Post by Deleted on May 31, 2017 17:29:21 GMT
And if there is all this well thought out subtext and layering to his dialogue and plot then he has been far from successful seeing how so many consider the films badly written. If you have the "mind for it" you can project a deeper level of subtext and layering to almost any film than was intended. I've read books doing the same for The Thing, worked on a website that dedicated pages and pages of it to the Die Hard, Alien and Predator franchises (all starting out as a joke and ending up getting really deep).
- The dialogue has always been cheesy and somewhat cumbersome. Good or bad it's a trademark to this fictional galaxy "far, far away and a long time ago..."
- Some movies make a better argument for it than others. Some people are determined to see everything in SW at face value to reinforce their argument that it's badly written wherever they don't like these movies. I guess when the cave scene happened with Luke in TESB, you thought that the beheaded Vader whose mask exploded to show Luke's face meant that Luke had a twin brother who was another Vader. He was going to kill his twin brother Vader in the future, and there were actually 2 Darth Vaders.
Well I will say this much. Lucas has always built metaphorical elements into his Star Wars films; whether it's scenes or lines or characters or environments, etc. If you've seen enough interviews of the guy or documentaries and featurettes you'd know this to true. For instance General Grievous is a metaphor for the mechanical villain that Anakin will become. An example of one of many metaphors disclosed.
Now where, what, and when all the metaphors occur is not always so certain. Obviously there's not a glossary index on them. So a good deal of this could come down to personal opinion. In other words either one of you could be right or could be wrong. As old Ben Kenobi said "(Luke) you're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our point of view."