Post a Reply
Back to the Forum
Well, R2-D2 and C3PO have already been in the first two. I'm not so sure finding a way to get Chewbacca into episode 3 is a great idea..
Posted: 20:19 Apr 29 2003
Please let this be true!!!
LOS ANGELES, California (Hollywood Reporter) -- George Lucas is bringing back the classic characters Chewbacca the Wookiee, C-3PO and R2-D2 for the upcoming "Star Wars: Episode III."
The director has already hired actors Peter Mayhew, Anthony Daniels and Kenny Baker to reprise their respective roles as sprightlier versions of their characters for the prequel in preproduction.
All three actors have donned costumes in past "Star Wars" episodes, and in the case of Daniel and Baker, they have loaned their voice talents to puppet and motion-control versions of their characters.
Lucas has noted in the past that having Baker inside the R2-D2 suit brought "an element of humanity" to the character.
The film, whose full title has not yet been disclosed, is scheduled for a May 25, 2005, release.
The director has already hired actors Peter Mayhew, Anthony Daniels and Kenny Baker to reprise their respective roles as sprightlier versions of their characters for the prequel in preproduction.
All three actors have donned costumes in past "Star Wars" episodes, and in the case of Daniel and Baker, they have loaned their voice talents to puppet and motion-control versions of their characters.
Lucas has noted in the past that having Baker inside the R2-D2 suit brought "an element of humanity" to the character.
The film, whose full title has not yet been disclosed, is scheduled for a May 25, 2005, release.
17 Replies and 6607 Views in Total.
Posted: 20:19 Apr 29 2003 
Chewie is meant to be almost 265 years old when he first appears in A New Hope so having him appear in Ep 3 isn't that big a deal..it just depends how they write him in really.
by In a State of Dan
Well, R2-D2 and C3PO have already been in the first two. I'm not so sure finding a way to get Chewbacca into episode 3 is a great idea..
Posted: 20:58 Apr 29 2003 
Not to mention how he forgets he's met R2, 3PO or Obi-Wan or even Anakin/Vader.
Maybe the same deus ex machina that wipes the droids memories will affect him too?
Maybe the same deus ex machina that wipes the droids memories will affect him too?
Posted: 21:33 Apr 29 2003 
Unless he doesn't actually "meet" the characters, but is there by association with something else..
Posted: 21:40 Apr 29 2003 Well I can explain away all that quite easily. The droids are simple..there are probably millions of R2 & 3PO units in the universe, they'll be as common as toasters or kettles are on earth. If they're memorys were wiped there would be no way for Chewie to know he'd seen/met these droids before unless he'd actually read internal serial numbers or something off them which I'm sure won't happen.
by Morph
Not to mention how he forgets he's met R2, 3PO or Obi-Wan or even Anakin/Vader.
Maybe the same deus ex machina that wipes the droids memories will affect him too?
Obi Wan...well when he see's Obi Wan again he is an old man, he maybe just doesn't make the connection because humans maybe look vaguely similar to a wookie?..more likely is that he won't actually see Obi Wan.
Anakin..the impression I get from the films and the books was that Darth Vaders identity as Anakin Skywalker wasn't commen knowledge. From what I can gather it looks like mostb people thought that Anakin was killed by his fight with Obi Wan..Obi Wan and a select few knew it wasn't true though..maybe the whole Jedi Council knew but decided to keep it quiet..anywhoo Anakin as a man would look totally different to Anakin - Darth Vader
Posted: 22:22 Apr 29 2003
I'd guess if you wanted to bring in Chewie it would be in connection with the enslavement of the Wookie race by the Empire, possibly only as a cameo. In general however, I agree that bringing in too many characters from Eps IV-VI is a bad thing. I'm already unimpressed by all the moisture farm bits in Clowns.
"My first job was programming binary load lifters...In fact, those lifters; yes those ones, just over there!"
Yeah; and what did happen to R2s leg rockets in the interim? Could've used those babies on Dagoba.
Forgetting Anakin is indeed a non issue though. "Hey; last time I met you, weren't you a foot sorter, all fleshy...and with a less impressive voice?"
"My first job was programming binary load lifters...In fact, those lifters; yes those ones, just over there!"
Yeah; and what did happen to R2s leg rockets in the interim? Could've used those babies on Dagoba.
Forgetting Anakin is indeed a non issue though. "Hey; last time I met you, weren't you a foot sorter, all fleshy...and with a less impressive voice?"
Posted: 09:10 Apr 30 2003
Just one more piece of our collective childhood for Lucas to urinate on from a great height...
Posted: 11:34 Apr 30 2003 
Well, Chewie's definitely confirmed: clickety-click here for details...
Plus with James Earl Jones doing Anakin voice-overs for the last 5mins of the film (so I've heard) plus ol' walkin' carpet, what're the odds of (a somewhat younger) Han Solo making an appearance?
Plus with James Earl Jones doing Anakin voice-overs for the last 5mins of the film (so I've heard) plus ol' walkin' carpet, what're the odds of (a somewhat younger) Han Solo making an appearance?
Posted: 12:26 Apr 30 2003
I really hope that Han doesn't appear...the back story that was created for Han in the expanded universe novels is really good and the only time he mentions Vader are just after he gradates from the Academy (about 10 years before ANH) and when he's onboard a Star Destroyer offering a bribe to an Imperial Admiral about 8 years before ANH. Can't see how they'd work either of those into the new film and I hoep they don't just ignore the back story like they did with Boba Fett 
..although I've written some notes that could explain all that if i could be bothered to write the fan fic.
..although I've written some notes that could explain all that if i could be bothered to write the fan fic.
Posted: 15:05 Apr 30 2003
oh please there are always changing storylines when different people write the novels and the films.
for example;
in buffy it was said that angel hunted the gypsie girl and went to her for weeks as an admirer and then killed her when she finally said i love you, in angel she was a gift from darla it the same conflicting stories in the books written. unless one person writes and produces all books and films there's always gonna be one thing (at least) not right somewhere.
for example;
in buffy it was said that angel hunted the gypsie girl and went to her for weeks as an admirer and then killed her when she finally said i love you, in angel she was a gift from darla it the same conflicting stories in the books written. unless one person writes and produces all books and films there's always gonna be one thing (at least) not right somewhere.
Posted: 17:43 Apr 30 2003 While I agree that what they show us in Angel of the girl's fate is pretty tame for that kind of vengeance, where did it say any of the above? As I recall, the only details ever given were that she was a gypsy, the favourite of the Kalderash tribe, and - if Angel is to be believed - not exactly the highest trump in the Tarot deck, and that Angelus worked his trademark 'destroy everyone her life ever touched' routine with her.
by EvilWillow
oh please there are always changing storylines when different people write the novels and the films.
for example;
in buffy it was said that angel hunted the gypsie girl and went to her for weeks as an admirer and then killed her when she finally said i love you...
Posted: 10:02 May 01 2003 sorry only just noticed this reply
by The Prophet
(quotes)
While I agree that what they show us in Angel of the girl's fate is pretty tame for that kind of vengeance, where did it say any of the above? As I recall, the only details ever given were that she was a gypsy, the favourite of the Kalderash tribe, and - if Angel is to be believed - not exactly the highest trump in the Tarot deck, and that Angelus worked his trademark 'destroy everyone her life ever touched' routine with her.
in angel it showed a scene where darla says she brought him a gift and the gypsy girl is lying on the floor tied up where as in buffy im sure he told her (at some point while explaining why he was cursed but im sure i remember watching it in a flash back too) what he did im also very sure i read the same version in one of the buffy books as i remember when i saw the different version in angel i started shouting at the telly that that wasnt the story we were originally told (i had read at that point almost every one of the buffy books until i decided it was costing way too much) sorry for drudging up a dead thread.
Posted: 00:03 Jun 25 2003 I was never that impressed by the stuff in Angel, because it was just so much more horrible when they left it at the level of implication. However, there's no other explaination of what he did given in any detail in the series. As with Star Wars, the novels aren't treated as canon for the writers, which is why everything gets messed around. As far as the series writers are concerned, the novels are licensed fan fiction, and thus they do not consider themselves remotely bound by them, even if they have read them.
by bipolar
(quotes)
sorry only just noticed this reply
sorry for drudging up a dead thread.
Enyos does say that Angelus killed every man woman and child that touched the girl's life - which he doesn't - but I think they retconned that to refer to Darla's slaughter of the gypsy family in revenge for the curse.
Posted: 09:56 Jun 25 2003
im gonna have to sit through every episode from the start now as i have a vivid image of him and the gypsy girl in the woods before he kills her. 
or maybe my imagination when reading books is becoming more visual and vivid. *shrug*
or maybe my imagination when reading books is becoming more visual and vivid. *shrug*
Posted: 12:01 Jun 25 2003 I'd guess the latter, because we certainly never see the girl before the Angel ep with Darla giving her to him as a present.
by bipolar
im gonna have to sit through every episode from the start now as i have a vivid image of him and the gypsy girl in the woods before he kills her.
Also, good as the book may have been, ultimately I'm not sure I buy the wooing story: I mean, he's not just dead, he's a Georgio, surely. Her family wouldn't have let her near him socially.
Posted: 12:57 Jun 25 2003 well no see that was the point it was forbidden and that was the pleasure he took from it that he was enticing her away and was secretly defying her family but meeting him i think it was that they would meet away from the camp(whatever they call where they live) and when she said i love you in english was when he killed her it was to toy with her emotions and then take her down so to speak that was his evil joy of the "chase" with the gypsy girl.
by The Prophet
(quotes)
Also, good as the book may have been, ultimately I'm not sure I buy the wooing story: I mean, he's not just dead, he's a Georgio, surely. Her family wouldn't have let her near him socially.
anyone got the entire collection to lend me cos this is gonna bug me now as my imagination aint THAT good.
Posted: 16:00 Jun 25 2003