StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Here we have this notorious Imperial governor with enough clout and power to rein in the friggin' Dark Lord of the Sith, yet he's completely absent from the entire backstory where he could have been so useful.

ANH implied that he was some sort of longtime asshole in galactic politics, which was fine back in '77 because everyone had an untold backstory at that time. However, in the context of the entire six-episode saga, his sudden appearance as the main villain inexplicably "holding Vader's leash" is somewhat abrupt and confusing.

Then again, I have similar feelings about Dooku and Grievous.

I agree, but it is possible that he could have gained a lot of power in the 18 years between the OT and the PT.

Besides, he was played off in the EU as a governor and Monty Burns-type befoer entering the main galatic arena.

Is it too late to declare this a movies-only thread?

The prequels were about the rise of Palpatine, the fall of the Republic, the fall of Anakin and the extermination of the Jedi. While Tarkin could have been worked into that, its not a necessity.

Galvatron wrote:Is it too late to declare this a movies-only thread?

If you must (while I find the concept irritating, it does makes sense considering this appears to be a "improve the movies" thread rather than a canon one), I don't see why not. It's not like it's that far along.

Personally, I enjoyed seeing him in a cameo (played by Wayne Pygram no less; perfect), but I don't think he really needed a larger role in the PT. True, he does appear abruptly in ANH, but it is accepted that two decades have passed, even putting aside the EU. Nevertheless, I would not have objected to seeing him in an expanded role, perhaps as a military advisor to Chancellor Palpatine in AOTC and ROTS.

One could easily be a member of the leadership of a multi-sector government and never show up in the prequils. We never see a representative of Corellia, either, or of Kuat, or of the galaxy's most oft-frequented tourest locale, Tatooine .

Too, the Senate seems not to be composed of the leaders of sectors, but of representatives chosen by those leaders (Palpatine, rather than Amidala, was the Senator for Naboo). Especially given the rather trivial role of the Republican government in the years leading up to the Clone Wars, there is no particular reason why Tarkin would show up at all in machinations within the leadership of the galactic governmental figurehead and quasi-republican police force.

It would be much like wondering, for instance, if Putin was an inconsequential part of world politics because he never showed up in the United Nations.

Darth Servo wrote:The prequels were about the rise of Palpatine, the fall of the Republic, the fall of Anakin and the extermination of the Jedi. While Tarkin could have been worked into that, its not a necessity.

To be honest, I'd have preferred Tarkin as the primary corruptor of Darth Vader to Palpatine.

I thought that Tarkin character was perfect as he was. There was no reason to see more of him in the prequels because he rode the New Order to power, which didn't occur until the Empire was actually established. Granted the EU shows that the Tarkin family was quite powerful, but that's the EU and we're talking movies.

I never really saw Tarkin as a superior to Vader and still don't to this day. I percieved it more as Vader deferring to Tarkin's order since it was Tarkin's command, but that if that situation had occured in a more neutral location, or on a ship under Vader's direct command, Tarkin would have had to sit there and watch.

Galvatron wrote:

Darth Servo wrote:The prequels were about the rise of Palpatine, the fall of the Republic, the fall of Anakin and the extermination of the Jedi. While Tarkin could have been worked into that, its not a necessity.

To be honest, I'd have preferred Tarkin as the primary corruptor of Darth Vader to Palpatine.

How would that've made sense? I would've been fine with Tarkin as a public face of the fascist revolutionary tendencies that subverted the Republic, and as the source of Anakin's autocratic politics - but for his religious conversion? That makes no sense.

Illuminatus Primus wrote:How would that've made sense? I would've been fine with Tarkin as a public face of the fascist revolutionary tendencies that subverted the Republic, and as the source of Anakin's autocratic politics

That's what I meant.

Illuminatus Primus wrote: - but for his religious conversion? That makes no sense

Prior to the prequels, I'd always imagined that Vader either sought out or stumbled across his knowledge of the dark side and the Sith on his own, without Palpatine's help. It made him less of a witless pawn, in my mind, than what Lucas ultimately turned him into.

I should also add that in my idealized vision of Star Wars, ROTJ never happened; Anakin and Vader are two separate people and the Emperor isn't a Force-user.

If that gives you any idea of where I'm coming from.

Galvatron wrote:I should also add that in my idealized vision of Star Wars, ROTJ never happened; Anakin and Vader are two separate people and the Emperor isn't a Force-user.

If that gives you any idea of where I'm coming from.

And you toss out most of the monomyth with that, and that's what makes SW great, to me. And Vader was Luke's father in TESB too, friend.

I can stomach it once, since Luke was the only Force user of his power left and the Jedi has their eye on him to save the galaxy, its inevitable, even in a galactic scale stage, he'd run into his father again - especially with his father's obsessive familial impulses. Leia as Luke's sister? That was stupid. There was no logical reason why they'd end up encountering each other.

Vader would still be Luke's father. Anakin wouldn't. Vader seduced Anakin's wife--either through his innate charm or the Force (or both) and conceived Luke (and Luke's twin). Obi-Wan is unaware of this in ANH.

Moreover, the climactic battle in Episode III would take place between Anakin and Vader. Anakin's death would be a hybrid of Qui-Gon's and Dooku's. Vader would chop his arm(s) off, then impale him with his lightsaber. Hence the betrayal and murder.

Darth Fanboy wrote:I thought that Tarkin character was perfect as he was. There was no reason to see more of him in the prequels because he rode the New Order to power, which didn't occur until the Empire was actually established. Granted the EU shows that the Tarkin family was quite powerful, but that's the EU and we're talking movies.

I never really saw Tarkin as a superior to Vader and still don't to this day. I percieved it more as Vader deferring to Tarkin's order since it was Tarkin's command, but that if that situation had occured in a more neutral location, or on a ship under Vader's direct command, Tarkin would have had to sit there and watch.

Forgive me for Me Tooing, but I agree with the above on both accounts, most especially the latter, as I definitely think Darth was at least Tarkins equal, if not superior, despite possibly being a special case, outside that chain of command.

Galvatron wrote:Vader would still be Luke's father. Anakin wouldn't. Vader seduced Anakin's wife--either through his innate charm or the Force (or both) and conceived Luke (and Luke's twin). Obi-Wan is unaware of this in ANH.

Moreover, the climactic battle in Episode III would take place between Anakin and Vader. Anakin's death would be a hybrid of Qui-Gon's and Dooku's. Vader would chop his arm(s) off, then impale him with his lightsaber. Hence the betrayal and murder.

I understand this is all personal preference, but I don't see how making everything so linear and obvious would improve the series, turning Vader into a simple, power-obsessed villan rather than the flawed "hero" he is. The Vader/Luke revelation and Anakin's redemption were some of the best parts of the whole saga, at least from my perspective.

Vader could still be a flawed hero. He just wouldn't be Anakin. Obi-Wan's account of Vader turning to evil and his literal betrayal and murder of Luke's "father," etc. in ANH would be essentially true. No "certain point of view" bullshit necessary.

The Vader/Luke revelation wouldn't be negated one bit. In fact, people who viewed the whole story in order from Episode I wouldn't be sure if Luke was actually Anakin's or Vader's son until Episode VI.

Vader's redemption could still be worked in.

That is pretty ingenious from the point of view of the twist.

I do like Tarkin as the face of what the Empire will be in the PT, explaining his significance in the OT. Of course, I'd make the Death Star his pet obsession - Vader and the Emperor interested in the more arcane. VI wouldn't have the Death Star II.

I like the Emperor as the corruptor in the Force. Not to mention by TESB, he's already a Force sensitive - "There is a great disturbance in the Force." I would downplay his ALL POWERFUL ROXORZ political machinations. I'd make him a genius of manipulation and politics, to be sure, but a more natural tendency - the Sith are symbolic of the rot, the decadence, the corruption which always takes root during apathy or ignorance. Its opportunistic. He'd ride a movement - the technocratic and militaristic authoritarianism of Tarkin and his familiars, into power, permitted by the horrors of the Clone Wars, both which would be bred by systemic decay of the Republic and Jedi themselves. Not all caused by Palpatine.

I was hoping for a greater role for Tarkin in the PT. It always seemed to me that Tarkin should have known Anakin/Vader for some time before he was put into the armor in light of Tarkin's characterization of him as "old friend". I have an extremely difficult time picturing someone becoming Vader's friend after he's in the suit.

I would say Tarkin would be the Sith opposite to Obi Wan Kenobi, he would also be a high ranking officer in the Republic's military and during the Clone Wars he would build up some sort of friendship with Anakin. He would be a much closer assistant to Palpatine in galactic affairs, plus it would be good if it was Tarkin himself who rescued Anakin from Mustafar and not Palpatine. Tarkin would also witness Anakin's transformation into Vader.

Illuminatus Primus wrote:Leia as Luke's sister? That was stupid. There was no logical reason why they'd end up encountering each other.

When in doubt, just say the Force did it. Like Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon essentially crash landing onto Anakin's doorstep.

I can envision a scene early in Episode I in which General Kenobi and his youngish (~25) pupil, Darth Vader (who looks just like Daniel Cudmore from X3), show up at the Skywalker Ranch on Tatooine.

Obi-Wan (Odysseus) is there to convince Anakin (Achilles) that he's needed for yet another war (Anakin just returned home to his wife a year earlier following the last war).

The two Jedi Knights are roughly the same age (~40) and good friends who "go way back." Anakin calls his friend Ben. Vader always calls his master Obi-Wan. Obi-Wan always addresses his pupil as Darth.

Big Orange wrote:I would say Tarkin would be the Sith opposite to Obi Wan Kenobi, he would also be a high ranking officer in the Republic's military and during the Clone Wars he would build up some sort of friendship with Anakin. He would be a much closer assistant to Palpatine in galactic affairs, plus it would be good if it was Tarkin himself who rescued Anakin from Mustafar and not Palpatine. Tarkin would also witness Anakin's transformation into Vader.

I was thinking along similar lines. I've bandied about the idea that Tarkin could have been the admiral of the fleet that carried General Kenobi's army.

Galvatron wrote:I can envision a scene early in Episode I in which General Kenobi and his youngish (~25) pupil, Darth Vader (who looks just like Daniel Cudmore from X3), show up at the Skywalker Ranch on Tatooine.

Obi-Wan (Odysseus) is there to convince Anakin (Achilles) that he's needed for yet another war (Anakin just returned home to his wife a year earlier following the last war).

The two Jedi Knights are roughly the same age (~40) and good friends who "go way back." Anakin calls his friend Ben. Vader always calls his master Obi-Wan. Obi-Wan always addresses his pupil as Darth.

The idea of Anakin and Obi-Wan is good, but in my mind Vader has to be Anakin. Otherwise TESB doesn't make sense, and Vader is just another generic evil bad guy.

Cao Cao wrote:The idea of Anakin and Obi-Wan is good, but in my mind Vader has to be Anakin. Otherwise TESB doesn't make sense, and Vader is just another generic evil bad guy.

How does TESB not make sense if Vader isn't Anakin?

And maybe you're too young to remember, but I recall how popular Vader was back in the late 70s when he "just another generic bad guy"; before he was Luke's father.

Galvatron wrote:I can envision a scene early in Episode I in which General Kenobi and his youngish (~25) pupil, Darth Vader (who looks just like Daniel Cudmore from X3), show up at the Skywalker Ranch on Tatooine.

Obi-Wan (Odysseus) is there to convince Anakin (Achilles) that he's needed for yet another war (Anakin just returned home to his wife a year earlier following the last war).

The two Jedi Knights are roughly the same age (~40) and good friends who "go way back." Anakin calls his friend Ben. Vader always calls his master Obi-Wan. Obi-Wan always addresses his pupil as Darth.

Big Orange wrote:I would say Tarkin would be the Sith opposite to Obi Wan Kenobi, he would also be a high ranking officer in the Republic's military and during the Clone Wars he would build up some sort of friendship with Anakin. He would be a much closer assistant to Palpatine in galactic affairs, plus it would be good if it was Tarkin himself who rescued Anakin from Mustafar and not Palpatine. Tarkin would also witness Anakin's transformation into Vader.

I was thinking along similar lines. I've bandied about the idea that Tarkin could have been the admiral of the fleet that carried General Kenobi's army.

I wouldn't have Darth Vader be his natural name. That way you can still introduce ambiguity into who becomes Darth Vader and who is his father during the PT. III's revelation would be who becomes Darth Vader, and V's would be who is Luke's father. I wouldn't have this silly menagerie of "Darth's" with assumed names, though.

I'd try to stick to Obi-Wan's story about "a young Jedi named Darth Vader..."

His "you can't win, Darth" line also makes more sense if his actual name was always Darth Vader.

Concealing Vader's identity as Obi-Wan's apprentice isn't an objective for me. Concealing Luke's true parentage is.

I agree about the menagerie of Darths. I always thought that was a dumb idea.

Galvatron wrote:I'd try to stick to Obi-Wan's story about "a young Jedi named Darth Vader..."

His "you can't win, Darth" line also makes more sense if his actual name was always Darth Vader.

Concealing Vader's identity as Obi-Wan's apprentice isn't an objective for me. Concealing Luke's true parentage is.

I agree about the menagerie of Darths. I always thought that was a dumb idea.

Well I think both would be interesting. And originally, before Darth became his Sith Caesar, I just thought he was affirming that he was no longer who he'd been before, just a twisted man.