PDA

View Full Version : Darkest Episode?

boringdave
05-22-2005, 02:06 PM
which do you think is the darkest star wars film?
Drizzt240
05-22-2005, 04:01 PM
Easily Revenge of the Sith. Empire comes in second but it's not even close IMO.
Glordreen
05-22-2005, 04:16 PM
no brainer
halo
05-22-2005, 04:45 PM
Actually, I disagree. Superficially ROTS seems darker in that there are more deaths and you have the slightly gruesome sight of Anakin being burned to a crisp, but on a deeper, emoional level, ESB seemed genuinely darker to me. There was more a sense of despair, and isolation of the 'good guys'. Maybe because we invested more in the characters personally, Han, Luke, Leia etc. The cause of the Rebel Alliance seemed to me more depressing than anything in ROTS where IMO we only really care for Obi Wan and Yoda who by the end of the film have skipped town to go into 'training'.
spide-ed
05-22-2005, 04:49 PM
I see halos point but although the heroes in ESB are in peril, at least not all hope has died.
In ROTS, there is essentially no good news throughout the whole thing.
Boiiinng
05-22-2005, 05:35 PM
I see halos point but although the heroes in ESB are in peril, at least not all hope has died.
In ROTS, there is essentially no good news throughout the whole thing.

Except that they showed Luke and Leia being born, which I thought they shouldn't have done. That gives an air of hope which we shouldn't have until Episode IV.

Episode V doesn't have a happy ending, not one. Han has been frozen, Luke loses his hand and finds out that Obi-Wan lied to him about his father (in his scene on the medical frigate he is really depressed). That's why it's called The Empire Strikes Back. The Empire is bad and they basically win this round.

Sure in ROTS, the empire starts and the Jedi have been wiped out, but do we really have that much emotional investment in the Jedi Order? We have investment in some of the characters but not the Order as a whole.

At the end of ROTS, there is still hope, but at the end of TESB it seems all hope could be lost. In fact, up until Han blows up the shield in ROTJ, hope keeps dwindling down to almost nothing. That's what was so good about the OT, you really thought all was gonna end bad until the last second it was ok, great tension in those films.
teewee1432
05-22-2005, 05:48 PM
I voted for Revenge of the sith
Moridin
05-22-2005, 05:53 PM
Except that they showed Luke and Leia being born, which I thought they shouldn't have done. That gives an air of hope which we shouldn't have until Episode IV.

Episode V doesn't have a happy ending, not one. Han has been frozen, Luke loses his hand and finds out that Obi-Wan lied to him about his father (in his scene on the medical frigate he is really depressed). That's why it's called The Empire Strikes Back. The Empire is bad and they basically win this round.

Sure in ROTS, the empire starts and the Jedi have been wiped out, but do we really have that much emotional investment in the Jedi Order? We have investment in some of the characters but not the Order as a whole.

At the end of ROTS, there is still hope, but at the end of TESB it seems all hope could be lost. In fact, up until Han blows up the shield in ROTJ, hope keeps dwindling down to almost nothing. That's what was so good about the OT, you really thought all was gonna end bad until the last second it was ok, great tension in those films.
Yes, but don't forget this line:"That boy was our last hope." "No...there is another."
THAT gives us hope.
darthspielberg
05-22-2005, 06:23 PM
right! I had forgotten that line for whatever reason.
Fanible
05-22-2005, 06:24 PM
This is more like a "duh" thread. :rolleyes:
urnothinglikeme
05-22-2005, 07:11 PM
this should even be a thread
Drizzt240
05-22-2005, 07:14 PM
It is a thread.
urnothinglikeme
05-22-2005, 07:17 PM
it shouldnt be
Boiiinng
05-22-2005, 07:20 PM
Yes, but don't forget this line:"That boy was our last hope." "No...there is another."
THAT gives us hope.

Really? You think so? If no one knows who it is, then it doesn't give you hope. It gives you mystery.
Moridin
05-22-2005, 11:45 PM
If Yoda says that person deserves our hope, then I'd have hope.
PsychoMike
05-22-2005, 11:55 PM
I voted for RotS... simply because I think it was suppose to be the darkest. And probobly would be if I didn't know what would happen in the future episodes.

RotS:
1) All the Jedi Killed, or in hiding.
2) The Sith rule the republic/Empire.
3) Building of the Ultimate Weapon (the Death Star).
4) Senate seeminly OK with the transfer to an Empire.
5) Very few people seem to have their doubts about the new Empire.
6) Only possible hope is the Twins.
7) Good has been defeted, Evil rules.
JBond
05-23-2005, 12:26 AM
Don't forget Anakin burning to a crisp.
bbf2
05-23-2005, 12:32 AM
The Phantom Menace is, by far, the darkest episode. (and not for the episode content)

It destroyed the series and legacy of Star Wars.
JBond
05-23-2005, 12:37 AM
I would say Return of the Jedi is the darkest, it's the most "film noir."

(As good as your joke)
Cloud Buster
05-23-2005, 01:12 AM
I would say Return of the Jedi is the darkest, it's the most "film noir."

(As good as your joke)

Yeah, because of all those independent contractors who get killed when the second Death Star is destroyed. :)

Seriously though, I have to say ROTS. I do agree with what some people said about ESB, that the ending is a real downer, but nothing in ESB really comes close to a cold blooded murderous rampage.
bbf2
05-23-2005, 01:28 AM
I would say Return of the Jedi is the darkest, it's the most "film noir."

(As good as your joke)

Mine wasn't a joke.
JBond
05-23-2005, 01:32 AM
Yeah, because of all those independent contractors who get killed when the second Death Star is destroyed. :)

When I was a kid and would go through the trilogy, I always thought the second Death Star was the damaged remains of the first one since it's only partly complete. At the time I couldn't understand why there'd be a second one...I still don't understand it now. As if they didn't lose enough resources from the first one, they somehow managed to create another behemouth...and then still had it have that liiiittle flaw where you could take a tunnel to the middle and blow the entire thing up.
PsychoMike
05-23-2005, 01:47 AM
I find it funny that the first Death Star took about 20 years to build and the second one took about 5 to get 2/3s built.
JBond
05-23-2005, 01:52 AM
Well at this point they've already built one, they're better at it now ;)...or they're mass producing them.

But yeah, now you know why I thought it was the same one.

While we're at it...what is the Death Star full of? I mean maybe if we assume the whole core is based on the weapon and the only habitable parts are a few levels on the surface it kind of works. And what could propel something so enourmous? Where are the jets? Then there are the Star Destroyers and the Super Star Destroyer which has to be a mile long...what the hell's in that?

This is why Star Wars is classified as Fantasy and not Science-Fiction.
bbf2
05-23-2005, 01:58 AM
The Death Star is held up by, um, the force.

But really, I could make a case (albeit a flawed one) that the 2nd Death Star was held in place by the gravity of Endor. But that doesn't explain the 1st one at all.
PsychoMike
05-23-2005, 02:00 AM
I had no problem beliving that it took a few years to build the Death Star (at least to the point where it was). The empire troops have to be doing something, when they are not hunting the Rebels... there is just so many of them.

I always wondered how it moved.... that's really gonna bug me for the next 20 min. now.

Maybe the Death Star also had a cloneing facility on it.... easier to replace troops that are killed... or everyone has really nice rooms.

The Death Star is held up by, um, the force.

But really, I could make a case (albeit a flawed one) that the 2nd Death Star was held in place by the gravity of Endor. But that doesn't explain the 1st one at all.

I don't think there is much of a problem with how it is held up.... there is nothing to pull it down while it's in space. The big question is how does it move around. How did it get from Alderann to Yavin?... or to any other star sysetm it would have to go to?
Cloud Buster
05-23-2005, 02:07 AM
I find it funny that the first Death Star took about 20 years to build and the second one took about 5 to get 2/3s built.

First rule of government spending: Why buy one when you can have two for twice the price?

I think they started on the second Death Star a few years after the first one. As far as why they need two, the Galactic Empire has a habit of building things that are unnecessary, sometimes virtually useless, for no other reason than to show off thier nearly unlimited resources. A good example is the Executor, the Super Star Destroyer. If I understand it correctly, the Executor had a crew of 250,000 and up to 500,000 troops on board, which is just ridiculous.
Moridin
05-23-2005, 02:12 AM
'Ridiculous' defines most of the actions of an authoritarian rule. :P They need big n' macho stuff, paying no heed to being practical.
Cloud Buster
05-23-2005, 02:17 AM
The only feasable way the Death Star could be moved reasonably would be if they had the technology to shield it from inertia. If they could reduce the inertial mass of the Death Star, they could move it easier. It would have to travel at hyperspace in order to cross the vast distances between systems, too. Though, if I may say it again, the Death Star moving at hyperspace is a bit....well, ridiculous.
Moridin
05-23-2005, 02:19 AM
Ever played a game called Star Wars Supremacy? It has extracts from the SW Encyclopaedia, and it actually says the Death Star, when travelling, is one of the fastest vessels the Empire had constructed.
Cloud Buster
05-23-2005, 02:42 AM
Ever played a game called Star Wars Supremacy? It has extracts from the SW Encyclopaedia, and it actually says the Death Star, when travelling, is one of the fastest vessels the Empire had constructed.

I find that surprisingly hilarious...
insaneMoViEgoer
05-23-2005, 03:03 AM
Ever played a game called Star Wars Supremacy? It has extracts from the SW Encyclopaedia, and it actually says the Death Star, when travelling, is one of the fastest vessels the Empire had constructed.
faster then AT-ATs!? :omg:
JBond
05-23-2005, 05:51 AM
A good example is the Executor, the Super Star Destroyer. If I understand it correctly, the Executor had a crew of 250,000 and up to 500,000 troops on board, which is just ridiculous.

Ridiculous is how easy it was to destroy the Executor (and all the star destroyers). Hey let's just blow this pod up and crash into the bridge, that'll take it down! (For a ship that is under a shield, you have to wonder how the only thing unprotected by it is the shield generator. At least Star Trek didn't fail there)
JBond
05-23-2005, 05:53 AM
I don't think there is much of a problem with how it is held up.... there is nothing to pull it down while it's in space. The big question is how does it move around. How did it get from Alderann to Yavin?... or to any other star sysetm it would have to go to?

He means the second one, unless it's in orbit, the gravity of Yavin (Endor?) would take it down.