#because if thrawn not a villain

[short-wooloo]

Either learn what that means or you can't use that term anymore

(Thanks to @rogueleader14 for showing me this)

An anti hero is not an antagonist who is likable or sympathetic, an anti hero is a protagonist who is unheroic in their motivations, someone who does/fights for good, but not necessarily for good reasons, fighting for things like profit or to save their own skin, basically their on the good guys side for selfish reasons, a good example of this would be Han pre character development

(Also I sincerely doubt Baylan is our first Force sensitive anti hero, pretty sure Ventress fits into that category after she split with Dooku, and there are probably others)

I'll grant that we don't precisely know what Baylan's motivations are yet

But he's trying to bring back thrawn, a fascist, so that thrawn can restore the fascist empire

That's not very heroic

And even if Baylan's motivation is a belief that the galaxy needs a strong hand to force it to be peaceful, that still doesn't make him an anti hero

Because y'know what? That's what Dooku and Anakin believed

In other words, Baylan, like Dooku and Anakin, is a fascist, or at least a fascist enabler

[ragnarssons]

“blugh blugh but they’re writing themselves into a corner, like why is moff gideon not in the sequels??” my dudes. let me tell you that moff gideon wrote his own end when he said something along the lines of “maybe we should look towards another leadership” when talking about thrawn. it’s thrawn. he’s gonna kill him. oh, spoilers.

[jjoelswatch]

Always amuses me (read: exhausts me) when people are surprised and angry when Star Wars creators refer to Thrawn as a villain and act like it’s the end of the world because the creators don’t “get” the character.

[whippedcloudsofcream]

Honestly, people on both sides misunderstand Thrawn. People either say slay or babygurl and ignore his crimes and make him some oversensitive guy who was forced into working for the Empire. Or some cliche comic book villain with no self control whatsoever. They’re both wrong. Thrawn isn’t bloodthirsty, he isn’t barbaric or sadistic, but he still a villain. Thrawn is, in the end, still a fascist. Still an Imperialist. He is a part of not one, but two governments that value control, order, and abuse over the masses. He is comfortable in fascism and it has benefited him greatly his entire life. He doesn’t want things to change. He sees no reason to change it. Thrawn has made his choices and he is a bad man who supports a bad system. He does anything to achieve his goals, but just prefers to do so with the least bloodshed possible for convenience sake and not any actual care to the lives of the people who serve under him. That’s literally it.

[shoulderholsterfreak]

So in anticipation of Wakanda Forever I revisited my interest in Namor and suddenly a couple things make a lot of sense…

[gffa]

The problem with Thrawn as a villain in the Ahsoka show is that, now that I have read the Thrawn novels, I now only care about him in the context of WHERE IS ELI, ARE YOU THINKING ABOUT ELI RIGHT NOW, THRAWN? I’M THINKING ABOUT ELI RIGHT NOW. I’M THINKING ABOUT YOU THINKING ABOUT ELI. I’M THINKING ABOUT ELI THINKING ABOUT YOU. “GOOD MORNING, LIEUTENANT VANTO.” YOU BETTER PRAY ELI’S HAD TIME TO CALM DOWN WHILE YOU WERE OFF IN NEW SPACE OR WHATEVER BECAUSE I KNOW I’M STILL REELING FROM THAT. ANYWAY WHERE IS ELI, THRAWN? ARE YOU THINKING ABOUT ELI RIGHT NOW? I’M THINKING ABOUT ELI RI-- and I will never be able to take the plot of the show seriously any time he’s on the screen.

[howtofightwrite]

Speaking of martial competence, do you have any examples of characters that are actually written with this in mind?

Loads. Some actually even make good on that.

So, there's different kinds of martial competence. There are characters who are proficient in combat directly, there are well written strategists, there are characters who excel at military leadership, and when they're written well, you can actuallylearn some things from them.

I'm going to give some examples, and at least one cautionary example.

For, just, raw combat prowess, I still go back to Robert E. Howard's Conan short stories. It's easy to meme on the character, especially 90 years after the fact, with the cultural persona that's grown around him, but Howard's original writing is excellent. The character would not have survived Howard's early (and, frankly, tragic) death if it was just the one note gag you might expect, if your only exposure to the character was through cultural osmosis and the films.

Howard's fight scenes were shockingly well written. To the point that it is still absolutely worth reading if you want to write a fantasy fighter.

For strategists, three characters come to mind, but only two are literary, and all are Science Fiction.

Grand Admiral Thrawn is probably one of the best villains Star Wars has ever produced, it's part of why he's one of the few characters that's migrated from the original EU to the Disney era. My personal take is, as a character, he's lost a lot over the years, but the original incarnation from the early 90s novels is a very solid model for a strategist. Particularly in how he takes time to understand his opponents while looking for potential weak points to exploit.

His practice of studying a culture's art to understand their psychology might sound a bit goofy, but the concept does have a real basis. (At least, until it metastasized into a superpower, in later adaptations of the character.) Being able to psychologically assess your foe is an incredibly valuable element of strategy, and one that you probably want to consider when you're writing a character who is supposed to be a “strategic genius.”

When writing fiction, you want to consider all of your characters as if they were people, rather than as hollow, plastic toys. And, yes, the obnoxious villain who knows exactly what your heroes will do because of authorial fiat is going to be a more compelling character than the ambulatory goldfish villain who exists as a prelude for your heroes showing off how badass you think they are.

Granted, even in Heir to the EmpireThrawn was already drawing strategic insights that strained credibility, but understanding your foe is an element of strategic thinking that is often forgotten in literature. So, even as a villain in a tie-in novel (we're not done with tie-in fiction yet), he is worth looking at. At least when written by Timothy Zhan, Thrawn was a well written character, and even if he bordered on a Mary Sue at times, he escaped a lot of that stigma by justifying his competence.

It's also probably worth mentioning in passing that he's one of the few Imperial leaders in Star Wars who isn't also criminally incompetent.

The non-literary example of a strategist would be John Sheridan from Babylon 5. Unlike Thrawn, Sheridan's main strategic focus is on situational exploitation. A little of that comes from his knowledge of enemy procedures and psychology, but at lot of it comes from a rather ruthless approach to technical limitations. An alien race is using technology that blocks human targeting systems? Set up a nuclear mine and then send out a fake distress single to lure them in. Need to deal with a significantly larger, more dangerous ship? Lure them into a gas giant and and let the planet's gravity well drag them past crush depth. Bruce Boxleitner's performance helped sell the character, but Sheridan is a really solid science fiction strategist, who really exemplifies how technical limitations can have enormous strategic considerations.

I'm not citing Sheridan as an excellent example of a leader per se,it's certainly there, but it is harder to unpack from Boxleitner's performance. It does have some good payoffs much later in the series when he starts making some orders that cause his subordinates to sit up and stop what they're doing. And that is a consistent theme even back to his introduction, but, it's a tangible consequence to an intangible cause.

The last example is a negative example, both for strategy and leadership. And, as much as it pains me to say this, at least Orson Scott Card understood that Ender was a bad leader. At least in the original novel. To be blunt, Ender is a mediocre strategist at best. His highlights in the book involve, “inventing armor,” and creative movement in micrograv. That's setting the bar exceptionally low, and while it is reasonably within the range of what you could expect from a pre-teen, that's not much of a justification.

Again, I'm not a fan of Card, and I'm reallynot recommending Ender's Gameto anyone. However, if I didn't mention it, you know there'd be a reblog going for twelve hundred words about how Andrew Wiggin is the best strategist in literature, which, yeah, no.

Do you want a goofy, tie-in fiction, literary suggestion for the best leader in sci-fi? Too bad, because I'm pretty sure Ciaphas Cain is not that person. The Ciaphas Cain novels by Sandy Mitchell are unusual as leadership recommendations, because of how much Cain internally processes the social manipulation involved in military leadership. He's not a great leader, but he is exceptionallygood at explaining to the reader how he's creating that illusion to motivate the soldiers around him. In fairness, some of that is an intrinsic character flaw, he is incredibly insecure, and desperately trying to hide that fact. And the difference between being a great leader, and effectively creating a comprehensive illusion of a great leader is: There is no difference. As a serious complement, it is one of the few times I've seen an author treat leadership as an actual skill, and not simply an extension of a character's charisma. Which is why I'm singling this one out. It might sound like a joke inclusion initially, and the books are quite funny in a Warhammer 40k kind of way, but there is quite a bit of  value to be had.

-Starke

This blog is supported through Patreon. Patrons get access to new posts three days early, and direct access to us through Discord. If you’re already a Patron, thank you. If you’d like to support us, please consider becoming a Patron.

[nobie]

I need to talk about Morgan Elsbeth and the connection to Thrawn. Along with some other questionable narrative choices Filoni has made with Thrawn.

I want to preface, this is not going to be a hating Morgan Elsbeth post nor hating on the actress or any bts production of her character. There is enough hate towards characters like this in this fandom and I will not be perpetuating that (take that negativity somewhere else). I only want this to be an open discussion on this part of Thrawn's story.

Morgan is a character that has been placed into Thrawn's canon timeline. She was not written in (everything is written obvs but let me explain). The distinction I want to make between those narrative ideas is, placing a character into a story means they are important in supporting the main character, but no one cares if they are replaced or removed from the story. Writing a character into the story means they are so important to the direct development of the mc, if they are replaced or removed it feels like a piece of that character is missing. Some examples for Thrawn would be Eli Vanto or Ar'alani. Morgan was removed from the story in the Ahsoka series and it didn't even effect Thrawn himself.

So why create this character and push a narrative that makes her seem like the most important part of the story? Like without her Thrawn wouldn't be able to get back to the galaxy? Thrawn is a genius, a warrior, and a survivor. He could've figure that out himself, or with the help of Ezra (an established character that the audience loves). Instead he's had to rely on Morgan.

This is where my qualm with Dave Filoni comes into play. I love Filoni's work he has created some of my favorite stories in the Star Wars franchise. But he does one thing that I despise. Ignores the work of amazing authors. In this case Timothy Zahn. I can't say for sure that he hasn't read the Ascendancy Trilogy or the Thrawn (2017) trilogy, but it feels like it when analyzing Filoni's characterization of Thrawn. If he did read those books or least consulted Zahn on them he would know Thrawn's true motives for what he does. He is a protector for the greater good. He goes against many higher powers to make the right choice, not the good or bad choices. He shows the characters around him time and time again that he will always do what is right even if it means his downfall. He is not a villain in his own story just himself, not good or bad, the one in the middle. He evolves, learns, observes, and understands things on a completely different level. And we only see a sliver of this characterization in Filoni's story. I understand the narrative built around Thrawn being the ultimate villain for the ghost crew because a good story like this should have an interesting dynamic between protagonist and antagonist. But the fact that you'd have to read his books to know who he is, is a clear indication to me that his novel characterization wasn't researched enough.

It also shows me that Filoni favors the legends version of Thrawn more. Especially with the inclusion of Pellaeon in Tales of the Empire and not Eli Vanto. Who could have easily been placed into that role. Although, he his Thrawn's aide he can and has done things like that for Thrawn.

Now in Tales of the Empire we see that he isn't the original creator of the TIE Defender. Trying to place Morgan into a characters story that is so beloved [Thrawn] feels so forced through this idea that she created the TIE Defender. Why would someone who is trying to get revenge for her people go to the Empire with an idea like this. If she is so angry why she is relying on someone else's power to get her revenge? And even when she got in the good graces of the Empire with Thrawn what came of it? The Defender project was ruined, shouldn't her allegiance to Thrawn be in ruin too. The deal they made implied she would get what she wanted, but she never did and was still loyal to him. Thrawn does have this quality about him though, you'd follow him off a cliff, the gravity in which he attracts people to his cause is so alluring. But that still doesn't explain where Morgans revenge story went. And in the end she really does feel like a character that can be replaced.

Trying to make a character that was placed into the story important to the audience does a disservice to the story as a whole. Thrawn has an established world of characters in the novels that are readily available to use in the narrative. So why aren't they in it? Eli especially in one I cannot ignore the absence of. From the moment Thrawn is found in exile Eli does not leave his side. Eli follows him into battle again and again. Even after realzing his initial career choice will amount to nothing now that Thrawn has taken over his duty in the Imperial Navy. Thrawn himself says "you hold my words in your hand, and their meanings," and although that was in relation to his survival with the Empire it still held true throughout the story. Eli is an extension of Thrawn, whatever is said to Eli is said to Thrawn and vise versa. So where is he?

(Ok that's all my ramblings for now. Hopefully this made sense. Feel free to leave your thoughts in the tags or replies. Thrawn was the first sw novel I read, I'm fiercely protective of him. So when his characterization is kinda ruined like this it upsets me. But I'm always excited to see him in any media and hear that silky voice of his, thank you lars.)

[holonetwork]

The March of Grand Admiral Thrawn, conducted by composer Arturo Díez Boscovich, performed live by The Malaga Philharmonic Orchestra at the MOSMA Festival in Spain in 2017. The new compositions were written and performed to accompany Timothy Zahn's classic novel, Heir to the Empire. About this new theme for Grand Admiral Thrawn, Boscovich said to the audience, "We have the march, the military march for Admiral Thrawn, who is the villain or one of the them in the book. He is related with the Empire, and because of that I tried to use that martial atmosphere to create a parallel with the Imperial March. You can also hear lyrical music within the march, because he is a real evil man, he is an alien, he has blue skin and red eyes, but he is also a true art lover. This admiral, besides being a magnificent strategist, is a charismatic person; he is elegant and he has a sensitive taste for the arts. He is a multifaceted character, and I have tried to translate all of this into the music."

[stevesnightmares]

they wasted the rebels sequel for a live action that the people who only watch live action star wars didn't even care about because it was full of characters and storylines that they don't know instead of making an animated rebels sequel for the fans and people who actually wanted and cared for it, all because they thought a live action version would be more profitable than a cartoon.

the people who actually care for either thrawn or star wars rebels and its characters wanted an animated series, not an 8 episodes live action version that doesn't really deal with ezra and what he did while lost in space with thrawn; that seems to want to make thrawn another imperial villain without his books depth; that doesn't deal with the rebels characters and their emotions; that condenses such an anticipated storyline in 8 episodes; much more that went wrong.

who exactly is the target audience? because rebels fans wanted an animated series that actually did justice to the storyline and people who watch only live action star wars weren't really interested in it either, I had to almost force my father to watch it with me.

so disappointing and sad. a rebels requel was one of the things I was looking forwards to the most when it comes to star wars and they just ruined it.

(there were good moments, don't get me wrong, there were some really good moments and some that I loved, but still, can't help the disappointment and the thought of what could've been had we gotten a book or an animated series instead)

[horatio-fig]

I cant stop thinking about him 🥹😖 That eyebrow raise!

Thrawn is such a great character because there are so many ways to enjoy him (and I do). Everytime I do a rewatch I pick a different way to interpret certain characters and storylines and Thrawn is a really fun one.

Sometimes he’s a misunderstood and complex man trying to do what’s right in a galaxy where that’s almost impossible, other times he’s a ruthless killer who gave up on caring about things long ago. My favourite is when he’s a somewhat decent guy, but without Eli (messy breakup maybe) he’s gone a little over the edge.

This is just the way I like to watch Star Wars and I have tonnes of other ways to interpret it. I also love villains 🤤 and all Star Wars villains are amazing but Thrawn is at the top of the pyramid for me 🥰

[nymph1e]

So I thought I'd elaborate on my thoughts on the "Ezra has joined Thrawn" theory.

The way I see it, Ezra has been missing for 10+ years. There are only so many reasons this might be:

He's dead.

He's been imprisoned.

There's something physically stopping him from going home (space shenanigans)

Boring. He lacks agency. Completely possible just kinda predictable.

He's avoided going home because of Guilt or whatever.

I highly doubt this would be the case as this basically completely removes him from the thrawn narrative they have going on. Wherever he is, he's got to be relevant to Thrawn still for this all to make narrative sense.

He's working with Thrawn against his will/has been driven mad.

Entirely possible, imo the most likely. You get the angst of Ezra turning out to be Bad, without him actually being Bad. Very likely he will redeem for good feelings all round.

He's working with Thrawn of his own free will.

Personally my favourite choice. This gives him the most agency in the story, keeps him relevant to the main plot, gives an interesting twist and adds a layer of emotion to the conflict with Thrawn. This route would ALSO be the one where they're most likely to do Thrawn as a villain justice.

Thrawn isn't just a power hungry stereotypical Star Wars villain. He's more of an anti-villain, who does villainous acts for a good fucking reason. Sure, to his enemies he's an insane megalomaniac. But like, he was also arguably right in his reasonings. If Ezra sides with him voluntarily, they have a chance to make this conflict more 3D, where both sides are sympathetic.

[jedi-enthusiast]

I said I would get on my "let villains just be evil" soapbox again in the Jedi Appreciation server, so here we are.

LET VILLAINS JUST BE EVIL, FOR FORCE'S SAKE!!!

For some context: this was brought up on a discussion of how Kallus should've just stayed a villain instead of getting the shitty half-assed "redemption arc" that he did in Rebels and also how I would have done Rebels differently.

Now-

I am just...so utterly sick of people (both fans + some of the people creating new SW media) just not letting villains be villains and/or trying to soften them up or give them a sad backstory or whatever.

-----

I like Anakin/Darth Vader as a villain...fans try to justify his actions and say that he was right + Filoni is now under the delusional impression that Anakin was the "best Jedi."

I like Thrawn as a villain...I've also seen people justify his actions and say that he was "right" to steal important cultural artifacts from the cultures he's taking over/destroying because "they'd be destroyed anyway," like that makes it ok.

(I'm also terrified that Filoni is gonna try to give him some sort of sob story or redemption arc in the Ahsoka show, since that's pretty on par for what he's been doing lately)

I like Maul as a villain...and apparently people also try to justify his actions, especially in Rebels, for some reason. I don't even know how, but apparently they do.

I like Dooku as a villain and Filoni tried to justify his actions and make him seem "reasonable" in TotJ, like Dooku didn't become a fucking fascist dictator.

I haven't seen enough of the Sequels to properly gauge whether or not I'd like Kylo Ren as a villain, but plenty of people did! ...and then the directors gave him a half-assed redemption arc and called it quits.

-----

Like please, for the love of god, can people just let villains be evil and terrible people? Can we all just enjoy their characters as they are instead of trying to turn them into something they're not?

Because, at this point, the only villain that's safe to like is Palpatine--but I'm almost certain that people have tried to justify his actions too.

It's exhausting to have to explain-

"Yes, I like Anakin/Darth Vader because I think he's badass, no I don't think the Jedi were evil or in the wrong or that they caused his Fall."

"Yes, I like Thrawn because I think he's creepy and a formidable opponent to face, no I don't think he was benevolent for stealing cultural artifacts from cultures he destroyed."

"Yes, I like Maul because he's absolutely batshit insane, no I don't think his actions against Obi-Wan were justified or that he was right to try and manipulate/kidnap Ezra to be his apprentice."

"Yes, I like Dooku because he's a snarky asshole and also pretty badass, no I don't think that he was actually right or that the Separatists were right either."

etc. etc.

LET VILLAINS JUST BE EVIL!

[prol-x]

Let‘s talk about this shot

Episode 6 was full of meaningful shots and cuts to other people (I will talk about this soon) but for now I would like to focus on this specific one.

Morgan, Thrawn, Shin and Baylan are watching Sabine riding away. You could say that the villains are watching the hero get away. But why do we only see Thrawn and Shin watching her in this shot?

It represents a triangle. They are all connected now. Thrawn and Sabine are obviously enemies and Shin and Thrawn are on the same side. However, we already know that he doesn’t care about Shin (or her master for that matter) at all. Lastly, we have Sabine and Shin of course. Technically, they are enemies but based on recent events, (I am working on an analysis for this) there could be or already has been a shift in their relationship.

This triangle could be the key point/ plot twist for the last episodes because whatever one person decides effects the other two and therefore the outcome of this upcoming battle. I am hoping for Shin to be the one to direct this triangle because I feel like her purpose for being there is way bigger than some people might think.

[jbk405]

I think I've found one of the key reasons why I prefer the old Expanded Universe to the current Star Wars content: Unique types of villains.

More specifically, people who weren't just Evil Force Users With Long Robes And Red Lightsabers. While there were always a few Darth Vader-clones that popped up to fill up space, so many of the Arc Villains were distinct not just in personality, but also how they were dangerous.

Grand Admiral Thrawn was a military tactician, which wasn't the point of any of the main villains in the Original Trilogy. Grand Moff Tarkin was a "Build a bigger superweapon and bludgeon the galaxy into submission" kind of villain, and Vader and the Emperor were mystical dark wizards. This isn't a complaint or criticism, but just pointing out that military tactics were never on display in the films since that wasn't the type of story they were telling. But Thrawn didn't have prophetic powers or Destiny, he had to analyze and plan around what he could learn about his adversaries. It's a different type of fight than Literal Magic. In the original Thrawn Trilogy, Captain Pellaeon frequently internally narrates how different Thrawn's style of leadership was to either Vader or the Emperor (Even if his art-analysis did verge on magic by itself).

Ysanne Isard was a political and/or espionage manipulator, which was even less a point of the Original Trilogy than military tactics were. She took advantage of the realities of actually needing to build a nation out of an underground military movement. With all of the dirty gutter politics, self-serving agendas, and logistics that doom so many revolutionary movements. I'm not as big a fan of her arc as I was when I was younger (I re-read the Rogue Squadron novels a few years ago and the writing quality is not as good as I remember, and Isard's plans frankly don't hold a lot of water), but the concept is still fantastic.

Warlord Zsinj on the surface seems like a merger of Thrawn and Isard -- he's a military commander who specializes in espionage -- but he also has a big focus that neither of them demonstrated: Business. While he still blows stuff up with his giant space ships and is sowing dissent through brainwashing and spycraft, he's simultaneously establishing a galaxy-wide network of completely-legitimate commercial businesses that he owns through untraceable pseudonyms. They fund his campaigns, give him influence on planets outside of his direct control, and allow him to control resources without any of his adversaries even being aware of it.

Even one-shot enemies like the Ssi-ruuk were so unique: They're invading the galaxy because their technology is powered by living souls and they want to harvest all life in the galaxy. That's messed up, and so distinct from the general "Take over the world" motivation of the Empire.

But as time went on, more and more of the enemies were just "Darth Vader Again". Another Jedi who fell to the Dark Side, or another long-lost schism of the Sith who rediscovered mainstream galactic society, or some other thing that is eventually resolved by a one-on-one lightsaber duel and a personal grudge against the Skywalker or Solo families. It definitely felt like they were out of ideas and kept running through the same villains over and over again.

This kicked into high gear after the Prequels came out, and continued in the new continuity after the EU was rebranded as "Legends".

I wish we could go back to the idea that there could be an enemy who wasn't super powerful in the force and consumed by Hatred Of The Jedi. With their own skills, their own methods, and something that makes them more than just another wannabe-Sauron. Pirates who are just pirates, marauding ex-Imperial Warlords who are just marauding ex-Imperial Warlords, and corrupt politicians who are just corrupt politicians, instead of revealing that Palpatine returned (somehow) all over again.

[dalekofchaos]

Context

Hux. Short version, Hux reveals Kylo killing Snoke to the FIrst Order leadership. Hux ousts Ben and becomes Supreme Leader. Now Hux plans to exterminate The Jedi, force sensitives everywhere and lead to the death of the force. Long version read here.

Kylo as the villain. Adam Driver said the plan was never to redeem Ben Solo, that was a late change to appease everyone. So my big pitch for Supreme Leader Kylo Ren. To me Kylo Ren is what Vader could’ve been had he reached his full potential. A Vader who was never wounded on Mustafar, a Vader who killed a close family member and his master. He is the villain they were looking for, but no they had to course correct.As for what his motivation could be, exactly what he said. Finish what Vader started. Destroy the Light and reign over the galaxy as Supreme Leader. Long version. Other look at Kylo as the villain

Snoke's essence transferred into Kylo Ren the moment he killed Snoke.

Darth Plagueis was a powerful Sith Lord who could influence the midichlorians to create life and also save others from dying. He taught everything he knew to his apprentice, Sheev Palpatine (aka Darth Sidious), but he eventually lost his power and young Palpatine killed him in his sleep. How could Plagueis not foresee his own demise at the hands of his ambitious apprentice? Why did Plagueis suddenly “lose his power”? The truth is, he didn’t lose his power and he knew Sidious planned to kill him. It was part of the plan. By dying, I believe Darth Plagueis was able to transmit himself into Sheev and assume control of his body, almost like an infectious disease. Ever notice his name? Darth Plagueis. Plague, as in an infectious disease. Darth Plagueis unlocked the secret to immortality by moving from one body to the next, continuing his lifespan through multiple hosts over countless years. Ever wonder why Palpatine was so obsessed with training a powerful young apprentice? Surely he knew that one day the apprentice would want to overthrow him, so why train his own murderer? In Return of the Jedi, Emperor Palpatine continually provokes Luke to strike him down. Why would Palpatine want to be killed if the goal is longevity? Because Emperor Palpatine was assumed by Darth Plagueis and, through his death, he would then be able to transmit himself into a new host body. He wasn’t just looking for an apprentice, he was looking for a new body since Palpatine’s body was growing old. Luke Skywalker was meant to be the next host body for Darth Plagueis. But unfortunately for Plagueis, Darth Vader had a change of heart and defeated the Emperor. Snoke was Plagueis. It’s the only way to make things work. StarWars.com describes Snoke as a seeker of arcane and ancient lore, and the Last Jedi Visual Dictionary shows that he is a collector of rare memorabilia. At some point, Snoke must have found the wreckage of the Death Star on the forest moon Endor, and was infected by Darth Plagueis when he came upon the corpse of Palpatine. Did you ever wonder why Snoke thought it was so important to complete Kylo Ren’s training? It’s because Snoke was Darth Plagueis and he was training his next host body. Plagueis didn’t have a choice but to infect a really old political influencer like Snoke. Kylo was being groomed to become the next host body. Remember the infamous scene in The Last Jedi where Snoke is “predicting” how Kylo Ren will kill Rey? Wasn’t it a little too obvious? Wouldn’t Snoke have been able to foresee Kylo’s treachery? See through his conflict? It’s because he wasn’t predicting Rey’s death, he predicted his own. He knew Kylo would kill him. He deliberately bullied and provoked Kylo in order to stir his anger into hatred to further fuel his dark side and lead him to completing his training.

So Darth Plagueis goal would be to transfer his essence into Rey and in failing in that. He will drain the life force from the Dyad to satiate his own life force.

Thrawn. Cardinal West's Sequel Trilogy rewrite has the best take of Thrawn as the villain

Rae Sloane.

Rae Sloane founded The First Order! Sloane was loyal to the Empire, so much so, rather than allowing it to cease to exist, she recruited other loyalists and they fled to the Unknown Territories beyond Jakku. She founded the First Order. Together with Hux, she could usurp control of the First Order and become Supreme Leader, which would start a civil war, those loyal to Sloane and those loyal to Kylo. We can have someone who could be a great antagonist to Leia. The founder of The First Order and the mother of the Resistance. What makes Rae a compelling character is the fact that she believes what the Empire is doing is right. In her eyes, the Empire is doing the right thing, purging lawlessness from a galaxy overrun by bureaucrats that care little for the common people. She’s wrong, but like great villains before her, audiences can see where she’s coming from even if they don’t agree with it. Throughout her many appearances in the supplemental Star Wars narratives, she is constantly pushing for the Empire to be “just.” When things start to fall apart after the Battle of Endor, Rae struggles to keep the remnants of the fleet playing by the unspoken rules of warfare and is frustrated to see the Empire careen into backstabbing and incompetence. You can see Rae’s influence in the First Order with its strict hierarchy and minute by-the-books stringency that makes Palpatine’s Empire look positively laissez-faire by comparison. Supreme Leader Rae Sloane would make The First Order a force to be reckoned with and what better way to end it than with the First Order’s founder?

The Grysks.

The Grysks were introduced in the new canon novel Thrawn:Alliances. They are what brings Thrawn to the Empire in hopes of co-existing to fight this threat in the Unknown Regions. Grysks are a species living somewhere in the Unknown Regions. Creatures half of myth, whom few have ever seen. It is said that they are nomads, with no fixed home, traveling in spacecraft so numerous they blot out the stars. They are said to be terrifying warriors, overwhelming their opponents by sheer numbers and ferocity. The fact that these intergalactic conquerors are not the main threat in the Sequel Trilogy is baffling. You could’ve had Ben Solo sense they were coming during his Jedi days and made the ultimate sacrifice to become Kylo Ren and join The First Order because he knew the New Republic was not ready to face such a threat. It wouldn’t make what he was doing the entire trilogy right, but it would make explain why he turned and what his motivations are.

I don't really have a explanation for Qi'Ra, but she was trained by Maul, took over the Crimson Dawn and you don't waste Emilia Clarke on one movie that never continued. So Qi'Ra as the villain could've worked.

A Mandalorian invasion lead by Fett writes itself.

I know it's technically Palpatine, but it works better because we don't stupidly retcon Anakin's sacrifice. This was planned, but the idiots that be decided it would be better if Ian played him. So instead this is the perfected clone. The Clone Wars were a test for Palpatine to perfect cloning. Throughout the reign as Emperor, he tinkered with cloning force sensitives, created a lot of failures(Snoke) but prior to Endor, he perfected it and kept it as a fail safe should he die. And after Kylo Ren killed Snoke, he awakened. Palpatine reborn. The movie opens at the end of the war. Finn successfully consurs up a Stormtrooper Rebellion and all the FO officers are executed, Hux is captured and Rey beats Kylo Ren for the umpteenth time. The First Order are on their last legs. Until a message is delivered to the galaxy.

“People of the galaxy. Your Emperor has returned after thirty long, lawless years. To the Sith and the Jedi; follow the Holocrons. We have much work to do. Those who remained loyal to me shall be rewarded. For those who relished in my demise, who celebrated what they thought the end of the Empire and believed their treachery had won them the galaxy…only death and suffering await. The great error shall be corrected. The day of victory is at hand. The restoration of the Empire! The Final Order! The Day of the Sith!”

And it's a race. Rey and the Resistance hoping to stop The Emperor, while Kylo Ren is hoping to kill Palpatine, obtain the power of the Sith Eternal and an infinite fleet that will win the galaxy, but in the end, Rey and Kylo are forced to work together. Matt Smith as Palpatine could've fixed the movie

The final contingency of the Emperor. Cloning Luke Skywalker. Palpatine had foreseen either Luke will kill him and Vader or Vader will betray him. So Palpatine orders that Luke's hand be brought to him. Luke is cloned, but imperfectly. He is just a husk of power, so Palpatine has the greatest minds of the Empire indoctrinate this malleable clone to being the heir and the eventual savior of the Empire. This clone. Let's refer to him as Luuke. Luuke learned everything there was from Palpatine. His Machiavellian cunning mechanisms. Mastery over the dark side and fully believed in his master's will and plans for him.

Luuke foresaw that there would be problems if he revealed himself. SO he created a puppet, Snoke. Through Snoke, he turned Kylo Ren to the dark side and puppeteered The First Order. Masterminding everything from the shadows and after Snoke and the real Luke Skywalker's deaths, it was time to reveal himself.

Luuke's motivations are to bring Kylo Ren to heel or cast him aside, turn Rey to the dark side or kill her and rule the galaxy as his master intended for him. This dark side Luke would unite both Rey and Ben against him and would give Mark Hamill the opportunity to play a dark side Luke Skywalker.