Discussion in 'Star Wars TV' started by TheTelmarine, Aug 14, 2008.
This is what I've been trying to say, but you've expressed this idea better than I.
If Mace is on his A-game with these crazy Force-powers, why would it be the case that the minute Grievous shows up he loses his connection to the Force? If he can take all the bolts out of a battle droid and make it collapse, why not Grievous? Super-Force-resistant-screws?
Because crushing Grievous' chest from half a block away didn't require using the force...
Seriously, though. Perhaps they were battle damaged droids that were flimsy from having been thrown, or perhaps the droids are just less tightly assembled. I'm sure Mace's force push abilities are well above those of the average Jedi.
Irregardless, I see even less wrong with Grievous being lightning fast in combat (can't easily force push him if he doesn't stay in one place long enough), having the ability to leap from location to location, having a spinning torso, being resistant to high speed winds, and being able to use sabers with his feet as well as his hands. He does at least some of this when he's at his best in TCW, so I see no reason why not to accept the rest of what he's shown doing.
Trebor is focused singularly on Dooku and he gets blindsided by Jango Fett. He has an excuse; he's more of a diplomat than a warrior.
Grievous is focused singularly on Obi-Wan and he gets shot... by Obi-Wan. In his gutsack, which is swinging in the open air and very obviously no longer protected by armour plating. If he's more than a match for Adi Gallia, what's his excuse for dying in a way that makes Coleman Trebor look like a sword master?
My problem with him is the exact opposite.
It's because Grievous is focused on Obi-Wan that he loses the fight and gets killed. Having just re-watched this scene, it's obvious that Grievous is too focused on finishing off Obi-Wan to remember the blaster he had thrown aside moments before. He was completely taken by surprise by Obi-Wan's force pulling the gun, and probably surprised that such a respected and respectable Jedi Master was using it.. He lost because he was overconfident, not because he's incompetent.
I thought he was both.
So General Grievous has defeated multiple Jedi Council members simultaneously... but is caught completely off-guard by a Force-pull?
Wait a second. Coleman Trebor has a backstory? This is the guy who has so little info about him that his replacement on the Council is also named Coleman.
Oy. Sometimes I really hate star wars.
This is Star Wars. Everyone has a backstory. Its the way it works. Its also why the EU can be such a mess at times. I love it all the same, but its nearly impossible to make sense of at times.
Anyways, back to the microseries, why is it such a debated topic that it's stylized? Everything about it is over the top for a reason. That's part of the reason why it's so fun. It's like the Force Unleashed. Starkiller/whateverthehellhiscanonnameis isn't actually the unstoppable force-god that he is in the game. That would be ridiculous. His very existence would make Luke, The Emperor, Yoda, and pretty much every other master before him look completely incompetent. You just simply accept that the character was exaggerated in order to make the game more enjoyable to play. The microseries goes with the same mindset. Its fun. It looks cool. But I wouldn't consider it to be the way these characters actually behave.
Again, my opinion really means nothing if you are deadset on believing that Grievous and Mace really are the total badasses they are in Genndy's series. Just offering my own two cents.
It's Star Wars, dude. People who don't have backstories are the weird ones, rather than the other way around. And if they were on screen in a movie, no matter for how long, you can expect someone fleshed out their life story.
And personally, as odd as it may be sometimes, I love that. Everyone has a story because people have lives, not scripts. It really helps to make the universe more expansive, tangible, and solid.
Oh believe me, I'm well aware of most obscure characters having backstories. What's the Story? springs to mind. But Coleman Trebor's story somehow escaped my notice. Either he's not obscure enough or he's just not that interesting. Seriously, I'd love to hear the amazing adventures of Coleman Kcaj, but Trebor? Meh.
Frankly, yes. He's not perfect. Everyone makes mistakes. He has a singular obsession with killing the Jedi, especially Kenobi, that he focuses entirely on that moment he's about to bring to Kenobi a killing blow.
Hey why not kill kenobi when he had the droid army at his disposal, Why not pick him up and throw him off the ledge..We can go on and on...But part of that poor showing by Grievous is on laziness and piss poor script. How many times have we seen this in movies before, the bad guy dies because he's either too arrogant, overconfident or in this case incompetent. It's the cliche' of the century.
Plus you factor in the huge nerf the character underwent.. That is how GL envisioned him I guess.
I like the other version of Grievous. The one that can duel with Mace Windu and fight against multiple Jedi. You know the one that has a backstory. Not this nerfed version that hates the Jedi for no apparent reason at all. Have we even had an explenation as to why Grievous hates the Jedi or why he even joined the separatists?
I'm pretty sure his motivation is that he's jealous that he can't become a Jedi. That is literally something a five year old would come up with. So, obviously that kind of embarrassingly bad nonsense comes out of GL's "mind."
Since everyone's digging my question so much, you also might want to consider whether if there is a viable explanation for that happening in Ep. III, what a possibly viable explanation might look like for him having the persona in EU that he does and that somehow being the same character who has that happen to him in the film. To me, it's like that Sesame Street song. One of these things is not like the other.
Unless his back story was retconned its partly because of alterations to his brain, and partly because the Jedi interfered in a war between his people and another group, and sided with the other group when his people were the victims.
I personally don't see a problem with the way Mace or Grievous were depicted in the original series. So Mace doesn't always fight his opponents hand to hand, so what? Few characters always do everything they're capable of, because the story would end if they did. Just look at Palpatine. He died by being thrown off a ledge...when he is one of the strongest Force Users in history and hadn't exerted himself in any way up until that point. You're saying he couldn't have grabbed Vader or levitated himself?
I'm not following. But I think you're refering to the differences between the EU GG and the ROTS GG..Like I said, there is no "viable" eplenation, that was all on Geroge Lucas hand and this is what we're left with. The force push and blaster events are self explanatory, **** happens, he didn't see or realize the blaster was there..Nothing else to add there.
I think I read about it somewhere else on the board, but is it really true that for the Clone Wars microseries, Tartakokvsky deliberately exaggerated Grievous into something of an unstoppable killing machine capable of fighting and defeating several Jedi in one fight, while Lucas always intended Grievous to be like he was in ROTS and even in TCW?
Vey. Sometimes I love Star Wars, just for that kind of stupidity.
I much prefer GL's GG to EU's GG.
The Character Encyclopedia- which postdates the change of Adi Gallia to "near-human"- uses the old story.
Essential Guide to Warfare mentions both- and leaves it vague as to which, if either, is true.
Mhm, yea. Totally the same BA in the comics, clearly George Lucas is ruining Grevious' reputation with this show.
I personally didn't feel Ep. III left him with a particularly strong reputation.