Admiral Vostok Posted October 16, 2004 Share Posted October 16, 2004 He's wishing the EU about grevious good luck because For the people who want to understand the back story about grevious they'll have to make him richer by buying the books.Please explain how this is any different to the rest of EU. And something's gonna have to flesh out grevious the film Isn't called Star Wars Episode 3 Grevious Beginnings it is?No, because the movie isn't about Greivous. He's a minor character, and as such if he isn't fleshed out in the movies then his background isn't significant enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DK_Viceroy Posted October 16, 2004 Share Posted October 16, 2004 If Episode 4 was actualkly episode 7 and GL had another 3 episode's to play around with insteads of having to focus on bridging gaps He would have been fleshed out but becaiuse of him having set himself the task of briding continuity he can't focus on the clone wars which are hardly unimportant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted October 16, 2004 Author Share Posted October 16, 2004 ? No the story is as it is. It was supposed to be in 9 episodes but it was better in only 6. 9 would have felt stretched. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Vostok Posted October 16, 2004 Share Posted October 16, 2004 The concept of storytelling means that a storyteller focusses on the important parts of the story. Yes, the Clone Wars are an important part of the Star Wars Galaxy, but are only a background to the story that takes place, and as such the Clone Wars themselves should not take the spotlight. Every little detail of every minor character is also not important to the story. I'd like to, if I may, compare the Star Wars movies to the Indiana Jones movies, because while both are extremely popular stories created by George Lucas, they differ fundamentally when you look at their fan base. Star Wars is a science fiction, and as a general rule sci-fi fans seem to love the concept of an Expanded Universe, a supporting set of stories based on the originator story. Indiana Jones, on the other hand, is not a sci-fi, so the need to create an EU to please the mad consumers that are sci-fi fans is not evident. Yet both Star Wars and Indiana Jones are still stories, both based in many regards on the same inspiration. So, how did Indy meet Short Round? How did he meet Sallah? What of Henry Jones Sr.'s adventures and his close friendship with Duncan? What ever happened to Marion and Willy? The fact is that no-one cares. They aren't important to the story, so they can be left up to the viewers imagination. So it is science fiction fandom itself that is the problem. Studies on science fiction fans have found them to be massive consumers, collecting merchandise, comic books, and all manner of other geeky paraphernalia. As such, EU was born, not out of necessity to fill in the gaps in the story, but instead because it is a well known fact that sci-fi fans will consume what ever is given to them. "Gaps" in the story and incomplete backgrounds do not need to be filled in. It is only because sci-fi fans are so willing to part with their money that the EU exists. If Indiana Jones had aliens in it, sci-fi fans would be all over it too, and no doubt an extensive Indiana Jones EU would exist to fill in all the backgrounds of the minor characters. EU is a result of the fandom, not of the story itself. Well I seem to have ranted a bit, but evidently this is the thread to rant in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nairb Notneb Posted October 19, 2004 Share Posted October 19, 2004 I think that we should rename this thread the "Rant all you want, we'll make more" thread. But I don't care isn't that why it was started, so that we would talk here? Anyway, I think that you hit the nail on the proverbial head Vostok. The EU came from the parched lips of a dried up and empty world of starving Star Wars fans that desperately wanted more Han and Luke. George Lucas' imagination, marketing skills and the hunger for more Star Wars was/is a volatile combination when it comes to consumerism and capitalism. It is a beautiful thing, especially when your last name is Lucas and you have big curly hair. Oh, one more thing. Viceroy, I mean no offense by this. The use of punctuation would be greatly appreciated please because it will make your posts easier to understand. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kryllith Posted October 19, 2004 Share Posted October 19, 2004 Originally posted by Admiral Vostok Kryllith: Again, no the revelation is not assured, I'm just assuming in the tradition of good storytelling that there will be a revelation. Why would Yoda and Mace Windu act all shifty upon hearing Sifo-Dyas' name if there was to be no revelation in Revenge of the Sith? I don't know, but then we don't know much about Sifo-Dyas. For all we know, he may have been one of the people to leave the Jedi like Dooku did (anyone have a list of the names?). What we do know for certain is that he was a Master (as indicated by Obiwan) and that he (or someone using his name) ordered the clones supposedly with the authority of the Jedi Council. Maybe he was a debilitative old man who never went anywhere, and it's just the use of the name that's causing the look, not anything to do with the actual person. Indeed the argument against Maul being unable to conceal his identity like Palpatine can is just an assumption of yours, there is no evidence for it and it doesn't necessarily hold true. Yes, but nor is there any evidence supporting the theory that he CAN conceal his identity. As I, and at least one other person, indicated, Palpatine's concealment doesn't work as evidence because we never actively (at least, not unequivocally) see him using the Force in the presence of those who might detect it. Truth is, we can picked at each others assumptions for being assumptions, but it won't get us anywhere since there is, as yet, nothing that we can use to verify them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nairb Notneb Posted October 19, 2004 Share Posted October 19, 2004 Kryllith I agree, there will be no way to confirm any of our speculations until the movie comes out and then one of us will come out and say "ha, I told you so, I was right!". Or, non of us will be right. To give a half answer to your "list" of fallen Jedi, according to the EU, there were what was known as the lost 12 I believe. Twelve Jedi that left the order. I don't know much about them but I believe Dooku was one of them as was Aura Sing (spelling). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Vostok Posted October 19, 2004 Share Posted October 19, 2004 They were the Lost Twenty. Supposedly the busts in the Jedi Archives are of the Lost Twenty, so Jedi can think about why these strange individuals left the Jedi Order. Obi-Wan was seen looking at Dooku's bust in the Jedi Archives scene. And I don't believe Aurra Sing was a Jedi. Personally I consider Aurra Sing to be the most hyped-up EU character ever; few characters with a single second of screen time in any Star Wars movies have had as much EU written about them. To me she's just a podrace spectator. Truth is, we can picked at each others assumptions for being assumptions, but it won't get us anywhere since there is, as yet, nothing that we can use to verify them.Indeed. I always stated my assumptions as being so, I just mean that your assumptions don't necessarily disprove mine in the same way mine don't disprove yours. And indeed this thread has become the "Rant about whatever Star Wars thing you want to" thread. And I like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DK_Viceroy Posted October 19, 2004 Share Posted October 19, 2004 Careful I'm feeling Philosophical and that staement sounded awfully shallow to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Vostok Posted October 19, 2004 Share Posted October 19, 2004 Which statement in particular? There are several in my post. And I invite you to philosophise, Viceroy. Just getting back to the whole Maul/Sifo-Dyas/Greivous argument: I'm 80% confident that Darth Maul is Sifo-Dyas, but probably only 40% confident that he is also in turn Greivous. So I believe the Maul/Sifo-Dyas connection (and would be surprised if it didn't turn out that way), and while it would be cool I don't believe as much that Maul/Sifo-Dyas is Greivous (I wouldn't be surprised if it didn't turn out that way). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted October 20, 2004 Author Share Posted October 20, 2004 This is actually the longest thread we have now so keep this from dying. Must...find..something...to discuss... EDIT: Ok it's not the longest but still... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nairb Notneb Posted October 21, 2004 Share Posted October 21, 2004 I agree that Aura Sing was one of the most hyped up characters ever, and one of the ugliest chicks to come out of Star Wars too. I think her story goes something like her being trained by some Jedi named the Dark Woman but then she split and started to hunt the Jedi down and kept their light sabers as trophies. The story seems similar to Grievous in a way. I wonder if Grievous is Aura Sing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kryllith Posted October 21, 2004 Share Posted October 21, 2004 That would be pretty interesting, given the quick cut scene to Aura Sing in the podrace in TPM. Talk about developing a character who got little time in the movie (even though, granted, she was put in there just as a cameo). Kryllith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Vostok Posted October 21, 2004 Share Posted October 21, 2004 LOL, Grevious is Aurra Sing! The average veiwer of Star Wars would have no idea what was going on there... And saying that Aurra Sing is one of the ugliest chicks in Star Wars means you're obviously forgetting the fat dancer in Jabba's palace... or Sy Snootles... or Gardulla the Hutt for that matter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nairb Notneb Posted October 21, 2004 Share Posted October 21, 2004 Vostok, I knew you would say that because I was thinking of them while I was typing that statement. Well, I didn't think of Gardulla. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swphreak Posted October 21, 2004 Share Posted October 21, 2004 Originally posted by Admiral Vostok ... or Gardulla the Hutt for that matter Technically, Hutts really don't have sexes... they sorta reproduce asexually... and I really don't know why I still remember this... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DK_Viceroy Posted October 21, 2004 Share Posted October 21, 2004 Sy SNootles was wearing lipstick in one edtition wasn't she? She must be attractive by her species standards. The Ugliest thing in Star wars has to be the emporer or as someone else called him Madame Monkey Eyes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted October 21, 2004 Author Share Posted October 21, 2004 Originally posted by StarWarsPhreak Technically, Hutts really don't have sexes... they sorta reproduce asexually... and I really don't know why I still remember this... Too much info. But yeah monkey-eyed emperor was ugly but now it isn't really an issue anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Vostok Posted October 21, 2004 Share Posted October 21, 2004 Originally posted by StarWarsPhreak Technically, Hutts really don't have sexes... they sorta reproduce asexually... and I really don't know why I still remember this... Yet another piece of EU contradicted by the prequel trilogy. Though I should add that little nugget of info was created from the Han Solo Trilogy, which in my opinion is one of the better works of EU that captures the feeling of the movies relatively well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DK_Viceroy Posted October 21, 2004 Share Posted October 21, 2004 Actually Phreak They Switch sexes so when they want to have a child they become female and impregnate themselves and then afterwards they become Male or i can't remeber but it may be sexless. I know madame Monkey Eyes had concubines something like a hundred of them so I'd hardly say he's something you'd WANT to look at. Who would want to be in the same room as that vengeful wrteched person? How is a hutts sex contradicted by anything? I don't see Obi-wan or Qui-Gon suddenly talking to Anakin about the Birds and The Bees of a Hutt do you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Vostok Posted October 21, 2004 Share Posted October 21, 2004 The fact they refer to Gardulla as "she". If it was as the EU claims, Hutts would be correctly called "it", or at least "he" all the time. Also the way Anakin speaks of her, it sounds as though Gardulla was both female at the time of the Phantom Menace and female when she lost Anakin and Shmi to Watto, which is unlikely if their sex-changing is as described. Also, in the book it describes Hutts in their female form as much smaller and differently coloured than male Hutts. This was an attempt to justify the poorly made CGI of Jabba in ANHSE: they tried to explain it be claiming Jabba was in a female form at the time he confronted Han. The different colouring theory at least was disproven by Gardulla's appearance in TPM, and indeed Jabba's renewal in ANHDVD also does away with the messy theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DK_Viceroy Posted October 21, 2004 Share Posted October 21, 2004 She May Have decided to crank the babies out and pop em out as fast as she could:D Besides a hutt could have a preference to acting male or female. I never saw Gardualla in TPM where is he/she/it after all Gardualla may have prefernces towards being female or male. It's certainly an interesting topic in Sci-Fi where an Asexual race has some people who prefer to be male and some female. how they reproduce I don't know. Why though the Emporer had something like a hundred Concubines I don't know He must have been a dirty old man He certainly comes across as one in dark empire asking Leia to "Help" him to bed. It's hard to Imagine something that old and fossilised could even be able to conceive a child. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Vostok Posted October 21, 2004 Share Posted October 21, 2004 Gardulla is seen accompanying Jabba in his box at the podrace. And the Emperor only had concubines in EU. With the protectiveness and jealousy evident in Sith Lords it seems unlikely to me that he would surround himself with concubines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DK_Viceroy Posted October 21, 2004 Share Posted October 21, 2004 Yes But Sith Lords Also Like Power so The Emporer would propably enjoy forcing himself on Concubines. Vostok I'm not happy that I've been forced into this region Of Star Wars Discussion. Drop The Sexuality Of Any And All Star Wars Creature NOW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Vostok Posted October 21, 2004 Share Posted October 21, 2004 But Sith Lords are very untrustworthy, that's why there's only ever a master and an apprentice; if there's more the master can't trust the apprentices not to gang up on him. If the Emperor did have concubines, he'd probably see them as a way that Vader could get at him. That's just my impression of the situation though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.