- Messages
- 63,801
- Reaction score
- 67,349
That is a question only George Lucas can answer but I will try getting inside his head for a few moments. I know that Lucas wanted his prequels to be in stark contrast to his original films. The latter showcases Darth Vader, the embodiment of evil in Galactic Empire films. Additionally, The Phantom Menace (I think) mentions that Padawans are assimilated into the Jedi Order either as infants or toddlers. Seemingly, successfully stable lifelong Jedi training requires mental conditioning from jump.
So! In my opinion, the Anakin Skywalker character required a youthful origin that was not too old for the conditioning integral to Jedi training (i.e. a teenager) and not too young that Jedi conditioning would make Anakin incorruptible to the temptations of the Dark Side. Humanity has always considered young children and pure innocence as one and the same. A 9-year old would meet this criteria and be seen as the polar opposite of a fully grown Sith lord.
Now, eliminating Episode I would make it unnecessary to cast a child actor as Anakin. The story could have originated with Anakin as a teenage youth as it did with Episode II. A prequel trilogy could have been built from that basis instead. Hypothetically, the prequel script could have used inferences of Anakin's childhood uniqueness and atypical assimilation into the Jedi Order. Lucas sprinkled the same method throughout the original trilogy to explain why The Republic evolved into The Empire, for example.
It could have been a viable option and would have eliminated the need to cast Jake Lloyd as 9-year old Anakin. Doing so would have left (some of) the audience wondering what Anakin was as a child--just as audiences of the original trilogy wondered what Darth Vader was like as a Jedi. I prefer Lucas' decision to re-start his saga with a 9-year old instead of a near adult, even though he should have done a much better job overall creating Episode I.
