[QUOTE=4057996]Originally posted by neo313
[B]Ian McDiarmid said that, in an issue of SW Insider. someone posted the page somewhere... he said palps is actually very, very old, but he has been masking his appearance
anyone have that magazine page?
ok here's how I see it
YODA > PALPS > MACE
well i also read that palps is 88 at the end of ROTJ + what the **** does McDiarmid know he's just an actor and in EU it said he died at the age of 88
All I meant was palpy is a hell of a lot older then he looks. If you were staring at a regular human that looked like him, you'd think about 55 or so give or take. He's way older then that. He can prolong his life, and change his appearance by using the dark side. But the fight with Mace took it out of him, and he reverted back to what he would look like normally. I believe that's what happened there. It was definitely not the lightning that was burning his face. Luke took it point blank for a long ass time and didn't even singe his clothes. Force lightning doesn't burn the skin like that, it seems to hit you more internally.
Originally posted by Vanquish
All I meant was palpy is a hell of a lot older then he looks. If you were staring at a regular human that looked like him, you'd think about 55 or so give or take. He's way older then that. He can prolong his life, and change his appearance by using the dark side. But the fight with Mace took it out of him, and he reverted back to what he would look like normally. I believe that's what happened there. It was definitely not the lightning that was burning his face. Luke took it point blank for a long ass time and didn't even singe his clothes. Force lightning doesn't burn the skin like that, it seems to hit you more internally.
Interesting, Since Sidious did do it to Luke for ages you would think Luke's skin would Burn like Maces, and since George Lucas would of known that hes doing it on Windu his wouldnt burn aswell..
go to this website if u want proof of palps's age
Originally posted by Vanquish
Palps face isn't deformed by the lightning. It is deformed because he has been hiding his true face for so long, and during the fight with Windu, he lost his power over his appearence, and reverted back to his real face. The dude is just really REALLY old.
Sidious lighting going back into is the reason he is deformed. Not because of some ancient chinese Sith secret of not showing your true face features.
Did you not see the smoke coming up from Sidious after he quit doing the lighting? I did ... All freaking 7 times I have seen the movie so far.
Ps
There is nothing and I mean nothing in the movie that backs up Sidious "toying" around with Mace Windu until Anakin showed up. You people need to understand that when Anakin didnt kill Sidous when he found out his true indenity, he was Sidious little jail yard *****. Anakin cutting off Mace Windu's arm was a test of loyality, not him turning to the dark side.
Originally posted by Darth Jello
every other source, including the novelization and the tech commentaries say that Sidious' face is deformed by force lightning
wrong.
i saw it written in one book (image was posted here) the he was 'unmasked' by the force lightning.
but guess what? everything that is NOT in the films means but 2 things: jack and shit...and jack left town 😛
Originally posted by PVS
wrong.i saw it written in one book (image was posted here) the he was 'unmasked' by the force lightning.
but guess what? everything that is NOT in the films means but 2 things: jack and shit...and jack left town 😛
Wrong ... I quote from the ROTS Novel, written by Matthew Stover. The one based on the screen play and story by GL.
Page 336
" Palpatine examined the DAMAGE to his face in a board expanse of wall mirror. Anakin couldnt tell if his expression might be revulsion, or if this were merely the new shape of his features. Palpatine lifted one tentative hand to the MISSHAPEN HORROR that he now saw in the mirror, then simply shrugged."
Originally posted by DeVi| D0do
The novel is NOT canon, I don't care what you say...I believe it is his true face.
"BASED ON THE STORY AND SCREENPLAY BY GEORGE LUCAS"
Hmmm ... So I guess Devil DoDo that we are making up our own little opinions about what happened and not listening to the person who freaking made the damn movie.
Originally posted by Kenpokarate 2
"BASED ON THE STORY AND SCREENPLAY BY GEORGE LUCAS"Hmmm ... So I guess Devil DoDo that we are making up our own little opinions about what happened and not listening to the person who freaking made the damn movie.
It says BASED ON the story and screenplay... which means it doesn't completely adhere to the original story.
The screenplay mentions nothing of his face being damaged. All it says is that "The Chancellor's face begins to twist and distort... His face has changed into a horrible mask of evil."
It doesn't imply anything, either sides of the argument. In fact, if anything it supports MY side of the argument... 'mask of evil'
And it is stated in the Visual Dictionary that his true face is 'unmasked'. And this is also what Ian McDiarmid says...
The fact is that there is absolutely NOTHING on screen to suggest either that his face is damaged by the ligthning OR that he is unmasked. Therefore it is left up to the audience to decide what has happened. Which means I AM RIGHT! Bahahahaha!
Originally posted by DeVi| D0do
Yup, I guess so... which kinda makes my opinion redundant don't it?It says BASED ON the story and screenplay... which means it doesn't completely adhere to the original story.
The screenplay mentions nothing of his face being damaged. All it says is that "The Chancellor's face begins to twist and distort... His face has changed into a horrible mask of evil."
It doesn't imply anything, either sides of the argument.
And it is stated in the Visual Dictionary that his true face is 'unmasked'. And this is also what Ian McDiarmid says...
The fact is that there is absolutely NOTHING on screen to suggest either that his face is damaged by the ligthning OR that he is unmasked. Therefore it is left up to the audience to decide what has happened. Which means I AM RIGHT! Bahahahaha!
I take it you dont read anything other than your retarded ass replies so here I go. Let me help you out some ...
Websters Dictionary: BASE "A fundamental principle; FOUNDATION. Establish as a fact or conclusion."
So with that in mind, if the novel is based on the screen play and story of GL, we can assume that it is GL interputation.
"The Chancellor's face begins to twist and distort... His face has changed into a horrible mask of evil." I never said it didnt moron. I said it was because of the lighting that made his face into a horrible maskof evil. Jesus ...
"And it is stated in the Visual Dictionary that his true face is 'unmasked'. And this is also what Ian McDiarmid says..." Did you get that off of one of Supershadow's EXCLUSIVE interviews. I bet you did.
😆 😆 😆
PS
"And it is stated in the Visual Dictionary that his true face is 'unmasked'. And this is also what Ian McDiarmid says..."
Sidious face was the face of the Sith. That has nothing to do with the fact that you think Sidious knows some type of ancient chinese secret to making himself look different. Sidious masked his presence from the force, not his freaking face.
OK, first of all, **** you.
Secondly, I am not a moron, the Ian interview was from an Insider magazine and I'm not about to go dig it up just for you...
Did you not read my last comment?
The fact is that there is absolutely NOTHING on screen to suggest either that his face is damaged by the ligthning OR that he is unmasked. Therefore it is left up to the audience to decide what has happened. Which means I AM RIGHT! Bahahahaha!
I don't care what the hell you say, there is NOTHING in the film to support your argument!
The fact that his face is damaged from the lightning is just so frickin stupid I wont let myself believe it so don't even bother trying to prove me wrong cause i ain't changing my mind.