StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Am I the only one wondering why the text is red? Given that red is a colour associated with the dark side?

Kojiro wrote:Am I the only one wondering why the text is red? Given that red is a colour associated with the dark side?

The logo colors for the OT varied too. "Return of the Jedi" was often depicted as red.

I've heard that text is red to signal that is a darker chapter in the SW saga, I just hope it's darkness with a purpose and not darkness for its own sake. What I'd like is that film was about the resistance having seek new allies now that the New Republic has been thrown into chaos thanks to loosing much of their heirarchy in Hosian, with the First Order chasing our heroes to make sure the resistance can't recover from that blow, that would be dark but not hopeless or oppressive.

Was it? I don't think I've ever seen that. I was just curious, given the way kyber crystals now colour swap if it didn't have some significance.

I have a calendar from many years back that is made up of old Star Wars posters, including one from before Jedi was released. At the time, the movie was going to be called Revenge of the Jedi, and the poster is mostly red (a very cool poster, if you ask me, and one of my favorites-- hence why I still have the calendar). Then Lucas decided that the name was inappropriate given Jedi philosophy, but I wouldn't be surprised if the color stayed in the title font in some of the marketing.

Formless wrote:I have a calendar from many years back that is made up of old Star Wars posters, including one from before Jedi was released. At the time, the movie was going to be called Revenge of the Jedi, and the poster is mostly red (a very cool poster, if you ask me, and one of my favorites-- hence why I still have the calendar). Then Lucas decided that the name was inappropriate given Jedi philosophy, but I wouldn't be surprised if the color stayed in the title font in some of the marketing.

The color stayed in the theatrical trailer (by which time it had been renamed to Return).

I wonder if "the last" isn't in the context of "the final" but "the previous". Or could go either way.

Though I do wonder what the name for Episode 9 will be, since I hope disney doesn't go for the "evil wins" storyline for the sequel trilogy, that worked for the prequels (to a degree at least) because we knew the saga wouldn't end on a downer.

EDIT:

I wonder if "the last" isn't in the context of "the final" but "the previous". Or could go either way.

it could be that they're keeping it intentionally vague to not end up with a spoiler title, after all with "Return of the Jedi" you knew the jedi would make some kind of return and with "Revenge of the Sith" you knew the Sith would make some sort of attempt at revenge.

I don't think it'll be an "evil wins" ending so much as compromise between light and dark that results in a true balance. Given the failure of both the New Republic and the new Jedi to prevent the rise of the First Order and the Knights of Ren, I get the feeling that we'll end up with some sort of benevolent constitutional monarchy defended by "grey" Force users with no attachment to any particular discipline.

This may be why Princess Leia was to be so central to the new story: she may have been intended to wind up as the future queen of the galaxy. What could be more Disney than that?

The Force Awakens The last Jedi.

Just found it funny.

Yup, based on that the interwebs figured out the title of the last movie:

Galvatron wrote:I don't think it'll be an "evil wins" ending so much as compromise between light and dark that results in a true balance. Given the failure of both the New Republic and the new Jedi to prevent the rise of the First Order and the Knights of Ren, I get the feeling that we'll end up with some sort of benevolent constitutional monarchy defended by "grey" Force users with no attachment to any particular discipline.

This may be why Princess Leia was to be so central to the new story: she may have been intended to wind up as the future queen of the galaxy. What could be more Disney than that?

And I will maintain that the duality of good and evil is thematically integral to Star Wars, or at least OT Star Wars (some other material does go in other directions somewhat, but in my opinion does so in contradiction to the OT), and that this would be a profound betrayal of the themes of the OT.

If you prefer I different take on morality as a personal philosophy, fine. But I wish fans would stop trying to make Star Wars fit their personal preferences. Their's a shit load of things I'd write differently if I was running Star Wars, but it is what it is.

Also, of course: Jedi is not synonymous with Light Side, and certainly the New Republic government is not. The Jedi Order and Republic might fail without the Light Side failing.

It would be interesting, or at least something different, if this story marked the end of the Jedi, though. Somewhat undercutting RotJ as well, obviously, but perhaps the "purpose" of bringing the Jedi back was simply to defeat the Sith, and with them (and perhaps, eventually, their First Order successors) gone, the Jedi have fulfilled their role and its time for something new.

Edit: Or at any rate, the new Jedi should be, well, new. I made my feelings quite clear in the past, I believe, on the Old Order's "love is bad" philosophy. And part of the progression of the Saga thus far as been a reevaluation of that. From the inhumane doctrine of the old Order, to Yoda and Obi-wan acknowledging that yes, attachments exist and allowing Luke and Leia to be raised by families in RotJ, to Luke's love for his father and vice versa ultimately saving the galaxy, defeating the Sith, and bringing balance to the Force where all the old Jedi and their armies could not. Its a beautiful story with a very clear thematic progression viewed in that light, and it would be a shame to lose that.

Kylo Ren's betrayal could be seen as arguing against that theme, but perhaps not- it sounds as though leaving his family to go train with Luke was what ultimately screwed him up completely, arguably, and Luke's isolation is also portrayed in a somewhat negative light.

personally I consider that fault was never really the Jedi Philosophy so much as the Jedi Order (or more exact their interpitation of the Jedi philosophy) I mean neither version of the code is precise on it's meanings and is open to interpitations

the main version is

• there is no emotion, there is peace
• there is no ignorance, there is knowledge
• there is no passion, there is serenity
• there is no chaos, there is harmony
• there is no death, there is the Force

the second version is even less clear about the meaning

• emotion, yet peace
• ignorance yet knowledge
• passion, yet serenity
• chaos, yet harmony
• death, yet the Force

I suspect that orginally Jedi weren't suppose to suppress their emotions (literally "no emotion") but rather achivive a state of inner peace where they could pass judgement without emotions clouding their rulings, but during the years this got corrupted to the version of the code the PT era Jedi Order had and Luke not knowing better copied that code and the sequel trilogy is Luke "purifying" the Jedi Code so to speak and truly making a "new" Jedi Order rather then making Jedi Order 2.0

It seems like all of those are just "there is no darkness, there is light". Like the Jedi philosophy was meant to imply that those first things were the absence of the second. Which only makes sense if the original Jedi had a sense of QuiGonn's trick, of course. Death being an absence of deep connection to the force.

If that's true, then the suppression of emotion is a pretty stupid way to bring about peace. But then, the Jedi having actual magical powers that were made stronger through meditation and a propensity to turn evil without it probably makes it hard to argue with the party line.

FireNexus wrote:It seems like all of those are just "there is no darkness, there is light". Like the Jedi philosophy was meant to imply that those first things were the absence of the second. Which only makes sense if the original Jedi had a sense of QuiGonn's trick, of course. Death being an absence of deep connection to the force.

If that's true, then the suppression of emotion is a pretty stupid way to bring about peace. But then, the Jedi having actual magical powers that were made stronger through meditation and a propensity to turn evil without it probably makes it hard to argue with the party line.

It would make thematic sense if the Jedi Order of the PT era had "lost its way" and was really just holding up a corrupt and unjust system because "the code says so" without anyone wondering why the code says so, indeed most of the PT seems to suggest that Jedi Order is too obsessed with doing what the rules say they must to do what is right.

The Romulan Republic wrote:And I will maintain that the duality of good and evil is thematically integral to Star Wars, or at least OT Star Wars (some other material does go in other directions somewhat, but in my opinion does so in contradiction to the OT), and that this would be a profound betrayal of the themes of the OT.

I agree, but then I see the PT as a betrayal of the themes in the OT so that ship has already sailed.

The Romulan Republic wrote:If you prefer I different take on morality as a personal philosophy, fine. But I wish fans would stop trying to make Star Wars fit their personal preferences. Their's a shit load of things I'd write differently if I was running Star Wars, but it is what it is.

It's not about what I prefer. I'd prefer to ignore the PT with regard to the future of Star Wars too, but that's not my decision to make.

The Romulan Republic wrote:Also, of course: Jedi is not synonymous with Light Side, and certainly the New Republic government is not. The Jedi Order and Republic might fail without the Light Side failing.

Granted. It's possible that Luke may restore the Jedi to what they were before 20,000 years of dogmatic baggage turned them into what we saw in the PT.

The PT does not invalidate or contradict the duality of the Light and Dark Side, unless one falls into the fallacy of equating the Jedi and the Light Side, and concluding that because the Jedi are flawed, the Light Side is invalidated.

The Jedi are not the Force, and they are not the Light Side. They are limited beings attempting to interpret it, and often failing.

The Clone Wars, incidentally, seems to have it both ways- in the Mortis arc, we see anthropomorphic personifications of the Light and Dark Sides, as well as another figure who appears to lie in between.

So, pretty interesting rumours and snatches of story that I've picked up on in the last few months...warning: potentially MASSIVE SPOILERS below.
Spoiler

Chimaera wrote:So, pretty interesting rumours and snatches of story that I've picked up on in the last few months...warning: potentially MASSIVE SPOILERS below.
Spoiler

Apparently, the Chosen One is a figure/entity that gets reincarnated at certain points in history, during times of massive conflict and inbalance within the force. It sounds almost like Avatar: The Last Airbender in how they approach it. There will be a point at which Rey makes a remark to Luke, something along the lines of "You're not my father" to which Luke replies "No, YOU are MY father!" which is where the true nature of the Chosen One is explained. Luke has spent decades immersing himself in the Force and exploring its deepest mysteries after his failure to rebuild the Jedi Order, and discovers that Anakin Skywalker was just one in a long line of Chosen Ones that acted as balancing agents for the Force. Rey is the reincarnation of Anakin, which explains why she is such a natural prodigy when it comes to the Force.

Oh balls. I hope that's not true. It sounds lame and fanficcy.

Each to their own, personally I thought it sounded awesome

Sounds a lot like the Dragon Reborn in the Wheel of Time series- history being repeating, with the Dragon being reborn again and again to face the Dark One.

It does kind of make sense that their would be multiple Chosen Ones, since even bringing balance to the Force would not make all evil spontaneously disappear, and likely the Force would eventually become imbalanced again. And the idea of the ancient champion returning in his land's hour of need is a classic, very much in keeping with Star Wars being basically epic fantasy/mythology in space. Though it usually takes more than thirty years.

And it gives the scene where Rey pulls Anakin's old light sabre away from Kylo Ren to her a whole new level of meaning.

Although, it wouldn't help with the "Rey is a Mary Sue" whining at all.

I think it would be better though if she was a figurative/spiritual successor to Anakin filling the same role, rather than a literal second coming of Skywalker. The aforementioned "Anakin's lightsabre" scene already established her as that, where it was her, not the Vader-wannabe Ren, who proved themselves the worthy heir to Anakin's blade.

Will she lead them all to Zion?

Lord Revan wrote:personally I consider that fault was never really the Jedi Philosophy so much as the Jedi Order (or more exact their interpitation of the Jedi philosophy) I mean neither version of the code is precise on it's meanings and is open to interpitations

the main version is

• there is no emotion, there is peace
• there is no ignorance, there is knowledge
• there is no passion, there is serenity
• there is no chaos, there is harmony
• there is no death, there is the Force

the second version is even less clear about the meaning

• emotion, yet peace
• ignorance yet knowledge
• passion, yet serenity
• chaos, yet harmony
• death, yet the Force

I suspect that orginally Jedi weren't suppose to suppress their emotions (literally "no emotion") but rather achivive a state of inner peace where they could pass judgement without emotions clouding their rulings, but during the years this got corrupted to the version of the code the PT era Jedi Order had and Luke not knowing better copied that code and the sequel trilogy is Luke "purifying" the Jedi Code so to speak and truly making a "new" Jedi Order rather then making Jedi Order 2.0

The first code could be taken as a pretty clear denial of emotion.

The second code acknowledges emotion and all the other normal human qualities existing, and suggests embracing them, without allowing them to corrupt oneself, which seems the more mature philosophy.