Star Wars Star Wars Discussion Thread - LET THE PAST D-! Oh, wait, nevermind

Reader mode
Crom's Black Blade said:
In truth an DB-esque power level has been baked into the cake long before the midichlorians were invented going all the way back to the OT and Luke being strong in the force not due any particular training or spiritual understanding on the nature of the Force but merely because he was born with it due to being Anakin's child. With only Luke, or potentially Leia, being capable of stopping Vader and the Emperor out of an entire galaxy beings.
Click to expand...

I disagree, that is just standard fantasy tropes/cliches/whatever. It is the same sort of idea as Aragorn being awesome, because he is the rightful king and his magic blood runs the truest. It is just normal fantasy conceits in a science fantasy setting.
 
Hlaalu Agent said:
I disagree, that is just standard fantasy tropes/cliches/whatever. It is the same sort of idea as Aragorn being awesome, because he is the rightful king and his magic blood runs the truest. It is just normal fantasy conceits in a science fantasy setting.
Click to expand...
I would question if that is a meaningful distinction or merely different trappings to express the same narrative idea under different guises. Would the OT's narrative meaningfully change if a number was attached to Luke's stronger force anymore than the PT's would have if they merely had said Anakin was strong in the force, stronger even than Master Yoda?
 
Crom's Black Blade said:
I would question if that is a meaningful distinction or merely different trappings to express the same narrative idea under different guises. Would the OT's narrative meaningfully change if a number was attached to Luke's stronger force anymore than the PT's would have if they merely had said Anakin was strong in the force, stronger even than Master Yoda?
Click to expand...

I would say, yes. It would drain the original story of the wonder and of the mystique. It would probably feel forced and artificial, and would have strangled the force as something truly mysterious and transcendental out of the crib.

For the first question, they very much aren't different trappings. Power levels are very much not the same thing as saying someone has more mystic mojo or more chosen-oneness or whatever than someone else. They are simply a tool to say that someone's Kungfu is stronger than another's which I don't think fits into either the grounded or more fantastical sides of Star Wars. It would cheapen the force and also cheapen any conflicts. Since there isn't room for "luck". for skill, for cleverness, or for sheer balls to the wall craziness/badassness it would just be "my force is stronger than your force". There isn't room for following the advice of a homicidal omnicidal android. You wouldn't have the tension of "can Luke actually pull this off", since the illusion that he possibly can't would be removed. It would be outright boring.
 
Hlaalu Agent said:
I would say, yes. It would drain the original story of the wonder and of the mystique. It would probably feel forced and artificial, and would have strangled the force as something truly mysterious and transcendental out of the crib.

For the first question, they very much aren't different trappings. Power levels are very much not the same thing as saying someone has more mystic mojo or more chosen-oneness or whatever than someone else. They are simply a tool to say that someone's Kungfu is stronger than another's which I don't think fits into either the grounded or more fantastical sides of Star Wars. It would cheapen the force and also cheapen any conflicts. Since there isn't room for "luck". for skill, for cleverness, or for sheer balls to the wall craziness/badassness it would just be "my force is stronger than your force". There isn't room for following the advice of a homicidal omnicidal android. You wouldn't have the tension of "can Luke actually pull this off", since the illusion that he possibly can't would be removed. It would be outright boring.
Click to expand...
Forgive me but you seem to be objecting more to how the information is presented, that the OT went for a more mysterious and vague aura, than how the plot mechanics affected the story. In both trilogies the Force is presented as a quantifiable entity one that is stronger in certain people than others and in both trilogies a Skywalker is said to be strong in the force.

Further its weird that you claim midcholorians "cheapen" the force and don't allow things like luck, skill, for cleverness or for sheer balls to the wall craziness/badassness when of the two trilogies its the OT which more closely matches your criticism. In the OT Vader or the Emperor apparently can't be killed by a weaker Jedi with some mad skills or a Rebel soldier with a lot of luck or mad skills. Only Luke can do it and not because of any skills or training but merely because he's "strong".

With the only exception being ANH when the Force was presented as more of a skill anyone could potentially pick up and Luke wasn't a chosen one yet who needed a power level to justify his chosenness. In that one Vader was pretty badly blind sided by muggle Han during the Trench run surviving more by luck than anything.

In contrast in the PT fights are much less about "only X person can defeat me", and indeed the concept of stronger or weaker force seems far less prevalent as fights are conducted as much by skill as anything else. We even are introduced to General Grevious a man without Force abilities, and thus a power level of "5" on the DB scale, who is a serious threat to Jedi.
 
Crom's Black Blade said:
Forgive me but you seem to be objecting more to how the information is presented, that the OT went for a more mysterious and vague aura, than how the plot mechanics affected the story. In both trilogies the Force is presented as a quantifiable entity one that is stronger in certain people than others and in both trilogies a Skywalker is said to be strong in the force.

Further its weird that you claim midcholorians "cheapen" the force and don't allow things like luck, skill, for cleverness or for sheer balls to the wall craziness/badassness when of the two trilogies its the OT which more closely matches your criticism. In the OT Vader or the Emperor apparently can't be killed by a weaker Jedi with some mad skills or a Rebel soldier with a lot of luck or mad skills. Only Luke can do it and not because of any skills or training but merely because he's "strong".

With the only exception being ANH when the Force was presented as more of a skill anyone could potentially pick up and Luke wasn't a chosen one yet who needed a power level to justify his chosenness. In that one Vader was pretty badly blind sided by muggle Han during the Trench run surviving more by luck than anything.

In contrast in the PT fights are much less about "only X person can defeat me", and indeed the concept of stronger or weaker force seems far less prevalent as fights are conducted as much by skill as anything else. We even are introduced to General Grevious a man without Force abilities, and thus a power level of "5" on the DB scale, who is a serious threat to Jedi.
Click to expand...

Luke didn't defeat the Emperor with force power, he defeated him through a moral victory. By appealing to the remaining humanity in Vader/Anakin and causing him to turn away from the Emperor's side. After that Vader/Anakin decided to toss the Emperor down a deep and dark shaft causing him to promptly explode. Which is probably more about him being a hulking cyborg than anything else. So, really, in the end it wasn't power in the force that won out- but power of character (and Vader's cybernetics/pimping suit)... Though the Force, itself, definitely made sure things went down that way.
 
Hlaalu Agent said:
Luke didn't defeat the Emperor with force power, he defeated him through a moral victory. By appealing to the remaining humanity in Vader/Anakin and causing him to turn away from the Emperor's side. After that Vader/Anakin decided to toss the Emperor down a deep and dark shaft causing him to promptly explode. Which is probably more about him being a hulking cyborg than anything else. So, really, in the end it wasn't power in the force that won out- but power of character (and Vader's cybernetics/pimping suit)... Though the Force, itself, definitely made sure things went down that way.
Click to expand...
Ultimately no, he didn't but bringing his father back from the darkside was never part of the plan. Obi-Wan and Yoda intended Luke to kill Vader and presumably the Emperor and Obi-Wan flat out didn't think there was any good left in Vader. That he was more machine than man. So the fact Luke ultimately took a third option doesn't negate that in terms of fighting other Force users only Luke was viable because of his strength with the force. While on the otherside both Vader and the Emperor are interested in Luke as their apprentice because of that exact same strength in the Force.

So, would you agree the Force is quantifiable in both Trilogies? And would you agree that in both trilogies a Skywalker is pronounced to be unusually strong in the Force? Because to me there's very little difference between the two in that regard beyond window dressing. One is mystical, one chooses a pseudo-science explanation. One can prefer one to the other but both serve the same function to the story establishing a Skywalker is special.

Now things would be different if in the PT everyone was concerned about their Midi-chlorian count, entire fights hinged on whose count was larger ect but that's not what happens in the PT. Outside of TMP I don't think we got another Midi-chlorian count in the films.
 
Hlaalu Agent said:
So, really, in the end it wasn't power in the force that won out- but power of character (and Vader's cybernetics/pimping suit)... Though the Force, itself, definitely made sure things went down that way.
Click to expand...
Vader's cybernetics were in no way a help to Vader being able to dispatch Sidious. Sidious specifically engineered Vader's suit to be vulnerable to Sidious' Force Lightning.

I believe it was only Vader's use of the Force in defense of Luke, which allowed Vader to overcome the damage being done to him by Sidious. So it was Vader's Character (to agree with you primary point) that saw to Sidious' downfall.
 
Coming back, for a moment, to how badly Disney screwed up with Star Wars: it's almost impossible to overstate the degree to which they mishandled it.

Their insane "there's no source material!" attitude is the crux of their stupidity. Even though a lot of Disney-era SW is dumb as anything, a lot of people would be willing to just accept it as mindless entertainment... if Disney hadn't erased decades of superior stories to "make space" for their own crappy knock-offs.

Personally, I'd prefer it if the "Disney canon" just didn't exist at all. I think the superior choice would have been to start producing screen adaptations of all the good parts of the old EU. It would have been a great opportunity to leave the less-than-good bits behind, while crafting the definitive versions of the many beloved stories. But even failing that, even if they absolutely wanted to create their own, brand-new continuity... there is no reason they couldn't have done both.

Instead of shunting the old EU off into the functionally dead "Legends" continuity and using it for little more than cashing in on reprints, they could have easily make their own new continuity and adapted the original continuity for the screen at the same time. (Comic books have had dozens of parallel continuities for many decades, and it's not like fans have given up on them because of it. People aren't "too stupid" to grasp this; so two separate Star Wars continuities wouldn't be "too confusing".)

Some time ago, I made a basic overview of potential projects set in the period 19 BBY – 19 ABY. Specifically, I did so in the context of a hypothetical scenario involving a full re-make of the prequels, and thus I imagined projects based primarily on the pre-1999 EU. Even though this approach leaves out a lot of potential source material, my conclusion was still that there was plenty to be adapted.

Enough for well over 30 different projects, clocking in at a combined viewing length that exceeds 400 hours.

Basically, you could just create Star Wars: The Animated Series, and add a shit-ton of related (mini-)series and (follow-up) films. You could keep this going, not just for years, but for decades to come. And that's "only" covering the stuff set in between the establishment of the Empire and the final conclusion of the conflict between the New Republic and the Imperial Remnant. If you also start considering adaptations of works set before f after this period, in-universe, then you can add many, many more hours of total viewing length.

"No source material"? They had a near-inexhaustible wellspring, and they squandered it.



TL;DR -- Don't these dumb fuckers understand that I'd have paid them good money to see this stuff on screen? And I know I'm not alone in that. Not by a long shot.
 
Allow me to quote C.S. Lewis.

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."

Yeah, this basically sums up the problem not just in Disney Star Wars, but media or even politics these days. We've either got sanctimonious assholes who are so drunk on their own kool-aid that any and all criticism only spurs them on further because to them we obviously so badly need their help to see the light and come to their way of thinking. That, or we've got corrupt sons of bitches who'll parrot anyone who offers them the best deal, or simple morons who just follow the leader because they can't think on their own.

...strangely enough, I trust the corrupt over the morons and sanctimonious assholes. The corrupt at least have a twisted honesty to them, maybe even more Human (?)/relatable in their selfish greed and ambition compared to walking mushrooms or those fanatics who simply cannot rest until the whole world is turned into mindless drones following their party line.
 
You know what they say, "Let the past die, kill it if you have to."
Well, the Star Wars franchise is in now firmly in my past, I don't even have to let it die, it is already a barely moving, leg-less zombie.
I am not spending a cent on any merch, or books, or giving the new shows the time of day.

I am not touching allegedly good stuff like Fallen Order or those prequel Thrawn books Zhan wrote.

It is dead, Jim.
 
Lord Sovereign said:
Probably not what you had in mind, but I’m just imagining Heir to the Empire having Batman TAS (earlier seasons) animation.

Holy shit, I’d have showered Disney in gold dust for that.
Click to expand...

That's pretty close to what I'd imagine, really. As far as character design goes, my nostalgic love mostly goes to the '90s X-Men and Spider-Man animated series, but that's a metter of preference. The production values were better on the Batman series, certainly when they had full budget available.

If you look at series like that, and then at big animated Disney films (say, Little Mermaid through Atlantis), as well as some other classic animated films (e.g. Anastasia, Prince of Egypt, The Iron Giant), I'd say you have all the indicators that you'd ever need to tell you what to do when it comes to making high-quality 2D animation works.

That Disney, off all companies, failed to grasp the potential[*] is truly staggering. But then again, they've left traditional animation behind (regrettably), let alone good story-telling.

------------------------------

[*] I mean: consider how popular the 2D-animated Clone Wars (2003) was from the start, and remains to this day. It has a fraction of TCW's duration and budget, and it's still a contender.
 
Skallagrim said:
That's pretty close to what I'd imagine, really. As far as character design goes, my nostalgic love mostly goes to the '90s X-Men and Spider-Man animated series, but that's a metter of preference. The production values were better on the Batman series, certainly when they had full budget available.

If you look at series like that, and then at big animated Disney films (say, Little Mermaid through Atlantis), as well as some other classic animated films (e.g. Anastasia, Prince of Egypt, The Iron Giant), I'd say you have all the indicators that you'd ever need to tell you what to do when it comes to making high-quality 2D animation works.

That Disney, off all companies, failed to grasp the potential[*] is truly staggering. But then again, they've left traditional animation behind (regrettably), let alone good story-telling.

------------------------------

[*] I mean: consider how popular the 2D-animated Clone Wars (2003) was from the start, and remains to this day. It has a fraction of TCW's duration and budget, and it's still a contender.
Click to expand...
Terminator-Grievous and Kung-Fu Windu were awesome, though. ;)
 
Skallagrim said:
[*] I mean: consider how popular the 2D-animated Clone Wars (2003) was from the start, and remains to this day. It has a fraction of TCW's duration and budget, and it's still a contender.
Click to expand...
There’s another point.

Give Gendry Tartakovsky a fat sack of gold and tell him “do whatever you want”, and you’d have a smash hit for Star Wars. Indeed, I’d task him with making an animated series about the Great Hyperspace War.

Imagine Naga Sadow in glorious animation.

To my mind animation is the future because its only real limit is imagination.
 
So I watched the clips of Ahsoka with Hayden...

Yeah, it was fucking great.

We see Rex and the Siege of Mandalore; we see the Clone Wars; we see Live Ahsoka as she was when she was a young padawan (her mannerisms match animated Ahsoka to a T, even the eye shift and head turn -- props to the actress there!).

We also see Hayden as the character bridge between Anakin in Episode 3 and the Clone Wars, and him as Vader both during his time as Dark Side Anakin and when he was Classic Vader (sans suit): The guy literally channeled Vader --voice inflections, body language, and all-- while looking like Anakin. We also see him fighting as Anakin and as Vader (with the latter using powerful, single strikes).


Fucking amazing acting.
 
Lord Sovereign said:
There’s another point.

Give Gendry Tartakovsky a fat sack of gold and tell him “do whatever you want”, and you’d have a smash hit for Star Wars. Indeed, I’d task him with making an animated series about the Great Hyperspace War.

Imagine Naga Sadow in glorious animation.

To my mind animation is the future because its only real limit is imagination.
Click to expand...

He sits on his throne of crystal and shadow, the meditation sphere flying through space as the Republic Fleet pursues. Laser beams turn the surrounding void into a kaleidoscope, and Naga Sadow closes his eyes. The crystals begin to pulse, the nearby stars start to flicker, and as the stars stretch out into infinity, they explode, incinerating the Republic Fleet as Naga Sadow escapes into uncharted space.
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top