Do you all agree that the prequels would have been better if Maul had been kept as the principle villain? He should have survived Episode 1 and came back. How do you think this would have been handled? How would the movies have been different? I believe that it would have been much better. Let me know.

No.. just no.

 

 

1st. Maul is overrated, and in the EU books his character has no personality or anything. He is like a Robot Assassin.

 

2nd. In the Darth Plageuis, it even states Maul was a tool. Maul was a tool, and Sidious knew Maul would never come close to outranking him. In fact Plageuis even knew it to. Maul's role in the Grand PLan was to reveal the Sith and that was it.

 

 

And the arguement, Savage is suppose to be Maul's equal and Savage went on a god mode in TCW is a fail. Savage was being empowered by the Night-Sisters.

Jar-Jar Binks should have been the principle villain which gets run over by the vehicle in the beginning.

Do you all agree that the prequels would have been better if Maul had been kept as the principle villain? He should have survived Episode 1 and came back. How do you think this would have been handled? How would the movies have been different? I believe that it would have been much better. Let me know.

 

I agree, GL sucked the life right out of it when he killed him. Darth Maul had the villian flavor "Vader" had. I remember when the movie hit the theaters for the first time and so many people were pissed off because Obi killed him so quickly.

 

Count Dooku was lame and it would of been better to have a face off with Anakin vs Maul.

I agree, GL sucked the life right out of it when he killed him. Darth Maul had the villian flavor "Vader" had. I remember when the movie hit the theaters for the first time and so many people were pissed off because Obi killed him so quickly.

 

Count Dooku was lame and it would of been better to have a face off with Anakin vs Maul.

 

No Villain in SW had a flavor like Vader.

 

Maul never killed his Servants because they pissed him off, Maul never even Force CHokeed anyone, had an awesome voice and had a decent story(Luke's father?)

Very much agree with OP, Maul should have had the "Vader" role in the prequels, they really needed a villain that we can be afraid of (they also needed a protagonist) however that would have meant giving him more character and not just a bunch of cool stunts.

 

Dont care about what they say in the EU, its the movies that counts, not the books, and especially not The clone wars.

 

Seems that the EU desperetly tries to cover up for Georges plot mistakes however.

Have fun

landoro

No.. just no.

 

Beat me to it.

Do you all agree that the prequels would have been better if Maul had been kept as the principle villain? He should have survived Episode 1 and came back. How do you think this would have been handled? How would the movies have been different? I believe that it would have been much better. Let me know.

 

honesty i agree with this i don't really feel count dooku was sith i flet him more like a dark jedi.

 

 

Darth sidious + Darth maul = complete sith (their purpose are clear and they are terrorfying)

 

Darth sidious + count dooku = Sith and emo dark jedi.

Edited February 13, 2012 by undeadsithdread

I agree, GL sucked the life right out of it when he killed him. Darth Maul had the villian flavor "Vader" had. I remember when the movie hit the theaters for the first time and so many people were pissed off because Obi killed him so quickly.

 

Count Dooku was lame and it would of been better to have a face off with Anakin vs Maul.

 

exactly!

 

Dooku = worst Idea ever

 

Grievous = not important to star wars universe in any way possible.

 

Maul = the coolest of the original PT characters.

 

Jango Fett = Basically Boba Fett, so yeah he's cool, but he's not Original.

 

Palpatine = necessary, but not that interesting in the movies.

 

What was so good about the OT? It was so well directed, and it was a constant struggle between Luke and Darth Vader. You are able to build more character depth that way, and cause the audience to form better opinions about your characters. Keeping Maul would allow the SW audience to be familiar with the threat and associate more with one side or the other. Sure a lot of people think Maul was overrated, but It's not about the SW universe because fans hated the prequels even though they weren't made for the universe they were made to shut up the fans. People hate the prequels because they hate new things. The SW fans wanted the OT but that wasn't gunna happen. Fans were upset because they romanticized the past. It's very common for us to do that, but one solution is to give people the past. here's what I would have done with the PT

 

Made the group more sustainable:

1.) kept Qui Gon and Maul alive (no main characters [except maybe Jar Jar] die)

2.) find a way to keep Obiwan, Anakin, Padme, and the group pretty much together (like the OT where they were always in the Falcon together and usually all ended up together)

3.) given the characters a ship that would serve as a common meeting place (much like the Falcon and the Ebon Hawk).

4.) Killed Maul either in the 2nd or part way through the 3rd movie.

5.) killed qui gon in the 2nd movie

6.) Allowed more sith. (if you're going to have a whole Jedi Order, then I think the balance would allow for a more believable extermination of the Jedi).

 

some of you may be glad I didn't make star wars, but that's just what I would have done. if you don't agree that's fine...i'm sure there are things you'd rather have done. Those are just a few things I think that would have given the PT a more believable flow (I'm not arguing that it would be better because I don't think you'll ever satisfy the SW fans).

Edited February 13, 2012 by Gantoris_Aym

Do you all agree that the prequels would have been better if Maul had been kept as the principle villain? He should have survived Episode 1 and came back. How do you think this would have been handled? How would the movies have been different? I believe that it would have been much better. Let me know.

 

I was very entertained by Maul and hoped 'he' might show himself in Ep.2. Hey, it was an attack of clones, after all. That said, I enjoyed Dooku as well and I understand they each had a part to play. But, he never had the villian mystique that Maul or OT Vader did.

Darth Maul did survive episode one. Look him up on Wookiepedia

Maul had two things going for him that set up his "cool" factor.

Demonic looking face, and a Lightsaber that had never been seen in the movies before.

 

If he'd had more than five small appearances before his battle with Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon, along with more dialogue and actually being seen doing more than just being Sidious' lackey, then he'd be comparable to Vader in the villain stakes.

 

Dooku should have had more screen time. Hell, Dooku could have been the main villain for most of the prequel trilogy. Instead he's relegated to being a secondary character like Maul, and is replaced by the pointless CGI job that is Greivous, who has a pitiful onscreen fight with Obi-Wan.

 

Meanwhile, the closest thing to a singular villain that runs the course of the prequels is Mr. Machiavellian himself, Darth Sidious. Who doesn't appear as Darth Sidious all that often, and only "lets loose" in the last part of the prequels.

 

All in all, it's yet another area where Lucas dropped the ball because he was trying to rush the plot of the prequel trilogy.

Maul was a MacGuffin. It's just that simple.

How did he survive when he was cut in half? Looked that way in the movie anyways. Mual was cool tho. Count duke sucked. I could kill count dukes old ***.

darth maul should not have been in the movies at all. he was barely a character. he was more like a "plot" device that had arms and legs and could dance around with a lightsaber.

 

christopher lee should have been the Darth Vader of all 3 prequel films because he is a good actor and can play a villain. darth maul was not a villain. he was a stunt-man with face paint and did nothing at all and served no purpose.

 

darth maul and general grievous were pretty much the same character. a boring emotionless nobody that accomplished very little and died ignobly at the hands of obi wan. neither of them should have existed.

Thing is Maul could have never united the Seps into starting a war. He was Sid's assasin and just like Dooku he was nothing but a tool to reach a goal.

No.. just no.

 

 

1st. Maul is overrated, and in the EU books his character has no personality or anything. He is like a Robot Assassin.

 

HK-47 has more personality than Maul, and would take offense to this comparison. Meatbag.

No.. just no.

 

 

1st. Maul is overrated, and in the EU books his character has no personality or anything. He is like a Robot Assassin.

 

2nd. In the Darth Plageuis, it even states Maul was a tool. Maul was a tool, and Sidious knew Maul would never come close to outranking him. In fact Plageuis even knew it to. Maul's role in the Grand PLan was to reveal the Sith and that was it.

 

 

And the arguement, Savage is suppose to be Maul's equal and Savage went on a god mode in TCW is a fail. Savage was being empowered by the Night-Sisters.

 

I think you missed the point of his post. While I agree with the points you made, the problem is those were made after the fact of him being cut in half and having his head blown off my Owen.

 

I think what he was getting at, is they should have MADE him a more interesting character and NOT a tool.

HK-47 has more personality than Maul, and would take offense to this comparison. Meatbag.

 

Observation: HK Has more personality then most of all of those sacks of meat in the PQ.

Darth Maul will be making a return in The Clone Wars soon.

 

Also, Maul was simply just a tool in the movies, and was far from being true Rule of Two Sith material. He might have cut it in the Old Republic, but he definitely didn't deserve to be part of Bane's Legacy.

 

Dooku on the other hand is awesome. Every time he fights in The Clone Wars it's awesome. it appears as though everything is so easy for him. He has no problem taking down his opponents. Dooku is a true Sith.

Count Dooku was lame and it would of been better to have a face off with Anakin vs Maul.

 

Yep. Anakin should've replaced Maul by killing him. Would've been much more meaningful than killing Space Saruman, who you've really only just met and have no reason to care about one way or the other.

Edited February 13, 2012 by PibbyPib

Sadly no, Darth Maul was really at heart a shallow character.

 

But he perfectly illustrates one of the problems Lucas has at times as a filmaker. I refer to this as the Boba Fett principle.

 

George is an amazing visual artist. He creates scenes and images that are just stunning and cannot be compared to. Even today his original trilogy has never been equaled in its ability to take you to worlds long ago and far far away.

 

And that is part of the problem. He creates amazing visuals, but he doesn't always create the characterization, dialogue and back story to back them up. What makes this worse is the "Boba Fett principle". Where he then takes those stunning (but relatively minor, to him at least) images and uses them for marketing purposes.

 

Lucas has never understood fans love of or fascination with Boba Fett. To George Boba was just a throwaway character. One of the Bounty Hunters. I dude in a helmet. Nothing special and no great story. he failed to appreciate that after the original movie, in 1979, Boba Fett was the first glimpse of what was to come. He was the first little piece we were given as kids that there was more to the Star Wars story than just the one movie. That it wasn't over. (remember back then, except for James Bond there really was no such thing as a movie franchise. Sequels were rare and often cheesy). And then the magic contest. If you bought enough of the regular Star Wars action figures, and clipped the proof of purchase code from them and mailed them in, they would send you a cool figure of a never before seen character from the NEXT movie. It was like Willy Wonka come to life. He was a bounty hunter! He had armor and a targeting thingy on his helmet and a jet pack and rockets and a wrist blasters! And he was hunting Han Solo! Oh the stories we came up with for him. And then the second and third movies released. He walked around in 2 or 3 scenes. Had about three lines of dialogue, and died stupidly in an evil carnivorous hole in the ground. Ummm ***???

 

You would have though that GL might have learned from that experience. But then he went and did exactly the same thing with the prequels. After 20 years of waiting, the ever increasing rabid fan base finally got a glimpse of a new Star Wars in production. And what do they see. This amazing image. A red and black kabuki Sith Lord wielding a double bladed red lightsaber/staff. OMG was this image ever badaz. Once again we and our children spent countless hours imagining how cool this character was, based on those badaz images and action figures alone. And then the movie hit. He walked around in three or 4 scenes. Had three lines of spoken dialogue, no actual story, had one exceedingly wicked fight, and died stupidly in a giant hole in the ground. UMMM? Once again ***???

 

The problem is Lucas is like the worlds greatest comic book cover artist, except he paints with people and film. He sets up these amazing looking scenes, astonishing characters etc. And then move on to the next bit of color and landscape without ever filling in the details we are screaming for. This isn't always a bad thing. Lucas when playing to his strengths of imagery is one of the truest masters of his art. It's when he attempts to play to his weaknesses or fails to recognize them that things fall apart (see romantic dialogue, Anakin v Padme). Unfortunately George seems to often has some personal blind spots regarding his own weak areas (casting small children, sorry GL but only Spielberg even manages to make it work) and often his greatest strengths (just the images of Boba Fett and Darth Maul stirred such strong fan reaction that he should have opted to better use them. He doesn't always recognize when he makes something incredible.) To be fair in this regard he is probably the same as the rest of us.

 

At least there are some signs that Lucas is at long last starting to learn to recognize some of this. The way he has recently played around with some of the images of the characters in the Clone Wars series, and even essentially brought back a "Darth Maul" character with a much more complicated and compelling backstory in the form of Savage Oppress is hopeful.

Edited February 13, 2012 by Faefrost

There's really a character named Savage Oppress?

 

HAHA oh wow. I think that might be the lamest character name I've ever seen. Sounds like the name of an Eastern European death metal band. And not in a good way.

Sadly no, Darth Maul was really at heart a shallow character.

 

But he perfectly illustrates one of the problems Lucas has at times as a filmaker. I refer to this as the Boba Fett principle.

 

George is an amazing visual artist. He creates scenes and images that are just stunning and cannot be compared to. Even today his original trilogy has never been equaled in its ability to take you to worlds long ago and far far away.

 

And that is part of the problem. He creates amazing visuals, but he doesn't always create the characterization, dialogue and back story to back them up. What makes this worse is the "Boba Fett principle". Where he then takes those stunning (but relatively minor, to him at least) images and uses them for marketing purposes.

 

Lucas has never understood fans love of or fascination with Boba Fett. To George Boba was just a throwaway character. One of the Bounty Hunters. I dude in a helmet. Nothing special and no great story. he failed to appreciate that after the original movie, in 1979, Boba Fett was the first glimpse of what was to come. He was the first little piece we were given as kids that there was more to the Star Wars story than just the one movie. That it wasn't over. (remember back then, except for James Bond there really was no such thing as a movie franchise. Sequels were rare and often cheesy). And then the magic contest. If you bought enough of the regular Star Wars action figures, and clipped the proof of purchase code from them and mailed them in, they would send you a cool figure of a never before seen character from the NEXT movie. It was like Willy Wonka come to life. He was a bounty hunter! He had armor and a targeting thingy on his helmet and a jet pack and rockets and a wrist blasters! And he was hunting Han Solo! Oh the stories we came up with for him. And then the second and third movies released. He walked around in 2 or 3 scenes. Had about three lines of dialogue, and died stupidly in an evil carnivorous hole in the ground. Ummm ***???

 

You would have though that GL might have learned from that experience. But then he went and did exactly the same thing with the prequels. After 20 years of waiting, the ever increasing rabid fan base finally got a glimpse of a new Star Wars in production. And what do they see. This amazing image. A red and black kabuki Sith Lord wielding a double bladed red lightsaber/staff. OMG was this image ever badaz. Once again we and our children spent countless hours imagining how cool this character was, based on those badaz images and action figures alone. And then the movie hit. He walked around in three or 4 scenes. Had three lines of spoken dialogue, no actual story, had one exceedingly wicked fight, and died stupidly in a giant hole in the ground. UMMM? Once again ***???

 

The problem is Lucas is like the worlds greatest comic book cover artist, except he paints with people and film. He sets up these amazing looking scenes, astonishing characters etc. And then move on to the next bit of color and landscape without ever filling in the details we are screaming for. This isn't always a bad thing. Lucas when playing to his strengths of imagery is one of the truest masters of his art. It's when he attempts to play to his weaknesses or fails to recognize them that things fall apart (see romantic dialogue, Anakin v Padme). Unfortunately George seems to often has some personal blind spots regarding his own weak areas (casting small children, sorry GL but only Spielberg even manages to make it work) and often his greatest strengths (just the images of Boba Fett and Darth Maul stirred such strong fan reaction that he should have opted to better use them. He doesn't always recognize when he makes something incredible.) To be fair in this regard he is probably the same as the rest of us.

 

At least there are some signs that Lucas is at long last starting to learn to recognize some of this. The way he has recently played around with some of the images of the characters in the Clone Wars series, and even essentially brought back a "Darth Maul" character with a much more complicated and compelling backstory in the form of Savage Oppress is hopeful.

 

 

Great post, I agree completely. Part of why I like TCW is because there's more time to flesh out the characters. They have 3 years of content stretched over 6 seasons of the show, giving plenty of opportunity to provide backstory and character development, while at the same time providing the same kinds of awesome visuals, effects, and wow moments as the movies.

Sadly no, Darth Maul was really at heart a shallow character.

 

But he perfectly illustrates one of the problems Lucas has at times as a filmaker. I refer to this as the Boba Fett principle.

 

George is an amazing visual artist. He creates scenes and images that are just stunning and cannot be compared to. Even today his original trilogy has never been equaled in its ability to take you to worlds long ago and far far away.

 

And that is part of the problem. He creates amazing visuals, but he doesn't always create the characterization, dialogue and back story to back them up. What makes this worse is the "Boba Fett principle". Where he then takes those stunning (but relatively minor, to him at least) images and uses them for marketing purposes.

 

Lucas has never understood fans love of or fascination with Boba Fett. To George Boba was just a throwaway character. One of the Bounty Hunters. I dude in a helmet. Nothing special and no great story. he failed to appreciate that after the original movie, in 1979, Boba Fett was the first glimpse of what was to come. He was the first little piece we were given as kids that there was more to the Star Wars story than just the one movie. That it wasn't over. (remember back then, except for James Bond there really was no such thing as a movie franchise. Sequels were rare and often cheesy). And then the magic contest. If you bought enough of the regular Star Wars action figures, and clipped the proof of purchase code from them and mailed them in, they would send you a cool figure of a never before seen character from the NEXT movie. It was like Willy Wonka come to life. He was a bounty hunter! He had armor and a targeting thingy on his helmet and a jet pack and rockets and a wrist blasters! And he was hunting Han Solo! Oh the stories we came up with for him. And then the second and third movies released. He walked around in 2 or 3 scenes. Had about three lines of dialogue, and died stupidly in an evil carnivorous hole in the ground. Ummm ***???

 

You would have though that GL might have learned from that experience. But then he went and did exactly the same thing with the prequels. After 20 years of waiting, the ever increasing rabid fan base finally got a glimpse of a new Star Wars in production. And what do they see. This amazing image. A red and black kabuki Sith Lord wielding a double bladed red lightsaber/staff. OMG was this image ever badaz. Once again we and our children spent countless hours imagining how cool this character was, based on those badaz images and action figures alone. And then the movie hit. He walked around in three or 4 scenes. Had three lines of spoken dialogue, no actual story, had one exceedingly wicked fight, and died stupidly in a giant hole in the ground. UMMM? Once again ***???

 

The problem is Lucas is like the worlds greatest comic book cover artist, except he paints with people and film. He sets up these amazing looking scenes, astonishing characters etc. And then move on to the next bit of color and landscape without ever filling in the details we are screaming for. This isn't always a bad thing. Lucas when playing to his strengths of imagery is one of the truest masters of his art. It's when he attempts to play to his weaknesses or fails to recognize them that things fall apart (see romantic dialogue, Anakin v Padme). Unfortunately George seems to often has some personal blind spots regarding his own weak areas (casting small children, sorry GL but only Spielberg even manages to make it work) and often his greatest strengths (just the images of Boba Fett and Darth Maul stirred such strong fan reaction that he should have opted to better use them. He doesn't always recognize when he makes something incredible.) To be fair in this regard he is probably the same as the rest of us.

 

At least there are some signs that Lucas is at long last starting to learn to recognize some of this. The way he has recently played around with some of the images of the characters in the Clone Wars series, and even essentially brought back a "Darth Maul" character with a much more complicated and compelling backstory in the form of Savage Oppress is hopeful.

 

The problem is that the stories were written before the movies in books. So Boba Fett's fate was already set in stone.