We’ve ruminated at length about the rumoured Apple tablet computer, from the iPhone “dock” that is our Apple Annex, to the Macbook sibling that is our iTablet Excelsior. And with recent clues shoved down our digital throat across the blogosphere suggesting that an Apple tablet will indeed be announced sometime next year, we find ourselves once again justifying its impending existence.

The truth’s in the Air.

It began with the MacBook Air and may indeed end with it. Almost two years ago, we complained that the MacBook Air was overpriced for a poorly performing machine with so little to offer other than a reduced physical footprint. To be fair, that same complaint holds even truer today, with even the basic 13″ MacBook Pro beating the MacBook Air out on all specs to include price, with the Air merely coming in at 1.5 lbs lighter. How many real-world applications is that 1.5 lbs going to make a real difference for?

But the Air, as we stated back in January, 2008, is a great proof-of-concept. And that proof-of-concept has gotten slight buffs during its two generational updates. One could almost say that the Air is Apple’s notebook AppleTV, in the sense that it’s more of a hobby to set the future stage than to sell based purely on its present merits. That’s not to say that the Air isn’t decent; we’re even considering picking up a used Air if the price is right, just so we have a very portable, no-frills writing device that runs OS X (we’ve seen first-gen models go for what amounts to the price of a netbook hackintosh). But if money is indeed a consideration, the Air today is a poor purchase when the 13″ MacBook Pro offers so much more for less money.

Back to the Air as a proof-of-concept, the makings of an Apple tablet were all thrown in front of us in 2007. The iPhone had the touch technology, and the Air had an ultra-portable form factor. Apple explored SSD hard drives with the Air, and in a sense, teased the niche market for expensive-but-polished notebooks. The unibody design was touted as an end to user-replaceable batteries, offering solid battery life that trickled into the MacBook Pro lineup. And with all that, Apple proved that there was a market for the Air, and one that could likely grow with cheaper hardware costs.

So what’s left? Take the Air, throw away the keyboard, and tablet nirvana is just around the corner. While we wouldn’t expect Apple to revive the Newton or Air names for a future tablet, one has to admit that the latter name is catchy and far more apt for a tablet than for what the Air is today.

Apple Tablet as the new king of media.

Looking at iTunes LP and iTunes Extra content, we see a pretty exciting, open technology for developers to exploit. These technologies add even more reason to go all-digital, as consumers won’t have to feel like they’re missing out on bonus content if they don’t buy a CD with art and lyrics on the pull-out jewel case pamphlet, or the extra content on DVD menus. The best thing about iTunes Extra, though, is that it’s flexible enough to be used with other media, like print. That is to say, books, newspapers, and magazines, in digital format, could have a degree of interaction that typical e-publications don’t. Instead of simply reading a PDF or ePub document, consumers will be able to interact with their digital downloads in a way we expect one to interact with web sites, only in this case, an online connection would only be leveraged sporadically.

For example, newspapers could have polls. When a user submits their response to the poll, the information is transmitted the next time the Tablet has an internet connection. Thereafter, the newspaper poll will show results to date, without the user having to manually reload the poll data. Local weather information could be dynamically generated upon purchase, while old issues of the publication would have static records based on the actual weather histories. Users could enable/disable audible readings of articles, and magazines could include video clips of product reviews, better leverage advertising, and generally include more media that would otherwise have been cut in a print magazine because of limited space. And books could leverage interactive media in another way: imagine reading through Lord of the Rings, and having an easy-to-access map of Middle-earth, where the Fellowship’s location is marked, and corresponds to where you are in the book’s reading. With enough foresight, one could even cross-reference terms from Lord of the Rings to Tolkien’s other works, assuming they too were purchased. In other words, digital publications could link to one another in a sort of quasi-wiki method.

Ultimately, these are things that will add value to a digital download, thereby making them more attractive for consumers. Considering Apple’s success with music, and to a more limited degree television and film, it would not be surprising if Apple took on the e-publishing mission with a zest yet unseen by the eBook industry. And why shouldn’t Apple carve out this rather important niche, especially since it won’t be competing head-on with today’s eBooks: the type of interaction we’re talking about isn’t suitable for an e-ink display. Apple will want colour (lots of colour!), and the quick, reactive display that one would expect to see on the iPhone or, in this case, an Apple tablet. Sure, the battery life won’t be as good as an eBook reader, but the experience will be better.

There have already been plenty of rumours suggesting that Apple has met with print-industry big-wigs, and other rumours indicating that print-industry execs are meeting with one another to address their future digital distribution plans. (Supposedly, Apple has even offered a 30/70 split to publishing houses as financial incentive.) It should be obvious to anyone that standardizing this distribution, to a firm degree, will be beneficial to all companies involved. And with Apple leading the charge, would it really surprise anyone if iTunes was rebranded as something more like “iMedia?”

The Apple Tablet as a MacBook.

With the type of interactive content we’re talking about, Apple won’t release a dedicated device. Anyone with iTunes will be able to download the latest music, movies, and magazines, and be able to sync them across all their iTunes-capable devices. What better way to showcase the multimedia prowess of the music/movie/magazine conglomeration flipping through virtual pages of the latest New York Times bestseller with an actual flick of one’s finger, using similar gestures to control music and movie playback? The processing power we’re talking about, particularly for the multimedia elements, will be greater than what most eBook readers have today.

Apple is about totality of experience. That’s where the iPhone trumps every other smartphone on the market, and why Apple was able to beat out competitors in 2007 when the iPhone, to much initial criticism, was unleashed upon the masses. Apple’s only going to duplicate this effort with a tablet: a perfect machine to showcase its multimedia initiative, but still capable of tackling most average computing needs. So yes, the tablet will support a wireless keyboard/mouse, and run the regular version of OS X. Its specs will likely be similar to that of the MacBook, or maybe even the 13″ MacBook Pro. But the market for a tablet is clearly different than the market for these more traditional laptops, so it won’t cannibalize sales of other Apple products any more than the Mac Mini cannibalizes sales of the iMac. Users who need a traditional notebook experience for class or work will still get a MacBook: it’s the desktop baseline for getting work done with mobility in mind. But those who can spare not having a physical keyboard will love the tablet, because it offers extra mobility at the expense of easy desktop integration. Some tablet owners may cart around a wireless keyboard in their tote bags, but they will likely be the exception. Everyone else will treat their tablets like an eReader that can do so much more; the tablet will be the perfect, portable entertainment tool aimed at those who consume information rather than games. It won’t be a one-trick pony like the CrunchPad Joo Joo, because as Steve Jobs said, an Apple tablet will be expected to do more than simply serve as a web-reading tool for toilet-surfers.

The assumed $1,000 price-point seems entirely realistic at this point, especially when one realizes that the tablet will be little more than a MacBook Air whose keyboard was replaced with a capacitive touchscreen. That price doesn’t make us gawk at all. In fact, we’re ready to jump at a tablet purchase under these conditions, and we wouldn’t be surprised if the device is ready in time for CES 2010.

Similar Posts:

• Enderle just wanted to write “JewJew.” – While we brought the Joo Joo up in passing, Rob Enderle proclaimed that the former CrunchPad could c…
• Conceptualizing an Apple sub-notebook: the Apple Annex. – When we commented [on the Macbook Air](http://beastwith.in/2008/01/16/macbook-air-fills-exactly-what…
• Maybe people just don’t like magazines. – Despite the number of initial downloads, it appears that magazine “subscriptions” on the iPad aren’t…

Alan Moore of Watchmen fame made a comment recently that we spotted over at io9. The comment hearkens back to the point we tried to make about the upcoming G.I. Joe movie. Namely, that big-screen translations can’t always be authentic, because what works in a cartoon aimed at children doesn’t seem remotely realistic to adults watching an action blockbuster.

There is something about the quality of comics that makes things possible that you couldn’t do in any other medium.. Things that we did in Watchmen on paper could be frankly horrible or sensationalist or unpleasant if you were to interpret them literally through the medium of cinema. When it’s just lines on paper, the reader is in control of the experience – it’s a tableau vivant. And that gives it the necessary distance. It’s not the same when you’re being dragged through it at 24 frames per second.

We happened to think that Watchmen was a pretty good movie, and a good translation of the comic book at that. Able to ignore the impossibility of the character’s super-human athleticism, we were still rather put off by the over-the-type ending, and the rather unnecessary use of character costumes as often as they were. Yes, it’s a comic book movie, but when chilling out at home while watching the world turn asunder, do you really need to be in your dork-outfit when no one’s around to discover your identity anyway?

While some decisions in big-budget movies are aimed at selling merchandise, it’d be nice for producers to realize that this merchandising really hurts the integrity of what could otherwise be a very good movie. This Ewok-syndrome has plagued many superhero movies in the past, and the lack of it is, in part, why the latest Batman movies were so successful. Let’s not revert back to bright crime-fighter outfits, and let’s hope that G.I. Joe also manages to avoid this pit. Of course, attempting silly gimmicks to explain away aesthetics can often hurt too, especially when trying to sell it to fanboys. Take the latest information about G.I. Joe’s Destro:

…according to the script review we read a while back, Destro’s mask in the film is made of nanotechnology, and allows Cobra Commander to control his mind.

If that’s the explanation for Destro’s mask that makes it into the final cut, then we can congratulate the producers on castrating the one great villain in the series, and seriously damaging the film’s credibility for a whole generation of young boys.

There’s a thin line between authenticity and believability, and it’s one that film producers need to carefully think about before putting a script into effect. Merchandising may not be the only offender in the equation, but it’s an easy culprit to spot. As always, changes to the original source material need to be carefully considered, but in the face of films targeting a viewership comprised of now-grown adults, the elements on film need to not only make sense, but be wholly believable unto the background material itself.

Similar Posts:

• The one time “authentic” means “lame”. – Why _wouldn’t_ a child of the 80s…
• E-Books: now hip? – Every month or two, there’s mention of the E-Book revolution, and the consensus usually tends to rem…
• Cheap man’s movies. – There are so many games that make their way to store shelves, it’s not very surprising that most fly…

Warning: spoilers below.

Apocalypto is the touching tale of an Indian a Mexican a Native American who changes colour. He comes from a small village that calls pigs “tapirs”, and hunts them with intricate booby traps that would make Indiana Jones jealous. The chameleone-sque Native American, named Jaguar Paw, is a practical joker, much like all the men in his village except for his exceptionally big neighbor, who we will call Little John.

The villain in the movie is the evil Mayan Empire, who sends an Einsatzgruppe to Jaguar Paw’s village to kidnap pretty much everyone but the children. The Mayans are masters-of-arms, and Jaguar Paw and his neighbors (hereafter “Jungle Dwellers”) are no match for them, despite the hulking mass of Little John. These children are later forced to fend for themselves in the jungle, and ultimately inspire the writing of Lord of the Flies, then presumably die, as we never see them again. Before the main battle sequence between the Mayans and Jungle Dwellers, Jaguar Paw stashes his wife and son away in a long-abandoned sarlacc pit, right before Jaguar Paw gets his ass-kicked. He is then force-marched, along with the rest of the Jungle Dwellers, to the dying lands of the evil Mayans. On the way, the war-band, with captured Jungle Dwellers, comes across a lone child with boils, who starts talking nonsense and then makes Nostradamus-like predictions. Only, the predictions aren’t neat little poems, nor in French, and are much creepier because they come from a diseased child.

In Maya-land, rich people wear green ink. They also have funky hairstyles and some, like the Emperor, have pieces of jade magically stuck to their faces. This is due to Mayan magic, which was once very potent, until the gods decided to punish the Mayans by killing their crops and spreading disease among the people. Making jade sticky enough not to fall off one’s nose, however, is still magically possible.

Jungle Dweller women are auctioned off to the green-skinned Mayans, while the men climb a Mayan temple to be sacrificed to the Mayan sun-god. This is the part where Jaguar Paw changes colour for the first time. He is painted blue to show that he is sad and hopeless. A fat kid laughs at him, and Jaguar Paw ponders how he can not die, and then he is miraculously saved by a freak solar eclipse. He and the Jungle Dwellers who haven’t been sacrificed are then forced to play a game of run-away-from-the-flying-objects-and-dodge-a-melee-weapon-at-the-end-of-the-field. Jaguar Paw beats this game using Indian Mexican Native American Jungle Dweller sneakery, along with the help of Little John (who never got to showcase his strength in the way we hoped before he was killed). This is when Jaguar Paw kills the son of the Einsatzgruppe leader with an arrowhead, then makes off across a mass grave and back to the jungle. (See what Mel Gibson did here? The Jungle Dweller returning to the jungle?) It should be pretty clear how the rest of this goes.

The ensuing chase scene lasts days, like some sort of freak Elvish/Dwarfish pursuit across Middle Earth where conveniently, everyone’s stamina is maxed out during an important plot element. After tricking a Jaguar into killing his pursuers, Jaguar Paw orphans a poor jaguar cub when the Einsatzgruppe kill the jaguar in revenge. One dude points out how the combination of a diseased, prediction-telling child, a freak solar eclipse, and the convenient jaguar-killing-a-man incident is a bad omen, but he is silenced not long thereafter by a snake-bite to the jugular, thus validating his concerns. The rest of his troupe press on nonetheless, whereupon they follow Jaguar Paw over the side of a waterfall, where one of the troupe members inconveniently bashes his head on a rock. This is where Jaguar Paw changes colour back to red brown Native American.

While Jaguar Paw has, at this time, shown an exceptional ability to dodge flying objects (despite being hit with a non-fatal arrow), he is not bright enough to not fall into a pool of quicksand. Nonetheless, he somehow manages to swim through it and climb out, whereupon he gains immense luck and shortly thereafter finds a poisonous toad. Now grey (see: Gandalf the Grey), Jaguar Paw pulls a MacGuyver and fashions poisonous blow-darts, which he uses to dispose of another pursuer. Having mastered the art of stealing bases in baseball during his tribe’s league games, he also manages to run at an attacker, slide beneath the attacker’s swinging weapon, and gracefully pick up a bludgeon which he uses to dispatch another enemy. There is glorious blood-mist in this scene.

Back at his old village, Jaguar Paw stumbles upon his wife in her watery hole (it’s raining at this point, and the sarlacc pit is steadily filling up with water). Oh, and Jaguar Paw is no longer grey now, but back to his original colour, just like he’s back at his village. (Gibson, you genius!) Here, Jaguar Paw uses boob-trappery to take out the Einsatzgruppe leader, just before stumbling upon Christopher Columbus and what we assume are boatloads of diseased blankets.

In the end, Jaguar Paw manages to pull his wife and now two kids (yeah, she had a baby while in the pit) out of the hole, whereupon they live happily ever after roaming through the jungle. With no shoes.

This BuzzCap brought to you by Dogfish Head’s 90 Minute IPA and Palo Santo Marron.

Similar Posts:

• Close encounters in India. – The Indians always have something interesting going on, and if it’s not monkey men killing people, i…
• Gaming on Macs alive, dead on OS X. – I don’t particularly get all the anger over Aspyr dropping the ball on Guitar Hero III. That is to s…
• The old Starbucks logo is better. – Somewhat surprised were we when we came across a post decrying the old brown Starbucks logo in favo…

We’ve been urging Bones Wiley to update his website, as we know he’s been hard at work coming up with lyrics and new tunes now that he’s back in the United States. While there’s no update just yet, there’s a new video up on YouTube under the name FolkClouds. The video shows a dark figure hammering out a new tune, and for those in-the-know, that dark figure is Bones Wiley hisownself. Check it:

Here’s hoping Bones Wiley FolkClouds will keep up with the updates. Oh, and pick up some better lighting equipment.

Similar Posts:

• Bones Wiley embraces the folk music. – Two days ago, Bones Wiley posted two more videos on his YouTube page. The videos suffer from minor …
• MacBook owners: No Guitar Hero 3 for you! – It was good news that Guitar Hero 3 (GH3) was shipping for both Windows and OS X, and this fact prom…
• Bringing back the bones. – Some time back, we stopped paying attention to Bones Wiley’s web site, because he was outta town and…

Why wouldn’t a child of the 80s find a modern G.I. Joe movie fantastic? Given the veritable success of the recent Transformers movie, a G.I. Joe movie seems like a logical move. That is, until one realizes that G.I. Joe is full of campy nonsense much like the Ewoks that heralded Star Wars’ demise.

When the minds behind the Transformers movie decided to not to make Megatron turn into a little gun, fans may have been upset, but let’s be fair: the ultimate transforming villain turning into what looks like a German handgun isn’t all that cool compared to the bad guy who turns into frikken tank. The point is, what we all thought was cool in a cartoon just doesn’t translate well into a live action film.

So why the G.I. Joe movie diss? We’ll be the first to say that early promotional pictures of key characters looked good, but “more recent pictures make the whole venture just seem lame. The chief problem, of course, is that one of the factors that made G.I. Joe appealing to kids was that each character had a pretty unique personality and look, creating a harlequin of an army. But that army wasn’t realistic, because all they ended up killing were machines, and even towards the end of the cartoon’s run, the only Joe to come close to dying woke up from a short coma.

Sadly, an authentic G.I. Joe movie won’t do to keep the old fans cheering. Rather, the movie writers need to change some key components to the original story to make the organizations believable, and then fit the characters in appropriately. That is, make G.I. Joe an elite counterterrorism task force comprised of members from a myriad of organizations, not a replacement for the country’s military branches. And for the sake of all that’s holy, don’t get carried away with each Joe’s garb; give them a standard outfit with some unique personalizations, but the harlequin thing just doesn’t work outside of the cartoon.

We haven’t seen any photos of Destro yet, but it already sounds like he won’t have any supernatural ties, which makes us a bit disappointed, but that kind of tangent would probably just complicate things anyway. Here’s hoping they don’t make the character lame compared to the original – we’d much rather see them not use Destro than screw him up.

Similar Posts:

• Believability sorely lacking in comic/cartoon-derived movies. – Alan Moore of Watchmen fame made a comment recently that we [spotted over at io9](http://io9.com/517…
• The iPad should interface with the iPhone directly. – As we checked out Apple’s latest guided tours for the iPad, it occurred to us that since the iPad is…
• Review: SW:E1: The Phantom Menace. – I was a hardcore Star Wars fan about five years ago. I’m talking a fan that watched the movies more …

Is anyone surprised that the copy protection announced for Mass Effect and Spore is being reconsidered? In short, publishers Bioware and EA, respectively, initially decided to include a copy protection mechanism that would cause the aforementioned games to “phone home” every ten days to ensure that the game played was legitimately purchased. The ten-day authentication angered a lot of gamers, despite the fact, as “[Tobold points out](http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/ToboldsBlog/~3/290143603/unable-to-comprehend-spore-drm.html Unable to comprehend the Spore DRM controversy”), they’re online all the time anyway. In reality, the group of gamers who have the most to complain about are the ones who won’t consistently be wired once every ten days, but this is a very tiny subset of those complaining.

Let’s be honest about software piracy, though: the lengths taken by a lot of companies these days (e.g. the RIAA) to protect their sales has ballooned to the point where it’s instead determining who can do what with media and software in a “fair” manner. In other words, the “protections” proposed have gone beyond simply protecting a company’s assets, to simply being unfair to the consumer.

Tobold’s take on the matter is not an unusual one, because like most others, he seems to forget that a pirated game does not equate to a “lost sale”. That’s because there are plenty of people who have no qualms about illegally obtaining a song, movie, or video game to try it out, who might very well never have bought the item in the first place, even if it wasn’t available illegally. In other words, the a chunk of software pirates have no effect on a company’s sales, but corporate big-wigs like to inflate their problems to impose stricter regulations out of greed, not simply financial security. That’s precisely why, after years of piracy increasing, the music, movie, and game industries are still seeing an increase in yearly profits, despite claims that they’re hurting.

We’re not sure what Tobold’s source is when he claims,

“There are several good game studios that have gone under or been forced to sell out because while lots of people played their games, less than half of their players had actually paid for them.”

Interestingly, he didn’t name one example, and the more likely suspect of them failing is because while some people may have enjoyed their products, they probably didn’t appeal to most gamers. Look at the considerable number of games that do manage to make money, which began as free products. Counterstrike is a prime example of a polished game, released as a free-download for Half-Life, that would later be sold, with minimal changes, to the same players who enjoyed it for free for years. Look at XBox Live Arcade, which features games based off free, web-based Flash games. Or, take a gander at Nintendo’s Virtual Console, which features titles many years old that are easily obtainable for free, illegally, by doing a simple Google search. Good games will sell despite piracy, and that’s a lesson the music and movie industries will need to learn, also.

Even assuming that strict copy protection was necessary, it still doesn’t justify a product phoning home every ten days. Nor does it require a physical check of the purchased media.

As far as video games go, it wasn’t too long ago that copy protection was based on the user looking up content from material bundled with the game. Some games made users look up certain words in the included game manuals, while other games found a way to incorporate bundled items into the game’s context. With how common bundling material in “collector’s editions” has become, developers could just as easily throw in a nice physical item that’s needed to decode an in-game puzzle or riddle. These methods were relied upon until CD-ROMs became popular, because at the onset of their release, they were not copyable by the average consumer.

Now, however, why not go back to this proven system that requires no media checks or online access?

Similar Posts:

• Spore’s DRM changes pale in comparison to Warcaft’s changes. – We found it utterly ironic when Tobold complained about EA releasing Spore sans DRM via Steam. That’…
• Apple’s Fairplay + 360 coolness = more piracy. – Word is out that AppleTV is getting a couple upgrades in the near future, to include a larger hard d…
• Beyond Giga. – The PSP Giga-pack bundle, the main selling point of which is the 1GB memory card, is the premiere PS…

What is this, the Reality Distortion Field (RDF) at it’s best? TUAW’s claiming that news of movie rentals via iTunes is making Blockbuster and Netflix stock drop, despite the fact that movie rentals on iTunes is nothing but novelty. Don’t get me wrong – the fact that I have a new rental option is nice, especially since I can do it without leaving my home. The price of this luxury is not cheap, however: four dollars for basic movies, and five dollars for HD movies.

Meanwhile, I can get unlimited HD movies sent via the mail, per month, thanks to Netflix, for less than the cost of two HD movies via the iTunes rental service. Plus, I’m not forced to watch my Netflix movies within 24 hours of starting them. In other words, the iTunes rental service looks great on paper if money is no option, but for a rental budget of $10 per month, Netflix is still the much better deal. Not to mention, Netflix allows me to stream movies from the Internet in addition to the movies I get via mail, which means the limitation on me having only one movie out at a time is moot, especially since Netflix announced that I can have unlimited movie streaming.

As nice as the iTunes movie rental business is, it’s too frikken pricey. What Apple should have done is find a way to negotiate unlimited rentals for a monthly subscription cost, perhaps by placing certain limitations on the service such as forcing users to delete/finish one movie before they can download another. Instead, Apple is charging a fee for movies at a higher cost than brick’n mortar competitors, and certainly more expensive than Netflix. That’s not a way to corner the market, and the undue hype around this movie rental announcement is plain silly.

Similar Posts:

• Week of tweets: 2011-09-25. – Netflix does video games now? # If "Netflix" is ubiquitous with DVD rentals by mail, woul…
• Too much drool over Apple TV. – People have been going ga-ga over Apple TV ever since it was announced. I wasn’t sure what the big d…
• Apple TV disappoints. Again. – When Apple TV first hit shelves, I had a couple things to say, the gist of which involved the device…

Introduction

It’s been over a year since I publicly released Bringing Back the Force, and have, since then, received quite a flood of e-mail. While there were, of course, flames from Lucas-zealots for defying their master’s vision, on the whole, feedback has been most excellent. I intended on writing a follow-up article a mere handful of months after Bringing Back the Force hit the web, but I decided against it. Now, a year and four months later, after another sudden surge of readership, I decided to put online some of the more popular responses to questions asked and comments received. For clarity’s sake, I will refer to Bringing Back the Force as “the theory” or “my theory”, and will refer “Ben” to the older Anakin according to my theory, not Obi-Wan. Additionally, “old Kenobi” will refer to Kenobi as seen in Episodes Four through Six, and “young Kenobi” will refer to Kenobi in Episode One.

The primary purpose of this follow-up article is not to prove that my theory has no holes. Nor is it to stubbornly prove that my theory is correct, and that the masses were tricked into falling for Lucas’ trap. Rather, this article intends on clarifying some points, and raising possible explanations for how the theory could further be supported. To me, it’s not a matter of “who is right”, but rather, “what could be done to the Star Wars storyline to make it better”. Because the theory is so well supported by the evidence already given, I see no reason that the theory could not be implemented, and however thin your stretch “evidence” here and there, that it would be convincing in totality.

OOC

While the theory tries dealing with events from the four released movies, people like to bring up quotes from Lucas himself, especially those where Lucas implies, or implicitly refers, to Anakin becoming Vader. In order for my theory to make the least bit of sense, you have to assume that Lucas doesn’t want people to know about it until Episode Two or Three (whichever reveals the secret). So naturally, Lucas would not refer to Obi-Wan becoming Vader, even in an interview with the press.

In a similar vein, the teaser posters where a shadowy silhouette of Vader comes out of young Anakin’s body serve only to reinforce the belief that the audience already has – that Anakin becomes Darth Vader. Again, this is what Lucas wants the audience to believe, until he himself decides otherwise.

Noting details about the script in my theory, I now suggest another. While it makes sense to refer to old Kenobi as “Ben” in Episode Four, it doesn’t make that much sense in Episode’s Five and Six, since by then, we’re supposed to know that he’s Obi-Wan. In fact, Episode 1 is the only Star Wars film in which the character is listed as “Obi-Wan” throughout the script. Is it because the character depicted in Episode One is not the same as in Episodes Four through Six?

Character Appearance

The question of casting is an important one, and I must admit, the care taken to find an actor with a British accent to play Obi-Wan was definitely intentional. As many of you have pointed out, old Kenobi had a British accent, young Kenobi had a British accent, and young Anakin did not. While the human voice of Vader was hard to make out in Return of the Jedi, people are quick to assume that the crippled Vader, and the mechanized Vader, spoke without an accent. To these people, I would raise the argument that Vader’s voice, being a robotically implemented attachment to his helmet, could perhaps not adequately filter the accent, and so it was not evident in Vader’s normal dialogue. Any words spoken by the dying Vader at the end of Return of the Jedi could be similarly misconstrued.

Over-enthusiastic critics will try to claim that they see a clear resemblance between young Anakin, and the dying/ghostly Vader. How anyone can see such a resemblance, given the huge gap in age, is beyond me. While I would be more likely to buy claims of a physical resemblance between young and old Kenobi, I can’t honestly say that I do. A recent picture offered to me, showing young Kenobi in Episode Two with a beard, and dressed in the garb of old Ben (which is traditional Jedi garb, mind you), does not convince me. As I responded then, I shall respond now: A beard does not an old Kenobi make. Even with the similarities in place, I don’t see the resemblance between young Kenobi and old Kenobi – the former’s head is much rounder, and looks to me to be a much closer match with the dying/ghostly Vader. In addition, the actor playing teenage Anakin in Episode Two looks to have a more slender face, much like that of old Kenobi.

Why then, would young Kenobi grow a beard in Episode Two, similar to the beard old Ben wears in A New Hope? If Anakin Skywalker needed to hide from the Empire, and took on the name Ben Kenobi to hide from the real Kenobi, perhaps he also took on his identification in other ways. Presumably, some sort of identification records exist in the Star Wars galaxy, and donning a beard much like the real Kenobi’s, Anakin was able to assume a new identity, and thus new records. Fake pictorial id is not difficult to use, especially when one’s face is hidden behind a beard.

Even if the fleeing Anakin didn’t need to look like the real Kenobi, the matter of both of them wearing a beard is easily explained by coincidence. Or, perhaps, Anakin growing a beard was done simply to hide a more known face – how often do we see movies in which the gangsters grow a beard to hide their face, images of which have been plastered across the city? It’s not much of a stretch, when considering the theory to be true, that Lucas gave young Kenobi a beard as just another way to throw the audience off.

Vader’s Penance

My introduction to Bringing Back the Force included a rough summary of David Brin’s article, which was a piece that caused me to seriously reflect on the Star Wars saga. Initially, I received just as much of an opposition to the ideas Brin brought up as I did “evidence” for the switch, which I found quite surprising. To summarize, Brin criticized Lucas for making the audience cheer for young Anakin, when we knew very well that the young lad would grow up, only to murder multitudes as Darth Vader.

Numerous arguments have been thrown around to justify this, usually taking the form of “but Vader died a righteous death” or “a rightful death is better than a sinful death”. I dismiss these claims in support of Brin’s article, for I believe that the audience should live up to one standard, not two.

It is here that I bring up historical references, and wonder why the arguments for excusing Vader’s crimes can be applied to a fictional galaxy, but not to the real world. After World War II, German military leaders were categorically executed for their relation to Germany’s military might, despite the fact that they were not personally involved in the execution of the Jewish peoples. Vader, who for all intents and purposes served as the Emperor’s right hand, both in charge of military forces and head of an inquisition against the Jedi, is just as evil (if not more so) than any Nazi war criminal. Yet the audience is fully capable of excusing Vader’s actions, arguing that he was just a tool of the Empire, not the true evil therein.

Whoever Vader was before he turned to the Dark Side, the fact remains that he did not have the force of will to resist the temptations of the Empire. Just as a member of the German military hierarchy did not have the force of will to resist the dominion of the Third Reich.

In my opinion, the parallels are shocking.

The Droids

I reference the droids in Bringing Back the Force, saying that if Anakin really were Vader, then some sort of reflection on his past would have taken place, given that he was once their owner. Critics argue that no such reflection took place because Vader was never in the proximity of the droids, and as such, was never in contact with then. In other words, they argue that he didn’t know they were there.

In Return of the Jedi, R2D2 is on Endor with Han and company, and Vader senses the presence of Luke with them. Before that, Vader is on Bespin with C3PO. In both of these cases, Vader’s prowess at reading people’s surface thoughts would very well be an explanation for discovering the droids. Arguing that there are hundreds of protocol and R2 droids doesn’t hold up in this case, not to mention that C3PO looked physically different (and sounded different) than other protocol droids. Catching some concern for, or other mention of, the droids, is not an impossibility.

Colloquialisms

Readers of my theory point out that my mention of Kenobi calling Luke “son”, and referring to R2D2 as his “friend” are colloquial terms. This, of course, I am aware of. It’s the fact that these specific two colloquial terms were used that I’m forced to question if they’re just a coincidence, or if they actually hint at some future plot-twist. To argue that they’re coincidental is just as valid as arguing they’re not.

Contradiction?

Two things I wrote in Bringing Back the Force confuses people more than any other. Namely, they are:

Might I add, now, that young Kenobi wasn’t an especially stable Jedi. That is, he wasn’t too well versed in keeping his cool, thinking as any Jedi should. In fact, he breaks the Jedi code at the end of Episode One, when he sees his Master die and, in a fervorous rage, engages Darth Maul in combat. Unlike his Master, Obi-Wan’s anger comes out, bringing him one step closer to the dark side. That’s right, folks, it’s Obi-Wan that becomes Darth Vader, not Anakin.

And:

When Yoda is first considering teaching Luke, he notes to Ben that the boy is reckless. Ben agrees, but reminds Yoda that when he was younger, he too was reckless. Yet from Episode one, we know that Obi-Wan was not reckless at all, always doing everything as in the book, always telling Qui-Gon that he ought not be reckless. Anakin, however, is another story.

The confusion here comes from the fact that the first quote refers to young Kenobi and his by-the-book attitude (he even lectures his master, Qui-Gon, on this). The second quote, however, refers to old Kenobi (Anakin, not Obi-Wan) who acknowledges that he (young Anakin) was also reckless once, which we saw when he was a boy in Episode One. Note also, that the first quote is primarily concerned with emotional stability, rather than conscious action, and involves an emotional leave from the Jedi code, not a conscious acknowledgment of breaching his codex. So, in fact, I am not contradicting myself with these two quotes.

Anger

My accusations against young Kenobi exploding in a fit of rage when his master is killed is dismissed by critics, and they often don’t agree that anger will lead one towards the Dark Side. Yet, Yoda and old Kenobi say this very thing – anger leads to the Dark Side.

To support their claims, however, critics will ponder why an angered Luke was successful in defeating Vader after being taunted by both Palpatine and Vader.

If we are to accept later Star Wars literature, with which the theory purposely does not deal with (seeing as Lucas may disregard it yet again), then Luke’s giving into anger might very well be foreshadowing his eventual fall to the Dark Side, which does in fact happen a number of years after Return of the Jedi closes.

The easiest way, however, for me to dismiss claims that anger won victory over the Empire is by explaining that it did not. The taunting of Luke by the Emperor, in order to bring about anger in the boy, was intentional. As you’ll recall from Return of the Jedi, the Emperor wanted Luke to slay Vader. Luke giving in to anger and defeating Vader was all part of the Imperial plan; it wasn’t some righteous win or final blow by the forces of good. In fact, it could very well be argued that even had Luke not faced Vader to begin with, and if the Emperor thusly disposed of Luke, that Vader would have destroyed his master anyway.

Vader’s Son

In my theory, I note that Vader only refers to Luke as his son once, when not confronting the boy. When he does do this, however, in Return of the Jedi, I explain the reference as sarcastic, and when reviewing an audio clip of the moment, I noticed an atypical voice inflection in the quote. I consider this an adequate explanation for the inconsistency, which I noted in the original text of my theory.

The most difficult hole to patch up in my theory is the end of Return of the Jedi, where Vader wants to see Luke with his own eyes. I could try proposing that Vader wanted to keep up the masquerade, either to kid himself as he lay dying, or to ease the boy’s pain when left alone with the realization that he is the “last” Jedi. Psychologically, the impact might be enough to keep Luke on the right track. This, of course, is stretching things quite thin, and I don’t claim to be able to defend any such argument flawlessly, but it is a possible explanation.

Owen

In my theory, I note that Ben explains to Luke that Owen is not really the lad’s uncle, but that Owen is Ben’s brother. While I incorrectly attributed the quote to Episode Five (it’s actually in Ep6), the quote is still present.

When your father left, he didn’t know your mother was pregnant. Your mother and I knew he would find out eventually, but we wanted to keep you both as safe as possible, for as long as possible. So I took you to live with my brother Owen on Tatooine… and your mother took Leia to live as the daughter of Senator Organa, on Alderaan.

So, according to old Kenobi, Vader didn’t know that Luke was born, or would be born. Old Kenobi also told Luke in Episode Four that Luke’s father wanted him to have the lightsaber that old Kenobi handed him. So, if according to popular opinion Anakin became Vader, then these two quotes don’t hold up – how could Vader not know that Luke was conceived and yet want for Luke to have the lightsaber, if Vader really was Luke’s father?

The quotes do hold up, however, if old Kenobi is actually Luke’s father. The quote written above is old Kenobi relaying the story of Vader to Luke, noting that the young Vader didn’t know that Luke’s mother was pregnant, so old Kenobi (then Anakin Skywalker) hid his wife and child with his own brother (as he says) on Tatooine.

The quote above can be found by flipping through the script of Episode Six. Curiously, there appear to be two copies of the Second Draft for this film, both with the same date on them but one missing the additional dialogue from old Kenobi. I take this to mean that this was filmed, but cut out of the final production run. Nevertheless, the quote appears to be quite valid.

But I digress; while I cannot validate the authenticity of the article, one of the leaked “spoilers” from a supposed inside source makes mention of the name Owen. As Episode II progresses, it seems that teenage Anakin has a vision of his mother in peril, and heads to Tatooine to save her. Finding her missing, he gets information from his once-master Watoo, the junk dealer, who tells him that his mother is no longer a slave, and married a man named Cliegg Lars. The two had a child named Owen, whose girlfriend is named Beru Whitesun. This would be the very couple that raises young Luke, whom we see in Episode Four.

Yet as the above quote mentions, Owen is old Kenobi’s brother. If this spoiler is at all true, and Episode Two follows it, then we have a contradiction – whose brother is Owen? The contradiction can be averted if my theory is true – young Anakin becomes Ben Kenobi, so both the reference to Owen being Anakin’s brother, and Owen being old Kenobi’s brother, makes sense, since they are the same person.

Fan Rumours and Speculation

Lots of people have written me about their own proof to aid my theory, and I figured I may as well drop some in with no further explanation. Enjoy.

In an interview with Anthony Daniels (C3PO) after the release of Ep1, he said, “George [Lucas] explained the story to me. He said, “You were built by Anakin,” and I thought, “Oh, that’s really nice because Alec Guiness was so supportive to me on the earlier movies.” I thought it was fitting that Threepio was built by Sir Alec.” Daniel later goes on to say that he forgot Anakin was supposed to end up as Vader. Perhaps it was a Freudian slip. (Can anyone validate this article?)

Another tidbit that I’d love to have someone validate is the supposed announcement of a national radio DJ in the UK who claims that Brian Blessed (Boss Nas) told him some privy information about the sequels. The DJ said that the outcome of the plot twist would be as strange as the revelation in Fight Club.

Similar Posts:

• Bringing back the Force. – It’s wholly possible that George Lucas isn’t a total twit, and pulls off something spectacular with …
• Review: SW:E1: The Phantom Menace. – I was a hardcore Star Wars fan about five years ago. I’m talking a fan that watched the movies more …
• Lucas still retarded. – After ruining the Star Wars franchise with the sad excuse of a prequel that was Episode One, and fai…

Playin’ DVD’s on your computer is pretty cool, and wirin’ your pad to send a DVD signal to your TV from your computer is pretty damn spiffy too, but it’s not always the most elegant solution. In fact, given the cost of quality RCA cables, and the possibility that you may have as old an entertainment set up as some of us, playing a DVD on your TV through your computer two rooms away is not the best way to impress the ladies, especially if the signal you get is more than a little fuzzy. The utilitarian geek, however, will note that connecting your computer to your entertainment system is not only a good idea if you want to watch DVD’s in your living room, but if you want to listen to mp3′s as well. Clearly, there’s no better solution available. Or is there?

Review

The Apex 600A DVD player is a power-users dream. Certainly, it’s not the greatest DVD player out there, but power isn’t always proportional with price, and the 600A doesn’t exactly cost an arm and a leg. The beauty of the 600A isn’t solely based on its DVD-playing features (though they’re not exactly sub-par either), but rather on what features the 600A boasts. In fact, calling the 600A a DVD player is only a fraction of the truth. If you haven’t already guessed it, the 600A plays mp3′s as well, assuring the 600A a position in the mp3 revolution.

Unlike most build-it-yourself solutions, the 600A simplifies playing mp3s with the included remote, which controls everything from the typical DVD play controls to navigating directories on your favorite mp3 CD. No longer do you have to run into your bedroom to change songs. No longer do you have to squeeze past 50 people at your latest partay ’cause someone doesn’t like the mp3 CD that’s playing. And best of all, no longer do you need to leave the living room to play your favorite Vanilla Ice song a fourth time.

Oh, wait, playing DVD’s and mp3′s aren’t the only things the 600A does either. There’s also the ability to play video CD’s, which lets those of you who make .mpg versions of your favorite DVD’s and movies play them on your TV. Finally, I can watch all 39 ripped episodes of The Mysterious Cities of Gold on my TV, instead of sitting in my uncomfortable computer chair a couple feet from my monitor. What more can you ask for? More features, I hear you say? Well, if you’re too poor to buy an audio CD player, the 600A can act as one of those, too.

Though all these kickass features are present, there’s a reason the Apex 600A carries the title of “DVD player”. In fact, it’s because of the “secret menu” that many hardcore DVD aficionados are trying to get their hands on one of these puppies. This configuration menu, hidden from the average user, lets the curious geek bypass Macromedia copy protection, allowing you to copy DVD’s to VHS with litle to no problems. In addition, the 600A allows you to select from numerous region codes, so you can play DVD’s from a number of countries. Better yet is the fact that you can change the region code on your player as many times as you want, unlike those DVD ROM’s out there that only let you change the region code two or three times. Now I can get ahold of the French-only release of Mysterious Cities of Gold II. Man, if only I could speak French.

The Apex 600A is only sold through a few retail outlets, and the only major one is Circuit City. Unfortunately, by the time I got there, all they had in stock was the display unit, which they refused to sell. I was put on their backorder list along with 29 other people, and had to wait a month for my unit to come in. By then, rumours abound of “modified” units that didn’t have the “secret menu”, since some corporate officials were making a fuss about the lack of region locking and Macromedia protection. Aww, are those rich-boys afraid of losing a little money? Fortunately, if you act quickly enough, you’ll still be able to get ahold of the 600A before production stops. As it stands, the 600A will soon be replaced with the new Apex model, the 660A, which is supposed to be practically identical to the 600A aside from the removal of the “secret menu”. Of course, if you only care about the mp3, VCD, and/or audio CD playing, then you’re in luck, ’cause Apex has no plans on getting rid of those excellent features.

After buying the Apex 600A, I didn’t have any problems setting it up. The included cables were all I needed to hook the audio up to our receiver, and the video up to our archaic VCR. The manual is pretty simple to follow, and contains information on playing the various file types, and even gives an intro. to what they are if you’re not in the know. The only thing the manual doesn’t include is how to properly burn CD’s for mp3 and VCD play; I threw an old party mix mp3 CD into the player and it worked fine, but non-Joliet burns done on a Mac weren’t readable. Also slightly annoying is the fact that the mp3 filenames on the disc were cut off at 8 characters, as if they were being viewed in DOS. As for VCD play, the manner in which you have to burn the CD is slightly more complicated, and I wasn’t able to just pop in my CD’s containing The Mysterious Cities of Gold after all; instructions for VCD creation are easily obtained from the web.

The most annoying thing I found was when I put my first DVD into the player, which was rated R: I was prompted for a parental control password. The 600A comes with password-protection enabled, so as to keep children from watching movies with adult content. I couldn’t find the default password in the included manual, so I had to jump online to find it. FYI, the password is 3308.

I serously believe the Apex 600A is a good DVD player, and an excellent entertainment toy. No longer do I have to worry about the cables running from my computer up into the attic and down into the living room being eaten away by rats. There’s nothing easier than just poppin’ a DVD or CD into the 600A, rather than having to load up Winamp or my computer DVD player, and checking to make sure all the audio connections are enabled properly. And heck, for the price, it’s tough to pass this offer up, especially since these things are going fast, and won’t be around for too much longer.

Verdict: 9/10 Price of Tested Unit: $170 plus tax. Pluses: Plays mp3′s, VCD’s, is technically region free, and Macrovision can be turned off. Minuses: mp3 filenames are shortened to 8 characters, VCD’s need to be burned in specific manner. Final Words: For its price, the Apex 600A is an excellent addition to your entertainment setup.

Similar Posts:

• Review: CloneCD. – ### Preface ### There’s more to hardware than a physical presence nowadays – software plays a huge…
• Week of tweets: 2011-05-15. – Strangely, we've never had a problem using older iOS device cables with our iPad 2. #theangled…
• Wireless audio for $25. – Don’t get me wrong, I love Apple. When they do things right, they really do things right. That doesn…

It’s wholly possible that George Lucas isn’t a total twit, and pulls off something spectacular with the Star Wars prequels. I noted in my review of Star Wars: Episode One the major faults with what I believed could have been an engaging storyline. Never mind the obvious mistakes that any Star Wars fan could pick out, or what any Star Wars savvy critic could pull from the review bag; Lucas has already deemed whatever lore he himself didn’t come up with as being completely different from his vision, from the true Star Wars storyline.

Though I don’t approve of the way Lucas has handled his lil’ baby, I have to cast some doubt on the expected nature of Episodes two and three. After all, back in the eighties, viewers were shocked to learn that Vader was Luke’s father. Though Lucas’ storyline is pretty straightforward, it has hit some bumps on the way, spreading somewhat unexpected outcomes to what others thought were obvious. So why would Lucas suddenly rely on what we know will happen?

The glaring mistakes Lucas has made in resurrecting Star Wars, bringing it back into mainstream hype, is pretty inappropriate, though not entirely inexcusable. After some serious thought, I believe that my loyalty to Lucas could be revitalized. After all, there’s got to be some chance, however tiny, that Lucas pulls a spectacular twist in the storyline, one that might bring back some credibility to the series.

David Brin, noted sci-fi author, wrote an article some months ago about the faults associated with Star Wars, and how Lucas could have made better decisions in the course of the storyline, primarily with episodes four through six. Though I don’t necessarily agree with all his points, he did raise a couple good ones, not the least of which is the fact that Vader’s crimes against the galaxy are forgiven, all on account of him saving his son, thus “returning” to the light side. Though Brin states this point a bit more eloquently, it does seem pretty damned ridiculous that Vader becomes the number two bad guy, kills off many, many Jedi, and basically brings about suffering throughout the galaxy under the Emperor’s tyrannical regime. Yet, despite all this, he saves his own son, and we are to forgive him. WTF? Of course, this idea only hurts my morals more when we’re expected to root for young Anakin in Episode One. Yea, okay, let’s root for the bad guy, who goes on to kill his mentor, and who the kickass good guy (Qui-Gon) brought into the fold. Does anyone else find this a little odd?

This is where my theory comes in, you see. Vader is not Luke’s father, nor, in fact, is he Anakin Skywalker. After watching The Phantom Menace a couple more times, this point only becomes clearer for me. I’ll begin by noting some of the evidence.

Obi-Wan Kenobi, the revered Jedi, is recognized by the Rebellion as an esteemed hero. Thus, he must obviously have once been a great Jedi, and though this is not shown as being untrue in the beginning of Episode One, there is no real evidence suggesting that Kenobi is an especially good Jedi either. In fact, considering the amount of fear and respect the word Jedi brings, it can easily be assumed that all Jedi were just as efficient as Kenobi.

Might I add, now, that young Kenobi wasn’t an especially stable Jedi. That is, he wasn’t too well versed in keeping his cool, thinking as any Jedi should. In fact, he breaks the Jedi code at the end of Episode One, when he sees his Master die and, in a fervorous rage, engages Darth Maul in combat. Unlike his Master, Obi-Wan’s anger comes out, bringing him one step closer to the dark side. That’s right, folks, it’s Obi-Wan that becomes Darth Vader, not Anakin.

Let me extend my hypothesis with an example of this switch being foreshadowed. At the end of Episode One, Anakin is dressed in similar attire, and with a similar hairstyle, as Obi Wan. This is the perfect setup for what’s to come next; Anakin will not only become Kenobi’s Jedi student, but he will become Kenobi by name as well.

Was Lucas really so foolish as to change not only the storyline set by other Star Wars authors, but his own storyline as well? Seemingly, that’s what he did when he introduced Qui-Gon, since we know from Episodes four through six that Obi-Wan’s mentor was not Qui-Gon, but Yoda himself. This only makes sense if something else is presented, perhaps the switch I mentioned. If Obi-Wan continues to fall to the dark side, which he has already begun to embrace, and does not complete Anakin’s Jedi training, who will teach Anakin further? If the shit hits the fan, as I’m sure it will when Palpatine/Sidious begin kicking ass, then the young boy may have a use after all, and who better to teach the lad than Yoda himself. Certainly makes sense, then, to never mention Qui-Gon as Obi-Wan’s master, because by the time Luke comes of age, Obi-Wan is Vader, and the old man who’s teaching Luke is none other than Anakin Skywalker himself, who was brought into the Jedi fold by Master Yoda, not Qui-Gon. The only person of relevance that Qui-Gon taught was Vader, making it perfectly acceptable for him to kill the old Obi-Wan, the very boy who he began to teach those many years back.

If you thought about the contrived storyline of Episode One at all, you’ll realize that Vader would have had some sort of recognition for his former friends, namely R2D2 and C3PO, who he put together himself. After all, if his supposed son, someone who he had never met before, could bring back some semblance of his old life, why not the droids (especially C3PO, who was his only friends on Tatooine). Though Vader sees these droids, he pays little attention to them; why should he, for when he was Obi-Wan, he could care less about who they were. The only person they mattered to was Anakin. This makes further sense when you consider which droids were sent to Kenobi’s residence on Tatooine in Episode four. R2D2, who knew Obi-Wan as Anakin, made the trip, not the least surprising bit of information when you put the pieces together. Considering C3PO’s disposition, Kenobi didn’t mention anything to him for obvious reasons; C3PO would have blown his cover right off the bat.

Let me backtrack a small bit to Luke’s place on the farm. When young Skywalker comes across R2D2′s little secret, he mentions to his uncle that he believes the droids were stolen, since R2D2 claims he is the property of Obi-Wan Kenobi. At this point, Uncle Owen becomes very alarmed, perhaps knowing that the legendary Obi-Wan became Vader. The topic quickly changes when the discussion begins to involve Ben Kenobi, who Uncle Owen claims is someone else. While the audience is meant to believe that Uncle Owen’s disposition towards Ben Kenobi is bad, we know this to be untrue from Episode five, when Ben explains that Uncle Owen is his brother. Since Anakin left his mother behind on Tatooine, it’s very possible that she had another child after his departure. It makes more sense for his brother to have remained on Tatooine than to have Obi-Wan and a mysterious brother suddenly appear on the desert planet. Uncle Owen further explains to Luke that Obi-Wan and Luke’s father died around the same time. In fact, both individuals left their identities behind at the same time, as Obi-Wan assumed the role of Darth Vader, and Anakin assumed the role of Ben Kenobi.

When Ben Kenobi first shows up in Episode four, R2D2 says something to him. Ben looks at the droid, and responds, “Come here my little friend.” If Ben is Anakin, this scene makes a lot of sense; R2D2 recognized the old man, and the old man recognized his old acquaintance. When one considers the events in Episode one, the ownership of R2D2 would very likely have gone to Anakin, adding to R2D2′s claim that he is the property of the old hermit on Tatooine in Episode four. Kenobi’s claim that he doesn’t recall owning a droid could simply be to keep the ploy running. It certainly eliminates questions that Luke might otherwise ask if Ben claimed he did once own the droid.

A moment later, Ben approaches Luke, places his hand on his forehead and says to be boy, “Rest easy, son.” Not “rest easy, boy,” or “rest easy, young one,” but he says “son” at a time where Luke is not completely conscious.

Kenobi’s place of residence was perfect; he wasn’t watching over his wartime friend’s son, but rather his own son. Naturally, he didn’t tell Luke that he was his father, because that kind of information would have thrown Luke into disarray, having lived so close to his father, yet never having met him before. And there was some truth to his claim that Vader killed Luke’s father; Anakin Skywalker was indeed dead, replaced by the persona of an old man named Ben Kenobi. For one, it was necessary to hide from Vader and the Empire, as Anakin was well known prior to the rise of the Emperor. Using his real name would have been suicide. And, since Vader was Kenobi, why would the Lord of the Sith go out and look for a guy named Obi-Wan? That’s the perfect guise.

Thinking things over, it makes sense for Ben to say that he hadn’t heard the name “Obi-Wan” used in a long time; he last heard it used to refer to his once-master, who later became Vader. Additionally, Ben says that Obi-Wan is not yet dead, and his statement need not be taken to suggest that he is in fact Obi-Wan. Vader, of course, also still lives.

If you’ll recall, Obi-Wan gives Luke a lightsaber once he meets him, and tells him that his father wanted him to have it. How unlikely, considering the amount of time Vader has been the Emperor’s servant, and how he didn’t know about his children. After all, if he was Obi-Wan’s enemy, then why would he give a lightsaber to him and say, “Give this to my son,” especially when he never even knew his wife was pregnant. It makes perfect sense, however, for Kenobi to give Luke the lightsaber with that claim, if Ben was his father. Kenobi is passing his weapon onto his son. In Episode six, the Emperor notes the construction of a new lightsaber that Luke has put together, saying that it is much like his father’s. Since Luke had never seen Vader’s lightsaber up close, he must have constructed his weapon off the design of his old one.

Moving forward towards the end of Episode four, Ben Kenobi and Vader face off. Contrary to popular recollection, Vader does not say, “When I left you, I was the student; now I am the Master.” but rather says, “When I left you, I was the learner; now I am the master.” The wording here is appropriate, for he’s not talking about a Jedi student/Master relationship (note the capital ‘M’ in “master”), but rather effectiveness and power with the force. In fact, the Star Wars scripts capitalize “master” when referring to Jedi rank, but not otherwise. In this scene, the word “master” is not capitalized at all. Here, Vader believes that he is stronger in the force than before, when Anakin was more powerful.

Now, given all this, someone has to ask the obvious: Why would Vader make the initial claim that he is Luke’s father? Well, it certainly throws Luke off guard, and seeing that the boy is an enormous threat to him, the intent to mind-fuck the lad is an excellent maneuver. It’s perfectly reasonable to expect Luke to join your side when you’re the number two badass in the galaxy, especially when you’re the most feared mofo out there. Heck, I’d have probably given in. Note, however, that Vader only once mentions that Luke is his son when not near the boy. When Luke is flying away in the Millennium Falcon at the end of Episode five, Vader feels Luke’s presence, and says, “Luke,” not “son.” When Luke responds with, “Father,” Vader realizes that Luke can hear him, and so he acknowledges his lie, by adding, “Son, come with, me.” Again, only once does Vader say that Luke is his son when not near the boy, and after rereading the script, it could easily come off as sarcasm, as he’s talking the Emperor about their plans.

Additionally, the Emperor never refers to Luke as Vader’s son, always saying, “young Skywalker”. Yet, Savvy to Vader being Obi-Wan, the Emperor lays the smack down by continually enraging Luke whenever he mentions what became of his father. This is one of the reasons for lying to Luke; since the boy doesn’t know it’s not true, he gets angrier and angrier, stepping ever closer to the Dark Side. When Luke tells the Sith Master that he will not be converted like his father was, the Emperor replies, “Oh, no, my young Jedi. You will find that it is you who are mistaken… about a great many things.”

So the cards are stacked, and Vader pulls out a nice hand. Why does Yoda play along? Luke’s becoming a pansy-ass, afraid of facing Vader a second time. Telling the boy that Vader was full of shit isn’t going to do much, since Luke would then realize that he’s physically weaker than the Sith Lord, as well as mentally weaker. In the confrontation needed to bring down Vader, Luke needed to feel strong, without showing dark side traits of anger, which would have been inevitable side-effects of knowing Vader lied. Since time was important here, Yoda plays along with the gag, knowing that it will bring Luke back to face Vader.

When Yoda is first considering teaching Luke, he notes to Ben that the boy is reckless. Ben agrees, but reminds Yoda that when he was younger, he too was reckless. Yet from Episode one, we know that Obi-Wan was not reckless at all, always doing everything as in the book, always telling Qui-Gon that he ought not be reckless. Anakin, however, is another story.

When you put all this together, it makes sense that Obi-Wan never tells Luke outright that Vader is his father, because Obi-Wan doesn’t want to lie to his son more than he has to. Only when Yoda lies to Luke, in order to inspire him on, does Obi-Wan give in, agreeing in order to work with Yoda, to make Luke get up and fight. Yoda doesn’t even tell Luke right off the bat, hesitating to lie to the boy. Only when asked again, on his deathbed, does he decide to do what will stir the boy on: lie to him. The conflict, however, is evident. Some scheme had to take place, and at every point, something was done to keep Luke from going over the edge, or to make him stronger. Even if that meant lying to him, and even if it meant keeping the weight on Kenobi’s shoulders. The glance Ben gave Luke when he was struck down by Vader was the perfect combination of sorrow and faith; “I am your father.”

When Yoda dies, he doesn’t appear to Luke in the patented Jedi ghost method. In fact, Obi-Wan is the only one who does, and Obi-Wan wasn’t even his damned Master, aside from the brief period of time on the Millennium Falcon. Obi-Wan appears because he is concerned about his son, because he is watching from beyond to guide his child. Perhaps only family can project for long periods of time, or repeatedly, because Yoda was clearly the wiser Jedi, certainly the one with more experience and former influence, but he does not guide Luke after his death at all. And, who knows whether or not Luke finds out the truth after Episode six; Return of the Jedi only takes us so far, and since the latter books are fake Star Wars canon, it’s quite possible that the truth is unveiled to Luke later on.

A giant conspiracy, says I, concocted to fool the audience and shock them into amazement. Perhaps the only way to regain the honor that I feel Lucas lost, this theory is a plausible explanation for various events in Star Wars, and could be the stone sent a flyin’ to tell the audience that they didn’t know jack shit, and that Old Man Lucas has more tricks up his golden sleeves.

Similar Posts:

• Bringing back the force, part II. – ### Introduction ### It’s been over a year since I publicly released [Bringing Back the Force](http:…
• Review: SW:E1: The Phantom Menace. – I was a hardcore Star Wars fan about five years ago. I’m talking a fan that watched the movies more …
• Lucas still retarded. – After ruining the Star Wars franchise with the sad excuse of a prequel that was Episode One, and fai…