h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/film/3924077.stm

Anyone else think this is a cool title loads better than "The Phantom Menace" and "The Clone Wars".

For the first time my sense on impending disappointment is being replaced with rising excitment about Star Wars...

It's a very - familiar - title.

Bear in mind that Star Wars VI was called 'Revenge of the Jedi' right up until its cinematic release.

I believe that, like the other two prequels, it will be a perfectly adequate film, bogged down somewhat by George Lucas' impulsion to explain, and make too many silly self-references to, the original trilogy.

B

Yeah, that old one was supposed to be called that. Untill they realised that Jedi´s aren´t supposed to be vengeful, that is a dark side feeling.

Still I think this one will be a bit better than the other two, if only becuase the subject matter will have to be that little bit darker.

For my Empire is much the best Star Wars film because it is so dark. f they can re-create that then it is bound to be a humdinger!

At which point people started taking it all a bit too seriously.

B

Simulpost!

I am also becoming increasingly dissatisfied with Ewan MacGregor as the 'comedy' Obi-Wan. His one-liners in 'Clones' were well-delivered, but surely a long way out of character. Alec Guinness would not approve.

B

I am starting to have a bit of a better feeling. I hated Episode one, thought Episode two was ok, and I just have a hunch I might enjoy the new one. You never know.

I didn't think One was half as bad as most people made out, although it was far from a classic. Two was spoiled for me by the terrible, terrible love scenes - surely the worst ever committed to celluloid - and a mite too much frivolousness.

B

I'll watch it but I'm not on the edge of my seat. I guess I won't be disppointed again that way.

Alec Guiness largely disapproved of Star Wars as a whole did he not? I thought he regretted playing Obi Wan Kenobi rather a lot.

I'll definately see the film, but i'm not going to get massively hyped up about it.

It's a good title though.

i dont know tha I will ever get that excited about a star wars film again.I mean we had to queue at the cinema for hours to see ti and you knew the only wayb to see it was to go back and see it again.!Then pre video net and the walkman fro chrissakes the sfx just blew the top of your head off.

Episodes I and II went far too slowly. It would have been better if the two films had been amalgamated into one. Now they have so much to do and only one film to d it in, which will probably make it too rushed.

BTW, am I the only one who thinks that Palpatine and Darth Sidious are not the same person?

I would imagine so.
Even the star wars website and the film credits tell you it's the same actor and the same person as far as I'm aware.

Yes, but it's just so obvious. It would be a good twist for the third movie if they turned out to be two separate people. I remember that I was watching TPM some time after I had come up with this theory and Sidious said something which seemed to back up my theory, but it was such a long time ago that I've forgotten what it was.

Well Godben I for one am pretty convinced that they are one and the same.

I mean the emporer is "Emporer Palapatine" and he is Sith... so for me it logically follows.

Watch Episodes I and II again but constantly be thinking about my theory. Analise what Palpatine and Sidious say and it will sow the seed of doubt in you mind. And I have to tell you that I'm usually pretty good at determining narative imperative.

It would be surprising is Palpatine were not Sidious, and I'm sure George is that subtle, to be honest.

Though in the shots of Sidious he does seem to be much older than Palpatine. Thinking about it, the Extended Universe material states that the dark side ravaged Palpatine's body to such an extent that he has to keep making clones and transfering is 'essence' to them. Maybe we are looking a two different clones here.


Geggs

It's also been written in the Star Wars books for getting on for 30 years now. Believe me, they're not different.

And think about the consequences for the trilogy as a whole. People, after seeing Episode III, would go back and see Epidodes I and II as marginally more intelligent than we had thought.

Hmmm, I've just been scouting the web. It seems none of the books or films explicitly say that they are the same and it also seems that this is an old theory (at least 4 years old) and it is controversial.

Can't say I care that much. Me? I suspect, as someone said above, George Lucas ain't that subtle. I may be wrong. We'll see won't we.