Even in the prequels, Boba Fett is not a clone

We're told in the prequels that Boba is a clone of Jango, but do we ever get any proof? We never get anything that proves beyond any shadow of doubt that he's a clone. However we do get what I'd say is proof that he's NOT a clone.

Look at the two actors:

Daniel Logan who played Boba:

http://www.imdb.com/media/rm4257126912/nm0517535

http://www.imdb.com/media/rm262509056/nm0517535

Temuera Morrison who played Jango:

http://www.imdb.com/media/rm4290156800/tt0115624

http://www.imdb.com/media/rm3300301056/nm0607325

The two of them together:

http://www.imdb.com/media/rm2701694976/nm0607325

I'm supposed to believe one of those guys is a clone of the other? They don't look like the same guy at all. Anybody can see they're not the same guy. Father and son, maybe, but not clone.

If they had to show a kid Boba clone of Jango they should have had his face covered or something. Or at least got a kid who didn't look so clearly different from Morrison. As it is now, it stretches suspension of disbelief beyind the acceptable to put those two guys on the screen side by side and claim one is a clone of the other. It bugged me every time the kid was onscreen.

Judging by what we see on the screen, Boba is not the special unaltered clone of Jango that Lamu Su said Jango asked to have made. Taun We calls Jango Boba's father, so I guess Boba is Jango's son. After all, he can't be a clone, the way he looks. And nowhere in the film did they actually say he was the special clone. And even if they did we'd have to assume they were lying, judging by the evidence of our own eyes.

It was the intention to have Boba be Jango's clone, but that's not what they put onscreen.  

Edited in later (April 11):

Because people seem to keep getting this post wrong, here's some explanation of what I'm trying to say:

By no means am I trying to suggest that Lucas really intended the kid to not be a clone. Of course Lucas intended the kid to be a clone. However I don't think that works onscreen, because I think the two actors are too conspicuously different looking. As such the attempt to convincingly make Boba a clone of Jango doesn't work. Of course I understand that they can't get a kid actor who looks exactly like Temuera Morrison, but they could have gotten somebody who looked more like him than Daniel Logan did. As it is now, the kid doesn't look enough like he's Jango's clone, so the story of Boba being a clone doesn't work. As such, if we want the film to work (as much as AOTC could ever work) then we are forced to be creative and invent our own explanations for how things went the way they did in the film if Boba's not a clone. In no way am I suggesting that such creative interpretation of the film was ever part of Lucas's intended story. It's just a fan trying to make sense of the mess left by Logan not working as a clone of Jango.

Like I said above, the difference between Morrison and Logan bugged me whenever the kid was onscreen. It was too jarring for me to succeed in suspending disbelief. I found it ridiculous that I be expected to accept this kid as a clone of the other guy. Also, the whole Boba-is-a-clone-of-Jango idea seems like one of Lucas's revisionist later inventions. It feels like bullshit. As such, it's on shaky ground even before the casting. So he really needed to do it very carefully and put in extra effort to make it work. There was no room for casting somebody who didn't look like he could possibly be a clone of Jango. I might go easier on this if the whole clone Boba thing wasn't such bull to start with. But it is such bull to start with, so Lucas really needed to do it convincingly, and he failed.

And I don't see it as the same situation as Jake Lloyd and Hayden or Ewan and Alec Gunness, because we are never shown the two versions of those characters side by side onscreen. Putting them side by side really rubs in the difference. Also, with Anakin and particularly Kenobi, having two different actors for the same character was more necessary. Whereas I don't think the whole Bob-is-a-clone-of-Jango thing was necessary.

The point off the post was to point out something that bugged me and encourage people to have a bit of fun at the expense of Lucas's mess-up.

I hope that clarifies my thinking a bit. I'm sorry if my way of expressing my opinion misled anybody into misunderstanding my view. 

Vaderisnothayden said:

It was the intention to have Boba be Jango's clone, but that's not what they put onscreen.  

 Well, I don't look at 30 much like I did at 10, but besides that, they show a room full of Jango clones, and all the young ones look exactly like lil' Boba. (the young adult ones aren't identical actors to Jango either)

So, if Boba isn't Jango's clone, the clone army is still based on the Boba template, and all soldiers undergo reconstructive surgery twice in their lives, once at young adulthood, and once at middle age.

Following this reasoning, ObiWan plainly kills young Anakin and replaces him with another young man at some point between TPM and AOTC. Obi's far more sinister than we suspected.

Great. I find a cool way in which the prequels screwed up and then you guys want to defend the bloody prequels. Sometimes I just don't get people.

Judging by what we see onscreen, kid clones must be cloned off Boba and adult ones off Jango. And if there's a third clone actor (I didn't notice) there must be a third clone template (another son of Jango?). So yeah the clone army is based on more than one guy and the Kaminoans failed to mention it.

Presumably the Jango clones were done earlier and later the Kaminoans moved on to cloning Boba, hence the older ones looking like Jango and the younger ones looking like Boba. Also, the Kaminoans are both a bit shifty (they pretend they're all cloned from one guy) and maybe a bit dumb (they think they can pass off all the clones as one guy) or maybe human faces just look all the same to them so they think they'll look the same to Kenobi. The shiftiness may be down to having an alien mentality with possibly a different moral system and different values and modes of behavior. Kenobi doesn't comment on the kid clones being different from the adult ones. Maybe he's just being polite. Kenobi is a polite sort of guy. Maybe he's being underhanded in his own way. That's in character too.

There are undoubtably many plausible explanations for this stuff. You have to stretch far less to explain it my way then you have to to explain Boba clearly not looking like a clone of Jango.

Luke and Leia are hardly a similar situation to the Fett situation. There's no obvious onscreen proof that they're not siblings. There is obvious onscreen proof that Boba isn't Jango's clone. So with Jango and Boba it's a screw up, but with Luke and Leia there's no screw up. No need for DNA proof. Silly comparisons don't get us anywhere.

Yes, people can change a lot in appearance between childhood and adulthood, but usually only so far. The adult face is a version of the child face and vice versa. Logan and Morrison's faces are not versions of each other.

As regards Jake Lloyd Anakin and Hayden Christensen Anakin, no that's not the same situation as the two Fetts. It's never a great situation when you have two actors playing the same character at different ages. It always stretches suspension of disbelief. But as long as you don't have them both on the screen at the same time and in the same part of the story then it can be just about tolerated. Not so when you have them side by side. Then suspension of disbelief is stretched past toleration.

And C3PX, if you paid attention to what I said, you'd see that in my thinking there's hardly any need for Lucas to clone Temuera Morrison to get somebody to play Boba. I pointed out that Lucas could have concealed the face of the kid or could have gotten a kid who actually looked like Morrison.

Another thing he could have done is drop this whole stupid Boba-is-a-clone-of-suddenly-invented-Jango. All the above has to be taken in the context of the Boba-clone-of-Jango thing being a revolutionary take on a longstanding character, a take that likely doesn't have a solid foundation in the old backstory. If Lucas wants us to buy his bullshit it's up to him to make it believable.

Reason works fine in this one. As my second post demonstrates. There is plenty of reason in my viewpoint. It seems like you believe that if you don't agree with the thinking in a particular viewpoint then it means there must be no reason in the viewpoint. That strikes me as a narrow view. People's views don't have to be to your tastes to have any sense to them.

Meanwhile we have two distinctly different looking guys pushed at us side by side while we're being told one's a clone of the other. Now THAT doesn't make sense. 

Vaderisnothayden said:

Great. I find a cool way in which the prequels screwed up and then you guys want to defend the bloody prequels. Sometimes I just don't get people.

Judging by what we see onscreen, kid clones must be cloned off Boba and adult ones off Jango. And if there's a third clone actor (I didn't notice) there must be a third clone template (another son of Jango?). So yeah the clone army is based on more than one guy and the Kaminoans failed to mention it.

Presumably the Jango clones were done earlier and later the Kaminoans moved on to cloning Boba, hence the older ones looking like Jango and the younger ones looking like Boba. Also, the Kaminoans are both a bit shifty (they pretend they're all cloned from one guy) and maybe a bit dumb (they think they can pass off all the clones as one guy) or maybe human faces just look all the same to them so they think they'll look the same to Kenobi. The shiftiness may be down to having an alien mentality with possibly a different moral system and different values and modes of behavior. Kenobi doesn't comment on the kid clones being different from the adult ones. Maybe he's just being polite. Kenobi is a polite sort of guy. Maybe he's being underhanded in his own way. That's in character too.

This is the most twisted wierd and convoluted explanation I've ever heard to justify ignoring the simplest possible expanation... the kid is a clone, they're all clones, played by different actors at different ages because that's the reality of filmmaking.

You're honestly suggesting that the film would have been improved if lil' Boba was running around in his helmet all the time so that the audience wouldn't have to see that the kid playing him wasn't a perfect enough dead-ringer for the dude playing Jango.  Or they made a CGI-Boba based on pictures of the actor who played Jango when he was young. (these are both terrible ideas)

This is not 'a cool way the Prequals screwed up.' This is bending over backwards to find a flaw where really none exists. If you don't like Boba being a clone, fine. I hate Boba being a clone too. I hate Boba being in the PT at all. But this is just silly. If it wasn't from you, I'd assume this was a parody of fan-complaints.

Vaderisnothayden said:

Meanwhile we have two distinctly different looking guys pushed at us side by side while we're being told one's a clone of the other. Now THAT doesn't make sense. 

 

 I'm only 30, and I don't recognize half the dude's I went to high school with.

A little kid with a mullett looks different than a grizzled middle aged warrior.

It's not like Jango was black and Boba was Asian. Seemed a pretty good match to me (including the young-adult Jangos).

TheBoost said:

Vaderisnothayden said:

Great. I find a cool way in which the prequels screwed up and then you guys want to defend the bloody prequels. Sometimes I just don't get people.

Judging by what we see onscreen, kid clones must be cloned off Boba and adult ones off Jango. And if there's a third clone actor (I didn't notice) there must be a third clone template (another son of Jango?). So yeah the clone army is based on more than one guy and the Kaminoans failed to mention it.

Presumably the Jango clones were done earlier and later the Kaminoans moved on to cloning Boba, hence the older ones looking like Jango and the younger ones looking like Boba. Also, the Kaminoans are both a bit shifty (they pretend they're all cloned from one guy) and maybe a bit dumb (they think they can pass off all the clones as one guy) or maybe human faces just look all the same to them so they think they'll look the same to Kenobi. The shiftiness may be down to having an alien mentality with possibly a different moral system and different values and modes of behavior. Kenobi doesn't comment on the kid clones being different from the adult ones. Maybe he's just being polite. Kenobi is a polite sort of guy. Maybe he's being underhanded in his own way. That's in character too.

This is the most twisted wierd and convoluted explanation I've ever heard to justify ignoring the simplest possible expanation... the kid is a clone, they're all clones, played by different actors at different ages because that's the reality of filmmaking.

You're honestly suggesting that the film would have been improved if lil' Boba was running around in his helmet all the time so that the audience wouldn't have to see that the kid playing him wasn't a perfect enough dead-ringer for the dude playing Jango.  Or they made a CGI-Boba based on pictures of the actor who played Jango when he was young. (these are both terrible ideas)

This is not 'a cool way the Prequals screwed up.' This is bending over backwards to find a flaw where really none exists. If you don't like Boba being a clone, fine. I hate Boba being a clone too. I hate Boba being in the PT at all. But this is just silly. If it wasn't from you, I'd assume this was a parody of fan-complaints.

Yes a flaw exists here. They COULD have gotten an actor who could actually pass for a young Temuera Morrison but they didn't. There's no bending over backwards to find a flaw here. The discrepancy between the two actors just SHOUTS out at you. It's an OBVIOUS problem that very much exists 

This is the most twisted wierd and convoluted explanation I've ever heard to justify ignoring the simplest possible expanation... the kid is a clone, they're all clones, played by different actors at different ages because that's the reality of filmmaking.

It's hardly that twisted or convoluted. It's pretty simple actually. Quite plausible. More plausible than a lot of the bullshit we got in the prequels.l

And the reality of filmmaking does not justify trying to pass off two actors who look very different as being basically the same guy while having them side by side onscreen together. Particularly not when it's all in support of a bullshit revisionist plot point. Does not work. My explanation works a lot better. And I don't NEED to provide an explanation. It's Lucas's mess, so he's the only one who needs to provide an explanation. All I need to do is point out the problem, that passing Logan off as a clone of Morrison doesn't work.

You're honestly suggesting that the film would have been improved if lil' Boba was running around in his helmet all the time so that the audience wouldn't have to see that the kid playing him wasn't a perfect enough dead-ringer for the dude playing Jango.  Or they made a CGI-Boba based on pictures of the actor who played Jango when he was young. (these are both terrible ideas)

Anything would be better than what they did. But I'd have preferred if they just found a kid actor who looked like Temuera Morrison. Or if they'd avoided the whole thing by not sticking in the whole Boba-is-a-clone-of-Jango business.

TheBoost said:

Vaderisnothayden said:

Meanwhile we have two distinctly different looking guys pushed at us side by side while we're being told one's a clone of the other. Now THAT doesn't make sense. 

 

 

 I'm only 30, and I don't recognize half the dude's I went to high school with.

A little kid with a mullett looks different than a grizzled middle aged warrior.

It's not like Jango was black and Boba was Asian. Seemed a pretty good match to me (including the young-adult Jangos).

There's way more difference in appearance between them than just a mullet. Look at the pic I posted a link to of Logan all grown up. Short hair. Still doesn't look like Morrison.

Logan didn't look different from Morrison just because he had a mullet and was a little kid. He looked different because he's a different guy with a very different face. Just look at his forehead for example, totally different from Morrison's.

Maybe you don't recognize the guys you went to high school with. Different people have different levels of ability at recognizing faces or distinguishing between them. But under study their faces would prove to be still basically the same faces. Not at all the same situation as Morrison and Logan's genuinely very different faces. I'm older than you and I have no problem recognizing people who went to high school with me. But I can't recognize Logan as Morrison.

Jango and Boba look way different. I hate laziness in casting different-age versions of characters. 

If it wasn't from you, I'd assume this was a parody of fan-complaints.

In other words, dare to think differently from the way the majority think and you're subject to ridicule. I know the drill. Not going to stop me posting my opinions.

Now would anybody like to actually stop and enjoy with me the way Lucas screwed up his own stupid Fett clone story?

skyjedi2005 said:

Well at least Boba's Helmet stayed on during the oot keeping him a mysterious character, and if he was shown without it on you guys would be complaining that prequel guy who played jango looks nothing like Jeremy Bulloch.  Who did not provide the voice that was wingreen.  When they replaced his voice in empire with the shitty prequel phoned in actors voice i was pretty pissed off.

I thought it was horrible in the comic Empire Strikes Back infinities when they showed Boba looking like that hack actor from the prequels that dude is not Boba.  Thank the maker its an infinities title and has not replaced the real comic by Al Williamson based on the real version of empire strikes back not either of the destroyed versions. A New Hope fared much worse i just found out it was put out of print by dark horse in favor of the stupid 1997 comic, which fuuny enough is based on a film not even on official dvd,lol.  Though who would pay for 2004 versions of the comics.  They redid the novelizations as Jr novels by Ryder Windam to try and tie the orignals to the stupid prequels.  it goes without saying i never bothered to read these new fanfiction official accounts of the original trilogy as approved changes by Lucash.

The Boba Fett voice thing stinks. Jason Wingreen did a great performance in ESB. It was the best thing about Boba Fett. Temuera Morrison's voice performance in the 2004 edition of ESB was crap. Totally changed the character too. And taking an actor out of a classic is really dirty. And it was so fucking unnecessary. And all part of the idiotic attitude that the OT has to be altered to fit the prequels while the prequels can go and ignore what happened in the OT.

I used to respect Temuera Morrison. He was good in Once Were Warriors. But I don't respect him anymore, not after he played a part in the changes that took Jason Wingreen out of ESB.

vote_for_palpatine said:

As regards Jake Lloyd Anakin and Hayden Christensen Anakin, no that's not the same situation as the two Fetts.

If one is a young clone of the other, then wouldn't these two situations be identical?

No, because we're never shown the two different Anakins side by side on the screen or in the same scene. We are shown the two Fetts side by side and in the same scene and that's the last straw that totally fucks it all to hell. 

And to me, Boba could have been the young version of Jango. I didn't think they couldn't be, not a bad bit of casting there IMO. Now please don't get all butt-hurt, I'm only throwing in my $0.02.

That's fine. You're entitled to your opinion, and you didn't poke fun at me or sneer at me while expressing it, so I'm not going to get pissed off with you. But I do disagree rather throughly. No way could those two be the same guy.

I would have assiduously stuck to one rule: you never show Boba Fett. Never, ever, ever. Big fucking mistake by GL.

I can agree with that. There's so much bad judgement in the prequels.

I was so taken aback at what I percieve as the sheer silliness of the argument, I didn't even look at the evidence presented.

After looking at the photos, I was actually taken aback at how GOOD a casting job it is, at least from a standpoint of a sweet young boy looking like he very well COULD be the clone of the older grizzled man.

Compare the brows, nose, general jawline, and of course coloring, all though that doesn't apply so much in these pics.

Seriously, from a purely appearance standpoint, it's brilliant casting. The resmblance borders on uncanny. I never noticed before, because when they said he was a clone, I willingly suspended my disbelief and never gave dirty little Boba a second glance. I was perfectly content loathing the character for being a stupid character. But now that you mention it, I need to give AOTC credit for that really solid on screen casting.

okay now. i don't see why we need to get two actors to look alike when they're at different ages. as c3px said, its

filmmaking. now, in attack of the clones, when obi-wan is talking to the kamino prime minister, the minister said, "He only

asked for one thing in return. An unaltered clone for himself." Its your view point, however i don't see how u can use actors as

proof that they aren't clones when they're only characters in a movie.

C3PX said:

Vaderisnothayden said:

Reason works fine in this one. As my second post demonstrates. There is plenty of reason in my viewpoint. It seems like you believe that if you don't agree with the thinking in a particular viewpoint then it means there must be no reason in the viewpoint. That strikes me as a narrow view. People's views don't have to be to your tastes to have any sense to them.

Meanwhile we have two distinctly different looking guys pushed at us side by side while we're being told one's a clone of the other. Now THAT doesn't make sense. 

 

The bottom line is that it is a movie. Those are the actors they chose to play those too roles, and by the script one is a clone of the other. Maybe they were way off on casting. I personally am not bother by them being played by two different people. They look well enough alike to me, there are so many giantic flaws in that film, I can't possibly care too much about this issue, which to me seem like a nonissue.

Ask youself this, if the film has been smack you in the rear end fantastic, would this still bother you?

If young Boba had been blond haired fair skinned, then I'd be right there with you. But they got a kid with the same complexion and hair color as Morrison, and I think the kid is plenty passable for a younger version of the older actor. Far more so than Hayden is to Loyd. Or Puppet TPM Yoda to ESB and ROTJ Yoda. Covering the kid's face the entire movie would be nonsensical (about as nonsensical as having Boba Fett in the story to begin with, actually), I think it would be dumb of them to do that just out of fear that a few viewers are going to come to the obvious conclusion that the two characters are not played by the same actor.

Yes it would bother me even if the film was good, but it would be more forgivable, particularly if it wasn't about a dumb revisionist plot point.

No I don't think he's more passable as the same guy than Hayden and Loyd are. I think the difference is more conspicuous than that.

Nor would it be dumb of them to make an effort to find somebody genuinely similar.

C3PX said:

Far, far from the truth. I think I have demonstrated that plenty on these forums. I may have an unfortunate tendency to express my opinions rather strongly, but I realize my opinions are just that, opinions, and I have a good deal of respect for those of others.

 

Not in my recent experience. Nor in the evidence of your mocking posts on this thread. Might look up "respect" in the dictionary. You know one of those clear cut words you're always talking about.

My point was that it is unreasonable to suggest that they go about anaylizing every aspect of an actors face to make sure every little thing matches up to the point of being able to truely convince someone that one actor is the other actor when he was a kid

It's reasonable to expect them to get somebody that looks genuinely similar. 

(but only when they appear on screen together, otherwise they can look as glaringly different as Hadyen and Loyd or McGregor and Genius).

I find those pairs a lot easier to buy.

I also find it unreasonable to take a poorly done casting decision and use it to conclude that some character in the story was lying, because you in real life were not convinced actor B makes a good young version of actor A.

I don't see why. You should trust the evidence of your eyes, and bullshit revisionist story stuff in a crap film doesn't deserve us trying hard to ignore glaring difference between two supposedly the same guys. Lucas fouled up and as such his attempt to push the Boba-is-a-clone story fails, which is worth noting.

You guys complain that I'm negative but you lot really are being negative here. I bring up a fun screw-up in the prequels so we can all have a bit of fun laughing at it and instead I get mocked by a bunch of prequel-defenders.

I liked the Boost's comment on Obi-Wan getting rid of the original Anakin and replacing him with some other teenage boy sometime between Ep. 1 and Ep.2. Likewise, regardless of what Lucas intended for the story, I am convinced that sometime between Ep.3 and Ep.4, Obi-Wan must have been discovered and perhaps killed, and an undercover agent of the Sith was put there in his place (which is the Obi-Wan we see in Ep.4). His job was to get Luke to leave Tantooine and go to the Death Star to get captured. Probably he was never real? An illusion made by Vader, which is why he vanished suddenly when Vader touched him with the lightsaber.This must be true, because it is obvious Ewan and Sir Alec are two different people. They don't even share the same moles on their faces.

Getting another actor for Kenobi was unavoidable. Making Boba Fett a kid clone of some new character was not. 

I have nothing against your opinion in the matter, I simply disagree with you and think you're being rather unreasonable in your efforts to nitpick this film, which is quite frankly such an awful pile of crap of a film that it hardly deserves the honor of having someone pick its nits,

If you have nothing against it, then why all the aggressive mocking? You seem to like insulting me in one way or another or in various ways implying I'm unreasonable or an idiot. I'm a bit sick of it.

And I don't see what's unreasonable about having a bit of fun at a prequel's expense.

Also, the prequels may be shit, but they're a big issue because of how they supplanted the original Star Wars backstory and how they're pushed as The Canon Backstory, plus the fact that they're films claiming to be Star Wars. So they're significant whether we like them or not. That means there's plenty reason to nitpick them. Everything in them should be looked at an examined and everything that was a fuckup should be pointed out and people should look at how all the fuckups work together to make up the grand fuckup that is the full effect of those films.

TheBoost said:

I was so taken aback at what I percieve as the sheer silliness of the argument, I didn't even look at the evidence presented.

After looking at the photos, I was actually taken aback at how GOOD a casting job it is, at least from a standpoint of a sweet young boy looking like he very well COULD be the clone of the older grizzled man.

Compare the brows, nose, general jawline, and of course coloring, all though that doesn't apply so much in these pics.

Seriously, from a purely appearance standpoint, it's brilliant casting. The resmblance borders on uncanny. I never noticed before, because when they said he was a clone, I willingly suspended my disbelief and never gave dirty little Boba a second glance. I was perfectly content loathing the character for being a stupid character. But now that you mention it, I need to give AOTC credit for that really solid on screen casting.

I don't mean to be in any way offensive, but I have to say that if you think those guys are so alike then your ability with faces only goes so far. But then a lot of people are not good with faces. The majority of people, even. Those guys have some things in common but they are also very distinctly different. If you can't see that, don't blame me.

 rcb said: okay now. i don't see why we need to get two actors to look alike when they're at different ages.

Seriously? They shouldn't bother just because the characters are at two different ages? With real life people, people's faces change between when they're a kid Boba's age and when they're an adult but any careful examination will show that both adult and child faces are versions of the same features. So yeah you have to try to get a kid to look like the adult if you want a kid to play the younger version of that adult. Not trying is lazy and an insult to our intelligence.

asked for one thing in return. An unaltered clone for himself." Its your view point, however i don't see how u can use actors as

proof that they aren't clones when they're only characters in a movie.

You can use anything on the screen as proof for theories about the story of the movie. Now you might give them a break if they didn't go so far as stick the two clearly different actors side by side on the screen or if the whole thing was actually necessary. But clearly this situation doesn't qualify for such a break.

see you auntie said:

Damn it. I hate it when board members go off their meds.

Oh yeah, it's terribly civilized and enlightened to imply people are nuts when they express a view you disagree with. How terribly clever of you.

see you auntie said:

You have reached a new level of nitpicking and prequel bashing that didn't exist prior to your original post, congratulations!

 Good. The prequels should be bashed and nitpicked.

Obi Wan in the prequels has a mole on his forehead where Alec Guinness' Kenobi does not. Zomg Conspiracy. The original Kenobi must has died on Tatooine post episode 3 and some older dude (that would explain the age discrepancy) must have taken his identity. Maybe some evil jedi who planned o lure Luke to the dark side through lying to him about his father!

With Obi Wan we have reason to give Lucas a break and go with it because there's no reasonable option other getting a new actor. Nor did they brazenly place Ewan and Guinness on the screen side by side and try to pass them off as the same guy. The Fett thing is not like the Kenobi situation. It was a unecessary piece of prequel bullshit revisionism. The reasonable option was not to write that shit. If he's going to push that crap he'd better do it right without expecting any great effort at suspension of disbelief from us.

You know what now I think about it, Vito Corleone in Godfather II looks nothing like Vito Corleone in the original, what's up with that?

I always found it hard to buy those two actors as the same character. But they weren't even in the same film, let alone side by side being passed off as the same while with one glance you could see both of them and see they weren't the same. Plus they had a good excuse for using two actors there. They couldn't do anything else. Whereas Lucas could have just abandoned that dumb piece of story.

You don't like the prequels, I don't care for them much either, but you seem to talk about them incessantly. Just ignore them and life will be a lot easier and you won't need to post this kind of rubbish.

Sorry, I don't function like you. Obviously you don't like talking about things you don't like. I do. And my view isn't rubbish just because you guys don't agree with it.

Jeez, try a little original thinking on this board and look where it gets you.

DarkFather said:You were just shown how they are genuinely similar by TheBoost.

No I was not shown. I was shown pictures which demonstrate how different they are and TheBoost listed a few areas in which he thinks those guys look similar, areas in which they look rather less similar than he thinks.