Jump to content



Photo

New Star Wars Canon


  • Please log in to reply
248 replies to this topic

#241 Lynata

Lynata

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,764 posts

Posted 26 June 2014 - 04:15 PM

Then again, you are renovating that house in order to continue renting it to the former tenants ...  ;)

 

 

I'm not disagreeing with your point in terms of legal matters, I just thought the comparison was begging to be expanded upon.  :P


current 40k RPG character: Aura Vashaan, Astromancer Witch-Priestess
previous characters: Captain Elias (Celestial Lions Chapter), Comrade-Trooper Dasha Malenko (1207th Valhallan Ice Warriors), Sister Elana (Order of the Sacred Rose), Leftenant Darion Baylesworth (Rogue Trader Artemisia)

#242 Dex Vulen

Dex Vulen

    Member

  • Members
  • 446 posts

Posted 26 June 2014 - 04:16 PM

Who said anything about renting it?  I bought the house.


Proud Member of the Gand Anti-Defamation League.


#243 Revanchist

Revanchist

    Member

  • Members
  • 822 posts

Posted 26 June 2014 - 04:18 PM

If I paid 4 billion dollars for a house, I am pretty sure I would remodel it however I wanted.  Those of you that have fond memories of the parties the other guy had are more than welcome to come when I was done.  If not,  I am sure that others will.


If I paid 4 billion dollars for a vintage Victorian Era mansion with a rich history, I would remodel it, not gut it and start over. Doing that makes it lose its depth and some of its appeal.
  • Icosiel likes this
Imperial: 5 TIE/ln, 1 TIE/adv, 5 TIE/in, 1 TIE/sa, 1 Firespray-31, 1 Lambda
Rebel: 3 X-wing, 1 Y-wing, 1 A-wing, 1 B-wing, 1 HWK-290, 1 YT-1300

"History is on the move, Captain. Those who cannot keep up will be left behind, to watch from a distance. And those who stand in our way will not watch at all."

#244 Dex Vulen

Dex Vulen

    Member

  • Members
  • 446 posts

Posted 26 June 2014 - 04:28 PM

 

If I paid 4 billion dollars for a house, I am pretty sure I would remodel it however I wanted.  Those of you that have fond memories of the parties the other guy had are more than welcome to come when I was done.  If not,  I am sure that others will.


If I paid 4 billion dollars for a vintage Victorian Era mansion with a rich history, I would remodel it, not gut it and start over. Doing that makes it lose its depth and some of its appeal.

 

 

It is a 36 year old house.  I do get what you are saying, but it is my house now and I can do whatever I like.  While some people may have awesome stories about the parties they went to at the other guys house, it isn't the other guys house anymore.  Heck, it was never their house either.  Maybe they will like my parties, maybe they wont, but I am pretty sure other people will come.  You know, the younger folks and the other people that were never part of the 'in' crowd.  


  • Revanchist likes this

Proud Member of the Gand Anti-Defamation League.


#245 RogueCorona

RogueCorona

    Member

  • Members
  • 570 posts

Posted 26 June 2014 - 04:55 PM

 

The Legends material covers over 40 years after ROTJ, and there aren't IMO any gaps within that timeframe that would allow a new movie.trilogy. If you set a new movie trilogy after Crucible, aka the last Legends novel chronologically, than you have to explain a lot and would basically need a whole movie for the what has happened between ROTJ and now.

 

With the chronological gap I was referring to the 90 years between the last novels (Fate of the Jedi) and the beginning of the Legacy comics. That should be more than enough to host a new movie trilogy if you exercise a bare minimum of care for consistency.

 

And again, why would you need "a movie to explain what happened between RotJ and now", when we also did not have a movie to explain what happened between RotS and ANH? Episode IV is a prime example for why it is entirely okay to "start in the middle" if the story you tell is strong enough to stand on its own two legs rather than relying too much on the setting's history.

 

Some people might have questions about what happened in the time "in between", but:

- if this information is entirely optional (similar to the Prequels), it may be conveyed by pointing to the existing EU material

- the people that ask are probably of the older generation and thus already aware of the Expanded Universe anyways

 

A third and fourth option were available. They just went for the easier solution, and it remains to be seen whether this was a clever move.

 

 

 

Because if they did a new trilogy focused on Luke, Han, Leia, and the droids set after 41 ABY people who watched the OT will be wanting to know where Chewie was, those who watched the PT will be wanting to know what happened to Coruscant to change it so much, where Han and Leia's granddaughter came from, and why her parent isn't around, and so on.

 

Not to mention that setting the new movies post Crucible locks them into the decisions made by the writers. They couldn't use chewie if they did that since he got killed for example.



#246 Lynata

Lynata

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,764 posts

Posted 26 June 2014 - 05:04 PM

Who said anything about renting it?  I bought the house.

 

If you really want to keep with your comparison, then you didn't buy it for yourself, but because you want to make money with it.

 

Because if they did a new trilogy focused on Luke, Han, Leia, and the droids set after 41 ABY people who watched the OT will be wanting to know where Chewie was, those who watched the PT will be wanting to know what happened to Coruscant to change it so much, where Han and Leia's granddaughter came from, and why her parent isn't around, and so on.

 

  1. A new trilogy would not necessarily have to focus on Luke, Han, Leia & Co. A few characters do not define the essence of Star Wars - as the forum you are posting in should prove (unless you are playing canon characters in your game).
  2. In fact, given the cast of the new trilogy, we already know that Luke, Han and Leia won't be the focus. Which kind of makes sense, given the actors' age and Hollywood's current trend towards younger protagonists.
  3. As already pointed out in the last post, those people who do want to know can go read the EU. This information is not crucial to movie(s) at hand; they would be an internally complete story just like the Prequels and the Original Trilogy.
  4. ... especially if the new movies are intended for a new generation of fans, as hinted at by the sacrifice of the EU.

current 40k RPG character: Aura Vashaan, Astromancer Witch-Priestess
previous characters: Captain Elias (Celestial Lions Chapter), Comrade-Trooper Dasha Malenko (1207th Valhallan Ice Warriors), Sister Elana (Order of the Sacred Rose), Leftenant Darion Baylesworth (Rogue Trader Artemisia)

#247 DanteRotterdam

DanteRotterdam

    Member

  • Members
  • 970 posts

Posted 27 June 2014 - 01:43 AM

All reasoning that is going nowhere... I wanted to say fast, but given the amount of time this discussion is now taking I am more leaning towards excrutiatingly slow.
Your point has been made time and time again. Everyone understands it but not a great many agree, including the people in charge of the story and the owners of the franchise.



#248 kinnison

kinnison

    Member

  • Members
  • 462 posts

Posted 27 June 2014 - 04:14 AM


  1. In fact, given the cast of the new trilogy, we already know that Luke, Han and Leia won't be the focus. Which kind of makes sense, given the actors' age and Hollywood's current trend towards younger protagonists.

 

Actually, with reports of Harrison Fords accident with a faulty door on the Millennium Falcon he seems to have more of a major role in the movie.


Check out my current Campaign:

The Minos Cluster

Last session 6/21/14 'The Treasure of Celis Mott'

Last Update 7/4/14


#249 awayputurwpn

awayputurwpn

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,205 posts

Posted 27 June 2014 - 10:32 AM

 

Anakin wasn't driven to the Dark Side by love. He was driven by fear.
If not his love for his mom or Padmé, it would have been being passed over for Jedi Master. I mean, come on, Palpatine was pulling his strings and manipulating him from early on. He used Anakin's fear to turn him, in desperation, to the Dark Side.
Fear of loss was too much for him to bear. Fear led to anger, anger led to hate, and hate led to suffering.
BOOM. Yoda'd.

His fear for what was going to happen to his wife (love). That was the major point being made. Had he not had a wife, or the attachment, he wouldn't have fallen. That was proven time and again in his best friend (obi), being is serious life threatening situations and he, while emotionally involved, retained his cool. Even with Soka too. Anakin was never going to be a "living gospel" of the order, he did things his way with little self preservation, but the dude wasn't afraid for himself. Heck, in the book, it was his love that ever killed his wife while he was becoming Vader.

 

 

I don't think the films movies were making that point. It's not like being Force-sensitive suddenly makes one into someone who can't love without becoming evil. Just because someone is a Jedi with Force powers doesn't make him or her incapable of being in a loving relationship. Forgive me, but the idea that love was responsible for Anakin's fall is silly. Anakin had a track record of attachment, fear of loss, and a very poor response to loss when it did happen. He let his emotions rule in a very selfish way: he refused to let go his attachments, and when they finally did leave him (Shmi, Padmé) he acted out violently and destructively.

 
Of course Anakin was never afraid for his own safety. He rightly (but not necessarily rightfully) confident in his amazing abilities, and perhaps in his destiny as the Chosen One, if he was aware of it. But many times over he displayed unwillingness to let go. Example: Master Luminara Unduli had made peace with the prospect of losing her padawan, Bariss. But Anakin refused to do the same. Example: Anakin refused to wipe Artoo's memory even though he knew it was protocol when entering battle situations. Example: in his unwillingness to let Ahsoka die, he handed over the holocron to Cad Bane. Combine these few examples with all the times he rescued Obi-Wan and others from death, and after a while he builds a track record of being "the one who saves people," so his trend of attachment is either masked by showy heroics or otherwise explained as a selfless attitude. 
 
But love has little to do with his fall. He really thought that he was going to be the most powerful Jedi ever. He couldn't deal with losing his mother, so in his rage he slaughtered those who had held her captive. He couldn't deal with the fact that he was losing Padme, so he knowingly pledged himself to a Sith Lord in order to "save" her. He couldn't deal with the fact that Obi-Wan wouldn't see his side of things, so he sought to kill him. And behind it all was the mastermind of Anakin's fall, Darth Sidious, described as the most powerful Sith Lord in history. He used Anakin's fear of loss, his sense of pride in his abilities, and his clandestine marriage with Padmé to slowly poison him and ultimately to turn him.
 
And as was pointed out much earlier, in the end, Anakin's love for his son was the thing that redeemed him. In destroying Palpatine, he destroyed himself as well, saved Luke from death, and fulfilled his destiny. 
(I understand the arguments about all the wrong he did and how one act of good doesn't balance it out, but we're dealing with a worldview that Lucas fostered, in which one big selfless act can overwrite countless wrongs. Deal with it ;) )

I'll leave the argument with a quote from a wise Jedi of times past:

The Jedi, with their damnable sense of over-caution, would tell you love is something to avoid. Thankfully, anyone who's even partially alive knows that's not true. Love doesn't lead to the dark side. Passion can lead to rage and fear, and can be controlled...but passion is not the same thing as love.
Controlling your passions while being in love...that's what they should teach you to beware. But love, itself, will save you...not condemn you.

...Do you want to avoid the greatest things in life because they come with some complications? Love causes pain, certainly. Inevitably love is going to lead to as much sorrow and regret as it does joy. I suppose there are perfect, eternal loves out there...but I haven't seen any.
How you deal with the bad part of love is what determines your character, what determines the dark side's hold over you.

 

I know, it's not "canon," but it's wisdom nonetheless.


  • segara82 likes this




© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS