Jump to content

Ahsoka Tano, why the hate?


Recommended Posts

I've been cruising many Star Wars boards for a couple of weeks since I've started catching up on The Clone Wars on Netflix and I'm starting to get this overwhelming feeling people really hate the young Togruta. I don't get why? I thought she was one of the show's strongest points. Sure she was annoying when she was first seen. But she was also like 14 years old. Most 14 year olds are annoying and they don't have Force powers and a lightsaber to back up their attitude. Other than that, people point to how she doesn't make sense with Episode III. But a lot of things don't make sense with the prequels.

 

So I guess, if you love her or hate her, why? And please be more descriptive than "Cause she ruined Star Wars" because I don't buy that immature tripe.

Edited by NullanSevens
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 73
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I've been cruising many Star Wars boards for a couple of weeks since I've started catching up on The Clone Wars on Netflix and I'm starting to get this overwhelming feeling people really hate the young Togruta. I don't get why? I thought she was one of the show's strongest points. Sure she was annoying when she was first seen. But she was also like 14 years old. Most 14 year olds are annoying and they don't have Force powers and a lightsaber to back up their attitude. Other than that, people point to how she doesn't make sense with Episode III. But a lot of things don't make sense with the prequels.

 

So I guess, if you love her or hate her, why? And please be more descriptive than "Cause she ruined Star Wars" because I don't buy that immature tripe.

 

Well you really hit the nail on the head as far as "she was annoying when she was first seen" and honestly that sentiment can be carried over through the entire first 2 seasons, which were both underwhelming and kiddy in the story and art departments and contributed greatly to the hate for her.

 

I personally disliked her completely till the 3rd or 4th seasons (her episode on Mandalore, as much as I hate the Hippie Mandos, was perhaps the turning point for me). And her personal story arc in season 5 was well done, so I don't hate her anymore, but I can't stand her in seasons 1 and 2 to this day.

 

Others hated the discontinuity of Anakin having a padawan for a length of time yet never mentioning her in Revenge of the Sith. They felt it was a major plot hole and that his having a padawan was a poor direction for his character. Someone else might better elaborate on this opinion, I'm just spewing someone elses words here as is.

 

A third potential avenue for hate might be the way her arc ended. If you've seen it you might understand why people dislike it and her in turn especially if you've seen season 6 (specifically her absence in that season). Some fans felt a tad betrayed, others felt it left too many loose ends. Either way, she gained a lot of fans and a lot of enemies with that arc.

 

Hope that helps a bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been cruising many Star Wars boards for a couple of weeks since I've started catching up on The Clone Wars on Netflix and I'm starting to get this overwhelming feeling people really hate the young Togruta. I don't get why? I thought she was one of the show's strongest points. Sure she was annoying when she was first seen. But she was also like 14 years old. Most 14 year olds are annoying and they don't have Force powers and a lightsaber to back up their attitude. Other than that, people point to how she doesn't make sense with Episode III. But a lot of things don't make sense with the prequels.

 

So I guess, if you love her or hate her, why? And please be more descriptive than "Cause she ruined Star Wars" because I don't buy that immature tripe.

 

you havnt figure out that some 'fans' just have to hate the thing they are fans of, especially star wars and especially when posting on the interwebz. you get no cool points for actually liking anything online.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because first impressions do matter, and despite how legitimately kick-*** she got by the end of the series, her "Skyguy" phase at the beginning was enough to turn some people off to not just the character but to the show as a whole - which in turn means they never even got to see the character development that might have made her more bearable to them.

 

Her young age may be a decent justification for some viewers to give her a pass, but others aren't interested in whether or not a TV show or movie gives a plausible reason for why an annoying character acts annoying, they just don't like watching an annoying character - end of story.

 

Personally, I went in saying "Hey, this is a show that is aimed towards kids, it's going to have a certain degree of childish humor or cutesy stuff for that demographic. I can accept that to a certain point, so now let's see if it tells a good story." Fortunately I found that it did, and that the elements I didn't care for as much even became less prominent over time. But my threshold for how much "kiddy stuff" is too much isn't necessarily the same as the next person's, so I can't really blame someone for writing it off if it just wasn't working for them as a form of entertainment.

 

I can, however, roll my eyes at anyone who goes on to say that Star Wars shouldn't have put out content that was catered towards kids in the first place. It was a sci-fi romp that had merchandising as a key part of its DNA from the beginning. There is plenty of Star Wars material out there that has been aimed at adults all along, mainly the novels and some of the video games, and even most of the comics, if not aimed specifically at adults, are perfectly accessible to mature readers.

 

Star Wars is a big enough franchise to have different bits of content aimed at different age groups - it makes perfect sense to say "this aspect isn't my cup of tea," (and I don't particularly even mind if someone chooses to express that as "man, I hate that aspect,") but it makes a lot less sense to say "this aspect shouldn't have ever been made because it's not my cup of tea."

 

The thing is, it can sometimes be rather hard to tell which one of those sentiments someone is really trying to express when they say "I hate [X]".

Edited by DarthDymond
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Haters? Where? *loads shotgun*

 

right here.... kind of.... I just didnt like the idea that Anakin had an apprentice since you would think something like that would have come up in the movies. It felt like pandering just trying to get in a new demographic rather then an actual good story choice...... and for the start thats exactly what it was.

 

heck you didnt even need to make her Anakins or Obi-wan's padawan she could have just been one of yoda's that didnt have a master and was just traveling from master to master or something and it could have worked.

 

So dont hate her, just the concept of her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

right here.... kind of.... I just didnt like the idea that Anakin had an apprentice since you would think something like that would have come up in the movies. It felt like pandering just trying to get in a new demographic rather then an actual good story choice...... and for the start thats exactly what it was.

 

heck you didnt even need to make her Anakins or Obi-wan's padawan she could have just been one of yoda's that didnt have a master and was just traveling from master to master or something and it could have worked.

 

So dont hate her, just the concept of her.

I don't think it would have worked if Ashoka wasn't Anakin's Padawan, not only was the Master-Padawan relationship important in developing both their characters, but it was important that they mark her as a main character.

 

Also I'm pretty sure Padawan's at this point are only allowed one master.

 

I also don't feel there is any room for her being mentioned in ROTS... at least in the scenes depicted.

 

And as the OP said she quickly became one of the strongest and most important aspects of the show, so I definitely think it was a good story choice in the long run.

Edited by Beniboybling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it would have worked if Ashoka wasn't Anakin's Padawan, not only was the Master-Padawan relationship important in developing both their characters, but it was important that they mark her as a main character.

 

Also I'm pretty sure Padawan's at this point are only allowed one master.

 

I also don't feel there is any room for her being mentioned in ROTS... at least in the scenes depicted.

 

And as the OP said she quickly became one of the strongest and most important aspects of the show, so I definitely think it was a good story choice in the long run.

 

Well there is no room for her because before the show came out there was no her. thats the problem. It reeks of pandering to me. I dont honestly know how it could have been done different, I am sure other stories could have been told with out her, but whether tehy would have been good or bad is anyones guess.

 

Like I said, dont hate her, just the concept of her. i dont think she should have ever existed, but now that she does at least i can use her to explain the other one that I dont think should exist as a legend. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wasn't the answer to her not mentioned in ROTS simply the fact that (Spoilers) left the order?

On her role in the saga I recommend the following read;

 

And perhaps with Ahsoka by his side, Anakin could have found the strength to reform the Jedi. When she tells him that she is going to leave the Jedi Order, she surprises him by telling him that she knows that he's thought about leaving the Order as well. Ahsoka gets him in a way that no other Jedi—not even Obi Wan—does, and she sees not just the good in him, but also his struggles. The Jedi didn't pay attention to Barriss' frustrations and largely ignore Anakin's divided heart until it is much, much too late. **

 

** Source; Article

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wasn't the answer to her not mentioned in ROTS simply the fact that (Spoilers) left the order?

On her role in the saga I recommend the following read;

 

 

 

** Source; Article

 

Has any one heard of the term..... lazy writing. She wasnt mentioned in ROTS or ANY media before hand was because she wasnt invented until people wanted to milk more money. Thus they shoe horned her in and then swept it under the rug and pretended like she was their the whole time and they just didnt mention her cus it wasnt relavent.

 

People are making excuses for a bad writing team and concept team :D.

 

Like I said what they eventually do with her is good, because it went from lazy and bad concept to people picking up the peices and actually giving 2 cruds and making it work. Doesnt make the idea any less bad :D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has any one heard of the term..... lazy writing. She wasnt mentioned in ROTS or ANY media before hand was because she wasnt invented until people wanted to milk more money. Thus they shoe horned her in and then swept it under the rug and pretended like she was their the whole time and they just didnt mention her cus it wasnt relavent.

 

People are making excuses for a bad writing team and concept team :D.

 

Like I said what they eventually do with her is good, because it went from lazy and bad concept to people picking up the peices and actually giving 2 cruds and making it work. Doesnt make the idea any less bad :D.

Forgive me but you've failed to actually provide a reason for why Ashoka's role in Season 1 and 2 was a bad one.

 

All you've said is that you think its pandering. Well that's your opinion, and no more meritorious than saying that Star Wars as a whole is just pandering towards sci-fi fans. Well duh.

 

Its called appealing to your audience, pretty important when writing stories.

 

EDIT: Every maybe thought that just maybe that what they eventually did with Ashoka was the plan all along?

Edited by Beniboybling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forgive me but you've failed to actually provide a reason for why Ashoka's role in Season 1 and 2 was a bad one.

 

All you've said is that you think its pandering. Well that's your opinion, and no more meritorious than saying that Star Wars as a whole is just pandering towards sci-fi fans. Well duh.

 

Its called appealing to your audience, pretty important when writing stories.

 

EDIT: Every maybe thought that just maybe that what they eventually did with Ashoka was the plan all along?

 

Beni, she was absolutely horrible in seasons 1 and 2, read the freakin comments in this thread more carefully and you'll see more than one argument so don't give me the "I haven't seen a good argument" BS because you just don't WANT to see it.

 

I know you like her, and that is fine. But you can't just deny that others have valid reasons to dislike her because you don't agree with them.

 

For instance, in seasons 1 and 2 we see her use stupid nicknames, is extremely naive, her story doesn't fit naturally into the existing canon at the time, she doesn't have much character development (in seasons 1 and 2), she is constantly being an obnoxious brat, she is a child with a lightsaber and flying starships as well as leading soldiers into battle (something no legitimate soldier would tolerate). etc...

 

The list goes on so don't give me or Tune your "you've failed to actually provide a reason" line again Beni. Just open your eyes for half a second.

 

All that said. I HATED her in seasons 1 and 2 (one of the reasons aside from Hippe Mandos that I refused to watch TCW for a long time), and if that was Lucasart's plan all along then it should have been buried long ago and never seen the light of day. However, her later stories especially her personal arc was something of adequate redemption and so I like her well enough now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Beni, she was absolutely horrible in seasons 1 and 2, read the freakin comments in this thread more carefully and you'll see more than one argument so don't give me the "I haven't seen a good argument" BS because you just don't WANT to see it.

 

I know you like her, and that is fine. But you can't just deny that others have valid reasons to dislike her because you don't agree with them.

 

For instance, in seasons 1 and 2 we see her use stupid nicknames, is extremely naive, her story doesn't fit naturally into the existing canon at the time, she doesn't have much character development (in seasons 1 and 2), she is constantly being an obnoxious brat, she is a child with a lightsaber and flying starships as well as leading soldiers into battle (something no legitimate soldier would tolerate). etc...

 

The list goes on so don't give me or Tune your "you've failed to actually provide a reason" line again Beni. Just open your eyes for half a second.

 

All that said. I HATED her in seasons 1 and 2 (one of the reasons aside from Hippe Mandos that I refused to watch TCW for a long time), and if that was Lucasart's plan all along then it should have been buried long ago and never seen the light of day. However, her later stories especially her personal arc was something of adequate redemption and so I like her well enough now.

So dont hate her, just the concept of her.

 

Tunewalker is approaching this subject from a different perspective here, not yours.

 

That said I understand people's reasons for disliking her, but I also feel this is simply a matter of perspective. I don't see it as bad writing at all, her initial character simply wasn't directed towards the older audience.

 

What I was asking of Tunewalker is examples say of her fitting clunkily into the story, or otherwise degrading its elements other than "I don't like her character" because as far as I'm aware she added a lot to each story she was in.

 

I mean really stupid nicknames, extremely naive? Are these not simply characteristics of a young individual who has yet to mature? A Padawan rough around the edges? Yet did she not have a fan following from the start?

 

I for one was not a massive fan, but I didn't dislike her, but then became one as she developed. But hate is a very strong word, and its certainly not what I felt, and certainly not one I'd apply to a character who simply didn't appeal to my tastes. And re-watching early episodes I don't find her annoying at all, in fact I enjoy her character.

 

But I think its beyond stupid, apologies, to think that it wasn't always the plan all along to have Ashoka grow and develop from the young, cocky etc. that we see in the earlier episodes into something more mature and developed.

 

I mean that's basic storytelling right there, see Luke Skywalker for details.

 

P.S. I think a lot of the undeserved hatred for TCW is because its not a dark and gritty adult TV show. I think its time that you opened your eyes and realised that Lucasarts had a duty to appeal to everyone, not just your demographic.

Edited by Beniboybling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I think its beyond stupid, apologies, to think that it wasn't always the plan all along to have Ashoka grow and develop from the young, cocky etc. that we see in the earlier episodes into something more mature and developed.

 

I mean that's basic storytelling right there, see Luke Skywalker for details.

 

P.S. I think a lot of the undeserved hatred for TCW is because its not a dark and gritty adult TV show. I think its time that you opened your eyes and realised that Lucasarts had a duty to appeal to everyone, not just your demographic.

 

No I understand the intent to have her grow as a person, but her often flippant behavior and some of the other qualities I mentioned still make her a poor character even considering her later development. I like her more developed self, and had she been less child-like at the start I might have been more impressed.

 

Luke is a good example Beni, and I never said she should have been her season 5 self from the get-go. But many of her more obnoxious traits could have been tempered and they could have brought her in as a tad bit older.

 

P.S. I couldn't give a damn about it being "dark and gritty". I'd just rather it be quality entertainment. As it was, they marketed heavily to kids in the first two seasons with simple stories, very cartoonish animation, almost stereotypical characters, overdone themes, and constant unimaginative repartee.

 

I think it is time you opened your eyes and realized that they can market to that wider audience better than they did, as evidenced quite well by seasons 3-6.

 

If they were appealing to my demographic btw, they'd be making it a Michael Bay explosion ridden-shoot'em-up or a cheesy horror flick and I'm not big on either of those thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that Ahsoka's character growth/arc was handled fine over the course of the series, but I can sympathize with people who were really put off by the "Suddenly, a Wild [Anakin's Padawan] Appears!" nature of her inclusion in the overall mythos.

 

But even if the decision to write in a Padawan for Anakin that we've just somehow never heard of before is an instance of bad writing, it also a very Star Wars thing to do - let's face it, shoe-horning in random plot elements is almost as common as someone saying "I have a bad feeling about this" throughout the series.

 

"Luke and Leia's mother dies immediately after giving birth!"

"Wait, the one and only thing we know about her from the original series is that Leia remembers her..."

"Have baby Leia's eyes be open!"

"That's not how..."

"No it's cool, Leia has the Force so it'll work!"

 

"Leia is Luke's sister!"

"But we just spent two movies setting up a love triangle..."

"She loved him as a brother all along because 'somehow she always knew'!"

"She kissed him full on the mouth in Empire..."

"Darth Vader is Luke's father!"

"But Obi-Wan specifically said Vader 'betrayed and murdered' Luke's father..."

"That's true from a certain point of view"

"That was an oddly specific wording choice if he was trying to be cagey about what really happened"

 

"Anakin built C-3PO when he was like 9 years old!"

"What? I don't even..."

"It's okay, they'll wipe 3PO's memory at the very end of the last prequel!"

"Then what is the point of including it at all?!?"

 

Since they did make the call to include a Padawan, I am just happy how it played out in the end, with the resolution of her arc giving one more reason for Anakin to harbor ill will towards the Jedi. At least she was a wedged-in plot point that you can interpret as actually adding something to the motivations and decisions of the characters, and Anakin's fall was one area that really needed some shoring up in RotS.

 

Basically, I think of Ahsoka as a good "No, I am your father" twist, rather than a bad "I built a droid, wanna see?" twist.

Edited by DarthDymond
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No I understand the intent to have her grow as a person, but her often flippant behavior and some of the other qualities I mentioned still make her a poor character even considering her later development. I like her more developed self, and had she been less child-like at the start I might have been more impressed.

 

Luke is a good example Beni, and I never said she should have been her season 5 self from the get-go. But many of her more obnoxious traits could have been tempered and they could have brought her in as a tad bit older.

 

P.S. I couldn't give a damn about it being "dark and gritty". I'd just rather it be quality entertainment. As it was, they marketed heavily to kids in the first two seasons with simple stories, very cartoonish animation, almost stereotypical characters, overdone themes, and constant unimaginative repartee.

 

I think it is time you opened your eyes and realized that they can market to that wider audience better than they did, as evidenced quite well by seasons 3-6.

 

If they were appealing to my demographic btw, they'd be making it a Michael Bay explosion ridden-shoot'em-up or a cheesy horror flick and I'm not big on either of those thanks.

Again their is a distinct difference between a poor character and a character you dislike. You disliked her because she was young, and grew to like her as she matured as a person. That's fine and understandable but doesn't make her a poor character. Again I point to the fan following she had from the start. I definitely feel that if she had been less child like at the start her development would have been thrown amuk, after all she was a child, that was the whole point.

 

Luke is a good example, funnily enough lots of people didn't much like him in ANH, and honestly he did start of a tad whiny, but I enjoyed seeing is character develop and didn't resent him for being portrayed as a flawed individual.

 

I also disagree that Season 1-2 should have been more like 3-6. TCW set a tone, like many other stories have, of starting off "light" and slowly building up to become more dramatic, darker and more intense, the former complementing the latter and leading to the show appealing to all audiences. I point to the Harry Potter movies/books for an example. Loved by children and adults alike. Why? Because they strike a medium between the two demographics, The Philosopher's Stone is a kids novel and a kids film, the Deathly Hallows is not. But because the kids have been inducted in by the initial books, they can enjoy the gravitas of the finale, while having appropriately dark undertones in the initial films when called for. And likewise the adult audience can appreciate the steady build up, something which wouldn't have worked and IMO made the story markedly worse if the initial films had been as dark as the latter.

 

TCW for me is the same, it started off light to draw in the younger audience, while adding flavour with dark episodes like Lair of Grievous, Hostage Crisis, Cloak of Darkness, the Bane and Boba arcs etc. and as we've been told this is the same direction that Rebels is going to take, because its tried and proven.

 

I also think its important in terms of character, especially Ashoka, it was important for Ashoka to develop into a more mature character before they started throwing mature situations at her which as a kid just wouldn't have worked.

 

Honestly though I feel you are exaggerating, I fail to see the over-abundance of "very" cartoonish animation (because lol it changed so much) stereotypical characters (I'll give you Dr Virus Dude) simple stories and overdone themes, at least in comparison to latter seasons and Star Wars as a whole.

 

I assume you have watched the initial seasons and are familiar with what episodes they are comprised of... Seems like a simply case of "don't like kids shows" to me as opposed to bad storytelling, which it simply is not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that Ahsoka's character growth/arc was handled fine over the course of the series, but I can sympathize with people who were really put off by the "Suddenly, a Wild [Anakin's Padawan] Appears!" nature of her inclusion in the overall mythos.

 

But even if the decision to write in a Padawan for Anakin that we've just somehow never heard of before is an instance of bad writing, it also a very Star Wars thing to do - let's face it, shoe-horning in random plot elements is almost as common as someone saying "I have a bad feeling about this" throughout the series.

 

"Luke and Leia's mother dies immediately after giving birth!"

"Wait, the one and only thing we know about her from the original series is that Leia remembers her..."

"Have baby Leia's eyes be open!"

"That's not how..."

"No it's cool, Leia has the Force so it'll work!"

 

"Leia is Luke's sister!"

"But we just spent two movies setting up a love triangle..."

"She loved him as a brother all along because 'somehow she always knew'!"

"She kissed him full on the mouth in Empire..."

"Darth Vader is Luke's father!"

"But Obi-Wan specifically said Vader 'betrayed and murdered' Luke's father..."

"That's true from a certain point of view"

"That was an oddly specific wording choice if he was trying to be cagey about what really happened"

 

"Anakin built C-3PO when he was like 9 years old!"

"What? I don't even..."

"It's okay, they'll wipe 3PO's memory at the very end of the last prequel!"

"Then what is the point of including it at all?!?"

 

Since they did make the call to include a Padawan, I am just happy how it played out in the end, with the resolution of her arc giving one more reason for Anakin to harbor ill will towards the Jedi. At least she was a wedged-in plot point that you can interpret as actually adding something to the motivations and decisions of the characters, and Anakin's fall was one area that really needed some shoring up in RotS.

 

Basically, I think of Ahsoka as a good "No, I am your father" twist, rather than a bad "I built a droid, wanna see?" twist.

That made be laugh. :D

 

You forgot one though. :jawa_wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again their is a distinct difference between a poor character and a character you dislike. You disliked her because she was young, and grew to like her as she matured as a person. That's fine and understandable but doesn't make her a poor character.

 

What about make her too powerful for no other reason just to make her look cool?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about make her too powerful for no other reason just to make her look cool?
That is probably the one thing I take issue with lol, poor Grievous. :p

 

That said, bad@ss Ashoka is bad@ss, and she's not too OP.

Edited by Beniboybling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that Ahsoka's character growth/arc was handled fine over the course of the series, but I can sympathize with people who were really put off by the "Suddenly, a Wild [Anakin's Padawan] Appears!" nature of her inclusion in the overall mythos.

 

But even if the decision to write in a Padawan for Anakin that we've just somehow never heard of before is an instance of bad writing, it also a very Star Wars thing to do - let's face it, shoe-horning in random plot elements is almost as common as someone saying "I have a bad feeling about this" throughout the series.

 

"Luke and Leia's mother dies immediately after giving birth!"

"Wait, the one and only thing we know about her from the original series is that Leia remembers her..."

"Have baby Leia's eyes be open!"

"That's not how..."

"No it's cool, Leia has the Force so it'll work!"

 

"Leia is Luke's sister!"

"But we just spent two movies setting up a love triangle..."

"She loved him as a brother all along because 'somehow she always knew'!"

"She kissed him full on the mouth in Empire..."

"Darth Vader is Luke's father!"

"But Obi-Wan specifically said Vader 'betrayed and murdered' Luke's father..."

"That's true from a certain point of view"

"That was an oddly specific wording choice if he was trying to be cagey about what really happened"

 

"Anakin built C-3PO when he was like 9 years old!"

"What? I don't even..."

"It's okay, they'll wipe 3PO's memory at the very end of the last prequel!"

"Then what is the point of including it at all?!?"

 

Since they did make the call to include a Padawan, I am just happy how it played out in the end, with the resolution of her arc giving one more reason for Anakin to harbor ill will towards the Jedi. At least she was a wedged-in plot point that you can interpret as actually adding something to the motivations and decisions of the characters, and Anakin's fall was one area that really needed some shoring up in RotS.

 

Basically, I think of Ahsoka as a good "No, I am your father" twist, rather than a bad "I built a droid, wanna see?" twist.

 

So ever how much we all do want Star Wars to be more then fiction, its still is, just fiction, either you buy it or you don't. As why Ahsoka 'suddenly appeared' Yoda's smirky face upon announcing it to Anakin said; "See here we will, if not responsibility over more than you expected, will set you straight, you reckless excuse for a prophecy to set all things straight!?" Either You want it or Even if old George wants it and Disney is just now experiencing it, SW has grown more layered then ever was intended, there's bound to be more wedging then any off us will realize. The thing with fiction is that its by definition not are supposed to 'make sense' or even 'be credible', 'Good' writing has always been in the eyes of the reader to decide.

Edited by t-darko
Link to comment
Share on other sites


×
×
  • Create New...