Make it act like a compass while it's being levetitated by a force user. Boom, so much better.
But it was given to a non-force user to get him to a place he had already been
Make the bounty hunter a force user. Bounty Hunter Palpatine. Boom, done.
More seriously, when did they say the bounty hunter had already been to the Death Star wreak? I don't remember that.
in total. He was given the dagger by palps, who was at exegal, so he could being rey to him on exegal.
Also in “dont ask no questions
if the force is a hereditary thing and rey is strong because of blood... why werent her parents strong and why didnt palps want to use his daughter/son?
The endind of that with the r2 scream was perfect
0
Options
Inquisitor772 x Penny Arcade Fight Club ChampionA fixed point in space and timeRegistered Userregular
edited January 2020
With more than a month in theaters now, The Rise of Skywalker's box office numbers are pretty much set, and while at first glance look pretty good, with some more analysis and comparison, don't look pretty. Basically, it looks like the final episode of the new saga will barely break a billion dollars , when it should have been the Star Wars event of the decade. This is significantly less than even its immediate predecessor , the "controversial" film The Last Jedi.
With more than a month in theaters now, The Rise of Skywalker's box office numbers are pretty much set, and while at first glance look pretty good, with some more analysis and comparison, don't look pretty. Basically, it looks like the final episode of the new saga will barely break a billion dollars , when it should have been the Star Wars event of the decade. This is significantly less than even its immediate predecessor , the "controversial" film The Last Jedi.
I guess in comparison to TFA or TPM it looks bad, sure, but each of those were massively hyped as the first new Star Wars in a decade. Obviously Disney is trying to make Star Wars into a more prolific universe, and you'd think Star Wars fans would be into that.
With opinion pieces like this I just can't help but compare to Marvel. The MCU releases about 3 films a year and no one laments the death of the franchise when they only make a billion dollars.
Part of that is the wealth of characters and settings, so hopefully post-ST Disney will continue taking Star Wars into novel territory and we can just judge new shows/movies without 40 years of expectations weighing on them.
0
Options
Ninja Snarl PMy helmet is my burden.Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered Userregular
edited January 2020
Star Wars has been the media franchise for decades now. When the latest three Star Wars films underperform badly, with one of them not even exceeding its budget by much, yeah, it's suggestive that the franchise is not going in a great direction. It almost takes effort to fail with "Star Wars" in the name of your movie, but that still has almost happened.
And if anything, Disney has shown they want the setting to be less prolific, not more. They wiped out the immense history of the EU, then let the main films keep treading water in identical territory to prior films. It's only the material outside the last few films that has shown any interest in actually expanding the setting. For anything major, Disney seems perfectly happy with tying the setting down to the same family and same handful of planets.
Nobody laments an MCU film not breaking a billion dollars because it's putting out random-ass stuff like Guardians of the Galaxy and Ant-Man alongside the big-name hero movies, then also sets a mountain of records when it releases Infinity War/Endgame to huge acclaim by both the public and critics. The MCU also (finally, now that certain assholes have been kicked out of control) doesn't struggle with having female leads in its films, instead of bowing to Internet criticism and carefully sweeping them under the rug.
There's a whole pile of reasons why the MCU is continuing to go strong and people continue to lose interest in Star Wars.
By prolific I was referring to new entries in the franchise. Disney bought Star Wars because they wanted to make money with new movies and TV series, so yeah, it's not surprising that they're putting out roughly a film per year.
There's certainly fair criticisms of each of the new movies, I just think the suggestion that 1 film per year somehow devalues Star Wars is ridiculous in the face of every other modern franchise. The 1980s are long gone.
My point was, now that the obligatory Sequel Trilogy is done, I hope there's less vitriol around "random-ass stuff" Disney is focusing on now like The Mandalorian, Cassian Andor, and new films in new settings.
I wanted it to be more than "obligatory", I wanted it to be good.
And just like with TPM, for a while there I was able to persuade myself it was.
They were going in at a disadvantage though. Pay homage to the old movies, but not too much. Make sure it's fresh. But not too crazy, it has to feel like Star Wars. And you have to get everyone's favorite characters in there, but you better introduce plenty of new characters. And make sure the old characters have a fitting conclusion but definitely give the new characters room to grow and develop. And on top of all that make it an entertaining story without any major plotholes. And pay homage to the extended universe even though it's not officially canon because people are really passionate about that.
It's just so much baggage. And while I like a lot of aspects of the ST, I'm looking forward to leaving that baggage behind. Just look at the success The Mandalorian has had, given some room to breathe.
Has any other franchise spanned 40+ years successfully without major reboots/shakeups?
I'm honestly curious if any movie has ever been made with as much baggage as Rise of Skywalker.
0
Options
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
With more than a month in theaters now, The Rise of Skywalker's box office numbers are pretty much set, and while at first glance look pretty good, with some more analysis and comparison, don't look pretty. Basically, it looks like the final episode of the new saga will barely break a billion dollars , when it should have been the Star Wars event of the decade. This is significantly less than even its immediate predecessor , the "controversial" film The Last Jedi.
I see no reason to go with "it's not special anymore" or "franchise fatigue" when the review scores are right there.
Has any other franchise spanned 40+ years successfully without major reboots/shakeups?
I'm honestly curious if any movie has ever been made with as much baggage as Rise of Skywalker.
....Justice League?
If you mean the "TimmVerse" DCAU, that had a solid 20, starting with Batman and Superman's solo shows in the 90s and continuing through the 00s; but there hasn't been much of late (a rather poorly received adaption of "The Killing Joke" in 2016), and most of their recent animated features have been in their own continuity(s), which arguably counts as a reboot.
I wanted it to be more than "obligatory", I wanted it to be good.
And just like with TPM, for a while there I was able to persuade myself it was.
They were going in at a disadvantage though. Pay homage to the old movies, but not too much. Make sure it's fresh. But not too crazy, it has to feel like Star Wars. And you have to get everyone's favorite characters in there, but you better introduce plenty of new characters. And make sure the old characters have a fitting conclusion but definitely give the new characters room to grow and develop. And on top of all that make it an entertaining story without any major plotholes. And pay homage to the extended universe even though it's not officially canon because people are really passionate about that.
It's just so much baggage. And while I like a lot of aspects of the ST, I'm looking forward to leaving that baggage behind. Just look at the success The Mandalorian has had, given some room to breathe.
I'm really starting to think that this needed to be two movies (unlike, e.g., the Hobbit, which got split for no better reason than the studio wanting another hit of that sweet trilogy money), just to fit all of that in. And also a director whose approach to the franchise isn't, in hindsight, perfectly typified by the (second) opening sequence of ROS: frantically skipping from one visually-cluttered setpiece to the next, in great distance ignoring devouring leaps, until the poor ship arrives at its destination literally on fire.
Has any other franchise spanned 40+ years successfully without major reboots/shakeups?
I'm honestly curious if any movie has ever been made with as much baggage as Rise of Skywalker.
....Justice League?
Justice League has a longer history than Star Wars, but there's been various reboots, no? I'm not a follower of the comics so I could be wrong. But I see the all the various Batman / Superman / Wonder Woman / DCU reboots as a big difference between DC and Star Wars.
0
Options
reVerseAttack and Dethrone GodRegistered Userregular
The Fast and the Furious is about 40 years old, right?
+6
Options
KetarCome on upstairswe're having a partyRegistered Userregular
Has any other franchise spanned 40+ years successfully without major reboots/shakeups?
I'm honestly curious if any movie has ever been made with as much baggage as Rise of Skywalker.
As far as baggage, Halloween 2018?
It came out 40 years after the original Halloween. After decades worth of increasingly terrible sequels, and a misguided reboot effort (and sequel) from Rob Zombie. On paper, the idea of going back and making a direct sequel to the original Halloween while ignoring everything that had happened since sounded both good and bad, and fans had very little faith that anything good was going to come of it given how long it had been since a good Halloween movie had been made. It came with nothing but baggage.
And it made $255.5 million on a $10 million budget to become the highest-grossing slasher film of all time - breaking the record set by Scream. It was favorably reviewed by critics and widely beloved by fans, prompting the green lighting of two additional sequels.
Has any other franchise spanned 40+ years successfully without major reboots/shakeups?
I'm honestly curious if any movie has ever been made with as much baggage as Rise of Skywalker.
Depends how you define reboot or shakeup, but... James Bond?
I’d call Casino Royale a reboot/shakeup, for one, but Bond also doesn’t have a single over-arching story. It’s Bond and some of the same characters playing out different stories, but it’s not like the events of Moonraker are supposed to matter in Goldeneye.
To the original point, I don’t think any bond movie has anywhere near as much baggage as RoS did.
Yeah. It's fun, and serviceable, as the first movie of a trilogy. Gets you hopeful that the rest will be as good or better. Same as TFA.
And then comes the middle movie, and the wheels start to come off. Some weird choices are made, and the timing/pacing doesn't really work, and...
By the time you go in to watch the third, you're just doing it out of obligation and wanting it to be over.
I mean, it's fine if you feel that way about the films, but let's not pretend that's objective fact.
Personally, I feel like with the sequel trilogy, we got 2.5 great films. I enjoyed TFA, loved TLJ, and while I was disappointed with ROS, there were at least things about it I enjoyed.
It's completely okay if you didn't like them, but it feels like around the internet many are insisting that, "The sequel trilogy was bad", is the general consensus, when it really isn't. If anything, I don't think there is a general consensus.
I think TPM came with significantly higher expectations than any of the sequel movies. People were desperate for some kind of quality after the prequels. The anticipation for the prequels started from a baseline expectation of greatness - the amount of focus on the return of Star Wars and Lucas and how he was completely shaking up the VFX world again was possibly unprecedented (releasing the same year as the Matrix was a real laugh on that last front). All the talk of the Star Wars Saga and Going Back to the Beginning was omnipresent - the anticipation itself was a cultural event.
There’s a lot of weight on RoS, but I don’t think they started claiming it was the end of some kind of momentous thing until months out from release. Maybe I’m out of the loop, but it never felt like that mania took hold.
Edit: It’s actually a little strange how much Star Wars has been overshadowed in both of its attempts at making a big splashy return. The prequels were immediately undercut by the Matrix, and by the time that franchise shit the bed, Lord of the Rings had thoroughly overtaken the prequels as the source for quality mainstream nerd material.
Then the sequels had to reckon with Game of Thrones and the MCU. It feels like for two out of three attempts at multi-year cultural dominance, Star Wars is actually kind of a miss.
I think TPM came with significantly higher expectations than any of the sequel movies. People were desperate for some kind of quality after the prequels. The anticipation for the prequels started from a baseline expectation of greatness - the amount of focus on the return of Star Wars and Lucas and how he was completely shaking up the VFX world again was possibly unprecedented (releasing the same year as the Matrix was a real laugh on that last front). All the talk of the Star Wars Saga and Going Back to the Beginning was omnipresent - the anticipation itself was a cultural event.
There’s a lot of weight on RoS, but I don’t think they started claiming it was the end of some kind of momentous thing until months out from release. Maybe I’m out of the loop, but it never felt like that mania took hold.
Edit: It’s actually a little strange how much Star Wars has been overshadowed in both of its attempts at making a big splashy return. The prequels were immediately undercut by the Matrix, and by the time that franchise shit the bed, Lord of the Rings had thoroughly overtaken the prequels as the source for quality mainstream nerd material.
Then the sequels had to reckon with Game of Thrones and the MCU. It feels like for two out of three attempts at multi-year cultural dominance, Star Wars is actually kind of a miss.
The thing is, it shouldn't have been overshadowed. It should have been able to hold its own and disloge the competition. As a franchise, Star Wars has mainstream name recognition, pop-culture penetration, and a dedicated fan base built up over decades. The Matrix and GoT had none of those things, LotR still suffered from "college required reading" syndrome, so their only real competition was the MCU, and that was only for the ST. Star Wars had everything going for it to become the movie event of our generation. Instead, the PT and ST flopped completely.
And both for the same reason actually! Both the prequel and sequel trilogies suffered from being visual spectacles without substance. What makes Star Wars great, what fuelled and nurished the growth of its fan base over two generations, has been the breath and deapth of its universe. We're talking about a world that spans the entire galaxy and thousands of years yet is detailed enough that the stripes on the pants of Han Solo in ANH have their own backstory. Both Lucas in the PT and Disney in the ST have created movies that are superficial treats but nonsensical messes if you try to look just below the surface. They are the antithesis of what made Star Wars popular, and what kept it alive for 16 years between RotJ and TPM.
+2
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
edited January 2020
The prequel trilogy actually has a lot of substance! It's just awfully executed.
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
If I'm gonna be generous, I'll say that all this talk of wrapping up the story was because they knew, at minimum, Adam and Daisy weren't gonna sign on for more films. And without either of them, what's the point of sticking around this area of the timeline?
If I'm gonna be generous, I'll say that all this talk of wrapping up the story was because they knew, at minimum, Adam and Daisy weren't gonna sign on for more films. And without either of them, what's the point of sticking around this area of the timeline?
They sure did a shit job of making me not want another film with Rey in it.
I think Star Wars has done fine as a property. It's less that it's diminshed imo and more that other nerd-adjacent popular properties have risen in the mean-time. Capturing the public imagination the way A New Hope did when it released in the modern world would be a massive jump in its cultural prominence rather then just a continuation of the status quo.
If I'm gonna be generous, I'll say that all this talk of wrapping up the story was because they knew, at minimum, Adam and Daisy weren't gonna sign on for more films. And without either of them, what's the point of sticking around this area of the timeline?
They sure did a shit job of making me not want another film with Rey in it.
I'd like to see one of her balancing the inticracies of a throuple relationship with her boyfriends.
...also, they can fight Gamorians or something.
You know what? Nanowrimo's cancelled on account of the world is stupid.
OK, you've got the rule of two; the Sith way of doing things is to have one master and one apprentice. The apprentice gets stronger while the master gets older until eventually the apprentice challenges the master and one gets killed. What happens if the apprentice never has the ambition to start shit and is comfortable being Number Two? What if the apprentice is loyal for life and doesn't do the required backstabbing to keep tradition?
Those SNL skits and the stormtrooper scene in Mandalorian have convinced me that I desperately need a comedy Star Wars. Though something more Thor: Ragnarok than pure farce.
Oh, look at that, they're talking about giving Taika Waititi a movie, this timeline isn't all bad after all.
...maybe make it a show instead, Star Wars seems to work better in longer forms.
Kamar on
+10
Options
ShadowenSnores in the morningLoserdomRegistered Userregular
OK, you've got the rule of two; the Sith way of doing things is to have one master and one apprentice. The apprentice gets stronger while the master gets older until eventually the apprentice challenges the master and one gets killed. What happens if the apprentice never has the ambition to start shit and is comfortable being Number Two? What if the apprentice is loyal for life and doesn't do the required backstabbing to keep tradition?
Generally a Sith wouldn't choose someone without that kind of ambition. However, if they did make an error of that sort, they would either kill the apprentice and start again, or make the apprentice think they were going to kill them, forcing them to make plans to defend themselves or even take the initiative.
Those SNL skits and the stormtrooper scene in Mandalorian have convinced me that I desperately need a comedy Star Wars. Though something more Thor: Ragnarok than pure farce.
Oh, look at that, they're talking about giving Taika Waititi a movie, this timeline isn't all bad after all.
...maybe make it a show instead, Star Wars seems to work better in longer forms.
I would love to see some sort of workplace comedy set around daily Stormtrooper/Empire Joe Schmoe goings on. It would probably be terrible, but I want someone to try.
The original skit got the costumes right, but the sequel had Imperial instead of First Order Stormtroopers. I would like to know the story behind where SNL gets their troopers. Do they find 501st volunteers in NYC or do they rent the suits from somewhere?
Black lives matter.
Law and Order ≠ Justice
ACNH Island Isla Cero: DA-3082-2045-4142
Captain of the SES Comptroller of the State
Those SNL skits and the stormtrooper scene in Mandalorian have convinced me that I desperately need a comedy Star Wars. Though something more Thor: Ragnarok than pure farce.
Oh, look at that, they're talking about giving Taika Waititi a movie, this timeline isn't all bad after all.
...maybe make it a show instead, Star Wars seems to work better in longer forms.
I would love to see some sort of workplace comedy set around daily Storm Trooper/Empire Joe Schmoe goings on. It would probably be terrible, but I want someone to try.
The original TROOPS was back in 1997. That's two years before TPM.
I think the mood for "ha ha, armored soldiers casually committing hilarious police brutality" has changed a bit since then. :?
OK, you've got the rule of two; the Sith way of doing things is to have one master and one apprentice. The apprentice gets stronger while the master gets older until eventually the apprentice challenges the master and one gets killed. What happens if the apprentice never has the ambition to start shit and is comfortable being Number Two? What if the apprentice is loyal for life and doesn't do the required backstabbing to keep tradition?
Everyone gets a side piece.
Master gets a side apprentice to keep his other one on his toes/worthy
Apprentice gets one because how can they be a master if they don't already have an apprentice
So it's more like the Rule of You're Lucky if There's Only Four
RedTide#1907 on Battle.net
Come Overwatch with meeeee
Posts
Also in “dont ask no questions
The endind of that with the r2 scream was perfect
I guess in comparison to TFA or TPM it looks bad, sure, but each of those were massively hyped as the first new Star Wars in a decade. Obviously Disney is trying to make Star Wars into a more prolific universe, and you'd think Star Wars fans would be into that.
With opinion pieces like this I just can't help but compare to Marvel. The MCU releases about 3 films a year and no one laments the death of the franchise when they only make a billion dollars.
Part of that is the wealth of characters and settings, so hopefully post-ST Disney will continue taking Star Wars into novel territory and we can just judge new shows/movies without 40 years of expectations weighing on them.
And if anything, Disney has shown they want the setting to be less prolific, not more. They wiped out the immense history of the EU, then let the main films keep treading water in identical territory to prior films. It's only the material outside the last few films that has shown any interest in actually expanding the setting. For anything major, Disney seems perfectly happy with tying the setting down to the same family and same handful of planets.
Nobody laments an MCU film not breaking a billion dollars because it's putting out random-ass stuff like Guardians of the Galaxy and Ant-Man alongside the big-name hero movies, then also sets a mountain of records when it releases Infinity War/Endgame to huge acclaim by both the public and critics. The MCU also (finally, now that certain assholes have been kicked out of control) doesn't struggle with having female leads in its films, instead of bowing to Internet criticism and carefully sweeping them under the rug.
There's a whole pile of reasons why the MCU is continuing to go strong and people continue to lose interest in Star Wars.
There's certainly fair criticisms of each of the new movies, I just think the suggestion that 1 film per year somehow devalues Star Wars is ridiculous in the face of every other modern franchise. The 1980s are long gone.
My point was, now that the obligatory Sequel Trilogy is done, I hope there's less vitriol around "random-ass stuff" Disney is focusing on now like The Mandalorian, Cassian Andor, and new films in new settings.
And just like with TPM, for a while there I was able to persuade myself it was.
They were going in at a disadvantage though. Pay homage to the old movies, but not too much. Make sure it's fresh. But not too crazy, it has to feel like Star Wars. And you have to get everyone's favorite characters in there, but you better introduce plenty of new characters. And make sure the old characters have a fitting conclusion but definitely give the new characters room to grow and develop. And on top of all that make it an entertaining story without any major plotholes. And pay homage to the extended universe even though it's not officially canon because people are really passionate about that.
It's just so much baggage. And while I like a lot of aspects of the ST, I'm looking forward to leaving that baggage behind. Just look at the success The Mandalorian has had, given some room to breathe.
Yeah. It's fun, and serviceable, as the first movie of a trilogy. Gets you hopeful that the rest will be as good or better. Same as TFA.
And then comes the middle movie, and the wheels start to come off. Some weird choices are made, and the timing/pacing doesn't really work, and...
By the time you go in to watch the third, you're just doing it out of obligation and wanting it to be over.
I'm honestly curious if any movie has ever been made with as much baggage as Rise of Skywalker.
....Justice League?
I see no reason to go with "it's not special anymore" or "franchise fatigue" when the review scores are right there.
If you mean the "TimmVerse" DCAU, that had a solid 20, starting with Batman and Superman's solo shows in the 90s and continuing through the 00s; but there hasn't been much of late (a rather poorly received adaption of "The Killing Joke" in 2016), and most of their recent animated features have been in their own continuity(s), which arguably counts as a reboot.
I'm really starting to think that this needed to be two movies (unlike, e.g., the Hobbit, which got split for no better reason than the studio wanting another hit of that sweet trilogy money), just to fit all of that in. And also a director whose approach to the franchise isn't, in hindsight, perfectly typified by the (second) opening sequence of ROS: frantically skipping from one visually-cluttered setpiece to the next, in great distance ignoring devouring leaps, until the poor ship arrives at its destination literally on fire.
Justice League has a longer history than Star Wars, but there's been various reboots, no? I'm not a follower of the comics so I could be wrong. But I see the all the various Batman / Superman / Wonder Woman / DCU reboots as a big difference between DC and Star Wars.
As far as baggage, Halloween 2018?
It came out 40 years after the original Halloween. After decades worth of increasingly terrible sequels, and a misguided reboot effort (and sequel) from Rob Zombie. On paper, the idea of going back and making a direct sequel to the original Halloween while ignoring everything that had happened since sounded both good and bad, and fans had very little faith that anything good was going to come of it given how long it had been since a good Halloween movie had been made. It came with nothing but baggage.
And it made $255.5 million on a $10 million budget to become the highest-grossing slasher film of all time - breaking the record set by Scream. It was favorably reviewed by critics and widely beloved by fans, prompting the green lighting of two additional sequels.
Depends how you define reboot or shakeup, but... James Bond?
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
I’d call Casino Royale a reboot/shakeup, for one, but Bond also doesn’t have a single over-arching story. It’s Bond and some of the same characters playing out different stories, but it’s not like the events of Moonraker are supposed to matter in Goldeneye.
To the original point, I don’t think any bond movie has anywhere near as much baggage as RoS did.
I mean, it's fine if you feel that way about the films, but let's not pretend that's objective fact.
Personally, I feel like with the sequel trilogy, we got 2.5 great films. I enjoyed TFA, loved TLJ, and while I was disappointed with ROS, there were at least things about it I enjoyed.
It's completely okay if you didn't like them, but it feels like around the internet many are insisting that, "The sequel trilogy was bad", is the general consensus, when it really isn't. If anything, I don't think there is a general consensus.
There’s a lot of weight on RoS, but I don’t think they started claiming it was the end of some kind of momentous thing until months out from release. Maybe I’m out of the loop, but it never felt like that mania took hold.
Edit: It’s actually a little strange how much Star Wars has been overshadowed in both of its attempts at making a big splashy return. The prequels were immediately undercut by the Matrix, and by the time that franchise shit the bed, Lord of the Rings had thoroughly overtaken the prequels as the source for quality mainstream nerd material.
Then the sequels had to reckon with Game of Thrones and the MCU. It feels like for two out of three attempts at multi-year cultural dominance, Star Wars is actually kind of a miss.
The thing is, it shouldn't have been overshadowed. It should have been able to hold its own and disloge the competition. As a franchise, Star Wars has mainstream name recognition, pop-culture penetration, and a dedicated fan base built up over decades. The Matrix and GoT had none of those things, LotR still suffered from "college required reading" syndrome, so their only real competition was the MCU, and that was only for the ST. Star Wars had everything going for it to become the movie event of our generation. Instead, the PT and ST flopped completely.
And both for the same reason actually! Both the prequel and sequel trilogies suffered from being visual spectacles without substance. What makes Star Wars great, what fuelled and nurished the growth of its fan base over two generations, has been the breath and deapth of its universe. We're talking about a world that spans the entire galaxy and thousands of years yet is detailed enough that the stripes on the pants of Han Solo in ANH have their own backstory. Both Lucas in the PT and Disney in the ST have created movies that are superficial treats but nonsensical messes if you try to look just below the surface. They are the antithesis of what made Star Wars popular, and what kept it alive for 16 years between RotJ and TPM.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
They sure did a shit job of making me not want another film with Rey in it.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
Adam Driver plays this role so well. He’s just delightfully awkward while trying to make Kylo act “normal”.
Here’s the first one in case you missed it.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
I'd like to see one of her balancing the inticracies of a throuple relationship with her boyfriends.
...also, they can fight Gamorians or something.
Oh, look at that, they're talking about giving Taika Waititi a movie, this timeline isn't all bad after all.
...maybe make it a show instead, Star Wars seems to work better in longer forms.
Generally a Sith wouldn't choose someone without that kind of ambition. However, if they did make an error of that sort, they would either kill the apprentice and start again, or make the apprentice think they were going to kill them, forcing them to make plans to defend themselves or even take the initiative.
I would love to see some sort of workplace comedy set around daily Stormtrooper/Empire Joe Schmoe goings on. It would probably be terrible, but I want someone to try.
Law and Order ≠ Justice
ACNH Island Isla Cero: DA-3082-2045-4142
Captain of the SES Comptroller of the State
The original TROOPS was back in 1997. That's two years before TPM.
I think the mood for "ha ha, armored soldiers casually committing hilarious police brutality" has changed a bit since then. :?
Everyone gets a side piece.
Master gets a side apprentice to keep his other one on his toes/worthy
Apprentice gets one because how can they be a master if they don't already have an apprentice
So it's more like the Rule of You're Lucky if There's Only Four
Come Overwatch with meeeee