| Author |
Topic:
Should Darth Maul have died?
|
HedecGa
Registered:
Apr '06
|
Date Posted:
6/15 9:39pm
Subject:
RE: Should Darth Maul have died?
|
|
I can see that. I think eventually Sidious would have done something "unworthy for a true Sith" in Maul's eyes and he would determine to take him out. Maul was pretty much a Sith elitist. He really had a high bar raised. Eventually--way down the line--I'm sure he would begin to think himself a better Sith than his Master.
-----signature-----
"The Coming Evil, Book One: The Strange Man" available NOW at http://www.thecomingevil.com Author of the Dusty Duck databank entry - The 71st "Greatest Thing About Star Wars...Ever!" - SW Insider 100 Co-author of the Silya Shessaun databank entry
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
EECHUUTA
Registered:
Mar '07
|
Date Posted:
6/16 6:20am
Subject:
RE: Should Darth Maul have died?
- Date Edited:
6/16 6:57am (2 edits total)
Edited By:
EECHUUTA
|
I imagine that Maul thought Sidious as a kind of father, in all but the name and genetics only... I know that Jedi Padawans can end up feeling love towards their Masters, even though they were introduced at age 10 or 11 and attachment is 'forbidden.' And so it would be stronger for a guy who was with his Master probably since he was at least a baby, and any attachments probably not discouraged(sp). But I wonder, when/if would he stop 'loving' his Master, and what would it take? Or is it possible that he might never have stopped 'loving' him, but instead let his Master die in his sleep naturally instead of killing him?
Here is a thought I just had.. It is extremely unlikely, but I just like the idea because of its sheer weirdness: 
What if Maul was really attached to Sidious not because he saw him as a sort of father, but because he really was his father? It would explain a little why Sidious seemed a bit mad at the Jedi killing Maul, who was not only his Apprentice, but also his son. It's a tad plausible, as human/alien hybrids do exist and Sidious would have had an heir that was nearly as powerful as him..
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Anakin7624
Registered:
Jun '08
|
Date Posted:
6/16 3:49pm
Subject:
RE: Should Darth Maul have died?
|
|
I think Darth Maul should have died. He is not really the kind of guy who could lead the Separatist movement. I personally loved the character of Count Dooku, he represents a different kind of villian.
-----signature-----
Chargers 2008 Super Bowl Champions!
R.I.P Bobby Kennedy
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Nichtganz
Registered:
Jul '07
|
Date Posted:
6/16 8:20pm
Subject:
RE: Should Darth Maul have died?
|
|
he couldntve left it he's more of the guy that hunts down jedu and kills them.
-----signature-----
Ib'tuur jatne tuur ash'ad kyr'amur.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
DarthBurger13
Registered:
May '07
|
Date Posted:
6/16 10:43pm
Subject:
RE: Should Darth Maul have died?
|
|
I personally think it could've worked out well for Maul to have walked away from the Episode I duel after he knocked Obi-Wan inside the hole, in his arrogance believing he killed him. It then shows Obi-Wan hanging on that ledge. Come Episode II, the character of Dooku would still be around, but be a simple politician instead of a sith lord, holding Maul's leash (a la the Tarkin-Vader relationship in Episode IV). So when the Arena scene on Geonosis comes in to play, instead of Jango (who would still be a template for the clones, but I don't know how he'd fit into all of this) flying in there to fight, it would be Darth Maul, who then proceeds to slaughter dozens of Jedi and duels Anakin and Obi-Wan in Dooku's hanger. Then, in Episode III, when Anakin and Obi-Wan show up to rescue Palps, Maul comes in there and they fight, ending with Anakin killing Maul and executing Dooku.
-----signature-----
The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.
Blessed is he who in the name of charity and goodwill shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness,
for he is truly his brother's keeper
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Anakin7624
Registered:
Jun '08
|
Date Posted:
6/17 5:34am
Subject:
RE: Should Darth Maul have died?
|
Darth_Gorman posted:
no
Your forgetting who Luke is the son of. Luke has the same force potential as Anakin. So it is a given that he would grow stronger at rapid pace. Darth Vader is still 80% as stronge as Palpatine, which still stronger then Maul or Dooku every was.
Maul and Dooku represent two opposite sith lords. And Vader represnets a combination of both of them.
-----signature-----
Chargers 2008 Super Bowl Champions!
R.I.P Bobby Kennedy
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
SithStarSlayer
Registered:
Oct '03
|
Date Posted:
6/17 6:23am
Subject:
RE: Should Darth Maul have died?
|
Maul is unique in his own right, as Sidious perverted the Jedi: Master-Padawan relationship with the Zabrak. Vader and Dooku are more alike as they both were tainted by their time as Jedi. Maul was ten times the Sith they both could dream of being. People rail that Maul didn't try and kill Sidious, but that makes no sense. Maul had just passed his trials, and had been indoctrinated to believe that he would raize the Jedi temple. Once the Jedi were dead, rest assured Maul would have eventually turned on his Master. It is the way of their Order, and besides Sidious in the PT-OT era, who was more of a Sith than Maul?
Maul was an heir to Bane...
The two Jedi that followed him would never have been considered worthy, because they were not better, or no different than Githany. One other thing, I can't imagine Maul crying when he got his Sith name. Sidious should have slapped Vader on the spot.
-----signature-----
Lucas didn't ruin my childhood, but he sure wrecked Vader's
Foolish men mistake transitory semblance for eternal fact
Practice makes perfect, so be careful what you practice
Tolerance is for people who lack moral conviction
o[[]|[ooooooooooo]|[0]|[|]|[
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Anakin7624
Registered:
Jun '08
|
Date Posted:
6/17 10:40am
Subject:
RE: Should Darth Maul have died?
|
|
I don't think some of you guys understand the reason why Dooku was more valuable then Maul. Dooku was never intended to be terrifying. He has class and grace, He was respected by the Jedi Order. He is the perfect person for what Palpatine was trying to do by Episode II, and if Maul lived, I doubt the Jedi would have sat and let it happen. His death was needed.
-----signature-----
Chargers 2008 Super Bowl Champions!
R.I.P Bobby Kennedy
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
DarthScubbles
Registered:
Sep '04
|
Date Posted:
6/17 11:19am
Subject:
RE: Should Darth Maul have died?
|
|
I just think that he was too "animalistic" a character to have lived. He seemed to be too much of raw dark side without the intelligence that makes a really good sith lord.
-----signature-----
In-House Counsel of the Lobster Division of the 3SA
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
SithStarSlayer
Registered:
Oct '03
|
Date Posted:
6/17 11:45am
Subject:
RE: Should Darth Maul have died?
|
How was Maul shown to be unintelligent?
Aside from his contrived ending, he piloted a Starship, rode a speeder and displayed pin-point accuracy when using the Force while engaged in a duel. (when he flung debris at the control panel to open the doors) Not to mention he knew how to read a trace and operate Sith probe droids. He even sounded articulate: "Tatooine is sparcely populated, if the trace was correct I will find them quickly, Master." A dullard wouldn't know what 'sparcely' means, let alone how to use it in a sentence.
If anyone appeared stupid, it was Anakin, Kenobi and the entire Jedi Order.
Lack of dialogue does not or cannot quantify any level of intelligence.
If that were the case, then Plo Koon, Kit Fister and Agen Kolar must be the 3 dumbest Jedi that ever lived.
-----signature-----
Lucas didn't ruin my childhood, but he sure wrecked Vader's
Foolish men mistake transitory semblance for eternal fact
Practice makes perfect, so be careful what you practice
Tolerance is for people who lack moral conviction
o[[]|[ooooooooooo]|[0]|[|]|[
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Anakin7624
Registered:
Jun '08
|
Date Posted:
6/17 11:48am
Subject:
RE: Should Darth Maul have died?
|
SithStarSlayer posted:
How was Maul shown to be unintelligent?
Aside from his contrived ending, he piloted a Starship, rode a speeder and displayed pin-point accuracy when using the Force while engaged in a duel. (when he flung debris at the control panel to open the doors) Not to mention he knew how to read a trace and operate Sith probe droids. He even sounded articulate: "Tatooine is sparcely populated, if the trace was correct I will find them quickly, Master." A dullard wouldn't know what 'sparcely' means, let alone how to use it in a sentence.
If anyone appeared stupid, it was Anakin, Kenobi and the entire Jedi Order.
Lack of dialogue does not or cannot quantify any level of intelligence.
If that were the case, then Plo Koon, Kit Fister and Agen Kolar must be the 3 dumbest Jedi that ever lived.
I don't think Maul is dumb or anything. I just think Dooku was exactly what Palpatine needed by Episode II. A popular Charismatic leader in charge of th CIS.
-----signature-----
Chargers 2008 Super Bowl Champions!
R.I.P Bobby Kennedy
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
EECHUUTA
Registered:
Mar '07
|
Date Posted:
6/17 12:36pm
Subject:
RE: Should Darth Maul have died?
- Date Edited:
6/17 12:40pm (2 edits total)
Edited By:
EECHUUTA
|
I wonder why a lot of people are saying that Maul was dumb? He was careless, but he wasn't dumb.
People forget that Maul had just recently became an adult. He still had that teenage male recklessness, hormones, and impulsivity that tends to make young men do really really stupid things. Obi-wan had it, Anakin had it, and Luke had it at Maul's age. But the difference between them and him was that they got the chance to grow up. We don't get to see Maul grow up because he died.
Edit: This was just posted right after the other replies showed up, so obviously not everyone thinks he is dumb. 
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
SithStarSlayer
Registered:
Oct '03
|
Date Posted:
6/17 1:04pm
Subject:
RE: Should Darth Maul have died?
- Date Edited:
6/17 1:36pm (1 edits total)
Edited By:
SithStarSlayer
|
I don't think any Force user is seriously lacking in the IQ department.
There is a reason that measurable Force Sensitivity is primarily found in sentient beings...
-----signature-----
Lucas didn't ruin my childhood, but he sure wrecked Vader's
Foolish men mistake transitory semblance for eternal fact
Practice makes perfect, so be careful what you practice
Tolerance is for people who lack moral conviction
o[[]|[ooooooooooo]|[0]|[|]|[
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Dark_Jedi_Kenobi
Title: PT Manager
Registered:
Oct '04
|
Date Posted:
6/18 5:57am
Subject:
RE: Should Darth Maul have died?
|
DarthScubbles posted:
I just think that he was too "animalistic" a character to have lived.
That was the whole reason that Lucas created the character. He wanted to show the audience that the Sith order was not just made up of old men and a guy in a breathing suit, hence Maul's appearance (tattoos/horns).
I agree with what others are saying in regards to Maul's intelligence. I think his character was meant to be more of an imposing figure through appearance rather than voice and that's the reason for his small amount of dialogue.
-----signature-----
***Host of the PT Trivia Challenge Game 12: Question 10 Posted!*** http://boards.theforce.net/prequel_trilogy/b10669/23314477/p4/?184
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
EECHUUTA
Registered:
Mar '07
|
Date Posted:
6/18 7:38am
Subject:
RE: Should Darth Maul have died?
- Date Edited:
6/18 7:41am (2 edits total)
Edited By:
EECHUUTA
|
|
What I think is interesting is that Maul might be an illustration of what the Dark Side does to a Force user. Some of his appearance is the result of long term Dark Side corruption. (Mostly the teeth and eyes.) I had noticed that when Anakin turns and his appearance is affected, he doesn't look as bad. His eyes are yellowish, but its not that straight yellow with the bloodshot irises like Maul has and to a lesser extent, Sidious. Plus Anakin's teeth probably still look good, unlike Maul's and Sidious's. It seems the longer you are corrupted by it, the worse your appearance gets. Though I think the reason Sidious wasn't as affected by it as much as Maul was, was because he had to keep it from showing on his face, and so his face was kept from the "rotting" damage of the Dark Side.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
