Jump to content
Imperial Advisor Arem Heshvaun

Star Wars Episode IX The Rise Of Skywalker

Recommended Posts

52 minutes ago, Firebird TMK said:

Thus spoke the official spokesman for Star Wars fandom.

Or maybe a fellow fan who is sick of the threats of violence being tossed around if the mob doesn't gets the story it wants and the petty spoiled child bile that those mental brats spew at anything that doesn't fit their head fanon...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Admiral Deathrain said:

No character should be above losing their live, else the stakes are too low. This is an issue star wars sometimes suffers from (however a lot of that also stems from watching the same movies over and over again for 30 years), demanding more of it is kind of counterproductive to better star wars. Death being the only way out of a story also is a laziness in recent storytelling history that gets on my nerves, though.

Exactly.  Over on one of the 3 stargate forums i was a member of, that's one of the BIGGEST gripes we kept hearing "How come all the core 4 never get seriously injured or killed?  Why is it only second stringers (those two doctors) or nameless faces we see killed??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/27/2019 at 11:36 PM, MegaSilver said:

They got mad because he was killed off and wouldn't be seen again in the series, and was one of the main characters. So totally understandable.

Eh.

I was annoyed that Chewie's old death was just sorta dumb.

The author wacked him in the first few pages in a fairly vanilla "women and children first" scene so that he could write the Grieving Han Story.

And then after setting up that premise, it was a fairly mediocre novel.  Which made Chewie's death sorta. . .useless.

Otherwise, I'm with @Admiral Deathrain: main characters need to die from time to time to keep you invested in outcomes.

Oh.  And they need to stay dead.  I'm lookin' at you, Maul.  Because a stupid resurrection is just as dumb as no death.

Edited by Darth Meanie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

Eh.

I was annoyed that Chewie's old death was just sorta dumb.

The author wacked him in the first few pages in a fairly vanilla "women and children first" scene so that he could write the Grieving Han Story.

And then after setting up that premise, it was a fairly mediocre novel.  Which made Chewie's death sorta. . .useless.

Otherwise, I'm with @Admiral Deathrain: main characters need to die from time to time to keep you invested in outcomes.

Oh.  And they need to stay dead.  I'm lookin' at you, Maul.  Because a stupid resurrection is just as dumb as no death.

I agree with this entirely, but would also like to add that the character he died saving dies later in the series as well. It almost seemed as if Chewie death was just a waste to set up story, from several different points of view. If it had been handled better, such as dying for a reason instead of propelling the story and putting off the inevitable, it would have been received better than it was. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

I'm lookin' at you, Maul.  Because a stupid resurrection is just as dumb as no death.

Maul's resurrection was ridiculous, I fully agree. That said, Sam Witwer's Maul is one of my favourite characters from Clone Wars and Rebels, so his ridiculous resurrection is almost forgivable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Hiemfire said:

Or maybe a fellow fan who is sick of the threats of violence being tossed around if the mob doesn't gets the story it wants and the petty spoiled child bile that those mental brats spew at anything that doesn't fit their head fanon...

Yep, you're right.  All that "bile" that's been spewing lately.  Like the "bile" that was spewed at Mark Hamill the other day when he posted a photo that didn't fit the "head fanon" of toxic SJW mental brats.

What?  That wasn't what you meant?  Dang, my bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, gadwag said:

Maul's resurrection was ridiculous, I fully agree. That said, Sam Witwer's Maul is one of my favourite characters from Clone Wars and Rebels, so his ridiculous resurrection is almost forgivable.

Kinda meh on Maul's role in both.

They could have just come up with a new character for Clone Wars  or made Sauvage less beef-no-brains.

And in the end, in Rebels, it just felt like they then decided to have Obi wan put him down again in some weird self-fulfilling circular  storyline of "we should not have let George talk us into that."  Like they were fixing a mistake while using the character one last time. 

Edited by Darth Meanie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Firebird TMK said:

Yep, you're right.  All that "bile" that's been spewing lately.  Like the "bile" that was spewed at Mark Hamill the other day when he posted a photo that didn't fit the "head fanon" of toxic SJW mental brats.

What?  That wasn't what you meant?  Dang, my bad.

 

Please stop trying to sow division and anger in the community. We don't want this behaviour from anyone. 

To be clear: I don't support people raging at Mark Hamill for posting the original stars in the cockpit, just as I don't support you threatening the Story Group if they blow up the Falcon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Magnus Grendel said:

You can retire a character from an ongoing story without killing them, though. 

Sure.  And as another major blockbuster and end of saga film has shown, you can

 

kill a hero and retire another and give them both be satisfying and fitting conclusions to their character arcs.

It's all about understanding who that character is, and what their journey has been.  Just killing them for shock value or because you want to have space for new characters is lazy screenwriting.  

Edited by Dr Zoidberg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gadwag said:

Maul's resurrection was ridiculous, I fully agree. That said, Sam Witwer's Maul is one of my favourite characters from Clone Wars and Rebels, so his ridiculous resurrection is almost forgivable.

I can definitely relate to this. So many fabulously moments came about from Maul’s resurrection, even though the “how” of his survival is groan worthy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, SabineKey said:

I can definitely relate to this. So many fabulously moments came about from Maul’s resurrection, even though the “how” of his survival is groan worthy.

When we had Maul and Hondo on-screen at the same time it was too perfect

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SabineKey said:

I can definitely relate to this. So many fabulously moments came about from Maul’s resurrection, even though the “how” of his survival is groan worthy.

 

1 hour ago, gadwag said:

When we had Maul and Hondo on-screen at the same time it was too perfect

But couldn't this have been achieved with a new character and a little bit of extra explanation about discovering a lost Sith apprentice??

I mean, other than "old character recognition" Maul really had no canon backstory save "At last we can reveal ourselves. . ." and "Ouch. . ."  Ergo, no actual personality save what was created for the New Maul.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

 

But couldn't this have been achieved with a new character and a little bit of extra explanation about discovering a lost Sith apprentice??

I mean, other than "old character recognition" Maul really had no canon backstory save "At last we can reveal ourselves. . ." and "Ouch. . ."  Ergo, no actual personality save what was created for the New Maul.

Yes and no. Some of what was so enjoyable about him could have transferred to a revamped Savage. 

But there is actually back story that makes it worth while for me and that’s his backstory with Obi-Wan. In Episode 1, Maul’s loss at the hands of Obi-Wan moved Maul from being the right hand of the most powerful man in the universe to nothing. The hatred and desire for revenge against Kenobi is easy to understand and leads to some epic moments, not just for Maul, but for Obi-Wan as well. Theoretically, you could try that with another failed apprentice or Savage, but that could fall flat if not correctly handled. 

There is definitely an argument to be made against bringing him back, but it comes down to what ifs. Yes, they might have been able to make a character that did the same/similar thing without bringing back Maul, but it also could have fallen flat in many different ways. The writers went with what they did, and while the start is ify for me, the rest of it was worth it. Kind of like Clone Wars in general.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

 

But couldn't this have been achieved with a new character and a little bit of extra explanation about discovering a lost Sith apprentice??

I mean, other than "old character recognition" Maul really had no canon backstory save "At last we can reveal ourselves. . ." and "Ouch. . ."  Ergo, no actual personality save what was created for the New Maul.

This.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/27/2019 at 3:07 PM, Scrivner said:

It hadn't occurred to me that they could kill the Falcon. That would acrually be more devastating to me than any other death that could occur.

I felt the Falcon should have gone with Han (obviously necessitating a different, less stupid death shock value twist death than he got). Why do the new films seem unable to come up with decent ship designs that aren't just copies of the OT ships? I realize that it's like poetry, it rhymes and all but...imagine if the US military decided "Nope, screw those F-16s and F-22's. We're gonna fly slightly pointier versions of the P-51 and P-38 for eternity."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/29/2019 at 10:54 PM, Darth Meanie said:

 

But couldn't this have been achieved with a new character and a little bit of extra explanation about discovering a lost Sith apprentice??

I mean, other than "old character recognition" Maul really had no canon backstory save "At last we can reveal ourselves. . ." and "Ouch. . ."  Ergo, no actual personality save what was created for the New Maul.

In the Phantom Menace, Maul is essentially a visual effect. He was set up as a threat that's hunting the two Jedi but other than that he has no real character. Anything else is just added on after the fact.

There's no reason for him to survive except "oh, we wasted a character with a cool appearance". Which seems to be the seed of The Mandalorian show idea, too- the movies didn't do much with Boba Fett, so here's a bounty hunter in Mandalorian armor that's totally an original character. Maul and Boba share a lot, in that they were more powerful as just images. Boba Fett is a clever bounty hunter in cool armor in Empire. That's all we need to know to be interested. Maul is an evil counter to the Jedi that looks like the devil. That's a great visual hook. We don't need to know the guy's life story to think he's interesting, and a lot of times it's disappointing when that story does get fleshed out. I don't know anyone that thought Boba was cooler for his appearance in AOTC.

As an aside to that, my biggest problem with both the Prequels and Sequels is that there are too many setups without payoffs. Oh, Maul's a big advertised villain? Oh, he's dead at the end of the movie. Oh, Jango Fett is important this time? Oh, he's dead by the start of the third act. And then there's a payoff without a setup in General Grievous. Without a series created years later we have no context for who he is or why he's important. Johnson basically took the setups JJ set up and completely destroyed the chance of a payoff.

 

Edited by ArcHammer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/28/2019 at 5:09 PM, Captain Lackwit said:

 

But it like, happens, y'know?

But getting rid of every old character the same way is bad writing. TLJ and TFA were studies in how not to write characters and what to avoid in story writing. 

On a related note, we got three “oh **** it’s the Death Star” movies in rapid succession there. Three. That’s flogging a dead horse till you wear a trench in the ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, BenderIsGreat said:

But getting rid of every old character the same way is bad writing. TLJ and TFA were studies in how not to write characters and what to avoid in story writing. 

On a related note, we got three “oh **** it’s the Death Star” movies in rapid succession there. Three. That’s flogging a dead horse till you wear a trench in the ground.

Anything positive to say, or do you wanna' just gripe some more?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/30/2019 at 11:57 PM, Captain Lackwit said:

Anything positive to say, or do you wanna' just gripe some more?

Here’s something positive for you: given the mass of Death Star II and its structural integrity (as it was not finished) it’s a good bet (mathematically) that its destruction meant there would’ve been intact chunks big enough to cause an impact winter on the Forest Moon of Endor which most certainly would have killed a large number of native life, including a lot of Ewoks. Over time they’d evolve to organisms better able to weather an ice age, but in the short term a vast amount of the surface would be covered in snow and ice and most fauna and flora frozen to death! The Maths are also with us in favor of there being nothing but Ewoksicles for OT Survivors to find!

Also, the cargo frigate was cool.

Two things positive.

Because I like you.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BenderIsGreat said:

Here’s something positive for you: given the mass of Death Star II and its structural integrity (as it was not finished) it’s a good bet (mathematically) that its destruction meant there would’ve been intact chunks big enough to cause an impact winter on the Forest Moon of Endor which most certainly would have killed a large number of native life, including a lot of Ewoks. Over time they’d evolve to organisms better able to weather an ice age, but in the short term a vast amount of the surface would be covered in snow and ice and most fauna and flora frozen to death! The Maths are also with us in favor of there being nothing but Ewoksicles for OT Survivors to find!

Also, the cargo frigate was cool.

Two things positive.

Because I like you.

 

Aw, thanks. Ewok Genocide always brightens up my day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally watched the trailer. The following are my thoughts / reactions.

"Sounds more like the continued rise of maREY sue."  "Oh look, I'm standing alone in the middle of the desert for no reason. Waiting to use my laser sword to kill my opponent in a spaceship that could vaporize me with or without said laser sword."

"Final?  Thank God"

"When did ancestor worship /  reincarnation become a Star Wars thing?"

"Moar deathstar"

"I'm out."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...