Why would the studio purposely avoid honoring one of its most popular Star Wars characters
with a standalone big-screen adventure? There's more than one reason, as it turns out. Here's
why Disney won't give Darth Maul his own movie.
If you're not a hardcore Star Wars fan, you may be surprised by the notion that Maul didn't
die in the prequel trilogy. There are a lot of places you can go to find the details of
Maul's story if you're interested, but suffice it to say that it's complicated.
Maul not only at one point builds himself a bunch of legs out of trash, he later gets
cybernetic legs that Mother Talzin creates for him. He goes on to build a bunch of different
crime syndicates that serve various purposes.
His backstory is rich, but it's a story that's already been told. So it may not make sense
for it to be retold in a feature film format.
In order to tell a new story featuring Maul, how would Disney approach what he has been
through over the course of his life? Not all Star Wars fans have watched all the animated
series or read all the comics, and that could impact both how understandable a Maul film
would be and interest in the film itself.
The best way to approach a Maul feature film would likely be to tell the most important
parts of his life story up to the point that a new story would take place. Depending on
when in Star Wars history that film was set, it could take quite a while to tell the relevant
bits of Maul's history. That leaves less time for any new events that would theoretically
be the point of the film, and that can be really complicated from a storytelling standpoint.
Do fans want to sit through 30 minutes of history that's accessible in other formats
to see an hour or so of new content? And, on the flip side, would that be accessible
enough for new viewers? There's a fine line to walk there that would likely have diminishing
returns for Disney. It's easier for them to focus on characters whose backstories are
more well-known or create brand new characters that they can establish on their terms. Certainly
a compelling story could be told by rehashing all of Maul's history, but is it worth Disney's
time and money to do so?
Sure, antiheroes can be really entertaining to watch. There's no rule that says that every
movie, TV show, comic, or whatever has to have a protagonist who is at least a little
bit good. But this is Disney we're talking about, and they tend to like their leads to
not be completely on the side of darkness.
Maul's story, while it's complex and certainly adds depth to the character, doesn't ever
show him regretting the things he's done, and he continues to harbor a lot of hate for
a wide variety of people across the Star Wars universe throughout his life, especially the
Jedi.
It's possible to tell a compelling story with this character, absolutely, but it may not
have the message that Disney wishes to send. Death and mayhem in fiction can be fun to
watch, they just don't always endear characters to fans.
Perhaps if Maul had more redeeming qualities, it might be possible. But that's just not
how the character has been established, and forcing that into a movie seems antithetical
to who he is.
In the history of the Star Wars franchise, there's never been a villain-focused film.
Certainly villains are extremely important to the universe, and many of them have captured
imaginations. While some Star Wars villains have been given their own books and comics
series, they have never been placed at the center of a film.
"I was destined to become…so much more."
Boba Fett came close, but that didn't pan out.
Given the good vs. evil nature of the main Star Wars stories, it's clear that they want
you to root for the "good" guys, even if that's not always how fans align. So of course as
stewards of the franchise, Disney seems unlikely to put money into featuring villains in their
own films. While it's true the prequel trilogy focuses on Anakin, who becomes Darth Vader,
really, he ceases to be the focus of the story at the moment he does. At that point, he's
sidelined to being an antagonist. If Vader, of all characters, hasn't been given his own
film, why would Maul?
It isn't all bad news for Maul fans, though. It's been rumored that he may have planned
appearances in several upcoming Disney+ shows, including the live-action Kenobi and the animated
series The Bad Batch. The character's appearance as a guest on shows like these would give
Disney the opportunity to use Maul without needing to delve into his backstory to the
degree they would for a feature film focused entirely on him.
The other benefit of having Maul appear on a TV show instead of star in a feature film
is that bits and pieces of his backstory could be explored without taking away from the overall
new content. If these rumors are true, Disney could be trying to test out fan interest in
the character currently, but they wouldn't necessarily want to oversaturate their content
with Maul.
It's also been rumored that Maul could be getting his very own Disney+ series. Disney
is likely determining the most effective use of the character at this point, and if they
go in the direction of a TV show, which it seems they will, it's less likely they'll
invest in a feature film about him as well. There would be no point in double-dipping
that way. Ultimately, a TV series feels like a better fit for the character, given his
complex history and the challenges of bringing that to a feature film. Doing a show would
allow Disney to explore that backstory at their leisure while also telling a brand new
story. The balance would still be very important, but is much more manageable in longer form
storytelling.
Check out one of our newest videos right here! Plus, even more Looper videos about your favorite
stuff are coming soon. Subscribe to our YouTube channel and hit the bell so you don't miss
a single one.