Originally posted by TheBoost:
"I just don't see it. Greivous is a general, a sneaky tactician who hits and runs. Maul is a silent killer. I don't see why Maul would somehow suddenly become a leader because he's cut in half."
Well, really I'm talking about what could have been. I felt General Grievous was an extremely underdeveloped and underused character. My argument is that if he had been built upon the remains of Darth Maul, Lucas would have had much more to draw from when developing the Grievous character. For instance, it would have given the Kenobi/Grievous rivalry a lot more resonance. Having been cast aside to command pathetic droids would have contributed to the depth of his anger and, lest I forget, the PT might have actually had the BAMF villain that it was so desperately lacking.
So yes, comparing the current Grievous and Maul, I can certainly understand not being able to see a connection. But, just think of what Grievous could have been if he were the broken shadow of Darth Maul
That being said, I honestly would not like to see somone try to incorporate this in a PT edit. It is one thing to fix continuity issues, broken lightsabers and Jar-Jar dialogue, but another thing to tamper with a character's backstory and essence. I also doubt that anyone would be able to pull this off in an effective and seamless manner.