sense to us to suppose that such a thing exists, and it certainly doesn't make any sense to suppose that spores are some kind of basic building block of reality. It's not just far-fetched, it's simply ridiculous. Could there be strange life out there? Sure. But supposing that the universe is tied together by spores is roughly on par with belief in the Force from Star Wars; in fact it's so close that it borders on copyright infringement. But I really do think that this concept is much closer to a fantasy premise than sci-fi. Most sci-fi isn't supposed to be 'real science' anyhow, but it's quite another thing to introduce what is basically magic and call it science. Frankly I think that's not only sloppy, but gives people a very bad impression of *what kinds* of concepts can be called scientific.
Set Bookmark
Peter Swinkels
Tue, Jan 16, 2018, 3:13pm (UTC -6)
Re: TOS S2: The Omega Glory

...okay, eternal youth, US flag, religion (attempting to convince others Spock is the devil)? Obviously an attempt to criticize them. The episode is too difficult to follow, so I don’t know what to think. Where did those “aliens” get that flag, Bible, and other stuff any way?
Set Bookmark
Peter Swinkels
Tue, Jan 16, 2018, 2:40pm (UTC -6)
Re: TOS S2: The Omega Glory

Okay, after 14 minutes I can barely follow what’s going on. Given the fact that the review essentially says this episode is incoherent I am going to assume that it’s not me missing something. Curious to see where this episode will go...
Set Bookmark
Peter G.
Tue, Jan 16, 2018, 2:34pm (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S1: The Wolf Inside

@ Plain Simple,

"Don't enter the palace! Our princess is in another castle."

Wait, is this an actual quote? And you're right, at the end of this episode he appears in a Mushroom Kingdom. Are the writers seriously making a Super Mario Brothers reference here? Oh man, Star Trek has been reduced to a pop culture pun.
Set Bookmark
Peter G.
Tue, Jan 16, 2018, 10:28am (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S1: The Wolf Inside

@ philadlj,

"It's high time Tilly got a receive a field commission of ensign."

Tell that to Harry Kim.
Set Bookmark
Peter G.
Mon, Jan 15, 2018, 10:52pm (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S1: The Wolf Inside

@ Shannon,

I do not believe by any means there are "more of you" than of people who object to various things in the show. My observation here is that it seems split roughly 50/50, and elsewhere I really can't say.

"Lisa Randolph wrote a very human script that explores how our characters are dealing with the beyond strenuous, dangerous situation in which they find themselves"

Really? Which characters are being explored through the scripting in this situation? Burnham, yes, and Lorca I suppose, since he's being tortured. Saru seems fine, Tilly seems better than fine (i.e. in better form than normal), Stamets isn't really a character right now, Culber is "dead"...so who's left? It appears to me that the exploration of 'characters' is really just more Burnham material. And to be frank I'm not even sure how they're exploring it, i.e., how she's changing. She *says* she's changing, but I have no idea what that means since I don't see any change. Even the one real change they could have gone for - an execution - turns out to be a cheat and it's the same old Burnham.

A couple of other points:

"One wrong move and death would be assured, so watching these characters navigating this proverbial mind field was very entertaining."

Yes, the twists in the story seem to be attractive to many viewers.

"And I love how they brought back Michelle Yeoh as the savage emperor. Looking forward to next week."

An example of one of these plot twists.

"As for Tyler/Voq, now that we know the secret (something we all suspected), I'm very curious where they take the character."

And yet another page-turner plot twist. From the sound of it, what you like about this show is that it's LOST in space. That's exactly what many people didn't want, which is a cut/paste of another series with its same design bible and manner of storytelling and just superimposed in a Trek setting. You know, exactly the same thing they did with Star Trek: Beyond, where the studio demanded a generic action film with Trek characters inserted. That's what many people feel we have here. Not saying you shouldn't enjoy it, but don't act all indignant when people would rather watch real Trek than LOST or Fringe. Those are what they are, and I even somewhat liked both, but Trek should never use that template.


Set Bookmark
Peter G.
Mon, Jan 15, 2018, 12:27pm (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S1: The Wolf Inside

@ wolfstar,

"The credit goes to writer Lisa Randolph"

So that's the perpetrator behind "She's an unspeakably deep well of human compassion" and other such gems.

"the presence of Andorians and Tellarites as an Enterprise callback was also welcome and realized effectively and understatedly."

You mean a TOS callback, right? ;)

@ Ed,

"Voq's mental conditioning obviously went wrong. The show has been very consistent about this. L'Rell is clearly aware of it."

Yes, but once he attacks Voq the directing and writing make it clear that the struggle is over and he's Voq now. He tells Burnham point blank that he can no longer feel any trace of Tyler and is entirely Voq. They make a point to show his face go blank as he transforms finally into Voq before attacking Burnham. So maybe there's a case that he was still unhinged on the planet, but in Burnham's quarters, no, that's just us seeing what a simpleton Voq is. Even when he's arrested he seems to think he's accomplished something. What a fool.

PS, I should comment on something I neglected in my initial review, which is - why is there a need for this show to include material that belongs in films like Event Horizon or Seven? It's one thing to have adult themes and morally grey characters, but straight-up slasher gore and disgusting images? This not only has no place on Trek, but it makes it impossible for families to show this to their children. Just how stupid are the producers to think that making a Trek series rated R is a good thing? I suppose we could argue the same about Tarantino's proposal to write a Trek film, but at least parents would know in advance to leave the kiddies out of it.
Set Bookmark
Peter G.
Mon, Jan 15, 2018, 10:10am (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S1: The Wolf Inside

This episode has the largest swings between being almost good and being almost bad. We go from scenes with legitimate potential - such as seeing Andorians and Tellarites together with Vulcans and Klingons, which even aside from the scripting is just very nice to see in any context - and then proceed to gibberish scenes with spores and Stamets involving the only actor they want to have to pay doing everything herself. Others have already commented on how ludicrous it is that the CMO isn't there, or the engineering staff either. Can you image someone doing an operation on the ship's 'engines' without Geordi standing right there watching? How about a lawyer to advocate for Stamets' rights as she attempts an untested and potentially risky procedure on him? Who exactly has power of attorney over him while he's in that state? If it was Culber then who does the PoA go to next? You see, this show doesn't have senior staff meetings where ideas are debated, instead they have 'action points' where 'the hero' daringly goes ahead with a Risky Plan because she's The One Who Knows What To Do (TM).

It's sad to have to endure these swings, because it becomes difficult to take the main arc of the rebel alliance seriously when it follows scenes that are just silly. When Tilly intriduced the spores (the masters of life and death!) to cure Stamets I sat back and said to myself, "Ok, we've gone all the way now, we may as well set this in Rivendell and call the treatment "magic elf powder".

The big pluses in the episode were the fact of Burnham trying to make contact with the Alliance, and trying to learn about their allied principles. The talking scenes there were the highlight of the episode. However the inescapable problem in the series is the scripting. It's beyond bad; it's hardly believable that anyone is lazy enough to accept scripts like this. If I saw lines like this from even an undergrad writing student I'd suggest they try to find a different line of work. The opening monologue was cringe-worthy, and the latest in a series of expositions that are supposed to get us to...know Burnham better? Feel some 'drama'? All they sound is like pretentious chatter. They come off similarly to that guy everyone knows who's totally incompetent and knows nothing and is always the first to volunteer to take charge of things and offer 'information'. The moment he opens his mouth you know you'll have no choice but to endure his chatter and there's nothing you can do about it. He'll probably be given the job, too, because no one has the guts to say out loud that he needs to just stop talking. Other parts of the dialogue were equally rank, including, unfortunately, some of the lines in the rebel camp, which caused what should have been an exciting scene to shrivel at times and fail to deliver on hearing something interesting. As an example, when Burnham asks the awkward question to Voq of how he does what he does (great question, genius) his answer is even less impressive, which just ends up being a plot contrivance to activate Tyler's inner persona instead of having importance in its own right. Sarek's commentary about Burnham is equally cringe-worthy, and the lack of his addressing - even privately to Burnham - the fact of the parallel universe made him look like a complete fool. He should have known immediately what her predicament was and took steps to take it upon himself to establish a rapport with her for mutual advantage. All he did instead was mutter obscure comments about her intentions; not very logical. And Sarek should be a bright enough fellow to deduce immediately "Ah, a parallel universe, of course, very simple". Instead the actor once again portrays Sarek emotively, presumably because he isn't aware that he can communicate ideas and understanding without needing to do things like 'look shocked'. I used to like that actor quite a lot but I think he's in over his head on this show. With scripting like this you need people who can rise over and above the material, like Patriack Stewart, not who can barely tread water with it.

Speaking of treading water, it appears by this point that SMG is capable of only two modes of expression: struggling to look like she's being attentive, and struggling to look pained. So far I haven't seen a third thing she can do and boy is her performance monotonous. Worse than that, the two notes she does aren't good ones; they seem completely artificial and flat. Any scene with her will sound the same way and end the same way every single time. I don't even need to see her perform it, I already know what it will be like. She's got to be the worst actor on this show by a longshot. She can't hold her own against Lorca or Stamets, and even Tyler acts circles around her despite having impossible material to work with.

One last point: after all this time with the Ash/Voq story, and the reveal of Voq being told this way turns out to be completely laughable. Voq's secret identity finally rears its tedious head, and what's his first action? To attack an alliance leader in front of his guards out of indignant rage that he isn't Klingon enough. His second action is almost as ridiculous, which is to attack the Captain on a ship where once she's dead he'll be killed right after so that the XO can become Captain. So what we're meant to learn about this fabulous lead Voq is that he's basically a neanderthal pigeon-brain without even the common sense of a child. He thinks he's being so cool doing these things, but - ha! - he just looks so stupid. No wonder that other Klingon took his ship away from him, the guy is plain clueless. Why are we following an arc again for a loser like this?

What a seesaw. I wish they could just get a better writer.
Set Bookmark
Peter Swinkels
Sun, Jan 14, 2018, 3:16pm (UTC -6)
Re: TOS S2: Patterns of Force

By today's standards this is rather tame but it must have been rather shocking back then. A few well presented interesting ideas. Better than average in my opinion.
Set Bookmark
Peter G.
Fri, Jan 12, 2018, 12:53pm (UTC -6)
Re: Star Wars: Attack of the Clones

@ Chrome,

" Jason and I were having a discussion working under the assumption that there *is* a law against being a Sith."

I was engaging under the premise for a bit too, but that shouldn't exclude discussion about whether that's a reasonable premise in the first place.

"It's also my understanding that the Jedi knew the Sith were involved in the Separatist war effort after Darth Maul appeared in Epiosde I to back up the Separatist militants"

In Ep 1 there were no Separatist militants, only the Trade Federation conducting an illegal invasion. One thing I am sure about is that no one by the time of Ep 3 had worked out any connection between the Trade Federation's bizarre embargo of Naboo and the later Separatist insurgency apparently led by Count Dooku. The Jedi in these films were not exactly swift on the uptake.

"I don't think Palpatine/Sidious was in any real danger from the Jedi at the point he revealed his identity because he never revealed the extent of his power."

It's not a question of him being in material danger. The goal was to make the removal of the Jedi order legal, not to merely kill them. By revealing he, himself, was a criminal, it would undermine his authority and legitimacy. The whole political game is about 'making things legal', not just brute forcing them through. That's what the Sith ostensibly seem to have done wrong in the past - try to use brute force to overcome the law. Sidious knew that the only reliable way to get rid of the Jedi was to do so on the correct side of the law.
Set Bookmark
Peter G.
Fri, Jan 12, 2018, 12:01pm (UTC -6)
Re: Star Wars: Attack of the Clones

@ Chrome,

"A more similar situation would be if it were found that Donald Trump was working in league with ISIS or Al'Qaeda to overthrow US forces."

Your example seems cherry picked to make it sound as bad as possible. But it's not applicable because the Sith were not actively doing anything to the Republic; there were no current hostilities, nor had there been for a very long time. In fact the force Palpatine was *actually* backing, the Separatists, were not Sith, and Windu and the others didn't even know when arresting him that he was behind any of this. All they knew was that he was a Sith and therefore a bad guy. They hadn't even connected this to the Clone Wars! So your analogy doesn't work because there was no cause for anyone to believe that Palpatine being a Sith was in any way an indicating that he was supporting anti-Republic forces. Even according to your logic, that being a Sith was in and of itself a crime, there was no other crime they were aware of that he had committed, and no reason to believe him a threat to anyone other than the fact itself of him being a Sith. Do you really think they brought this matter to the judiciary before trying to arrest/kill him? I hardly think that's likely since this was part of a two-pronged effort to also take the senate by force. I somehow doubt a judge would sign off on that!

One seeming problem with Ep 3 people had was that the senate seemed strangely ok with the Jedi being wiped out randomly. The film doesn't shove this in your face - it focused more on Padme's view of freedom being lost - but the story implies that Palpatine made the video of the Jedi attacking him available for all to see, and that their conclusions matched his, that the Jedi had attempted a legit coup d'etat. I guess you could always just say he had mind controlled the whole senate and that their point of view shouldn't be taken seriously, but the film in any case doesn't show us that (and neither does the novelization). What it does show us is that the senate accepts that the Jedi tried to take over and had to be treated like terrorists after that. Were they fooled in some sense? Yes, but the lie is couched in a truth, which is that the Jedi messed up badly. What Luke in Ep 8 said about the Jedi was surely true in Ep 3, which is that the order was rotten and needed to be taken down from power. This is consistent with Qui-Gon's view of the council, which is that he didn't want to be a member and didn't believe their actions and bureaucratic attitudes were correct.

We don't know Republic law and can only speculate, but (flawed or not) I believe the story Lucas was trying to tell in Ep 3 was that Palpatine tricked the Jedi into treason knowing they wouldn't be able to resist. You do know that he didn't have to tell Anakin he was a Sith, right? If it was illegal to be a Sith don't you think he would have gone about this a different way? The story doesn't dwell on these details but if we're to assume he was a master strategist then surely he'd never offer the Jedi an officially legitimate reason to arrest him that the senate would accept.
Set Bookmark
Peter G.
Fri, Jan 12, 2018, 11:06am (UTC -6)
Re: Star Wars: Attack of the Clones

Windu in particular is a different story. Once you accept the premise that Palpatine has to be arrested, I do agree that the concept of simply incarcerating someone with the power to mind control the guards and tear apart any prison is troubling. I'm not exactly sure what Windu could do with someone who's going to resist like that except kill him. However that begs the question that the arrest was legitimate. Where was the warrant signed by a judge? Where was the actual proof he was a Sith other than the fact that Anakin had a conversation with him? Even if we accept your notion that the Sith would have been seen as criminals, do you just walk into the Chancellor's office and arrest him when you merely suspect he is one?
Set Bookmark
Peter G.
Fri, Jan 12, 2018, 10:19am (UTC -6)
Re: Star Wars: Attack of the Clones

@ Chrome,

Not sure where you're getting your facts, but neither canon nor expanded universe backs that up. In original canon the Jedi defended the Republic for "1,000 generations" so it's not a recent thing where the Sith have been around anytime recently. If you include the prequels then the law of Darth Bane had been in place for 1,000 years, and since then the Sith have been on the DL, never amounting to an army or an organization. Just two of them at a time, as Yoda says. The Republic would never consider a group of two people to be a threat in the face of an entire Jedi order, and in fact I doubt anyone in the Republic had ever heard of them.

You want to talk about a lone individual, with a religious faith that hadn't clashed with the Republic in 1,000 years, and who was duly elected, and then say he's broken the law? That sounds really messed up to me, and I'm not just being an apologist for this side of the argument. It's seriously a question of religious oppression. They had no proof that Palpatine did anything wrong other than having a faith that previously (a long, long time ago) was at odds with the government.
Set Bookmark
Peter G.
Fri, Jan 12, 2018, 9:06am (UTC -6)
Re: Star Wars: Attack of the Clones

Facts aren't in evidence about what the Sith were in the eyes of the average Republic citizen, but we know at least that the Jedi had thought them extinct and that this had been the case for some time as of Ep 1. Also don't forget that this was a group of basically military officers and not the legitimate police. So imagine if a general and two captains barged into the White House to 'arrest' the President and the army was supporting this. In our modern parlance that's called a coup, not a lawful police action. And indeed it was a coup, because other military people were intending to walk into Congress with weapons and declare that they were now in charge. That's what was happening here. Think of it in modern terms and tell me it isn't scary.
Set Bookmark
Peter G.
Thu, Jan 11, 2018, 3:55pm (UTC -6)
Re: Star Wars: Attack of the Clones

@ Chrome,

"The Jedi had evidence that Palpatine was a Sith Lord, and they knew a Sith had orchestrated two wars against the Republic. That should be cause enough for a lawful arrest."

Seriously, replace "Sith" with "Jew" or "Protestant" or something and tell me if that makes what the Jedi did ok. 'X group, that you are a member of, did bad things, so we're here to arrest you.' And it's not even the designated police, it's a group of vigilantes there under no authority but their own who've decided to arrest the Supreme Chancellor during wartime. It's pure treason according to the law. Of course they had good reason to want him arrested! But he knew they were too full of their own sense of entitlement to try to do so lawfully. Prior to the 'arrest' Yoda and Windu are literally plotting to take direct control of the senate, and Yoda - in a somewhat understated comment - suggests that this may be a dangerous path to take.

Also, check out the scene again. Palpatine doesn't just attack them, he makes double sure that their intent will be backed by violence before he strikes first, and announces treason for the cameras to make sure it's clear he's defending himself rather than starting trouble. Also, the Jedi clearly draw weapons first rather than try to make the proceedings peaceful.

From a 'good vs. evil' standpoint it may look obvious that the bad guy got the drop on them and that Windu did what he had to. From a legal standpoint the Jedi had no leg to stand on and they knew it. When watching this scene think back to the scene where Palpatine explains to Anakin that the Jedi are just as invested as the Sith in maintaining their public power, and he's completely correct. The Jedi don't even realize this is a weakness, and in that they're the cause of their own demise.
Set Bookmark
Peter G.
Wed, Jan 10, 2018, 4:39pm (UTC -6)
Re: DSC S1: Despite Yourself

@ Lobster,

You're right. Visual storytelling can turn a good script into something memorable. But visuals cannot turn a bad script into something memorable, only something flashy. The question is what's left over when you peel away the effects. In the end the core of the piece has to be the story, the writing. We're here to see human beings telling a story. That is not replaceable.
Set Bookmark
Peter G.
Wed, Jan 10, 2018, 3:32pm (UTC -6)
Re: VOY S7: Homestead

Rahul, you doing the sandwich method? Starting at seasons 1 and 7 and going to work your way to the middle? :)
Next ►Page 1 of 37
▲Top of Page | Menu | Copyright © 1994-2018 Jamahl Epsicokhan. All rights reserved. Unauthorized duplication or distribution of any content is prohibited. This site is an independent publication and is not affiliated with or authorized by any entity or company referenced herein. See site policies.