Talk:Star Wars

According to the Interview on the 1995 Video release of Star Wars Episode IV Lucas states that Ep4 is the first act of the original Star Wars movie script. He clearly states in that interview that there were only two other parts, thus he wrote the episode 4 5 and 6 as one movie and splintered into 3. the second Interview on the Episode V tape goes into this even more, Down to calling it the middle act of a three act play. On the interview on Episode 6 he clearly says he is currently writing the script for the episode III.

He also states that in order to write the first script he had to write a back story, where Vader came from and his wife and Luke and Leia. He said that is the basses for the story he was working on "now" being 1995. That says to me he had yet to write episodes 1 2 and 3, he only had a general story that helped him write the scripts.

Because of this I am changing what it says on the page about being 6 movies as one. --68.4.250.200 23:02, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I moved older and inactionable items to Talk:Star Wars/Archive. - Brian Kendig 12:38, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The story

Allright, I just came back from ep III, and I've also seen cw. But when I read the article, I still don't 'get it'. Too many names and political jargon are mixed up. Can someone please explain without skipping over what's what and who's who? I find the Matrix trilogy somewhat easier to follow, but that's a tough one too, especially in the 2nd part.
But really, the names of the first 3 episodes (besides the main character Anakin ofcourse) are easily mixed up imho (I also used to mix up names of the original trilogy, but 123 explained some things I missed in 456). Count Dooku, Palpatin, Padme, are quite unusual names. Even worse, Padme used to be called Queen Amidala. Queen Amidala was familiar to me from the 1st episode, but when I heard about Padme, it sounded like an evil name to me, instead of the much nicer queen Amidala. But I found out Padme was actually the same person.
Then there's clone wars in which I saw storm troopers helping the Jedi knights, which confused me. But now I understand those storm troopers are from 'the republic', and the jedi knights were friends of the rebublic or something or whatever, and when this Palpatine guy gave 'order 66' those stormtroopers killed the Jedis.
So, this is about as far as I understand it. Ofcourse I know what a 'sith' is. Basically a Jedi, only a sith is for the dark side. Come to think of it, wasn't that explained in the origional trilogy? But that was already a long time ago ;)
Also the whole war thing still puzzles me. Why was there a war started in the first place? Who benefits from it, and who does/has what? Sorry if that question basically reads 'what happened on Star Wars?'.
Also, in the Clone Wars, there was this white robot, which was trained by... the guy who flew out the window. Mace Windu iirc (hey thats conveniant to remember, mace windu flew /out/ the winu). He says so in the movie, which made me recall some scenes from cw. But he is obviously with the evil empire of palpatin. Or darth sidious, whatever. So why would mace do that? He's a Jedi!
It's all some kind of wicked conspiracy, isn't it? :D (kidding).
But I hated to see Anakin obey darth sidious and become darth vader for nothing (padme died anyway). And he didn't stop being vader either and smack sidious in his face for betrayal. I don't quite get that either.
So please, keep it simple, maybe an overview of characters and planets would be very useful. Also something about the, how you call it, those intergalactic countries, the republic and what else. How their system works and who their allies and their enemies are.
Well, sorry about the long comment, but I hope it makes clear where the vague areas are in the story and the article. I bet I'm not the only one having trouble following star wars, and indeed I've spoken to people who didn't want to see it because of that. Men too.

Six movies or Nine?

I remember reading an old issue of TIME Magazine from 1980 which featured an article on Star Wars and Lucas' work on The Empire Strikes Back. The article said that Lucas had started telling his story in the middle, where the first movie was to be part four in a series that would feature a grand total of nine films. It explained that parts 4-6 would tell the story of the rebellion against the empire, parts 1-3, designated as "Clone Wars" would outline the fall of the republic, and the finale, parts 7-9, would be about the rebuilding of the republic. Does this ring a bell with anyone?

Taken that it took a few years before Lucas eventually got around to making The Phantom Menace after The Return of the Jedi, it might only be natural to perceive the series concluded with the six films less than hoping, possibly in vain, for the final three. Are there any recent sources that disclose more information on this, whether it should be regarded as a six part or as it at least once was stated a nine part series?

I can't recall which issue of TIME it was, but it featured the burial of Marshal Tito on the cover. -- Mic 23:05, Jan 14, 2004 (UTC)

Lucas did a talk with journalists before the release of Episode II, and he said: "The challenge for me is telling a six-part story: so in Episode I there are things that I have to get in that refer to Episode VII... no, hang on, we're not there yet. I mean Episode IV." He then hastily added, "The next film completes the saga as originally written." This either means that there will not be any extra movies, or that there will. No one from LucasFilm is willing to speak on this subject very much, but the rumors are getting more believable.

I believe Lucas originally envisioned nine episodes, but only actually wrote six. After the first three movies, they started writing novels in the Star Wars universe, and I suspect those novels have more than covered what would have been in the last three movies. I don't think Lucas in his wildest imagination could have predicted the Star Wars literature explosion when he wrote the first six! Of course, this is not to say that Lucas couldn't come up with another three movies' worth of original material, or that he couldn't pick any three of the third party novels already extant and turn them into movies. I'm sure this is why the studio won't give a non-squishy answer. The real question is if Lucas will feel like making three more movies after he finishes Episode III or if he will finally retire from authoring movies rather than just doing the effects. --ssd

Solution: Lucas could do the effects that he loves, and leave the storyline and dialogue to the writers. Riffsyphon1024 05:30, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The current text ("... Lucas has stated that he does not intend to make any more Star Wars films after Episode III. In other words, there will be no Episodes VII, VIII, or IX.") seems to completely exclude the possibility that there will be further SW movies, made without GL. Personally I think it would be odd if such an amazingly powerful brand would be left untouched after Episode III, even if GL doesn't want any part in it. Especially now that there are rumours about a SW tv series... In short, I'd remove that last sentence. It's superflous at best, and at worst completely wrong. --MMad (WP noob)

The first sentence of the current text is still there. The planned television program may or may not happen, or it may be based on The New Jedi Order series. Some elements in The Expanded Universe may constitute or lead to Episode VII. George Lucas once said after Episode VI that he only intended Episodes IV-VI. Lucas should enjoy doing the special effects that he does. It should be the Expanded Universe to decide. It is unclear whether Episode VII can be done without Lucas's direct involvement. --Tedius Zanarukando 19:27, 12 March 2005 (EST).

Here's a link to a recent 60 minutes transcript (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/03/10/60minutes/main679325.shtml) where Lucas says there is no episode VII. Quoting: "What if someone else beside you came to you and said, 'I want to make episode seven.' Could you see this happening," asks Stahl. "No," says Lucas. "There is no episode seven." -- Connor Hill ( ^talk | ^site (http://www.connorhill.com) )

At the time of Episodes IV-VI, Episode I was not written. There was no Episode I until the late 1990's. Tedius Zanarukando 14 May 2005 15:31 (EST).

While there may be plenty of content out there to go along with Star Wars, are there any loose ends left now that Episode III has come out? I can't see how the epic would continue after Luke brought balance to the force, since that seems to be the focus of the Star Wars epic. Citizen Premier 02:58, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

For a long time, George Lucas stated that he does not intend to make Episode VII. According to the Expanded Universe division, The New Jedi Order series, Luke Skywalker turns to the dark side. That may hint for Episode VII. George Lucas once abandoned the prequel trilogy right after Return of the Jedi. He just plays with his film plans. Decimus Tedius Regio Zanarukando 00:48, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

According to Appendix L of the timeline on the Star Wars Timeline Gold (http://www.starwarsfanworks.com/timeline/) website Lucas made statements in February 1978 to the effect that there would be a total of twelve movies, with a A New Hope (then known only as Star Wars) as the first one. The source for this is given as issue #2 of The Official Star Wars Fan Club Newsletter. In 1980 Lucas told the The Official Star Wars Fan Club Newsletter (renamed Bantha Tracks by then) that he had reduced the number of episodes from 12 to 9 and that A New Hope was to be number four in the series. According to the Appendix, Lucas told Time (in the issue of May 19, 1980) that the last trilogy (episodes seven to nine) would deal with the rebuilding of the Republic. He is to have made similiar statements to Time in the issue of May 23, 1983. It is not until 1995 Lucas puts in writing that there will only be six movies in the series. Mark Hamill is also to have stated that Lucas at one time queried him about playing an "Obi-Wan-type character" in the last trilogy in a 1996 Starlog interview. There is also to have been an official ban on major character changes in the Expanded Universe material in the era after Return of the Jedi (until 1999). --Sus scrofa 14:20, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

Star Wars Wiki (was Wikipedia Portal: StarWars ?)

There are hundreds of articles about StarWars on Wikipedia. Shouldn´t we start a wiki-portal for everything StarWars-related? (like games, movies, books, philosophy, history.....)

Probably a good idea. Wikipedia can't be the definitive wiki repository for SW info. Too many articles are getting generated about SW subjects that many editors feel are waaaaay to esoteric for inclusion, and when articles about various SW races, characters or planets end up on Votes for Deletion, editors want to delete them. That's why I created combined articles like Minor characters in Star Wars and Minor races in Star Wars, as a repository for these items, when their individual articles were likely to end up on the cutting room floor. Creating a Star Wars wiki-portal would be a great idea for SW enthusiasts. Kevyn 18:20, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- I just saw a Halo-wiki (the definitive source for Halo), but since Star Wars is even more huge and complex, I believe it deserves its own Wiki. It could be the rival to the CUSWE at force.net. Also, the planets list has gotten rather large, to 60 planets at least. Another Wiki could store them all as separate entities. Riffsyphon1024 04:40, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

So we'd call it Wookieepedia? :D Cbarbry 07:48, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Hahahaha, that's great! Wookieepedia! And what about Wicketpedia? (i.e. Wicket the Ewok) Riffsyphon1024 08:28, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The List of Star Wars races has now grown to 95 races with my merging the Minor races in Star Wars with the List. Seems like this is only going to get bigger. Riffsyphon1024 01:54, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

So does anyone know how we go about doing this? Who do we "talk to" with Wikipedia? Seems to me that it would be a good thing to be associated with either this site (preferably) or possibly hosted on theforce.net rather than me just try to start up my own site. Not that I'm totally opposed to doing that. Cbarbry 08:27, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Check out http://www.starwarswiki.org. I ran across this doing some domain searches for this idea. It looks like it has already been done by someone else, we just need to populate it. Of course this is not an official portal. Thoughts? Cbarbry 21:07, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

It looks very amateurish. Some titles like 'The Phantom Menace' aren't even spelled right. -- Riffsyphon1024 00:57, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, it would definitely need some work, but that can be done by the users in the same way Wikipedia works. It's obviously just been put up. If you look at the history, it's been up less than a month. I guess my main thoughts:

Pros

it's a good domain name
it's based on MediaWiki, so it'll be familiar to Wikipedians

Cons

it's not run by Wikipedia or me or someone who will ensure that it is run like Wikipedia (dunno this for sure, but could be a pretty big problem)

Do you know how to get in touch with the people who run Wikipedia to see about the possibilities of doing something like this? Cbarbry 06:17, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I've only been here a little more than a month. I could message a sysop, but would I really want to do that? We'd have to find someone who has those connections, yet is dedicated enough to the Star Wars cause. -- Riffsyphon1024 06:37, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I'm pretty new to Wikipedia, too. But I did run across an interesting section tonight - Wikipedia:Wikiportal and Wikipedia:WikiProject. It's late, so I'm going to investigate some other time. Cbarbry 10:29, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

There is also a Star Wars wiki (http://starwars.wikicities.com) at Wikicities. Angela . 21:21, Mar 4, 2005 (UTC)

I think this would be a better answer than the other starwarswiki.org site. The main reason is because of who is managing it. I don't know who is doing the starwarswiki.org site, but Angela is a known Wikipedian and a member of the board. So I'm sure it would be run in a similar fashion.

I wonder if/hope there's a way to link the sites together like an interwiki link. It would be best if there weren't duplicate information.
I think the way we should handle it would be general Star Wars info remain in Wikipedia, but detailed info be moved to the Star Wars WikiCity. Wikipedia become the general encyclopedia and the SWWC be the detailed "trade mag." :)

Thoughts? Cbarbry 05:22, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I'll still able to work on my articles here, the lists of races, planets, systems, sectors, cities, and creatures? -- Riffsyphon1024 22:33, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

OK, good news! Angela is on the board and she and I have exchanged a few emails. She has already setup the Star Wars Wiki she mentioned above. But even better, she has now arranged to get interwiki links setup - [[Wikicities:c:StarWars:Article]]. Now, we need to start working on building up the Star Wars Wiki, and I think a great way to do that is to migrate some of the more trivial articles to the Star Wars Wiki. Remember to leave a redirect until all links are pointing to the SWW site. Like I mention above, I think the way we should handle it would be general Star Wars info remain in Wikipedia, but detailed info be moved to the Star Wars Wiki. Wikipedia being the general encyclopedia and the SWW being the detailed fan site.

To answer your question, certainly keep working on your articles. We're just trying to move them to a separate wiki. Cbarbry 06:46, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

If you would like to see what I have created and edited, and what may be suitable for transwikification, refer to my user page --> Riffsyphon1024 06:52, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC)

One point to remember is that Wikicities isn't aiming on removing encyclopedic content from Wikipedia, so if content is acceptable here, don't go deleting it just because there's a new Star Wars wiki. Angela . 13:13, Mar 10, 2005 (UTC)

Two options I see: (1) on major articles (e.g. Phantom Menace) we have an (trimmed down) overview article here then a detailed article on SWW. Or (2) SWW just links back to Wikipedia's article (major articles only like the films and Star Wars). In either case I think we need to move all but the most major articles to SWW. Thoughts? Cbarbry 18:26, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

References

Are there any good references, books, etc, for the article? (Verifiably, etc) -- AllyUnion (talk) 19:42, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Any of the LucasArts-backed DK books, including the Inside the Worlds of books, the Visual Dictionaries, and the Incredible Cross Sections, not to mention all of the Essential Guides created for characters, droids, planets, weapons, ships, etc, etc, etc.... -- Riffsyphon1024 19:47, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- One requirement for FA status is to add the Reference Section with books that can be used to back up the article's information. -- AllyUnion (talk) 02:54, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  - Maybe sources for the themes, inspirations, and the Battlestar lawsuit, as they're the least "common knowledge". Stuff like "Lucas has control over Star Wars" is so well-known that it's almost unsourceable. Or, we could just put the novelizations of each movie as references, but that would kinda be a cop-out.-LtNOWIS

Comparison to other themes

I deleted the section "Comparison to Other Themes". The section was nothing but barely concealed propaganda. It was purely speculative, and contained no useful information. George Lucas did surely not intend Star Wars as a parable on protestant christianity.

-- Dedalus

I disagree. The mere fact of his association with Campbell, and the virgin birth part with Anakin, point to quite the opposite.

-- MaxiPad

Then go ahead and produce some evidence! As far as I remember from an interview, George Lucas is not even a christian, save a christian propagandist. If you have better evidence, go ahead and prove me wrong. And then adapt the section to contain some facts. Until then, leave it as it is.

Dedalus 09:29, May 13, 2005 (UTC)

It makes as much sense as Lucas' theming it after the Nazi Holocaust. From what I know- Lucas is neither Jewish nor German! It does however have 1) A virgin birth, 2) a religion at centerpoint (As Han Solo described Jediism on board the Falcon), 3) Romanesque names (Palpatine, similar linguistically to Constantine, elector of Trinitarianism). Further- Jediism/Judaism (pre Pauline Christianity), not much difference there! The content should be in there if the Nazi stuff is there. It is no less plausible.

-- MaxiPad

I've meanwhile reread some interviews with Lucas. Lucas states that for him all religions are equal. So I guess he wouldn't deem one of the world's largest religions the "evil" side, would he? Secondly, you're quite right about the nazi stuff: I don't think that belongs in here, either. But we can take care of that at some other time and at least the nazi stuff is not offensive to one sixth of the world's population. Dedalus 13:00, May 14, 2005 (UTC)

Whatever the facts, someone make it make sense. I have no idea what it's saying after the first two or three lines. S. Way

I agree with Daedelus. I was about to put a disputed fact or NPOV dispute message on the article. I have researched the contributions of anonymous user 24.176.6.165, and they seem to be bewildering and contradictory, but on the whole, take an anti-trinitarian, and in particular, anti-Catholic slant. He has contributed to a number of different articles, and I am beginning to suspect he is a vandal. I am a fairly new contributor, so could someone tell me where I should report suspicious activity from anonymous users? Thanks InFairness 09:58, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

On the Films' Focus.

The meta-narrative of "good vs evil" as an abstraction, has unnecessarily burdened the Original Saga via its simplistic reductionism. This is not to say that there are not any profound and diametrically opposed modes of human reality in them. And clear no less.

Contrast this with the tendency in the leading films of the 1970's, which sought out the ineffable and ambiguous for contention of the Oscar.

I choose to term the two modes, as forcibly in tension as any, short of the "Ten Commandments", as any American film: Domination and Freedom. And it is these very "horizon motivating" impeti, so permeating both character, dialogue, (however "wooden" these are to have been criticized as) and scenic management and driving them along "necessarily" towards realization and fulfillment, and informing all of their developments, that the later Prequels lack. Indeed, a great deal of waste is to be observed. Note this especially in scenic management, where the effects seam to be their own raison d'etre, being arbitrary and superfluous, instead of being of value only in service to the drama: Domination/Freedom.

Little wonder of the fans' rage - as in baseball, it is the fans who are the reason for the thing, or at very least, are its best gauge. Domination and Freedom pursue their "inner logic". It's really a relational logic that garners its being from its role in the drama of "human reality"(non-human aliens or other species could potentially share in our being - self and cosmically aware). Though the actual cosmos, by all signs, is cold, dark, empty, and radically uninterested in the struggle.

Freedom wants an openness towards the cosmos; it places a premium on experience. It is singular and unique. If this doesn't work and does not express itself, that aspect of "human reality"(I know not its name) which gives rise to it will fold in upon itself as a cancer, or at the very least, if "freedom" wasn't an overriding motivating issue to begin with, a sort of "spiritual diabetes".

Domination is easy... to understand! Yet this impetus has its place. If your body did not try to "lock down" on the situation, keeping everything in order as much as it could, hunting down parasites, obsessing over equilibriums, etc. you would cease very shortly.

Clearly freedom, since its essence is desire, earns our sympathy over the base and rote, however valid on its own level, domination.

It is this tension that is the essence of the drama in question here. Other modes of tension include: Love and the experience of its limitations and disappearance(Sophicles, Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliette, Wagner's Tristan und Isolde, and virtually all 19th Century(non-Russian) literature).

Meaning in life and the experience of its limitations and disappearance(Hamlet, Macbeth, Lear, Wagner's Woton, the Russians! ...or nearly all of 20th Century lit.).

And also, starting out unawares, and reaching fufillment(Goethe's Wilhelm Meister, Wagner's Parsifal).

Though the Prequels leave us gasping for air in regards to drama, they do, to be sure, display an impressive command of the intricacies of the political world that gives us much to "chew on" in regards to backstory. But, even nonwithstanding the wasted scenes, characters, and dialogue, is it necessary to use up precious film time and space for this?

P.S. This writing on the Prequels does not take into account the yet-to-be released Revenge of the Sith. However, from many reports, it leaves us with a "New Hope".

Indeed, it's looking like it's going to be the "smorgasbord" of the series.

--Scroll1 04:16, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

Themes: The nazi stuff

In my opinion, the whole second part of section "Themes" is useless and does not belong here. That is for several reasons:

1. True, one can compare Palpatine to Adolf Hitler in certain respects. Both turned a decaying democracy into an evil dictatorship, limited freedoms of the people, used fear as their primary tools, they turned the focus of public antipathy to some ethnic or political or whatever group to distract from internal problems, etc. But then again, most of that can be said about most despots in world history: Nero, Oliver Cromwell, Robespierre, Mussolini, ...

2. There are a lot of crucial aspects in which the two differ. First of all, even Palpatine did not persue the complete extinction of a whole ethnic group. It that respect, a comparison to Hitler would even do Palpatine unjustice. And, what is worse: it relativizes the crimes of Hitler. A comparison to Moussolini e.g. would be much more fitting, especially since Moussolini was indeed overthrown by an internal rebellion.

3. Most of the shown similarites are quite obvious and to my opinion they do not qualify as the sort of information you would expect in an encyclopedia.

--Dedalus 16:55, May 14, 2005 (UTC)

"Palpatine did not persue the complete extinction of a whole ethnic group"

But Palpatine attempts the entire destruction of the Jedi race. Here are the main simularities I see between the two -

You have the Weimar Reepublic

You have the Galactic Republic

Hitler gets appointed Chancellor of the Republic and issues emergency decrees and pronounces himself Fuhrer

Palpatine gets appointed Chacellor of the Republic and issues emergency decrees and pronounces himself Emperor for ever

The Third Reich is formed

The Galactic Empire is formed

Hitler has stormtroopers

The Emperor has stormtroopers

Hitler purges all his enemies and "inferiors"

The Emperor launches the Jedi purge

Hitler puts Jews and others in ghettos

The Emperor puts non-human species in segregated parts of Coruscant

Eventually both lose in wars and eventually both become Republics again

Dear anonymous,

excuse me if I'm wrong, but it appears that you just wrote a summary of the section I'm criticizing. I guess it would be more helpful if you tried to reply more directly to my arguments. Anyway, I'll take the opportunity to illustrate again what I mean:

You talk about the "destruction of the Jedi race". - Hm, the Jedi don't seem like a race to me. They are a religious order, an occupation group, and for palpatine they are first of all political opposition which -- like any good tyrant -- he has to get rid of. This is nothing like Hitlers antisemitism, which targeted anyone of jewish descent, regardless of political affiliation, profession or practised religion.
"Hitler did not have "stormtroopers. "Sturmtruppe" is nothing but the German word for "assault team". Assault teams in the German army were no special feature of the Third Reich nor had they any special role in the holocaust whatsoever.
All the other similarities -- while true -- do not exclusively apply to Hilter. Palpatine is more the archetype of the dictator who rises to power by quasi-legal means. E.g. if you make yourself acquainted with the biography of Benito Mussolini you will find that he fits the comparison to Palpatine even better than Hitler, as Mussolini -- unlike Hitler -- was toppled by an internal rebellion and not by an outside force.
Even if we assume that Palpatine actually represented Hitler, there would be no need to have such an extensive section on that matter. A small statement of one or two sentences would be enough. All that delving into the details of actual and supposed similarities is quite obvious and trivial. It is not information. Therefore, it does not belong into an encyclopedia.

Regards, Dedalus 15:05, May 20, 2005 (UTC).

"Palpatine is more the archetype of the dictator who rises to power by quasi-legal means"

Umm, and Hitler didn't. He was appointed chancellor (the same position that Palpatine obtains) of the Weimar Republic by President Hindenburg in 1933 which was a legal move and completely how the Weimar constitution said that things should be done. He then used his power to turn himself into a dictator.

"Hitler did not have "stormtroopers"

Ummm, yes he did he just got rid of them in the Night Of The Long Knives, learn your history.

"Mussolini -- unlike Hitler -- was toppled by an internal rebellion and not by an outside force."

Int the context of Star Wars an outside force in your words would have to be another galaxy and I can't see that happening. If you are reffering to the inside force being Darth Vader when he kills the Emperor then I can actually see where you are coming from.

"Umm, and Hitler didn't. [...]"

Um, hello? "quasi-" is defined by Merriam-Webster as "in some sense or degree". "In some sense legal" seems to me a pretty good summary of Hitler's way to power. What's your problem with that? (Consider the crucial role of the Enabling Act and the circumstances under which it was passed.)

"Ummm, yes he did [...]".

You mean the Sturmabteilung (SA). Concededly, this term has been (mis)translated as "stormtroopers". Nevertheless, the SA was a band of thugs in party uniforms and not an army like the Palpatines stormtroopers.

"[An] outside force in your words would have to be another galaxy and I can't see that happening"

True. That's my point. (Unless you suggest that Lucas accidentially made the Empire to emcompass the whole galaxy, so he couldn't ("oops!") bring an outside force into play. That's not your point, is it?) The "internal force" I am talking about is, of course, the rebellion. (Regardless of whether Palpatine was finally killed by Vader or not.)

Besides, it would be nice if you got yourself an account an signed your contributions. Regards, Dedalus 17:42, May 20, 2005 (UTC)

Errr, the Jedi ARE NOT A RACE. The Jedi are made of many races. Sheesh. Same thing with the jewish fanatics who seem to insist that jews comprise a "race" which they don't. There are indian and african jews as well as slavs arabs and germanic jews. Sheesh.

If the Jedi are not a race and Jews are not a race then it cannot be said that Palpatine and Hitler are different because one tried to wipe out a race but another didn't. If, like the Jews, the Jedi are made up of lots of races then they, like the Jews, constitute an ethnic group and so simularities can be seen.

Dear anonymous, Hitler saw jews not as a religious but as an ethnic group. That's why practitionors of other religions of jewish descent suffered just like practicing jews under Hitler (see e.g. Edith Stein). That's why Hitler called his ideology anti-semitism and not anti-judaism (see Anti-Semitism for details). Regards, Dedalus 15:05, May 20, 2005 (UTC).

"That's why practitionors of other religions of jewish descent suffered just like practicing jews under Hitler"

I think you'll find that Christians didn't get sent to the camps and many Christian churches collaberated with Hitler, there was even a Reich church. And the Catholic Zentrum party supported Hitler on his enabling laws. Also many Arab and Islamic countries cooperated with the Nazis in attempt to wipe out "the greater evil" of the Jews.

Dear anonymous, it would really help if you read my contributions carefully. I said "of jewish descent". You even quoted it! (That's "practitioners of jewish descent" of course.) Regards, Dedalus 07:16, May 21, 2005 (UTC)

Question: If Palpatine was a pro-human 'racist,' why did he have Darth Maul as a Sith Padawan? He didn't know about Anakin by then, did he? Citizen Premier 03:09, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

FAC

I personally think the article should be expanded a bit and cleaned up a bit before it could become a Featured Article. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 03:22, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

VII, VIII and IX

Is there any concrete knowledge on the three theoretical sequels? -Litefantastic 19:30, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

That depends on what you mean by "concrete". Lucas has recently claimed he never intended to make nine films and that he is done with the main movies. However, it has been speculated that his successors-in-interest (his heirs and the corporations involved) will end up making them, even if it is ~~over Lucas' dead body~~ after Lucas' death. For example, see: This Houston Chronicle article off a recent newswire. (http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/ae/jump/3191250) The trouble is, any denial by Lucas that any more will ever get made can't be considered the final word. There is no way to know for sure that he (or his heirs) won't change his mind later. Therefore, the only thing concrete would be an announcement they will be made, or their actual making, depending on how strict you want to be. Johntex 22:01, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Time and Tide

Does anyone know if Lucas planned on episodes I - IX to be made, and then ended up making only IV - VI due to technical restrictions, or was that simply an afterthought? -Litefantastic 19:30, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

I heard somewhere it was because of Lucas's marriage problems, where if he were to make any more movies (which he really wanted to do), then the income would also have to go to her, or something along those lines. Not quite sure what the whole story was/is. - Fervidfrogger

I doubt technical restrictions play a part. What technical limitations could stand in the way? Why would he need any better technology than he has today? As to the income going to his wife, I suppose it is possible. If we assume he has to pay alimony until the day he dies (I've not looked into that assumption at all), and that his wife does not inherit any of his empire when he dies, then one could theorize he would prefer to delay their production until after his death so that his chosen heirs get the full benefit, instead of his wife. However, it seems like a strange thing to do since under this scenario it seems like she would already be getting so much money along the way from all the merchandising, etc. Would he really alter his "artistic vision" just to decrease her income? Johntex 22:17, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Humans in Star Wars

In a galaxy far far away, are these human beings supposed to be cousins of we Earthlings? Or are they supposed to be Earthlings' future descendents? In the Episode I, Anikan is referred to as a "Human boy". Is Earth part of the republic? Since the story is set in a galaxy far far away, all the humans in the story are colonists? Kowloonese 00:57, May 19, 2005 (UTC)

I know that several different works in the Expanded Universe use the term human, but I'm not aware of Lucas ever offering an explanation. Perhaps Lucas wanted us to wonder about it and draw our own conclusions - more likely he didn't give it too much thought. We may as well ask why Galactic Basic sounds so much like English, or why these creatures from "a galaxy far far away" look so much like humans, whatever they are called. In all 3 cases, to have made the movies otherwise would probably have been more tedious on the production team, the audience, or both. As far as I know, Earth has never been mentioned in any canonical work. Johntex 22:32, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Since on every episode, the beginning line says "A long time ago in a ....". That means these humans in the movie are the ancesters of Earthings if the term "human" means the same thing in the movie and in the English language. This also implies that George Lucus is not a creationist nor an evolutionist. The star wars movies implied humanity on Earth was planted by alien civilization. Kowloonese 23:30, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)

Star Wars Chronology Project

Maybe some of you are familliar with the Marvel Chronology Project (http://www.chronologyproject.com). It's an effort to catalogue every canon appearance of every Marvel character and arrange them in chronological order. Has anyone started such an effort for Star Wars? There are so many SW characters spread across various media. It'd be great if there was a way to track character arcs this way.--StAkAr Karnak 21:36, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

This information exists in other places. For example, see www.theforece.net/timeline (http://www.theforce.net/timeline/default.asp). Wikipedia does currently have some Timeline articles to aid in navigation. For example, see Timeline of the Texas Revolution. I think a Star Wars character based chronology would be appropriate for inclusion conceptually. It would be difficult in practice because of the sheer amount of information. Why not Be Bold and start the article? Johntex 21:51, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

We already have the article: Dates in Star Wars. Star Wars timelines have been around for a long time. Lucas's publishing wing even includes timelines in most of its books. Palpatine 01:32, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Star Wars Exhibit

A few years ago, there was an exhibit here in San Diego of 'The Art of Star Wars.' It had real models and such. Does anyone know if it's still touring? If so, it should be mentioned in the article. Citizen Premier 03:15, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Way too long

This article is 72KB long, far over the recommended limit of 32KB. In particular, the episode summaries are far too detailed. We need to work on shortening them to the bare essentials, while making sure that the individual episode articles have all the detail which is removed from this article. - Brian Kendig 15:21, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I agree --Kyle Dantarin 16:25, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)

I agree. We have separate articles on each movie so we can pare their descriptions here down to just a good introductory paragraph. Johntex 16:30, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'm removing the plot summaries of all six movies from this article in an attempt to cut it down to a manageable size. The article still contains a brief summary of each trilogy's overall plot, and the individual movie articles go into as much detail as necessary, so I don't see any point to trying to present abridged movie plots in this article. - Brian Kendig 06:13, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

just cut the 3rd reich rubbish to bring it down to size.

The Third Reich

I'm removing the entire "Third Reich" section because I believe it draws parallels which either aren't there at all, or are weak. In specific:

Both men begin their careers as outspoken political activists who gain control of their respective governments after the Chancellors of each are removed from office. But Palpatine was elected fairly and peacefully before he began his dirty work, whereas Hitler was an outspoken force before he was part of the government.
The first measure both enact in office is one limiting the freedoms of the people. No specifics are given about Palpatine's "emergency powers" in the movies, are there? I see no reason to believe he's imposing hardships on citizens or restricting business; I get the idea his "emergency powers" are more along the lines of being able to act without Senate debate or approval.
Both use the disenfranchised and down-trodden to perform their dirty work. Palpatine isn't shown recruiting the unwashed masses or organizing any grass-roots movements to overthrow the government.
The governments both men create are openly racist and xenophobic. There's no evidence that Palpatine is racist, and the xenophobia is an Expanded Universe concept.
Both enact mass exterminations of certain groups of people. I don't think the Jedi are numerous enough to be a "mass extinction". Also, they are killed after they are declared enemies of the Republic; their deaths are more like the deaths of enemy soldiers.
Both men's troops are called Stormtroopers. Also, the uniforms of officers in the Empire are extremely similar to the uniforms worn by members of the Nazi party. The Nazis did not have "stormtroopers", and I don't think the officer uniforms are particularly similar.

From the wikipedia page on the SA - "The Sturmabteilung (SA, German for "Storm Division" and is usually translated as stormtroops or stormtroopers)" So the Nazis did have storm troopers.

And also a mass extinction does not relate to the amount of people killed it refers to a extremely high percentage of a group of people. Seeing as nearly all the Jedi got killed I think it can be counted as a mass extinction. The fact that they are declared enemies actually links them more to the Communists in Germany after the Reichstag fire much more than enemy soldiers.

"I get the idea his "emergency powers" are more along the lines of being able to act without Senate debate or approval" Isn't that exactly what Hitler did so that he didn't have to rely on Reichstag support?

There are parallels between Palpatine and many other controversial leaders throughout history, but the connections to Hitler in specific aren't very strong ones. - Brian Kendig 12:08, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I have decided to also delete this bit - " Anakin Skywalker's declaration to Obi-Wan Kenobi in "Revenge of the Sith" that "If you're not with me, you are my enemy" is an obvious parallel to George W. Bush's declaration, "If you're not with us, you are with the terrorists," which was successfully used to limit political dissent for several years following 9/11."

One quote does not constitute a parallel and this has just been put in by people who want to think they are clever and can relate anything in the world to George Bush.

Parallelism between the two trilogies

The section titled "Similarities" gave many examples on how the two Trilogies runs in parallel. Did George Lucus ever mentioned that he did that on purpose to show similar destiny of the father and son. If that is the case, perhaps the intention should be mentioned here in this article. There are more similarities that are not listed in the sections yet. For example, the ending of Episode I and Episode IV is almost the same with a victory parade. The Wookie and Ewok's battle in Episode III and VI. The two trilogies are just variations of the same story line. Kowloonese 23:36, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)

The thing about Bush

Someone probablly mentioned this already.

But here: "If you're not with me, you are my enemy" is an obvious parallel to George W. Bush's declaration, "If you're not with us, you are with the terrorists,"

Do we agree that it's really a parallel? It sounds like an opinion to me. I don't even think that's Bush's real quote. I googled it.

Problem

"Some purists reject the Expanded Universe, believing that only the events in the Film Series are part of the "real" Star Wars universe."

This is true, so is it POV for wikipedia articles to indiscriminately mix EU and movie source material when describing a particular character?

Retrieved from "https://academickids.com:443/encyclopedia/index.php/Talk:Star_Wars"