Expanded Universe IS relevant . . .

As I stated on the old board, Expanded Universe IS relevant. Where do you think GL got the idea of a double-bladed lightsaber from? The Sith War was written YEARS before Episode 1 was written. Exar Kun IS relevant, because he invented the double-bladed lightsaber and Darth Maul used one in Episode 1. That proves EU IS relevant. There are other examples also, but I'll let you find those out on your own.

I'm sorry, DN, but in relation to the films, the EU is NOT relevant, and that is OFFICIAL policy. Nothing you or I say or do will change that. They have NO canonical status; therefore anything they say is irrelevant to the films

And the double-bladed sabre is not such an odd idea that it MUST have been based on Exar. And we have no reasom to think that it was.

This argument has been done to death... it's not that I don't like EU, but the point is that they no not apply to the gospel Star Wars Universe. GL doesn't want them to, never wanted them to, and will not allow them to. ONLY the films are the real deal.

[ April 13, 2001: Message edited by: Ushgarak ]

GL dosnt supply us with enough

so the eu has to count

It depends what you mean by 'count'. I mean, obviously it exists, and we should bear it in mind, and they are perfectly valid in their own right. But when GL ddefines the official Star Wars Universe- that we have to accept is his right to do, and his alone- the EU doesn't figure. Now, thay may be a tragedy, or it may not, but either way that is the case.

I think that in the grander scale of things, the EU is relevant, but anything in the six movies will automatically overrule anything in the books, graphic novels, comics, CCG, computer games, etc, etc...

Once the films are finished, the EU should gain some canoncal status as it will then be the ongoing stories.

That's an on-going debate; I'd have no objection to that, but it doesn't look like GL will play ball.

Mara Jade's lightsabre, Obi-Wan's appearance in Truce at Bakura and the construction of the Death Star are three more biggies, though Fett is by far the largest. It's a more theoretical than practical thing.

Why, Why and lastly why?

MJs sabre is an illegal colour, Obi-Wan's appearance in ghost form was a BIG risk and has already been dumped by the big boys, and all the DS stuff about Despayre has been thropwn out as well

The jury is still out on the official sabre colour line.
Ghosts come, they go... 😂
And as for DS construction, never been addressed has it?

The POINT is that, come the crunch, the books have zero power. None at all. They are worth nothing in that line. That's the way it is.

If you raised an objection to any of the above on the grounds that 'The Eu said..." you would have no case.

And canonical sources sink the Despayre thing.

I know about the Fett thing, but where else has he ignored EU?

*Prepares for barrage of examples.*

OK, I agree with what you are saying, apart from one thing.

And canonical sources sink the Despayre thing.

Despayre is an EU thing, and therefore not canon but nothing in the movies actually tells us where construction took place, or how many Deathstars there might be...

IMHO

Canoncial sources make it very clear that Alderan was the FIRST planet to be destroyed by the DS, making Despayre's destruction impossible.

And I should remind you that the screenplays ARE canonical. So are the novelisations and radio plays. But there is a strict pecking order involved. Things fropm the lower three canon grades can be ruled un-canonical if they seem illogical for one reason or another (Luke's lightsabre constrcution may be such a detail,lifted moslty as it is from SOTE). Stuff from the films is ALWAYS canonical unless Lucasfilm's Production and Continuity department rules otherwise- like the ROTJ rank badges.

On the whole, though, you can accept all 4 as correct.

[ April 15, 2001: Message edited by: Ushgarak ]

Returning to an original point of the apparent potential relevence of Exar Kun is this then likely that we are going to see the return of the double length Light saber?...

It would seem not, despite speculation that the new descrption of the 'Sith Ligfhtsabre' on the official site suggests that all Sith sabres are double-bladed.

Making Vader a what? A handicapped syth? Or is that inferring a generalisation that predominantly Syth have double lightsabers, anyway in the Expanded universe that is a falsification as there have been double lengthers, and field widener lightsabers

Does anyone think this double bladed sabre is a deliberate ploy by GL to represent some other oriental warrior type whilst the single blade version ramains analogous to the Samoria? (spelling???)

Also, that Vader maintained a single blade as he was initially trained as a Jedi and learnt that style rather than a Sith style with a double blade as seen in use by Maul???

Are you infering that Maul represented the equivilent of the Bo staff as opposed to the Samurai blade. Does that could partially explain the Double blade at half mast he seems to fight differently than a sword so perhaps a Jo or Tanjo staff technique (shorter staffs) That can become extended at will. The only fear then is the next Darth with Sai or Nunchukers perhaps light shirukin...

Basically yes, I'm not much up on the martial arts so could not put names to the various arts as they stand.

I'm not saying that we will see a whole load of different martial styles, but more that the "staff" style is that favoured by the Sith. It's possible..