ST Here are the new Villains of Star Wars: Episode VII (Spoiler)

Couple of things Satipo... I think it's a sad reflection of where we are if the prime reason for this is to shoehorn Darth Vader into the movie in some shape or form. I agree... it was inevitable, but that's not really a great defence of their inclusion on artistic merit.

Also - I don't personally have a problem with the notion of Inquisitors, after all, we learn that the Empire has 'sinister agents' as early as ANH... but that the Inquisitors are looking like Sith in all but name creates several problems for me (if they are to appear in the ST).

1) It undermines the notion that the force was seen as an 'ancient religion' (within the higher echelons of imperial command itself), if we are now to believe that there's a whole group of lightsabre wielding, force using Inquisitors running about and commanding imperials between ROTS and Ep VII.

2) Their lack of presence, or reference, in the OT is obviously indicative of the fact that they are being retrofitted into events... which isn't a problem in itself, but again it creates questions about why they weren't at key events during the OT. Why did Vader need to hire bounty hunters when he had these guys at his command? Why wasn't there a few Inquisitors down on Endor ensuring that things went to plan? Were these Inquisitors just partying on Coruscant 24/7?

Again - I don't have a problem with the notion of Inquisitors. It's that we are to assume that the Inquisitors are basically Sith (or Sith acolytes) that creates a few logic problems for me... given the Sith's assumed covert presence during both the OT and PT.

 

Thats why I said "If Luke has been missing and/or held captive" = Reading for the Win.

Andw hat the report says is there is - The party is looking for Luke who has been MIA since Jedi. But Luke isn’t hiding, Luke is a captive - nothing in that sentence that says Luke was recently captured or what he was doing before he was, if this is true. Again, READING for the win.

 

For the first point, it's one of those "certain point of view" sorta things Jedi/Sith are both ancient religions - but that doesn't necessarily mean that people cant/don't practice it still. There isn't a single major religion on Earth that doesn't date back a couple millennia. Those religions are ancient. But people still practice them. So you could, if you so choose, see Motti clowning Vader for practicing "that ancient religion" not as calling Vader an old relic himself, but being someone who hasn't come around to the idea that believing in The Force is just stupid, especially considering what all the people who DID believe in it ended up doing to the galaxy. Han sorta backs that up too. If anything, you can draw a parallel to modern-day athiests telling obnoxious religious zealots that their devotion to a 2000 year old book of fables is dumb.

And then, of course, it turns out the guys who believe in the 2000 year old book can turn a bottle of aquafina and some Ritz Crackers into a jug of Carlo Rossi and a DiGiorno's pizza, and people have to reassess their position on "ancient religions."

So far as their lack of presence - I think it's been quoted in here before, but Dave Filoni discussed the thinking behind this retcon directly when Germain Lussier over at Slashfilm was talking to him about Rebels. Basically - Once the Purge has happened, and Vader's mopped up some of the stronger Jedi that have managed to escape, the Emperor and Vader turn their attention to more important matters, and draft some force sensitives into the job of hunting down other force-sensitives to make sure they never become any real threats. So that's why we never saw them. They were off in other areas of the galaxy, snuffing out potential Kanans & Eras while Vader & Palpatine were building Death Stars and trying to see what they could do about this Skywalker problem.

 

1) Why? I don't see any contridiction there

2) Its easy enough to explain - we see them (in comics or a Novel or something) hunting Luke, until Vader learns that Luke is/might be his son and he calls them off to handle Luke personally. We also don't kjnow how many there are. If there are 8 Inquisitors to cover the entire Galaxy, its not crazy to have them be in other places during the OT.

Vader wasn't hunting a Jedi when he hired the bounty hunters, he was hunting a smuggler. And again, easy enough to have it come in some material that the Inquisitors would have reported to Palpatine and Vader didn't want that happening at that time. As for why they weren't on Endor, who says they are military leaders? Even in Rebels it doesn't appear that The Inquisitor is in charge the Imperial troops, but called in specificlly when there is a Jedi there that needs to be dealt with. Its not crazy at all to think/assume 1-2-3 Inquisitor would bring very little to the table in the kind of Military opperation that Endor was. All these questions existed with Mara Jade - why didn't they use her to hunt down Luke or Han in ESB. Why wasn't she there on Endor etc... but its easy to deal with given the type of Imperial agent she was.

 

I have no problem with inquisitors being the villains of episode 7. I have no problem with a flashback of vader and the inquisitors. I don't think the inquisitors will be the main baddie of the ST, though. I think we will have another sith or siths as the main baddies again and I have no problem with that either. It all boils down to how it's executed. I'm actually kind of excited to see vader again.

 

Yeah, I made those comments referencing the recent articles - which give Flioni's (and therefore I assume the story group's) position on the whole thing - which for me, if they want to ret-con this whole thing, works logically enough.

As for why Vader used Bounty Hunters and not Inquisitors - one it's a ret-con (if it's in at all). and two, we know Vader was working his own angle in regards Luke. Maybe he wanted to use his own guys rather than guys who's first loyalty might be to Palpatine.

As for the sad state of affairs regarding Vader's inclusion - I'm not endorsing that position, I'm just stating what I think will be a concern or driver on the part of some of the people involved. That driver is also not mutually exclusive to Vader's inclusion having genuine artistic merit. I think a vision featuring Vader (not dissimilar to the cave) could work brilliantly, and I actually think a character (if there is one) obsessed or inspired by Vader somehow could also be very interesting as well. Truth be told, I would hate for there to be no mention of Vader. If they can make his presence felt and make it feel organic to the story and execute the ideas well, I think it could genuinely enrich the film and connect it back to the wider saga, PT and OT.

 

A flashback could work if someone was actually having it-in a dream or in a vision, etc.

Having a flashback placed as someone is telling a story seems out of place and disconnected and is thus forced.

 

You can't say its out of place and disconnected without seeing the movie. It might fit in perfectly.

 

I've got questions about the inquisitor(s) or the new baddie being obsessed with Vader because Vader turned away from the dark side before his death so to me that's puzzling, but then again they just may not know that. Maybe the inquisitors are an organization created to serve at the behest of the Sith and to preserve the Sith in the event both master and apprentice are killed leaving no heir to the mantle as Dark Lord. Bane started the rule of two and maybe he started another organization to preserve the Sith. Maybe there's an unknown Sith temple somewhere in the galaxy, like the Jedi temple, that preserves Sith teachings and artifacts that is guarded and maintained by the inquisitors.

 

I think also, it does sound as if there is some confusion about what form and name these kind of warriors may take in the ST. I mean, we have several rumours suggesting there are Jedi Hunter types, and one logical conclusion might be they are linked to the same kind of faction as the Inquisitor in Rebels. But we also have several firm denials regarding the use of the terms Inquisitors or Jedi Hunters. I mean, do we even know what the proper term for these individuals is? Seems to me The Inquisitor might only refer to the dude in Rebels.

 

I agree flashbacks could be useful. Lucas' Rule of Two painted the writers in to a corner. They need to get out of because there are now more Episodes. If the series ended at Episode 6 then there's no need for anymore Sith. The final two Sith are dead story over. But not now. I never liked the flawed Rule of Two. How could it really prevent another person on the other side of the Galaxy from discovering or studying the "Dark Arts".

 

Well they were around after the Clone Wars looking for Jedi in Rebels. They didn't just die with Vader & the Emperor. It going to be interesting to see how this is explained.

 

Also, seems like new force sensitives would be being born throughout that period, so maybe they would want to make sure no potential threats rise up to challenge the ruling powers.

 

Yeah, there are force sensative kids born every day. Gotta make sure they don't grow up to be cowboys any kind of threat to the emporer.

NINJA'D!!!!

 

Rule of Two kills that idea.

 

Also, I think when Filoni or the film-makers involved in the story-group are giving us the reasons, maybe we should listen and accept their rationale. No one has to like it, but it seems crazy not to take their reasoning.

 

Here was concept art leaked prior to the flood of recent Inquisitor rumors:

 

do you know the date this picture was posted?

 

I wish they didn't hire any of these guys back. Those artist can't compare to RMQ. I did like the designs Lucas chose before that last artist brought forth General G. Which was a weak design.

 

July 1st, 2014.

 

And then he slept with it every night for 30 years, like a child with a toy.

 

Trolling or plain gullible? The title kind of gives it away?

 

CrazyOldJedi - I guess I'm gullible. What am I missing?

 

That print is being sold here,
Jedi Hunters

by Yvan Quinet

http://society6.com/product/jedi-hunters_print#1=45

 

Where did you get the pic from?

 

who would buy a fake art print?