Villains revealed?

[Cainhurst Crow]

I'd like the Sith to be present but not the main focus of the movie.

I'd rather we see a admiral or moff be one of the main bads tbh. Show off some imperial commanding and maybe make the guy not just generic bad guy but just a skilled solider who was on the wrong side of the war. Maybe a star wars equivalent of Erwin Rommel.

 

[Cortan]

I'd rather we see a admiral or moff be one of the main bads tbh. Show off some imperial commanding and maybe make the guy not just generic bad guy but just a skilled solider who was on the wrong side of the war. Maybe a star wars equivalent of Erwin Rommel.

His first line would be:

"Ackbar you magnificent bastard, I READ YOUR BOOK!"

 

[Kaeb]

I like the idea of there not being two different kinds, that the Force is just the Force and Sith are simply force users who delve too deep and lose themselves/are consumed by the power like a drug.

If the Jedi are performance enhancing drug using Samurai Cowboys, then the Sith are crazed Meth heads who are armed and dangerous.

 

[Miz]

I'd rather we see a admiral or moff be one of the main bads tbh. Show off some imperial commanding and maybe make the guy not just generic bad guy but just a skilled solider who was on the wrong side of the war. Maybe a star wars equivalent of Erwin Rommel.

I'd prefer a Jedi screwing up at some point in time causing a huge shit storm, then eventually have to make amends.

 

[Brandon Rhea]

Meh.

I liked the notion of other writers and creators coming to make their own ideas with an established work, it's thanks to that prospect that a lot of people drew some not terrible ideas and stories out of shitty ideas and stories.

The Sith as an idea is one of them. Changing the Jedi from wandering and diversely mythical cowboy Samurai, into all of them being white hat monastic monks, who do nothing but exclusively fight angry dudes who wear all black and wield red lightsabers was awful. Complicating the Sith and making them more interesting with more engaging back stories, if they absolutely must be used going forward, is something that needs to happen.

Give me a pale Sith lady who wears all white and wields a white lightsaber, who uses the Force to stop people's hearts from beating and whose main goal is to find her lost child or something, give me something different.

I don't think Boli is saying that the Sith can't be new. In fact, he's said before that he also thinks the Sith, as generally depicted in canon, are boring. His point was more in response to how Martha said that Sith can be heroes too, which is meh.

 

[Green Ranger]

I don't think Boli is saying that the Sith can't be new. In fact, he's said before that he also thinks the Sith, as generally depicted in canon, are boring. His point was more in response to how Martha said that Sith can be heroes too, which is meh.

I also find the idea of making the greater Sith ideal sympathetic or misunderstood laughable tbh. The bad guys are the bad guys are the bad guys. Any attempts to somehow pretend that murdering each other for personal gain is somehow a noble aspiration, is pretty ****ing stupid, and I've always had issue with people who think the Sith are somehow good or worth idolization.

I mean sure, if you want to make a Sith character with relateability and a bit of moral ambiguity, that's a different story. But it's pretty clear the Legends Sith philosophies were pretty ****ing evil and not something to be emulated or respected.

 

[Marf]

I get that you have your whole different take on the Sith and this whole angle of, 'they're really not all that bad you guys,' but thankfully Disney has come along and trashed all the EU nonsense around Sith. So we're left with a back to basics approach. Sith = Dark side = evil douchebags. All those piss-poor attempts to try to make them anti-heroes or sympathetic in their own right is thankfully washed away. All we know is they're evil, they're dicks, and they willingly embrace the dark side which is categorically and unarguably evil.

All this stuff about the Sith being sympathetic or somehow noble in their aspirations is, frankly, blatant fanboyism and blind idolisation, and I'm glad it's non-canon. It was a joke to begin with.

I also find the idea of making the greater Sith ideal sympathetic or misunderstood laughable tbh. The bad guys are the bad guys are the bad guys. Any attempts to somehow pretend that murdering each other for personal gain is somehow a noble aspiration, is pretty ****ing stupid, and I've always had issue with people who think the Sith are somehow good or worth idolization.

I mean sure, if you want to make a Sith character with relateability and a bit of moral ambiguity, that's a different story. But it's pretty clear the Legends Sith philosophies were pretty ****ing evil and not something to be emulated or respected.

My view on the Sith is not that they are good or moralistic. As many of you know, I actually prefer the brutal, immoral and darker kinds. My view on the Sith is not that they are heroes or villains, but that they are diverse and that they, or any large society or culture, should not be depicted as "evil" or "good" as a whole. It is a shallow, unrealistic generalization. What I meant was, the Sith as a whole aren't heroes, but it is possible for an individual Sith to be. This is the reason why I greatly dislike the Darth Bane and the Rule of Two era, because there are so few Sith it disallows for diversity among Sith characters. There are hundreds and hundreds of angles and archetypes a Sith character can be written as.

While I do adore cruel, amoral and dark Sith, I also appreciate Sith with degrees of compassion and kindness just as much. Both of which can have equal levels of complexity and originality. I will also point out that making a character sympathetic is not about making them moralistic and nice. Dark characters can attain just as much sympathy from the audience as lighter characters or "heroes". Hannibal Lecter is one well-known example that instantly comes to mind. The audience is absolutely gripped and enthralled by his charm and manner and they actually want him to escape in the end. You cannot categorize a character like that as evil or good.

What I find most interesting about both the Sith and Jedi philosophies is that they each have their own core faults. While the Jedi philosophy is contradictory the negative emotions and passion which are just a part of human nature. The Sith philosophy has the opposite problem, in that they encourage extreme levels of selfishness, which of course leads to infighting and self-destruction. The other major fault of the Sith philosophy is the idea of attaining perfection, as perfection is something that is physically impossible for anyone to attain. Even the most villainous and powerful Sith Lord is still a person, he still possesses all the normal, unavoidable traits and faults that every human being does.

One thing I find quite amusing is the idea of "evil" in Star Wars, or in most action films or comic books. In the real world, human beings do abhorrent things to one another which make the act of destroying a planet seem totally comical. The acts of "evil" the Sith commit in canon cannot be compared to the atrocious and repulsive crimes committed in the real world, very often by everyday human beings. Many of the things I am referring to would never be depicted in Star Wars canon due to its family audience, but I'm just trying to put things in perspective.

The Sith philosophy teaches that conflict, primal instinct, selfish desires and negative emotion are core parts of human nature (which they are) and that instead of being avoided or repressed, they should be used and embraced to improve ones' self. I legitimately cannot understand for the life of me how that can be called evil. It is certainly dark and morally questionable, but that's why it is so exotic and intriguing. Again, going back to my previous comments, it isn't the greater Sith ideal which is good or evil, but the individual Sith who follow it. Many of which might not want kill their brethren in order to further their goals, many of course have no issue with doing so, but only if it really benefits them, whereas there are those who are totally out of control.

The Sith as an idea is one of them. Changing the Jedi from wandering and diversely mythical cowboy Samurai, into all of them being white hat monastic monks, who do nothing but exclusively fight angry dudes who wear all black and wield red lightsabers was awful. Complicating the Sith and making them more interesting with more engaging back stories, if they absolutely must be used going forward, is something that needs to happen.

Give me a pale Sith lady who wears all white and wields a white lightsaber, who uses the Force to stop people's hearts from beating and whose main goal is to find her lost child or something, give me something different.

This. Though I actually would like to have the character maintain some stereotypical and recognizable Sith aesthetics, like the uniform robes and red lightsaber. That way, we are still in touch with the fact the character is in fact Sith. Actually Kaeb, your idea reminds just a little of SWRP's own Andraste, who fell to the Dark Side after she lost her child. To me, she was an oppressed woman who faced every mother's greatest fear, her only source of warmth and love was taken from her. When she killed her husband, she broke her chains, got revenge and empowered herself. To me, that is a very sympathetic character.

I like the idea of there not being two different kinds, that the Force is just the Force and Sith are simply force users who delve too deep and lose themselves/are consumed by the power like a drug.

I agree, though what I would like is the idea of the Light Side and the Dark Side not being categorized and good and evil, but each just as a natural part of the force. Both of which are necessary for maintaining balance. The Jedi and Sith fail to recognize this and one is attempting to destroy the other. They don't realize that they need the Light and the Dark and will upset the balance of the Force and inevitably self-destruct by wiping each other out. The Jedi want to save the galaxy from the Dark Side without realizing that the Dark Side is just a normal part of existence. The Sith on the other hand believe that the Dark Side is more relevant to human nature and fail to realize that the Light Side is just as important aswell.

If the Jedi are performance enhancing drug using Samurai Cowboys, then the Sith are crazed Meth heads who are armed and dangerous.

I do love me some drug-addicted, hedonistic Sith.

 

[Green Ranger]

My view on the Sith is not that they are good or moralistic. As many of you know, I actually prefer the brutal, immoral and darker kinds. My view on the Sith is not that they are heroes or villains, but that they are diverse and that they, or any large society or culture, should not be depicted as "evil" or "good" as a whole. It is a shallow, unrealistic generalization. What I meant was, the Sith as a whole aren't heroes, but it is possible for an individual Sith to be. This is the reason why I greatly dislike the Darth Bane and the Rule of Two era, because there are so few Sith it disallows for diversity among Sith characters. There are hundreds and hundreds of angles and archetypes a Sith character can be written as.

Except the Sith, at least in terms of canon, aren't a large organization. Whether or not you like the Rule of Two, it's a huge part of canon that needs to be factored in to this argument. The Rule of Two in fact ensures that questions of morality aren't a factor amongst Sith for the past millenium at least - any Sith that balked at their duty or refused to kill their master would be killed and replaced. There's no if, ands or buts about this. Contemporary Sith in the time of the movies and for a millenia beforehand have had to be evil, selfish and ambitious, as defined by their own strict teachings. And we know nothing of the pre-Bane Sith in canon, so any argument there is pure speculation.

While I do adore cruel, amoral and dark Sith, I also appreciate Sith with degrees of compassion and kindness just as much. Both of which can have equal levels of complexity and originality. I will also point out that making a character sympathetic is not about making them moralistic and nice. Dark characters can attain just as much sympathy from the audience as lighter characters or "heroes". Hannibal Lecter is one well-known example that instantly comes to mind. The audience is absolutely gripped and enthralled by his charm and manner and they actually want him to escape in the end. You cannot categorize a character like that as evil or good.

You're joking right? Of course Hannibal Lector is evil. Just because we find the character charismatic, relateable and/or sympathetic in some way doesn't change the fact that they are a ****ing nasty piece of work. You're allowed to root for the bad guy, but they're still a bad guy. It's a matter of perspective. I wasn't arguing against giving an individual character a relateable/sympathetic angle, I was arguing against the notion that the greater Legends Sith idealogy is somehow noble or worthy of praise. It isn't.

What I find most interesting about both the Sith and Jedi philosophies is that they each have their own core faults. While the Jedi philosophy is contradictory the negative emotions and passion which are just a part of human nature. The Sith philosophy has the opposite problem, in that they encourage extreme levels of selfishness, which of course leads to infighting and self-destruction. The other major fault of the Sith philosophy is the idea of attaining perfection, as perfection is something that is physically impossible for anyone to attain. Even the most villainous and powerful Sith Lord is still a person, he still possesses all the normal, unavoidable traits and faults that every human being does.

Since this is all (in terms of the Sith) pretty much Legends philosophy now, there's not much point in me commenting on this. There's actually not a huge amount of Sith idealogy/philosophy that's canon anymore, so there's an interesting potential here for massive parts of it to be rewritten - even down to the core values.

One thing I find quite amusing is the idea of "evil" in Star Wars, or in most action films or comic books. In the real world, human beings do abhorrent things to one another which make the act of destroying a planet seem totally comical. The acts of "evil" the Sith commit in canon cannot be compared to the atrocious and repulsive crimes committed in the real world, very often by everyday human beings. Many of the things I am referring to would never be depicted in Star Wars canon due to its family audience, but I'm just trying to put things in perspective.

Just because you can imagine something worse doesn't make Sith ideals any less evil. That just means that you can imagine something worse. Ratings and target audience are also a factor. There's really nothing else for me to say on this particular point, considering it's not really an argument for anything.

The Sith philosophy teaches that conflict, primal instinct, selfish desires and negative emotion are core parts of human nature (which they are) and that instead of being avoided or repressed, they should be used and embraced to improve ones' self. I legitimately cannot understand for the life of me how that can be called evil. It is certainly dark and morally questionable, but that's why it is so exotic and intriguing. Again, going back to my previous comments, it isn't the greater Sith ideal which is good or evil, but the individual Sith who follow it. Many of which might not want kill their brethren in order to further their goals, many of course have no issue with doing so, but only if it really benefits them, whereas there are those who are totally out of control.

Sith Philosophy also teaches -and highly values - use of dark powers which inherently corrupt the individual, murder, torture, cruelty and a complete disregard for sentient life, amongst other things. If you want to cherry-pick aspects of the philosophy and then try to argue that you 'cannot understand for the life of me how that can be called evil' by ignoring the bits that make it bad, then I seriously question your judgement.

This. Though I actually would like to have the character maintain some stereotypical and recognizable Sith aesthetics, like the uniform robes and red lightsaber. That way, we are still in touch with the fact the character is in fact Sith. Actually Kaeb, your idea reminds just a little of SWRP's own Andraste, who fell to the Dark Side after she lost her child. To me, she was an oppressed woman who faced every mother's greatest fear, her only source of warmth and love was taken from her. When she killed her husband, she broke her chains, got revenge and empowered herself. To me, that is a very sympathetic character.

Which, again, makes her a sympathetic character...but she's still evil. Look at Coruscant, or the invasion of the core, or the torture against Ebberla Daw, or a myriad of other instances. Sure, there are sympathetic aspects about her that give her more dimension, but that doesn't mean her actions are justified or in any way noble or right.

 

[Brandon Rhea]

Which, again, makes her a sympathetic character...but she's still evil. Look at Coruscant, or the invasion of the core, or the torture against Ebberla Daw, or a myriad of other instances. Sure, there are sympathetic aspects about her that give her more dimension, but that doesn't mean her actions are justified or in any way noble or right.

Indeed. Sreeya will attest to how downright evil Andraste is as well.

It's the same thing with Darth Vader. He's sympathetic, but it doesn't change the fact that he's evil until the end.

 

[Andrewza]

Agreed. Just because a bad guy has some good in him does not change the fact he is evil. No one is truly that evil. And yes bad guys with emostion such has love are intristing. But if a evil ruler bent on rulling the world and is willing to sacrfice inocent children to achieve this goal stil loves his own kids, it will not change that he killed others.


And yes it is nice to see how a bad guy became bad. And the OT did that and it makes darthh vader all the more a intristing charater.

I will all so add that if a sith changes his way and becomes good he is no longer a sith. He is now a Jedi. Thus when darth killed the emporia he was no longer darth vader but ankhin.


So a sith can not be a hero or anti hero. A sith is a bad guy.

 

[Brandon Rhea]

A Sith can't be a hero, but I disagree with the idea that they can't be an anti-hero. You can easily write a story where a Sith is still evil but his/her goals align with the Jedi, or whoever the good guys are in the story. It doesn't mean they're on the same side in the long-run, but they can be aligned with the heroes and work towards common goals if those common goals exist.

Crowley from Supernatural is a good example of this. He's a demon, the King of Hell, but he often works with the Winchesters because their goals often align with one another. There's often some other villain who poses a threat to not only Sam and Dean but to Crowley as well. Crowley can be an anti-hero in that scenario, but he's still evil.

 

[Marf]

This is clearly a matter of perspective and personal opinion, so I'm not going to reply to each of Boli's individual responses. Ragnos, Vitiate and Sidious are the only three Sith I would describe as evil. To me, the definition of an evil character is not that they simply commit atrocities, but that they are totally devoid of humanity. Apart from the three Sith I just mentioned, none of them in my mind fit that description and still retained degrees of humanity. By humanity I mean things like, the ability to feel love, fear and remorse, emotional conflict, to even just to sit down and have a nice conversation with someone without attacking them. Which is why I take back my comment about Hannibal Lecter, as he was indeed, a character devoid of humanity.

As a person with autistic psychopathy, my own IRL perception of morality and right and wrong, is distorted. (It's also why I almost never engage in debates and I apologise if I've said anything that sounds moronic). I don't see Andraste as an evil woman, I admire her as someone who rose from nothing to attain power, command respect and crush her foes. I often wish that I had the ruthlessness and lack of morals to do the same. Of course, I don't, and I never will. I would LOVE to be able to channel all my emotional instability and agony into awesome telekinetic powers and rid myself of weakness. That's what I want to do, I don't care about peace and justice or defending the galaxy from evil. That is why I find the Sith inspirational, more so than the Jedi.

I also take back what I said about a Sith character being a hero. In a story compromised of only Sith characters, where there are Sith antagonists and protagonists and they are all against one another, it is possible. In a story where the Jedi are the protagonists, it is not. They can definitely be an anti-hero though.

 

[Andrewza]

Good point Brandon

 

[Cainhurst Crow]

To add to the inhuman sith list, Malice, there's Darth Jadus, who is both awesome and devoid of any humanity. I think however, at least in the old canon, the dark side fo the force erodes away at your humanity the more you delve into it. Most of the sith who have been most powerful or in positions of power are described as having no human emotions or humanity to them anymore, just cold and unfeeling malevolence. Darth Marr, one of the sith from the old republic series I've seen a lot of people praise as being close to a "good sith" because of his concern for the empire, has been left essentially a emotionless machine for the state through his immersion in the dark side, whose only concern was serving the empire.

And thats the thing I never really got about the dark side, as it was depicted in earlier works. Its all about emotions, and using them as fuel for power, and having them be unbridled and all that other stuff, but most of the super powerful sith seem to have completely gotten rid of their emotions all together, being just completely cold sociopaths. Its always been a bit weird in my opinion.

 

[Sess]

Selfishness really seems to be the root of 'evil.' An individual who goes through emotional upheaval and becomes 'evil' as a result, to me just seems selfish enough to act as if their pain entitles them to disregard the value of sentient life, and different points of view. I think any 'rulings' on the matter can be factual to a very small degree like how the green power ranger implied multiple times that things were 'evil' as if it were fact. I think by definition, yeah they are, but not to everyone's sensibilities. Everyone's own sensibilities is what is going to matter to them in the end, especially if they lack the capacity to truly objectively assess another's perspective as valid. I.E. you're thinking of an argument as you read, its NOT really getting through to you, and if you're going to tell me otherwise, you may have some issues of your own. Aside from that the selfishness that I personally think causes all Sith to rationalize their behavior, or to abandon rationality is the same thing that makes people feel they have the right to treat others as they please when they're depressed, annoyed, stressed etc.

Similarly, I think the Jedi possess a selfishness that enables them to rationalize *not* intervening in things (though we fixed that with the NJO here, right?) It lets them stand by and not do things, in contrast to the Sith who do things even when they shouldn't (subjectively, therefore making themselves evil, and giving them something to work with.) I would say the 'evil' of the Jedi is that they don't do things when they could, or should. Especially when it comes to grey areas, they just avoid it altogether. To me personally that gives a sense that they are above the issues at hand, and their 'wisdom' lets them turn away the hand that would reach out to them. Things like letting innocents die in order to save more to me are moral compromises, which they should strive to never make (as I'm sure they do,) but the attitude they adopt because of their teachings seems like some forced introspection in order to gain wisdom. The wisdom comes in time, with reflective meditation on the incidents or issues, just like the passion, hate, and anger comes in time for the Sith who are forced to commit acts of atrocity. Do you see where I'm going with this?

Well, I think at the pinnacle of both sides of the light and dark spectrum they can achieve a degree of understanding that transcends our innate sensibilities. I think at the height of understanding of the Light, and Dark side the two masters would be very much alike. Maybe even becoming hermits, spending their time trying to find an end-all solution to each of their respective issues, which I think would be to eliminate human selfishness, or at least the drawbacks that come with it, then power could be perfected. I also feel that the 'middle path' is always the superior option.. its never the strongest in either direction, but neither is it the weakest. Luke is my favorite character in the series because I *heard* he fell to the dark side, and came back. I never read into it or anything, I just like the idea. Revan was also a favorite of mine, but I thought he looked dumb in SWTOR and his lines were lame as hell so I kinda shrugged at him, but walking both paths, however slowly is probably the best, and most complete way to find yourself IMHO, and in turn others. This turned out a little longer than I wanted and I'm not as articulate as some others around here (which by the way makes your posts beautiful to read,) so please excuse me if my points are stretched a bit thin, my lexicon is smallish.

 

[Marf]

Exactly. It is normal to be selfish at times, to feel hatred or anger.

I do agree with your last post aswell, Sess. Sith definitely take out what ever emotional turmoil they're feeling on others. Though a good Sith does control his emotions and uses them efficiently, unleashing them in combat. It's more positive and optimistic than say, taking out your anger on yourself, which is the extreme opposite and is why repressing one's negative emotions as the Jedi do, is actually potentially dangerous.

I agree with you too, Bronitarian. Sith certainly lose their humanity and morality as they grow in power and use of the Dark Side. Which is why I have major issues with teenage Acolytes behaving like 50 year old Darths. Jadus and Marr were kids once.

(which by the way makes your posts beautiful to read,)

D'aww.

 

[Venom]

Because of what's been said I realised that I'm surprisingly really happy about some of the return to a more strictly "good guy" jedi group. A lot of the EU shit on them was making them into almost bad guys.(Having them commit genocide) And while I usually prefer a gray vs darker gray morality system, it's not really very fitting for starwars. As a side note, not really sure how Dooku is an evil person at all.

 

[Sess]

Because of what's been said I realised that I'm surprisingly really happy about some of the return to a more strictly "good guy" jedi group. A lot of the EU shit on them was making them into almost bad guys.(Having them commit genocide) And while I usually prefer a gray vs darker gray morality system, it's not really very fitting for starwars. As a side note, not really sure how Dooku is an evil person at all.

He seems like a corrupt politican to me, Self-serving, not to mention the guy he does play lackey to is the supreme authority on killing, manipulation, and torture in the known galaxy.

 

[Brandon Rhea]

Dooku is evil, but he's the kind of evil who, even if it's in a small way, was doing those things for somewhat good intentions. Based on what we know of him, he did seem to genuinely want to rid the galaxy of the corruption in the Republic.

 

[Andrewza]

To me dooku is evil. He may have had good intenstions but his methods made him evil. Even Vader had good intenstions and I all so realy think that if Luke joined vader in besbin vader would have (or tried to) kill the emporia.

All so Vader is for me why the Jedi are so inactive. I think the Jedi fear that if they try to impose there will on people, that it will make them no better than the evil they wish to destoy.