So if you lived through the height of Pokemon’s popularity, you know it took the world by storm. Kids wouldn’t shut up about it and adults didn’t understand it. All they saw was a bunch of cute Japanese designed critters killing their wallets and detracting kids from school and hobbies they’d rather them enjoy. What people fail to notice is that the Pokemon franchise, Like a lot of media during the late 90’s, has close ties to nature and an environmental message.

Most pokemon are modeled off real life animals, use an elemental power of nature and can be found deep in the wilderness. A Pokemon trainer has to go out into nature in order to capture and train them. This is the plot of nearly every game and there’s a reason for this. Satoshi Tajiri, the head creator of Pokemon was a big bug catcher as a kid. As such, He was dissapointed that urbanization had destroyed that opportunity for many children in Japan. Pokemon was created in order to give children some of the feelings he had has a kid.

The intrusion upon nature being bad for Pokemon and humans alike is a massive theme in all areas of the pokemon franchise. For example, In the gold and silver versions of the game respectively, The villianous Team Rocket develops a device that deeply disturbs the Pokemon of the Lake of Rage. Even earlier in the game, they can be found poaching Slowpoke to profit off their tails.

In addition, the Pokemon anime has numerous episodes dealing with pollution, mistreatment of animals and the problems it can cause. In “Tentacool and Tentacruel” A group of jellyfish Pokemon attack a human city that’s disturbing their habitat. In “Sparks fly for Magnemite” A city suffering from huge amounts of pollution has their Power plant disturbed by Grimers and a Muk, Pokemon that thrive in polluted in environment.

One of the strongest of these episodes “Dig those Diglett”. In this episode, the mole Pokemon called diglett are Sabotaging efforts to build a dam. Pokemon trainers from across the land come to Stop the Diglett, but they discover that their Pokemon refuse to fight for their trainers. No one is sure why this is, but Ash and his friends discover that the Diglett work help grow tree’s for the valley.

Slowly, the human characters discover Diglett and Dugtrio (an evolved Diglett) planting trees. From this discovery, they realize that they were protecting the forests they had planted and the the creation of the damn would destroy the forest and hurt or displace the pokemon living there. The episodes gives not only an idea that humans shouldn’t disturb nature but it explains that nature is interconnected. Even if it’s not with real animals, it explains directly how changing one part of nature can have disastrous effects in areas they didn’t anticipate.

The Pokemon franchise is more then silly gimmick to sells toys, It was made in response to the problems urbanization and disrespect to nature can cause. It reminds us that these problems of nature will ultimately become problems for humanity itself. It’s still a franchise for kids but the message it projects is useful for everyone.

So something I used to think about a lot is the amount of satisfaction i’ve had from video game sequels and the lack of satifaction i’ve had from movie sequels. Don’t get me wrong, there are terrible video game sequels and brilliant movie sequels but in general, I feel video game sequels are a bit more lucrative for a nerds heart and I think is because video games are adding to a formula where as films are adding to a story.

So in order to have a film sequel, you have to either expand on a story or repeat it in the films own universe. This is problematic because some stories are clearly meant to be closed, and the writers have to stretch the plot a bit, even ignoring important details from a previous film. Other times when they expand on something from the original story, it can be something the audience didn’t care about to begin with.

A good example for repetition of a plotline is Jaws 2. The plot is the same is the first film: A Giant shark appears, The town officials don’t want it to hurt tourism and Brody is forced to kill it again. Another Shark dead, but no new plots retreaded and nothing new offered.

An example of plot expansion going wrong is the Exorcist 2. In this film, the writers add to the story of Regan and expand on the demon a tiny bit more. While they tell a new story and expand upon elements of the original, it clashes with the tone of the original story and audiences weren’t that interested with the new elements it brought.

Video games on the other hand, don’t have the same same problems since they don’t have to restrict themselves to plot. A gamer doesn’t always care if the plot is repeated, as long as the formula and graphics are added too and improved.

A good example is Super Mario Brothers, To Super Mario Brothers 3. Now when you think about it, not much has changed. In fact, Nothing was taken away from the original gameplay formula. You still play as Mario, You still are trying to save Peach from Bowser and your going to different Levels through Bowser’s minions to do so.

However, new additions have been made. For example, There are ton of new power ups, new bosses besides Bowser, New fun ways to get and save the power ups, Better graphics. The Graphics are a straight improvement and all the additions add variety to the game as a whole. However, It doesn’t remove the fact the game is still about a plumber running through a level and jumping on enemies to save a princess. It doesn’t risk losing anything the previous games gave but it also offers new and old audiences something new to enjoy with the game.

Like I said in the beginning, there are huge exceptions to what i’ve said. However, I do stand by there are more loved video game sequels then movie sequels and it’s because the medium lends itself better to sequels. You can improve on a story in the writing process, but once it’s made into a film you have no choice but to expand, or repeat it. Video games, there’s a bit more leeway to improve.

So in a lot of Modern Star Wars media there is an emphasis on a light side vs dark side dichotomy. The light side is always in conflict with the dark side and there is no true in between. This has been in everything from comics, to video games and even a commercial where a kid has to choose between white milk and chocolate milk. Fear your choice child, your love of chocolate will be your undoing! I bring up the silliness because the original trilogy was pretty clear on having a balanced life like the Jedi, while living undisciplined and giving no control over your emotions like a Sith will lead to dire consequences.

While the expanded universe makes it pretty clear there a conflict between the light and dark side, Never in the films is the word light or “light side” used. In fact, While the Jedi don’t speak of the dark side positively at times it’s implied to be necessary. For example, In Luke’s trial of Spirit (a test of moral character) he has to gotoo the Dagobah cave. Yoda describes the Degobah cave as “A Domain of evil it is” but still encourages Luke to go in. going to a place like this is necessary to understand the darker aspects of his characters and better control himself. More on this later.

The Sith on the other hand, have no such tests, believing only in getting stronger and embracing their emotions whether positive or negative. Sadly for them, this behaviour has consequences. One of the strange karmic motifs you often see with Sith lords is them becoming part machine. Whether it’s Vader, Malgus or even Darth maul Clone Wars, The Sith often become, as Obi Wan puts it “More Machine, then man”. This represents a sort of Karmic punishment. Lao Tzu, the Famous Daoist has a statement “A violent man, will suffer a violent death.” Star wars concept of the Force was deeply inspired by Taoism and implies giving violence means receiving violence.

In addition, it reflects the Sith lords becoming more like tools then actual people. Darth Vader, The most famous Sith lord of the films, believes he has power to overthrow the emporer at any time yet he never attempts to hurt him until the end. The Emperor manipulates him, preying on his fear and encouraging his anger towards others. Through his submission to these emotions, Vader ends up being the biggest pawn of both the Emperor and the empire. The end of the Sith Code “The Force shall free me” is ironic considering the opposite happens to most.

And lastly, the transformation to machine reflects becoming artificial, rather then natural as you embrace the unnatural parts of the force. The idea of the sith and to at least some extent of the Dark side is unnatural is also shown in the Sith Lightsaber. Unlike the Jedi Lightsaber, The sith use a crystal that is manufactured, which gives it the red color. This is unlike the Jedi, who use natural crystals for their weapons. This reflects the ease of the dark side and the unnatural speed of technolody as opposed to patient self-cultivation of nature.

Back to the Jedi view of balance, the story of the original points to the idea of balancing your darkness. For example, Luke himself becomes partly robotic himself when he gets his prosthetic. During his climactic battle against Vader, Luke ends up giving into his anger, In his rage he manages to cut off one of Vaders prosthetic limbs. It looks like it is the end and Luke has finally given in to the Dark side. But as the Emperor is talking to him, He looks at his prosthetic hand and then looks at his fathers machine wound. In this moment he is realized that he is like his father and he can become what he is. In understanding that, he rejects the Dark Side for a final time. In acknowledgment in his own darkness, he realizes what he must be.

Contemplating the dark side is interesting way can make interesting characters and fun gaming experiences but embracing the villians of a mythos as a lifestyle choice as some people do, baffles me. The ideas of the sith are not meant to be taken as a way to handle problems. Star wars takes ideas from many difference sources but communicates the important ones very clearly.