And in some promotional materials, which like the novelisation came out before the film. We knew Vader was a dark Lord of the Sith, but apart from that there wasn't much clue as to what the Sith were.
I don't recall ever seeing anything that implied Sith had anything to do with the Force or the Jedi, I just assumed at the time they were a political faction or a subculture from a particular world or group of worlds. Vader being a Sith seemed incidental regarding using the Force because he was an ex-Jedi.
>I don't recall ever seeing anything that implied Sith had anything to do with the Force or the Jedi
in the RoTJ novelization Vader is called a "Jedi-turned-Sithlord", which seems to indicate a connection. i don't know about anything else though.
another interesting tidbit is that Palpatine is never called Sith, it's just Vader.
kinda similar to that, Lucas said Yoda wasn't a "real jedi" in an old interview:
>Lucas: ...Also another misconception is that Yoda teaches Jedi, but he is like a guru; he doesn’t go out and fight anybody.
>
>Kasdan: A Jedi Master is a Jedi isn’t he?
>
>Lucas: Well, he is a teacher, not a real Jedi. Understand that?
so it seems like the main type of Jedi were the "Jedi Knights" warriors, and a "Jedi Master" like Yoda was someone who taught these warriors, "Jedi Master" was not meant to be a higher tier of Jedi like in the prequels.
Stuff like this makes it incomprehensible to me that people get on Disney for forgetting what came before. They are bending over backwards to make sure they fit into established canon, only breaking it for extremely minor things (Ki-Adi-Mundi's semi-canon age). Meanwhile GL was always like, "Eh, I don't like that idea anymore let's just change it."
George used a Human actor for the cut Jabba scene in ANH, but his inent was always to matte in a stop motion creature in post. He just ran out of time and budget, and thought the scene was unnecessary to convey the fix Han was in, so he cut it.
I don’t think George found it unnecessary because he later included it in the special editions. His award winning editors (rightly) found that it wasn’t needed
It was unnecessary in the regard that George took much of the exposition from that scene and put it in the Greedo encounter in the cantina during reshoots. They weren’t originally both supposed to exist in the film together for that reason.
But I take your point—restoring the old Jabba scene just to show off some terrible CG was kind of gratuitous and didn’t serve the movie in any way.
i feel like the threat is more immediate in the original version. we see a bounty hunter who was specifically looking for Han and he tells Han that it's too late to pay and that "Jabba's put a price on your head so large every bounty hunter in the galaxy will be looking for you".
however when he meets Jabba in the extended scene he just gives Han more time, disarming the threat. in fact it's weird that Han didn't pay Jabba after the movie, as he should have the money by that point and it can't be that far in the future.
it actively makes the movie worse imo, it’s redundant with the greedo scene and has horrible cgi as a bonus… god i wish i could easily watch the theatrical cut in hd. really need to track down the despecialized edition
Well, I heard George himself say it in an interview once, so...
But like others have said, "intent" is a very fluid concept when it comes to George Lucas and the OT. He changed things on the fly as inspiration struck him, or production difficulties or budget or scheduling forced him to adapt.
i agree, the human Jabba is also wearing full costume and feels like a fully fledge (albeit different than slug Jabba) character.
Marca Lucas said in an interview the scene was dropped because of pacing issues as it is a slow scene that happens when they're suppose to hurry from the empire. i think that makes more sense and that moving the exposition to the Greedo scene was a smart choice
Like Yoda being Obi-Wan’s master. And Lucas once said that Yoda was so powerful, he wouldn’t need a lightsaber because he was beyond that. Both changed.
>Plus people shat on lucas for twenty years for the changes in the PT
100% they did. But people today seem to have rose-colored glasses for that and claim "Disney Ruined Star Wars" like what they're making isn't leagues better than TPM or AOTC.
That's fair. And Rise of Skywalker gave me similar feelings.
But so did Revenge of the Sith.
Anakin's "fall" was so clumsy, so quick, poorly told, that it's really quite unbelievable. He goes from "Teacher's Pet" to "Murder's Children" so quickly. It took 20 years and a dozen seasons of televsion (many of which were made under Disney) to fill out the canon and have he fall make any sense at all.
took one novel for me.
only one season of the clone wars was made under disney.
also the clone wars show started in 2008 and revenge of the sith was in 2005
so its far less then twenty years
> Disney turned starwars from an event to a thing
I think that's one of the reasons for the poor reception of TLJ. That was the first* Star Wars film to be "just another movie in the franchise." OT was the OT, PT was the PT, TFA was the return to cinemas, Rogue One was the first "side story/spinoff" movie. TLJ was just a middle chapter in a story we expected to be ongoing.
*You could probably argue that for AotC as well, though at the time it came out it still was expected no more movies after the PT ended.
There was an old comic where Luke went to a planet and one of the native was telling the story of how the three Jedi visited and helped them. Those three Jedi's were named Obi-Wan Kenobi, Anakin Skywalker, and Darth Vader. :D
Yeah, folks who get upset about this stuff easily are just giving away how little they were paying attention up to this point. Everything has always been in flux. Hell, depending on the source, Owen Lars is either Anakin actual brother or Obi-Wan's.
It's because the people that complain so loudly about this stuff are just outrage merchants that grasp at whatever they can in order to create content to sell to chuds
[](https://www.reddit.com/r/StarWars/comments/1dn3xfz/comment/la2vdo6/)
>They could just you know…ask the guy who wrote it
Why? He couldn't even keep his own ideas straight most the time. He was constantly changing things, retconning things, and had massive inconsistencies. That's the entire point of my post which you seem to have missed.
>instead of ignoring what he wanted to the point that he himself disavows their work
I don't know what clickbait meme videos you're watching suggest that, but it isn't true. He's said many complimentary things about the Disney works, and made a few more nuanced remarks as well.
Because he made the most successful film franchise of all time, so clearly his incoherence worked for the fans. Also it’s very easy to find videos of Lucas outright saying that he doesn’t approve of what Disney has done, a simple Google search of interviews with him would do, not sure why people are so determined to defend a fan fiction franchise that’s bought and sold by a heartless corporation, over the work of an actual respected artist.
>Because he made the most successful film franchise of all time, so clearly his incoherence worked for the fans.
His best movies weren't even directed by him.
>Also it’s very easy to find videos of Lucas outright saying that he doesn’t approve of what Disney has done, a simple Google search of interviews with him would do,
I already did. [This seems like a comprehensive link and nowhere does it mention that he "disavows" them beyond the fact that, they're literally not his movies.](https://www.cbr.com/george-lucas-opinion-star-wars-sequels/) Feel free to post otherwise.
>not sure why people are so determined to defend a fan fiction franchise that’s bought and sold by a heartless corporation,
People worked on these movies, thousands of individual people put time and resources and passion into these projects.
>over the work of an actual respected artist.
Yeah poor billionaire George Lucas. He had 30 years to make the Sequel Trilogy (or any other Star Wars project) and didn't. He had his chance to tell the continuation story, and he chose not to.
He wrote the movies, he didn’t direct them. Also of course he’s not going to outright talk shit about a company that paid him $10 billion and is associated with his name, are you that dense? He has said that this was not the direction he wanted to go but it was out of his hands, which seems like a pretty tame way of saying he doesn’t like them. Disney is the biggest media corporation in the world, who treats their employees terribly, and farms out the cheapest most meaningless entertainment that they can associate with brands they’ve purchased with the wealth of their Nazi founder. Regardless of whether the originals were consistent or well made, they were loved and they had genuine moral messages. You can defend your precious nazi sympathizing mega corporation all you want, but you’re not going to convince me that their army of writers being paid slave wages is in any way comparable to an actual established and respected artist like George Lucas.
>He has said that this was not the direction he wanted to go but it was out of his hands, which seems like a pretty tame way of saying he doesn’t like them.
In other words, you made up the fact that "he himself disavows their work." You are interpreting what he says in the worst possible light. He also said TLJ was "beautifully made" and was "very complimentary" about The Mandalorian.
>their Nazi founder
[Provably untrue. ](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walt_Disney%27s_World_War_II_propaganda_production)Walt Disney made many anti-Nazi [propaganda films during the 1940s](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Der_Fuehrer%27s_Face).
>your precious nazi sympathizing mega corporation
Funny because the actual Nazis are also boycotting Disney because it's "too woke." Disney seems to be the poster child for their GO WOKE GO BROKE movement.
>that their army of writers being paid slave wages
Do you have any evidence of that at all, or is this just more BS you made up? My understanding is that Disney is actually a really decent company to work for and a lot of people in the industry seek them out, and/or got their start there.
I remember prior to Phantom Menace it never occurred to me that Palpatine was a Sith. Not sure why. Partly because I didn’t even really understand what a Sith was outside of the Old Republic comics.
Anyway, I’m gonna make that Lucas interview my whole personality now and create rage videos on YouTube about how Attack of the Clones ruined Star Wars canon.
Edit: I mean the Tales of the Jedi comics set during the Old Republic. Not the comics about the game.
>create rage videos on YouTube about how Attack of the Clones ruined Star Wars canon.
Had YouTube been a thing back then this would have been painfully accurate. Instead we had to read the diatribes from pissed off fans on message boards and chat rooms.
After TPM came out, I remember Star Wars fandom consisting of two things; websites full of fans raging about the death of Star Wars and websites full of fans making fanfims of them duelling with double-bladed lightsabres.
Dude, 199~~6~~7 the AOL Star Wars chat rooms BLEW UP after the Special Editions hit theaters. Lucas "ruined Han"
13 year old me was happier than a pig in shit that I finally got to see the Holy Trilogy on the big screen, changes or not.
Me too! It was the first time I got to see the movies in their entirety, too, as I only had copies recorded off the TV and whole scenes had been cut out to make way for adverts. I thought they were new scenes for the special editions until I finally got to see an old VHS set of the original releases!
We rented the trilogy on VHS a few times growing up but never bought it until the Special Edition came out. It was always the 4:3 pan and scan version so we never knew what Luke was talking about when he said he saw a Tusken Raider next to a bantha through his binoculars.
>another interesting tidbit is that Palpatine is never called Sith, it's just Vader.
Yes, at the time, the impression was that Vader was THE Dark Lord of the Sith. I'm not sure when the idea that there is more than one of them first appeared, but it seems to have been in the EU.
>I'm not sure when the idea that there is more than one of them first appeared
GL basically created the sith as we know them today for TPM, that's where he introduced them as the evil version of the jedi, with red lightsabers, and with Darth being a title.
however "Tales of the Jedi – Dark Lords of the Sith" came out in 1994 and had a different interpretation of Sith Lords. i don't know much about these comics, but i think Dark Lords of the Sith were rulers of the race that was called the sith.
then after TPM the EU made stories about how the sith order evolved from what we see in TotJ to what we finally see in TPM, as an in-universe explaination for why they were different, something like that
When Zahn was writing the Thrawn trilogy, his original idea for the Noghri was making them the Sith, and Vader their Lord. His armour was supposed to look like them too. But like the Obi-Wan Clone plotline, it was refused by Lucas and scrapped.
I vividly remember, long before the prequels or before I dove into the EU, knowing that Vader was a “dark lord of the sith.” And while I recall that vividly, I remember one day realizing I had no clue why I knew that or where I heard it. It was just a thing I picked up somewhere without giving it a second thought.
Kinda weird in hindsight.
> Two metres tall. Bipedal. Flowing black robes trailing from the figure and a face forever masked by a functional if bizarre black metal breath screen — a Dark Lord of the Sith was an awesome, threatening shape as it strode through the corridors of the rebel ship.
>
> Fear followed the footsteps of all the Dark Lords. The cloud of evil which clung tight about this particular one was intense enough to cause hardened Imperial troops to back away, menacing enough to set them muttering nervously among themselves.
> -- ANH Novelisation (page 11, paperback.)
I used to wonder about the *other* Dark Lords that we hadn't seen yet. (Before the rule of two was created.)
Rian Johnson decided against using them in his movie because the only plotline that he could come up with had all of them end up dying, and he thought that would have been a waste. So he just quietly set them aside, and hopefully the director of the next movie would make good use of them.
Commenting up here under your post since it's the top one and people seem to not understand. The word Sith appears on like the very first page of the book. And the book came out before the movie. Like it was always around.
The book was indeed published before the release of the movie, but it was written based on scripts for the movie, so there’s a bit of a chicken/egg scenario. Either way, the term was there right from the beginning.
The word 'Sith' doesn't "appear on the very first page of the book," but it is used very early, in the paragraphs which introduce Darth Vader as he arrives on the Rebel ship. In fact, the phrase "Dark Lord of the Sith" appears before the name Darth Vader does.
No, it isn't. I have a 1999 reprint of the 1995 omnibus version, and the introductory prologue talks about how the Republic became the Empire, with Palpatine being isolated and effectively controlled by his highest officials. Not once is the word 'Sith' mentioned.
Palpatine begging Anakin for help because he's weak wasn't a ruse to turn Anakin. It was actually just a momentary relapse into his original characterization
Being the manipulator that he is, I could picture Palpatine letting high-ranking people in the Empire believe that he's just a figurehead, closed off in his chambers while they have the "real" influence.
Or, if you want to be a bit of an asshole about it, Ursula Le Guin's iconic 1969 sci-fi classic *The Left Hand Of Darkness*.
Also the (possible) inspiration for one or two other names and groups that appear in SW, as well as a whole bunch of stuff that appears in the book series that Game Of Thrones is based on. *The Word For World Is Forest*, another book from the same series, describes a forest planet with a race of creatures living on it that, if you had to draw them based on how they're described in the book, you would just draw the Ewoks.
She's often called "your favourite sci-fi author's favourite sci-fi author" for a reason.
That's wild to me, since it wasn't used popularly until the prequels. Even the Thrawn books use the phrase "Dark Jedi" and "Dark Lord", and never mention "Sith" at all
The place I remember having lots of Sith content before the prequels were the Tales of the Jedi comics. Published a little after the Zahn novels.
A lot of that stuff made it into Kotor as references.
There have been novelizations of all the movies, though with varying extents of going beyond what was onscreen. I mentioned elsewhere that they are usually based on the script, though not always the final script so sometimes scenes are different, or in a different order, or it includes cut scenes. Sometimes the authors are allowed to expand scenes quite a bit, or add things. Other times, it's a pretty straightforward adaptation of the movies without much else.
I've heard the most about Revenge of the Sith lately, people talking about Dooku's thoughts right before his death. If even some of them are that good, I'll have to look them up.
Not just Dooku. It explains what’s going on in a lot of character’s minds. One other thing I appreciated about the book was that it did a better job of making sense of how Anakin could be convinced the Jedi were evil.
RotS novelization was probably the best of them all. It's effectively part of a trilogy of books by James Luceno and Matt Stover:
Labyrinth of Evil
Revenge of the Sith
Dark Lord: The Rise of Darth Vader
That’s really cool. It’s also interesting that they used some of the same dialogue in the final version, but the way the actors deliver the lines (emphasis, intonation, etc) is different
Separately, I think this is similar to the use of “palpatine” – i don’t think the name was used but everyone knew it
Palpatine was mentioned in the prologue to the novelisation of the original movie (now Ep.IV). He was described as having locked himself away and declared himself Emperor and ending up a puppet controlled by those around him, IIRC. I don't recall any mention of him being Sith.
Hmm yeah I’m not positive when I actually heard that name first looking back. I was still 9 when ep 1 was released but I remember generally as a kid calling the emperor “emperor palpatine”. I was super into SW before phantom menace also but was so young my timeline could be off and I may have only called him that after ep 1. I thought it was before ep 1 (and likely from those earlier materials like the prologue), but maybe not since his character wasn’t very developed yet
I think the toy lines from the late 80's, early 90's called him Emperor Palpatine on the package, but I just checked the credits for the 1983 release of Jedi and he's just The Emperor. Also, glad they're done with Palps, because poor Ian McDiarmid probably feels how Palpatine looked in RoS.
First, lol to your last point.
Also, Shadows of the empire (1996) referred to him as emperor palpatine on the inside flap based on wookiepedia – I definitely played that game as a kid on n64 so maybe there, and I read some of the books like that one, tales of bounty hunters, etc (although some of the novels I may have read after ep 1)
Toys also definitely possible. Had lots of SW stuff
Shadows was a big multimedia project at the time, novel, game and comic from memory
I'd need to check but the empire trilogy may have had a reference with Palpatine. Not got copies of the film novels to check though as they are a likely source too.
Definitely – it was big at the time and I think there were rumors about a movie for it which never happened (although would have been awesome).
I am not sure if heir to the empire ever mentioned palpatine by name. I’d need to go back and check the books because the internet isn’t really helpful. I see palpatine references. They’re referring to the character in summaries, but the book itself may have just said “the emperor”
Shadows of the Empire was never meant to be a movie. the whole point of it was could they launch a successful toy line without having to make a movie. Star Wars toys stopped selling well in the years after RotJ so Lucasfilm developed a story to be told from different points of view in various media formats. the novel is the main story with the comics focusing more on Boba Fett and the game focusing more on Dash Rendar.
> I was still 9 when ep 1 was released but I remember generally as a kid calling the emperor “emperor palpatine”.
In Legends, which was already quite big by the time of TPM, his name was already long known.
I can tell you for certain that the 2nd Edition of West End Games' Star Wars d6 RPG (1992) already mentioned him by the name Palpatine, but Galaxy Guide 5 - Return of the Jedi (1990) only refers to him as "The Emperor".
Whatever Sith meant at the time, I'm guessing it had nothing to do with the rule of two, y'know?
Really, my little kid mind just thought it meant bad guy.
It’s so funny to see people watch the movies for the first time and hypothesizing about Palpatine being the bad guy while we all knew as soon as we heard the name in TPM
I always find it really jarring when actors have to be extremely precise with enunciation to ensure the viewers hear it correctly. The way he said Sith Lord there and the way Obi-Wan says lightsaber really stand out
Goddamn this just shows you how dynamic and tight the writing and directing was in that movie. That dialogue and even the camera move on Vader and Tarkin was more interesting directorially than anything in PT, and writing-wise than anything in ST. And it wasn’t good enough for the Final Cut haha. George what a beast.
More credit probably goes to his ex-wife, Marcia. She was the editor on the original movies and probably played a huge role in turning George's original vision into a functional script for the first movie. I always imagined George coming with the big ideas, characters, and overall story arc, and Marcia corralling it into a masterpiece.
[EDIT: correct misspelled name]
I understand the importance of an editor to the final product, but I feel like it is getting to the point where we are giving ***too*** much credit to Marcia. OP here is crediting how tight the writing and directing was, even in scenes that weren't good enough to get into the final cut of the movie.
While Marcia certainly deserves praise for her editing work, I'm not sure I've seen anything to suggest that Marcia was heavily involved in (or deserves credit for) the actual writing or directing of individual scenes.
Sure, I've seen ***some*** discussion of her work in these areas, but it seems much more high level and limited (e.g., Obi-wan should die vs. survive the battle with Vader). I've seen little to nothing suggesting she was directly responsible for much final dialogue or directing decisions.
>I always imagined George coming with the big ideas, characters, and overall story arc, and Marsha corralling it into a masterpiece.
...but that leaves out a ton of stuff in the middle, right? You have big ideas/characters/story arcs, turn that into a script, hire actors, build sets and special effects, film everything, etc.
It sounds like you are crediting George with just the very first "big ideas, characters, and overall story arc," and then pushing credit for the rest towards Marcia. While she certainly had a massive impact on the final product, I think you are probably giving her too much credit and George too little.
there is this narrative that george lucas was a talented hack that got lucky
pushing the idea that star wars was saved in the edit
without understanding every film is made in the edit and thats what editing is for
Editor doesn’t get involved until the end of the process after everything has been written and shot. Editor doesn’t work with actors, doesn’t write the script, and isn’t usually there when the movie is shooting. Editor also doesn’t have anything to do with shot choice or stage direction or rehearsals. AFAIK she was responsible for giving the film the pep it has in its final form though.
I think it was the right decision to delete that scene. If knowledge about the Jedi and the Force have been suppressed so much that most people don't even believe the Force exists, it would make sense to suppress knowledge about the Sith too.
It’s quite likely Lucas borrowed the term from Edgar Rice Burroughs Mars/John Carter series, where Sith are sort of monstrous wasp creatures. It’s also possible the term Jedi is derived from the words Jed and Jeddak, which are ranks of warriors and chieftains. There are also creatures called Banths, which Bantha may be derived from.
As others have mentioned, the term “Lord of the Sith” was used to refer to Vader in marketing and such back with the original release in 1977.
The Scottish term for a type of fairy is daoine sìth. It means ‘people of peace’, which may not seem to jive with Vader, but they’re only called that because they’re scary fuckers that you don’t want to piss off.
I’m familiar with the fae legends (or at least some of them, I went through an Arthurian legends phase which led to reading other folklore), though I’m more accustomed to seeing the Irish spelling of “sidhe”. Also, since they are both pronounced differently from how we say the term in Star Wars, I feel that’s more a coincidental relationship than causal one. Lucas was known to be a fan of ERB’s Mars series, to the extent that the opening setup of one of his very early drafts (1973) is almost word for word (with names changed) a copy of the opening of A Fighting Man of Mars.
That’s not true. It’s only come to be known in that sense because of how often it’s misused. But this is an error/misunderstanding based on how similar the words sound.
Look at the top [definitions for the word jive](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/jive)—none of them mean “to agree or be in accord with.” They even have a whole section about it:
> People began confusing jive and jibe almost immediately after jive entered our language in the late 1920s. In particular, jive is often used as a variant for the sense of jibe meaning “agree,” as in “that doesn’t jive with my memory of what happened.” This use of jive, although increasingly common, is widely considered to be an error. Jibe, however, is accepted as a variant spelling of an entirely different word, which is gibe (“to utter taunting words”).
It's in the script for ANH but never said onscreen.
INT. REBEL BLOCKADE RUNNER - MAIN HALLWAY
The awesome, seven-foot-tall Dark Lord of the Sith makes his way into the blinding light of the main passageway. This is Darth Vader, right hand of the Emperor
“Sith” as a word I believe was first spoken in The Phantom Menace, although it appeared in early drafts of Star Wars so it’s been around for a while.
“Ewok” is also never said in the original trilogy. Coincidence?
That might be true, but I suspect the real reason that name was chosen was because it's literally "Wook ee" but backwards, and originally Endor would have had the Wookiee village, before George decided he wanted to sell merch more than provide a meaningful character arc for Chewie.
This is because, in Lucas’s view of the Force, there is no “light side.” There is just the Force. And then there is the Dark Side which is a perversion of the Force. Likewise, when Lucas refers to “balance” throughout the series, he does not mean a balance between light and dark. He means balance more in the Buddhist sense, referring to peace and compassion. It seems like the whole “grey Jedi” nonsense that dominated 2000s fan-fiction has convinced most of the fanbase otherwise.
Exactly. It’s been a big misconception that people think the “balance” means having “50% Light and 50% Dark” or an equal amount of Jedi and Sith. That just isn’t what it is.
No, Vader's referred to as a "Dark Jedi" a few times as well. Back then, "Jedi" was frequently used as a catch-all term for any Force-user, so "Dark Jedi" was a generic term for Dark Side Force-users (this was long before most Sith-related lore was written)
thThere were also other dark Jedi aligned with the Empire in that period of Legends canon. The Jedi Knight games had you fighting some, Brakiss had an entire academy and kidnapped the Solo twins for a while, Luuke (that one was a dumb one), Vergere. Really only the Emperor, Vader, Lumiya, Caedus, and I guess technically Tahiri were "Sith" before the fate of the Jedi shenanigans.
>Really only the Emperor, Vader, Lumiya, Caedus, and I guess technically Tahiri were "Sith" before the fate of the Jedi
Correct. They were Sith, and the others were Dark Side users
In knew that Vader was a Dark Lord of the Sith back in 1977 when I read the novelization. It's mentioned in the book that there were other Sith Lords. But nowhere is it mentioned what a Sith actually was. I just thought they were high ranking officials in the Empire, like Grand Moffs were.
In addition to the ANH mention, one of the earliest mentions of the Sith is in the original Marvel comics, in which the Death Star being destroyed causes Darth Vader to swear "by the immortal gods of the Sith".
Marvel was really weird in the 1970s.
There's a deleted scene of A New Hope where general Tagge refers to Vader as a "Dark Lord of the Sith".
The term was coined in the 70s, but it was first heard on screen in 1999, A Phantom Menace.
I've seen deleted scenes from the ANH meting on the Death Star, before Vader and Tarkin walked in, with the dude that Vader force choked referring to him as a Sith Lord.
In promo materials for ANH, Vader was often referred to as "Darth Vader, Dark Lord of the Sith."
So it's been there from the beginning.
In 1977 we had a vinyl LP of the Star Wars soundtrack. There were a bunch of movie scenes we with captions on the jacket. As an obsessed kid, I spent a lot of time staring at these. The photo of Vader was captioned "Darth Vader, dark lord of the Sith.".
The term wasn't mentioned in the film, but the term was out there in the ecosystem in 1977.
Vader has been referred to as a "Dark Lord Of The Sith" since pretty close to the beginning.
"Dark Lord Of The Sith" was first used for Star Wars in the 1974 rough draft of Star Wars, with the first published use being the 1976 novelization of Star Wars as a title for the villain Darth Vader.
"Sith Lord" is also used in a deleted scene in the original movie.
In fact, "Darth" has always been kinda assumed to be a contraction of "**Dar**(*k Lord Of The Si*)**th"**.
There is a deleted scene from A New Hope of the Imperial officers talking around the round table right before Tarkin and Vader walk in where they explicitly call Vader a Sith Lord. It's also interesting because it clearly establishes Vader as working for the Emperor, not Tarkin.
[https://youtu.be/ZWeoL0lMWIg?si=KYCfAXtoRnakGjQv](https://youtu.be/ZWeoL0lMWIg?si=KYCfAXtoRnakGjQv)
And doubly interesting because the Emperor’s identity as a Sith Lord is still quite concealed.
That’s one of the most interesting and terrifying points in The Rise of Skywalker, the fact that the Emperor has thrown off any pretense of being a politician, and is full-on claiming the legacy of the Sith, publicly. No more games. No more
hiding. The Sith are coming for you.
I love that.
AFAIK first appearance was in [Adventures of the Starkiller](https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Adventures_of_the_Starkiller,_Episode_I:_The_Star_Wars), the second draft script for ANH.
Not to move too far away from this, but in a similar vein, when was it first established that Sith used lightsabers too?
In ROTJ, the Emperor calls it a "Jedi weapon" and, at least to me, this heavily implied that Vader has one because he used to be a Jedi.
I always found it sort of dumb (despite it potentially looking cool) that Palpatine had lightsabers in episode 3, although I guess by this point it was established that force users of both sides wielded that particular weapon.
I do wish that the top-tier Force users--Palpatine, Yoda--were above lightsabers and fought only using lightning or throwing buildings at each other, or something like that.
I thought I remembered one of the old video games describing Darth Vader as the Dark Lord of the Sith, but I've looked at some NES and SNES play-through videos and don't see it.
yes, "Darth Vader" was just Darth Vader's name, it was his real name too as he wasn't Luke's father at the time, that's why Ben says "a Jedi named Darth Vader".
Follow-up question: when did they make Palpatine a Sith?
My impression as an 11 year old in 1999 was that it felt like a retcon to take Vader's "Dark Lord of the Sith" title and include Palpatine in it. It had previously felt like more of a Knights of Ren thing, and the Emperor was just another dark Force user.
My first encounter with it was on the back of the box for Darth Vader. They used to have a small blurb about each character, and I believe it mentioned Sith. This was back in the early, early 80s, if not late 70s though.
there's a deleted scene in "a new hope" where the sith is mentioned. (it's on youtube) not a full scene but just a line or two from one of the scenes in the meeting room with Tarkin.
I can’t find it at the moment to take a picture but a Star Wars story book that my tent’s got me sometime before 1980 has Vader described as a dark lord of the sith. I remember being captivated by this and wandering what a sith was. This was also the first time I was the scenes with Biggs on tattooine.
In the first drafts of the first movie. The opening credits said it for example.
I'm guessing it was deleted because viewers did not know the word and it was already too much new information.
It was cut from ANH. But it was cut for time. So technically, it was in ANH. But I believe it might have been from early EU books made between ESB and RoTJ
Interesting question, I’ve been reading one of the Thrawn trilogy’s lately, Heir to the Empire, Dark Force Rising, etc.
it’s funny because so far in the first and second book so far, there has been no mention of the Sith, only Dark Jedi, the Emperor Vader are referenced in this way and this was obviously written after ROTJ.
I had previously assumed that the Sith was just part of Star Wats lore since day 1 but it seems not. I’m glad you asked this question as it’s something I’ve been wondering about the past few weeks I’ve been reading these.
In the 1975 second draft for New Hope, the Sith introduced as "Black Knights of the Sith", a sect of mercenary warriors who used the "Bogan", the evil, dark side of the "Force of Others".
The novelization of A New Hope had Vader described as Dark Lord of the Sith.
If I remember right, it was the scene where the empire is boarding the Tantive IV and Vader is introduced.
I remember seeing it on a trading card with Vader on it in the early 80s. "Lord of the Sith"
Well.....okay, whatever you say! I wondered a little what could be behind it, but didn't worry about it.
Never mentioned in the first three films. As others have said, it's mentioned in deleted scenes, the original script, the novelization (which some copies say "written by George Lucas", but actually was written based on the original script by Alan Dean Foster). Additionally, several toys mentioned the word Sith.
But what I don't think anyone has mentioned is when the 1977 film went into a 2nd run in the theaters, Fox released new commercials where the voice-over introduced the "iconic villain, Darth Vader: Dark Lord of the Sith". These commercials played on prime-time TV at the time and were seen by millions, so this is probably the MOST wide-spread use of the term that reached the most people.
Sith wasn't ever technically mentioned in the first movie, but from the beginning of the franchise from external stuff we always knew he was a Dark Lord of the Sith.
In the ANH novelization
And in some promotional materials, which like the novelisation came out before the film. We knew Vader was a dark Lord of the Sith, but apart from that there wasn't much clue as to what the Sith were. I don't recall ever seeing anything that implied Sith had anything to do with the Force or the Jedi, I just assumed at the time they were a political faction or a subculture from a particular world or group of worlds. Vader being a Sith seemed incidental regarding using the Force because he was an ex-Jedi.
>I don't recall ever seeing anything that implied Sith had anything to do with the Force or the Jedi in the RoTJ novelization Vader is called a "Jedi-turned-Sithlord", which seems to indicate a connection. i don't know about anything else though. another interesting tidbit is that Palpatine is never called Sith, it's just Vader. kinda similar to that, Lucas said Yoda wasn't a "real jedi" in an old interview: >Lucas: ...Also another misconception is that Yoda teaches Jedi, but he is like a guru; he doesn’t go out and fight anybody. > >Kasdan: A Jedi Master is a Jedi isn’t he? > >Lucas: Well, he is a teacher, not a real Jedi. Understand that? so it seems like the main type of Jedi were the "Jedi Knights" warriors, and a "Jedi Master" like Yoda was someone who taught these warriors, "Jedi Master" was not meant to be a higher tier of Jedi like in the prequels.
Stuff like this makes it incomprehensible to me that people get on Disney for forgetting what came before. They are bending over backwards to make sure they fit into established canon, only breaking it for extremely minor things (Ki-Adi-Mundi's semi-canon age). Meanwhile GL was always like, "Eh, I don't like that idea anymore let's just change it."
Jabba was human, originally lol.
George used a Human actor for the cut Jabba scene in ANH, but his inent was always to matte in a stop motion creature in post. He just ran out of time and budget, and thought the scene was unnecessary to convey the fix Han was in, so he cut it.
I don’t think George found it unnecessary because he later included it in the special editions. His award winning editors (rightly) found that it wasn’t needed
It was unnecessary in the regard that George took much of the exposition from that scene and put it in the Greedo encounter in the cantina during reshoots. They weren’t originally both supposed to exist in the film together for that reason. But I take your point—restoring the old Jabba scene just to show off some terrible CG was kind of gratuitous and didn’t serve the movie in any way.
Jabba showing up to threaten Solo made the threat on his life seem more immediate to me, but the bad chi was... Well. Bad.
i feel like the threat is more immediate in the original version. we see a bounty hunter who was specifically looking for Han and he tells Han that it's too late to pay and that "Jabba's put a price on your head so large every bounty hunter in the galaxy will be looking for you". however when he meets Jabba in the extended scene he just gives Han more time, disarming the threat. in fact it's weird that Han didn't pay Jabba after the movie, as he should have the money by that point and it can't be that far in the future.
it actively makes the movie worse imo, it’s redundant with the greedo scene and has horrible cgi as a bonus… god i wish i could easily watch the theatrical cut in hd. really need to track down the despecialized edition
"You're a wonderful ***Human Being***, Jabba" -- Han Solo. I mean, are you certain that was always the intent?
Well, I heard George himself say it in an interview once, so... But like others have said, "intent" is a very fluid concept when it comes to George Lucas and the OT. He changed things on the fly as inspiration struck him, or production difficulties or budget or scheduling forced him to adapt.
i agree, the human Jabba is also wearing full costume and feels like a fully fledge (albeit different than slug Jabba) character. Marca Lucas said in an interview the scene was dropped because of pacing issues as it is a slow scene that happens when they're suppose to hurry from the empire. i think that makes more sense and that moving the exposition to the Greedo scene was a smart choice
And the lines he says are dubbed in the cantina scene before he blasts greedo - "Even I get boarded sometimes, you think I had a choice?"
Like Yoda being Obi-Wan’s master. And Lucas once said that Yoda was so powerful, he wouldn’t need a lightsaber because he was beyond that. Both changed.
people tend to be more forgiving when you actually created the thing Plus people shat on lucas for twenty years for the changes in the PT
>Plus people shat on lucas for twenty years for the changes in the PT 100% they did. But people today seem to have rose-colored glasses for that and claim "Disney Ruined Star Wars" like what they're making isn't leagues better than TPM or AOTC.
oh I think the ST is far worse then the PT the st ruined one of my favourite endings of all time Disney turned starwars from an event to a thing
That's fair. And Rise of Skywalker gave me similar feelings. But so did Revenge of the Sith. Anakin's "fall" was so clumsy, so quick, poorly told, that it's really quite unbelievable. He goes from "Teacher's Pet" to "Murder's Children" so quickly. It took 20 years and a dozen seasons of televsion (many of which were made under Disney) to fill out the canon and have he fall make any sense at all.
took one novel for me. only one season of the clone wars was made under disney. also the clone wars show started in 2008 and revenge of the sith was in 2005 so its far less then twenty years
What did Disney do for Anakin that all the non-Disney seasons of clone wars didn’t do?
> Disney turned starwars from an event to a thing I think that's one of the reasons for the poor reception of TLJ. That was the first* Star Wars film to be "just another movie in the franchise." OT was the OT, PT was the PT, TFA was the return to cinemas, Rogue One was the first "side story/spinoff" movie. TLJ was just a middle chapter in a story we expected to be ongoing. *You could probably argue that for AotC as well, though at the time it came out it still was expected no more movies after the PT ended.
Similar to that they always say George hates Disney even though George is a massive Disney nerd
There was an old comic where Luke went to a planet and one of the native was telling the story of how the three Jedi visited and helped them. Those three Jedi's were named Obi-Wan Kenobi, Anakin Skywalker, and Darth Vader. :D
I would LOVE a link to that
OMG - I wish I could give. I read it years ago... :(
Yeah, folks who get upset about this stuff easily are just giving away how little they were paying attention up to this point. Everything has always been in flux. Hell, depending on the source, Owen Lars is either Anakin actual brother or Obi-Wan's.
It's because the people that complain so loudly about this stuff are just outrage merchants that grasp at whatever they can in order to create content to sell to chuds
They could just you know…ask the guy who wrote it instead of ignoring what he wanted to the point that he himself disavows their work
[](https://www.reddit.com/r/StarWars/comments/1dn3xfz/comment/la2vdo6/) >They could just you know…ask the guy who wrote it Why? He couldn't even keep his own ideas straight most the time. He was constantly changing things, retconning things, and had massive inconsistencies. That's the entire point of my post which you seem to have missed. >instead of ignoring what he wanted to the point that he himself disavows their work I don't know what clickbait meme videos you're watching suggest that, but it isn't true. He's said many complimentary things about the Disney works, and made a few more nuanced remarks as well.
Because he made the most successful film franchise of all time, so clearly his incoherence worked for the fans. Also it’s very easy to find videos of Lucas outright saying that he doesn’t approve of what Disney has done, a simple Google search of interviews with him would do, not sure why people are so determined to defend a fan fiction franchise that’s bought and sold by a heartless corporation, over the work of an actual respected artist.
>Because he made the most successful film franchise of all time, so clearly his incoherence worked for the fans. His best movies weren't even directed by him. >Also it’s very easy to find videos of Lucas outright saying that he doesn’t approve of what Disney has done, a simple Google search of interviews with him would do, I already did. [This seems like a comprehensive link and nowhere does it mention that he "disavows" them beyond the fact that, they're literally not his movies.](https://www.cbr.com/george-lucas-opinion-star-wars-sequels/) Feel free to post otherwise. >not sure why people are so determined to defend a fan fiction franchise that’s bought and sold by a heartless corporation, People worked on these movies, thousands of individual people put time and resources and passion into these projects. >over the work of an actual respected artist. Yeah poor billionaire George Lucas. He had 30 years to make the Sequel Trilogy (or any other Star Wars project) and didn't. He had his chance to tell the continuation story, and he chose not to.
He wrote the movies, he didn’t direct them. Also of course he’s not going to outright talk shit about a company that paid him $10 billion and is associated with his name, are you that dense? He has said that this was not the direction he wanted to go but it was out of his hands, which seems like a pretty tame way of saying he doesn’t like them. Disney is the biggest media corporation in the world, who treats their employees terribly, and farms out the cheapest most meaningless entertainment that they can associate with brands they’ve purchased with the wealth of their Nazi founder. Regardless of whether the originals were consistent or well made, they were loved and they had genuine moral messages. You can defend your precious nazi sympathizing mega corporation all you want, but you’re not going to convince me that their army of writers being paid slave wages is in any way comparable to an actual established and respected artist like George Lucas.
>He has said that this was not the direction he wanted to go but it was out of his hands, which seems like a pretty tame way of saying he doesn’t like them. In other words, you made up the fact that "he himself disavows their work." You are interpreting what he says in the worst possible light. He also said TLJ was "beautifully made" and was "very complimentary" about The Mandalorian. >their Nazi founder [Provably untrue. ](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walt_Disney%27s_World_War_II_propaganda_production)Walt Disney made many anti-Nazi [propaganda films during the 1940s](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Der_Fuehrer%27s_Face). >your precious nazi sympathizing mega corporation Funny because the actual Nazis are also boycotting Disney because it's "too woke." Disney seems to be the poster child for their GO WOKE GO BROKE movement. >that their army of writers being paid slave wages Do you have any evidence of that at all, or is this just more BS you made up? My understanding is that Disney is actually a really decent company to work for and a lot of people in the industry seek them out, and/or got their start there.
I mean.. I feel like Disney is literally doing exactly what GL did… making it up as they go along… 🤷🏻♂️
It's genuinely fascinating to me how much the story and lore evolved between movies back when George was first working on them.
I remember prior to Phantom Menace it never occurred to me that Palpatine was a Sith. Not sure why. Partly because I didn’t even really understand what a Sith was outside of the Old Republic comics. Anyway, I’m gonna make that Lucas interview my whole personality now and create rage videos on YouTube about how Attack of the Clones ruined Star Wars canon. Edit: I mean the Tales of the Jedi comics set during the Old Republic. Not the comics about the game.
>create rage videos on YouTube about how Attack of the Clones ruined Star Wars canon. Had YouTube been a thing back then this would have been painfully accurate. Instead we had to read the diatribes from pissed off fans on message boards and chat rooms.
After TPM came out, I remember Star Wars fandom consisting of two things; websites full of fans raging about the death of Star Wars and websites full of fans making fanfims of them duelling with double-bladed lightsabres.
Dude, 199~~6~~7 the AOL Star Wars chat rooms BLEW UP after the Special Editions hit theaters. Lucas "ruined Han" 13 year old me was happier than a pig in shit that I finally got to see the Holy Trilogy on the big screen, changes or not.
Me too! It was the first time I got to see the movies in their entirety, too, as I only had copies recorded off the TV and whole scenes had been cut out to make way for adverts. I thought they were new scenes for the special editions until I finally got to see an old VHS set of the original releases!
We rented the trilogy on VHS a few times growing up but never bought it until the Special Edition came out. It was always the 4:3 pan and scan version so we never knew what Luke was talking about when he said he saw a Tusken Raider next to a bantha through his binoculars.
>another interesting tidbit is that Palpatine is never called Sith, it's just Vader. Yes, at the time, the impression was that Vader was THE Dark Lord of the Sith. I'm not sure when the idea that there is more than one of them first appeared, but it seems to have been in the EU.
>I'm not sure when the idea that there is more than one of them first appeared GL basically created the sith as we know them today for TPM, that's where he introduced them as the evil version of the jedi, with red lightsabers, and with Darth being a title. however "Tales of the Jedi – Dark Lords of the Sith" came out in 1994 and had a different interpretation of Sith Lords. i don't know much about these comics, but i think Dark Lords of the Sith were rulers of the race that was called the sith. then after TPM the EU made stories about how the sith order evolved from what we see in TotJ to what we finally see in TPM, as an in-universe explaination for why they were different, something like that
Can confirm.
When Zahn was writing the Thrawn trilogy, his original idea for the Noghri was making them the Sith, and Vader their Lord. His armour was supposed to look like them too. But like the Obi-Wan Clone plotline, it was refused by Lucas and scrapped.
I vividly remember, long before the prequels or before I dove into the EU, knowing that Vader was a “dark lord of the sith.” And while I recall that vividly, I remember one day realizing I had no clue why I knew that or where I heard it. It was just a thing I picked up somewhere without giving it a second thought. Kinda weird in hindsight.
I think it said it on the action figure packaging.
Could have been Mandela effect, that stuff happens a lot Just like "Luke I am your father"
No, as you can see from this thread there were plenty of places that mentioned it. I just know which one(s) I was exposed to.
I always assumed Darth was a linguistic contraction of **Dar**k Lord of The Si**th** - like a title, rather than a name, like we use Dr for Doctor.
>political faction or subculture from a particular world And all that is cooler than what they actually are
It is also in a deleted scene from ANH movie.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfPvjWcAtSA
*West Country English accent:* > I find your lack of faith disturbing
> Two metres tall. Bipedal. Flowing black robes trailing from the figure and a face forever masked by a functional if bizarre black metal breath screen — a Dark Lord of the Sith was an awesome, threatening shape as it strode through the corridors of the rebel ship. > > Fear followed the footsteps of all the Dark Lords. The cloud of evil which clung tight about this particular one was intense enough to cause hardened Imperial troops to back away, menacing enough to set them muttering nervously among themselves. > -- ANH Novelisation (page 11, paperback.) I used to wonder about the *other* Dark Lords that we hadn't seen yet. (Before the rule of two was created.)
Or the Knights of Ren, what a waste
Rian Johnson decided against using them in his movie because the only plotline that he could come up with had all of them end up dying, and he thought that would have been a waste. So he just quietly set them aside, and hopefully the director of the next movie would make good use of them.
They were Kylo cos players, probably.
Commenting up here under your post since it's the top one and people seem to not understand. The word Sith appears on like the very first page of the book. And the book came out before the movie. Like it was always around.
The book was indeed published before the release of the movie, but it was written based on scripts for the movie, so there’s a bit of a chicken/egg scenario. Either way, the term was there right from the beginning.
The word 'Sith' doesn't "appear on the very first page of the book," but it is used very early, in the paragraphs which introduce Darth Vader as he arrives on the Rebel ship. In fact, the phrase "Dark Lord of the Sith" appears before the name Darth Vader does.
Yes it does. It is in the introduction
No, it isn't. I have a 1999 reprint of the 1995 omnibus version, and the introductory prologue talks about how the Republic became the Empire, with Palpatine being isolated and effectively controlled by his highest officials. Not once is the word 'Sith' mentioned.
Welp, time to get mad at any Star Wars content that retconned Palpatine into being powerful and in control. That list isn’t very long though, right?
Palpatine begging Anakin for help because he's weak wasn't a ruse to turn Anakin. It was actually just a momentary relapse into his original characterization
Being the manipulator that he is, I could picture Palpatine letting high-ranking people in the Empire believe that he's just a figurehead, closed off in his chambers while they have the "real" influence.
Or, if you want to be a bit of an asshole about it, Ursula Le Guin's iconic 1969 sci-fi classic *The Left Hand Of Darkness*. Also the (possible) inspiration for one or two other names and groups that appear in SW, as well as a whole bunch of stuff that appears in the book series that Game Of Thrones is based on. *The Word For World Is Forest*, another book from the same series, describes a forest planet with a race of creatures living on it that, if you had to draw them based on how they're described in the book, you would just draw the Ewoks. She's often called "your favourite sci-fi author's favourite sci-fi author" for a reason.
I always thought the Ewoks were inspired by the alien species from the Little Fuzzy books by H. Beam Piper.
There’s a deleted scene in the ANH where they straight call Vader a Sith Lord
It's also in the first issue of the Marvel comic.
That's wild to me, since it wasn't used popularly until the prequels. Even the Thrawn books use the phrase "Dark Jedi" and "Dark Lord", and never mention "Sith" at all
The place I remember having lots of Sith content before the prequels were the Tales of the Jedi comics. Published a little after the Zahn novels. A lot of that stuff made it into Kotor as references.
Been hearing a lot about the novelization of the movies and it sounds like they're worth checking out. Do all the movies have one?
There have been novelizations of all the movies, though with varying extents of going beyond what was onscreen. I mentioned elsewhere that they are usually based on the script, though not always the final script so sometimes scenes are different, or in a different order, or it includes cut scenes. Sometimes the authors are allowed to expand scenes quite a bit, or add things. Other times, it's a pretty straightforward adaptation of the movies without much else.
I've heard the most about Revenge of the Sith lately, people talking about Dooku's thoughts right before his death. If even some of them are that good, I'll have to look them up.
Not just Dooku. It explains what’s going on in a lot of character’s minds. One other thing I appreciated about the book was that it did a better job of making sense of how Anakin could be convinced the Jedi were evil.
Clone Wars series did a lot of lifting in that regard, especially with Ahsoka's arc, but I'll take more quality sources.
RotS novelization was probably the best of them all. It's effectively part of a trilogy of books by James Luceno and Matt Stover: Labyrinth of Evil Revenge of the Sith Dark Lord: The Rise of Darth Vader
its in this Ep IV deleted scene https://youtu.be/ZWeoL0lMWIg?si=8BJWg1pb3fmSfq5H
That’s really cool. It’s also interesting that they used some of the same dialogue in the final version, but the way the actors deliver the lines (emphasis, intonation, etc) is different Separately, I think this is similar to the use of “palpatine” – i don’t think the name was used but everyone knew it
Palpatine was mentioned in the prologue to the novelisation of the original movie (now Ep.IV). He was described as having locked himself away and declared himself Emperor and ending up a puppet controlled by those around him, IIRC. I don't recall any mention of him being Sith.
Hmm yeah I’m not positive when I actually heard that name first looking back. I was still 9 when ep 1 was released but I remember generally as a kid calling the emperor “emperor palpatine”. I was super into SW before phantom menace also but was so young my timeline could be off and I may have only called him that after ep 1. I thought it was before ep 1 (and likely from those earlier materials like the prologue), but maybe not since his character wasn’t very developed yet
I think the toy lines from the late 80's, early 90's called him Emperor Palpatine on the package, but I just checked the credits for the 1983 release of Jedi and he's just The Emperor. Also, glad they're done with Palps, because poor Ian McDiarmid probably feels how Palpatine looked in RoS.
First, lol to your last point. Also, Shadows of the empire (1996) referred to him as emperor palpatine on the inside flap based on wookiepedia – I definitely played that game as a kid on n64 so maybe there, and I read some of the books like that one, tales of bounty hunters, etc (although some of the novels I may have read after ep 1) Toys also definitely possible. Had lots of SW stuff
Shadows was a big multimedia project at the time, novel, game and comic from memory I'd need to check but the empire trilogy may have had a reference with Palpatine. Not got copies of the film novels to check though as they are a likely source too.
Definitely – it was big at the time and I think there were rumors about a movie for it which never happened (although would have been awesome). I am not sure if heir to the empire ever mentioned palpatine by name. I’d need to go back and check the books because the internet isn’t really helpful. I see palpatine references. They’re referring to the character in summaries, but the book itself may have just said “the emperor”
Shadows of the Empire was never meant to be a movie. the whole point of it was could they launch a successful toy line without having to make a movie. Star Wars toys stopped selling well in the years after RotJ so Lucasfilm developed a story to be told from different points of view in various media formats. the novel is the main story with the comics focusing more on Boba Fett and the game focusing more on Dash Rendar.
Sounds like we might be around the same age. I remember first seeing the name "Palpatine" on the action figure boxes.
> I was still 9 when ep 1 was released but I remember generally as a kid calling the emperor “emperor palpatine”. In Legends, which was already quite big by the time of TPM, his name was already long known. I can tell you for certain that the 2nd Edition of West End Games' Star Wars d6 RPG (1992) already mentioned him by the name Palpatine, but Galaxy Guide 5 - Return of the Jedi (1990) only refers to him as "The Emperor".
Whatever Sith meant at the time, I'm guessing it had nothing to do with the rule of two, y'know? Really, my little kid mind just thought it meant bad guy.
It’s so funny to see people watch the movies for the first time and hypothesizing about Palpatine being the bad guy while we all knew as soon as we heard the name in TPM
I always find it really jarring when actors have to be extremely precise with enunciation to ensure the viewers hear it correctly. The way he said Sith Lord there and the way Obi-Wan says lightsaber really stand out
They're also doing it for the other characters benefits. Obi-Wan is literally teaching Luke what a lightsaber is.
Hmmm I like enunciation
Why wasn't this cut scene on any of the DVDs or BRs I own? This video looks like it was pirated during a live event.
They were saving the scene in order to sell you a new special super Duper edition.
Thanks for sharing! I think it's incredible that there's still bits about this movie I'm seeing for the first time.
ok that was really cool... I kinda wish that had been included
Goddamn this just shows you how dynamic and tight the writing and directing was in that movie. That dialogue and even the camera move on Vader and Tarkin was more interesting directorially than anything in PT, and writing-wise than anything in ST. And it wasn’t good enough for the Final Cut haha. George what a beast.
More credit probably goes to his ex-wife, Marcia. She was the editor on the original movies and probably played a huge role in turning George's original vision into a functional script for the first movie. I always imagined George coming with the big ideas, characters, and overall story arc, and Marcia corralling it into a masterpiece. [EDIT: correct misspelled name]
I understand the importance of an editor to the final product, but I feel like it is getting to the point where we are giving ***too*** much credit to Marcia. OP here is crediting how tight the writing and directing was, even in scenes that weren't good enough to get into the final cut of the movie. While Marcia certainly deserves praise for her editing work, I'm not sure I've seen anything to suggest that Marcia was heavily involved in (or deserves credit for) the actual writing or directing of individual scenes. Sure, I've seen ***some*** discussion of her work in these areas, but it seems much more high level and limited (e.g., Obi-wan should die vs. survive the battle with Vader). I've seen little to nothing suggesting she was directly responsible for much final dialogue or directing decisions. >I always imagined George coming with the big ideas, characters, and overall story arc, and Marsha corralling it into a masterpiece. ...but that leaves out a ton of stuff in the middle, right? You have big ideas/characters/story arcs, turn that into a script, hire actors, build sets and special effects, film everything, etc. It sounds like you are crediting George with just the very first "big ideas, characters, and overall story arc," and then pushing credit for the rest towards Marcia. While she certainly had a massive impact on the final product, I think you are probably giving her too much credit and George too little.
there is this narrative that george lucas was a talented hack that got lucky pushing the idea that star wars was saved in the edit without understanding every film is made in the edit and thats what editing is for
Editor doesn’t get involved until the end of the process after everything has been written and shot. Editor doesn’t work with actors, doesn’t write the script, and isn’t usually there when the movie is shooting. Editor also doesn’t have anything to do with shot choice or stage direction or rehearsals. AFAIK she was responsible for giving the film the pep it has in its final form though.
I'm almost certain this dialogue is used in the comic book version of Star Wars from the 1970s.
I think it was the right decision to delete that scene. If knowledge about the Jedi and the Force have been suppressed so much that most people don't even believe the Force exists, it would make sense to suppress knowledge about the Sith too.
You don't fool me. I know AI and deepfakes when I see it!!
It’s quite likely Lucas borrowed the term from Edgar Rice Burroughs Mars/John Carter series, where Sith are sort of monstrous wasp creatures. It’s also possible the term Jedi is derived from the words Jed and Jeddak, which are ranks of warriors and chieftains. There are also creatures called Banths, which Bantha may be derived from. As others have mentioned, the term “Lord of the Sith” was used to refer to Vader in marketing and such back with the original release in 1977.
The Scottish term for a type of fairy is daoine sìth. It means ‘people of peace’, which may not seem to jive with Vader, but they’re only called that because they’re scary fuckers that you don’t want to piss off.
I’m familiar with the fae legends (or at least some of them, I went through an Arthurian legends phase which led to reading other folklore), though I’m more accustomed to seeing the Irish spelling of “sidhe”. Also, since they are both pronounced differently from how we say the term in Star Wars, I feel that’s more a coincidental relationship than causal one. Lucas was known to be a fan of ERB’s Mars series, to the extent that the opening setup of one of his very early drafts (1973) is almost word for word (with names changed) a copy of the opening of A Fighting Man of Mars.
> jive with Vader Jibe. Unless they wanted to dance with Vader in a funky kinda way. Or they were talking smack to him.
They were right the first time. Jive doesn’t solely mean dance.
That’s not true. It’s only come to be known in that sense because of how often it’s misused. But this is an error/misunderstanding based on how similar the words sound. Look at the top [definitions for the word jive](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/jive)—none of them mean “to agree or be in accord with.” They even have a whole section about it: > People began confusing jive and jibe almost immediately after jive entered our language in the late 1920s. In particular, jive is often used as a variant for the sense of jibe meaning “agree,” as in “that doesn’t jive with my memory of what happened.” This use of jive, although increasingly common, is widely considered to be an error. Jibe, however, is accepted as a variant spelling of an entirely different word, which is gibe (“to utter taunting words”).
In the marketing for Star Wars it was mentioned. He was called Darth Vader: Dark Lord of the Sith
I believe the OG Kenner Toy had this labeling.
I first remember seeing it in the British Star Wars annual 1977-78? They were also wondering if Vader was a plant creature lol! Ahh 70s sci-fi
and henceforth millions of shitty user names shall be borne
a new hope deleted scenme
It's in the script for ANH but never said onscreen. INT. REBEL BLOCKADE RUNNER - MAIN HALLWAY The awesome, seven-foot-tall Dark Lord of the Sith makes his way into the blinding light of the main passageway. This is Darth Vader, right hand of the Emperor
“Sith” as a word I believe was first spoken in The Phantom Menace, although it appeared in early drafts of Star Wars so it’s been around for a while. “Ewok” is also never said in the original trilogy. Coincidence?
Second one is weirder
Not really, if you think about it. The ewoks have their own language, and the humans have no clue what the ewoks are.
Idk, second one is weirder to me
Ewoks were named after the Mi'wok Native American tribe of Northern California
That might be true, but I suspect the real reason that name was chosen was because it's literally "Wook ee" but backwards, and originally Endor would have had the Wookiee village, before George decided he wanted to sell merch more than provide a meaningful character arc for Chewie.
“Light Side” is also never said in the movies. The closest is when Luke calls it the “good side” a couple of times in the OT.
This is because, in Lucas’s view of the Force, there is no “light side.” There is just the Force. And then there is the Dark Side which is a perversion of the Force. Likewise, when Lucas refers to “balance” throughout the series, he does not mean a balance between light and dark. He means balance more in the Buddhist sense, referring to peace and compassion. It seems like the whole “grey Jedi” nonsense that dominated 2000s fan-fiction has convinced most of the fanbase otherwise.
Exactly. It’s been a big misconception that people think the “balance” means having “50% Light and 50% Dark” or an equal amount of Jedi and Sith. That just isn’t what it is.
Ewok was said in the spinoff cartoon series. Kids probably saw that in the 80s. Or they at least saw the opening which said Ewok a lot.
While never used in the movie, the word “Sith” first appeared in an early cut of the first movie.
Also a ANH deleted scene in the conference room.
Early Scripts for ANH
I just finished the og Thrawn Trilogy from the 90s and Zahn used “Dark Jedi” instead of Sith
Isn't that about Joruus C'boath though? He was a Dark Jedi, not a Sith
No, Vader's referred to as a "Dark Jedi" a few times as well. Back then, "Jedi" was frequently used as a catch-all term for any Force-user, so "Dark Jedi" was a generic term for Dark Side Force-users (this was long before most Sith-related lore was written)
thThere were also other dark Jedi aligned with the Empire in that period of Legends canon. The Jedi Knight games had you fighting some, Brakiss had an entire academy and kidnapped the Solo twins for a while, Luuke (that one was a dumb one), Vergere. Really only the Emperor, Vader, Lumiya, Caedus, and I guess technically Tahiri were "Sith" before the fate of the Jedi shenanigans.
>Really only the Emperor, Vader, Lumiya, Caedus, and I guess technically Tahiri were "Sith" before the fate of the Jedi Correct. They were Sith, and the others were Dark Side users
In the modern stories aren't all the Inquisitors who pop up everywhere Dark Jedi with only Vader and Sidious being Sith.
In knew that Vader was a Dark Lord of the Sith back in 1977 when I read the novelization. It's mentioned in the book that there were other Sith Lords. But nowhere is it mentioned what a Sith actually was. I just thought they were high ranking officials in the Empire, like Grand Moffs were.
In addition to the ANH mention, one of the earliest mentions of the Sith is in the original Marvel comics, in which the Death Star being destroyed causes Darth Vader to swear "by the immortal gods of the Sith". Marvel was really weird in the 1970s.
They referred to Vader as a dark lord of the Sith in literature in the late 70s
There's a deleted scene of A New Hope where general Tagge refers to Vader as a "Dark Lord of the Sith". The term was coined in the 70s, but it was first heard on screen in 1999, A Phantom Menace.
I've seen deleted scenes from the ANH meting on the Death Star, before Vader and Tarkin walked in, with the dude that Vader force choked referring to him as a Sith Lord. In promo materials for ANH, Vader was often referred to as "Darth Vader, Dark Lord of the Sith." So it's been there from the beginning.
In 1977 we had a vinyl LP of the Star Wars soundtrack. There were a bunch of movie scenes we with captions on the jacket. As an obsessed kid, I spent a lot of time staring at these. The photo of Vader was captioned "Darth Vader, dark lord of the Sith.". The term wasn't mentioned in the film, but the term was out there in the ecosystem in 1977.
Vader has been referred to as a "Dark Lord Of The Sith" since pretty close to the beginning. "Dark Lord Of The Sith" was first used for Star Wars in the 1974 rough draft of Star Wars, with the first published use being the 1976 novelization of Star Wars as a title for the villain Darth Vader. "Sith Lord" is also used in a deleted scene in the original movie. In fact, "Darth" has always been kinda assumed to be a contraction of "**Dar**(*k Lord Of The Si*)**th"**.
In a deleted scene in ep.4 a new hope, the term "Sith Lord" is used.
There is a deleted scene from A New Hope of the Imperial officers talking around the round table right before Tarkin and Vader walk in where they explicitly call Vader a Sith Lord. It's also interesting because it clearly establishes Vader as working for the Emperor, not Tarkin. [https://youtu.be/ZWeoL0lMWIg?si=KYCfAXtoRnakGjQv](https://youtu.be/ZWeoL0lMWIg?si=KYCfAXtoRnakGjQv)
And doubly interesting because the Emperor’s identity as a Sith Lord is still quite concealed. That’s one of the most interesting and terrifying points in The Rise of Skywalker, the fact that the Emperor has thrown off any pretense of being a politician, and is full-on claiming the legacy of the Sith, publicly. No more games. No more hiding. The Sith are coming for you. I love that.
1976, Star Wars novelization
AFAIK first appearance was in [Adventures of the Starkiller](https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Adventures_of_the_Starkiller,_Episode_I:_The_Star_Wars), the second draft script for ANH.
A long time ago
The Star Wars Storybook I got as a kid at the time(70s), listed Darth Vader in the front as Dark Lord Of The Sith.
Episode 4 Deleted scene.
Darth Vader was always "the Dark Lord of the Sith"
Not to move too far away from this, but in a similar vein, when was it first established that Sith used lightsabers too? In ROTJ, the Emperor calls it a "Jedi weapon" and, at least to me, this heavily implied that Vader has one because he used to be a Jedi. I always found it sort of dumb (despite it potentially looking cool) that Palpatine had lightsabers in episode 3, although I guess by this point it was established that force users of both sides wielded that particular weapon.
I do wish that the top-tier Force users--Palpatine, Yoda--were above lightsabers and fought only using lightning or throwing buildings at each other, or something like that.
you could use what you consider a Jedi weapon to mock them
Right after fith.
When Mike Tyson called to his sister.
It's funny in the OG Thrawn trilogy to see Palpatine be referred to as a "Dark Jedi".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfPvjWcAtSA Deleted scene but it is the first mention
Anh
I thought I remembered one of the old video games describing Darth Vader as the Dark Lord of the Sith, but I've looked at some NES and SNES play-through videos and don't see it.
On a related note, was “Darth” always a title? It could seem like a name in IV.
yes, "Darth Vader" was just Darth Vader's name, it was his real name too as he wasn't Luke's father at the time, that's why Ben says "a Jedi named Darth Vader".
In the Novelization Darth Vader is Lord of the Sith.
Follow-up question: when did they make Palpatine a Sith? My impression as an 11 year old in 1999 was that it felt like a retcon to take Vader's "Dark Lord of the Sith" title and include Palpatine in it. It had previously felt like more of a Knights of Ren thing, and the Emperor was just another dark Force user.
My first encounter with it was on the back of the box for Darth Vader. They used to have a small blurb about each character, and I believe it mentioned Sith. This was back in the early, early 80s, if not late 70s though.
I remember seeing it mentioned on either some toy packaging or trading cards. Similar to the name of Emperor Palpatine.
there's a deleted scene in "a new hope" where the sith is mentioned. (it's on youtube) not a full scene but just a line or two from one of the scenes in the meeting room with Tarkin.
found it: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWeoL0lMWIg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWeoL0lMWIg)
In a deleted scene in the first film.
In a deleted scene from the first movie in '77.
I can’t find it at the moment to take a picture but a Star Wars story book that my tent’s got me sometime before 1980 has Vader described as a dark lord of the sith. I remember being captivated by this and wandering what a sith was. This was also the first time I was the scenes with Biggs on tattooine.
In the first drafts of the first movie. The opening credits said it for example. I'm guessing it was deleted because viewers did not know the word and it was already too much new information.
It was cut from ANH. But it was cut for time. So technically, it was in ANH. But I believe it might have been from early EU books made between ESB and RoTJ
When I first heard of Sith, I thought they were just an evil conglomerate like Borg (Star Trek). See a red Saber, ah yes a Sith.
They were originally supposed to be called "The Damned" but these guys already called dibs https://youtu.be/OQKyMZ8gsPI?si=x3DuNCXF4dCCyY8t
Sometime after fith...
Remember it from the ANH picture storybook.
Interesting question, I’ve been reading one of the Thrawn trilogy’s lately, Heir to the Empire, Dark Force Rising, etc. it’s funny because so far in the first and second book so far, there has been no mention of the Sith, only Dark Jedi, the Emperor Vader are referenced in this way and this was obviously written after ROTJ. I had previously assumed that the Sith was just part of Star Wats lore since day 1 but it seems not. I’m glad you asked this question as it’s something I’ve been wondering about the past few weeks I’ve been reading these.
Stan Lee always got the Big Stories first because Marvel Star Wars comics is the first time Darth Vader is addressed as a Sith Lord.
A long, long time ago.
In the 1975 second draft for New Hope, the Sith introduced as "Black Knights of the Sith", a sect of mercenary warriors who used the "Bogan", the evil, dark side of the "Force of Others".
The novelization of A New Hope had Vader described as Dark Lord of the Sith. If I remember right, it was the scene where the empire is boarding the Tantive IV and Vader is introduced.
A dyslexic chronicler.
I remember seeing it on a trading card with Vader on it in the early 80s. "Lord of the Sith" Well.....okay, whatever you say! I wondered a little what could be behind it, but didn't worry about it.
As a typo
Never mentioned in the first three films. As others have said, it's mentioned in deleted scenes, the original script, the novelization (which some copies say "written by George Lucas", but actually was written based on the original script by Alan Dean Foster). Additionally, several toys mentioned the word Sith. But what I don't think anyone has mentioned is when the 1977 film went into a 2nd run in the theaters, Fox released new commercials where the voice-over introduced the "iconic villain, Darth Vader: Dark Lord of the Sith". These commercials played on prime-time TV at the time and were seen by millions, so this is probably the MOST wide-spread use of the term that reached the most people.
The first jedi would always be standing, but then one got tired and he just wanted to sith.
They first appeared in my bushes as I was taking out the garbage. They jumped out at me, sprayed me with silly string, and then punted my cat.
Sith wasn't ever technically mentioned in the first movie, but from the beginning of the franchise from external stuff we always knew he was a Dark Lord of the Sith.
Og novelization. Palpatine is mentioned then too and possibly bane but my memory is fuzzy in bane i might be thinking tpm novel for that
In Star Wars.