Star Wars: 5 Reasons Darth Maul's Death Was A Good Idea (And 1 Way It Could Have Been Made Better)

3. Christopher Lee

If you have the opportunity to cast Christopher Lee in your film, you cast Christopher Lee in your film. That€™s the way it is. I don€™t make the law. Yes, I do have a soft spot for Dooku; he€™s played by one of the coolest veteran actors alive, he has a brilliant voice, a wonderful dress sense (by the Force, that cape!) and he never stops being a gentleman even when he€™s ordering deaths! But in all seriousness, I do understand why some people favour Maul to Dooku. There€™s more mystery, and the greater promise of originality. I would just argue that this is more due to a 180 degree on what kind of character Dooku was meant to be. If you haven€™t read it, I really recommend reading Michael Kaminski€™s The Secret History Of Star Wars. It offers insight into the writing process of the films, and it reveals that the Separatist Leader and the Sith Lord were originally two characters. Dooku was a Tarkin-esque politician, and the Sith would have fulfilled a role similar to Maul: scary-looking, shadowy, fights the Jedi (this could actually have been a woman at one point, hence Asajj Ventress). In the end, casting an actor like Christopher Lee allowed the characters to merge, and granted a character for the heroes to talk to. That€™s something Maul could never be, due to his limited lines all being dubbed. I think it€™s a shame that Dooku was relegated to regular Sith role in Episode III, but think of his scenes in Episode II and think of Maul in his stead. Gone is the rich, English voice, and in comes Maul€™s evil glare once more. Are you telling me the film would have been better for it?