Full Series The Mortis Opinion Poll

Oh ya Stover and Luceno are both fantastic. Add Drew Karpyshyn to that list as well. Haven't heard of the other 2 so I can't comment on those.

 

Contractually, George owns(ed) everything on Star Wars, including any and all characters and stories developed by EU authors, so he is fred to change or override those stories if he pleases. The authors who write the novels retain no ownership of their work, so it stands to reason that they understood their novels wouldn't necessarily remain part of the Star Wars canon equivalent to the movies.


I personally have no problem with Lucas Star Wars stories like the movies and TCW completely contradicting or negating the EU novels. While I do enjoy the EU novels I've read I simply view them as a separate continuity where only the PT and OT take place. I don't think it's so much that George is unnamable to keep his story continuous with the EU as much as he's unwilling to have his stoy guided or more accurately, limited by the independent work of other authors. Rightfully so in my opinion as he created the Star Wars galaxy and as always has his own very unique vision of how the story should be told. The way I see it, he understands that fans are clamoring for more star wars and authors are interested in telling these stories, so he allows the EU novels to be publishes. It's great that fans have built this whole new part of Star Wars, but that in no way obligates George Lucas to accept all of these stories and ideas as part of his own. As it stands, the only people other than George who really have a say on things in the official or canon continuity of the aeries are the people like Dave Filoni who work one on one with GL on planning out story arcs for the prequel tilogy and beyond.

 

From what EU authors have said regarding acknowledging Lucas' prerogative to overwrite their stories on a whim, I do think it's "understood." But I don't think "canon" has any kind of legal importance at all, I think that's fans inflating something that isn't an issue. I don't know that an author trying to make a lawsuit against LucasFilm over their story being rendered "non canon" is going to go anywhere. They are effectively burning their bridge with LucasFilm and I doubt there's any kind of breach of contract in John Smith's Star Wars book becoming non-canon. I would be surprised if "canon" actually shows up in the contract. Instead it probably just says something about all rights to created content going to LucasFilm, thus allowing them to do whatever they want with it.

For instance, Subway used to have a commercial that featured the character of Peter Griffin. Let's say that hypothetically Subway wanted to use a Star Wars character in one of their commercials. I don't think they can go to Zahn and get the rights to use Thrawn... in a Subway commercial... He probably retains no rights to the character.

Lucas Licensing contracts John Smith to write a book that conforms to the canon of x, y and z. Upon completion I would think LucasFilm retains all rights to the material* to do with however they please, and that they would never guarantee that the material being written about would be referenced by other authors and never contradicted.

*I asked about this on the forums before in case anyone knew. I gave the example that in Star Trek's EU assets created by one company cannot be freely used by another. So an original starship design created for a ST novel cannot freely be used in a ST video game - as was the case in Star Trek Online (made by Cryptic Studious) having to work out a deal with an artist to use their ship in the video game (the ship was an original design featured in a Star Trek licensed novel). You don't see that kind of thing in Star Wars though. If Lucas Arts wanted to include Darth Tenebrous in a video game, it seems like they would just do it. I don't get the impression that they have to work anything out with Luceno to do so.

 

Lucasfilm does indeed retain rights to any and all elements of the EU, thus they're free to do with them as they please. EU authors wouldn't have any basis for a lawsuit because they signed over rights to whatever characters and stories they created. I'm including EU authors as fans because typically you would expect a person to enjoy a series in which they write novels. I wasn't trying to equate them with fanfic writers as I understand they are contracted by Lucasfilm to write a novel or comic.

That said, I stad by the points about Lucas maintaining his own vision and only taking elements from the EU he likes to add into the movies / tv series. With new movies etc. Ultimately. What I most want to see I gL's vision for Star Wars. Yeah he should use other directors and writers like Davr Filoni and JJ Abrams to help tell those stories but ultimately it's still his story. Ultimately when George completely steps out of even a creative role in the series, I'd imagine it would still be best for one person like Filoni or Kathleen Kennedy to step in and decide what elements of the EU will and will not be considered in the films.

Ultimately, no matter who is in charge of the films , I do not expect them to retain continuity with the EU, only selectively choose characters to be used In the films.

One other thing I wanted to comment on is tha GL is "making money off of the work of the EU novel writers"...while it is true that Lucasfilm does make money on those projects, we can't forget that those authors are getting paid for their work and making money of of the star wars name / series GL invents. GL already made his fortune off of the movies. If he needed more, he just would have made more. The EU writers benefit pretty substantially by attaching the name Star Wars to they story. Gerge doesn't need the novels to make money off of as much as the novelistsbwnedit financially from writing a Star Wars novel. Simply, the EU authors have a lot more to gain financially than George Lucas, who has already made and given away billions. This isn't meant to dimmish the role of re Eu authors, only dispel any kind of notion that George is somehow exploiting the EU auhors out of pure greed before mercilessly and "illegally" tearing their stories asunder. Ultimately the stories belong to Lucas so he's free to do with them as he pleases and he doesn't require novels to continue making money. I'd wager that ultimately he has made far more off of the films, ILM, etc.

 

This is a tough one for me. I'm honestly not sure just how to vote as I completely adored "Overlords" (gave it my only perfect, 10/10 rating, in fact), but I found the following two episodes of the Mortis arc somewhat lacking. I suppose that, on the whole, I can only be said to have "liked" the arc, but I absolutely loved the opening act.

 

I don't know, I mean, I'm not an attorney, either, but I'm fairly certain that the contracts would have these things spelled out in explicit detail (after all, these type of considerations are precisely what contracts are for). Reading some of Zahn's quotes, for example, he understands that as a "work for hire," he has no rights over what is done with his work once he turns his manuscript over. It's just the reality of the situation and these writers should, in fact, understand this going in. If they don't, well, they either failed to read/comprehend their contracts, or were working under the assumption that their work was somehow 'safe' from alterations, in spite of having no such assurances from Lucas (either way, that's on them, I think).

If this is a concern, the writer is free to request certain protections before they sign any contract, but it's simply not how Lucas has operated in the past and, unless an author carried such weight that Lucas desperately wanted him or her, I just don't see Lucas saying anything other than "Thanks, but no thanks. We'll persue other options." It's all about leverage and generally speaking, in these cases, Lucas has almost all of it.

I certainly applaud your stance and every author who is approached has the same opportunity to chose not to sign on the dotted line, as well. That said, I think most authors are stated fans of the franchise, who literally consider it a dream come true to work in the Star Wars universe and/or simply understand the windfall that authoring an approved Star Wars work will mean to their careers.

 

Only just watched the Mortis arc. Don't know how I feel about it really.

But one thing I like is the order in which the 'gods' died and its representation of Anakin.

First, his actions lead to the destruction of Daughter, reflecting him joining the dark side and destroying the Republic and Jedi order.

Secondly, he and father work together and destroy Son, reflecting him and Luke destroying the dark side.

Finally, Father had to sacrifice himself in order to destroy son, by doing so he saw the error of this ways and in a way redeemed himself for what he had caused. Restoring balance. This reflects Anakin's death and his redemption with Luke, which effectively restored the balance.

What I dislike about the episode is the fact it is supposed to fit too nicely into a package. Anakin sees his future, yet has his mind wiped. The three meet up with the Rex, but its too complicated to explain as non Jedi would not understand. Plus the fact such a seemingly major revelation in never mentioned again in the films and apparently the TV show as well.

I like the interpretations the episode gives, but its execution and the fact it comes after every major film/event it concerns has already been completed make it seem a wasted concept just shoehorned in.

 

I don't know about you ac4155, but I truly did like the Morits Trilogy. For one, it brought out super powered force users and the relevation to Anakin to name a few. The three episode series was a first in terms of storytelling. It was this story and the Witches of Dathomir arcs that started the change and pace the series was to take. So hell yeah, I love it.

 

IMHO ending with Overlords would leave me wanting more. It sets up the problem, but it doesn't provide the solution. Overlords is really lovely in presenting the concept of balance, but Anakin walks away from his responsibility. He didn't learn his lesson, so he's forced (or is it Forced?) to stay and learn his lesson. In the end, Anakin needed to see events play out, and then apply the lesson to the galaxy. Too bad it took him 25 years to get his **** together.
And I also enjoy the discussion! I'm glad Mortis is still being talked about.

Thank you for getting on my level. Mortis has some wonderful and applicable concepts, but its so darned ambiguous and open to interpretation - its easy to understand why some would be completely turned off. But mythology is my thing, so Mortis was a treat.

Perhaps you'd be open to discuss Altar of Mortis? I've been trying to understand Ahsoka's role in the arc, and by extension her role in the TCW and the saga as a whole.

On one level, Ahsoka is a metaphor for Anakin: irritating Jedi-brat is poisoned by evil, assists in the death of the Daughter/Jedi Order, then dies and is resurrected.

Then, on another level, Ahsoka's portrayal is one of Anakin's worst fears: losing Ahsoka to the dark side by his action/inaction.

Here's where it gets tricky for me to understand:
There's the Son/Daughter battle that mirrors Palpatine and the Jedi respectively, and how the sword is a metaphor for Anakin (and/or the clones). If Ahsoka gives the sword to the Son, what does that mean? If Ahsoka dies at the whim of the Son, what does that mean? And if Ahsoka is resurrected by Anakin, using the remaining life in the Daughter, what does that mean? How are these actions reflected in Ahsoka's finale? Is Ahsoka's death and resurrection in AoM a metaphor for her death as a Jedi and resurrection as a new being? Also, Ahsoka dies while under the Son's influence; when she comes back to life, she is back to her old self, no dark influence.

I think its easy to see the echoes of Revenge of the Sith in Altar of Mortis and Return of the Jedi in Ghosts of Mortis. But Ahsoka has a diminished role in GoM, which is more about Anakin anyway. So I thought I'd focus my questions to AoM, because really I want to discuss Ahsoka. It seems, by her character's end, she too has learned to follow the Living Force. She transcended the Jedi and the Sith, like Qui-Gon before her, and like Anakin after her. But then she's not the Chosen One, so she was free to walk away.

Edit: Gotta star out the whole word.

 

For me personally ending it at Overlords was good enough. To continue it on and have the Father knocking out Anakin and freeing him from the darkness was a bit of a cop out. I had expected Obi-Wan and Ashoka to work together to bring him back.

 

It definately could have ended at Overlords, but Anakin having been redeemed before would make ROTJ less powerful.

 

I want to agree with you. I'd rather hear Filoni or Taylor explain why that happened, so that I can assess the value of showing his future and not learning from said-experience. But Filoni said on the BR featurette, there is a concrete reason for all of Mortis, yet an explanation would ruin the experience. Why do you think they decided to include the Future/Forgotten part?

 

I'm glad Anakin got to learn something of the Chosen One Prophecy even though he wouldn't remember it. We probably have to settle for the Force works in mysterious ways as a reason. If Obi-Wan and Ashoka had brought him back to the light I'd like to think he would have finally remembered that in ROTJ and then go and save Luke in ROTJ or something like that.

 

I know this is a bit of a joke, but this topic always interests me, because I don't think that's entirely true. I think it's the nature of the mystical to remain mystical, almost as if there are no words that could satisfactorily explain things, and sometimes... there's just nothing to explain. The mystical sometimes just is what it is.

I relate it back to all the "questions" about Lost. Sometimes people seek explanations about mystical topics by asking questions that are not really questions, like, "What is the smoke monster?" when the actual answer is, spoilers: it's just a guy who can turn into a smoke monster. What matters is how the story plays around it.

Now, granted, in this case it's a bit different because nobody really asked "What is the very essence of the Force?" However, in such a fully fleshed-out mythological universe, I don't think it's wrong to dip a toe in, even if it is very symbolic and open-ended. When you try to cap off something so mystical, it's very easy to handle it very badly, and open-endedness solves this. It's almost like a "spiritual aspect," the same way that in fantasy mythology one might see a divine being as, yunno, whatever: a goat, then a dentist, then a watermelon, all that whacky crap. It doesn't mean the mystical force is a goat or a dentist or a watermelon, but it's an insight into an otherwise-unportrayable mystery, a veil which obscures the vision, but prevents one from going blind at the sight of a cosmic mystery.

I know that's not to everyone's taste, but there are those of us like myself or cwustudent who want to explore that wherever possible, and I'd say it should be a tolerable balance, because it's so symbolic that it doesn't have to mean anything for anyone else, because it's only an aspect.

 

Then they wouldn't be able to sell it then, would they? That's all a license is for, the right to sell an official product for a franchise you don't own. You have to realize you're not buying ownership.

I don't think you'd be getting much work in that case. Your asking your employer to basically sign over part of their franchise to you. I can't think of any employer willing to do that, even if they fully intended your story to be official canon.They'd be just inviting the costly, time consuming legal battles that might ensue, and they certainly wouldn't be able to sell their franchise(like Lucas did, for example) because they're no longer the full owner of it, all the writers who have ever worked for them legally own part of it as well.

But why do you only think the writers should have part ownership? Why not directors, animators, actors, special effects crews, people who were all hired to make a licensed product etc. Wouldn't they have as much of a claim as the writers, if all that's necessary for said claim is "Hey, I worked on this, you can't change/overwrite/remake/sell this."?

 

Perhaps, all I'm saying is there is a reason for the disclaimer. Even if they knew weren't going to change it, and really who knows what will happen after ten or twenty years, they still would have a disclaimer just it case.

It's not even owned by Lucas anymore, did anyone see that coming?

There is no way of knowing for sure, that's why all franchises use a disclaimer. If you try to wait for a 100% guarantee that your work will never be overwritten, then you'd best just write your own original story.

 

I liked it, and I didn't like it. It was too much like a sixties' Star Trek episode, but it kind of made no sense, too. It had so much potential of being good. If only they would have stopped at the first episode.

 

Well I enjoyed the Mortis arc I understand that might be a bit of an unpopular opinion however.

 

They where just ok for me. I thought Ghosts of Mortis was pretty good though.

 

I wish Filoni would explain it all, because I'm stupid.