13 minutes ago, Odanan said:

Was

until 2019.

Meh. Din isn't even the most popular character in his own flippin' show.

4 hours ago, LUZ_TAK said:

What kind of logic naturally takes you from "the child is strong with the force" to "lets fill the show with fanservice old characters"?

Really, what does Boba Fett have to do with any of the show's premise? Give him his own series and less lame way to get his amor back.

At least Ashoka seems will be a one time appearance...

Simple. I know how Star Wars works. If The Force comes up as a used thing, the main characters around it all will just start flooding in. That is just how Star Wars works and I hate it. But it is what it is, which is, whatever. You and I, we're on the same page.

But when The Darksaber came up, if you were still fooling yourself then? Honestly buddy that one's 100% on you if you know a single thing about The Darksaber. No sympathy there, that thing has "Saga" written all frakking over it.

18 minutes ago, Jo Jo said:

Meh. Din isn't even the most popular character in his own flippin' show.

The most unfortunately true thing I have ever read lmao and it's not even Bo-Katan or Ahsoka's fault. Grogu was more popular immediately. Poor Din Djarin. He will always be my favorite character on the show.

4 hours ago, LUZ_TAK said:

What kind of logic naturally takes you from "the child is strong with the force" to "lets fill the show with fanservice old characters"?

Really, what does Boba Fett have to do with any of the show's premise? Give him his own series and less lame way to get his amor back.

At least Ashoka seems will be a one time appearance...

This appearance of Boba Fett is part of the plan to do just that, get him his own show or miniseries. It's to let those casual fans who may not follow Star Wars beyond the films that Boba did survive the Sarlacc and is still alive and kicking. It also makes his survival canon as well.

It's series about a copy of Boba Fett walking with a copy of Yoda.

2 hours ago, Jo Jo said:

Meh. Din isn't even the most popular character in his own flippin' show.

For a long time, Din had no name AND no face. Hard to empathize with that.

For all of its perceived faults, I’m still thoroughly enjoying this show. The cast, the characters, the ships, and all the other Star Wars lore are making me regret there are only two episodes to go for this season.

12 hours ago, LUZ_TAK said:

What kind of logic naturally takes you from "the child is strong with the force" to "lets fill the show with fanservice old characters"?

Really, what does Boba Fett have to do with any of the show's premise? Give him his own series and less lame way to get his amor back.

At least Ashoka seems will be a one time appearance...

Have you seen any of Filoni's previous work?

Bruh guys just be happy we’re finally getting consistent, good Star Wars content. It’s Dave Filoni’s show, and he wants to relate it to some of his old shows. It makes sense, and the show’s good. I know us Star Wars are known for complaining about everything, but for once, let’s sit back, relax, and enjoy the content 😊

ok ok... geesh sorry... (touchy boba-grognards)

I do enjoy the show and look forward to more of it, hopefully with the spotlight more on the new chars than the old, but that's just my preference.

On 12/7/2020 at 11:44 PM, theBitterFig said:

There's times when it's better done than others. Rule-of-cool is carrying a lot of weight here.

It's not a big deal, but hey, kinda true.

For now I am telling myself, Boba knew his armour would attract other Mandalorians, so he waited. I need to rewatch the the first episode, where we just see Bobas feet, but how cool would it be if he himself was the guy who placed a bounty on Fennecs head? Useing her as bait for Mando to turn up? Not exactly the same as Jango, but Jango was not sad about killing Zam Wessel either.

On 12/8/2020 at 1:27 PM, LUZ_TAK said:

What kind of logic naturally takes you from "the child is strong with the force" to "lets fill the show with fanservice old characters"?

Really, what does Boba Fett have to do with any of the show's premise? Give him his own series and less lame way to get his amor back.

At least Ashoka seems will be a one time appearance...

I think Boba fits in nice, the show is about among other things, origin. Mando is a foundling, and he has just started to learn that the people who raised him where not telling him the full truth. Equally Bobas origin is strange (him being a clone, which ties in nicely with the cloner/Doctor in Mandalorian), Jango was a foundling so some common issues there. I bet the things in tubes we saw in the Imperial lab, are old clones, Gideon is experimenting on. Further connecting Boba to the show. He will probably go abeshiiit, revenge them all, die in the process and leave Slave One to Mando, but that just my guess for now.

3 hours ago, Dwing said:

die in the process and leave Slave One to Mando

Nnnnnooooooooooooooooo!

We've just Had him back from the grave. Don't kill Boba, Disney.

(but I'm really curious what will be the next Mando's ship)

42 minutes ago, Odanan said:

Nnnnnooooooooooooooooo!

We've just Had him back from the grave. Don't kill Boba, Disney.

(but I'm really curious what will be the next Mando's ship)

Not saying that I hope for it, but I think Boba is here to teach Mando a lesson and then die spectaculary.

SQUAD GOALS

7 minutes ago, Imperial Advisor Arem Heshvaun said:

SQUAD GOALS

When is the album dropping?

3 hours ago, Dwing said:

When is the album dropping?

Straight outta Mandalore

3 hours ago, Dwing said:

When is the album dropping?

A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away...

On 12/8/2020 at 1:53 PM, Odanan said:

For a long time, Din had no name AND no face. Hard to empathize with that.

That's entirely untrue. What could possibly lead you to the conclusion that one needs a face to empathize with, that one needs a name? Before we knew his name and face, we knew him simply as a Mandalorian, rather The Mandalorian given the show's title. He was very recognizable and had plenty of character. Would you argue too, that for empathy one must have a human so that the audience has someone that looks like them? Contesting this notion is the entire thesis of my writing.

Because that notion is incorrect.

The Mandalorian was a fully realized character with needs, wants, fears and things he enjoyed, things he believed and we saw his creed be challenged multiple times. He has changed often and has learned much, but never did he need a name or face reveal, I don't think. When you think of Vader, Boba, Jango, do you ever consider the face under the mask before the helmet? Are you unable to empathize with Stormtroopers because they're nameless, do you not recognize their pain or when they die, because they are inhuman solely based on the merit that you don't know they're like you, so directly? Is Darth Vader more known for his face than his iconic mask? Is it hard to empathize with him because of his expressionless visage? Does the tonality in his voice, the motions of his body and digits, limbs, do nothing to evoke that empathetic response in you?

If you answer difficulty with these things I don't really know what to say. But the notion that one needs something directly identifiable in their own visage is to me entirely flawed and even problematic. The notion that one cannot relate to something outside of themselves or what is immediately recognizable can be twisted and turned to various phobias even. Not what I'm accusing you of, but it's a dangerous notion - and a false one, to entertain.

You do not need a name and a face to be somebody, recognizable or empathized with. You simply need actions. That's truly all you need to reach people.

1 hour ago, KCDodger said:

Are you unable to empathize with Stormtroopers because they're nameless, do you not recognize their pain or when they die, because they are inhuman solely based on the merit that you don't know they're like you, so directly?

I was with you until this point. Storm troopers wear full face masks for the exact reason that they can be cut down like sheaves of wheat and the audience doesn't care, no matter how many Wilhelm screams we hear. That was Lucas's intention front and center. Rebel pilots and troops have open face helmets so we can see their faces and care when they die, Imperial pilots and storm troopers have full face coverings so we don't care when TIE pilots die on screen and storm troopers are eaten by Ewoks. Top 100 Things I'd Do If I Ever Became An Evil Overlord Rule # 1 is "My Legions of Terror will have helmets with clear plexiglass visors, not face-concealing ones" for this exact reason, nobody cares (in or out of universe) when faceless goons die. Give them faces and it is a different ballgame.

Having said that, the rule does not apply to heroes or villains, only goons. Darth Vader, Boba Fett, Din, the Lord of the Nazghul, Judge Dredd, various superheroes and other *named* full helmet heroes and villains are the main characters so they get a different set of narrative rules to follow.

4 hours ago, KCDodger said:

That's entirely untrue. What could possibly lead you to the conclusion that one needs a face to empathize with, that one needs a name? Before we knew his name and face, we knew him simply as a Mandalorian, rather The Mandalorian given the show's title. He was very recognizable and had plenty of character. Would you argue too, that for empathy one must have a human so that the audience has someone that looks like them? Contesting this notion is the entire thesis of my writing.

Because that notion is incorrect.

The Mandalorian was a fully realized character with needs, wants, fears and things he enjoyed, things he believed and we saw his creed be challenged multiple times. He has changed often and has learned much, but never did he need a name or face reveal, I don't think. When you think of Vader, Boba, Jango, do you ever consider the face under the mask before the helmet? Are you unable to empathize with Stormtroopers because they're nameless, do you not recognize their pain or when they die, because they are inhuman solely based on the merit that you don't know they're like you, so directly? Is Darth Vader more known for his face than his iconic mask? Is it hard to empathize with him because of his expressionless visage? Does the tonality in his voice, the motions of his body and digits, limbs, do nothing to evoke that empathetic response in you?

If you answer difficulty with these things I don't really know what to say. But the notion that one needs something directly identifiable in their own visage is to me entirely flawed and even problematic. The notion that one cannot relate to something outside of themselves or what is immediately recognizable can be twisted and turned to various phobias even. Not what I'm accusing you of, but it's a dangerous notion - and a false one, to entertain.

You do not need a name and a face to be somebody, recognizable or empathized with. You simply need actions. That's truly all you need to reach people.

You are mixing two things: how humans are and how you want humans to be .

A very large part of the successful film and literature "industries" is based on the concept of identification . The most basic identification start in phenotypes, culture...

You want to tell a story in Japan (or any exotic place)? Put a white protagonist there (like in The Last Samurai, Shogun, Madama Butterfly). Even in almost all occidental fantasy and fiction films/books, not constrained by our real world, you get white, human protagonists (when you could have inhuman aliens/creatures as main characters). There are many examples: Avatar, The Last of the Mohicans, The Lord of the Rings, Dune, Star Trek...

There is a reason every major character in Star Wars is human, except for the "old, eccentric master who talks funny" (Yoda) and the "muscular native, loyal as a dog, who doesn't even speak their language" (Chewie). Villains don't count: it was always common to depict than as monsters/ugly people. There is a reason we will never see a series/film called "Yoda", "Chewbacca", or (I dare to say) "Ahsoka".

You only knew Mando's face in the end of the first season, but for all matters he was "human". Imagine if he had, instead, 3 arms or legs, or backward knees. The series would be a disaster.

I'm not saying it is right or good. It is what it is. And to change a reality, we need first to understand it.

12 hours ago, Imperial Advisor Arem Heshvaun said:

SQUAD GOALS

Foundlings to Mando !

About to drop THE phreshest album in the Outer Rim

featuring the number one hit on the Coruscant Top 66

Straight Outta Mandalore **

**Produced by Max Rebbo & John Williams

PreOrder Today and get Wilhelm Scream remix for free!

17 hours ago, Imperial Advisor Arem Heshvaun said:

SQUAD GOALS

The Mando Marauders , A Tribe Called Deathwatch

Plasma Swords , Genius/BKK

12 hours ago, Odanan said:

You want to tell a story in Japan (or any exotic place)? Put a white protagonist there (like in The Last Samurai, Shogun, Madama Butterfly). Even in almost all occidental fantasy and fiction films/books, not constrained by our real world, you get white, human protagonists (when you could have inhuman aliens/creatures as main characters). There are many examples: Avatar, The Last of the Mohicans, The Lord of the Rings, Dune, Star Trek...

Well this is a load of colonial malarky. You’re suggesting I can't empathize or follow a story unless it has, what, a white male lead?

That is complete bantha poodoo.

I absolutely LOVED Frog Lady and I only use that moniker, for lack of anything else, and I was genuinely filled with anxiety when, she was calling out and we didn't see her husband right away.

I've watched countless films from non-western sources, from classic Kurosawa to even the occasional bollywood flick. I have no problem relating, or if not relating, understanding characters.

Frell.. I remember Farscape fondly, and had no problem with seeing Pilot or Rigel as characters.

If Star Trek has had major inclusivity - always has. I got Sisko as much as I got Picard. Im sure if they had a bigger budget, we could have got an non-humanoid species.

15 hours ago, Odanan said:

You are mixing two things: how humans are and how you want humans to be .

A very large part of the successful film and literature "industries" is based on the concept of identification . The most basic identification start in phenotypes, culture...

You want to tell a story in Japan (or any exotic place)? Put a white protagonist there (like in The Last Samurai, Shogun, Madama Butterfly). Even in almost all occidental fantasy and fiction films/books, not constrained by our real world, you get white, human protagonists (when you could have inhuman aliens/creatures as main characters). There are many examples: Avatar, The Last of the Mohicans, The Lord of the Rings, Dune, Star Trek...

There is a reason every major character in Star Wars is human, except for the "old, eccentric master who talks funny" (Yoda) and the "muscular native, loyal as a dog, who doesn't even speak their language" (Chewie). Villains don't count: it was always common to depict than as monsters/ugly people. There is a reason we will never see a series/film called "Yoda", "Chewbacca", or (I dare to say) "Ahsoka".

You only knew Mando's face in the end of the first season, but for all matters he was "human". Imagine if he had, instead, 3 arms or legs, or backward knees. The series would be a disaster.

I'm not saying it is right or good. It is what it is. And to change a reality, we need first to understand it.

Bite me, colonialist.

2 hours ago, That Blasted Samophlange said:

Well this is a load of colonial malarky. You’re suggesting I can't empathize or follow a story unless it has, what, a white male lead?

That is complete bantha poodoo.

I absolutely LOVED Frog Lady and I only use that moniker, for lack of anything else, and I was genuinely filled with anxiety when, she was calling out and we didn't see her husband right away.

I've watched countless films from non-western sources, from classic Kurosawa to even the occasional bollywood flick. I have no problem relating, or if not relating, understanding characters.

Frell.. I remember Farscape fondly, and had no problem with seeing Pilot or Rigel as characters.

If Star Trek has had major inclusivity - always has. I got Sisko as much as I got Picard. Im sure if they had a bigger budget, we could have got an non-humanoid species.

You and I are friends now. Forever. You have no say in this.

18 hours ago, DarkHorse said:

I was with you until this point. Storm troopers wear full face masks for the exact reason that they can be cut down like sheaves of wheat and the audience doesn't care, no matter how many Wilhelm screams we hear. That was Lucas's intention front and center. Rebel pilots and troops have open face helmets so we can see their faces and care when they die, Imperial pilots and storm troopers have full face coverings so we don't care when TIE pilots die on screen and storm troopers are eaten by Ewoks. Top 100 Things I'd Do If I Ever Became An Evil Overlord Rule # 1 is "My Legions of Terror will have helmets with clear plexiglass visors, not face-concealing ones" for this exact reason, nobody cares (in or out of universe) when faceless goons die. Give them faces and it is a different ballgame.

Having said that, the rule does not apply to heroes or villains, only goons. Darth Vader, Boba Fett, Din, the Lord of the Nazghul, Judge Dredd, various superheroes and other *named* full helmet heroes and villains are the main characters so they get a different set of narrative rules to follow.

Honestly, I don't LIKE that Stormtroopers are cut down like that. I do care when they die regardless of their face coverings and it's a very bad media trope that reinforces the very wrong idea that you need a face to empathize with, which is wrong. The rule can apply to protagonists of their own stories, be they villains or not in the broader story. Unless we suddenly think Delta Squad doesn't matter, because they are very clear and cut straight up goons.