darklordoftech

Maybe Luke's Jedi Order (assuming it is a Jedi Order) won't use lightsabers as much as the prequel Jedi Order did.

Reegar said:

Look at it this way. . . the soldiers who died in WWII saved thousands of civilian lives in the decades to come (Jews, Roma, Gays, Jehovah Witnesses, etc). If Nazi Germany returned, those lives would still have been spared those prior decades of evil.

I'll give you that.

I have found some EU that I like (provided future movies feel free to ignore it): Dawn of the Jedi. It doesn't copy the movies and I'm curious to see how the Jedi come to be.

DuracellEnergizer said:

 

skyjedi2005 said:

Bad EU idea from the 90's Palpatine's Son.

Playing devil's advocate here, I have to say that the Jedi Prince series was only written to appeal to kids and wasn't meant to be taken as a serious addition to the Star Wars canon. It's only the diehard completists who came later who decided it that it had to be shoehorned into a continuity it didn't mesh with.

 

I could not agree more.

Erikstormtrooper said:

I don't mind lightsabers and large-scale battles, as long as they're done right.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjhJcm-lpjc

 

I can't stand the Old Republic. I think it's one of the worst parts of the EU. It copies the movies to the point of being inconsistent with them.

Leonardo said:

I got a little idea.

How about some sort of war against a robot army, you know, technology either turns evil (no Force or Sith bullcrap though) or revolts against humans or something.

Did the EU ever use similar concepts?

I'm sure I'm not the first one to conceive an idea like this one.

In Tales of the Jedi, a Jedi recalls "The Great Droid Revolution", but never elaborates, and "Tales of the Bounty Hunters" tells a bizare story about IG-88 revolting, but I'm under the impression that that whole story is just an in-universe rumor.

DominicCobb said:

AntcuFaalb said:

DominicCobb said:

The more I think about it, the more I realize I don't want there to be any red lightsabers in Episode VII.

I'll raise you...

I don't want to see more than two lightsabers in any single frame. I'll walk the fuck out if I do.

The PT ruined lightsabers for me.

Yes.

And as for why: yeah, I see red lightsabers as a Sith thing, specifically a Palpatine clan thing (if only because that's what we see in the films). I fancy the villain being a bad Jedi (is dark jedi the correct term?), or not a force/lightsaber wielder at all. 

Ever notice that the color red appears on many Naboo things and Naboo is Palpatine's homeplanet? I think that Palpatine gave himself and his apprentices red lightsabers because red means something on his homeplanet.

AntcuFaalb said:

darklordoftech said:

Does anybody else think that they might not have Sith in the sequel trilogy so that people don't think of "unliiiiimited powaaaaaahhhhhhh!!!!!"?

I hope there aren't any Sith in the new films.

I'm sick of this Jedi vs. X (where X wants to destroy the Jedi) bullshit.

Who else has wanted to destroy the Jedi?

I too am sick of Jedi vs. X.

Reegar said:

darklordoftech said:

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Can-Episode-VII-ignore-the-prequels/topic/16046/page/2/

There I explain why I hate Thrawn so much.

Thank you for elaborating. :)

You're welcome.

DominicCobb said:

The more I think about it, the more I realize I don't want there to be any red lightsabers in Episode VII.

Why? (unless you're just talking about villains, in which case I agree because I don't think the pre-Palpatine Sith (if there were any) had red lightsabers)

DuracellEnergizer said:

 

darklordoftech said:

Here's why I hate Thrawn: I feel that the Empire should die with Palpatine. To have the Sith and/or the Empire outlive Palpatine undermines Palpatine's death and all that the heroes of the original trilogy fought for.

Yeah, and all those Neo-Nazis goose-stepping around today really negate the sacrifice all those Allied soldiers who fought in WWII made and render the deaths of the ones who died totally meaningless.

 

They do negate the sacrifice of the allied soldiers and make their deaths much less meaningful, and if those neo-nazis took over the territory once ruled by nazi germany, the deaths of the allied soldiers would be totally meaningless. 

SilverWook said:

Now I'm wondering if there's the SW equivalent of South America, where lots of former Imperial officers are laying low dreaming of restoring their beloved Empire.

There has to be one deranged former Imp somewhere who has penned a little musical love letter titled Springtime For Palpatine. ;)

I've wondered about that too.

Does anybody else think that they might not have Sith in the sequel trilogy so that people don't think of "unliiiiimited powaaaaaahhhhhhh!!!!!"?

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Can-Episode-VII-ignore-the-prequels/topic/16046/page/2/

There I explain why I hate Thrawn so much.

http://boards.theforce.net/threads/the-chosen-one-the-prophecy-and-the-st.50014664/page-38

I can't believe I have to have discussions like the one I'm having on page 38 of the thread I linked to.

TMBTM said:

darklordoftech said:

Here's why I hate Thrawn: I feel that the Empire should die with Palpatine. 

I don't "hate" Thrawn or some of the EU, but YES I totaly agree. I'd prefer Episode 7 to NOT have imperials (as we know them) included in the story. Plus the movie taking place like 30 years later i don't see how there would still be "imperials" around here anyway. Unless the New Republic is a New Empire.

:)

Here's why I hate Thrawn: I feel that the Empire should die with Palpatine. To have the Sith and/or the Empire outlive Palpatine undermines Palpatine's death and all that the heroes of the original trilogy fought for.

The reason I always hate on the EU is that on many pro-EU websites I've seen people saying that the sequel trilogy should make sure not to contradict the EU. I was appalled at the idea of the movies making sure to be consistent wih other material, so I joined a community that is known not to be particularly fond of the EU, and that community is originaltrilogy.com.

Reegar said:dismissing the entire EU because it "sucks".

Is something I have the right to do. Since when do products have to be judged fairly? Products aren't people.

TV's Frink said:

We're flaming you for who you are.

I'm sure those who flamed Reegar for disliking ROTJ would say the same.

Reegar said:I voiced my dislike of ROTJ and several members flamed me.

Just like how everybody flames me for disliking the EU.

skyjedi2005 said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

 

darklordoftech said:

Is anybody else afraid of the EU influencing the sequel trilogy?

I'm more afraid of the PT influencing the EU.

 

Which happened with fate of the jedi and crucible where they reference mortis from the clone wars.

There wasn't even a need to reference Mortis in either. Denning put Mortis in both to make them seem more "epic".

skyjedi2005 said:

Bad EU idea from the 90's Palpatine's Son.

Another Darth Maul clone with double bladed red lightsaber.

 

Honestly i hope its none of these.

I couldn't agree more.

Davnes007 said:

Yes, they would have.

You are right, sadly. For some reason criticising something with the "Star Wars" brand that's not written by George Lucas is considered trolling.

Would replacing Moore and Amedda with the ROTJ advisors be preferable?

Tack said:In My Incredibly Controversial and Idiotic Opinion

I was expecting mass agreement with my criticism of the EU. I've never met anybody who would prefer the Ssi-ruuk or Waru over Jar Jar.

imperialscum said:

If they selected this period purely to be able to bring the original cast back then that is very sad.

That needs to be repeated for eternity.