Spartacus01

Channel72 said:

The dinosaurs were likely wiped out by the asteroid that hit the Yucatan peninsula. I mean, while not all paleontologists agree, there’s something of a consensus about this, and the Chicxulub crater is large enough and dates to the correct time period to explain the extinction of all (non-avian) dinosaurs. Speculating about some alien laser battle in the skies seems ridiculous.

Why are you being so antagonistic? I never tried to present my hypothesis about the accidental hit of an alien weapon in the context of an orbital war between two different alien species as an historical fact. It’s just a fascinating hypothesis that I think is realistic and that I like to speculate on. And I personally think that it is not ridiculous at all. None of the proponents of the asteroid impact theory were in Chicxulub 65 million years ago, nor was I. All we know is that something hit the Earth, caused a huge crater, and led to the extinction of the dinosaurs. Why are so many people against speculation, even when it is openly presented as speculation and not as objective fact?

Also, while aliens probably exist somewhere, evidence of alien visitations to Earth from ancient sources is likely all 100% bullshit. The ancients had all kinds of interesting ideas and mythologies surrounding gods, demi-gods, angels and other supernatural beings, and ancient artists and writers depicting weird shit happening in the sky were probably inspired by that kind of stuff rather than actual alien visitations. Consider the bat-shit crazy description of a divine or angelic being in the Biblical book of Ezekiel. The description includes things like spinning crystal wheels, wings, fire, lightning, a crystal dome and multiple “eyes”. It’s easy to read something like a spaceship or whatever into that description, but in reality Ezekiel was probably just high on opium one day, and drew from various imagery inspired by things he was familiar with, like chariot wheels and other ancient equipment.

If you had read what I wrote in my previous post, where I extensively expressed all my opinions regarding the UFO phenomenon and related topics, you would know that I spoke unfavorably about the Ancient Astronaut Theory. I consider this theory to be heavily flawed, and based on scant or entirely non-existent evidence. However, I think it is important to make a distinction between the Ancient Astronaut Theory and Clipeology, because they are not the same thing.

The Ancient Astronaut Theory attempts to reinterpret sacred texts from various cultures, suggesting that the gods worshipped by these ancient civilizations were actually extraterrestrial beings who descended from the sky. According to this theory, these aliens supposedly taught ancient civilizations about astronomy, medicine and agriculture, built the megalithic structures we still see today, and performed other acts that the ancient civilizations attributed to divine intervention. Clipeology, on the other hand, is simply the study of unidentified flying objects in ancient history. Typically, clipeologists don’t rely on sacred texts or myths to identify UFO sightings from the distant past. Instead, they focus on historical texts, such as the works of historians like Josephus Flavius and others, as well as the writings and diaries of emperors, kings, soldiers and sailors. They look for references to strange flying objects in the sky within these sources. In this sense, Clipeology doesn’t take mythology as fact, and has no direct connection to the Ancient Astronaut Theory. Clipeology is more about examining historical records for possible evidence of UFO sightings in ancient times, rather than reinterpreting religious or mythological texts. Therefore, what you said about the Ezekiel account from the Bible is applicable to the ancient astronaut theorists, but not to clipeologists. Clipeologists are perfectly aware of the difference between mythological accounts and historical records, and they look for evidence only in historical records.

I am quite convinced that extraterrestrial spacecraft were sighted in ancient times, the Middle Ages, and the Renaissance. However, I have never supported the idea that aliens made direct contact with ancient civilizations, provided them with knowledge they didn’t possess, or built the ancient megalithic monuments we see today. Furthermore, I have never claimed that descriptions of flying chariots in some ancient texts were references to extraterrestrial spacecraft. Like clipeologists, I recognize the difference between mythology and history, and I never take mythology as factual. In fact, I argue that most biblical accounts are historically inaccurate.

Channel72 said:

You’re right, A New Hope pretty clearly implies Anakin was originally from Tatooine. The problem is that A New Hope was written under the assumption that Anakin and Vader were separate characters. When George Lucas wrote that dialogue, he was not thinking that Luke was actually hiding from anything. Luke was just an average farmboy who happened to live where he lived. But by the time Return of the Jedi was written, Luke was now Vader’s son, and was sent to Tatooine as an infant because it was a remote location far from the reach of the Empire. But this change to the backstory implies that Vader/Anakin shouldn’t be from Tatooine, because otherwise sending Luke to hide there comes off as a really bad decision. I mean, there’s a reason that modern “witness protection” programs choose locations completely detached from any former associates of the protected witness, and require a complete identity change.

In my opinion, once Vader and Anakin were merged into a single character, Anakin should no longer be from Tatooine. I’d rather just ignore or reinterpret Obi Wan’s line in A New Hope, rather than have to squirm around coming up with excuses for why anyone would hide Luke on the same planet his father grew up on.

I see where you’re coming from, but I think Anakin being born on Tatooine actually works really well for the story. First off, Obi-Wan’s dialogue with Luke in A New Hope is already filled with half-truths, but not everything he says is a lie. He’s protecting Luke from the harsh reality of his father’s fall, but there’s still truth in his words. If we change where Anakin was born, it could make Obi-Wan seem even more deceptive, which I think would undermine his role as a mentor. Keeping Tatooine as Anakin’s birthplace helps maintain a level of trust in what Obi-Wan is telling Luke. Plus, there’s something poetic about both Anakin and Luke starting their journeys on the same desert planet. It creates a strong narrative symmetry that ties their stories together. Anakin’s life starts on Tatooine, and so does Luke’s. This makes Luke’s journey more poignant because he’s unknowingly retracing his father’s steps, only to find his own path in the end.

Now, hiding Luke on Tatooine might seem risky at first — after all, it’s the same planet where Anakin was born — but that’s what makes it so clever. Anakin had such a rough time on Tatooine — being a slave, leaving his mother behind, and eventually losing her — that he’d have no desire to go back. The trauma he experienced there creates a psychological barrier, which makes Tatooine the last place he’d want to revisit. In that sense, it’s actually the perfect place to hide Luke because it plays on Anakin’s deepest pain and memories, keeping him away. So, even though the decision of hiding Luke on Tatooine might seem nonsensical at first, it works perfectly if you introduce a trauma that caused Anakin to not want to return to the planet, which is exactly what Attack of the Clones does. Also, you don’t have to forget that, sometimes, the best place to hide something is in plain sight.

There is an entire thread dedicated to this:

https://originaltrilogy.com/topic/Pre-PT-era-lore-an-OT-EU-scrapbook-resource-additional-info-sources-welcome/id/113915

You even wrote a post in that thread. Can you stop opening hundreds of threads about the same topic?

Superweapon VII said:

I personally don’t mind the Jedi of the prequel era being more centralized, hierarchical, and legalistic than the ancient Jedi. As someone who has a deep interest in early Christianity and its evolution, I enjoy the parallels. I also believe this makes Luke’s restoration of the Jedi all the more poignant, as he’s not merely bringing back the Jedi Order, but restoring it to a purer form absent the ossified traditions which contributed to its downfall. But I do mind the dogmatic Jedi being the rule rather than the exception throughout time, like what we see now in the Disney canon.

I agree wholeheartedly.

Vladius said:

I’m not saying you CAN’T reduce it to just one time period of history, I’m saying you SHOULDN’T because it’s very limiting in terms of stories you can tell. I know you know this already, but it’s an out of universe change which is why we emphasize pre-1999 (real life) not pre-4000 BBY or pre-1000 BBY or something.

In my opinion, the prequelization of the Jedi and Sith orders should have happened only after the Russan Reformation in 1000 BBY. Darth Bane should have been the first Sith to use the Darth title, and he should have been the one who introduced the “only red lightsabers for the Sith” rule, as well as the Sith aesthetics from the Prequels in general. The same goes for the Jedi. They should have become a centralized and bureaucratized order that forbids romantic relationships and takes infants only after the Russan Reformation. Every Old Republic story that takes place prior to 1000 BBY should have seen a Jedi Order more similar to the one from the Tales of the Jedi comics, and a Sith Order without Darths and red lightsabers.

Vladius said:

timdiggerm said:

Channel72 said:

And I agree about Alderaan. I’ll never understand why Lucas created Naboo instead of just using Alderaan as one of the principal settings.

As much as I agree, I can’t help but feel that if he had done this, we’d be calling it the prime example of “universe shrinkage”

If Anakin wasn’t from Tatooine, Anakin didn’t build C3PO, and Jabba the Hutt, Boba Fett, and Chewbacca didn’t appear, it would be completely fine and no one would have said anything or been any the wiser.

Personally, I am of the opinion that having Anakin being born on Tatooine was actually a good idea. A New Hope heavily implies that he was born and grew up on Tatooine, especially when Obi-Wan tells Luke that Owen thought that Anakin should have remained on Tatooine and not get involved with the Jedi. Why should have Anakin remained on Tatooine if he didn’t grew up there? I think it’s clear that Obi-Wan’s sentence about Owen’s wishes implied that Anakin was born on Tatooine.

StarkillerAG said:

Spartacus01 said:

StarkillerAG said:

The Sequels (my hypothetical fanedit where Palpatine never comes back)

Ah, that sounds interesting. Can you elaborate, please? What are your ideas to fix the Sequel Trilogy?

I was hoping to do this in a separate thread in the fanedit section, but whatever. Basically, I’m cycling through a few hypothetical concepts for a radical sequel edit, all focused on removing Palpatine entirely (and thus returning the sequel trilogy to how it felt in the TFA/TLJ era):

1. TFA and TLJ are mostly the same, but TROS has been edited to have the Sith fleet be created by Kylo, and the duel on the Death Star is the final duel of the film. This is by far the simplest option (and it’s even been done by a couple other editors), but I’m worried it would leave the trilogy without a proper climax.

2. TFA is mostly the same, but Rey meeting Snoke has been cut out of TLJ entirely (meaning Snoke’s still alive by the end of the movie), and TROS has been edited to replace Palpatine with Snoke (using both AI voices and clips from 21CPeasant’s Legend of the Solo Twins edit). This is also pretty simple (especially since most of the work has been done already), but I’m worried Snoke isn’t an interesting enough villain to carry the main conflict of an entire trilogy.

3. TFA is mostly the same, but TLJ and TROS have been cut into one movie featuring the best elements of both (again, heavily inspired by 21CPeasant’s edit), with the upcoming Rey movie being the final installment of the trilogy. This is the one I’m the most passionate about (especially since it sort of mirrors Episode I being a prologue by having Episode IX be an epilogue), but it depends almost entirely on the Rey movie being good enough to fanedit in the first place (unless I’m fine with the sequels being a duology).

I’m not sure I like the entirety of these ideas, but I think they are still better than what we got.

Star Wars should have three main timelines that exist simultaneously and expand in parallel to each other: the old Expanded Universe timeline, the New Canon timeline, and the Original Trilogy timeline. The Original Trilogy timeline should consist of the Original Trilogy films and the pre-1999 EU, and the authors who write their works in this timeline should be free to completely rewrite the Prequels, the New Jedi Order and the Old Republic by using the pre-1999 lore, as well as the ideas and theories that circulated among the fans in the 90s .This way, every major section of the fanbase would be happy: the fans of the old EU would see their favorite stories continue; the fans who like the newest TV shows, books, comics and video games would continue to enjoy them; the Original Trilogy fans who were disappointed by the Prequels and did not like the prequelisms that were introduced in the old EU after the trilogy came out could have an alternative version of the Prequel era (explored through written media and video games) that could potentially satisfy them.

Inbar Lavi

Vladius said:

In short they were the opposite of the prequel Jedi in almost every way, and it was much better. More creative, interesting, and varied stories were more possible.

I absolutely agree. As much as I like the Prequels, I think that the lore surrounding the Force and the Jedi was much better before they existed. The individual Jedi were free to have romantic relationships, the Order as a whole was more competent, and weird and ambiguous concepts like the balance of the Force and the Chosen One prophecy did not exist. It was much more creative and interesting, as you say.

Hell, the only reason Lucas introduced the “no marriage rule” for the Jedi is because he wanted Anakin and Padmé’s love story in Attack of the Clones to be a reminiscence of Romeo and Juliet’s Love story: a forbidden love story between two people that shouldn’t be in love. In The Phantom Menace itself there is no indication whatsoever that the Jedi are not supposed to have romantic relationships. If Lucas hadn’t become obsessed with the idea of having a forbidden love, we might have had a more tolerable Jedi Order even in the Prequel Trilogy we actually got in real life, and Anakin’s motivations for turning to the Dark Side might have even remained the same, without any need for the “no marriage rule” to be introduced. Because let’s be real, it’s not necessary to have a version of the Jedi Order that completely forbids marriage to try to convey the message that selfish and possessive love is not good. Even a lot of married people will tell you that selfish and possessive love is not a good thing.

Also, Lucas always said that the Jedi did basically nothing wrong during the Prequel era, and has always openly advocated for the idea that the fall of the Jedi Order was caused exclusively by Palpatine’s manipulations and Anakin’s selfishness, which led him to fall to the Dark Side and betray the Jedi. Therefore, we don’t need the Jedi Order to be less relatable to explain its fall, because even Lucas himself doesn’t see things that way. If anything, portraying the Jedi of the Prequel era more similarly to the Jedi of the Tales of the Jedi comics and the New Jedi Order series would have helped to better convey the message that Lucas was trying to convey, that the Jedi have no responsibility for Anakin’s fall. The Jedi Order of the Prequel era has a lot of questionable rules, which makes it very difficult for the viewers not to partially blame them for what happened with Anakin (which makes sense if you consider how they were written in the Prequel Trilogy we got). But without these rules, it would have been even more clear that the fall of the Jedi and the fall of the Republic were all Palpatine and Anakin’s fault as Lucas intended.

TMP (The Motion Picture — Star Trek)
TPM (The Phantom Manace — Star Wars)

Coincidence?
I don’t think so…

*Illuminati song starts playing… *

Why did you open the same thread in two different sections of the forum?

derill129 said:

Where can I get a link to this version?

It’s not out yet.

Channel72 said:
But I think Padme’s death doesn’t quite work as an ironic self-fulfilling prophecy, because Padme doesn’t actually die from anything Anakin does to her directly, but rather she dies mysteriously of a broken heart later on. Maybe it would have worked better if Padme actually died from complications during childbirth brought on by injuries she sustained when Anakin force-choked her.

Well, here’s the thing: her heartbreak is due to the fact that she saw what Anakin had become, what he had done and what he intended to do. It’s not something that came out of nowhere, but is the direct product of Anakin’s actions. She died because she couldn’t handle seeing what Anakin did and what he had become. In this sense, I think you can still say that Anakin killed her, and it still works as a self-fulfilling prophecy. If Anakin didn’t turn to the Dark Side and remained loyal to the Jedi and to Padmé, he would not have done all the things that caused Padmé to get depressed, have an heartbreak, and subsequently die. This is, among other things, the explanation given by Lucas himself.

Channel72 said:

Spartacus01 said:

I’m aware of the fact that this is a very unpopular opinion on this forum, so I hope I will not get crucified.
I don’t like the idea of explaining Leia’s memories in Return of the Jedi in a literal way, that is by making Padmé survive to the events of Revenge of the Sith. Force visions are the best way to explain Leia’s memories, especially when you consider that her descriptions in Return of the Jedi are very vague. In fact, Leia herself said that she only remembered vague images, so I don’t get why they couldn’t just be the product of Force visions. After all, in The Empire Strikes Back it was Yoda himself who said that the Force allows you to see “the future, the past, old friends long gone”, so there is no contradiction really. Also, Padmé being alive at the end of Revenge of the Sith and not appearing in A New Hope is super-jarring, especially if you watch the movies in chronological order, and having her death occur between the two trilogies without actually showing it is not a good idea in my opinion.

I won’t crucify you - but… I think it’s obvious that a “Force vision” wasn’t the original intent of the person who wrote Leia’s dialogue in Return of the Jedi. Clearly, they meant to communicate to the audience that Leia/Luke’s mother was alive when Leia was a young child. The Prequels changed this for no real narrative benefit. They didn’t even use Padme’s death for some compelling narrative purpose - like for example, having Padme’s death push Anakin over the edge and fall to the Dark Side. Instead, it was only the fear of Padme potentially dying that pushed Anakin over the edge. Padme didn’t even need to actually die, yet for some reason Lucas made her die anyway, despite the cost of violating continuity with ROTJ.

Overall, it’s not such a big deal. Attempting to explain the discrepancy with a “Force vision” is fine - and certainly not the worst attempt at damage control from fans - but it’s still just fan damage control after an obvious (and pointless) retcon.

I always viewed Padmé’s death as a self-fulfilling prophecy. Anakin acted upon his fear of losing her, and this is what caused her death in the first place. In this sense, I always thought it was a compelling death. Also, I am of the opinion that Leia’s mother being alive when she was still a little child was never a good idea to begin with, so I’m more than happy that the Prequels retconned it.

I’m aware of the fact that this is a very unpopular opinion on this forum, so I hope I will not get crucified.
I don’t like the idea of explaining Leia’s memories in Return of the Jedi in a literal way, that is by making Padmé survive to the events of Revenge of the Sith. Force visions are the best way to explain Leia’s memories, especially when you consider that her descriptions in Return of the Jedi are very vague. In fact, Leia herself said that she only remembered vague images, so I don’t get why they couldn’t just be the product of Force visions. After all, in The Empire Strikes Back it was Yoda himself who said that the Force allows you to see “the future, the past, old friends long gone”, so there is no contradiction really. Also, Padmé being alive at the end of Revenge of the Sith and not appearing in A New Hope is super-jarring, especially if you watch the movies in chronological order, and having her death occur between the two trilogies without actually showing it is not a good idea in my opinion.

Here there is an excellent video that offers a convincing natural explanation for the famous “UFO Battle of Nuremberg of 1561”, which many ufologists and supporters of the Ancient Astronaut Theory claim to be evidence of the presence of extraterrestrial spaceships in Earth’s skies in ancient times:

https://youtu.be/_-7W9mZGFQo?si=1UDuFzTVmSWEHkLf

I’m not opposed to the idea of ancient battles between alien fleets. In fact, one idea I find particularly fascinating is the possibility that the giant impact crater near Chicxulub, Mexico — the one most scientists believe was caused by an asteroid impact and is linked to the extinction of the dinosaurs — might actually have an extraterrestrial origin.

According to a hypothesis I came across online several years ago, that crater could be the result of a massive orbital battle between two alien civilizations that took place around 65 million years ago. The idea is that during this ancient conflict, the flagship of one of the fleets fired a powerful weapon at the flagship of the opposing fleet, but the shot missed and ended up striking Earth instead. The impact of that weapon would have been what caused the massive destruction and led to the extinction event. Of course, this is pure speculation and there’s no real evidence to support it, but I think it’s a really interesting hypothesis and I’m willing to entertain it.

However, even though I don’t reject the idea of ancient alien battles in Earth’s skies and low orbit, I’ve always been very skeptical about the Nuremberg case. And since the explanation offered in this video makes way more sense to me, I’m more than happy to share it. Enjoy!

I’m an Expanded Universe fan as well, and I’m always in contact with the Expanded Universe community. I can tell you, from personal experience, that most EU fans don’t like the idea of EU characters being adapted into the current Canon timeline, regardless of whether they are adapted faithfully or not. The majority of EU fans love characters like Mara Jade, Thrawn and Revan precisely for the environment that surrounds them, because it’s the universe they exist within that makes them what they are. Which means that it makes no sense to adapt them to another universe, because they are actually not the same characters that EU fans use to love. The majority of EU fans don’t want Canon stories with EU characters arbitrarily inserted in them, they want the actual EU timeline to be continued through the publication of new stories, new books, comics and video games that are set specifically in the EU timeline itself. Having two separate but equally valid timelines is not confusing, and the material that belongs to the EU timeline can still have the Legends banner on it in order to avoid confusion. Disney is perfectly capable of managing two different timelines, and yet they decide to keep the EU as dead. If they really want to do something for the EU fanbase, then they should authorize the publication of new stories set during the Dawn of the Jedi era, the New Sith Wars era and the Legacy era. Furthermore, they should make a public statement announcing that TCW is not part of the EU timeline, because the show is technically part of both timelines, even though the majority of EU fans completely disregard it in the context of the EU, since it totally contradicts the Clone Wars Multimedia Project and the timeline of the Clone Wars that was already fully established before 2008, with all the books, comics and video games that used to be part of it.

I’m also a Prequel Trilogy fan, and I can tell you that not all Prequel Trilogy fans use to love TCW. Yes, the majority of Prequel fans love the show, but those who love the show don’t necessarily constitute the entirety of the Prequel fandom. Your propositions for Prequel fans are pretty valid and I don’t want to criticize them, I just want to make it clear that not all Prequel fans actually care about a Clone Wars continuation. Something that all Prequel fans (regardless of their opinions on TCW) might appreciate, though, is a Special Edition of the Prequel Trilogy that tries to improve the way the CGI looks and inserts some of the deleted scenes.

Even though I generally don’t agree with the criticisms that some of you give to the Prequels, I agree with this specific point. Anakin killing younglings is not a good idea, and it shouldn’t have been done. It is one of those things that make some people say that he was never a good person to begin with and never deserved redemption in the first place. Which is understandable. Understandable but not good, indeed, since we are supposed to believe that there is still good in him, which is not very believable after you have seen him killing Innocent children with cold blood.

SparkySywer said:

When is Leia whiny?

Throughout the entirety of A New Hope.

Leia is a very annoying character in A New Hope. She improves in the next two movies, but she is very annoying in the first one. I couldn’t stand her at all when I watched the movie for the first time, and I still can’t stand her now. Say everything you want about Prequel Anakin, but at least he had his reasons to be whiny and angry. Leia from A New Hope is arrogant and whiny just for the sake of it.

1. I don’t like the concept of Palpatine coming back from the dead. In fact, I prefer to retcon Dark Empire by saying that the Emperor from the comics is just a wild, crazy clone, and not the real Emperor.
2. I don’t like some of the weirdest books from the 90s, like the Callista Trilogy and The Crystal Star.
3. I don’t like the fact that Vitiate comes back so many times. He should have been killed for good by the Hero of Tython, and that’s it.
4. They should have avoided creating so many stories about the Rebels stealing the Death Star plans. Rogue One did it way better in my opinion: we only have one story and there is no confusion about how the Rebellion stole those plans.
5. Everything post-NJO is just stupid.

BedeHistory731 said:

This is why, despite Matt Lanter giving overall better performances, I have a soft spot for Matt Lucas as Anakin. He actually tried to sound like Hayden, emphasis on tried.

Hey, I actually think he sounded very similar to Hayden.

I love Russia and Germany. And I swear, this has nothing to do with me being a Marxist-Leninist, I simply love the history and culture of those countries. I also love the history and culture of my own country: Italy. 2500 years of history, a rich culture, we are responsible for a lot of the things that exist in modern European and Western civilization, and great food! Besides, I live in the city where pizza was invented!

JadedSkywalker said:

I actually like Matt Lanter Anakin more than Hayden, but I appreciate what Hayden did on the Disney shows.

I do like the Republic Comics those were before Filoni Wars. I also much prefer Ventress in the EU over Filoni, and I like the Micro Series and the Obsession comic. I liked the Battle of Jabiim and how it tied into Luke’s story later in the other comics. I like the character of Asharad Hett who went on to become Darth Drayt, I liked the Aurra Sing books. Those are all non canon to Disney Star Wars.

You want an unpopular opinion I hated Dark Disciple and how it comes off like a YA romance novel. I actually like Son of Dathmomir even if most of the retcons Filoni made to Maul’s backstory i dislike.

I may have disliked the Legacy books but I liked the Legacy comics the first one with Cade, though Legacy II was kind of meh, though a Solo without force powers has some merit.

I, too, dislike the post-NJO/Legacy books while simultaneously liking the Legacy comics. But even though I like the Legacy comics infinitely more than the Legacy books, I still don’t consider them Canon, because I don’t like the concept of the Sith returning after Episode VI in general, since I am one of those people who actually likes the idea of the Chosen One Prophecy and the idea of the Sith being destroyed once and for all by Anakin.