Admiral Yularen will get "promoted" to colonel??

First off, that's not in the movie. So Greedo's only actual appearance is in ANH.

If it had been in the movie (and hopefully someday it will be along with all the others), then it will be the EU that will have to be retconned to make Greedo an older character. The reason for this is that the the other Rodian hints at Greedo's fate at Solo's hands. That forewarning makes no sense if it is Greedo's father.

How was the "parsec" goof fixed by an EU explanation? Please explain.

I'll hit you back with your own "That's your reading of it".

The2ndQuest stated earlier that the STAR WARS EU "it's also not something that can be outright ignored in discussion". I was merely pointing out that it can be. The EU is intended to enhance the STAR WARS mythos for fans who choose to embrace it, but it is by no means essential in any STAR WARS discussion - unless of that STAR WARS discussion in about the EU.

First, George did completely disregard TOTJ take on Jedi culture, etc. (that is if he even knew their take on it). Force Ghosts and Jedi marriages don't happen. Even ROGUE PLANET is out of date with that Jedi who had children.
Second, the only EU names Lucas seems to have used is Coruscant (is that indeed Zahn's creation?) and Quinlan Vos. Aayla Secura crossed over from the EU because her character is sexy. I know of no others. Hardly evidence that Lucas gfives it more than a passing glance.

If, George sat down tonight and began creating EPISODES VII to IX I doubt very much he would allow the EXPANDED UNIVERSE to influence him if he knew the story he wanted to tell.

The2ndQuest wrote this - "And, quite frankly, there's a huge difference between the names of characters and other background info from the films and actual EU prose."

The2nd is saying here that there is a "huge difference" in names and info. He is not talking about things "unnamed".

Seriously, though, can somebody please look at Veers uniform and compare the colour to Ozzel's?

 

The only reference I can recall to the age of the Old Republic is from ANH when Obi-Wan tells Luke that "For over a thousand generations the Jedi Knights were the guardians of peace and justice in the Old Republic". The Republic could be older than even that.
Ki-Adi-Mundi comments that the Sith have been extinct for a thousand years and Palpatine says he does not want to end 1,000 years of peace in the Republic.

Where does the "1,000 or 25,000" come into it? Does the TPM opening crawl have "25,000 years" in it?

Ah, I see. You mean it actually tries to make everything fit together into a reasonable timeline where as the TREK books and comics do not.

Yes, it can be a "viable source", however, it can be completely diregard in a discussion whereas the movies and TCW cannot be.

 

I disagree. I think it goes to the heart of the Yularen issue. Perhaps it's a tangent, but every discussion needs a few of those.

Yes, you can - Motti calls him Commander. Motti's rank is never addressed except in the credits.

Furthermore, you could reasrch the costume designs, to see what reference you can find to the "badges" on their uniforms. This counts as "from the films", and more valid than EU sources.

Again, I've never seen or heard an Admiral, General or Captain being called "Commander". Please direct to a source which can correct me if I'm wrong.

How do you know this?

 

Grytpype, 2ndQuest was clear enough. Move the canon discussion to its proper thread. Let's keep this thread to Yularen's rank and any discussion on military organization.

 

If the rules of the forum are that strict, then anything not that does relate directly to Yularen's change in rank between the series and the action figure are OFF TOPIC and absolutely no tangents are allowed. This is a very poor notion of as discussion.

It also seems to me that I raised points nobody is willing to discuss. Shame that.

 

I'm not sure about the credits, but I also recollect that in the novelization he is indeed a Moff. However, this is exactly the same as the Tagge issue - what we hear spoken in the movie is the final script. For whatever reason, Lucas change his rank to Commander on the day of shooting. The novelizations of movies rarely work from the final shooting script.

Now who wants it both ways.
These other sources are the same sources which say Motti is an admiral. yet the credits state it's general. How can it be correct for one and wrong for the other?

Also, how can the final shooting script be wrong?

Please, show me an example of a military officers holding the rank of admiral or general, who is called "Commander" not (not "a" commander) by other officers or subordinates. This as been claimed more than once here and I keep asking but I get no answer. Please, if I'm wrong, I want to know.

Again, as above - it's not an interpretation - Motti says it.
Plus, I've never heard Lucas refer to Tagge or his rank. Did he intend for that character to be a general, but like the "parsec" incident a mistake was made? such things happen but like "parsec" in was spoken on screen in the finished movie.
It makes no sense for every "source" to name him general, thus contradicting what we see in the movie. It is only logical that the "sources" change their data to the correct info.

 

Well, we're being quite lenient with the forum rules (they're more like guidelines, anyway ). This whole discussion has veered far too much off topic, to the point of being a disservice to itself. 2ndQuest is trying to do a bit of house cleaning now, so that all the points can be discussed in an objective fashion. True, this thread is about Yularen's rank, but discussing the organization of the military is quite pertinent to the original discussion, so there's no problem to veer off into this direction here. Going in depth into several issues of canon however, is going a bit too far, so it's best to split the discussion into its appropriate threads.

Well, you're raising a lot of points, so some of them do tend to fall through the cracks. Sometimes people are just not ineterested in discussing everything, and just focus on topic they care more about.

 

I see nothing wrong in a discussion "veering" on to new topics. That is what happens.

By "splitting" the discussion, to you mean The2ndQuest intends to edit the thread?

Well, if a person doesn't want to discuss certain points raised in a discuss, then it's not much off a discussion. If a person wants to be involved they can't just stick with what makes them comfortable.

You'll never learn anything that way.

 

It's all right to veer off into new topics as long as you're still discussing the same overall issue. The problem with having a thread supposedly devoted to ranks in the military that is instead discussing in-depth canon issues is that: 1-The rank issue loses strength and questions go unanswered. 2-Someone looking to discuss canon-issues will go to the Canon thread and miss all the good discussion that's been going on in the wrong thread.

No, he's not editing the thread, he's just making sure that from now on the issues pertaining to canon happen in the Canon thread instead of here.

It's not about avoiding "uncomfortable" issues, nobody is running away from an argument here. It's just that with so many points being raised, people don't have time to discuss the ones they have no interest on. I don't much care about the colour of Ozzel's uniform, so I don't discuss that. I'm not avoiding the issue, I just don't care about it. Someone who does is welcome to comment on it.

 

But the issue of canon was related to the issue of rank ??

Good

But the colour of Ozzel and Veer's uniform is an important point in discussing whether the Imperial military is divided into branches or is a single organization - a "deciding factor" in fact.

I'd always thought they wore the same colour - evidence that they may indeed be one single group.

However, looking at a still the other day they appeared to be slightly different in colour. This could be due to lighting, but they could be different.

This would be clear evidence that George, will never stating it in the dialogue or anywhere else in the movies, did intend for the Imperial forces to be branched into army, navy, etc. - irrelevant of whatever EU sources say on the matter.

You may have no interest in the colour of costumes, but it is vitally important.

 

They were related only as far as accepting or not the EU arguments concerning ranks and organization. But the discussion had moved way beyond that territory, which is why it was more productive to move it to the appropriate thread.

I wouldn't call it a "deciding factor" or "clear evidence". Even if his uniform did have a different tone, that's not enough to base a whole "different branches" argument which invalidates a crystal clear organization established by other sources. The colour could be different due to lighting, post-production color-grading or simply due to a minor slip-up in the costuming department. In-universe, his uniform could be from a different batch, with slightly altered colours, or washed with a different kind of soap or whatever...
Or, just as you said that it being the same colour may indicate a single group, it being a different colour may not indicate separate groups.

 

Not really "way beyond", I was merely pointing out some obvious errors in the EU and saying that it doesn't make much sense to disregard things from the actual movie, whiich are the heart and soul of STAR WARS.

Considering that there will be no more movies, and unless a future TV series, is set in the timeframe, the colour of the uniforms in that scene in EMPIRE is a deciding factor - irrelevant of what is contained in the EU.
Veer's is the only non-stormtrooper Imperial officer who we know for definite actually commands ground troops. If his uniform is the same colour as Ozzel's and Piett's then it is likely that Imperial military structure is the same as the GRAND ARMY in TCW.
If it is a different colour, then there must be a reason. His uniform is different because he is in a different branch to Ozzel - he is only seen commanding ground troops and not a ship - so therefore the Empire does indeed have an army separate to it's fleet.

Production-wise the colour may be accidental - but like the "parsec" incident that is a goof that works within the movie - an accident in the costume department created an Imperial Army!! Awesome!!!

 

I was only asking.

Well, first off, you are saying that the credits are wrong because the EU disagrees. I'm saying it because the final script says so.
I'm not "citing the credits as the primary reason" - they are only source of Motti's rank because nothing in the movie says otherwise, like it does for Tagge.

Officially created by Lucas, yes - but irrelevant if the finished movie disagrees - unless an edit is done to change it

[/quote]

Ah, Lucas made a mistake, but the script isn't wrong.

Well, using only the narrow sources you wish to use, the most notable would be Jerjerrod being a Moff and commander of the DS2. If your not taking the credits in ANH as an error, then Tagge is a General referred to as commander. [/quote]

That was my third time asking that. The first two specifically asked for real world examples. I didn't ask that the third time because I thought it was self evident. You can't use as two in movie examples of two of the three instances that we disagreeing about.

That is exactly a point I made previously. Vader says "I hope so Commander" not "I hope so Moff"

Exactly what I was looking for. Googled it myself but came up with nothing. Okay, it doesn't state that an actual general could be called "commander" but it's good enough for me. So this sorts out the issue of rank for Tagge and Moff and removes those "errors" in regards to the credits - Tagge is indeed a general, Jerjerrod is a Moff and it so follows that obviously and logically Motti is a general also.

After all of that, a simple Wiki entry would have sorted it out. We've learned something today.

[/quote]

Issue sort

 

HA!! THE GALAXY IS TOO BIG TO CONTROL!!

anywho, won't be online myself for a few days.

laters.

 

On an unrelated note - use of the term parsecs in ANH was not a mistake, as explained by Lucas on the DVD commentary. It is a unit of distance and that is what he intended it to mean. Therefore there may have been an EU explanation created for what Han meant by completing the Kessel Run in less that 12 parsecs, but it is not a retcon since the meaning did not change.

 

Trying to stay on topic here.

 

He may indeed say that, but he also admitted years ago that is was a mistake on his part.

Lucas retconned himself!!

 

Is there any site or book that has images of both movie and EU uniforms, New Republic in particular?

 

I would say theforce.net/swtc, but I know a lot of people don't like his work.