Wednesday, November 14, 2012

Quantifying Star Wars: Part 2.1 (Episodes V & II)

Readers, today I envy you.  Today you get to sit back and read about Attack of the Clones (episode II) without actually having to watch Attack of the Clones.  By the way, feel free to toss on Empire (episode V) while you read.  I'd highly recommend it.

If you haven't picked up on it, this week I worked on the next two films in each of the Star Wars trilogies.  For the original trilogy that means The Empire Strikes Back, and for the prequel trilogy that means Attack of the Clones.

I'm not going to go into as much detail on the opening for this part, as if you want some of the setup and explanation you can start at the first part of this series, here: ( http://theskepticalstatistician.blogspot.com/2012/11/quantifying-star-wars-part-one-episodes.html )

The idea of last week was that lack of character depth could be partly attributed to the breadth of characters introduced.  A sacrifice of quality for quantity, so to speak.  By coding the times in the movies that characters were mentioned, introduced, and killed, it gave a different sort of picture by which to compare the movies.

Spoiler alert: Episode I has a lot of characters, and almost none of them die.  Episode IV has quite a smaller cast, and lots of those characters are eventually killed.  So how do things look if we apply the same sort of coding to episodes II & V?

Well, here's Empire:


And here's Clones:


I kept both of these on the same scale that I used for The Phantom Menace to keep things easily comparable across all the movies.  I'm not sure yet if the last two movies will fit, but it's at least a good sign that both of these movies fit on it. 

The first thing I notice is that fewer characters die in Empire - at least in comparison to the first movie in its trilogy, A New Hope.  In A New Hope characters were killed all over the place - in Empire the number of characters killed is 7.  This is the same number that were killed in The Phantom Menace, but still almost twice as many as are killed in Attack of the Clones.

To be completely fair, two of the 'deaths' in Empire are worth discussion.  I am including in them both C3P0 and Han Solo.  Let me explain.  Suffice it to say there will be spoilers (but almost no blood).

Han Solo is tricky, as his freezing in carbonite marks the end of his input into the rest of the film.  He is now simply a stationary prop, not a character.  While the comment is made that he is in perfect hibernation, he is from a character standpoint - all intents and purposes - dead.  This is something that could be debated (and I'd love to hear debate on it), but I'm basing things partly on the fact that from a screenwriting/directing/acting standpoint Harrison Ford has no more work to do.

If I think to other movies for similar situations I'm drawn back to Lord of the Rings, and the character of Gandalf.  If you're familiar with LOTR this one probably starts to make sense to you, and if you're not I'm actually not going to spoil this one.  Okay, just a little - Gandalf also gets frozen in carbonite.    

The other character is C3P0, and there's an interesting contrast to his mortality across these two movies.  In Empire - shortly after arrival in Cloud City - C3P0 wanders off from the group and stumbles into a room of stormtroopers (though it's only revealed that there are stormtroopers later).  He tries to back out but is shot by a blaster - his parts scattered across the hallway.  He is decapitated by this blast and he appears to lose power, functionally dead.  His broken parts are about to be fed into a furnace when Chewie stumbles upon him.  Chewie doesn't just turn him back on, he puts his parts in a box.  He starts working on fixing him, but it's a long process, and likely only possible at all due to Chewie's mechanical prowess.  C3P0 is barely back together at the end of the film, after intensive work from both Chewie and R2D2.

I tried to think about things as if I had never seen Empire before.  When C3P0 was shot I moved him into the 'killed' column.  When he was reactivated by Chewie I moved him out of the 'killed' and back into the 'appeared' - it's why you'll see a 'takeback' of sorts in the 'killed' curve for Empire.

In Attack of the Clones, C3P0 is also violently decapitated.  Did I have to move him to the 'killed' column?  Nope.  He never stops talking.  He's a little disoriented, but it doesn't seem to affect him in the slightest.  His body continues walking around, ala Frankenstein.  Shortly after decapitation his head is welded onto a battle droid, and a battle droid head is welded onto his body.  Both continue to express slight disorientation, but also continue to function.  In fact, both continue to act like battle droids, raising some questions about where commands originate in Star Warsian droids.

A blaster shot again violently decapitates the battle droid head off of C3P0's body, and C3P0's head is violently pulled off by R2D2, dragged across the ground, and then hastily reapplied.  C3P0 never seems overly concerned (at least by C3P0 standards), but more than that he never comes even remotely close to a state that could be considered 'killed', and so no change had to be made to his state on the charts.

Now, it makes sense that there are less deaths in Empire than in A New Hope.  In A New Hope a ton of the deaths happen when Red and Gold Squadrons are assaulting the death star.  They are a dozen or so people assaulting a small moon, and the overwhelming odds pay off in almost complete extermination.

The entire story of Empire is about running away.  The rebels aren't trying to stop the imperial fleet on Hoth, they're trying to buy time for a hasty evacuation.  Luke removes himself from both the rebels and the empire and retreats to Dagobah , where there is no signs of war whatsoever.  The Millenium Falcon and its passengers spend the entire remainder of the movie trying to evade and escape imperial pursuit.  The death count is low because they are not fighting, they're fleeing.  Beyond that, they're fleeing in a ship that has a history of evasion.

[update - I originally mistakenly cited 'Dantooine' instead of 'Dagobah', which was caught by a few readers.  Just wanted to point it out as a good situation where a few extra sets of eyes caught something that I would have kept erring on over and over - this is why it pays to pay people to proofread something, regardless of how many times you might have proofed it yourself, Lucas]

Aside from Han and C3P0, which were described above, the only other deaths were a couple members of Rogue Squadron while fighting the Battle of Hoth and a couple members of the imperial fleet that Darth Vader chokes and kills unceremoniously.

Attack of the Clones is about the start of a full-fledged galactic war.  Unlike A New Hope where a small force is looking to exploit a strategic vulnerability, Attack of the Clones involves full scale, army-to-army, open conflict.  We'd expect this situation to prove a bit more fatal...right?

Deaths of actual characters in Attack of the Clones come roughly every 40 minutes or so.  The opening scene involves the death (by explosion) of one of Amidala's decoys, which seems like it might be setting a pace a little more grim than that of The Phantom Menace.  The next character to die is generic shape-shifting bounty hunter (by poison dart).  An accident-free hour almost elapses before Shim Skywalker is introduced, and almost immediately dies of...exhaustion?  Starvation?  Relief?  Prior wounds?  Boredom?

Slow up to that point, but then a war starts.  A star war.  


Yousa thinking yousa people gonna die?  Well, maybe Jar Jar.  But not if they have names.  Just Jango Fett.

It's okay that he's decapitated because he's wearing a suit and helmet, and it's functionally almost no different than C3P0's decapitation.  There's no blood, no guts, just a lifeless suit and helmet.  It might as well have been some Fullmetal Alchemist action going on there.  At least the suit of armor in Fullmetal Alchemist has some blood in it.  When Jango is killed it doesn't feel like Jango the guy has been killed.  It feels like Jango the suit of armor has been killed.  It feels like he's been removed from the suit, and the suit is all that remains.  Do you know what else that removes?  Emotion.      

Anyway, the entirety of Attack of the Clones is as dangerous as...you guessed it - ONE POD RACE.

I want to make one more point on character deaths for a moment.  I'm not going to dwell on it, because you can go back to the last post for more on it, but I want to point out another death that is set up similar to that of Biggs in A New Hope.

At the start of the battle of Hoth, Dak is introduced as Luke's gunner.  It's quick, and his main line is "right now I feel like I could take on the whole empire myself!"  In that simple line you get the picture of his character and start to root for him to actually take them on.  Minutes later, Luke fails to pull Dak's unconscious body out of his speeder after being shot down, and Dak is crushed under the foot of an imperial walker and unceremoniously killed.  It adds to the despair of the audience because moments earlier you were rooting for this kid to take on the empire and he has now (literally) been crushed under them.  You now feel like maybe you can't take on the empire, and retreat is a reasonable option.  You're in there with them, and feeling the same emotions and motivations.  These moods and emotions are something we'll cover in a bit. 

Anyway, deaths aside, we can also just look at how many living characters there are in each of the movies up to this point:


I'm actually surprised how similar the trajectory is between The Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones.  I think the biggest difference is that in Attack of the Clones the audience is introduced to a room of a dozen or so characters almost immediately, which accounts for that early spike.  It raises a good point, as a lot of (but not all) of those characters are characters that have been introduced in Phantom Menace.  What would these lines look like if characters were removed that had already been introduced in the prior movie?
Feel free to speculate on it, but it's something we're not quite ready for.  I do plan to look at that after we have all the movies taken care of, though.  

A New Hope and The Empire Strikes Back are also somewhat similar - I think the biggest difference in those is that the main battles (Hoth & Yavin 4) take place at drastically different points.  These battles are where a lot of characters are introduced all at once.  The Battle of Hoth is basically still in the opening of Empire while the death star run is the close of A New Hope.  It's a different type of pacing that gives the movies distinct feels.

A New Hope is all about the buildup to the death star run, while Empire is all about the aftermath of Hoth.  It makes A New Hope more about triumph, while Empire is more about futility.  All of the training and running in Empire simply postpones the inevitable.  At the end of A New Hope Luke and Han save the day against all odds.  You cheer with them.  At the end of Empire the odds catch up to them - Luke is no match whatsoever for Vader, and Han is frozen and hauled away by a bounty hunter.  You mourn for them. 

It got me to thinking about how the moods of the films differ between Attack of the Clones and Empire.  It also just got me to thinking about scenes in general.  Before watching either movie again my initial remembrance of Clones was that of a movie that jumped back and forth between Obi-Wan scenes and Amidala/Anakin scenes for most of the movie.  I remember that on first viewing, years ago, I kept finding myself incredibly bored by all the Ami/Ani scenes, and just constantly asking myself 'I wonder what Obi-Wan is doing?'  

I'm getting ahead of myself.  The important thing here are the scenes of the two different movies.  I decided that this was something else I could code for these two episodes to try to get a little deeper into things.  To start I had to define how I was going to code a scene.

Now, I realize I could just go to the DVD menu and pull up chapters or something, but I don't think that would be very rigorous.  Instead, I decided that I would define scenes as segments of the movie where action with a set of characters occurred basically uninterrupted and the mood was fairly uniform.

This produced a pretty decent amount of data.  I took note of a lot of stuff, much of which I'm going to hold off on for a second post sometime later this week.  For now we can talk about a few things that I tried to do.
First off, this allowed me to look at the number of scenes in each movie.  Empire had 56 scenes, and Clones had 61, but Clones is also around 15 minutes longer of a movie.  Most scenes in either movie are three minutes or less, so this extra 15 minutes more than allows for those five extra scenes.

One thing I did seem to notice is the fact that scenes in Empire have much softer beginnings and ends, and are really only separated by other scenes.  The action doesn't really stop, and it gives the feeling that a lot of things are happening at the same time.  In Attack of the Clones the scenes are a lot more self-contained.  The characters involved need to do something, or want to answer a question, or want to get somewhere.  They do it, and the scene is over.

Obi-Wan and Anakin need to meet Amidala.  Obi-Wan and Anakin need to catch the shape-shifter.  Obi-Wan needs to figure out where the dart came from.  Amidala needs to pack.  Anakin and Amidala need to leave the planet.  Obi-Wan needs to find a planet.  Obi-Wan needs to get to that planet.

I could keep going.  I'd rather not.

There's very few big-picture goals going on in Attack of the Clones.  What little actual big picture goals exist, they're never really fleshed out.  I guess Obi-Wan is trying to find the killer (despite saying that's not his job in the opening scene), then later trying to find Jango?  Amidala is trying to pass legislation?

Actually, I just read up on it, and I guess she's opposed to the legislation.  I remember the opening crawl said she needed to vote on something, but didn't say vote for which side.  I guess I got that wrong.  Whoops.  Oddly, that doesn't really change my interpretation of the movie in the slightest.  I guess that's how important that legislation turned out to be - it might as well have been a minor tax increase or something.

After she voted I guess she was trying to...stay safe until the next vote?  Or did she not vote yet?

Anakin's goals are easy - he is trying to lure Amidala into his windowless van.  More on that later in the week.

Let me know if you think I'm missing some big picture goals here, but this is what I'm getting at - goals are hard to come by, so we're stuck with these really small goals, like needing to pack a bag.

In Empire the big picture goals are simple and blatant.  Luke is trying to become a Jedi.  Han and Leia are trying to escape the pursuit of the imperial fleet.  Vader is trying to catch Luke.  All the smaller goals come directly from these larger goals.

Luke is trying to get to Dagobah to become a Jedi.  Luke is trying to find Yoda to become a Jedi.  Luke is trying to master the force to become a Jedi.  Luke is trying to lift the ship out of the water to become a Jedi.  Luke is fighting Vader because he thinks if he wins he'll show everyone he's a Jedi.

Han and Leia go into the asteroid field to escape the fleet.  Han and Leia try to fix the ship to escape the fleet.  Han and Leia go to Cloud City to try to get parts to fix the ship to escape the fleet.

Vader sends the probe droid to Hoth to find Luke.  Vader brings the fleet to Hoth to find Luke.  Vader comes to the surface to find Luke.  Vader sends star destroyers into the asteroid field to find Luke.  Vader kills his own officers because he's angry because he's not finding Luke.  Vader sets a trap in Cloud City to find Luke.

Is this sinking in?

This sort of aim or aimlessness manifests itself in the mood of scenes in each movie.  In Empire, the story of Luke and Vader is that of frustration and anger.  Luke is frustrated that he can't become a Jedi faster and gets angry, eventually directing this anger at Vader.  Vader is frustrated that he can't find Luke, and directs his anger at his own officers.  The story of Han and Leia is one of escape and despair.  The empire is constantly on their heels, they have very few small victories, and a lot more setbacks.

In Attack of the Clones, the Obi-Wan story comes off as a murder mystery.  He's constantly looking for something, but it's completely unclear to the audience (and him) what it is.  He's in libraries and diners and sneaking around places.  Unlike Vader and Luke or Han/Leia and the imperial fleet, Obi-Wan has no true antagonist.  There's nothing and no one for him to play off of or share motivation with.

Amidala and Anakin are similarly lacking any antagonist, unless you count themselves as each other's.  Tell me, why are Amidala and Anakin having a picnic in front of waterfalls?  Why are they having a fancy dinner?  Why are they riding native animals?  Why are they getting married?

Seriously, I get the heavy-handed overtones telling me that it's supposed to be a love story, but there is simply no love on display at any part of this movie.  Love was never the dominant mood of any singular scene.  Anakin and Amidala are not doing these things because they are in love, they are doing these things so that they will eventually have a reason (if you think they eventually do) to say that they're in love.  There is a much longer discussion to be had here about the contrasting love stories of Empire and Clones, but I think I am going to push it off until later in the week as it's exceptionally harder to quantify, and I want to talk about actual things that were coded in this post.

Speaking of, the coding of scenes is what got me to thinking about the things in the last few paragraphs.  Before sitting down to either movie I decided to simply code each scene with one word (sometimes two) that reflected the overarching mood of the scene.  I had very few preconceptions of how this would work out, and it's only by doing it that I think I realized some of the main themes that were present in each movie.

Beyond that, I had to come up with ways to identify each scene, and I was looking for ways to keep myself entertained.  To that end I also tried to come up with good names for each scene.  I had more fun with this than I should have.  Disney, please feel free to use these names for any upcoming DVD releases.

I can't quite measure this in any easy way, but the more the scene delivered a sense of meaning the more I should be able to encapsulate that meaning in a title that speaks to all of you, right?

That's a long setup for a long table, so here it is:


Empire Scene Mood
Clones Scene Mood





Placing sensors foreboding
Arrival on Coruscant confusion
Echo base tension
Meeting with Palpatine despair
The droids frustration
Old friends tension
Skywalker's check-in worry
Security breach suspense
Escape from the Wampa suspense
The chase action
Closing the doors absolute despair
The club seediness
Rescue party suspense
Jedi council confusion
Recovery happiness
Palpatine's plans plotting
A visitor worry
A Jedi discussion mistrust
The Imperial Fleet dominance
Packing whining
Preparing for evac friendship
Leaving for Naboo transition
The fleet approaches dissatisfaction
The diner comedic
Evac plans resolve
Jedi archives confusion
The ion cannon suspense
Commoners tension
Rogue squadron persistence
Younglings comedic
The Millenium Falcon panic
Arrival on Naboo retcon
Luke's departure happiness
The Queen tension
The asteroid field panic
Arrival on Camino confusion
Dagobah suspense
The lakehouse creepiness
Vadar's chamber anger
Showing off the clones disconcerting
Down the rabbit hole worry
Don't go chasing waterfalls creepiness
Making camp tension
A romp in the field playfulness
Fixing the ship tension
Meeting Jango tension
Hunting the falcon persistence
Sunlit dinner playful
The emperor worry
Fireside chat tension
Yoda's home frustration
Contacting the council confusion
It's alive! panic
Anakin's dreams worry
Training begins curiosity
Jango's exit action
The dark side fear
Arrival on Tatooine nostalgia
Continued pursuit panic
Chasing Jango action
Yoda and the force frustration
Arrival on Geonosis confusion
Apology accepted anger
The farmstead nostalgia
Nothing but trash triumph
Meeting with Lars despair
Visions worry
Hunting tusken raiders anger
Cloud city worry
Spying on Dooku confusion
Lando happiness
Finding Shmi despair
Yoda's plea frustration
Yoda and the force confusion
City in the clouds worry
Contacting the council confusion
Chewie's rescue chaos
Anakin's return silent disdain
Let's make a deal betrayal
Anakin's anger whining
Fixing C3P0 despair
Shmi's rest sadness
Punishment despair
R2's message confusion
Containment anger
Obi-Wan's capture confusion
Carbon freeze absolute despair
Jar Jar's Pride triumph
Luke's arrival suspense
Arrival on Geonosis confusion
Enter Vader tension
The conveyer belt level action
Lando's escape anger
Arena preparations happiness
Fett's escape despair
The arena action
Luke's escape anger
This party's over action
Hunting Vader suspense
A diplomatic solution action
Evacuation panic
The command center worry
Revelations anger
Send in the clones action
Just hang in there hope
The death star confusion
Escape   panic
Time for a battle! action
The rebel fleet hope
Chasing Dooku tension



Dooku's hanger action



Yoda's embarassment action



Dooku's escape confusion



The council chambers confusion



Shotgun wedding somber happiness

        
So, spend some time with that, see with what you come up with.  I really tried to come up with valid and simple adjectives for each scene (the simpler the adjective the better), but there were some places where things just took a little more.

For example, there are a lot of scenes in Empire that are dominated by despair.  I used the adjective despair for a number of scenes, but then came up to two that were dominated by despair to such a high level that I had to append them with 'absolute'.  The first of these two scenes are when Han goes out (to his presumed death) to hunt for Luke (who is presumed already dead) in the snowstorm, and the rebels have to close the main doors behind him.  If you've seen Empire you can probably hear in your head the broken howl that Chewie lets out as the doors slam shut and Leia looks away in...well, absolute despair.  It is devastating.

The second 'absolute despair' scene is that in which Han is frozen.  I doubt that I really need go into that one.

There's actually also an interesting difference in mood in the imperial fleet between A New Hope and Empire.  In A New Hope, Darth Vader is not in command of the death star, or the fleet, or of much of anything.  He's clearly lower in the chain of command than Grand Moff Tarkin, and it's unclear if he's higher or lower than some of the officers who mock him, his 'ancient religion', and his failure to find the rebels or the plans.  He starts to choke one of those officers in A New Hope, and Tarkin yells at him like a child that he's just caught misbehaving.

In Empire, all those people who might have been at or near Vader's level have been killed on the death star.  Darth Vader is now in charge of the imperial fleet.  The mood of imperial scenes is drastically different - Vader knows he is in power, and everyone else knows it, too.  When his officers do things he doesn't like, he kills them in front of the crew and promotes someone else.  When one of his officers comes to him to personally apologize and accept responsibility for losing the Millennium Falcon he kills him, says "apology accepted", and calls on someone else to continue the search.

Moods like this are easy to come by in Empire.  Things are pretty clear cut, and you get to see what is motivating each character and even each larger group.   

What was really a surprise to me when I started to get into Attack of the Clones was how many scenes in it are dominated by confusion.  It's not to say that I was confused by these scenes (I often was), but rather that confusion was the dominant emotion expressed by characters in the scene.  There are many scenes with Obi-Wan and others standing around being confused, saying things like 'but why would X do Y?' or 'but isn't X a Z?' or 'did you know that X did Y?'  I think that long ago I always wondered what Obi-Wan was doing during Ami/Ani scenes simply because I always wondered what Obi-Wan was doing.

There are also many scenes where there is no mood, simply action.  The scene where Obi-Wan fights Jango on Camino is a perfect example of this.  The scene starts with Obi-Wan running out a door and bringing up his lightsaber.  Jango starts shooting at him.  I remember thinking - the first time I saw this in theaters - that this scene was a bit jarring.

There's no setup, there's no context.  A few lines of dialog at the start would have made all the difference.  It has the feel that Obi-Wan didn't come there to talk to Jango and then had the realization that he was the bounty hunter in the jetpack suit (which is what it should have had).  It has the feel that Obi-Wan just came there to fight, maybe having already pieced all that together.  He's never shown piecing it together, or walking down the hallway, or doing anything that would set this up, so you just get the action for action's sake.

It's a small thing, yes, but it's one of many small things.  I will keep coming back to this, but it's something so small that it could have been easily corrected, which is in some ways worse than something large that couldn't be.

Anyway, this table of moods has a lot of information, but it's a little tricky to get a picture of all of it.  To try to simplify things a bit I decided to code these moods into a number of larger categories across the two movies.  That produces this chart:

Now that's a little clearer.  By the way, I recognize that Attack of the Clones has a few more scenes total, but we've already discussed that this is simply due to the fact that it's a slightly longer movie.  The difference is also fairly minimal, and wouldn't change anything in the above chart.

You can see that the predominant mood of Empire is negative - despair, worry, fear, anger, etc.  The predominant mood of Clones is also negative, but it wins by only a hair above the second place finisher: confusion.  A tight third is scenes which have no mood other than pure action.  Oddly - as negative as a movie as Empire is - it still has more positive scenes than Attack of the Clones.

This is a good time to point out that Empire had no scenes which were simply coded as action.  There is plenty of action in Empire, but there's always other mood and emotion present.  When Rogue Squadron is fighting the Battle of Hoth there is quantifiable mood to those scenes because the characters are invested in it.  Think of the example of Luke and Dak above.

When the thousands of identical soldiers - all in full gear to obscure their humanity - fight the giant army of robots, well, there's really not any emotional connection to anyone involved.  It's just action for the sake of action.  The Battle of Hoth is not action for the sake of action, it's action to develop the characters and set the whole movie in motion.  The Battle of Geonosis is action for the sake of adding five minutes to the movie where they didn't have to pay actors, and to set a different series of profitable cartoons (The Clone Wars) in motion.  

There were some scenes in Clones that had action in them but also had a distinct mood, but those were by far the minority.  Obi-Wan was occasionally in action and able to look confused at the same time, as was Yoda occasionally in action but able to look worried and disapproving.

Speaking of Yoda.  In Empire he says - in response to Luke looking for a great warrior - "Great warrior, hmmm?  Wars not make one great."  In Clones, Yoda seems to be in full command of the force that attacks Geonosis.  Jedi are billed as having "kept the peace for generations", which might indicate that the first thing that he might try to do would be to negotiate with Dooku, maybe for a peaceful resolution.  Every major player in this scenario is present, so if he could sit down at a table with them he could potentially work out the surrender of the separatists.  He has the upper hand with a brand new Army of the Republic - something that the separatists don't know about and might completely change their mind about entering into peaceful negotiations.

Instead, he comes in with blasters on full, initiating the start of the war.  You might say that the attempted execution of Ani/Ami and Obi-Wan started the war, but to be completely fair they were all spies who were caught, well, spying.  You could say that the Jedi's attempt to rescue Ani/Ami and Obi-Wan was the start of the war, but it was another unwarranted attack on a group that had yet to do anything but execute some spies.

In fact, once Dooku had the upper hand he called for a cease-fire.  He gave Obi-Wan and the captured Jedi a full chance to surrender, promising that their lives would be spared.  You might say he was lying, but he has no reason to.  If he was planning on killing them after they surrendered he could much more easily kill them without surrender.  He might lose a few battle droids, but it would be a miniscule cost next to wiping out the majority of the Jedi.  If he was looking to use them for bargaining (which Obi-Wan accuses him of), why didn't he try to bargain with two Jedi and a prominent senator? 

So, the Sith are acting reasonable and trying to end the conflict with a peaceful resolution, and the Jedi come in and attack in full without any attempt at negotiations or offer of surrender.  Trade Federation ships are trying to retreat, and Yoda instructs the clone troopers to concentrate all fire on the closest ship in order to destroy it and all those on board.  What?

I guess if it's just robots (is it?) you don't really have to listen to the hundreds or thousands of voices crying out all at once before being silenced.  

I get it now, when they talk about the Jedi being peacekeepers they actually mean capital P 'Peacekeepers', like in Farscape.  You know, a militaristic organization that keeps the peace by attacking and destroying anyone that disagrees with them.  Can't believe I didn't think of that one sooner.

I think I can simplify things just a little bit more, and that's by really trying to collapse scenes down to positive moods (happiness, triumph, hope, etc.), negative moods (despair, anger, tension, etc), or neutral moods (action, confusion).  That allows us to look at the ups and downs (quite literally) of each of the movies.

Here's what Empire looks like:


And here's Clones:


Here they are on the same graph (though it's a bit more cluttered):


I think that should be quite clear by now that there's a fundamental difference in the way that moods are used across the two different movies.  Empire is a sea of bad news punctuated by a series of small victories, while Clones is a rapidly shifting movie trying to find itself.

I have a bit more that I've coded that I think I'm going to turn into a bonus post later in the week, along with questions similar to those I included at the end of the first post.  This will hopefully satiate all of you for an extra week, as with the lead-up to Thanksgiving I'm not sure I'm going to get to the third installment until after the holiday.


Before we go (you can feel free to leave now if you were only here for the pretty pictures), I want to touch on two more scenes to make one more point about confusion and dialog.  It is partly in the hopes that someone will finally be able to explain away what I believe to be the singularly most confusing scene in Attack of the Clones. 

The first scene in question is nothing more than a conversation between Obi-Wan and Count Dooku.  It immediately follows Obi-Wan's capture by the separatists, and Obi-Wan is being held in a stasis field.  This has the added benefit similar to having a conversation over the phone, as Obi-Wan is incapable of doing anything more than talking.

The scene unfolds as such (borrowed from www.moivequotedb.com with great thanks), with my comments in italics and brackets:

Obi-Wan Kenobi: Traitor! [true]
Count Dooku: Oh no, my friend. This is a mistake, a terrible mistake. They have gone too far, this is madness! [said incredibly quickly, seeming entirely facetious]
Obi-Wan Kenobi: I thought you were the leader here, Dooku. [Obi-Wan's constant air of confusion]
Count Dooku: This had nothing to do with me; I assure you. [could be true or lie] I will petition immediately to have you set free. [could be true or lie]
Obi-Wan Kenobi: Well, I hope it doesn't take too long. I have work to do. [true]
Count Dooku: May I ask why a Jedi Knight is all the way out here on Geonosis? [honest question]
Obi-Wan Kenobi: I'm tracking a bounty hunter named Jango Fett. [true] Do you know him?
Count Dooku: There are no bounty hunters here that I'm aware of. [lie] The Geonosians don't trust them.
Obi-Wan Kenobi: Well, who can blame them? But he is here, I assure you. [true]
Count Dooku: It's a great pity our paths have never crossed before, Obi-Wan. Qui-Gon always spoke very highly of you. I wish he were still alive. I could use his help right now. [seems true, no reason to be a lie]
Obi-Wan Kenobi
: Qui-Gon Jinn would never join you. [could be true or lie]
Count Dooku: Don't be so sure, my young Jedi. You forget that he was once my apprentice, just as you were once his. [true]  He knew all about the corruptions of the Senate, but he would never have gone along with it if he had known the truth as I have.  [true]
Obi-Wan Kenobi: The truth?
Count Dooku: The truth. What if I told you that the Republic is now under the control of a Dark Lord of the Sith? [totally true]
Obi-Wan Kenobi
: No, that's not possible! [lie] The Jedi would be aware it!  [lie]
Count Dooku: The Dark Side of the Force has clouded their vision, my friend. [true] Hundreds of senators are now under the influence of a Sith Lord called Darth Sidious. [true]
Obi-Wan Kenobi: I don't believe you. [true]
Count Dooku: The Viceroy of the Trade Federation was once in league with this Darth Sidious, but he was betrayed ten years ago by the Dark Lord. [true] He came to me for help; he told me everything. [true] You must join me, Obi-Wan, and together we will destroy the Sith! [seems legit]
Obi-Wan Kenobi: I will never join you, Dooku. [true]
Count Dooku: It may be difficult to secure your release. [true]

The first time I saw this I remember scratching my head and wondering that had just happened.  I was willing to give them the benefit of the doubt in that things might become clearer later in the movie, but it only ever gets more confusing. 

From Dooku's first line I'm thrown off-guard.  The delivery comes off so quickly it seems like Dooku is making a show of being facetious.  It's like he needs to get some procedural stuff out of the way, and just wants to get it over with quickly.  So he's either lying, or the directing in the scene was abysmal.

Dooku next starts moving through a series of possible lies.  He infers he's not in charge, which would allow for the fact that he doesn't know that Jango is there.  It seems like he is in charge, though, which would mean that he would almost certainly know that Jango was there.  This seems to back up the point that he's lying to Obi-Wan.

Then the mood changes, unexpectedly, and he's going all nostalgic about how he trained Qui-Gon and how much he misses him.  This, immediately, seems heartfelt - a rarity in Attack of the Clones.

Then things go totally off rails and Dooku starts revealing huge truths to Obi-Wan, like that Palpatine is Darth Sidious, the sith lord behind everything that's been going on so far.  Obi-Wan scoffs at this, and Dooku gives detailed information on how he came to know this and how credible the information is.  Obi-Wan - who has been on an investigation the entire movie to this point and is one of the rare voices of reason - seems completely uninterested in this information, or for that matter on every following up on it later.

Dooku makes an impassioned plea to Obi-Wan for him to join him, and destroy the sith.  There's no reason for Dooku to be lying here.  He's making a reasonable case that if Obi-Wan helped him they could both rally the Jedi to overthrow Darth Sideous.  It's a win-win situation.

Dooku is revealed to have been a Jedi, and nothing is shown that would suggest any motivation for him to have turned to the dark side.  He's not fearful, he's not angry, and he doesn't hate anyone.  He's calm, and well-reasoned.  Moreover, there's no talk of any fear, or anger, or hate in his past.  A throwaway line at some other point in the movie - maybe from Yoda or Mace - would be as simple as 'Dooku succumbed to fear and anger after X event, and his desire for power led him down a path to the dark side'

Instead, you're left wondering if Dooku might actually be against Darth Sideous, if he was willing to reveal so much of the core of the entire plan.  Without any explanation or change in motivation, Dooku is later revealed to be Darth Tyrannus, Darth Sideous' sith apprentice.  His actions are completely incongruent.

A line or two would be all you'd need to establish back story, and another line or two would be all that's needed to explain his true loyalty.  That's all you need, and now there's a little more understanding of what might motivate Dooku.

I mentioned it earlier, but it's these small things that keep cropping up in Clones.  There is one more, and it's quick.

It's the opening scene.  Amidala's decoy has just been killed.  Her response, right before dying?  "I'm so sorry...I've failed you, senator."


Why would Amidala’s decoy say that she was sorry that she failed her? From where I’m sitting it looks like she did exactly what she was supposed to do - distract people from killing the actual Amidala. She did her job to the fullest extent, and if she was the kind of person who signed up for that job she should die proud instead of regretful.

Her last words shouldn’t be 'I’m sorry' or 'I've failed you', but something that actually shows her dedication, like “my life...for the queen!”

If a member of the secret service takes a bullet protecting the president they’re not going to turn around and with their dying breath say “I’m sorry I didn’t stop that bullet harder, sir.  I've failed you.” or “I feel like my dive could have used a little more work.  I've failed you and I'm sorry.”

The goal of the queen’s decoy is to shield the queen from all the people trying to kill her. Did the decoys not get that from the job description? What was the discussion like before they left for Coruscant? “Hey handmaiden, do you know what would be fun today? Why don’t you ride in the nice big ship, and I’ll fly the fighter - I always get to ride in the big ship, today you’ve earned it. It’s my present to you for your years of undying service. Feel free to put on any clothes you find - really dress up and feel like a queen.”

The problem is again that this is such a glaring error, and the fix is so simple.  You could honestly just dub this over in post and correct what stands out as a major point of disconnect.

I keep asking myself, Attack of the Clones could not possibly be worse than The Phantom Menace, right?  No matter how I come at it, I think I have to admit that The Phantom Menace is in fact a better movie (deep breath, deep breath).

Episode I is plagued by some big problems, and there are really no good fixes.  Episode II did not learn the lesson that having two or three people read the script with a critical eye would fix a lot of things.  The errors are more egregious because they're so easily fixed by a little bit of script work.  It's death by a thousand cuts vs a sledgehammer to the face.

It's not that this sort of dialog that would fix things is completely foreign to Attack of the Clones, either.  The astute reader may have noticed that the scene 'Arrival on Naboo' is coded as 'retcon'.  For those of you unfamiliar with the term, it stands for 'Retroactive Continuity' - the act of going in and altering prior facts or worldview to be consistent with new facts or worldview.  You see, the only point of this scene - the absolute only reason it is in the movie - is so that Anakin and Amidala can have a quick chat and explain why she's not Queen anymore.  Spoiler alert, turns out that on Naboo the royals are elected, and Amidala was elected at the age of 13 or 14. 

A whole scene is devoted to fixing that mess.  One line of changed dialog makes the opening scene make sense.  A few lines of dialog could explain Obi-Wan's motivation for fighting Jango on Camino.  A line or two of dialog could give Dooku the needed back story.  A line or two from Yoda could turn a preemptive strike into a plea for peace.  A few more lines from Dooku could explain his conflicting motivations.  A line or two from Jango could return his humanity, and any emotional lines at all from the clone troopers could give them theirs (oh, I forgot, they were bred not to have emotion).  

The Phantom Menace felt like the script only made it to the very early stages of peer review, and those that looked at it were blinded by their love of the other Star Wars movies.  In Attack of the Clones it feels like they simply said forget it, and used the first draft.

In contrast, The Empire Strikes Back feels so incredibly tight.  There are no wasted lines, and everything seems to have a focus and a purpose.  Characters have clear motivations and speak and act accordingly.  Their slightest moves and expressions seem carefully planned to pack as much emotion into every scene, while Clones seems to try to pack as much action and CGI into every scene.  

It's almost unfair to put Attack of the Clones up against a film like The Empire Strikes Back, but there it is.

Anyway, be sure to check back later in the week for the less statistical follow-up that I find myself unable to avoid.  

And if you've made it through all of this, thanks again!  These are getting...a little long.

Wednesday, November 7, 2012

Quantifying Star Wars: Part One (Episodes IV & I)

Well readers, today you're in for a special treat.  Welcome to part one of a special three-part series about Star Wars.  

Okay, half of you may have just stopped reading (in which case come back in a few weeks), but the other half of you are likely pretty excited.  I'll take that tradeoff on this one.  Given the recent news that Disney has bought Lucas Film (and basically all the other things that have 'Lucas' or 'Skywalker' in the name), I couldn't help but put together a post about the Star Wars franchise to try to give Disney a little heads up about what not to screw up in a new trilogy.  Please Disney, pay attention here.

If you've ever talked to anyone that's kind of in to Star Wars you might have picked up on the notion that the newer prequel trilogy (episodes I-III) is viewed as a much weaker series of movies than the original trilogy (episodes IV-VI).  It is certainly reflected partially in the company that I keep, but I don't think I've ever met a person that considered the prequel trilogy better than - or even equal to - the original trilogy.

So what's so bad about it?  Well, there's a lot of people out there that have done a decent amount of work highlighting some really solid things that are bad in the prequels (might I suggest that you start here [NSFW]: http://redlettermedia.com/plinkett/star-wars/ ).  There are a lot of great points out there (like the lack of a protagonist), but there's not much - if anything - that you can point to as quantitative and measurable.

If you can't measure it, you don't understand it.

With that in mind I started to think of some of the ways that I could measure things about the Star Wars Movies.  One of the things that came to mind was how needlessly complex the prequels were made, and how little time was devoted to character development.  The lack of character development is something that a lot of critics touch on (there's a good example of it in the series of videos linked above), especially compared to the original trilogy where characters become a lot more developed.

What's the difference then?  After thinking about it a bit, I realized that the problem was likely one of breadth over depth - that the prequels contain more characters than the original trilogy.  This would be something that also then plays into the increasing complexity and lack of development for any given character.  So, I decided to try to quantify this by figuring out some numbers relating to characters in each trilogy.

When I started working on things I realized that this was something I couldn't do in just one week, partly due to the fact that I would need to watch and code each movie in turn.  I therefore decided that splitting it into three parts made a lot more sense.  Today will be the first installment of each trilogy (episodes IV & I), next week will be the second (episodes V & II), and two weeks from now will be the close of each trilogy (episodes VI & III).

Now, there's an easy comparison to be made if you simply look at the number of credited characters in each movie.  The Phantom Menace (Episode I) has a lot more credited characters than A New Hope (Episode IV).  Part of this is likely because George Lucas wrote more parts for friends and family (e.g. Amanda Lucas as 'Diva Funquita').  For fairness, I'm not going to count characters of this caliber.  On the other side of the coin there are also characters that are present but not credited, like Jabba the Hutt in Phantom Menace.  Since he was CGI there was no need to credit an actor, though his character was still mentioned and presented as at least semi-important.

My base, then, is going to be the list of credited characters.  I will exclude some characters in Phantom Menace that are clearly unimportant to the story (which should only make the effect I'm looking for smaller), but will also include those uncredited characters that do seem important.  I will do the same for A New Hope, though there's less work to be done.

There's something to be said about how many characters there are in the movie, but that's not the entire story.  There's also something to be said about how characters are introduced, and how many loose ends are left running around.  What do I mean by that?

Well, when you meet a new character in a movie they either just show up, or someone talked about them beforehand.  Having characters talked about but not present works to either fill out other characters' backstories or motivation (e.g. talking about the emperor in A New Hope), or works to create a background for that character when the eventually appear (e.g. Yoda in The Phantom Menace).

Characters also either stay in the main focus, wander off, or are killed.  Killing off characters reduces the number of characters that you have to worry about (e.g. most of Red Squadron in A New Hope), and allows you to focus more on the remaining characters.

With that in mind I sat down and watched The Phantom Menace and A New Hope (theatrical editions of each), coding them both.  Read that again, by the way - I watched The Phantom Menace for you guys, and I watched it hard.

What did I code?  Well, I took note of the minute into the film that every character of note was either first mentioned, first presented, or first killed.  Usually they were only killed once, but that's neither here nor there.

There were some tricky points, like how to treat storm troopers, or battle droids, or things of that nature.  Basically, I only counted these characters if they were unique from the generic group (e.g. TK-421 in A New Hope), as this seemed to balance out fairly well in both movies.  I wasn't going to count every Gungan or battle droid the same as I wasn't going to count every generic rebel or storm trooper. 

That data can be graphed by time to give us a picture of how characters are introduced (and removed) in each of the movies.  Let's start with A New Hope:


For the most part, characters are introduced fairly slowly, and somewhat steadily.  There are two main peaks where characters are introduced somewhat in bulk.  The first is around 15 minutes, and it's where we meet a number of characters, including Luke.  The other larger peak is around 100 minutes, and it's the start of the death star run where we meet the pilots of red and gold squadrons.

There's a decent number of characters who exist only in reference, at least for a while.  Downturns in the overall character number (blue line) mean that characters are being killed.  Downturns in the 'mentioned' (orange line) mean that a character that has been mentioned has now shown up.  An example of this takes place at that same spike around 100 minutes.  It's the first appearance of Biggs, who Luke mentioned nearly an hour and a half earlier (and who is killed only minutes later).  It makes Biggs' death more impactful - you know him the whole movie as one of Luke's close friends only to finally meet him and shortly thereafter watch him killed. 

Overall, things seem fairly balanced in A New Hope.  There's a reasonable number of off-screen characters used for reference, backstory, and foreshadowing, and plenty of people are killed (as would be expected given the situation). 

Let's move on, then, to the Phantom Menace:





Well, there you go.  Before you say anything, yes these graphs are on different scales.  The reason is that The Phantom Menace wouldn't fit on the same scale we just used for A New Hope.  Here's what A New Hope looks like if we put it on the same scale as The Phantom Menace, for fair comparison.


The picture is pretty clear, there are more characters.  It's also the case that even with all these characters, very few are spoken of off-screen (some of the rare exceptions are characters like Yoda and Chancellor Valorum).  No characters of note make it to the end of the movie having been mentioned but not revealed.

There's an interesting additional point here - for clarification I watched the theatrical cut of A New Hope, not the special edition.  What does the special edition add?  This kind of over-presentation of everything that seems to be plaguing the prequels - a good example being the character of Jabba the Hutt moving from the 'talked about as back story and development' to 'a guy who shows up and you can look at'.   
 
I also have to say, the world of The Phantom Menace must be a whole lot safer than that of A New Hope, because very few important (or even just named) individuals are killed.  In A New Hope there are fewer characters alive at the end of the movie than characters killed.  In Phantom Menace?

MAJOR SPOILER ALERT - In The Phantom Menace Qui-Gon and Darth Maul both die, as well as one fighter pilot from Naboo (a much lower fatality rate than red or gold squadrons in A New Hope which faced almost TPK).  Four named but uncredited CGI/puppet pod race competitors are also killed, making a podrace event more deadly than a three-man Jedi-Sith lightsaber duel and an assault on a heavily shielded command cruiser, combined.  Two pod races (if they were similar to the one in The Phantom Menace) would be nearly as deadly as assaulting the death star with a small rebel force.  Three would be more deadly.   Read that again, please.  Let it sink in.  Let it really sink in.

A quick aside - which do you think was longer, the pod race in The Phantom Menace, or the death star run in A New Hope?  I swear that I've always thought that the pod race was like a half hour long.  I would have easily put money on it being over 20 minutes.  It is only 10 minutes and 31 seconds.  The death star run?  11:56.  

Back to characters killed.  Sure, battle droids 'die' in The Phantom Menace, but I'm not counting generic deaths.  I'm not counting all the stormtroopers and rebels that die in A New Hope, because it would skew the numbers pretty hard (let alone if I were to include the deaths following the first demonstration of the death star on Alderaan, or the stormtrooper deaths following the destruction of the death star).  More people die on the death star than Gungans and battle droids 'die' fighting anyway.  

The deaths that are seen in the A New Hope graph are people like Biggs, Uncle Owen, Aunt Beru, and Grand Moff Tarkin.  I already talked about the power of Biggs' death - you see Uncle Owen and Aunt Beru's charred skeletons.  Even Grand Moff Tarkin's death makes a strong point - he believes the death star, and himself by proxy, to be so invincible that he scoffs at the thought of any possible threat or his own demise.  It makes the hope for the rebels seem that much more minimal, and makes it that much more powerful when they eventually do beat the odds.  

To be totally fair I'm not even including in those killed the characters like General Taggi or General Motti (both credited characters with reasonable speaking roles), as I can't verify that they were on the death star when it was destroyed.  It's possible they were simply there for a conference or something.  Stopping in for lunch, you know?  Trade a few jabs with Vader and head home somewhere. 

Noteworthy are the spikes in the number of characters in The Phantom Menace.  That huge jump right before the hour and a half mark is when the Jedi arrive back on Coruscant (the stable area right before that is the end of the podrace and trip to Coruscant).  The third act is hardly the time to be increasing the character count by 30-40%.  More than that, almost none of these characters had been mentioned earlier in the movie (again, the exceptions are Yoda and Chancellor Valorum).

It's hard to really tell the difference having these on separate graphs, so let's take a look at how things play out just looking at the difference in characters overall.


Again, no surprises.  There are simply more characters, this just looks at the data in a way to make a good comparison.  This is the number of live characters at any given point, though, so what happens when we look at killed characters?

So there's a part right around the hour mark where Phantom Menace almost has the same number of killed characters, but not quite.  When you look at it this way you can really see how deadly the death star run is, and - in comparison - how non-lethal the end of Phantom Menace is.  You thought storm troopers were inaccurate with blasters - it's like the Trade Federation was using foam bats or something.

I'm not even being as mean as I could be - this graph could be normed to number of characters in the movie.

The fact that one movie is winning on live characters and one is winning on dead characters makes me wonder what would happen if we just talked about characters that have been introduced into the story.  Well, that's this graph:

 
Is this point becoming clear enough that it can be explained to someone at Disney yet?  Hold on, I've got one more way to look at this.

My original thought was that The Phantom Menace is sacrificing character depth for character breadth, while A New Hope is not.  This should be manifest in how much time in focus is available for each character - that is, an average character's share of the running time for any given minute.  The more characters are fighting for the same screen time the less you can give to any particular character.  So, here's a graph of the minute by minute share of screen time that each average character would get in a fair split:

Basically, every minute is split among all the current characters, and this is the average share that each would then receive (in a fair split).  This also takes into account that when a character is killed, they no longer need screen time.  [Obi-Wan Kenobi in A New Hope is the one instance that might not hold up perfect here, but I would argue that after his death he is no longer taking up screen time for his own character development, but present only to help develop Luke.]

If a movie only had one character this graph would be a straight line neither upward nor downward, as each new minute is a minute devoted only to that character.  When new characters are introduced the line heads down, as each character is receiving a reduced share of screen time.

While A New Hope spends time developing the characters they have (with that main dip again being the death star run), The Phantom Menace is constantly devoting time not to developing old characters, but simply introducing new ones.  As the minutes tick on each character has to fight for a diminishing share of screen time.  If you look at things split between minutes up to that point, things look like this:



I'm starting to feel like I've been beating a dead horse for a while now, so I think that's going to be the last graph for today.  All said and done I think it was the first two that really packed the real punch.  There is a little left to wrap up, though.

Characters weren't the only thing I looked at, mind you.  I also tried to code groups or races of people (like rebels, jedi knights, the galactic senate), and it was working for a while.  The hardest part of A New Hope by far was the cantina scene, where there's about a half dozen races introduced all at once.  That wasn't too bad, as it's easily the densest part of A New Hope.  I tried to do the same for The Phantom Menace, and Tatooine was like a mock United Nations.  Every other character is a completely unique race.  I thought that was bad, and then the gang arrived on Coruscant.  Game over, man.   

Anyway, a simple lack of characters does not a good movie make - you can still make a pretty bad movie with a pretty small cast.  I won't list examples because you can probably come up with dozens on your own.  The point here is that it's a lot harder to make a good movie if you have too many characters.  When I think of movies that are well executed with large casts of characters the first two things that come to mind are Lord of the Rings and the Harry Potter series.

There's a reason that the LOTR movies are so long and that the Harry Potter series is 8 movies, and it's because of the number of characters at play and the time spent developing those characters.  The extended editions of LOTR are over 12 hours long, for three movies.  That's only a little more than an hour less than all six Star Wars movies. 

The LOTR extended editions are actually a great comparison to close this out.  Peter Jackson's extended editions use that extra time to better flesh out the characters already in play, to great effect.  Think of the time spent developing even the (relatively) minor characters of Merry and Pippin.  George Lucas' extended editions (the special editions) use that extra time to introduce things like dewback lizards and random CGI elements like cars, buildings, and crowds.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to seeing how this plays out next week in the next two parts of the series, especially considering the fact that I get to watch Empire.  I have a few ideas for other things I can look for in those two movies, but if you have suggestions feel free to let me know - I probably won't sit down to code things until the weekend.

If you're still reading, though, you deserve a treat - this one got long.  For you, then, I have a special bonus for this week's post.

After only a short bit of The Phantom Menace I couldn't help but start writing down questions I had as they came up.  Some of them were things I'd noticed before, or seen online before, but some are things I've never noticed until I was really watching the movie with an intent to code it.  Without further ado, then, here are some unanswered questions I have regarding The Phantom Menace, in full fan-boy fury:



Deep breath, push nerd glasses up nose.  Here we go.



- What is the “Congress of the Republic” (look it up, it's in there) from the opening crawl?  The Galactic Senate?  Is there another body of the Congress that hears other matters?  Is there a House that also has members and might have been able to listen to the matters at hand?  Did a typo like this that happens in the first minute of the movie really slip by?  Is that how few people read this script?  Did Lucas forget the crawl and write it day of?

- Why does the Trade Federation stop firing on the ship after the shields are fixed?  Why don’t they send even a single fighter in pursuit?  It’s not like they have to scramble the pilots, their ships have no pilots.  They're just ships.

- If the Queen’s ship doesn’t have enough power to go to hyperdrive, how is it that the Trade Federation had no means to track or follow it?  How close is Tatooine?  Do they have a cloak?

- Why doesn’t Qui-Gon try out a larger dealer after Watoo says he’s the only one who has the part?  Qui-Gon noted that Watoo was one of the smaller dealers, and from the looks of the city in the distance as they approach we are talking about a major starport.

- Why doesn’t Qui-Gon go to a bank, or a currency exchange?  Take a hit on the exchange rate, sure, but SOMEONE must care about republic credits.  He’s also not opposed to casual theft and con acts, so why not just go steal some money?

- Why does Watto say he’s lost everything?  He has lost one part for a ship, which sounded expensive but couldn’t have been the main bulk of his stock, especially given how rare of a part it was (since no one else carried it).  He lost Anakin, and Qui-Gon kept the pod racer (which was never Watto’s anyway).  Qui-Gon made a secondary bet about Anakin, but let the original premise of splitting the winnings at 50-50.  That means that Watto took in half the winner’s purse of a podracing event, but lost one ship part and one slave.  The purse would have to be at least reasonable in a race with something close to a 50% fatality rate.

- Watto is willing to take a bet of the pod racer vs one of the slaves (Anakin or Shmi).  He says that no ship is worth two slaves, but is willing to take the bet for one on a roll, meaning that the average of Anakin of Shmi is equal or less in value.  He seems angry when it turns out to be Anakin, suggesting that Anakin is the more valuable of the two.  He is thus more than willing to take a bet of the pod racer in exchange for Shmi (or he wouldn’t have rolled for it), suggesting that she is worth near or less than the pod racer.  Later, Qui-Gon sells the podracer (its value hopefully increased by the fact that it just won a major race), and gives the money to Shmi.  Why doesn’t she use it to buy her freedom?  What else could she possibly do with this money?  If Watto has just 'lost everything' wouldn't he be pretty happy to have some cash?

- The Senate seemed super happy to vote in no confidence.  Like, same enthusiasm as the end of Return of the Jedi.  There is almost unanimous open cheering after it’s mentioned.  I cannot express how excited the Senate seemed.  The second it is mentioned, the Chancellor sits down in defeat, as if he knows that his ejection is now all but a certainty.  If it’s as easy as just suggesting it, and everyone totally hated the Chancellor, why wouldn't someone else have done it by that point?  Did everyone forget it was an option?


- Why doesn’t the trade federation just invest in more droid destroyers?  They can’t cost more than an entire ship of regular droids, and they are dramatically more effective, standing up to everything short of a Naboo fighter ship.  When Qui-Gon and Obi-Wan are fighting two of them at the start of the film Qui-Gon admits it is a draw between them.  That means that these droids are potentially as effective as Jedi - and presumably a lot easier to make.  The regular battle droids are useless, but 20 destroyers probably could have easily wiped out every last Gungan on the planet.  1,000 might have single-handedly won the clone wars.

- Big picture here, how does the occupation of Naboo help ease the taxation of trade routes?  Was the Republic planning to build a toll booth on Naboo or something?  I really looked for subtext to explain this one, and there's just nothing.  NOTHING. N-O-T-H-I-N-G.

- Why do the Gungans have weapons that are designed for exclusively fighting synthetics when the main group on their world that they might get in conflict with are human?  There are no droids larger than an R2 unit shown among the population of Naboo.  Zero.  What is this stockpile of weapons for?  And why aren't they dropped from orbit during the Clone Wars?  What are these weapons, anyway, and why are they never seen again?

- Okay, I’ve seen this elsewhere, but it’s just so ridiculous - child-sized fighter pilot helmets?

- Why did the trade federation need dozens of ships for the initial blockade, when there was no fighting going on, but only one to hold the planet against an organized attack, and after the Senate had been told of the invasion?  Where did the rest of the Trade Federation ships go?  Was there something more important going on?

- Anakin’s auto-pilot (he doesn’t turn off his auto-pilot until a decent amount of the battle has already passed) is able to outmaneuver several trade federation fighters (odds against him) as well as the main guns of the only ship needed to hold the entire planet, all of which are - by definition - themselves automated-pilots.  Why is it that the Naboo can build a better auto-pilot than a race of robots, or a race that built a race of robots?

- What is lightsaber battle room powering, exactly?  The planet?  Perhaps it generates a magnetic field for the planet to protect against cosmic rays, charged particles, and solar flares due to the fact that - since Naboo’s core is liquid water - Naboo would have no natural magnetic field?  ZING.

- Why would the control room of the battle droid ship (which Anakin flies past when going through the ship) have battle droids sitting in front of traditional computer monitors?  There is no evidence whatsoever of any organic life needed to run these ships, and visual transmission seems like the least effective way for two computers to interact with each other.  Are the USB ports all full?

- Why is it not addressed that there is a female member of Yoda’s race on the Jedi council?  Is the name of his race Jedi, given that 100% of them seem to become Jedi?

- This one was actually pretty mind-blowing for me.  How many of the Queen’s scenes is the Queen played by Natalie Portman?  Watching it again it’s really hard to tell when it’s Portman and when it’s Kiera Knightley, but it seems like they do deliver lines differently.  With the knowledge that there are two actresses in the roll - and making sure to really watch for when Portman is also on screen as Padme - it seems that Knightley is more responsible for some of the really flat and boring delivery, and Portman actually did a pretty decent job, both as Queen and as Padme.  Seriously, go back and check it out.

- What does the Queen give Boss Nass at the end of the movie?  It looks a lot like the weapons they were throwing at the battle droids - is it some sort of naturally occuring anti-droid weapon that’s specific to Naboo?  Is that why the Trade Federation was concerned with this planet?  Maybe Naboo was the one source of this material and they provided it through trade to those who made anti-droid weapons, threatening the power of the Trade Federation and their army of droids?  That would also explain why the Trade Federation switched from just capturing the Queen to trying to take control of the entire planet?  Can we just retcon that one in there?

Special bonus crossover question:
- In New Hope Han Solo says it will cost them 10,000 credits for the journey, and Luke balks at it, saying that “we could almost buy our own ship for that”; Han does not debate the point but says, yeah, but who would fly it?  Obi-Wan comes back with an offer of 2,000 now, 15,000 on arrival, and Han is pretty happy with the sum, even in what would seem to be Republic credits, on Tatooine.  Sure, Han is a smuggler and travels to a lot of different worlds, but Mos Eisley is a spaceport, and it seems like it wouldn’t have been too hard for Qui-Gon to just find someone like him to take his 20,000 credits. He also could have made the EXACT SAME DEAL that Obi-Wan later did, finding a pilot to give them transport for 20,000 and a slightly broken ship now and all the money on Naboo on arrival.



Anyway, see you next week!

Wednesday, October 31, 2012

Halloween Candy: Children and the Hunter/Gatherer Ideal

Today happens to be Halloween, and the fact that it fell on a Wednesday this year convinced me to take a try at putting together a special Halloween post.  It will be 6 years before that happens again (remind me to do a post on the regression of dates and days of the week), so it seemed like the right time.

I'd like to say that I spent a lot of time thinking about a really good idea, but I have to say that I've found the most interesting ideas are often those that come to mind fairly quickly.  There's a subtle quality to simplicity.

There's a good chance you might be reading this after Halloween is over, knee deep in the spoils of war: Halloween candy.

That got me thinking - what if we didn't look at trick or treating as a modern method of gluttony and endulgence, but of a viable hunter/gatherer method of procuring a food source?  Another way to think about it is: What if the movie Encino Man had taken place in late October and Pauly Shore and Samwise Gamgee hadn't been around to help him out?

Well, Brendan Frasier might have started foraging in a world where every house was handing out some of the most calorically dense food he'd ever encountered.  What does that mean to Paleolithic Man or a young child?  HOARD FOOD.

Just how good of a strategy is this, if you were in fact a child of the Paleolithic Age?  A child of the modern age on Halloween will no doubt tell you that biggest bag of candy is best bag of candy.  A child of the modern age two weeks later will tell you that the candy is still good and of course they will still (begrudgingly) eat it. 

So what sort of net caloric gain can we expect from trick or treating?  The easier part is our caloric deficit by actually getting up and going outdoors to walk around and collect things.  The problem is that calories burned while walking is exceptionally dependent on a lot of different factors that are going to vary a lot, not only in the overall population but even in the child population.

I'm going to make some reasonable guesses here, and say that on average the pace is fairly slow - there's a lot of walking, but also a lot of waiting at doors.  The best bet for a kid is suburbia, where houses are pretty close together, so that the time spent waiting and the time spent walking is probably pretty well balanced.  Given that there's a mix of walking, (child) running, and dead stop, I'm going to assume that the average pace is somewhere around 2mph, which means that a child should be burning somewhere around 100-150 calories an hour.

There's an interesting classical mechanics reverse rocket fuel problem here, as children are also collecting mass in the form of candy that they have to carry through the rest of the evening.  If anyone wants to tackle that one it would be a great physics problem, but for the purposes of this post the noise already inherent in estimates is more than enough to wash out any extra precision that would be gained from such an exercise.

So, let's say kids are burning around 125 calories an hour through the process of trick or treating.  Earn and eat one Reese's Peanut Butter Pumpkin (90 calories) every 45 minutes and you're now just about calorie neutral.

You're not going to spend all that time just collecting and eating one peanut butter pumpkin, though - what else should you reasonably expect to get?

Here's there the real guesswork begins.  I have a brief aside about the dangers of relying on information found on the internet without going to source.  A search of 'most popular halloween candy' brings up a lot of hits, and it's easy to find websites that claim to have just that.  They don't put any context on it, and it's easy to believe that these lists represent the most likely candy to be given out to children.

The usual top of those lists?  Reese's Peanut Butter Cups.  I was once a kid, and I am immediately skeptical of this.  I never once poured out my bag of candy to find a overwhelming pile of peanut butter cups.  Well, let's dig to source.

Most websites with this same list don't mention where it came from at all, but I eventually found one that did.  The list of 'Most Popular Halloween Candy' could eventually be tracked back to a site that presented the same list as Voted Most Popular Halloween Candy, from a poll that they had held.

It seems like most leads I was able to find eventually get down to something like this.  There are several articles whose titles are things like "Best Selling Halloween Candy", but then immediately talk about popularity and just which candy is best.  I don't know what I was really expecting when it came to Halloween-centric candy articles, but it's pretty disheartening.

Given this lack of information, the best way to really figure this out would be to simply have kids, send them out trick or treating, and then catalog what was in the bag at the end of the night.  I'm going to consider that a little too much work for one post, so instead I'm going to try to work with some averages.

I'm also going to try to work from memory and think back to the things that I remember getting back in the day.  I think this list pretty much covers it, complete with the most accurate calorie information I could find:

100 Grand - 95
3 Musketeers - 63
Almond Joy - 91
Baby Ruth - 85
Butterfinger - 100
Candy Corn (11 pieces) - 70
Caramels (2 pieces) - 80
Dots - 70
Heath Bar - 77
Hershey's Chocolate Bar - 67
Hershey's Kisses (3 pieces) - 78
Junior Mints - 50
Kit Kats - 73
Laffy Taffy - 32
M&M's - 90
M&M's Peanut - 93
Mike & Ike - 50
Milk Duds - 40
Milky Way - 76
Mounds - 92
Mr Goodbar - 90
Nerds - 50
Nestle Crunch - 51
Pay Day - 90
Pixie Stix (3 sticks) - 25
Reese's Peanut Butter Cup (medium) - 88
Reese's Peanut Butter Pumpkin -90
Skittles - 80
Snickers - 72
Sweet Tarts - 10
Tootsie Rolls (3 pieces) - 70
Twix Carmel - 50
Twix Peanut Butter - 50
Twizzlers - 64
Whoppers - 100

All the calories are for 'fun size' or 'snack size' bars.  In terms of bar candy, these are the ones that are actually rectangular, not the square ones - I'm assuming if someone is giving out the smaller square ones you'd get two of them, which adds up to the larger bar.  Some of the items on the list also have notes for those that are unlikely to just receive one of (like Hershey's Kisses).

A histogram of these candies reveals that things are generally all in the same area.



Sweet Tarts are the oddity, with only 10 calories in the Halloween sized portion.  That said, the mean and median are almost identical (70 and 73), so I'm just going to go with those.  If I doubled things for Sweet Tarts on the assumption you probably wouldn't just get one thing of Sweet Tarts then the mean would be a touch closer to the median anyway.  Some of these candies might be more represented in a standard take, but hopefully most of that should wash out.  I'm going to assume that the majority of houses give out one of these things from the list (60%), some houses give out double (30%), and a small number give out triple (10%).

If we weight houses based on these numbers we come up with an average take per house of just about 110 calories. 

This means that we now know how many calories you will burn per unit time, how many calories you will collect per house (on average), and all that remains is how many houses you can trick or treat at per unit time.

This is the place that things should vary the most.  If you live in a neighborhood where the houses are closer together (or farther apart), you might be able to change this number around a bit.  The type of neighborhood I'm going to work from gives me about a house every minute, taking into account walking, waiting, and getting the candy.

We now have enough data to do some math - if you're able to get to 60 houses an hour, and each house gives you an average of 110 calories of candy, and every hour you spend 125 calories in work, then you're coming up with a net gain of about 6,475 calories worth of candy per hour.

Not too bad.  Considering that kids usually trick or treat for 2-3 hours, that means that you have the potential to be pulling down just a little more than 500 calories short of 20K: 19,425 calories.  If you ate nothing but candy, and every day ate your daily allotment of 2,000 calories, you'd still be set for over a week.  It's likely you wouldn't be feeling that great by then, but if we go back to Brendon Frasier I'm betting he wouldn't care as much.  Food is food.

So, how much could our hunter/gatherer ancestors pull down if they were really stockpiling for the winter?

The candy they get at each house shouldn't change, so the things they have the ability to change are pace and total time.

In the above example we assumed that little kids can only move so fast, and are also burdened by slowest members of the group, whether those are even younger children or parents who want to walk at a more casual pace.

Living in a hunter/gatherer society would likely create individuals who were much more willing and capable to pick up the pace.  An all out sprint is probably unsustainable, but it's a lot easier to believe that our trick-or-treaters could maintain a light jog of about 6mph.  That's only a 10-minute mile and there are plenty of opportunities for rest while waiting at the door, so I don't think it's too unreasonable.

If you've never watched an analog clock tick away 30 seconds, I suggest you do it now.  It's actually a pretty long time, for what it's worth.  I'm going to assume that a job of 6mph between houses in the above scenario will cut time per house in half, or double the number of houses that you can trick or treat at in any given time frame.

It also comes at a cost - a jog is going to burn considerably more calories than our casual stroll.  How many?  Well, if we're also assuming that we're now talking about full grown adults, and they're still spending half the time waiting and half the time jogging, then they're going to burn somewhere around 300 calories per hour (three small butterfingers).

That said, they're also collecting double the calories per hour by getting to twice as many houses.  The net result?  12,900 calories earned per hour.

If such an individual is motivated, they might also find a town that has longer trick or treating hours - let's say a 4 hour window.  During that four hour window they could net over fifty thousand calories - 51,600 to be exact.

That's almost a month of 2,000 calorie candy days.  If you were willing to ration and only eat 1,000 calories per day you could eke out seven weeks of sustenance (if it could be called that).

Anyway, Hollywood, that's my pitch for Encino Man 2: Brendon Frasier Saves Halloween. 

Happy Halloween, everyone!