Slashdot Mirror
Revenge of the Sith Easter Eggs
Ant writes "Via TheForce.Net, a StarWars.com article with a great list of Easter Eggs from the third prequel movie, Revenge of the Sith. There were many cameos and hidden images." From the article: "
It's tiny, but visible enough to send a warm fuzzy through the hearts of original trilogy fans. In the establishing shot of the expansive Senate docking bays, there's a tiny Millennium Falcon easing into frame. And it's not just a non-descript Corellian freighter; it's on good authority -- namely George Lucas -- that this is the infamous hunk-of-junk before it came into the ownership of either Lando Calrissian or Han Solo."
**Minor Spoiler**
Did anyone else feel the scene where Yoda leaves Kashyyyk was entirely reminiscent of the last scene in ET? Even Yoda's little pod looked a lot like ET's ship to me. I could even swear I heard the ET theme playing in the background.
... in fact it's one of TPM's few redeeming features.
A dusty EVA pod from 2001: A Space Odyssey can be seen in amongst the junk in Watto's junkyard. Must have been the one that cut Frank Poole's air supply, eventually ending up in a galaxy far, far away.
You mean, "If you aren't with me, then you're my enemy!" of course. (right before he and Obi-Wan go at it/also a Bush quotation)
try { Signature mysig = new CleverAttempt(); } catch(NonCleverSignatureException e) { postanyway(); }
It's not those lines. It's the "you're either with my, or your my enemy" (from Anakin), and the "only the Sith see things in absolutes" (from Obi Wan).
While I agree with him, I personally couldn't really care less what Lucas thinks, and his references to the situation are as simple and without subtlety as we accuse Bush of being.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Does anyone know how C3P0 lost his right leg, which is silver in the original films instead of gold. I expected him to lose it in episode 3.
Philosophy.
Offended? No. Saddened? Yes. Check out this (urbandictionary.com) for more information about this strange phenomenon.
Mod parent +10 insightful!
Only one point I'd like to add though, is that unlike hitler and other fascists in history, I do believe Bush is not so much after the allure and power in and of itself, but rather by a dubious sense of 'higher purpose' by his beliefs and his insistance that everyone share them. From his point of view it's his 'duty' to bring democracy and stability to the world and to persuade other like minded people to help him push it through, essentially by any means necessary. He's on some kind of crusade, and while in the end the effects are pretty much the same, the motives are somewhat different.
You know, I've never really understood that line... I thought a parsec was a distance. ~3.26 l.y. specifically. Wouldn't you measure the speed of a ship by the time it takes to go a set distance?
New slang when you notice the stripes, the dirt in your fries.
Other issues are more important. Although I generally consider the new movie to be excellent, I wish that Lucas would have un-did a major thematic flaw in the first 2 stories in this new trilogy. I am referring to the comment, in "Star Wars I", about the force being transferred from person to person via mitochondria (which is labeled "mito chlorians" by one of the characters.)
Note that in the original trilogy, episodes IV-VI of "Star Wars" (SW), Lucas alludes that anyone can be part of the force. Your participation depends solely on your commitment to open-mindedness and the good side of the force. With this force, you can transcend the difficulties that you currently face. That message is a wonderfully uplifting message for kids of past and present generations.
Then, in SW I, Lucas trashes that egalitarian view and says that Jedis are born, not created. Namely, you cannot be part of the good side of the force by your own choice. Jedis are some sort of elite, snobby group whose membership is determined by blood. Such a message, in my opinion, is atrocious and runs counter to the fundamental egalitarianism of Western society.
Was anyone bothered by this fundamental change in one of the themes of SW?
It is. There are sort of two schools of thought about Han meant.
Croddy gives one explanation (the maneuverability test).
The other is that Han was just boasting nonsense deliberately to try to impress Luke and Obi-Wan to see if they were suckers. Had they been impressed, had would have charged them more.
Remember to watch "Serenity" later this yeah, there you'll have great acting from a cast of unknowns on a small budget.
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Not really. She goes on to become President of the New Republic, and doesn't really learn that much about the Force during that time. She does step down eventually, and learns a bit, but she's never as strong as her brother.
If you REALLY wanted to spread the BS a little more... we could take the "test of maneuverability" explanation as fact and say that Han was purposely trying to do a verbal slight of hand of sorts... Perhaps the Falcon isn't as fast as he'd like his potential passengers to believe, and he was trying to confuse, hoping they wouldn't know what a parsec really is. Lie to make a quick cred? Sure, why not.
;D
Bless you Star Trek for giving the fans the ability to bullshit their way out of even the worst writing.
BytesTemplar.com
I read
I know and like Star Wars.
I know and like and play D&D.
And thanks to someone else's comments my boob size is now being discussed on the
Boy, you're easily swayed, aren't you?
PS: Sorry, no, I'm with NoKey who teaches me linux (gotta love a man who teaches you linux!).
PPS: sorry for off-topic.
I thought the exact same thing about Easter Eggs. I'm not sure if there's been some change in the meaning of "Easter eggs", or if the writer misunderstood what the term meant.
Perhaps the writer was too busy inserting hyper-links willy-nilly to look up the term.
I just hope this isn't a part of a changing trend where writers start to misuse words and before you know it people just accept the missuse as normal. Like the case with emoticons. Somewhere along the line writers decided that "emoticon" was too big and confusing as a word, so they started using the word "smiley" instead. Sadly smiley caught on.
The Internet is generally stupid
Remember, Ben had already been talking with Chewie, so he would have known (surely through his homework of communing with Kwi Gon, or the history with Yoda), that Chewie was okay.
In Norway we measure the speeds of cars in kilometers per hour. When asked about a speed we usually say just "100 kilometers", not "100 kilometers per hour"
so "do or do not.. there are no try" and now "only the Sith see things in absolutes".. Hmmm.
Remeber in ep1 when Yoda looks into Anakin's future, frowns, and declares it "fuzzy" and says he can't see?
He lied.
He saw the awnser to the riddle of the Balance of the Force: From an imbalance of thousands of light-side weilder and only two dark-siders, Anakin will bring balance: Two of each.
Yoda keeps his mouth shut and makes sure he's one the two.
You can't take the sky from me...
Can somebody explain why Yoda is serious in the Old Republic and playful and infantile / senile in the Empire?
He's trying to test Luke's patience (and Luke fails the test: "I cannot teach him, the boy has no patience.") After that, Yoda is dead serious the rest of the film, and only attempts to be funny once in Return of the Jedi ("when 900 years old you reach, look as good you will not").
And what did he do with his laser?
His lightsaber? I think I saw it get dropped during the battle with Palpatine in the big Senate room. I suppose Yoda could have used the Force to retrieve it, but he was probably in a hurry - or figured, in exile, he would not need it.
Besides, when Luke comes around looking for a "great warrior" the last thing Yoda would have wanted to do was break out the lightsaber and show Luke a few cool moves. Luke was stuck in a mindset of expecting Jedi to just be saber-wielding killing machines, something Yoda probably wanted to correct. Seeing Yoda using a lightsaber would only have convinced Luke that the lightsaber makes the Jedi, and he'd have ignored or misinterpreted all the lessons after that.
~ radiographite: art by john shepard
He probably thought he would then kill Darth Sideous, and make himself Emperor
That's his plan all along. He tells Padme that they can rule the galaxy together, and when that falls through he tries to recruit Luke for ruling-the-galaxy duty. He just doesn't want to rule the galaxy alone. His main character flaw is his inability to be alone. He was upset enough from losing his mother to commit a minor atrocity, but luckily for him, he can in a way replace her with Padme. He's obsessed with saving Padme, and when he ultimately loses her, only Palpatine is there to be a father figure. And he's loyal, at least until he finds Luke and figures he can off Palpatine and rule the galaxy with his son.
Probably comes from the fact he never had a father. Interesting, eh?
In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
> That's his plan all along. He tells Padme that they can rule the
> galaxy together, and when that falls through he tries to recruit
> Luke for ruling-the-galaxy duty. He just doesn't want to rule
> the galaxy alone.
Interesting.
I also find it fascinating that Anakin is never free.
He starts life off literally as a slave on Tatooine. Then he starts his Jedi training, and he's not free there either. Remember in Episode II when Padme asks him if he's even allowed to love? He's still a slave, but now he's a slave to the Jedi order, in a sense.
Then he joins the Sith to save Padme, and he's now a slave to the dark side. he tells Luke in Episode VI that it's too late for him, he must obey his master. Anakin's situation makes one reinterpret Leia's line in Episode IV, about Tarkin holding Vader's leash.
The only time Anakin is truly free is when he kills Sideous. And he dies minutes after that.
I guess it can go beyond that. If the Jedi are "slaves" to the Jedi order, and the Sith are "slaves" to the dark side, and he's a slave his whole life, then Anakin's line in Episode I is correct about his dream where he freed all the slaves.
Insert simplistic political, ideological, or personal proselytization here.
That's the best line ever: "Only the Sith see things in absolutes." Hahaha! You should never generalize, Obi Wan. Everybody always generalizes.
Music speeds up when you yawn, but does not change pitch.