They don't have to be important. but, they have to be good, and not ruin other stuff. Rebels is a terrible show that won't stay self contained and has to drag a bunch of the real SW stuff down with it.
Huh? My understanding was that you thought
Rebels was isolated and didn't affect anything else. Did I misunderstand that, or are you predicting that
Rebels will have a wider sphere of influence in the future?
Rebels doesn't change anything about TCW or the movie.
It does continue some plot threads from TCW and provide more background to the films. Whether we like said material or not is a different question. Also, who's to say what the future will hold? TCW influenced
Rogue One, so there is a prescient.
No, the adult stuff is the core of the universe outside of the movies. The movies come out once a year, the adult books get several releases a year that follow their own arena of the universe and fill stuff in. How they effect each other is, to me, the important stuff that builds the universe, even more then the movies. Not everything has to effect everything else, but when something important happens that does effect stuff, its in a general audience book.
Then why are the YA and "kid's" books given equal billing with the GA books in the press announcements? Why was the Journey to
Star Wars: The Force Awakens" program and the most TFA-relevant books predominantly YA/"kids" releases? If there is a distinction between the importance of the YA and GA book, the people actually writing, making, producing, and distributing the materials are ignoring it.
Also, there has been no prescience for the YA stuff being on a lower tier. Even under Legends it held a lot of weight. Cases in point, the
New Jedi Order books built heavily on the YA
Young Jedi Knights series, the
Boba Fett chapter books were accorded their place with the adult stuff in the original Clone Wars multimedia project, and multiple middle-school and YA books were included alongside "adult" stuff in the
Essential Reader's Companion with zero caveats.
I got that immediately just from my first viewing of the movie. It was really obvious that she wouldn't be able to tell who her family was if they were standing in front of her, and that she'd been on Jakku so long she basically didn't remember anything before it.
I actually missed that. Until I read that book, I assumed she remembered a few details about what happened, she just didn't want to talk about them (as we see in the movie, she becomes evasive or changes the subject when people pry about her personal life). What was the smoking gun?
Again, that stuff was either obvious or unimportant. Rey can fly a ship for the same reason a 10 year old Anakin was the best podracer pilot, a combo of natural skills and the force. Finn was obviously a good guy who never conformed to the brainwashing, and he eventually was ordered to do something he couldn't do, so he decided to leave.
I actually agree more or less. I think every question was answered in the movie at some point, however, considering the sheer number of people who complained about the plot holes, I'm guessing it was too subtle or something. However, the books provide more details and so enhance the viewing experience, and in a few cases, lend a lot of credibility to the movie's answers.
Finn/Rey's friendship was done fairly well in the movie..."
Very much agree. I was bringing it up as an example of something that the books enhance, not a missing detail. Sorry for the confusion.
...and Poe/Finn's friendship, while underdeveloped really didn't need more development.
I never actually brought that one up.
I either got all that stuff from the movie, or (in my opinion) it was not noteworthy and the same fluff I'd expect kids books to "add".
I don't know. Part of any tie-in is to engage in the "fluff" and the things that make the franchise's world bigger but would bog down the movie or can't be shown well in a visual medium. And there can be surprises as to what materials are of higher quaility. The TFA junior novelization does a better job of fleshing out the characters and adding information that adds development to them that the "general audience" one did. In fact, I've seen a lot of readers vote that the junior one is the superior novelization.
Well they say one thing, but do another. That's about as obvious a definition for "lying" as I know.
I'll be getting back to this.
I've seen enough clips of the Rebels character they are calling "Thrawn" to judge the character.
Clips don't give the full context of the character and the situation. While it's fair to say if you don't like what you see based on the clips, the only way to accurately judge the character would bee to watch the entire story. The clip removes a lot of important information.
I understand your opinion, I just disagree. I really don't like the show, but I also really dislike Dave Filoni, and the people working with him on the show. They are the reason the show is terrible, because they are literally the ones making it. That is enough reason to insult them, but then you have the idiots going and pretending like they care about characters, or making a good show, which the end result shows to be a lie.
At this point, its not just a bad show. It goes past that. Some bad shows might actually have decent people working on it. For an example from other cartoon creators, Bruce Timm and Paul Dini worked on several different terrible shows in the 80s, and that didn't make them bad. Paul Dini worked on stuff like Ewoks and He-Man before Batman: The Animated Series. Sometimes talented people work on bad projects.
But, Rebels obviously has no one like that. The only people working on Rebels who aren't directly contributing to it being terrible are the voice actors. They're just reading lines fed to them. Besides them, everyone else is fair game when it comes to insults as far as I'm concerned.
I don't quite agree. For example, Lucas had an "interest" in SW lore and building it, and he made the prequels, but I never got the sense that he wasn't putting in effort. I think he worked as hard as he could, but his ideas just didn't work and he made two terrible movies and one ok-ish movie. But, it never felt to me like he was being lazy or just not trying. He just wasn't the person to be making SW movies anymore.
Filoni is just garbage. He doesn't want to do anything worthwhile and almost seems to be actively insulting SW fans. I'm assuming he's just cashing his paycheck at this point. Or, maybe a making a really dumbed down cartoon for 5 year olds is what he always wanted TCW to be, but was never allowed to do it that way. Now, he can make the show he wants. Either way, Rebels is a show made by people who obviously don't care, are generally incompetent and seem to actively dislike the material they're working with. I hate it more then any SW thing ever made, and its a complete insult to the franchise. Its easily the stupidest, most poorly made non-preschooler show on mainstream television, and I'm including the current Marvel cartoons in that statement.
Okay, I have one major problem with your reasoning; your linchpin is something that's subjective. Your whole argument hinges on
Rebels being a bad show, which must mean that the people who make it are lying, awful people. If it's rooted in subjectivity, then there is no definitive answer. If so, how can a definitive conclusion be drawn from it? Your main example is that the creators lie by saying they want to do right by the fan and then make bad shows. But if it's a subjective opinion if the show is good or bad, how is that useful as conclusive evidence of the nature of the people making it?
I've seen the exact same show you have. I saw an excellent show with great characters (albeit with some growing pains), well-told story arcs, high-quality TV animation, and clearly made by people who love
Star Wars and their jobs on the show. This is easily the best
Star Wars has had in animation yet. I literally have no idea where you're coming from.
Because the show itself is not a reliable source of determining anything, the only place to go is by what the production team have said in interviews across the board. As far as I know, they have been consistent that they are fans and love
Star Wars, that they want to make the best show possible and work hard to do so. Whether or not they succeed, there is no reason to doubt their sincerity or their intentions, much less to attack them because they haven't done what you wanted them to do. Honestly, I'm disturbed by your need to smear the names of the people who made the show to justify your dislike of it. By any standards of human decency, that's not acceptable.
I absolutely disagree. The characters have almost nothing in common. Same general appearance and name, and the Rebels cliche is treated like he's a strategic genius (and by the shows standards he might be, especially with his stupid leaps in logic he gets from looking at paintings that magically turn out to be correct). But he's not Thrawn, not in any real way. Its just a standard "smart" kids villain cliche with a Thrawn paint job. I'm convinced no one even looked up his wookiepedia page when they wrote his appearances, much less read a single page of Zahn's books.
By your own admission, you've only seen clips of the episodes in question. They do not paint the full picture. Having seen the actual episodes, I can assure you that this is a very faithful depiction of Thrawn. If you have seen the full episodes, still don't agree, and can provide a well-reasoned explanation, I'd be more inclined to take your seriously on this point.
I believe you are letting your hatred blind you, and your research into the matter is clearly lacking since, as you've said, you aren't watching the show. What you think happened is not what happened at all. That is the impression one can get from a teaser only. The actual characterization in the show, beyond the teaser clips, are spot on Thrawn from the novels. This point alone: "...especially with his stupid leaps in logic he gets from looking at paintings that magically turn out to be correct". This did not happen in the episode. Thrawn studied the culture and art as per usual. The art item Hera stole was a family heirloom, that in Twi'lek culture, only has meaning for the individual family members, like a generational quilt or other such piece of art. It has not value outside of family to a Twi'lek No one else would care about it within the culture. So, you have a Twi'lek woman, in the Syndulla family estate, stealing a family heirloom, when the only female of that family that is left is Hera, that is not a hard conclusion to make when their is also a family portrait showing the three Syndulla. Hera's mother being dead. And since Thrawn was called in to deal with the growing Rebel threat by the governor of the Lothal Sector, it would make sense he'd study what they have on the Rebels that became a problem from Lothal. Thrawn shooting Ezra was the bonus of that scene. Remember that Thrawn studies cultures, people, tactics, about anything to keep several steps ahead. If he doesn't know something about how an enemy will react, he will test them to see what they do. Thrawn does this to Hera to see just what she does for later. He's after the larger Rebellion, but wants as much information as possible to counteract and defeat the Ghost's crew, as they appear to be the spearhead of the local Rebellion. And I have no doubt he will defeat them. They will get away in the end, because the show would continue, but they will lose if it comes down to Thrawn engaging any form of Rebel fleet. If for no other reason, the Rebels don't have a major victory until the events depicted in Rogue One.
The only complaint I've heard from older fans that watched the episodes concerning Thrawn is they don't care for his voice, and minor complaints about his eyes.
Funny, I liked those things.
I know of no complaints from those that watched the show about his characterization. He fits his novel characterization in The Thrawn Trilogy up to this point in Rebels. Now it is possible he might deviate from how the character was depicted in other novels, since I only remember him in the Thrawn Trilogy best. I read those the most times, while the other I probably only read once.
A lot of the other books either deal with him before he was the big-shot admiral or his legacy after his death, so it would make the most sense to focus the characterization on the original books, when he's the closest to that place in the show (minus being the de facto leader of the Empire).
For those thinking this is off topic (it could be) I would think this could fit as how you interpret a character from a set of novels to television and see how it works out. I think Thrawn is done with justice to Zahn's works within Star Wars: Rebels up to this date.
Agreed.
