Darth Maul is back (Officially)

[Drazel O'Thumos]

Wow. Very well said.  And may I also add, "Could someone get us a new thesaurus? Forcepractitioner just wore a hole through ours."

Lol.

Lol.  :)  Sorry about the possible neologisms or awkward expressions I used in the explanation of my argument, but you have to keep in mind that English is not my native language. Anyway, the important thing is that what I wrote was understandable, isn't it?  ;)

Oh and, I also agree with what Jm419 has just written about the notable contrast between these two fictional universes. I also share the legitimate concerns about the lack of identifiable narrative continuity and rigor in many parts of the "expanded universe", even if I appreciate the various attempts at producing narratives of the physical (ageing, wounds, "memories of the flesh", so to say) and mental (emotional evolution, contrasting mental representations that some characters had of the same past events, "traces of the mind" ) evolution of some "key" characters of the Old Trilogy. For instance, the few comics depicting Vader's mental torment and evolution between Episode 3 and Episode 4....that is interesting. They should have done the same for Obi-Wan in exile on Tatooine, pondering about the past and the future, etc.... I like when there is a meaningful introspection carried out in the characters' consciousness and conscience, and a useful depiction of something that gives perspective about what is visible and accepted as "canon" in the movies. Now, I fear that reviving Darth Maul will just be a mere useless trick and a lame excuse to produce spectacular fighting effects (the idea exploited in the Visionaries comics of a revival of Darth Maul had a --very small-- introspective interest, but on the whole, it was simply not plausible to revive him in that way)...

[WEDGE ANTILLES]

the clone wars is but a walking shadow of the real SW.  a poor player that struts and frets his hour upon the stage and then is heard no more. (we watch it one time, and nobody will even remember the plotlines in 10 years).  it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

[Onli-Won Kanomi]

Whether we like it or not the "dead is dead" boat had already sailed in 1977 the moment that Alec Guinness uttered the phrase "CLONE Wars" establishing the existence of cloning in "The Galaxy" long ago and far far away.

That was the fatal flaw that right that moment set the stage for the "never say die" EU.

Consider an alternative; what if Old Ben had said "DROID Wars" instead of "Clone Wars".

No cloning; dead is dead. No cloned Emperor. No Luuke. People die and don't come back.

And it would have added 'gravitas' to the roles of Threepio and Artoo who could have become more than mere 'comic relief'; what was their part in the Droid Wars that led them to being on the Tantive that fateful day? Why are they involved in the OT with the Rebellion? Do they have a hidden droid agenda? The prequels begin similarly to TPM with autonomy minded Separatist battleDROIDS invading Naboo and ending with Mauls death that is permanent. AOTC becomes AOTD: Attack Of The Droids and there is no need for Dooku since Darth Grievous appears in Ep II instead of out of the blue [cinema-wise] in ROTS. ROTS ends with Anakin becoming in effect a droid as Vader. The living beings of the Galaxy who have recently thrown over the Republic and Jedi who defended Droid Rights to install the anti-droid Empire that put down the 'Droid Wars' uprising know they need droids as 'slave labour' but distrust, fear or hate droids...suddenly displays of insubordination on the Death Star and Cloud City against droid-like Vader seems an understandable emotion not suicidal stupidity. "We don't serve their kind here" takes on new meaning as does "these are not the droids you're looking for". etc etc etc

Even if you don't like this idea then come up with another but it avoids the pitfalls of cloning foremost among which is an 'easy out' from dead-is-dead eh?

Point is...the precedent for bringing back EVERYONE was set by Old Ben in '77 and simply saying "we only like/count the OT" doesnt avoid that.

Next up...Uncle Owen and Aunt Beru reborn! LOLOLOL

[Drazel O'Thumos]

the clone wars is but a walking shadow of the real SW.  a poor player that struts and frets his hour upon the stage and then is heard no more. (we watch it one time, and nobody will even remember the plotlines in 10 years).  it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

Very witty and shakespearian observation.  ;) :D It is true that Clone Wars was made for kids and, unlike Macbeth or the StW movies, was more "light-hearted" in its spirit and was not meant as the depiction of a fateful tragedy.... but even a shadow should rigorously fit the outline of the real object that it represents...

[WEDGE ANTILLES]

just for the sake of example..  like I said in the other thread..  jar jar and dooku share the same dramatic purpose.  jar jar is to padme, as doku is to qui-gon:  jar jar shows us the slippery slope of padme's "Militarization of Naboo" decision from TPM, when he imitates her decision, and raises a motion to Militarize the Galaxy --   dooku shows us the slippery slope of (what yoda called) "QuiGon's Defiance" when he creates the separatist movement.  

--> DOOKU has a purpose in the larger story.   Maul doesn't.     Maul is cannon fodder, for Obiwan's lightsaber.    he's a useless villian: his only "use" was to die.  he's a mustache-twirling stereotypical 'bad guy', with no plot relevance, except to die at obiwan's blade.    he was completely expendable.



again, for the sake of example.. the thing that made Vader the most iconic villian of ALL time, was the fact that he was both luke's father and Ben's personal nemesis.  in the end, the entire saga was about him.   you can't question his relevance to the plot.

...but Maul?  pfft.  obiwan didn't even KNOW him.  he wasn't a personal nemesis.  he was an extension of palpatine.  (like Don Corleone's hitman: did that guy even HAVE a name?  did anybody even care?).    palpatine was the REAL villian.  he was an actual "Character" in the overall drama of the saga.   maul was just a tool.   he served no dramatic purpose in forwarding the plot.    I wouldn't even call him a "character", in that sense.

Palpatine could have easily done his "wet work" himself.   killed quigon, had a confrontation with obiwan, and then escaped.  the only reason to even include Maul, IS, so he can die.   that WAS his only purpose. LOL!  (and now they took it away)



Dooku, Vader, Palpatine ..  these villians were actual characters in the play.   they had a purpose in forwarding the plot.  etc.  
(Vader and Palpatine are the top 2 most iconic villians of all time.   right next to Holmes' Moriority).  

--> unless they can give us a plot-relevant reason to bring Maul back in the saga between episodes 2 and 3 (when clone wars takes place) then this is just "Sound and Fury, signifying nothing" :\  

this 'character' will never be relevant to the saga. :(




THAT's my story, and I'm sticking to it ;) hehe

  

[Drazel O'Thumos]

That was the fatal flaw that right that moment set the stage for the "never say die" EU.

Consider an alternative; what if Old Ben had said "DROID Wars" instead of "Clone Wars".

It is funny that you mention that, because in the french translation (in the 1977 version of ANH), when Obi Wan tells Luke about his former role as a Jedi knight in a past conflict, Luke replies: " Ben, tu as fait la Guerre Noire?", which, in English, means : "Ben, you were involved in the Black War?"  ::)..... When I was younger and that only the Old Trilogy was available, I always wondered why this mysterious war was called "la Guerre Noire" (The Black War): it is not an apt translation of Clone Wars, but it remains quite neutral as to the content of the war (at that time, when only the OT was available, judging by the bizarre french translation, it could have been anything : a conflict involving clones, droids, aliens, a disease - like in the expression "Black Plague" etc....)  :-\ ;)

[Onli-Won Kanomi]

It could be a thread of its own eh? But I didnt want to threadjack this one simply intended an example of how Old Ben could have said something else that would have avoided the existence of cloning and thus kept dead-is-dead as a guiding principle that imo would have been better than repeatedly bringing back should-be-dead characters [in this case Maul] simply as el cheapo 'fan service'.

I'm with Wedge that Maul's ONLY purpose was to die by Obi's hand...this robs him of his raison d'etre and cheapens the character just so fans can see a bit more of a character who has now been devalued?

Bad thinking and stupid decision imo.

[Darth Xylon]

I think Maul could have been relevant if Lucas gave us the chance to see more of him then obviously what is coming up next year, Lucas himself stated that killing him off to soon was a bad idea and which i agree b/c i love Maul, hes my favorite character. You can't make a character relevant if you only give him 3 lines and like 4 seconds of screen time just to have him "killed" off in the end. If he could have just lived in TPM i'm sure we would have saw more of him in a bigger light, i'm glad hes not dead, i honestly think they're gonna make this work somehow and i feel Lucas is bringing him back for justice all those years ago for having him "die" at his beginning and who knows, perhaps he'll live throughout the clone wars and with this so called live action series coming (if it ever does) he'll put maul in that and then we'll get to see the real Darth Maul and not this clone wars version.

[Corran Horn]

Wow. Very well said.  And may I also add, "Could someone get us a new thesaurus? Forcepractitioner just wore a hole through ours."

Lol.

Lol.  :)  Sorry about the possible neologisms or awkward expressions I used in the explanation of my argument, but you have to keep in mind that English is not my native language. Anyway, the important thing is that what I wrote was understandable, isn't it?  ;)

Actually you misunderstood. I was really impressed by how articulate your statement was.  Very well done.

[Drazel O'Thumos]

Oh ok, thank you for the compliment then.  ;) :D
I was glad to take part in this pleasant  little discussion.

[General Veers]

This is getting out of hand. 

Let's look at perhaps the other most successful movie franchise around, Harry Potter.  Rowling seems to get it far more than Lucas ever did.

For one thing, there's the EU.  Personally, I think the Star Wars EU (really, fan fiction) is in general, very badly done.  Chaotic storylines crisscrossing everywhere immediately after the Battle of Endor are one thing, but do we really need to hear about the further further adventures of our heroes?  Sure, the EU licensing has made Lucas a bundle, but frankly, the entire universe is becoming hard to follow if you consider anything other than the six films to be canon, and even those are a little out of perfect continuity.  Really, the OT is what defines Star Wars for a lot of people.  Only the OT.  These other writers have vastly changed Lucas' universe, and not for the better, I'd have to say.  Cloning, Luke getting married, the Solo Children, Ahsoka - sure, people love these characters, but I think it's both laughable and pathetic at the same time.

Rowling, on the other hand, has steadfastly refused to allow anyone to write fan fiction - and as such, her story is her story, without any EU equivalent.  She has defined what she wanted her world to be, and as such, she can make her own rules.  There's a reason, though, that she has one of her main characters say, "No spell can awaken the dead," or something along those lines.  Dead is dead, and that means dead.  It also means world balance; if you think about it, no one would ever die.  Say your spouse dies; no problem, just go out and clone another one.  Bad speeder crash?  No problem!  It removes consequences from life - and to have death be permanent, well, that defines the world in the only way we know how to define it.

This is just another example of Lucas' foolishness, or greed.  Maul was cool, whatever, but now he's dead.  He should just stay dead - or else, there are a lot of unpleasant implications for Star Wars at large.

I'd like to take a quote from George Lucas and just re word it.
He basically said, in an interview that Luke doesn't get married, the Emporer doesn't get cloned, etc. All of the so called EU storylines are, in George's mind, nothing more than fan fiction that NEVER happened.

GV

[Corran Horn]

I'd like to take a quote from George Lucas and just re word it.
He basically said, in an interview that Luke doesn't get married, the Emporer doesn't get cloned, etc. All of the so called EU storylines are, in George's mind, nothing more than fan fiction that NEVER happened.

GV

I believe the actual line is in Wedge's sig

[General Veers]

Indeed.
"Star Wars is really the story of the tragedy of Darth Vader. That is the story. Once Vader dies, he doesn't come back to life, the Emporer doesn't get cloned, and Luke doesn't get married..."
-George Lucas



GV

[Corran Horn]

Indeed.
"Star Wars is really the story of the tragedy of Darth Vader. That is the story. Once Vader dies, he doesn't come back to life, the Emporer doesn't get cloned, and Luke doesn't get married..."
-George Lucas



GV

I love that quote, it's so simple and straight to the point.  Sort of like GL telling everyone, stuff it, it's MY story. I'll do what I want with it.

[Luke S.]

If maul is coming back this is what I'd like to see.

First off, an honest to goodness special edition.  Dont add a wamprat here and there.  Reshoot key scenes. Let Obi wan wound maul but instead let maul escape down the shaft.  He could then reemerge to fight in the other prequels.

At the same time edit out 85% of jar jar and we'd have a truly precious prequel worthy of the saga.

But not this way.