Ok... so in ep. I we establish that Annie was conceived by the midichlorians, right? And in ep. III Sidious goes on about Darth Plaguis who could create life with the midichlorians, and how his apprentice murdered him after he'd taught him everything... So is Sidious implying that HE was Plagius' apprentice? And if so, does that mean he conceived Anakin, making him his father, and Luke's grandfather? I'd like your perspectives on the 'Darth Plagius' speech. Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
I think we already covered this in one of the other Ep 3 threads. It seems pretty clear to me that Palpatine was Plageus' apprentice. What he told Anakin is not a Sith legend... it's what Palpatine knows first hand.
As far as the rest, basically two possibilities present themselves:
1) Palpatine was in fact able to force the Midichlorians to create life and created Anakin. The problems with this are that it would have had to have been a blind creation, with Palpatine not knowing where his creation would be born. Consider that Anakin never would have been found had Qui Gonn and Obi Wan been killed on the Trade Fed ship as Palpatine had ordered. Somehow knowing that they would escape and end up on Tatooine and somehow make it back safely is a stretch. And the idea that he would create something that might one day threaten him without having any control over it doesn't seem very inSidious.
2) It was BS. Palpatine knows that Anakin was apparently conceived by the Midichlorians as does Anakin himself. By implying that the Dark Side might have been responsible for his birth, he was trying to create a connection with Anakin that would further gain his allegiance.
Theory 2 seems much more plausible to me.
Posted by Marauth (Member # 1320) on :
Actually the more prevalent theory that I've seen touted about regarding Anakin's immaculate conception is that it was Darth Plagueis who directed the space-herpes^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H Midichlorians to create Anakin, thus making him the effective 'father' in a sense.
But likewise that is far too big a stretch. Also I should point out that Sidious admits he doesn't know how to save Padm� to Anakin, but says that together they could discover his master's secret, thus eliminating him as a possible Darth Daddy. Plagueis never taught Sidious that one power.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
Of course, with all this TESB and RotJ talk about Emperor Palpatine "foreseeing" this and that, there might have been no coincidence or blindness involved in the first place. Darth Plagiarious just decided to create life on Tatooine for some Sith reason (perhaps the Hutt wages on setting up the necessary machinery were lower), and Darth Sidious was fully in on the plan but saw no disadvantage in letting the kid grow on the sandball for a few years before sending somebody to pick him up.
And just as Sid foresaw, the Jedi did the dirty work for him - either subconsciously guided by the Force, or deliberately manipulated by Sid, or perhaps because Qui-Gon, too, was in on the plan somehow. Quiggy's actions are shady in other respects, such as pretending that Ma Schmi cannot be brought to Coruscant with Ani... It's not implausible that he'd be toying with the Dark Side, too, or at least messing with Dark experiments in risky ways. Shit, he could be the mysterious Sifo Dyas if need be, supposedly serving Jedi interests in unconventional ways, but really being a Dark Side pawn through and through.
Or then the Jedi pickup of Anakin was indeed "random", but Sid had foreseen it early on and could rely on it delivering the kid to his hands - just like he could rely on Luke coming to him at the time and place of his choosing, despite all the uncertainties involved.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Bones McCoy (Member # 1480) on :
Or maybe he fathered a few more kids in random locations? Hoping some Jedi would stumble across them? Nah, that would only mean more sequels...
Posted by David Sands (Member # 132) on :
Allow me to propose a question more within our reach perhaps: what is the proper spelling of this wise Sith's name? I count no fewer than three on this one string.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
And allow me to clarify that "Darth Plagiarious" definitely isn't it.
"Darth Playjoyous", perhaps? Although it doesn't become increasingly sinister when you add "In" in front of it.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Plagueis, I believe. And the intent of that whole scene was to mirror the "I am your father" scene between Vader and Luke from ESB. In fact, a passage from the script makes it even more explicitly clear:
quote:DARTH SIDIOUS I have waited all these years for you to fulfill your destiny... I arranged for your conception. I used the power of the Force to will the midichlorians to start the cell divisions that created you.
ANAKIN I don't believe you.
DARTH SIDIOUS Ahhh, but you know it's true. When you clear your mind, you will sense the truth. You could almost think of me as your father.
ANAKIN That's impossible!
DARTH SIDIOUS Nevertheless, you must decide.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Well, for one thing, it was pronounced "plague-us". From what I've seen elsewhere, I think it's supposed to be "Plagueis".
"Consider that Anakin never would have been found had Qui Gonn and Obi Wan been killed on the Trade Fed ship as Palpatine had ordered."
You're assuming that Sidious wanted Anakin to be found, therefore killing the Jedi who were going to find him would be dumb. But, if he never intended for the Jedi to find Anakin, there's nothing strange about his ordering the death of some Jedi who are meddling in his affairs.
I would guess that the discovery of Anakin was purely accidental, and, once it had already happened, Sidious simply had to change his plans a bit.
"Also I should point out that Sidious admits he doesn't know how to save Padm� to Anakin, but says that together they could discover his master's secret, thus eliminating him as a possible Darth Daddy."
Unless, of course, he was lying. If he claims not to know the secret, then he doesn't have to tell Anakin what it is. And if he doesn't give away the secret, he can keep stringing Anakin along. As soon as he gives up the secret, he runs the risk of Anakin turning on him.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
And, to reply to the intervening post, I sure hope that the reason they cut those lines was because they realized that it wasn't so much a "mirror" of the TESB scene as it was a rip-off.
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
Are those really lines they cut from Ep. III?...because if they are, then thank God they cut them.
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Yes they are, according to page 82 of The Making of Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith. And while I agree that the refined and more subtle dialogue from the final film is superior, my point was that the intent was clearly for Palpatine/Sidious to be Ani's daddy.
As for the "discovery" of Anakin, I might even go so far as to speculate that Palpatine planned the whole thing. I mean, it *is* rather convenient the way the Queen's ship (and its Jedi passengers) broke through the blockade. They could have been damaged in the way they were intentionally, with Sidious *knowing* that the nearest neutral world was Tatooine and that they'd have to set down there. Darth Maul certainly knew just where to find them. And Palpatine's political/military maneuverings are already in full swing at this point...
-MMoM Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
The one thing I'd do for sure if I was a Sith lord who had murdered my master and taken his place is use my powers to create a superpowered apprentice of my own, because there is no possible flaw in this plan.
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
Well it did work for, what, twenty-odd years or so. I mean not even counting the time that he was only Chancellor Palpatine.
I realize Mim's info trumps this, but my pet theory was that Plagueis created Anakin (why Schmi? dunno) and that Palpatine knew he was going off and doing his life-generating experiements somewhere, but didn't know where. And it's only after Plagueis is dead and Sidious has had some time to collect data that he figures out who this little force-prodigy is. At a certain point, I imagine Dooku would be filling Sidious in on details like the whispers of his chosen-ness and the boy's midichlorian count. Also I hate midichlorians. I'll never forgive them for the death of my boy.
Posted by Topher (Member # 71) on :
I think you have to pay CaptainMike some sort of royalty for using his line...
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
He got thrown down an improbable well of infinite depth! Twenty years or not, that's hardly what I call an effective endgame. I think a reconsideration of some basic Sith strategies is called for.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
No obvious alternatives present themselves, though. If the Sith trains no apprentice, he'll have to fight his battles himself. That means no free afternoons, no long Black Sabbaths, and probably no time to masquerade as the leader of a Republic whose name he once read off a cereal box.
If the Sith trains an incompetent apprentice, he'll most certainly be thwarted by a bunch of meddling kids and their dog.
And if the Sith trains multiple apprentices who'll slug it out between themselves before going for the big guy, he's only delaying the inevitable, AND risking a gang-up. Not to mention the extra expenses, or the endless complaints of Darth Fernal getting a bigger saber and cooler name than Darth Competent.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
Palpatine wouldn't need Dooku's help in figuring out Anakin's status. As Supreme Chancellor, he'd no doubt have access to that info, either from the council or from the gibbering young Anakin himself.
Posted by B.J. (Member # 858) on :
Timo's post about the Sith names got me thinking about the name we do know (from the movies) - Plagueis, Sidious, Maul, Tyrannus, and Vader. To me the only one that doesn't conjure up other imagery and doesn't seem to fit is Vader. Does that name mean anything to anyone else? (It's probably because I've heard that name almost my entire life is the reason it doesn't mean anything else to me. It's too familiar, I guess.)
B.J.
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
I believe it's Norse for something. I know I read somewhere that it meant something. They're obviously all supposed to sound e-vil. Plagueis = plague. Sidious = insidious. Maul = errr.. maul. Tyrannus = tyrant (unless you want to believe he was named after the library owner mentioned in the Bible). Vader = evade? I don't know... it's kind of dark sounding all on its own.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
Well, (In)Sidious and (In)Vader seem like a good match...
More generally, it seems to me that the names are not merely cutesy by coincidence. Rather, it's a "Universal Translator" thing: these Sith are indeed named suggestively, and the same magic that translates nearly everybody's words to English also translates these names into English almost-words.
So Darth Vader in Galactic is actually Horcha Moogu, "Horcha" being almost like "Horfha" which translates as Dark, and "Moogubav" translating as Invader. Luke Skywalker is actually Vuuk Johunagom, with "johunag" meaning "sky" and "om" meaning "one who does not own a hovercar". And so forth.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
He could just, you know, hire out an army. As things went, Maul and Dooku and even Anakin didn't really contribute much to the big picture. I've never seen those Clone Wars cartoons, but from what I hear he could have got the same Jedi-killing effect by commissioning a few more Greviouses to mop up straggling Jedi after the clones got through with the bulk of them.
(As far as actual physical battles go, Palpatine seemed to have no trouble dispatching a whole squad of some of the presumably best Jedi available all by himself.)
And anyway, manipulating your underlings into a constant state of competition with each other is a trusted and time-honored method for avoiding coups. Intentionally creating followers who are, according to prophecy, way more powerful than you, is not.
Though I do wonder if the Sith version of that prophecy might not read rather differently.
Posted by Marauth (Member # 1320) on :
He didn't 'commission' the original Grievous though, Grievous was made out of the leftovers of some deep-fried alien into a cyborg by the Banking Alliance, they're the really tall headed sniveling cowards in the Clone Wars series, I think one is visible amongst the separatist leadership in RotS aswell. General Kenobi leads the assault on their planet and forces their surrender in a few of the Clone Wars shorts.
In any case they had to go through some fairly convoluted procedure to actually make Grievous, I doubt Sidious would have gone to all the trouble when he could just have Vader do the mopping up, or any other force user he could find and brainwash.
Re: Sidious' strength, remember Mace dealt him a severe beating and face-melting, were it not for the ever-whining chosen one's intervention, Mace would have probably killed Sidious then and there. Was a bit odd how quickly the other 3 Jedi bought it compared to Mace, Saesee Tiin and that Zabrak dude barely got on screen.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Vader = Dutch for "father".
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
1.) I don't mean to imply that Palpatine personally built Grevious. Just that Grevious can obviously be built (ingredients: some dude, robot parts), by people already working for him, though they don't know it; and apparently he/it serves as a highly capable Jedi-killing machine once constructed.
2.) I guess this is a matter of opinion, but it seemed clear to me that Palpatine took a dive for Anakin's benefit. I'm not saying he was sure to beat Mace Windu if Anakin hadn't intervened, but I'm pretty sure he wasn't beaten yet.
1a.) I kind of resent the fact that I have to bring all this stuff that wasn't in the movie into the movie with me in order to appreciate it. Like, not totally, because I am not really against on the idea of supplementary stories and stuff, but, like, as far as I can tell, if you have never heard about those cartoons Grevious basically makes no sense at all. Who is he? Why is he coughing? How come he has living organs? What's with the lightsabers? All explained somewhere that isn't this movie.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
It seems to me that the "droid leader has four lightsabers" thing is explained in the movie well enough - he himself says it's a trophy collection. And the discovery that he's an extreme cyborg is a sort of an early introduction to Vaderization, and works nicely outside the Clone Wars cartoon context. The cough could be a proto-Vaderlike thing, too...
Overall, it seems plausible that there would be Jedi-haters all over the galaxy, them being the galactic cops and all. And the continuing resistance would mean that some would be very good at opposing the Jedi, like this Grievous dude. He wouldn't have to be a Dark Side drone or anything, story logic wise; indeed, for those who had forgotten most of the plot points of AotC by the time of RotS, his communion with Darth Sidious serves as a nice reintroduction to the whole Both-Sides-Palpatine concept.
Not that I'd disagree on the annoyance factor of tying movies too much to the surrounding franchise. Having Khan in ST2 was already stretching things a bit; using Sela in ST10 would have been even worse than building parts of RotS plot on a cartoon!
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
"Having Khan in ST2 was already stretching things a bit"
See, I think this case is just the opposite. Khan's whole deal (genetically engineered dictator type, marooned by Kirk, eager for revenge) is laid out quickly and painlessly in the film, no prior "Space Seed" viewing required.
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
It's not a counterproductive use of a TV show reference by any means, but it's not the dramatically best possible choice, either. I saw TMP and ST2 before seeing any TOS, and while the character dynamics in both were fairly straightforward and quickly outlined, most of my buddies were left wondering why Khan was so angry at Kirk. The concept of a space pirate thwarted by the hero fifteen years before opening credits, and now seeking a rematch, is quite acceptable; but it also makes the task of fleshing out the villain harder, since either there's too much exposition to be done first, or then too little is done and the villain is left "unfounded".
Khan was okay, and perhaps better than Kruge due to having a background - but Kruge could have been introduced as an "old nemesis" easily enough, too. I'd have had no big problems with that. The Borg were very smoothly used as familiar villains, too. It's the Sela scenario I was truly frightened about, and IMHO the use of a never before seen villain was a vital dramatic choice here, a saving grace in a relative dramatic disaster. More Romulans and less Remans would have been nice, perhaps - but NEW Romulans, rather than rehashes by Crosby or Katsulas or somebody else semi-notorious from the TV show.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
quote:Originally posted by Timo: ...while the character dynamics in both were fairly straightforward and quickly outlined, most of my buddies were left wondering why Khan was so angry at Kirk.
{snip}
More Romulans and less Remans would have been nice, perhaps - but NEW Romulans, rather than rehashes by Crosby or Katsulas or somebody else semi-notorious from the TV show.
Timo Saloniemi
Firstly I'd only ever seen like Wrath and Search and Voyage Home for years. I had no problem with the story line and I was a kid. Maybe it's the fact the video had a blurb on the back which set the seen. Most people are going to know at least that much before they go and see a movie.
Secondly - best Romulan on TNG... Carolyn Semour. She did play 2 Romulans but both strong women and not too forgettable either.
"The Face of the Enemy" was just brilliant (and really Emmy-worthy) television all round.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"1.) I don't mean to imply that Palpatine personally built Grevious. Just that Grevious can obviously be built (ingredients: some dude, robot parts), by people already working for him, though they don't know it; and apparently he/it serves as a highly capable Jedi-killing machine once constructed."
"Some dude" who's particularly proficient with the Force, I should think. All the metal bits do is let him fight with four arms, or stick to magnets, or whatever. His ability to not be immediately destroyed when fighting a Jedi is, presumably, something he already had before he was cyborgified.
As for needing to see "Clone Wars" to understand the movie... You also have to have seen the other movies. Why complain that one thing is prerequired viewing, but not another thing?
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Why on. . . well, I guess Earth is inappropriate here; what's the basis for saying Grevious can use the force? There's nothing to suggest that.
Unless it is in some cartoon somewhere, or a comic book, or on the back of a branded vomit bag.
(There's an argument to be made that sequel/prequels constitute their own particular media experience, unified and indivisible. If I go see Action Film 1, I'm clearly in the market for the Action Film experience. That doesn't mean I'm going to be at all interested in consuming Action Film 1: The Kabuki. I might not like Kabuki, no matter how many of my favorite characters show up. Moreover, no, I don't like it when movies ((or novels, where this is far more prevalent)) do not function as complete stories on their own. The only person I know who did not like Batman Begins did not like it because he felt it was two hours of setup with no resolution. ((I disagreed.)))
Posted by Marauth (Member # 1320) on :
quote:Originally posted by TSN: "Some dude" who's particularly proficient with the Force, I should think. All the metal bits do is let him fight with four arms, or stick to magnets, or whatever. His ability to not be immediately destroyed when fighting a Jedi is, presumably, something he already had before he was cyborgified.
Actually he's completely incapable of using the force, his proficiency with the lightsabre is only because of his cyborg body. Given that there are many training droids with lightsabres in the EU material it's not so surprising that Grievous could wield 6 at once. Slightly silly when he floats about with them in his feet...
Oh and Mace Windu is the cause of his cough, in the second sries of CW he force-pushes Grievous armour plating into his internal organs severely damaging them; further this slows his movements and reactions explaining why he was so bitchified during his fight with Kenobi, with that information we can all fully enjoy his worthwhile and valuable contribution to the plot of Ep. III...
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"Actually he's completely incapable of using the force, his proficiency with the lightsabre is only because of his cyborg body."
Was it actually established, either way?
Posted by Bones McCoy (Member # 1480) on :
I was always under the impression that only Jedi could use lightsabers, cos they "...has the ability to see things before they happen. It's a Jedi trait." says Qui-Gon of young Anakin. So, with the 'ninjas-on-speed' approach Lucas has taken to lightsaber fighting in the new movies, wouldn't that ability be a pre-requisite?
Posted by Timo (Member # 245) on :
A powerful computer coupled to a competent sensor system should do the trick just as well, I think.
Also, it cannot be that actual lightsaber OPERATION would be a Jedi privilege, since we saw the heathen Solo activate and use Luke's saber in TESB.
Timo Saloniemi
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
Well, that was truly a case of extreme circumstances. But I do nonetheless agree with your point.
BTW, when I said those script lines were from page 82 of The Making of ROTS, I meant to say page 42. Sorry.
-MMoM Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
In the movie, Grevious says he's been trained in the in either the Jedi Arts or the Jedi Fighting... something. He's refering to the fact that Dooku trained him in lightsaber technique as seen in the Clone Wars cartoon. I don't think either the cartoon or the movie make it clear whether or not he has Force abilities or not, though.
He seems to rely on pure saber fighting, and doesn't throw people around using anything other than his arms and legs. This could be because the Jedi are blocking his attempts to use the Force against them in that way, much as they would with any other Force user, or it could be because he can't use the Force.
Posted by Marauth (Member # 1320) on :
I'd go with the later option, you see in his backstory, he was just an ordinary guy fighting in a war between his race and some other race, the Jedi sided with the other race making the Kaleesh (Grievous' folks) rather angry, he was not a force user before his 'accident' at the hands of the Separatists and given Lucas' explanation that losing limbs lowered Anakin's force potential, I'd think losing every part of his body apart from the eyes, brain and internal organs would render Grievous pretty much useless with the force. Lightsabre technique could easily be picked up by an advanced mechanical creature, so why not a cyborg that's mostly robot anyways?
Posted by Nim' (Member # 205) on :
Marauth:
quote:and given Lucas' explanation that losing limbs lowered Anakin's force potential
What's your source for this?
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
Interesting to note though, that even in the cartoon where Big G was a super psycho Jedi slaughtering machine, he was still no match for Dooku.
Posted by Marauth (Member # 1320) on :
quote:Originally posted by Nim': What's your source for this?
Under the paragraph on 'Talents' the wikipedia doesn't usually just make stuff up out of thin air, especially things that could be easily refutted by speaking to the source of the info (Lucas in this case).
Posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim (Member # 646) on :
quote:Originally posted by Aban Rune: Interesting to note though, that even in the cartoon where Big G was a super psycho Jedi slaughtering machine, he was still no match for Dooku.
Well, he said that Doou was the one who trained him, so that might make a measure of sense.
As for the loss limbs affecting force-potential, I too had this thought. It actually occurred to me just from having watched the films, although I get the impression that there are also EU materials supporting this as well. (The Visual Dictionary note regarding Vader's non-use of force lightning, mentioned in another thread, for one.) Nonetheless, Wikipedia is not a particularly solid source to cite.
-MMoM Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
Yes, it makes sense that he was no match for Dooku, but I guess my point was that as deadly as he was, there were still Jedi and Sith who could've taken him out, even before he was injured.
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"A powerful computer coupled to a competent sensor system should do the trick just as well, I think."
A computer with sensors could see something before it happens? Those are some damn fine sensors, sir.
And while turning on a ligtsaber and cutting things with it may not require the Force, I believe the point is that, in order to hold your own in an all-out lightsaber battle against a Jedi, you'll need a little more ability than Han exhibited against the dead taun-taun.
Posted by Toadkiller (Member # 425) on :
But just a little. I mean that was one mean bad ass dead taun-taun.
Posted by Zefram (Member # 1568) on :
I had assumed that 'Jedi reflexes' referred to their ability to respond to an action that had yet to occur rather than some sort of super speed (although I guess we have seen that a couple times). Thus, Grievous might have a chance with his advanced sensors and mechanical reflexes. He may not be able to respond to a future threat, but his mechanical limbs can physically move faster than the Jedis' organic ones. And the fact that he has twice as many arms doesn't hurt either.
Finally, I think the Clone Wars cartoon at least partially explained Grievous' success. Dooku taught Grievous to use his 'unconventional attacks' to break his opponents' concentration. Since a Jedi has to concentrate at least a little to be able to effectively use the Force, Grievous' unusual techniques and four flailing light sabers (plus whatever he may be carrying with his feet) would definitely be a serious distraction and an impediment to using the Force to defeat him.
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
Neal Stephenson had a neat op-ed recently in the New York Times about certain of these topics.
"Likewise, many have been underwhelmed by the performance of Hayden Christensen, who plays Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader. Only if you've seen the 'Clone Wars' cartoons will you understand that Anakin is a seriously damaged veteran, a poster child for post-traumatic stress disorder. But since none of that background is actually supplied by the Episode III script, Mr. Christensen has been given an impossible acting task. He's trying to swim in air."
Even if that's true, I don't think it's the reason the performance was sub-par. Didn't he watch episode II?
Posted by Zefram (Member # 1568) on :
From the article:
quote:In the opening sequence of the new Star Wars movie, "Episode III: Revenge of the Sith," two Jedi knights fight their way through an enemy starship to rescue a hostage. Ever since I saw the movie, I have been annoying friends with a trivia question: "Who is the enemy? What organization owns this vessel?"
We ought to know.
I hadn't read any of the Clone Wars novels or comics (although I did see the Clone Wars cartoon series), yet I thought it was blindingly obvious whose ship Anakin and Obi Wan were on. It was protected by vulture droids, as seen in Episode I, and the crew consisted of battle droids and nemoidians as seen in Episodes II and III. I think anyone who paid attention to the previous movies would have understood exactly what was going on in the opening scenes without venturing into the Expanded Universe.
It seems to me that, rather than ask people who such-and-such is etc., the author needed to watch the previous two movies again before seeing Episode III.
Posted by Bones McCoy (Member # 1480) on :
quote:Originally posted by Timo: A powerful computer coupled to a competent sensor system should do the trick just as well, I think.
Also, it cannot be that actual lightsaber OPERATION would be a Jedi privilege, since we saw the heathen Solo activate and use Luke's saber in TESB.
Timo Saloniemi
True, but it takes something away from the Jedi if any toaster with a particularly high spec can duke it out with them. Just my opinion.
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
Well, they also have trouble with Droidikas.
I've always thought of Jedi's ability to see things before they happen as like "spider-sense." It gives them the ability to react faster because they actually start to react before something happens.
Grievous counters that by being super fast, as well as having the four arms, being able to climb walls, and run around like a hurricane. Not only do they have less time to react than with a normal person, but they've got a single coordinated attack coming at them from multiple angles. The aforementioned use of distractions helps him too.
Posted by Bones McCoy (Member # 1480) on :
So it's really a sign of the dark times ahead when the Jedi can be replaced by machines? Yes, I think I'll use that as an explanation for Greivous, instead of him just being a cool idea for a toy...
Posted by Marauth (Member # 1320) on :
Now explain Jar-Jar as more than an excuse for a toy...
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sol System: Moreover, no, I don't like it when movies ((or novels, where this is far more prevalent)) do not function as complete stories on their own.
Not to be a smart-arse, but what about "The Empire Strikes Back", the film that I've seed described as having a "middle, a middle, and a middle"?
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
It's a fair question. I don't think that a "complete story" means a story that isn't connected in any way to other stories. Beyond that I'm not sure what to tell you. I think it would fail my nebulous criterion if it ended before Han Solo was frozen. As it is, it poses a question "Can they escape the Empire?" and answers it: "No."
I mean, this is a thing that can annoy me, but it isn't the only thing going on in a story, you know?
Posted by Bones McCoy (Member # 1480) on :
quote:Originally posted by Marauth: Now explain Jar-Jar as more than an excuse for a toy...
Well, you know those toads they used to lick back in the 60's..?
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
quote:Originally posted by PsyLiam:
quote:Originally posted by Sol System: Moreover, no, I don't like it when movies ((or novels, where this is far more prevalent)) do not function as complete stories on their own.
Not to be a smart-arse, but what about "The Empire Strikes Back", the film that I've seed described as having a "middle, a middle, and a middle"?
Star Trek III
Posted by WizArtist II (Member # 1425) on :
ST3 was a simple network bridge.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
ST III: Invalidating that whole "sacrifice" thing from the last movie
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
is that it was Darth Plagueis who directed the space-herpes^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H Midichlorians to create Anakin, thus making him the effective 'father' in a sense.![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)