Villains in the next Star Wars movie

[Octoberist]

Chad Vader it is

[THANOSRULES]

[Hunter Rider]

Who's da man!

[kang604]

I wouldnt mind seeing a mix of resurgent Imperials, Mandalorians, and an ancient Sith Lord who is resurrected. I dont know much about EU stuff but Exar Kun comes to mind.

[Gianakin_]

Originally Posted by paladinryan

This rumor originated in a British tabloid, guys. It's not going to happen. They also said Cher would be Catwoman in TDKR, and how did that turn out?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/cele...tman-film.html

Still angry that didn't happen.

[thorstone]

There is a shared theme in the great fantasy movies of the past decade-- the dark lord returns from the dead. Viewers ate this plot up in Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter, and it's where Star Wars should go in the sequels.

[Spider-Vader]

Honestly, I wouldn't mind Darth Maul popping up. He's alive in the Clone Wars show, maybe they did that to set him up for the sequel trilogy? As for why he's not ancient during the time of this movie, perhaps his species ages slower than humans (much like the Wookiees).

[Lead Cenobite]

For some reason I can't buy Maul being alive, even if he is in a cartoon.

[ThePowerCosmic]

Same here.

[HowardStark]

How about Darth Mauls race of aliens in the movie because we saw plenty of them in the clone wars.

[Indy1Jones]

Originally Posted by HowardStark

How about Darth Mauls race of aliens in the movie because we saw plenty of them in the clone wars.

That could work.

[mr. peasant]

But how organised and powerful are they as a faction? In Star Wars movies, the villain is one that operates on a galactic scale. For the new trilogy, the enemy needs to be a large entity with an army of its own that is large enough to go head to head with the Republic.

As such, one that I think could work is the Chiss Ascendancy (think: space elves with blue skin and red eyes). Elitist, xenophobic and isolationist, they would very much be opposed to joining the Republic.

[Spider-Vader]

His race doesn't seem that organized, their planet seems pretty primitive compared to the likes of Coruscant.

[Lobo]

I want Mandalorians as the villain(s). Count my vote for the Mandalore

[ComicStalker]

Whomever the villian(s) are for the new trilogy I would like them to keep in mind that the OT was not much more than a magical tale of wizards and princesses. Of a boy discovering that he was all part of it. All the sci-fi elements were just there to make it different than Earth.
I hope the new movies dont make the fatal mistake that the PT made. And that is that everything has to look cool, super clean and futuristic. The best part of the OT was that it was very rough looking and the story was about the characters and not about the sets and backdrops. Also I would LOVE it if they stayed away from green-screening all the back drops. Make as much of the sets as possible. Make them look worn and lived in.

[mr. peasant]

Originally Posted by ComicStalker

Whomever the villian(s) are for the new trilogy I would like them to keep in mind that the OT was not much more than a magical tale of wizards and princesses. Of a boy discovering that he was all part of it. All the sci-fi elements were just there to make it different than Earth.
I hope the new movies dont make the fatal mistake that the PT made. And that is that everything has to look cool, super clean and futuristic. The best part of the OT was that it was very rough looking and the story was about the characters and not about the sets and backdrops. Also I would LOVE it if they stayed away from green-screening all the back drops. Make as much of the sets as possible. Make them look worn and lived in.

Going into dick mode here but you're contradicting yourself. If the best thing was that 'the story was about the characters', then it wouldn't matter if the sets and back drops weren't 'very rough looking'. In my opinion, it's fine and actually great if they continue to use green screen back drops (especially since stuff like Coruscant can't be done using practical methods) so long as it's not what carries the film.

[Octoberist]

I prefer if they can use practical sets when possible but yeah greenscreen it for the impossible. The whole point is to make these worlds tangible and lived in. The last two PT films felt like black box theater with everything all the blanks filled in.

[Destructus86]

Mandalore would be a good choice. Seeing a peaceful world become a galactic threat again would be something different to see in the movies. Plus...we don't know what's been happening on Mandalore since the time between the Empire's rise and fall. My assumption is that Mandalore went back to it's old violence ways during the Imperial occupation.

[ComicStalker]

Saying that the best part about the OT was the characters and also saying that they need to stay away from Green-Screening everything aren't mutually exclusive.
The PT also showed that its possible to make everything look fake with green screen and also to have wooden lifeless characters that most people couldnt root for.
I do wish that they stay away from using Green Screen for 99% of backgrounds. Like they did in the PT. Somehow they managed to construct mostly real sets with matte paintings that looked more real that the newer stuff in the PT. Green Screen should be to fill in holes in the background. Not to provide the whole thing. Thats what the PT got wrong (among many other things) and what the OT got right.
I hope they stay more in line with the OT for just about every aspect.

[Octoberist]

I always loved old school matte paintings. When they worked, they worked well and made the backdrop almost surreal.

[mr. peasant]

Originally Posted by ComicStalker

Saying that the best part about the OT was the characters and also saying that they need to stay away from Green-Screening everything aren't mutually exclusive.
The PT also showed that its possible to make everything look fake with green screen and also to have wooden lifeless characters that most people couldnt root for.
I do wish that they stay away from using Green Screen for 99% of backgrounds. Like they did in the PT. Somehow they managed to construct mostly real sets with matte paintings that looked more real that the newer stuff in the PT. Green Screen should be to fill in holes in the background. Not to provide the whole thing. Thats what the PT got wrong (among many other things) and what the OT got right.
I hope they stay more in line with the OT for just about every aspect.

I'm sorry but I'm pretty sure you're seeing that through rose-tinted glasses. That, or it's because the OT had a lower resolution and picture quality. There's almost no way that a painted backdrop can look more convincing than properly done CG; even those from 10 years ago.

The main argument for CG is for the complexity of the background. Painted backdrops are static, lack animation and cannot be interacted with. And while set-design and prop-making have improved a lot since the 80s, they are still limited by time and practicality. As such, they are best used for interior shots such as corridors and rooms; where as action sequences and exterior shots (especially urban ones) are better done using green screen with CG backgrounds.

[Octoberist]

To be fair to 'greenscreen' can work great but it depends on the director. Personally and ironically, I don't think Lucas fully utilized his 'digital sets' as well as he should have. I think he excelled in some aspects like on Corusant but the last battle in 'Attack of the Clones' looked claustrophobic despite being an exterior setting. And don't get me started on the Anakin/Obi fight at the end of Revenge of the Sith. Boy, Luke/Darth's fight was simplier sure but it had something called DRAMA and TENSION. That kills visual effects any day.

It never felt tangible. The best thing to do is the 'combo' route' with sets and CGI/Greenscreen to expand the backdrop, etc. Sometimes, it's very subtle. For example, Raoul Silva's island (though inspired by a real island near Japan) is completely made out of a set and CG extension to the buildings.

Also, if you gonna green screen and it's an exterior setting, film it outside like what JJ Abrams and Peter Jackson has done. The natural lighting makes it feel like it's outside.

[mr. peasant]

Originally Posted by Octoberist

To be fair to 'greenscreen' can work great but it depends on the director. Personally and ironically, I don't think Lucas fully utilized his 'digital sets' as well as he should have. I think he excelled in some aspects like on Corusant but the last battle in 'Attack of the Clones' looked claustrophobic despite being an exterior setting. And don't get me started on the Anakin/Obi fight at the end of Revenge of the Sith. Boy, Luke/Darth's fight was simplier sure but it had something called DRAMA and TENSION. That kills visual effects any day.

It never felt tangible. The best thing to do is the 'combo' route' with sets and CGI/Greenscreen to expand the backdrop, etc. Sometimes, it's very subtle. For example, Raoul Silva's island (though inspired by a real island near Japan) is completely made out of a set and CG extension to the buildings.

Also, if you gonna green screen and it's an exterior setting, film it outside like what JJ Abrams and Peter Jackson has done. The natural lighting makes it feel like it's outside.

I think that's a fair comment. How much practical sets and how much green screen depends on the needs of the individual scene. Sometimes, physical props are needed and at other times, CG is called for.

Now, back to topic:

Originally Posted by Lobo

I want Mandalorians as the villain(s). Count my vote for the Mandalore

Here's an idea... what about having the antagonists be a combination of Mandalorians and the Hutts? Perhaps with the reason being they are defending their way of life since since the Mandalorian lifestyle often involves piracy and mercenary activities whilst the Hutts are involved in crime, period; all of which are things the Republic probably do not tolerate.

[HowardStark]

How about this Yoda Had an Evil Twin or Son. It be kinda cool to see an evil Zin master

[ComicStalker]

Originally Posted by mr. peasant

I'm sorry but I'm pretty sure you're seeing that through rose-tinted glasses. That, or it's because the OT had a lower resolution and picture quality. There's almost no way that a painted backdrop can look more convincing than properly done CG; even those from 10 years ago.

The main argument for CG is for the complexity of the background. Painted backdrops are static, lack animation and cannot be interacted with. And while set-design and prop-making have improved a lot since the 80s, they are still limited by time and practicality. As such, they are best used for interior shots such as corridors and rooms; where as action sequences and exterior shots (especially urban ones) are better done using green screen with CG backgrounds.

No Im sorry. But the matte paintings used in the OT looked more real and blend better than the fake looking CGI plastic looking stuff done for the PT.
In fact the matte painting in the OT are so good that most people would have a hard time picking them out unless they watched the extras on the recent Blu-Ray set. Even then they still look more realistic. But thats my opinion.
Back On Topic...
I prefer they stay with a Sith or Dark Jedi for the villians. Star wars inst Star Wars without Sith or at least some Dark Jedi to take the place of Sith...