Seeing as how it's Hallowe'en, I thought I'd start a thread about possibly the creepiest Star Wars villain, Palpatine. I think that both versions work equally well, but for different reasons. The Palpatine in ESB seems much more inhuman (if that's possible for Palpatine), probably because they used a woman's face with superimposed chimp eyes. There's an unnerving quality to it; I couldn't quite place why it looked strange the first few times. I also think Clive Revill does an excellent job as the voice of Palpatine. Of course, McDiarmid's Palpatine was excellent. More than anything, I think he's a fascinating character to watch, thanks to the superb make-up work and McDiarmid's sinister facial expressions. Then, of course, there's his voice; it sounds like oozing evil. This version came along at the right time, I feel, just as Vader became less menacing. I'd argue that Palpatine is a more interesting character as well; before the prequels came along, we knew even less about him than Anakin Skywalker. His appearance in Jedi raised so many questions for me when I first saw the movie. But the question is, when you first saw ESB and ROTJ, did you realise Palps was played by two different actors? I have to admit that I didn't, but in my defence I was pretty young at the time. Also, does it bother you that there is an inconsistency between the portrayals? GK edit: Please visit our lovely Index.