- The Star Wars movies may have come to an end, but the Star Wars universe lives on in many forms, including video games, novels, comic-books, and in a few years, TV shows. In 2007, we will get a 3D animation Star Wars TV show based during the Clone Wars. In 2008, we will get a live-action Star Wars TV show set between episode 3 and episode 4 (also known as the jedi purge.)

I have some hopes for both of these shows (namely that George Lucas isnt writing or directing either of them), but I have serious issues with the live-action TV show. I think filming a TV show that takes place between episode 3 and episode 4 is a remarkably bad idea. The new live-action show will suffer from the same problem that episode 1 through 3 suffered from. We already know the outcome of any major plot-point included in the TV show, so there will be very little suspense. I suppose filming between Revenge of the Sith and A New Hope will allow them to include a few cameo appearances, like Yoda, Boba Fett, Darth Sidious (Ian McDiarmid is considered a minor actor, I suspect he would gladly do the new TV show) and Darth Vader, but it just doesnt seem enough to me. I doubt they could get Ewan McGregor to make a cameo. He still considers himself a major celebrity, even though his star is clearly fading.

If the new TV show sticks to Star Wars canon, then the show must include very few, if any jedi, and those jedi must get bumped-off as the show progresses. Maybe this idea, above all others, is why I object to a Star Wars TV show set during the jedi purge. To me, Star Wars is just your typical sci-fi setting, no different than Star Trek, Aliens, etc..but when you add jedi into the mix, when you add the concept of the force into the Star Wars universe, then Star Wars gains a greater purpose. It becomes mystical, even spiritual in nature, and makes you reflect upon ideas and concepts greater than yourself. This is when Star Wars truly shines. A Star Wars TV show without jedi just isnt Star Wars to me. Would I still watch the show? Very likely, but I wouldnt get "into it" like I did the six Star Wars movies.

I think it would be far better, and more entertaining to base the new live-action TV show after Episode 6. In fact, I would place it exactly 25 years after episode 6 (1983 + 25 = 2008). Then you would have a whole new plot to follow, which creates the suspense that was sorely missing in episodes 1, 2 and 3. There are also plenty of characters who could perform walk-ons, and their appearance due to aging would be completely justified. Mark Hamill, Carrie Fischer, and Billy Dee Williams, just to name a few, would crawl on their hands and knees to George Lucas, begging him to allow them to appear in a new Star Wars TV show. I think many actors who have appeared in Star Wars have grown to resent being in it, since it usually over-shadows everything they do following it, but most actors would give their right arm to appear in another Star Wars project, due to the publicity it creates for them. Alas, they could never get Harrison Ford to make a cameo. He despises Star Wars, and never appears in anything unless he is the biggest star in the show. Harrison Ford is an ego-maniac, and he has a mid-life crisis every five years.

Think of it...how much fun would it be to watch Mark Hamill train a new cadre of Jedi knights, only to have one of the new Jedi turn to the dark-side of the force, and take over the galaxy! Perhaps Luke faces off against this new Sith lord, gets his butt kicked, and one of Luke's apprentices saves the galaxy instead. I know it's horribly contrived, but that is exactly the kind of thing Star Wars fans are hoping to see in a new TV show.

Here is an interview with Steve Sansweet, one of the honchos at Lucasfilm, talking about the new TV shows. Oh sure, I just spoiled most of the interview, but I am including it anyhow, for those of you who need to read official word of the new shows:
http://filmforce.ign.com/articles/694/694283p1.html

- The ten greatest accidental discoveries:
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.03/start.html?pg=3

- I use to watch the TV show Deadwood on HBO. I gave up on it half-way through it's second season. No show in the history of television uses more foul-language than Deadwood. Every character on the show is greedy, dirty, and violent. Even the main character, sheriff Seth Bullock, the only possible "good guy" on the show, cheats on his wife. Maybe I am too old-fashioned, but I can't watch a show unless I can relate to some of the characters.

Three interesting historical points about Deadwood:

1. Seth Bullock became a major player in American politics during the early stages of the 20th century. He became close friends with Teddy Roosevelt, and was appointed Secretary of the Interior, back when being Secretary of the Interior meant something.
2. Wyatt Earp traveled to Deadwood, and lived their for a short time. He and Seth Bullock, despite being on the same side of the law, became enemies. Bullock supposedly ran Wyatt out of Deadwood.
3. Mark Twain visited Deadwood in 1877.

Here is an article explaining the historically accurate and inaccurate details of the show. Make sure to also read page two of the website, as it might contain information even more interesting than the first page of the website:
http://www.legendsofamerica.com/WE-DeadwoodHBO.html

- Ten obscure facts about Albert Einstein:
http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/19980907140525data_trunc_sys.shtml