he looks to be more vicious and scary than darth sidious...so why???!!! they could have switched places instead...
Dec 11, 2007 12:12 AM | Report Abuse reply
dono... maybe they wanted to keep him only for episode 1... and... the emperor was dark mauls master so...
Dec 11, 2007 4:16 AM | Report Abuse reply
No, they wouldn't have switched their places.
But I wonder how Obiwan can kill Maul and loose against Dooku several years later...
Dec 11, 2007 5:49 AM | Report Abuse reply
what are you guys...goofy? maul is killed to make way for anakin
Dec 11, 2007 9:59 AM | Report Abuse reply
The fact that Darth Maul looks like a badass doesn't mean that he's necessarily the best fighter. And Dooku was supposedly an experienced Jedi Master before he became Sith (although Lucas neglected to explain his story).
In any case, Royazex is right. Maul had to die both to make way for anakin and to give Obi-Wan the chance to prove his worth independantly of Qui-Gon.
Dec 11, 2007 10:10 AM | Report Abuse reply
maul was just a small part in palpatines plan. obi-wan was origanaly soposed to be palpatines aprentice (in his plan, but then it changed as we all know) so i think sending maul to fight obi-wan and qui-gon was to make obi-wan tap into his dark side. which i think he did a little after maul killed qui-gon
Dec 11, 2007 12:13 PM | Report Abuse reply
I think Maul was meant to be Palpatine's apprentice all along and was an unfortunate set back when he learned of his demise especially by the hand of a padawan. I believe it was after Palpatine first met Anakin on Naboo for Qui-Gon's funeral that he sensed how powerful Anakin would and could become. Then he put in motion for his plans to eventually turn him to the dark side and only Dooku was a pawn in his overall plan.
Dec 11, 2007 4:32 PM | Report Abuse reply
Well the producers got a evil guy to create some more fan base for EP I. He died the same reason that Jango died. We need to have some cool side stories, but ultimately it's about Anakin.
Dec 11, 2007 11:18 PM | Report Abuse reply
Also, it is important to note that it is very important for the good guys to have some sort of real victory in Episode 1. It wouldn't have been very satisfying if the primary bad guy got away.
Darth Maul's role, in terms of the story, was to take away Qui-gong Jin so that Obiwan would have to become the master and would take Anakin on as an apprentice when Obiwan was clearly too green to be ready for that task.
In fact, this was eluded to in the original trilogy-- in Return of the Jedi Obiwan says that he wasn't ready to have taught another Jedi and blames himself for Vader having gone astray.
So Quigong was meant to demonstrate that an older, wiser jedi would have seen there was a fundamental problem with Anakin, even if teaching him was still somewhat tempting, while Obiwan without that guidance was to make the mistake.
Now, granted, both Darth Maul and Jango Fett were very good characters (even Grievous was to some degree) and it would have been nice to have gotten to see them interacting with one another, it was a side effect of someone having put a lot of work into what was ultimately simply a plot device character.
You have the same thing in the original trilogies too. Look how little Tarkin, Boba Fetta and Jabba do before they die (okay, technically Boba Fett is considered to have survived being eaten alive by a giant pit monster because more people wanted to write stories about him, but that aside... that was still his 'death' in the movies.) Of course, on the flip side, Vader is a string to the evil Empire that helps link the movies together and you really don't get that in the prequils. You barely even see Darth Sidious in the first movie and though fans already knew that Palpatine was the bad guy (actually, I knew fans who insisted that Sidious and Palpatine weren't the same person after the first one, so maybe it wasn't that obvious), he just doesn't have the forefront role of 'evil force to be overcome' that Vader held. Thus the prequils come off as too 'good guy' centered.
Of course, what others said is right-- ultimately Star Wars was just about Anakin and the prequils supported that.
That said, Grand Moff Tarkin, Boba Fett, Jabba the Hutt, Darth Maul, Count Dooku, Jango Fett and General Grevious were all very nicely done characters for 1-movie (or 2 half movie) villains.
Dec 11, 2007 11:37 PM | Report Abuse reply
Grand Moff Tarkin was a great character. He was major although he only appeared in one movie. Although we didn't know much about him, good writing and acting allowed him to be very strongly established as a character. Especially the fact that he was superior to Vader and destroyed Alderaan. It is regretable that he was not developed in the prequels even a little.
Bobba Fett was basically a plot device. Except that he is the bounty hunter that actually catches Solo, we don't know much about him. But looking cool made him popular with the fans, so in Attack of the Clones his origin was explored. I personally found it underwhelming.
Jabba the Hutt appeared only briefly in ROTJ, but he was so well designed that his presence at a character was very well established. Also, although he does not apear (originally) until ROTJ, he is refered to and he influences the story from early on, which contributes to the strength of his character.
Darth Maul looked really cool. He should have been a major character at least on par with Tarkin, in the sense that he was the main representative of the Sith in the first movie. Unfortunately he was not established as strongly as he could have been.
Count Dooku was extremely underwhelming. He was supposedly not oly a Sith apprentice but also a former Jedi Master. His story should have been very intriguing. Mace Wyndu's reference to him as an idealist and his own statements raise a lot of interesting questions. But in reality his presence in AOTC was marginal. He popped up out of nowhere in the last third of the movie and had few noticeable characteristics. It was also weird for me that Palpatine was able to corrupt a full Jedi Master at this stage. It cheapens the acheivement of corrupting Anakin.
Jango Fett's battle with Obi Wan was great, but aside from that I didn't really get him. Like I said, I found him disappointing as an explanation for Bobba Fett. That's it, the man behind the mask is just a New Zeelandi guy, and Bobba Fett is his child-clone? That's it.
General Grievous also looked cool, but he could also have used some more characterization. I liked his potential more than the actual character.
Dec 12, 2007 10:21 AM | Report Abuse reply
Hobgoblyn makes excellent points. Personally I think that Sidious meant for Maul to die around TPM, if not necessarily by Obi-Wan's hand--it certainly would have been good if Anakin would have been left Masterless. But this begs the question of whether Sidious knew Anakin was alive at this time, which begs the question of whether Plageus created Anakin, which hasn't been resolved. (Has it?) Sidious would certainly have liked if Maul survived and got Padme to sign the treaty by taking her to the Neimoidians and keeping her there. But I think that Maul was a stand-in for the apprentice Sidious knew he would need to have to manage the galaxy. Dooku could have been that apprentice, but his age and honor code worked against him. Grievous was much like Maul,a killing machine. Anakin fit the mold perfectly.
Dec 12, 2007 5:58 PM | Report Abuse reply
Maul was the apprentice, he wasn't just a fill-in. Palpatine was shocked when Maul was killed by a Padawan. Palps called it bad luck and a small set-back. He wasn't worried because he knew there would be a new apprentice.
Dec 13, 2007 7:09 AM | Report Abuse reply
It would have been cool to see Darth Maul live till "Attack of the Clones" and have Anakin kill him. The dark lord would be most impressed.
Dec 13, 2007 4:05 PM | Report Abuse reply
Well, Jabba's lack of appearance in films earlier than Jedi could be written up to the same reason why Biggs Darklighter wasn't a MUCH more central character 'originally'. Despite what was in the original script, what got shot and what the actual story contained, what was left after the final edits of cutting it down to the needed time had a few pieces 'missing' and, if one was paying close attention to the movie, they might have found the missing pieces a bit confusing.
Of course, Lucas did go back and tried to put back in what was lost, but in the process he also decided to go off in other directions and change some things that might not needed have been changed. This seemed to upset a lot of people. But, seriously, I can't imagine a serious arguement posited against the concept of having made a 'director's cut' of the original Star Wars that put the three scenes Biggs was supposed to be in so that Luke's reaction at his death made more sense or Jabba's meeting with Han that explained what was going on better than you get from Han just randomly shooting some alien guy in a bar.
Of course, had they put Jabba in the first movie he wouldn't have been anything like he was when he did appear. His design would have been entirely different, in fact I believe he would have simply been just a fat human.
As for what Sidious actually planned for Darth Maul, that can only be guessed at. It makes no sense that he would have sent Darth Maul traversing across the galaxy after Padme and the Jedi if he had not been planning on Darth Maul ever winning. There is no reason to suspect that Palpatine had any idea Anakin existed or any plans for him at such a time either. After all, it would have been all too easy for Palpatine to just go to Tatooine, buy Anakin off the junk dealer and lure him away with wonderous tales. It would have been far more reliable, cost-effective and worthwhile.
So, clearly, at least initially, Sidious's plan was for Padme to die and for him to be left in charge of the planet. However, as things progressed he was able to set his sights higher than a meer planet and plot the overthrow of the entire galaxy.
But, still, I think for things to have worked out best for Sidious, Darth Maul would have killed the Jedi even once they made it back to Tattooine, the Trade Federation would have taken over the planet and eliminated anyone who might suspect his betrayal and, following that, he'd be able to go before the Galactic summit and play the victim from a small ravaged homeworld and been able to take on the role of hero using his enemies as martyrs for his own cause.
However, if the bad guys had totally won in movie 1 it wouldn't have been very satifying. The first movie had to go to the good guys, the next two could be won by the bad guys (#2 might be considered a 'draw' really).
Dec 13, 2007 10:55 PM | Report Abuse reply
I think Jabba's absence from the earlier movies ended up being a good thing from a story telling point of view. However, after all these years it is difficult for me to tell if the reasons why Han was being hunted down were not clear enough because there was no scene with Jabba. The missing part with Biggs is weird but not significant to the story as a whole.
Hobgoblyn is right. It is unlikely that Palpatine knew about Anakin or was planning for Maul to fail. But in general I think that the relationship between a sith master and apprentice is such that the master views the apprentice as a valuable tool for his (or her) purposes, but an expendable one. I also think the master also knows that the apprentice hates the master, and that he (the apprentice) is always dreaming of the day in which he will free himself from the master's thrall and replace him as master. So the Sith master is always shopping around to replace his apprentice before he is replaced, with a better and more pliable apprentice. It would have been very convenient for Palpatine to replace Vader with Luke (somebody should write a what if book; somebody should also write a Darth Sidious trilogy: ' the Apprenticeship of Darth Sidious' , 'the Apprentices of Darth Sidious', and 'the Last apprentice of Darth Sidious'.)
Palpatine's plans in Phantom Menace was another example of sloppy writing on Lucas's part. But had it been elaborated I think it would have resembled what Hobgoblyn says. It would have bben something like that:
1) Palpatine wants to concentrate all the powers in the hands of the Chancellor, so he is interested in making the Jedi, the Senate and the planetary governments seem impotent.
2) Padme sees the Republic as an alliance of independent planets. By liberating her own planet on her own she put a setback in Palpatine's plans. He had to wait several more years before he could manufacture a kind of threat that would cause the senate to hand him the powers he wanted.
Dec 14, 2007 4:57 AM | Report Abuse reply
here is my opinion on the sith motives.
--Darth Sidious wanted to control the galaxy, no one can question that. The whole deal with EP I where he has the trade federation take the planet of Naboo. Now he didnt want to kill padme cause he needed her to vote against the chanelor to be put out of office so Sidious himself could be nominated for Chancelor. He sent Maul to look for the Jedi and Padme to draw attention from himself, and put it on Maul. He used the dispute on Naboo to get himself into the Chancelor position. The death of Maul was not expected, but after the discovery of Anikin when meeting him on Naboo he realized his power and befriended him and throughout his training fed his ego.
--With Dooku he used him to start up the sepratist to cause a war for the republic. He knew the repiblic would need an army, so he used jango fett to lure the jedi to Kamino to where the discovery of the clones was made. He then again used Padme who used Jar Jar to vote to give Sidious emergancy power over the entire republic.
--Sidious waited until the time was right then issued the order to destroy the Jedi and seduce Anakin. Giving Sidious the power to create his empire. Sidious had it all planned, and evrything fell right into his plan perfectly
Dec 14, 2007 11:05 AM | Report Abuse reply
Very good points and what-ifs. Palpatine playing the martyr about his beleaguered planet would be so in-character for him--that makes more sense than what I said at first.
"It would have been very convenient for Palpatine to replace Vader with Luke (somebody should write a what if book" There's plenty of dark Luke fanfic out there if you look for it--I've got two, one where Anakin goes back to the light side on Mustafar but Palpatine gets his children and raises them on the side of the empire, and one where teenage Luke is captured and trained by Maul (incidentally).
Dec 15, 2007 1:36 AM | Report Abuse reply
Thanks Cy Ndakial.
One of Palpatine's characteristics is probably his ability to adapt and manipulate every situation to his advantage. Still, I would like to think that the actions of Padme, Qui-gon and Obi-Wan did matter in some way, and did not just fit his plans perfectly.
Dec 15, 2007 11:09 AM | Report Abuse reply
I would have like to see him more in the movies. Even see Anakin conquer him at one point to take his place later on.
Dec 16, 2007 12:48 PM | Report Abuse reply
Help us improve The World of Star Wars.