Restoring Balance to the Force: Episode III - Return of the Philosophy

Restoring Balance to the Force

Episode III

THE RETURN OF THE PHILOSOPHY

If you read my other three pieces about saving/rewriting the Star Wars prequels (Mom!), you might have noticed that is has been quite some time since I wrote my last entry. This is partially because I was busy with medical school, partially because I was vacationing with family, but largely because of this terrible news:

It's as if a couple dozen voices cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.

Considering I claimed in my last post that the only way to ensure that a Star Wars film would be good is to heavily feature Wedge, I almost gave up on it all. Curse you, Denis Lawson, and your moderately successful British career! But, daaaaaaaamn, you cannot deny he has aged well!

But back to the topic at hand! Before we get started, you can read my other entries here, here, and here. Today I'll share what I believe is the third important approach to enacting a successful rewrite of the Star Wars prequels: an exploration of its own philosophical principles. Considering how simplistic of a tale the Original Trilogy contains, they manage to be rather profound at times. Of course, even the most banal of statements can take on an intellectual air when said in Yoda speak.

Consider the Force, for example. Obi-Wan describes it as an energy field created by all living things that surrounds and penetrates everything, binding the universe together. Yet there were two sides to it: a Light Side that allowed you to protect that which was good and a Dark Side offered far more power, but ultimately enslaves you at the expense of your free will. And the line between the two was paper-thin. Once Luke begins his Jedi training, Yoda's concern is that Luke comprehends how easy it is to fall to the Dark Side. Until the end of Return of the Jedi, the viewer is meant to worry about whether or not Luke will be seduced and fall away. And what is it that nearly causes that to happen? Though Darth Vader offers Luke the opportunity to rule the galaxy by his side, that does not interest him at all; Luke almost falls to the Dark Side simply because he wants to protect his friends. That's it! An altruistic, rather charitable notion. But the moral is this: the end is just as important as the means. So that is why a Jedi, in the Original Trilogy, shirks anger, fear, and aggression, and uses his or her power only for defense, never attack. I loved this growing up because I felt that a Jedi might not notice they were slipping to the Dark Side until it was too late, like how easy it was for me to become an unbearable douchebag, unless I was constantly checking myself before wrecking myself.

But, for a tale of how someone ultimately makes this fall from grace, the Prequels were rather light on this nuance. You don't see Anakin make these small decisions, only big, very murder-y ones. Lucas does set up some interesting moral dilemmas, but then he leaves them largely unexplored. As a result, these films were virtually reduced to little more than hyperkinetic popcorn flicks. Here are some questions that, if properly explored in the films, could add some meat to the bones of the Prequels' philosophy.

Have the Jedi lost their way?

Yoda makes it clear that training in the Force is a dangerous commitment. The Light Side will support you only if you keep yourself pure, but it will abandon you completely once you take a step down "that dark path". So what happens when the entire order loses sight of their principles? Even in Lucas' Prequels, this is already happening. As the Republic has depended on the Jedi as peacekeepers to the point of neglecting to maintain its own army, when war inevitably breaks out and the Jedi can no longer only use their power for defense, they are forced to attack. And, when you are leading an invading army, aggressive tactics are inevitable.

Even worse, once the mysterious Clone Army is discovered, the Jedi adopt its use without question. While maybe this was their only choice, given the dearth of any other fighting force, it still means that the noble guardians of peace and justice have stooped to employing an expendable army of slaves. While the Clone Wars TV show grapples with this issue, the movies never question the ethics of forcing thousands upon thousands of children through programming and military training.

So, with the Jedi, using the Force for attack and at the helm of a slave army, do they have the Light on their side? 

Are the Jedi even fighting for the right cause?

In the Prequels, George Lucas ensures that the leaders of the Separatists are done up so cartoonishly evil that there is never any question as to whom you are supposed to be rooting for. Yes, we are shown that the Separatist cause is being manipulated by a nefarious group of profit-seekers, but the dozens of entire planets that have taken up the cause have done so because they no longer feel they are properly being represented by some far away government that has determined to enforce its rule by force. Sound familiar?

I'm talkin' 'bout 'Merica.

So, what happens when the Jedi aggressively lead their slave army against a disenfranchised, freedom-seeking people?

In Revenge of the Sith, the Jedi owe their sudden downfall to a trap they never saw coming: it turns out that free slave army they stumbled upon had been created with less-than-noble intentions. With the uttering of simple code-phrase, the soldiers turn on their generals, and the Jedi are nearly extinct in a matter of minutes. But what prevented the Jedi from seeing this coming? Why were they completely unable to stop it? Could it be that the Force had withdrawn from them completely? I like this yin-and-yang concept of the Force; the Sith in this case could be some sort of a reset button, clearing the universe of an ineffectual Jedi order so a new one could begin.

But I guess none of it really matters because ultimately, it all comes down to midi-chlorians.

What does it mean to restore balance to the Force?

Everyone is always saying it. The "prophecy" of the "Chosen One" claimed that he would do it. And the Jedi seem pretty confident that "balance" means completely destroying the other side. In their defense, the Sith seem to share the sentiment.  But, if there is a give-and-take, self-regulating nature to the Force, wouldn't a true balance mean harmony between Light and Dark? Since the Prequels are about the fall of the Jedi and the rise of the Sith, maybe this idea best belongs in the new Star Wars movies. And though I would hate to overuse a phrase on the internet, when it comes to the Jedi and the word "balance":

Yes, Star Wars has always been a simple tale of good versus evil, but it has also sought to explain how people can move from one side to another. The pseudo-religiousity of the Force has allowed the series to elevate itself above mere eye-candy.

You know who I'm talking about.

In the end...

These changes I propose (a plot restructuring, a plot simplification, and more attention to the inherent ethical questions in the plot) could produce a version of the Star Wars Prequels that share much of the same story, but would also finally be able to sit alongside Episodes IV-VI as respectable additions to the series.

Kathleen Kennedy, if you'd like me to start working on a screenplay, just let me know in the comments.