Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Star Wars III: The Curse of Pregnancy

By Kimi Eisele, AlterNet. Posted May 25, 2005.


Why does Padme spend this movie sentenced to an idle life at home in tearful silence? Is this what pregnancy does to women?

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Is Blind Faith in God and the Bible a Modern Invention?
Devilstower

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
What Can the Morass of the 1970s Tell Us About the Current Economic Crisis?
Alejandro Reuss

DrugReporter:
Lies About Marijuana Drive People to a Much More Harmful Drug -- Booze
Steve Fox

Environment:
Why Max Baucus' 'No' Vote on the Climate Bill May Really Help Its Passage
Jeff Mcmahon

Food:
Soda Helps Make Americans Unhealthy and Fat -- Will Soda Tax Prevail Despite Pushback by Beverage Industry?
Christine Spolar, Joseph Eaton

Health and Wellness:
Does the House Bill's Public Option Kill Off the Senate's?
Booman

Immigration:
Recent Democratic Victories May Grease the Wheels for Immigration Reform in Congress
Marcelo Balive

Media and Technology:
Focusing on Fort Hood Killer's Beliefs Is an Easy Out to Avoid the Deeper Reasons for the Massacre
Mark Ames

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
What Obama Is Up Against in His Own Branch of Government
Russ Baker

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
How the Stupak Amendment Radically Undermines Women's Rights
Rachel Morris

Rights and Liberties:
"Women Are Being Killed All Over the World": One Reporter's Fight Against So-Called "Honor Killings"
Robert S. Eshelman

Sex and Relationships:
9 Silly Things People Say When They Hear You Don't Want Kids (And Ways to Counter Them)
Liz Langley

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Radioactive Wastewater in New York Raises More Concerns About Oil Drilling
Abrahm Lustgarten

World:
Egyptian Marine: Soldiers Often 'Racialize' the Enemy to Cope With Stress
Aaron Glantz

More stories by Kimi Eisele

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

I learned long ago to leave my feminist sensibilities at movie theater doors, particularly when the feature is an overly hyped and commercialized blockbuster. So when I agreed to my partner's request that we go see Star Wars, Episode III: The Revenge of the Sith last weekend, I didn't expect much in the way of enlightened female characters.

Escaping the 100-degree desert heat, I settled in for some air-conditioned entertainment. And I got it.

And then, despite my best efforts, I got bugged.

Not because of the stilted and often ridiculous dialogue, or because of the seemingly endless light saber fight scenes. But because the single female character in the film was nothing more than a weepy girl, distressed and overdressed.

Of course when I was 6 and watched the first Star Wars movie, things weren't much better. For a few minutes we had Luke Skywalker's aunt. Then we had Princess Leia, who first appears as a mini-hologram and then as a kidnapped victim awaiting rescue, the classic damsel in distress. Though Leia gets more substantive as the film goes on, she's still mostly a sex symbol. But that was the 1970s.

It's 2005. We're well into the 21st century. Hell, this is sci-fi. We're well into the future. Why did this film feel like the Dark Ages?

Padme reminded me of all those disconnected and discarded mothers and wives of 19th century literature. Hester Prynne, Madame Bovary, and Charlotte Perkins Gilman's famed (and unnamed) protagonist in "The Yellow Wallpaper."

These women were bored, isolated, and stuck in society's limited expectations of them and much of their purpose and meaning depended on their husbands or fathers. Trapped and insignificant, it seemed the only power they had was to take their own lives--which they often did.

Despite the futuristic age in which she lives, things aren't much brighter for Padme, whose pregnancy renders her oddly helpless. Though supposedly a member of the Galactic Senate, she does little more than sit listlessly in an oversized living room watching the passing hovercraft and the multiple sunsets, waiting for her belly to grow and for Anakin to come home. The only thing that changes are her outfits.

According to the story, Padme was a talented and educated girl from the planet of Naboo. She became an apprentice legislator by age 11 and by 14 was the planet's queen. A principled ruler, she fought illegal occupations and cleverly restored freedom to her planet. When her term as Queen ended, she remained active in public service and became an outspoken senator, championing peaceful solutions to the galactic wars.

So what happened? Why does Padme spend this movie sentenced to an idle life at home in tearful silence? Is this what pregnancy does to women?

I'm wondering because for the past year or two I've been thinking about having a kid myself. Now, added to my usual litany of questions--do I have the money, will I still have time to write, can my body handle it--I'm wondering if pregnancy itself will make me lonely and dull. Will I become like Padme, stuck on the sofa, isolated, brushing my hair for hours, waiting for my partner to come home from work?

In my effort to answer the "Should I have a baby?" question, I spend a lot of time looking for role models. I look for mothers who still make it to book club, stay up on current events and show up for the dinner party. I look for pregnant women who read more than just mothering magazines, who dance and go running and converse about things other than diapers and babysitters. In short, I look for mothers and mothers-to-be who are active, smart women who still make it to Galactic Senate meetings.

I find nothing of the sort in Padme.

Of course, this is Hollywood. I should know better. But something strange has happened in the midst of my baby deliberations. The prospect of motherhood has opened up in me a sense of optimism. True, the world is a mess; true, Hollywood blockbuster films do little to challenge our brains; true, female characters in sci-fi movies seemly sadly un-evolved. But that doesn't mean I can't hope for something else.

After all, isn't science fiction supposed to stretch the boundaries of what is and lead us to a world of what if? What if Padme, pregnant and all, had kicked cyborg ass, used her diplomatic brain, and stood up for Jedi power? Then what?

Okay, I'm tampering with the storyline. But beyond Star Wars, if female characters in 21st-century science fiction sagas were smart, well-rounded, and consistently active participants in the drama, maybe they'd give young girls, women and mothers-to-be a hopeful world to look forward to. Instead of a sorry one to look back upon.

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

Kimi Eisele is a freelance writer and the writing director for Voices, Inc., a Tucson, Ariz.-based nonprofit that mentors teenagers in the documentary arts.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Well...
Posted by: Armafied on May 25, 2005 12:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I see your gripe with Padme's character in Episode III, but I think you should re-read over your following paragraph: "According to the story, Padme was a talented and educated girl from the planet of Naboo. She became an apprentice legislator by age 11 and by 14 was the planet's queen. A principled ruler, she fought illegal occupations and cleverly restored freedom to her planet. When her term as Queen ended, she remained active in public service and became an outspoken senator, championing peaceful solutions to the galactic wars." As a lifetime Star Wars fan, I have been pleased with the assertive role the women have played in the movies, be it Leia or Padme. To gloss over this fact because you have a gripe with one of six Episodes strikes me as strange.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Well... Posted by: Duncan Idaho
Well...
Posted by: Armafied on May 25, 2005 12:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Not to even mention the fact that the leader of the Rebel Alliance is non other than a female, Mon Montha.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You left off the ending.
Posted by: Samantha Vimes on May 25, 2005 1:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Rather than go on with life and raise her children, event hough her body is healthy, Anakin's attempt to strangle her causing no damageother than to their relationship, she dies because she "lost the will to live". Huh? Her heart beat in the background sounds stable up until it suddenly stops... no fibrillation or irregularity to say there's a physical danger. Nope. Her Man Betrayed Her, So She Dies. I don't know-- was Anakin inadvertantly siphoning her life force to keep himself alive during his cyberization?
Honestly, I found it very disturbing that her death was so vague and unexplicable. When we left the theater, I said that Leia had been a fighter, but in the end, Padme was nothing more than a plot point.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's George's generation
Posted by: Beaner on May 25, 2005 2:24 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
None of this is surprising considering the main force behind all this is a 50 something white man. Come on ladies, expectations. It all begins in the previous episode where despite being the badass senator, she falls for a petulant, whining, punk 10 years her junior. You'd think there were better eligible men in the galactic senate. But no, although Anakin shows us almost zero redeeming qualities (my other beef with the movie - he's Darth Vader fer chrissake - when does he stop sucking?) we're suppposed to buy into this suppposedly enlightened woman falling in love with him. The force must be powerful indeed. All this before the great battle where Padme is artfully given a midriff top by the big mean tiger. Why, in movie, is it only women's clothing that is in danger of falling off during battle. Everyother jedi's billowing robes survive, but the skin tight outfit worn by the female protagonist gets torn in just the right way.... Even Leia was mostly naked by movie number three. You should stick with your first insticnt and keep those expectations where they belong.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Padme's fatal flaw
Posted by: Firebird44 on May 25, 2005 5:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think Padme's true fatal flaw was bad acting.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

kt1066
Posted by: kt1066 on May 25, 2005 6:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you have been considering having a child for a year or two, and you are looking for women whose lives haven't been completely overtaken by pregnancy and child-rearing, Stop Now! Don't have a baby. The reason you have a hard time finding women not absorbed by pregnancy and infants is that being pregnant and having an infant takes nearly all your time and energy. It's not a cliche -- a child completely changes your life and your time is not your own, your money is not your own, your home is not your own. Unless you can afford a full-time nanny or you want to have a child so much that you can't live without one, don't have a baby. Padme and Anakin obviously weren't planning to have a baby, at least not at that time, and Padme may have been ill a good bit, so that could explain her moping around.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: kt1066 Posted by: simonsmom
ZylogZ80
Posted by: ZylogZ80 on May 25, 2005 6:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's stuff like this that can make us liberals look just as kooky as the religious right. An article on feminism in relation to a Star Wars character.

Light sabers, "The Force," Yoda, faster-than-light-interstellar travel with no odd effects on time. Shouldn't psyicists lament at Star Wars' mis-representation of the realities of space flight? C'mon, it's a story, and an over the top one at that. No one should be looking at it as more than what it is.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ZylogZ80 Posted by: lavachickie
» RE: ZylogZ80 Posted by: Kym525
» RE: ZylogZ80 Posted by: Graeme
Leia was not helpless
Posted by: kullinaer on May 25, 2005 8:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I haven't seen Star Wars III yet, so I can't comment on Padme. But I'm shocked and amazed to read Leia being described as a helpless damsel in distress! I have to wonder if the author even watched the movies. Granted, Leia became less effective (and less clothed) with each movie, but she totally kicked butt. In the begining of Episode Three, she is unafraid of Darth Vadar and stands up against his intimidation tactics. Then, as soon as she's rescued, she takes over the badly planned rescue mission. In the second movie, it becomes clear that she's one of the people in charge of the whole Rebel Alliance. In the third, she threatens Jabba with a nuclear detonator, kills Jabbba, and saves Han (twice).

Well, now that I've put my full geekiness on display, I'll close by saying, Go Leia!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There are women in sci-fi films
Posted by: Johannes on May 25, 2005 8:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Star Trek Voyager: Captain Kathryn Janeway, a whole sci-fi tv series with a woman in charge. "Alien" films: Ellen Ripley, main character in all the films of the series. Also mother to some of the aliens, at least in a way. There ARE women in science fiction, if one only wants to see them.

About Padme: She simply does not exist in the original trilogy, therefore her character has to "go away" somehow. The Revenge of the Sith is all about explaining how the universe of the "New Hope" came to be. There is no secret plot against women here.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

...
Posted by: socgrrrl on May 25, 2005 9:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Actually, Padme stayed out of the public eye and sat at home b/c, well, I assume she didn't want it made public that she was pregnant and married to Anakin. Jedi's aren't supposed to be married....they're like monks.

Also, I think you're reading a little too much into the movie. I'm a feminist too...and I had no problems with the storyline. It's a great series of films.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Padme as senator Posted by: Truffle
"Fargo"
Posted by: Iamnotafruittree on May 25, 2005 9:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Watch "Fargo" over and over again. Then change your attitude about yourself. Don't let these people minimize you into no-where-land anymore. It is true, when you are pregnant, you are even more invisible than ever before. You're only worth to society is that you are a more valuable consumer. Doctors make money, hospitals make maoney, clothing sales, furniture sales, diapers, formula, toys and the list goes on and on. I pray to the Goddess everyday to please let people see that children are real human beings and not money making machines for the rich and greedy! And I pray to Her everyday to please let these "gay little boys" grow up and love us again! (Before they blow us up into little tiny pieces!)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: "Fargo" Posted by: lulu17
a longtime ago
Posted by: kenoflife on May 25, 2005 9:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
well, the story was supposed to have taken place in "a galaxy a long time ago" wasn't it?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: a longtime ago Posted by: MissMolly324
» RE: a longtime ago Posted by: zing
» RE: a longtime ago Posted by: Samantha Vimes
So why no Jar Jar death scene?
Posted by: Truffle on May 25, 2005 9:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
:P

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

speed racer
Posted by: speedracer01 on May 25, 2005 10:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The author is forgetting a couple of things:

(1) In the context of the plot of "Star Wars III: Revenge of the Sith," Padme and Anakin's marriage is secret. Anakin cannot reveal his secret marriage, lest he violate the code of the Jedi Knights. So when Padme remains behind for much of the movie & tries to hide her pregnancy, she's doing so out of concern for Anakin, hoping not to reveal his secret to the Jedi.

(2) Padme doesn't spend the whole movie in hiding and pregnant. When Anakin is on the volcanic planet (I forget the name), she takes off in her spaceship to try to rescue him. Unknown to her, Obi-Wan Kenobi sneaks on board; so she is unwittingly the agent to bring Obi-Wan and Anakin together for their final, crucial confrontation.

As for Princess Leia in the original "Star Wars," if you go back and watch it, you'll see she is actually a pretty strong character from the beginning. Yes, she's a "damsel in distress," but one who's sassy, speaks up for herself, and fights for herself. Right at the start, she talks back to Darth Vader--Darth Vader!--even when he's just strangled the captain of her starship to death. And later, when she's a prisoner on the Death Star (having been tortured, and knowing she'll probably be executed), she insults the Death Star commander, Grand Moff Tarkin, for his "foul stench." After being rescued, she stands up to Han Solo's big ego, and even calls Chewbacca a "big walking carpet." She was hardly the anti-feminist, submissive female character the author is suggesting; indeed, quite the opposite, I would say.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: speed racer Posted by: Kym525
» RE: speed racer Posted by: speedracer01
» RE: speed racer Posted by: Kym525
Don't you think you're just a tad over analysing this...?
Posted by: cooperji on May 25, 2005 12:10 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Don't you think you're just a tad over analysing this...?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Misty of Tucson
Posted by: Misty on May 25, 2005 12:43 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Kimi, you nailed the main problem with this movie. I felt a similar disturbance, although I must say I found Leia's character to be fairly progressive given her 1970s appearance. In the most recent three episodes, Padme was the only prominent woman--or should I say girl? I found it annoying that George Lucas selected a 14-year-old to be queen. Precocious or not, that's a bit extreme, and a clear attempt to me to make sure today's heroine would still be considered beautiful by society's standards. The only female jedi knight I ever saw was killed embarrassingly quickly during the round-up. So, although I did enjoy the movie overall, I mourned the appalling depiction of women ... or, more accurately, woman. Perhaps the next generation of sci-fi geniuses will be more even-handed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Misty of Tucson Posted by: Armafied
» RE: Misty of Tucson Posted by: Jo$h
Reading your article....
Posted by: Donkeykong on May 25, 2005 1:31 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have learned that women who go to movies they don't really want to go to because their "partner" wanted them to are often disappointed in other fictional women's behavior because it may be influenced by what their "partner" wanted them to do.

Whats more, this angst you feel is somehow a man's fault.....

And just like EPIII we know the ending before your article started.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: eading your article.... Posted by: Samantha Vimes
» RE: eading your article.... Posted by: Donkeykong
This is silly
Posted by: slayerdave on May 25, 2005 1:44 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's whole discussion is simply ridiculous. But let me make two points.

1. Padme is mere days from giving birth. You try kicking ass across the galaxy when you are nine months pregnant.

2. Padme's pregnancy (and marriage) is a secret. If she was busy legislating or kicking ass through the movie, it wouldn't take long for someone less honorable than Obi-wan to figure out who the father is.

Remember, this is a movie, not a treatise on the role of gender in other galaxies (or our own).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Star Wars - the Equalizer
Posted by: ewok on May 25, 2005 2:23 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you're going to comment on the movie, you may want to understand the PLOT. As others have pointed out, she needed to be in hiding for a reason.

Also, Padme was the one to leave Naboo in Episode II to go save Obi Wan and told Anakin he could follow along. I think she's a very strong character. Because she loves her husband so much does not make her WEAK. She tells him she cannot follow down his path if he turns to the Dark Side - obviously she has a mind of her own! His change does break her heart. She's human so she cries. When did that become a character flaw??

Sure - the delivery could have been better (as with ALL the other characters) and you can blame Lucas for that - but not for demeaning women and pregnancy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

i hate to point out the obvious, but...
Posted by: zing on May 25, 2005 4:28 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"a LONG TIME AGO, in a galaxy far, far away...!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

She was not in hiding...
Posted by: Truffle on May 25, 2005 4:35 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In fact, she was serving in the Senate and is the one to utter the line "So this is how liberty dies." She was, however, dressed to cover her pregnancy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

some thoughts..
Posted by: cricktage8 on May 25, 2005 4:37 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
i was annoyed that the queen had to be so young.

i was similarily annoyed that she got an instant belly shirt in epidsode 2.

and i think that their romance was somewhat unbelievable. and that, like most of my female friends, padme could have done better when choosing a husband.

however, i assumed that in episode 3 the reason she wasn't featured very much was because annikin's storyline was what needed to be featured to make the whole story come together an, also, because she was keeping a low profile.

i think i might lose the will to live if my husband turned to some dark force that was the anithesis to everything i belived in (a neocon, maybe?) and, then, tried to kill me. i think he would say the same about himself.

or maybe all of hollywood is so sexist that this seems mild in comparison only.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Pregnant Pause
Posted by: allesandro on May 25, 2005 6:58 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You all really need to get a life, now don't you?

- Darth

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Pregnant Pause Posted by: Samantha Vimes
While there's truth to your article...
Posted by: attilatheone on May 25, 2005 9:01 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Padme had one of the most profound lines (maybe the *only* profound line) in the whole movie:

"So this is how liberty dies, to thunderous applause."

Granted, she did seem quite overly-homebound and while I question much of Lucas' storyline regarding her diminished role of power and influence, that line right there shows a woman enlightened and eloquent, unafraid to speak her mind. Not to mention, even through the stilted dialogue, she did not follow her husband down a path of idignant self-righteousness, but followed her own path, albeit to a corny and contrived death.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Lack of feminist characters? No.
Posted by: earlbecke on May 25, 2005 9:09 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think you're missing the value of the movie in the way that it deals with politics and seems to echo the current political situation in America today. That was what struck me most about it. And, as others have pointed out, you apparently weren't aware of the plot-related reasons why Padme kept her pregnancy hidden. Or you chose to ignore them.

Mind you, I do believe there's value in analysing popular entertainment and pointing out harmful messages. I just think you're looking in the wrong places. (I would hardly describe Leia as a weak character, for one. I mean...she totally kicks ass.)

This quote, though, is what really bothered me and made me feel the need to comment:

"But beyond Star Wars, if female characters in 21st-century science fiction sagas were smart, well-rounded, and consistently active participants in the drama, maybe they'd give young girls, women and mothers-to-be a hopeful world to look forward to. Instead of a sorry one to look back upon."

As a huge sci-fi fan and a writer of the genre, I have to say: obviously, you aren't really exposed to a lot of the science fiction out there, and anything you have seen or read is more pop-science fiction than anything deep. (What I mean is, yes, science fiction is supposed to examine "what if"s by positing alternate settings and realities and exploring cultural values in a light removed from our world. Fantasy also. But there's so much stuff out there, especially Star Wars, that doesn't actually do this, and can only claim to be science fiction because it has weird aliens and is set in outer space, even though it has nothing to do with the "SCIENCE" part whatsoever. This makes it nothing more than light entertainment. And there is a value to that.) But even in the context of popular sci-fi, as someone else pointed out, there are PLENTY of strong female characters. Star Trek: Voyager, Alien, and the Final Fantasy movie all spring to mind. Additionally, there was a feminist science fiction movement in the 70s and 80s that you might be interested in looking into that generally examines gender relations and roles. Pick up one of the "Women of Wonder" books to read sci-fi written by female authors, usually focusing around female protagonists.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If you can you are supermom
Posted by: nm_girl_friend on May 25, 2005 10:24 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you can still find time to read what you want, go out when you want, keep up on current events like you want, pretty much to anything you want with a baby....
Well I would have to say you are supermom! Babies change your life, forever. After 10 years I still find it hard to actually get time to even do things like sit down and post a comment to a site like this. It does get better with time, but look at me. I am just now getting time at 11pm to even read my favorite sites. Don't get me wrong, the benefits of being a mother are unimaginable to someone who has never experienced it. But to think that your life will be anything like it is now would be a big mistake. Think long and hard about what matters most to you in life before you decide to have a child. And personally, money shouldn't be the second thing on the list, it should be lower. Money always works it's self out. Being able to be a dedicated mother to your child is another thing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: If you can you are supermom Posted by: Samantha Vimes
Huh?
Posted by: Geoff on May 26, 2005 10:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Stop complaining and make your own movie.

This article reminds me of the positions we see family first and moral values groups take when they get worked up, complain and force feed their idea of a decent and wholesome lifestyle down our collective throat.

Don't like it? Don't buy it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Author's comments well-founded
Posted by: evenstar on May 26, 2005 12:53 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While I agree that this is "only a movie", movies reflect and inform popular attitudes. I, personally, was mostly annoyed that Padme didn't have a more important role, more than disturbed about what it said about our society, but I do think the author's comments are well-founded. Part of the reason I was irritated by Padme's lack of action in the movie (except for the one scene in the Senate and her attempt to save Anakin on the lava planet) is that I am a mom with a 2-year-old and am in my third trimester with a second boy. I'm certainly no lady-in-waiting, sitting around waiting for my husband to show up after he's been out fighting the bad guys. In fact, I work full-time, while he works part-time and takes on a huge share of housework.

I also believe, that while life does change significantly with the birth of a child, that does not mean that one cannot be active in the causes that they believe in. On the contrary, as a recent AlterNet article discussed, I feel it becomes even more important to be involved. I also don't think it has to detract from time with the child. A few hours per week away from your child will help you be a better parent by giving you the time for yourself that you will find you desperately need. That said, there is a lot less time for doing the fun, non-parent things and the trips to the movie theater and martini bar decrease significantly!

One more comment - I'm a HUGE fan of LOTR, so I'm not one of "those liberals" that find bias against women, race, etc. in anything... The protrayal of Padme initially bothered my husband more than me!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

don't despair
Posted by: debkilleen on May 26, 2005 1:50 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For a couple of better female sci-fi characters, check out Joss Whedon's short-lived series Firefly. Zoe is the co-pilot, and she's no wilting flower, and Kaylee is the ship's mechanic, not exactly a traditional female role. Okay, lots of violence besides, but this is the man who created Buffy and Angel, so it's not much of a surprise.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: don't despair Posted by: cygnet
I agree with most, but...
Posted by: Leah on May 26, 2005 2:17 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think that part of the reason why Padme was sequestered for most of the film was her and Anakin's desire to keep the pregnancy and their relationship a secret. Jedis are supposed to be celibate and free from attachments while Padme wanted to maintain a career in the Senate.
That answer might not suffice for all the critiques, but I think it explains it somewhat. If anything, I was most dissapointed with Padme's outfit being ripped off during the Jedi battle in Episode II (as someone else noted).
Someone also said that they felt Leia's role was primarily sex symbol. On the whole, I won't refute that, but I think that Leia's role in the original trilogy did break gender barriers in many ways. For example, Leia always holds her own in battles and the other male characters treat her as an equal. Leia even saves their lives at many points.
What I think was unfair was how it was Luke that had a special connection with his father, while Leia was left in the dark. Why is this? Why is Luke more in tune with the force and Leia hadn't developed the powers yet?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

She's minimized because Natalie Portman can't act
Posted by: Gitaiba on May 26, 2005 8:31 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The reason is plain and simple. Natalie Portman is a terrible actress, and ever scene she's in is painful to watch. It was necessary to show her, since Padme is a main character, but even Lucas was smart enough to minimize her role as much as possible in this movie. The romance slows everything down, and the love scenes, or horrific attempts at them are the perfect moment to go to the concession stand.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Parents have to be survivors
Posted by: medicalmaryjane on May 27, 2005 9:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My mother and I recently had a discussion in which I told her that I knew she gave us (me and my brother) all she had to give but a lot of the time, she didn't have much to give. The irony of that comment (which went straight over her head) is that I'm a suicide widow with four children and I had a fifth that I gave up for adoption because he was the child of my rapist; I've never run out of the energy it takes to be a mom!
The biggest difference between my mother and I is that she's a victim and I am a survivor. To be a parent in American society today, one has to be a survivor. The world's messed and kids feel that with all of their hearts just as they sense the stench of lies and hypocrisy but a good parent will teach their children the way things are and the way things should be along with decent problem-solving skills to get from point A to point B. Parenting is a career though, not to be taken lightly and from a financial perspective, the pay sucks. But if you change that perspective and commit to being the best mom you can be every day, you'll be the richest woman in the world.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wrong time, wrong galaxy to draw conclusions about preg here & now
Posted by: idspudgem on May 27, 2005 10:04 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Don't fret so much. This movie wasn't about the future (hence the whole "a long time ago" bit at the beginning) and not about us at all (remember the "a galaxy far far away). If you want to look for a possible future about the inhabitants of Earth... that's Trek, not Wars. :) Feel better?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Actually...
Posted by: ajosu on Jun 1, 2005 12:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I completely agree with the author about Revenge of the Sith. I mean, what the hell happened here? We start out with a brilliant courageous young woman and now because she is pregnant it seems as if she has had a total brain drain. I understand that pregnancy would prohibit her from zipping around the galaxy and fighting and all that. But why doesn't she speak up at the senate meetings instead of quietly making comments to herself? She didn't seem to have such a problem with it in the previous movies. And did she really become so dumb that she didn't realize that something was going on with her husband other than nightmares? I feel that the pre-pregnancy Padme would have done more to prevent Anakin's turn to the dark side and the downfall of the republic. But no, she just sat around being pregnant. And her death? What is up with that? All these other characters that weren't even in more than one movie (Qui Gon Jinn, Darth Maul, etc.) got to have more dramatic memorable death scenes than what Padme was given. It's like George Lucas couldn't figure out what else he should do with her once she had the twins so he just killed her off in the most lame ass possible way. I'm not saying she should have been sawed in half, but c'mon no one in that room looked very sad about her dying.
Without this character we would have no Luke and Leia, no turn to the darkside, in theory really no movie to watch.
Go check out some feminist film theory if you think we should watch the movie and be happy with it. You might learn something...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A Long Time A-wha???
Posted by: sonofdengar on Jun 4, 2005 4:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I realize this is coming a bit late. I saw this article a week ago and couldn’t figure out how to respond. I guess verbal vomit is the answer!

So, there seems to be quite a few responses about the concept "A long time ago...", even the far away bit, and first of all, hats off to you fellow Star Wars buffs out there keeping the rules straight. I'm one of you and I take a lot of crap for it. Often. I mean really, I get it a lot. I can see the issues Eisele has with this movie, but what about the bigger analogy of The Galactic Empire!!!? (ooh spooky!)

Yeah, Ok. But let's just step back a tiny bit, just for a second, and in our own current age, please. While I don't completely agree with this writers article, there are some good points in it. One of them is that you can take any subject or movie or story and relate it to current events, issues and problems - relevant or not. It's a good tool to use. People relate. it's a chance to make your point as a writer or debater or whatever and we all want that, don't we? The other is that the whole Star Wars story was created, at least in rough form, all in the 70's. And by this I mean episodes 1-9, not all the graphic novels, paperbacks, games, etc that fill in the blanks before, between and after. When it all started, Lucas picked Episode 4 (IV for you Romans) as the most relevant single episode/story/movie idea for THE movie. He was only planning on making one.

Now, as far as Episode 3 goes (III, sorry again), the final movie the public is supposed to see, Luke’s father falls spiritually, physically and Darth Vader is created, it’s going to be friggin great! Oh yeah, THIS IS A MOVIE MADE BY GEORGE LUCAS IN 2004 (plus or minus a year - I've lost touch with a little bit of my Star Wars self and have not kept up with the exact production dates). The guy is a tard at this point. He has sold out so much more that any of us ever will, yet we let him be the God (well, maybe custodian... ok, janitor) of our childhood science fiction soul only to find our grade school locker broken into and our lunch box stolen. By him. That was a Star Wars lunchbox too, a really cool one...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

...continued
Posted by: sonofdengar on Jun 4, 2005 4:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But now I'm ranting... these movies aren't historical studies or cosmic biographies of long ago forgotten worlds. They were created in the 70s, and then sort of re-created in the 2000's with the original ideas and stories in mind. So logically, if we're going to apply philosophy and politics, why not start there? Not a "Long, long time ago...". Uhh, I mean it IS a great line and everything.

Soooo, the 70's, 77 in fact. Things aren't super for women, but getting better and the TV and movies are starting to reflect that. And to be honest Leia does manage to kick some pretty good ass. Great? Not really, we have a long way to go as far as equal opportunity, women’s rights, etc.

What's that, Leia gets to go before the Wookie? Sorry, couldn't help myself. Anyway, like many of these comments have pointed out, Leia and other women do know how to take care of themselves fairly well. Up until the last of the movies, in "historical" - chronological order. And yeah, we know Padme is secretly knocked up and is keeping it on the DL, AND Portman doesn't lift a finger to try and act her part (to be fair, nobody really does).

What? did I just say "acting"? Whoops, no I said "act" and there's none of it in this movie. Not one little drop. And who thought there was going to be, come on! There are many good actors in this film and I can't figure out whether they should be given a "get out of jail free" cards or fined for participating. That will take some of my own time with myself to figure out.

Back to it, if we're going to split wampa hairs or beat a dead taun-taun about this movie, let's focus on THE DARK SIDE!!!

Yeah that’s right. The dark side. You all know it. We all love it. Nothing looks quite as evil but still quite as sexy as polished black plastic. I mean damn!

more...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

...continued, and done!
Posted by: sonofdengar on Jun 4, 2005 4:17 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So, current government. Yes, part of the dark side, in the truest sense of a dark apprentice. ‘Some people say it’s evil, but you can do this stuff for the good of all people’, just turn to the dark side and you can save your wife! Oh, she's not dying? She's actually smarter and funnier than you? Well, Just turn and you'll get a lot of money. Yeah, I made that confusing. Trust me, they’re evil. I mean part of the dark side. Ok, I tweaked that a bit, but seriously, evil!

The movie has already come under a little bit of flack in the press about this, it's not just my brilliant insight and benevolent skill for doing good that has uncovered this. You want to talk about feminist Star Wars issues? Well ok, there aren't many that I can personally find. But I have to admit, that's to the untrained eye. And I’m really trying not to pull out the cheap shots like some Imperial Generals I know of! (wink-wink Rummy!)

Moving on, things actually seem pretty cool in the far, far away - Apart from the way the dark senator overtakes the Old Republic, assumes all power under the guise of keeping order and peace during stressful times of war. Oh yeah, remember "Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists" thing? What was that Anakin? Either you are my ally or my enemy? That’s right, only the Sith deal in absolutes! Oh never mind, you're about to be burned up and turned into one of the galaxy's most ruthless leaders.

We don't care about that!

Well, that’s neither here nor there. Liked your article Eisele, always good to see something like this getting people like us ranting!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

your gripe
Posted by: ronfayne on Jun 4, 2005 12:12 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Kimmi: of course things are so much better now. SW III is not the future, it happened a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Regarding Padme, etc.
Posted by: Jo$h on Jun 15, 2005 12:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First and Foremost:
In case any of us forget, Star Wars supposedly takes place "A long time ago... in a galaxy far, far away." Our own earthly history defines us as a people of evolutionary status, derived from which men went to the mines, and women would bear children and play Susie Homemaker. All things considered, Star Wars accurately depicts many of our social dispositions, including Anakin and Padme's secretive "Religious Activist/Politician" relationship.

Secondly:

Anakin Skywalker was a Jedi Knight; a religious knight of the Jedi way and of the Council. One who could manipulate the Force with an innate mitochlorian count higher than Master Yoda's. He was to be atoned with the Force to overcome such a powerful emotional attachment such as falling in love. We must now also refer to Anakin's mother. Shmi Skywalker, of course, bore Anakin in somewhat of an 'Immaculate Conception'. His bond with her was more powerful than many of us can fathom. Furthermore, Anakin was worldly, born into poverty, slavery, and suffering. His mother was all that he had, and she was his nurcherer, caretaker, and provided the only comfort of such a female figure to young Anakin. ((Where is he going with this?)) Padme Amidala was a bright, ambitious, courageous and active Queen, however, a large portion of her role in The Phantom Menace was directed towards a means of nurturing and bonding with Anakin while serving as a role model also. In the long run, Anakin would only lose his mother to become enraged and take his first steps to the Dark Side. This places Padme's role at a particular cornerstone, as to where she becomes the overly dominant female figure in Anakin's life, and basically the only piece of the pie that he has left to hold onto in the galaxy. What I mean by that is we're all aware that it's not the Jedi way to commit temptuous acts or to be wed to another. Without Padme's role, and her essence of the story, Anakin may have never become Darth Vader. He may have assassinated Palpatine upon his discovery of Darth Sidious. There would be no New Hope, or any need for that matter. Anakin would've brought balance to the Force much sooner than at the end of Return of the Jedi. Of course it's all speculation, but Mace Windu harnessed the Dark Side in his time as well, and atoned. Without Padme there may not have been much of a story to tell.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Continued..
Posted by: Jo$h on Jun 15, 2005 12:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Finally: (And briefly... I promise.)

Supreme Chancellor Palpatine had been granted full emergency war power, and the Galactic Senate no longer functioned in the respect that it had in Episodes I and II. It was but a mere shadow of the Democracy it once stood for, and I don't believe there were many meetings that Palpatine didn't dictate and manipulate. I don't think Padme had much faith left in peace, on top of the fact that her relationship was entirely taboo and in the pits with twins on the way. Wouldn't you try to keep a low profile if you were in her place? I would've been even more lax than she was, with 3PO on the couch eating cheese curls or something. Not running around Sidious' "Senate". So the fact that Episode III involved less of Padme's charismatic, and often reckless acts of heroism suggests nothing offensive, or direct towards any theme of female inferiority, but rather played in fine tune with the Star Wars saga.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

User Gitaiba had an interesting point on May 25th.
Posted by: Jo$h on Jun 15, 2005 1:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Gitaiba wrote:
The reason is plain and simple. Natalie Portman is a terrible actress, and ever scene she's in is painful to watch. It was necessary to show her, since Padme is a main character, but even Lucas was smart enough to minimize her role as much as possible in this movie. The romance slows everything down, and the love scenes, or horrific attempts at them are the perfect moment to go to the concession stand.

This is probably the most unique and simplistic explanation so far for Episode III, but I agree. And if any feminist left-winger reads this and pukes, don't take it the wrong way, but STATISTICALLY, science-fiction, or whatever you want to characterize Star Wars as, appeals more to men by a large ratio. The majority of this ratio wants extensive lightsabers and less smooches. Is it sinking in yet? You get it?? With all due respect ladies, I love ya, but Lucas wasn't intending to necessarily cater to your inclinations or convictions or whatever. He wanted lightsabers like we men did, and he knew that going into it. It's about $$$! If he wanted to script and produce a movie that would more satisfy the general female crowd, he would've jumped on Cameron's gun to do Titanic or something. He knows his market better than we do so just let Star Wars be more of a guy's story and "let go of your hate!"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A non-sexist rewrite of "Episode III"
Posted by: samrosenbaum on Apr 24, 2006 8:42 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I found your article only recently and have to say I agree with it nearly 100%. I felt so strongly about how Padme's role was denegrated in ROTS, that, having been writing screenplays for many years, I did a fan fiction rewrite of the screenplay, its main purpose being to enhance her role in the story. I thought it might interest you, since it does some of the things your article suggested for the plot, to counteract pregnancy stereotypes. Below is a link to the latest version of it on TheForce.Net, one of the sites where I've been posting the rewrite.

Episode 3.2: Revenge of the Sith Revisited

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement