Question: What's wrong with Greedo shooting first? I agree changing it is pretty pointless, but what difference does it make? How does it affect the movie?
Chosen answer: This has already been asked and answered on this site, in the past few weeks in fact. But again: It doesn't affect the movie, but it affects the character of Han Solo and how he is meant to be perceived by the audience. If he shoots first, he's an outlaw, a rogue, and, in the classic Western tradition, quicker on the draw than Greedo. If Greedo shoots first, Han is just killing in self-defense, which does nothing for his character and makes the whole scene superfluous, other than establish that people want to kill him.
Answer: Also, Han shooting first places doubts about his motives in the viewer's mind early on. It establishes Han as ruthless, willing to do whatever it takes to survive. Might he turn Luke and Ben over to the Empire if he decides it's in his best interests? But having Greedo shoot first turns Han in to just another generic good guy.
Answer: I mostly agree with the other answers about Han, but his shooting first is integral to the plot and not about showing any ruthlessness. Greedo cornered Han and intended to turn him over to Jabba the Hut to collect the bounty on Han's head. Greedo told Han, while holding him at gun point, that he wanted the money Obi Wan was paying Han, then implied he was going to kill Han before turning his body over to Jabba for the reward. Han's only option was to kill Greedo right then and there. He basically is shooting Greedo in self-defense (or for self-preservation). As well as establishing what his character is like, the scene also serves as exposition that shows Jabba had put a price on Han's head, Greedo was a deadly adversary, that Han leads a dangerous and illegal life, and he was desperate to resolve his dilemma of living under a death sentence.
As a child of the 70's, I grew up with the notion of Han shooting first. Never gave it much thought, to me he was in a situation of kill or being killed. The debate seemed over a moot point to me.
Question: I have 3 questions. 1) How come Obi-Wan lied to Luke by telling him that Darth Vader killed his father? 2) Why didn't Obi-Wan tell Luke that Leia was his sister? And 3) Why does Obi-Wan act like he doesn't know Leia?
Chosen answer: 1) Obi-Wan doesn't view this as being a strict lie. He states in Return of the Jedi that what he said about Vader betraying and murdering Luke's father is technically true, from a certain point of view. He keeps the details hidden to keep Luke from falling to the dark side the same way Anakin did. 2) The identity of Leia was kept secret to protect her from the emperor. Obi-Wan only tells Luke of her identity when Vader begins directly targeting Luke's friends to goad him into a confrontation. By this point there is no reason to keep the secret from Luke. 3) Because he doesn't. Obi-Wan was present at her birth and that's the only contact they've ever had. Leia specifically describes Obi-Wan as someone who once helped her father and nothing more. He knows her secret but he doesn't really know her personally.
Just commenting on your last answer. Leia didn't know that Darth Vader was her father and neither did Luke. However, Obi Wan did fight with Bail Organa, her adopted father so it could make sense either way.
Question: Why does everybody hate the idea in the special edition of Han shooting first?
Chosen answer: Because Han Solo had been established as a cunning, roguish antihero. The scene as it originally played out shows that Han is not afraid to get his hands dirty when facing danger. The altered scene is an awkward attempt to make it seem like Han is acting completely in self defense rather than as an assertive tough-guy, and in the process takes away part of the character's charm. In short it makes Han seem less "cool". It must also be pointed out that the Special Edition changes were met with very strong fan backlash almost unilaterally, Greedo shooting first is just seen by some as a perfect example of why the changes were unnecessary.
Answer: In the original, Greedo doesn't even fire a shot. The film established Han as more ruthless, and the antihero, for killing Greedo in this way. In the special edition, Lucas altered the film so that Greedo fired first (and in a later version both shoot about the same time). Any changes to original releases are often met with criticism for a number of reasons, especially by adults who watched the film as kids and remember it in a certain way. Another example of this is when E.T. was digitally changed so the police were holding walkie-talkies instead of guns and was met with such criticism that even South Park made fun of it. However, ultimately, Greedo shooting first changes the character of Han, who becomes less proactive and more reactive and less of an antihero. And it raises the question of how could Greedo miss at such close range? Given that the film already has stormtroopers with terrible aim, it seems like another cop-out to let the good guys win.
Question: As someone else pointed out, Obi-wan states that Anakin wanted Luke to have his lightsaber when Luke was old enough. But Anakin violated the Jedi Order's rules by marrying and having children, so he (before he became Darth Vader) couldn't have expected Luke to join the Order himself someday and become a Jedi. Surely the Council would not have accepted Luke?
Answer: The Jedi are discouraged from marrying and having relationships, but not from procreating. Based on council's views, Luke would actually be an ideal Jedi subject; He comes from a lineage strong in the force, but has no ties to his parents.
Not exactly. Jedi are allowed to have casual sex occasionally, but they are not supposed to deliberately reproduce. Most of them would become attached to their children and the partners who they conceive with. Also, what would pregnant female Jedi do at the Temple? They would need to rest and take special health/safety precautions during pregnancy, so they couldn't participate in many missions and battles. And they would need to give up their newborn babies.
Question: How many Death Stars have there been?
Answer: In the official canon, just the two we've seen in the original trilogy - in Star Wars and Return of the Jedi.
Answer: Three if you count Starkiller Base.
Starkiller base was a planet, and much bigger. It does not count as a death star.
Question: In Obi-Wan's home, he explains that Luke's father wanted Luke to have his lightsaber when he was old enough. But in "Revenge of the Sith", in Anakin's (Vader's) last fight with Obi-wan, Anakin's legs and right arm were severed and his saber was lost. So how could he give it to Obi-Wan to give to his unborn son if it was lost and Vader left for dead?
Chosen answer: Anakin's Lightsaber was never lost. When Obi-Wan cut Anakin down (when Anakin jumped at him), Anakin's lightsaber falls to the ground next to Obi-Wan and when Obi-Wan leaves, we see him pick it up.
And as far as "your father wanted you to have this", it's a lie. Remember that Obi-wan is spinning a yarn to Luke about his father to keep from revealing that his father is Darth Vader.
Well, he might have wanted him to have it, "from a certain point of view."
Question: I would appreciate sincere opinions of the following: I watched the original Star Wars movie when it came out in the 80's. Now I want to catch up and watch all of them to get ready for the next. In what order do you think it is best to watch all the episodes now available?
Answer: The first Star Wars film came out in 1977. The best way to watch Star Wars is in the original order that the films were released: Episodes 4 through 6 first, then Episodes 1 through 3, then Episode 7 and Rogue One. If you watch the episodes in sequential order (1,2,3,4,5,6,7), then you will be disappointed with the lower quality of the early special effects in Episodes 4 through 6. Some aspects of the prequels also depend on, or are at least enhanced by having seen the original three movies.
Answer: My advice when it comes to films like these (sequels and prequels, trilogy form, etc); if you have a basic understanding of the entire series or you know the basic plot of each film, but just want to refresh, watch them in chronological order. (I'd also suggest watching the stand alone films, like Solo and Rogue One, after you finish the series). If you've never seen them all, or forgot what's going on, I'd suggest watching in order of release. Often the sequels and prequels don't have the same character development like the original film because it's assumed you know enough of the character's background. And in the original films, there's often key reveals or plot twists that add more suspense to the story line and can make the film more enjoyable.
Answer: This boils down to personal taste and there are advantages as well as drawbacks to each. If you only care about all the flashy special effects, then you should watch in order of release dates as the cinema quality has gotten better with time (Episodes 4, 5, 6, 1, 2, 3, 7, Rogue One). You will have questions surrounding the plot as the events of Episodes 4, 5, 6 occur 18-20 years after the events of Episodes 1, 2, 3. However if you care more about story telling, plot development and general acting ability then you should watch in sequential order (Episodes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, Rogue One). OR you can watch in chronological order (Episode 1, 2, 3, Rogue One, 4, 5, 6, 7) and get the best of both worlds. The down side here is that there are discontinuities in lore due to the fact that Episodes 1, 2, 3 were written 20 years after Episodes 4, 5, 6. Like I said, it's all personal taste. May the Force be with you.
Question: The Dark Lord Darth Vader has no military rank, he only answers to the Emperor. So, why do admirals give him orders that he obeys?
Chosen answer: Tarkin is a Grand Moff. He is in command of the Death Star. He has full authority on board the station, so Vader obeys him. In reality, they are of fairly equivalent rank, but Vader's respect for Tarkin allows him to follow his orders.
Question: What was the explanation for Princess Leia changing from an American accent to a bad British accent and back to an American again during "A New Hope"? Was this simply a case of bad acting and sloppy editing, or was Leia actually mocking Tarkin's British accent (which doesn't seem very dignified for a Princess)?
Chosen answer: In-universe, the accent Tarkin has (and that Leia starts with) is the Coruscanti accent. The one she uses later is an Alderaan accent. In reality, Carrie Fisher had been living in Britain for a while before production started and had picked up a slight accent, which she lost as production continued.
Question: Why was Han Solo ever promoted to general, given that he typically ran from a fight?
Chosen answer: First off, he didn't always run from a fight. He was a prominent member of the Rebellion and excellent pilot and underworld contact. Second, he was one of the heroes of the Battle of Yavin and several other battles. This is going to get him influence. Third, a general needs to be someone with the courage to run away and not keep after a lost cause, especially as outgunned as the Rebels were.
Question: When R2D2 is stunned by the Jawas and falls over, did Kenny baker do the stunt? Me and my brother have argued about this for years.
Chosen answer: Most likely, not. The 'costume' Kenny Baker wore had what look like hoses running from the center body to the feet of R2 (to conceal his legs). Looking at the scene in question, those hoses cannot be seen. On that note, it looks like a third leg (and not the center one shown elsewhere) is visible behind R2 and probably used to push him over.
Answer: While Han was in the Imperial academy, he was thrown into a pit to be killed and eaten by Chewbacca; however, the two of them ended up working together to escape.
Chosen answer: In the Star Wars Expanded Universe, Han was an Imperial pilot several years before the events of "A New Hope". Han refused a direct order to execute a group of Wookiees which included Chewbacca; Han was subsequently dismissed by the Empire. Chewbacca, however, was bound by a Wookiee tradition that dictates that they become the lifelong protector of anyone who saves their lives; thus, he quickly became Han's companion as well as his bodyguard and copilot when Han began his new career as a smuggler. That said, the Expanded Universe isn't canon, so we may get an "official" story in the Han Solo prequel film that's in production.
Question: What ever happened to Obi Wan's lightsaber? Did Vader keep it as a trophy, or just throw it away?
Answer: According to the Expanded Universe (now non-canon), Darth Vader kept it as a trophy in his castle on Vjun. It was found by Anakin Solo, stolen by someone who wanted to learn to be a Jedi, and eventually returned to Luke's Jedi academy.
Question: Obi-Wan Kenobi has a lightsaber in Star Wars, and he is killed by Darth Vader. Luke does NOT pick up Obi-Wan's lightsaber, but escapes on the Falcon. In the Empire Strikes Back, Luke has a light saber, which he uses to escape from the Wampa. We know that Luke did not make his own lightsaber until Return of the Jedi (a green one). Question: Where did Luke get the lightsaber that he uses in Empire Strikes Back?
Chosen answer: It's his father's lightsaber, which Obi-wan gives him at the beginning of the film.
Answer: It's Anakin's lightsaber, the one Obi-Wan gave to him at the beginning of the movie. After the duel in Revenge of the Sith Obi-Wan took it. You can tell it's the same saber by the hilt.
Question: I'm surprised no one has asked this question. The whole tense moment during the final battle is someone making it safely down the trench to shoot the exhaust holes and destroy the death star. Besides dramatic effect why would they all start from so far away?
Answer: It's explicitly stated that the targeting computers will have difficulty targeting the small exhaust port. The long approach was to give the computers time to make their calculations as accurate as possible.
Chosen answer: The trench near the exhaust port is protected by laser cannon batteries. To come in below them, the trench run has to be started from a long distance away.
Question: Why is Obi Wan Kenobi called Obi Wan when in fact his name is Ben Kenobi?
Answer: Obi-Wan is Kenobi's real first name. It is explained in the Clone Wars television series that Satine Kryze, a Mandalorian Duchess whom Obi-Wan once saved the life of, had an affair with him after Kenobi became a Jedi Knight. Their relationship did not last, but her pet name for him was "Ben" and he adopted the name in tribute.
Question: When C-3PO meets Luke, he says that R2-D2 claims that they are both the property of Obi-Wan Kenobi. Since both of their memories were erased at the end of Revenge of the Sith, how could R2-D2 remember belonging to Obi-Wan but C-3PO doesn't?
Answer: Only C-3PO's mind was wiped - if you listen to the dialogue, the order given specifies "the protocol droid" for memory erasure; R2-D2's memory remains intact. That being said, as neither droid in fact ever belonged to Kenobi, it's fairly clear that Artoo is simply being devious in the hope of being taken to the intended recipient of the message that he's carrying, a lie that he could have told quite readily even if his memory had been wiped at some point.
Answer: At the end of Revenge of the Sith, Bail Organa said to wipe 3PO's mind. He didn't say anything about R2. In fact, R2 laughed at 3PO's reaction. Why would he do that if he was being wiped as well?
Answer: R2 D2 did not have his memory intact. Princess Leia gave him specific orders to find Obi-Wan and give the information to him and him alone. Since the information is in the Droid and it belongs to Obi-Wan, therefore he belongs to him.
This is speculation. If we consider Revenge of the Sith, it's plain R2's memory was not wiped. If we only look at what's in A New Hope, there's nothing to indicate it was wiped. In fact, R2's behavior suggests he knows far more about what's going on than C-3PO.
Question: I understand that purists are up in arms over this scene, but why they are very upset on the Han Solo-Greedo scene?
Chosen answer: Originally, Han shot Greedo outright. The next releases of the films were altered, the first with Greedo firing roughly a second before Han does, and in the subsequent release, Greedo firing just slightly before Han does. Many fans felt that Han seemingly shooting in self-defence took away from his scoundrel character.
Question: How was Obi-Wan going to become more powerful after he was dead?
Answer: It is heavily implied that one who becomes a Force-Ghost achieves an untold level of power upon entering the state. Given that they have become a pure entity of the Force, it seems to back up the statement. Obi-Wan also becomes free to assist Luke in any case.
In addition to this answer, I think Obi-wan also became powerful because he "let go." He did not feel a need to defeat Vader on this occasion - he was willing to surrender the fight and "move on" to a new state. Something that Vader might not currently understand.
Answer: I agree with Darius Angel's comment. I also think Vader expected a certain sense of satisfaction after defeating his former master. In reality, though, he was still "owned" by the Emperor and was living with the consequences of his choices. Defeating Obi-wan did not change much for him. Obi-wan, however, gained the benefits that Darius Angel mentioned.
Chosen answer: It's possible that he wasn't experienced enough with it, or at least felt like he wasn't, to be of any use. Remember, in the first film, Luke's total experience in handling the lightsaber was only a few screen minutes before he, Han, Chewie and Obi-wan attempted the rescue. It's also quite probable that Obi-wan warned Luke NOT to carry the lightsaber during the rescue attempt; it was, after all, Anakin Skywalker's lightsaber. If Luke (Anakin's son) boarded the Deathstar armed with Anakin's lightsaber, that peculiar disturbance in the Force could potentially lead Darth Vader straight to Luke, rather than to Obi-wan.