Governor Tarkin
#16
Posted 23 May 2005 - 08:09 AM
#18
Posted 23 May 2005 - 10:55 AM
#19
Posted 23 May 2005 - 11:20 AM
constructed. The ability to destroy a planet is insignificant next to
the power of the Force.
MOTTI: Don't try to frighten us with your sorcerer's ways, Lord Vader.
Your sad devotion to that ancient religion has not helped you conjure
up the stolen data tapes, or given you clairvoyance enough to find the
Rebel's hidden fort...
Motti would never have spoken that way to Vader if he were his superior officer. He even calls him a sorceror who held a sad devotion to an ancient religion. This showed me that Vader was more like a dark priest, a voodoo master that served Tarkin and the Empire and whom the other high ranking officers tolerated simply because Tarkin did.
Then Tarkin's line to Vader later on:
You, my friend, are all that's left of their religion.
Shows that Vader was the last of his kind, meaning a force user - Jedi, Sith or otherwise. I always felt based on these things that GL changed his original plan for the Emperor who was someone that was always intended to be the leader of the Empire, but not a dark lord of the Sith.
This post has been edited by Deleted Scene: 23 May 2005 - 11:23 AM
#20
Posted 23 May 2005 - 11:49 AM
Obi-Wan became a general in the Republic because he was a great fighter and leader.
Jar-Jar became a general for the Gungans because (according to the book), Boss Nass was bored. Jar Jar had no power, even his luitenants ordered him around.
(that should be in someone's signature) [/Qoute]
As you command, Lord Barend.
#21
Posted 23 May 2005 - 11:58 AM
I believe this too.
#22
Posted 23 May 2005 - 12:04 PM
There is no such thing as a 'sith' in the OT.
#24
Posted 23 May 2005 - 02:37 PM
#25
Posted 23 May 2005 - 03:50 PM
#26
Posted 23 May 2005 - 08:43 PM
Not in the movies. I haven't read a single Star Wars novel, and to the point - I shouldn't have to either.
That said, I guess it makes sense to have 'Dark Jedi' give themselves a different name like Sith. But if my understanding of the EU is correct, Sith is lot more complicated than that.
#27
Posted 23 May 2005 - 11:44 PM
#28
Posted 24 May 2005 - 03:24 AM
Motti would never have spoken that way to Vader if he were his superior officer. He even calls him a sorceror who held a sad devotion to an ancient religion. This showed me that Vader was more like a dark priest, a voodoo master that served Tarkin and the Empire and whom the other high ranking officers tolerated simply because Tarkin did.
Then Tarkin's line to Vader later on:
Shows that Vader was the last of his kind, meaning a force user - Jedi, Sith or otherwise. I always felt based on these things that GL changed his original plan for the Emperor who was someone that was always intended to be the leader of the Empire, but not a dark lord of the Sith.
Exactly!!!
No one would have spoken this may if the emperor, their leader, was a sith.
another fine example of fill-in-the-holes scrit writing!