That’s kind of what I meant when I said I was irritated. To elaborate, part of the problem with including so many outside characters (in addition to being a worldbuilding misstep imo) is that they get shortchanged, especially in Rebels’ 20-minute episodic format. The main focus of the show is on the Ghost crew. That doesn’t mean you can’t pull in outside characters - but if you pull in too many, they’re competing over such a tiny amount of screentime that none of them gets the chance to really shine. It becomes an exercise in name-checking for fanservice and profit rather than an effort to meaningfully build on those characters’ stories. Personally I feel Maul comes off better than most in this respect, but your disappointment with the brevity of his arc illustrates the problem. So while I also enjoy Palpatine, any excitement about his appearance was initially tempered by my “here we go again” feeling regarding the show’s penchant for including franchise characters for their own sake, rather than (with a few exceptions) because they had something interesting planned to do with them.
That said, I don’t think I would describe Maul’s plotline as superfluous? The fallout from the season 2 finale, and the lessons learned from their continuing interactions, form a pretty major thread in Ezra’s character development. He isn’t the same character without Maul. In fact I think you could argue that part of the reason Ezra ultimately does so well against Palpatine’s manipulation is because he had a trial run against Palp’s former apprentice. (In many ways Maul was actually the more effective opponent, because he turned Ezra’s greatest strength - his ability to make connections in unlikely places - against him. Palpatine just rehashed his Anakin Strategy.)
I also read the Twin Suns fight scene very differently in that I think it functions on a very symbolic level. These two characters have already had big flashy lightsaber duels, on multiple occasions. So instead of rehashing those, the showrunners gave us something else: pure character study. They gave us a duel of philosophies between two lonely old men living with the traumas and mistakes of their pasts. Obi-Wan says it explicitly: “If you define yourself by your power to take life, you have nothing.” The fight itself is not the climax of their confrontation - it’s just a literalized illustration of the much more significant clash in outlooks that occurred beforehand.
Thus I absolutely do think they made Obi-Wan earn his victory - they just made him do it emotionally, rather than via combat. There’s so much history between the characters that their meeting is reminiscent of that horrible way arguing with family can make you feel like a child again. The dynamic is so well-established and those psychological ruts are so well-worn that you fall right back into them, even after you’ve promised yourself that you wouldn’t. To me that’s the heart of Maul’s tragedy: he justifiably hates the Sith for the way Palpatine used and mistreated him, but his approach to solving problems is still fundamentally the violent, vengeful, manipulative one that Palpatine taught him. He has so many opportunities to change, and he keeps turning them down. Faced with Ezra’s empathy and willingness to vouch for him to the other Jedi, he tries to murder them and take Ezra as his own padawan. Faced with Obi-Wan’s desire not fight, he threatens the boy Obi-Wan has devoted the last 20-odd years of his life to protecting. Hurting others has brought him nothing but suffering, and yet he keeps trying the same approach and expecting different results.
Meanwhile Obi-Wan, after he’s finally goaded into igniting his lightsaber, falls instinctively into the stance of prequels-era Ewan McGregor...and then he takes a breath, and shifts into OT Alec Guinness. He’s not a better fighter than he was the last time they met - he’s a different person, with a different approach to life. He doesn’t win by killing Maul (and in fact Maul’s death is framed as a tragedy rather than a triumph). Obi-Wan wins when he tries to avoid the fight, and when he stops himself from going on the offensive, and when he cradles his old enemy as he dies. He wins the moment he breaks out of that psychological rut. And Maul loses the moment he falls back into it - quite literally by attempting the same feint that killed Qui-Gon, but more metaphorically by his inability to change his approach.
So I don’t think that scene shows Maul to be a less skilled fighter at all. I think it shows a fight between two master duelists, one of whom has a psychological and emotional edge. For one it’s a final, self-destructive attempt to punch the same wall he’s been breaking his fists on for most of his life. For the other it’s a step on the road between the man in ROTS - who loses a fight by winning it - and the man in ANH who wins a fight by losing it, because he recognizes that the fight and the fencing match are different things. Maul is consumed by the past. Obi-Wan is safeguarding the future. I’m a sucker for that sort of beautiful economy in storytelling, so I loved Twin Suns a lot.
Which is not to begrudge you your disappointment! Nor to say that I don’t think there are other satisfying ways to have concluded Maul’s story. It would have eaten up a lot of their limited showtime, and run up against the same problem they face with all the other Force-users (ie, how to get them out of the way in time for the OT), but I agree that a Maul redemption arc would’ve been really fun to see, and played a similar thematic role as characters like Hondo and Vizago (shady types changed and drawn into the larger fight via connections with Ezra).
As for Thrawn, the short version is that he and Ezra are both driven by love of their homeworlds. (Though I do also agree that Thrawn and Sabine should have had more opportunities to discuss art.) When Ezra surrenders to him in the finale after Thrawn threatens to destroy Lothal he says that he didn’t really have a choice, and Thrawn’s reply is “Nonsense - you could have let your people die.” It comes off as standard-issue villain gloating on the show, but the line has so much weight if you know that Thrawn’s whole motivation for allying with the Empire is to protect the Chiss. There’s so much potential characterization mileage for both of them in those parallels!!! As written, though, none of Thrawn’s motivations make it into Rebels, so it’s hard to tell if the dramatic irony is deliberate or just a happy accident.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2019-06-05 08:09 am (UTC)That said, I don’t think I would describe Maul’s plotline as superfluous? The fallout from the season 2 finale, and the lessons learned from their continuing interactions, form a pretty major thread in Ezra’s character development. He isn’t the same character without Maul. In fact I think you could argue that part of the reason Ezra ultimately does so well against Palpatine’s manipulation is because he had a trial run against Palp’s former apprentice. (In many ways Maul was actually the more effective opponent, because he turned Ezra’s greatest strength - his ability to make connections in unlikely places - against him. Palpatine just rehashed his Anakin Strategy.)
I also read the Twin Suns fight scene very differently in that I think it functions on a very symbolic level. These two characters have already had big flashy lightsaber duels, on multiple occasions. So instead of rehashing those, the showrunners gave us something else: pure character study. They gave us a duel of philosophies between two lonely old men living with the traumas and mistakes of their pasts. Obi-Wan says it explicitly: “If you define yourself by your power to take life, you have nothing.” The fight itself is not the climax of their confrontation - it’s just a literalized illustration of the much more significant clash in outlooks that occurred beforehand.
Thus I absolutely do think they made Obi-Wan earn his victory - they just made him do it emotionally, rather than via combat. There’s so much history between the characters that their meeting is reminiscent of that horrible way arguing with family can make you feel like a child again. The dynamic is so well-established and those psychological ruts are so well-worn that you fall right back into them, even after you’ve promised yourself that you wouldn’t. To me that’s the heart of Maul’s tragedy: he justifiably hates the Sith for the way Palpatine used and mistreated him, but his approach to solving problems is still fundamentally the violent, vengeful, manipulative one that Palpatine taught him. He has so many opportunities to change, and he keeps turning them down. Faced with Ezra’s empathy and willingness to vouch for him to the other Jedi, he tries to murder them and take Ezra as his own padawan. Faced with Obi-Wan’s desire not fight, he threatens the boy Obi-Wan has devoted the last 20-odd years of his life to protecting. Hurting others has brought him nothing but suffering, and yet he keeps trying the same approach and expecting different results.
Meanwhile Obi-Wan, after he’s finally goaded into igniting his lightsaber, falls instinctively into the stance of prequels-era Ewan McGregor...and then he takes a breath, and shifts into OT Alec Guinness. He’s not a better fighter than he was the last time they met - he’s a different person, with a different approach to life. He doesn’t win by killing Maul (and in fact Maul’s death is framed as a tragedy rather than a triumph). Obi-Wan wins when he tries to avoid the fight, and when he stops himself from going on the offensive, and when he cradles his old enemy as he dies. He wins the moment he breaks out of that psychological rut. And Maul loses the moment he falls back into it - quite literally by attempting the same feint that killed Qui-Gon, but more metaphorically by his inability to change his approach.
So I don’t think that scene shows Maul to be a less skilled fighter at all. I think it shows a fight between two master duelists, one of whom has a psychological and emotional edge. For one it’s a final, self-destructive attempt to punch the same wall he’s been breaking his fists on for most of his life. For the other it’s a step on the road between the man in ROTS - who loses a fight by winning it - and the man in ANH who wins a fight by losing it, because he recognizes that the fight and the fencing match are different things. Maul is consumed by the past. Obi-Wan is safeguarding the future. I’m a sucker for that sort of beautiful economy in storytelling, so I loved Twin Suns a lot.
Which is not to begrudge you your disappointment! Nor to say that I don’t think there are other satisfying ways to have concluded Maul’s story. It would have eaten up a lot of their limited showtime, and run up against the same problem they face with all the other Force-users (ie, how to get them out of the way in time for the OT), but I agree that a Maul redemption arc would’ve been really fun to see, and played a similar thematic role as characters like Hondo and Vizago (shady types changed and drawn into the larger fight via connections with Ezra).
As for Thrawn, the short version is that he and Ezra are both driven by love of their homeworlds. (Though I do also agree that Thrawn and Sabine should have had more opportunities to discuss art.) When Ezra surrenders to him in the finale after Thrawn threatens to destroy Lothal he says that he didn’t really have a choice, and Thrawn’s reply is “Nonsense - you could have let your people die.” It comes off as standard-issue villain gloating on the show, but the line has so much weight if you know that Thrawn’s whole motivation for allying with the Empire is to protect the Chiss. There’s so much potential characterization mileage for both of them in those parallels!!! As written, though, none of Thrawn’s motivations make it into Rebels, so it’s hard to tell if the dramatic irony is deliberate or just a happy accident.