Advertisement
A good critical essay that says much of what I have had to say of how BSG went wrong, but also a great deal I over looked:
ideas.4brad.com/battlestar...nce-fiction
ideas.4brad.com/battlestar...nce-fiction
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Wed, July 15, 2009 - 1:26 PMWow, thanks for that. Not much of it new to me, though I will admint the Intelligent Design aspects remained an unnamed niggling pest in the back of my head. Nice to shed some light there.
I think I now know why I was never as able to enjoy this series as everyone else seemed to. The prophesy and religion aspects all pointed to this kind of Deus ending. I think my instincts wouldn't let me commit my full suspension of disbelief because of the inevitable impending crash of religious crap to come. -
-
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Wed, July 15, 2009 - 8:16 PMI was thinking that it would have made more sense for the refugees to go Stone Age if the newly sentient non-biological Cylon's decided to force that state on them?
In other word their viewpoint (with nukes to back it up)...
"We have learned that both of your kinds, human and biological cylons are too dangerous as you are with advanced technology. We've decided to that since killing all is folly as you have shown us... therefore then you must exist at a more primitive state for the sake of everyone’s survival." -
-
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Fri, July 17, 2009 - 7:48 AMWhatever. But I still think the ending I suggested is better. Even so, BSG's ending -- as bad as it was -- was not as bad as the Quantum Leap finale. Interesting that the one thing both endings have in common is Dean Stokwell.
-
-
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Fri, July 17, 2009 - 1:07 PMWhat's not to like about QL? He's still leaping through space and time, just with a biggere playground....
-
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Tue, July 21, 2009 - 6:12 PMHow could you complain about the end of Quantum Leap? It was heartbreaking, which made it awesome. -
-
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Wed, August 26, 2009 - 12:37 PMOther than Dean Stockwell being incredibly entertaining to watch, I never grasped what was so great about Quantum Leap. -
-
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Wed, August 26, 2009 - 1:02 PMDon't think of it as science fiction. Clearly, it was never really intended to be hard science. It was all about the fun to watch parts. -
-
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Thu, August 27, 2009 - 11:00 AMAs a concept, seeeing Scott Bakula have to act like characters who were physically completely unlike him had promise, but the scripts were rarely very interesting, and Bakula is a rather bland actor. Dean Stockwell would have been a lot more interesting in that role-- he's just a better actor.
I don't care whether or not it was science-fiction or not-- I enjoy a lot of stuff that isn't science-fiction. I just never found the writing to be intriguing the few times I watched it.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Sun, July 19, 2009 - 8:33 PMI certainly got the Luddite anti-science (that is, "Intelligent Design") bit that crept in at the end. As I said back then: "who died and made Lee Pol Pot?"
I certainly valued the reminder that the evidence up until that point (the constellations seen in the temple on Kobol, the temple on the Algae planet, the beacon in the nebula) was that BSG took place in the far future and not the ancient past. -
-
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Sun, July 19, 2009 - 10:04 PMIn many ways the last season seemed to be screwed over by the writers strike of previous years?
Even without the "divine hand" playing his cards -- the story was going downhill in plausibility in the 4th season... -
-
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Sun, July 19, 2009 - 10:24 PMI thin SFC gave them plenty enough time to get things back together. The writer's strike only forced the Dead Earth ending [in case the show didn't come back]. It's true, though, if they handn't been forced to pop that, then they wouldn't have had to come up with all the crap that came afterwards (a cylon world, a different Earth, dead Starbuck, etc) -
-
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Mon, July 20, 2009 - 9:19 AMThe "Dead Earth" ending, while it left unresolved questions, would still have been a hell of a lot better than the "Mitochondrial Eve" ending.
The big problem was that RDM relied too much on seat-of-his-pants plotting during the third and fourth seasons, which meant that he really wasn't paying attention to how new elements, like the ending, fit in with previously established plot points, themes, or characters. -
-
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Mon, July 20, 2009 - 11:58 AMIn short: they Didn't have a plan....
:) -
-
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Mon, August 31, 2009 - 10:37 AM"In short: they Didn't have a plan...."
Alas, this is not unexpected. The premise of Galactica in this go-'round was just as flawed as in the first go-'round.
Not to say I didn't enjoy the hell out of it, but (shrug) there is no reasonably easy way to end it. The ONLY way the Galactica premise can be ended is with either a complete WTF ending (like this one) or a Deus ex Machina (like Star Trek, but don't get me started on the horrible decision that was the 'Borg), or with a "Surface" kind of ending (which is alllllmost how the Larson-era series ended (we're completely ignoring Galactica 1980 for the sake of Sanity Points)).
The only and best way to have this series work is to KNOW, absolutely, and precisely, how the series will end, and then be so outstandingly clever that you fool EVERYBODY who's watching it into not understanding how it all comes together until the last episode, and then in retrospect, it MUST make sense or the viewers have been cheated.
This is storytelling.
It may be the case that each individual episode was done well, or spectacularly, or so forth, but the entire thing has got to work as a whole as well. The premise of Galactica restricts heavily the kinds of endings allowable that still work well, storywise. -
-
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Mon, August 31, 2009 - 12:01 PMI still don't understand all the vitriol against Start Trek, particularly when no reference is made as to which one. If you're talking about that last movie, there was no deux ex machina ending, it was simply badly written. And the borg line through 3 series and a couple movies was never (to my knowledge) ever resolved.
The series you seem to be speaking of, though, is Babylon 5. The entire timeline for a million years in either direction was established before the show was pitched, almost every episode was written by a single man, and that man had complete creative control. The down side was that the writing came off a little stilted and unnatural at points, particularly in the foreshadowed scenes and plot driving speeches. The endings of any of he archs weren't all that clever, but there were no gods in the machine other than the ones introduced from the very beginning. And it was they we were ultimately fighting against.
And Surface? Really? You're going to lump a show that was written by the same kind of writers that brought us the Poseidon adventure, and Towering Inferno as anything but a melodrama with a biotch backdrop? Sheesh, why not just call the Smurfs "aliens" and bitch about them?
Come to think of it, if we're going to loosen the reigns on what we call SF, I thought the ending to Third Rock was acceptable, though a little expected. And even though Firefly never completed it's 5year mission, the compressed plot in he form of Serenity showed and nice juicy twist in the making. But if you're looking for a real crapfest, how about the ending of any of the Heroes seasons?
I could go on, but I wont. -
-
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Mon, August 31, 2009 - 12:39 PM"I still don't understand all the vitriol against Start Trek..."
No vitriol at all -- I'm a HUGE Star Trek fan. I LOVE Star Trek.
But many episodes ended with, basically, a last-minute fix by a doctor, or an engineer. Endings like that are formulaic. I used Star Trek as an example of that sort of ending because, after nine thousand eight hundred million episodes, it's not rocket science to find endings like that in the various pieces of the series.
"And the borg line through 3 series and a couple movies was never (to my knowledge) ever resolved. "
Meh. The 'Borg:
startrek.tribe.net/thread/9...4bd5dcf66
startrek.tribe.net/thread/5...8a1e59309
"The series you seem to be speaking of, though, is Babylon 5"
I'm not speaking of any particular series -- just the distressingly more distant idea that storytelling in the long run matters.
If some feature ended the same way Moore's BSG ended, people would be annoyed at it, because it wouldn't make any sense when you look back on the rest of the movie. Gorgeous stepping stones can still lead to a Monster Den, and this is why I'm specifically pointing out that while individual episodes and lots of the smaller chunks of Moore's BSG were fantastic, in the final analysis, the storytelling didn't reward the viewer with something that was satisfying, and a huge part of that challenge was BSG's setup structure.
As far as B5 is concerned, my understanding was that it WAS strongly plotted, but suffered a scheduling hose*.
And yeah, sometimes when you have a strongly plotted Big Story Structure, if you're individual episodes and plots aren't well written, then things get a little clunky.
"And Surface? Really?"
As far as ending suggestions, yes, absolutely. There were many things about "Surface" that annoyed me, but it had a distinctive "so this is the new world we're living in" kind of ending. Despite all its flaws, it was willing to Change The World at the end and NOT have everything magically be fixed.
Like I've said above, it's just an example of an ending style, and happened to be the first one I thought of that did that. If it really curdles your milk, feel free to pick a different example.
Ending BSG in that fashion would not have had a lot of suck to it, and probably would have been even more acceptable given the very, very dark premise. Just some indication that the Fleet basically spends its future FTL'ing around, always struggling for resources, always just barely keeping a step ahead of the Cylons, and so forth. It would have been very, very dark (too dark for Larsen's BSG, I think), but it would have been appropriate. And hey, for people who are loving the idea of a hopeful future, perhaps the very last episode could have had that stirring speech by Adama about how they're going to find the mysterious lost Thirteenth Colony. If Earth had been left completely out of it until the absolute very last minute as simply a mention, then, although it would be dark and dreary, we could always be hoping that ragtag fleet would eventually discover Earth.
-=-=-=-=-
* My understanding is that JMS had a strongly plotted Big Story Arc that was supposed to end the series with a bang, but the series was basically cancelled with an entire season left for the Big Story Arc, so instead, the last season was hastily rewritten to seal the whole thing up, but by doing so, it became MUCH more exciting (this can happen when you cram two seasons of story into one season), and so the series was then UNcancelled, which left JMS and the writers in a bit of a lurch, as they'd basically shot the Story Wad in the last season. -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Mon, August 31, 2009 - 1:41 PMYeah, that's about exactly what they say in the directors comments of S4 of B5.
That BSG ending you mention is pretty much exactly how the first series ended. They find earth, it doesn't have space travel, so to keep the cylons off earth's tail, they drop an advancement force on them and keep moving. Too bad G80 had to suck so much. Though it did lay all the groundwork for the new series: humlons, continuing after finding earth, etc.
I know you weren't speaking of a particular series. but if you wait a moment while I pull out my artistic license....
Surface, as a series had the distinct advantages of 1) alternate reality, and 2) limited run. They always knew it would be a one-season thing, so they /could/ make a major change. Plus, a critter like this in the modern world would be spotted in a minute, much faster than the story showed. So there had to be alterations. Theoretically, shows like Trek b5 and even BSG are within OUR reality, skewed through time. So they have to [try to] adhere to our timeline and laws of physics. Surface didn't need to. and that's one of the big reasons I lable it fantasy, and not science fiction.
As for the ST endings you mention, they're frequently using a standard mystery plot device where the answer is revealed at the beginning in some fashion then evolved at the end. Granted, not all done well, and certainly not all done correctly, but with writers like Behr and Moore what they heck do you expect? -
-
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Mon, August 31, 2009 - 2:36 PM"Yeah, that's about exactly what they say in the directors comments of S4 of B5"
Really? Well, cool. By the time it got to me, it was a chain of hearsay, so I'm glad to see it's survived relatively intact.
"That BSG ending you mention is pretty much exactly how the first series ended. They find earth, it doesn't have space travel, so to keep the cylons off earth's tail, they drop an advancement force on them and keep moving."
Nah, it had a key difference. "Earth" would be TREMENDOUSLY more powerful as a twist if it were only appearing at the very end*. So, no mention at all of a lost thirteenth colony, just the series doing its thing. All during the series, based on all sorts of hints, we are led to believe that this is somehow Earth's far future. Technology, lingo, religions, everything points to that, but nothing's ever stated. And then, at the last few minutes of the last episode, after a particularly harrowing escape, it's obvious the Fleet has managed to collect itself and work out a reasonable defense, but is now casting itself off into the stars and only THEN are we told that we are going to look for a final hidden home, a lost thirteenth colony that only exists in rumors and whispers -- a lost colony called Earth.
And THAT would be the end.
We should never actually find it with them, anymore than the castaways on Gilligan's Island must never actually be rescued.
"Surface, as a series had the distinct advantages of 1) alternate reality, and 2) limited run. They always knew it would be a one-season thing, so they /could/ make a major change. Plus, a critter like this in the modern world would be spotted in a minute, much faster than the story showed."
I didn't see indications that it was clearly an alternate reality. Out of curiosity, what indications were there?
And yes, the fact that people seemed ridiculously stupid about the existence of the critters was one of the things that annoyed me about it. Like I said, it had a lot of things that annoyed me**, but it was willing to Change The World as its ending. Before we started watching it, we read a LITTLE about it, and most people didn't like the ending, but (shrug) I think they just wanted something more Something Magical Solves The Problem as an ending.
I REALLY wish I'd seen the final episode of "Golden Years" as another example, because they set up a bunch of intriguing stuff, although I doubt they buttoned ANYTHING up.
"As for the ST endings you mention, they're frequently using a standard mystery plot device where the answer is revealed at the beginning in some fashion then evolved at the end."
No, not the ones I'm thinking of. It's kinda like Truman Capote's character in "Murder By Death", and how he was ranting at each and every one of the famous detectives for shitting on their readers by pulling resolutions out at the end that were NOT telegraphed in any way or solvable in any way upon retrospect.
Although I'll grant that sometimes a crap ending such as that can be redeemed by a line of dialogue near the beginning. Barely.
* For example, when "Planet of the Apes" was re-released on DVD, a scene was restored at the beginning that had Heston's character reviewing a chronometer and commenting on how thousands of years had passed (as well as lots of yakking about time distortion in his interminable monologue). Problem is, this TOTALLY spikes the twist at the end, and everyone guesses long before they actually see the monument. When it was originally released (as I dimly recall), we only started getting the idea this was a human "future" in the caverns, and only really got the gag when we saw the monument. The INSTANT we saw the monument, we could watch the whole movie again and it was all subtly different, but nothing actually contradicted it. In fact, I happen to really enjoy the "mystery" aspect of the whole first act, which slowly revealed more and more of this weird world.
** Maybe you and I are viewing the obvious breaks with physical reality differently in "Surface." For example, being able to magically pop to the surface in a matter of SECONDS from 10,000 feet or so isn't breaking the laws of physics in this world so much as it's simply bad-bad-bad writing. But, jeez, quibbling at the goofs in "Surface" is like shooting a barrel filled with magnetic fish. My point is just that what you may be seeing as evidence-of-an-alternate-reality I may be seeing as evidence-of-sloppy-work. 8)
-
-
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Mon, August 31, 2009 - 3:31 PM** Point
As for the bad endings, I got accustomed to looking for the telegraphing by watching the original Batman series and Electra Woman shows as a kid. They were blunt force telegraphs (Hey, I have a NEW gizmo that you've never heard of before..... It's only really good for ONE thing...). And while I agree that the franchise plummeted in quality after Gene let go of the reigns, I think the foreshadowing was pretty consistent, and when they veered from formula, I always wrote that off as an attempt at shaking things up or breaking formula to keep the show fresh. -
-
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Mon, August 31, 2009 - 5:02 PMAh, possible, possible. I'm not discounting, however, the powerful effect of bad writing, or bad editing, or other mistakes.
In the case of BSG, in order to finish the series in a way that made sense and was sufficiently rewarding, the senior writers, plotters, whatever, would have had to be EXTREMELY good at what they do, because they have millions of people following this story and those fans want to be satisfied. While each brick on this path was laid lovingly and well, the overall path meandered to a place that was not only nonsensical, but contradicted signs in the earlier part of the series.
I very much doubt there ever WAS any sort of overall "plan" to the thing.
This, of course, does not prevent me from enjoying the hell out of each episode, naturally. 8) -
-
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Mon, August 31, 2009 - 7:26 PMIndeed, I've made it pretty clear I'm not much of an RDM fan.
but I think the real problem was trying to be too literal and too sacred to the story elements. All they had to do was hang a lantern on the fact that since Some of the pythian prophesies did not come true (like Ros seeing earth), such prophesy is dangerous to take literally, even the shared Opera house visions, or the music of the final four. then, they could stumble across the final planet and have half the people land and form a neolithic culture and the other half take the [now] roomy fleet to find new planets... say like 12 ships... ahem.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Tue, July 21, 2009 - 12:14 AMI'll be honest. I really liked the "god did it" ending. I'm an adamant athiest and I like my science fiction hard, so normally such resolutions annoy me as a cheap bailout. But...
there's two perceptions of religion in the show. The humans & cylons notion of God, which mostly mirrored their deep-seated needs, and the actual reality of God, which was manifested entirely by the actions of Head Six & Head Baltar and the occasional divine events that guided the show.
Note that there's no assumption of connectivity between these two perceptions. The cylons and the humans were both entirely wrong about it. They were under the false assumption that a God or Gods cared at all about their day to day actions, when the truth is, the only interest that God seemed to have was to engineer, through subtle mechanizations, the delivery of Hera to the new home. There wasn't any inconsistency in the presentation of the actual God (and he hates to be called that) across the show; there was just inconsistency between that reality and the humans & cylons concept of God or gods.
This, to me, is a far more reasonable presentation of religion vs. reality than I've seen in most works of fiction, SF or otherwise. There may or may not be a God or Gods. However, the cultural inventions that we use to describe God, or use to describe how there is no God, has no baring on the existence or nature of God, and it's just human arrogance to believe otherwise. -
-
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Tue, July 21, 2009 - 3:44 AMI agree that it was good to have the "real" God be something beyond both Cylon and Colonial perceptions, but I don't think that the divine intervention in the story was handled consistently from season to season or episode to episode. It's one thing to have fortuitous events that could have a rational explanation yet the characters interpret as a divine action, it's quite another thing to have the divine intervention being the only possible explanation for inconstancies that the writing team could have avoided (like the evidence throughout the show that the story took place thousands of years in the future.)
Also, the entire "it was all God's magic plan" is a particularly naive theological position that has more to do with fundamentalism than serious theology, or even the rich story telling traditions of the worlds' mythologies-- in fact, I think the more we saw of God's magic, the less serious the religious talk became ("Flesh & Bone" was an episode that treated religion very intelligently simply by having the characters talk without showing any miracles.)
It's pretty apparent that RDM never really decided what Head Six and Head Baltar were until the fourth season, just like he didn't really give any thought to the identity of "The Final Five" until the end of the third season and they weren't part of the story for the first two seasons.
Bad storytelling, bad science and bad theology.
-
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Wed, August 19, 2009 - 1:14 PMWhew! An intellegent post. Everybody is all upset because the story didn't end like another Trekkie adventure.
I must admit that although I am not religious, I have a belief in the Universal Presence (as I prefer to call it) and from my experience of it, it seems to me that we are living within a VR game. White noise keeps our conciousness from being distracted by "reality" and so we go through the game from birth to death and only when we leave do we understand the reality of it. Much like "Life on Mars" attempted to say with it's makeshift ending.
There are as many anomolies that don't make sense in the "no god" corner as there are in the "god" corner. Which is why I believe a thinking person will leave the debate with an open finding every time.
Although there have always been questions as to how did they get there or how did they know that, I liked the end. -
-
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Mon, August 24, 2009 - 5:29 PMExcept it was a Trek ending-- 1930s sci-fi cliché meets new-age mysticism. -
-
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Mon, August 24, 2009 - 5:40 PMWhich trek are you talking about? Not original. It wasn't until Gene stopped showing up on set that Wesley started becoming wonder boy and the endings weren't solvable by a normal human.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Sun, July 26, 2009 - 1:19 AMI guess it's safe to say this now....
They should have given BSG the "Sopranos Ending®".
-
-
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Sun, July 26, 2009 - 9:09 PMJust thinking about the akin storylines...
You know maybe the writers of that episode where big fans of that Battlefield Earth movie?!
-
-
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Sun, August 16, 2009 - 2:16 PMYou know, the absolute worst thing about "Daybreak" is that it rendered the entire series obsolete! All the pain, all the battles, all the intrigue, all the guesses, all the anguish that the Colonials went through was pointless because in the end they elected to be savages. What a bunch of crap!
I'm reminded of Ray Bradbury's short story, "The Rocket Man", where a father is entreating his son not to be like him. "...when you're out there, you want to be here, and when you're here you want to be out there." The meaning is clear, space gets into your blood. It's a drug that locks you in. As such, I cannot believe that a spacefaring culture--even one that had gone through as much as the Colonials did--would elect to throw away their FTL drives and live a Paleolithic lifestyle. That's just not believable.
As such, I will not be buying the final installment of BG, and I'm toying with the idea of selling the ones I've got. Looking at the series now leaves me with a bad taste in my mouth, for all I can think about is that in the end, RDM elected for a cheapjack Ancient Astronaut that only a diehard Von Danckian would embrace. -
-
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Mon, August 24, 2009 - 5:27 PMAmen.
The whole point of the series all along was that the survivors had made every effort to hang on to some semblance of their civilization even after a near total genocide-- so suddenly after years of struggle when they get fresh air, fertile soil, and a temperate climate, they decide to give everything up?
It's bad storytelling-- and it's also insulting to cultures that have been targeted for genocide: "Sorry about the Holocaust, Jews, why don't you just give up?" "Sorry about the genocide, Armenians, why don't you just give up?" "Sorry about the Trail of Tears, Native Americans, why don't you just give up?" "Sorry about the Killing Fields, Cambodians, why don't you just give up?"*
*Yes I know it's an incomplete list, but I'm just making a point about how insulting the ending really was if we are to take seriously the idea that BSG is supposed to be an allegory for real life moral issues.
-
-
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Mon, August 24, 2009 - 5:39 PMyou could say the same thing about the original star wars series. David Brin wrote a fascinating article about it. Okay, so the worst criminal in galactic history makes a last minute turn-around to save his own son and now we're supposed to love him? Do you think you could do the same if you found out Hitler had done it? -
-
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Mon, August 24, 2009 - 5:58 PMThere's some interesting stuff in the article, mostly about how largely irrelevant the Jedi are to the plot resolution of "Return of the Jedi", and even a good idea for a sequel (which is less interesting once one realizes the ground had already been covered in Tom Veitch's "Dark Empire" graphic novel.)
However, Brin's interpretation of the moral and ethical issues shows that he even has less subtlety than Lucas. Vader isn't exonerated in a legal sense for his crimes. He just has a moment of spiritual redemption where he chooses to break free of his mental slavery to a tyrant in order to save his son, to whom he regrets having never been a father. So if Vader survived, maybe he would be executed, or imprisoned for the rest of his life, it's just that he would get some sort of closure with his adult children. -
-
Re: Link: Battlestar's "Daybreak:" The worst ending in the history of on-screen science fiction
Sun, August 30, 2009 - 8:52 PMActually, there was a bit of closure for Vader and his daughter, Leia, in Kathy Tyers' Star Was book, "The Truce at Bakura".
The story takes place immediately after the events of RotJ. Without spoiling the story, the Rebels intercept a courier who was bound for the Emperor; the message tells of an invasion from outside the galaxy. Leia and a team go to aid the Imperial garrison. Anyway, during the story, Vader (now, Anakin Skywalker) appears to Leia as a Force-Ghost (like Obi-Wan) and asks Leia to forgive him. She initially refuses, citing the destruction of Alderaan and his torture of her while she was on the Death Star. Anakin replies that he is not asking for absolution, and implies that he will be judged for his actions by a higher power. But he needs her personal forgiveness for his actions toward her. Again, she refuses, and he vanishes.
Later on, however, Leia is forced to make a choice that she knows is imperative, but morally wrong. Later, reflecting on it, she realizes that she is more her father's daughter than she would like to admit. At that point, she silently forgives Anakin. Through the Force, she feels his gratitude, and knows that he has heard her.
It's a very powerful scene, and a reminder that redemption is possible, though not always immediate.
-
-
-
-
