Discussion in 'Canada Discussion Boards' started by Cow_Girl, May 19, 2005.
I wish Harry Potter would do that too....
I went back at watched the scene on the DVD of ESB the other night and I never realized that in addition to changing to Ian MacDiarmid as the emperor they modified lines:
OT Palpatine: We have a new enemy. Luke Skywalker.
Vader: He is just a boy. Obi Wan can no longer help him.
Palapatine: The son of Skywalker must not be allowed to live.
SE v. 2 Palpatine: We have a new enemy. The boy who destroyed the Death Star. I have no doubt that this boy is the son of Skywalker.
Vader: (pause) How is that possible?
Palpatine: Search your feelings.
I never understood why they did that till I saw the new movie. When I saw the OT I thought that Vader figured out about his son because he sensed the force in the battle, heard the name Skywalker and put it together. Then at the scroll when it said he was obsessed with finding him, his revelation makes sense because not only did he want to get rid of an enemy, it would make sense he'd also really want to find his son.
I can only assume Lucas made this change to now show that I guess Vader never knew Luke was the son of him until the Emperor points it out.
I guess after that last line Vader was supposed to figure out in about 2 seconds that Padme had the babies before dying and then they hid them.
Is there any other lines or scenes changed in the DVD SE (besides Hayden replacing Sebastian Shaw as a ghost)?
My thought on this is that Vader knew the whole time that Luke was his son. He felt it at Yavin, he had heard the name etc., but he didn't let Palpatine know because he was planning to use Luke to help him overthrow the Emperor. Palpatine had no intention of letting Luke live until Vader suggested it, but he had no idea of Vader's real motives.
I caught the changed lines in ESB, but I didn't know they changed the actor. I guess I'll have to watch it again.
ah, now having the two pictures next to each other makes it obvious...
Ah the difference that a good cleanser and toner makes...
DISCLAIMER: This review comes from a total,
unabashed Star Wars fanboy geek. He eagerly
lined up for the midnight show of Sith and, at
the time of this writing, has seen the movie four
times. There will be no objectivity in the review
contained herein, nor will any objectivity even
be attempted. You have been warned.
This is it. The climatic finale/middle part of
George Lucas? space opera has been
unleashed with Star Wars: Episode III -
Revenge of the Sith.
What?s great about Sith is not just the FX or the
action (to be brief: they all rock); it?s the
character drama that gives the film a sorely
needed dramatic kick in the pants. Annoying
side-plots and diversions are jettisoned (Jar
Jar Binks is in three shots and doesn?t say a
single word), centering the film on Anakin
Skywalker?s fall to the Dark Side.
Sure, the spectacle is there, but this movie has
a soul, a soul that?s stomped into submission
by the end, sending the audience flying to pick
up the first trilogy to reassure themselves
there?s a happy ending.
But the action, sweet Jebus, the action is
spectacular. There?s more action in this movie
than in any of the previous Star Wars films.
Sith?s opening sequence is one of the best of
the series, kicking off with a huge space battle
(finally!), keeping the pace brisk and
introducing problems for the Jedi that they
easily breeze through.
I won?t give too much of the film away, but
suffice to say, there?s plenty of action after that
opening scene. When ?Order 66? (the
destruction of the Jedi) is unleashed, Lucas
cribs the cross-cutting from the Godfather, and
the sequence drips with pathos. The capper to this scene, when Yoda unleashes some Jedi
Master fury, brought the house down.
In the third act of Sith, Yoda and Darth Sidious
engage in a bat-***t crazy game of
king-of-the-mountain that can be interpreted
as a metaphor for the prequel trilogy. The
metaphor: the fight for domination of the galaxy,
or a fight between an old man and a CGI
effect, depending on your point of view.
Ewan McGregor has grown into the role of Jedi
Master Obi-Wan Kenobi over the course of
these films. In Phantom Menace he was stiff
and humourless, but he had the voice right. He
lightened up considerably in Attack of the
Clones, and now Sith gives him a chance to
both have some fun and get serious.
There?s also a brief and powerful moment
when Obi-Wan realizes Anakin is lost to the
Dark Side. The way McGregor empathizes the
simple line ?I have failed you, Anakin,? made
me misty eyed. (Note: I said, ?misty eyed.? Not
At the centre of Sith are the two key players,
Anakin Skywalker (Canuck Hayden
Christensen) and Chancellor Palpatine/Darth
Sidious (Ian McDiarmid). Both Christensen and
McDiarmid play off each other impressively.
McDiarmid gets to do all sorts of variations
upon ?evil bastard? throughout Sith, he?s
alternately charming, slimy, dangerous,
manipulative, subtle and gleefully over the top.
This film cements the Emperor as the true
villain of the series, and Vader as the fallen
hero. He?s able to pull Anakin in because
Palpatine is the only person who truly seems to
understand him, or at least pretends to. It?s
delightfully calculating, the only person who
treats Anakin as an equal turns out to be the
evilest bastard in the Universe.
As for Christensen, he pulls off the delicate
balancing act of being sympathetic while he?s
doing Very Bad Things and helplessly
spiralling out of control. His big flip to the Dark Side may seem somewhat abrupt, but A)
Christensen acts simultaneously horrified and
empowered by his actions, and B) there are
dozens of reasons why he switches sides
layered in all the movies. Pay attention here,
Christensen and Natalie Portman (Anakin?s
ill-fated wife, Padme) is the other duo that gets
the most screen time in Sith, and it works a lot
better this time around because a feeling of
inevitable calamity hangs over their heads. One
of the best moments between the two doesn?t
involve any dialogue, nor are
One thing that I was talking to someone about was how weird it was to hear Darth Vader asking about Padme. It just seemed odd coming from him. But then I thought about how this is something Anikan would say, and I think it shows how, even though he is now the Darth Vader we all know from the original trilogy, he's also still Anikan. He still has feelings, and he's still somewhat immature at this point. He is powerful, but even if his power has grown, he still hasn't grown into his power.
I just went and rots with my wife tonight, I know I'm slow. Anyway A few things First off when the original trilogy came out What we thought were special effects back then were cool and still are, as the movies progressed as with technology so did the effects. A trooper wasn't just shot and layed dead there were definate signs of a wound. Which brings me to my point You could tke a younger child to the original movie and they might get a bit frightened by Vader or Jabba or Rancor, but with ROTS the gore, slaughter of children, limbs lopped off and catching fire was too much. There was a 3 and a 6 year old behind us and I think the scariest thing was that the little girl didn't make a peep throughout the entire movie and I know at that age I would have had bad dreams for weeks I won't be taking my 6 year old to see it. I think Lucas strayed from the context of the originals in that he was able to show the things needed to create an epic series of movies without going to the masses of blood and gore. I know in ESB Luke gets his hand cut off, but it wasn't focused on as it was in this movie, was it really necessary to show Anakin catch fire without any limbs or the fact he slaughtered the younglings or Dooku?
So in all I left feeling dissapointed, The fight scenes were good but I agree there was to much CGI and not enough real actors in costumes.
Sorry I'm so negative on this I guess, I looked at it through a childs eyes as I saw the original trilogy.
"but with ROTS the gore, slaughter of children, limbs lopped off"
I agree with some of your points, but are you forgetting the lopping off of the Wampa and Ponda Baba's arms, complete with the bloody mess? And "slaughter of children" was a necessary point in the story. The fall of Anakin has been been bulding up since ANH. Darth Vader is the personification of evil, and him killing younglings was the most powerful way to depict his lack of remorse. Just be glad he didn't SHOW them being killed. Just the way that it was implied was amazing. He said that this movie wasn't going to be a kid's movie, just like TPM really wasn't an adult's movie
What you said about the origional trilogy, Speederscout, I disagree with. I could never watch the scene with Owen and Beru Lars' dead bodies, and still can't. I also have trouble watching Han slice open the dead tauntaun's belly and the rancor eating the gamorrean guard.
While it's true that I don't like seeing Anikan burning or Count Dooku's head rolling away, there are a few scenes in every movie that bother me. I might be more sensative than other moviegoers, but I've gotten used to the fact that almost every movie will have a scene that bothers me. Even many Disney movies have a skeleton somewhere in them.
I'm not saying there isn't pieces in every movie that wasn't scary, I completely agree with that fact I just think that we've become more desensitised to gore and death and it shows up when you can take a 3 year old to watch ROTs and her not be afraid of it. I just feel that it could have been potrayed a little different to get the point across. I feel that the scenes showed a little to long on the pain and suffering(Anakin on fire without limbs). Yhe other movies may have shown this but it was an aside from the story itself it felt like it was one of the main storylines in ROTS. There Are parts that were really enjoyable to watch I just left the theatre not feeling fullfilled like I had in previous movies I was more shocked. The fight scenes and space battles definatly were a high point and the effects amazing. I'm sorry if I've offended anybody; but I think having your own children makes you view your ideals differently and seeing another child in a movie that disturbed me with it's dark demeaner and knowing this is not something I can share with my 6 year old brought cause to me voicing this.
Not nessesarily, I took a 10 year old opening night, he was fine as were we. Having kids doesn't make you more sensitive, just interpretation.
It was a needed scene to get the reaction it required. How would you have shown, without a doubt, that Anakin was evil? Aside from killing more faceless Jedi...
I don't see a problem with a 10 year old they can at least understand what's happening, at 3 or 6 they are still to young in my opinion; others may feel different. I also didn't mean more sensitive being a parent but more aware.
I don't know how I would have done it differently I like the suggestion before of a volcano and Obi Wan leaving him for dead(Anakin), and I think you don't you need to slaughter children to show no remorse, killing unarmed or stangling your soon to be mother of your children did a fair job of it.
Well ROTS was a PG-13 movie and Lucas himself said he didn;t recommend it for younger children.
Its up to the parent to accept that and make a decision.
You are absolutly right.
The one thing I don't understand, being a new dad, is how parents can tell a child that a movie is to violent for them to go see in the theater, then end up renting it to show in their own home once it comes out on DVD. Like somehow the movie is different when watched at home. It's often more grafic at home due to extended/unrated versions released for home viewing.
Deb and I are itchin' to go see it again. I for one loved it, even though it still does not beat out ESB as my favorite movie.
The only part I didn't like was the fact that it moved way to fast, much like TPM. I guess that tends to happen when you have 9 hours of story that needs to be compressed into 2-3 hours of film.
Having watch the 1st and 2nd seasons of the "Clone Wars" cartoon it made the time frame of events a little more understandable. I knew the background of Grevious going into the ROTS, but Deb was at a loss and thought his charater was pointless.
If you had some quelms with the movie....or even if you loved it but can still laugh at the obvious flaws....check this out (it does have profanity fyi)
Hi ladys and guys,
sorry I havent been on in a while, been busy with wedding plans and work. But I did see the movie I was impress with most of the movie but one Scene in the movie. but overall well done.
hope talk again soon
My 2 cents again....(as he hear's everyone grown)
You are correct that this movie was too graphic..why I say this is because you can have violence in a movie(the world is filled with it..its a part of life) but when you cross the line and make it gratuitus (sp?) that's another thing.
In ANH yes Owen and Beru were invited to the BBQ. But you know what, when I was a kid I blocked that out..I didn't know what they were showing..all I saw was the smoke and the building when they cut to a close up..I didn't see the chared remains until years after when I re-watched it. As for the cantina scene with Walrusman's arm coming off..once again it was a quick shot and it was over. ESB same thing..Wampa arm, Lukes arm, Taun Taun. When ROTJ Sarlac pit, Rankor eatinga gammorean guard ect.
As for ROTS and Anakin's wounds..yes they were way over the top. When you think of it Obi Wan got his butt handed to him by Dooku twice, Jango once, Destroyer droids once..and the list goes on...he wasn't the greatest fighter...so to see him beat a character that was suppose to have grown and had so much evil and ulitmate power running through him was a little hard to believe....I personaly think they should have had Obi Wan fight with Anakin and have Anakin fall from a ledge and crash down on another ledge 100's of feet below..cut to Ben looking over and leaving him there. As Anakin lays there he breathes in the hot gases of the lava..thus needing a resperator. Palapatine comes down and scoops him up from the ledge. done deal....he didn't need to be torched..he didn't need to have limbs cut off.
just my 2 cents.