YES!!!!!!!!!!!!

Just please don't mess him up Disney, please don't mess him up Disney, please don't mess him up Disney....

Unless he absolutely annihilates the crew of the ghost will a well placed Interdictor, tractor beam, and team f Noghri commandos, then traces them back to the rebellion, I'm not buying it...

Seriously though, in a "protagonists always win" kind of show (or at least don't take heavy losses), I'm not sure how they can do justice to thrawn.

I'm certainly happy to see him back in canon (like ecstatic), but I also don't want to corrupt his memory.

The thrawn of Star Wars EU was just so artistically done...

Sorry just a second comment to make up for some of the negativity in the previous one...

Watching the trailer, Disney seems to have done an excellent job of remaining true to the Grand Admiral Thrawn that's so well loved. With the obvious references to his ruthlessness, and the art reference with him studing the rebel graffiti, I'm actually pretty exited to see what they do with thrawn.

I just still don't want to see the ghost fly circles around him because they're the main characters...

I just still don't want to see the ghost fly circles around him because they're the main characters...

They've proven they know how to make the characters fail with competent villains...

Darth Vader absolutely schooled them every time they were up against him in season 2.

I never got the Thrawn thing. The general concept of a thoughtful villain was fine, even needed; but the execution was lame. Reminded me of those stupid Agatha Christie novels where the detective practically has omniscience throughout.

So I could care less about Thrawn. However, I trust Filoni & team to do the general concept justice, I expect it will be better than the original.

I just still don't want to see the ghost fly circles around him because they're the main characters...

They've proven they know how to make the characters fail with competent villains...

Darth Vader absolutely schooled them every time they were up against him in season 2.

True, I Definately agree, and hope that they use thrawn in somewhat the same way, as a character who's not just: "Oh, here's another minor villain to add flavour before they defeat/humiliate/outsmart them". The trailer certainly seems to depict him in this way, as a real threat to the fledgling rebellion (as he should be!), ad although I don't really follow rebels all that much, I'll Definately make sure to watch anything with Thrawn in it!

Long live the empire!

Holy **** holy **** holy **** holy **** (repeats for 3 hours)

I never got the Thrawn thing. The general concept of a thoughtful villain was fine, even needed; but the execution was lame. Reminded me of those stupid Agatha Christie novels where the detective practically has omniscience throughout.

So I could care less about Thrawn. However, I trust Filoni & team to do the general concept justice, I expect it will be better than the original.

The omniscience bit can be explained by some of the talents, like the one in Strategist that allows facts to be introduced as if spending a Destiny point. Those things don't have to just be for the players to use.

I never got the Thrawn thing. The general concept of a thoughtful villain was fine, even needed; but the execution was lame. Reminded me of those stupid Agatha Christie novels where the detective practically has omniscience throughout.

So I could care less about Thrawn. However, I trust Filoni & team to do the general concept justice, I expect it will be better than the original.

Glad to hear someone else shares my feelings about the super snowflake Thrawn. He really pissed me off in that trilogy, and is the single reason why I've avoided the EU like the plague. Everyone I knew practically orgasmed about how awesome Thrawn was, and I read it and was like "ok..if this is the best the EU has to offer, I'll pass."

I never got the Thrawn thing. The general concept of a thoughtful villain was fine, even needed; but the execution was lame. Reminded me of those stupid Agatha Christie novels where the detective practically has omniscience throughout.

So I could care less about Thrawn. However, I trust Filoni & team to do the general concept justice, I expect it will be better than the original.

Glad to hear someone else shares my feelings about the super snowflake Thrawn. He really pissed me off in that trilogy, and is the single reason why I've avoided the EU like the plague. Everyone I knew practically orgasmed about how awesome Thrawn was, and I read it and was like "ok..if this is the best the EU has to offer, I'll pass."

For example as much as I disliked the comeback of Maul after being sliced in half, Filoni's characterisation of him was way better than Lucas's, both in The Clone Wars and especially in Rebels. Similarly Matt Landers and Filoni's Anakin made much more sense than Lucas's direction of Christian Haydensen in the films.

I am also looking forward to the new book to be honest.

For example as much as I disliked the comeback of Maul after being sliced in half, Filoni's characterisation of him was way better than Lucas's, both in The Clone Wars and especially in Rebels. Similarly Matt Landers and Filoni's Anakin made much more sense than Lucas's direction of Christian Haydensen in the films.

Keep in mind Lucas was fully involved in those efforts. The problem with the movies is they have to cram a couple decades of character development into 6 hours...recipe for failure on that level. TCW was Lucas' storytelling finally given room to breathe. That said, Filoni and crew deserve a lot of credit (especially seeing what they've managed to do on Disney's shoestring budget).

I never got the Thrawn thing. The general concept of a thoughtful villain was fine, even needed; but the execution was lame. Reminded me of those stupid Agatha Christie novels where the detective practically has omniscience throughout.

So I could care less about Thrawn. However, I trust Filoni & team to do the general concept justice, I expect it will be better than the original.

Glad to hear someone else shares my feelings about the super snowflake Thrawn. He really pissed me off in that trilogy, and is the single reason why I've avoided the EU like the plague. Everyone I knew practically orgasmed about how awesome Thrawn was, and I read it and was like "ok..if this is the best the EU has to offer, I'll pass."

There is already a thread going on on the edge forum, however bear in mind this iteration of Thrawn is not being written by Zahn or any of the other writers that picked up the torch for him since. This has been written in by the Rebels team who have already said that Ysalamari have been tossed out of canon (in the panel they explained that both Lucas and Filoni agreed some time ago that because they are living creatures they cannot be 'invisible' to the force like they were in the book). So if you are expecting the exact same viewpoint of the character then I suspect you might be surprised by what they put on screen.

For example as much as I disliked the comeback of Maul after being sliced in half, Filoni's characterisation of him was way better than Lucas's, both in The Clone Wars and especially in Rebels. Similarly Matt Landers and Filoni's Anakin made much more sense than Lucas's direction of Christian Haydensen in the films.

I am also looking forward to the new book to be honest.

I have zero expectation for the character. None of those details are familiar to me. I purged that story arc from my brain. If they make him the same super smug, super-uber brilliant guy who can know how a race will fight "because he studied their art", then I will flip some tables for the sheer idiocy of it. But hopefully they don't actually do that with the character, and just use his name for rating pull, but do something genuinely good with him.

What is wrong with you people? Do you hate joy?

I fully realize that the plot of the books may not stand up to rereading it after a quarter of a century and a college education including literary criticism. I read them at the tender age of 16, and I remember both the character and the plot very fondly.

I imagine that some teenagers might get the same joy out of a decent story with the same character, and that makes me smile.

What is wrong with you people? Do you hate joy?

I fully realize that the plot of the books may not stand up to rereading it after a quarter of a century and a college education including literary criticism. I read them at the tender age of 16, and I remember both the character and the plot very fondly.

I imagine that some teenagers might get the same joy out of a decent story with the same character, and that makes me smile.

FWIW, I enjoyed the original Thrawn trilogy far more than TFA, and likely for the reasons you mention,

What is wrong with you people? Do you hate joy?

I fully realize that the plot of the books may not stand up to rereading it after a quarter of a century and a college education including literary criticism. I read them at the tender age of 16, and I remember both the character and the plot very fondly.

I imagine that some teenagers might get the same joy out of a decent story with the same character, and that makes me smile.

And it's pretty much because of the success of the Thrawn Trilogy that we really even have an Expanded Universe and a wealth of material to be drawn upon for the new films, books, and TV series.

I don't think Thrawn was a Mary Sue. Part of the problem was the people leading the New Republic in battle were terrible at that. I mean seriously look at his opposition they aren't exactly the best at anything involving military tactics or strategic thinking.

I don't think Thrawn was a Mary Sue. Part of the problem was the people leading the New Republic in battle were terrible at that. I mean seriously look at his opposition they aren't exactly the best at anything involving military tactics or strategic thinking.

Especially the Bothan Bor'sk Fey'laa, who was an astute (if power-mongering) politician, but still very much a politician. Mon Mothma was moderately better, but not much, and probably too focused on the New Republic's image vs. winning a war with an Imperial Grand Admiral (none of whom were tactical slouches). We saw that same issue in the NJO series, again with things really only starting to turn around when those leaders with plenty of actual military experience were allowed to take command.

Thrawn was almost definitely not a Mary Sue. He was hypercompetent, which was tempered by the fact that he had only a handful of star destroyers to work with. He was not omniscient, but he knew his opponents well enough because he did opposition research. Which, by the way, is just good practice.

He definitely was not a self-insertion character. He is just a marginally better officer than we've seen so far, who encourages creativity instead of weaseling out of responsibility out of fear of choking.

Using this term is pretty much an insult to the author's craft. Every Star Wars author creates fanfiction, to a degree, every author puts much of his own into his craft - so now we can't have competent characters anymore? That's boring. Also, Thrawn had a flaw that was his downfall. It killed him while he was winning.

Now where are these referee cards?

What is wrong with you people? Do you hate joy?

I fully realize that the plot of the books may not stand up to rereading it after a quarter of a century and a college education including literary criticism. I read them at the tender age of 16, and I remember both the character and the plot very fondly.

I imagine that some teenagers might get the same joy out of a decent story with the same character, and that makes me smile.

And I read it at around the same age, if not a bit younger, and I found his character infuriatingly written. What's your point? No I don't hate joy, and I would appreciate you not implying that anyone who disagrees with your opinion is apparently some hateful person. You like his character, fine. I thought he was a poorly written piece of shite. Amazing how the world can have varying opinions on things.

yeah people have a huge difference in taste.

e.g. There are so many people that like **** on TV like all these super talent / next popstar / hyper model / life of rich offsprings / some behind the woods yunkyard holders / and so on shows, while I don't get the grip on it (and want to puke if I even have to see a glimpse of it) there are (so it seems) enought people that like those things, so they put up even more strange dating the rich one/ going shopping/ and every show with special B,C,D and E VIPs...

On the other Hand I know that there are a lot of people who don't get my hobbys, favourite shows/ movies and personal taste in line.

I for example really liked Thrawn and the entire triology. Yeah I was 14/15 years back then and was hyped since it was really the first real continuing of the story I so much love. And even today I like the Idea of Thrawn, an antagonist the have wits and less brawn,

Yes it is a little over the notch to say it would be enough to study some species art to know how they fight, but it is not to much over the notch to say you can learn about theire culture by study it, which can give you an advantage (nether more nor less)

He is somewhat the Sherlock Holmes of Evil... the Moriaty of Star Wars, as all the evil guys a little over the notch but not too much (even Vader was over the notch... chocking everyone for a mistake...[yes I know blasphemie ] but i like him even so... as villiain.... as father he is an terrible example...) because otherwise we wouldn't buy him beeing the evil guy.

So after blabbering here now too much, I just say, I liked the old Thrawn and hope that the Disney Thrawn will keep up to my (may be to hyped) expactations... and I'm curios about the "Thrawn"- Book (espacially in which time frame it will play)

For all those NOT-Thrawn-Fans: Please move on there is nothing to discuss, we fans of the blue skinned guy are just getting hypped because we found something we like. Please move on

I think it's good to see other personal aside from Tarkin and Vader. One of the greatest issues with star wars in my opinion was it's tendency to rely on a limited bundle of characters and locations in a galaxy that is meant to be really large. Thawn was one of the better ones, though the inner fellow would imagine Zajni to be a more amusing villian, since he literally is a tash twirling baddie with a performance as wide as his waist line. XD

Then again, Star Wars has always been about it's outrageously camp villains, Jabba is gluttony incarnate, Vader is a black knight clad in leather and Palpatine was a evil wizard pulled off some other fantasy movie set. Needless to say the bar wasn't set particularly high to begin with by modern standards, yet I enjoy the campness.

Thrawn was probably my favorite EU character; I LOVED how someone with no Force abilities was able to wipe the floor with the entire New Republic, outthink their every move, and even take their capital by making them believe he had a weapon he didn't, through clever use of the Force, that he, himself, didn't even have. He also lacked several of the silly failings other Imperial officers had. Don't worry, though; I won't keep going on, after this.

I think one thing we need to acknowledge, regarding the return of the Chiss Grand Admiral, is the potential number of people, like myself, who are still a bit miffed at the sheer amount of material Lucas, and Disney, burned to the ground, to make way for their new? (depends on what you are watching?) material. So much stuff we took as "fact" in that fictional universe, all gone. If you were a Star Wars nerd, there were now such huge gaps in your material, especially if the only contribution the other person was making was to remind you of the EU purge; that none of it now mattered. As far as I understand, Rebels is still officially canon, and anything they do technically counts as "official", so I can definitely see where many people, myself included, would get excited to see this very cool bit of the old canon, or whatever part o it they liked, get worked back into the new. I can accept that some people weren't a fan of Timothy Zahn's work, and there were whole chunks of the Expanded Universe that just made me slap my forehead, trying to figure out what the writer had laced their death sticks with, but I know I get happy when the old stuff becomes relevant again, and officially. Thank you Star Wars!

The eu purge was necessary to give the writers a clean slate to work from. This did not mean that the old material has been consigned to the fire but there has been so much work done that even contradicts itself in the films bringing in the extra material means that many of the new films would be impossible.

Even the first book written has a creature in it confirmed as to be definitely not canon. The Ysalamari were said to be invisible to the force and as such contradicts one of the basic tenets of the force in that it was a part of all life (as viewed by Lucas). They originally did not intend on doing further films and in particular gave carte blanche (within reason) to any writer when writing material based after Return of the Jedi. Given that Disney bought the rights to star wars and are now creating stories in this space in time, where do they draw the line, and how confusing would it be to say x book is okay, but y isnt because its based in a period of time that a film affects.

They can have the best of both worlds, and so can the readers. Example we could bot have had rebels if the force unleashed remained canon. TFA is incompatible with any book set in Lukes lifetime after ROTJ, Rogue One wouldnt work in world where Kyle Katarn exists as he did. They had to cut it somewhere and its pretty much everything Lucas had his hands on only, even then the first novel written isnt canon anymore and that's Lucas that wrote it.

The eu purge was necessary to give the writers a clean slate to work from. This did not mean that the old material has been consigned to the fire but there has been so much work done that even contradicts itself in the films bringing in the extra material means that many of the new films would be impossible.

Even the first book written has a creature in it confirmed as to be definitely not canon. The Ysalamari were said to be invisible to the force and as such contradicts one of the basic tenets of the force in that it was a part of all life (as viewed by Lucas). They originally did not intend on doing further films and in particular gave carte blanche (within reason) to any writer when writing material based after Return of the Jedi. Given that Disney bought the rights to star wars and are now creating stories in this space in time, where do they draw the line, and how confusing would it be to say x book is okay, but y isnt because its based in a period of time that a film affects.

They can have the best of both worlds, and so can the readers. Example we could bot have had rebels if the force unleashed remained canon. TFA is incompatible with any book set in Lukes lifetime after ROTJ, Rogue One wouldnt work in world where Kyle Katarn exists as he did. They had to cut it somewhere and its pretty much everything Lucas had his hands on only, even then the first novel written isnt canon anymore and that's Lucas that wrote it.

Well, that's just it, While TFA, as it was released, my not be compatible with the original EU, had they kept the EU canon (which, personally I believe they should have done), they could still have made a perfectly good SW sequel without rehashing any of the books or comics. When Episode VII was fors annouunced I was exited to finally see Jacen and Jaina Solo on screen, and Mara Jade and Ben Skywalker, and Corran Horn, and other favorite characters, including the other new Jedi. I was heartbroken when they decided to jettison all of that. It almost made me skip the new movie trilogy all together, but I love Star Wars too much.