Lets talk all things Star Wars
- Status
Can hear George's intentions in how ADF embellished it in the novelization when Ben gave Luke -- "Your father's lightsaber. At one time they were widely used. Still are, in certain galactic quarters." Echoed in McQuarrie's concept painting:
It was just a thing that a lot of people knew how to use and the duelling mode of the Old Republic had only recently fallen out of vogue, with the lawless fringes relying more on blasters these days.
That said, I don't doubt that for all the mass-manufactured 'sabers, there were also artisan-crafted masterpieces. A Jedi should know how to build and tune a lightsaber on their own in an emergency. I can even see it being part of their training to build at least one by hand, proving that, by focusing through the Force, a Jedi can match the precision of a machine. WWII would be a good analogy. The Japanese army made a whole lot of mass-manufactured swords, but many officers dismounted the old wrappings and grips from family-heirloom swords and used the blades in standard-issues fittings. While they didn't forge the blades themselves, it still set them apart.
Still, though, Glamdring not glowing jumped out at me instantly in the Moria sequence of Fellowship of the Ring. And it has pissed me off ever since. Making Sting the only one that glowed was stupid. It didn't set Frodo (and, later, Bilbo) apart from the rest -- it failed to elevate him to equal stature with the Big Movers. A Hobbit bearing a First-Age Elven weapon? That's special enough. It doesn't need to be frikkin' Excalibur.
Heck, Excalibur is probably the perfect example. How something... not mundane, but certainly not miraculous, got blown all out of proportion through the retellings. The best deep delves into the period yield that "Arthur" (whoever he actually was, whatever that name was before multiple corruptions) was one of the late-Roman warrior-kings of Britannia. The practice of the Romans was to induct subject peoples in the Legions. Higher-borns -- who could afford horses -- served as heavy cavalry. A Romano-Briton who returned home after serving his term, only to face opportunistic Angles and Saxons moving in from the East. He took with him the finely-made spatha he bore in battle -- ornately-made because he could afford it, made of Roman steel rather than bronze, and a cavalry longsword, at that. A much finer and longer and sharper weapon than the Northern European "barbarians" invading his land would have seen. It would have seemed magical.
In "The Star Wars", there were lightsabers and there were lightsabers. In Middle-Earth, there were swords and there were swords.
It was just a thing that a lot of people knew how to use and the duelling mode of the Old Republic had only recently fallen out of vogue, with the lawless fringes relying more on blasters these days.
That said, I don't doubt that for all the mass-manufactured 'sabers, there were also artisan-crafted masterpieces. A Jedi should know how to build and tune a lightsaber on their own in an emergency. I can even see it being part of their training to build at least one by hand, proving that, by focusing through the Force, a Jedi can match the precision of a machine. WWII would be a good analogy. The Japanese army made a whole lot of mass-manufactured swords, but many officers dismounted the old wrappings and grips from family-heirloom swords and used the blades in standard-issues fittings. While they didn't forge the blades themselves, it still set them apart.
Still, though, Glamdring not glowing jumped out at me instantly in the Moria sequence of Fellowship of the Ring. And it has pissed me off ever since. Making Sting the only one that glowed was stupid. It didn't set Frodo (and, later, Bilbo) apart from the rest -- it failed to elevate him to equal stature with the Big Movers. A Hobbit bearing a First-Age Elven weapon? That's special enough. It doesn't need to be frikkin' Excalibur.
Heck, Excalibur is probably the perfect example. How something... not mundane, but certainly not miraculous, got blown all out of proportion through the retellings. The best deep delves into the period yield that "Arthur" (whoever he actually was, whatever that name was before multiple corruptions) was one of the late-Roman warrior-kings of Britannia. The practice of the Romans was to induct subject peoples in the Legions. Higher-borns -- who could afford horses -- served as heavy cavalry. A Romano-Briton who returned home after serving his term, only to face opportunistic Angles and Saxons moving in from the East. He took with him the finely-made spatha he bore in battle -- ornately-made because he could afford it, made of Roman steel rather than bronze, and a cavalry longsword, at that. A much finer and longer and sharper weapon than the Northern European "barbarians" invading his land would have seen. It would have seemed magical.
In "The Star Wars", there were lightsabers and there were lightsabers. In Middle-Earth, there were swords and there were swords.
Solo4114
Master Member
A thought about how the JJ Star Wars films work, and why I don't respect JJ's style:
You ever ask yourself why Han Solo and Leia Organa's kid is named "Ben"? Most likely, you haven't. But it struck me the other day as I was thinking to myself that there really is zero reason to name him that, other than "I dunno. I just liked the name."
It'd make more sense to name him "Bail" or even "Luke" or, I dunno, after someone from either of Han or Leia's pasts who meant something to them. Instead, they name him "Ben," which is a name that means more to *Luke* and to the *audience* (referencing Obi-Wan) than to anyone else.
But neither Leia nor Han really were that close to Obi-Wan. Luke was, but why is Luke naming Han and Leia's baby? The whole thing just...doesn't make a ton of sense when you ponder it for more than 15 seconds.
And that's JJ's style. It's just another meta-narrative manipulation of the audience. It's meant to evoke pleasure and familiarity in the audience while not merely serving no purpose organic to the narrative, but actually making...not much sense narratively when probed even slightly. You aren't supposed to think about it, because if you do, you're gonna say "Hey, wait a minute..." Instead, you're just supposed to sit back and say "Ahh, I get the reference" and smile to yourself.
At the small scale, like character names, it doesn't make a huge difference. But there's other stuff in the films that JJ does that are meant to be either referential or that rely on the audience doing this same kind of mental gymnastics, and which serve as both a shortcut and in some cases a barrier to building narrative cohesion. None of it is organic to the story. Instead, it's organic to the audience, and it's meant to manipulate them into thinking they got a good story, when what they got was a bunch of stuff that reminds them of good stories.
I believe it's also why I, at least, find it difficult to remember many story specifics of the JJ films. I remember broad strokes, I remember certain moments. But the overall story? It's all pretty hazy in my mind, and I've seen TFA at least 3-4 times now. Granted, nowhere near as many times as the OT, but even the PT holds together better in my mind and I've probably seen it about the same number of times. Instead, it ends up feeling like "Uhhh...a bunch of stuff happened, and then here's a plot point. And then more stuff happens, and here's another plot point." But the why? How we got there? What propelled the story to this place? That's pretty thin, at best.
You ever ask yourself why Han Solo and Leia Organa's kid is named "Ben"? Most likely, you haven't. But it struck me the other day as I was thinking to myself that there really is zero reason to name him that, other than "I dunno. I just liked the name."
It'd make more sense to name him "Bail" or even "Luke" or, I dunno, after someone from either of Han or Leia's pasts who meant something to them. Instead, they name him "Ben," which is a name that means more to *Luke* and to the *audience* (referencing Obi-Wan) than to anyone else.
But neither Leia nor Han really were that close to Obi-Wan. Luke was, but why is Luke naming Han and Leia's baby? The whole thing just...doesn't make a ton of sense when you ponder it for more than 15 seconds.
And that's JJ's style. It's just another meta-narrative manipulation of the audience. It's meant to evoke pleasure and familiarity in the audience while not merely serving no purpose organic to the narrative, but actually making...not much sense narratively when probed even slightly. You aren't supposed to think about it, because if you do, you're gonna say "Hey, wait a minute..." Instead, you're just supposed to sit back and say "Ahh, I get the reference" and smile to yourself.
At the small scale, like character names, it doesn't make a huge difference. But there's other stuff in the films that JJ does that are meant to be either referential or that rely on the audience doing this same kind of mental gymnastics, and which serve as both a shortcut and in some cases a barrier to building narrative cohesion. None of it is organic to the story. Instead, it's organic to the audience, and it's meant to manipulate them into thinking they got a good story, when what they got was a bunch of stuff that reminds them of good stories.
I believe it's also why I, at least, find it difficult to remember many story specifics of the JJ films. I remember broad strokes, I remember certain moments. But the overall story? It's all pretty hazy in my mind, and I've seen TFA at least 3-4 times now. Granted, nowhere near as many times as the OT, but even the PT holds together better in my mind and I've probably seen it about the same number of times. Instead, it ends up feeling like "Uhhh...a bunch of stuff happened, and then here's a plot point. And then more stuff happens, and here's another plot point." But the why? How we got there? What propelled the story to this place? That's pretty thin, at best.
Four and a half years ago.
The only thing I can think of would have been if Lucas had remembered his own canon and had Obi-Wan Kenobi going by Ben "since before you were born". When Luke rescues her on the Death Star, Leia recognizes and reacts to what Luke calls him: "Ben Kenobi! Where is he?" We get the sense Old Ben has been watching over Luke for the last couple decades. Bail obviously knew him, but I don't think Leia had ever met him. Just had her father's stories. Her ending her message to him by calling him Obi-Wan was a deliberate thing.
But those beats are as invisible as water to the fish. Unless you're specifically listening for them, it's easy to miss the significance -- unless the entirety of ROTS had featured Obi-Wan going by "Ben" for brevity's sake or something.
So yes, it makes sense that Leia would want to name him that -- but only if you think about it too hard. It should have been made more obvious that she knew (of) Kenobi better as Ben than Obi-Wan.
...Or just toss the EU fans a bone and call him Jacen.
The rest of what you say is pretty much spot-on.
robn1
Master Member
Han and Leia naming their kid Ben isn't even on my list of problems with JJ/Dizney wars. The only part of the trilogy that gave me any feels at all was when Han stepped out onto that catwalk and shouted "Ben!". I immediately thought that Han must have felt bad for giving Obi-Wan such a hard time and named his son Ben to honor him, after all he did gain a lot of appreciation for things after the fact.
The rest of the trilogy? Completely disposable.
The rest of the trilogy? Completely disposable.
DARTH ANIBAL
Sr Member
Maybe they wanted to keep it short, like "Han." Maybe "Ben" is a really common name, and that's why Obi-Wan adopted it (even though he and the Solo kid are the only ones we encounter throughout the 9 films with it 
).
I'm just joking, of course. I enjoyed the ST, but I'm not about to pretend it doesn't have its share of flaws.
).I'm just joking, of course. I enjoyed the ST, but I'm not about to pretend it doesn't have its share of flaws.
Not to mention that Luke and Mara Jade already named their son Ben in the novels.
I think in several of the old EU novels they mentioned that lightsabers can and were used by normal people, but to fully utilize one you need to be a Force user. One mentioned an unlucky dude who had a lightsaber and his enemies assumed he was a Jedi and let loose a blaster volley which didn't end well.
I think in several of the old EU novels they mentioned that lightsabers can and were used by normal people, but to fully utilize one you need to be a Force user. One mentioned an unlucky dude who had a lightsaber and his enemies assumed he was a Jedi and let loose a blaster volley which didn't end well.
PumpkinKing
Active Member
I’m not even a Star Wars fan, but when does it end? Is it just infinite Star Wars movies forever? There’s gotta be more people out there that wish Disney never had anything to do with Lucas film
Star Wars as a brand means nothing to me. Star Wars, The Empire Strikes Back, and Return of the Jedi as films are wonderful. Rarely there might be a cool piece of officially licensed merchandise but I often admire it from a distance. I own very few pieces sanctioned by the brand itself.
Everything else I love about those movies I make for myself in the form of props and costumes or I buy from other fans who make them better than I ever could.
There was a huge portion of my life where I lived and breathed this series but barring my love for the few things I've mentioned, it's been on a steady decline since 1999. I have fond memories of those things mostly tied to the friends I've made along the way, but the brand and all that comes with it was a vehicle to drive those experiences, not the end itself.
Everything else I love about those movies I make for myself in the form of props and costumes or I buy from other fans who make them better than I ever could.
There was a huge portion of my life where I lived and breathed this series but barring my love for the few things I've mentioned, it's been on a steady decline since 1999. I have fond memories of those things mostly tied to the friends I've made along the way, but the brand and all that comes with it was a vehicle to drive those experiences, not the end itself.
Celtic007
Sr Member
Rumored that Hayden will be back in the Obi Wan series -
www.comicbookmovie.com
That would be cool if he can be Vader and not just Anakin in flashbacks.
It's crazy to think that he's basically the same age Vader would be during the series (~40)
Hayden Christensen Rumored To Return As Anakin Skywalker For OBI-WAN KENOBI Series
Could we see Hayden Christensen rejoin Star Wars prequels costar Ewan McGregor as a pre-Darth Vader Anakin Skywalker in the upcoming Disney+ Obi-Wan Kenobi series? Get some salt ready for this one...
That would be cool if he can be Vader and not just Anakin in flashbacks.
It's crazy to think that he's basically the same age Vader would be during the series (~40)
I feel the EXACT same way. At the end of the day it all comes back to those three wonderful movies. That's all that's ever mattered to me.
Frogfreak
Sr Member
Or you know, maybe leia thought about it and said to Han, you know what Han my hon', since since luke is my brother and I love him as such (I hope), I say we name our son after ol' Ben kenobi. And honor both my brother, and his friend/mentor. What do you say darling?
(My idea is a serious one, I just wanted to have a little extra fun with it. )
(My idea is a serious one, I just wanted to have a little extra fun with it.
)
sztriki
Sr Member
I was wondering myself and whilenit didn't particularly bother me I get your point. Similar to the scene in Star Trek Into the Wrath of Khan when Cumberbatch announces in his glass cage that his real name is Khan. Everybody gasps whereas they really just should have said "erm...ok dude". But since Khan was familiar to the audience it had to be the gasp moment in the movie too.
CB2001
Master Member
It wasn't even that. It was more groan inducing if anything.
Joek3rr
Master Member
Glamdring as I recall glows white. Though it does glow blue with the delight of killing the goblin king.
The funny thing is. LEGO The Lord of the Rings, the video game. Actually has Glamdring glow white.
Joek3rr
Master Member
So I'm watching ESB this morning. And can't help thinking, I wish George in all his additions would have added light coming from the sabers.
How awesome would it have been to have seen Vader's lightsaber reflecting off of his helmet? Particularly since it's so glossy in ESB.
Like this.
How awesome would it have been to have seen Vader's lightsaber reflecting off of his helmet? Particularly since it's so glossy in ESB.
Like this.
PumpkinKing
Active Member
Lego Lotr>>>>>the hobbit movies
Joek3rr
Master Member
No joke, it's honestly one of the best LotR games. Followed by, if not tied with The Battle for Middle-Earth.
- Status
Similar threads
