ST The Force, the Chosen One, Balance, and the ST

I just hope they keep the force somewhat mysterious. There's no need in my mind to elaborate further.

 

I 've never liked mysterious. I'll take an evolving, complex and 6 different methods of having a relationship with the force. It's better than a vague" it's everywhere and everything" kind of deal. I do understand that this is my preference and I respect others view, some people's Starbucks takes 1 minute to make mine takes 5 it's all java in the end.

 

I do like mysterious things. Things which make me wonder. Maybe that's what SW has that's special. The undefined makes a fan feel their own story in this universe. If you start defining exact details fans might feel left out or disconnected. The feeling that they don't fit into a certain category to have something. So that would lead me to more embrace the mysterious aspect.

However, titling the movie "The Force Awakens" raises questions that might need to be answered. That phrase "TFA" implies so many things and has people wondering. Just look at this thread. It's enough for some to start wondering. Hopefully they refine and expand the Force without concluding it.

 

Its an interesting one that I'm afraid is very close to the truth.

 

Thread merge

 

Thats not coffee. 1 minute is coffee, 5 minutes i s coffee flavored.
I prefer my force be espresso, americano, or just black.

 

Yea that's the opposite of what prefer in fiction. The worst type of scene in a film is the "architect" scene in the matrix sequel , it explains things too much and ends up being a let down because it's never as good as you hoped it would be - that's not to say explain nothing - but leave enough mystery for your imagination and speculation

 

The matrix example is the extreme and I agree that was poorly done. In SW with 7 films the force has to have some more complexity to it to validate things like Qui-Gon's living force philosophy opposed to the views Yoda and others take. That expansion of avenues to enlightenment can make a character like Snoke, who might be outside our known concepts of the force, more believable because we were exposed to the complexities of it in earlier films.

 

Obi-Wan waited on Luke, Yoda waited on Luke. So Luke has those examples to go by but Yoda told him to pass on what you have learned. So he feels that he is doing what Yoda wanted him to do. My view of balance is with a co-exsisting light/dark sides, not one in which the dark is eliminated. Check out the Revenge of the Sith novel. I think Drew K. does an excellent job of describing how I think light and dark sides are balanced. (assuming you haven't already)

 

It's a bunch of biases, tropes and prejudices roled into one. If evil gangs always imploded in itself, we wouldn't have ISIS or mobsters. I find the rule of two tiresome. In the end, it makes the Sith seem like weak and nonthreatening villains because you can always play them against each other. I want more of my villains than the same ol' tired "chronic backstabbing disorder" and going on murder sprees against your allies.

We didn't need the Rule of Two as an explanation back in the day when Vader killed Palpatine to save his Son. His real human motivations were much more fascinating than the tropes retroactively inserted.

We can discuss technicalities, do some corner cases align with the rule of two or not, but that's not the point I am trying to make. The point is: Do we need the Rule of Two in future SW storytelling? In my opinion: NO

 

Is the Rule of Two even canon anymore, anyway? It's not mentioned in any of the six films, and I don't really remember it being discussed in Clone Wars either.

I think it might be something from Legends at this point, so it doesn't matter anyway.

 

It is mentioned in the films. In the Phantom Menace it's explicitly stated that there are always two Sith.

 

Huh, there you go. Forgot about that I guess!

Is it canon that Palpatine ever broke it, though? Didn't he pick up Tyrannus post-Maul?

Obviously Tyrannus broke it, but I'm sure Palpatine & Vader never did in current canon.

 

I don't understand why so many people get so flustered about the Chosen One prophecy, especially if they are not fans of the prequels.
When it was just 3 movies, there was no such thing as Chosen One and the ending of Return of the Jedi was all about Vader saving his son and being brought back from the darkside.
Lucas changed it when he made the prequels. There is no reason WHATSOEVER that they cannot change it again and we find out that Anakin was NOT the chosen one and Yoda was RIGHT.
In my opinion, it is stupid to have the Chosen One come as a result of a Sith Lord's meddling in the dark side.

 

Yoda said that he might or might not be the chosen one. We are told in the movies what the requirement is to be the chosen one and Anakin is that. He defeated the sith. Bringing the chosen one plot back again changes the story but in a bad way not like Lucas.

Some are already upset with rehasing and this would be the worst. They should make their own story.

 

I always thought Tenebrus trained Venamis because he wasn't sure Plagueis was going to take the mantel from him, or simply to insure that which ever of them won would be powerful enough to continue the Rule of Two, sort of like what Bane was thinking with Zannah. Tenebrus congratulated Plaguies after he got him and mentioned the rule of two prior to his death. At that point Plagueis told him that the Rule of Two dies with him. Even Venamis expected to become Hego's apprentice as per the Rule of Two but Plagueis had other plans.

Also, when you're conspiring to become the next Sith Lord I would imagine some of the Bane line Sith would have already had their apprentice in waiting either targeted or already secretly training them. Rule of two doesn't stipulate an apprentice with eyes on the mantel cannot already have an apprentice being trained.

 

That quote means that they are usually found in pairs, not literally that there is only ever two of them. That would be silly.

 

Rule of Two features, and explained, in TCW. The concept is canon.

 

And as mentioned earlier, it was referenced before that point in TPM by Yoda.

 

Asajj Ventress was never a Sith. She wanted to be one, but she wasn't. She was a mere pawn that was used, much like Dooku had been before Maul's defeat on Naboo. Once he was thought dead, Dooku became Darth Tyranus and Ventress was allowed to serve under them.

No, it quite literally means that there can only be two Sith Lords.


MOYERS: "When Darth Vader tempts Luke to come over to the Empire side, offering him all that the Empire has to offer, I am taken back to the story of Satan taking Christ to the mountain and offering him the kingdoms of the world, if only he will turn away from his mission. Was that conscious in your mind?"

LUCAS: "Yes. That story also has been retold. Buddha was tempted in the same way. It's all through mythology. The gods are constantly tempting. Everybody and everything. So the idea of temptation is one of the things we struggle against, and the temptation obviously is the temptation to go to the dark side. One of the themes throughout the films is that the Sith Lords, when they started out thousands of years ago, embraced the dark side. They were greedy and self-centered and they all wanted to take over, so they killed each other. Eventually there was only one left, and that one took on an apprentice. And for thousands of years, the master would teach the apprentice, the master would die, the apprentice would then teach another apprentice, the master, and so on. But there could never be any more than two of them, because if there were, they would try to get rid of the leader, which is exactly what Vader was trying to do, and that's exactly what the Emperor was trying to do. The Emperor was trying to get rid of Vader, and Vader was trying to get rid of the Emperor. And that is the antithesis of a symbiotic relationship, in which if you do that, you become cancer, and you eventually kill the host, and everything dies."

--Time Magazine Interview; 1999.

Lucas was basing this off of what happened on TESB and ROTJ and at the time, he wasn't going to do anymore films. So this was his way of wrapping things off. That's why our new lead villain in TFA is named Kylo Ren and not Darth Ren or Darth Kylo.

Lucas was not dealing in real world, he was dealing in mythological tropes. In fictional stories, the bad guys cannot get along.

 

I don't see how it's changed at all. Luke saves Vader and Anakin saves Luke. The story is the exactly the same. The only difference is the overall context which we didn't know. Now we do which is no different than finding out that Vader is Luke's father in the first place which doesn't actually change the story of TESB itself but the way we see it. Now we know what Luke doesn't know.

Yoda was wrong about a great many things and he is wrong again and again in the OT and for all his knowledge he really doesn't have all the answers. He like Obi-Wan is stuck in the old ways and can't transition to a new way of thinking. They simply can't make that leap that Luke was able to do.

He keeps falling to the old ways over and again no matter how badly things turned out for the Jedi Order.

They still have value of course but they can't be the only way because it doesn't work anymore.

Luke makes Anakin realize just because things are the way they are or have been doesn't mean that they can't change.

Luke took Yoda's wisdom but was able to add to it to come up with a solution that Yoda never could have.

 

There was very evidently no explicit 'rule of two' during ROTJ. 'He will join us or die.' So there would have been three, or maybe Darth Vader and the Emperor were just winding each other up, in which case the implication is that there was no 'rule of two', otherwise the Emperor would have said, "Yeah, but, you know, he can't join us, because..."

Anyway, there was nobody to enforce a formal 'rule', so it can only ever have been a 'rule of thumb' or a perceived law based on observation (and thus liable to be broken). You can only have a 'rule' if there is somebody or something to enforce it.

 

It was a formal rule in as much as Dooku wasn't a Sith, but he was alongside Palpatine and Maul. This was confirmed in "The Lost One". Luke needed training in order to be of use, which is why it was okay that he join them, as an agent of the dark side. Once he was ready, the other would try to sway him to join against the other.

 

I have read it awhile ago, you may have gotten something from it that i missed. Personally I like the Idea that the Dark side or at least Dark Side Users like the Sith are the imbalance. Light side symbiosis and the Dark side cancer, one it pisses off all those people who want to be Grey or Twilight Force-Users and in this day and age of moral relativism and ambiguity its nice to have something clear cut. Though I did like the idea that the good or bad of the Force came from the person wielding it.

I think that we are going to get the resurgence of the Jedi, just on a much delayed timetable compared to what was seen in the EU where Luke began working towards rebuilding the Jedi with in a few years of Endore, which I personally find preferable.

I just hope that they don't have Luke's first attempt at restarting the Jedi end in failure because "The Force was not with him", and now that Rei and probably Fin are around its time to do things the right way. No Big order(like in the Prequels) just a master and his apprentices learning the ways of the Force at his feet(like in the OT).

I'd rather Luke have just been preoccupied for the past thirty years.