Ahsoka Star Wars series related to other Star Wars content

of course they didn't bring back the best character from those earlier series

Normally I don't write about this kind of topic, but it has been interesting catching up on some Star Wars background related to watching the new Ahsoka series.  The main background is two cartoon series, Clone Wars and Rebels, beyond a lot of other books and such.

I never did review earlier related content when watching the other shows (Mandalorian, Obi-Wan, Boba Fett), even though the broader Star Wars story lines relate to those stories and characters too.  I'm temporarily living in a different part of the world than my kids just now, so catching older Star Wars content works out.  I'm running a lot too, and meditating, but still there are some extra quiet hours.

Youtube channels cover how individual characters or story components relate to what is being told week to week now, so I don't really plan to duplicate that.  I'll just pass on some thoughts and background, so that someone who has mostly only ever seen the 9 movies--10 or 11?; maybe something like Solo doesn't count--and limited tv show series content can better place Ahsoka themes.  More than for those other series the background enters in as relevant.

To place how much one could appreciate the show with no awareness of earlier related story lines it works to consider what it would be like watching Return of the Jedi without seeing the original two movies (#4 and 5 in that series, now).  It's fine, it stands alone, but it would lose a lot of story-value impact for dropping out all the earlier story line and character development.  

Ahsoka seems a little different because they really emphasize dramatic beats that are almost entirely cross-references, so pacing and meaning would seem odd if you watched it without knowing who Ahsoka even is.  She was briefly in a couple of Mandalorian episodes but that didn't describe cover her background.  They're not exactly getting her character right, but then since in earlier cartoon shows she was 13 or 14 or so and now maybe on towards 40 she would be different.  That's part what I will cover, what works and what doesn't.

Is it good?

Let's start there; yes and no.

Yes:  if you are really into Star Wars and watched a good bit of The Clone Wars and Rebels (series), or if you've just liked all of the series on Disney+.  Never mind liking all the movies; after the first 3 the rest were hit and miss.  Ahsoka characters and story extend most directly from the Clone Wars and Rebels series, with the latter series slightly better than the Clone Wars, I thought.

No:  it's not too "woke" to be ok, pushing some agenda, but if you thought the other Disney+ series didn't tell great stories or build characters effectively, and you aren't already familiar with these ones, you should probably pass on this one too.  It's much more interesting based on the earlier story development, and these characters are fairly one-dimensional, at best.  

Ahsoka was a more compelling, personable, and dynamic character in the other two cartoon series; it just is what it is.  Rosario Dawson delivers her lines so, so slowly, I guess mimicking the serious demeanor of the older Obi-Wan character (the Alec Guiness version).  It doesn't work.

What should you watch to catch up?

Youtube fan channels tend to suggest a half dozen specific Clone Wars and Rebels episodes; catching one of those and watching what they say to would work.  That's if you subscribe to Disney+; I don't think it's worth it otherwise, but then you wouldn't have access to this Ahsoka series either without that.  Just catching the very last Rebels episode is probably enough (or maybe that was in two parts?; they often are).  

There is a Clone Wars cartoon movie; if cartoons are of interest that's probably a shorter and more integrated story, easier to catch up on than watching a few dozen short episodes.  The end of the Clone Wars series tells the story of Anakin's change to becoming Darth Vader from a different perspective, very indirectly, but to me it was almost more moving than the live action "Attack of Clones" direct story.

Skipping the Mandalorian episodes Ahsoka is in makes sense; she isn't developed at all in those.  Maul--formerly Darth Maul, later just Maul--is the most compelling character in both cartoon series, but he's not around in the Ahsoka show time-frame.  Anyone going back to watch just a little of all of it might catch only what he is in, and the two Mortis Gods related episodes, and the relative end of Rebels where Ezra visited the World Between Worlds (I think it was).

The main characters carrying over, Ahsoka and Sabine, and later Thrawn and Ezra, are different enough that catching a lot of Rebels would be overkill.  Those Youtube commentary channel content producers would say that you really need to understand who Thrawn is, and the witches (Night Sisters), but catching only the last Rebels episode covers Thrawn, and there's no need to sort out the Night Sisters, since they barely do anything in Ahsoka.  To me that was quite interesting background, so I'd recommend it for other reasons, if watching cartoons works for someone.

What gets extended, beyond those earlier shows

Most of the show content is about new directions.  There is earlier "expanded universe" Star Wars content in the forms of other cartoons, books, video games, and whatever else, and surely parts of all that relates more directly than Rebels or Clone Wars.  Since the main characters all were in Rebels (Ahsoka, Sabine, Ezra, Thrawn, and earlier on Hera) their intro is there; I mean related to where the story goes after the first couple of episodes.

Baylan is more or less a grey Jedi, it would seem, or perhaps dark Jedi (the extra categories get confusing), one turned away from the most positive "light side of the Force" range.  He is probably the main character addition, but since that actor (Ray Stevenson) died since filming not one that will probably continue on.  Morgan is a "Night Sister," a witch, and others turn up.  The range of their magical abilities varies; they can shoot energy blasts, make up some sort of force shield, enhance others' powers, and extended the furthest they can raise the dead as zombies.  It all works better than it sounds.  The plot in this show will determine what they need to be able to do, which isn't too much until the end.

Most of the first half of the season is build-up; they visited where Thrawn (the bad-guy Empire military leader) was transported with Ezra, a Jedi in training.  What is going on in that place is only hinted at in the first episode there.  Star Wars, and Marvel and other series, tend to all often commit the error of using most of the season to build up a solid, compelling story base, and then conclude that in two episodes at the end, speeding pace of progression tenfold.  Looking back half of what happens in the first third of the shows is filler, directionless content that sets up the world and characters but should've done so faster.

On to the series conclusion (with some spoilers)

They did finally wrap up initial intro and build-up in episode 7, finally re-uniting the main characters, and all that was left is for them all to return back to where they started in the 8th and last episode.  That's really the core of the plot:  Thrawn and Ezra, the main antagonist and protagonist in Rebels, were relocated to a distant place at the end of that series, resolving Thrawn's initiative to end the rebellion, and this whole series is about them coming back, with anyone getting left behind as a starting point for later.  

As to limitations or problems the story lines with Baylan and Shin just drop.  They must have cut out a lot related to the actor not being around to continue the role, since he died after filming, but it still just completely hangs at the end.  

Half of what happened in the 8 part series happened in the last two episodes, and it wasn't all that much.  All the main characters only met each other in #7.  For people who have been following these story lines for the last 17 years, or whatever it has been, with related books out since the 80s, every cross-reference and hint at a new direction could be meaningful and much appreciated, but for anyone else it would just seem slow.  

I've watched all of the movies, Clone Wars and Rebels, and every Star Wars show (so I guess I'm a fan?), but for me the shows need to actually move a story along more, they can't just reference old ideas and hint at what might follow.  It was nice seeing Hayden Christianson fill in some largely unnecessary scenes as Anakin; that worked, even though it is only a reference, not an actual part of the story plot.  If you go back and watch every two-part episode of the Clone Wars and Rebels cartoon series more happened in every one of those than this entire show series.

Does this work to re-start new Star Wars direction?

I think so.  The earlier Mandalorian, Boba Fett, Obiwan, and Andor weren't set up to do that, although Mandalorian comes the closest, by far.  It's problematic that they're telling stories mixed within different parts of the timeline, so that Andor leads directly to Rogue One, but stops there (kind of; there is plenty of gap to add a couple more series in between).  Here's that timeline order (listed in references like this one):

1. Episode I: The Phantom Menace
2. Episode II: Attack of the Clones 
3. The Clone Wars (TV show and movie)
4. Episode III: Revenge of the Sith
5. Bad Batch
6. Solo: A Star Wars Story
7. Obi-Wan Kenobi 
8. Star Wars Rebels 
9. Andor 
10. Rogue One: A Star Wars Story 
11. Episode IV: A New Hope 
12. Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back
13. Episode VI: Return of the Jedi 
14. The Mandalorian 
15. The Book of Boba Fett 
16. Star Wars Resistance
17. Episode VII: The Force Awakens 
18. Episode VIII: The Last Jedi 
19. Episode IX: The Rise of Skywalker

So Ahsoka is after Rebels, and even after Return of the Jedi, after the Empire was defeated.  Probably Star Wars channels could place it better in relation to the Mandalorian and Boba Fett, or maybe there aren't enough timetable markers in the movie to make that clear.

Since the last three movies were so badly received that throws off developing the most natural themes, going later than all of it.  Starting well before the prequels is possible.  Folding in completely different scope is the most natural direction, as Clone Wars and Rebels did, adding Night Sisters, Maul, and Mortis Gods story lines, or linking to pre-history, which the entire other location in Ahsoka points towards.  It looks like there's a time-gap between 13 and 14 on that list.

They had really set up Baylan, the character based on the actor that died, as the next main center of that story line, so they'll need to work out a story shift to account for that, or re-cast the role, which Star Wars tends not to do.  Obiwan was played by two actors, but in different parts of the character's life, and the Baylan Skoll character was already old.  They could make him young again, a Gandalf returning from death sort of theme, but radically changing the rules to the universe in the sequels is part of what fans hated.  They should probably bring back Mark Hamill as a grey Jedi, later on, while he is still around; that could all link together, and back-story leaps that actually work would be better accepted.

Ahsoka would've worked better as its own series, standing alone, if it was made to actually do that, to tell a unique and distinct story.  Since it only carried forward the last stopping point and introduced new directions it was ok for that.  It limits the potential audience, since it wasn't an interesting enough stand-alone story to work as that for people who have only seen the nine main movies (or 10 or 11; however you count them).

Reviewing Obi Wan Star Wars series in relation to forms of bias

 

Recently I wrote about how Marvel series interpretation varies a lot in relation to a "woke" theme issue.  Marvel (and Disney) really are adding a lot of diverse characters to their movies and television shows, in some cases clearly swapping out white male characters for female / minority versions.  I don't see that as a problem, but it is interesting how that shifts interpretation of whether the shows are good or not.  

To some extent focus on those themes, and not story lines and character development, may really be causing a correlation, of poor story telling adjoining those diversity / inclusive-focused forms.  The show I was discussing, Ms Marvel, is pretty bad, in the sense of developing core characters well and setting up motivations, oppositions, and story lines.  It's really for kids, so in a sense keeping tone lighter and focusing on form could make sense, but it's still bad writing, and kids can definitely relate to good writing, in the right form.  Movies like Frozen worked well for succeeding at all that.

The Obi Wan series works as a good example because, to me, it's right in between good and not especially good, and it tones down the gender / race diversity themes.  The story line is interesting, just not incredibly well developed, and of course the characters are compelling, and general look and feel of the show is relatively amazing, very well done.

I get the sense that a set of popular Youtube movie "critics"--they do represent the new form of that, but it's not like Siskel and Eibert, or newspaper media versions--lean heavily to the right, politically, and mix together story and character development judgment with their own political bias.  For shows like Ms Marvel and the Hawkeye series poor writing quality really does combine with adding "diversity" and gender swapping main characters, but this is something else.  The Obi Wan series could be interpreted as a fantastic development of prior Star Wars themes, better than the last three movies, or on the other side as suffering from the same weaknesses.  It might help to spell out what worked well and what didn't, before critiquing that left / right bias issue.

Positive show aspects:

-characters, setting, familiar theme, use of backgrounds, film quality:  all of this equates to the production quality and style of the rest of the nine core movies (with two others, and lots of animation and text adjoining that).  It's possible to critique the use of the same characters within the story line, as not developing them, or not being true to earlier patterns or details, which I'll take up again as a potential negative aspect.

-CGI use, sets:  beyond filming in similar appearing locations (as the main movies) the production quality and set design choices, and use of visual effect input, all seemed positive to me.  It's possible for critics to say that every single movie exhibits a gap in CGI use, perhaps unless a film clearly takes a next step in what can be shown, as Jurassic Park and the one Terminator movie did.  In a sense saying that the CGI is bad seems to imply a reviewer is seeing something others aren't, as a better judge.  To me the look of the films was fine, quite positive, including that input.  They added two new set versions, Darth Vader's "castle / palace" on the volcanic planet shown in the third movie, and a new Empire base that included an underwater building setting.  To me the final outcome is more about the stories and characters, but these parts were an obvious positive input.

-acting:  for mostly drawing on already established characters the main points related to fleshing those out related to included character arcs (writing quality) and actor selection and portrayal.  For the most part, to me, those worked well.  The child actor portraying Leia was fantastic, as good as any child actor portrayal of any character I can recall, and of course Ewan McGregor is on another level, among the best of this time period.  The main criticism would fall to the black female antagonist character, Reva, and the writing, how characters were used, which goes beyond what actors can do with the material.

photo credit and background

Negatives:

-acting, character development:  was Reva's character arc that bad, or was she so badly written, or portrayed through limited acting skill?  It was more that shifts in her character arc didn't make sense.  I think that actor's skill level didn't match with Ewan McGregor's, that the same degree of subtlety of expression wasn't there, but it would've been harder to give life to a character with relatively poorly written motivations and personal direction.  This is a weakness in the series.

Reva's arc was this (a complete spoiler for the general story line):  she had been trained by the Jedi as a young child, was present for the killing of the other children in training in the movie series version events (film #3), then joined under Darth Vader to hunt Jedi, and later changed to try and extract revenge on Darth Vader, still acting on negative motivations (revenge), and then turned back to "being good" at the end.  It didn't really add up.  

Obi Wan's arc from not being the powerful and confident warrior he had been, after a decade in hiding, and then returning to that form, also didn't work.  It was so close too; with minor revisions that sequence could have transitioned naturally.  It seemed like some of that might've related to not shooting and editing the whole series as one long movie length segment, so it was harder to get the transitions like that to flow naturally.

breaking canon / inconsistency:  this gets overstated by Star Wars enthusiasts.  Creating lots of movies and television content is eventually going to relate to inconsistencies, but earlier focus on complete consistency tried to avoid that.  To me these were trivial (eg. a "force ghost" changed capabilities, a main movie line describing prior relationship between Leia and Obi Wan didn't reflect them meeting in this series), so it works to set this aside.

improvement potential:  this is where things get really hazy.  What was so badly managed that it should've been different?  Did they do injustice to any prior character forms, were parts so unrealistic that they "take you out of the movie," did parts of the character and story just absolutely not work?  

I already suggested the main antagonist role didn't really come together; there's that.  In the original three movies (#4, 5, and 6) they set up Darth Vader and the Empire as this oppressive, powerful, mysterious evil background opposition, and that really worked, not developing those characters or story components so much, using background context and short exchanges to support that, more so than developing a character perspective.  Then that approach wouldn't work as well in a smaller scale story designed to focus in more on limited story and character range, as this was, the form the Mandalorian series also took, largely successfully.  Adding a little about Anakin's earlier perspective kind of worked, but it was a late and limited addition, and it didn't tie to what Darth Vader was going through in those sequences as well as they were trying to achieve.

The parts that over-use coincidence, or just didn't portray space battles realistically (?), didn't seem as problematic, I suppose with one exception.  In one scene an escaping small ship couldn't be captured prior to time to allow plot development to occur, even though it was pursued by a much larger and heavily armed ship.  Or a wounded character recovered way too fast, from one scene to the immediate next one, in time sequence.  They just weren't careful enough to avoid a few obvious errors.

General assessment:

People can like or dislike whatever they watch, based on their own preconceptions and preferences.  Blade Runner 2049 can be regarded as a masterpiece, a visual marvel that creates complex story lines and characters, true to prior development, and weaves together a complex story with just enough open ended aspects to keep it all interesting, and enable significant plot twists and development.  Or it could seem like a horrible, uneventful, muddled slog, badly acted and written worse yet.  People could love or hate this Star Wars television series, or any of the movies, or Star Wars in general.

To me this matches or exceeds level of writing quality and character development of the last six Star Wars movies.  Maybe that could be seen as a problem, since the first two movies, #4 and #5, were clearly better than the rest (per my judgement, at least).  With positive or negative bias going in one might love or hate this tv series.

I don't see the "woke" / left-leaning concerns as much of an issue.  The main antagonist was a black female, and I think if that character had been a white male the politically conservative critics would've reviewed this series much more positively, but to me that's a case of being conditioned by bias in an unreasonable way.  Maybe something like one fourth of all Americans are white males, so a majority of characters could reasonably be female or of other races, all the more reasonable when you consider that Star Wars isn't supposed to map directly to US gender and race diversity.

One criticism often levelled against series framed like this, in terms of placement in a franchise series, is that "it's a story that no one asked for."  To me that's relatively meaningless too.  No one asked for the Mandalorian either, which wasn't as concerned with core characters, but since the show was well written and developed this criticism was never levelled at it.  The prequel movie version of Han Solo's story line wasn't as well regarded, so that came up then.  When animation versions are released the opposite response seems to occur, because Star Wars enthusiasts then value creators fleshing out story lines and events that had only been developed in text forms prior, in "official canon" or other forms.

One main input seems to be that Youtube content creators draw viewers by honing in on popular opinions, so that given the culture-war context they either need to hate left-leaning content (or what can be framed as such) or support it, to draw on a related viewer base.  Once a dozen (or 100) prior Youtube videos expressing a point of view draw large viewership it becomes a matter of of pursuing ad revenue, and earning a living, to keep pushing that theme, regardless of how it relates to content being critiqued.  Hating Marvel and Star Wars movies and television shows pays off; passing on mixed reviews wouldn't, and acceptance probably targets a much more limited audience.  

These content creators need to stick to form too; to some extent they can't love one Marvel show and hate another, even though some are much better or worse than others.  They can openly accept content aspects that offset their primary opinion, but viewers are there to support one of two main takes, acceptance or criticism, which would tend to apply across all similar content.  For viewers generally disliking the past six Star Wars movies (with the seventh version made, also #7 in production order, a bit more neutral) it's clear which side general viewer opinion falls on, and which stance is going to draw more views, and compensate Youtube creators better for supporting.

Reviews:

Let's consider what audience or critics thought:

Generally positive, but critic opinions can tend to differ from movie viewer takes, and seemingly can relate to a left-leaning political bias.

It's a little unusual that one third of Rotten Tomatoes viewers regarded the film negatively, and about 80% gave it a score of 7 or above in the IMDB reviews, but there could be differences in who provides feedback through different channels, or how a general positive and negative identification tends to be used.

In general the show was good.  Writing about it here related to considering why it got the mixed reviews then, not showing up so much in terms of that Rotten Tomatoes score (although over one third of the audience didn't like it), but tied to online opinions.  It was good but it could've been better, and it didn't seem to be accepted well because it was dealing with core characters, which some audience members weren't open to seeing portrayed in a series with some clear weaknesses.

Unfortunately probably including a black, female antagonist probably shifted about 25% of the audiences perceptions.  Or maybe half, with that only accounting for a lot of the negative takes.  Maybe it's that 63% liked it partly because one character was a minority female, and another a white female.  Maybe the culture war is just like that now, that everything is going to be filtered through that lens first.