Jump to content

Thrawn (Legends vs Canon Novels)


Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, Zerimar Nyliram said:

This right here encapsulates the entirety of what is wrong with you. You can't judge something you know nothing about. If you actually knew the context, it makes perfect sense and is perfectly in line with what Obi-Wan says. The way it does it directly correlates to this. Without the Force, even the ysalamiri couldn't exist, and couldn't interact with it the way they do.

Apparently, the ysalamiri exist within the new canon now as well. So yeah, there's that.

What's wrong with you is that when someone criticizes the EU you take it as a personal attack on yourself for some reason. Eventhough I did preface my statement saying I don't know much about it I don't generally go into things completely unprepared so before making my post I went to wookiepedia and read up on these things. Now that wouldn't make me an expert but it gives me a decent impression of the idea. And after reading about them I made my post about it seeming like a dumb idea because well it seems like a dumb idea. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 83
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Over the past few years, I have been burning through the new Thrawn novels by Timothy Zahn as they have come out. Specifically: Thrawn (2017) Thrawn: Alliances (2018) Thrawn: Treas

I enjoyed reading Heir to the Empire, Dark Force Rising, and The Last Command. I think you would have to read all three since they are just one big story. However, that was almost 30 years ago when I

Actually, all of the new canon books Zahn has written so far have been carefully written around EU continuity, so they can fit into either canon ("Legends" or Disney). I own them all but have only rea

On 12/2/2020 at 6:27 PM, Tank said:

Yeah-- I just don't like things in Star Wars explained. I love it for Star Trek-- because that was always part of it's DNA. Anything that makes Star Wars not a simplistic mythic visual-based tale, I feel ruins it.

 

On 12/2/2020 at 8:54 PM, Darth Kid said:

For me, this is exactly why I hope we never find out where Yoda came from or anything else about his species.

Most stuff I don't mind getting explained in the EU, but this is one of my red lines.

Yeah, Star Wars needs some mystery to it.  I also hope we never find out where Yoda, and by extension, Grogu's people are from.  Not everything needs a back story.

However, there are times in Star Wars when it is annoying, too.  Like where the EFF did a whole planet of Sith Eternal  come from and how did they build thousands of star destroyers with death star canons without raising anyone's attention?  Why would a Sith assassin leave the key to finding the wayfinder on a knife that if you hold it just right, tells you where to go?  Who are the Knights of Ren? How did the Emperor survive?  How did they recover Luke's saber from Bespin.   I know some people are able to just roll with it, and if it works for them, more power to them.  But things like that bother me. 

Or maybe I should say JJ-style mystery boxes in general, bother me.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The trick is, if you want to be mysterious about something don’t hang the plot on it. Yoda’s origins are mysterious, but in no way is it connected to any plot points.

All that TROS nonsense, the story all hinged on it, so of course you ask questions. The Emperor was mysterious during the OT, but there was nothing that said he couldn’t be. With TFA taking place after ROTJ, Snoke doesn’t get to be mysterious because the story left off somewhere that begs an explanation. JJ doesn’t seem to get this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely!  I mean a logical thing JJ could have done is just made the Emperor a force ghost, who was seeking to use the powers of Rey and Kylo to take physical form again.  Predictable, maybe even unoriginal (because it has been done time and again in EU and video games), but at least it is an explanation one can accept.  Yet in TROS JJ just has characters in one scene spit ball ideas like, "Is he a clone, or is it dark side alchemy? Who knows....Oh, squirrel!"  Then it is never addressed again.   I hate when things are written like that. It's so lazy.  And quite frankly, sloppy.  Yet JJ literally can just print money  as he hops from franchise to franchise, leaving each one in worse shape than he got it in. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Im not one who often wants a ton explained in these movies cause it basically slows the movie down in a lot of ways. With Snoke I didn't want one really, and the one we got was terrible anyway, it was fine he came out of nowhere to me. Johnson essentially made him a red herring which was more than fine. Basically a step for Kylo to take by killing him.

With Palpatine though it was different. He wasn't a red herring, he wasnt a role player. JJ made him the main villain again. Plus we saw him die basically. Plus defeating him at the end of IX is supposed to be some final victory but by not explaining how he came back there is no reason to think he can't just come back again.

The whole idea of Palpatine being back was dumb but then once he was back his role in the movie itself was just as dumb.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I agree.  I admittedly like some fan wank in my Star Wars, as long as it is not in your face and is done in an interesting and cool way.  Easter eggs are fine (EG including the Imperial Troop transport in Rogue one or Mando, which was a classic Kenner vehicle that was made up and not featured in the OT).  But when things are overly explained, or mysteries are solved  that don't need to be and with lackluster payoff, it becomes a bit much even for me.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m perfectly okay with leaving a lot of stuff as mystery. The movies aren’t about Snoke, or Luke’s lightsaber, and I never expected any information about them. When it comes, it’ll be a book or a comic. Not in a film. But Rise of Skywalker made something a central mystery and never explained it. It would be like if they had never addressed Rey’s parentage.  Or watching a detective movie and when they get to the big reveal, the detective just shrugs and walks away.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Overall, I agree... but I do think Snoke needed explanation if only because seemingly evil was defeated. There were multiple places in both TFA and TLJ that Snoke’s background question could have been addressed with a single line or two. That is not hard to do, and jettisons so much baggage.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tank said:

Overall, I agree... but I do think Snoke needed explanation if only because seemingly evil was defeated. There were multiple places in both TFA and TLJ that Snoke’s background question could have been addressed with a single line or two. That is not hard to do, and jettisons so much baggage.

You'll get Snoke heads in bacta and like it!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tank said:

Overall, I agree... but I do think Snoke needed explanation if only because seemingly evil was defeated. There were multiple places in both TFA and TLJ that Snoke’s background question could have been addressed with a single line or two. That is not hard to do, and jettisons so much baggage.

The issue with Snoke is this: Star Wars always want more. A few lines from Snoke, or Luke, giving a quick explanation where he came from may have made you happy. But you know if Snoke is like "I waited in a far corner of the Galaxy gathering strength until I saw my opening..." that a huge section of the fan base would have been like "ok, how did he meet Ben? how did he turn him? how did he get this enormous military to support him?" No explanation could sate large portions of the fan base. 

The thing is Snoke sucked from the start. He wasnt a cool charcter in TFA, most people thought he was a lame Emperor stand in. Which he was. So Johnson rather than spend any significant time trying to really build him up in TLJ decided that instead of trying to fix the weakness from TFA that he would try to build on the strength of Kylo and Rey. Two great characters.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Fozzie said:

I’m perfectly okay with leaving a lot of stuff as mystery. The movies aren’t about Snoke, or Luke’s lightsaber, and I never expected any information about them. When it comes, it’ll be a book or a comic. Not in a film. But Rise of Skywalker made something a central mystery and never explained it. It would be like if they had never addressed Rey’s parentage.  Or watching a detective movie and when they get to the big reveal, the detective just shrugs and walks away.

 

My issue with Snoke is like Tank said.  Evil was supposedly vanquished, and we deserve some back story as far as who he was, where he came from, and why there is a First Order.  All that was set up in TFA, and I at least, expected to get some back ground in TLJ.  Even if it was 2 minutes of dialogue.  Is that too much to ask?  I think not.  Instead, we got ham fisted and bad writing of bringing the Emperor back, and Snoke was a meat puppet, that felt more like retcon than anything else.  Lame. 

Also, the same with Luke's lightsaber. TFA made it a big deal that it was LUKE'S saber.  Sorry, "another story for another time," which we never get, btw, is not sufficient. In about the same amount of time, Maz could have said something like "It came into my possession from someone who used to work at cloud city.  The Force works in mysterious ways."  I would have been happy with just that, and it would have also established a special circumstance where the Force is somehow making sure Rey gets the saber.  And why was it so important to be Luke's saber in the first place, complete with flash backs.  The implication was they were going for an artifact that connected all three trilogies, in an Excalibur sort of way.  But at the end of the day, it didn't matter it was Luke's saber. SO, why even bring it up without explanation?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ofcourse it mattered that it was Luke and Anakin's saber. The whole way Kylo and Rey fight over it and then it breaks. Its symbolic of a breaking with the past and that these new characters don't need to be connected to Star Wars past to be important on their own. Ofcourse JJ just had the saber fixed for some reason. 

The issue with Snoke is that if he does give some backstory on himself, or if Luke does it for him, the info has to be pertinent at the time for the other characters present. If the backstory is only there to give the audience the info then its just poor writing. At what point does Rey need to know how Snoke came back? At what point would she really care?

Its the same as people who wanted her to be a Kenobi. That would be info only cool to the audience. For Rey it would mean nothing and not affect her character. "Rey, your grandfather was  Jedi named Obi Wan Kenobi". Her response would be "who?" and it would have no affect on her character going forward.

So back to Snoke how does a quick 30 second speech on where Snoke came from affect her? Change her motivations? Change her perception of herself? Change her actions going forward? Because if it doesn't do those things, then it doesnt matter. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, The Choc said:

Ofcourse it mattered that it was Luke and Anakin's saber. The whole way Kylo and Rey fight over it and then it breaks. Its symbolic of a breaking with the past and that these new characters don't need to be connected to Star Wars past to be important on their own. Ofcourse JJ just had the saber fixed for some reason. 

Ah, yes, the let the past die theme I hated most about the ST.  Except for the fact that connection to the past DOES matter.  Rey literally had to receive help from ALL the Jedi ghosts that came before her to defeat Sidious. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Zathras said:

Ah, yes, the let the past die theme I hated most about the ST.  Except for the fact that connection to the past DOES matter.  Rey literally had to receive help from ALL the Jedi ghosts that came before her to defeat Sidious. 

The let the past die thing was the theme of evil and despair. Luke changed his mind in the end, within TLJ. The only other character who focuses on destroying the past is Emo Ben.

In the end, even TLJ is about the bad guy wanting to cut off his connection with the past, which makes no sense since he was basically worshipping Vader a few days before in TFA, and the good guys having deep connections with the past.

 The lightsaber was a symbol of power, and specifically was a symbol of the struggle in the Skywalker family between light and dark. It’s why it came to Rey in TFA instead of Kylo. Because Rey, despite not being trained, represents the light, even more after Ben takes what’s supposed to be his final step into the dark by killing Han.

The lightsaber breaking wasn’t about destroying the past. Leia even says “We have everything we need” while patting the broken lightsaber in TLJ. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The Choc said:

You are 100% right the bad guys want to destroy the past, not the good guys. The good guys don't want to be beholden to the past.

Every word of what you just said is wrong. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Fozzie said:

Every word of what you just said is wrong. 

No, you are wrong. Thats the whole point, not letting your past define you. It doesn't matter that Rey's parents were (at the time) nobodies. That doesn't define her. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...