Timeline for Why isn't the First Order the Second Order?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 10, 2017 at 18:54 | comment | added | Tophandour | @DaaaahWhoosh It's like George Lucas said: "It's like poetry. It rhymes." | |
| Apr 24, 2016 at 17:25 | vote | accept | Rogue Jedi | ||
| Apr 23, 2016 at 0:01 | comment | added | Mazura | Indiana Jones is so old there's spaceships now. Wait, what? This was a Star Wars movie? | |
| Apr 22, 2016 at 21:46 | comment | added | LindaJeanne | per the quoted entry: So, an empire loses a Great War, and is hampered by reparations and restrictions. Out of this environment a new charismatic leadership (with promises of a return to greatness) rise, and launch a Second War two or three decades after the one it lost, with with the goal total conquest? | |
| Apr 22, 2016 at 21:45 | comment | added | SnakeDoc | @Zack Don't... just don't. Defending a wholesale copy of earlier films is ridiculous as it's insulting to viewers. | |
| Apr 22, 2016 at 21:15 | comment | added | Zack | @DaaaahWhoosh it's like a reboot and continuation at the same time. History repeats itself... | |
| Apr 22, 2016 at 16:35 | comment | added | PointlessSpike | @DaaaahWhoosh- Actually, it's closer to 40 years. | |
| Apr 22, 2016 at 14:41 | comment | added | DaaaahWhoosh | This answer kind of reminds me of the idea of The Force Awakens: they're not making anything new, they're just regurgitating whatever worked 30 years ago. | |
| Apr 22, 2016 at 1:06 | history | edited | Praxis | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 14 characters in body
|
| Apr 22, 2016 at 0:50 | history | answered | Praxis | CC BY-SA 3.0 |