The hatred I feel for the Black Fleet Crisis Trilogy

Am I the only one who thinks that whole trilogy was the most useless, boring, and downright annoying series ever? What really made me mad first was that it took place way ahead of many of the books, but Luke wasn't married yet and acted like he never would be. I think it was written even before the whole Callista storyline was wrapped up, which basically meant that Callista would never be and forced the other books to move even farther ahead on the timeline in order to undue the stupid things that the BFC did. In addition to all this the whole series just sucked. Does anyone else agree?

 

Blasphemer! I do not want to hear such speak of the great Black Fleet Crisis! It is the best trilogy of the entire EU, IMO.

Michael P. Kube-McDowell was very knowledgable about the militaristic and political happenings of the GFFA. He did the best job in that department.

Also, the vagabond was pretty cool. Could've used a little more plot development, but it still owns.

Overall: Black Fleet Crisis gets a 9.4 out of 10.






Blasphemer!

 

I have only read the first 2 books so far, but I disagree. While the Luke material was questionable, I enjoyed the politics between Leia and the Yevetha, and the Lando sections were straight out his trilogy, with a similiar setting and writing style. Also, I liked the odd pairing of he and Lobot with the droids.

Back when I was a naive 15-year-old, I remember reading that first chapter of Before the Storm and saying to my dad, "This is the best Star Wars novel I've ever read!" ( Yes, with that much enthusiasm. )

Now that I'm older and more cynical, I don't heap quite as much praise upon it.

 

Fluke, you must be kidding. The BFC makes me want to throw up. I HATED THAT ENTIRE VAGABOND STORYLINE. I think it actually put me to sleep. I don't think there's one thing about the BFC that I like.

 

The Yevetha/NR/Han & Leia plotline: Outstanding, some of the best, most interesting EU ever written. I want this guy back writing more SW.

The Lando & Vagabond plotline: I enjoyed it, it was reminiscent of the Lando Adventures and the Rama books, but I can see where some wouldn't like it.

Luke/Akanah plotline: Just plain awful.

EDIT: Another point in its favor is that it dared to go beyond "The Imperial Remnant/ex-Imperial Warlord/Imperial wannabe strikes yet again under bold new leadership with a bold new plan," which up to this point had been pretty much it in terms of Bantam's plots.

 

I do not kid about serious things, such as STAR WARS literature.

Ok, maybe that was a joke, but I loved the BFC.

EDIT: See, Mastadge agrees. Bring back K-Mac!

 

I didn't like BFC much

There were some OK bits like Han's capture and Leia's politics

But I hated the Luke and Lando bits

At least it wasn't as bad as Hambly's two SW books

 

Nope, you're not. A year ago I opened a thread just like this one. The only good book in the trilogy is Tyrant's test, but it gets pulled down in the muck by Before the Storm and Shield of Lies. Their just too politically driven. I had a hard time reading them because of it, having to force myself to read them. I almost didn't read Tyrant's Test. Thankfully, it was not another politics is best book.

 

Be careful hatred leads the darkside.

 

So does Before the Storm and Shield of Lies.

 

IMO, this series was the worst series out there. He created some interesting characters, but then got rid of them almost imediately.

The vagabond was the dumbest thing that I have ever read, save CotJ.

He did do the battles well, but politics sucks and I do not want to here about it.

Luke was changed so much in those books that he didn't seem like Luke anymore.

Of course this is all IMO

 

Yes! Join me in hatred of the ****ing BFC and togther we will...

Uh-Dominate the forums with basher stuff?


But seriously, the BFC is, in my opinion, the epitome of EU crudieness. And I know many conesiours and rabid fanboys who agree with me.

 

BFC is one of the best of the EU, except the Luke-Akanah plotline. It was totally useless and didn't serve anything. But overall the trilogy was soo good that I can easily ignore this. And I too would love to see K-Mac writing in the NJO, or the prequels.

 

"While the Luke material was questionable"

To me, the Luke material is questionable in any book. "I, Jedi" written from Luke's POV would probably drive me over the edge.

Overall, I enjoyed the BFC, but I've read better. That whole time era is kinda dull... no Empire, no Vong. In between bad guys. Result: dumb enemies like the... whatever these dudes were.

 

As far as I'm concerned, BFC is about average for EU. It has its ups and its downs. Luke is out of character, but then he's nearly always out of character in Bantam... Leia is also out of character, but i kind of like how K-Mac writes her. The Fallanassi (sp?) really annoy me, and I found the Qella storyline boring, but the politics and the space battles were written well, and i liked how the wookies actually spoke without their moans having to be translated by other people so we could understand... The scenes with Han in were also very interesting...

 

I think that the political parts of the story were the best...
The story line for leia & the NR was quite realistic...it sounded like post-ww2 politics..

 

I agree about the political parts. They were the best part of the trilogy.

 

WORDS CANNOT DESCRIBE MY HATE FOR THOSE BOOKS,
MAY THEY BURN IN EVERLASTING HELL! OR LEMONADE?...

 

Lemonade's good.

Seriously, I've never found a SW book I hated. Now, Homer, on the other hand...

 

Lemonade so that the book goes mouldy and mildews. Muhahahahaha....

 

I hated both of Hambly's book way more

I read all EU books in order and once I got from CoJ and PoT to Crystal Star I was happy. Most of you hate Crystal Star, but it was an excellent novel after having read both of Hambly's rubbish. Keep in mind though, I think McIntyre wrote Crystal Star in a few months, so it's a good job considering the little amount of time she wrote it.

BFC wasn't that bad compared to CoJ and PoT, but it is pretty poor compared to Thrawn Trilogy, HoT duology, DT duology & EoV duology

 

I liked the BFC. Of course, the Luke storyline was crap. One of the reasons I like it, was that it was one of the only books to actually do something interesting with the Character of Chewie. He wasn't babysitting or fixing the Falcon or protecting Leia. You got more inside his head, and I think K-Mac did a good job of portraying him. 1/3 of a bad book does not make the other 2/3 bad.

 

I've got such a terrible memory...
A lot of you are comparing the BFC to Hambly's books and how bad those were. For some reason I don't really remember much about Children of the Jedi, but I definently read it. That's where Luke meets Callista right? And for some reason I really liked Planet of Twilight, but I hated the Chrstal Star. The Chrystal Star didn't even seem to have a point, just like the BFC. Everything in them served no purpose.

 

I agree with Mastadge. The NR Political/military story line was great.

the Lando story line was good, in parts, but boring in others. It seemed like a good idea that became average because it was too stretched out.

The luke/akanah part of the story was interesting at first. Soon afterwards it became the most hated part of the entire EU.

Overall, i give this trilogy a B.

--My favorite part of this trilogy is definately the character of Gen. Etahn A'Baht.

 

i agree it is boring...i read not even half of one of them and fell asleep...