fred.umcp-cs@UDel-Relay@sri-unix (12/10/82)
From: Fred Blonder <fred.umcp-cs@UDel-Relay> From: CAIN@MIT-AI Why shouldn't Obi be corporeal? ROTJ chronolgically comes BEFORE Star Wars (or A New Hope, as you like), and thus has not yet been killed. Jonathan Levine Nope. ``A New Hope'' is episode #4, ``The Empire Strikes Back'' is episode #5 and ``Revenge of the Jedi'' is episode #6. The episodes released after #6 are to be #'s 1, 2, 3, 7, 8 then 9.
faunt (01/01/83)
Who is listening out there? My friends at the Other Change of Hobbit in Berkeley received, yesterday morning, new promotional material on "The RETURN of the Jedi"!! Maybe Jedi DON'T get revenge. Doug Faunt <....!hplabs!faunt>
willy (02/23/83)
According to the STAR WARS Fan Club, of which my son is a member, one of the working titles was BLUE HARVEST, not BLUE MOON. They're offering promotional posters with the REVENGE title. (Now you can own the poster that is already a collector's item!)
urban (05/06/83)
As I sit here, it's less than three weeks until the opening of Return of the Jedi. Comic books, novelizations, press previews, and the like will all be appearing between now and then. So, a reminder: PLEASE have the courtesy and common sense to restrain yourself when you learn one of the long-awaited `answers' in the Star Wars trilogy. I will personally strangle the first sender of any message that looks like Subject: RotJ I just saw a preview last night. Boy, was I surprised to find out that the cantina bartender was the `other'... or the like. (Ask someone who knows me. I'm big and mean and willing to travel.) At least put *SPOILER* in the Subject field or something. If the cantina bartender turns out to be the 'other', by the way, I'll cheerfully strangle myself. We might also consider creating a temporary group net.sf-lovers.rotj for the dual purpose of mitigating the amount of trash that non-fans of the films have to wade through, and so that people who haven't seen the film yet can hold off before reading. Mike
hxe (05/10/83)
RE: Not Spoiling The New Star Wars Film
Hear! Hear! Mike (who is "big and mean and willing to travel"), I
will pay your air fare!
P.S. I just heard rumors that Tony Perkins is his own mother in
Star Wars IV - Yoda meets the Psycho. Should I have put
"spoiler" in the title?ignatz (05/12/83)
Relay-Version:version B 2.10 gamma 4/3/83; site mhuxt.UUCP Posting-Version:version B 2.10 gamma 4/7/83; site ihuxx.UUCP Message-ID:<422@ihuxx.UUCP> Date:Wed, 11-May-83 21:12:38 EDT Organization:BTL Naperville, Il. Ok, guys...I heard one of the ultimate spoilers this Monday, when a local newscaster on WLS FM in Chicago announced, as part of his 6:30 AM newscast, all of the salient plot kicks of RotJ! I mean like soap opera update time-- who did what to whom, when, why, and where. Sheesh! Dave Ihnat ihuxx!Ignatz
hal (05/13/83)
There is now apparently a net.movies.sw group to which all the Star Wars articles should be sent. With luck, this will keep us from having to waste time and hot air debating whether there is too much Star Wars stuff in other news groups. Hal
KATZ%USC-ISIF@sri-unix.UUCP (05/26/83)
Relay-Version:version B 2.10 5/3/83; site harpo.UUCP Message-ID:<1565@sri-arpa.UUCP> Date:Wed, 25-May-83 17:12:00 EDT From: Alan R. Katz <KATZ@USC-ISIF> Just saw Jedi this morning, and it was pretty good. However, the cute furry creatures were a direct steal from H Beam Piper's Little Fuzzies! (Great Books to read, by the way) Also, I would say the movie required a much greater willfull suspension of belief than even the other Star Wars movies. Still alot of fun to watch, though. Alan (Katz@usc-isif) -------
FIRST@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA (05/26/83)
From: Michael First <FIRST@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA> 1) SF-LOVERS was RIGHT!! Back about 2 years ago, a super spoiler message appeared on SF-LOVERS from someone who claimed that a friend who worked at Lucasfilm got to see the script for RotJ, and leaked that Leia and Luke wre in fact siblings! 2) I enjoyed the film but I was somewhat disappointed about several aspects. I claim that of the 3 films, ESB was the most innovative and exciting. RotJ was very much a rehash of ESB with respect to ideas and technique. It seemed that there were very few novel sets (in fact, most of the sets seemed to be leftovers from the previous two films), few new gadgets, and very little new pure Sci-Fi ideas. The only "new" things were the creatures which were done at least as imaginatively in "Dark Crystal". The battle scenes also were very similar to those in the previous films. In fact, the primary interesting thing was the plot development, which was foreshadowed in ESB. With the exception of the major plot points concerning Darth and Luke, there was little else suspenseful in RotJ--everything else was extremely predicatable--i.e. the Death Star really being fully operational, etc. 3) The direction in this film was also lacking; battle scenes seems overly confused on the screen, and an inordinate amount of time was spent showing the muppets dancing. 4) Finally,it seems unlikely that Darth could have killed the emperor with such ease. I mean, this guy is supposed to be the most powerful user of the Dark Side, and Darth just tossed him down the shaft to his death. It is always disappointing to suspend one's disbelief for the magic of a story only to have the plot resolved in such an unsatisfying way. 5) Well, I still enjoyed the film but I don't find myself caring very much when SW part I hits the screen. --Michael (FIRST@SUMEX-AIM) -------
norskog@fortune.UUCP (05/28/83)
#R:sri-arpa:-156500:fortune:9900009:000:486 fortune!norskog May 27 16:17:00 1983 No, the little teddy bears are not steals from "Little Fuzzy", they are much more from "Earthman's Burden" by Gordon Dickson & Poul Andersen. (A much better story than either fuzzy or rotj!) In clarification of that last remark, I will only say that white teenagers pay Hollywood's bills, and thay they would choke on anything morally complex. Lance Norskog Fortune Systems megatest!fortune!norskog hpda!fortune!norskog harpo!... sri-unix!... amd70!...
jrb@wdl1.UUCP (05/31/83)
If the Ewoks were Hokas, all the Rebels need to do is show them a couple of battle scenes (or preferably Star Wars itself) and the Empire's days are numbered. John R Blaker (...!fortune!wdl1!jrb) (jrb @ FORD-WDL1)
JDM%SU-AI@sri-unix.UUCP (06/02/83)
From: Jock Mackinlay <JDM@SU-AI> Who says that Vader killed the Emperor? All he did was throw him off the deck - getting him out of the way for the moment. We might see him in one of the later episodes. And it wasn't even easy since Vader got killed as a result. Jock Mackinlay
bmcjmp@burdvax.UUCP (06/02/83)
Unfortunately, even though a special newsgroup has been created for the Star Wars discussion topic, not all sites support the new newsgroup. Please be tolerant of those who do not have access to the net.movies.sw group, and be thankful that MOST of the Jedi stuff is confined to its own group. (This is especially for you, Tim Maroney! I'm tired of your complaining. Just because YOU don't think that Star Wars stuff isn't SF doesn't mean it really isn't. And remember, you do have an "n" key. Nobody forces you to read anything!!!!) Barb Puder, burdvax!bmcjmp (a site that does support net.movies.sw)
rtf@ihuxw.UUCP (06/03/83)
Give 'em hell Barb!
bill@utastro.UUCP (06/26/83)
<FLAME ON> Please post your ROTJ comments to net.movies.sw, which has been expressly created for the purpose. I know that lots of you have seen the movie, but there are still some of us out there who have not, and we don't appreciate accidentally finding out things about the movie before we see it. Sometimes it is difficult to distinguish between a spoiler and a non-spoiler from the title, so I have made a practice of avoiding all identified articles on ROTJ. Unfortunately, not everyone titles their articles clearly enough for this to work. If you *must* share your wisdom with this group, *please* use ROTJ in the title of your contribution so that people like me can skip it. <FLAME OFF> Thanks for your consideration. I really don't want to have to unsubscribe to this group. Bill Jefferys Astronomy Dept University of Texas Austin TX 78712 (...ucbvax!nbires!ut-ngp!utastro!bill) (...decvax!eagle!ut-ngp!utastro!bill) ( utastro!bill@utexas-11)
Anonymous@inmet.UUCP (07/01/83)
#R:utastro:-43400:inmet:8100006:000:140 inmet!Anonymous Jun 30 10:46:00 1983 Some sites don't GET net.movies.sw, so holster your flame-thrower. We don't have any choice but to but Star Wars discussion in net.movies.
nrh@inmet.UUCP (07/01/83)
#R:utastro:-43400:inmet:8100007:000:137 inmet!nrh Jun 30 19:20:00 1983 One other choice -- Label the spoilers clearly. Yet another choice -- DON'T DISCUSS IT (hah!) because such discussions tend to be inane.