All posts by Phantom of the Space Opera

I’ve been fairly critical of the PT on here for various reasons, so I suppose I owe them some love, problems though they have.

I love the world building and the type of galaxy built during the waning days of the Republic. The Jedi are powerful and just, the Republic a proud government ... until you look beneath the gold blankets and see the corruption and hubris of the Jedi and Republic. The tension is complex, interesting, and dramatic.

Obi-Wan was perhaps the strongest part of the trilogy. Seeing the wise Jedi Master from the OT struggling as a mentor and later grief-stricken friend to Anakin made him a favorite of mine. To me, he’s the ultimate Jedi, on par with Luke. Qui-Gon too, for that matter.

Visually, although the CGI was overused, the PT has a very distinct and fresh aesthetic that distinguishes it from the OT in almost every aspect - ships, architecture, wide-shots of space, the planets themselves. It’s a nice touch.

And overall, I do like the story. Yes, I think there are major issues with the characters and moments of the story (some of which are indeed irreconcilable) but the Fall of Anakin Skywalker is still a compelling cautionary tale about the dangers of greed, lust, and misguided obsession. The PT compliments the OT well, even if it doesn’t quite enhance its sister trilogy as I wish it did.

The PT is fun, vibrant, and inspired one of the strongest eras in Star Wars. Do I think it’s overpraised and romanticized by its more staunch apologists? Yes, particularly when it comes to ROTS.

But I couldn’t imagine Star Wars without the PT.

Very strong analysis worthy of its conclusion. The discrepancies between the Original Saga and the ST you noted are indeed present, and of course I understand that deferring to the “correct” interpretation of the Original Saga (i.e. George’s concepts) is preferred by most.

I’m hesitant to call this a failing of the ST, however. Regardless of who was crafting the films, seamless cohesion with the Original Saga (hereafter “OS”) and purist understanding of the mythic tapestry comprising the OS would never be possible. The OS is an immutable six-chapter story that overshadows anything else within the Star Wars mythos. The ST either fails to live up to that standard or (imo) wasn’t trying to meet it out of the knowledge it would fall short.

I suppose this then feels like a point for those who question why the ST even exists if not in tandem with the fundamental elements of the OS.

I am of the opinion, however, that “different” isn’t synonymous with “worse” or “incorrect.” I do believe there’s still worthwhile and fulfilling symbology and lessons at play in the ST that, while perhaps diverging from the religious and philosophical undertones of the OS, still are worthy of recognition and praise.

If there is one point I’d say I disagree with, it’s in regards to Luke. For me, the darker cynic we saw in TLJ was a much needed Luke, even if it was initially hard to swallow.

Most Monomythic heroes never complete their Hero’s Journey, and for a long while, Luke never did himself. So seeing Luke go through that final phase of darkness was important and inspiring to me, if imperfect, from a personal and storytelling perspective. Perhaps that very well does infringe on George’s purpose and concept of Luke. So be it. I wouldn’t trade TLJ’s Luke for anything.

Great post. Refreshing to see a more refined critique of the ST that isn’t dependent on vitriol or double-standards.

Nice. I had heard whispers that Luke was originally planned to be struggling with some conflict, though I thought them just rumors.

Although these particular pieces hint that he was originally struggling with his father’s dark legacy and his own darkness, rather than his legendary status and failure to revive and reform the Jedi, it’s interesting to note that Luke was never planned to be the mythic hero many people might’ve wanted.

Although an appearance by Anakin would’ve been cool, I’m happy they didn’t include him. The ST needs to be centrally concerned with Rey and Kylo rather than Anakin and Luke, and I feel Anakin’s presence would’ve been overshadowing. It seems too that Kylo was the one who became obsessed with Vader, worshiping his burnt mask as of it were a holy relic, so it’s not like Anakin was wholly absent.

I understand why TFA reduced Luke’s role, though I do admit that something more could’ve been done than simply making him the McGuffin. Then again, I do love that cliffhanger ending to TFA.

Once again, thanks for sharing. These are always thought-provoking discussions.

The article makes the design seem more aesthetically driven rather than functionality based. Although the hand-guard plays a role, the primary impetus for implementing a cross-guard is to evoke the Medieval Knight visual and emphasize the regality of the Order at this time.

Functional or not, I love the design. I like that the HR Jedi are being differentiated from their successors in aesthetic as well as attitude. Pre-Imperial era Jedi always have struck me closer to Knights of the Templar rather than the Ronin-like Jedi of the OT.

I’d be curious to know why the cross-guard design was abandoned by the time of the PT.

@Cian42 Anakin was ready to train Ahsoka, imo, but he wasn’t ready to let her go when she decided to leave the Order. Whether Qui-Gon was there or not, I believe Ahsoka would’ve still followed the same path, more or less, and the impact on Anakin would’ve remained the same.

Qui-Gon chaperoning Anakin and Padmé isn’t something I can see, nor do I think it would’ve made a difference anyway. I suspect Qui-Gon, like Obi-Wan, would’ve quietly deduced Anakin and Padmé’s marriage, but Anakin’s problems are pretty fundamental. He’s courageous, strong, and caring, but also unbalanced and obsessive. His fate was sealed.

To be honest, if Qui-Gon’s survival would’ve prevented anyone from falling to the dark side, I think it’d be Dooku.

Obi-Wan was a fine master, but doomed to fail. The moments where he does genuinely try to reach out to Anakin are still blunted by his devotion to the Order that Anakin is increasing resentful of. Brothers-in-the-Force or not, Obi-Wan was thrust into a situation he wasn’t ready for during Anakin’s formative years as a Jedi.

I agree that Qui-Gon’s temperance, respect, and understanding of Anakin’s unique circumstance might’ve proved more compatible with Anakin’s own maverick tendencies, fostering his rebelliousness in a healthy way in service to the Force.

That said, I disagree with the idea that Anakin wouldn’t have fallen to darkness if Qui-Gon lived to be his master. Anakin was still his own man, and while his feelings of alienation from the Order played a role, his own insecurities and toxic characteristics were far more responsible for his turning to the Sith and Palpatine. Moreover, events like Shmi’s death or Ahsoka leaving the Jedi still would’ve happened with or without Qui-Gon.

Anakin’s fall was the coalescence of several things mostly controllable only by Anakin. Perhaps Qui-Gon might’ve been the confidant Anakin turned to rather than Palpatine, but Darth Vader was inevitable the moment Anakin decided he loved Padmé Amidala.

That’s the thing, having The Child and Boba Fett interact with the ST drama unnecessarily condenses the galaxy. While The Mandalorian itself certainly won’t stretch into the TLJ-TROS gap, it thrives from taking place in its own corner of galactic happenings.

Suddenly connecting its characters (if that is indeed possible by the conclusion of the show) to the all-important Luke Skywalker and Emperor Palpatine creates the impression that writers don’t trust the characters to stand on their own and feel like everything needs to be forcibly connected. Nobody in The Mandalorian has anything to offer the ST, imo.

The ST wasn’t constructed to support years of storytelling between the films. I think that, if creators want to tell stories in that era beyond what we already have, they have to realize you don’t need a galactic war or generation-spanning conflict to make your story interesting.

I don’t think The Mandalorian should tie in with the ST. One aspect of the show’s success is how self-contained it is. Connecting to to the ST wouldn’t help either project, imo, and just make the universe smaller.

Shows like TCW or Resistance don’t exist to “fix” a trilogy (not that I think the ST needs “fixing”), they exist to tell their own stories. They compliment their respective trilogies but they aren’t a crutch.

The existence of TCW, for instance, doesn’t excuse the flaws and failings of the PT or make the films themselves higher quality.

A tie-in series between the year gap of TLJ and TROS would be constrained by the relatively small window and won’t have much to offer beyond seeing more of Kylo’s time as Supreme Leader and perhaps more Resistance missions.

It could be fun, but rushed and non-essential. Novels and comics have covered that time frame already, too.

A flawed masterpiece. It’s my favorite trilogy and contains some of my favorite moments of the saga. I do have several issues with the OT, particularly relating to Leia and ROTJ in general, and I believe the films have been romanticized beyond what they actually are.

Regardless, I will never deny their craftsmanship nor their legacy. They’ve aged well and they’ve played a large role in shaping my views on storytelling.

Thanks for sharing. I'm looking forward to more of these. I too believe that this information, although not explicitly seen in the films, enhances Rey's character. Besides, it's always interesting to see how much aesthetic design influenced the personality and abilities of the character.

Our introduction to Rey in TFA is perhaps my favorite introduction to a character in Star Wars. Without any dialogue, we are quickly familiar with Rey's competency as a scavenger and mechanic (it's clear her speeder was customized and she knows her way around a Star Destroyer) as well as her curious yet wary personality. I see a lot of those elements in the concept art in the OP. Though I must admit, I wish we lingered on Jakku a little longer in TFA so that we could see more of the scenes in the concept art manifest on screen.

Although TFA was a fairly fast-paced movie (albeit one of the better paced films in the saga imo) adding a number of these scenes might've satisfied those who criticize Rey's supposedly inexplicable skills. Interesting, too, that the creators were set on a impoverished, scavenger Jedi from the start.

Even more interesting that Kira/Rey exploring the DSII was first considered during TFA. I think it demonstrates that, although many decry the plot of TROS as being spontaneous and lacking foresight, it was not an act of desperation but a revisitation of older concepts that didn't get used in TFA. Not that TROS is absolved of all its more questionable decisions, but I do think its foundation is firmer than what is popularly believed.

Cool. I can’t think of a Canon equivalent to the Shadows, so I would hope the concept is utilized at some point. The group adds a new dynamic to the Jedi that makes them all the more complex. They seem like black-ops Jedi.

In terms of their “ends justify the means” philosophy, I tend to side with Yoda’s teaching that it matters how Jedi choose to win. Victory without honor is hollow, and although I don’t doubt the Shadows were courageous and loyal to the Jedi, their mission isn’t one of “knowledge and defense” but eradication of the Sith. The Jedi are called to first unconditionally love everyone, including their enemies, so I don’t know how faithful to the professed Jedi philosophy the Shadows were in concept.

On the other hand, sometimes idealism is too high a cost. The secrect actions of the Shadows may have prevented a number of catastrophes and their somewhat moral ambiguity allows them to do what must be done for victory, to go where the Jedi otherwise couldn’t. They are instrumental in preserving the public image and security of the Jedi. The Shadows get their hands dirty so everyone else can keep clean and live safely, speaking volumes to the what Jedi Shadows sacrifice.

I dislike RLM for several reasons, including his lengthy disparaging of the PT. His reviews are devoid of critical analysis. They rely on an unfunny persona and disgruntled appeals to nostalgia for the OT to garner support for his opinion.

I blame RLM for popularizing the idea that taking a Star Wars film you didn’t like and lambasting it on the Internet without highlighting anything it does well is somehow respectable.

Nowadays, most, if not all, of the the videos that do nothing but bash the ST really are just mimicking RLM’s PT reviews. Even the criticisms are the same (ruin what comes before, bland characters, lack of creativity, etc.).

Not everything RLM says is completely invalid, but his presentation is so abysmal that he loses all credibility in my eyes. I’m glad Mike Klimo directly refutes him in his Ring Theory essay.

To the point of the post, I agree that the “lack of a protagonist” is a silly complaint. The scope of TPM is larger than that of ANH, requiring several different perspectives to navigate the different aspects of the galaxy.

Qui-Gon is our lens to view the Jedi (I think it’s interesting that the first PT Jedi protagonist is known for criticizing the Jedi Order), Padmé is our lens in Republic politics, and Anakin is our lens to view Tatooine (i.e. the common man).

TPM is not a linear story, and although I sometimes feel it wanders and lingers too much, saying it fails because it doesn’t mimic ANH’s progression (when TPM never sought to do so) is bogus.

I will say, however, that I wish Obi-Wan had a larger role to play. He felt like Qui-Gon’s sidekick throughout the film, even taking a backseat on Tatooine. When he’s left alone to face Darth Maul at the end, I’m really only rooting for Obi-Wan based on the fact that I know who he is from the OT.

It’s not a big deal, and I’m sure Lucas decided to give more time towards developing the new Jedi in Qui-Gon and trust audiences will already recognize and accept Obi-Wan as is.

He’s taking a shot at Rey by implying that, because she’s not a Skywalker by blood, she has no right to wield the Skywalker Saber.

Which is silly, imo, considering Luke and Leia give Rey the name Skywalker, Luke gave her his explicit blessing to use the saber, she has far more connection with the Skywalkers than with Palpatine, and the saber specifically called to her in TFA.

The requirement that you must be a Skywalker by blood is imaginary and again propagates the unnecessary argument over “rightful ownership.”

For instance, arguing that Rey shouldn’t have the saber means Mara Jade shouldn’t either, since she married into the Skywalkers and isn’t one by blood (which again is simply nonsense). To be frank, refusing to recognize Rey’s claim to the saber feels like a subtle way of unfairly disparaging her character.

^Anakin did bring balance to the Force. TROS explicitly confirms this and does nothing to contradict that fact. The balance restored by Anakin (and Luke, though to a lesser degree) is not everlasting. It must be continually fought for as evil inevitably returns.

Rey is the preserver of Anakin’s legacy. Although her accomplishments are her own, she is carrying on a never-ending war that Anakin and Luke fought before her. Nothing in the ST is dismissive or disrespectful of Anakin being the Chosen One. If anything, it honors what he started.

Of course, as the OP also points out, Anakin restoring balance to the Force, while important, is secondary to him saving his son and freeing himself from Palpatine’s thrall.

Saying Anakin’s sacrifice is rendered meaningless by Palpatine surviving mistakenly reframes his actions in ROTJ as motivated by hatred for Palpatine rather than love for Luke, imo. Both feelings are present, but the latter is far more important and is what truly gives Anakin’s sacrifice meaning.

I agree with much of what you argue, particularly the concluding paragraph. Squabbling over the “rightful owner” of the iconic Skywalker Lightsaber is fruitless and unnecessary. As the OP suggests, each owner of the Skywalker Saber has connection and claim to it, none of which is more valid than the other.

I also completely agree of how fitting it was for the Skywalker Saber to be buried on the Lars Homestead next to Shmi. She’s an unsung hero that too often gets diminished to a plot device for Anakin’s fall when in reality she’s the “matriarch of the family,” as the OP aptly put. The entire ending sequence on Tatooine in TROS was nothing but respectful and honoring of the Skywalkers and their legacy.

I have mixed feelings regarding the possibility that some future heroes would dig up and use the Skywalker and Leia’s lightsaber, but since it is a symbolic “passing of the torch,” I think I would ultimately be ok with it.

In a more meta-context, it was the Return of the Jedi that led to the Palpatine’s initial defeat, and in that moment Palpatine believes it’s the Return of the Sith that is assuring the Final Order’s victory. So perhaps it’s having Palpatine turn something triumphant for the Jedi into something sinister, if that makes sense.

I believe that Canon has created the narrative of Palpatine always acknowledging the possibility, or outright inevitability, that his original “revenge” in the form of the Empire would be undermined or dismantled at some point, hence his obsession with immortality, the secrets of the Force, The Contingency, and the formation of the FO/Sith Eternal.

Like all tyrants, Palpatine, having attained power, spends the rest of his life desperately trying to preserve it and regain it when it’s lost.

I think substituting “Revenge” for “Return” would indeed be a cool callback, but I think “Return” is more appropriate: he’s returning to power and dominance in a moment of euphoric victory, not taking revenge on the Resistance or the Jedi. “Revenge” would imply that Palpatine believes he’s been beaten, and I think Palpatine thinks of Endor as merely a “setback”; he’s too proud to admit his fallibility.

I’ve saved this image and your previous one to my phone. I love how you take abstract concepts and break them down in a digestible and comprehensive way. The complexity of the Force may never be fully understood by us fans, but making worthwhile attempts to decipher its state of being enriches the Star Wars universe. This post accomplishes that in spades.

I was originally pretty staunchly anti-Midi Chlorians during the PT releases, but I’ve since come around and accepted them as an integral and profound part of the symbology of life, death, creation, and unity with the Force.

Thanks for posting these. Your work is a gift.

Something that TLJ calls out is that we too often consider the Jedi and the Sith synonymous with the light and dark side respectively, something that TROS admittedly does little to rectify.

Star Wars has gone to great lengths to illustrate that the dark side has a place in the Force, though of course not in a dominant sense. But, even if that that Taoist balance between the light and dark (e.g. the Mortis Daughter and Son) is necessary, it’s still in service to the larger godhead of the Force (e.g. the Mortis Father). It’s the Sith who twist and corrupt the dark side by essentially trying to enslave the metaphysical Force to their mortal whims.

I think that characters like Chirrut Îmwe illustrate that the serving the Force faithfully isn’t necessarily about balancing the light or the dark. He never speaks of those two sides, in fact. It’s not “I’m one with the light side/dark side,” it’s “I’m one with the Force.”

So, in theory, if the post-TROS landscape wants to break the mold of this endless Jedi vs Sith feud, a war that hopefully Rey put to rest with Palpatine’s death, a more enlightened approach would be to serve “the Force” period, not the light side/Jedi nor the dark side/Sith, if that makes sense

It actually would add symbolic weight to Rey taking the name Skywalker, since she now bears the legacy of both the Jedi-Skywalkers and the Sith-Palpatines. Light and darkness in name and action, I guess.

But I guess the question is, will Star Wars shift away from the Jedi, and honestly I don’t know. TROS seemed to affirm Rey’s identity as a Jedi and the legacy of the Jedi before her, but at the same time it ended the war between the Jedi and Sith, so does that mean she’s a Jedi in that moment of destroying the Sith and will later change?

In any case, I agree we need to move past the “light vs dark” dynamic and focus more on the Force as a divine whole. I feel like such a concept was beyond the PT Jedi (although Yoda eventually understood this, I believe), but it’s possible that Rey possesses that wisdom. Time will tell.

I’ll say no. Most Jedi are taken from their biological parents before they can form close attachments, so they’re pretty much strangers. Parents who give up their child to the Jedi probably just want their child to have a better life or don’t want to argue with the supposed Will of the Force.

Also, some alien cultures may not emphasize the family dynamic we’re familiar with in most parts of the world. Children may be raised collectively by their communities or, like in the case of someone like Ventress, they may be an orphan.

^^Among fans of the specific trilogies, I would agree. But as a whole, yes, I do believe that fans are forgiving or forgetting (or at least minimizing, if that’s a better word) the potential falterings of the Original Saga for one reason or another yet don’t do so when it comes to the ST.

Perhaps I’m wrong and it really is just optimism, that people are, as you say, more interested in expressing their enjoyment rather than their misgivings. I doubt it, though, since a large number of fans have no problem lambasting films and content they don’t particularly enjoy. Admittedly, I do this too at times.

(Not that critiquing something is bad, but I think we’re all familiar with the type of discourse I’m referring to when I say “lambasting,” which, even if propagated by a vocal minority, has only grown louder and more self-assured).

I can’t think of a time when anyone lodged a serious criticism of the OT in recent years. And the PT narrative has taken a complete reversal from where it was 10 years ago (which is a good thing).

So in a fanbase where there’s been a unified effort, approaching consensus levels of agreement, to recognize the importance and success of the Original Saga on some level, even if one doesn’t identify as a PT or OT fan first and foremost, why isn’t the same curtesy extended to the ST throughout the fanbase?

Why must the ST discourse be dominated by its potential shortcomings (e.g. this entire thread) rather than its successes while the Original Saga is hailed as a masterpiece?

Indeed, there are fans who refuse to acknowledge that the ST even deserves to exist, and those voices aren’t fringe in any way.

If I were to say that about the PT or the OT, I’m sure very few would agree and would even be bewildered that anyone could think such a thing (not that I do).

Just to be clear, I’m not saying fairness is the rule of law here. People have to right to craft and express what opinions they choose to. 

Accordingly, my opinion is that double-standards abound when speaking of the ST in relation to other trilogies, and I’d like to see that change.

I’m expecting that this imbalance is due to there just being a comparatively small amount of ST fans populating the discussion, which will hopefully change in the years to come.

Edit: A little off-topic, I know, but I think what I typed applies to what’s been talked about thus far with (lack of) ST planning or the general discourse surrounding Rey.