29

I came to this thought that E.T. was in fact a Jedi (or at least Force-sensitive) and the more I think about it, the more it seems possible. This would explain many things.

First, we already know that E.T came from the Star Wars Galaxy.

So, if he was a Jedi, he would show some force powers:

So, the only thing left is to determine if all others member of E.T.'s species (Children of the Green Planet) possess those powers. I hope we could find this information in "E.T.: The Book of the Green Planet" (a book from E.T. franchise which is the sequel to movie's novelization).

closed as primarily opinion-based by Lobo, Valorum, Stan, Ward, Monty129 Apr 20 '14 at 19:35

Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • 14
    This is why cross-franchise tribute easter eggs/gags should be avoided in canonical works... If we're to take the "E.T. is part of Star Wars" thing seriously, then we also have to conclude that Star Trek (2009) is also set in the Star Wars universe due to R2-D2's cameo, and that Coruscant is actually New York City. – Lèse majesté Nov 27 '11 at 16:56
  • 4
    @Lèsemajesté - Yes. No fun allowed in our movies! – neilfein Nov 27 '11 at 18:14
  • 8
    @Lèsemajesté - Planet of the Jedi Apes! :) – DVK-on-Ahch-To Nov 27 '11 at 18:25
  • 5
    Note to self: If I ever make big budget movies, be sure to include disclaimers that all easter eggs are NOT canonical! – Tango Nov 27 '11 at 19:58
  • 11
    @Lèsemajesté: That could also be explained as someone having a toy R2D2 on one of the ships, which only requires that the Star Wars movies exist in the Star Trek universe. Heck, I've seen two R2D2s in the last few days. – Keith Thompson Nov 28 '11 at 23:59
22

I think it is fairly clear that E.T. is from the species of the Star Wars galaxy, probably having come on a generational ship, since the journey would be very long indeed. Since the Force pervades the galaxy and everything in it, and can be used for purposes of manipulating it, I think it's reasonable to assume that E.T.'s "magic" did use the force at some level, even if it wasn't as directly as a Jedi would have (there is precedence for this, I believe the Force-witches of Agamar, as well as several of the cultures Jacen went and studied with).

However, I don't think E.T. was a Jedi, at least as we know them in the Star Wars time frame.

  • First, though perhaps not most compellingly, we didn't see E.T.'s lightsaber, and a lightsaber is almost a part of the Jedi, they are almost naked without it.

  • Second, consider whether there were Jedi on the ship the Brodo Agosians/Children of the Green Planet sent. If not, then one of them over the generations would likely have discovered the Force and started using it, probably passing down the knowledge, if not the genes for it. But since he or she would not have been trained in the force, the culture around it would probably not have been the same. This could easily lead to the level and manner in which E.T. used it.

    If there were a Jedi on the generational ship, then either the training could have died out due to a lack of trainees (recall Jedi are not supposed to have children, and an original Jedi would likely have adhered to this) and then they'd be in the Jedi-less situation described above, or the training could simply have evolved over the years as a natural progression. After all, there wouldn't have been a Jedi council to keep it on track, and the situation on a generational ship would not need to serve the same purpose as in the galaxy at large.

So I think that yes, E.T. was on some level using the Force, but no, he was not a Jedi knight, at least as we know them from the Star Wars era.

  • 3
    Oh man. I read your 3rd sentence as "Witches of Angmar" and started to devise explanation for why Arda and GFFA are in the same Universe... – DVK-on-Ahch-To Jan 20 '14 at 1:02
9

A Jedi is defined not be the symptomatic effect of his abilities, but by his connection to the Force. Since E.T. is never shown to be connected to the Force (neither are his people in SW EU), you can not really attribute any of his abilities to being a Jedi. It's an elegant theory, admittedly, but one that has no canonical proof either way.

NITPICK: As phantom42 correctly noted in the comment, technically speaking, the question as stated is 100% clearly false, as a "Jedi" is strictly speaking only someone in the Jedi Order, which E.T. clearly was not. What the OP probably meant to ask was "Was E.T. a Force-sensitive or rather Force-user" - so in both the question AND in my answer, "Jedi" should read as "Force-user".

  • 1
    "A Jedi is defined not be the symptomatic effect of his abilities, but by his connection to the Force." No, a Jedi is defined as them being a member of the Jedi Order. A connection to the force means that they are Force-Sensitive or Force-Attuned. You are correct otherwise though. E.T. demonstrates no specific connection to the Force. – phantom42 Aug 2 '12 at 20:06
  • @phantom42 - Good nitpick. Edited – DVK-on-Ahch-To Aug 2 '12 at 20:52
3

I really think you're reading too much into these cross-cameos. Spielberg and Lucas are good friends and include nods to each other. I really think "easter egg," or more specifically attentive fan gratification, is all it is. Not canon or hidden meaning. Following this question's logic, R2-D2 is part of the Close Encounters of the Third Kind Universe because "he" was part of the Mothership.

They're just having fun and not expecting us to equate all their works as a cohesive Whole. The Yoda costume in E.T. being a prime example.

  • 1
    +1 Pretty much my opinion. There are no E.T.s in the Star Wars universe, and whatever we saw in the prequels was a playful joke. – Andres F. Jan 20 '14 at 0:41
1

Video about the E.T. is a Jedi theory.

  • 2
    Can you please provide a summary for the video? Answers that are links only are frowned upon here, for the simple reason that links (and videos) can be removed in the future and the answer becomes empty. – System Down Mar 31 '14 at 16:41
1

Is E.T. a Jedi? Perhaps, providing that the Jedi Council and its ways of "being" and teachings from a long long ago and a galaxy far far away still exists by the time Elliott's E.T. meets with humans.

Jedi is a religion and way of life, E.T. may just as well be a Sith Lord. Life preservation is part of the dark side of the force. Are the Sith not the only ones who practice life extending abilities? Is that not the whole MacGuffin behind Anikin and Vader? Anakin, as he was becoming a Sith told queen Amadala over and over again on how he would save/heal her and what did E.T. do? Heal that little boy!

Either way it is apparent that ET has control of the force which is one of the requisites to be a Jedi or a Sith or any other paths of such being.

It is likely that ET is probably not one of those seen on the counsel in star wars and he simply recognized the Species of the "Yoda" mask.

The action figures and other references implicate that the ET species brought knowledge of the Star Wars legacy to Earth. Which would mean the main characters in the saga have long since past and was translated to human for prosperity and in preparation of the unification of species.

So we have an ancestor of Elliott's ET bringing droids of similar models, if not 3po and r2Dtoe'a themselves to Earth and an epic story that transcends galaxies. The mythology is suppressed by the Egyptians until the 30s when the Joness open the way for some one to see the droid glyph, and for Lucas to find it and share his translation with the rest of us.

enter image description here

  • Why the negative votes? – UhlBelk Apr 22 '14 at 5:20
  • Really what part of this answer deserves a down vote? – UhlBelk Apr 27 '14 at 19:01
  • Because Meme's and Easter eggs are not definite proof like a source would be, and then as other answers have suggested, Jedi refers to a specific set of force users whom have a specific philosophy and interpretation of how to view and apply the force and therefor there is not enough information to prove anything beyond E.T. possibly being a [well-intended] "force user". – Darth Locke Dec 31 '18 at 19:31
  • they still showed a better argument than one against it – King of NES Mar 6 at 20:22

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.