Talk:Children of the Green Planet

From Wookieepedia, the Star Wars wiki.

Contents 1 Yoda 2 3 million lightyears 3 E.T. and Indiana Jones' hat 4 Name 5 Timeline 6 Language 7 Familiar Species 8 Toy 9 Canon

[edit] Yoda

I just re-watched ET for the first time in about 15 years last night. There's a part where ET sees a kid dressed up like Yoda, and really wants to talk to him, but Elliot won't let him. ET recognizes Yoda! Anyway, here's a fun little theory: The "Children of the Green Planet" are the Whills, who brought the Journal of the Whills to Earth at some point. I know thats alot of speculation, but I just thought I'd share.

yeaaaaaaah... P.h 22:05, 18 January 2006 (UTC)p.h

Please remember to sign your pages and restrict talk to known facts or questions about the article and its arrangement. Darth Nefarious 18:38, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 3 million lightyears

I was just thinking, if the 3 million LY is taken to be canon, and we also assume E.T.'s home world to be in the Galaxy, that would put the galaxy within the local group (10 million LY diameter with center between Andromeda and Milky Way). The only likely candidate would Be Andromeda itself, even though it is twice the size of the Galaxy. Hypothetically, if the planets Earth and Brodo Asogi were at extreme distances away from each other, the distance would be close to 3 million LY (2.5 million LY + 120,000 LY [the Galaxy] + 100,000 LY [Milky Way] is about 2.7 million). If Andromeda is the Galaxy, then the Triangulum Galaxy could be the Rishi Maze. Of course, I could be reading way too much into this little factoid culled from promotional movie material, but speculation is fun. :) Bocoroth 08:46, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

• Yea, it would be pure speculation, however since you are basing it on facts given in sources, it is fun to think that the little smudge in the sky is the GFFA. :) -- Riffsyphon1024 07:34, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Why would the only likely candidate be Andromeda? Have we documented all galaxies located at about 3 million ly from Earth? If science has indeed gone that far, that's very limiting for people with a rich imagination. --Master Starkeiller 16:47, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] E.T. and Indiana Jones' hat

Has anyone else noticed, in the picture of the three senators of ET's species that wookieepedia has up on that species' page, that the senator on the left seems to be wearing what looks like an Indiana Jones hat?

Could just be my eyes playing tricks on me, but it really looks like it.

It's a hole on the pod's surface. MoffRebus 10:33, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I can't see it

[edit] Name

Anyonethought changing the name to 'Children of Brodo Asogi' or Brodo Asogans? Conjectural, but less than this one. MoffRebus 13:13, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

• The former might be better...it should probably be at least a redirect. On the other hand, if Children of the Green Planet is the only name they're given in the ET spinoff novel, that might be considered the least conjectural (just as the Firefly-class transport and Spinner are included here using the name they have in another franchise. —Silly Dan _(talk) 17:05, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Timeline

so i was just pondering and it came to me that Star Wars is set a long time ago while ET is set in the relative present. that does pose a bit of a problem Csheks'a'muruodout

• Time travel, maybe? —Silly Dan _(talk) 17:05, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
• ET may be a "modern" inhabitant of the world, as in, from thousands of years after the SW movies. QuentinGeorge 21:06, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Hey who tells us that SW occurs thousands of years before us and not, say, 2 or 3 ceonturies only? MoffRebus 21:29, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Except that the Senator they reference was a Senator between 33 BBY and the dissolution of the Senate, which means the trip he organized would either have to take thousands of years (which is possible, depending on their life cycle), or it was a different trip. Lord Arcanum 17:57, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
      • Here's my theory... so E.T and his pals decide to travel to our galaxy - the Milky Way - from the Star Wars galaxy. So they're traveling so many light years away, maybe it took them all that time to get there? Despite whatever technology there is that the Children of the Green Planet may have for getting there. -TheLostJedi 22:41, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
• The SWT-G places Episode IV around AD 1798, based on Into the Great Unknown. Granted, ItGU is non-canon, but given that the trend lately has been to incorporate as much as possible of lower-canon material into the canon until it's contradicted by higher-level stuff, times and settings can probably be presumed to be accurate, assuming that the Falcon didn't accidentally time travel. That would put the time between the announcement of Grebleip's expedition (22 BBY, AD c. 1774) and E.T.'s arrival on Earth (probably c. 1982) at ~210 years, which doesn't sound too unreasonable for a 3 million lightyear trip with some form of GFFA-level technology. 70.109.107.68 16:30, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Language

Where is it said that they speak Basic? I know, the canonicity of this article is dubious, but I'm pretty sure E.T. didn't speak Basic, unless you want to get into the whole "Basic is not English" thing. —Unsigned comment by 68.18.60.228 (talk • contribs).

[edit] Familiar Species

when E.T. goes trick-or-treating with the children, he spots a child in a Yoda mask and begins to follow that child saying "Home… home…". This could be interpreted as E.T. recognizing a familiar species from his home galaxy. Aren't Humans also a species from his home galaxy? (unimportant which of the two his home galaxy is) --TeakHoken84.173.70.123 23:44, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes but he realised soon we are quite different from the Galactic Humans who could travel in space since 200,000 years ago MoffRebus 07:35, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

It's kind of a 4th wall conflict though. The child has a Yoda mask as a result of Star Wars being popular Earth fiction. So you've got this problem where you're saying that, within the context, the Star Wars universe is both fictional and real. --Steve

Aw shit, you're right. My brain hurts now.--Valin Kenobi 09:13, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Not really. Remember that (1) it's most likely that the cameo was never meant to directly link the movies in the same canon uinivers and (2) aside from that, if one WERE to make that connection, supposedly the story of the Star Wars came from the Journal of the Whills. According to a timeline put forth on theForce.net, it is explained that the Journal finds it's way into George Lucas' hands and he decipers it and crafts the movies from that source, including likenesses and so on. Whether or not that's fanon, that's just an example of how one could imagine a way to explain the apparent internal/external continuity gaff. Now because of point #1, we shouldn't expect a canonical explanation or resolution to ever be presented, so we're best off just accepting that it's not an impossible conundrum. Medleystudios72 17:41, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Toy

Recently, I found this:[1]. I can't read Japanese, so I don't know if it is a joke or a real thing.--TeakHoken91.7.46.169 15:28, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

• There was never a E.T. toy made in the Star Wars line. However, when E.T. was rereleased in the 2000s, some toys were made. That action figure card is a rudimentary copy/paste job.--Valin Kenobi 07:58, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
• OK, thanks.--TeakHoken91.7.47.136 21:04, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Canon

Shouldn't this be N-canon? ''' Rebel TIE Fighter''' 23:35, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

• Nope. -- Ozzel 23:37, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
• Why not? ''' Rebel TIE Fighter''' 23:38, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Because it is not non-canon. -- Ozzel 23:46, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
  • <sigh>
    • Why is it not N-canon? ''' Rebel TIE Fighter''' 23:48, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
      • Why would it be? -- Ozzel 23:50, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
        • Dude,the article even said it was N-canon. ''' Rebel TIE Fighter''' 23:52, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
          • No, it says the name is non-canon. -- Ozzel 23:53, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
• While this is primarily an easter egg, and E.T. is probably not meant to be taken as part of Star Wars canon...

-The article. ''' Rebel TIE Fighter''' 23:58, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

• • Yes, E.T. the film is not part of the Star Wars canon. But the E.T. species, which is the topic of this article, clearly appear in an absolutely canonical Star Wars film, and are therefore definitely canon. -- Ozzel 01:36, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
    • If so, why is there a mention of friggin' Earth and a "child" in the main, in-universe section of the article? --Master Starkeiller 13:36, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
    • The E.T. species is *not* in any way canon. A species obviously inspired by E.T. does exist in canon, but that's not the same thing at all. --86.146.162.73 18:22, 4 August 2008 (UTC)