 | | Re: SW set list for 2000 —James Simpson
|
| | | (...) I completely agree. I do not think that the power of Star Wars can be conveyed in print in any way that does justice to the feel, to the texture of the saga. The books try to capture the epic quality of the movies, but in this they fail. SW (...) (25 years ago, 21-Oct-99, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: SW set list for 2000 —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | | (...) "You just watch yourself. We're wanted men. I have the death sentence on twelve servers." --Todd (25 years ago, 21-Oct-99, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: SW set list for 2000 —Mike Petrucelli
|
| | | | (...) George Luscas has a team of people that do nothing but insure that all the movies, books, comics, and even the plots of the computer games fit into a complete non-contradictory and interlaced story. For example, SW ep.4 special edition had the (...) (25 years ago, 22-Oct-99, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: SW set list for 2000 —Shaun Sullivan
|
| | | | | (...) movies are considered canon. Refer to the following article: (URL) that "novelisations" refers to novelisations of the movies, not the extended-galaxy novels put out by pulp authors. Even shadows of the Empire, which did seem to take great (...) (25 years ago, 22-Oct-99, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: SW set list for 2000 —Mike Petrucelli
|
| | | | | | (...) contradiction. If a movie doesn't contradict it then it happened. That is the basic definition of cannon. The order of precedence being: Movies, radio-drama/novelisations, continuation books, and comics. (...) Then why would be paying a team (...) (25 years ago, 22-Oct-99, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: SW set list for 2000 —James Simpson
|
| | | | (...) Point well-taken and partially conceded. I realize that Lucas licenses all SW products and literature, which makes me call into question the better judgment of allowing so much thrown-together nonsense to become part of the "official" SW (...) (25 years ago, 22-Oct-99, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: SW set list for 2000 —Mike Petrucelli
|
| | | | (...) I understand your point of view and to some degree sympathize with it. My only consolation is that Lucas trys to make sure it is all consistent with everything else. Paramount on the other hand totally destroyed Star Trek with all that crap (...) (25 years ago, 22-Oct-99, to lugnet.starwars)
|
| | | | |
