New Magazine Photo Gives Us a First Look at Bail Organa from Rogue One!

organa

Twitter member @IndianaJedi made an interesting discovery on the shelves of one of the Target stores in the US. It was the latest issue of the “US Weekly” magazine that featured a photo with our very first look at Bail Organa from Rogue One: A Star Wars Story. Read on for the details…

 

 

The first official confirmation that Jimmy Smiths will reprise his role as Bail Organa in Rogue One, came from the actor himself during his appearance on the talk show “The Talk” (here). The words that Smiths used to describe his role were “cameo” and “small part”, so don’t expect anything memorable from Senator Organa in Rogue One.

Still, Bail Organa is a very important character in the Star Wars universe since he’s been part of the Prequel Trilogy, the Original Trilogy (only mentioned) and now Rogue One. His character connects these 3 different periods of the Star Wars history.

 

Here’s the image that was posted on Twitter:

 


 

This image perfectly matches with the brief glimpse that we got at Bail during the BTS footage shown at Celebration Europe 2016 (spotted by eagle eyed fans on reddit):

 

bail

 

The text on the image says:

Bail Organa’s garb “isn’t as stately as in the other episodes,” because in Rogue One, “he isn’t as high up the political food chain.”

 

Bail’s appearance pretty much confirms that, hugely deferring from his appearance during Attack of the Clones (title image) when he was a high Senator.

 

organa
One of the last scenes with Bail Organa in Revenge of the Sith

 

For those of you unfamiliar with Bail Organa, here’s Wookieepedia‘s entry on the character:

Bail Organa was a human male politician who served as Senator of Alderaan in the final years of the Galactic Republic. The husband and consort of Queen Breha Organa, Bail Organa bore the titles of Viceroy and First Chairman of Alderaan, and was among the founders of the Alliance to Restore the Republic during the reign of Emperor Sheev Palpatine and the Galactic Empire.

Along with his wife, he was the adoptive parent of Leia Organa, the secret daughter of the fallen Jedi Knight, Anakin Skywalker and the late Senator, Padmé Amidala of Naboo, the latter of whom was a close friend and colleague during the Clone Wars. Raising their daughter as the crown princess of Alderaan, Leia would eventually follow in her father’s footsteps in becoming Alderaan’s representative in the Imperial Senate and a leading member of the Rebel Alliance.

 

 

Bail Organa was also briefly shown during the 20 min Rogue One footage screened in Mexico during the movie’s promo tour (more on that here).

 

 

Website | + posts

Founder of SWNN, MNN and The Cantina forums.

Born on April 24, 1980.

Val Trichkov (Viral Hide)

Founder of SWNN, MNN and The Cantina forums.Born on April 24, 1980.

61 thoughts on “New Magazine Photo Gives Us a First Look at Bail Organa from Rogue One!

  • November 25, 2016 at 11:04 pm
    Permalink

    Great to see him again and links the PT and OT is such a smooth way.

  • November 25, 2016 at 11:07 pm
    Permalink

    Ahhh, good ol’ Continuity. <3

  • November 25, 2016 at 11:22 pm
    Permalink

    I just love that they really decided not to ignore the prequels completely. More PT References should have been in TFA

    • November 26, 2016 at 12:22 am
      Permalink

      God, no. Anything that references those disasters is depressing as hell.

      • November 26, 2016 at 12:23 am
        Permalink

        Hey kids, what time is it?

        TIME TO GET OVER IT.

        • November 26, 2016 at 2:27 am
          Permalink

          Let me know what time those movies stop sucking, and I’ll stop complaining about them.

          • November 26, 2016 at 3:21 am
            Permalink

            You know what movie I hated? Towering Inferno. God that film sucked. Now let me hold forth for the next 15 fucking years about how it so offended my sensibilities…

          • November 26, 2016 at 9:10 am
            Permalink

            Still a better film than Battlefield Earth.

          • November 26, 2016 at 9:17 am
            Permalink

            The difference, you see, is that Towering Inferno is not forever joined at the hip with a series of films that you consider to be your favorite films ever made. It was not anticipated by you for 16 years, only to blindside you by its terribleness. It is not the foundation for new films still being released today. See the difference?

          • November 27, 2016 at 7:33 am
            Permalink

            Move along. Move along.

          • November 27, 2016 at 12:09 am
            Permalink

            Did it cause you emotional trauma?

          • November 26, 2016 at 5:07 am
            Permalink

            You could just ignore them. It says more about you that you are still complaining 17 years later than it does about the movies.

            A baby born that year will be able to vote next year and you can’t let it go? Move on.

          • November 26, 2016 at 9:22 am
            Permalink

            How, exactly, do I ignore them when they are linked forever to the movies that I actually like, and characters from them show up in new episodes and remind me of them? New episodes of Star Wars will always generate discussion comparing them to previous episodes. And movie criticism has no statute of limitations. A movie doesn’t stop sucking after a number of years, not do they become immune from criticism. And I’ll criticize them as long as I damn well please, thank you.

          • November 26, 2016 at 5:22 pm
            Permalink

            Well, I don’t know who forced you to comment and say “God, no. Anything that references those disasters is depressing as hell.”

            You could have just IGNORED it, but you chose to hit “reply” and type all those bitter words. If you had just moved on, that would be ignoring it and you would have taken your first step into a larger universe instead of staying in a small, petty little world. It’s your choice, but don’t act like you don’t know how.

            You are allowed to criticize anything you like for however long you like. No one can stop you.

            But if even a reference to them is “depressing as hell”, that goes beyond mere movie criticism. You act like they are a personal affront to you.

            17 years later, that’s an issue you should work out. Best of luck!

          • November 26, 2016 at 6:11 pm
            Permalink

            And no one forced you to respond to my criticism. You could’ve just ignored it. But you chose to hit “reply” and rant about my rant. So how about practicing what you preach? Is criticism of the prequels a personal affront to you?

          • November 26, 2016 at 6:20 pm
            Permalink

            The difference is that I’ve not been hounding you about it for 17 years. It’s a subtle difference, to be sure.

            I often criticize the prequels. I just showed them to my cousin this past month and paused it to complain about things and point out the many stuff I don’t like about them.

            But I don’t find them embarrassing or disasters, merely poorly executed and missed opportunities. You can rant about them all you want. But like I said, 17 years later, it’s time to at least let go of the hurt feelings.

          • November 26, 2016 at 10:41 pm
            Permalink

            So what, in your estimation, is the statute of limitations for when a person is allowed to stop recognizing that a film is bad? Does it also apply to people who praise the film, or is it limited to criticism only? Please tell me, because I want to be in full compliance with your personal standards for how a person talks about films, or art in general, and what one is allowed to say without causing offense.

          • November 26, 2016 at 11:58 pm
            Permalink

            I am starting to wonder if you are even reading these.

            Allow me to quote myself:

            “You are allowed to criticize anything you like for however long you like. No one can stop you.”

            BUT:

            “But if even a reference to them is “depressing as hell”, that goes beyond mere movie criticism. You act like they are a personal affront to you.”

            You can whinge and whine all you want until the day you die. A bad film is bad forever (like Prometheus, for instance).

            But if a reference to a 17 year old film depresses you or causes such a negative emotional reaction…that’s on you. That’s not the movie’s fault. That’s some stuff you need to work on.

            I’ve now repeated this very basic point about 3 times, so I shan’t be responding again unless you have something new to say.

            I have no personal standard about talking about movies and you have caused me no offense.

            I just worry about your emotional well-being since if I were to say in a future post that something is “SO WIZARD!” that it might send you into an emotional spiral. I don’t want discussion of mediocre movies to cause any traumas to you or the other delicate little flowers.

            Have a nice day. May your life be prequel-free.

          • November 28, 2016 at 8:08 pm
            Permalink

            Let me explain to you the relevance of my original critique.
            The original poster said that it was great to see prequel references in Rogue One, and that more should’ve been in TFA. So, my comment about the prequels being terrible was in response to that suggestion. I wasn’t simply going off on the terribleness of the prequels for no reason, it was in response to what should be in movies currently being made, not just movies released 17 years ago.

            The prequels sure as hell were a personal affront to anyone who spent 16 years anticipating how great they would be, only to have them turn out to be lazy, insulting messes. And it is depressing to see them again and be reminded of how disappointing they were. If you haven’t noticed yet, fans feel passionately about these movies and that devotion manifests itself into intense opinions about them, which run the gamut from loving to loathing.

            Why you would have such a problem with someone expressing an opinion suggesting that a series of movies were bad and those bad ideas shouldn’t be carried into new films currently being made is beyond me. If anything, you’re the delicate little snowflake for making such a big deal about it and not simply ignoring something that upsets you, exactly like you’re preaching to me about doing.

        • November 26, 2016 at 9:32 pm
          Permalink

          considering the prequels are canon, they will always be with us and open to discussion. in your own words: if you don’t like it, start your own blog. k, thanks.

          • November 26, 2016 at 11:53 pm
            Permalink

            What a staggering display of misunderstanding. You have failed to pay attention to this discussion just as much as Crixxxx has.

            Open to discussion is always allowed and encouraged. “Disasters that are depressing” is something different and implies emotional damages from a 17 year old movie. It’s a simple distinction.

            And the comment about starting a blog is a reference to when someone replies to a news post with something entirely off topic from the post. If you want to talk about whatever you want instead of what the thread is about, start a blog.

            Please follow the discussion’s nuances or be ignored.

            K, thanks.

      • November 26, 2016 at 3:36 pm
        Permalink

        those “disasters” exists.

        • November 26, 2016 at 4:41 pm
          Permalink

          Unfortunately.

          • November 26, 2016 at 4:47 pm
            Permalink

            Even though worldwide. and I did say worldwide, Lucasfilm reps have said the prequels are as popular as the original films.

          • November 26, 2016 at 4:50 pm
            Permalink

            Well, it wouldn’t be the first time corporate reps have talked BS

          • November 26, 2016 at 5:24 pm
            Permalink

            Or the first time a guy on the internet considers his anecdotal opinion to be true for all.

          • November 26, 2016 at 6:07 pm
            Permalink

            Right back at ya.

          • November 26, 2016 at 6:20 pm
            Permalink

            Except I’m not saying that my opinion is true for all. Try to keep up.

          • November 26, 2016 at 10:35 pm
            Permalink

            How exactly was me stating my own opinion an assertion that it was true for all?

          • November 27, 2016 at 12:01 am
            Permalink

            1. Lucasfilm rep says prequels are as popular as OT. (And worldwide, the numbers bear this out).

            2. “Well, it wouldn’t be the first time corporate reps have talked BS.”

            3. Statement 2 is purely an opinion, implying that because you find them bad or the vocal internet does, that means Statement 1 is false.

            Regardless, Pablo once stated that the last time LFL checked, it was 50/50 in terms of popularity. You may disagree if you like. Won’t change a thing.

          • November 28, 2016 at 7:51 pm
            Permalink

            The numbers? What numbers? Total nonsense. If the prequels are as popular as the OT, then why is the overwhelming majority of SW merchandise based on OT characters and elements? (excluding Force Awakens and Rogue One) Go to any store display of Star Wars products. Don’t see too many young Anakin figures, Naboo fighters or Jar Jars. It’s all OT stuff. Why did the poll taken by starwars.com on the popularity of the films favor the OT movies by a 75% majority?

    • November 26, 2016 at 12:23 am
      Permalink

      I don’t think there should be any more than there were because they would be forced in. The ones they did made sense. TFA takes place 50 years later. It’s not as connected as the OT.

      Some are fine, but no need to overdo it.

      • November 26, 2016 at 3:35 pm
        Permalink

        yea, but, just as gow Bones in Aftermath is a separatist droid, you know, e.g. mention this or that prequel planet, or have that old pt era droid in the corner of Maz’s castle… some small tie-ins

        • November 26, 2016 at 5:12 pm
          Permalink

          They mentioned clonetroopers and the balance of the Force. Young Obi-Wan’s voice was used. Phasma’s armor is from a Naboo ship. There’s little nods. It’s fine.

    • November 26, 2016 at 1:26 am
      Permalink

      no one has ignored the prequels, ties to that trilogy are all over the new canon.

      • November 26, 2016 at 3:33 pm
        Permalink

        I mean movie-wise, refering to TFA, when JJ deliberately didn’t want PT references and a Ghost Anakin starring Hayden to show up.

        • November 26, 2016 at 3:52 pm
          Permalink

          I think a more logical moment where Abrams should have allowed a few Prequel references was Maz’s castle. Like, there could have been a cocktail waiter droid that was a reprogrammed Battle Droid, for example, working in the background.

          Come to think of it, there should have been a “parking lot” for ships by Maz’s where the Falcon could have set down. And among these parked ships could have been a few recognizable ships seen in the Prequels.

          • November 26, 2016 at 8:01 pm
            Permalink

            tou are perfectly right!

        • November 26, 2016 at 9:27 pm
          Permalink

          JJ wanted more of an OT look and feel. considering its time frame it made sense.

    • November 26, 2016 at 3:53 am
      Permalink

      Anyone remember what happened to Legends post-RoTJ continuity after the Prequels came out? They had a lot of trouble retconning in all that backstory and galaxy building. But they did it with some ‘hidden memories’ of Anakin locked away in R2D2…

      I am much more okay with the subtle inflections of data and references they are shooting in. And the attack-on-history the Emperor made fits neatly.

      • November 26, 2016 at 9:25 pm
        Permalink

        i do. zahn’s first novel post TPM and AotC was so jammed full of prequel references to the point of feeling ridiculous. (not a slam on the prequels, just the amount of back tracking)

      • November 27, 2016 at 4:53 am
        Permalink

        R2D2 memory was intact. C3PO memory was deleted at the end of ROTS.

        • November 28, 2016 at 3:09 pm
          Permalink

          Yeah… And they made a big deal about Luke figuring that out and watching some holograms of his daddy turning to the dark side.

    • November 26, 2016 at 3:49 pm
      Permalink

      I agree. They should organically work in the cooler elements from the Prequels. Like, it would be okay if they showed Gungans in one of the movies, but have them be cool, bad-ass gruff mercenaries (which is what Jar Jar should have been). Or, imagine Chewie in the Han Solo movie taking scrapped Battle Droids and cobbling together a few of them to help them fight Stormtroopers. Whenever it makes sense to the story, they should do more things like this, and this would help to salvage the reputation of the Prequels.

      • November 26, 2016 at 8:02 pm
        Permalink

        I think the mere presentation of a few alien species and locations we’ve seen in the prequels works.

      • November 28, 2016 at 1:52 am
        Permalink

        Re: “scrapped Battle Droids and cobbling together a few of them to help them fight”
        Mr Bones?

  • November 26, 2016 at 12:46 am
    Permalink

    Something I don’t understand. If he is wearing ordinary clothes because he’s not high up political chain as Jimmy says, I then how does Leia become a Princess. Does Bail become King or does he marry a Queen?

    • November 26, 2016 at 1:24 am
      Permalink

      i’ve wondered about that myself.

    • November 26, 2016 at 2:52 am
      Permalink

      I think he’s talking about his Galactic political position more so than his status as the queen of Alderaan’s husband. He still holds his royal position back home but his political career has suffered (possibly due to him being suspected as a rebel sympathizer). His more simple wardrobe reflects his current political status. No doubt back home he cleans up nicely.

      • November 26, 2016 at 11:54 am
        Permalink

        But how does Leia become a princess? Is she already a Princess at the time of Rogue One?

        • November 26, 2016 at 4:45 pm
          Permalink

          Yep and senator.

        • November 27, 2016 at 4:51 am
          Permalink

          She is adoptive daughter of Queen Breha Organa ( Bail wife ).
          Soo Leia is princess since the end of ROTS.

        • December 1, 2016 at 6:01 pm
          Permalink

          She’s a princess the moment she is adopted. Bail did not hold the title of “king”. He was the consort of the planet’s monarch, Queen Breha. At different times he held various titles like “Viceroy” and “First Chairman”. But he was never a monarch. Leia owes her title of “Princess” to her mother’s status and that is unaffected by her father’s political standing.

    • November 26, 2016 at 3:48 am
      Permalink

      I think they are referring to the galactic political food chain, his position in Alderaanian society is basically the same.

      They may also have just got it wrong – he would have to travel fairly incognito to get to that Rebellion war-room roundtable without getting stopped by the Empire.

  • November 26, 2016 at 2:03 am
    Permalink

    Will he drive up in his pink cadillac?

    • November 26, 2016 at 4:44 pm
      Permalink

      Was red, I recall.

  • November 26, 2016 at 5:38 am
    Permalink

    More proof of Disney’s anti-Prequel bias. /s

  • November 27, 2016 at 4:57 am
    Permalink

    This is awesome. It is nice to see prequel character in Rogue One. Bail Organa is important character. This is realy great news.
    And Jimmy looks awesome as Bail.

  • November 27, 2016 at 11:16 pm
    Permalink

    Who is Jimmy Smiths?

Comments are closed.

LATEST POSTS ON MOVIE NEWS NET