...mentions of the Journal of the Whills... and I was wondering if either of these has any effect on the official continuity?
The term "Journal of the Whills" has been around since the original novelization of Star Wars and it is also mentioned in the The Annotated Screenplays. With the ROTS screenplay, we learn that the "Shaman of the Whills" are involved with how the Jedi learn to come back from the dead. All this is considered in-continuity, though details about the Whills remain a mystery.

With regard to George's comments to Rob Coleman, we try to glean whatever tidbits of information we can in instances like this but we also have to take these statements with a grain of salt. Sometimes George may have been joking or he may have just been speaking off the cuff. He also reserves the right to change his mind. Sometimes we get to explore these ideas further in the EU, and sometimes we don't. In this case we don't.

Tasty, SithScribe,

I was told recently by Suzanne about these two recent mentions of the Journal of the Whills:

*First - the screenplay itself - scene 222, yoda talking to Qui-Gon (deleted from the final movie):
The ability to defy oblivion can be achieved but only for oneself. It was accomplished by a Shaman of the Whills..."

Secondly, page 72 of the Making of Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith

George remarks to Rob Coleman that the story of Star Wars is actually recounted by R2-D2 to the Keeper of the Whills, one hundred years after Return of the Jedi. Journal of the Whills is what Lucas titled his first outline of Star Wars back in 1972.*

...and I was wondering if either of these has any effect on the official continuity? I mean, since they did both come directly from George Lucas.

Good morning or afternoon or whatever, depending on where you are,
Taking it from the top: I'll let the publisher know that the books aren't available in Australia--too bad, considering that's where we all spent so much time!

Thanks for the TV recommendation--I'll take it up with the powers that be. Who knows...

As for the Yoda/lightsaber bit in front of the Jedi Temple, it was shelved--but not absolutely refused. And what happened is that later in the process, after all the books and so on were written, Rob Coleman and Rick and George reviewed that shot, and obviously decided to put it in. Often shots need to be thought about, viewed in the rough cut, etc., till they're either finally cut out or edited in for keeps.

The shot of the Alderaan cruiser approaching the actual city on Alderaan was another case in point. At one point, that digi-matte painting was cut out of the film, even though it was done and looked great. But eventually, with John Knoll as an advocate, George decided to put it back in.

Any more questions, just holler!

JWR

There is a point relevant to this topic,though - you might be also interested in looking at The Making of as it gives information about GL's early plans including a very young Han being with the Wookiees (page 41). However, he changed his mind.

Right, I realize that. That's why I asked that particular question in this thread.
aaaaand, since Leland mentioned that early scripts give an interesting look into George Lucas' interpretation of the Star Wars universe, I thought it an appropriate question.

mavrick899, in the thread directory there are a number of threads about Han Solo, inlcuding one that has turned into a general Han thread here so you might like to post your thoughts in there.

There is a point relevant to this topic,though - you might be also interested in looking at The Making of as it gives information about GL's early plans including a very young Han being with the Wookiees (page 41). However, he changed his mind.

^I'm pretty sure this is not the right thread for that....

I'm going to be looking at this thread hopefully everyday--I'm interested in comments as I wrote the art of and making of books.

Good to see you around again!

I'm going to be looking at this thread hopefully everyday--I'm interested in comments as I wrote the art of and making of books.

One thing that George told me is that Palpatine is not always sure exactly what's going to happen. He puts events in motion and is then ready for whatever might happen. Note that in Episode I how he responds to the Jedi escape and Padme's arrival on Coruscant. He changes his plan to become Supreme Chancellor. Originally he just wanted control of Naboo (correct me if I'm wrong--my memory is hazy sometimes).

In Episode III Palpatine can't know exactly how Anakin will repsond to the situations he puts him in--but he has enough of an idea to manipulate him successfully at every turn.

The early scripts give you an idea of different ways Palpatine was planning on manipulating Anakin, using statements that may or may not be true--but one thing is pretty definite: Palpatine is Anakin's metaphorical if not biological father.

Tasty, the book refers to early drafts of the script where scenes were changed/deleted. In previous scripts there is little doubt that the early versions are of almost no value as far as canon goes, but as I was reading this one I was wondering whether a couple of points might have actually made their way into the holocron:

• Palpatine tells Anakin that he manipulated the midichlorians to create him;
• Palpatine tells Anakin that Dooku set up the Tusken kidnapping of his mother (both on page 42).

Are these points that may be taken up in the future or have they been totally jettisoned by GL?

You've seen the film, now read about how it was done. Use this thread to discuss the books that go behind the scenes of Revenge of the Sith.

Art of Star Wars Revenge of the Sith

The Making of Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith

Post your comments and questions here.