• Most new users don't bother reading our rules. Here's the one that is ignored almost immediately upon signup: DO NOT ASK FOR FANEDIT LINKS PUBLICLY. First, read the FAQ. Seriously. What you want is there. You can also send a message to the editor. If that doesn't work THEN post in the Trade & Request forum. Anywhere else and it will be deleted and an infraction will be issued.
  • If this is your first time here please read our FAQ and Rules pages. They have some useful information that will get us all off on the right foot, especially our Own the Source rule. If you do not understand any of these rules send a private message to one of our staff for further details.
  • Please read our Rules & Guidelines

SW - Star Wars

Zamros

Well-known member
Messages
1,219
Reaction score
3
Trophy Points
43
gep59dz589a01.jpg
 

matrixgrindhouse

Well-known member
Messages
2,388
Reaction score
111
Trophy Points
73
gazza said:

bruce lee just got a whole lot cooler

Awesome.

That's from Fist of Fury - in it, Bruce Lee plays famous character Chen Zhen.  You know who else played that character?

hqdefault.jpg


Chirrut Imwe himself, Donnie Yen.  


maxresdefault.jpg

Also Jet Li.

efc45182460d70a20a4bde86fc6310d9.jpg

And Jackie Chan played his successor.

My point?  Guardians of the Whills: A Star Wars Story could be the greatest thing ever.  Ever.
 

wilhelm scream

Well-known member
Faneditor
Messages
1,321
Reaction score
87
Trophy Points
68
Recently, Disney explained the specific reason why they got rid of the old expanded universe: https://io9.gizmodo.com/the-expanded-universe-story-that-lead-to-lucasfilm-re-w-1822092518


While I understand their reasoning, I can't help but wonder: if they wanted to ignore Chewie's death, then why not ignore the entire New Jedi Order series and everything after it, considering how bad it got.

But then again, maybe it was for the better, considering how inferior the Disney continuity is when compared to legends.
 

TMBTM

Well-known member
Faneditor
Messages
5,907
Reaction score
16
Trophy Points
83
wilhelm scream said:
Recently, Disney explained the specific reason why they got rid of the old expanded universe: https://io9.gizmodo.com/the-expanded-universe-story-that-lead-to-lucasfilm-re-w-1822092518


While I understand their reasoning, I can't help but wonder: if they wanted to ignore Chewie's death, then why not ignore the entire New Jedi Order series and everything after it, considering how bad it got.

But then again, maybe it was for the better, considering how inferior the Disney continuity is when compared to legends.

Having Disney and Lucasfilm simply re-telling the stories from the E.U on movies would have been boring and dare I say maybe even more useless than the prequels. 
At least the prequels were meant to tell a story that we all wanted to know about (or at least were curious about). We knew bits and pieces but it could have been told in an interesting way (and with the renaming of Star Wars in Episode 4, it simply was meant to be that, someday, episodes 1 to 3 would be made)

Simply adapting novels most harcore fans knew everything about would have been a nightmare. Not only the fans would have been upset that the movies were not 100% as the books, but all the folks who didn't read them would have been spoiled on internet years before the movie would hit the screens. Not counting that if they wanted to start with the Zhan's trilogy Lucasfilm needed to start the whole thing by recasting all the main characters we loved...
As much as I think the anger between pro and against "The Last Jedi" is bad... I prefer not thinking about what it would have been if the E.U were adapted as movies...

Disney absolutely did the right thing. They're telling knew stories and eventualy, sometimes, pick some things from the Legends (because legends always have some truth in them!).
 

Moe_Syzlak

Well-known member
Messages
3,451
Reaction score
1,161
Trophy Points
118
When I read the Zahn books when they first came out, I thought they were Lucas’ stories. But I learned not too long after that that if the sequel trilogy was ever made it would be completely different. This irked me because I wouldn’t have trudged through, what I considered to be pretty bad books (apologies; I know some love them) had I known. But I thought this fact was common knowledge for decades now. But regardless, I agree with TMBTM.
 

Zamros

Well-known member
Messages
1,219
Reaction score
3
Trophy Points
43
I'm interested to check out Zahn's canon Thrawn series. A sequel is planned for this year, so I guess Thrawn's a thing again :D

EDIT: Did you know Phasma got a book? I didn't.

EDIT 2: This is great  
 

TomH1138

Well-known member
Messages
2,819
Reaction score
43
Trophy Points
53
In the article posted by Wilhelm Scream, the logic used by Lucasfilm doesn't make any sense to me:

"We had to get rid of the EU because we couldn't bear for Chewbacca to die...but now in the sequels we're killing off everyone else."

I mean, there are absolutely dramatically valid reasons to kill characters off. But saying that they had to get rid of the EU because it would be too upsetting to kill off a beloved character ... that's a head-scratcher in light of what they've done with the material themselves.
 

wilhelm scream

Well-known member
Faneditor
Messages
1,321
Reaction score
87
Trophy Points
68
You know, I've noticed 2 interesting side effects to how unsatisfied with the Disney Star Wars movies (and their not very good canon materials, like Rebels).

1: More and more people are going over to Star Wars Legends, because of how badly the new films have treated the original trilogy characters (especially Han and Luke).

2: The prequels are getting more and more praise.

To be honest, the only reason why I am going to continue seeing the new films, is to see how Disney could screw up next. Now, if you excuse me, I need to finish reading the The Hand of Thrawn Duology.

P.S. The true episodes 7,8 and 9 are the Thrawn trilogy.
 

Moe_Syzlak

Well-known member
Messages
3,451
Reaction score
1,161
Trophy Points
118
wilhelm scream said:
You know, I've noticed 2 interesting side effects to how unsatisfied with the Disney Star Wars movies (and their not very good canon materials, like Rebels).

1: More and more people are going over to Star Wars Legends, because of how badly the new films have treated the original trilogy characters (especially Han and Luke).

2: The prequels are getting more and more praise.

To be honest, the only reason why I am going to continue seeing the new films, is to see how Disney could screw up next. Now, if you excuse me, I need to finish reading the The Hand of Thrawn Duology.

P.S. The true episodes 7,8 and 9 are the Thrawn trilogy.

Well, I’d rate TLJ a C and TFA a C-, but I think they are so much better than the prequels it’s not even a discussion. The Thrawn trilogy is one I read when it first came out and I still have no idea what anyone sees in those books. They felt poorly written to me, even by pulp sci fi standards and Thrawn was a completely uninteresting character to me. I’d love to hear these defenses of Thrawn and the PT. Because I’m honestly at a loss. Please provide links!
 

TV's Frink

You Catch On Pretty Quick
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
23,676
Reaction score
406
Trophy Points
193
wilhelm scream said:
You know, I've noticed 2 interesting side effects to how unsatisfied with the Disney Star Wars movies (and their not very good canon materials, like Rebels).

1: More and more people are going over to Star Wars Legends, because of how badly the new films have treated the original trilogy characters (especially Han and Luke).

2: The prequels are getting more and more praise.

To be honest, the only reason why I am going to continue seeing the new films, is to see how Disney could screw up next. Now, if you excuse me, I need to finish reading the The Hand of Thrawn Duology.

P.S. The true episodes 7,8 and 9 are the Thrawn trilogy.

Nah.  To all of it.
 

Gaith

Well-known member
Faneditor
Messages
5,785
Reaction score
291
Trophy Points
123
Moe_Syzlak said:
Well, I’d rate TLJ a C and TFA a C-, but I think they are so much better than the prequels it’s not even a discussion.

Agreed, though I do think it's worth pointing out that they diverged much farther from the OT than the PT has in nearly every respect. Doesn't make them better movies, but it does arguably make them more interesting ones.


Moe_Syzlak said:
The Thrawn trilogy is one I read when it first came out and I still have no idea what anyone sees in those books. They felt poorly written to me, even by pulp sci fi standards and Thrawn was a completely uninteresting character to me. I’d love to hear these defenses of Thrawn and the PT. Because I’m honestly at a loss. Please provide links!

Uh, not sure I can help you, as I love pretty much everything about the Thrawn Trilogy. Well, maybe not Luke's mention of hot chocolate (I feel pretty neutral about that, but it's a throwaway detail at the very start), but everything else, from the plots, to how our OT heroes have evolved without being too perfect, to the new characters, to the tactility of the universe (hyperspace travels and on-foot surface journeys taking days at a time, political bickering and gossip, etc.). I love the double threat of Evil Sherlock Holmes General and Batshit Insane Dark Jedi, and how they plan to defeat the New Republic despite being tactical underdogs. I love how pretty much everything pays off/comes together at the end. One of the critic blurbs for Heir to the Empire says something like "it feels so much like the movies, you can practically hear John Williams score in your head as your read," and I couldn't agree more. :cool:
 

Canon Editor

Well-known member
Messages
1,730
Reaction score
80
Trophy Points
53
TomH1138 said:
In the article posted by Wilhelm Scream, the logic used by Lucasfilm doesn't make any sense to me:

"We had to get rid of the EU because we couldn't bear for Chewbacca to die...but now in the sequels we're killing off everyone else."

I mean, there are absolutely dramatically valid reasons to kill characters off. But saying that they had to get rid of the EU because it would be too upsetting to kill off a beloved character ... that's a head-scratcher in light of what they've done with the material themselves.

I believe what they meant was having a character die in a book without the proper build up or emotional payoff these characters and their audiences deserve, which they believe to have done with Han and Luke in the sequel trilogy… and I tend to agree  :p !
 

Moe_Syzlak

Well-known member
Messages
3,451
Reaction score
1,161
Trophy Points
118
Gaith said:
Moe_Syzlak said:
The Thrawn trilogy is one I read when it first came out and I still have no idea what anyone sees in those books. They felt poorly written to me, even by pulp sci fi standards and Thrawn was a completely uninteresting character to me. I’d love to hear these defenses of Thrawn and the PT. Because I’m honestly at a loss. Please provide links!

Uh, not sure I can help you, as I love pretty much everything about the Thrawn Trilogy. Well, maybe not Luke's mention of hot chocolate (I feel pretty neutral about that, but it's a throwaway detail at the very start), but everything else, from the plots, to how our OT heroes have evolved without being too perfect, to the new characters, to the tactility of the universe (hyperspace travels and on-foot surface journeys taking days at a time, political bickering and gossip, etc.). I love the double threat of Evil Sherlock Holmes General and Batshit Insane Dark Jedi, and how they plan to defeat the New Republic despite being tactical underdogs. I love how pretty much everything pays off/comes together at the end. One of the critic blurbs for Heir to the Empire says something like "it feels so much like the movies, you can practically hear John Williams score in your head as your read," and I couldn't agree more. :cool:

Well it certainly seems I’m in the minority. I often wonder if it’s the same sort of nostalgia that allows people to like those books. All I remember about Thrawn is we’re told he’s a tactical genius and he’s blue. It seemed so uninventive to me even then. But I’m glad so many people enjoy the books. Even so, I think LFL just adapting the books to the screen would’ve been a huge mistake. You think hardcore fans are upset about the current ST? Imagine the backlash when a screen adaptation doesn’t capture what all the fans had in their minds when reading.
 

Gaith

Well-known member
Faneditor
Messages
5,785
Reaction score
291
Trophy Points
123
Moe_Syzlak said:
Well it certainly seems I’m in the minority. I often wonder if it’s the same sort of nostalgia that allows people to like those books. All I remember about Thrawn is we’re told he’s a tactical genius and he’s blue.

I first read the trilogy as a kid, so nostalgia may very well play a role in my appreciation, but I re-read it a few years back and found it as fantastic as ever. And we're not merely "told" Thrawn is a tactical genius, Zahn absolutely shows him out-thinking our heroes multiple times in the course of the stories themselves. Perhaps it's time you gave them another try?   ;)


Moe_Syzlak said:
Even so, I think LFL just adapting the books to the screen would’ve been a huge mistake. You think hardcore fans are upset about the current ST? Imagine the backlash when a screen adaptation doesn’t capture what all the fans had in their minds when reading.

I haven't seen anyone here saying LFL should have done that, for obvious reasons: the OT actors are far too old, the plots wouldn't fit into two-hour movies, there aren't that many action sequences. That said, this isn't an all-or-nothing situation. LFL could absolutely have used Thrawn and/or C'baoth as main villains in a new story, and they could have re-used the galactic power balance of the books. In order to avoid having Luke be an unstoppable superhero, they could have had him too injured by his many battles to personally fight anymore, but still have him be a wise leader who'd grown into a better person than at the end of RotJ instead of a worse one. They could have kept Han and Leia married (though maybe, in a departure from the Thrawn Trilogy, and in order to focus on brand-new, clean-slate young heroes, they'd have decided not to have kids themselves, out of respect for the devastation the Skywalker bloodline had wrought on both sides).

Reasonable people can disagree as to whether any of this should have been done, but I don't think anyone can dispute the idea that what LFL did do - hit the reset button to the OT status quo, and hit it hard - was, for better or worse, the easiest, most obvious course.
 

ThrowgnCpr

awol
Staff member
Messages
15,090
Reaction score
36
Trophy Points
133
Disclaimer: I am in no way suggesting that Disney should adapt any of the books, nor do I think that is a good idea, but:

Gaith said:
Moe_Syzlak said:
Well it certainly seems I’m in the minority. I often wonder if it’s the same sort of nostalgia that allows people to like those books. All I remember about Thrawn is we’re told he’s a tactical genius and he’s blue.

I first read the trilogy as a kid, so nostalgia may very well play a role in my appreciation, but I re-read it a few years back and found it as fantastic as ever. And we're not merely "told" Thrawn is a tactical genius, Zahn absolutely shows him out-thinking our heroes multiple times in the course of the stories themselves. Perhaps it's time you gave them another try?   ;) 

Another of those rare occasions where I completely agree with Gaith. I re-read the Thrawn trilogy about 10 years ago and absolutely loved it.
 

Moe_Syzlak

Well-known member
Messages
3,451
Reaction score
1,161
Trophy Points
118
I was 21 and in college when the Thrawn books came out. Perhaps it suffered by comparison as I was reading authors like John Irving, Gabriel Garcia Marquez, Pynchon, Thomas Wolfe, etc. back then (as college kids do). I found the writing to be tedious. I persisted simply because I was led to believe this was the sequel Lucas had mapped out. I don’t I know why I thought that; perhaps just that it was the first (?) books set after Jedi that featured the OT characters? Perhaps I should give them another go.
 

TomH1138

Well-known member
Messages
2,819
Reaction score
43
Trophy Points
53
Canon Editor said:
I believe what they meant was having a character die in a book without the proper build up or emotional payoff these characters and their audiences deserve, which they believe to have done with Han and Luke in the sequel trilogy… and I tend to agree  :p !

Ahh, OK! Putting it that way, it makes a lot more sense. "Chewie died offscreen 15 years ago" is no way to start the opening crawl. :D
 

TV's Frink

You Catch On Pretty Quick
Staff member
Donor
Faneditor
Messages
23,676
Reaction score
406
Trophy Points
193
TomH1138 said:
Canon Editor said:
I believe what they meant was having a character die in a book without the proper build up or emotional payoff these characters and their audiences deserve, which they believe to have done with Han and Luke in the sequel trilogy… and I tend to agree  :p !

Ahh, OK! Putting it that way, it makes a lot more sense. "Chewie died offscreen 15 years ago" is no way to start the opening crawl. :D

IX Crawl: Chewie died offscreen from food poisoning after eating a Porg.
 
Top Bottom