Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Star Wars Prequels Media Movies

Revenge of the Sith a "Blood Bath" 780

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the yes-please-make-it-true dept.
An anonymous reader writes "The BBC is reporting that the Revenge of the Sith is a blood bath and is to recieve a PG-13. One notable point from the article is Lucas is quoted as saying "But I have to tell a story. I'm not making these, oddly enough, to be giant, successful blockbusters. I'm making them because I'm telling a story, and I have to tell the story I intended." As he lit a cigar with a large stack of burning 20's."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Revenge of the Sith a "Blood Bath"

Comments Filter:
  • by fembots (753724) on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:01PM (#12434742) Homepage
    With a PG-13 rating, parents will be forced to go with their children to watch the movie, so not only you get the expected children tickets, you now have as many adult tickets too, and the extra drink and popcorn sales. Truly a great success.

    Now imagine if this superfan [blogspot.com] camping out for 139 days [slashdot.org] is under 13....
    • by essreenim (647659) on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:05PM (#12434817)
      a cigar with a large stack of burning 20's."

      I love it when a good plan comes together.

    • by YouHaveSnail (202852) on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:08PM (#12434853)
      The thing is, the only people who are really interested in seeing the sixth movie (or third, depending on how you count) in the Star Wars saga are those that have seen the other five movies. Mostly, it's the people who were kids when "Star Wars" came out. We're all about 35 now. If we go with our kids, it'll be because we can't find a babysitter and so decide to drag our kids along with us rather than the other way around.
      • by Enigma_Man (756516) on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:27PM (#12435094) Homepage
        The only people at all I saw at episodes 1 and 2 were 20-somethings (including myself and friends). The olds all stayed home to watch it later.

        -Jesse
      • by redfenix (456698) on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:49PM (#12435354)
        Weren't all the adult viewers griping about how Ep1 & Ep2 were catering to kids? (e.g. Jar-Jar, Pod Race, etc, etc.)

        And I also suppose that the "Jar-Jar tongue lollipops" were marketed to 20s-40s people? And the Action Figures? And the card games? And the plastic electronic light sabers? (wait, I would like to play with those, I'll give you that one!)

        Anyway, I don't think anyone can deny that the Star Wars Marketing Machine(TM) Has been targeting those well under 13.
        • by edremy (36408) on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @05:05PM (#12435540) Journal
          And the Action Figures?

          Don't know about anyone else, but my brother-in-law just spent 7 hours standing in line at the Star Wars convention to get a special Darth Vader action figure. He's 30, a married college grad in the Army and thus not exactly a kid.

          Perhaps it has something to do with getting back from a tour of Afganistan. I think his wife hopes it was.

        • In a single-datapoint study, I've determined that my 3-year-old thinks Jar-Jar Binks is really funny. He also really, really, wants to do a pod race.

          Oh, and Qui-Gon needs to see a doctor to have his tummy fixed. These *really* aren't movies for little kids, they're actually quite dark and violent.

          Upon reflection, I think Lucas knew what was coming and installed Jar-Jar in a feeble, stupid attempt to lighten things up a touch. Stupid, like I said... but I really think he's targeting the over-7 crowd. Toy m

      • by creimer (824291) on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @05:03PM (#12435517) Homepage
        If we go with our kids, it'll be because we can't find a babysitter and so decide to drag our kids along with us rather than the other way around.

        When I went to see LOTR: Return Of The King during the day, a very young father brought his little girl with him so he could see the movie. Bad move. The kid was very interested in the cartoon advertisements just before the movie started, and when the first scene opened with Gollum biting into a fish, the poor kid went berserk and started balling at the top of her voice. I wondered if he ever tried to get a refund for his tickets since he didn't see the movie, and if anyone cited him for child abuse.
    • by raehl (609729) <raehl311@@@yahoo...com> on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:09PM (#12434860) Homepage
      Why would parents be forced to go with their children? The -13 on the PG is simply an advisory notation; G, PG, and PG-13 all have the same admission criteria: Anyone can see it, no adult supervision required.
      • Lets face it, a determined kid is going to be able to see this movie no matter what. There are so many ways to see movies with DVDs, on-demand, friend's house, etc that except for XXX a kid is going to see it. And with the internet even the XXX obstacle is a maybe.
      • Why single out PG-13... _all_ MPAA ratings are jsut advisory notations with no legal basis.

        It is not illegal for a youngster to go to an R movie. It is not illegal for theatres (or anyone else) to show R movies to youngsters.

        I think only in the last 10 years have theatres started to really enforce the age restrictions. But these are internal policies, not law.

        Additionally, I believe there's no law prohibiting youngsters from seeing NC-17 movies based on rating alone. If the NC-17 movie contains
        • by raehl (609729) <raehl311@@@yahoo...com> on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @06:22PM (#12436174) Homepage
          Why single out PG-13... _all_ MPAA ratings are jsut advisory notations with no legal basis.

          You mean no CRIMINAL legal basis. Theaters must enforce R and NC-17 ratings for movies distributed by members of the MPAA as a contractual condition of being able to show movies distributed by MPAA members.

          Theaters are under no obligation to the distributors to regulate who may see G, PG, or PG-13 movies.

          That's not to say a movie theater couldn't decide on it's own to not allow 12 year olds to see PG-13 movies, but if any do enforce such a policy, it's extremely rare, and entirely voluntary on a theater-by-theater basis.
    • by neoform (551705) <djneoform@gmail.com> on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:19PM (#12434987) Homepage
      not to mention lucas get's 100% of ticket sales for the first two weeks, locks his movie in the largest screen in the house for 13 weeks and in some cases, get's a cut of the concession sales. (no, i'm not joking, those were the terms my theater agreed to in order to get the movie)
    • With a PG-13 rating, parents will be forced to go with their children to watch the movie

      Not nationally, at least. A given theater manager may choose to require parental presence at a PG-13 movie but it's not part of the MPAA's system. Theaters have only agreed to enforce parental presence at R-rated movies and no children period at NC-17 movies. PG-13 is simply a stronger warning to parents than PG that they should consider whether or not their kids should see it.

      Incidentally, a popular movie having

  • by coupland (160334) * <dchase@NOSPam.hotmail.com> on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:01PM (#12434744) Journal

    Yuh-hunh. Sin City [imdb.com] and Kill Bill Volume 1 [imdb.com] move over, this one's a blood bath. OOOOooooo....

    That's the problem with them damn Brits, they don't realize it's boobies in movies that's the real corrupting influence, not a little innocent killing and maiming.

  • by GweeDo (127172) on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:01PM (#12434745) Homepage
    Freaking Jedi mind tricks...
  • by Scott Lockwood (218839) * on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:02PM (#12434751) Homepage Journal
    If you've read the dog of a script, [cgispy.com] then you know that it's stunningly bloody. Don't click on that link if you don't want to know everything - the whole script is there.
  • by DragonPup (302885) on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:03PM (#12434764)
    ...Jar Jar meets a painful demise, I am happy.
  • by TripMaster Monkey (862126) * on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:03PM (#12434771)

    From TFS:


    "But I have to tell a story. I'm not making these, oddly enough, to be giant, successful blockbusters. I'm making them because I'm telling a story, and I have to tell the story I intended."


    Yeah...we know all about the story you intended [penny-arcade.com], George.

  • Er? Eh... Wha... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Cylix (55374) * on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:03PM (#12434774) Homepage Journal
    Ok...

    I guess we need to figure out how we kill Jedi in a soft well meaning conservitive and correct manner. (They can't all whisk away to ghosts can they? What's that about anyway?)

    Besides, I'd rather not watch an hour and a half of G.I. Joe style combat.
  • PG-13? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ilyaaohell (866922) on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:04PM (#12434784)
    If it was really a blood bath, it would be rated R. There's probably not gonna be anything more violent here than what we saw in Spider-Man 2.

    On the other hand, I think the previous two Star Wars movies have been some of the most violent PG-rated films since the introduction of the PG-13 rating in the 80s. So, if MPAA is continuing to rate Star Wars on a curve just because it's targetted at children, maybe my original analogy is wrong after all.
  • by Stormwatch (703920) <<rodrigogirao> <at> <hotmail.com>> on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:04PM (#12434785) Homepage
    ...would love to see Jar Jar Binks' death scene.
  • Isn't this good? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Grakun (706100) on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:04PM (#12434791)
    I hate it when directors cut down a movie just for a rating. This is a good thing. "A lot of people saying how can you do this? My children love these movies. Why can you not let them go see it?" he said. He's not preventing them from seeing it. He's just warning the parents that it may not be suitable for them. The parents get to decide wether or not they want their children to see it.
  • by oldosadmin (759103) on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:05PM (#12434804) Homepage
    In my state (NC), at least, PG-13 is not a binding rating.

    (Theoretically) A 7 year old could walk up and get into it without a parent. It's not like R, where it is enforced parental guidence, it's just a strong SUGGESTION.
    • by hackstraw (262471) * on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:41PM (#12435251)
      In my state (NC), at least, PG-13 is not a binding rating.

      Binding under what pretense?

      The ratings are voluntary and self moderated by the MPAA. There is no legal obligations or enforcements whatsoever. The enforcement is done at the movie theater by the movie theater people. I'm sure it varies much more from theater to theater than from state to state.
  • No Suprise (Score:5, Interesting)

    by kpwoodr (306527) <kenneth,p,woodruff&gmail,com> on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:05PM (#12434808) Homepage Journal
    Does this suprise anyone? We all know the story already. Darth Vader doesn't become Darth Vader with out some serious action. A clone army is not going to win a war with out a large loss of life. Yoda is not going to just leave the hot zone to live on some God forsaken swamp planet because a few people died. We've all know that it would take thousands and thousands of dead clones and mutilated Jedi.

    On top of that, it has to be so bloody that we all lose hope. Otherwise, why would there be a "New" hope?

    Rise Lord Vader!
    • Re:No Suprise (Score:3, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Considering that Kenobi cuts off Anakins other good arm and both of his legs(the screenshots have to be seen to be believed), I'd say this movie easily qualifies for a pg-13 rating if not more.

      They even show in great detail Anakin's new robotic arms and legs being attached to his body while what's left of his body looks like it just came fresh out of the oven. Anakin gets messed up bad in this one. I don't know if I would let my 12 year old kid see that.

  • by hal9000(jr) (316943) on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:06PM (#12434829)
    "But I have to tell a story. I'm not making these, oddly enough, to be giant, successful blockbusters."

    Unfortunately, Luca is not a good story teller. He is great at effects and the details that bring a vision to life. He really needed Spielberg.
    • by TheRealFixer (552803) on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:19PM (#12434992)
      I would say he's actually a very good storyteller. The movies he's done (with the terrible exception of Howard the Duck) have had very appealing storylines, the themes have spoken to a lot of people. He is, however, not a very good screenwriter. Horrid, stilted dialog, endless cliches, dysmal romance. His directing is suspect as well. Visually, he's an outstanding director, but he doesn't work well with actors, often getting very wooden performances out of them

      It's why the most hailed of the Star Wars films was ESB, where he left dialog up to others and let a decent director deal with the actors.
  • First PG-13 (Score:4, Insightful)

    by CrazyTalk (662055) on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:07PM (#12434843)
    Of course, there WAS no such rating when the original trilogy was released - just G, PG, and R. That said, I don't think any of the originals would have qualfied even if there was such a rating (which lies between PG and R, for folks outide of the US)
  • Parents (Score:5, Funny)

    by Winterblink (575267) on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:09PM (#12434864) Homepage
    Unfortunately it won't stop parents from bringing their five year screaming, whining kids to the theaters so they can throw popcorn around and kick our seat backs. Of course if the movie's as ultraviolent as everyone's making it out to be, they'll just add to the illusion of debris flying through the air and the solid punch of the subwoofer.
  • Violence? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by lheal (86013) <lheal1999 AT yahoo DOT com> on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:09PM (#12434865) Journal
    * shrug *

    My kids (age 13 and 17) have said they want to go see it. Last time they wanted to see a movie it was, um, I don't remember them ever both saying they wanted to see the same movie.

    We'll go, probably the first weekend.

    Go Darth!

    (I just like to cheer for the winning side)

    (Sorry for the spoiler)

    (But anybody who's see Star Wars IV knew that already)

    (We already know the ending. The only thing left to see is the blood!)
  • Yeah, Right... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by blcamp (211756) on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:12PM (#12434898) Homepage

    As if seeing Qui-Gon Jinn being run through and Darth Maul cut completely in half wouldn't be disturbing enough to some kids (or even a few adults)... or how about Anakin's hand arm being cut off? Or Luke's?

    And those were just PG?

    And some of the discussion between Anakin and Amidala about thier "first times"?

    And that movie was NOT PG-13?

    Lucas is using the whole ratings "controversy" as yet another way to get more free publicity!

    And the media, and us, are eating it up...

  • by sagneta (539541) on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:13PM (#12434915)
    To think that this movie is somehow more violent than *this* planet is amusing. It is a restless day in which somebody is not blown to smithereens in Iraq yet I am supposed to feel outraged that the new Star Wars movie earned a pg-13 rating?

    My outrage well is dry for the moment. Sorry.
    • To think that this movie is somehow more violent than *this* planet is amusing. It is a restless day in which somebody is not blown to smithereens in Iraq yet I am supposed to feel outraged that the new Star Wars movie earned a pg-13 rating?

      I'd say the Iraq war should be rated at least an R.
  • by deathcloset (626704) on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:15PM (#12434947) Journal
    I know, I know - it's just the old, "if you don't like it, SHUT UP!" || "if you like it then post on a fanboi forum! and SHUT UP" arguments.

    But seriously, you cannot fault the technical achievements of these movies.

    And I know that many (if not most) are of the opinion that movies are primarily about the characters and the story, but I am of very different taste.

    you see, I am the kind of guy who sits down with EPII attack of the clones and pauses the corusant scenes and goes frame by frame through them to just admire all the amazing design and creation.

    I love to stare in awe at the new particle systems, the accuracy of the human computer models and the beautiful, alien landscapes painted before my eyes.

    But that's me, and I am of a small minority I know. I am that small minority that actually doesn't really care for chatty movies. Didn't really think the godfather was really all that. Never sees a movie unless there are spaceships and explosions - and then only if the movie is about that universe and not just the people in it.

    Nevertheless I feel that those like me should have something of a voice.

    There are three movie types in my world:
    1) Movies about people
    2) Movies about events
    3) Movies about ideas

    I prefer the order of importance to be 3,2,1 and Star Wars seems to fit that type for me quite well.
    • I don't think people would whine as loudly if Lucas just admitted that he was creating a series of neat explosions and effects loosely tied together by a story, the way a pornographic film might be a series of sex scenes tied together.

      But Lucas fancies himself to be a storyteller, and therefore that's how he will be judged. Why would you lower the bar against his stated wishes?

    • by flyingsquid (813711) on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @05:16PM (#12435651)
      I love to stare in awe at the new particle systems, the accuracy of the human computer models and the beautiful, alien landscapes painted before my eyes. But that's me, and I am of a small minority I know.

      Give me the apocalyptic opening scene of Blade Runner as tongues of flame rise over a dim cityscape, reflected in Deckard's eyes. Or give me the Millennium Falcon pulling that immelman turn through the clouds of Bespin as they turn back to rescue Luke. Or that nearly endless vertical scrolling shot of the Fortress of Ultimate Darkness in Terry Gilliam's Time Bandits. THAT is special effects.

      Now the Star Wars prequels... sure, they may have been technically demanding to execute, and sure they may be intricate. But they lack soul. They are all surface and no substance, just video games on steroids.

  • by multiplexo (27356) on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:17PM (#12434972) Journal
    Should be a Gungan kill-fest. Anakin and the clone warriors and the Sith go to Jar Jar's home planet and decimate the place. I'm talking light saber decapitations and gruesome disembowelments. I'm taking Gungans being gut shot and left to die in the hot sun by storm troopers, napalm being fired into Gungan villages from AT-AT walkers, Gungans being impaled on stakes, an imperial encampment surrounded by poles bearing Gungan heads. They finish things off by nuking the planet down to the bedrock, which explains why there are no Gungans in episodes 4, 5 and 6, the Sith the proto-Empire wiped them all out.

    Lucas is quoted as saying "But I have to tell a story. I'm not making these, oddly enough, to be giant, successful blockbusters. I'm making them because I'm telling a story, and I have to tell the story I intended." As he lit a cigar with a large stack of burning 20's."

    I won't begrudge him the darkness or the money so long as he kills all the fucking Gungans!

  • by GPLDAN (732269) on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:28PM (#12435100)
    Screenwriter magazine this month has an article on Star Wars. I spend my lunch hours in bookstores wayyyy too often.

    Anyhow, the article is about how Lucas wanted to perpetuate the ties to mythic storytelling in his saga. Even though in '77, his initial interviews talked about little more than a Western in space, once the connections to Joseph Campbell's The Power of Myth started happening, Lucas didn't exactly go out of his way to deny it.

    I wonder if that, more than anything, overly influenced the latter trilogy. The epic fall from grace. Suddenly, I have visions of Lucas sitting around reading Milton and having inner dialogs about why Satan gets all the zingy one liners.

    There's a ton of ways to read into Star Wars. The ancient Sith / Jedi split invokes the Jesuits, right down to the robes and the dress. If you've read the final script, you know that (spoiler ahead)








    Anakin forsees the death of his beloved again and again (in very vividly written scenes) and it torments him, as he wants his children, but it starts to drive him mad, and he agrees to become Sith only to gain the power to change the future and save the woman he loves. But, in the end, when he thinks Obi-Wan has betrayed him, he force chokes her and nearly kills her. in fact, Sidious tells him later that his force choke DID kill her, which drives him right over the edge.

    There's a strong influence of Greek tragedy in this script. Cheating death, changing fate. Being at the height of your intellectual and phsyical powers in your late 20's, thinking that the world owes you, that you are the sole master of your destiny and finding your mortality is still all too real.

    The script is brutal. If it's shot that way, it would be a stark departure from the first two. The final scene between Anakin and Obi-Wan was suprising in it's adultness. He falls into the lava, his legs are burning, he can't get up. He's clawing the sand... all of his conceits wash away. No more rationalizations of how totalitarianism is somehow more benign, he just cringes and screams at Obi-Wan, hs face twisted and red "I hate you!!!". Obi-Wan leans down, a tear streaming in his eyes and responds "I always loved you. Like a brother." and walks away leaving him to burn.

    That's serious Campbell territory. The mentor relationship, the hero who fails the test because jealousy consumes him.

    So, when Lucas says 'I needed to tell this story', what I really think is happening is that he needs to fufill the power of myth aspects. This film is a violent fable. The father falls, the son redeems him. His fall needs to be brutal and ultimately apolitical. Anakin doesn't want power for power's sake. He wants respect, he wants everyone to love him and adore him. He has a God complex. There are many levels there.

    I have a feeling that this movie will leave everybody wondering all the ways the first two could be redone. Anakin should have picked up in his early 20's someplace NOT tattooine. His struggle as a slave, beaten and oppressed, would have forced him into spirituality (not chemistry) and a brutal desire for acceptance and hatred for oppression that ultimately twisted around until the only way he could fufill that was to become the oppressor.

    Oh, and the scene where he kills all the padawans, that could have been brutal if it had a flashback to his slave days. As it is, it's just disturbing and the script invokes Columbine somewhat, with the imagery focusing on his black cloak.
  • by LabRat007 (765435) on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:28PM (#12435104) Homepage


    Queen Amidala: Oh no! some invisible force has removed my clothing!! I must put on some clothing.

    Degenerate Jedi: You don't need to put any clothes on (waves hand in front of face).

    Queen Amidala: I don't need to put on any clothes...

    Degenerate Jedi: Yeah know, they say once you go darkside you never go back.
    (que cheesy sci-fi music with inappropriate back beat)


    You get the idea.
  • by simm_s (11519) on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:29PM (#12435110) Homepage
    Yes could see that! Your eyes may bleed after watching George Lucas' latest atrocity against the StarWars franchise leaving you soaked in your own blood.

    -- Relax it's just a joke!
  • by kwiqsilver (585008) on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:30PM (#12435129)
    George Lucas does not use cash to light his cigars. And I really wish people would stop characterizing him as such.
    He uses the $20 bills as toilet paper (due to their cottony softness). He uses orignial Shakespearean manuscripts to light his cigars.
    In the future, please be more sensitive.
  • by Render76 (574613) on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:30PM (#12435133)
    "I should have done this with The Phantom Menace."
  • by portwojc (201398) on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @04:42PM (#12435253) Homepage
    "A lot of people saying how can you do this? My children love these movies. Why can you not let them go see it?"

    The kids can go see it. Their parents/guardian just need to be present.

    -

    This is good anyway. Last thing I want is another 7 year old girl screaming behind me like when Vader was pounding away on Luke in Cloud City during ESB (when it re-released back in theaters years ago). Of course it did add to the effect.
  • by fuxoft (161836) on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @05:01PM (#12435487) Homepage
    It's a little bit misleading to call Episode 3 "bloodbath" when there is not a single drop of blood anywhere in it. :) True, there are some severed limbs and heads and (very stylized) burnt flesh but all "cuts" are very clean and quick (the reasoning probably being that lightsabers automatically cauterize the wound). The terrors are mostly psychological, due to surprisingly good directing and few neat plot ideas. (E.g. we don't ever SEE Anakin killing the Jedi kids but we know very clearly he did it)
  • by ylikone (589264) on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @05:20PM (#12435686) Homepage
    Young anakin is actually DARTH VADER!!!
  • by hellfire (86129) <deviladv @ g m a i l . c om> on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @05:34PM (#12435802) Homepage
    Children under 13 can still attend the movie in the US if they are accompanied by an adult, however.

    Do you know how many people I see bringing their 5 year old kids into violent R-rated movies? It's ridiculous.

    Lucas said he was getting "a lot of flak" from parents concerned about the film's US rating.

    "A lot of people saying how can you do this? My children love these movies. Why can you not let them go see it?" he said.


    Oh for %^&#%^()%$# sake! Yanno, I'm a fan of Star Wars, even of the new movies, but if I were to miss the 12:01 showing of episode 3 (yes I'm going to that!) I won't be terribly disappointed. My son wants to go to the 12:01, but I won't let him because it's a school night. We'll see it on the weekend together when we have time.

    My son was something like 5 I think when they re-released the original trilogy on the big screen. He was immediately hooked. If he was 5 when this movie came out, I'd go see it first then decide if I could take him. If I said no, then my son is going to have to live with that. It's not going to kill anyone not to see these movies, even a fan. I admit I'm lucky here because he's 13. Frankly, I think he can deal with it now, and not just because he's 13.

    If we had to miss this movie because of some life altering event which required my attention, I'd grow up and deal with it and you better believe I'd make him grow up real quick.

    Lucas on an artistic level owes me a decent movie, but on a parenting level he owes me jack shit.

    Frankly this is just another symptom of Hollywood. They hype the hell out of something, then a restriction gets placed on it, and people get upset because they think they are entitled to this. It's a vicious circle?

    Where the hell am I going with this? I don't know. Parents want entertainment catered to their exact whims, and think that some how people owe them exactly what they want. Hollywood wants everyone to go to every movie, but yet absolve themselves of responsibility in case someone decides to take their 3 year old to "Alien vs. Predator" because "Well we did tell you the rating on that movie was inappropriate for children."
  • by TheLittleJetson (669035) on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @05:36PM (#12435818)
    So at the start of Episode 4, Yoda and Obi-wan are like the only Jedi still alive. This movie starts out with a bunch of Jedi living. BUT I NEVER EXPECTED A BLOOD BATH!!!!!!!!
  • by Draoi (99421) * <<moc.cam> <ta> <thcoiard>> on Wednesday May 04, 2005 @06:45PM (#12436382)
    ... be with you!!

    (Sorry, sorry. It only works once a year!)

When all else fails, read the instructions.

Working...