ST Official Sequel Trilogy / Legends / Expanded Universe discussion thread

You sound hopeful, rather than ITK. Given the age of the OT actors, there's just as much chance of the new films preserving the EU 95% intact, as there is of them deleting 95% of it.

 

You guys seriously believe that they will follow all established canon (that lots of Star Wars fans don't know about) and that Episode VII will take place in 45 ABY?

 

The whole point of this thread is to prove that they don't necessarily have to follow the established canon at all, while at the same time avoid stepping all over it. Also, why is it laughable for the new trilogy to start in 45ABY? At that point, the character's ages will match the age of the actors. If it doesn't start near that point in time, they're going to have to put the actors in a ton of makeup, recast them, or use digital doubles, which I don't see happening, especially with Indy 4 as a template.

 

You and your ilk seem to believe that if they use even a little bit of EU material, they have to explain EVERYTHING about it for it to make sense to everyone else. Why?

Luke Skywalker has a son. Feasible. He's a different sort of Jedi to the others. His son is called Ben, after his mentor. Feasible. Ben's mother has tragically died, unseen. Feasible. We all bought into it when we saw Episode IV, why can't the same be true here?

Han and Leia have married. Feasible. We all saw it coming anyway. They have a daughter called Jaina. Feasible. Is it necessary to mention the two dead brothers? No, of course it isn't. Time has passed since they died in the EU, they don't talk about it all the time anymore.

Chewie's dead. Feasible. But you don't even have to tell the audience he's dead. He just doesn't have to be there. As I've said, just put in a couple of lines where Han admits he misses him, and life's golden.

There's a new government. Not only feasible, but necessary. Do we have to talk about all the various incarnations of said government that have existed between the films? No, of course we don't.

There's a tribe of Sith, a whole army of them. Feasible. Sure, Yoda said that there could only be two, but Jedi have been wrong before. The tribe's "lost" nature is easily explained in the crawl, or just a couple of lines of dialogue, if you're using them as the antagonists.

We also don't have to talk about the Yuuzhan Vong, or the Palpatine Clones, or Joruus C'Baoth, or Luke's flirtations with the Dark Side, or Thrawn, or anything else that happens in the EU. Is it necessary to spell out everything? No, because it would be boring. You set up a universe, slightly different than the one the audience left behind thirty years ago, and the general non-SW audience won't be sitting there going "hey, whoa, where's Chewie? Where's the Empire? Why are there loads of Jedi?" They'll take a look, say, "Oh. Things are different. Alright then" and get on with it.

It is more possible than you believe for the EU and the ST to exist in perfect harmony. You need only open your mind a little to the possibility.

 

where did you find an "official time line"? Is there a link for this

 

The new films will definitely step over certain parts of canon. I worded my post wrong, I'm not laughing that the trilogy could start in 45 ABY, I'm laughing that it could start in 45 ABY while having a continuation of what has happened before in the EU i.e. the aftermath of Abeloth and the rise of Darth Krayt.

The difference is at that time Lucas had the intention of someday making the prequels, explaining Anakin's fall and Luke's and Leia's mother's death. That was shown on film, not in a novel that a lot of Star Wars fans haven't read.

If they want to include Allana, then yes, they're gonna have to explain who she is, that she is the daughter of Jacen Solo.

Do you really expect them to follow Chewie's death in the books and not include him in Episode VII? As much as I love the NJO, not every Star Wars fan follows it, and I'm pretty sure that most, if not all, of the crew behind the film do either. Chewbacca is simply too big a character to offhandly say that he died offscreen.

George Lucas and his films made it perfectly clear that Darths Maul, Tyrannus, Vader and Sidious were the last remaining Sith. Just because some authors thought it would make a good story doesn't mean that the film crew is obliged to follow that storyline.

 

i think it was always known that George wanted to do 9 but just did not think he would have the time or energy or money - from early documenataries and makings of it was mentioned a lot. Funnily enough i wrote my own star wars stories as a kid and my story took place in a palace just like theNaboo palace with lots of statues that always made me smile in episode 1. I still think the keeper/journal of the whills and R2D2 will be a part and maybe resurrect the Starkiller name - also i want to see a light sabre weilding imperial guard - I take it the timeline he wrote originally and the EU writers just filled parts in?

 

This is why they should have just went with a recast and adapted the Thrawn Trilogy in the first place. What we wanted to see is these characters in their prime again and not old farts running around to save the galaxy.

 

Type star wars timeline into google - it's right there .

 

There's a "gap" because nothing had been published yet...I'm not sure what your point is, exactly? @ OP.

 

I always looked at the post-ROTJ timeline inching upwards and upwards, noticing how they never did Luke, Leia & Han's *final* story and I do think there is somewhere in the timeline post ROTJ that was designated "no go". However, I think it was so vague and unspecific that the book companies started to take more liberties with how far along and how much they could break the universe, thinking that the ST would never happen. So it probably wasn't as hard as "No clone wars, no dark times stories" that happened beforehand but maybe it was a lot vaguer.

 

Also if you look at Wookiepedia the only thing that happens in 45 ABY is "Crucible". It's about the main trio. It's probably going to be Del Rey's last novel. http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/45_ABY Seems like a pretty solid place thereabouts to start to the ST.

 

the only good EU was the muppets pigs in space episode...if they keep amy EU it should be that....I also think 95% will be ignored with the odd scene like the out rider taking off in ANH

 

Hello, everybody.

-This is the official Expanded Universe and the Sequel Trilogy thread. This is the only thread in the Episode VII forum where the Expanded Universe can be discussed. Any other threads will be locked; any posts outside of this thread will be deleted or edited. Repeat offenders will be banned.

-"Continuity" and "canon" debates are not allowed. LFL policy is that everything is canonical and part of one continuity unless there's a direct contradiction that hasn't had retroactive continuity applied to it. This is how this thread will conduct itself.

-What IS allowed: Story ideas from EU story lines, things you think would be cool to have in the EU. Things you DON'T want to come to the sequels from the EU. Basically anything but continuity debating.

So, basically, keep the EU discussion to here.

 

Why did it come to this? I don't think anyone was insulting anybody.

 

This doesn't make sense. EU elements spill into all kinds of threads. So all those should be closed now? For instance in the Ep 7 villain thread people are suggesting EU villains -- me inlcuded with Black Sun and Mandalorians -- but I don't think anyone has a problem with that.

 

I don't want to get banned again so I won't comment.

 

wtf does this even mean?

 

Great Idea!!!!

 

That the inmates are running the asylum.

J/K DarthBoba, don't tase me bro.

 

I aggree can't understand it ? my guess is what you are saying is that Eveything is the EU is true untill Episode VII contradicts it ! .

 

It means that stuff that hasn't been overruled/tossed out is canon for the purposes of discussion in this thread, including not yet invalidated post-RotJ material (Which at this time is everything post-RotJ that is "traditionally" considered canon). Essentially the EUC rules on canonicity apply here, so arguments about what "counts" are not welcome.

 

What distinguishes this from a similar thread in the Literature forum?

 

80 pages and being on this board*. But by that logic one could also inquire as to what the difference is between this being confined to one thread as opposed to five of which two overlap.

*Edit: Oh, and of course my sparkling and approachable personality.