ARCHIVE: Rey's Lineage Discussion II - 2

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:

Darth Dingbat wrote:Still OT, but I really can't imagine any version of the trilogy with Darth Talon in it being "epic". I just can't. But maybe I'm prejudiced against Twi'leks.

*looks at own avatar* Wait...

@Darth Dingbat
*entitled voice* I feel angry and cheated because I would have wanted to see the Thea/Talon catfight in skimpy clothing with Skylar/Sam/Whatever Skywalker watching eating some popcorn. Sounds absolutely epic. I'm not sure what you mean.

On a side-note Skylar Skywalker might actually be the worst fictional name ever. Why, George? WHY? There's a difference between cute alliteration and a first name and last name that start with the same three letters.

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:It feels like it's been largely forgotten over time that the reason those of us who don't believe in Rey Kenobi take the stance we do largely has nothing to do with all this contradictory production stuff (which absolutely does not prove Rey is a Kenobi at all, not even by process of elimination). It has much more to do with trying to piece together a seamless, logical timeline/story that seems to be focusing on other things, the fact that Rey's backstory has been set up as an obstacle/something she'll have to overcome, the fact that it would retcon Obi-Wan's backstory (a backstory they seem intent on keeping if the new comics are anything to go by) and the (debatable) fact that it would take more exposition than just about any other lineage theory. More backtracking through history Palpatine and more character exploration than Luke. I just want a good story, and I don't see a connection to Obi-Wan giving us anything more than a head-scratching, retconning, exposition-filled explanation connecting TFA to TCW despite 90% of the GA having never heard of either Satine or the show.

Gemini wrote:

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:It feels like it's been largely forgotten over time that the reason those of us who don't believe in Rey Kenobi take the stance we do largely has nothing to do with all this contradictory production stuff (which absolutely does not prove Rey is a Kenobi at all, not even by process of elimination). It has much more to do with trying to piece together a seamless, logical timeline/story that seems to be focusing on other things, the fact that Rey's backstory has been set up as an obstacle/something she'll have to overcome, the fact that it would retcon Obi-Wan's backstory (a backstory they seem intent on keeping if the new comics are anything to go by) and the (debatable) fact that it would take more exposition than just about any other lineage theory. More backtracking through history Palpatine and more character exploration than Luke. I just want a good story, and I don't see a connection to Obi-Wan giving us anything more than a head-scratching, retconning, exposition-filled explanation connecting TFA to TCW despite 90% of the GA having never heard of either Satine or the show.

So as she was pegged as a legacy character, who would she have been if Han, leia and Luke  had sons?

How does it exactly in no way prove possible kenobi by process of elimination?

Considering that in canon obi wan was already being retconned. I also remember a post of yours after one of pablos recent  tweets talking about how it could be retconned.m and you didn't seem to have much problem with it in that post?


@FrolickingFizzgig

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:

Gemini wrote:

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:It feels like it's been largely forgotten over time that the reason those of us who don't believe in Rey Kenobi take the stance we do largely has nothing to do with all this contradictory production stuff (which absolutely does not prove Rey is a Kenobi at all, not even by process of elimination). It has much more to do with trying to piece together a seamless, logical timeline/story that seems to be focusing on other things, the fact that Rey's backstory has been set up as an obstacle/something she'll have to overcome, the fact that it would retcon Obi-Wan's backstory (a backstory they seem intent on keeping if the new comics are anything to go by) and the (debatable) fact that it would take more exposition than just about any other lineage theory. More backtracking through history Palpatine and more character exploration than Luke. I just want a good story, and I don't see a connection to Obi-Wan giving us anything more than a head-scratching, retconning, exposition-filled explanation connecting TFA to TCW despite 90% of the GA having never heard of either Satine or the show.

So as she was pegged as a legacy character, who would she have been if Han, leia and Luke  had sons?

How does it exactly in no way prove possible kenobi by process of elimination?

Considering that in canon obi wan was already being retconned. I also remember a post of yours after one of pablos recent  tweets talking about how it could be retconned.m and you didn't seem to have much problem with it in that post?


@FrolickingFizzgig

@Gemini
Because there's so much "likely was" and "may have been" in that production timeline, and things other people have said contradict it. It's still largely based on rumours. We really just don't know. We won't know until the film is released (maybe not even until IX). It's just another part of the mess that is the production timeline. And we still don't know how much was changed between the Lucas and JJ/Kasdan treatments, but let's not get that going again.

I've written many posts in the lineage thread about how I would rather they leave Obi-Wan's past in the past. Yes, this is an opinion. I never said otherwise. He's a great character as he is (he's my favourite from the PT), but his story was complete at the end of the OT. I'm not really sure I agree with others when they say Kenobi is missing from the ST either. He lives on through the Force. He's always going to be a presence in the SW universe.

Bad storytelling is never going to be "evidence" for me, so I look at anything that says they're going to randomly retcon recent things with extreme skepticism.

spacebaby45678 wrote:

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:

Gemini wrote:

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:It feels like it's been largely forgotten over time that the reason those of us who don't believe in Rey Kenobi take the stance we do largely has nothing to do with all this contradictory production stuff (which absolutely does not prove Rey is a Kenobi at all, not even by process of elimination). It has much more to do with trying to piece together a seamless, logical timeline/story that seems to be focusing on other things, the fact that Rey's backstory has been set up as an obstacle/something she'll have to overcome, the fact that it would retcon Obi-Wan's backstory (a backstory they seem intent on keeping if the new comics are anything to go by) and the (debatable) fact that it would take more exposition than just about any other lineage theory. More backtracking through history Palpatine and more character exploration than Luke. I just want a good story, and I don't see a connection to Obi-Wan giving us anything more than a head-scratching, retconning, exposition-filled explanation connecting TFA to TCW despite 90% of the GA having never heard of either Satine or the show.

So as she was pegged as a legacy character, who would she have been if Han, leia and Luke  had sons?

How does it exactly in no way prove possible kenobi by process of elimination?

Considering that in canon obi wan was already being retconned. I also remember a post of yours after one of pablos recent  tweets talking about how it could be retconned.m and you didn't seem to have much problem with it in that post?


@FrolickingFizzgig

@Gemini
Because there's so much "likely was" and "may have been" in that production timeline, and things other people have said contradict it. It's still largely based on rumours. We really just don't know. We won't know until the film is released (maybe not even until IX). It's just another part of the mess that is the production timeline. And we still don't know how much was changed between the Lucas and JJ/Kasdan treatments, but let's not get that going again.

I've written many posts in the lineage thread about how I would rather they leave Obi-Wan's past in the past. Yes, this is an opinion. I never said otherwise. He's a great character as he is (he's my favourite from the PT), but his story was complete at the end of the OT. I'm not really sure I agree with others when they say Kenobi is missing from the ST either. He lives on through the Force. He's always going to be a presence in the SW universe.

Bad storytelling is never going to be "evidence" for me, so I look at anything that says they're going to randomly retcon recent things with extreme skepticism.

@FrolickingFizzgig

I think Obi Wan is GL'S creation and if he feels like a retcon or further extrapolation or exposition on a character is needed I will go with his decision, ultimately I am a life long Star Wars fan, and that is ALL GL not Disney.. the more I have learned about GL and his creative process especially through Dave Filoni I have actually come to love and respect him more. He is a big romantic sap, I adore that.

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:

spacebaby45678 wrote:

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:

Gemini wrote:

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:It feels like it's been largely forgotten over time that the reason those of us who don't believe in Rey Kenobi take the stance we do largely has nothing to do with all this contradictory production stuff (which absolutely does not prove Rey is a Kenobi at all, not even by process of elimination). It has much more to do with trying to piece together a seamless, logical timeline/story that seems to be focusing on other things, the fact that Rey's backstory has been set up as an obstacle/something she'll have to overcome, the fact that it would retcon Obi-Wan's backstory (a backstory they seem intent on keeping if the new comics are anything to go by) and the (debatable) fact that it would take more exposition than just about any other lineage theory. More backtracking through history Palpatine and more character exploration than Luke. I just want a good story, and I don't see a connection to Obi-Wan giving us anything more than a head-scratching, retconning, exposition-filled explanation connecting TFA to TCW despite 90% of the GA having never heard of either Satine or the show.

So as she was pegged as a legacy character, who would she have been if Han, leia and Luke  had sons?

How does it exactly in no way prove possible kenobi by process of elimination?

Considering that in canon obi wan was already being retconned. I also remember a post of yours after one of pablos recent  tweets talking about how it could be retconned.m and you didn't seem to have much problem with it in that post?


@FrolickingFizzgig

@Gemini
Because there's so much "likely was" and "may have been" in that production timeline, and things other people have said contradict it. It's still largely based on rumours. We really just don't know. We won't know until the film is released (maybe not even until IX). It's just another part of the mess that is the production timeline. And we still don't know how much was changed between the Lucas and JJ/Kasdan treatments, but let's not get that going again.

I've written many posts in the lineage thread about how I would rather they leave Obi-Wan's past in the past. Yes, this is an opinion. I never said otherwise. He's a great character as he is (he's my favourite from the PT), but his story was complete at the end of the OT. I'm not really sure I agree with others when they say Kenobi is missing from the ST either. He lives on through the Force. He's always going to be a presence in the SW universe.

Bad storytelling is never going to be "evidence" for me, so I look at anything that says they're going to randomly retcon recent things with extreme skepticism.

@FrolickingFizzgig

I think Obi Wan is GL'S creation and if he feels like a retcon or further extrapolation or exposition on a character is needed I will go with his decision, ultimately I am a life long Star Wars fan, and that is ALL GL not Disney.. the more I have learned about GL and his creative process especially through Dave Filoni I have actually come to love and respect him more. He is a big romantic sap, I adore that.

@spacebaby45678
Spacebaby, all I want is a good story. A well written story. A story that makes sense and respects the famous SW characters Lucas created. I'm not saying that Rey Kenobi doesn't respect Obi (it certainly doesn't not respect him), but as the timeline currently stands Rey Kenobi would be difficult to explain to even hardcore fans, let alone people who haven't watched TCW. But as I've said a million times, we'll see. If this was something Lucas wanted I still expect it to make sense. I really just want an entertaining trilogy created by people who love the characters and story as much as we all do, but who also understand that structure and creative decisions don't mean nothing...

spacebaby45678 wrote:

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:

spacebaby45678 wrote:

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:

Gemini wrote:

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:It feels like it's been largely forgotten over time that the reason those of us who don't believe in Rey Kenobi take the stance we do largely has nothing to do with all this contradictory production stuff (which absolutely does not prove Rey is a Kenobi at all, not even by process of elimination). It has much more to do with trying to piece together a seamless, logical timeline/story that seems to be focusing on other things, the fact that Rey's backstory has been set up as an obstacle/something she'll have to overcome, the fact that it would retcon Obi-Wan's backstory (a backstory they seem intent on keeping if the new comics are anything to go by) and the (debatable) fact that it would take more exposition than just about any other lineage theory. More backtracking through history Palpatine and more character exploration than Luke. I just want a good story, and I don't see a connection to Obi-Wan giving us anything more than a head-scratching, retconning, exposition-filled explanation connecting TFA to TCW despite 90% of the GA having never heard of either Satine or the show.

So as she was pegged as a legacy character, who would she have been if Han, leia and Luke  had sons?

How does it exactly in no way prove possible kenobi by process of elimination?

Considering that in canon obi wan was already being retconned. I also remember a post of yours after one of pablos recent  tweets talking about how it could be retconned.m and you didn't seem to have much problem with it in that post?


@FrolickingFizzgig

@Gemini
Because there's so much "likely was" and "may have been" in that production timeline, and things other people have said contradict it. It's still largely based on rumours. We really just don't know. We won't know until the film is released (maybe not even until IX). It's just another part of the mess that is the production timeline. And we still don't know how much was changed between the Lucas and JJ/Kasdan treatments, but let's not get that going again.

I've written many posts in the lineage thread about how I would rather they leave Obi-Wan's past in the past. Yes, this is an opinion. I never said otherwise. He's a great character as he is (he's my favourite from the PT), but his story was complete at the end of the OT. I'm not really sure I agree with others when they say Kenobi is missing from the ST either. He lives on through the Force. He's always going to be a presence in the SW universe.

Bad storytelling is never going to be "evidence" for me, so I look at anything that says they're going to randomly retcon recent things with extreme skepticism.

@FrolickingFizzgig

I think Obi Wan is GL'S creation and if he feels like a retcon or further extrapolation or exposition on a character is needed I will go with his decision, ultimately I am a life long Star Wars fan, and that is ALL GL not Disney.. the more I have learned about GL and his creative process especially through Dave Filoni I have actually come to love and respect him more. He is a big romantic sap, I adore that.

@spacebaby45678
Spacebaby, all I want is a good story. A well written story. A story that makes sense and respects the famous SW characters Lucas created. I'm not saying that Rey Kenobi doesn't respect Obi (it certainly doesn't not respect him), but as the timeline currently stands Rey Kenobi would be difficult to explain to even hardcore fans, let alone people who haven't watched TCW. But as I've said a million times, we'll see. If this was something Lucas wanted I still expect it to make sense. I really just want an entertaining trilogy created by people who love the characters and story as much as we all do, but who also understand that structure and creative decisions don't mean nothing...

@FrolickingFizzgig

This is not the place for an extended explanation of the Retcon for TCW that was done, and why we might possibly expect from that retcon, but is is all RING COMP once you begin to understand GL's symbolism and how he connects fathers and sons through imagery, it is recognizable. It is there, it is.... proofs is in the pictures.

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:

spacebaby45678 wrote:

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:

spacebaby45678 wrote:

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:

Gemini wrote:

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:It feels like it's been largely forgotten over time that the reason those of us who don't believe in Rey Kenobi take the stance we do largely has nothing to do with all this contradictory production stuff (which absolutely does not prove Rey is a Kenobi at all, not even by process of elimination). It has much more to do with trying to piece together a seamless, logical timeline/story that seems to be focusing on other things, the fact that Rey's backstory has been set up as an obstacle/something she'll have to overcome, the fact that it would retcon Obi-Wan's backstory (a backstory they seem intent on keeping if the new comics are anything to go by) and the (debatable) fact that it would take more exposition than just about any other lineage theory. More backtracking through history Palpatine and more character exploration than Luke. I just want a good story, and I don't see a connection to Obi-Wan giving us anything more than a head-scratching, retconning, exposition-filled explanation connecting TFA to TCW despite 90% of the GA having never heard of either Satine or the show.

So as she was pegged as a legacy character, who would she have been if Han, leia and Luke  had sons?

How does it exactly in no way prove possible kenobi by process of elimination?

Considering that in canon obi wan was already being retconned. I also remember a post of yours after one of pablos recent  tweets talking about how it could be retconned.m and you didn't seem to have much problem with it in that post?


@FrolickingFizzgig

@Gemini
Because there's so much "likely was" and "may have been" in that production timeline, and things other people have said contradict it. It's still largely based on rumours. We really just don't know. We won't know until the film is released (maybe not even until IX). It's just another part of the mess that is the production timeline. And we still don't know how much was changed between the Lucas and JJ/Kasdan treatments, but let's not get that going again.

I've written many posts in the lineage thread about how I would rather they leave Obi-Wan's past in the past. Yes, this is an opinion. I never said otherwise. He's a great character as he is (he's my favourite from the PT), but his story was complete at the end of the OT. I'm not really sure I agree with others when they say Kenobi is missing from the ST either. He lives on through the Force. He's always going to be a presence in the SW universe.

Bad storytelling is never going to be "evidence" for me, so I look at anything that says they're going to randomly retcon recent things with extreme skepticism.

@FrolickingFizzgig

I think Obi Wan is GL'S creation and if he feels like a retcon or further extrapolation or exposition on a character is needed I will go with his decision, ultimately I am a life long Star Wars fan, and that is ALL GL not Disney.. the more I have learned about GL and his creative process especially through Dave Filoni I have actually come to love and respect him more. He is a big romantic sap, I adore that.

@spacebaby45678
Spacebaby, all I want is a good story. A well written story. A story that makes sense and respects the famous SW characters Lucas created. I'm not saying that Rey Kenobi doesn't respect Obi (it certainly doesn't not respect him), but as the timeline currently stands Rey Kenobi would be difficult to explain to even hardcore fans, let alone people who haven't watched TCW. But as I've said a million times, we'll see. If this was something Lucas wanted I still expect it to make sense. I really just want an entertaining trilogy created by people who love the characters and story as much as we all do, but who also understand that structure and creative decisions don't mean nothing...

@FrolickingFizzgig

This is not the place for an extended explanation of the Retcon for TCW that was done, and why we might possibly expect from that retcon, but is is all RING COMP once you begin to understand GL's symbolism and how he connects fathers and sons through imagery, it is recognizable. It is there, it is.... proofs is in the pictures.

@spacebaby45678
Can't say I wasn't expecting the age-old "you just don't understand storytelling/Ring Composition" insinuation. I guess lots of people on this forum are just idiots, right? We're not "logical" enough, not "smart" enough, not "advanced" enough. We haven't read enough or studied up on film language or Ring Composition enough. You would think if your evidence was so great many others on this forum (which I'll add is an absolute hub for extremely intelligent, educated people who absolutely understand storytelling) would be seeing what you see. If only it didn't come down to "intelligence", this topic might be less controversial... *Sigh*

MyOnlyHope wrote:Oh, look, personal attacks accusing people once again of "not understanding something so obvious and undeniable." How I've missed you.

spacebaby45678 wrote:

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:

spacebaby45678 wrote:

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:

spacebaby45678 wrote:

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:

Gemini wrote:

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:It feels like it's been largely forgotten over time that the reason those of us who don't believe in Rey Kenobi take the stance we do largely has nothing to do with all this contradictory production stuff (which absolutely does not prove Rey is a Kenobi at all, not even by process of elimination). It has much more to do with trying to piece together a seamless, logical timeline/story that seems to be focusing on other things, the fact that Rey's backstory has been set up as an obstacle/something she'll have to overcome, the fact that it would retcon Obi-Wan's backstory (a backstory they seem intent on keeping if the new comics are anything to go by) and the (debatable) fact that it would take more exposition than just about any other lineage theory. More backtracking through history Palpatine and more character exploration than Luke. I just want a good story, and I don't see a connection to Obi-Wan giving us anything more than a head-scratching, retconning, exposition-filled explanation connecting TFA to TCW despite 90% of the GA having never heard of either Satine or the show.

So as she was pegged as a legacy character, who would she have been if Han, leia and Luke  had sons?

How does it exactly in no way prove possible kenobi by process of elimination?

Considering that in canon obi wan was already being retconned. I also remember a post of yours after one of pablos recent  tweets talking about how it could be retconned.m and you didn't seem to have much problem with it in that post?


@FrolickingFizzgig

@Gemini
Because there's so much "likely was" and "may have been" in that production timeline, and things other people have said contradict it. It's still largely based on rumours. We really just don't know. We won't know until the film is released (maybe not even until IX). It's just another part of the mess that is the production timeline. And we still don't know how much was changed between the Lucas and JJ/Kasdan treatments, but let's not get that going again.

I've written many posts in the lineage thread about how I would rather they leave Obi-Wan's past in the past. Yes, this is an opinion. I never said otherwise. He's a great character as he is (he's my favourite from the PT), but his story was complete at the end of the OT. I'm not really sure I agree with others when they say Kenobi is missing from the ST either. He lives on through the Force. He's always going to be a presence in the SW universe.

Bad storytelling is never going to be "evidence" for me, so I look at anything that says they're going to randomly retcon recent things with extreme skepticism.

@FrolickingFizzgig

I think Obi Wan is GL'S creation and if he feels like a retcon or further extrapolation or exposition on a character is needed I will go with his decision, ultimately I am a life long Star Wars fan, and that is ALL GL not Disney.. the more I have learned about GL and his creative process especially through Dave Filoni I have actually come to love and respect him more. He is a big romantic sap, I adore that.

@spacebaby45678
Spacebaby, all I want is a good story. A well written story. A story that makes sense and respects the famous SW characters Lucas created. I'm not saying that Rey Kenobi doesn't respect Obi (it certainly doesn't not respect him), but as the timeline currently stands Rey Kenobi would be difficult to explain to even hardcore fans, let alone people who haven't watched TCW. But as I've said a million times, we'll see. If this was something Lucas wanted I still expect it to make sense. I really just want an entertaining trilogy created by people who love the characters and story as much as we all do, but who also understand that structure and creative decisions don't mean nothing...

@FrolickingFizzgig

This is not the place for an extended explanation of the Retcon for TCW that was done, and why we might possibly expect from that retcon, but is is all RING COMP once you begin to understand GL's symbolism and how he connects fathers and sons through imagery, it is recognizable. It is there, it is.... proofs is in the pictures.

@spacebaby45678
Can't say I wasn't expecting the age-old "you just don't understand storytelling/Ring Composition" insinuation. I guess lots of people on this forum are just idiots, right? We're not "logical" enough, not "smart" enough, not "advanced" enough. We haven't read enough or studied up on film language or Ring Composition enough. You would think if your evidence was so great many others on this forum (which I'll add is an absolute hub for extremely intelligent, educated people who absolutely understand storytelling) would be seeing what you see. If only it didn't come down to "intelligence", this topic might be less controversial... *Sigh*

@FrolickingFizzgig

Please don't misconstrue what I said as an attack and don't put words in my mouth. Sorry if you where offended. It was not meant that way you are characterizing at all. I just meant, that the retcon is there for an Obi Wan kid before his exile on Tatooine, and GL gives clues.

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:

spacebaby45678 wrote:

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:

spacebaby45678 wrote:

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:

spacebaby45678 wrote:

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:

Gemini wrote:

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:It feels like it's been largely forgotten over time that the reason those of us who don't believe in Rey Kenobi take the stance we do largely has nothing to do with all this contradictory production stuff (which absolutely does not prove Rey is a Kenobi at all, not even by process of elimination). It has much more to do with trying to piece together a seamless, logical timeline/story that seems to be focusing on other things, the fact that Rey's backstory has been set up as an obstacle/something she'll have to overcome, the fact that it would retcon Obi-Wan's backstory (a backstory they seem intent on keeping if the new comics are anything to go by) and the (debatable) fact that it would take more exposition than just about any other lineage theory. More backtracking through history Palpatine and more character exploration than Luke. I just want a good story, and I don't see a connection to Obi-Wan giving us anything more than a head-scratching, retconning, exposition-filled explanation connecting TFA to TCW despite 90% of the GA having never heard of either Satine or the show.

So as she was pegged as a legacy character, who would she have been if Han, leia and Luke  had sons?

How does it exactly in no way prove possible kenobi by process of elimination?

Considering that in canon obi wan was already being retconned. I also remember a post of yours after one of pablos recent  tweets talking about how it could be retconned.m and you didn't seem to have much problem with it in that post?


@FrolickingFizzgig

@Gemini
Because there's so much "likely was" and "may have been" in that production timeline, and things other people have said contradict it. It's still largely based on rumours. We really just don't know. We won't know until the film is released (maybe not even until IX). It's just another part of the mess that is the production timeline. And we still don't know how much was changed between the Lucas and JJ/Kasdan treatments, but let's not get that going again.

I've written many posts in the lineage thread about how I would rather they leave Obi-Wan's past in the past. Yes, this is an opinion. I never said otherwise. He's a great character as he is (he's my favourite from the PT), but his story was complete at the end of the OT. I'm not really sure I agree with others when they say Kenobi is missing from the ST either. He lives on through the Force. He's always going to be a presence in the SW universe.

Bad storytelling is never going to be "evidence" for me, so I look at anything that says they're going to randomly retcon recent things with extreme skepticism.

@FrolickingFizzgig

I think Obi Wan is GL'S creation and if he feels like a retcon or further extrapolation or exposition on a character is needed I will go with his decision, ultimately I am a life long Star Wars fan, and that is ALL GL not Disney.. the more I have learned about GL and his creative process especially through Dave Filoni I have actually come to love and respect him more. He is a big romantic sap, I adore that.

@spacebaby45678
Spacebaby, all I want is a good story. A well written story. A story that makes sense and respects the famous SW characters Lucas created. I'm not saying that Rey Kenobi doesn't respect Obi (it certainly doesn't not respect him), but as the timeline currently stands Rey Kenobi would be difficult to explain to even hardcore fans, let alone people who haven't watched TCW. But as I've said a million times, we'll see. If this was something Lucas wanted I still expect it to make sense. I really just want an entertaining trilogy created by people who love the characters and story as much as we all do, but who also understand that structure and creative decisions don't mean nothing...

@FrolickingFizzgig

This is not the place for an extended explanation of the Retcon for TCW that was done, and why we might possibly expect from that retcon, but is is all RING COMP once you begin to understand GL's symbolism and how he connects fathers and sons through imagery, it is recognizable. It is there, it is.... proofs is in the pictures.

@spacebaby45678
Can't say I wasn't expecting the age-old "you just don't understand storytelling/Ring Composition" insinuation. I guess lots of people on this forum are just idiots, right? We're not "logical" enough, not "smart" enough, not "advanced" enough. We haven't read enough or studied up on film language or Ring Composition enough. You would think if your evidence was so great many others on this forum (which I'll add is an absolute hub for extremely intelligent, educated people who absolutely understand storytelling) would be seeing what you see. If only it didn't come down to "intelligence", this topic might be less controversial... *Sigh*

@FrolickingFizzgig

Please don't misconstrue what I said as an attack and don't put words in my mouth. Sorry if you where offended. It was not meant that way you are characterizing at all. I just meant, that the retcon is there for an Obi Wan kid before his exile on Tatooine, and GL gives clues.

@spacebaby45678
By making Korkie Obi-Wan's son, right? Another character 99% of people will never have heard of from a show most people who will see this trilogy have never watched? No Obi-Wan standalone to make any of this make sense... :/

Gemini wrote:

MyOnlyHope wrote:Oh, look, personal attacks accusing people once again of "not understanding something so obvious and undeniable." How I've missed you.

@MyOnlyHope

It's going both ways trust me.

There was an entire attack on a theory and thread and ideas people post in that thread, it was called crackpot and ridiculed.

Did you miss that?

I don't particularly enjoy being made out to be a crackpot lol because that ain't true.

spacebaby45678 wrote:

Gemini wrote:

MyOnlyHope wrote:Oh, look, personal attacks accusing people once again of "not understanding something so obvious and undeniable." How I've missed you.

@MyOnlyHope

It's going both ways trust me.

There was an entire attack on a theory and thread and ideas people post in that thread, it was called crackpot and ridiculed.

Did you miss that?

I don't particularly enjoy being made out to be a crackpot lol because that ain't true.

@Gemini

I did not attack anyone or insinuate that people too dumb to understand... I don't want anyone to take that away from this conversation.

spacebaby45678 wrote:

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:

spacebaby45678 wrote:

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:

spacebaby45678 wrote:

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:

spacebaby45678 wrote:

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:

Gemini wrote:

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:It feels like it's been largely forgotten over time that the reason those of us who don't believe in Rey Kenobi take the stance we do largely has nothing to do with all this contradictory production stuff (which absolutely does not prove Rey is a Kenobi at all, not even by process of elimination). It has much more to do with trying to piece together a seamless, logical timeline/story that seems to be focusing on other things, the fact that Rey's backstory has been set up as an obstacle/something she'll have to overcome, the fact that it would retcon Obi-Wan's backstory (a backstory they seem intent on keeping if the new comics are anything to go by) and the (debatable) fact that it would take more exposition than just about any other lineage theory. More backtracking through history Palpatine and more character exploration than Luke. I just want a good story, and I don't see a connection to Obi-Wan giving us anything more than a head-scratching, retconning, exposition-filled explanation connecting TFA to TCW despite 90% of the GA having never heard of either Satine or the show.

So as she was pegged as a legacy character, who would she have been if Han, leia and Luke  had sons?

How does it exactly in no way prove possible kenobi by process of elimination?

Considering that in canon obi wan was already being retconned. I also remember a post of yours after one of pablos recent  tweets talking about how it could be retconned.m and you didn't seem to have much problem with it in that post?


@FrolickingFizzgig

@Gemini
Because there's so much "likely was" and "may have been" in that production timeline, and things other people have said contradict it. It's still largely based on rumours. We really just don't know. We won't know until the film is released (maybe not even until IX). It's just another part of the mess that is the production timeline. And we still don't know how much was changed between the Lucas and JJ/Kasdan treatments, but let's not get that going again.

I've written many posts in the lineage thread about how I would rather they leave Obi-Wan's past in the past. Yes, this is an opinion. I never said otherwise. He's a great character as he is (he's my favourite from the PT), but his story was complete at the end of the OT. I'm not really sure I agree with others when they say Kenobi is missing from the ST either. He lives on through the Force. He's always going to be a presence in the SW universe.

Bad storytelling is never going to be "evidence" for me, so I look at anything that says they're going to randomly retcon recent things with extreme skepticism.

@FrolickingFizzgig

I think Obi Wan is GL'S creation and if he feels like a retcon or further extrapolation or exposition on a character is needed I will go with his decision, ultimately I am a life long Star Wars fan, and that is ALL GL not Disney.. the more I have learned about GL and his creative process especially through Dave Filoni I have actually come to love and respect him more. He is a big romantic sap, I adore that.

@spacebaby45678
Spacebaby, all I want is a good story. A well written story. A story that makes sense and respects the famous SW characters Lucas created. I'm not saying that Rey Kenobi doesn't respect Obi (it certainly doesn't not respect him), but as the timeline currently stands Rey Kenobi would be difficult to explain to even hardcore fans, let alone people who haven't watched TCW. But as I've said a million times, we'll see. If this was something Lucas wanted I still expect it to make sense. I really just want an entertaining trilogy created by people who love the characters and story as much as we all do, but who also understand that structure and creative decisions don't mean nothing...

@FrolickingFizzgig

This is not the place for an extended explanation of the Retcon for TCW that was done, and why we might possibly expect from that retcon, but is is all RING COMP once you begin to understand GL's symbolism and how he connects fathers and sons through imagery, it is recognizable. It is there, it is.... proofs is in the pictures.

@spacebaby45678
Can't say I wasn't expecting the age-old "you just don't understand storytelling/Ring Composition" insinuation. I guess lots of people on this forum are just idiots, right? We're not "logical" enough, not "smart" enough, not "advanced" enough. We haven't read enough or studied up on film language or Ring Composition enough. You would think if your evidence was so great many others on this forum (which I'll add is an absolute hub for extremely intelligent, educated people who absolutely understand storytelling) would be seeing what you see. If only it didn't come down to "intelligence", this topic might be less controversial... *Sigh*

@FrolickingFizzgig

Please don't misconstrue what I said as an attack and don't put words in my mouth. Sorry if you where offended. It was not meant that way you are characterizing at all. I just meant, that the retcon is there for an Obi Wan kid before his exile on Tatooine, and GL gives clues.

@spacebaby45678
By making Korkie Obi-Wan's son, right? Another character 99% of people will never have heard of from a show most people who will see this trilogy have never watched? No Obi-Wan standalone to make any of this make sense... :/

@FrolickingFizzgig

They have never heard of Rey Random's parents either

spacebaby45678 wrote:A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not advanced by that opponent.[1]

Ok, I don't think I have anything more than I can say that would enlightening at this point.

Gemini wrote:Sorry but just read the post throughly and spacebaby is in no way suggesting people dont understand ring comp. It looks like she was talking about herself. Sometimes people use the word you when talking about personal understanding or coming to retalisation of things through study.

Gemini wrote:Sorry but just read the post throughly and spacebaby is in no way suggesting people dont understand ring comp. It looks like she was talking about herself. Sometimes people use the word you when talking about personal understanding or coming to retalisation of things through study.

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:

spacebaby45678 wrote:A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not advanced by that opponent.[1]

Ok, I don't think I have anything more than I can say that would enlightening at this point.

@spacebaby45678
And if it's easier to peg anything poking holes in your theories as "straw men", then have fun with that too. But please don't forget that if your evidence was so great, you would have convinced more of us by now.

spacebaby45678 wrote:

FrolickingFizzgig wrote:

spacebaby45678 wrote:A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not advanced by that opponent.[1]

Ok, I don't think I have anything more than I can say that would enlightening at this point.

@spacebaby45678
And if it's easier to peg anything poking holes in your theories as "straw men", then have fun with that too. But please don't forget that if your evidence was so great, you would have convinced more of us by now.

@FrolickingFizzgig

So are you saying I am not smart enough to convince you? Are you saying I am dumb? Sounds like a personal attack.