Which, in my opinion, completely ruins her character. She was evil enough on her own without the assistance of an undead Sith Lord.
Not that I'm an Imperialist within the context of Star Wars- the only fictitious Empire that I'm an ardent supporter of is the Tamrielic Empire, under the Septim Dynasty- but Mothma can also be rather petty, and has some crazy double standards. Read/listen to the Dark Forces novellas/radio dramas to see how she treats Kyle Katarn with contempt because he was once an Imperial Stormtrooper, despite the fact that half of the named Alliance officers used to be Imperial personnel- hell, Crix Madine founded the Storm Commandos, and actually participated in atrocities.
As well as including the equally erroneous claim that the Sorcerers of Tund were all Crokes, when the point of Rokur Gepta being a Croke was supposed to be a plot twist, not a fait accompli. Or, to put it more simply, we were mocking the fact the Jedi Academy Training Manual is full of outright poodoo due to poor editing.
Well in the end all of them (all one of them) were Crokes. Plus Exar Kun could still have possed Mon Mothma after the whole Academy mess, we just have not been told the full story of the event
Taking away entirely the wrong point from this, how many people listening are going to know what an Ewok even is? Like, are they common knowledge? Why? They're little fuzzballs that live on a largely unexplored, unimportant moon. Plus their major contribution to galactic politics was massacring a bunch of stormtroopers and then eating them because they had their religious beliefs manipulated by a protocol droid at the request of the Rebellion. Arguably the Ewoks represent the Rebels sanctioning a giant human rights violation. I don't know, I just hear this an imagine people going, "Wait, Mon, that's kinda racist I mean, no, hang on, Palpatine is a scheming backstabber disguised as a manipulated savage? Just who is the target of this insult anyway?"
Retcon: "Ewok" was a catch all term for "cuddly teddy bear" and the species first encountered by the Rebellion in 4 ABY were named after them.
On a diversity note, the Miss Universe contest has been won, once again, by a human from Earth. Species bias!
Assuming that the writer of the X-wing game also wrote the TIE-fighter game- maybe that writer had in mind a "Rebels are nastier than the movie makes them out to be" plot thread from the start- which is why they put those lines in.
Well its kinda hard to be Saints when you are the Rebels. IF you are then its kinda of a copout. I mean sure sometimes nonviolent protest works but not that much on evil empires especially with no external pressure.
Disney and diversity... so, tell me about Disney diversity scores for their own products that are supposed to be scifi or relatable to Star Wars as prediction what's coming?
Well they tend to be pretty bad at least for cartoons Live Action Impossible to really tell. I suppose Pirates of the Caribbean might be informative. Not much to go off with Marvel Movies although the solo films have been one white guy after another. I mean really Ant-man?
Er... Disney and diversity... hmm... does making all the hyenas bad in the Lion King mimic the problems people were talking about in LOTR's use of fantasy races?
I wouldn't say it's as problematic: though I would take issue with their elevating any one species as "good" over another - they're pretty much all equally unpleasant in various ways.
TLK was disney's first attempt at a non-racist portrayal of a non-western story. Compare it to Aladdin, for instance. Yeah the habits of the hyenas may be troubling, but when it came out it was still a huge step forward. It's also probably my favorite Disnsy film (possibly with only Beauty and the Beast as a rival).
Maybe I'm too close to it, but I have trouble seeing Aladdin as all that racist. Certainly not so racist as to outweigh the benefit of being a major children's movie entirely about Middle Eastern people.
Yeah, caricatures aside, I always thought Aladdin was pretty good too, as you got a typical "rags to riches" story about how even a nobody could achieve great things, and how -- putting aside the stereotypes -- even Arabs were nice people deep down, with the bad ones corrupt aristocrats like Jafar, not the average dude in the slums. Ironically, while I was just joking when I brought up TLK, now that I think about it, it's not as diverse in terms of characterisation, since you don't have the "nice hyena" the way you have some good thieves, some bad thieves in Aladdin.
true there Coop, but I wonder would Disney do Aladin or something like it based on middle eastern culture again these days, it would look very different. Americans see the middle east different than back then now and tend to force these actual topics as well as their pov into their fictional products, especially movies lately. Which I think is not good by the way. Too often they generalize or throw all people into the same cliché. No offense here to anybody I hope, but I read too many patriotic posts here and elsewhere by folks who actually believe propaganda and cliché more so than anything else. Every action movie has some foreign guy of color or other race as enemy.. be it middle eastern states, island dictators or african warlords. I am sick of all this bias. so while old Disney was more open to do Aladin and such, I think today they'd rather not. They are more open to do another Mulan or asian culture thing, instead of a positive middle east portrayal. sadly so. I hope I am wrong there, but that's the trend I get from movies and tv these days, especiall american productions. as I said, no offense to anybody here!
