Comic book territory

Well…now it did happen I guess the question I’d have more is…where do we get that he just did nothing? Was that an old EU thing?

I get the sense that, even if that was his first time really learning of the Rebellion, the Path doesn’t break that, necessarily. The Rebellion are actively guerrilla fighters, while the Path is…more like the Underground Railroad, helping Force Sensitives escape. Plus the fact that Bail and Leia are part of the Resistance.

In terms of the Inquisitors, iirc, don’t we get the impression most die or were less prominent in Rebels?

that said, you can certainly watch the films without knowing anything of this series or seeing it. We’ve done it for years, but at least there is added context or weight to things for those that care. Same with the comics. Obi-wan’s confidence in saying Anakin is dead, the wording of Leia’s last plea in ANH, why Vader hasn’t bothered hunting his old master or Yoda, are all added to, imo.

 

The thing is that it doesn’t really conflict with the movies. We’ve now seen two fights that Vader lost and was still “the learner”, and now we see how Obi-wan knew that Anakin/Vader was alive. Because…if I left someone missing 3 limbs and burning in lava…i wouldn’t think they survived.

with Leia, I think I said it above, but I don’t fully agree with this idea of “they never knew each other,” well, at least now, and I can still see it as not breaking. Leia opens with a formal request for help, specifically from her father, appealing to his service in the Clone Wars. She ends with a more personal sounding plea, dropping all formality, “help me, Obi-wan Kenobi. You’re my only hope.” Him rescuing her in the series adds to why she believes that.

bonus: Luke pretty much only refers to him as Ben. When he says he’s with Ben Kenobi, she automatically knows who he means. It also adds an element to why she might’ve named her son Ben.

I mean, yeah I went to the EU, because one of my first thoughts in the whole “he did nothing but sit on Tatooine” was the Kenobi novel. The films don’t indicate really one way or another if he was there the whole time or not. The most we get in RotS, iirc, is “I will watch over the boy”, but we don’t fully know what that entails or what exactly he did.

Plus, he has quite a bit of items in his little hut that I don’t think he had at the end of Revenge of the Sith.

 

No. Because she's matured into princess and a member of the senate who is making a formal request on behalf of her father, the ruler of Alderann, for Kenobi to join rebellion against the Empire and enter a civil war. She's not asking a favour for old times' sake.

No it was just the path of least resistance to assume that there have been no previous adventures. Some are resisting leaving that path. The only obstacle is the head canon they've volunteered to form in their head but wasn't required of them.


Contradict literally means against what was said. Nobody said Leia and Kenobi never met. So it's not possible to contradict. You can't contradict an omission.

 

could not some of this be held also against the Prequels? When Anakin and Obi-wan parted, they were more equals than learner/master at that point. Obi-wan outright says in the OT that Yoda was the Jedi that trained him, but then we have Qui-gon as his actual master in the PT.

this is part of how prequel content works. It takes stuff and spins things where tbey can to point to the initial content or work in the grey spaces, which then can add more context/weight to things. Star wars and other stories, when they get into expanded content from the original, can have a tendency to fill in gaps or retcon things to have new/deeper meaning. Nothing here in Kenobi contradicts anything explicitly stated in the films, only things assumed or grey/vague.

 

So... I sorta get what you mean.

Giving Obi Wan stuff to do, especially exciting stuff to do across multiple planets and involving other Force Sensitives, definitely plays against our expectations of him just hanging out on Tatooine and watching Luke. It's definitely a lot more than many of us expected to happen- and some of us were originally even expecting this show to be a slow, pensive event where Kenobi never leaves the overused sand planet at all.

That being said... obviously you're free to have your own headcanon. But I cannot help but feel that it's a bit odd to draw lines in the sand on what actually happened... I mean, it's all just a story. Yes, claiming that the "space wizard show feeling like a comic book isn't really surprising", while true, also feels like a bit of a copout, so I can understand why you wouldn't accept that.

So, here's what I feel- the scope of this show could've easily outpaced itself, and maybe sometimes it did. But as a whole, I think Kenobi did a good job of running the gauntlet between telling a meaningful and exciting story, and not overstepping its territory.

For example, the version of the Resistance is no Rebel Alliance. If anything, it's more akin to the Underground Railroad, and clearly they're not starting any sort of planetary rebellions. They're not even able to defend their single base against like 30 stormtroopers. So frankly, I don't care what expression Alec Guiness had on his face forty years ago, lol. It's kinda unfair to hold these things to niche, subjective standards- especially when, as @Iotatheta points out, the prequels already set up some much more blatant, actually text based, inconsistencies anyway. So, by putting Kenobi in a situation where he's still fulfilling his oath to protect the twins, putting him with a small proto-Rebellion, and actually letting the scene have some weight in him coming a long way to re-accepting his status as a Jedi and the hope that can bring? Personally, I think that was handled pretty well.

Maybe it's because I'm a Star Wars fan who loves the board games, video games, etc, and has seen a ton of re-imagining of the lore in which Kenobi somehow fought with a more fully-fledged Rebellion in massive battles against the Empire, but I thought this more subdued yet exciting approach was pretty masterful.

 

How?

 

you are using terms that suggest your stance is the only correct one. It’s fine to say “I believe that x is the case.” Yet here, your posts come across to me as if your view is the only correct one?

yes, I did spend time saying that’s an aspect of prequels: deeper context, new context, potential retcons. It’s as much like how prequels don’t offer any real dangers of death to a character that you’ve already seen in the story at a later point (prime example: Obi-wan, Yoda, Anakin, and Sidious were never in any danger of death in the PT). As an example, Obi-wan speaks of the Jedi as if he is the last one in ANH, and the Jedi and the Force are treated as hokey, ancient and not really existing now. Yet now, he has already met Ezra, and multiple Jedi survived the purge, one of which actually meets with Luke post RotJ. Retcons happen.

What does this do for that scene? Well, one can read his face as “who is this strange woman?” Or one can read it, as we now can, as pondering going back into action, especially now with Luke showing curiosity. “Is this the right course?” Her plea can be read as formal, and then quickly personal due to their history, or as purely formal, whether one has seen Obi-wan Kenobi or not.

These things can have meaning with or without it. Imo, it’s richer with the context of the show, and nothing really contradicts. Nothing explicitly stated at least, imo. I honestly believe most of the things that are perceived as contradictions to the OT are more things that were unspoken in the films and thus had to go off of interpretation.

You’re welcome to ignore the show, and any media outside the films, if you so desire. But I don’t know if it’s in good taste to come and state your opinions as if they were fact and the only way to view those scenes. The series is here, it’s part of the story.

 

Don't forget Yoda. It was quite clear that Obi-Wan and Vader were the last of the Jedi in ANH.

 

I don't think anyone should have a problem with "comic book territory". That's been familiar ground for this franchise for 45 years.

Whether you pretend something is a retcon or don't is.... incidental.

 

I’m confused. The only reason these things don’t “exist” or “didn’t happen” in the OT is because they were made after. Same with the prequels. So are they also “comic book territory”? Something that didn’t happen when we watch the OT?

Just because they didn’t exist in the 70s-90s doesn’t mean they don’t exist now. Their stories are part of the universe now and add more context or depth to the stuff we already had. Retcons aren’t bad. When you watch the OT, we can now go and see possible new context for things, which I’ve pointed out above (Leia’s shift in tone in her request for help, Obi-wan’s comments about Vader, Leia knowing “Ben Kenobi”).

heck, Vader being Luke’s father is a retcon, as is Luke and Leia being siblings. Obi-wan wasn’t trained by Yoda but Qui-gon, that’s a retcon of something in ESB.

So I gotta ask, do the prequels exist in the story to you, or is it comic book territory with Kenobi? If it does “exist”, what separates the two for you?

 

You’re right it obviously didn’t happen. Just like Luke never blew up the Death Star, Han was never frozen in carbonite and Darth Vader never threw the emperor down a shaft…

Because these are all fictional stories.

To say something obviously didn’t happen in a fictional universe is an oddly absolute stance (and you who deals in absolutes )to take on a period in those fictional stories that hadn’t been addressed before on screen. Nothing happens in fiction until a writer puts it on paper.

I’ve rewatched ANH and I can make the events of Kenobi fit in OWK’s reaction to Leias message. If you look at the expression on Alec’s face when he sees the recording you can interpret an emotional reaction that is consistent with him knowing Leia.

Obviously that wasn’t Alec’s intent because this part of his backstory hadn’t been written yet, but there’s enough there where I can let myself BELIEVE it’s all consistent.

There’s enough there that as long as you don’t hang on too tightly to head cannon or you’re a fan that criticizes new SW first and asks questions later.

But if nothing can get you to believe the connection, I’m sorry for you. But I’d recommend not arguing absolute interpretations of fiction with people who can make that connection. It’s not debate. Debates are arguments in search of truth and there is no truth in a fictional universe.

Hell Disney could go all Marvel and go all multiverse, I mean World Between Worlds on us and retcon anything they want.

 

You made me laugh! +1

They stabbed Han Solo in the stomach and dumped his body off a bridge like the dude never even mattered to the SAGA.

Disney already does whatever it wants and no one cares that patricidal Ben Solo is 78% more dense and 10x dumber than Vader ever was.

So yes.... yes, I agree - Disney could go all multiverse. My popcorn is ready either way.

​

 

What?