The Rancor Pit :: View topic - Fourth Star Wars trilogy in the works

Welcome to The Rancor Pit forums!

FAQ :: Search :: Memberlist :: Usergroups :: Register :: Profile :: Log in to check your private messages :: Log in

Fourth Star Wars trilogy in the works

The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> General Star Wars -> Fourth Star Wars trilogy in the works

Goto page Previous 1, 2

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

Bren
Vice Admiral

Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA

Posted: Tue Nov 14, 2017 2:16 pm Post subject:

Solo4114 wrote:

I'll try to explain. To be fair, it's been a long while since I watched the prequels themselves. But, my recollection of the films was that it felt as if a ton of stuff was interconnected.

I could go either way on Tatooine appearing in the prequels. I don't think Anakin needed to be from there at all. He or Owen, Beru, and Luke needed to end up there, but that doesn't necessitate that they start there.

I really didn't like that Anakin literally built C-3P0, who referred to him directly as "The Maker." That just seemed an unnecessary connection. I get that they needed to introduce the droids into the story, but it still seemed kind of...forced...the way they did it.

It didn’t seem kind of forced to me. It seemed forced and it was one of the reasons that the prequels made the universe feel smaller. The original films made the universe feel large, enormous actually. The prequels, by taking us to Tatooine again and again and by things like Palpatine being Amidala’s evil uncle (not literally, but figuratively), Annie building C-3P0, Jar-Jar in the Senate, Chewie knowing Yoda, made the universe seem like rural Nebraska where, if you aren’t from the same small town as someone, you know the small town they are from and know someone else who is from that same small town.

Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)

Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10402
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:22 am Post subject:

Solo4114 wrote:

I'll try to explain. To be fair, it's been a long while since I watched the prequels themselves...

I hated that Chewie and Yoda knew each other....

Anyway, I won't get too far into why I dislike the prequels. That'd take....a long time.

I'm sorry that you've had this intense negative emotional experience with the prequels. You're definitely not the only one I've heard that disliked Chewie knowing Yoda, which is how I predicted that would be an issue for you. It is completely unnecessary and pure fan service, but I find that it just doesn't bother me.

Solo4114 wrote:

But, my recollection of the films was that it felt as if a ton of stuff was interconnected.

It's no different than the classic movies, especially in light of making Vader Luke's father and Leia his sister. I haven't heard much criticism of those things, so it seems to me that the two trilogies are often not held to the same standards by fans.

Solo4114 wrote:

I could go either way on Tatooine appearing in the prequels. I don't think Anakin needed to be from there at all. He or Owen, Beru, and Luke needed to end up there, but that doesn't necessitate that they start there.

Never heard that one. Sure, Shmi and Ani could have been from any world and Shmi could have married Owen's dad on any world, and then they would just have to show Owen moving to Tatooine at the end. By design, one quality built-in to the prequels is enhancing the drama of the classic films. Watching the films in chronological order spoils the 'I am your father' reveal and that green muppet in the swamp is the Jedi Master Luke is looking for, but they enhance other dramas. My wife who first watched the films in chronological order was really on the edge of her seat during Luke's tench run because it was Luke's father trying to gun Luke down and neither of them knew it. She went nuts when Luke tossed his lightsaber away on Death Star II because she knew the Sith lightning was coming next and Luke had no way to defend himself like the Jedi did in the prequels. There are many delightful parallels between RotJ and RotS.

I think it is possible that Shmi being tortured by Tuskan Raiders was meant to enhance the drama of ANH when Luke and Threepio get attacked by them. And there may be something deeper at work in Lucas' brain that didn't make it into the films: Earlier drafts of the original Star Wars included a prophecy referring to the messiah as "the son of suns", and having Anakin live on that two-sunned planet as a child evokes the debate of Luke or Anakin being the chosen one. And the prequels also compare/contract Luke and Anakin by demonstrating how Little Ani is more in tune to the Force because he has a less developed ego (Luke has more to unlearn and a harder time letting go of his conscious self and acting on instinct, while Anakin 'oops' fortuitously.) I have no issue with Anakin and Shmi living on Tatooine. I love Tatooine and had no issue with going back to it. It felt natural to me.

Solo4114 wrote:

I really didn't like that Anakin literally built C-3P0, who referred to him directly as "The Maker." That just seemed an unnecessary connection. I get that they needed to introduce the droids into the story, but it still seemed kind of...forced...the way they did it.

Good point. I can't believe I forgot about that criticism. This actually goes back to background notes that Lucas wrote up in the early 70s, and Threepio's background included that he had been rebuilt from parts on a backwater world by a young scavenger boy. No there was no identification of that boy being Anakin, but Threepio's background notes may have actually been inspiration for kid Anakin in TPM. But anyway, this is another connection that I just don't have any problem with. For some reason I really like the idea of Anakin and Padme each giving their droids to each other as wedding gifts, and for that to be possible than Threepio has to be Anakin's to give away.

Solo4114 wrote:

This brings up the last aspect that felt like the "fishbowl" effect. I realize that some of this continues from the original trilogy, but it felt like a ton of what happened in the films ignores the HUGE events happening elsewhere. Mostly that's because of where the focal characters are and what they're doing.

I have the opposite reaction - I feel it is the classic trilogy that has more big events not shown. We don't get to see what is going on on Coruscant while these mostly outer rim adventures are going on. The prequels show us all the major galactic events of the era and I feel very satisfied with what we saw over all. Maybe this is why for the RPG I have no desire to run adventures during the prequel era. It just feels to me that there are so many more stories to tell in the classic era.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage

Last edited by Whill on Sat Jan 06, 2018 12:03 pm; edited 2 times in total

Dredwulf60
Line Captain

Joined: 07 Jan 2016
Posts: 911

Posted: Wed Nov 15, 2017 8:52 am Post subject:

Bren wrote:

I’m not especially interested in seeing the latest Thor film

I know that you don't know my movie taste, and I don't know yours, but for what it's worth...

'Thor: Ragnarok' was a super-fun movie. So much better than the previous Thor movies.

Whill
Dark Lord of the Jedi (Owner/Admin)

Joined: 14 Apr 2008
Posts: 10402
Location: Columbus, Ohio, USA, Earth, The Solar System, The Milky Way Galaxy

Posted: Thu Nov 16, 2017 1:39 am Post subject:

Bren wrote:

I'm not just talking about the latest few DC films. There have been more than 4 Batman movies and 4 Superman movies and DC has had and now has a number of live action TV shows a la Smallville, Arrow, old Flash, new Flash, etc. and tons of animated films and TV shows.

The old Flash was the 90s. Yes, before Batman v Superman there have been 7 Batman movies since 1989 and 6 Superman films since 1978. I doubt the last century stuff is still overwhelming anyone.

I only saw some of the last season of Smallville and wasn't impressed but I wasn't expecting to be. In this century I've seen some episodes of animated shows and a good handful of the DC animated movies - I really don't see what the hype is all about for any of them. I was following the DCW shows since Arrow season 2 but gave them all up this season. In Arrow the flashbacks caught up to the beginning of the series and the show still going seems strained. Last season, the Flash time travel logic jumped the King Shark. Supergirl was ok but silly, and Legends of Tomorrow was outright ridiculous from the get-go. So it was easy to be done with the CW multiverse. I was also following Gotham on Fox which I really loved but Bruce being brainwashed by the League of Shadows was too much, and now with teenage Bruce becoming a non-Batman costumed vigilante (with a stupid mask) and Dr. Bashir Ra's al Ghul, I'm done. Less TV is more time for reading.

Bren wrote:

Too many characters and too many that I don’t care about like Superman, Aquaman, Flash, or Green Lantern (There’s a Green Lantern in this one, right?) or that I don’t like this iteration of like Ben Affleck Batman. I like Jason Momoa, but Aquaman always seemed like a weak link.

I collected comics as a kid, but before that I was a big fan of the Super Friends (which was mainly inspired by the Silver Age Justice League). With my adult nerd sensibilities, I actually liked BvS (extended version). There is a nostalgia factor in my excitement for Justice League, but it's deeper than that. In the interregnum between the Golden and Silver Ages of comics, the superhero genre hung by a thread as only Superman, Wonder Woman, Batman & Robin, Aquaman, Green Arrow & Speedy, and Superboy remained in publication. The Barry Allen version of Flash kicked off the Silver Age. There's something iconic about these characters or the whole superhero genre would have died, and then there would have been no Marvel. I was there for the creation of Cyborg in 1980.

I feel sorry for Aquaman because of all the crap he gets. It has not been established that Green Lantern is in this movie, but I'll know tomorrow night. I hope he's not because I never liked Green Lantern, even as a kid.

Bren wrote:

And Captain Marvel, I don’t think I really even know who that character is. Is he the one who goes Shazaam or something?

The original Captain Marvel goes back to 1939 and he is boy who says the magic word "Shazam" to turn into Captain Marvel. He was licensed to DC in the 70s and there was a live action TV show, but when he would out of publication Marvel Comics copyrighted the title "Captain Marvel" so the comics and show of the original Captain Marvel were instead called Shazam. DC bought the rights to the character in the 80s, and in more recent years renamed the character Shazam. Marvel Comics has had many heroes called Captain Marvel and the Marvel movie in the works that I was referring is what I suppose is one of the more popular versions, the second one below. I know almost nothing about that character. Incidentally there is also a DC film for Shazam in the works but I am very much looking forward to that movie.

Bren wrote:

Ant-Man was surprisingly good, but I can’t say I care about the character. Dr. Strange was well done, but he’s a character that I like in concept more than I ever want to follow in execution.

Ant-Man and Dr. Strange were not bad, but they are both in my bottom third of the MCU series.

Dredwulf60 wrote:

'Thor: Ragnarok' was a super-fun movie. So much better than the previous Thor movies.

My son and I saw it for a second time tonight, and I agree. I put it in the top third of the MCU series. As a kid I was more into DC Comics but Thor was one of the Marvel comics I collected, and that probably arose out of being a huge Mythology nerd. I wasn't expecting the Ragnarok movie to be that true to the Norse myth of Ragnarok (or even the comic version in the 80s), but I thought the films over did it a bit with the humor. Still, it was a lot of fun.
_________________
*
Site Map
Forum Guidelines
Registration/Log-In Help
The Rancor Pit Library
Star Wars D6 Damage

Last edited by Whill on Wed Sep 05, 2018 11:19 pm; edited 2 times in total

MrNexx
Rear Admiral

Joined: 25 Mar 2016
Posts: 2248
Location: San Antonio

Posted: Thu Nov 16, 2017 8:07 am Post subject:

The newer Captain Marvel at Marvel is Carol Danvers, previously Miss Marvel, who took the mantle of Captain Marvel after the death of Mar-vell, the Kree warrior who previously held the title. (Monica Rambeau was also called Captain Marvel, but is unrelated). Carol is a former Air Force pilot who gained her powers when an alien device exploded and Mar-vell partially shielded her from the blast. She was Ms. Marvel for a while, but got rebooted as Captain Marvel a few years ago by Kelly Sue DeConnick, a fantastic writer who moved her into more cosmic adventures after a short time. _________________ "I've Seen Your Daily Routine. You Are Not Busy!" “We're going to win this war, not by fighting what we hate, but saving what we love.” http://rpgcrank.blogspot.com/

Solo4114
Commander

Joined: 18 May 2017
Posts: 256

Posted: Thu Nov 16, 2017 11:16 am Post subject:

Bren wrote:

Solo4114 wrote:

That's about where I come out on it. I think a big part of the issue, though, is also the moments within the story that they choose to focus on. The main characters provide the audience's "point of view" for the events surrounding them. In the OT, the main characters were involved in some of the most impactful events of the war (as far as we know, anyway). The destruction of both Death Stars, and the disastrous escape from Hoth being the biggest we see. Luke is a central figure because of his (and Vader's) destruction of the Emperor. Granted, some of their side treks aren't as meaningful (e.g., most of the Tatooine stuff), but the rest is pretty central.

In the PT, it felt like there must be TONS of other stuff going on...but we only casually glance at it. The biggest events of the war seem to happen off screen for us, while our heroes are doing other stuff. Most of that, I think, is because an entire movie is devoted to unnecessary set-up.

You ask me, the PT should've started with AOTC, had a middle film focused exclusively on the Clone Wars themselves, and then done ROTS or something like it. Also, I'd have drastically altered Anakin's motivation and backstory. I get what Lucas was trying to do, I just don't find it remotely interesting.

Whill wrote:

No worries. I know it bugs some of us more than others. Just different tastes is all, really. But I do find fan service to ultimately be irritating if it isn't accompanying an otherwise stellar story. And the PT is not a stellar story to me.

Quote:

I actually kinda wish Leia wasn't Luke's sister, but that's a whole other discussion. (No, not because of creepy romances.) I do hold the trilogies to different standards, in the sense that I saw the PT as an opportunity to do something different. Connections in the OT make sense because they come with a backstory. Luke is Vader's son or at least is connected to Vader somehow through Luke's father (before Vader = Anakin was necessarily the case). Ben knew both, so his connection makes sense, as does Yoda. But Han and Chewie have zero connection to any of the characters they meet in the first film. They're guys who did a shuttle job and got caught up in something bigger. Lando is connected to Han, again through a backstory, but that's it. The rest of the universe occurs by happenstance. The droids fall into Luke's hands through chance (or the Force, I guess). But Luke has no connection to them at that point.

My point here is that, in the OT, when characters first meet, they are just as often completely unrelated to each other. The Luke and Leia thing is the only "retcon" of that. Well, that and Vader = Anakin, I guess. That helps give the universe a sense of scale. You can imagine that these characters were all off doing their own things, living complete lives in a vast galaxy, and only came together by chance and the course of events. There's no sense of predestination.

The PT changes all of that by creating "retcon" connections between characters where there didn't need to be any. Anakin builds 3P0. R2 is Leia's mom's droid and later becomes Anakin's droid, and knows Obi-Wan, as does 3P0. Shmi may have been "Force impregnated" by Palpatine (although he could've been lying), and Palpatine is actually Leia's mom's old co-worker. Chewie and Yoda were roommates at prep school, Boba Fett is a clone and his dad is the basis for literally the entire army, and likely a bunch of stormtroopers in the OT, and so on and so forth. Jar Jar the clown ends up in the Senate just so he can be the one who actually starts the vote for the Empire (ugh....Jar Jar...).

Quote:

Never heard that one. Sure, Shmi and Ani could have been from any world and Shmi could have married Owen's dad on any world, and then they would just have to show Owen moving to Tatooine at the end. By design, one quality built-in to the prequels is enhancing the drama of the prequels. Watching the films in chronological order spoils the 'I am your father' reveal and that green muppet in the swamp is the Jedi Master Luke is looking for, but they enhance other dramas. My wife who first watched the films in chronological order was really on the edge of her seat during Luke's tench run because it was Luke's father trying to gun Luke down and neither of them knew it. She went nuts when Luke tossed his lightsaber away on Death Star II because she knew the Sith lightning was coming next and Luke had no way to defend himself like the Jedi did in the prequels. There are many delightful parallels between RotJ and RotS.

I think it is possible that Shmi being tortured by Tuskan Raiders was meant to enhance the drama of ANH when Luke and Threepio get attacked by them. And there may be something deeper at work in Lucas' brain that didn't make it into the films: Earlier drafts of the original Star Wars included a prophecy referring to the messiah as "the son of suns", and having Anakin live on that two-sunned planet as a child evokes the debate of Luke or Anakin being the chosen one. And the prequels also compare/contract Luke and Anakin by demonstrating how Little Ani is more in tune to the Force because he has a less developed ego (Luke has more to unlearn and a harder time letting go of his conscious self and acting on instinct, while Anakin 'oops' fortuitously. I have no issue with Anakin and Shmi living on Tatooine. I love Tatooine and had no issue with going back to it. It felt natural to me.

So, here's the thing. The more of the PT that you retain, the more it needs to end up the way it did on screen. If you keep Shmi and Clieg Lars and such, then yeah, it kinda makes sense to have it all be on Tatooine and the sand people and whatnot.

But I envision an entirely alternate universe with some drastically different changes.

Example:

Imagine a film trilogy where Anakin comes from, say, Averam. He was discovered as a child by the Jedi Order, and taken in at an early age, where he was trained by Yoda initially, and then apprenticed to Obi-Wan. When the Clone Wars break out, the Republic fields the clones primarily to provide top-notch combat troops that can be mass produced, but still fields auxiliary forces drawn from multiple worlds. Let's say that Owen Lars is a soldier from these auxiliary forces, who gets caught up in the war, and becomes friends with Anakin and Obi-Wan by fighting alongside them. Owen plans to return to his home planet of Tatooine and start his own moisture farm, after his time in the auxiliaries. And there's your set-up for getting Luke to Tatooine. Owen is a nobody in the galaxy, but he's someone Obi-Wan comes to trust, and he's someone who was close with Anakin. Obi-Wan knows that Anakin -- before his fall to evil -- would have wanted someone like Owen looking after his children, so it would make sense for that connection to exist.

The first film plays out similarly to Attack of the Clones, only there's no backstory/connection that exists between Padme and Anakin. They've never met, but they fall for each other as Anakin guards her, while Obi-Wan tries to investigate the threat. There's no journey back to Tatooine to protect Shmi at all -- Shmi just doesn't exist in this version of the films. Anakin starts off as someone who is committed to democracy, but recognizes the inefficiency of it all, and is more for direct action. Partially that's because of his power and ability, but his experiences shape those attitudes as well. That's where he gets his "rashness" from. Palpatine is more like Kevin Spacey in House of Cards (or, better still, Ian Richardson). He's not a back-bencher, but he's not top dog. Yet. He still instigates the Clone Wars, though, largely through manipulation of the various interest groups, and through working with Count Dooku, whom he has corrupted to the Sith.

The second film is an entirely new chapter, that focuses on the events of the war itself. We see how the war has spread, and we see its costs. Anakin and Obi-Wan fight alongside Republic Clone regiments and auxiliary forces. They make friends with both the clones and the local troops. They watch the cost in lives. Anakin witnesses the cruelty of the droid armies, and their willingness to put civilians in danger, as well as their willingness to slaughter their opponents, rather than show mercy. The main focus of the campaign is the destruction of a separatist superweapon capable of destroying an entire city in a single shot or something similarly large-scale.

He watches the dithering of the Senate and its inability to get aid to people who need it, due to a metastasized bureaucracy and the self-interest of various senators. You could include a secondary villain in this chapter who is a corrupt senator working both sides of the war to his own benefit (and arguably backed by Palpatine). Anyway, long story short, Anakin loses friends in the course of the battle. Senior Jedi (not necessarily Obi-Wan) scold him about getting too close to his soldiers, and that, as a general, he needs to be willing to sacrifice his men, sometimes en masse, if necessary. Anakin hates this, and it sows the seeds for his ultimate turn to evil. However, by the end of the film, he marries Padme (no forbidden marriage in this story), and the battle itself is resolved. But Anakin has been changed by the war, and we see that manifest in the third film.

By the third film, Anakin is fed up with the Jedi Council and the Senate, seeing both as unable or unwilling to act decisively. Although he hates the Separatists, he recognizes the value of some of their tactics, such as the use of superweapons as a means of instilling fear in opponents, and as an efficient means of wiping out your enemy. His gradual fall accelerates, Palaptine goads the Jedi into attacking him and being declared enemies of the Republic and claiming they want to overthrow the senate for themselves, then forms the Empire as a means of defending democracy by investing him with plenary powers while retaining the nominal power of the Senate. Anakin goes along enthusiastically, believing that with Palpatine able to make more executive decisions, the war can be brought to a swift end, and direct action can be taken to ensure no similar war ever breaks out. The whole "order from chaos" thing from Vader comes from all of this. Anakin even embraces the Sith because he believes he can control it and use it to good ends, even if he must do so through evil means. And so, he completes his fall. He sees his former friends and allies and even his wife recoil from all of this, as Palpatine stokes his anger and resentment, and all while Anakin keeps telling himself he has this under control and is doing it all for the right reasons. Things play out somewhat similarly to ROTS by the end, Padme goes to Alderaan in secret, but dies when Leia is a toddler. Luke is raised by Owen on Tatooine, completely anonymous even though he kept his name.

Now, is any of this a good story? I have no idea. All I'm saying is that it's an example of an alternative that could've been done. The PT didn't have to play out as it did.

I get what you're saying about some of the parallels to the originals. I actually find that to be a bug rather than a feature, though, since it strikes me as just hitting the same notes rather than expanding the symphony.

Quote:

You know...I literally never made the conncetion that 3P0 and R2 were wedding gifts! Ha! I think I've only seen the entirety of AOTC maybe 2-3 times, though, and it's been probably a decade since I watched it. I used to use the final battle as a demo for my surround sound system, though. Smile

Quote:

I agree, but to me that makes sense because of who the characters are. Luke is just some kid on a backwater planet with a larger destiny, so focusing the action on him and his adventures makes sense. But there's no reason why -- with august figures like Obi-Wan and Anakin -- you have to relegate them to similar backwater activity. They can be right in the thick of the biggest events of the story because they're already central players. In other words, it makes sense to have Anakin, for example, be the bodyguard of a Senator, or a general in the Clone army, because he's already a Jedi. Same story with Obi-Wan. It makes sense for them to hobnob with the highest echelons of government, or be intimately involved in military campaigns at a command level, because they're already Jedi. So, it would make sense for them to be located at the epicenter of these huge events like the fall of the Jedi, the establishment of the Empire, etc. You can't really do that with Luke, at least not initially.

Plus, Luke, as the last Jedi himself, is necessarily the focal point for most of the OT, because without him, the war cannot be won. So, his trip to Dagobah, his attempts to rescue his friends from Vader on Bespin, his journey to Tatooine to rescue Han, etc., all make sense. The story is focused on him because he's the only one who can end the Emperor.

Bren
Vice Admiral

Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA

Posted: Thu Nov 16, 2017 12:42 pm Post subject:

Whill thanks for the synopses.

Whill wrote:

Less TV is more time for reading.

And more time for other things. Which is how I feel with the glut of superhero media and how I'm beginning to feel with amount of Star Wars stuff Disney has announced. Watching all of it feels like it will take more time than I want to devote and will add more "history" to the canonical setting than I want to mentally track. While I can ignore new films (and to an extent I have been doing that since TPM was released) I do like to maintain an awareness of where my SWU and that of Lucas/Disney are congruent and where they diverge. One or more movies per year overloads my aged brain's ability to easily manage the mental gymnastics.

Quote:

I collected comics as a kid, but before that I was a big fan of the Super Friends

I never collected comics. I either read those a friend bought or while standing next to a comic rack. And I'm too old to have enjoyed the Super Friends when they were on the air though the Wonder Twin who can turn into enough water to fill a bucket is kind of funny in a sad, pathetic sort of way. Poor guy with super powers created in one of the few super hero RPG systems that use randomly generated powers. Laughing

Quote:

I was there for the creation of Cyborg in 1980.

I'm way older than you. I was there for the creation of Iron Man and the X-men.

Quote:

I hope he's not because I never liked Green Lantern, even as a kid.

Me neither. A guy creating giant mallets out of green light to bash bad guys who recharges his power with an old railroad signal lantern...way too silly for me to ever get enthused.

Whill wrote:

Dredwulf60 wrote:

'Thor: Ragnarok' was a super-fun movie. So much better than the previous Thor movies.

My son and I saw it for a second time tonight, and I agree.

We may see it. It was showing at the theater we were in yesterday. But we were there to see a screening of Casablanca hosted by TCM/Fathom. Not having been quite old enough to have seen it in the theater when it was released in 1942 we enjoyed the chance to see it on a big screen (in a theater with super comfortable reclining seats). I love Casablanca but it was way, way better on a big screen. The shot taking you into Rick's at the beginning of the film makes you feel like you are there in Ricks and the music really comes through in so many scenes in a way similar to how John Williams' music makes so many of the films we all know and love today.

Whill wrote:

As a kid I was more into DC Comics but Thor was one of the Marvel comics I collected, and that probably arose out of being a huge Mythology nerd. I wasn't expecting the Ragnarok movie to be that true to the Norse myth of Ragnarok (or even the comic version in the 80s), but I thought the films over did it a bit with the humor. Still, it was a lot of fun.

I like Thor, but I have to mentally ignore the egregious mythological mistakes starting with red haired Thor being a goldilocks and golden haired Sif having hair black as a raven's wing. Doesn't help that I knew the Norse myths before ever seeing a Thor comic book. At least Odin only has one eye.

garhkal
Sovereign Protector

Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14168
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

Posted: Thu Nov 16, 2017 4:29 pm Post subject:

Whill wrote:

I was following the DCW shows since Arrow season 2 but gave them all up this season. In Arrow the flashbacks caught up to the beginning of the series and the show still going seems strained. Last season, the Flash time travel logic jumped the King Shark. Supergirl was ok but silly, and Legends of Tomorrow was outright ridiculous from the get-go. So it was easy to be done with the CW multiverse. I

I watch all the arrowvers DC shows on the CW network, and LOVE the campyness and ridiculousness of Legends! Its what makes me keep coming back for more!

Not sure if i am going to give that 'black lightning' new show a try though.
AND am stoked to see Season 5 of 'The 100"..
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!

Display posts from previous:

	The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> General Star Wars	All times are GMT - 4 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2
Page 2 of 2

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum