Father Skywalker

NeverarGreat said:

1990osu said:

It makes you wonder if they are considering reshooting ROTJ's ending for the sequels, or perhaps beginning Episode 7 with a replay of the throne room scene going differently...

That's not true. That's IMPOSSIBLE!

I agree that the scene strains credulity however. The first time that I watched it, I was absolutely sure that Luke wouldn't be turned to the Dark Side. There was no question in my mind. Luke was a hero. He was us, the audience. And so the scene played out. The point of the scene, I think, was to show the audience that he who can make you angry can control you. The only question that Luke had was in what Vader was thinking when he let Luke escape Cloud City. When that scene is reenacted with Luke as the antagonist, he feels the same as Vader in that moment. In that moment, father and son are as one, both equally culpable in their use of the Dark Side. However, Luke is still himself. He used the Dark Side, and was not turned. So here was the answer to his question, about whether Anakin was in some way still alive. Indeed he was.

"Never. I'll never turn to the Dark Side. You've failed, your highness. I am a Jedi, like my father before me."

He states that Anakin yet lives. Therefore he is saying that not only did the Emperor fail to convert him, he failed to even convert Anakin.

Of course, I disregard the prequels in this analysis.

What does religious conversion have anything to do with defeating the galactic empire??? Why not just turn to the darkside??? A sith lord can be good. Even if that's incorrect and false, not all darksiders are sith, the sith are just a specific sect/cult of darksider force users......

For instance, luke skywalker could turn to the darkside and still be on the rebel's side. Obi wan kenobi and yoda wanted luke skywalker to kill his father not because he was an evil dictator/tyrant who used a planet destroyer (the death star) to keep people in line through fear, but because darth vader was basically a dark wizard with evil magical powers (the darkside of the force). Religious persecution........

Tyrphanax said:

Father Skywalker said:

Tyrphanax said:

Father Skywalker said:

twister111 said:

 

Father Skywalker said:

they would've at least had plans and mention of it during episode 6. Darth Vader never told luke skywalker that "join me and together we can destroy the planets with the death star as father and son"".

The hell are you on about!?!? The Death Star from the beginning was a weapon of fear to keep the systems in line so they could just dissolve the senate. It wasn't created to destroy a list of planets. They only needed to demonstrate it's destructive power once to test it then the second time to destroy the rebel base. After that they would have all the fear they needed to keep their power and they would set out to rule the planets from that fear.

 

They actually used it twice, once on Despayre, the second time on Alderaan, if you count the EU (the expanded universe) as being canon.... Let's not get into canon debates now, however. My point is, what the hell/heck does dissolving the senate and beauracy have anything to do with using the death star???

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zzs-OvfG8tE

I watched that video and I'm still very confused. Was the death star built as a tool against the rebels?? If the rebel alliance had never existed, would the death star still have been built and used on alderaan and despayre???

Use the death star to rule the galaxy?? What?? I don't get it.... Fear was used to keep the rebels in line, not the people.....No rebels, no death stars, rebels are not good guys, they provoked the war and the destruction of planets.

"No star system will dare oppose the emperor now"

 

When you have an Evil Empire, there will always be a dissenting group of Rebels opposing it. Especially in a fantasy world.

Ultimately it makes very little sense to debate whether the Death Star would exist if there were no Rebels, because if there were no Rebels there would be no movie because the whole premise of Star Wars is the oppressed people rising up and overthrowing their corrupt and evil government and if that didn't exist, neither would Star Wars.

Umm, star wars is a space opera/science fiction/sci fi story, NOT a fantasy story.......

Second of all, yes, with evil people, you'll have people opposing them........

As for the last paragraph, umm, you said, without the rebels, there would be no star wars and therefore you wouldn't be asking that question....... Yes, that's true, but you're just cut me off at whatever i'm saying, meaning you don't even give any time to consider my question, you just blow it off and assume that it's is wrong and not even a question in the first place. 

But please, answer what I said about that, it's a very important and relevant question. I don't ask what if scenarios, and hypotheticals usually, they're stupid, but not when it pertains to the storyline.......

I considered your question, it just seems a bit pointless to me when the whole premise of the film is that there is a just Rebellion against an evil Empire.

I will address it anyway:

The Death Star, as Adywan said, was constructed in order to control the people of the galaxy through fear of its use after the the senate was dissolved.

Again, as Adywan quoted Tarkin: "Fear will keep the local systems in line.... Fear of this battlestation"

It was not built to fight a small band of Rebels, as they were not seen as a threat by anyone but Admiral Tagge, which is why the Rebels were able to evade the Death Star's defenses and destroy it.

As General Dodonna said, the Death Star's defenses were designed around a direct, large-scale assault, which is much more in line with what an opposing star system might send against it.

Remember, at the end of Revenge of the Sith when Vader, Palpatine, and Tarkin are watching it being built? That was back when the Rebel Alliance was just a gleam in Mon Mothma's and Bail Organa's eyes.

So, yes, the Death Star would have been built and used against at least two planets as the purpose of the station was to keep entire planets from rising up against the Empire through the fear of a giant armoured space station that could show up in your system at any time and blow your entire planet up.

So, when was the rebel alliance officially formed?? Both wikipedia and wookipedia claim that the senators meeting (with padme, mon mothma, and jimmy smits), formed the rebellion, but others claim that the rebellion was formed years later on.

What does a direct, large scale assault have to do with an opposing stay system?? Please define an opposing star system in this context?? The rebellion?? Are the imperials a bunch of paranoid stalinists?? Either way, what does that even mean??

BTW, how early was the idea for the death star thought out of?? Please use the Expanded Universe EU here. On the jedi council forums, another user told me that as early as episode 1, darth plageius and darth sidious had the idea of the death star planned out yet.......

What does controlling people through fear to replace the Senate even mean??? The bureaucry had something to do with the death star;how did that control the imperial citizens?? Weren't most of them happy though?? I had a theory that the imperial senate was used to control people.

Tyrphanax said:

Father Skywalker said:

Umm, is the EU canon?? By canon, I mean, not just canon, but part of the same storyline as the movies, and do they basically add to the movies storyline?? Besides, why did screams erupt in the next room?? And then it blew up?? You just stopped quoting the book after that, and added your own stuff to that....

"I don't read that stuff. I haven't read any of the novels. I don't know anything about that world. That's a different world than my world. But I do try to keep it consistent. The way I do it now is they have a Star Wars Encyclopedia. So if I come up with a name or something else, I look it up and see if it has already been used. When I said [other people] could make their own Star Wars stories, we decided that, like Star Trek, we would have two universes: My universe and then this other one. They try to make their universe as consistent with mine as possible, but obviously they get enthusiastic and want to go off in other directions."

Don't use the books/the EU expanded universe to explain what happened in the movies. Both are canon, but are different storylines and timelines and universes, as stated in the above quote.........

Umm, all canon debates aside, i thought that most of the imperials evacuated it. So, a few of them stayed on it, kinda like the handful of fools that stay in their town after the hurricance, while everybody else evacuates???

 

It is generally accepted that unless Lucas explicitly overwrites what a book claims happened with something of his own design, then it is the "true canon". So, yes, the books are canon until Lucas says otherwise. If you want to go purely off the movie, then unless a character is explicitly shown to survive something, general consensus is that they are dead.

Screams were erupting in the next room because the station was falling apart already due to damage incurred from the attack, as well as the Executor crashing into it. I'm sure some Imperials did evacuate, but certainly not all of them. Just like when a ship in the navy gets destroyed in combat, not everyone can get out before it sinks.

I stopped quoting because it's not a good idea to reproduce large amounts of a legally-protected book on a public forum, and because the next part tells about Lando and Wedge escaping the superstructure and the Death Star blowing up.

Speaking of copyright issues, why would you even post any of it here in the first place???

By canon, I mean, part of the same storyline, more specifically, the "same canon".....

I know the last part already, so, no need to tell me.......

Does the book explicity say "boom, they died"!!!!

Puggo - Jar Jar's Yoda said:

Father Skywalker said:

You see?? Without the rebel alliance's existence, no death star usage on any planets!!!!

That is really lame logic.  If someone opposes you, you have the right to kill people, because your defense is "if that person hadn't opposed me, nobody would have died" ?

Umm, no. Even if the rebels had never existed, alderaan wouldnt have been destroyed, it was a means to replace the galactic senate........

Even with your analogy, if the rebels left them alone and waged no war, no problem...... The quadrillions of happy imperial citizens/civilians didn't care if they retaliated against a bunch of rebel terrorists, from their POV........

zombie84 said:

Father Skywalker said:

zombie84 said:

Father Skywalker said:

thecolorsblend said:

 

Wexter said:

Is this even a serious question? How about the same reason we haven't yet cloned a human being? Because it doesn't seem right. Basically the Clone Wars were about Republic pitting their artificially manufactured disposable human beings against the armies of disposable machines. And everyone was so degenerated that it didn't even strike them as a moral dilemma. Now if "Clone Wars" (which was established as soon as Episode IV) was in fact about this dilemma - and the bad guys would be in favor of such policy - that would make an interesting conflict.

I think you're missing the forest but hitting the trees. Doesn't it mean something that the morality is scarcely ever discussed? Nobody seems to terribly mind the loss of life. The absence of that concern for life manufactured to kill and/or die is what morally indicts the Republic and the Jedi.

 

Just like during/in the original trilogy.......

"Great shot kid that was one in a million"- Han Solo, five seconds or so after the first death star exploded and was blown up and the millions of people on it were burned to death in a large, giant explosion........ As well as "ye-hooo", after killing two of anakin skywalker's tie fighter pilots.......

"YE-HAWWW"-Lando Calirissian after blowing up the second death star, and, guess what??? The same thing that happened with the first death star..........

Star Wars, hence the title obviously, is about war........Yet none of our "heroes" or "good guys" ever experience regret for killing stormtroopers. Luke skywalker even killed stormtroopers, not in self defense, but in anger after anakin killed obi wan......

Nothing suprising going on there during/in the prequels trilogy!!!!

The Star Wars films are about war, in the sense of Where Eagles Dare, the movie inspiration for first person shooters. You have bad guys and you have heroes, and the heroes kills the bad guys to win. Just like the serials. They are Villains, because in the end it's a black and white morality tale, a fantasy without real-world examples because it's a morality play. Lord of the Rings is like this too. Ultimatelyt it is isn't applicable to real life, and is actually a bit offensive if you really break it down, but fantasy's get away with it, because they are fantasy's and also play on our inherant either/or biases.

Well, then don't criticize the prequels for that kind of disposable life morality; both han solo and lando calirissian were happy screaming guys, who screamed like cowboys when millions of people were burned to death in a giant explosion........Hmm......... That sounds very kind, moral, and nice, let's give them medals of good moral character (sarcastic tone).....

There are 2 things that i don't understand about what you had just said. Where eagles dare??? That's a kickass iron maiden song, but what does that have to do with star wars?? I also don't understand your last sentence, please explain it better, fantasy is offensive but gets away with it, what???

The Iron Maiden song is based off the 1968 Clint Eastwood WWII movie that inspired the 1992 video game Castle Wolfenstein, the basis for FPS games. It's a great action film, and Lucas seems to have used part of the plot when making Star Wars too! And yeah, fantasy gets away with it. That's why people--myself included--love Star Wars, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Lord of the Rings, and other films. They should be terribly offensive, but they aren't, mainly because they are intentionally unrealistic. It's the same thing with a film like 300. A film that is embarassingly racist. But I love it. Temple of Doom gets the same pass in my book. I overlook things that would cause me to write letters to the editor because the fantasy environment promotes leniency. Based on their popularity, this is widespread.

Why should LOTR be terribly offensive???

So, the fact that they are unrealistic justifies gloryfying evil characters??? Luke skywalker killed a group of stormtroopers in a new hope, not for self defense or defending his rebel allies, friends, or any innocent people, but because he was pissed off that his mentor obi wan kenobi died (darth vader killed him, not the stormtroopers, ur taking it out on the wrong guy here).............

Tyrphanax said:

Father Skywalker said:

Tyrphanax said:

Father Skywalker said:

Tyrphanax said:

adywan said:

Father Skywalker said:

Yes, but how do you know that moff tiaan jerjerrod was on it when it blew up?? Remember that the guys were evacuating on it at the ending; nothing ever confirmed whether or not grand moff tiaan jerjjerod escaped!!!!

Check the deleted scenes on the blu-ray. They were about to blow up the moon of Endor when the Death Star was destroyed, so no, he didn't escape

Wookieepedia.

Wookipedia banned me. They're mean and stupid.....

Besides, wookipedia is not george lucas's offical canon website, it's is a star wars website made by fanboys and fangirls......

I read that he died during/in the explosion, it just wasn't confirmed by an official source yet. What about the evacuation, when luke skywalker was dragging his father's body down to the shuttle????

Wookieepedia, while it has the same drawbacks of any wiki site, is a collection of most of the sources of Star Wars cannon available (books, movies, games, et cetera).

Moff Jerjerrod's death as he waited to pull the trigger to destroy the forest moon of Endor is documented in the novelization of Return of the Jedi. You can read it yourself if you don't believe me!

Did the novelization explicity state "he died", or "he did not escape"??? No. Please send me a quote. Also, remember the guys that were evacuating when luke dragged anakin's body down to his shuttle?? Luke just stayed there for a moments and talked to his father, the other imperial guys didn't wait, they got themselves off of the second death star and escaped pretty fast. If luke could barely escape, then those guys could most certainly escape too, they were quicker and they got ahead of him when escaping, they didn't stop and pause to talk to a dying man.........

By that logic, jerjerrod could have escaped too, and he probably did. What, did two or three guys stay on there or something like that???

Jerjerrod was obsessed with carrying out Palpatine's final order (destroy the forest moon) and his hatred of the Rebels. So much that he died waiting for the Death Star to rotate around to face the moon while holding the firing switch.

Here are the quotes:

 

The Emperor hissed. 'Your fleet is lost - and your friends on the Endor Moon will not survive...' He pushed a comlink button on the arm of his throne and spoke into it with relish. 'Commander Jerjerrod, should the Rebels manage to blow up the shield generator, you will turn this battle station onto the Endor Moon and destroy it.'

'Yes, Your Highness,' came the voice over the receiver, 'but we have several battalions stationed on-'

'You will destroy it!' the Emperor's whisper was more final than any scream.

'Yes, Your Highness.'

 

 

Commander Jerjerrod sat, brooding, in the control room of the Death Star, watching all about him crumble. Half of his crew were dead, wounded, or run off-where they hoped to find sanctuary was unclear, if not insane. The rest wandered ineffectually, or railed at the enemy ships, or fired all their guns at all sectors, or shouted orders, or focused desperately on a single task, as if that would save them. Or, like Jerjerrod, simply brooded.

He couldn't fathom what he'd done wrong. He'd been patient, he'd been loyal, he'd been clever, he'd been hard. He was the commander of the greatest battle station ever built. Or, at least, almost built. He hated this Rebel Alliance, now, with a child's hate, untempered. He'd loved it once - it had been the small boy he could bully, the enraged baby animal he could torture. But the boy had grown up now; it knew how to fight back effectively. It had broken its bonds.

Jerjerrod hated it now.

Yet there seemed to be little he could do at this point. Except, of course, destroy Endor - he could do that. It was a small act, a token really - to incinerate something green and living, gratuitously, meanly, toward no end but that of wanton destruction. A small act, but deliciously satisfying.

An aide ran up to him. 'The Rebel fleet is closing, sir.'

'Concentrate all fire in that sector,' he answered distractedly. A console on the far wall burst into flame.

'The fighters in the superstructure are eluding our defense system, Commander. Shouldn't we-'Flood sectors 304 and 138. That should slow them up.' He arched his eyebrows at the aide.

This made little sense to the aide, who had cause to wonder at the commander's grasp of the situation. 'But sir ...'

'What is the rotation factor to firing range on the Endor Moon?'

The aide checked the compuscreen. 'Point oh two to moon target, sir. Commander, the fleet-'Accelerate rotation until moon is in range, and then fire on my mark.'

'Yes, sir.' The aide pulled a bank of switches. 'Rotation accelerating, sir. Point oh one to moon target, sir. Sixty seconds to firing range. Sir, good-bye, sir.' The aide saluted, put the firing switch in Jerjerrod's hand as another explosion shook the control room, and ran out the door.

Jerjerrod smiled calmly at the view-screen. Endor was starting to come out of the Death Star's eclipse. He fondled the detonation switch in his hand. Point oh oh five to moon target. Screams erupted in the next room.

Thirty seconds to firing.

 

And then it blew up. If you think after reading that that he either cared/wanted to escape or if he could somehow get off the station in the scant few seconds before the reactor blew (by the time the thirty-second count had begun, Lando and Wedge were already firing at the reactor), then I don't know what else to say.

Umm, is the EU canon?? By canon, I mean, not just canon, but part of the same storyline as the movies, and do they basically add to the movies storyline?? Besides, why did screams erupt in the next room?? And then it blew up?? You just stopped quoting the book after that, and added your own stuff to that....

"I don't read that stuff. I haven't read any of the novels. I don't know anything about that world. That's a different world than my world. But I do try to keep it consistent. The way I do it now is they have a Star Wars Encyclopedia. So if I come up with a name or something else, I look it up and see if it has already been used. When I said [other people] could make their own Star Wars stories, we decided that, like Star Trek, we would have two universes: My universe and then this other one. They try to make their universe as consistent with mine as possible, but obviously they get enthusiastic and want to go off in other directions."

Don't use the books/the EU expanded universe to explain what happened in the movies. Both are canon, but are different storylines and timelines and universes, as stated in the above quote.........

Umm, all canon debates aside, i thought that most of the imperials evacuated it. So, a few of them stayed on it, kinda like the handful of fools that stay in their town after the hurricance, while everybody else evacuates???

Tyrphanax said:

I was not being serious when I was talking about the Rebels being terrorists, it's a common non-serious viewpoint in order to play the devil's advocate, and I regret ever giving you that idea.

It is incredibly obvious by watching the films, which are very black and white in their morality, that the Rebellion is good and the Empire is evil.

OK, let's get over that one silly joke......

By that logic, you can say that the world operates in a black and white morality and that the justice system is evil and that criminals are good. You see???

Did you even read my long post that had rebuttals to it, about the great jedi purge, owen and beru lars, and alderaan's destruction????

Tyrphanax said:

I dunno. Vader didn't seem too impressed with the Death Star as compared to the Force, but then he had a lot of respect for Tarkin, and the Death Star was really the pinnacle of The Tarkin Doctrine of "Rule by Fear". I feel like he would have used them had he had access to them.

 

Luke refused Vader's offer to join him because he was a stronger person than Anakin was when the dark side came a-callin'. Though they did share similar attachments (Anakin's visions of Padme dying in childbirth; Luke's visions of his friends being tortured on Cloud City), Luke wanted to fight for good for the sake of fighting for good, because that's what his father did, because Luke is selfless; while Anakin wanted to save Padme at the cost of everything else. In the end, his drive to do good and save her brought only evil and cost him her life, as well (this is why Lucas calls the story a "Tragedy") because Anakin is selfish.

Luke was always the epitome of the optimistic, incorruptible hero; whereas Anakin was the tragic figure who was doomed to fall, if you look at them from an "archetype" standpoint.

What exactly was the tarkin doctrine??? Rule by fear?? What does that even mean??

Besides, darth vader probably would've destroyed dissneting planets with the Force-storm.

You are assuming that he respected tarkin and his ideas, which, again, is just not true. You could tell from a new hope that he was annoyed with tarkin and his plans and ideas. 

The Sith were not evil just because they had a death star........

My theory is this. As the Emperor of the galaxy, Darth Vader would've been a stalinist-style dictator/tyrant, who force-chokes and kills any officer, commander, soldier, or anybody with rank or status that he feels is a dissenter or disagrees with him. And, he would have done other evil atrocities- for instance, the sith once ruled the galaxy even before the prequels, in galactic sith empires, before the jedi defeated them (hench the revenge of the sith), and that was long before the deaths stars even existed. So, emperor darth vader would've done many of the similar things that the ancient sith emperors did......

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Sith_Empire

Tyrphanax said:

I dunno. Vader didn't seem too impressed with the Death Star as compared to the Force, but then he had a lot of respect for Tarkin, and the Death Star was really the pinnacle of The Tarkin Doctrine of "Rule by Fear". I feel like he would have used them had he had access to them.

 

Luke refused Vader's offer to join him because he was a stronger person than Anakin was when the dark side came a-callin'. Though they did share similar attachments (Anakin's visions of Padme dying in childbirth; Luke's visions of his friends being tortured on Cloud City), Luke wanted to fight for good for the sake of fighting for good, because that's what his father did, because Luke is selfless; while Anakin wanted to save Padme at the cost of everything else. In the end, his drive to do good and save her brought only evil and cost him her life, as well (this is why Lucas calls the story a "Tragedy") because Anakin is selfish.

Luke was always the epitome of the optimistic, incorruptible hero; whereas Anakin was the tragic figure who was doomed to fall, if you look at them from an "archetype" standpoint.

You have just contradicted yourself. If the rebels are evil terrorists, then why is darth vader so evil????

georgec said:

Father Skywalker said:

zombie84 said:

Maybe. But since the entire debate--whether it's good, bad, or a non-issue--is never brought up, discussed, or even alluded to, it really just feels like the script failed to pick up on a serious thematic issue inherant in the film. In other words, it's a bit of a plot hole. To me, it doesn't seem deliberate design. It seems the same reason that the entire central mystery of Attack of the Clones--who ordered the clones, and who Sifo-dyas was and what he was doing--was simply ignored in the sequel. Which is to say....who the fuck knows. It was simply dropped.

...what the hell!? How can you have a sequel that does that?? But Lucas went that far. I'm not sure what he was thinking. But basically the effect is that he pretended Episode II didn't exist. Which is awesome, because that movie is terrible. But it's just one more nail in the coffin for why the prequel trilogy was an epic failure of sometimes embarassing preportions. Can you think of another trilogy that simply jettisons the entire plot 2/3 of the way through? Well, maybe that is why Revenge of the SIth is so watchable, so I don't regret it, but it's certainly an indictment against George Lucas from his own self.

Episode 2 basically copied and recycled and shoehorned all of the ideas from Episode 5 into the same storyline; no originality and coming up with new ideas here Georgey Lucas, just borrowing and taking from the older storyline ideas.......

For example.....

Cut off the hand of somebody during a 3-way fight involving Darth Sidious, and after that, was given the choice to either join or to reject the Darkside of the Force, during the 3rd episode of the trilogy......

Had their right hand cut off during a duel with a Sith Lord, during the second episode of the trilogy, only to be replaced with a cybernetic right hand replacement.......

In the third episode of the trilogy, in a 3-way fight between darth sidious, his other sith apprentice, and the young jedi knight, the young jedi cuts off the sith lord's hand in revenge and is tempted by palpatine to kill the sith lord that they have at their mercy.......

Is that Anakin or Luke Skywalker???? Both of em!!!!!! Stop borrowing old ideas, george, it's getting old by now.....

 

cue "poetry" quote...

Wait, what????

adywan said:

Father Skywalker said:

Use the death star to rule the galaxy?? What?? I don't get it.... Fear was used to keep the rebels in line, not the people.....No rebels, no death stars, rebels are not good guys, they provoked the war and the destruction of planets.

"No star system will dare oppose the emperor now"

 

"Fear will keep the local systems in line.... Fear of this battlestation"

It was built to control the people since they had dissolved the senate, NOT built to keep the rebels in line.

Without the rebels, the death star never would've existed and alderaan and despayre would have survived.  "no star system will dare oppose the emperor now"-to quote governor grand moff tarkin. He said that just before destroying alderaan, the home planet of the rebel traitor.........

I quoted blueharvest.net and edited on parts that aren't relevant to this topic-the death star's usage, and let's analyze this to see whose opinion of ours is true.....

TAGGE: Until this battle station is fully operational we are
vulnerable. The Rebel Alliance is too well equipped. They're more
dangerous than you realize.

MOTTI: Dangerous to your starfleet, Commander, not to this battle
station!

TAGGE: The Rebellion will continue to gain a support in the Imperial
Senate as long as....

TARKIN: The Imperial Senate will no longer be of any concern to us.
I've just received word that the Emperor has dissolved the council
permanently. The last remnants of the Old Republic have been swept
away.

TAGGE: That's impossible! How will the Emperor maintain control
without the bureaucracy?

TARKIN: The regional governors now have direct control over
territories. Fear will keep the local systems in line. Fear of this
battle station.

TAGGE: And what of the Rebellion? If the Rebels have obtained a
complete technical readout of this station, it is possible, however
unlikely, that they might find a weakness and exploit it.

VADER: The plans you refer to will soon be back in our hands.

MOTTI: Any attack made by the Rebels against this station would be a
useless gesture, no matter what technical data they've obtained. This
station is now the ultimate power in the universe. I suggest we use
it!

MOTTI: Don't try to frighten us with your sorcerer's ways, Lord Vader.
Your sad devotion to that ancient religion has not helped you conjure
up the stolen data tapes, or given you clairvoyance enough to find the
Rebel's hidden fort...

TARKIN:  Lord Vader will provide us with
the location of the Rebel fortress by the time this station is
operational. We will then crush the Rebellion with one swift stroke.

You see?? Without the rebel alliance's existence, no death star usage on any planets!!!!

Tyrphanax said:

Father Skywalker said:

twister111 said:

 

Father Skywalker said:

they would've at least had plans and mention of it during episode 6. Darth Vader never told luke skywalker that "join me and together we can destroy the planets with the death star as father and son"".

The hell are you on about!?!? The Death Star from the beginning was a weapon of fear to keep the systems in line so they could just dissolve the senate. It wasn't created to destroy a list of planets. They only needed to demonstrate it's destructive power once to test it then the second time to destroy the rebel base. After that they would have all the fear they needed to keep their power and they would set out to rule the planets from that fear.

 

They actually used it twice, once on Despayre, the second time on Alderaan, if you count the EU (the expanded universe) as being canon.... Let's not get into canon debates now, however. My point is, what the hell/heck does dissolving the senate and beauracy have anything to do with using the death star???

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zzs-OvfG8tE

I watched that video and I'm still very confused. Was the death star built as a tool against the rebels?? If the rebel alliance had never existed, would the death star still have been built and used on alderaan and despayre???

Use the death star to rule the galaxy?? What?? I don't get it.... Fear was used to keep the rebels in line, not the people.....No rebels, no death stars, rebels are not good guys, they provoked the war and the destruction of planets.

"No star system will dare oppose the emperor now"

 

When you have an Evil Empire, there will always be a dissenting group of Rebels opposing it. Especially in a fantasy world.

Ultimately it makes very little sense to debate whether the Death Star would exist if there were no Rebels, because if there were no Rebels there would be no movie because the whole premise of Star Wars is the oppressed people rising up and overthrowing their corrupt and evil government and if that didn't exist, neither would Star Wars.

Umm, star wars is a space opera/science fiction/sci fi story, NOT a fantasy story.......

Second of all, yes, with evil people, you'll have people opposing them........

As for the last paragraph, umm, you said, without the rebels, there would be no star wars and therefore you wouldn't be asking that question....... Yes, that's true, but you're just cut me off at whatever i'm saying, meaning you don't even give any time to consider my question, you just blow it off and assume that it's is wrong and not even a question in the first place. 

But please, answer what I said about that, it's a very important and relevant question. I don't ask what if scenarios, and hypotheticals usually, they're stupid, but not when it pertains to the storyline.......

Tyrphanax said:

Father Skywalker said:

Tyrphanax said:

adywan said:

Father Skywalker said:

Yes, but how do you know that moff tiaan jerjerrod was on it when it blew up?? Remember that the guys were evacuating on it at the ending; nothing ever confirmed whether or not grand moff tiaan jerjjerod escaped!!!!

Check the deleted scenes on the blu-ray. They were about to blow up the moon of Endor when the Death Star was destroyed, so no, he didn't escape

Wookieepedia.

Wookipedia banned me. They're mean and stupid.....

Besides, wookipedia is not george lucas's offical canon website, it's is a star wars website made by fanboys and fangirls......

I read that he died during/in the explosion, it just wasn't confirmed by an official source yet. What about the evacuation, when luke skywalker was dragging his father's body down to the shuttle????

Wookieepedia, while it has the same drawbacks of any wiki site, is a collection of most of the sources of Star Wars cannon available (books, movies, games, et cetera).

Moff Jerjerrod's death as he waited to pull the trigger to destroy the forest moon of Endor is documented in the novelization of Return of the Jedi. You can read it yourself if you don't believe me!

Did the novelization explicity state "he died", or "he did not escape"??? No. Please send me a quote. Also, remember the guys that were evacuating when luke dragged anakin's body down to his shuttle?? Luke just stayed there for a moments and talked to his father, the other imperial guys didn't wait, they got themselves off of the second death star and escaped pretty fast. If luke could barely escape, then those guys could most certainly escape too, they were quicker and they got ahead of him when escaping, they didn't stop and pause to talk to a dying man.........

By that logic, jerjerrod could have escaped too, and he probably did. What, did two or three guys stay on there or something like that???

twister111 said:

 

Father Skywalker said:

they would've at least had plans and mention of it during episode 6. Darth Vader never told luke skywalker that "join me and together we can destroy the planets with the death star as father and son"".

The hell are you on about!?!? The Death Star from the beginning was a weapon of fear to keep the systems in line so they could just dissolve the senate. It wasn't created to destroy a list of planets. They only needed to demonstrate it's destructive power once to test it then the second time to destroy the rebel base. After that they would have all the fear they needed to keep their power and they would set out to rule the planets from that fear.

 

They actually used it twice, once on Despayre, the second time on Alderaan, if you count the EU (the expanded universe) as being canon.... Let's not get into canon debates now, however. My point is, what the hell/heck does dissolving the senate and beauracy have anything to do with using the death star???

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zzs-OvfG8tE

I watched that video and I'm still very confused. Was the death star built as a tool against the rebels?? If the rebel alliance had never existed, would the death star still have been built and used on alderaan and despayre???

Use the death star to rule the galaxy?? What?? I don't get it.... Fear was used to keep the rebels in line, not the people.....No rebels, no death stars, rebels are not good guys, they provoked the war and the destruction of planets.

"No star system will dare oppose the emperor now"

Tyrphanax said:

adywan said:

Father Skywalker said:

Yes, but how do you know that moff tiaan jerjerrod was on it when it blew up?? Remember that the guys were evacuating on it at the ending; nothing ever confirmed whether or not grand moff tiaan jerjjerod escaped!!!!

Check the deleted scenes on the blu-ray. They were about to blow up the moon of Endor when the Death Star was destroyed, so no, he didn't escape

Wookieepedia.

Wookipedia banned me. They're mean and stupid.....

Besides, wookipedia is not george lucas's offical canon website, it's is a star wars website made by fanboys and fangirls......

I read that he died during/in the explosion, it just wasn't confirmed by an official source yet. What about the evacuation, when luke skywalker was dragging his father's body down to the shuttle????

zombie84 said:

Father Skywalker said:

thecolorsblend said:

 

Wexter said:

Is this even a serious question? How about the same reason we haven't yet cloned a human being? Because it doesn't seem right. Basically the Clone Wars were about Republic pitting their artificially manufactured disposable human beings against the armies of disposable machines. And everyone was so degenerated that it didn't even strike them as a moral dilemma. Now if "Clone Wars" (which was established as soon as Episode IV) was in fact about this dilemma - and the bad guys would be in favor of such policy - that would make an interesting conflict.

I think you're missing the forest but hitting the trees. Doesn't it mean something that the morality is scarcely ever discussed? Nobody seems to terribly mind the loss of life. The absence of that concern for life manufactured to kill and/or die is what morally indicts the Republic and the Jedi.

 

Just like during/in the original trilogy.......

"Great shot kid that was one in a million"- Han Solo, five seconds or so after the first death star exploded and was blown up and the millions of people on it were burned to death in a large, giant explosion........ As well as "ye-hooo", after killing two of anakin skywalker's tie fighter pilots.......

"YE-HAWWW"-Lando Calirissian after blowing up the second death star, and, guess what??? The same thing that happened with the first death star..........

Star Wars, hence the title obviously, is about war........Yet none of our "heroes" or "good guys" ever experience regret for killing stormtroopers. Luke skywalker even killed stormtroopers, not in self defense, but in anger after anakin killed obi wan......

Nothing suprising going on there during/in the prequels trilogy!!!!

The Star Wars films are about war, in the sense of Where Eagles Dare, the movie inspiration for first person shooters. You have bad guys and you have heroes, and the heroes kills the bad guys to win. Just like the serials. They are Villains, because in the end it's a black and white morality tale, a fantasy without real-world examples because it's a morality play. Lord of the Rings is like this too. Ultimatelyt it is isn't applicable to real life, and is actually a bit offensive if you really break it down, but fantasy's get away with it, because they are fantasy's and also play on our inherant either/or biases. That's why it's okay to have a film like Raiders of the Lost Ark, where Harrison Ford is killing conscripted German citizens for laughs, while in reality films/books like The Reader or Slaughterhouse Five would turn Indiana Jones into a brainwashed mass murderer as much as any Nazi. Yet we cheer him on as he machine guns Germans while we boo when John Wayne is under fire from them. It's a bit disgusting, but hey that's the way George Lucas makes films, did you see Red Tails? A movie that is racist to both white AND black people! Congrats to him!

So, U r implying that george lucas is digusting??? Hmm......

georgec said:

What are we arguing about? I want in on this.

Read all of the previous posts, brother.......

zombie84 said:

Father Skywalker said:

thecolorsblend said:

 

Wexter said:

Is this even a serious question? How about the same reason we haven't yet cloned a human being? Because it doesn't seem right. Basically the Clone Wars were about Republic pitting their artificially manufactured disposable human beings against the armies of disposable machines. And everyone was so degenerated that it didn't even strike them as a moral dilemma. Now if "Clone Wars" (which was established as soon as Episode IV) was in fact about this dilemma - and the bad guys would be in favor of such policy - that would make an interesting conflict.

I think you're missing the forest but hitting the trees. Doesn't it mean something that the morality is scarcely ever discussed? Nobody seems to terribly mind the loss of life. The absence of that concern for life manufactured to kill and/or die is what morally indicts the Republic and the Jedi.

 

Just like during/in the original trilogy.......

"Great shot kid that was one in a million"- Han Solo, five seconds or so after the first death star exploded and was blown up and the millions of people on it were burned to death in a large, giant explosion........ As well as "ye-hooo", after killing two of anakin skywalker's tie fighter pilots.......

"YE-HAWWW"-Lando Calirissian after blowing up the second death star, and, guess what??? The same thing that happened with the first death star..........

Star Wars, hence the title obviously, is about war........Yet none of our "heroes" or "good guys" ever experience regret for killing stormtroopers. Luke skywalker even killed stormtroopers, not in self defense, but in anger after anakin killed obi wan......

Nothing suprising going on there during/in the prequels trilogy!!!!

The Star Wars films are about war, in the sense of Where Eagles Dare, the movie inspiration for first person shooters. You have bad guys and you have heroes, and the heroes kills the bad guys to win. Just like the serials. They are Villains, because in the end it's a black and white morality tale, a fantasy without real-world examples because it's a morality play. Lord of the Rings is like this too. Ultimatelyt it is isn't applicable to real life, and is actually a bit offensive if you really break it down, but fantasy's get away with it, because they are fantasy's and also play on our inherant either/or biases.

Well, then don't criticize the prequels for that kind of disposable life morality; both han solo and lando calirissian were happy screaming guys, who screamed like cowboys when millions of people were burned to death in a giant explosion........Hmm......... That sounds very kind, moral, and nice, let's give them medals of good moral character (sarcastic tone).....

There are 2 things that i don't understand about what you had just said. Where eagles dare??? That's a kickass iron maiden song, but what does that have to do with star wars?? I also don't understand your last sentence, please explain it better, fantasy is offensive but gets away with it, what???

U R basically implying that the rebellion alliance are a bunch of evil bad guys, and it's is OK to root for evil violent criminal people in fiction, which is basically implying that REBELS=EVIL, and Galactic sith Empire=Good guys!!!!

zombie84 said:

Maybe. But since the entire debate--whether it's good, bad, or a non-issue--is never brought up, discussed, or even alluded to, it really just feels like the script failed to pick up on a serious thematic issue inherant in the film. In other words, it's a bit of a plot hole. To me, it doesn't seem deliberate design. It seems the same reason that the entire central mystery of Attack of the Clones--who ordered the clones, and who Sifo-dyas was and what he was doing--was simply ignored in the sequel. Which is to say....who the fuck knows. It was simply dropped.

...what the hell!? How can you have a sequel that does that?? But Lucas went that far. I'm not sure what he was thinking. But basically the effect is that he pretended Episode II didn't exist. Which is awesome, because that movie is terrible. But it's just one more nail in the coffin for why the prequel trilogy was an epic failure of sometimes embarassing preportions. Can you think of another trilogy that simply jettisons the entire plot 2/3 of the way through? Well, maybe that is why Revenge of the SIth is so watchable, so I don't regret it, but it's certainly an indictment against George Lucas from his own self.

Episode 2 basically copied and recycled and shoehorned all of the ideas from Episode 5 into the same storyline; no originality and coming up with new ideas here Georgey Lucas, just borrowing and taking from the older storyline ideas.......

For example.....

Cut off the hand of somebody during a 3-way fight involving Darth Sidious, and after that, was given the choice to either join or to reject the Darkside of the Force, during the 3rd episode of the trilogy......

Had their right hand cut off during a duel with a Sith Lord, during the second episode of the trilogy, only to be replaced with a cybernetic right hand replacement.......

In the third episode of the trilogy, in a 3-way fight between darth sidious, his other sith apprentice, and the young jedi knight, the young jedi cuts off the sith lord's hand in revenge and is tempted by palpatine to kill the sith lord that they have at their mercy.......

Is that Anakin or Luke Skywalker???? Both of em!!!!!! Stop borrowing old ideas, george, it's getting old by now.....

thecolorsblend said:

 

Wexter said:

Is this even a serious question? How about the same reason we haven't yet cloned a human being? Because it doesn't seem right. Basically the Clone Wars were about Republic pitting their artificially manufactured disposable human beings against the armies of disposable machines. And everyone was so degenerated that it didn't even strike them as a moral dilemma. Now if "Clone Wars" (which was established as soon as Episode IV) was in fact about this dilemma - and the bad guys would be in favor of such policy - that would make an interesting conflict.

I think you're missing the forest but hitting the trees. Doesn't it mean something that the morality is scarcely ever discussed? Nobody seems to terribly mind the loss of life. The absence of that concern for life manufactured to kill and/or die is what morally indicts the Republic and the Jedi.

 

Just like during/in the original trilogy.......

"Great shot kid that was one in a million"- Han Solo, five seconds or so after the first death star exploded and was blown up and the millions of people on it were burned to death in a large, giant explosion........ As well as "ye-hooo", after killing two of anakin skywalker's tie fighter pilots.......

"YE-HAWWW"-Lando Calirissian after blowing up the second death star, and, guess what??? The same thing that happened with the first death star..........

Star Wars, hence the title obviously, is about war........Yet none of our "heroes" or "good guys" ever experience regret for killing stormtroopers. Luke skywalker even killed stormtroopers, not in self defense, but in anger after anakin killed obi wan......

Nothing suprising going on there during/in the prequels trilogy!!!!

Bingowings said:

At the beginning of ROTJ Vader turns up to give the Moff the bad news that he can't have more men until he gets the second Death Star working.

So it couldn't have blown up anything around the time of ESB because it wouldn't be operational yet.

Obviously. What I meant was, destroying any planets wasn't even mentioned. Obviously they couldn't blow up any planets during episode 5, I meant, if the empire and the sith were truly the bad guys, they would've at least had plans and mention of it during episode 6. Darth Vader never told luke skywalker that "join me and together we can destroy the planets with the death star as father and son"". I won't even discuss episode 6 because that is totally off-topic and not pertaining to this thread, as we've gotten off on a bit of a tangent here already, discussing cloning and stuff like that!!!!!

Bingowings said:

Father Skywalker said:

Bingowings said:

At the beginning of ROTJ Vader turns up to give the Moff the bad news that he can't have more men until he gets the second Death Star working.

So it couldn't have blown up anything around the time of ESB because it wouldn't be operational yet.

I know that already, but just because it wasn't around yet that didn't mean that it was totally irrelevant to the plot yet..... The rebellion alliance were trying to stop the bad guys from blowing up planets with it-yet, when Luke Skywalker refused to join Darth Vader, he never said "I'll never destroy planets with you"......

Yet, in episode 5, they never mentioned saving any planets; and that's is my point here........

Tony Todd would.

Tony Stark would.........

Bingowings said:

Father Skywalker said:

Bingowings said:

Father Skywalker said:

In other words-the Old republic had child soldiers.........

Hmm, that sounds so moral and nice and alright and good!!!!!!!!

Technically speaking yes and if we are meant to care for Artoo and Threepio were should also care for the sapient machines in the Confederate Army too.

They are programmed to kill they have no choice.

Yet we are supposed to cheer the Jedi (with their brainwashed child warrior monk novices) as they slice them into bits while they make weird comic sounds.

It's really hard to like the PT Republic.

Sapient machines??? They were just droids and robots, disposable objects . I have a theory that George Lucas made the Confederacy of independent systems (oh, such an American Civil War allegory-they wanted to leave the Union/USA-oh, I mean the galactic Republic), have an army of droids and robots so that he didn't actually have to show real people/soldiers getting killed in war, to make it light-hearted for the little kids/children who watch star wars, they just see people fighting robots, cartoonish fantasy violence, not like the true horrors of war......

Yes but Artoo and Threepio are fully fleshed out characters that we are meant to care about.

They have independent internal lives.

If we are meant to care about them, we should extend that same level of personality to all the droids in the series that seem to fall into the same classification.

The Federation Battledroids annoying as they are also have independent lives.

They talk to each other when they don't need to for example.

Therefore they are mechanical slaves in the same way that the clones are biological machines.

It's the lack of depth in the PT and ROTJ that's the problem.

We see Artoo and Threepio as people (something even the heroes often fail to do).

The line when they enter the Cantina in the first film is an indication that their low status is something we should notice.

This is blown out of the water however when we have the comedy torture scene in ROTJ.

Not sure if troll

Or is a conspiracy theorist with crazy fan theories 

TV's Frink said:

the.darkside.is.fun, amiright Father Skywalker?

Umm, ok, i still dont get your ur point, but OK........

Bingowings said:

At the beginning of ROTJ Vader turns up to give the Moff the bad news that he can't have more men until he gets the second Death Star working.

So it couldn't have blown up anything around the time of ESB because it wouldn't be operational yet.

I know that already, but just because it wasn't around yet that didn't mean that it was totally irrelevant to the plot yet..... The rebellion alliance were trying to stop the bad guys from blowing up planets with it-yet, when Luke Skywalker refused to join Darth Vader, he never said "I'll never destroy planets with you"......

Yet, in episode 5, they never mentioned saving any planets; and that's is my point here........