Well, except for Zahn's and to a large degree, Stackpole's stuff. The rest of it... yeah, pretty much agree.
Spoilers All Things STAR WARS - News, Speculation & Spoilers Thread
- Thread starter Reverend
- Start date
Well, except for Zahn's and to a large degree, Stackpole's stuff. The rest of it... yeah, pretty much agree.
To be clear; I was only referring to the old 'Dawn of the Jedi' comics specifically, not the EU as a whole. That's a whole other slightly longer and more nuanced conversation.
That may end up being the case, but I think for now they've learnt their lesson about overcommitting and are taking it slow to see how things play out before making any grand plans about multi-part movie arcs.
Hardly controversial, but I'm going to mildly disagree with it nonetheless. Just looking at it from a mytho-narrative dramatic structure POV, there is a valid place there for a third trilogy to serve as a denouement for the whole saga. Of course that requires thoughtful planning, and a coherent execution. Alas!
Last edited:
Of course there's a place. I just find it a completely unnecessary, and less than worthwhile aspiration to try and go there. From a mythological standpoint I found the ST satisfactory enough, which perhaps is damning with faint praise. Nevertheless, for me the OT is the main story and the rest of people playing in the sandbox. None of it is like the OT and I don't want it to be. I have the OT-that's sufficient for me.
Mileage will vary.
Anjelica Houston and Daveed Diggs! Hell yeah!
And like I said in the Celebration thread, AARDMAN!!!!
I agree with this. Time to move on from the Skywalker Saga. It still technically is because of Rey but I'm still mad they didn't stick to Rey as a nobody, which I far preferred.
Apropos of nothing; I decided to clean up the new timeline graphic at a size when you can actually make it out a little better. (Could've redrawn it, but that can miss smaller details at this resolution.)
I've always found "necessity" to be a strange criteria to demand of storytelling, at least when it comes to the telling of new stories. It's irrelevant. A non-sequitur. All a story needs to exist is whether it has value in and of itself. It's not a zero-sum game.
Though if we must then consider this: any study of classical mythic storytelling will quickly reveal that most epic heroes' journeys end on a bittersweet note. From Gilgamesh, to Ulysses, to Beowulf, to Frodo Baggins. After the hero achieves their great victory, life goes on; sometimes mistakes return to haunt them, sometimes the cost of that great victory comes due, sometimes tragedy strikes.
I think it's perfectly justified to end the Skywalker saga in a similar fashion by showing Luke as a person plagued by regrets and guilt despite all that he achieved. That rebuilding what was broken was in the long run far more arduous and difficult than destroying the tyranny that broke it to begin with, and in-turn, the effort broke him. That's powerful storytelling if done right, which brings me back to my previous summation: alas!
Well if you go by that logic; all the Star Wars movies after ANH were unnecessary. It told a complete story, the bad guys were defeated, there was a medal ceremony and everything where everyone cheered. The end! What more do you need?!
I've always found "necessity" to be a strange criteria to demand of storytelling, at least when it comes to the telling of new stories. It's irrelevant. A non-sequitur. All a story needs to exist is whether it has value in and of itself. It's not a zero-sum game.
Though if we must then consider this: any study of classical mythic storytelling will quickly reveal that most epic heroes' journeys end on a bittersweet note. From Gilgamesh, to Ulysses, to Beowulf, to Frodo Baggins. After the hero achieves their great victory, life goes on; sometimes mistakes return to haunt them, sometimes the cost of that great victory comes due, sometimes tragedy strikes.
I think it's perfectly justified to end the Skywalker saga in a similar fashion by showing Luke as a person plagued by regrets and guilt despite all that he achieved. That rebuilding what was broken was in the long run far more arduous and difficult than destroying the tyranny that broke it to begin with, and in-turn, the effort broke him. That's powerful storytelling if done right, which brings me back to my previous summation: alas!
Last edited:
100% agree. Alas, it was not to be!
Nothing, actually.
I agree and I think the ST, despite missteps, does that style very well. The rest of it is questionable in terms of satisfaction, but it was satisfactory enough for my purposes. Would I do it differently? Yup. Am I satisfied with what we got? Also, yes.
While Skywalker was a large part of episodes 1-6 and 7-9 (debatable). It's really only a tag that disney gave the franchise during the promotion of 'TROS' and after. I'm perfectly happy to get away from the idea that this was a Skywalker Saga and embrace the larger idea of Dark Vs. Light or whatever. Seeing the opening of a Star Wars Saga movie in the cinema is an exciting experience that should hang around a little longer.
I feel like 1-6 were once thought of as the Skywalker saga.
Lucas tried to spin it as such and the story of Anakin Skywalker.
I personally cannot see the PT and OT connected together as tightly as Lucas perhaps was attempting to do. To me it's always OT, PT, and ST, and not an overarching story. It's like reading "The Three Musketeers" and "The Man in the Iron Mask." They are connected but distinct.
I personally cannot see the PT and OT connected together as tightly as Lucas perhaps was attempting to do. To me it's always OT, PT, and ST, and not an overarching story. It's like reading "The Three Musketeers" and "The Man in the Iron Mask." They are connected but distinct.
Even before the prequels existed, before the "special editions" the original films were always -- first and foremost -- Vader's story.
As an antagonist. Which is fine but it doesn't take it to the level the PT does in my opinion. Never mind how incongruous the two feel.
Sort of a random through experiment. Thrawn is in a way the chess master here (if one doesn't consider Palpatine). So if one imagines what Thrawn is doing in the Empire as a game of chess, what are his pieces? Is he the King piece, or the player (if he is the piece does that make Palpatine the "player")? Who is his Queen piece? He used to have a literal Rukh piece, and he may get another rook, as one has two in chess (and he may have reset the game after Rebels). If one assumes the two new Dark Siders as Thrawn's two Knights, and perhaps Moff Gideon and the Magistrate as his Bishops? He's got lots of Pawns of course...the Empire always had pawns.
Thoughts?
Thoughts?
No idea.
I just know Hera is my queen.
I just know Hera is my queen.
Pellaeon
I really don't see Thrawn just playing chess. Playing half a dozen simultaneous games of chess and/or Go where the opponents don't realise it's actually stealth chess rules on the other hand, seems much more his speed.
As for who is a pawn, who is a rook etc; that would always depend on the specific scenario and circumstances, and would shift from engagement to engagement. I wouldn't even say that Thrawn considers himself the King. I think for him, the Chiss are the King and if anything, he's the Queen, and the Rebellion/New Republic are his pawns.
Perhaps a better question should be: who does he consider to be his primary opponent in this game? Extinction? Chaos in general? Enthropy? Palpatine?
As for who is a pawn, who is a rook etc; that would always depend on the specific scenario and circumstances, and would shift from engagement to engagement. I wouldn't even say that Thrawn considers himself the King. I think for him, the Chiss are the King and if anything, he's the Queen, and the Rebellion/New Republic are his pawns.
Perhaps a better question should be: who does he consider to be his primary opponent in this game? Extinction? Chaos in general? Enthropy? Palpatine?
Last edited:
If they play Thrawn like he was in the books and to some extent in Rebels, we'll see the moves but won't know what he's really planning until it's well underway and pretty much unstoppable unless you're Ezra Bridger or Luke Skywalker, or in the case of the upcoming show, Ahsoka.
It's changed over time. Whatever sells the movies/trilogy best is the tagline.
