Clone Wars If only evil didn't always try to betray one another

Discussion in 'Star Wars TV' started by Sith_Kingpin, Feb 8, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Sith_Kingpin Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Feb 4, 2013
    The last arc in TCW could have been so much smoother for Maul and Pre Viszla. Instead, Savage and Viszla are dead, and Maul's fate is unknown. Anyway, if they didn't divide the Mandalorian clan's loyalty, they could have formed a great criminal Underworld with over 2,000 neutral systems under their command! They could have been a 3rd party if you like (after the Republic and Separatists). Yet, once again, evil cannot work together, and it all goes haywire thanks to their distrust and vying for power.

    IMO, Maul, Savage and Viszla's Mandolorians could have thwarted Palpatine when he showed up if they aided each other for a greater cause, but now their mini Empire has fallen already and most are dead. I know there's a lot of plot armour that meant this was going to happen because of the movies, but it was a nice idea for the criminals and Sith to form a 3rd political party and rule the Underworld. It could have ended so much better if they just knew what the word "teamwork" meant.

    Throughout SW EU lore, there's too many examples of evil not trusting one another and then their Empire/clan falling to tatters as the dominant leader is challenged, and this causes a separation in the ranks. You'd think they'd learn to work in harmony as good does, but maybe it's a Cartesian Circle of perpetuity that will see the demise of evil in the SW Universe. What's your take on this? Do you think their formed Underworld could have expanded and been a threat to Palpatine's vision of a Galactic Empire? I think it may have been a minor blip, but Palpatine would have found a way to eradicate this undesired threat as he always does. Nonetheless, we'll never know as they imploded internally and deserved their short-lived Empire.
  2. tal0nkarrde Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Dec 1, 2005
    star 2
    They would never work in harmony, because the kind of evil we see here is all about power. Seekers of extreme power will always be paranoid that someone else will try to take that power away. Look in our own history - in China for example: When Mao began to think that others might be becoming too powerful and could gain support against him, he began the Cultural Revolution to destroy all those who might oppose him. In the end, he took out quite a few of the leaders of the Communist Party, thus ensuring full power for himself for quite some time. The world of Star Wars, though science fiction, actually takes quite a few pages from our own history books.
    General Immodet likes this.
  3. anakinfansince1983 Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 4, 2011
    star 7
    Being self-centered, power-hungry and unwilling to work with others are characteristics of the type of evil we see in Star Wars, as the PP said. Had they been willing to work together and share power, they might have been able to expand their Empire as you said, but such a willingness is contrary to their ways.
  4. General Immodet Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Dec 5, 2012
    star 4
    Sometimes I think it is really interesting to see people betray other people. Such themes can be really good plot twists.
    I really liked how Darth Wyyrlok betrayed Darth Krayt in the Legacy comic series. Did not see that coming.
    What if Maul had tought Savage everything he knew and then Savaga stabbed him? That would be unexpected.
    Well, now the Mandalorian episodes have aired, we know it is not going to happen after all.
  5. Jabba_The_Hutt_123 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Oct 29, 2003
    star 3
    Aw that'd have been hilarious.
    Maul comes back for say, 3 episodes just to train Savage then ends up killed by his superior apprentice.
  6. General Immodet Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Dec 5, 2012
    star 4
    I always thought that was the point. Savage was supposed to become the 'Maul' of TCW.
    I always thought Maul was the one who trained Savage in the way Yoda trained Luke.
    Actually, the thing you are saying happened to Savage.
    The only purpose he served was rediscovering Maul. They killed him off way too soon.
  7. Jabba_The_Hutt_123 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Oct 29, 2003
    star 3
    Yeah if I remember rightly, they created Savage to pacify Lucas who wanted Maul back and then obviously he returned anyway.
  8. DARTHVENGERDARTHSEAR Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jun 8, 2002
    star 4
    I agree, getting rid of Savage Opress was a waste. The Darth Maul and Savage Opress tandem was pretty cool to see. But unless this show isn't on its way out next season, maybe killing Savage was necessary at this juncture. The thing that needs to be answered is, what the hell are they going to do with Darth Maul, now?
    General Immodet likes this.
  9. CT-867-5309 Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jan 5, 2011
    star 5
    Savage had his own version of Vader's story going and I was so disappointed to see it so compressed and devoid of detail.
    SithStarSlayer likes this.
  10. Slowpokeking Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Sep 21, 2012
    star 4
    That's what made the SW story great, endless betrayal and backstabbing between the Sith.
  11. anakinfansince1983 Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 4, 2011
    star 7
    Savage should have been the Maul of TCW. They should have had him intent on avenging his brother's death rather than bringing that brother back and making him Savage's superior. That said--the Savage tandem was literally the only thing I liked about Maul being back.
  12. Darth Ibonek Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 11, 2013
    star 2
    Completely agree. Funny how Filoni "revives" Maul (arguably a fan-favorite among many SW fans before TCW) but ends up having people like Savage more than Maul.
    Bo-Katan likes this.
  13. Seerow SWTV★Manager

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Jun 7, 2011
    star 6
    Its hard not to like Savage better after the heart hurting death where he reverts back from a lion on crack into the Savage who was all about protecting his smaller brother. He died the tragic character he was meant to be with my deep sympathy. Maul has no sympathy for me. It was surprising how he comforted his brother but phhht, ya take his head I won't bat an eye. Glad he's still a wild card.
    QuangoFett likes this.
  14. SithStarSlayer Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Oct 23, 2003
    star 6
    He's either going to the basement, or Kamino. :p
  15. DARTHVENGERDARTHSEAR Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jun 8, 2002
    star 4
  16. anakinfansince1983 Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 4, 2011
    star 7
    I'm already seeing the ads about getting Maul out of the Disney vault for a limited time only before he goes back in forever.
    TrandoJedi likes this.
  17. DARTHVENGERDARTHSEAR Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jun 8, 2002
    star 4
    Kamino? I like that idea. :)
  18. 07jonesj Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 16, 2010
    star 4
    Savage was successful because we all expected him to pretty much be a straight-up Maul clone, and we actually got a good backstory to him. A shame that we didn't see more of Savage's thought process on Maul taking dominance.
  19. TaradosGon Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Feb 28, 2003
    star 4
    Evil men of ambition are pretty much never able to work together, there are many cases of this historically and not just in fiction. And sometimes when an ambitious man even so much as perceives such ambition from a peer, he will have that person killed out of paranoia of what might happen.This sentiment is also echoed in The Lord of the Rings, when Gandalf tells Saruman that there is only one Lord of the Ring (Sauron) and that he does not share power.

    The idea of the Sith Order and Rule of Two always seemed farfetched to me and requires suspension of disbelief, since the Sith are willing to share power (they have an apprentice) but are not willing to share power beyond that because it leads to infighting. And yet, we've seen that it really doesn't prevent infighting, since there are plenty of attempts at infighting even under the Rule of Two because there is nothing to stop a person from breaking the rule.

    That raises the question to me as to why the Sith would ever take an apprentice. An ambitious Sith Lord taking on an apprentice is essentially a Sith Lord taking on a rival that has ambition to usurp his master. This just seems asinine to the point that the only way I can accept it is through suspension of disbelief. Palpatine is excited at the prospect that Vader will one day eclipse him in power in ROTS; Sam Witwer says that Palpatine is looking for the perfect apprentice that will one day kill him and take his place; Palpatine says that all those with power are afraid to lose it; and Filoni mentions that the Sith cling to life so stubbornly because they believe that there is nothing for them after death and so that power can only be maintained while alive.

    The only way I can rationalize it is that Palpatine wanted Vader to surpass him, but was arrogant to think that he would be able to manipulate Vader and keep him under control, such that Vader's power would enhance Palpatine's power indirectly, rather than Palpatine hoping that Vader would kill him, which IMO just goes against everything the Sith are and makes them selfless in putting the needs of the Sith Order above their own desire to live.

    The line in ROTS is, "you will not stop me; Darth Vader will become more powerful than either of us!" It just seems like Palpatine intends to use Vader's power for his own designs, not that he has any intention of being usurped (and definitely isn't looking forward to it).

    Maul and Vizsla both had eyes on the same prize, to rule over the Death Watch. It's the same kind of struggle that the Sith have amongst themselves, only instead of both coveting the position of Sith Master, they are fighting for the right to lead Death Watch and rule Mandalore. The only way that they could have co-existed would be if Vizsla bowed out and was willing to surrender full authority to Maul (which wasn't going to ever happen). But even then it is unlikely since Maul would probably remain paranoid of the potential threat Vizsla could pose in the future and have him killed anyway. The remaining Death Watch that had no ambition and were willing to work for Maul were left alone.

    Ambitious villains cannot co-exist indefinitely.
    Last edited by TaradosGon, Feb 13, 2013
    07jonesj likes this.
  20. 07jonesj Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 16, 2010
    star 4
    Actually, that is what the Rule of Two is about - ensuring the Sith Order remains strong above all else. IMO, a major opinion of "true evil" is that the weak shall die, and are unworthy of help - the strong shall live, rule and gain power.

    If a Sith Master is able to be able to be defeated by his/her apprentice, then they don't deserve help. They deserve to die. That doesn't make them selfless, just that they value power over all else, and if they aren't powerful enough then they deserve to die.
  21. SithStarSlayer Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Oct 23, 2003
    star 6
    So does MaulKiller.;)
  22. TaradosGon Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Feb 28, 2003
    star 4
    This mechanic was still in play prior to the Rule of Two. Naga Sadow and Ludo Kressh fought for authority; the strong would lead and the weak shall die. Malak betrayed Revan, and Sion and Nihlus betrayed Kreia. In TOR there are plenty of betrayals within the Sith Empire as ambitious Sith fought amongst themselves or even attempt to build power bases that would rival the Sith Emperor's so that they may destroy him. I don't see what whittling the number down to two and saying that there can ONLY be two does. There is still going to be betrayal. Darth Plagueis even states that the Rule of Two is thrown out the window frequently and that few Sith ever actually abide by it. Nobody with that kind of amoral and cutthroat ambition is going to abide by a rule. So it's kind of worthless.

    And the Sith managed to survive far longer without a Rule of Two than with one. Vitiate's Empire in the EU lasted far longer than Palpatine's. And though it is unclear as to what Palpatine is referring to when he implies that the Sith ruled the galaxy before, we have no idea how long that Empire lasted, but presumably they managed to work together long enough to take control.
    Last edited by TaradosGon, Feb 13, 2013
  23. 07jonesj Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 16, 2010
    star 4
    I find it hard to argue with your points, they're very valid.

    Do we know if the Rule of Two came straight from George?
  24. ImNotAStarWarsFanboy Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Feb 25, 2011
    star 5
    The title of this thread always irks me when I see it.
    07jonesj likes this.
  25. Sith_Kingpin Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Feb 4, 2013
    Lol at ImNotAStarWarsFanboy. I knew it'd annoy some people as I didn't get the wording right in the title. The premise I was trying to state was, evil in the SW Universe could be so much more efficient and actually rule star systems if they worked together for a greater cause instead of vying for top dog positions of power they always desired. My reference for this was the Mandalore arc, and I think Maul, Savage and Pre Viszla, along with the crime syndicates, could have done soooooooooooooooo much more if they didn't backstab one another.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.