Discussion in 'Star Wars Community' started by MasterDillon, Jun 15, 2011.
You mean ?
I'm just saying how can Grievous be criticized for being made to look like loser when he wasn't eactly not a loser in the movies, but Ahsoka is completely fine and her existence does nothing to ROTS.
Except contradict Anakin's inability to let personal problems go.
Exactly. Anakin has shown an inabilty to let go of those he is close to. So why would his Padawan, someone he is potrayed to be close to at this moment(as the show is continueing and things may change, as it stands though she is still close to him none the less) not be mentioned/used against him the way his mother and Padme was? Makes no sense.
Personally, I think there are more qualified people to continue the GFFA after GL has passed, and I do not think it is Filoni. I would like to see Timothy Zahn get a crack at it, unfortunately he is not too young himself.
But who do we know Palpatine didn't use Ahsoka's disappearance to manipulate again? Anakin and Palpatine's relationship is expanded, extended, and continued offscreen. It's obvious by the time we reach AOTC, for instance, that Anakin and Palpatine have formed a relationship since TPM that we weren't privy to onscreen. It's up to the viewer to use their imagination to fill in the details. And who knows? Maybe someday Lucas will do a special special edition and add a live action Ahsoka to ROTS.
Well, obviously not. It's all about context. The audience knows Anakin is in the Vader suit. So when he's unmasked, it's obvious that we're looking at a badly burned Vader. But when the Force ghosts show up, the context is different, and it makes more sense from a viewer's perspective--particularly a younger viewer's perspective--to show the Anakin that we're familiar with. Then again, another explanation is that the power to transcend death and become a Force ghost is only available to the light side, and Anakin reverted to his "pure" form when he returned to the light, etc, etc, etc. But I dunno. It's never been a problem to me because it's such a beautiful moment when Luke gets to see his father as the smiling, content Jedi he never really was.
So they were aimed solely at children, but they were hugely popular with older audiences?
Okay. But the idea that there was no creative thought process behind PotC, that it's aimed solely at teenage girls, that no craftsmanship went into those films at all, is just... Uninformed, to say the least. Narrow-minded, too, probably.
Yep, and now we have cookie-cutter Pixar films with cookie-cutter, puffy-cheeked, irritating characters, flat plots, lazy animation, and sickening political correctness. But anyway, I don't think the Pixar films or the classic Disney animated films were aimed solely at anyone. The trick to forming a successful franchise has always been to appeal to a variety of people. Any franchise which fails to do that will fail to grow and fail to survive.
Unlikable to you.
He'd still do better than Filoni, I believe.
Pick me, George! I'll do it! I would give all my limbs to have creative control over SW.
After Lucas becomes one with the force, the negatives of the theatrical originals of the original trilogy (which have always been mysteriously preserved by someone despite Lucas saying it wasn't his "vision") will be released on whatever is the latest format. The deleted scenes that make sense (Luke and Biggz meeting up before Battle of Yavin for example) will be restored.
If I was in charge, I would cancel the live-action series and make 2-3 new animated series, one of them being "The Adventures of Embo".