Because at that point he'd committed an irrevocable act, and could no longer go back to his old life. "Whoops, sorry, Jedi Council, that I lopped off 'ol Mace's life, and caused his death. My bad. Uh, should I go stand in the corner?"
Most optimistic result in "normal" Republic circumstances would obviously call for expulsion from the Jedi Council, but presumably also trial for homicide of Mace Windu (and what happened to the village of sand people on Tantoine might come out, to).
"Which is to say, why not something else, like surrendering himself to the Council?"
See above. Also, primary thing, he'd lose Padme.
"Or killing himself?"
a) Not a Jedi thing. B) he'd lose Padme.
"Or killing Palpatine and himself?"
One of his then present melange of confused fantasies was doing that, sooner or later; remember his line to Padme about how they could rule the Galaxy together after killing Palpatine?
One of his then long term delusions was that he was going to kill Palpatine, and, of course, eventually he did.
I'd just like to make sure I understand this story properly. After the movie, ex walked directly into Jimmy Smits' car, you immediately forgot how he reacted to it, and it turns out he's so not nice that he's even an ass about walking into his car? Also, is it really necessary to go so far as to collide with his car in order to criticize the film? Couldn't she have just given him the finger, or told him he ruined his career by leaving NYPD Blue, or that he couldn't fill President Bartlett's shoe's on Bartlett's worst day?
Actually, this is one of the moments I liked, because HC manages to convey the sort of unmoored-ness of AS after he did something awful & hence sees his old life evaporate. Think of Milgram saying "the experiment demands that you continue." False, but potent.
Ex is in town, the Smits' incident is from the distant past (same galaxy, though).
"Whoops, sorry, Jedi Council, that I lopped off 'ol Mace's life, and caused his death. My bad. Uh, should I go stand in the corner?"
Well, yes, except that it wouldn't be strange for the Jedi to have some byzantine method of punishment/rehabilitation/purgatory. Keep in mind, Anakin didn't actually kill Windu, Palpatine did. Skywalker stopped Windu from breaking the law, which is certainly mitigating, no? (I do think the Padme thing might be the reason.)
HC manages to convey the sort of unmoored-ness of AS after he did something awful & hence sees his old life evaporate
Yes, so it was especially too bad that he doesn't wrestle with it at all, just drops to his knees and pledges allegiance to Palpatine.
Okay, that was snarky, and I've heard the "he sure turned bad awfully fast" comment from someone else who I also trust, so I think you are onto something.
I haven't yet seen the movie myself. I'm probably the last fan left who hasn't seen it.
Clearly, Lucas needs to brush up on his Aristotle. A probably impossiblity is always preferable to an improbable possibility. A series of improbable impossibilities? Well..
Why does he immediately pledge allegiance to the Dark Side?
Because the laws of collective expediency required it to happen. By which I mean George Lucas.
Personally I found it as unbelievable as the 'Noooooooo!' at the end. Is there any audience in the world that didn't titter at that scene? I was sitting surrounded by wee children and they were all laughing merrily. There was no pathos.
It wasn't as terrible as it could have been, I suppose.
By the way, on the indirect recommendation of you all I went and rented Barcelona, and it was a hilarious movie. Thanks!
""Whoops, sorry, Jedi Council, that I lopped off 'ol Mace's life,and caused his death."
Sorry; my head wrote "lopped off 'ol Mace's hand," and I didn't proof.
"(I do think the Padme thing might be the reason.)"
I don't think there's any argument over whether that was Anakin's primary motivation (which grew out of the loss of his mother, and his pre-existing insecurities as foreshadowed in The Phantom Menace). (What's a tad harder to explain, perhaps, is why Anakin waited until his last premonition of his mother's death, in AOTC, after 14 years or so, to go back to Tatooine to try to do something about his, last he looked, enslaved mother.)
I've figured you wouldn't be interested enough in the subject for their to be any point in my calling attention to my four posts looking at the script, and the scenes and lines that fell out of the final picture, but if anyone is, start here and read the three posts above it.
Also, arguably Anakin had been in the grips of the dark side for a very long time before the confrontation in the Council Chambers. Since the massacre of the Sand People, say. Or even earlier. Recall that during Attack of the Clones he's musing about the merits of dictatorship until it becomes clear that Padme's unimpressed by this stuff. All of his heroic Jedi work comes in the course of the Clone Wars when he, like the rest of the Jedi, was fighting on the side of the Dark Lord of the Sith. The only time in his whole career when he's genuinely fighting on the side of the good guys is at the very end of Return of the Jedi when he kills Palpatine.
If the council was worried that Anakin and Palpatine were getting to be too close, why did they follow a consistent policy of pushing the two of them together? Why not send Anakin somewhere else instead of leaving him in the one place he could do the most damage?
"All of his heroic Jedi work comes in the course of the Clone Wars when he, like the rest of the Jedi, was fighting on the side of the Dark Lord of the Sith."
Of course, there was no one fighting on any other side (save any, but presumed, unmentioned Imperial pacificists, insofar as they "fight" by not fighting), since Palpatine/Sidious commanded both sides.
But, as I pointed out, and unnecessarily, because it's perfectly obvious if one isn't blinded by ranting about Jar-Jar, right from the start the Council barred the training of the boy Anakin ("much fear I sense in you," "fear leads to, etc.," "the boy is dangerous! why can't you see it?," and so on). The only reason the Council allowed Obi-Wan to train Anakin is because of Qui-Gonn's death, and Obi-Won's death-vow to him. And we already knew from the very first movie that Obi-Wan had proved unable to teach Anakin in a morally successful way ("I thought I could teach him as well as Yoda; I was wrong."). (Left unclear, of course, is whether if Ani had, hypothetically, been Yoda's padawan, would Yoda have done any better.)
All SW questions are, by definition, geeky; live with it.
"If the council was worried that Anakin and Palpatine were getting to be too close, why did they follow a consistent policy of pushing the two of them together?"
They didn't. Anakin had started with the Jedi at age 5 ("too old, he is). They never "pushed" him near Palpatine; they simply couldn't keep them entirely apart. But even if all you know is the movies, you know that the Council had sent Obi-Wan and Anakin to the Outer Rim for the past five months (they'd just returned as the movie began, as stated in dialogue). That's literally as far away as he could be sent from Palpatine.
Neither could they stop Palpatine from his "I'm appointing you as my personal representative to the Jedi Council" maneuver; they just tried to make the best of it, and, obviously, failed. But we have nigh-endless dialogue on the problem, from the AOTC, to Mace's in-every-commerical "It's dangerous to put them together; I don't trust him" lines.
"Why not send Anakin somewhere else instead of leaving him in the one place he could do the most damage?"
They did. See above. (And, again, Mace forbade Anakin to come with him and Kit and the other two to arrest Palpatine.) There's obviously nothing else they practically could have done.
I was referring only to the last (latest) movie. To tell him to spy on Palpatine is to tell him to do something that would necessarily make the relationship between the two a closer one. Also, keeping Anakin at home while Obi-Wan went off to get General Grievous had the effect of keeping Anakin closer to Palpatine.
To tell him to spy on Palpatine is to tell him to do something that would necessarily make the relationship between the two a closer one. Also, keeping Anakin at home while Obi-Wan went off to get General Grievous had the effect of keeping Anakin closer to Palpatine."
This is reversing cause and effect. Palps had already appointed Anakin as his rep to the Jedi Council; asking Anakin to spy doesn't make them any closer at all, but simply tries to take advantage of the existing closeness. It's a failed attempt to drive a wedge, and Palps cannily takes advantage of it, but if there's a failure by the Council there, and there is, it's a failure of results, not intent.
"Also, keeping Anakin at home while Obi-Wan went off to get General Grievous had the effect of keeping Anakin closer to Palpatine."
It kept him where he was, not closer. This is arguably a better point, and not entirely without merit, but it's not a huge point, either.
Besides, Ani had a Destiny, and a Prophecy To Fulfil. :-) (I hope everyone realizes that trying to explain away contradictions is a game played for fun, not a Serious Cause, which Kieran Healey has bewailed over at Timothy Burke's site.)
"Why?"
Because at that point he'd committed an irrevocable act, and could no longer go back to his old life. "Whoops, sorry, Jedi Council, that I lopped off 'ol Mace's life, and caused his death. My bad. Uh, should I go stand in the corner?"
Most optimistic result in "normal" Republic circumstances would obviously call for expulsion from the Jedi Council, but presumably also trial for homicide of Mace Windu (and what happened to the village of sand people on Tantoine might come out, to).
"Which is to say, why not something else, like surrendering himself to the Council?"
See above. Also, primary thing, he'd lose Padme.
"Or killing himself?"
a) Not a Jedi thing. B) he'd lose Padme.
"Or killing Palpatine and himself?"
One of his then present melange of confused fantasies was doing that, sooner or later; remember his line to Padme about how they could rule the Galaxy together after killing Palpatine?
One of his then long term delusions was that he was going to kill Palpatine, and, of course, eventually he did.
Posted by Gary Farber | Link to this comment | 05-22-05 11:54 PM
I'd just like to make sure I understand this story properly. After the movie, ex walked directly into Jimmy Smits' car, you immediately forgot how he reacted to it, and it turns out he's so not nice that he's even an ass about walking into his car? Also, is it really necessary to go so far as to collide with his car in order to criticize the film? Couldn't she have just given him the finger, or told him he ruined his career by leaving NYPD Blue, or that he couldn't fill President Bartlett's shoe's on Bartlett's worst day?
Posted by washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 05-23-05 12:35 AM
Actually, this is one of the moments I liked, because HC manages to convey the sort of unmoored-ness of AS after he did something awful & hence sees his old life evaporate. Think of Milgram saying "the experiment demands that you continue." False, but potent.
Posted by FL | Link to this comment | 05-23-05 6:05 AM
I thought you and ex lived far apart now?
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 05-23-05 8:17 AM
Ex is in town, the Smits' incident is from the distant past (same galaxy, though).
"Whoops, sorry, Jedi Council, that I lopped off 'ol Mace's life, and caused his death. My bad. Uh, should I go stand in the corner?"
Well, yes, except that it wouldn't be strange for the Jedi to have some byzantine method of punishment/rehabilitation/purgatory. Keep in mind, Anakin didn't actually kill Windu, Palpatine did. Skywalker stopped Windu from breaking the law, which is certainly mitigating, no? (I do think the Padme thing might be the reason.)
HC manages to convey the sort of unmoored-ness of AS after he did something awful & hence sees his old life evaporate
Yes, so it was especially too bad that he doesn't wrestle with it at all, just drops to his knees and pledges allegiance to Palpatine.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 05-23-05 8:54 AM
"Why?"
I assume you've seen the original Star Wars?
Okay, that was snarky, and I've heard the "he sure turned bad awfully fast" comment from someone else who I also trust, so I think you are onto something.
I haven't yet seen the movie myself. I'm probably the last fan left who hasn't seen it.
Posted by Tripp | Link to this comment | 05-23-05 8:57 AM
Palpy is a forceful personality, you know. And maybe AS had the thought that he had to do something immediately. That part isn't so implausible.
Maybe you'd like a wine cooler?
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 05-23-05 8:58 AM
Ha! I was thinking of linking to that, but I don't want staged bizarreness.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 05-23-05 9:01 AM
Whoops.
Posted by Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 05-23-05 9:05 AM
so it was especially too bad that he doesn't wrestle with it at all
How is that different than my "flat and uninteresting" comment on a prior thread?
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 05-23-05 9:06 AM
cry, cry, masticate, cry?
Posted by mike d | Link to this comment | 05-23-05 9:08 AM
How is that different than my "flat and uninteresting" comment on a prior thread?
I thought you meant the acting or tone, not what the characters say. If you meant the latter, it's not much different.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 05-23-05 9:13 AM
Can we at least all agree that the comment "needs more wrestling" applies to ALL movies?
Posted by Tripp | Link to this comment | 05-23-05 9:23 AM
NO
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 05-23-05 9:29 AM
I agree.
Clearly, Lucas needs to brush up on his Aristotle. A probably impossiblity is always preferable to an improbable possibility. A series of improbable impossibilities? Well..
Posted by Sam Kagan | Link to this comment | 05-23-05 9:30 AM
Why does he immediately pledge allegiance to the Dark Side?
Because the laws of collective expediency required it to happen. By which I mean George Lucas.
Personally I found it as unbelievable as the 'Noooooooo!' at the end. Is there any audience in the world that didn't titter at that scene? I was sitting surrounded by wee children and they were all laughing merrily. There was no pathos.
It wasn't as terrible as it could have been, I suppose.
By the way, on the indirect recommendation of you all I went and rented Barcelona, and it was a hilarious movie. Thanks!
Posted by winna | Link to this comment | 05-23-05 9:33 AM
I have a relative who went to college with Mr. Smits. I'm told he was quite nice. But then again, no one in my family ever hit his car.
Posted by benton | Link to this comment | 05-23-05 11:01 AM
""Whoops, sorry, Jedi Council, that I lopped off 'ol Mace's life,and caused his death."
Sorry; my head wrote "lopped off 'ol Mace's hand," and I didn't proof.
"(I do think the Padme thing might be the reason.)"
I don't think there's any argument over whether that was Anakin's primary motivation (which grew out of the loss of his mother, and his pre-existing insecurities as foreshadowed in The Phantom Menace). (What's a tad harder to explain, perhaps, is why Anakin waited until his last premonition of his mother's death, in AOTC, after 14 years or so, to go back to Tatooine to try to do something about his, last he looked, enslaved mother.)
I've figured you wouldn't be interested enough in the subject for their to be any point in my calling attention to my four posts looking at the script, and the scenes and lines that fell out of the final picture, but if anyone is, start here and read the three posts above it.
Posted by Gary Farber | Link to this comment | 05-23-05 2:05 PM
Yes, yes, "for there to be any reason."
Posted by Gary Farber | Link to this comment | 05-23-05 2:05 PM
Also, arguably Anakin had been in the grips of the dark side for a very long time before the confrontation in the Council Chambers. Since the massacre of the Sand People, say. Or even earlier. Recall that during Attack of the Clones he's musing about the merits of dictatorship until it becomes clear that Padme's unimpressed by this stuff. All of his heroic Jedi work comes in the course of the Clone Wars when he, like the rest of the Jedi, was fighting on the side of the Dark Lord of the Sith. The only time in his whole career when he's genuinely fighting on the side of the good guys is at the very end of Return of the Jedi when he kills Palpatine.
Posted by Matthew Yglesias | Link to this comment | 05-23-05 2:24 PM
My own, perhaps geeky, question:
If the council was worried that Anakin and Palpatine were getting to be too close, why did they follow a consistent policy of pushing the two of them together? Why not send Anakin somewhere else instead of leaving him in the one place he could do the most damage?
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 05-23-05 2:34 PM
"All of his heroic Jedi work comes in the course of the Clone Wars when he, like the rest of the Jedi, was fighting on the side of the Dark Lord of the Sith."
Of course, there was no one fighting on any other side (save any, but presumed, unmentioned Imperial pacificists, insofar as they "fight" by not fighting), since Palpatine/Sidious commanded both sides.
But, as I pointed out, and unnecessarily, because it's perfectly obvious if one isn't blinded by ranting about Jar-Jar, right from the start the Council barred the training of the boy Anakin ("much fear I sense in you," "fear leads to, etc.," "the boy is dangerous! why can't you see it?," and so on). The only reason the Council allowed Obi-Wan to train Anakin is because of Qui-Gonn's death, and Obi-Won's death-vow to him. And we already knew from the very first movie that Obi-Wan had proved unable to teach Anakin in a morally successful way ("I thought I could teach him as well as Yoda; I was wrong."). (Left unclear, of course, is whether if Ani had, hypothetically, been Yoda's padawan, would Yoda have done any better.)
All SW questions are, by definition, geeky; live with it.
"If the council was worried that Anakin and Palpatine were getting to be too close, why did they follow a consistent policy of pushing the two of them together?"
They didn't. Anakin had started with the Jedi at age 5 ("too old, he is). They never "pushed" him near Palpatine; they simply couldn't keep them entirely apart. But even if all you know is the movies, you know that the Council had sent Obi-Wan and Anakin to the Outer Rim for the past five months (they'd just returned as the movie began, as stated in dialogue). That's literally as far away as he could be sent from Palpatine.
Neither could they stop Palpatine from his "I'm appointing you as my personal representative to the Jedi Council" maneuver; they just tried to make the best of it, and, obviously, failed. But we have nigh-endless dialogue on the problem, from the AOTC, to Mace's in-every-commerical "It's dangerous to put them together; I don't trust him" lines.
"Why not send Anakin somewhere else instead of leaving him in the one place he could do the most damage?"
They did. See above. (And, again, Mace forbade Anakin to come with him and Kit and the other two to arrest Palpatine.) There's obviously nothing else they practically could have done.
Posted by Gary Farber | Link to this comment | 05-23-05 3:10 PM
I was referring only to the last (latest) movie. To tell him to spy on Palpatine is to tell him to do something that would necessarily make the relationship between the two a closer one. Also, keeping Anakin at home while Obi-Wan went off to get General Grievous had the effect of keeping Anakin closer to Palpatine.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 05-23-05 3:18 PM
To tell him to spy on Palpatine is to tell him to do something that would necessarily make the relationship between the two a closer one. Also, keeping Anakin at home while Obi-Wan went off to get General Grievous had the effect of keeping Anakin closer to Palpatine."
This is reversing cause and effect. Palps had already appointed Anakin as his rep to the Jedi Council; asking Anakin to spy doesn't make them any closer at all, but simply tries to take advantage of the existing closeness. It's a failed attempt to drive a wedge, and Palps cannily takes advantage of it, but if there's a failure by the Council there, and there is, it's a failure of results, not intent.
"Also, keeping Anakin at home while Obi-Wan went off to get General Grievous had the effect of keeping Anakin closer to Palpatine."
It kept him where he was, not closer. This is arguably a better point, and not entirely without merit, but it's not a huge point, either.
Besides, Ani had a Destiny, and a Prophecy To Fulfil. :-) (I hope everyone realizes that trying to explain away contradictions is a game played for fun, not a Serious Cause, which Kieran Healey has bewailed over at Timothy Burke's site.)
Posted by Gary Farber | Link to this comment | 05-24-05 2:10 PM