Wednesday, May 25, 2005
there's nothing remotely interesting about luke skywalker. he's just a wimpy, lame-ass version of his dad. i mean, anakin was d' bayaw!
the way i figure, luke didn't have to endure the kinds of pain and loss anakin endured. in A New Hope, luke returned to find his aunt and uncle killed and didn't seem as affected by it as he should. all he wanted was to leave, fly, je-die! he didn't actually lose anybody else; even obi wan was always around in his casper-like presence. at most, luke had abandonment issues.
but anakin's story is a lot different. you've all seen revenge by now, and it's perfectly understandable why anakin succumbed to the darkside. all these jedi, with their lofty counsel of control and discipline couldn't save anakin. he was tailor-made to follow the path of the dark.
and isn't that what revenge of the sith really wants to tell us? the logic of losing control? to let go of our emotions and feel? We should keep in mind that all this time, star wars is really anakin's story--his rise, fall, and, in the end, redemption.
make no mistake about it. luke was never the one. he was too wimpy for the dark side, too wholesome. nothing remotely poetic about it. pwe!
heck, they should have just given han solo a light sabre. he could've played the part better.
Posted by ramblingsoul at 12:16 PM