ST Darth Maul as the big bad in Lucas's ST?

I dig this idea and it would have been interesting. However, it raises a few questions:

1. Isn't Maul a remnant of the Sith? What would this mean for Anakin and the Chosen One prophecy?

2. Is Maul technically not a Sith? Does the prophecy deal in technicalities?

3. If Maul is not a Sith, what it he?

 

I never like this idea in general because i think it realties too heavily on TCW and what Star Wars becoming at the time. It just feels like a weird disconnect in general from what we saw before (In Return of the Jedi) as well as what just the movies were going for.

It's really does feel like we skipped something along the way.

Granted I guess Lucas ST was more as sequel to the Clone Wars then the OT and while i think maybe TFA went to far the other way I think Lucas was going to far in the opposite direction as well.

It just reads like a weird disconnect when looking at the Saga as it's own entity. away from the other stuff.

 

Depending on whether he'd disregard it.

I think the sith is more like a specific cult. However, I think it depends on how Maul would be used. Is he gonna plunge the galaxy into utter control of the sith? Or seek to be more of an agent of chaos and revenge for the heroic characters and their goals in pursuit against them and for his own.

I think an agent of chaos and revenge could suit him.

I disagree that it'd have to rely particularly heavy on that. Maul survived and got robot legs, I think is the most information that's actively necessary, as far as what he did action wise. While I think his motives from TCW could be used in a ST.

 

Yeah, technically TCW also just skipped over explaining how he survived and just showed him with an artificial lower half to indicate that it was indeed him and that this was how he was now alive.

And I think he would’ve simply been a Sith Lord. I don’t think Lucas was necessarily as strict about the prophecy as we fans are. If he had a story he wanted to tell, then other side details could simply be modified or reinterpreted to fit that. But he also probably would not have been shy about having Anakin Skywalker play a bigger role in the story.

 

I don't think Lucas was as stricken about ANYTHING as we the fans are

As for the explanation their just seems to be something strange and disconnecting about it.

Granted i guess in a weird way Lucas is doing what the current High Republic books are doing now and telling it in Machatte Order. Where the Prequel information will effect the Sequel information. Although then you have that whole 'Well is it important NOW when it wasn't important back ten" issue that you get with all prequel.

The Sequel Trilogy we got at least up to 9 really did feel like moving forward and even with Palpatine's return at least it felt more like a natural continuation since Palpatine was already a villain that we know from the start. Sure he's saying Prequel Lines but he's still Palpatine from Episode 6.

 

The ST was regressive and moved the story backwards. It was designed by people whom had no consideration for what was at the heart of the previous films, and whom believe Star Wars was purely about deserts and x-wings I.e. the established iconography. The story and characters were risible. Palpatine was not a nit a ‘natural’ continuation because he was dead and his story was entwined with the story of Anakin Skywalker. As such, without Anakin being a fundamental aspect of the ST, it made Anakin’s/Vader’s actions in the PT/OT utterly moot.

 

I don't know how anyone can say that the ST continues the narrative in a natural forward direction, when it's literally a copy of the OT and ends in the same narrative spot as EP 6. Oh, except all the Skywalkers are now dead and House of Palpatine lives on.

 

Maul and Talon would most definitely have been presented as Sith Lords (and used the name Darth). Or maybe Maul would've been established as a former Sith at first; one who seeks to revive the Order and retake control of the galaxy.
As @dagenspear suggests, I think he would have set himself apart from Sidious as an agent of chaos. A different kind of evil that seeks to transform the galaxy into a chaotic hell. Maul was always rage personified, so that would be the logical direction for the character.
And far more interesting than just repeating history.

As for the prophecy, I think there might have been more to it in GL's trilogy. Regardless, Anakin did bring balance by removing the Sith from the highest seat of power. Or at the very least, he made it possible for balance to return (which is what bringing balance kind of IS).
George talked about Leia ultimately being the Chosen One because she becomes Supreme Chancellor and ushers in a new era of peace. I personally think he meant that from a certain point of view. From a different point of view, you might say that she, Luke and Anakin are all Chosen Ones... but she was probably envisioned as the one whose actions served as the final step into long-lasting balance.
She was meant to unite the galaxy.

 

I like the view that the Skywalkers are all THE Chosen One "character", living across three forms/people. The Destroyer, The Redeemer, The Creator.

But that's not really anything other than POV/Head-cannonish stuff.

 

I think for sure Lucas would have played with, and broadened, the concepts... the 'son of the suns' etc.

 

I also don’t think the sequels really moved the narrative forward. It’s more like they reinterpreted the original trilogy with a more modern lens. TFA is especially guilty of this, though it did set up some novelty that TLJ then also tried to take to another level. But both
movies were still held back from really doing something more original by narrative structures, character types, and a general aesthetic that mirrored the originals too closely.

But I do think they were teasing a step forward, even if they were the two steps backward that are sometimes needed to go beyond what’s expected. And that was an opportunity that TROS didn’t really take. Ultimately, I think this betrays insecurity on the part of the storytellers about their ability to tell an original Star Wars story. In reading behind-the-scenes books, you keep seeing the common question pop up, “Is this Star Wars?” Lucas was a very flawed creator, but at least he didn’t have that insecurity, and he was not afraid to try genuinely new things.

And I do think Maul as the villain mastermind could have been an original choice. Yes, he was a legacy character, but he hadn’t really been explored in depth on the big screen beyond his role in TPM. And this would’ve been a very different role, only with his familiar and iconic face on it. Which is almost the opposite of what we got with Snoke, who had a very familiar role but was entirely new and unknown.

A new villain can be exciting and full of potential, but that’s not what they did with Snoke. In his case, he was only new in terms of identity, which raised ultimately pointless questions. But his character and role were all too familiar. In contrast, we knew where Maul fit in the bigger story, and we knew where he came from. Which means the focus would’ve been on what he was planning to do next, on the new story and his new role, with no need to distract with baseless mystery. And that story was a move forward, a look at the complicated process of reconstruction after a war, rather than a thinly veiled repeat of the Empire vs. Rebellion conflict from the originals.

 

I'm hoping they animate George's treatments some day. They can call them not canon, I don't care. Just give me the real story and my Maul vs Luke fight, lol

 

The prophecy refers to the destruction of the Sith, the implication being that they were the catalyst for bringing the Force out of balance (specially at such scale).

He's a crime lord. Maul was excommunicated from the Sith the moment Sidious made Dooku his new apprentice, something made more explicit in TCW.

That said, we don't have enough information to automatically exclude anything. Lucas did present the idea that the criminal underworld would be the antagonist faction(s). Maul is simply the guy who's apparently ruling that lesser evil compared to the Empire.

 

My thought would be that Anakin brought balance back to the Force, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's gauranteed to always be that way forever. As in, he leveled the playing field, after it had gotten out of hand, so the good guys could do what they do to hopefully keep it from getting it out of balance again. There's always going to be bad people. It's up to the beings of the Galaxy to decide how to be stewards of the balance and determine which way the balance goes, I'd say.

Depending on when the prophesy was made, it may specifically refer to the Sith, or the Jedi of the Republic era just interpreted it that way. But being that the Sith consist of a Master and an Apprentice, Anakin did end the Sith and thier Empire, thus restoring balance.

Now Maul, as Alex said, ceased to be a Sith when Dooku was made Palpatine's apprentice. Though he was a Sith Lord for awhile (possibly a very short while), he was very young and most likely never really reached a high level of Sith-hood. He's more of a formidable bad guy, capable of throwing the Galaxy into chaos, than a full-on Sith, not on par with the Palpatines and Plagueises who had the power to throw the balance off. Then again, I guess those two go hand in hand a bit - being that Leia as Chancellor has significant bearing on the balance. With that said though, he'd likely know where to obtain a lot more Sith knowledge, and grow in power enough to potentially affect the balance.

I wouldnt say having Maul alive nulls the prophesy.

 

That's fine. But come on...20 years later. So a thousand year old prophecy of a Chosen One is all for ... 2 decades.

 

This is the dumbest idea I've ever heard, and I hope it actually happens!

 

This is the most contradictory post I have ever seen on this site

 

It all depends on what underpinned the prophecy. I don’t think anyone believes that the galaxy post ROTJ would be devoid of ‘evil’… and we don’t know what exactly Lucas would have done, but a villain (be that Maul or other) heading up a galactic crime syndicate *would* have allowed for an antagonistic force that didn’t directly contradict the prophecy of bringing ‘balance’. It still allows for expansive conflict/war and lightsaber battles etc. but without the requirement for the lightside of the force being at stake…

 

I would think the stakes of the Force potentially going back out of balance would be the dramatic tension of the trilogy, no? Or do you mean Maul merely being alive post-RotJ does not put the balance at stake?

 

The Sith were the imbalance, so I don't think Lucas had any desire to bring them back, thus negating Anakin's role and actions. And I don't think he had any plans to unbalance the force once again, not after so short a time period. That kind of stuff was in the cosmic force domain, and that happens over eons. Not years.

Maul could be a villain, because he was no longer a Sith, and had other ambitions, other than causing the force to become imbalanced.

And I'm sure there would be other dark side forces. But I get the feeling that Lucas was doing to dive into the force itself, and the darker presence that resides there.

 

It does not, because he is no longer a Sith.

 

When Lucas first sold LFL to Disney and then they started adapting GL's ST treatment - there was rumors that were actually fact that there was characters in EP7 called Kira , Sam and a villain called the Jedi Killer - there was no mention of Maul initially so one can only conclude that Maul was going to be a surprise, Leia was the leader of the new republic and Luke was training Kira but in no way like it was in TLJ......I definitely like what I hear for GL's ST and dam Disney for chucking it out and giving us an unstructured no outline and no plan ST.

 

I agree that the Force would probably not have been unbalanced again, but I also don't think it would have regained its balance yet in EpVII. Anakin removed the root of the problem, but it would take a while - and a lot of hard work - for balance to be fully restored. Dark forces, like Maul and his criminal empire, would inevitably seek to fill the void left by the Emperor and threaten to destroy everything the Rebel Alliance had fought and suffered to achieve. There are also the former stormtroopers that GL mentioned to consider. The Hutts (Rotta?) might have caused trouble, as well.
It would've been a struggle for the new Republic and some of it's citizens would probably have been tempted to choose the quick and easy path to some sort of peace, but eventually, all attempts to stand in the way of galactic democracy would've been fruitless. No new Sith, no reign of terror. Just peace, love and understanding!

 

Hypothetically, if Palpatine were to renounce the Sith ways (yet still remain evil as Maul did) , or if Dooku was to be excommunicated from the Sith (yet still stay evil as Maul did), would the Force be brought into balance?

Meaning, the implication is that simply getting the Darth taken out of your title is enough to bring balance to the Force. No?

You can still be a villainous demon as long as you aren't an officially recognized/practicing Sith Lord and The Force will be balanced?

 

No. The dark side is a natural part of the Force and of life. It's more in the philosophy. The Sith were more like a cancer, who deliberately messed with the nature of the Force itself. Maul's goals as a crime boss don't unbalance the Force like Sidious's goals of large-scale domination and death. The Mortis arc in The Clone Wars does a good job elaborating on this concept.