“Is required”, “has always been”, “needs to be”... seems to me that this is a pretty rigid mindset and you are setting yourself up for disappointment.
Also there is a lot of reasoning I cannot follow you in. Calling Anakin the protagonist of the prequels seems to be wishful thinking seeing how he isn’t even in half of the first movie, Obi Wan is the obvious protagonist of Revenge of the Sith, and the Star Wars OT era basically had three protagonists only two of which were Skywalkers.
11 minutes ago, DanteRotterdam said:Also there is a lot of reasoning I cannot follow you in. Calling Anakin the protagonist of the prequels seems to be wishful thinking seeing how he isn’t even in half of the first movie
/pushes nerd glasses up bridge of nose
If we go by the proverbial textbook definition of protagonist the way it was always taught in my English classes, Anakin’s definitely at least one of the protagonists, as he’s a central character who undergoes a change over the course of the stories’ narratives, usually as a result of the antagonist’s actions (the antagonist being the one who directly or indirectly causes that change). In more recent times, it’s morphed so that the definition is broader, and essentially means “a central character.”
I’m gonna go sit down now. That was a lot more “ackchewully” than I’m used to being. 😜
Oh but I never implied Anakin wasn’t “one of the protagonists”. He is just not the solitary protagonist of the prequels.
Edited by DanteRotterdam3 hours ago, DanteRotterdam said:“Is required”, “has always been”, “needs to be”... seems to me that this is a pretty rigid mindset and you are setting yourself up for disappointment.
Also there is a lot of reasoning I cannot follow you in. Calling Anakin the protagonist of the prequels seems to be wishful thinking seeing how he isn’t even in half of the first movie, Obi Wan is the obvious protagonist of Revenge of the Sith, and the Star Wars OT era basically had three protagonists only two of which were Skywalkers.
3 hours ago, Nytwyng said:/pushes nerd glasses up bridge of nose
If we go by the proverbial textbook definition of protagonist the way it was always taught in my English classes, Anakin’s definitely at least one of the protagonists, as he’s a central character who undergoes a change over the course of the stories’ narratives, usually as a result of the antagonist’s actions (the antagonist being the one who directly or indirectly causes that change). In more recent times, it’s morphed so that the definition is broader, and essentially means “a central character.”
I’m gonna go sit down now. That was a lot more “ackchewully” than I’m used to being. 😜
3 hours ago, DanteRotterdam said:Oh but I never implied Anakin wasn’t “one of the protagonists”. He is just not the solitary protagonist of the prequels.
As @Nytwyng so succinctly put it, by classical definition, Anakin is indeed the Protagonist of the entire prequel trilogy, as he is the main character of that trilogy, just as Luke is the main character of the OT. The Prequel trilogy is specifically about his rise and fall. Obi Wan is what's called the Deuteragonist of the sequel trilogy, Padme was the Tritagonist, and Palpatine being the primary Antagonist.
4 hours ago, Tramp Graphics said:The Prequel trilogy is specifically about his rise and fall.
That doesn’t make him the single protagonist.
The Downfall was about Hitler’s last days. Hitler is not the protagonist of that movie.
On 8/30/2019 at 9:44 PM, Tramp Graphics said:Anakin was the hero of the prequels; a tragic hero who fell to darkness to become a villain at the end, but the hero none the less. He was the protagonist of that story, just as Luke was the protagonist of the OT, and Rey is the protagonist of the Sequels. So, yes, the protagonist of the saga is required to be a Skywalker by blood. That was set down by GL himself. And, given the sheer strength in the Force that Rey has (I'm talking full potential Anakin level strength here), that strongly supports her having Skywalker blood, whether that comes from her being an actual child of Luke or Leia, or, potentially, genetically engineered by Palpatine from cells taken from Luke's severed hand, or even from Anakin.
You know, the Mad Max movies are ostensibly about Max Rockatansky, but he's not the only protagonist in those movies.
Look at Fury road.
Furiosa was just as much of a protagonist as Max, if not more!
It's very possible that Rey isn't of the Skywalker line, and that she's just the catalyst in Kylo's transformation from bad to good.
This has made me feel very old, but I've realized that investing too much by speculating and analyzing scraps of information months ahead of a films release is only likely to detract from my enjoyment of it. Nowadays I watch trailers once, and try not to fret or worry too much until I get a chance to see the film.
There's a lot of stuff that might mean something, or mean nothing. We'll find out when we see the film. I'm ok with waiting until then and save the analysis for when I have all the facts.
Edited by penpenpen5 hours ago, penpenpen said:This has made me feel very old, but I've realized that investing too much by speculating and analyzing scraps of information months ahead of a films release is only likely to detract from my enjoyment of it. Nowadays I watch trailers once, and try not to fret or worry too much until I get a chance to see the film.
There's a lot of stuff that might mean something, or mean nothing. We'll find out when we see the film. I'm ok with waiting until then and save the analysis for when I have all the facts.
That's not so much a sign of being old as it is a sign of simply being rational.
Trailers are simply there to build interest and anticipation, from the earliest days of Hollywood up through today. While there are some studios that pretty spoil several if not all the major beats of a movie in the trailers, or include scenes that aren't in the final film, or even structure the trailer in a way to mislead the viewer, at the end of the day the only thing a trailer is meant to do is say "hey, here's this new thing coming soon, maybe you want to go check it out?"
Sadly, too many people get hung up on their pet fan theories and build something up in their heads to unrealistic levels of expectation that they turn around and blame the franchise for not being able to meet their personally-established unrealistic level of expectation, when the core of the problem is sitting in the very chair that alleged "fan" has their butt parked in.
And I've seen it not just with Star Wars (the prequels got slammed with this HARD), but also Star Trek (well before the JJ Abrams films, and even for the films featuring the original cast), Harry Potter (good lord some of the crazy fan theories that cropped up about events in the later part of the books), Game of Thrones (not so bad for the book readers, as we just want the next freaking book in the series), and even the Lord of the Rings films (book readers already knew the general theme of how things were going to shake out, but those who hadn't read the books came up with some frankly hilarious endgame scenarios), just to name a few.
I might indulge in some fan theories of my own of how things might shake out, but I don't cling to them and treat them as what they really are: idle speculation based on very limited information, to be easily discarded once the actual product is released.
21 minutes ago, Donovan Morningfire said:That's not so much a sign of being old as it is a sign of simply being rational.
Trailers are simply there to build interest and anticipation, from the earliest days of Hollywood up through today. While there are some studios that pretty spoil several if not all the major beats of a movie in the trailers, or include scenes that aren't in the final film, or even structure the trailer in a way to mislead the viewer, at the end of the day the only thing a trailer is meant to do is say "hey, here's this new thing coming soon, maybe you want to go check it out?"
Sadly, too many people get hung up on their pet fan theories and build something up in their heads to unrealistic levels of expectation that they turn around and blame the franchise for not being able to meet their personally-established unrealistic level of expectation, when the core of the problem is sitting in the very chair that alleged "fan" has their butt parked in.
And I've seen it not just with Star Wars (the prequels got slammed with this HARD), but also Star Trek (well before the JJ Abrams films, and even for the films featuring the original cast), Harry Potter (good lord some of the crazy fan theories that cropped up about events in the later part of the books), Game of Thrones (not so bad for the book readers, as we just want the next freaking book in the series), and even the Lord of the Rings films (book readers already knew the general theme of how things were going to shake out, but those who hadn't read the books came up with some frankly hilarious endgame scenarios), just to name a few.
I might indulge in some fan theories of my own of how things might shake out, but I don't cling to them and treat them as what they really are: idle speculation based on very limited information, to be easily discarded once the actual product is released.
Just gonna leave these here...