Darth Maul: Should he have been in all three Star Wars prequels?

[Mr. Socko]

It would have been cooler if he got away in the first movie, and got killed by Anakin in the third movie. This comes from someone who loves the prequels.

For the past 8 years I've been searching for that lost soul that likes the new Star Wars films...finally found him!




hehe, just kidding.

 

[Sebastos]

It would have been cooler if he got away in the first movie, and got killed by Anakin in the third movie. This comes from someone who loves the prequels.

That's exactly what I think could have happened.

 

[TwilightPro101]

Yes, he should have been.

 

[Redwoods Wolf]

Hmmm.....maybe. On the one hand, Maul's death in Ep. 1 and Dooku's ten-minute life-span in Ep. 3 makes Sith Lords seem rather disposable. On the other hand, Vader seems all the more powerful in the OT by comparison.

On the other OTHER hand, I despise Count Dooku, so...yes. Maul should have at least made it to Episode 2, where Anakin could kill him and fall to the dark side (much as he did in the beginning of Ep. 3) and spend all of 3becoming truly, horribly evil.

 

[Sebastos]

Hmmm.....maybe. On the one hand, Maul's death in Ep. 1 and Dooku's ten-minute life-span in Ep. 3 makes Sith Lords seem rather disposable. On the other hand, Vader seems all the more powerful in the OT by comparison.

On the other OTHER hand, I despise Count Dooku, so...yes. Maul should have at least made it to Episode 2, where Anakin could kill him and fall to the dark side (much as he did in the beginning of Ep. 3) and spend all of 3becoming truly, horribly evil.

Yeah, maybe Anakin killing Maul in Episode 2 could have also happened to show a little bit of the dark side in him. Instead of just the moment with his mom.

I don't know, I just can't believe that we've thought of all these cool things that could have happened in the prequels, and none of them happened. Well, it's also I guees cause George didn't think about them either.

 

[FaT_tONle]

Anakin killing Maul would have showed his dark side??? Heck... then Obi Wan should have switched and joined Dooku in Episode 2 for avenging Qui Gon... guys give it a rest... Maul is overrated... Dooku actually had substance... he was the one that was under developed... Maul should have just been a pawn... a secret apprentice or some ****... Maul was just cool cause of the makeup and the martial arts edge... I am glad they did away with his ass...

 

[November Rain]

we're obviously talking about a merge of maul's and dooku's personas somewhat...

instead of having two separate sith lords, have one that does the entire role until anakin takes over.

 

[Kahoot]

I don't think they should've merged of Maul and Dooku I'm of the school that Maul and Grievous should have been mearged but keeping Dooku.

 

[Gilpesh]

Hmmm.....maybe. On the one hand, Maul's death in Ep. 1 and Dooku's ten-minute life-span in Ep. 3 makes Sith Lords seem rather disposable. On the other hand, Vader seems all the more powerful in the OT by comparison.

If that was the actual plan of the prequel villains then this thread would have been about the tragic qualities of Maul's death and how it affected the Star Wars mythos...

Instead this thread is asking who wanted him in more movies so he just wasn't a flash in the pan all style no substance villain.

And doesn't the entire movie life-span of Dooku in Episode 2 undermind this whole "Sith lords come and go fast" message that Lucas was going for?

Wouldn't that mean there should have been a fourth sith apprentence that was active in Episode 2 that was killed off in the very same episode?

And doesn't that lead to plot holes of how these supposed new Sith suddenly show up and are so good they must have been training as Sith for many many years but nope, just the little time between the movies?

 

[shapeshifter]

Darth Maul was the only good thing about the prequels.

i agree but would like to add one thing.
it seems like in the prequels everyone was much better at fighting. i liked that aspect, and maul embidied it. ray park is great.
in the real trillogy it just kind of looked like the actors were handed prop swords and told to hit them together until i saw cut.

 

[Sebastos]

i agree but would like to add one thing.
it seems like in the prequels everyone was much better at fighting. i liked that aspect, and maul embidied it. ray park is great.
in the real trillogy it just kind of looked like the actors were handed prop swords and told to hit them together until i saw cut.

That's exactly what I thought too. Especially in the Anakin and Obi-Wan fight, you can clearly see it.

 

[Redwoods Wolf]

If that was the actual plan of the prequel villains then this thread would have been about the tragic qualities of Maul's death and how it affected the Star Wars mythos...

Instead this thread is asking who wanted him in more movies so he just wasn't a flash in the pan all style no substance villain.

Hence the second paragraph in my post. By being key component in which Anakin falls to the dark side, Maul would have had substance and not have been a CGI-less special effect.

And doesn't the entire movie life-span of Dooku in Episode 2 undermind this whole "Sith lords come and go fast" message that Lucas was going for?

Wouldn't that mean there should have been a fourth sith apprentence that was active in Episode 2 that was killed off in the very same episode?

And doesn't that lead to plot holes of how these supposed new Sith suddenly show up and are so good they must have been training as Sith for many many years but nope, just the little time between the movies?

I'm not sure that's what he was going for. I think he was trying to highlight Palpatine's search for the perfect Sith apprentice. Maul didn't work out, and Dooku was getting a little long in the tooth, so he focused on Anakin. (But to be honest, he should have established Dooku in Ep. 1 as someone good and powerful if he wanted his character to have an effect) If you want disposable Sith Lords, there's always that Arsajj Ventress girl from the Clone Wars cartoon.

The main thing the prequels are missing is the mythic touch. The age of the Jedi should be like an age of wizards, but Lucas focuses more on the sci-fi. More sci-fi makes sense for the age of the Empire, where cold machinery is the rule of the day. (as personified by Anakin Skywalker himself)He should have gone back and studied up on his Joseph Campbell and various legends and myths. Imagine--the SW equivalents of the Chair Perilous, Grendel, Medusa...

 

[shapeshifter]

no because then there would have been know Grievous.

keep grevious and remove jango fett
grevious vs maul would have been worth while.
grevious with a back story and a character would have been worth while

 

[Redwoods Wolf]

i agree but would like to add one thing.
it seems like in the prequels everyone was much better at fighting. i liked that aspect, and maul embidied it. ray park is great.
in the real trillogy it just kind of looked like the actors were handed prop swords and told to hit them together until i saw cut.

I like the Luke vs. Vader fights in the OT more than Anakin vs. Obi-Wan, myself. Darth Maul did make for an interesting three-way fight, but the episode 2 duel is just annoying and empty.

 

[November Rain]

i think they were made to be dull so that the yoda fight could shine.

 

[†~AntiChrist~†]

2 was my least favorite out of the whole saga..But the fight with yoda and doku was pretty good but short..

 

[DorkyFresh]

i think they were made to be dull so that the yoda fight could shine.

they were dull cuz Ray Park wasn't involved with the choreography. as flashy as the fight between Obi Wan and Anakin was, it still wasn't the calibur of the Darth Maul fight.......and that's because Ray Park wasn't there for episode 2 or 3 to make the choreography better. i remember a lot of specific movements from the Darth Maul fight but when i try to remember any of the other lightsaber fights from the prequels it's all one big blur.

 

[Warhammer]

The Phantom Menace had the best lightsaber duel in the entire franchise, despite the movie being bad.

 

[Matt]

No, but they should've at least made him do something actually, evil aside from standing around and crossing his arms in a way that would make Dean Cain envious.

 

[JackBauer]

Am I really the only one who thinks this looks totally ridiculous?

 

[QueerMike]

Maul actually would have been good in the role of General Grievous. If not, i'd still like him to have survived until the second film.

 

[matthooper]

Like someone said earlier in the thread. Maul was the only decent thing in the entire Prequels, and even he was pretty boring for the most part. But he had a real evil about him. He should have been there for all three. The lightsaber duel at the end of TPM was great and it would have been nice to see more.

Nothing could have saved these crappy films though except maybe if Lucas hired actual writers for all three. It's such an embarrasment knowing these films are part of the classic trilogy. To me, they are all unwatchable.

 

[The Shape]

I don't know if he should have been around for all three movies, but when Lucas killed him off in TPM, he killed the only exciting thing about his prequels.

Maul was just a badass, and as others have said, his lightsaber battle was the best one of the prequels, mainly because they shyed away from using CGI every 5 seconds.

 

[DorkyFresh]

The Phantom Menace had the best lightsaber duel in the entire franchise, despite the movie being bad.

exactly....thanks to Ray Park!

holy sh**, that's pretty badass. sans the horns, that would've been AWESOME to see Maul come back in Episode 2 or 3 like that. it would've been a better foreshadowing of Darth Vader than General Grievous was.

 

[Rez]

Am I really the only one who thinks this looks totally ridiculous?

I'm not the biggest fan of that design, it's the concept of him coming back as more machine than man that I enjoy. But I think it's easy to see how you could switch up a few things and have a great looking villian.