Saga Does anyone here see the Saga 1-9?

Visions isnt canon but we can still love it. Id count it to Legends

 

no, I see I-VI as the saga
and everything else as what if's.

But that is the beauty of fiction, anyone can pick and choose what they want within reason.

 

Or indeed the Clone war movie

 

its a challenge to watch eveything chronologically

 

No. I-VI is the saga for me.

 

Saga 1-9?

Don't you mean The Tragedy of Darth Sidious the Laugher?

 

I see the saga as 1-9. I don't watch them in that order though.

Part of the issue with Star Wars is that, unlike say Harry Potter or LOTR, generations passed in between trilogies.

Therefore, the tone, the look, tastes, and (maybe most importantly) expectations changed in between.

Simply put, the continuity doesn't seem as cohesive as it could/should.

 

Well no because like you said George Lucas waited 10-15 years to do his prequels, and then they waited another 10-15 years to do Sequels.

Regardless of what happened as you said expectations, situation and even HISTORICAL CONTEXT changes.

Not to mention we have now the EU and all that stuff as well.

 

Episodes I-IX is a saga. The original, though, is episodes I-VI. The ST is a fanmade continuation; EU material.

 

Well for me it's definitely 1 - 6, and ignoring the existence of 7 - 9 entirely, as I really don't enjoy those movies and don't personally consider them canon. I would say that the old Thrawn trilogy is my sequel trilogy.

 

1 and 6 i see the EU and Disney as tales in universe

 

Yeah well in 10-15 years that's not how younger generations are gonna see it so better get ready

 

Personally, I'd rather watch 4-9. Just not a fan of the PT.

Maybe that's one for the unpopular opinions thread.

 

You likely have just as many fans that will (and have for years) claim that 4-6 is THE saga.

Yet, as you have illustrated with your claim, the negative rhetoric towards the PT has softened.

So will it be with the ST. As was said....get ready.

 

Hey, I'm just stating facts. GL is the originator of the saga. Hence, his trilogies are the original saga. Since Abrams decided to write his own continuation of that saga, the ST is expanded universe by definition.
The viewers' opinions have no bearing on that.

 

I get what you are saying and it's kinda/sorta true with in the parameters of your specific definition. Yet, it's not exactly accurate, is it?

The ST is not the expanded universe. You likely know this. Likely, you also know that the ST is just as official/canon as the OT and PT.

So, in effect, it seems you are using the term "expanded universe" to marginalize/dismiss/invalidate/denigrate the ST. What you are doing/saying is a bit like this:

Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster are the originators of Superman. DC comics decided to write their own continuation of the story that character/story and anything after that is expanded universe Superman by definition.

One is free to claim that the only true/valid Superman stories are the stories that originated from Siegel and Shuster.

One is free to imply that the ONLY true/valid SW stories/films/properties are those that Lucas originated.

Yet, neither of those claims/implications are the truth. They are simply one's point of view.

 

Look at Star Trek. Gene Roddenberry died after Next Generation season 1, yet everything after that is considered canon. Heck, he hated Wrath of Khan, yet it is canon, and the most well known movie

 

Not sure SW and Superman are very comparable. But yeah, any of the non-creator stuff is technically just paid fanfic, same as the ST. Same as the EU. That doesn't mean it's subpar material.

Really, I wish Disney would just embrace the idea of a SW multi-verse. The EU / Legends, the ST, it's all equally canon and neither is more ''official'' than the other. They could even make another ST if they wanted. It would both give Disney more material to work with and please a lot of fans.

 

Eh, let's not go down that canon rabbit hole again.
Yes, I know what is official canon. I also know the difference between legal ownership and artistry. Again, George is the originator, the one who created this saga. His story is the original. If someone continues the saga with a story of their own, then their story is not George's original story. This is undeniable.

How is that a problem for fans of the ST, though? As I said, episodes I-IX is a saga.

 

Fair enough. This is a distinctly different framing/claim from what you said before. Thanks!

 

How have I missed this thread for so damn long?

Well, I picked an interesting time to jump in here - absolutely LOVE the I-IX saga as it is. However, in contrast to what others have said, I view it through a separate lens as to how I view the franchise as a whole. For me, there's the numbered episodic saga, and then there's a view of the franchise which is that, and everything else

I used to dislike a great number of things introduced by, say, The Clone Wars, because I felt it didn't really fit with the movies in certain ways. But nowadays, I'm not quite so negative about it - it's just seeing it two separate ways. For me, there's the whole franchise, and then there's the nine film saga I love, where characters like Ahsoka or Ezra or any of the named clones or whatever just don't exist

It's two very different but equally valid experiences, in my mind

 

Weeell, I worded it differently, but the claim is the same.
I'm glad that worked for you, though

 

The claim is different. True, the ST is not Lucas's original story. The ST is also not fan fiction nor is it the expanded universe.

If the ST less than legitimate to you, that's your own thing to hold onto, but it is your thing. Just like those who claim the OT is the only valid saga is their thing.