Talk: Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith (novelization)

When Mace, Kit, Agen and Saesee go to arrest the chancellor, was he stabbed through the chest in the novel??

the dutch version says, translated, ofcourse: 'it doesn't' agen kolar nearly fell over. the emeraldcoloured blade dissappeared and slipped out of his powerless fingers. smoke was leaking out of a small hole in his forehead, and light was visible through the back of his head. 'hurt' he fell forward and no longer moved.

• Im an expert at this stuff and it is NO (and remember to put your sig)--Wattamb2001 19:59, 20 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Expansion

Could someone please expand on the ending of this book? Apparently, this page only begins does not go into when Yoda speaks to Qui-Gon Jinn, or even the birth of the Skywalker twins. Could someone please do something about it?

-OxfordScholar09 20:08, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

• Major plot points can refer to the movie article, and please dont start a new discussion in the middle of the page. Darth Kevinmhk 15:51, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Yoda > Palpatine?

Certainly don't remember THAT from the novel...source, anyone?Thanos6 01:43, 23 Oct 2005 (UTC)

• In the novel, it becomes clearer that Sidious was able to enfold the escalating power of Yoda into his own and use it against the Jedi, thus making it impossible for Yoda to gain a decisive advantage. OK, someone, please give me a source for this. Thanos6 10:25, 8 Dec 2005 (UTC)
  • I think it's a mis-interpretation to the "the stronger the light, the darker the shadow" talk in that scene. It makes it clear, however, that Palps was stronger than Yoda; whilst Yoda and all the Jedi had trained to fight the old Sith all over again, Darth Bane's order had evolved. I'm going to change what's said in the article. --Fade 10:45, 8 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Palpatine tests Anakin's thirst for power

Any ideas on a better title for this section? I am starting to believe that I chose a bad title for this scene. - TopAce 11:38, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Dumping ground

Has anyone noticed that this movie is sort of a dumping ground for names that George Lucas never used for planets? -- SFH 16:11, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

• Could be mentioned, but in the movie's article, if it isn't already - TopAce 19:33, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

The neutrality of this article is disputed!?

Hmm. I fill quite some information in this article, but i don't understand which part of this article has disputed neutrality? Care to explain my fellow Wookieepedians? Thanks! Darth Kevinmhk 06:25, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

• The section above the TOC is the one. - TopAce 14:06, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Other than the part about delighting EU fans, I really don't see where there's a problem with neutrality. If that's the issue, it's minor enough that it should just be excised, rather than debated. I think that I may have been the last one to cleanup that bit, anyway, so if anyone wants to tinker with the wording, they have my blessing. Jwebb13^HoloNet 03:01, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Should we take the neutrality tag off as I do not see anyone who thinks it needs to be changed. All it does it lower the quality of the article. Sith Penguin Lord 01:23, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

• Nobody has objected for a week and a half now. I removed the tag. Wildyoda 03:19, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Exactly how should we write the plot?

The plot of the novel is essentially the same as the movie, with a few divergent elements. Should we just go ahead and write the plot or copy/paste it from the movie article? Or, we could just keep the section on "Differences between the movie and book", relying on people's common sense to navigate to the movie article for a plot summary.

I'm personally for copy/pasting the summary from the movie article, and also keeping the "Differences" section. Mindgiver 00:29, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

• Why would we have to copy/paste the plot summary of the movie article into this one? - TopAce 19:16, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
  • If we do decide to put the "Plot" section in, we could use the main article template to point it to the movie article. Darth Kevinmhk 02:55, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Images

Why are there images from the film and comic in the page? I know they follow the same plot, but I believe we are only supposed to have stuff from the novel. Darth Greig (Talk) 22:10, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

• It seems like they shouldn't be there, but since its not like its a picture book the page wouldn't have any images besides the article. I say we keep them. Aqua Unasi 22:31, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

It's like rain on your wedding day

"Palpatine could not direct the search for Yoda as he hurried to rescue Darth Vader, but he told the clones to destroy the whole building if they had to (Ironically, the building would later be renderred useless when he dissolved the Senate completely)." How is that ironic?InSaneWeTrust 07:09, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

C Canon?

Why is this novel listed as C canon but all the other movie novelizations are listed as G canon? Shouldn't they all be the same..? -- Xell Khaar 07:11, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

• They should all be C-canon. -- I need a name (Complain here) 10:27, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Broken link

The excerpt link is broken, due to StarWars.com's recent reformat. There's other busted links around Wookieepedia too, for the same reason. Can we try and correct this ASAP? I'm only bringing this up here because that link is very important to the article. 76.171.55.249 17:47, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

R2-D2 Speaks?

I think this is the first book where R2-D2 comments are translated for the reader to understand. Comments? Ztyran 02:24, January 27, 2012 (UTC)

Nope, the Quote of the Day archive shows several examples that predate the ROTS novel, including one from the old Marvel comics. At any rate, this page is for discussing changes to the article, not for general discussion about the topic. Master Jon ^{War Room} Friday, January 27, 2012, 03:20 UTC

Anakin and his unborn child?

It says there is a part in the book where Anakin and Padme talk about the gender of the baby, yet when I read the book I could not find it.

Maybe I missed a page out when reading but I tried to find it after I finished and have yet to spot it.

The closest I could to fining it was when Padme was in labour and asks if she's had a girl because that's "What Anakin thinks it is"

Alright, is it canon or not?

So, what I'm getting from this article is that this novel is not considered “canon” since 2014, when the canon was reestablished. However, I'm wondering if we need to change this. I recently ordered a copy of this novel, which I believe is a more updated version. Disney's logo is prominently shown on the back cover, alongside the Lucasfilm logo and links to the Star Wars books Facebook and Twitter pages. Additionally, the book includes the timeline that has been included in all of the “canon” Star Wars books. It also has a preview for Battlefront: Twilight Company, a canon novel, as well as ads for A New Dawn, Tarkin, and Heir to the Jedi, all of which are canon. Therefore, I'm now confused as to whether or not the article is entirely accurate in its current status in regards to what is and is not “canon.” This could obviously affect the other film novelizations prior to The Force Awakens as well, so this is rather important. I assumed that the novelizations were considered “Legends” except in the instances where their events lined up with the events in the films, but after seeing this, I'm unsure. Could someone please clarify? Thanks! Adele Addict ^(talk) 00:14, May 31, 2017 (UTC)

• The logo update is just that a logo or a cover update. TFA and RO novels are considered more canon than the movies novels. Del Rey has said that they're canon where they align to the movie, for example if the novel mentions an event from the old EU, it's legends but a scene that its accurate to the movie, its canon. --DarthRuiz30 (talk) 00:21, May 31, 2017 (UTC)
  • Alright, just wanted to make sure! Thank you for clarifying! Adele Addict ^(talk) 22:11, May 31, 2017 (UTC)

Battle of Kashyyyk "completely absent" ?

the article currently states that "The Battle of Kashyyyk is completely absent from the novel"

this is not true, the battle is mentioned, perhaps indirectly, but it is mentioned:

a "droid landing on Kashyyyk" is mentioned as is "the counter invasion of Kashyyyk", "the seperatist attack on Kashyyyk", and various other references to a battle occurring on Kashyyyk are made.

As this is the case it cannot be said that the battle is "completely absent" but rather that it is not mentioned or shown in depth. --2601:43:1:6010:170:46:D34D:71CA 17:43, November 17, 2017 (UTC)

Novel rerelease canonicity

As we know, later this year the novelization is getting a rerelease for the 20th anniversary. Notably, though, the revealed cover lacks the legends banner, implying it could be canon. Combined with the fact that the book has been referenced numerous times in canon, will the wiki be considering this book as canon now?BearInsanity (talk) 21:30, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

• There isn't really reason to think we should be treating it as canon, it's just the book being released with footnotes from the author Lewisr (talk) 23:55, 15 April 2025 (UTC)
  • the lack of the legends marker implies it isnt legends. BearInsanity (talk) 00:48, 16 April 2025 (UTC)
    • Tom Hoeler—Editorial Director for the publisher—has indicated its BTS only content and the book has not changed, and specified it is not being introduced to the new canon; it's annotations-only. The relevant messages are in the Wookieepedia Discord if you want to look them up; in #social on the 7th of April.—spookywilloww^talk 01:06, 16 April 2025 (UTC)