The Future Of Maul In The Anthologies

If that is the case, I'm all for it. I loved Solo and I would love to see it continued!

 

I really feel the streaming service will open the doors to, potentially, so many things. Maul could totally be one of them.

 

Lol, that George-Dave interaction is priceless

 

I watched Solo last night for first time since seeing in theatre. Based off Maul running the crime syndicate...an idea I would like to see for a movie would be expanding on Mauls operations and the story being how it is disrupting the empires goal....which in turn brings the emperors attention. Vader is dispatched to deal with this group and the payoff is a Vader/Maul conflict with Maul playing the "good" guy in the movie.

It brings Maul back in the spotlight and Vader which is a big sell......Maul obviously would die at the end but perhaps he does something "noble" for the rebels or some other group. The enemy of your enemy is your friend.

 

Disney can do whatever they want.....Maul was presumed dead in TPM but is back on the big screen in Solo. I enjoyed Rebels and loved the Tatooine scene but is Disney really going to shelve a popular character like Maul due to a cartoon?

 

A bit late to reply, but I wanted to say that when Sidious took Maul as his apprentice, Maul was still very young. It's confirmed in Rebels that he doesn't even remember his real birth name at all. He got rid of the "Darth" title because he no longer identified as a Sith, but kept "Maul" as his name.

 

True they can do what they want...but Rebels (in which Maul's ultimate fate is decided) was released under the Disney banner. I'm sure they'd be okay exploring him as a character in other timeline scenarios, but they won't go against what they now consider in-universe canon and retcon a character's last few years, leading up to their death just cos they want to make him do different things or die in a different way. It's one thing if they changed was was released in the Legends material-but they wouldn't contradict a storyline resolved under their name. It would be like Marvel Studios releasing something that showed Asgard being destroyed a different way, or something like that.

 

Don’t underestimate the mighty $$$$

The avg moviegoer, even the ones who saw TPM and Solo, haven’t watched Rebels. If Disney feels it will make money (and Maul would IMO) they will trot him out. A stand alone Kenobi movie battling a non force user boss or a Maul movie with him taking on a non force user will not sell.....SW is the force. Solo was the first SW that was for the most part not force focused. RO had the force all over it between kyber crystals, Cheruit, Vader...

Even the line from Vader to Kenobi in ANH about when we last met is vague.....they could easily fit another confrontation between the two in there (post lava, pre DS) .....in fact give me a movie where Maul and Kenobi “join sides” an attempt to stop Vader w/ Maul falling.

 

Ever heard of Time Travel?

 

Lol. Solo didn’t sell because it had only three months of marketing. There’s no evidence that a lack of force usage had anything to do with its reception. Fans have a funny way of projecting their own desires onto general audiences.

 

Indeed. LFL created the Story Group to oversee the new canon in order to ensure its longevity by creating a universe whose consistency fans can count on. They're not about to break continuity for a quick cash grab, especially not on such arbitrary grounds as "They'd probably like to see Character X fight Character Y". That would be incredibly short-sighted.

 

My theory is based off conversations with numerous people from conventions...its why the Mandalore is a tv series. Solo will be the last SW movie made where the force is not part of the story. It has nothing to do with fan fantasies or desires....and all to do with what what SW unique. To think otherwise...well

 

We will see I guess...I for one am not sure I'm convinced that Solo will be the last film (TV or theater) to not include the Force as a part of the story. Besides, Iger made it clear that their stance is that Solo's lackluster performance was due to timing and marketing-NOT the subject matter or quality of the film. So IMO Solo's performance at the BO will not hold any bearing on their future decisions on what kinds of stories they tell going forward.

We can all predict until the cows come home based on what we've seen/heard-I myself have done the same for different things. But theories are still just that-theories. Until I hear an announcement of upcoming films from LFL, IMO it's all up in the air, and anything can only be speculation until they say what's what.

 

I find it funny that anyone thinks “Force usage” in a film is a determinant of its Box Office. What is that based on?

 

In a Star Wars movie it is a determinant...... It's based on the simple fact that SW and the force are one and the same. Go make a movie about Aragorn taking on rock trolls without any magic in the movie whether it be Gandalf, Sarumon or the ring and see how it does. The main discussion in my group after seeing Solo was focused on Maul. It had nothing to do with the quality of Solo..we all enjoyed and thought it was a decent movie but one we wouldn't see a sequel unless it explored Maul and his crime group.

I likened Solo to one of the many EU books that came out after ROTJ like Takes from Jabbas Palace....fun to read as it explored the GFFA but not big screen worthy.

Future SW films will focus on the force......to think otherwise is being silly. If Disney puts out another SW movie without the force in it, I will gladly bring up this post and eat crow.

 

Your little friend group is hardly representative of a global audience. My colleagues and friends, for example, had the exact opposite reaction. They loved the less mystical nature of Solo. Even if just as a refreshing change. Though most of them didn’t get to see it until home release, because most of them didn’t know it was out in May.

The short marketing window was the most likely culprit. Absence of the force has nothing to do with it.

 

That's great your little friend group thought differently.....the proof will be in the releases and why we are seeing Netflix material.

10 SW movies have been released with 8 of them having the force as a main subject point and a 9th having it part of the story (kyber crystals, guardians of the whills, Vader). All knocked it out of the park in the Box Office. The lone movie without the force involved (Solo) bombs bringing in less than $400mil. Could the short marketing window have played a part? sure but guess what...if it was a good movie involving lightsabers, the force, etc..word would spread and people would flock but it wasn't....it was about a heist involving a young Han Solo being played by someone other than Harrison Ford.

We shall see but my bets are force related movies moving forward on big screen....non force stories on Netflix

 

We knew where things were going to end up with the PT. Same with several characters in TCW, Rebels, and Solo. Doesn't mean you still can't tell engaging stories.

Maul said that he cannot face Vader alone in Rebels. That to me seems to imply they fought at one point and Maul lost in some way - I believe that's what Maul's appearance in Solo was going to build to!

 

The Maul situation is just another example of Lucasfilm not having a plan.

Cool character but hard to say what his future is when its unclear what is the Star Wars plan. Constantly hopping around the timeline isn't a good one though. From Rebels when we dies, to Solo when he's a crime boss to now something else in between? This all under Disney watch in 3 years time.

Some diehard fans may enjoy but no way that sells with the masses.

 

The masses don’t care. It’s Star Wars. The only reason Solo didn’t do that well at the Box Office was the incredibly short three-month marketing window. The DVD/ Blu-Ray is doing great.

 

Oh I definitely agree with that.