We saw plans for it in AotC... do you think we'll see it being built in the third movie?
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
$$$SPOILERS$$$ - - - - - - - Lucasfilm has confirmed that part of Episode III will take place at the construction site of the Death Star.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Cool - what planet? Kashyyyk?
I wonder if it'll look like the construction of the 2nd Death Star?
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
Novels have the construction taking place at Despayre, IIRC. But Lucas doesn't pay attention to the novels, so probably Kashyyyk. Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
M
O
R
E
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
P
A
C
E
Well, that explains what Tarkin's doing in the movie...
As an aside, I'll be pretty pissed if anyone calls Obi-Wan "Obi-Wan" in Ep III...
--Jonah
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Omega: Novels have the construction taking place at Despayre, IIRC. But Lucas doesn't pay attention to the novels, so probably Kashyyyk.
Yet another reason why the novels are such total shit. (exceptions being the Heir To The Empire trilogy-the only books approved by Lucas himself)
Posted by akb1979 (Member # 557) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon:
quote:Originally posted by Omega: Novels have the construction taking place at Despayre, IIRC. But Lucas doesn't pay attention to the novels, so probably Kashyyyk.
Yet another reason why the novels are such total shit. (exceptions being the Heir To The Empire trilogy-the only books approved by Lucas himself)
That trilogy was the first set of Star Wars books that I read. It was fucking awesome and Timothy Zahn is a God when it comes to writing.
HEHE!
:-D:-D:-D:-D:-D:-D:-D:-D
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
Hey, I actually like the novels. Mainly because they're all accepted as true in the SW world (at least, the stuff that's not contradicted by the movies), unlike the Star Trek books, which are the real BS.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:Originally posted by Omega: Novels have the construction taking place at Despayre.
The subtle use of symbolism amazes and astounds.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:Originally posted by Peregrinus: As an aside, I'll be pretty pissed if anyone calls Obi-Wan "Obi-Wan" in Ep III...
*sigh* And why's that?
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Probably something to do with his comment in ANH about not having gone by "Obi-Wan" in some number of years I've forgotten.
Of course, we assume he wasn't simply senile and lost track of the years, I guess.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
"I haven't gone by the name Obi-Wan since...oh, before you were born..."
But why would this conflict with Ep III? I would have thought (if anything) that Padme would be pregnant, but the twins wouldn't have been born yet, would they?
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Well, one presumes they will be born at some point during the film.
Posted by Kazeite (Member # 970) on :
quote:Originally posted by Veers: Hey, I actually like the novels. Mainly because they're all accepted as true in the SW world (at least, the stuff that's not contradicted by the movies), unlike the Star Trek books, which are the real BS.
Actually, Star Wars novels cannot be accepted as canon. Why? Because, (as George Lucas has repeatedly stated), they are set in different universe.
And I think that latest trek books (New Frontier series) are great Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
However, everybody considers them canon, mainly because there will never be any movies after EP. 6 that will contradict them.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
"Well, one presumes they will be born at some point during the film."
Then all Lucas has to do to shut the fanboys up is make sure nobody calls Ben "Obi-Wan" after that point.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Has it been confirmed that the birth will occur during the film? I thought I had heard that it would be one of those things that happened "in between" III and IV.
-MMoM Posted by Kazeite (Member # 970) on :
quote:Originally posted by Veers: However, everybody considers them canon,
I don't consider them canon. I know people who doesn't consider them canon.
And most importantly, Lucasfilm doesn't consider them canon.
quote:mainly because there will never be any movies after EP. 6 that will contradict them.
And how exactly do you know that there will be no other works authorized by Lucas after ep 6 that will contradict them?
And how exactly this makes canon novels that happen before ep 6?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Veers: However, everybody considers them canon, mainly because there will never be any movies after EP. 6 that will contradict them.
Everybody considers the ghost of Sith masters and, the Emporer having an endless supply of clones of himself, the awful "Sun Crusher" and "force dragons" as canon?
And they say bad things about Ferengi on Enterprise. Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
The thing is, most of the novels follow the same storyline. The events of previous novels are referenced in the other novels, and when someone writes a new novel usually they do not change what already has been established. Also, the Star Wars encyclopedia, the Chronology, and most reference books all list the events that occurred, meaning at least those people consider them to be canon.
I guess that you might consider them a separate series from the movies, but since there will not likely be another trilogy, they are the best source of what comes after the 5 original movies. Even if there was to be another trilogy, they wouldn't completely disregard the novels and might incorporate some events from them (remember, "Coruscant" came from the Zahn novels).
As for novels that come BEFORE ep. 6, I tend to not regard them as canon, seeing as the prequels might contradict them. But novels or comics that come before even the prequels could probably be considered canon, because they follow each other and cannot be contradicted much by only 7 or so hours of film.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"Has it been confirmed that the birth will occur during the film? I thought I had heard that it would be one of those things that happened 'in between' III and IV."
Well, I hadn't really heard anything official either way. I just figured it was too important an event to just not show.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
I'll be happy if the just remember to have Obi-Wan pick up Anakin's lightsabre after their duel.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Obi-wan can just be called "General Kenobi" instead of Obi-wan... and then there is no problem.
I want to see Luke at least on Degobar... considereing his line "I've been here before" or whatever it was in TESB.
Posted by Kazeite (Member # 970) on :
quote:Originally posted by Veers: The thing is, most of the novels follow the same storyline. The events of previous novels are referenced in the other novels, and when someone writes a new novel usually they do not change what already has been established.
That's nice for them, of course, but folowing inside continuity doesn't make novels canon
quote: Also, the Star Wars encyclopedia, the Chronology, and most reference books all list the events that occurred, meaning at least those people consider them to be canon.
Star Wars Encyclopedia and the Chronology is not canon either, so it is irrevelant whether they consider certain novels canon or not.
quote: Even if there was to be another trilogy, they wouldn't completely disregard the novels and might incorporate some events from them (remember, "Coruscant" came from the Zahn novels).
Despite being the first novels where name "Coruscant" is used, Zahn trilogy is not canon either. The same thing goes for "Shadows of the Empire", which introduced us to Outrider, which was later inserted in the ANH SE.
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
Neither of us wil change our opinion. At least we can agree we are all waiting anxiously for Episode III (although judging by the response to Eps I and II, I can't say that either).
Posted by Kazeite (Member # 970) on :
My "opinion" is not an opinion - it is the fact. The fact is that novels are not canon, although in some people's opinion they are canon.
Analogically, I may not like the fact that Brannon Braga has declared Enterprise canon, but this is the fact - Enterprise is canon :/
And most of all, myself included, are waiting anxiously for Episode III Posted by MarianLH (Member # 1102) on :
quote:Originally posted by Kazeite: My "opinion" is not an opinion - it is the fact. The fact is that novels are not canon, although in some people's opinion they are canon.
Analogically, I may not like the fact that Brannon Braga has declared Enterprise canon, but this is the fact - Enterprise is canon :/
Which is why it's so deliciously freeing--in an intellectual way, of course--to not give a rip about what is or is not "canon." You should try it sometime. It's like skinnydipping for the mind.
Having said that, I will now earn the ire of the novel fans by saying I didn't like the Zahn novels very much. I found the plot rather silly and the new characters trite and shallow--especially Karrde and Mara Jade. The use of Earth names like "katana" also bothered me. I did like the use of stuff from the West End SWRPG, and the scene where an X-Wing with a damaged hyperdrive is stranded in the middle of nowhere--scifi seldom gets across the idea of how vast space really is. I'm also tickled by the idea of Leia with a lightsaber. But a few good bits don't make up for Force-repelling tree anemones or the Seven of Nine of the Star Wars universe.
Raising shields, Marian
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
Every time I mention Star Wars I seem to get myself in a little argument.
*Sigh* Oh well, I'll stick to wandering the halls of this forum. Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
Little? You bursted into an irrational SW vs ST rant there, boy! Trust me, you do NOT want to start another one like that on canonicity, not with Kazeite around this time. B)
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
Which is why I'm skirting away from that issue...so history does not repeat itself.
Posted by Woodside Kid (Member # 699) on :
Anyone else find it a little curious that (given the spoiler) it took the Empire some twenty years to build the Death Star, and only three years to get its replacement to operational status? I'm assuming that they wouldn't have the facilities and raw materials sitting around waiting to start constructing a new Death Star on a moment's notice; after all, given the fact that everyone in ANH seemed to accept the first one as the "ultimate weapon", why would you need to be building another one at all? Not to mention the fact that if I was as paranoid as the Emperor, I certainly wouldn't want a fleet of planet-killing weapons around that could conceivably be used to unseat me.
Posted by Kazeite (Member # 970) on :
I think that it took twenty years to build first Death Star because at this time Palpatine wanted to keep it a secret.
Maybe Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Maybe there was a lot of trial and error with the first one?
"Try the big laser now!"
*BANG*
"Didn't work properly. And we've just destroyed the shipyards too. It'll take a year to repair them."
"Damnit, that's the 16th time that's happened!"
And so on, but in a much more amusing manner. Honest.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
The pre-empire had to feed all those construction workers: that cost alone wouldve been noticed if they built the Death Star any faster.
Whereas second Death Star had an unlimited supply of Ewok rations.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
How long had Palpatine been incharge by the time of ANH? Fully-fledged control of "The Empire" would have made it easier to build compared with having other distractions like... Jedi running around, Resistance factions, trying to take control of the Republic etc.
Posted by SoundEffect (Member # 926) on :
Maybe it was like the man-machine device from Carl Sagan's 'Contact'..."why build one when you can build two at twice the price?"
They probably had the second Death Star already started well before the first one was destroyed.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Except, as Woodside Kid pointed out, why would you bother building a second if the first was suppossed to be your "ULTIMATE WEAPON"?
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
to have two ultimate weapons... of varying sizes?
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
I'm starting to wonder why the emperor even built a death star at all. A single Star Destroyer can slag an entire planet within, what, three days? And the empire had a few thousand? I don't think the Death Star was intended as a strategic weapon so much as it was an expression of the emperor's paranoia. So long as he's on Coruscant, some admiral could fry him from orbit and for all his force powers he couldn't stop them. But on something like the Death Star, he's effectively unkillable. ESPECIALLY if he's on the second one with off-axis firing capability. Maybe that was the new tech that came along that convinced him to build a second.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"Except, as Woodside Kid pointed out, why would you bother building a second if the first was suppossed to be your 'ULTIMATE WEAPON'?"
So you can blow up two different planets at the same time?
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
That's being a bit greedy, don'tcha think?
quote:Originally posted by Omega: I'm starting to wonder why the emperor even built a death star at all. A single Star Destroyer can slag an entire planet within, what, three days?
Sorry to go all anti-expanded universe, but...based on what?
I think it wasn't an expression of his paranoia. Rather, I think it showed his complete confidence and arrogance. He didn't need the Death Star. But he could build a weapon of unimaginable desructive power, so he was going to. To show that he was Just That Awesome.
Also, it meant that he would be as powerful technologically as he was with the Force, if that means anything.
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
Sorry to go all anti-expanded universe, but...based on what?
Well, the concept of BDZ is based on the EU, but analysis of TESB's asteroid field would, FYI, indicate absolutely massive firepower on ISDs. Thus it's likely they could quickly frag a planet, QED.
-SWC, Ph.D, KBE, 123
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
I don't think the phrase "analysis of TESB's asteroid scene" can be said without Guardian 2000 charging in, sirens blazing.
Posted by Da_bang80 (Member # 528) on :
The Death Star was built to inspire fear in the systems controlled by the empire. sure a star destroyer may be able to frag an entire planet in the days. but the death star could come into the system, and people would be terrified of this gigantic battlestation that has the power to blast your planet into little bitty pieces in a fraction of a second. Also it would be invulnerable to planetary defenses, whereas an ISD might be taken out by a planetary turbolaser or Ion cannon as in ESB.
but the Death star was mostly built for it's value as a psychological weapon. Both to terrify people and remind them of the power of the Empire.
Posted by Ultra Magnus (Member # 239) on :
I just finished playing Knights of the Old Republic and am neatified by the fact that planets in the Star Wars thigners are always one climate.
I am also the absolute first person to notice, and then subsequently comment on this issue, I believe.
Maybe I will start a web page.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Of course the real reason why the Emperor had the Death Star built is because he foresaw that it would cause Kenobi, Skywalker and Organa to break ground. Posted by Kazeite (Member # 970) on :
quote:Originally posted by Omega: Well, the concept of BDZ is based on the EU, but analysis of TESB's asteroid field would, FYI, indicate absolutely massive firepower on ISDs.
TESB scene is not conclusive enought to convincingly support "absolutely massive firepower", and I heard that calculations that show that kind of firepower are based on assumptions that ignore inconvienient rules of physics.
(And, as far as I know, except DBZ and AOTC ICS EU supports much, much lower ISD firepower)
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
quote:Originally posted by Ultra Magnus: I just finished playing Knights of the Old Republic and am neatified by the fact that planets in the Star Wars thigners are always one climate.
I am also the absolute first person to notice, and then subsequently comment on this issue, I believe.
The cartoon eps have the Mon Calamari living in an ocean planet (i.e. under the water).
What planet would Alderaan have been?
Presumably we will get a lava planet.
Posted by HerbShrump (Member # 1230) on :
quote:Originally posted by Omega: Well, the concept of BDZ is based on the EU, but analysis of TESB's asteroid field would, FYI, indicate absolutely massive firepower on ISDs. Thus it's likely they could quickly frag a planet, QED.
-SWC, Ph.D, KBE, 123
According to the dialouge in ANH, the Imperial Starfleet wouldn't have enough power to destroy a planet. At least, not in Han Solo's opinion.
LUKE: What's going on?
HAN: Our position is correct, except...no, Alderaan!
LUKE: What do you mean? Where is it?
HAN: Thats what I'm trying to tell you, kid. It ain't there. It's been totally blown away.
LUKE: What? How?
Ben moves into the cockpit behind Luke as the ship begins to settle down.
BEN: Destroyed...by the Empire!
HAN: The entire starfleet couldn't destroy the whole planet. It'd take a thousand ships with more fire power than I've...
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
So the Empire needed something to scare the planets into line... maybe this is how Palpatine promises to restore the Republic from the separatists... and using his 'emergency powers'...
I'm guessing the Jedi eventually learn of Palpatine's plans and Ep III ensues.
I'm also guessing that a test fire was used on Naboo... explaining the lack of mention of Naboo and/or Gungans later on.
Posted by Reverend (Member # 335) on :
Just because I love splitting hairs, I think a few Star Destroyers could effectively destroy an inhabited world, that is bombard the surface until the crust shatters and the surface gets all Dante's inferno. On the other hand it probably couldn't do what Han and co were observing in ANH, that is reduce a planet into a cloud rubble, that'd take allot of ordinance. Not that it matters terribly, Star Wars has always been more fantasy than Sci-Fi.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:Originally posted by AndrewR: Cloud/Atmosphere Planet (Cloudcity planet)
Otherwise known as, er, "gas giant". Don't get them in reality. Nope.
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
I wonder what the likelihood would be of a gas giant's upper atmosphere being breathable to humans...
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
About the same as having a perfectly habitable moon flying around the galaxy without a planet to orbit.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
The cloud city wasn't on "cloud planet" any more than the Jetsons were.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
quote:Originally posted by PsyLiam:
quote:Originally posted by AndrewR: Cloud/Atmosphere Planet (Cloudcity planet)
Otherwise known as, er, "gas giant". Don't get them in reality. Nope.
Ohhh pthhh!!
I just didn't think it was a gas giant as they were able to breath it's atmosphere... what i meant was that it was in the 'air'... straight copy of "The Cloudminers"?
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
quote:Originally posted by TSN: The cloud city wasn't on "cloud planet" any more than the Jetsons were.
Actually in the Jetsons... what WAS that or WHERE were they living - was it in the upper atmosphere of Earth?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by PsyLiam: About the same as having a perfectly habitable moon flying around the galaxy without a planet to orbit.
Add to that the giant asteroid worm with gravity and enough heat and pressure in it's stomach to accomidate humans and those "mynock" things.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
The Jetsons lived on Earth. Their apartment complex was on the top of a giant pole. And, if the weather was bad, the pole would extend until they were up above it.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Everything they did was 'in the air' though... all the buildings and office complexes... did you ever see the ground? Had the Earth been covered entirely with water?
Couldn't the people in the Matrix future have just done that - built above the clouds? Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
quote:Originally posted by PsyLiam:
quote:Originally posted by AndrewR: Cloud/Atmosphere Planet (Cloudcity planet)
Otherwise known as, er, "gas giant". Don't get them in reality. Nope.
Otherwise known, in the SW universe, as "Bespin." Posted by Da_bang80 (Member # 528) on :
Well. Whose to say there aren't any Nitrogen /Oxygen based Gas Giants in the universe?
As for the fact that most of the planets seem to be one climate does seem far fetched. I could see why Tatooine with it's 2 suns might be a dustbowl. Or Hoth possibly being quite far from the sun. Maybe chalk it up to laziness on Lucas' part. Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Or symbolism.
(Don't get me wrong, I think it's silly too. But the fact is, Star Wars has always been more fantasy and not really genuine science fiction.)
Posted by Da_bang80 (Member # 528) on :
Symbolism? I never looked at it that way. Tatooine symbolizing Lukes No-where life before meeting Ben. Hoth symbolizing the dark time for the Rebellion. Very Interesting.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
I think Lucas may have talked about it in those Leonard Maltin interviews that preceeded the last VHS versions of the non-SE trilogy. Not sure though.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by Da_bang80: Symbolism? I never looked at it that way. Tatooine symbolizing Lukes No-where life before meeting Ben. Hoth symbolizing the dark time for the Rebellion. Very Interesting.
The smooth lines of Cloud City representing the smooth taste of Colt 45 (billy dee's favorite drink).
The giant worm in the asteroid symbolizing Han wanting to fuck Leia.
It all makes sense now.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Endor representing Admrial Ackbar's penchant for small furry creatures Posted by Epoch (Member # 136) on :
Back to at least part of the original question. It is not unheard of to believe that it would take 20 years to build the first DeathStar. Sure they have the plans for it, but having plans and having a working system are two very different things. Based off of EU(I know some of you hate this but stay with me) a prototype was built at the Maw Instillation. This does make sense, you don't just go out and build something that big and complex in the first try. Now this wasn't a complete prototype but one that was to test the super laser. Depending on how long this took and how many other problem they ran into it could have taken 20 years. Once you have built something it is immensely easier to build a second as well as faster.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Except the second version was far larger than the first so really, it would've needed a almost entirely new blueprint design.
EU also has the DS being designed by some absent-minded professor type that was, of course, human. Unlike Episode II. So much for that idea.
Besides, the EU is notorius for dumbass sounding places like "the Maw Instillation" and planet "Despayre"..... Even Cartoon Network's Clone Wars cartoon has "General Grievous". Mel Brooks doesnt need to make Spaceballs II: Lucas is making it all by himself.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Yeah, like "The Death Star" isn't a dumbass name...
$$$SPOILERS$$$ - - - - - General Grievous will be in Episode III. According to rumors, he will be the one the audience "thinks" will become Darth Vader as per Lucas' dumbass attempt to preserve the surprise of TESB when watching all the movies in chronological order. Too bad he can't preserve the Yoda surprise... - - - - - END SPOILERS
-MMoM Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
The names just seem like they were intended for a Thundercats episode.
Posted by MrNeutron (Member # 524) on :
Or maybe it's not the Death Star itself that thakes 20 years to assemble, but the tooling and the factories required to make one... plus getting the raw material to construct something that size.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
Or growing enough nearsighted but technically skilled Stormtroopers to man such a station.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
"I think Lucas may have talked about it in those Leonard Maltin interviews that preceeded the last VHS versions of the non-SE trilogy."
The transcript of which goes something like: "I did a drab brown planet to underscore Luke's loneliness and longing for a better life, then I did an icy white planet to underscore the Rebels' hopeless struggle against the forces of darkness, and then I did a happy green planet to underscore that happier times were about to arrive for the good guys and also because that was the only color I hadn't used before. Well no actually there were a lot of colors I hadn't used before but I had to reserve those for the future trilogy. Oh, and I did a swamp and a gas planet just for kicks, and the bad guys were all grey and colorless to underscore their evilness. NOTE MY HEAVILY LAYERED SYMBOLISM!!"
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:Too bad he can't preserve the Yoda surprise...
Actually, I think the whole-Yoda thing works really well now, if different to how it originally went. Assuming someone is watching the trilogy in order, they will know Yoda as this wise, arse-kicking little dude, and they'll be shocked when this crazy, mental wierdo turns up. They'll wonder if Yoda's gone mad. Thus, the whole "I can't train him" goes from "OMG, that's Yoda!" to "OMG, he's been fooling us all the time!"
Sort of.
It works.
Anyway, if you want to talk about stupid names, surely the Empire's most famous starship is a good example. Going by labels, they should be more powerful than the Death Star, since they could "destroy" it. Snark.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)