Discussion in 'Star Wars: The Force Awakens - Spoilers Allowed' started by YoureNotJonesy, Nov 2, 2012.
Well, as George Lucas himself once said about Star Wars:
I understand your point about Hollywood, although I think it's a tad strong. But we shouldn't argue against a particular genre and what makes it work simply because Hollywood might be a certain way. Limiting imagination is always a mistake imo. Especially when the audience begins to forget what makes fantasy fantasy and realism realism. They both have their charms, but let's honor their different powers.
Excellent quote. But this isn't an argument for realism for the sake of realism as a genre, but about how storytellers use stylistic realism to make the fantasy genre believable. I agree. But this isn't an argument against fantastic elements; it's about how to make them work best.
Restraint is very important in writing imo.
It's backed up by evidence. Did you see Thor 2? If you did, the material was handled with complete and utter disrespect for both the characters and what the story presents. Thors mom is killed and the hero doesn't spend more than two minutes mourning her before he starts cracking jokes again. There are other scenes like this. They just didn't give a ****! They stuffed Loki in countless scenes - despite his actions having almost nothing to do with the plot! Pure fanservice. And that was a product of the current superstar, Joss Whedon.
JJ Abrams himself mistreated Khan, using him in a gimmicky and totally unnecessary way. And I'm saying that despite being an Abrams fan. Same with the "death scene" and the cheap "miracle cure".
Do you really think these people are capable of handling the baddest possible plot destroyers there are, resurrection and time travel? If you say yes then I will immediately shut up. But if you say no, then well your opinion isn't so far removed from my own!
Truth is, I don't need a heavy fantasy element in SW. I'd rather the movies are full of bounty hunters than about anything like dead people fighting against the heroes.
Haha, but are space bounty hunting aliens really much more realistic than unnaturally living Sith?
The problem with your argument is that it's not about fantasy, but about poor storytelling. Poor storytelling is a problem for all genres.
I think your argument would be stronger if you simply argued that Star Wars would be better if it's treated more like science fiction. It seems like that's what you really want. But others like me love the fantasy elements. Ghosts, zombies, unkillable Sith. I love it all.
EDIT: Restraint is only important in writing so the writer can learn control. After that, restraint is only a cultural value and serves little artistic purpose on its own.
Poor storytelling often goes hand in hand with the elements I mentioned. I simply don't trust all the writers that are to come to handle them well.
They can be used in a good way, but in my experience this is rather rare.
Additionally, I don't think some of these elements fit SW. They would be better suited in a different universe. Time travel for instance almost needs a universe to be created around it.
What I truly think is that there should be a balance between the magical and the SF elements, just like in the first three SW movies, as what SW truly is is being a great mix. Everyone finds something different they like about it, that's why it worked so well. I neither want technobabble - nor unkillable ghosts wishing objects into being and creating force wormholes. Balance isn't possible if you go to far in one direction.
I totally disagree. What a writer does and does not use often plays a huge part in determining his/her style. It's very important to create your own boundaries.
One of mine is for instance not to write about something that doesn't really interest me. Or starting a story when I have no clear ending in mind.
I learned that from bitter experience.
The force should not be used as a Deus Ex Machina free for all card. If "He used the darkside" is the only explanation that is required to explain anything that happens then it has become a tool of pure Deus Ex machina. Why is Darth Plagueis special for discovering how to cheat death if anyone can do it? This really comes down to each fans threshold for what they consider "believable". Maul's survival was not believable too me. Vader's was. Palpatine's would not be if it happened. Neither would Dooku's if it happened. I'm not the kind of fan that just excepts whatever I'm told. They've got to earn it.
Yea I was not a big fan of bringing Maul back and I need to watch all the episodes of him in TCW to get a better understanding of it all. I don't want Plagueis, Palpatine, etc to come back in anyway fashion form in VII. You can have a all new threat sith or whatever that was some how influenced by what they did in there time to bring a connection to PT,OT.
It's not explained in TCW. As
@Iron_lord pointed out, you have to read a spinoff comic to actually get the explanation.
Yea I will have to look into that but for some reason I loved him only in PT but when he died I was glad and done with him, no matter how badass he was. Plagues was not all that impressed with him, to him he was just a sith soldier thats it.
A good page
I loved Maul's survival, not only because Maul's defeat on Naboo would have been a waste of potential for the character, but because it ties in neatly with the Sith lore and the obsession with overcoming death. Even with Maul's survival, Plagueis can still stand out. What Maul achieved was surviving a fatal injury; what Plagueis MAY have achieved is immortality, or at least essense transfer. They're two completely different things, what Maul did and what Plagueis may have done. So yeah, I'm quite content with the idea of Maul coming back and just because Maul did it, doesn't mean that suddenly any Sith can do it as there's nothing to say that any Sith can develop a sense of hatred for someone to the degree that Maul did. I think there was a net benefit to Maul surviving.
I love the blatant "Chewbacca-type" character. Surely that's based on the earliest concept art for Chewbacca?
This entire article (link below) is about the huge parrallels between Rebels and Lucas's original draft. Its a good read, and its subtitle is lol "How Rebels is a more PURE Star Wars than A New Hope". My first thought upon reading it was losing some of the magic of the potential of Rebels due to it being a 'copy' but after 3 seconds I realized they're just borrowing the core concept and arc designs, plus I'm loving 'The Star Wars' (Dark Horse's comic of Lucas's original draft) so I'm good with it. I have no doubt it won't follow the first drafts main plot, so it just taking the swashbuckling adventure and concepts and applying it to their story set between III and leading into IV.
Its a day or two old... but the author flat out predicted we'd see a Chewbacca type character based on his early concept art due to Chopper, Kanan, and Ezra all being very close to original draft characters... and what do you know... there he is.
The knowledge of Essence Transfer is specifically stated as being completely lost in the Plaguis novel. Never does it imply that is what Plagueis is trying to master. Plagueis is trying to learn an entirely new skill. As for Maul, we'll just have to agree to disagree.
Don't forget the many other Sith in the EU who gained a form of physical life immortality in the EU (though both achieved it unintentionally) Darth Sion and Darth Nihilus. Plus many other who achieved a ghost form of immortality, such as Kryat, Marco Ragnos, Exar Kun... and exactly what kinda immortality Plagueis may have achieved or got close to is open to debate.
Darth Sion held his decaying body together though sheer concentration of never ending anger... of course dying once he finally had his concentration of anger broken when forced to fight the Jedi Exile (Meetra Surik, god aweful name), the Exile is female in canon and in all female Playable Character fights its revealed he had fallen for her (since she reminds him of a nice version of his mentally abusive sith master, mommy issues I guess, lol, mixed with the Exiles ability to form force bonds) and knows he's just being used as a tool. These two things make him lose his concentration of anger, thus he colaspes and dies after several rounds of duels (he fights her to save her from his fate)
Darth Nihilus however energy essanced his life force into his mask. He had to feed off the force in others to preserve his own that was trapped in the mask. He died in canon due to using the bulk of his trying to absorb the Jedi Exiles life force when she herself was cut-off from the force so in effect he wasted most of his remaining power and was then defeated when he was weakened.
Darth Kryat kinda gained immortality too or at least figured out how to survive death and his ghost boosted he could return to life next... but was defeated before he could. Sadly exactly how this happened wasn't quite clear or I'm forgetting, I personally presume he tied himself either to Cad or an object but once the ship was vapped in the Sun all the objects burned up and Cad himself finally accepted the lightside thus likely severing any connection.
Marco Ragnos possessed/haunted his tomb after death, so did Exar Kun... Kun has since been presumed defeated forever while if Ragnos might only be down for a bit.
I'm sure I missed a ton of others too...
Looked at from the perspective that Jedi are the force at balance and the Sith represent being out of balance , plus death being natural it is logical all Sith want immortality on the physical plain while the Jedi want it in the afterlife so a few getting close to it or a form of it is very natural for their motives. So Maul surviving being cut in half and physically surviving while Qui-gon physically died from a gut wound but his spirit achieved immortality is very in tune with their natures. Not to mention a great parrallel between the two and foreshadowing of the nature of what the jedi and sith of there age will achieve or try to.
I have no real problem with spirits. I've usually liked how they've been used in the EU. I don't think I'm making myself clear here. The other Sith you mentioned kept themselves alive and in one piece through the force. They never actually died, they just used the force to keep themselves going, which is what Plagueis was trying to do. They still had bodies. They were also very powerful masters. Maul's body was mostly gone. Several organs, part of the spinal column, the digestive tract, all gone. That's not even counting how much damage the fall would cause. Would you guys be cool with Dooku surviving? Is there no injury too great for you to draw the line? How does death have any meaning in the Star Wars universe if you're willing to accept any resurrection no matter how extreme?
When you put it like that...? Dooku's injury leftovers are precisely all that Lovecraft needed for Whisperer in Darkness. Thanks. I am now sold out for a severed head and a pair of disconnected hands being a villain.
Lovecraft inspiration...disconnected hands...
Someone go grab me a Necronomicon, some Bruce Campbell, and a healthy dash of Sam Raimi directed Star Wars and I can make some magic happen!
And that's somehow more grevious than General Grevious? Or Darth Sion... a guy who's litterally rotting from foot to skull both on the inside and outside. Btw before he became this, realize he was human before his injury not some Alien. Maul wasn't dead either and being cut in half there takes a bit of time to kill, about the same amount of time being immolated would take to die from... which Vader survived regardless of having two major arteries in his legs left open (too big to be culterized)... and no Mauls body wasn't mostly gone, more like bellybutton up was left that's more than half of the torso and the important half.
As to the fall a girl just survived a 3,500 foot fall due to her parashoot getting tangled up but still about a third opened according to some (she's saying it never opened though... but I'm not sure I believe that)... we also know Jedi/Sith can forceleap and minorly slow their falls. So it is possible, however unlikely, that Maul could survive... though like the girl clinging to life for days then having many weeks of recovery after a 3,500 foot fall.
big image of Darth Sion (Move your mouse to reveal the content)
big image of Darth Sion (open)
big image of Darth Sion (close)
Now, as Dra_ keeps saying, its fantasy not reality both have there place... but this is a fantasy series with some sci-fi thrown in.
We've got Trekm in Star Wars
Carmelle @Con_noisseur 1h
Entire #YoungJustice panel is jealous that @Greg_Weisman & @BrentSpiner are currently working on #StarWarsRebels. #gally1
Brent Spiner is awesome in anything and I damn skippy hope that his character is the "crossover" between Rebels/ST.
I really hope he's playing the Inquisitor. I think he could make a very menacing and iconic character out of him.
Darth Sion I'm unfamiliar with. Grevious did it to himself. Vader's injuries were indeed cauterized (you can see in the film that he isn't bleeding). I'd say that Vader was maimed, but not injured in a way that would be instantly fatal. Maul is gone from below the ribcage. That means no stomach, intestines, bladder, kidneys, liver at least partially, etc. I believe that would be instantly fatal.
Granted Maul isn't human, but it's never established that his internal anatomy is different, so it's all we have to go on. Fantasy doesn't mean anything goes. There still has to be internal logic and boundaries or you get rampant deus ex machina. Maul surviving the fall is not what really bothers me. It's the two things in conjunction. But really it's ok that we disagree on this. We just have different expectations and views of what we want Star Wars to be. It doesn't mean I don't love you guys.
But by the same token it's never established that his internal anatomy is the same as a human's, which makes it plausible enough to me that it isn't when we see that he survived being cut in half.