Originally posted by: Commander Courage
When I originally thought of Grievous being Maul, such a scene did not seem necessary to me. A few hints and a brief explanation through Grievous dialogue would do fine, and I still feel that way. After all, in this version of the saga we aren't going to see the complete Anakin=Vader transformation, are we? Even so it would seem rather repetitve to see the same process twice. The last scene has potential, as Dooku and Sidious really need some more dialogue between them to explain just what the heck is going on. Christopher Lee sound clips seem to be in abundance, but what about Ian McDiarmid? Anyone have any ideas for possible sources for alternater Palpatine dialogue?
When I originally thought of Grievous being Maul, such a scene did not seem necessary to me. A few hints and a brief explanation through Grievous dialogue would do fine, and I still feel that way. After all, in this version of the saga we aren't going to see the complete Anakin=Vader transformation, are we? Even so it would seem rather repetitve to see the same process twice. The last scene has potential, as Dooku and Sidious really need some more dialogue between them to explain just what the heck is going on. Christopher Lee sound clips seem to be in abundance, but what about Ian McDiarmid? Anyone have any ideas for possible sources for alternater Palpatine dialogue?
I don't know what the current plan is for seeing Anakin's transformation -- I vote we keep it because in this Saga it's always Anakin's story that counts and that is about the most powerful material in Anakin's story. Aside from the staging of his "NOOO!", that scene where Sidious tells his new best friend a horrible and corrupting lie is a wonderful portrait of evil. "by the way, you killed your true love. Don't let it get you down."
I'd miss everything but the "Nooo!" if we cut it out. That's the climax of the first three movies.
That said, whatever way we go I believe the Maul=Grievous story needs the transformation scene for a couple reasons -- first, it's a hell of a lot of off-screen action to cover in a couple lines of dialogue-- Maul is recovered in pieces, turned into a robot, and brought back onto the scene about 13 years later? Without the "rebuilding scene" it's almost like this stuff must happen all the time.
Second, I think the skeptics of this idea will be able to say we took the easy way out if we don't do this scene. The strength of this idea is that it adds depth to something shallow. But if we make the viewer work too hard to understand it, or if they feel it should have been done better, then I don't think we're going to achieve what we want.
But I, of course, bow to the decisions of the actual editors on all these things. My powers are not yet great enough to force my changes upon you...