MovieChat Forums > The Name of the Rose (1986) Discussion > True prequel to Star Wars

True prequel to Star Wars

posted 12 years ago by Perun
12 replies | jump to latest

I just watched this movie recently and all of the sudden I said to myself...this scenario would fit perfectly into Star Wars prequels, of course being put in star wars universe, that is.
Sean Connery would be of course (no, not Qui-Gon) Obi-Wan, and C.Slater Darth...I mean Anakin S.
The only problem would be that there would be no space battles, but with the story, such as this one, who would need them :D.

Any thought?

cheers,
P.

[–] playtoyer 12 years ago

yes it,s a great book and a great movie it,s could have been a good idea

[–] liquidsouther 12 years ago

"Sean Connery would be of course (no, not Qui-Gon) Obi-Wan, and C.Slater Darth...I mean Anakin S."
I however, see them more as Connery - Qui-Gon, Slater - Kenobi. :D

"He drank. He fought. He made his ancestors proud!"

[–] Sussexfilmlad 12 years ago

This fits rights into one of the great Star Wars issues - that Star Wars can be best seen as Lucas' adaptation of Campbell's "Hero with a Thousand Faces". All of those archetypes and tropes that Lucas used in Star Wars (from Campbell) were exactly the archetypes and tropes that the Monks in the Abbey would have read about (licitly or illicitly) in the Aedeficium. Same again double for the link between William of Baskerville and Adso, and Sherlock and Watson. You've gotta love comparative lit crit, haven't you?

[–] snorfinn 12 years ago

The portrayal of the Christian monastic order as corrupt, conservative, stifling and dehumanizing definitely fits with how the Jedi are portrayed in the Star Wars prequels. But as with the prequels it doesn't fit how the Jedi are portrayed in the original Star Wars movies.

The Star Wars prequels taught us that Jedi child abuse and the stupidity of their dogma is what created Darth Vader in the first place. Given that we now know how dumb the Jedi are, it changes the whole meaning of 'Return of the Jedi'. Why would it be a good thing? That's the biggest problem the Star Wars prequels created, and plugging the characters into the Name of the Rose wouldn't solve that.

[–] natalie0407 12 years ago

The portrayal of the Christian monastic order as corrupt, conservative, stifling and dehumanizing definitely fits with how the Jedi are portrayed in the Star Wars prequels. But as with the prequels it doesn't fit how the Jedi are portrayed in the original Star Wars movies.

Doesn't it? Let's see... Lied to Luke about his family, trained him to assassinate his father, told him sacrificing friends for the greater good is ok, didn't even consider that Vader could be redeemed (i.e. dogmatic). Obi-Wan couldn't even admit he was lying to Luke and instead came up with the "point of view" evasion.

As much as I liked the old geezers, they were annoying at times and certainly far from perfect!

At the same time, they're wiser and the teaching methods are somewhat different - which can be seen as the sign of learning from their past mistakes.

The Star Wars prequels taught us that Jedi child abuse

What child abuse? Did those kids that Yoda trained looked miserable to you? What about Obi-Wan? Why didn't he want to leave Order as an adult? Why did Anakin want to join the Order? Surely if they were so abusive it would've leaked out (just like the scandals involving the Catholic Priests).

Even if they were too rigid, it's not the same as abusive. If you want abusive, look up school to prison pipeline (or in general, the origins of the modern industrial dehumanizing school education).

Given that we now know how dumb the Jedi are, it changes the whole meaning of 'Return of the Jedi'. Why would it be a good thing?

First of all, whatever the Jedi's faults were, they still did a very good job of keeping peace and justice for many generations. They were honorable, loyal to a fault and dedicated to serving Republic at the expense of personal happiness. How many people these days are willing to do it?

It seems to me some fans tend to forget the Jedi are not in the same situation in the prequels. They're the official and large law enforcement order who works with the representative body and have to comply with certain rules and regulations. The problem is, at some point they started valuing political status quo over well being of the people (i.e. not doing anything about the slavery in the Outer Rim since it's not part of the Republic). Just like it often happens with the large organizations, they became complacent and failed to adapt to times. They have the same problem as Anakin: inability to accept change (except for occasional mavericks like Qui-Gon).

Besides, after Yoda's death, the rebuilding of the Jedi Order falls on Luke's shoulder and he's certainly a new kind of a Jedi!

Now I know I'm not supposed to say anything good about the prequels on IMDB unless I want to be called a Lucas apologist but, despite some serious flaws in execution, I really like that things are not black and white in the prequels. It's not as simple as bad Sith and Vader vs. good Jedi and Republic as we were led to believe in ANH. And I don't see how's that a "problem" because even the original trilogy is not exactly black and white either (i.e. friends lie and enemies tell the truth).

---
Going back to the original topic... I'd say the dynamics here are definitely more similar to Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan in Episode 1. Anakin would have run away with the girl for sure (or would have a mistress on the side).

[–] GreenGoblinsOckVenom86 11 years ago

My main beef with the prequels is the Jedis can't be married thing. Never once in the original trilogy did Obi Wan or Yoda tell Luke that he can't be married if he becomes a Jedi. I hate that the reason Anakin turned to the dark side in Episode 3 because he wanted to be married and be a Jedi. I always thought there was a better reason as a kid watching the OT before the prequels came out.

"You want me to roll 6,000 of these!? What? Should I quit my job!?" George Costanza, Seinfeld

[–] keeslimburg 10 years ago

He didn't turn to the dark side because he fell in love. He fell the dark side because he let his love consume him to the point of control. In the end, he didn't love Padme so much as he wanted to posses her. I'll agree that the prequels failed to articulate it well. Many religions today have similar philosophies on living celibate lives including Catholic Priests, Hindu Monks, and Buddhist Monks. You can disagree with the philosophy if you want, but rather than taking the ethnocentric route and calling it stupid, maybe try to understand why Lucas would put that into the rules of the Jedi Order.

Maybe Yoda and Obi-wan didn't tell Luke not to have a love life because they were too busy trying to lay the ground work of what the force is for him. I'm sure the first lessons in the Jedi Academy for all the five year olds didn't start out "here's why you can't be in love while being a Jedi." In the original trilogy, they obviously didn't have companions as they clearly live the lives of hermits. So they are not hypocrites in that sense, and it remains consistent between the two trilogies.

[–] keeslimburg 10 years ago

Here's another thought. We've all watched a movie with an interrogation scene where they need to find the bomb or some other information. What always happens? They usually threaten the guy and maybe beat them up some. Then the guy says "you'll just have to kill me." What happens after that? The interrogator show's the guy a picture of the guy's family and says "We have your family." That's all it takes and the guy usually cooperates. Now imagine that scenario in the Star Wars universe. The force is so powerful it can move huge objects, electrocute people, choke people from across space, fore see the future, trick people, and be used to find people. Wouldn't an organization that wields such power do anything it could to ensure that it's members would have the least amount of pressure points possible, so as to mitigate the possibility of that power being used for harm?

[–] teal123 10 years ago

Bravo Sir, Bravo, very well put. And I agree - the dynamic between William & Adso is much more similar to the one between Qui-Gon & Obi-Wan instead of the one between Obi-Wan & Anakin.

[–] bartgirls 11 years ago

When I first saw the Phantom Menace I also thought of William and Adso, too. Lucas could have used Umberto Eco's novel as a influence. It would have been so much better.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Sussexfilmlad 11 years ago

Isn't there a scene in a library in one of the Star Wars prequels that relates to a secret in an archive? (cf finis africa?) Memory suggests that it's Yoda and someone jawing about missing data from an infinite library? I seem to remember thinking at the time "Oh that's a bit Eco / Borges".