Episode III

Before you all go see the next chapter in the saga, I recommend you read this:


http://www.weeklystandard.com/Conten...1/248ipzbt.asp


By the way, how was it?

The article is gross and questionable.
I'm going to see the movie tomorrow.

An interesting take on the story but what does he expect, a rebel alliance manifesto

Very convincing argument, and if I see the movie it will certainly be on my mind.

I always liked the empire more, anyway.

im skipping school with friend to see it today..it got an A in the paper, im looking forward to it.

Elaborate, please.

I have always felt the way that the author of the article feels. What Ep 3 did do for me was show atrocities committed by the empire that otherwise had been absent from the story.


I still contend that Luke, Ben, Leia, and Han were nothing more than terrorists.

The only atrocities in Ep 3 are when the clones are given order #66, and that is basically just a tactic used by Palpatine. The clones never attack a non-seperatist people before that order. It could be argued that the Emperor's motives at the end are still for "order" and not just terror.

BTW, the subject of the article was covered extensively in Tom Carson and Joe Queenan's essays in A Galaxy Not So Far Away......

Rebels= Third world Empire = US.......by cheering for rebels, we cheer for anarchy.

It's the sixth instalment.

How come that Farah-wearing amphibious camel didn't buy the farm first?

Hah, great article. I agree with it, on the most part. I've always actually sort of felt that way, especially after Episode II.

it depends how you look at it, i mean if you want to just sit and enjoy it the way georgey boy lucas intended it, rebels are good, empire bad
but then if you intermpret it your own way (death of the author basically) there are tons of different views on the thing, more than just the blacks and whites basically, it deals more in terms of the grey...sorry if that was pointless

One of the things you must know about literature (and we can assume movies are part of literature for this conversation) is that the author really has little control over what the subject "means." Granted George Lucas may have envisioned things one way, but everything is open to interpretation.

The "atrocities" really are just basically killing the Jedi--and one can equate that with pre-emptive self-defensive. THe only crime (that I recall) the Chancellor had committed was admitting that he was in fact part of the dark side. For that MAce Windu was prepared to kill him on the spot. Apparently the Republic, a supposed democratic institution, had no desire to grant people freedom of religion.

I was about to give a bit of a rant on why this movie sucked and how this trilogy actually takes away from the first, but I'll admit to being lazy and just say two things:

The lightsaber battles were fantastic.

If Yoda is such a great Jedi, why did he have to run in Exile?

I almost forgot Episode III did give me something to get excited about...


THe Lion The Witch And The Wardrobe--coming to theaters in Decembers.

I`m going to see it tomorrow.

That's because Lucas lost all subtlety. And im not saying that its an anti-bush movie, I'm just saying that Lucas is making a blatant attempt to include politics in general to the saga.

NNJ, have you seen the Phantom Menace? Remember that part were Amidala calls for a vote of no confidence in Chancellor Valorum? Do you think that that's a little reminiscent of Bill Clinton's situation? Because I do. And can't believe that anyone would think that Lucas can't control that kind of storytelling. How can something like that be left up to interpretation?