Carthage said:
What was your reaction when Disney announced that the Legends cannon would exist unto itself, and that long familiar characters (notably the three in the OP) would not be involved in the upcoming films?
My reaction was pure bliss. The new movies should be able to tell their own story, not be beholden to another story.
I wonder if Kanan will use a blaster like Luke did in Star Wars (1977) and ESB. I miss when Jedi didn't feel the need to always use lightsabers.
The Merchant said:
Man, with the rumors released on how Luke might fall to the dark-side I'm really worried that migh happen-san.
I don't think they'd really do such a terrible thing. Luke is too iconic and the whole point of Luke is that he can't be turned.
When someone defends the EU with "the prequels did it too" or "Lucas did it too". How does one person doing something wrong make it ok for someone else to also do something wrong?
point5 said:
Considering this is supposed to represent the darkest days of the empire, why oh why did they choose to present it in this amateurish and childish way?
I guess they're trying to have their cake and eat it too. If you're going to make an amateur and childish show, why not set it in a different era?
Is it just me or are the prequel Jedi like Joseph Kony? Both kidnap children and brainwash them to be soldiers ready to put their lives on the line.
unamochilla2 said:
If the Inquisitors existed during the OT, then where were they this whole time? Why weren't they working with the Empire?
Same place as Thrawn, Mara Jade, and Jerec. If equating not appearing to not existing isn't world shrinkage, I don't know what is.
The Merchant said:
How did people pronounce Coruscant before TPM?
hard second c
RicOlie_2 said:
Apologies, Dark Lord of the Thread. I will defer to your wise judgement in the future.
It's more that I created the thread than it is that I'm wise.
My major problem with the fight is that the characters were fighting just because they're Jedi and Sith. There was no personal conflict between the characters.
RicOlie_2 said:
I believe this is the "what don't you want in episode 7" thread.
I'm ok with what Carthage posted.
I hate how TCW made so much effort to do right what the prequels did wrong but doesn't get the recognition it deserves because of canon nazis.
Excessive lightsaber use.
http://boards.theforce.net/threads/luke-skywalkers-new-or-old-jedi-order.50014514/page-86
In this thread, somebody says that the prequels should and will be ignored while also saying that the Jedi should and will have the no attachments policy.
Johnny Ringo said: New Saber Colours
What's wrong with new saber colors?
pablumatic said:A Force user could call themselves an Imperial. They could call themselves an elephant if they wanted. Without an actual Empire backing them up they are just appropriating a lost cause. Like U.S. southerners who still wave Confederate flags. Utterly meaningless.
I also wouldn't want to see a repeat of the prequels where a Force user actually goes about building an Empire. We already know that makes for bad cinema.
Any Force-user who seeks to rule the galaxy without an actual Empire backing them up would be "just appropriating a lost cause", whether they call themselves a Sith, an Imperial, or something else.
If nobody goes about building an Empire, nobody is going to be ruling the galaxy.
skyjedi2005 said:
No Jedi forbidden to love bullshit, or forbidden to marry and have children.
This so much.
edit: nvm
I love how in TOTJ the Jedi are decentralized, aren't trained from birth, don't dress like Tatooinians, and have families.
The Merchant said:
they weren't really.
And how do we know that? TOTJ doesn't show the entirety of the Great Sith War.
The problem with the SEs is that the cgi is there just to show off what cgi can do, not to add anything to the films. Tech demos age because their entire purpose revolves around them being up to date. The SEs are tech demos, therefore they've aged. The SEs are more like a video created to demonstrate the PS1 than they are like a PS1 game.
imperialscum said:
darklordoftech said:
One of my biggest criticisms of the EU is that everyone who disagrees with the leading Jedi Master of the time becomes a Sith Lord.
Not all EU is like that.
Not all, but plenty.
When a character in KOTOR says, "Shut up about Revan and Malak. Kun and Ulic were far worse."
moviefreakedmind said:
darklordoftech said:
I don't get:
1. How would a Sith be any less of a rehash than an Imperial? How is the ansence of the Sith "taking things in a new direction" if the absence of the Empire isn't? How is Star Wars about Jedi vs. Sith yet not about Rebels vs. Empire?
2. Why can't a Force-user call themselves an Imperial? You can have Imperials without the Empire.
Also, does a force user who is not necessarily evil, but just morally not in line with the Jedi (like if Han Solo in ANH were a force user) have to automatically be a Sith Lord?
Absolutely not. Not everybody who disagrees with the President is a member of Al-Qaeda. One of my biggest criticisms of the EU is that everyone who disagrees with the leading Jedi Master of the time becomes a Sith Lord.
I don't get:
1. How would a Sith be any less of a rehash than an Imperial? How is the ansence of the Sith "taking things in a new direction" if the absence of the Empire isn't? How is Star Wars about Jedi vs. Sith yet not about Rebels vs. Empire?
2. Why can't a Force-user call themselves an Imperial? You can have Imperials without the Empire.