ST Who's The Baddie?

After reading through the this thread i am finding a lot of interesting debates going on, i personally think this....... Max Von Sydow is this "Collector" character, an old (half cyborg) character who has spent years collecting lightsabers, masks, cloaks etc from various Sith and Jedi.
Daisy Ridley sells these items to him when she comes across them (John Boyega comes across Luke's Lightsaber on a mission (as a Stormtrooper) and that's how Daisy and John meet).
Adam Driver is Leia and Han's son who is a skilled x wing pilot but like his Grandfather he dreams of bigger things, he hears stories of his Grandfather and "someone" starts to manipulate him....this leads to Han trying to find him ...and Luke coming out of Jedi meditation to stop Adam Driver at all costs, this leads to a climatic battle with Luke ready to strike Adam Driver down and Han begging Luke to spare his son....Adam Driver is seriously injured but escapes...the final scene sees Driver with Vadar helmet seeking revenge on Luke.

Unsure at this point who Domnhall Gleeson is playing, or who the main protaganist is that manipulates Adam Driver, but the scenario above would easily enable Disney to bring back Vadar 2.0 for Episode VIII

 

Hey, another idea. What if Luke does indeed turn to the dark side, by killing the collector? Hear me out:
Dude is collecting old sith relics and waves around the most ridiculus looking lightsaber ever. He is like a stupid teenager who wants to look cool and edgy by wearing heavy metal shirts and guy fawkes masks. Maybe he really is just a stupid teenager who lost it because he spent too much time surrounded by his cool little toys. Luke kills him in a battle, removes his mask and finds a kid underneath. It wouldn't go well for his psyche. Maybe the kid has a supplier who wants just that. Probably the best was to ruin Luke.

 

Imagine if a Cult of Vader has developed led by this Collector guy. A growing bunch of wackjobs who worship the Sith. At one point the New Republic Senate is confronted with a sea of people all wearing Vader masks, kind of like this scene:



On second thoughts, that's just crazy

 

Like I said, guy fawkes masks.

 

It's rather coincidental and intriguing that we have dialogue at the end of Act I (Episode III) which refers to a wise Sith Lord who was murdered in his sleep and a new title, STAR WARS: The Force Awakens making reference to a revival or an awakening. My assumption is that the title is making reference to both the Light (Luke) and the Dark Side of the Force. If the rumors are true, Luke is extraordinarily powerful, unlike anything we've seen before. Further, Luke is in a delirium and lacks lucidity. He's in a dormant (pour dormir) state. This leads me to believe that the same will be true with regard to a Dark Side equivalent.

I, for one, believe the ST will be Act Three, the Resolution, of a larger, all encompassing and over-arcing three-act structure, which will emphasize, or may change and alter our understanding and perceptions/meanings of the previous plot points as a consequence of this new Resolution. That is, the Resolution/Climax is no longer the destruction of Palpatine at the hands of Vader and the internal change of Anakin, but a plot-point pivot that leads to the Third Act of the saga. The ST climax should be the piece de resistance of the meal; the orchestra's magnum opus and the artist's masterpiece.

 

The idea that Luke will become this god-like, but deranged messiah doesn't sound like the character he grew to become in the OT, at all. It's a ridiculous idea to say the least. And what, they would throw away all that he had achieved in those movies just because they can't find another way to make a villain? Sorry, but I don't buy it.

 

Has too much of the jobbing trait to me to make the next bad guy seem cooler, I could see the collector working for the true sith without even realizing it.

 

Will people please stop saying the past is ruined by the future? It's absurd. It's like saying WW2 didn't matter because we fought other wars afterward.

Luke, like anyone, will have ups and downs as he ages. That's normal character development. There is no such thing as an endlessly progressive arc. It's called position change; Luke will have some challenges to overcome. It's not the end of the OT. Good grief. If I had a dollar for every time someone claimed something from the OT will be undermined, I could retire.

Something people should try to come to terms with -- the very existence of the ST means Luke and friends didn't rid the galaxy of evil for all time. It's already too late to stop the undermining. The only realistic response is to enjoy the story and see what happens next.

 

Do go on... Plagueis or not, your premise is far more logical than the "collector/cybog" crap that's being thrown around.

I still believe "The Ancient Fear" was an original working title, but Disney favored a less ominous tone. I'm sure the "Awakening" has multiple meanings. Not only has the Force been dormant in the galaxy far, far away since the fall of the Jedi & Sith, but it has been dormant for the 30 plus years its fans have waited; hopeful and anxious for a sequel. This is a new awakening for Disney and Lucasfilm as they take their first steps in a unique partnership.

 

And it's been 30 years since the OT.
He could have grown into a drastically different person. And he most certainly did, one way or another. People change in three decades. Even fictional people.

 

They're going to be dark films I think. The good guys aren't prevailing in the real world and these movies are metaphorical as we all know.

 

I think it depends. For example, if Luke has taken it upon himself, as a sacrificial act, to withdrawal the Force/himself from the GFFA, in order to protect his friends and loved ones I think that's certainly in keeping with his character. He'd be Atlas taking the weight of the Galaxy on his shoulders and in the process becomes delusional. Why is he delusional? Because he knows/fears/he's seen the future conflict, not for himself, but its effect(s) on his relations. He knows the breadth and scope of the antagonist. But, of course, this is no good. The forces of evil are gathering and advancing and the time has come to act. "Luke, wake up!"

This squares with Campbell in the Hero's Journey, i.e, he's denying his return in the journey and needs assistance from a new generational hero with the boom or elixir: The defeat of the antagonist and the rebirth of the Republic and Jedi Order. Luke, in someways, is beginning a new arc. He will rise to the occasion, again, to assist from near or far. In and out of time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Obi Wan, Yoda, & the Sith especially all experienced a dormancy or "hibernation" of sorts.

 

The villain should be all new. A new criminal mastermind invested with the power of the force. He is assisted by super-intelligent aliens with tech to disarm a Jedi's lightsaber! His new organization threaten the new Republic. "The time of the Sith is over... a new enemy will rise..."

This won't happen, of course.

Like Jurassic World (see the teaser trailer), The Force Awakens will be more of the Sith/Republic (albeit with Luke going a bit nuts and no doubt Sith type Inquisitors sworn to destroy the Republic!). Star Wars won't go for anything too new out of fear of alienating the core fanbase.

 

But that's OK, because the OT didn't promise any such thing.

 

The OT didn't have a Republic.

 

"The last remnants of the Old Republic have been swept away."- Grand Moff Tarkin, A New Hope
So yeah, they do mention the Republic at least once in the OT

 

My point was that Old Republic that Tarkin was referring to wasn't one of the factions taking part in the events of the OT. It was something that was long-dead and the only two references to it in the entire OT make that clear.

Palpatine appears in two out of three OT movies and is mentioned in the one OT movie that he doesn't appear in yet nobody says that he's a fundamental component of Star Wars.

 

I don't think anyone is specifically stating that are they Dra? I'm sure no one believes that the GFFA went into a state of suspended animation immediately after ROTJ. I think the conecerns are about a natural evolvement of the characters and situations versus duplicating the characters and situations that have gone before. Given that most of sequels/remakes in popular cinema gravitate towards the latter, as opposed to the former, I think it's a natural concern that the narrative of the ST may end up undermining the saga as a whole. And whilst I don't nessersarily agree with that (they are just movies afterall) I think it's a legitimate concern for fans with strong emotional connections to the previous films, and who like to see it as one big connected narrative.

 

In a way I can understand it. With someone like Luke, for instance, we've had almost 40 years to see that character in a certain light. And when the OT ended, we've had a particular arc in which to view him. For those of us who love that character, I know we wouldn't want to see something now that changes the way we feel about him. Personally I think it will all work out in the end, and even if his character develops a bit more of a tragic aspect, I seriously doubt we would leave the ST hating him. I suppose that danger is there though, and it would leave a lot of people unsatisfied with the inability to ever view that character the same way again. Because the truth is that movies that come after can and will affect the way we see the ones that came before.

 

I'd be very surprised if they found a way of completing destroying our perceptions of Luke's character. I think you are right in that we all had expectations about where the characters would end up after ROTJ... My view is that it doesn't matter what they do as long as it's done well. If Luke Skywalker ends up being a 'tragic' character, or Han Solo dies, in a very good movie... then it doesn't matter, it only serves to progresses the narrative. However, it needs to be technically 'good'.

 

Double post...

 

Many people are crying such doom and gloom, but I don't understand that though, because, if something happened that made me, God forbid, hate TFA , it would most likely affect the other Sequels, but not what came before.

 

It can colour what went before it if it changes the broader narrative I.e. if Anakin's sacrifice was for nothing, if in retrospect the 'consequences' of the characters personal journeys were less significant etc. etc. The narrative of the ST cannot hurt the technical quality of the previous films for sure, but when watching them sequentially, it may lessen the story. I think it's a risk, but one that is unlikely to manifest itself (given that I can't believe they would do something that radical).

 

Yes, I suppose… but I don't wailing of "Star Wars is Dead", before we even see it