ST Who's The Baddie?

Dra--- : Don't leave this thread.
darklordoftech : Sorry, but what does that ("How would you feel about a Sith who's Palpatine in all but name?") even mean?

 

I think in times of preproduction on new Star Wars films, the official site doesn't tend to run contrary information. It's far more likely that it's setting the scene for new canon.

I think if there's a criticism that the Sith (be it in the form of a returning Palpatine or Plageuis) is too repetitive a theme, then I think that applies even more so to returning imperials. We've already had 3 films worth of that with the OT. And whilst Palpatine's Sith machinations were a major component of the PT, I feel that there's much more to be explored regarding the Sith; their philosophies and practises (not yet seen in any movie). I wouldn't particularly like to see just a return to the Sith plotting in the shadows... I'd like to see the Sith culture - that's something worthy of further exploration if done right.

Literature and cinema has a tendency to 'up the anti' with sequels or associated works... so I think it's logical to conclude that the writers (be that Lucas, JJ or other) will be asking themselves "who can be bigger than Palpatine and Vader?". I don't think someone serving in the ranks and file of the Empire would be the first thing to spring to mind as a terrifying antagonist. I think logic dictates (although I recognise this is speculation) that they will look up the chain of command for the 'big bad' i.e. someone who had/has the potential to subjugate both Palpatine and Vader... therefore I think it has to be a Sith rather than a Tarkin type figure.

 

It means somebody with the same desires, goals, and powers.

 

OK, I thought as much but wondered if there was more to it.

 

What more would there be to it? I'm happy to answer questions about it.

 

Well that's what I didn't know, so I was just asking whether there was more to it or not. On the other hand, I'd hate to see people who are trying to delve deeper into this stuff feeling frustrated by what may or may not be a series of one-liner questions or statements simply being thrown out there. Not necessarily saying you're doing that, and not every post needs to be long and in-depth, but still.

 

Do you have any supporting evidence from the story that leads you to believe any or each of these possibilities?

 

I can only speak for myself. I am sick and tired of being told wrong claims that "Plagueis is the only viable villain to discuss. All the evidence points to Plagueis and nobody else, we should talk about Plagueis." or any other versions of this same tired argument that has been repeated over and over in this thread. How can anybody claim, after 350 pages full of Plagueis, that I am forbidding anyone to talk about it? I'm just tired of repetitive arguments and claims based on invalid assumptions (like the one that Lucas rates the films over TCW), which sometimes just seem constructed to making Plagueis look like a more valid possibility than he really is.

The truth is that we know barely anything, definitely not enough to make all these claims about Plagueis importance.

I think when people are talking about "fresh and original" (including myself), it is in the context of the Star Wars movies. It would be insane to demand something one has never come up with or even something that wasn't done in an EU that spans decades now. Plagueis isn't original because he more or less Palpatine 2.0 who succeeded in the whole cheating death deal.

Force vampires have never been done in the movies. They open some interesting questions about the force. And they wouldn't be garlic-hating fanged bat-creatures, but rather a Star Warsified version that is not too close to the real deal. If I remember, you yourself liked the idea back when I first suggested it. So don't go around now claiming that you hate it.

The Empire and what happens with its remains is one hell of a question that needs to be answered. The plot demands it, original or not.

 

Agreed. Perhaps the Imperial Remnant is an ally of the New Republic.

 

Yea, leaving the fate of billions of stormtroopers and officers unanswered would be one hell of a hole in the plot. Writing follows rules. One of it is that very big questions that resulted from the plot of prequels and are still unanswered need to be addressed.

 

We'll probably at least get Temuera Morrison back playing older Stormtroopers for a scene. It's easy continuity.

 

I think there are lots of creative ways to include the imperials (ex imperials) in the ST... Yes, perhaps there are ex Moff's etc. now at the heart of the New Republic who help fuel a schism - or at least create some background political tension. Having the Sith return (in my view) doesn't/shouldn't exclude seeing and learning about how the rebels/New Republic dealt with the aftermath post Endor.

 

I not sure how long Dathomiri live, but is there any reason why Asajj (Mother?) Ventress would not make a good villain?
Other than military, she seems to have belonged to almost every faction in the SW galaxy.

- Sold into slavery as an infant
- Raised by a Jedi
- Trained as a potential Sith Apprentice
- Member of the Night Sisters clan (probably knows at least some about their magicks)
- Last known as a Bounty Hunter

I could see her vast variety of experiences pushing her toward ruling the Galaxy as she thinks it should be (whether that be behind the scenes or as an active role).

 

I see it as the Sith that came before Palpatine didn't do much more than supply him with the resources to accomplish what he did. Even taking the full thousand years, the lion's share of the "work" was done by Palpatine (or the people that he put in position to do what he needed). The Sith that came before him were no more than the generations of "family" past that left credits and contacts that he then utilized. I know it's not the same thing, there are still other elements there that diminish it, but I think this viewpoint can mitigate some of it.

 

An old hag. I like the idea.

 

Mystery Roach

I do like your theorizing about the Whills perhaps being a faction transcending common morality. They could make for an interesting antagonistic group, though perhaps not outright villains. The idea of balancing the Force was introduced already in TCW, in the form of the Ones in Mortis. Specifically, balance was embodied by the Father. While the Ones of TCW were later expanded upon in the EU, which referred to them as Celestials, what if the Father is an example of a Shaman of the Whills? Was it really a coincidence that Qui-Gon Jinn's Force Ghost first appeared there on Mortis? Could this arc hint at what's to come in the ST? Finding a balance, as opposed to choosing a side is a great theme, I think. A theme that was emphasized in the Mortis arc. Perhaps the Whills do have the betterment of the galaxy in mind, and their ultimate goal is to oversee the balance of the Force, as the Father on Mortis did before he and his children were killed.

Also, I figured darklordoftech's idea about the Whonts was tongue-in-cheek, so I played along briefly. But honestly I do think introducing them would needlessly complicate things, which is why sticking just with the Whills should suffice. Introducing them could give our heroes an interesting moral quandary at the conclusion of the saga. However, I do want epic space battles involving the opposing forces!

Dra---

Your idea about a droid army in the likeness of Vader is intriguing, but I think it's too close to the idea for the antagonists of the fake Star Wars: Reclamation treatment. They are described as "legions of black droids [that] issue forth from the depths of Coruscant, destroying indiscriminately." Furthermore, they are apparently self-replicating machines that spawned from the deep underlevels of the galactic capital, in level 1313. As I recall, the idea got rather mixed reviews, and folks were scoffing at the idea of a droid rebellion. I’m not averse to it, but I can’t see it fitting in well to the saga as a whole—although I do imagine that your theoretical Vader-droid army will be led by a new antagonist who is probably an organic, correct?

Also, I'd like to note that they can get all with a good deal of bloodless violence involving organic and humanoid characters, especially if they are fully armored, and wearing helmets. Even in TCW (a show many consider to be aimed at children), they show decapitations of helmeted Mandalorians onscreen! Here's a montage of some of the show's most violent moments (including a number of scenes censored in the TV versions). Language warning for the video!

Speaking of which, I much prefer Mandalorians or some other organic race as the new army opposing the New Republic, with new but iconic armor that will mark them as a truly threatening and fearsome force to be reckoned with. Who knows, perhaps this force has already assimilated some of the Imperial troops dissatisfied with the direction of the New Republic, and they are now part of the army?

In the words of Mandalore the Destroyer (a female Mandalorian), in more barbaric times:
"Here's why you can't exterminate us, aruetii. We're not huddled in one place—we span the galaxy. We need no lords or leaders—so you can't destroy our command. We can live without technology—so we can fight with our bare hands. We have no species or bloodline—so we can rebuild our ranks with others who want to join us. We're more than just a people or an army, aruetii. We're a culture. We're an idea. And you can't kill ideas—but we can certainly kill you."

Darth Chiznuk

I like your idea; it makes the conflict far more personal and allows them to bring back Sidious' spirit in a convincing manner that ties in very neatly to the Skywalker line, while also bringing back the Vader iconography in the form of Vader's fortress/castle. Good job on the idea!

 

Palpatine never said Vincent Price was dead......

Hmmmmmmmmm ?

 

Circular Logic I wasn't suggesting that the Whills would actually be the primary antagonistic force of the ST. More of an X-factor that throws all bets out the window. I think we'll essentially still be dealing with a galaxy divided through manipulation and dissatisfaction about the nature of government in the ashes of the Empire. I haven't quite decided what I'd like to see for armies yet, though I'd imagine some form of stormtrooper imagery will be involved on at least one side. More droids would be logical as well but I know people don't want to see another trooper/droid war.

 

Underestimate the Emperor... Must be a family thing

 

Absolutely none, but at least these are characters who aren't dead.

 

Just to point out that by the end of ANH; Luke's father was (apparently) dead, Obi-Wan had been killed by Darth Vader, and Luke fancied the pants off the princess... funny how things pan out.

Seriously though - I think Palpatine's death, Plageuis' alleged death are the least insurmountable obstacles in the way of their return... this is sci/fi fantasy after all.

 

I'll ignore your other jibberish but I'll respond to this. I said one option is "a completely left field unknown evil Force user". You responded with "why should anyone care? Sounds completely unrelated to the previous six films. Might as well say right field. Or an evil clown army." Then I said that it's the job of the writers, director & actor to make us care by creating a well performed & compelling character. They could also be related to the previous films via their use of the Dark Side.
You then responded with this "Sorry, I thought you said you wanted to share your idea with us. If you don't care about making us care, why should we even read it? Basically this idea amounts to "new darksider" with no new information. It's so vague it's pointless to even respond"

This was a strawman tactic because rather than addressing my point about having a well developed & performed new character & that it's perfectly plausible to achieve this with a new villain (as countless films demonstrate), you focused instead on me "not including enough detail". You then drew the conclusion that this means I didn't care about making you care. What nonsense. Clearly you were unable to properly address your absurd point that we couldn't care about a villain who wasn't involved in the previous films. Not wanting to tackle this ridiculously weak position of yours you diverted attention to the trivial point of me not including enough detail. Ie you attacked B instead of A.

In your last post you also used this matter as a rather timid excuse to not address your other nonsense points, like according to you an Imperial leader has to be 80 & therefore not credible!!

Anyway, now that you've ripped a fragile straw man that no one cares about to shreds with your bayonet, maybe you can return to point A & explain why we as an audience wouldn't care about a new villain with no established backstory in the movies so far. If it's done well & it generates tension in the story by being an extremely serious & grave threat then why is that a problem?

 

Here's another idea. Although it would be pretty great and profound (in a good way) to see Plageuis in the ST, there's another option. If the ST pursues discussion of the conceivement of the Skywalkers at Plageuis' doing, there could be a whole new kind of villain. Plagueis and Sidious performed experiments with midichlorians to create the ultimate Sith and being of the Dark side. They were partially successful in that the Force responded to this abomination by taking Plageuis' move and making Anakin instead. What if Plagueis was actually unknowingly successful in, through midichlorians, creating a Sith being more powerful in the Dark Side than ever before..........we just haven't seen him yet. Anakin's bloodline was the response of the Force in preparation to eventually confront and stop this dark side being.....(Sithaari?)