ST Official Sequel Trilogy / Legends / Expanded Universe discussion thread

Center of galactic civilization, the seat of the Republic and then the Empire.... massive citadel structures dotting the surface. All came from the Thrawn Trilogy. Pretty much the only differences between EU Coruscant and Film Coruscant is the planet wide cityscape, which is really only an exaggeration of Zahn's original concept for Imperial Center and the Imperial Palace. Hell, in the book Wedge's Gamble, released 1996 (Before the Special Editions mind you), it was already converted into the Ecumenopolis we all know.

 

> First appearance: Thrawn Trilogy
> Not an EU concept

 

The concept you're describing dates back to drafts for Return of the Jedi--the city planet and Imperial Capital Had Abbadon. Indeed, Lucas referenced the "city planet" in his story meetings with Leigh Brackett in '78. So again, Coruscant is not an EU concept, even if the name itself originated with Zahn.

 

Thank you for reminding everyone because it needed to be stated. The concept of Had Abbadon also shows up in the beginning of the script for Revenge of the Jedi, revised rough draft, dated June 12, 1981:

http://starwarz.com/starkiller/2010/03/revenge-of-the-jedi-revised-rough-draft/

 

Who cares. It still uses the name rather then disregarding it and your point is moot

Ironically Had Abbadon appeared in the Eu

 

Well, that's a devastating argument. I guess all those years of high school debating really paid off.

 

More like not giving a **** about being polite to people who like to distort facts to prove their point

 

Would you propose instead that no one attempt to theorize about a new Star Wars movie, which we have very little information on, in a forum dedicated to such discussions?

 

There's other threads for that. This thread appears to be where some people wonder about how EU might be incorporated into the new trilogy while a chorus of people shout about how anything discussed here should be burned down.

 

Yes it's called recycling a concept. Your beloved EU is open to that for the sequels much like the original drafts, hmm? Of course what gets used won't be whole cloth, and might not even resemble what you recognize (the Had Abbadon concept used in the EU is a good example). Of course you might find that horrifying. Because it's not enough for the EU cult to have some of their concepts show up in some form in the new films. It has to be 100% what you recognize or nothing at all.

Remember that your EU writers were playing in someone else's universe. They aren't the makers of that universe.

 

Oh that argument again.

 

Yes, that old chestnut about how tie-in media is a licensed product that is written as a paid gig and owned by the owner of the actual property (i.e. the fictional universe). You know, the argument that concepts from tie-in media may be loosely adapted for use in primary media (i.e. films or TV shows) but there is little chance that continuity with the tie-ins will be respected.

It's the argument that is actually supported by both the facts and history. Reality seems to have an anti-EU bias.

 

There was barely much of the planet used but a a site of an antagonists base so not much would be overwritten so i couldn't give less then a ****. IN4 more jabronis claim Legacy is an alternative universe along with other retarded speculation

 

Right, and nothing in the Halo novels ever had an impact on any of the games, because they weren't part of Bungie's artistic vision. Of course.

In fact, I think that Microsoft actually does a much better job of handling EU incorporation than Lucas does. They are there for people who want to learn more but are not vital to understand the plot of the games. However, the games themselves treat the EU around them with respect, giving nods here and there and incorporating elements into the games, sometimes with vital plot points.

It's a mutual respect. I guess that Bungie, Microsoft and 343 were all fighting reality, if your analogy were to work.

I don't see why people take such hardline stances against the EU.

 

Because movie purists

 

Obi Rob?

 

I also see they just read summaries off of something and pass judgement on it rather then reading the actual books in question and see how it's executed and say "Oh this idea is stupid" rather then reading the book and seeing it's impact and execution within the story. Case in point the NJO getting bashed

 

Oh good God this is getting worse than the 2003-04 era of the Senate Forums.
EU is the gasoline while the rabid fanboys are the sparks.

 

Show me the rabid fanboys and watch the accused deny it. (Myself included)

 

I'm not even talking about how good/bad the EU is. I personally like Stover and will read Shadows of Mindor when I get the spare cash; I've also enjoyed the comics I've read. But that doesn't change the fact that writing a new film that has built-in mass appeal while also respecting the EU canon is not only an impossible task but also creatively frustrating--it's not going to happen.

That's just the way it is.

 

But does it have to be that way? This whole thread is dealing with speculation, so why not let us have our fun discussing things? Besides, EU elements have been incorporated into the films and into The Clone Wars, albeit in adaptation rather than direct porting. And the EU has adapted in turn to help support these changes. So while I agree that it is in no way feasible to make a Thrawn adaptation or the Vong, a passing reference or two, or an adapted name or character isn't off the table.

 

I don't disagree. But when I said earlier that they may be researching the EU in order mine concepts (to then be adapted), Esg replied that I was "wrong" because Google could be used to achieve the same thing. The main discussion happening here, AFAICT, is how literal the adaptation of concepts from EU to the screen will be.

 

I'm not inclined to think that any of the later EU (NJO etc.) will factor into the ST, however I'm still reading the Thrawn trilogy (pretty slowly so far, it's only barely holding my interest) and I'm trying to determine what the chances are that it will remain untouched. Zahn was asked about the ST recently and this is what he had to say...

According to Zahn, he was "briefed" on Lucas' plans for sequels years ago and how the Thrawn books would fit in. "The original idea as I understood it- and Lucas changes his mind off and on, so it may not be what he's thinking right now - but it was going to be three generations," said Zahn to Entertainment Weekly.
"You'd have the original trilogy, then go back to Luke's father and find out what happened to him [in the prequels], and if there was another 7th, 8th, or 9th film, it would be Luke's children. The Thrawn Trilogy really would have fit into the gap," the author said.

This would make it seem to me that, at the very least, the twins will be utilized in some capacity (though if they are, I would anticipate a complete re-write of their characters). The one thing that puzzles me is how Lucas has said that in his mind Luke never got married. I know Luke and Mara were actually married later in the Union comic, but I'm curious about the state of their relationship at the end of the Thrawn trilogy. I don't want to know too much about what will happen in these books (still on HttE), but I don't mind knowing that. I'm assuming that within the trilogy their relationship goes from adversarial to... something else?

 

Let's just say trying to explain Mara's relationship to Luke in the ST would be complicated at best, especially with the outcomes. A throwaway line or two wouldn't do it justice .

 

That's pretty much what I figured. It's things like that which make me think they're better off just starting from scratch with nothing but the end of ROTJ from which to proceed.