How did they think this was a good idea/LF's management/ST, EU plotlines?

[Captain Crimson]

Hey, guys, I'm back with another topic.

Going off what I said in the TROS thread, let's just assume I'm right. How did LF feel what they took from the EU with grafting into the ST was going to work out well?

Really, the criticisms we're getting now, now a much larger scale, were first made by a small handful of millions of people back in the 1990s and early aughts, those who bought the comics and novels and played the games. Dark Empire? The original complaints were that it had cheapened Anakin's sacrifice exactly the same as today, but going off of what Mr. Lucas did with the PT I don't see it that way. And besides, the original plan was to bring in a Vader imposter, but Mr. Lucas nixed that and said if they can bring in the Emperor somehow, they had his full blessing.

Jedi Prince? The relative of Palpatine thing? I mean, Trioculus's buildup as the big bad and then being tossed aside for Triclops mirrors the Snoke/Palpatine thing way too closely to be a mere coincidence. And those books were notoriously torn to shreds by older fans back in the day, because they'd had the same excuse now, you know - "for kids!" Before the era of YJK and JA, mind you, which were massive game-changers for the genre.

The Crystal Star? Look, for all the complaints people make of TLJ, I respect it breaking the mold to justify the reboot. But TSC is a notoriously awful EU book and some even call it THE worst one ever, without hyperbole. And what strikes me is a moment Luke had there, where he suspected Han might be cheating on Leia, and so his hand drifted down towards his lightsaber, almost the exact mirror of what led to Kylo Ren's fall in the ST. Criticisms regarding the mischaracterization of Luke played out long before TLJ, but this was at least one small cog in the overall timeline, that didn't led to defeat, failure, and running and hiding.

There is too much similarities here to just brush it off. I could go even further, but at the end of the day, I'll maintain the "recanonization" and adaptation fusion job they did with RO proves that you can do it, and reach a large audience. I love the DF books, and I love Kyle Katarn. And DS was wonderfully written by Mr. Luceno. The reception to RO kinda validates that, IMO. Sure, it's annoying they shoved away Kyle Katarn to make it Jan Ors' story, but at the same time, most casuals love it. And kinda puts a nail in the head to indifferent DC fans or casuals who think they're taking the "best" EU elements to "recanonize." They really aren't, if they are choosing JP, DE, and TSC. For every RO you got, you got the ST.

How did they think that was going to work? We were played. They didn't want "creative freedom." So decanonizing the EU meant nothing. For those who say they are engaged in historical revision? While you may have a valid point, there is also a degree of failing to learn from history here. But that's just how I see it.

But I wanna hear what YOU guys think. Do you agree with my assessment here, they were hardly trying to "recanonize" the best of the EU? Did they make a mistake putting too much emphasis on "recanonization" or could that have worked, but it was the source material they chose that was all wrong? Do you have some other viewpoints? Something I haven't brought up? Leave your thoughts, smash out a reply below, and I'll talk to you guys again soon.

[CharlesPhipps]

I think because the majority of people who licensed these books thought Star Wars was a children's series and it would sell a lot of books to make them a lot of money.

I think people who want a bible-literal important "serious" Star Wars would also miss out on a lot.

[Captain Crimson]

I think because the majority of people who licensed these books thought Star Wars was a children's series and it would sell a lot of books to make them a lot of money.

I think people who want a bible-literal important "serious" Star Wars would also miss out on a lot.

Given how often the modern LF management team harp on it being "for kids," I fear you're right, sadly...

[CharlesPhipps]

I think because the majority of people who licensed these books thought Star Wars was a children's series and it would sell a lot of books to make them a lot of money.

I think people who want a bible-literal important "serious" Star Wars would also miss out on a lot.

Given how often the modern LF management team harp on it being "for kids," I fear you're right, sadly...

Jar Jar would always have been annoying but never have been HATED if not for the fact that he was direct evidence George Lucas thought his universe was silly.

I feel a lot of fans of franchises from the 80s are secret edgelords as depicted here:

https://www.shortpacked.com/comic/buckets-of-blood

[Captain Crimson]

I think because the majority of people who licensed these books thought Star Wars was a children's series and it would sell a lot of books to make them a lot of money.

I think people who want a bible-literal important "serious" Star Wars would also miss out on a lot.

Given how often the modern LF management team harp on it being "for kids," I fear you're right, sadly...

Jar Jar would always have been annoying but never have been HATED if not for the fact that he was direct evidence George Lucas thought his universe was silly.

I feel a lot of fans of franchises from the 80s are secret edgelords as depicted here:

https://www.shortpacked.com/comic/buckets-of-blood

Mr. Lucas had even said that TESB, the most-beloved of the OT, was more Mr. Kershner's movie than his own. I've seen the RS article. So for casuals to be surprised by the PT is astounding to me, at least amongst the older fans who grew up with it in the years prior to '99. Same thing that's repeating with the ST, TBH. But this time, you'd think they would have looked to all of the complaints of the past for the stories they lifted from the EU, that I listed above, and adjusted their approach accordingly. But then they might have literally slapped together a plan very quickly with Disney breathing down their necks demanding a movie in '15. At least with two years, they have more time than they most surely had in '12. Hopefully.

Since that was my primary point of contention. The same criticisms from casuals now are those older fans and even younger ones raised back in the 1990s. "It cheapens Anakin's sacrifice!" "This is botched characterization of Luke!" And more. They seem to be failing to learn from history. They have no one but themselves to blame. The overall management reminds me of the failures that had gone into STE, since by that time, the Paramount top brass should have learned from their mistakes, and they didn't. They could have avoided tons of grief if they'd just examined the history of all of the fans' complaints while lifting from the EU.

But, you know, with COVID giving the publishing industry a pounding, and with two years till the next movie, hopefully they give us more SWL in the meantime. We got Marvel #108, and I loved it. Though my suspicion is we won't get another novel for quite some time and for those interested in the KOTOR games being "recanonized," you'll be disappointed, since Disney will definitely meddle to some extent in the big-budget movies. Revan won't have the same name. Nor would Thrawn. They're just not going to pay royalties for a movie that makes billions. It won't happen. And who knows what other changes they will add that deviate further and further from the lore.

Just my take on it.

[Zargon]

They don't really care. To any executive non-fan Star Wars is and has always been "silly crap for kids...and 'kid-like' adults". They don't care about the brand at all: aliens, space wizards, laser swords and space ships that go 'pew pew'....just toss it all together and makes some money.