How do we know Palpatine is really dead?

Lucas never said that blast before 1999 and you know it. Watch the God damned original trilogy and tell me that's about "AnAkiN!"

 

Star Wars : From The Adventures Of Luke Skywalker - The Anakin Skywalker Story (A Star Wars Story)

 

You're angry

 

That's not wrong, but Lucas is a revisionist, for better and for worse. Yes, we have terrible CGI all over the OT now, but we also have two great prequel shows and two great Star Wars aesthetics.

Personally, I don't think that the two are mutually exclusive. The OT by itself is about Luke. The OT + PT is about Anakin/Vader, as the PT recontextualizes (and in some ways retcons) the OT.

 

I might be horribly wrong, but we're definitely getting another Jean Grey tale... well i hope so, simply because the MCU must take swing at it. The previous tales left so much on the cutting room floor... from the biblical like source material. Bad Superman: The Gladiator, Disney owns the Alien franchise (the Brood - Alien rip-off), that would be a hell of a cross over, if you don't know what I speak of, the Shi'ar Empire featured prominently in the Dark Phoenix tale. I hope the MCU finally does her tale Justice!

https://screenrant.com/x-men-lilandra-the-shiar-empire-facts-trivia/

 

The ST is about...Palpatine.

 

The Emperor was such an unknown quantity back in 83. And he remained that way after ROTJ came out.

The main takeaway from the conclusion of that film was that Vader turned "good" by not letting his son die at the Emperor's hand. I doubt anyone thought that Palpatine being dead, for ever, was the prime impression they were meant to get from the finale. It probably would have been less exciting but if instead of killing Palpatine, Vader instead helped he and Luke escape from the Death Star before Palpatine could capture or kill them both. Leaving the audience to assume that Palpatine perished aboard the station when Lando blew it up. The movie would have been just as successful conclusion to the trilogy and to the saga.

Palpatine is barely more than a maguffin/exposition dispenser in ROTJ. He doesn't even appear until about a third of the way through the movie. So he only plays a direct role on about 20% of the trilogy his death is supposedly so important to provide any value to.

The prequels make Palpatine a more dimensional character in order to facilitate him hiding in plain sight. And McDiarmid did a great job in both roles. But that just makes the mismatch between the PT and the OT more awkward.

 

It's almost as if they are myths or something.

Cheers,
Jayson

 

So, thank's to the Bad Batch we now have a better understanding at how things led to the events of the ST.
Basically, Palpatine had immedeately set up some plans in case he dies - the Contingency plan to wipe the Empire that "failed him" and a set for a new, better Empire (Aftermath trilogy) and the Project Necromancer to bring himself from the dead and rule this new Empire (Bad Batch).

I guess I am glad, that, regardless of some parts being poorly made, the overall narrative fits together and works well enough.

 

Cool. But does anybody seriously need the Bad Batch to tell them that Palpatine was a schemer and a planner, and that he likely had some contingencies?

Palpatine got himself to be made a senator then a chancellor and we later found out he had two entire armies built in secret. And prequel fans will gush about how great it is that Palpatine planned all that. We never saw him plan any of it though, we just accepted that everything that happened did so according to his design, whatever it was (we're never shown how he could credibly be capable of pulling all that off), since all the outcomes were in his favour. But for some reason the same fans are almost completely at a loss as to how Palpatine could possibly still be clinging to existence beyond the battle of Endor.

 

I think they should have either let him stay dead, or have him return as a creepy FG - for me anyhow, it didn't work having back in the (rotting) flesh.

In any case, looking at those clones of Snoke ....whoever did the cloning for Palps should have given him his money back they weren't a patch on brothers Dawn, Day and Dusk in Foundation!

 

My wife, not a SW fan (doesn't hate SW, either), holds the best reaction to SW ever.

When she heard of this fan topic she blurted, "Did they forget it's Star Wars? No one dies. It's a soap opera."

Made me chuckle. I mean, obviously there's nuance, but she's not wrong. Quite a few characters "die" and come back. Hell, old double-blade showed up out of nowhere at the end of solo after being cut in half on screen and people cheered...

I think it just comes down to whether people wanted it or not and not whether it's merited or not.

Cheers,
Jayson

 

I also think it's down to what the company wants....after the end of TROS a group of young reylos sent a lovely petition to DLF asking if they could bring back Ben Solo in some way, shape or form. They accepted that Daisy Ridley had dismissed 'reylo' but just thought that maybe the character could have returned in a tv series or comic.
They received a flat 'no'.

So that speaks volumes.

 

I would say that almost all the fans who continue to seriously object and demand "explanation" are just resentful at not being in the loop, as they thought they were. They weren't given the opportunity to pre-approve it in their projected head canon, which had other ideas.

 

At the end of the day, we are just 'fans'....we aren't creators.
We buy their products, we don't get to tell them what to do, for better, or for worse.

 

I know one thing for sure. The studio did not reply to a petition agreeing that Daisy dismissed Reylo and telling fans "no" they will not be getting any future Kylo movies or TV shows.

 

I think it's twofold:
1) a overall obsession of (some) fans with every little detail up to and including daily routine of the cantina barman from ANH. This is somewhat understandable since pretty much everything was explored in some comic, novel or guidebook in the last 40 years and a lot of things end up being connected to each other. So, when a new thing comes out, fans, who are "trained" to think this way start demanding immediate explanations, coming with theories and, well, we all know how that goes.

2) a general internet culture of "analyzing" media, which by this point evolved into nitpicking and discussing, again, every tiny detail. So, an unspoken rule seems to have emerged, saying that everything has to be explained it a clear and obvious manner, otherwise it's a "plot hole", "bad writing" etc. etc.

That's why when I watch something, unless there is some sort of irreconcilable contradiction, I quickly come up with some plausible explanation as to why something unexplained happened and move on. "Palpatine came back somehow? Probably cloned himself in those vats we saw in the beginning. Now, what's Rey up to?" Is it the "smart" way to enjoy media? Not necessarily, but most nitpickers aren't as "smart" as they think either.

 

People who have watched a movie dozens of times over the years come to believe that the knowledge they've harvested from that and from supplementary material, all the connections that are made later and they credit the film with having cleverly told them what to expect all along, they delude themselves that this was their experience in real time the first time they saw it.

And, of course, they've already approved of what came before. So the new stuff is not valid if it doesn't immediately resemble scenarios they've already pre-approved. Those pre-approved scenarios are normally always paddling pool depth, surface level. Something they've seen before. Or something they've been literally told will happen. (Inversely, if they haven't been told to expect it, then it can't legitimately happen)

I don't think those that hold serious objections are pacified if someone explains that it makes sense (enough sense that it DOESN'T need explanation or justification within the context of the saga). It just doesn't make sense to them that it didn't go the direction they felt entitled to predict. For which they will never forgive.

 

It's easy to start building a person and deciding things about their psychology, but the simple commonality is the reveal didn't feel good to some. The reasons come after as each mind tries to justify how it felt.

But there's no arguing with emotional experience. And anymore, I find it not very interesting arguing with duct taped reasons a mind came up with to explain why it felt wrong.

It's very simple. It felt bad to someone and therefore it sucked. Then they get upset they had a bad experience given the anticipation of feeling good.

Sh*t happens.

Cheer,
Jayson