Mark Hamill return

124Next

Replies

  • terascque wrote: »
    Kylo Ren sucks as a villain, and that isn't Adam Drivers fault.

    Imagine if in the original movie Dracula, Dracula the Master Vampire, was defeated by some peasant from the countryside who had never hunted a vampire before, and had only learned that vampires even existed the day before. Its totally not possible. There is zero chance.

    Because they allowed Ren to be defeated by Rey, they destroyed any credibility he may have had. Regardless of the fact that this is a movie, and the bad guy rarely wins, does anyone really think Ren can beat Rey?

    This whole problem of Rey/Ren is the fault of the writers. I mean my God, even the chosen one studied for years, and fought numerous battles, giving him tons of experience, and was unable to beat Dooku or Obi Wan.

    How does some character, regardless of that character being male or female, defeat someone who has training, and experience, without any training or experience of their own.

    I have never studied boxing or any martial art. Does anyone in the entire world think I could have picked a fight with Muhammad Ali and beaten him??

    Come on, get real!

    Edit: typos

    Agreed with all this. But JJ Abrams set Kylo Ren up to be a monstrous villain. Then Ep8 happened and we got the same kid with no additional training as it was alluded to in Ep7.

    Should have been a time jump and Ren should've come back vicious and unrelenting with his Knights of Ren. Sorta like a Super-Vader with a squad of killers.

    That also would've solved Rey's problem because no way she would've bested this darker Ren. She would've needed the great hero Luke Skywalker to teach her everything he knows. Then she becomes powerful and we all get how she got there. But again, Ep8 happened.
    CLONE HELMETS!! Now let's get Sabine her epic helmet.
  • UnstopableSteve
    370 posts Member
    edited August 2018
    Hey new t-shirt idea! Never mind stuff happens!
    Episode 8 happened!
    Your to late guys ive nicked it and its copyright protected.

    Edited for language. - EA_Cian
    Post edited by EA_Cian on
  • Boo
    3430 posts Member
    Boo wrote: »
    And this is exactly why I was hoping Luke would be more in the belief of the grey/balanced force rather than what we got out of him in TLJ - it would have grown his character to a better understanding of the force without the arrogance and trapping of the jedi belief system nor give into the corrupting power of the darkside.

    Maybe I saw a different movie, but isn't this exactly what happened in TLJ? It seems to me this is the path TLJ went down, it just came away with a different conclusion than many people hoped for. And if you examine it from the character's perspective, it makes sense that he wanted to be done with all of it. He chose to be a recluse, just like his master.

    Which raises the question, why doesn't the great George get any of this flak for essentially using the same plot device with Yoda? Why couldn't Yoda have secretly started to develop a new generation of Jedi after escaping Palpatine? Instead, he went into hiding and started losing his marbles while talking to the fauna of a swamp planet.

    And before anyone goes down the Order 66 path, I seriously doubt "Order 66" had been conceived of when ESB was written. It's actually amazing how short people's memories were in the Galaxy Far Far Away. In ANH they're talking about an "ancient religion" that only 20 years prior was running a galactic military operation. It would be like us calling Michael Jordan the "ancient basketball great" or some such thing.

    This was not the path Luke went down in TLJ - he wanted the jedi to end as he saw their teachings as corrupt and misguided, allowing Darth Sidious to overthrow and dominate the galaxy.

    If you watch what Johnson says about Luke's character on the commentary he states that Luke wanted the Jedi to end as this aggravates the rise of the darkside - the failing of this "logic" is that the darkside has already risen, in Snoke and Kylo, although not Sith in name, they are essentially the same - Luke turned his back on a galaxy, friends and family that needed him.

    It was Luke's love of family and friends that made him different from the Jedi (his attachments, which to the Jedi are forbidden). This is why Obi Wan and Yoda were pushing Luke to end the Sith by eliminating Sidious and Vader - Luke could not kill his father and redeemed him.

    This ultimately shows that the Republic era of the Jedi were indeed flawed and that love and attachments are a good thing. It also showed Luke's love of family and friendship where he constantly put his own life on the line (saving Leia in the Death Star in ANH, confronting Vader to save his friends on Bespin in TESB, and distracting the eyes of the EMpire away from the Endor Shield Generator and Redeeming his father in ROTJ).

    Now we have Luke in TLJ who decides the best course of action is to murder his own nephew, and ultimately leaving everyone he has ever cared about to die, while he secludes himself away from stopping the rise of the darkside that has already risen???

    As for Obi Wan and Yoda being hermits - it would have been nice to see Luke do something different. Everyone says TLJ was refreshing and different - but having another hermit Jedi master was just too cliché - especially as this went against everything Luke stood for.

    As for Order 66 - although not called that, Obi Wan clearly talks about Vader and the Empire hunting down and destroying the Jedi Knights. Yoda and Obi Wan going into hiding knew that Luke and/or Leia were the only beings powerful enough, once trained in the force, to overcome the Sith. The secluded themselves to pass on their knowledge and train them under the radar - Leia never took to training, which makes the whole Leia Poppins thing more ridiculous than if she was a fully trained Jedi (it still was ridiculous).

    Yoda or Obi wan was not in a position to establish a new Jedi Temple or Academy to train Jedi - risking the attention of the Empire. Luke was only able to do so once the Empire had been defeated.

    As for the time frame - have you ever read Orwell's 1984? This topic has come up again and again on these forums. The Empire controlled the galaxy, they controlled the people, they controlled information. The Jedi were slandered (re: attempts on Palpatine's life and against the Republic, hence the birth of the Empre).

    Palpatine all but destroyed almost any trace of the Jedi and could make up the galactic "News" and archived history as he saw fit. If you haven't read 1984, then please do, it would explain a lot about this issue.
  • Boo
    3430 posts Member
    DatBoi wrote: »
    DatBoi wrote: »
    Why is the marvel universe so good and star wars so bad. Disney pull your finger out.

    Because there’s enough diversity in the MCU characters to where you can make three movies a year and (most) people won’t feel fatigued.

    I could watch a new star wars film every week if they were written and directed properly.

    I’ve always held Star Wars to a higher standard than typical blockbusters like Marvel films. Because of that, I want to savor them and look forward to them. If there’s a new SW film, I want it to feel special and like an event. This applies especially to the “saga” films that I feel should have several years in between. After every trilogy, there should be at least a decade.

    I don’t completely hate the idea of standalone films, but they need to have new (likable) characters, new locations, and be completely seperate from the familiar stories. That means no more movies set during the OT. I’m sick of stormtroopers, x-wings, tie fighters, and all the references to better films made 40 years ago. Give us something new. Take some risks.

    As much as people say the ST is taking risks - we still have stormtroopers, x-wings, tie fighters and the resistance are now renaming themselves as rebels. Not to mention we have TFA which is a carbon copy of ANH and another hermit jedi in TLJ - these movies aren't fresh, anything new they actually do is generally terrible, lore breaking or diminishing loved characters.

    The ST had a good chance at giving us fresh villains, fresh tenchanology and vehicles - and they failed.

    I loved Rogue One - yes it was set in the time frame of the OT so you are going to have the same technology seen in the OT. If you made a movie set in the 1960s - you are going to see 1960s cars etc. Rogue One was the first Star Wars period drama, lol.

    Rogue one actually did try to give us some new things - like the U-WIng and Death Troopers etc. without breaking the mold of OT of which it was trapped in, being set during that time frame.

    As for Solo - no one wanted that movie to be made in the first place. I haven't seen it, so I can't say it wasn't enjoyable, but it was clear that from the fanbase no one cared to have a Solo backstory movie - especially right after the eliminated his character in the current ST.
  • DatBoi
    3572 posts Member
    edited August 2018
    Boo wrote: »
    DatBoi wrote: »
    DatBoi wrote: »
    Why is the marvel universe so good and star wars so bad. Disney pull your finger out.

    Because there’s enough diversity in the MCU characters to where you can make three movies a year and (most) people won’t feel fatigued.

    I could watch a new star wars film every week if they were written and directed properly.

    I’ve always held Star Wars to a higher standard than typical blockbusters like Marvel films. Because of that, I want to savor them and look forward to them. If there’s a new SW film, I want it to feel special and like an event. This applies especially to the “saga” films that I feel should have several years in between. After every trilogy, there should be at least a decade.

    I don’t completely hate the idea of standalone films, but they need to have new (likable) characters, new locations, and be completely seperate from the familiar stories. That means no more movies set during the OT. I’m sick of stormtroopers, x-wings, tie fighters, and all the references to better films made 40 years ago. Give us something new. Take some risks.

    As much as people say the ST is taking risks - we still have stormtroopers, x-wings, tie fighters and the resistance are now renaming themselves as rebels. Not to mention we have TFA which is a carbon copy of ANH and another hermit jedi in TLJ - these movies aren't fresh, anything new they actually do is generally terrible, lore breaking or diminishing loved characters.

    The ST had a good chance at giving us fresh villains, fresh tenchanology and vehicles - and they failed.

    I loved Rogue One - yes it was set in the time frame of the OT so you are going to have the same technology seen in the OT. If you made a movie set in the 1960s - you are going to see 1960s cars etc. Rogue One was the first Star Wars period drama, lol.

    Rogue one actually did try to give us some new things - like the U-WIng and Death Troopers etc. without breaking the mold of OT of which it was trapped in, being set during that time frame.

    As for Solo - no one wanted that movie to be made in the first place. I haven't seen it, so I can't say it wasn't enjoyable, but it was clear that from the fanbase no one cared to have a Solo backstory movie - especially right after the eliminated his character in the current ST.

    TFA is the worst offender in this subject, but it gets a pass from me because it was the first sw film in over 30 years that wasn’t complete garbage. Also, despite being a remake of ANH and having identical imagery, my enjoyment didn’t rely on the nostalgia factor. Unlike Rogue One, the best parts of it for me were the aspects that were new.

    But after TFA, I really expect more from Lucasfilm. Rogue One did not take any risks. It was a bland, typical action movie whose entertainment value relied solely on all the familiar imagery. Having one new spaceship or another kind of stormtrooper isn’t expanding the universe , let alone a risk. Everything about it that was “new” was completely devoid of any personality, color, or fun. The only risk it took was making Star Wars miserable and removing any excitement and sense of adventure.

    The only sw film that’s taken any risks in the last couple years (for better or for worse) is TLJ. I’m not making a statement on whether the risks paid off or were good (lord knows we’ve covered that), but they were risks nonetheless.

    When I say “something new”, I mean no more x-wings, no more stormtroopers, no more desert planets, no more empire, and no more rebels. I want a whole other corner of the galaxy that is so foreign to what we know that even the definitions of Jedi and Sith are blurred. Maybe nobody even has lightsabers and they just use the force in creative ways.

    Edit: Most of Solo is atrocious, especially if you can’t view it without the context of Ford’s performance and the OT. But by the end, there was enough that I liked that I would recommend eventually seeing it. In terms of the plotting, I actually found it to be the most creative amongst the new films. For example, the climax isn’t some bombastic set piece with constant explosions. It’s literally a bunch of scoundrels in an office with nothing but their wits to save them and they can’t trust anyone but themselves.
  • Boo
    3430 posts Member
    edited August 2018
    DatBoi wrote: »
    Boo wrote: »
    DatBoi wrote: »
    DatBoi wrote: »
    Why is the marvel universe so good and star wars so bad. Disney pull your finger out.

    Because there’s enough diversity in the MCU characters to where you can make three movies a year and (most) people won’t feel fatigued.

    I could watch a new star wars film every week if they were written and directed properly.

    I’ve always held Star Wars to a higher standard than typical blockbusters like Marvel films. Because of that, I want to savor them and look forward to them. If there’s a new SW film, I want it to feel special and like an event. This applies especially to the “saga” films that I feel should have several years in between. After every trilogy, there should be at least a decade.

    I don’t completely hate the idea of standalone films, but they need to have new (likable) characters, new locations, and be completely seperate from the familiar stories. That means no more movies set during the OT. I’m sick of stormtroopers, x-wings, tie fighters, and all the references to better films made 40 years ago. Give us something new. Take some risks.

    As much as people say the ST is taking risks - we still have stormtroopers, x-wings, tie fighters and the resistance are now renaming themselves as rebels. Not to mention we have TFA which is a carbon copy of ANH and another hermit jedi in TLJ - these movies aren't fresh, anything new they actually do is generally terrible, lore breaking or diminishing loved characters.

    The ST had a good chance at giving us fresh villains, fresh tenchanology and vehicles - and they failed.

    I loved Rogue One - yes it was set in the time frame of the OT so you are going to have the same technology seen in the OT. If you made a movie set in the 1960s - you are going to see 1960s cars etc. Rogue One was the first Star Wars period drama, lol.

    Rogue one actually did try to give us some new things - like the U-WIng and Death Troopers etc. without breaking the mold of OT of which it was trapped in, being set during that time frame.

    As for Solo - no one wanted that movie to be made in the first place. I haven't seen it, so I can't say it wasn't enjoyable, but it was clear that from the fanbase no one cared to have a Solo backstory movie - especially right after the eliminated his character in the current ST.

    TFA is the worst offender in this subject, but it gets a pass from me because it was the first sw film in over 30 years that wasn’t complete garbage. Also, despite being a remake of ANH and having identical imagery, my enjoyment didn’t rely on the nostalgia factor. Unlike Rogue One, the best parts of it for me were the aspects that were new.

    But after TFA, I really expect more from Lucasfilm. Rogue One did not take any risks. It was a bland, typical action movie whose entertainment value relied solely on all the familiar imagery. Having one new spaceship or another kind of stormtrooper isn’t expanding the universe , let alone a risk. Everything about it that was “new” was completely devoid of any personality, color, or fun. The only risk it took was making Star Wars miserable and removing any excitement and sense of adventure.

    The only sw film that’s taken any risks in the last couple years (for better or for worse) is TLJ. I’m not making a statement on whether the risks paid off or were good (lord knows we’ve covered that), but they were risks nonetheless.

    When I say “something new”, I mean no more x-wings, no more stormtroopers, no more desert planets, no more empire, and no more rebels. I want a whole other corner of the galaxy that is so foreign to what we know that even the definitions of Jedi and Sith are blurred. Maybe nobody even has lightsabers and they just use the force in creative ways.

    Edit: Most of Solo is atrocious, especially if you can’t view it without the context of Ford’s performance and the OT. But by the end, there was enough that I liked that I would recommend eventually seeing it. In terms of the plotting, I actually found it to be the most creative amongst the new films. For example, the climax isn’t some bombastic set piece with constant explosions. It’s literally a bunch of scoundrels in an office with nothing but their wits to save them and they can’t trust anyone but themselves.

    I appreciate you have your own opinions regarding Rogue One - but being a star wars story and not a saga, I felt it could have done anything there - they chose to do a movie explaining the weakness aspect of the Death Star (that was an issue for many fans) I thought they covered that nicely and expanded that there were more heroes and sacrifices made in regard to the Rebellion - other than the main characters of the OT saga movies.

    As a viewer, you didn't need to get too invested with the characters of Rogue One - only their mission, which I thought was a fun story added within the star wars universe. The only lightsaber was Vader's scene at the end, which sent shivers down the backs of the viewer - because we know who he is. But we have rarely seen that "Dark" side of Vader before - most of the OT he is fighting Luke, who he is not trying to kill anyway and is kinda holding back.

    But - you took something different out of it - at least it wasn't lore breaking or character damaging in any way.

    I don't think TFA should get a "Pass" I mean TPM was the first star wars movie in almost 20 years and didn't copy any story we had seen before - it also introduced new characters, vehicles and technology where TFA did not - apart from poorly written characters - in my opinion, but also not saying the PT had awesome written characters either - just curious why TFA gets a "pass" and TPM doesn't.

    Yes TLJ took risks, I'll agree to that. But something fresh isn't always good. A steaming pile of fresh dog poo, is still dog poo. But as you say we don't need to go over whether the risks TLJ took paid off or not.

    At the end of the day lightside vs. darkside and the clash of lightsabers is really the core of what star wars is about - people want to see these things in a star wars movie - ships and stuff can change, but this really is the core of a star wars movie.

    The stand alone star wars movies, such as Rogue One or Solo seem to be the exception - which are more like star wars meets mission impossible or Ocean's 11 etc. which can be a fun take on the galaxy far far away, but as for the saga movies - lightside vs. darkside and the clash of lightsabers is where its at. Without I think would be another painful direction the franchise could ultimately take.

    Edit/Addendum:

    As for star wars in a different corner of the galaxy foreign to star wars, I would look to Mass Effect and see how they played out for Andromeda - it was so far devoid of what was familiar and good about the original mass effect trilogy - it was a flop.
  • DatBoi
    3572 posts Member
    I do think the prequels deserve credit for expanding the universe, but the bottom line is that I get absolutely zero entertainment value out of them. TFA on the other hand was fun, exciting, and had likable characters. In 2015, I wasn’t overcome with fatigue like I am now so I didn’t mind some pandering as long as the film was entertaining.

    But TFA did its job of reminding people what the franchise was built on so now Lucasfilm needs to step up their game.
  • I just preordered Solo. Did I like it that much to preorder? probably not. But I did like it and I want to complete my star wars movie collection.
  • Boo
    3430 posts Member
    I just preordered Solo. Did I like it that much to preorder? probably not. But I did like it and I want to complete my star wars movie collection.

    I am sure there will be plenty of copies in the stores - so don't worry.
  • Boo
    3430 posts Member
    DatBoi wrote: »
    I do think the prequels deserve credit for expanding the universe, but the bottom line is that I get absolutely zero entertainment value out of them. TFA on the other hand was fun, exciting, and had likable characters. In 2015, I wasn’t overcome with fatigue like I am now so I didn’t mind some pandering as long as the film was entertaining.

    But TFA did its job of reminding people what the franchise was built on so now Lucasfilm needs to step up their game.

    This is exactly why people are angry about TLJ - I'll agree TFA was an entertaining star wars movie - the first movie in 10 years since ROTS, it did remind people what was good about star wars - but then TLJ came along and has tried killing everything people enjoy about star wars.

    The contrast alone between TFA and TLJ is black and white in what it was trying to do with the franchise.

    This makes it even more clear that Lucasfilm has no clue what they are going with a $4B+ franchise. If I were Bob Iger - Kennedy would be gone and Johnson, never to work again.
  • DatBoi
    3572 posts Member
    Boo wrote: »
    DatBoi wrote: »
    Boo wrote: »
    DatBoi wrote: »
    DatBoi wrote: »
    Why is the marvel universe so good and star wars so bad. Disney pull your finger out.

    Because there’s enough diversity in the MCU characters to where you can make three movies a year and (most) people won’t feel fatigued.

    I could watch a new star wars film every week if they were written and directed properly.

    I’ve always held Star Wars to a higher standard than typical blockbusters like Marvel films. Because of that, I want to savor them and look forward to them. If there’s a new SW film, I want it to feel special and like an event. This applies especially to the “saga” films that I feel should have several years in between. After every trilogy, there should be at least a decade.

    I don’t completely hate the idea of standalone films, but they need to have new (likable) characters, new locations, and be completely seperate from the familiar stories. That means no more movies set during the OT. I’m sick of stormtroopers, x-wings, tie fighters, and all the references to better films made 40 years ago. Give us something new. Take some risks.

    As much as people say the ST is taking risks - we still have stormtroopers, x-wings, tie fighters and the resistance are now renaming themselves as rebels. Not to mention we have TFA which is a carbon copy of ANH and another hermit jedi in TLJ - these movies aren't fresh, anything new they actually do is generally terrible, lore breaking or diminishing loved characters.

    The ST had a good chance at giving us fresh villains, fresh tenchanology and vehicles - and they failed.

    I loved Rogue One - yes it was set in the time frame of the OT so you are going to have the same technology seen in the OT. If you made a movie set in the 1960s - you are going to see 1960s cars etc. Rogue One was the first Star Wars period drama, lol.

    Rogue one actually did try to give us some new things - like the U-WIng and Death Troopers etc. without breaking the mold of OT of which it was trapped in, being set during that time frame.

    As for Solo - no one wanted that movie to be made in the first place. I haven't seen it, so I can't say it wasn't enjoyable, but it was clear that from the fanbase no one cared to have a Solo backstory movie - especially right after the eliminated his character in the current ST.

    TFA is the worst offender in this subject, but it gets a pass from me because it was the first sw film in over 30 years that wasn’t complete garbage. Also, despite being a remake of ANH and having identical imagery, my enjoyment didn’t rely on the nostalgia factor. Unlike Rogue One, the best parts of it for me were the aspects that were new.

    But after TFA, I really expect more from Lucasfilm. Rogue One did not take any risks. It was a bland, typical action movie whose entertainment value relied solely on all the familiar imagery. Having one new spaceship or another kind of stormtrooper isn’t expanding the universe , let alone a risk. Everything about it that was “new” was completely devoid of any personality, color, or fun. The only risk it took was making Star Wars miserable and removing any excitement and sense of adventure.

    The only sw film that’s taken any risks in the last couple years (for better or for worse) is TLJ. I’m not making a statement on whether the risks paid off or were good (lord knows we’ve covered that), but they were risks nonetheless.

    When I say “something new”, I mean no more x-wings, no more stormtroopers, no more desert planets, no more empire, and no more rebels. I want a whole other corner of the galaxy that is so foreign to what we know that even the definitions of Jedi and Sith are blurred. Maybe nobody even has lightsabers and they just use the force in creative ways.

    Edit: Most of Solo is atrocious, especially if you can’t view it without the context of Ford’s performance and the OT. But by the end, there was enough that I liked that I would recommend eventually seeing it. In terms of the plotting, I actually found it to be the most creative amongst the new films. For example, the climax isn’t some bombastic set piece with constant explosions. It’s literally a bunch of scoundrels in an office with nothing but their wits to save them and they can’t trust anyone but themselves.


    Edit/Addendum:

    As for star wars in a different corner of the galaxy foreign to star wars, I would look to Mass Effect and see how they played out for Andromeda - it was so far devoid of what was familiar and good about the original mass effect trilogy - it was a flop.

    I haven’t played it, but my understanding was that andromeda flopped because it was crippled with glitches, had a boring story, empty open worlds, horrendous voice acting, and terrible characters.

    I think SW audiences would be surprisingly receptive to a fresh interpretation and perspective of the galaxy. It’s become more than the imagery. Just look at the popularity of KOTOR. People love those games because of the characters, the sense of adventure and discovery, the questions of morality, and the battle between good and evil because thats what star wars is. Not the stuff or the names or the references.
  • Rogue One > TFA, TLJ
    Leader: Grey Area 51 - My Squads: https://swgoh.gg/p/716522998/
  • Boo wrote: »
    Leia never took to training, which makes the whole Leia Poppins thing more ridiculous than if she was a fully trained Jedi (it still was ridiculous).

    Who knows what happened in the period between ROTJ and TFA? You speak of things in absolutes that may not be absolute, which is why it makes sense you cannot stand TLJ - I mean, first they took your childhood hero and turned him into an actual human being with depth and faults. Then they offered up a nuanced view of all of the great black and white issues in the original fairy tale.
    Palpatine all but destroyed almost any trace of the Jedi and could make up the galactic "News" and archived history as he saw fit. If you haven't read 1984, then please do, it would explain a lot about this issue.

    So, you're using one piece of fiction to justify an absurd plot device from another piece of fiction....sure, why not?

    I'm sorry for you that TLJ has caused such an intense personal reaction. With that perspective, I consider myself lucky to be able to enjoy these movies without the same level of investment that many people have in them. I hope the final installment of the Skywalker saga meets your expectations and redeems the franchise in your eyes. May the force be with you.

  • EU, Legends tells another story. But they turned their back on it. Sad there were stories there that could run for decades.
    Leader: Grey Area 51 - My Squads: https://swgoh.gg/p/716522998/
  • EU, Legends tells another story. But they turned their back on it. Sad there were stories there that could run for decades.

    Yeah. But I do think they did need to go out far enough that they weren't dependent on the original cast. So most of the eu couldn't have been made into the movies. But had they gone out beyond the Fate of the Jedi books they could have continued the EU without scrapping it. That series ended with a new generation ready to take up the mantle and dozens of sith still on the lose, including a strong female antagonist. They also had a strong female hero in Jaina Solo. The Jedi were reestablished so it wouldn't seem like RTJ was for nothing. They could have come up with a new threat that wasn't just another Empire and went with it. Most fans would be ok with Jaina already being a bad **** since there are dozens of books already showing that she had been trained from a young age and was already a jedi master. Same with Vestara Kai as a villain. I remember when I finished that series. I was actually looking forward to what would come next. Not so much now.
  • DuneSeaFarmer
    2930 posts Member
    edited August 2018
    EU, Legends tells another story. But they turned their back on it. Sad there were stories there that could run for decades.

    Yeah. But I do think they did need to go out far enough that they weren't dependent on the original cast. So most of the eu couldn't have been made into the movies. But had they gone out beyond the Fate of the Jedi books they could have continued the EU without scrapping it. That series ended with a new generation ready to take up the mantle and dozens of sith still on the lose, including a strong female antagonist. They also had a strong female hero in Jaina Solo. The Jedi were reestablished so it wouldn't seem like RTJ was for nothing. They could have come up with a new threat that wasn't just another Empire and went with it. Most fans would be ok with Jaina already being a bad **** since there are dozens of books already showing that she had been trained from a young age and was already a jedi master. Same with Vestara Kai as a villain. I remember when I finished that series. I was actually looking forward to what would come next. Not so much now.


    Question, I wonder if other studios can make the EU stories into movies? And what if they had used Thrawn to make some "Saga" movies, instead of Solo?

    Leader: Grey Area 51 - My Squads: https://swgoh.gg/p/716522998/
  • DatBoi
    3572 posts Member
    EU, Legends tells another story. But they turned their back on it. Sad there were stories there that could run for decades.

    Yeah. But I do think they did need to go out far enough that they weren't dependent on the original cast. So most of the eu couldn't have been made into the movies. But had they gone out beyond the Fate of the Jedi books they could have continued the EU without scrapping it. That series ended with a new generation ready to take up the mantle and dozens of sith still on the lose, including a strong female antagonist. They also had a strong female hero in Jaina Solo. The Jedi were reestablished so it wouldn't seem like RTJ was for nothing. They could have come up with a new threat that wasn't just another Empire and went with it. Most fans would be ok with Jaina already being a bad **** since there are dozens of books already showing that she had been trained from a young age and was already a jedi master. Same with Vestara Kai as a villain. I remember when I finished that series. I was actually looking forward to what would come next. Not so much now.


    Question, I wonder if other studios can make the EU stories into movies? And what if they had used Thrawn to make some "Saga" movies, instead of Solo?

    They probably could, but why would you want to see something you already know? I like the idea of appropriating EU characters and maybe take some inspiration from the stories, but they shouldn’t make straightforward adaptations. That’s boring
  • DuneSeaFarmer
    2930 posts Member
    edited August 2018
    DatBoi wrote: »
    EU, Legends tells another story. But they turned their back on it. Sad there were stories there that could run for decades.

    Yeah. But I do think they did need to go out far enough that they weren't dependent on the original cast. So most of the eu couldn't have been made into the movies. But had they gone out beyond the Fate of the Jedi books they could have continued the EU without scrapping it. That series ended with a new generation ready to take up the mantle and dozens of sith still on the lose, including a strong female antagonist. They also had a strong female hero in Jaina Solo. The Jedi were reestablished so it wouldn't seem like RTJ was for nothing. They could have come up with a new threat that wasn't just another Empire and went with it. Most fans would be ok with Jaina already being a bad **** since there are dozens of books already showing that she had been trained from a young age and was already a jedi master. Same with Vestara Kai as a villain. I remember when I finished that series. I was actually looking forward to what would come next. Not so much now.


    Question, I wonder if other studios can make the EU stories into movies? And what if they had used Thrawn to make some "Saga" movies, instead of Solo?

    They probably could, but why would you want to see something you already know? I like the idea of appropriating EU characters and maybe take some inspiration from the stories, but they shouldn’t make straightforward adaptations. That’s boring

    Agreed, no rehash. But a trilogy of Luke meeting and marrying Mara Jade would be a great start. Then one based on Thrawn starting with the new book where he meets Anakin. Let Sebastian Stan play Luke after ROTJ.

    I'd be more excited to see another season or two of Rebels picking up a few years later etc.. Then the SW9 movie.
    Post edited by DuneSeaFarmer on
    Leader: Grey Area 51 - My Squads: https://swgoh.gg/p/716522998/
  • DatBoi wrote: »
    EU, Legends tells another story. But they turned their back on it. Sad there were stories there that could run for decades.

    Yeah. But I do think they did need to go out far enough that they weren't dependent on the original cast. So most of the eu couldn't have been made into the movies. But had they gone out beyond the Fate of the Jedi books they could have continued the EU without scrapping it. That series ended with a new generation ready to take up the mantle and dozens of sith still on the lose, including a strong female antagonist. They also had a strong female hero in Jaina Solo. The Jedi were reestablished so it wouldn't seem like RTJ was for nothing. They could have come up with a new threat that wasn't just another Empire and went with it. Most fans would be ok with Jaina already being a bad **** since there are dozens of books already showing that she had been trained from a young age and was already a jedi master. Same with Vestara Kai as a villain. I remember when I finished that series. I was actually looking forward to what would come next. Not so much now.


    Question, I wonder if other studios can make the EU stories into movies? And what if they had used Thrawn to make some "Saga" movies, instead of Solo?

    They probably could, but why would you want to see something you already know? I like the idea of appropriating EU characters and maybe take some inspiration from the stories, but they shouldn’t make straightforward adaptations. That’s boring

    Agreed, no rehash. But a trilogy of Luke meeting and marrying Mara Jade would be a great start. Then one based on Thrawn starting with the new book where he meets Anakin. Let Sebastian Stan play Luke after ROTJ.

    I'd be more excited to see another season or two of Rebels picking up a few years later etc.. Then the SW9 movie.

    Pretty sure that ship has sailed. I'd be ok if they'd just allow new legends books to be made to continue the EU story. Especially since the new cannon after ROTJ isn't very good. Or scrap cannon, and start over like the sequel trilogy never existed.
  • DuneSeaFarmer
    2930 posts Member
    edited August 2018
    Something I have started doing each night before bed, to wind down is watch youtube.com I stumbled onto The Hollywood Reporters "Round Tables" discussions. Some are all actors, or directors, writers etc.. And it has helped me understand the process more each time I watch one. Now I am not saying I agree with all their choices, or reasons, but if nothing else the inflection and emotions they bring out in themselves discussing said choices, is really telling in that they are important to them. Ridley Scott (Aliens, Blade Runner) said he makes movies his way. No regrets. Others have said they try to work from the fans viewpoint and what would make them happy. It's really interesting. another great series was James Camerons History of SciFi. I highly recommend them.
    Post edited by DuneSeaFarmer on
    Leader: Grey Area 51 - My Squads: https://swgoh.gg/p/716522998/
  • Those movies are lame, STAR WARS NEED TO BE AVENGED, Please, dont watch episode iX
  • DatBoi
    3572 posts Member
    Something I have started doing each night before bed, to wind down is watch youtube.com I stumbled onto The Hollywood Reporters "Round Tables" discussions. Some are all actors, or directors, writers etc.. And it has helped me understand the process more each time I watch one. Now I am not saying I agree with all their choices, or reasons, but if nothing else the inflection and emotions they bring out in themselves discussing said choices, is really telling in that they are important to them. Ridley Scott (Aliens, Blade Runner) said he makes movies his way. No regrets. Others have said they try to work from the fans viewpoint and what would make them happy. It's really interesting. another great series was James Camerons History of SciFi. I highly recommend them.

    I’ve seen a couple of them and they’re usually pretty good. I haven’t watched more because the moderators are usually atrocious. My favorite one is the one for cinematographers. It has Roger Deakins, Robert Elswit, Rachel Morrison, and some other people I don’t remember.
  • DatBoi wrote: »
    Something I have started doing each night before bed, to wind down is watch youtube.com I stumbled onto The Hollywood Reporters "Round Tables" discussions. Some are all actors, or directors, writers etc.. And it has helped me understand the process more each time I watch one. Now I am not saying I agree with all their choices, or reasons, but if nothing else the inflection and emotions they bring out in themselves discussing said choices, is really telling in that they are important to them. Ridley Scott (Aliens, Blade Runner) said he makes movies his way. No regrets. Others have said they try to work from the fans viewpoint and what would make them happy. It's really interesting. another great series was James Camerons History of SciFi. I highly recommend them.

    I’ve seen a couple of them and they’re usually pretty good. I haven’t watched more because the moderators are usually atrocious. My favorite one is the one for cinematographers. It has Roger Deakins, Robert Elswit, Rachel Morrison, and some other people I don’t remember.

    They can be very informative. I tend to like those with the Exec of THR and the ones with Lacey Rose TV Scribe.
    Leader: Grey Area 51 - My Squads: https://swgoh.gg/p/716522998/
  • Boo
    3430 posts Member
    Boo wrote: »
    Leia never took to training, which makes the whole Leia Poppins thing more ridiculous than if she was a fully trained Jedi (it still was ridiculous).

    Who knows what happened in the period between ROTJ and TFA? You speak of things in absolutes that may not be absolute, which is why it makes sense you cannot stand TLJ - I mean, first they took your childhood hero and turned him into an actual human being with depth and faults. Then they offered up a nuanced view of all of the great black and white issues in the original fairy tale.
    Palpatine all but destroyed almost any trace of the Jedi and could make up the galactic "News" and archived history as he saw fit. If you haven't read 1984, then please do, it would explain a lot about this issue.

    So, you're using one piece of fiction to justify an absurd plot device from another piece of fiction....sure, why not?

    I'm sorry for you that TLJ has caused such an intense personal reaction. With that perspective, I consider myself lucky to be able to enjoy these movies without the same level of investment that many people have in them. I hope the final installment of the Skywalker saga meets your expectations and redeems the franchise in your eyes. May the force be with you.

    Luke already had flaws (the person with no flaws in this picture is Mary Sue Rey).

    No, they turned Luke into nothing that resembled the character we saw from him in ROTJ. For fans waiting 30years to see where Luke has come, not to mention the many EU stories that depicted Luke as a competent and powerful Jedi Master - we get a homeless, suicidal, grumpy old man, who cares nothing for the galaxy or even friends and family and instead spends his day milking aliens for breakfast - I'm sorry, but I am not alone in thinking that what Johnson did to Luke was nothing short of a slap in the face to fans that grew up with the OT and made star wars the successful franchise it is - well at least until the ST trilogy came along, it's kinda dying a slow death right now and needs a kiss of life, so a lot of fans with emotional investment in the franchise got burned by this installment.

    And yes I am quoting 1984 because much of what that book represents has turned true in real life. Such as surveillance, government control etc - but most importantly the government control over the populace mainly in regard to information, news and history - which we see in the real world, such as reports of fake news and many disturbing stories that do not get mentioned in the main stream media - so brush it off to pure fiction and do not bother expanding your mind with reading one of the best books ever written. I guess documentaries and Netflix is more your thing.

    You think the Emperor wouldn't continue to manipulate the galaxy with the ability to controlling information? Most powerful leaders do, lol.

    This was actually true in the mobile game Star Wars Uprising, where the death of the Emperor was covered up by the Empire and the reports of his death were lies, resulting in death - they did this to maintain control as much as they could after ROTJ - this game is considered Cannon (Note this game has now been cancelled, but ran for a few years).

  • Boo wrote: »
    This was actually true in the mobile game Star Wars Uprising, where the death of the Emperor was covered up by the Empire and the reports of his death were lies, resulting in death - they did this to maintain control as much as they could after ROTJ - this game is considered Cannon (Note this game has now been cancelled, but ran for a few years).

    I liked SWU, it took a wrong turn with the armor revamp, and from there it seemed to spiral..
    Leader: Grey Area 51 - My Squads: https://swgoh.gg/p/716522998/
  • Boo
    3430 posts Member
    Boo wrote: »
    This was actually true in the mobile game Star Wars Uprising, where the death of the Emperor was covered up by the Empire and the reports of his death were lies, resulting in death - they did this to maintain control as much as they could after ROTJ - this game is considered Cannon (Note this game has now been cancelled, but ran for a few years).

    I liked SWU, it took a wrong turn with the armor revamp, and from there it seemed to spiral..

    I thought it was too demanding re: game time requirements and then SWGOH came along, so I promptly switched games I was playing, lol.
  • Boo wrote: »
    Boo wrote: »
    This was actually true in the mobile game Star Wars Uprising, where the death of the Emperor was covered up by the Empire and the reports of his death were lies, resulting in death - they did this to maintain control as much as they could after ROTJ - this game is considered Cannon (Note this game has now been cancelled, but ran for a few years).

    I liked SWU, it took a wrong turn with the armor revamp, and from there it seemed to spiral..

    I thought it was too demanding re: game time requirements and then SWGOH came along, so I promptly switched games I was playing, lol.

    To be fair, SWGOH used to boast about players spending hours and hours in game, then realized it was not because we loved it, but because it was so clunky and unbalanced it took forever to get things done. Happily they realized (a year or so later) and made changes lol
    Leader: Grey Area 51 - My Squads: https://swgoh.gg/p/716522998/
  • Boo
    3430 posts Member
    Boo wrote: »
    Boo wrote: »
    This was actually true in the mobile game Star Wars Uprising, where the death of the Emperor was covered up by the Empire and the reports of his death were lies, resulting in death - they did this to maintain control as much as they could after ROTJ - this game is considered Cannon (Note this game has now been cancelled, but ran for a few years).

    I liked SWU, it took a wrong turn with the armor revamp, and from there it seemed to spiral..

    I thought it was too demanding re: game time requirements and then SWGOH came along, so I promptly switched games I was playing, lol.

    To be fair, SWGOH used to boast about players spending hours and hours in game, then realized it was not because we loved it, but because it was so clunky and unbalanced it took forever to get things done. Happily they realized (a year or so later) and made changes lol

    They can always do better - and they are. Love this game!
Sign In or Register to comment.