|
Post by Alexrd on Jan 28, 2021 11:10:22 GMT
But doesn't Luke have a right to know the truth about his father? Especially since being captured and potentially going to the Dark Side is a fate worse than death. It does seem they hope Vader won't reveal the truth to Luke but it seems a flimsy reason when the galaxy's fate is at stake. They were going to reveal the truth when he was deemed ready for the burden, and at that point they didn't consider him ready in a variety of ways. The fact that Luke was going away is the most evident sign of that.
|
|
|
Post by tonyg on Feb 17, 2021 9:23:32 GMT
But doesn't Luke have a right to know the truth about his father? Especially since being captured and potentially going to the Dark Side is a fate worse than death. It does seem they hope Vader won't reveal the truth to Luke but it seems a flimsy reason when the galaxy's fate is at stake. They were going to reveal the truth when he was deemed ready for the burden, and at that point they didn't consider him ready in a variety of ways. The fact that Luke was going away is the most evident sign of that. The problem is that Luke would never be ready. No one would be ever ready for this except if he is a Jedi and consider the Order as his family. But Luke is not like these Jedi. His father is important for him no matter that he thought of him as deceased till that moment. I think that even because of what happened Luke received the necessary confidence (not arrogance) that he can do the right thing for his own no matter that the wise older people around him think that this is impossible. That confidence that gave him strength to go and try to save his father against the odds in ROTJ. Is not that it was easy for him in ROTJ but he considered it possible and actually was the only one who thought it.
|
|
|
Post by Alexrd on Feb 17, 2021 22:03:09 GMT
The problem is that Luke would never be ready. No one would be ever ready for this except if he is a Jedi and consider the Order as his family. I don't see how Luke would never be ready or how he had to consider the Order to be his family in order for him to know that Darth Vader was his father. He would need to be a Jedi, yes. Or rather, by finishing his training first, he would be better prepared to deal with it appropriately. He would have the necessary wisdom and emotional maturity. And I think he would be ready eventually. Why wouldn't he? Yoda and Obi-Wan were working towards that. The issue with Luke is not that he wants to save Vader. The issue is that he becomes blind to the possibility that he might have to kill him by confronting him. And he knew that he needed to confront him.
|
|
|
Post by jppiper on Jan 7, 2022 0:54:50 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Samnz on Jan 7, 2022 16:33:55 GMT
I think ESB is somewhat overrated, certainly compared to the other Star Wars films by Lucas. It has shortcominings in terms of advancing the macro story, especially concerning the overlong opening battle that doesn't have any lasting effect and is basically pointless. I also think it's slightly ridiculous how the Empire - despite being suddenly almost overpowered - simultaneously fails at almonst everything. Sure, they get to beat the Rebels on Hoth, but they fail to capture Han, Luke and Leia. Vader doesn't get to turn Luke and the Rebel leadership is still intact and ready to launch their counter attack.
In regard to the characters, I think the problems are equally noticable. Luke's journey is great and his scenes with Yoda are among the best. That said, I feel Yoda's ramblings would seem kind of hollow to me without the additional context given by the Prequels. AOTC and ROTS made those scenes so much more impactful. Apart from Luke, it's worse. Leia is pretty stagnant and her development is reduced to falling in love and secretely admiring Han. There is no growth and we don't see her struggle with anything meaningful. Han is the worst of them all, especially how they regressed him to an egoistic mercenary all over again. Seriously, I can't stand seeing him wanting to leave his friends all alone and possibly dead after the growth he presumably experienced in ANH. I don't like that, he was played up too much as a bad-ass.
Thats said, the movie is great. It's just overrated among certain segments of the fanbase, but I think that stance is becoming less and less dominant. The Sequels and them being so different in nature and style despite copying the OT to the extent of absurdity, helped making more people see how consistent both in style and quality the Original Sage really is. Lucas' fingerprints are all over it.
|
|
|
Post by Subtext Mining on Jan 10, 2022 14:52:28 GMT
Thor Slywalker discusses two very big points here that illustrate what I find ironic in those who love ESB but dislike the PT, and RotJ for that matter. Thor goes into how ESB is a great sequel because it didn't try to do what made the original work with fans, only bigger, just focusing on the spectacle. It took things in new and unexpected directions, changed the format, took a different tone, focused on character rather than action, etc. Basically, it's not just like ANH. And yes, that's true, there's nothing to debate there really. (Although I would include the fact that things like the special effects and spaceship movements are indeed, naturally, more spectacular as the technology progressed). But the irony is that people liked ESB so much that it seems they wanted every subsequent movie to... be just like ESB. They seem to be disappointed when it's not. They hold ESB up as a yardstick, as evident with comments like "best since Empire". The thing is though, Return of the Jedi and the Prequels also share in this essence of what makes SW and Lucas' filmmaking so different and appealing. They did was was necessary for the story. And the direction, the format, the tone, the characters, the action all follow that story. Doing the unexpected, not repeating what came before, challenging the characters in unique ways, all these things Thor mentions about ESB. Lucas says "I don't make retro movies" and "I like to do something different with each film", etc. Star Wars was great in 1977 because it broke the mold. ESB was great because it broke the mold of ANH and the typical sequel. RotJ and the Prequels are great because they each continue to break the mold, as well. Yet it seems, to me, a lot of people ironically want what made ESB their favorite to be repeated in each film. But they should know from ESB that Lucas isn't going to fall into a formula. I get the impression fans think he owes it to them to keep making ESBs. Like he somehow winked at them with the release of ESB and made some sort of pact, like, "Hey, I know what you like and I'm going to keep giving that to you". Fact is, ESB went way over budget and time. Something no other SW film did. So the production quality is a bar raised higher than was meant, and is going to be hard to top. And the other fact is these overages almost cost Lucas and the fledgling Lucasfilms everything. If it hadn't been for a stroke of luck with a certain bank loan, there may not have been a RotJ or Prequels. I'd also say that ESB seems to go straight to the pleasure centers of the brain. (And I've mentioned before how it's the quintessential male fantasy). I mean, ANH does too, Lucas is good at that. I'm just saying I think he pulled out all the stops for ESB because it needed to succeed if he wanted to establish his own independent film company. There was an enormous amount at stake with ESB for Lucas as an independent filmmaker - unlike with studio sequels. I'm not saying that's the only reason ESB is the way it is, but I'd bet it's a small part of it. But there's also the phenomenon of people complaining that the ST is too much a copy of the OT, but at the same time it seems they also feel the Prequels aren't enough of a copy of the OT. Isn't that what you wanted? Make up your mind. Either way, I think the PT is the perfect blend of OT familiarity with a fresh newness. Thor also took a dig at the romance in the PT (by contrasting it with the OT), which I found worthy of rebuttal. He says the romance in ESB works so well because it's subtle and not in your face, while in the PT it's very overt and in your face, which is quite obviously not true. The subtleties are similar in both cases. Lucas even mentions often how he went to great lengths to keep them both subtle. Ultimately, I think what Thor means is Han and Leia's romance is great because they say "I love you"/"I know", but Anakin and Padmé's isn't because they literally tell each other how much they're falling in love with each other. That's how each story works, bro. In both cases they're confessing their love, but I'd say Anakin and Padmé's is at least more earnest. Han and Leia's is more cynical. And ya know what? They both work for their characters and their circumstances and their trilogy's tones. The PT romance is more '30s and classical, while the OT's is more Hawksian. As far as the believability for each, which he also mentions; that's subjective. I think this is, at least partly, another case of wanting things to be like ESB, and if it's not, it's wrong. It's important to remember the circumstances and contexts the characters find themselves in. It should also be noted Han's "I know" was ad-libbed after many takes, making it another contributing factor to going over time. It was not scripted that way. Yeah, it's great, and I like the call back in RotJ, but the other films didn't always really have that luxury. ESB is what it is because Lucas created for himself the rare opportunity to make films without studio interference. He was free to make his films and tell his story exactly the way he wants. Something we all admire. It's just, it seems some only admire that when it comes to ESB. But by extension, I feel the same admiration should be extended to all his films. People don't have to like every film or anything, but at least realize the unique situation Lucas was able to make for himself, along with all the innovations he ushered in by constantly pushing the boundaries of what is possible with storytelling in filmmaking. Like I always say, I love ESB. All six of GL's SW films are a 10 for me. They each do what they do for their own reasons. It's just I see ESB as the black swan, if you will, in the SW library, for the reasons I've tried to go over here. I think it's unrealistic to except other SW films to be like it for a multitude of reasons, both in-universe and out. Reasons that should be apparent. Like Lucas says, the six movies are meant to be seen as one twelve-hour film. And each chapter has it's own unique flavor according to where it is in the overarching mosaic of the story. Lucas picked Kershner for ESB because he is great with character pieces, and like even Thor says, there's not much going on plot-wise. ESB is the second Act in a three part story, and accordingly it is darker and mostly serves to throw obstacles in the heroes' way. Yes it's great, but if you take each film for what they are in the larger context, there's no reason to hold one up as an unrealistic standard that the others have to follow. Hopefully this encapsulates what I mean by ESB being great but over-hyped. This goes into the psychology of fans and what not, though, so, it's... interesting.
|
|
|
Post by tonyg on Mar 26, 2022 20:00:44 GMT
While I'm not big fan of TESB myself, I agree with Subtext that is overhyped because of certain segment of fans not because of the movie itself. First, let's say that I don't think that there is something like flawless movie at all. Every movie has something to be desired to be better, but that's normal. Discussing these flaws is fine and it doesn't make the movie obligatory bad (there are bad movies but their flaws are significant and their bright sides almost non-visible). However, when someone is looking at the movies from a cultist point of view (not as a fan, the fans like the movie despite some flaws but it is a completely different mentality)... in the cultist view there are only two positions: the movie is a masterpiece/the movie is abysmal. There is not only anything in between, but there aren't any nuances: the masterpieces have no flaws and the abysmal ones have no good sides. I think OT is perceived by this cultist point of view by some fans and TESB is on the top of this. So yes, it is overhyped and unfortunately, because of this, the attitudes towards it are presented by clichés that are things that are very frequently repeated but some of them are not true at all. My "favorite" is that TESB is the darkest SW movie. First of all, it is not. Is not even the darkest of OT, because much more people died in ROTJ, the battles were more cruel and so on. Second and more important: even if it was, how this makes it the better movie? Here comes the cliché: darker=obligatory better. So if this was true, the horror movies should be the top of the tops of the cinematic art and comedies would be full trash. Another cliché: the actors played their roles better (as they weren't directed by Lucas, this is the real reason of this). Again cliché: I really don't see how Mark Hamill shows his feelings in more subtle way during the father/son scene in TESB than during the father/son scene in Endor or even when he saw the death of his aunt and uncle in A New Hope. In general the accusation of bad /good actors is very tricky, I think in every SW movie there are moments when the actors are not, how to say convincing enough from my point of view and in general for me these moments are more frequent in OT than in PT, but I don't see any particular difference between the three movies of OT. About the romance: many people had commented it above, I'll add this: the romance is more comfortable for some fans as is more "traditional" for the Sci fi genre. It looked as smooth banter, a play of dominance between the two, that is very frequent in the genre. In a way, cliché. But more important, the romance in Sci fi is almost always a "sided" project. If there were no romance in OT, none of the main events would be affected, even Han's rescue would be a fact, so in a way the romance is seen as a good "deviation", a respite, but not as something interconnected with the main story that would change it forever. The doomed love is not frequently seen in "adventure" movies in general, for me Lucas was indeed bold to implement it in the Sci fi genre through PT. I have other issues with this romance that has nothing to do with this and this is Leia's role in it. In ROTJ the romance worked for me but not in TESB. Apart from Han acting as, well smuggler, I still cannot chew why she at all was convinced to confess to him that she loves him (really cannot see why at this point this should be true) and then in ROTJ they played it with the presumed love triangle for Leia’s stronger connection with Luke (that is motivated by completely different reasons, still…). Maybe I’m too suspicious but this for me is demonstration of the famous “impermanence” of women who in general don’t know what they want, so they search it in different places. I’m not talking about the famous kiss between Luke and Leia which was part of the game and even Luke knew it but for what happened in ROTJ and how Han came as the jealous lover. Yes, in the end, in the case of Leia it was no impermanence after all, but still, I think that her confession came too early in TESB almost for Han to have his momentum. However, this is not the issue that is frequently discussed for the romance in TESB, the romance is discussed from the “cliched” point of view: the smuggler won the princess, case closed. And when I say ‘won’, I have in mind the opposition “I love you/I know” that is considered as brilliant. As I commented in other threads, I like what happened in ROTJ, both Han and Leia convinced me in their true feelings (is not always necessary to say it directly) but I still have my issues in TESB. The funny thing for me is that with the exception of the “I’m your father” scene, the strongest aspects of TESB are rarely discussed , a difference from these clichés. And it is a pity. TESB is slower, philosophical type of movie, where the action is not important but the “slow moments” (it is ironic, because PT are accused to be too slow, with too much conversations) and generally speaking, the action is scarce. Yes, there is the battle of Hoth, but it is very brief and it is evacuation more than battle and there is the duel between Luke and Vader but is less intense in action a difference from ROTJ and so on. I like this and I think this is the strongest aspect of the movie, unusual sequel of ANH, indeed. I like the spiritual journey of Luke: is more like this than real training and so on. TESB works like the middle movie, that is very difficult role especially in a trilogy that is build step by step as such, a difference from PT that is more coherent as is created as such from scratch if I can say so. I think that the fact that the movie is overhyped impede the interesting discussions of its strongest parts as is presumed that every bit of it is masterpiece and there is no need to be discussed.
|
|
|
Post by Subtext Mining on Aug 27, 2022 14:44:24 GMT
An interesting take from Richard Marquand in an interview on RotJ. m.youtube.com/watch?v=oRsHQLbMnWk(h/t jppiper) "By the time I actually came to shoot Jedi, I knew Star Wars and Empire backwards and forwards, I knew them extremely well. And I liked the apparent naïveté and simplicity with which George had made Star Wars, I liked that style very much. I found the slight, possibly over-sophistication, slightly more filmic, more visual way in which Kersh told his story a little bit excessive, for me, for my tastes. I'm a sentimental, very emotional Welshman, with a rather maddening sense of humor. I have a twinkle in my eye. And I think the previous director was a different kind of person with perhaps a deeper sense of gloom, or a deeper sense of doom, and maybe slightly less sense of humor. George is a different man, again, with a different kind of an attitude to relationships and so forth. Maybe a little bit more introverted, perhaps a little bit more distant. And maybe therefore a greater sense of action storyline and perhaps less interest in the way that people interact. And for me, this film is about friendship, and loyalty, and trust, and self-identification. But, don't take it too seriously, let's have a laugh about it. But when we're gonna cry, let's cry, and when we're gonna laugh let's laugh. And I think that's what I guess I brought to this movie and I like to think that's why I was asked to direct it." It's statements like these that I think a lot of fans would do well to dwell on for a moment. ESB is an anomaly. It's a departure. Kershner doesn't direct films like Lucas or Marquand, and, for many reasons, it's unrealistic to expect every SW after ESB to be just like ESB. Each film is going to have its own feel and Lucas chose Kershner and Marquand specifically to capture the tones he wanted. And as also mentioned in this thread, ESB went over budget and over time, something no other SW film had the luxury of. Plus, genuine artists are always striving to try new things with each subsequent work, not keep repeating the same thing. That's why ESB is what it is and not a repeat of ANH.
|
|
|
Post by smittysgelato on Aug 27, 2022 17:45:51 GMT
This statement pretty much sums up why I don't think Star Wars is a brand, although it is often treated like one.
|
|
|
Post by Darkslayer on Aug 30, 2022 3:37:26 GMT
I used to think this, but no. It deserves the praise it gets. Gets better every time I watch it.
|
|
|
Post by smittysgelato on Aug 30, 2022 3:45:09 GMT
The cave scene on Dagobah is seared into my soul for all time. Best use of slow motion ever.
|
|
|
Post by Subtext Mining on Sept 1, 2022 7:41:16 GMT
I think the question at hand, at least for me, has evolved more into: do some fans expect subsequent films to be just like ESB, and get disappointed when they're not?
Because yes, as I've gone over, it deserves all the praise it gets, of course. But, if any following SW films aren't like ESB, does it automatically mean they're bad? In other words, I get the feeling some think Lucas had found the magic formula for SW with ESB, and now he is beholden to following that formula for every film.
I feel like as people would watch each new SW film, they'd watch it through the filter of ESB, and if it didn't fit that perceived alignment in almost every way, they got upset. So I guess im asking, are some people allowing themselves to be spoiled by ESB?
|
|
jtn90
Ambassador
Posts: 66
|
Post by jtn90 on Sept 1, 2022 11:25:23 GMT
I think the question at hand, at least for me, has evolved more into: do some fans expect subsequent films to be just like ESB, and get disappointed when they're not? Because yes, as I've gone over, it deserves all the praise it gets, of course. But, if any following SW films aren't like ESB, does it automatically mean they're bad? In other words, I get the feeling some think Lucas had found the magic formula for SW with ESB, and now he is beholden to following that formula for every film. I feel like as people would watch each new SW film, they'd watch it through the filter of ESB, and if it didn't fit that perceived alignment in almost every way, they got upset. So I guess im asking, are some people allowing themselves to be spoiled by ESB? This is what I think is a big part of the matter. as I said earlier in this thread is glorified at the expense of the other Star Wars movies, some people find it to be the only real good star wars movie, and add some dumb stuff like is the best because is the one George Lucas was the least involved, Irvin Kershner, Lawrence Kasdan and Marcia Lucas are the holly trinity of weapons against George Lucas for the most ESB fanboys. ALso for them h¡this movie seems the most DARK of the Star Wars movies with little to no goofy scenes, because light hearted scenes bad.
|
|
|
Post by Samnz on Sept 1, 2022 12:05:35 GMT
I think the question at hand, at least for me, has evolved more into: do some fans expect subsequent films to be just like ESB, and get disappointed when they're not? Because yes, as I've gone over, it deserves all the praise it gets, of course. But, if any following SW films aren't like ESB, does it automatically mean they're bad? In other words, I get the feeling some think Lucas had found the magic formula for SW with ESB, and now he is beholden to following that formula for every film. I feel like as people would watch each new SW film, they'd watch it through the filter of ESB, and if it didn't fit that perceived alignment in almost every way, they got upset. So I guess im asking, are some people allowing themselves to be spoiled by ESB? This is what I think is a big part of the matter. as I said earlier in this thread is glorified at the expense of the other Star Wars movies, some people find it to be the only real good star wars movie, and add some dumb stuff like is the best because is the one George Lucas was the least involved, Irvin Kershner, Lawrence Kasdan and Marcia Lucas are the holly trinity of weapons against George Lucas for the most ESB fanboys. Missing the point that Kasdan probably had more input on ROTJ, which those kind of people consider "the beginning of the decline"... I also think that this is one part of the matter, but then there is also the thing called double standard. Consider 3PO and people lamenting he's "ridiculous" in AOTC while firmly sticking to the believe that 3PO offers some kind of "sophisticated humour" in ESB. ESB is, actually, really the movie that turned 3PO into a comedic (and some would say laughable) character, whereas in ANH he was still mostly a narrator character with comedic beats. And there is no difference between AOTC and ESB: 3PO is a ridiculous figure whose trials and tribulations offer more depth beyond the surface, but on the surface, he's silly in both cases... yet ESB only lovers will never admit, because it would rip their "it's so adult adult adult" illusion to shreds. ESB is still Lucas, it's still very similar to the other five and part of the original six. If you really want to see movies that are clearly different, you have to watch the ST and spin-offs.
|
|
|
Post by smittysgelato on Sept 1, 2022 19:16:10 GMT
I think the question at hand, at least for me, has evolved more into: do some fans expect subsequent films to be just like ESB, and get disappointed when they're not? Because yes, as I've gone over, it deserves all the praise it gets, of course. But, if any following SW films aren't like ESB, does it automatically mean they're bad? In other words, I get the feeling some think Lucas had found the magic formula for SW with ESB, and now he is beholden to following that formula for every film. I feel like as people would watch each new SW film, they'd watch it through the filter of ESB, and if it didn't fit that perceived alignment in almost every way, they got upset. So I guess im asking, are some people allowing themselves to be spoiled by ESB? Very well said. I couldn't have said it better myself.
|
|
|
Post by Moonshield on Sept 11, 2022 6:23:18 GMT
Because yes, as I've gone over, it deserves all the praise it gets, of course.
No, it doesn't. It is very bad, and, mostly, plagiarized. For example, the whole Han/Leia love story is plagiarized (by Lucas) from his own film "American Graffiti" except one part: Han's hibernation. It is plagiarized from "Valerian and Laureline". That is why the whole this part is a massive plot hole: because Lucas forgot to "match" it to the other part of the story. Though Vader' attempt to freeze Luke contradicts the Emperor's order and Vader's own goal to turn Luke to the dark side - he wants to turn a block of ice to the dark side?
Yes, Lucas is the greatest screenwriter. Moreover, he is the great writer, because his dramaturgy is almost as precise as Jack London's, Emily Bronte's and Dostoevsky's. But even great writers make mistakes.
He had no time to write a good screenplay, as he wrote ANH or PT. Also, he didn't have experience as a producer - it is much easier to write-direct the film by your own hand than to control other people to write-direct it instead of you. Especially if they are bad writers or directors (Kasdan was an aspiring writer in 1979 and Kershner doesn't have good films at all - Robocop 2, Never Say Never Again, etc.)
Well, if you praise this pile of garbage, you will have the same mistakes in TFA, TLJ, TROS. I have already said, that many TLJ mistakes have come from TESB. Pathetic Luke has come from goofy Yoda. The empty story has come from the story about the broken hyperdrive. Solo tries to repair it in the beginning and, filally, in the ending it is... repaired. Another Death Star Assault, I think.
All the acting in this film is thick as a brick. Harrison Ford smiles during the whole film instead of acting. When in a couple of small scenes in the "American Graffiti" his acting is better, it is a disaster. Carrie Fisher looks sometimes like she is a drug user. (ha ha ha)
Cinematography... in some moments I could see that AT-AT walkers are small figures in front of the painted picture. Even in TPM I didn's see that. The cinematographer doesn't know what is composition: even when Luke and Leia look at the stars (the ending), the are so many objects in the frame that I don't know where to watch.
Lightsaber duel in TESB is more clumsy than Jar Jar Binks, especially when Vader throws things at Luke. Even when I watched this in 1997, it was painful to watch. And that is why every lightsaber duel in the ST looks so bad - because they are all copied from TESB.
Because nobody criticies TESB. (And it is not criticised to destroy Lucas, btw.)
The sectarianism is the inability to admit mistakes and, much worse, the inability to admit others' achievements.
|
|
|
Post by smittysgelato on Sept 11, 2022 18:58:05 GMT
I always felt like the point of freezing Luke in carbonite was so that Vader could work on getting Luke to join him later. Of course, the plan fails and Vader has to ask Luke on the spot to join him.
|
|
|
Post by Subtext Mining on Sept 12, 2022 10:30:31 GMT
Yeah, I tend to think we saw the reason why Vader wanted to freeze Luke, because he'd of course put up a fierce fight and would need to be subdued. When Luke dodged the freezing unit, Vader was forced to resort to plan B and debilitate Luke by cutting off his hand, regrettably damaging the Emperor's prize and taking a little bit of Luke's organic body mass.
Freezing Luke was a pretty smart idea. If it goes to plan, he can bring him frozen to the Emperor, thaw him out when convenient, with both of them present so Luke won't be able to put up any fight, and they can work on him together however they deem necessary.
Also, it's interesting that we see Vader wasn't going to tell Luke he's his father before freezing him. He pulled out that card later. It seems he was waiting for a more opportune time for that, when the conditions were better. Here he was more forced to do it as a final attempt to convince Luke to join him.
What exactly was taken from Valerian and Laureline?
|
|
|
Post by Moonshield on Sept 13, 2022 10:50:43 GMT
Freezing Luke was a pretty smart idea.
Not, it was a stupid clownery. Luke was captured 2 times in ROTJ. Leia was shoot by paralyzer in ANH.
Lando:
"Lord Vader, we only use this facility for carbon freezing. If you put him in there, it might kill him."
Vader: "I do not want the Emperor's prize damaged. We will test it... on Captain Solo."
What will happen if Captain Solo doesn't die and Luke does, is unknown. What will happen if Solo dies, is also unknown (the whole carbonite factory is useless).
It is typical for the plagiarism - the plagiarized part doesn't match other parts of the script.
UPD.
Vader has two hostages: Han and Leia. They are Luke's best friends and he knows it.
Vader: "Luke, drop your weapon or I'll kill them"
Luke drops his lightsaber.
Stormtrooper shoots him with the paralyzer.
That's all.
But, for TESB fanbase it is too complex.
|
|
|
Post by tonyg on Sept 13, 2022 16:28:30 GMT
Freezing Luke was a pretty smart idea.
Not, it was a stupid clownery. Luke was captured 2 times in ROTJ. Leia was shoot by paralyzer in ANH.
Lando:
"Lord Vader, we only use this facility for carbon freezing. If you put him in there, it might kill him."
Vader: "I do not want the Emperor's prize damaged. We will test it... on Captain Solo."
What will happen if Captain Solo doesn't die and Luke does, is unknown. What will happen if Solo dies, is also unknown (the whole carbonite factory is useless).
It is typical for the plagiarism - the plagiarized part doesn't match other parts of the script.
UPD.
Vader has two hostages: Han and Leia. They are Luke's best friends and he knows it.
Vader: "Luke, drop your weapon or I'll kill them"
Luke drops his lightsaber.
Stormtrooper shoots him with the paralyzer.
That's all.
But, for TESB fanbase it is too complex.
I think that what is missing is to show more explicitly Vader's inner conflict. He tries to hide it pointing out what the Emperor wants but in the end is what he wants: he wants Luke (to rule together as father and son). So the freezing is kind of attempt to "slow" the moment when Luke should be given to the Emperor. In a way ROTJ shows Vader's conflict through Luke's words (father, I see the conflict in you, etc.)but in a way Luke looks odd, insisting that there is still good in Vader (with no proofs for it, at least, not yet). If the prequels didn't exist, ROTJ would looked even more shocking than the TESB (for the record, I don't consider the 'I'm your father' revelation as something unprecedented for various reasons). The trap here is that with the purpose to hold the tension that should bring the momentum for the father revelation, Vader inner thoughts should be hidden from the viewer (if we look at TESB as standalone movie, of course).
|
|