Discussion in 'Live Action, Clone Wars & Classics' started by Anakin Starkiller, Oct 25, 2012.
Yeah, that does put a damper in the concept. Still, it'd be interesting if Maul didn't turn out to be himself in the end, but an empty shell controlled by Mother Talzin.
I will answer both.
If we did not see a body it didn't happen. In the Mortis episodes Anakin cuts the Son with a lightsaber, not with the Dagger. We only know of the Dagger ending the life of the Ones for sure, it is within the realm of possibility that being cut with a lightsaber is not enough to kill the son and he feigned death.
@hlc88 In film and stage its called "losing yourself in the role" also its a way to make him convincing as Maul. And Obi Wan was instrumental in fouling the plans of the son on Mortis so to say Obi Wan has done nothing to him is just not true. We know the Son takes on the physical form of others because he took on the Form of Shmi and was able to touch Anakin.
I see a body right here next to the remnants of the Father's clothes, Anakin is standing in front of it. It's the Son's body.
The Daughter and Son were tied to the Father. The Father killed himself with the knife breaking his power therefore making The Son vulnerable to a lightsaber kill.
And, here's another question for you, how would The Son even know anything about Darth Maul and what happened to him? It makes no sense.
The Anchorites were well aware of things happening in the Galaxy. The Son would know the same way that he knew enough to imitate Shmi, the same way he knew Anakin would become Darth Vader and shared the vision of the future with him.
I used to think it was possible that Maul was really the Brother in that form given the similar lines they spoke and because in a way the Sister is inside Ahsoka.
The Son didn't just have similarities with Maul. He slips into Palpatine's voice too, particularly when he tells Anakin that they will destroy both the Sith and Jedi. When it comes to Maul and Son saying the same things, the IU answer I think is just that the Son was pretty much the Dark Side represented in physical form, and so he may had channeled Maul and Sidious-like voices and phrases because to an extent he represents them and might be influenced indirectly by them.
I think it's equally possible some poor Naboo citizens rescued Maul and got paid back with hate and insanity.
I think Ahsokas Life runs through Anakin now. Anakin was the medium which transfered the Lifespirit of the daughter into his Padawan. They have a boundary through the Force now. If Anakin joins the dark side than Ahsoka cant live anymore because the conection between her and the light side fades away.
That was through Anakin, because he was on Mortis... because of the passionate way that he missed his mother, never letting go of that. And as for what he became? Well, the force showed the son a glimpse...
The son was a power mad idiot, not some darkside god... unless you live on Dathomir.
Well the Ones were aware of things in the outside Galaxy even though they were removed from it. They knew the "Chosen One" had been found and had knowledge of Jedi distress beacons -- though antiquated.
I may be wrong about Maul actually being the Son, but I think these clues I point out are intentional. A lot of the counter-arguments could be simple misdirection from the writers.
I find it funny that you think it more likely the son died by a lightsaber, but Darth Maul survived being cut in half and falling down a bottomless pit.
But like I said I might be wrong. I am not attached to being right on this, but I think the Son as Maul is fun to think about, and for now I am convinced this is the case.
I don't see how it's simply misdirection that the Son was all about allying with the Chosen One while Maul hasn't mentioned the Chosen One, is unaware of the Force being out of balanced until his insanity is removed (for the most part), and how he is obsessed with revenge against Obi-Wan and not Anakin - and has yet to even acknowledge the Chosen One or concern himself with that prophecy.
Plus there's the whole thing about the Son talking like Palpatine, which to me is no different than him saying the same thing as Maul. Yet, there's no argument that the Son is Palpatine. And when Sam Witwer talked about his role as Son, he said that he was directed by Filoni to blend Palpatine and Starkiller into the character as well as Maul. So there isn't just a link to Maul. Plus it seems that Palpatine is going to take both Maul and Savage on and school them (Maul is getting zapped by Palpatine in the trailer and we see a shot of him taking them on, 1 vs 2. And as I said, there was just as much influence of Sidious in Son as there was Maul.
I can see how Son had a little influence of Maul in his character, but not vice versa, aside from one stray line. When it comes to the character's motives, I see no influence of Son.
I'd by more heavily into the idea that Father, Son and Daughter are the "Whills" based on Lucas' original description of the Journal of the Whills being that it was derived from wise, immortal beings that were outside observers that chronicled the events of the Galaxy. Father, Son and Daughter existed outside the temporal world, lived unnaturally long, were aware of the happenings in the temporal world, and could not be killed conventionally with a lightsaber and only through some enchanted plot device. Son was the exception in that he was killed via lightsaber, though only by virtue of the fact that Father mortally wounded himself via said enchanted dagger, which weakened Son. On top of this, ignoring the EU, Father is the first character to chronologically become one with the Force, and Qui-Gon was established as having a vague link to Mortis as well (and we know that he ultimately learns to retain his identity after becoming one with the Force as well).
Personally, I'm skeptical that Lucas can aim for an idea that is so consistent with how he described the writer(s) of the Journal of the Whills, and yet not intend for Mortis to be related.
This just makes me think of John Locke and the Man in Black on LOST....
This is somehow even less plausible than Darth Maul surviving and ending up on Lotho Minor... and that really takes some work. Congrats.
I don't see how its any less plausible of a reason for Maul surviving fatal injuries than anything else.
You don't see how a character that was killed not being dead impersonating a character that was killed not being dead is less plausible than a character that was killed not being dead?
Well, it is.
There is, of course, a question of timing: whatever enabled Maul to survive in the first place happened over ten years before the events in the Mortis arc.
By creating an unnatural Force Born, right?
That was always my analogy. And Vader killing Sidious and therefore killing himself did he restore the natural balance of the Force.