Could Rogue one be Ahsoka?

Literally nobody is saying that. I'm saying that it is difficult to transfer a character from a TV show and turn them into the main character of a movie.

Again, I'm saying that it is difficult to transfer a character from a TV show and turn them into the main character of a movie. If Disney thought that the Rebels characters were worth being in a movie, they would've already announced a Rebels spin-off movie. The problem is the majority of people don't know who they are.

 

That's interesting. The number Disney has been touting to advertisers is "49 Million" in North America alone.

They can take any existing character or any brand new character and stick them in a movie (at least any good movie) tells you anything you need to know about a character and their role. they can do this with ease. It is not difficult at all.

[Princess Leia addresses the assembled Rebel pilots and briefs them on the mission]
As the camera pans across those assembled there is a Green Twi'lek sitting and in the back is a Lasat with his arms crossed]

Cameo: Done
Making them a main character: Leia addresses the character directly. Hard edit to character close up answering Leia
Other scenes show said character later (Think Nien Nunb or Admiral Ackbar in RotJ)

Simple

 

So you're telling me that one in lets say every fifteen North Americans watches Star Wars Rebels??? If that's the case then I stand corrected. But I doubt it.

It depends. The Rebels franchise hasn't grown into something the size of Spongebob yet. The majority of people out there don't know who Sabine is. Are they going to just throw her in? No. They are going to have to revisit certain things about her that are in Rebels.

And if you tried putting Sabine in a similar role to Leia, it would just be easier to create a new character than to incorporate her into the story (and I'm not implying Sabina as a princess. I mean as one of a big 3).

 

There's a difference between throwing a EU character in the background and making a featured character from a cartoon the star of a movie.

Odmichael is absolutely right when he says that any Rebels or Clone Wars character would need to be reintroduced to the larger audience, and that's tricky to do without boring people or bogging down the story with a lot of exposition.

It's differnet if you're doing a movie version of a TV show, book or comic. You wouldn't make a movie about Spider-Man and expect the audience to understand all the background from the comics. You make a Spider-Man movie by starting over from the beginning. As with the Juggernaut example, it doesn't matter if you know his comic background in X-Men Last Stand, because it's not the same Juggernaut - it's the movie version of the character.

You can put the Outrider in the background as an Easter egg, no problem. But if Dash Rendar shows up and everyone acts like he's been a part of things all along, the vast majority of the audience is going to be left wondering what the hell is going on.

 

Yeah General Grievious was never seen again after that animated micro-series. /sarcasm

 

You've actually just proved my point. Think of how Grievous was introduced into ROTS. It was the most awkward entry of a character into the movies. He just shows up and is this boss. But from the movie you learn nothing about him and his fight scene with Obi Wan is the only one he has and it really doesn't drive the story forward except that he dies. And unless you watched that mini series, you knew nothing about him (and to be fair that mini series really didn't tell us much about him either. The EU expanded a bit).

 

Your saying they never would do something they have done.

I'm aware that the need for Grievious' back story is not there. He hops up on the screen little known like Fett, or even Vader with know backstory you learn as you go. But he started in a cartoon series one that jumped the shark bad enough that they struck it from the canon.

Everbody seems to think that Disney is served by keeping the properties separate but they are designed to feed off each other. Look what they are doing in the MCU; Agents of Shield, Agent Carter and Daredevil are all playing in the same sandbox by design. The movies bring fans to other content and the other content builds on what is already there. They seem to be trying this here too.

 

daffy72 said: ↑YES!
Seriously, what is wrong with people these days? Why do you think you can't introduce a character in a single scene or four words of dialogue?

Really, it sounds like you are saying they can't be introduced in a single scene or four words of dialogue, in many quotes below.

No you don't. Not every background character gets hashed out. Did you have any trouble following along with boba fett in ESB? One scene of him in a line up was his introduction. Many didn't know or care that he came from a cartoon.

In the cantina, no one was concerned that we don't have a detailed back history for Ponda Boba, and if he came from a book first, no one would've cared.

I personally agree that she prolly wont be used, but again your argument is flawed. Every new characters is a character no one knows anything about. You only have to tell the audience that is relevant to the scene.

And you don't expect people to understand all the background characters in star wars. If Han or Leia has a newly introduced friend in the movie, people only turn into drooling idiots wondering what their life history was.

Empire strikes back introduced Reikan and Palpy, ROTJ introduced Mothma. No one needs to know their backstory. It is super easy to populate minor roles with pre-existing characters.

Need new bounty hunters for a spin off taking place around rebels? Using Embo and Sing would be no more confusing than 2 new generic hunters.


Edit: How would this not lead to an infinite regress? You can't watch spin off of sabine unless you watched rebels; you can watch rebels without seeing the internet shorts; you can't watch the internet shorts unless you followed the design process....

 

This is the second time you've come back with this argument to a point nobody made. Of course you can introduce minor characters with little explanation, and they can throw in a bunch of easter egg stuff like that if they want to. Nobody need to know anything about Mon Mothma because you could replace her with anyone, and it would not change the scene.

The point is that the movies have to written as if the comics and books do not exist - because the majority of the audience does not have that information. All of the RotJ characters you use as examples, did not have any backstory that needed to be explained. All of them made their first appearances in the movies.

 

Grievous was created for RotS, not for that cartoon. Yes, the cartoon aired before the movie, but the concept and design for the character were done for RotS. Also, the movie was in no way beholden to anything that happened in the cartoon. If Lucas had decided to change something about Grievous in post-production, continuity conflicts with the cartoon would not have stopped him.

No one thinks that the different media properties should be kept separate. Just that the intermixing is inescapably tied to the size of the audience. To borrow from your example, the Marvel movies impact Agents of Shield far more than Agents of Shield impacts the Marvel movies. They will use major characters from the films to help prop up the shows. The reverse isn't at all helpful to the films, since the TV audience for Agents of Shield is already invested in the movies, and inserting major elements of the TV show (via plot lines and characters) is generally more trouble than it's worth.

If there was a scene in Avengers 2 involving Shield agents, they could use the TV actors in cameo roles and that would be fine since the larger audience wouldn't recognize them, and it really wouldn't be important to the movie who the Shield agents were anyway.

The problem comes from trying to insert a character with a complicated and convoluted back-story into a major role in a medium that is targeted at a much broader audience.

 

How do you figure? I quoted several instances of people saying that you can't introduce characters without rehashing their background. It doesn't matter where a character first appears, the audience would be none the wiser. Why do you make a special distinction for some minor background characters and others? Secura needs no more introduction than Mothma.

I'm not too concerned if you agree, but don't act as if no has said "any Rebels or Clone Wars character would need to be reintroduced to the larger audience" or " don't know who Sabine is. Are they going to just throw her in? No. They are going to have to revisit certain things about her that are in Rebels."

I'm simply arguing that Sabine, Secura, Grevious, and Fett are no different from any other minor character. They are introduced in a scence, sometimes without dialogue, and they are just as effective without any confusion for the audience.

 

Not one time in this entire thread has anyone said that you can't reintroduce characters from other mediums for use in minor roles or cameos. The argument has been, the entire time, that it's not a good practice to take main characters from less popular mediums and use them as main characters in the more popular mediums.

ODMichael made that distinction in the first line of his first post in this thread. In his second post he specifically states that Ventress COULD have a cameo because it would mean more to the fans.

For my part, I've made that distinction in every post I've made here.

You are arguing against a point no one is making.

 

These Anthology movies will focus on characters we haven't met yet with well known characters occasionally sprinkled through for the core fans. If Lucasfilm focuses too much on main characters that the average movie goer can identify, they will eventually have people start calling these separate from the Episodic movies prequels and sequels and pre-sequels and pre-prequels and it will just get stupid. These are tangentially related stories from a gigantic galaxy of beings. I look forward to meeting new characters that have very little to do with the ones we know now. I'm not even sure I want origin stories, I'm still wary, anytime a new writer or director gets to play in the sandbox, they are just as likely to break my toys as they are to show me new ways to play with them.

 

Won't be Ahsoka, no Jedi involved in this apparently. I get the feeling Felicity Jones is Rogue One. Felicity is 31, super close to the age Ahsoka would probably be in Rebels, but I just don't see the resemblance.

 

Locking this thread since we know there will be no Force users in Rogue One.