Maul: Shadow Lord — Page 3

Connor MacLeod said:

Ah Darth Maul, a.k.a. Darth NoPenis. I will never understand why so many people accept his absurd return after being cut in half. This for me is easily one of the worst creative decisions Lucas has ever made as far as ruining the suspension of disbelief for the world he created but then again, his clone wars cartoon is filled with ridiculous kiddy nonsense that i find insufferable. The way he came back is like it was an idea from a 5 year old, “And then…And then…he got spider legs and was found by his little brother and some witches use magic and gave him new legs!” SMH. And to think that they brought him back just to be cut down by Kenobi again! LOL. It’s pathetic. They could have done so much with this character and that’s all they could do?! Make him obsessed with Kenobi and lose to him again? YAWN. I would have loved to see him seek out revenge against Palpatine for abandoning him and basically making him into a expendable goon. Sure, Palpatine can’t die, but it would’ve been cool if he could go out as some kind of anti-hero striking against the Sith rather than a pathetic fool. I hate that last fight with Kenobi in rebels.

Obi killing Maul in Rebels wasn’t in Lucas’ run as far as I remember. Also, Mother Talzin I think more just built new robot legs for him. Also, I think that run established him as becoming a rival to Palpatine.

aGreatHumanBeing said:

But I do feel this show might be the most “Earthy” I’ve seen Star Wars. The tip of the iceberg was when they played a “football” match at a stadium. I’m not particular familiar with the Extended Universe, so it might have happend there, but that was a new one for me.

Looked a lot like a lacrosse stick to me, which is interesting.

The finale was just okay.

Anchorhead said:

Oddly enough, I gave this a look and don’t dislike it. To be clear though, as I’ve said plenty of times before, Maul has always been one dimensional to me, so he was just marketing and visual placement.

That said, this is so different from anything I’ve seen of him in years past (which isn’t much), this just plays for me as a new character who looks like Maul. I’m watching it and not connecting it to anything I’ve seen before. I’m not steeped in canon genuflect, so I don’t care how the show connects or how he was retconned into the GFFA.

Truth be told, I last saw Phantom Menace 27 years ago and I don’t even remember him speaking. For me, this is just a new show and a new character.

So, you haven’t seen The Clone Wars? I feel like you’re kinda missing a solid chunk of his character.

I really enjoyed the first season, but a few things really annoyed me.

*Spoilers ahead

• Did Maul need to have his robotic legs damaged 5000 times? We get the point.

• Maul, who was trained as a Sith lord since his childhood, cannot handle the inquisitors? I never liked the inquisitors when introduced in Rebels, but Maul’s inability to take them out made them way too powerful. That leads to my next major problem.

• Too many drawn out lightsaber duels that end up in stalemates. You could cut them mostly out and nothing would be missed.

• A few others already mentioned it, but the appearance of ‘Him’ was pointless. My favorite aspect of the show was the characters. Why bring ‘HIM’ in to just be a silent very scary generic monster? His only purpose in the finale was to kill the Jedi master to push Devon over the edge. This could have been accomplished with the same result by the inquisitors. Please only bring in this legend if it lead to his or Maul’s character development.

honestabe said:

I am interested in the new Maul show. However, I think the show is effectively redundant with what we got out of Maul in the Clone Wars.

He becomes head of a crime syndicate, takes on a new apprentice, and then inevitably loses everything.

This is effectively the same plot.

We’re making prequels to prequel characters now

Oh I “got” what they were going for with Acolyte…but it was atrocious anyway. 🤷‍♂️

Anchorhead said:

This should have been the end of Maul. He was a one-dimensional character and added nothing at all to the story.

I was on board with Solo, in spite of its weak story and poor acting, until his reveal. It was a one & done film for me at that point. It’s shocking to me that they’re still trying to make him relevant to the brand 27 years later.

it’s obvious that the team making star wars realized that George screwed up by not making Maul the Darth Vader of the prequels and not taking advantage of a character that everyone thought was cool and badass, so they retconned his death to insert him in all of these other properties in an attempt to make up for it. Problem is that it doesnt change the main issues: Maul having no impact on anything movie wise and the prequels having no central villain.

JackNapier said:

Tayday said:

Anchorhead said:

This should have been the end of Maul. He was a one-dimensional character and added nothing at all to the story.

I was on board with Solo, in spite of its weak story and poor acting, until his reveal. It was a one & done film for me at that point. It’s shocking to me that they’re still trying to make him relevant to the brand 27 years later.

it’s obvious that the team making star wars realized that George screwed up by not making Maul the Darth Vader of the prequels and not taking advantage of a character that everyone thought was cool and badass, so they retconned his death to insert him in all of these other properties in an attempt to make up for it. Problem is that it doesnt change the main issues: Maul having no impact on anything movie wise and the prequels having no central villain.

Isn’t Sidious/Palpatine the main villain?

Sure, but pretty minimal or “off screen” as the villain for most of the trilogy. You could say the same for the OT, he is the “big bad”…but he’s off screen until ROTJ and we had good Ole Vader as our invested antagonist. The prequels killed off their other baddies before we could give af.

The Sith are the primary antagonist of the Prequel trilogy. Anakin is an unexpected threat to the Jedi. Well unexpected by everyone except Yoda in episode 1. I sense much fear in you. Fear is the path to the dark side. Anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering.

Anakin does give into his anger. When the Tuskens kill his mom, he kills an entire tribe. He murders Dooku who is defenseless, for having taken his hand in Episode II. His fear of loss of Padme makes him join the Sith and kill younglings, and he ends up choking Padme. He helps kill Mace Windu who has his hand chopped off, and blown out a window by Sidious and unlimited power.

He did tell Padme he likes dictators in Episode II and seemed to imply fascism is better than Democracy. It was implied, she thought he was joking and they were laughing and being playful.

Yoda tells Anakin to let Padme go, for her to die. the same way he tells Luke in TESB to let Han and Leia die.

Luke’s vision of the future and impatience cost him a hand. Anakin’s cost him his wife, his soul. and his humanity.

JackNapier said:

Isn’t Sidious/Palpatine the main villain?

The emperor is the background villain in both trilogies. Vader was the main villain for the originals but the prequels had no main villain.

JackNapier said:

I just realized Jar Jar is the main villain

That’s soooo 2009 😆

Tayday said:

it’s obvious that the team making star wars realized that George screwed up by not making Maul the Darth Vader of the prequels and not taking advantage of a character that everyone thought was cool and badass, so they retconned his death to insert him in all of these other properties in an attempt to make up for it. Problem is that it doesnt change the main issues: Maul having no impact on anything movie wise and the prequels having no central villain.

Why would or should Maul be the Vader? What does that add to the PT and why should it copy the OT in that way?

I’ve heard that Lucas may have been the one to present bringing back Maul in TCW.

Tayday said:

The emperor is the background villain in both trilogies. Vader was the main villain for the originals but the prequels had no main villain.

Palpatine I think is pretty front and center in his actions in the PT. It’s not always stated outright and the heroic characters don’t know until the end basically, but he’s still consistently shown active throughout the trilogy. So, I think Palpatine, with pawns, like Maul and Dooku and the trade federation and the sepratists and Grevious, works as the main villain. I don’t see really what Maul would add story and character wise as existing just based on that idea.

Dagenspear said:

Why would or should Maul be the Vader? What does that add to the PT and why should it copy the OT in that way?

Maybe motivation for the main characters and also someone the audience can attach to? Basic stuff you need for a movie to work, even more necessary for a trilogy.

I dont know how you can think any of this when Maul killed Kenobi’s master, as if that isnt a strong enough reason to keep him as the main villain.