ST Who's The Baddie?

Very nice... More please...

 

Yeah, I always took that to mean that the use of the Force was kinda like a replacement for all the technological gauges and equipment you would need to make all the precise calculations and adjustments involved with constructing a lightsaber.

And at the same time, I didn't think that the "find your crystal" stuff in TCW made this any different because I took that more as the Padawan was simply sensing the variations in crystals and were in fact choosing the crystal themselves subconsciously by way of the Force.

 

It makes no sense for me - from a storytelling perspective - to take away choice and conflict. The force is not supposed to be convenient and it doesn't need to 100% fit into the Jedi view either.

I don't care how plausible it is if it means removing story possibilities and making the force more mainstream conventional magic.

 

How do you "take away choice and conflict" if you add another side to the equation, that is in conflict with the existing two? It doesn't remove the conflict, it expands it.

Also, if the "crisis of the Force" is now supposedly over and it is strong once again, it also makes sense that more average level Force sensitives would be able to tap into it easier. Adding new layers to existing concepts is hardly something that I would call "cheapening" it.

 

My interpretation of RotJ was always that Luke ultimately chooses the middle ground. The extremes being 'kill Vader and join the Emperor' or 'kill Vader and the Emperor'. In his refusal to kill Vader, he defys the Emperor AND Yoda/Ben

 

You don't need neutrals to create another opposing party. Any dark side or light side faction could be both in conflict with the Jedi and Sith.

It removes conflict because now a struggling Jedi doesn't have to chose between light and dark. He can just remain gray.

For using the force you have to pay the price of devoting yourself to the light. As Yoda said, a Jedi must have a most serious mind. Take that away and the force is not much more than a playthingy.

It is removing some layers that exist and make the force fascinating to me.

 

Luke was a "true" Jedi more like Qui-Gon. His ability to make suck decisions was based partially on the idea that he was not corrupted like the Jedi Oder of the PT, including Yoda and Obi.

 

This is basically why I would like Qui-Gon Jinn to be in the ST. Not only is he an awesome character, he's Liam freakin' Neeson!

 

Typo... Ooops!

 

I do so very much like the Young Jedi arc of TCW.

I think they portrayed the Force in a nice way. That is, revealing details about it yet keeping much of it a mystery.

I think the ST should answer questions about the Force yet at the same time bring up new ones. Basically, give us answers but leave us hungry for more.

 

I would like to know why Qui-Gon did not disappear. I think.

Honestly, I like it when we are not given "all the answers". There's something particularly engaging for me about a film that does not feel the necessity to provide the viewer with all the answers and leave some intriguing details up for debate. Like the cave. I hope it always and forever remains an ambiguous element in the Star Wars universe.

 

According to Rinzler's The Making of Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith, Lucas says Qui-Gon did not reach the level of ability to become a "ghost;" he only managed to retain his consciousness. So apparently disappearing is related to retaining your form after death.

 

If Plagueis were to be the ST villain and turn out to be the 'larger hands at work' or the 'bigger fish' in the saga, than The Phantom Menace title may be an ironic foreshadowing.

 

The Rule of Two was hit on briefly in TPM. It could be forgotten but assumed.

Perhaps there is an attempt to create a new Sith "army" through engineering. Maybe it s done somehow in conjunction with Mandalorians. In any case, it could end up being a situation where there are too many Siths, thus breaking the Rule of Two and causing the Sith to cannibalize each other.

 

Agree with everything in this post. I would add that binary choices only force a choice between two options by ignoring an infinite range of possibilities in the middle. It doesn't mean those options don't exist, just that they have been excluded, or even wrongly categorized.

Also: I think it's dangerous to continue to promote black and white thinking in franchises as popular as Star Wars. One of art's most important missions should be to expand thought in the world, not reduce it. If you think about it, it's very unhealthy this idea that one can never step into the gray without that step somehow being dangerous. It's akin to teaching people that being openminded or open to various options can lead to murder.

I've been pointing out recently that the Jedi, because of their militarism, already lack purity. They are more of a light-gray organization than pure light. They chop heads off when necessary for good causes. It's this impurity that makes them interesting, makes them more powerful or unpredictable than the absolutist Sith, who in their absolute darkness are pure.

Someone else mentioned how ROTJ shows us Yoda and Obi-Wan trying to restrict Luke’s choices on how to approach his father. I would argue that their hard binary view – that Vader could only ever be evil – limits Luke to one decision, killing his father, which might have turned Luke to the darkside. Instead Luke rebels and imagines another option: love. This not only saves his own soul from darkness, but his father’s too.

 

I would like the "baddie" to be a traditional bad guy in every sense. Less blurring of the lines and more "a guy who wants power and does bad things to get it".

Should this baddie wield a lightsabre? Perhaps. Maybe in the same way as Grevious in that he was "trainned in the Jedi arts" but not necessarily a force user.

 

We've had various sorts of baddies in SW. Palpatine was pure evil. Vader and Dooku were evil for reasons. Jango Fett was evil for money.

What I'd like to see is a pure evil vs. some middle groups and the Jedi. Or even a lightside purity (absolutism) that creates its own kind of evil.

 

It's probably a given that the next antagonist will be a Neo-Sith • one who saw the Empire as some great entity that needs to be restored • much like how Hitler saw his country and their place in history.

 

Wouldn't that be a Neo-Imperial, not a Neo-Sith? The Sith ideology (personal vengeance) is very different from the Imperial ideology (obedience and order).

 

No, a Neo-Sith. Someone who lived under and believed in the Empire's rule as a pre-teen, and being born Force sensitive, was able to find a way to learn the power of the Dark Side.

 

But you can step into the grey - if you don't use the force. Life without the force yields the infinite possibilities you are talking about. I would welcome a protagonist who actively choses not to learn the force.

But once you become a Jedi - like a Shaolin monk - a certain path is set before you. Entering on that path was a free choice but it requires sacrifices.

White and black thinking would be for me if every force sensitive were automatically required to become a Jedi and be boxed into a Jedi role from the very beginning.

Stories in which superpowers are not embraced automatically because the price for it is very high would seem more interesting to me.

Lightsiders don't need to be perfect. Sith are pure darkness? Vader and Maul both showed feelings for others.

Yes, lightsiders sometimes have to make hard decisions. But that doesn't turn them into greysiders. The dark/light dichotomy of the force is simply something that is there like gravity, and it doesn't snuggly fit people. How people deal with it is the interesting thing. It is way more interesting than the "I got superpowers and I remain my old self" that a grey Jedi would be.

 

Right. That's how I see it, too. You have to commit, and the indecision to devote oneself to either the light or dark seems like it could only hold one back. Hence the reason why it's a religion thing.

 

I miss discussing who the baddie is going to be.