Whats the deal with making all the sith lords grey and rotten looking. I mean, the only reason Palpatine was like that was cause of his force lighting that got shot back at him and Anakin that way cause of the fire burning his skin. I really don't see why all the sith lords are being portrayed as "rotting."

I would guess it's because they are using negative energy over time, which destroys their pretty appearance. I think it sucks.

Well the darkside does zap the living force out of ya, so that could be it. Or the darkside makes you age five times faster than normal...

Whats the deal with making all the sith lords grey and rotten looking.  I mean, the only reason Palpatine was like that was cause of his force lighting that got shot back at him and Anakin that way cause of the fire burning his skin.  I really don't see why all the sith lords are being portrayed as "rotting."

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actually, that was his face. Though the did lightning cause some burns, for the most part, it's Palpatines actual face.

What did Kriea say about falling to the darkside?...something about an early grave.

Actually, that was his face. Though the did lightning cause some burns, for the most part, it's Palpatines actual face. 

I've heard that before, and I still don't understand it. If the Force (DS or not) can allow one to change one's appearance that drastically (as in, disguise the corpse like features into that of a kindly looking older man), why wouldn't he use it to imitate other people? There's no such indication that I've ever noticed in the films (never read the books and such) that the Force allows for this kind of transfiguration morphing of cells ability. C. Lee wasn't all funky looking, neither was Maul (well Maul was weird looking, but I thought that was simply because of his race) - yet Anakin starts going all bad-skinned and yellow-eyed in a few hours - seems inconsistent.

 

I think they just flip a coin each time they have to decide whether they get the 'funky look'.

Whats the deal with making all the sith lords grey and rotten looking.  I mean, the only reason Palpatine was like that was cause of his force lighting that got shot back at him and Anakin that way cause of the fire burning his skin.  I really don't see why all the sith lords are being portrayed as "rotting."

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actually, that was his face. Though the did lightning cause some burns, for the most part, it's Palpatines actual face.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yeah.

 

I believe that it is quite tiring to keep false appereance for years. Palpatine always insisted that jedi did it ( aka deflected force lightning) so no one is wondering his now different appereance, plus it gives him sympathy points, and jedis are even more hated because they dared to attack so brutally against beloved Supreme Chancellor

 

edit: Darth Maul has yellow eyes. Dooku however isn't changed. Maybe they just thought that Dooku was cool enough already

Edited July 22, 200619 yr by Xard

Dooku was too cool to look lame.

Exactly

 

CL is too charistmatic to be ruined with grey skin

Actually, that was his face. Though the did lightning cause some burns, for the most part, it's Palpatines actual face. 

I've heard that before, and I still don't understand it. If the Force (DS or not) can allow one to change one's appearance that drastically (as in, disguise the corpse like features into that of a kindly looking older man), why wouldn't he use it to imitate other people? There's no such indication that I've ever noticed in the films (never read the books and such) that the Force allows for this kind of transfiguration morphing of cells ability. C. Lee wasn't all funky looking, neither was Maul (well Maul was weird looking, but I thought that was simply because of his race) - yet Anakin starts going all bad-skinned and yellow-eyed in a few hours - seems inconsistent.

 

I think they just flip a coin each time they have to decide whether they get the 'funky look'.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

We know buy Bao-Dur that the whole Iridonian darkside face thing, is caused by the darkside and Darth Maul, evidentally was a strong individual within the force to have caused such coverage. Bao-dur at his max darkside capacity only have portions of his face coloured.

Then how does Kreia maintain that grandmotherly look up until Malachor V?

if the force is the very energy of life, it would seem quite natural (imho) that using it negatively or tapping in to "anti-life", if you will, causes some effects .. just as Jedis could possibly look younger than they are since they are tapped into the positive..

While it's occasionally inconsistently dealt with, I don't think the idea that the DS would have some unsavory result on appearance is unreasonable. You can always make something up that sounds plausible in terms of the story-world.

 

Mostly I just get hung up on the Palpatine real/not real face thing.

 

As to Maul/Bao Dur - is that cannon? Just cause bao-dur's face changed doesn't mean Maul's did. Kinda like CS vs Anakin. :D I know Zabrack's are generally thought of as having mellower skin shades but I've also heard Maul's markings referred to as tatoos - ie that his skin might've been red to begin with and then he did the black tattooing, like in this comic rendering (hehe) :

 

http://starwars.wikia.com/images/3/3f/YoungDarthMaul.jpg

http://starwars.wikia.com/images/7/76/Dart...ngHisTatoos.jpg

 

*tosses up hands* but I wouldn't know. :D

Edited July 22, 200619 yr by LadyCrimson

Then how does Kreia maintain that grandmotherly look up until Malachor V?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

He might've used same technique that Palpy used

maybe it because they never change clothes or bathe?

I mean really evil guys always wear the same robes or set of malicious clothes

Mabe they have multiple pairs of evil badass robes?

 

Like Mickey Mouse has propably over hundred pair of those trousers/whatever. Pants?

Edited July 22, 200619 yr by Xard

Bad guys are to evil to strip down and change clothes .. even if it is completely identical ... but how many "+5 to all attributes" suits can you possibly own? I mean even though they usually rule most of the known universe, these items doesn't exactly come a dime a dozen you know...

Whats the deal with making all the sith lords grey and rotten looking.  I mean, the only reason Palpatine was like that was cause of his force lighting that got shot back at him and Anakin that way cause of the fire burning his skin.  I really don't see why all the sith lords are being portrayed as "rotting."

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Actually, that was his face. Though the did lightning cause some burns, for the most part, it's Palpatines actual face. 

I've heard that before, and I still don't understand it. If the Force (DS or not) can allow one to change one's appearance that drastically (as in, disguise the corpse like features into that of a kindly looking older man), why wouldn't he use it to imitate other people? There's no such indication that I've ever noticed in the films (never read the books and such) that the Force allows for this kind of transfiguration morphing of cells ability. C. Lee wasn't all funky looking, neither was Maul (well Maul was weird looking, but I thought that was simply because of his race) - yet Anakin starts going all bad-skinned and yellow-eyed in a few hours - seems inconsistent.

 

I think they just flip a coin each time they have to decide whether they get the 'funky look'.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

While it's occasionally inconsistently dealt with, I don't think the idea that the DS would have some unsavory result on appearance is unreasonable. You can always make something up that sounds plausible in terms of the story-world.

 

Mostly I just get hung up on the Palpatine real/not real face thing.

 

As to Maul/Bao Dur - is that cannon? Just cause bao-dur's face changed doesn't mean Maul's did. Kinda like CS vs Anakin. :D I know Zabrack's are generally thought of as having mellower skin shades but I've also heard Maul's markings referred to as tatoos - ie that his skin might've been red to begin with and then he did the black tattooing, like in this comic rendering (hehe) :

 

http://starwars.wikia.com/images/3/3f/YoungDarthMaul.jpg

http://starwars.wikia.com/images/7/76/Dart...ngHisTatoos.jpg

 

*tosses up hands* but I wouldn't know. :D

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The primary source of the anomaly may be the individual's distinguishing biological reaction to the corruption of the Dark Side, which is communicated symbiotically via Midi-chlorians.

 

What you see in KotOR and KotOR II are overused archetypes. One's biological repercussion may noy exhibit any likeness to that of another.

Which would vary between for various DS force users. Vader's face looked pale. Palpatine's face was pale and aged looking, much more wrinkly than Vader's. Maybe due to a strong belief in dark side of the force.

I find the skin fact very annoying... the only Sith who looked good with DS skin was Bastila :D

Which would vary between for various DS force users. Vader's face looked pale. Palpatine's face was pale and aged looking, much more wrinkly than Vader's. Maybe due to a strong belief in dark side of the force.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

or maybe he was simply older? "

I do feel the KOTOR 2 DS transitions were way overdone. Though the DS is taxing on the body, it should not manifest itself so quickly in the way K2 shows it.

 

If we notice Vader from Ep3, we can see that he looks almost the same as his normal self, save the Sith eyes and a really angry look. that should be an adequate example of a transition to the DS...

 

As for Bastila, she probably cheated the dark side of the force with the beauty that so many of her fans love, in order to maintain her good looks