Dominion Strategy Forum

Miscellaneous => General Discussion => Topic started by: werothegreat on November 28, 2014, 11:36:43 am

Title: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on November 28, 2014, 11:36:43 am
AAAAAHHHHHHHHH

www.youtube.com/embed/erLk59H86ww
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: jsh357 on November 28, 2014, 11:37:49 am
I am hyped, but man, that lightsaber seems impractical.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: AndrewisFTTW on November 28, 2014, 11:45:59 am
When Tracy Morgan popped up I laughed and thought it was going to be a joke trailer. It's not.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on November 28, 2014, 11:46:34 am
When Tracy Morgan popped up I laughed and thought it was going to be a joke trailer. It's not.

That was not Tracy Morgan.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: AndrewisFTTW on November 28, 2014, 11:48:46 am
When Tracy Morgan popped up I laughed and thought it was going to be a joke trailer. It's not.

That was not Tracy Morgan.

At third glance I think you're right. It does look like him though.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kirian on November 28, 2014, 12:24:22 pm
Abrams destroyed Star Trek by trying to turn it into Star Wars.  So we know he can do a good action film.  Yet Star Wars also had cerebral elements, even the prequels.  Will he destroy Star Wars by going full-on Transformers with it?  I guess we'll know soon.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Voltaire on November 28, 2014, 03:31:17 pm
Abrams destroyed Star Trek by trying to turn it into Star Wars.  So we know he can do a good action film.  Yet Star Wars also had cerebral elements, even the prequels.  Will he destroy Star Wars by going full-on Transformers with it?  I guess we'll know soon.

Bah. He's a great fit for SW, and it's a shame it took him doing ST to show it, but he's finally where he belongs, so that's good.

I am hyped, but man, that lightsaber seems impractical.

Same thought I had. Cool, the inevitable (but awesome) new variant! That...increases the odds you cut off your own fingers?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Beyond Awesome on November 28, 2014, 06:58:04 pm
I love the trailer. I have heard several people complain about the lightsaber though. My guess is it belongs to a secret religious order...maybe disciples of Sith teachings or something. That's just my imagination going though. Anyway, what's the beginning of a new Star Was trilogy if you don't have a bad guy with a new lightsaber?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: pacovf on November 28, 2014, 07:35:00 pm
Oh, so it is going to be 3D, ok I guess.

Anybody knows what the lore says on original trilogy stormtroopers? They were all originally clones of Jango, but I don't know if by the time A New Hope rolls around the Empire has started taking recruits.

Basically, I am asking who discount Tracy Morgan is playing as.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: DG on November 28, 2014, 08:17:21 pm
That discount Tracy Morgan is a British actor who I think was in Attack the Block. I you want a low budget action/horror movie to watch after a few beers then you can do worse than Attack the Block.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Beyond Awesome on November 30, 2014, 08:59:25 am
Oh, so it is going to be 3D, ok I guess.

Anybody knows what the lore says on original trilogy stormtroopers? They were all originally clones of Jango, but I don't know if by the time A New Hope rolls around the Empire has started taking recruits.

Basically, I am asking who discount Tracy Morgan is playing as.

After the Clone Wars, the Empire recruits non-clones to be Stormtroopers.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Lekkit on November 30, 2014, 09:28:03 am
I am hyped, but man, that lightsaber seems impractical.

Same thought I had. Cool, the inevitable (but awesome) new variant! That...increases the odds you cut off your own fingers?

No way. Those small things where the light comes out will stop your hand from sliding into the beam. I think "regular" lightsabers are easier to cut yourself with. What bothers me, though, is that the light looks more like flames and less like... Light.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: pacovf on November 30, 2014, 09:57:30 am
Oh, so it is going to be 3D, ok I guess.

Anybody knows what the lore says on original trilogy stormtroopers? They were all originally clones of Jango, but I don't know if by the time A New Hope rolls around the Empire has started taking recruits.

Basically, I am asking who discount Tracy Morgan is playing as.

After the Clone Wars, the Empire recruits non-clones to be Stormtroopers.

Ok, thanks.

I am hyped, but man, that lightsaber seems impractical.

Same thought I had. Cool, the inevitable (but awesome) new variant! That...increases the odds you cut off your own fingers?

No way. Those small things where the light comes out will stop your hand from sliding into the beam. I think "regular" lightsabers are easier to cut yourself with. What bothers me, though, is that the light looks more like flames and less like... Light.

They kinda look the same to me. But then again maybe they are moving towards lightsabers being made of plasma rather than a laser, which would make a little bit more sense.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: silverspawn on November 30, 2014, 10:00:55 am
They kinda look the same to me. But then again maybe they are moving towards lightsabers being made of plasma rather than a laser, which would make a little bit more sense.

I had a talk about this with a friend, and we concluded that lightswords and the laser beams that aren't really moving with the speed of laser are actually made of wood (in plasma form). So, there's your answer, they fight with wooden swords. no, don't thank me.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: 2.71828..... on November 30, 2014, 11:22:47 am
The problem is not your hands for the lightsaber though, it is your legs.  I mean, swing that thing around in circles and you could very easily cut your thigh open.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Asper on November 30, 2014, 03:58:46 pm
The problem is not your hands for the lightsaber though, it is your legs.  I mean, swing that thing around in circles and you could very easily cut your thigh open.

The resolution of the video is not high enough to make it visible, but that lightsaber has ACME written on it. The movie will also introduce laser guns that shoot in fourteen different random directions at once.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: GendoIkari on December 01, 2014, 12:41:23 am
The problem is not your hands for the lightsaber though, it is your legs.  I mean, swing that thing around in circles and you could very easily cut your thigh open.

The resolution of the video is not high enough to make it visible, but that lightsaber has ACME written on it. The movie will also introduce laser guns that shoot in fourteen different random directions at once.

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xap1/v/t1.0-9/10733971_1728293800729424_363746480530304099_n.jpg?oh=8de6181c7ac2658cf4b99c8df5025a6a&oe=550E3D95&__gda__=1427884873_272917da2e7ddba4536bc115c10e0927)
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: eHalcyon on December 01, 2014, 12:52:22 am
The problem is not your hands for the lightsaber though, it is your legs.  I mean, swing that thing around in circles and you could very easily cut your thigh open.

I believe the in-universe answer is that the user doesn't cut themselves because THE FORCE.

And also, the guards would help defend against opponents' laser swords, so there is that.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Titandrake on December 01, 2014, 01:59:52 am
Timely non-sequitur, start reading Darths & Droids if you aren't already. They're currently nearing the end of Episode V, and by the time they finish VI it's possible they might be able to start riffing on the upcoming movie.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: pedroluchini on December 01, 2014, 03:23:30 am
(https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xap1/v/t1.0-9/10733971_1728293800729424_363746480530304099_n.jpg?oh=8de6181c7ac2658cf4b99c8df5025a6a&oe=550E3D95&__gda__=1427884873_272917da2e7ddba4536bc115c10e0927)

So that's what happens when Gillette starts making lightsabers... "The best a Sith can get," indeed.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: qmech on December 01, 2014, 03:26:13 am

So that's what happens when Gillette starts making lightsabers... "The best a Sith can get," indeed.

I heard you like lightsabers...
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: ashersky on December 01, 2014, 06:27:39 am
They can't all be the best lightsaber ever.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kuildeous on December 01, 2014, 09:55:39 am
I saw a picture of a Swiss army lightsaber. That was amusing.

I don't like the new lightsaber. It looks impractical and only serves to exist for the "Oh cool" factor. I hate the "Oh cool" factor when it's presented by itself. At least the double lightsaber has a practical effect, if a bit more dangerous to wield. The filmmakers are going to have to really sell me on this lightsaber's practicality.

And okay, so a popular assumption is that the cross guard will protect you from lightsaber attacks, which is a pretty legitimate claim. After all, just about every lightsaber battle could be resolved quickly if the duelist just slides the blade down to the fingers and chop them off. But it's not much of a threat now, is it? Why doesn't that happen already in every lightsaber battle? Possibly the "friction" is too much to allow for that kind of sliding. Or as someone already said, the FORCE!

But then why extend that protection to just one plane? A real broadsword has that plane because of how the swords are created. Additional cross guards would be unnecessary and unwieldy. A lightsaber can be struck from any of 360 degrees. And besides, is the handle safe? Because I'm looking at how those cross guards stick out and seeing an unprotected housing. What happens if the opposing lightsaber slides toward that?

It does seem that they are trying too hard to make something cool with lightsabers while forgetting that lightsabers are simply cool. Darth Maul's lightsaber was pretty badass (even though Darth Maul was boring cardboard). General Grievous's four lightsabers were also pretty cool, even though he wasn't technically a Jedi. But not everything needs to be souped up.

But if you are going to soup up a lightsaber, then go big with it, man. Cross guards? Pfft, it looks silly and doesn't convey a sense of awesomeness. A lightsaber chain weapon? Now that would be awe-inspiring. A lightsaber chain would be pretty cool, but they'd have to explain that nobody talks about the horrible period of time in R&D. Tragic, simply tragic.

I just hope the teaser is a marketing test. Maybe they want to see if that weapon will sit well with the audience. Hopefully they got enough negative feedback that they'll reconsider the broad sword idea. But you know I'll go see the movie regardless.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on December 01, 2014, 09:56:17 am
The blade is controlled by the Force, bitches!
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: GendoIkari on December 01, 2014, 11:22:43 am
The new lightsaber fails at protecting sliding down to cut off fingers, because the beams don't come directly out of the other beam:

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/v/t1.0-9/10731174_1728374450721359_6723522382456112569_n.jpg?oh=c25a6fbafe395df655bcd820437f48b3&oe=551A744D&__gda__=1426634380_ab2c3930d4dc28141dff3e2a1d864307)
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on December 01, 2014, 12:01:02 pm
I think it's less for protecting his hand and more for stabby-stabby.

Imagine I've got the crossguard saber, and I'm parrying your normal saber.  I just turn a little, and I slice your arm off.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kuildeous on December 01, 2014, 12:05:02 pm
Thank you for that illustration. That's what I was trying to get at, but this picture explains it so well. And even if that design did somehow work, why not make it wrap around 360 degrees?

Also, there's got to be a reason that it's not a thing (aside from Lucas oversight). Most lightsaber duels can be over in 5 seconds. Two blades strike; the person who first slides his blade along the opposing blade and to the hand wins. What would a cross guard accomplish that isn't already accomplished with conventional lightsabers?

And while super-friction sounds like a good enough explanation, there is almost always the cool disengage motion where the blades are touching and then slide apart as the combatants whirl away from each other. One-way super-friction? Yeah, there's a reason why FORCE! is often a sufficient answer, just like MAGIC! That's the problem with taking traditional swordfighting and applying metal-melting properties to it.

I'm still going to chalk it up to "It looks cool but we have no idea how to make this work."


The new lightsaber fails at protecting sliding down to cut off fingers, because the beams don't come directly out of the other beam:

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/v/t1.0-9/10731174_1728374450721359_6723522382456112569_n.jpg?oh=c25a6fbafe395df655bcd820437f48b3&oe=551A744D&__gda__=1426634380_ab2c3930d4dc28141dff3e2a1d864307)
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kuildeous on December 01, 2014, 12:06:54 pm
I think it's less for protecting his hand and more for stabby-stabby.

Imagine I've got the crossguard saber, and I'm parrying your normal saber.  I just turn a little, and I slice your arm off.

If they use it like that, then that eliminates many of my problems with the design. Then the issue becomes that it's very dangerous to use, but that's true for Darth Maul's lightsaber. Hell, any lightsaber is pretty dangerous. Swinging a zero-mass blade around that could slice through flesh like butter? How do we not have more one-armed Jedi?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on December 01, 2014, 12:18:30 pm
There is quite a bit of nerd-talk on these topics:

http://imgur.com/gallery/rCFKP
https://imgur.com/gallery/zMEq4

Also: http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Crossguard_lightsaber
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Asper on December 01, 2014, 12:23:42 pm
Imagine I've got the crossguard saber, and I'm parrying your normal saber.  I just turn a little, and I slice your arm off.

Pfff, and then what? That's just a flesh wound.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Ozle on December 01, 2014, 01:00:01 pm
I think it's less for protecting his hand and more for stabby-stabby.

Imagine I've got the crossguard saber, and I'm parrying your normal saber.  I just turn a little, and I slice your arm off.

Yeah, except you'll still be the Sith everyone laughs at behind your back.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Jorbles on December 01, 2014, 01:37:42 pm
What would a cross guard accomplish that isn't already accomplished with conventional lightsabers?

I'm holding out hope for this scene between the new Sith and one of his henchmen.

"Hey come check out my new light saber. It's really cool. Stay out of the way of the blade while I activate it. Look at the hilt. Look closer, look right at the hilt. That's where the cool part is."
"AUGH my eye!"
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kirian on December 01, 2014, 02:57:37 pm
The new lightsaber fails at protecting sliding down to cut off fingers, because the beams don't come directly out of the other beam:

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/v/t1.0-9/10731174_1728374450721359_6723522382456112569_n.jpg?oh=c25a6fbafe395df655bcd820437f48b3&oe=551A744D&__gda__=1426634380_ab2c3930d4dc28141dff3e2a1d864307)

I think that makes some serious assumptions about the plasma physics of light sabers.  Why couldn't they both be the same plasma source, which can be cut off via force field to get rid of the crossbars?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: 2.71828..... on December 01, 2014, 05:33:38 pm
The new lightsaber fails at protecting sliding down to cut off fingers, because the beams don't come directly out of the other beam:

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/v/t1.0-9/10731174_1728374450721359_6723522382456112569_n.jpg?oh=c25a6fbafe395df655bcd820437f48b3&oe=551A744D&__gda__=1426634380_ab2c3930d4dc28141dff3e2a1d864307)

I think that makes some serious assumptions about the plasma physics of light sabers.  Why couldn't they both be the same plasma source, which can be cut off via force field to get rid of the crossbars?

I just want to know how the green lightsaber jumped from the upper crossbar to cutting off the lower crossbar
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Jorbles on December 01, 2014, 07:07:10 pm
The new lightsaber fails at protecting sliding down to cut off fingers, because the beams don't come directly out of the other beam:
I think that makes some serious assumptions about the plasma physics of light sabers.  Why couldn't they both be the same plasma source, which can be cut off via force field to get rid of the crossbars?

I just want to know how the green lightsaber jumped from the upper crossbar to cutting off the lower crossbar

I can't unsee it.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: eHalcyon on December 01, 2014, 07:35:07 pm
The new lightsaber fails at protecting sliding down to cut off fingers, because the beams don't come directly out of the other beam:
I think that makes some serious assumptions about the plasma physics of light sabers.  Why couldn't they both be the same plasma source, which can be cut off via force field to get rid of the crossbars?

I just want to know how the green lightsaber jumped from the upper crossbar to cutting off the lower crossbar

I can't unsee it.

Whereas I can't see it.  It never looks like it's at the upper crossbar.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Jorbles on December 01, 2014, 07:39:06 pm
The new lightsaber fails at protecting sliding down to cut off fingers, because the beams don't come directly out of the other beam:
I think that makes some serious assumptions about the plasma physics of light sabers.  Why couldn't they both be the same plasma source, which can be cut off via force field to get rid of the crossbars?

I just want to know how the green lightsaber jumped from the upper crossbar to cutting off the lower crossbar

I can't unsee it.

Whereas I can't see it.  It never looks like it's at the upper crossbar.

In 1 and 2 the green light saber is clearly in the foreground, whereas in 3 the green light saber is now in the background. Maybe it cut through the crossbar and then went down below the bottom of the hilt and we are seeing image 3 as the green light saber comes back up on the upswing now on the other side of the hilt?

Edit: although that said, whether it was originally going for upper or lower crossbar is clearly just a mental bias because there's nothing to indicate one or the other.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: eHalcyon on December 01, 2014, 07:50:54 pm
Ahh, I get it now.  Except I still see 1 and 2 as the green going for the lower crossbar.  It's ambiguous in 1, it's clear in 2, and then 3 is just weird because of the green saber suddenly being in the background.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Axxle on December 01, 2014, 08:56:12 pm
Maybe the sith just likes how it looks?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kirian on December 02, 2014, 01:53:16 am
Maybe the sith just likes how it looks?

If you're going to accidentally kill yourself with your own weapon, at least look cool doing it?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: GendoIkari on December 02, 2014, 12:44:56 pm
The George Lucas special edition of the trailer:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v93Jh6JNBng
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Ozle on December 02, 2014, 02:53:22 pm
Maybe the sith just likes how it looks?

If you're going to accidentally kill yourself with your own weapon, at least look cool doing it?

It would only look cool if the Sith was a 12 year old boy....
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: GendoIkari on December 02, 2014, 03:02:57 pm
The new lightsaber fails at protecting sliding down to cut off fingers, because the beams don't come directly out of the other beam:

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/v/t1.0-9/10731174_1728374450721359_6723522382456112569_n.jpg?oh=c25a6fbafe395df655bcd820437f48b3&oe=551A744D&__gda__=1426634380_ab2c3930d4dc28141dff3e2a1d864307)

This image has now been debunked by Steven Colbert: http://thecolbertreport.cc.com/videos/umsrnb/lightsaber-controversy
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: 2.71828..... on December 02, 2014, 03:14:33 pm
The new lightsaber fails at protecting sliding down to cut off fingers, because the beams don't come directly out of the other beam:

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-d-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/v/t1.0-9/10731174_1728374450721359_6723522382456112569_n.jpg?oh=c25a6fbafe395df655bcd820437f48b3&oe=551A744D&__gda__=1426634380_ab2c3930d4dc28141dff3e2a1d864307)

This image has now been debunked by Steven Colbert: http://thecolbertreport.cc.com/videos/umsrnb/lightsaber-controversy

yeah.  Case closed.  Nothing more to say on the matter.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on December 02, 2014, 03:24:19 pm
A somewhat interesting point:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/02/opinion/beale-star-wars/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

I don't exactly share his views, but he does have a point that Star Wars misrepresents Sci-Fi.  Though, the author loses a lot of authority for saying The Matrix is "the most original sci-fi movie of the past 25 years".  Well Matrix was original, but did this guy never hear of Primer?  Moon? 
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Ozle on December 02, 2014, 03:34:08 pm
A somewhat interesting point:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/02/opinion/beale-star-wars/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

I don't exactly share his views, but he does have a point that Star Wars misrepresents Sci-Fi.  Though, the author loses a lot of authority for saying The Matrix is "the most original sci-fi movie of the past 25 years".  Well Matrix was original, but did this guy never heard of Primer?  Moon?

Never heard of that other stuff, but Matrix clearly is a rip off of Tron.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: jsh357 on December 02, 2014, 03:47:14 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TiabUnjU84w
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: qmech on December 02, 2014, 04:03:21 pm
The creator of the illustration was clearly following rule 0 of memogenesis: make sure to include a triviel mistake for people to point out.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: blueblimp on December 02, 2014, 04:07:15 pm
A somewhat interesting point:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/02/opinion/beale-star-wars/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

I don't exactly share his views, but he does have a point that Star Wars misrepresents Sci-Fi.  Though, the author loses a lot of authority for saying The Matrix is "the most original sci-fi movie of the past 25 years".  Well Matrix was original, but did this guy never heard of Primer?  Moon?
This editorial seems analogous to criticizing Lord of the Rings for misrepresenting historical fiction. It's not like people are somehow tricked into thinking that Star Wars is serious speculation about the future.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on December 02, 2014, 04:25:33 pm
A somewhat interesting point:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/02/opinion/beale-star-wars/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

I don't exactly share his views, but he does have a point that Star Wars misrepresents Sci-Fi.  Though, the author loses a lot of authority for saying The Matrix is "the most original sci-fi movie of the past 25 years".  Well Matrix was original, but did this guy never heard of Primer?  Moon?
This editorial seems analogous to criticizing Lord of the Rings for misrepresenting historical fiction. It's not like people are somehow tricked into thinking that Star Wars is serious speculation about the future.

Hmm.. that wasn't what I got from it.  I read it more as people saw Star Wars and thought Sci Fi was big operas and explosions, when really it's about exploring deep issues of our humanity.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: eHalcyon on December 02, 2014, 04:44:29 pm
A somewhat interesting point:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/02/opinion/beale-star-wars/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

I don't exactly share his views, but he does have a point that Star Wars misrepresents Sci-Fi.  Though, the author loses a lot of authority for saying The Matrix is "the most original sci-fi movie of the past 25 years".  Well Matrix was original, but did this guy never heard of Primer?  Moon?
This editorial seems analogous to criticizing Lord of the Rings for misrepresenting historical fiction. It's not like people are somehow tricked into thinking that Star Wars is serious speculation about the future.

Hmm.. that wasn't what I got from it.  I read it more as people saw Star Wars and thought Sci Fi was big operas and explosions, when really it's about exploring deep issues of our humanity.

The problem isn't Star Wars misrepresenting sci-fi.  The problem is people misclassifying Star Wars as sci-fi.  It's fantasy.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on December 02, 2014, 04:47:32 pm
A somewhat interesting point:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/02/opinion/beale-star-wars/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

I don't exactly share his views, but he does have a point that Star Wars misrepresents Sci-Fi.  Though, the author loses a lot of authority for saying The Matrix is "the most original sci-fi movie of the past 25 years".  Well Matrix was original, but did this guy never heard of Primer?  Moon?
This editorial seems analogous to criticizing Lord of the Rings for misrepresenting historical fiction. It's not like people are somehow tricked into thinking that Star Wars is serious speculation about the future.

Hmm.. that wasn't what I got from it.  I read it more as people saw Star Wars and thought Sci Fi was big operas and explosions, when really it's about exploring deep issues of our humanity.

The problem isn't Star Wars misrepresenting sci-fi.  The problem is people misclassifying Star Wars as sci-fi.  It's fantasy.

That's a good point.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Ozle on December 02, 2014, 05:39:11 pm
Nope, its definitely Science Fiction

"fiction based on imagined future scientific or technological advances and major social or environmental changes, frequently portraying space or time travel and life on other planets."

Just because its not the dark gritty moralistic style of Sci Fi....I like to think of it as High Science Fiction, in the same way people like David Gemmel are High Fantasy
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: sudgy on December 02, 2014, 05:46:30 pm
The creator of the illustration was clearly following rule 0 of memogenesis: make sure to include a triviel mistake for people to point out.

trivial*

Now that I have explained qmech's joke, it is funny.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: eHalcyon on December 02, 2014, 06:01:16 pm
Nope, its definitely Science Fiction

"fiction based on imagined future scientific or technological advances and major social or environmental changes, frequently portraying space or time travel and life on other planets."

Just because its not the dark gritty moralistic style of Sci Fi....I like to think of it as High Science Fiction, in the same way people like David Gemmel are High Fantasy

Star Wars features The Force, which is basically magic.  They "explain" it later with midichlorians and whatnot, but really, it's still magic.  IMO, that puts it squarely outside the realm of science fiction and firmly in the realm of fantasy.  It's fantasy in space with some technological trappings, but still fantasy.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: pacovf on December 02, 2014, 06:05:45 pm
Not sure if that is a good argument. Lots of science fiction feature some sort of psyonics. Or sufficiently advanced alien technology (=magic).

Not like I disagree with your final conclusion, though.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on December 02, 2014, 06:07:21 pm
You could use that to argue that Dune is fantasy, though I consider it pretty Sci Fi.  I guess it intersects both.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: eHalcyon on December 02, 2014, 06:11:06 pm
The Star Wars plot also features far more fantasy tropes than sci-fi tropes.

Call it Science Fantasy if you wish?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Jorbles on December 02, 2014, 06:19:54 pm
Can't it be both?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Ozle on December 02, 2014, 06:20:08 pm
Nope, its definitely Science Fiction

"fiction based on imagined future scientific or technological advances and major social or environmental changes, frequently portraying space or time travel and life on other planets."

Just because its not the dark gritty moralistic style of Sci Fi....I like to think of it as High Science Fiction, in the same way people like David Gemmel are High Fantasy

Star Wars features The Force, which is basically magic.  They "explain" it later with midichlorians and whatnot, but really, it's still magic.  IMO, that puts it squarely outside the realm of science fiction and firmly in the realm of fantasy.  It's fantasy in space with some technological trappings, but still fantasy.


"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

Can't argue with Arthur C Clarke! Well, you can, but he would send one of Asimovs robots over to kill you...
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Ozle on December 02, 2014, 06:20:22 pm
Can't it be both?

Who are you??! George Lucas!?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: eHalcyon on December 02, 2014, 06:31:02 pm
Nope, its definitely Science Fiction

"fiction based on imagined future scientific or technological advances and major social or environmental changes, frequently portraying space or time travel and life on other planets."

Just because its not the dark gritty moralistic style of Sci Fi....I like to think of it as High Science Fiction, in the same way people like David Gemmel are High Fantasy

Star Wars features The Force, which is basically magic.  They "explain" it later with midichlorians and whatnot, but really, it's still magic.  IMO, that puts it squarely outside the realm of science fiction and firmly in the realm of fantasy.  It's fantasy in space with some technological trappings, but still fantasy.


"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

Can't argue with Arthur C Clarke! Well, you can, but he would send one of Asimovs robots over to kill you...

Sure, but the Force isn't technology.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Jorbles on December 02, 2014, 06:59:15 pm
Can't it be both?

Who are you??! George Lucas!?

:_( I have been found out.

No, but seriously there's no reason because a piece of work draws mostly from the ideas of one genre that it can't draw on the tropes of another, they don't have to be considered mutually exclusive.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Beyond Awesome on December 02, 2014, 07:18:52 pm
George Lucas himself said he sees Star Wars as fantasy. The whole A long Time Ago... is supposed to be a nod to fairytales saying Once Upon a Time... Lucas created Star Wars around the idea of the Hero's Journey which is a common motif in myth's.

Anyway, long story short, Star Wars is fantasy with sci fi elements.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kirian on December 02, 2014, 07:35:50 pm
Nope, its definitely Science Fiction

"fiction based on imagined future scientific or technological advances and major social or environmental changes, frequently portraying space or time travel and life on other planets."

Just because its not the dark gritty moralistic style of Sci Fi....I like to think of it as High Science Fiction, in the same way people like David Gemmel are High Fantasy

Star Wars features The Force, which is basically magic.  They "explain" it later with midichlorians and whatnot, but really, it's still magic.  IMO, that puts it squarely outside the realm of science fiction and firmly in the realm of fantasy.  It's fantasy in space with some technological trappings, but still fantasy.


"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

Can't argue with Arthur C Clarke! Well, you can, but he would send one of Asimovs robots over to kill you...

Actually, I imagine an argument with Clarke would be rather boring.

Ozle: "I'd like to argue about the intersection of technology and magic!"
Clarke: <decomposes slowly>
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: blueblimp on December 02, 2014, 11:15:13 pm
Although it's maybe a bit pointless to argue exactly what genre label Star Wars should have, here's some misc evidence from the internet:

IMDB: Action Adventure Fantasy
Google "star wars genre" (dunno where it gets its data from): Fantasy, Adventure Film, Science Fiction, Action Film
Wikipedia: "epic space opera", where "space opera" is defined as "a subgenre of science fiction"
Wookieepedia, "the Star Wars Wiki": "a science fiction franchise"

I'd argue based off this that it's more common to call Star Wars "science fiction" than to say that it isn't.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: eHalcyon on December 03, 2014, 01:28:42 am
I don't think that hurts my point at all.  I agree that it is more common to call Star Wars "sci-fi", but I'm saying that doing so is inaccurate.  The earlier linked article suggests that Star Wars hurts the sci-fi genre by making people think that sci-fi is all about laser gun fights and explosions and big bad villains, whereas the best sci-fi is "essentially about ideas, not action", touching on larger themes of the human condition, and so on and so forth.  I'm saying that there isn't even a comparison because Star Wars isn't really sci-fi, even though most people think of it as such.  The problem isn't that Star Wars misrepresents the depths of sci-fi, as the article posits, but that people like to classify Star Wars as sci-fi when it shouldn't be.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Davio on December 03, 2014, 02:22:31 am
This whole discussion is pretty sci-fi.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Lekkit on December 03, 2014, 03:40:50 am
I think Star Wars is Sci-Fi. I don't think it's only Sci-Fi. And I don't think it's the definition of Sci-Fi. But definately Sci-Fi.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Asper on December 03, 2014, 04:31:03 am
I think it's a matter of definitions. Would "Lord of the rings IN SPACE" be science fiction or fantasy?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Lekkit on December 03, 2014, 05:07:46 am
Why can't it be both?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Asper on December 03, 2014, 06:40:41 am
Why can't it be both?

I'm neither saying that nor the opposite. Are they mutually exclusive? Dunno.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on December 03, 2014, 09:04:21 am
I think it's a matter of definitions. Would "Lord of the rings IN SPACE" be science fiction or fantasy?

LORD OF THE SPACE RINGS!
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: WalrusMcFishSr on December 03, 2014, 10:45:51 am
Star Wars Episode VIII: R2-D2 has a Crisis of Identity in a Society where Sentient Robots are Treated as Subservients
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: pacovf on December 03, 2014, 11:36:34 am
I think it's a matter of definitions. Would "Lord of the rings IN SPACE" be science fiction or fantasy?

It would be awesome.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vt_7W1FyDa0
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: GendoIkari on December 03, 2014, 11:39:11 am
Nope, its definitely Science Fiction

"fiction based on imagined future scientific or technological advances and major social or environmental changes, frequently portraying space or time travel and life on other planets."

Just because its not the dark gritty moralistic style of Sci Fi....I like to think of it as High Science Fiction, in the same way people like David Gemmel are High Fantasy

Star Wars features The Force, which is basically magic.  They "explain" it later with midichlorians and whatnot, but really, it's still magic.  IMO, that puts it squarely outside the realm of science fiction and firmly in the realm of fantasy.  It's fantasy in space with some technological trappings, but still fantasy.

I dunno, is The Force all that different from certain races in Star Trek being able to read minds, or mind control, or heck, the practically omnipotence of Q? Since the characters in Star Wars are not "human", it's reasonable to say that "The Force" is simply an ability that some members of their various species possess. So if Star Trek is sci-fi despite having characters such as Q, then surely Star Wars could qualify.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: blueblimp on December 03, 2014, 12:13:32 pm
I don't think that hurts my point at all.  I agree that it is more common to call Star Wars "sci-fi", but I'm saying that doing so is inaccurate.  The earlier linked article suggests that Star Wars hurts the sci-fi genre by making people think that sci-fi is all about laser gun fights and explosions and big bad villains, whereas the best sci-fi is "essentially about ideas, not action", touching on larger themes of the human condition, and so on and so forth.  I'm saying that there isn't even a comparison because Star Wars isn't really sci-fi, even though most people think of it as such.  The problem isn't that Star Wars misrepresents the depths of sci-fi, as the article posits, but that people like to classify Star Wars as sci-fi when it shouldn't be.
To me though, this seems like redefining "science fiction" to be more narrow than the term has been used for decades. I mean, looking up the history of the term "space opera", that was invented in 1941 and was considered a subgenre of science fiction from the very beginning. Science fiction is a very broad category.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kuildeous on December 03, 2014, 12:16:41 pm
Star Wars Episode VIII: R2-D2 has a Crisis of Identity in a Society where Sentient Robots are Treated as Subservients

This was kind of what I had hoped the Clone Wars would be when it was mentioned in Episode IV. Then the prequels had to go and ruin that fantasy.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: eHalcyon on December 03, 2014, 12:31:28 pm
OK, but where do you draw the line then? Is being in space the only requirement to being called sci-fi? The term doesn't seem useful then. It seems like you could stretch it to fit anything and everything at that point.

You can say that the Force is a possible non-human ability, but how is that different from saying that magic in Harry Potter is a potentially scientific ability of non-muggles? What about the fanfic HPMOR, which has far more of a scientific spin than Star Wars ever did? How is the Force different from the supernatural spirits in Pact?

Star Wars has elements of both sci-fi and fantasy, and I can see the argument that it is a hybrid "science fantasy". But on the whole, it is far more the latter, IMO. Star Wars plays out like a sword and sorcery tale, just in a space setting.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Davio on December 04, 2014, 05:18:56 am
Any attempt to quantify some parameters to decide whether something is Sci-Fi is bound to fail.

Also it seems the "Fi" part in "Sci-Fi" which means fiction, i.e. something which is not real, is too easily dismissed.
There are a lot of things in Star Wars which are not and can't be (due to the laws of physics as we understand them) real.

But if we take the route of requiring everything in Sci-Fi to be at least possible, there are only two films I can think of: Gravity and Apollo 13.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on December 04, 2014, 08:58:12 am
There is a difference between hard sci-fi and science fantasy (often also called sci-fi).  Something written by Asimov or Heinlein or one of those other authors from the 50s or 60s is more likely to be interested in exploring an idea, realistic or not, than telling a story.  A nice recent example is the Mars trilogy by Kim Stanley Robinson - probably not *everything* in it is feasible, and there's definitely some alteration for artistic license or drama, but most of the focus of the book is "what would it actually be like to colonize Mars?" rather than trying to build a satisfying narrative.

Whereas in Star Wars, every science-y idea or gadget/gizmo is entirely to serve the plot, rather than the other way around, so I would call it science fantasy.  Obviously there isn't really a strict defining line here, but just because a border is hazy, doesn't mean the two sides don't exist or aren't worth talking about.  It might be hazy when a zygote becomes a baby (somewhere in the second trimester?) but they're certainly different.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: sudgy on December 04, 2014, 12:11:25 pm
But if we take the route of requiring everything in Sci-Fi to be at least possible, there are only two films I can think of: Gravity and Apollo 13.

After playing Kerbal Space Program, there was a lot wrong with Gravity...
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on April 16, 2015, 10:21:52 am
So... we might be seeing a new trailer today.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on April 16, 2015, 10:26:51 am
So... we might be seeing a new trailer today.
Hmm. I was sure they were going to release it with Age of Ultron.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on April 16, 2015, 10:44:07 am
So... we might be seeing a new trailer today.
Hmm. I was sure they were going to release it with Age of Ultron.

Companies are slowly starting to realize that everything gets leaked if you try to release stuff at a con or something before it gets sent to the internet.  Better to just have the company officially leak it themselves.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kuildeous on April 16, 2015, 10:46:49 am
I don't find myself jumping at trailers quite so often anymore. I still haven't even seen the latest Age of Ultron one yet. Not sure if I'm getting jaded or if I'm intentionally keeping myself in the dark so I can be a little surprised by the actual movie. I do remember watching the hell out of the Phantom Menace trailer, though. Maybe that scarred me when I realized the movie did not live up to the hype.

Related to Star Wars, I was at Disney Hollywood Studio last week and experienced the Star Tours "ride." It's a 3-D virtual space ship ride. It was pretty good, but my wife didn't take her motion-sickness medication, so we had a bit of a pause in the exit hallway. I do recommend it for anyone going to Disney. Be sure to Fast-Pass it.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on April 16, 2015, 10:52:02 am
I don't really jump at trailers either; I also haven't seen the latest Avengers trailer.

But this is Star Wars.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on April 16, 2015, 11:08:30 am
I don't mind seeing movie trailers. I don't mind seeing teaser trailers.

What I really hate is teaser trailers for trailers.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: sudgy on April 16, 2015, 12:36:13 pm
I just don't feel like watching trailers.  They don't really get me hyped up at all, and so they're just a waste of time.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on April 16, 2015, 02:07:21 pm
HERE IT IS

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngElkyQ6Rhs
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on April 16, 2015, 02:12:06 pm
I like breathe-heavy black man. I hope he's the main protagonist, with many scenes of him fighting to catch his breath.

I would have thought Chewbacca would have some gray hair!

Edit: In all seriousness, I'm looking forward to this. 
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Robz888 on April 16, 2015, 02:19:54 pm
This was good. Quite good.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: silverspawn on April 16, 2015, 04:22:06 pm
I recently rewatched all 6 starwars movies, and thought most of them were terrible. When you're excited for the new one, is it out of nostalgia, or am I just weird for not liking the original movies?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on April 16, 2015, 04:25:24 pm
I recently rewatched all 6 starwars movies, and thought most of them were terrible. When you're excited for the new one, is it out of nostalgia, or am I just weird for not liking the original movies?

You're weird.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on April 16, 2015, 04:26:30 pm
I recently rewatched all 6 starwars movies, and thought most of them were terrible. When you're excited for the new one, is it out of nostalgia, or am I just weird for not liking the original movies?

The Empire Strikes Back was fantastic and fantastic-er, and that alone makes up for any shortcomings of the other movies.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: markusin on April 16, 2015, 05:20:01 pm
George Lucas himself said he sees Star Wars as fantasy. The whole A long Time Ago... is supposed to be a nod to fairytales saying Once Upon a Time... Lucas created Star Wars around the idea of the Hero's Journey which is a common motif in myth's.

Anyway, long story short, Star Wars is fantasy with sci fi elements.
Thinking about it now I have to agree with this. Star Wars doesn't really focus on the implications of the technology being used. How lightsabers and warp drives work is irrelevant. The Force and the conflict of good and evil is the focus of the series. You could have the same story set in medieval style.

Compare with Sci-fi's like Blade Runner, and possibly Brave New World and The Island (the movie).

I guess that means Gundam is both Sci-fi and fantasy. On the one hand the significance of space colonies and Minovsky particles is elaborated upon somewhat, but the main stories focus on the triumph of individuals with super suits. Universal Century Gundam also features New Types, humans who have developed powerful psychic powers from living in space too long. No scientific basis is given for this.

Edit: Oh, I was late to that discussion. This new Star Wars movie, I just see it as going to come out when it come out. I'm interested in seeing how it plays out, but I'm not anxiously waiting for its release or anything.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on April 16, 2015, 05:31:34 pm
Somebody's forgetting midi-chlorians...
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: markusin on April 16, 2015, 05:41:51 pm
Somebody's forgetting midi-chlorians...
How in-depth is the lore on midi-chlorians, anyway? If it's just like Harry Potter magic blood kind of stuff, it doesn't affect the conclusions on Star Wars' genre much.

This question is coming from someone genuinely not familiar with Star Wars lore.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Jimmmmm on April 16, 2015, 05:49:29 pm
Is it just me, or does Harrison Ford look like his old self dressed up as young Han Solo, rather than old Han Solo? Maybe that's inevitable at first.

Also, pretty sure it's Sci Fi/Fantasy.

Also, yay Star Wars!
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on April 16, 2015, 05:52:07 pm
Is it just me, or is Harrison Ford awesome?

Yes, yes he is.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: eHalcyon on April 16, 2015, 05:57:46 pm
Is it just me, or does Harrison Ford look like his old self dressed up as young Han Solo, rather than old Han Solo? Maybe that's inevitable at first.

Wait, he's playing Han Solo?  I thought the new Star Wars film was going to be an Indiana Jones crossover.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Jimmmmm on April 16, 2015, 06:03:29 pm
A somewhat interesting point:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/02/opinion/beale-star-wars/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

Quote
I mean, how many light sabre duels can you sit through before you're bored out of your skull? How many outer space dogfights? How many seemingly profound Yoda-esque thoughts?

Very, very many.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: pacovf on April 16, 2015, 06:05:45 pm
Somebody's forgetting midi-chlorians...
How in-depth is the lore on midi-chlorians, anyway? If it's just like Harry Potter magic blood kind of stuff, it doesn't affect the conclusions on Star Wars' genre much.

This question is coming from someone genuinely not familiar with Star Wars lore.

Midichlorians impregnated Shmi Skywalker. You decide.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Jimmmmm on April 16, 2015, 06:11:52 pm
Somebody's forgetting midi-chlorians...
How in-depth is the lore on midi-chlorians, anyway? If it's just like Harry Potter magic blood kind of stuff, it doesn't affect the conclusions on Star Wars' genre much.

This question is coming from someone genuinely not familiar with Star Wars lore.

Midichlorians impregnated Shmi Skywalker. You decide.

The Force impregnated Shmi Skywalker. Midi-chlorians are simply a quantification/demystification of the Force.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on April 16, 2015, 06:20:03 pm
Somebody's forgetting midi-chlorians...
How in-depth is the lore on midi-chlorians, anyway? If it's just like Harry Potter magic blood kind of stuff, it doesn't affect the conclusions on Star Wars' genre much.

This question is coming from someone genuinely not familiar with Star Wars lore.

Midichlorians impregnated Shmi Skywalker. You decide.

The Force impregnated Shmi Skywalker. Midi-chlorians are simply a quantification/demystification of the Force. 

Clarification: Palpatine made the Force make the midi-chlorians impregnate Shmi.  Which kind of makes Anakin literally an anti-Christ figure.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: pacovf on April 16, 2015, 06:36:31 pm
Somebody's forgetting midi-chlorians...
How in-depth is the lore on midi-chlorians, anyway? If it's just like Harry Potter magic blood kind of stuff, it doesn't affect the conclusions on Star Wars' genre much.

This question is coming from someone genuinely not familiar with Star Wars lore.

Midichlorians impregnated Shmi Skywalker. You decide.

The Force impregnated Shmi Skywalker. Midi-chlorians are simply a quantification/demystification of the Force.

Midi-chlorians are some sort of wibbly wobbly tiny weeny... stuff. Symbiotic bacteria that mediates between life and the Force. Midi-chlorians "allegedly" conceived Anakin. Wookieepedia has my back on this!

Clarification: Palpatine made the Force make the midi-chlorians impregnate Shmi.  Which kind of makes Anakin literally an anti-Christ figure.

Wait what when did this happen
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: 2.71828..... on April 16, 2015, 09:23:10 pm
Clarification: Palpatine made the Force make the midi-chlorians impregnate Shmi.  Which kind of makes Anakin literally an anti-Christ figure.

Wait what when did this happen

Its part of Star Wars lore that you won't get by simply watching the movies.  I don't know where, but I know it is there somewhere
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on April 16, 2015, 10:21:06 pm
Spock used a Vulcan Mind Meld to impregnate Shmi Skywalker.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kuildeous on April 16, 2015, 10:51:36 pm
Midichlorines seemed like an attempt to inject science into the Force. Fortunately, they didn't press too hard, and it was all forgotten in the other movies. Bad mistake to shove that in there.

And I saw the trailer. While it was a nice trailer, I was not floored by it. My reaction to it was not as nerdgastic as some of my friends. I guess I am just approaching this with wary trepidation.

I do agree that Han looks like old Han trying to wear his iconic outfit, which is like a 60-year-old woman trying on her prom dress. Hope that's just for the sake of the trailer. Han did wear more than just that jacket after all.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on April 17, 2015, 02:06:20 am
Midichlorines seemed like an attempt to inject science into the Force. Fortunately, they didn't press too hard, and it was all forgotten in the other movies. Bad mistake to shove that in there.

And I saw the trailer. While it was a nice trailer, I was not floored by it. My reaction to it was not as nerdgastic as some of my friends. I guess I am just approaching this with wary trepidation.

I do agree that Han looks like old Han trying to wear his iconic outfit, which is like a 60-year-old woman trying on her prom dress. Hope that's just for the sake of the trailer. Han did wear more than just that jacket after all.
I still can't figure out why they wanted some old guy to play Han Solo...

 :o ;D
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Beyond Awesome on April 17, 2015, 03:16:51 am
Midichlorines seemed like an attempt to inject science into the Force. Fortunately, they didn't press too hard, and it was all forgotten in the other movies. Bad mistake to shove that in there.

And I saw the trailer. While it was a nice trailer, I was not floored by it. My reaction to it was not as nerdgastic as some of my friends. I guess I am just approaching this with wary trepidation.

I do agree that Han looks like old Han trying to wear his iconic outfit, which is like a 60-year-old woman trying on her prom dress. Hope that's just for the sake of the trailer. Han did wear more than just that jacket after all.
This trailer did not do much for me either. I liked the other teaser more for the sense of urgency. Anyway, this trailer doesn't really give anything which is either a plus or a negative. I sort of want to know what's going on. Anyway, there are some beautiful shots like the downed Star Destroyer in the sand. This also seems more Star Wars looking than the prequels. But, at the same time, nothing screams this will be as amazing as the originals. On the bright side, this won't come nowhere near as bad as the prequels. Well, this movie is still 8 months from release, so I am sure they are holding a lot back. My guess is a lot of the footage in this teaser is from the first half of the film.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kuildeous on April 17, 2015, 08:10:14 am
There's no need to show too much. The point of showing a lot of what's happening in the trailer is to get people interested in seeing the movie. Star Wars honestly doesn't need that. Hell, if this movie didn't show a single trailer, it'd still do well at the box office.

There is a danger to showing too much. My enjoyment of Terminator 2 was hampered by the marketing geniuses telling all of us that in this movie Schwarzenegger is the good guy. What a lost opportunity. Unless you read too much into the nonlethality of Schwarzenegger at the beginning of the movie (versus the opening of the first one where he rips a guy's heart out), there is really no indication of him being the good guy until the confrontation with the T1000. The marketing execs went too far with this movie, and it's not like I can unlearn that when watching it for the first time.

By contrast, the Matrix marketing was brilliant. What's going on? Dunno. It has Keanu Reeves in black. Well, that's got to be fun, right? What does he do? No idea. Who are the bad guys? We don't even know if there are any. They kept the plot of the Matrix secret, and it made the movie much more enjoyable IMO.

Granted, this is Star Wars. Aside from the paternity of Vader, there haven't really been major twists and turns. The reveal of Leia's relationship to Luke wasn't even that big of a deal when it happened (I'm sure it'll be a bigger deal in Ep 7). So I'm not really expecting anything earth-shattering in terms of plot here, but it could still happen. Brand new characters and plots, so there's a vast playground to build relationships and backstories. The less said, the better.

It does occur to me that the movie comes out on Christmas. Haven't all the previous movies been released in May? It's not  greatly unsettling, but I'm a little sad to see tradition bucked.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Darth Vader on April 17, 2015, 11:52:23 am
Don't watch this movie. I'm not in it.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Voltaire on April 17, 2015, 12:36:50 pm
But we saw your hat!
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Darth Vader on April 17, 2015, 02:57:23 pm
But we saw your hat!

Don't make me destroy you.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: AndrewisFTTW on May 01, 2015, 12:26:46 am
New teaser!

https://www.facebook.com/videoincredibilidelweb/videos/435944856584402/
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on May 01, 2015, 02:19:23 am
I thought the preview attached to Age of Ultron looked fantastic in 3D. Really, this could be the next "worth 3D" movie since Avatar and Gravity.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Titandrake on May 02, 2015, 03:50:29 am
Watched Star Wars IV for the first time.

- There are a lot more alien creatures in the beginning than I thought there'd be.
- It's very strange watching a movie where I recognize 80-90% of the scenes through parodies, references, and Darths & Droids screencaps.
- It's also very strange to see the plot the way it originally was, instead of the way it's been bent and twisted by D&D. (I knew the broad strokes beforehand, but the small details are all slightly different.)
- It lived up to the hype.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on May 02, 2015, 12:04:37 pm
Watched Star Wars IV for the first time.

- There are a lot more alien creatures in the beginning than I thought there'd be.
- It's very strange watching a movie where I recognize 80-90% of the scenes through parodies, references, and Darths & Droids screencaps.
- It's also very strange to see the plot the way it originally was, instead of the way it's been bent and twisted by D&D. (I knew the broad strokes beforehand, but the small details are all slightly different.)
- It lived up to the hype.

Welcome to the beginning of your childhood.  It's going to be a wild ride.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on May 02, 2015, 02:54:18 pm
So, here's my take on the Prequels. You can hate the bad acting, because there certainly is some. You can hate the bad writing, because there's certainly a lot of it. You can hate the cinematography, because, let's face it, George Lucas gets bored when he's just filming people talking.

What PISSES me off is when people start going on about "oh, it's all just politics, it's so boring, who cares about taxation and trade routes wahhhh" Like, seriously? Are you really that much of a spastic three-year-old that you need explosions and fight scenes every three seconds and can't be bothered to think about anything? The politics and all that is what I LIKE about the Prequels. Rather than just a straight good vs. evil story, it's a story about temptation and manipulation and corruption, which is far more interesting than just white hat vs. black hat cowboy shoot-em-ups.

What I really, *really* hope is that J.J. Abrams takes a philosophical, nuanced look in this new film. If it's just good guys vs. bad guys, I will be disappointed. It'll probably still be a decent movie with awesome special effects, but the Star Wars saga really deserves more than that at this point.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on May 02, 2015, 02:59:58 pm
Politics were the single best thing about the Prequels.

Also, Episdoe 2 was the best of the Prequels.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on May 02, 2015, 03:03:46 pm
Politics were the single best thing about the Prequels.

Also, Episdoe 2 was the best of the Prequels.
Agreed x2
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: AndrewisFTTW on May 02, 2015, 03:39:22 pm
Politics were the single best thing about the Prequels.

Also, Episdoe 2 was the best of the Prequels.

Yeah I thought that too when I saw them years ago. I can't remember why though.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on May 02, 2015, 03:48:49 pm
Politics were the single best thing about the Prequels.

Also, Episdoe 2 was the best of the Prequels.
Agreed x2

What makes you prefer 2 over 3?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: silverspawn on May 02, 2015, 04:01:19 pm
Politics were the single best thing about the Prequels.

Also, Episdoe 2 was the best of the Prequels.

yeah, honestly, I thought the first movie was awful, the second one really good, and the third one kind of stupid but also kind of fun. And unlike everyone else here, I didn't like any of 4-6, so as far as I'm concerned #2 is by far the best starwars movie.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on May 02, 2015, 04:07:22 pm
Politics were the single best thing about the Prequels.

Also, Episdoe 2 was the best of the Prequels.
Agreed x2

What makes you prefer 2 over 3?

Honestly, I think it was how quickly they "turned" Anakin... The first half of the movie worked well with Ep.I and Ep.II but the second half of the movie seemed to fall apart when they forced it to end exactly where "A New Hope" begins.

(I also didn't like the ending of the latest Hobbit movie, for the same reason.)
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on May 02, 2015, 04:16:31 pm
Politics were the single best thing about the Prequels.

Also, Episdoe 2 was the best of the Prequels.
Agreed x2

What makes you prefer 2 over 3?

Honestly, I think it was how quickly they "turned" Anakin... The first half of the movie worked well with Ep.I and Ep.II but the second half of the movie seemed to fall apart when they forced it to end exactly where "A New Hope" begins.

(I also didn't like the ending of the latest Hobbit movie, for the same reason.)

The Hobbit movies are shit.  Except for Smaug.  Smaug was the only (ONLY) good thing about those movies.  Okay, Martin Freeman acted well.  But that's it!  The Prequels at least have more than 1.5 redeeming qualities.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: silverspawn on May 02, 2015, 04:55:57 pm
Politics were the single best thing about the Prequels.

Also, Episdoe 2 was the best of the Prequels.
Agreed x2

What makes you prefer 2 over 3?

If you pay attention to any of the action scenes in #3, it becomes really hard to take them seriously. There are countless moments where main characters could have been killed but the bad guys just don't do it, both during and in between fights scenes. For instance, Obi Wan just jumps into a large group of droids and stuff, and only doesn't die because grievous chooses to duel him. Later during their fight, there is a moment when grievous has obi van in his grip and could have easily killed him, but instead just throws him away, allowing him to find this laser gun and win the fight. When the 4 Jedi come to arrest Sidious, 3 of them just stand by while he kills them one by one, so that he can have the duel with Mace. Every fight scene in the movie is full of those things. The Jedi just keep surviving with ridiculous luck and nonsensical behavior from their opponents.

That's the one reason. The other reason is the whole thing of anakin turning evil, which is like the main arc of the film. That's harder to explain, but the Palpetine's persuasion just seems so weak. The idea is that he becomes evil to save his girlfriend, but it doesn't make sense, because he had a vision of her dying while giving birth. Even if the sith could prevent death, how does he expect to learn it in a few months? Also, why does he suddenly flip his entire political view? That's some serious confirmation bias. And the key moment... dunno, that's just cruel to watch. Kind of like GoT the combat with oberyn and the mountain.

The second movie really doesn't have any of these problems. The big fight at the end makes sense and didn't kill my suspension of disbelief. Even the jedi fights at the very end are much more reasonable.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Awaclus on May 02, 2015, 05:01:24 pm
Politics were the single best thing about the Prequels.

Also, Episdoe 2 was the best of the Prequels.
Agreed x2

What makes you prefer 2 over 3?

Honestly, I think it was how quickly they "turned" Anakin... The first half of the movie worked well with Ep.I and Ep.II but the second half of the movie seemed to fall apart when they forced it to end exactly where "A New Hope" begins.

(I also didn't like the ending of the latest Hobbit movie, for the same reason.)

The Hobbit movies are shit.  Except for Smaug.  Smaug was the only (ONLY) good thing about those movies.  Okay, Martin Freeman acted well.  But that's it!  The Prequels at least have more than 1.5 redeeming qualities.

The Hobbit movies are brilliant. I usually vastly prefer animation over live action movies, but the Hobbit movies are some of the very few live action movies that actually look pretty much as good as animated movies, and they manage to be incredibly simple without being boring. The only disappointing (although, not surprising) thing about them is that none of the ending songs are performed by Summoning.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: AndrewisFTTW on May 02, 2015, 05:04:12 pm
Politics were the single best thing about the Prequels.

Also, Episdoe 2 was the best of the Prequels.

yeah, honestly, I thought the first movie was awful, the second one really good, and the third one kind of stupid but also kind of fun. And unlike everyone else here, I didn't like any of 4-6, so as far as I'm concerned #2 is by far the best starwars movie.

Downvotedownvotedownvote etc. etc.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: silverspawn on May 02, 2015, 07:44:11 pm
well, to be fair 5 was alright-ish; 4 is just too old to be enjoyable and 6 is straight up bad.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kuildeous on May 02, 2015, 11:29:29 pm
well, to be fair 5 was alright-ish; 4 is just too old to be enjoyable and 6 is straight up bad.

It was a rough time for me when I realized that 6 just wasn't as good as I remembered it. Granted, the Jabba scene was really cool, but that was one of the dumbest rescue plans ever. Everything building up toward the end was pretty decent, but the Ewoks really did drag the movie down quite a bit. The Ewoks were like Jar Jar, but there were more of them. And the Chewbacca Tarzan yell was really out of place. And let's not forget that this movie had two burp jokes. Burp jokes in a Star Wars film. I saw this when I was 11, and I thought it was excellent. As an adult, the illusion is shattered.

But I wouldn't say 6 was terrible. It had enough bad things to make it not great, but it did manage to avoid being terrible.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: AndrewisFTTW on May 02, 2015, 11:36:02 pm
I think we can all agree that the worst one is the Christmas special. Ugh.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on May 02, 2015, 11:39:08 pm
I think we can all agree that the worst one is the Christmas special. Ugh.

There are... moments... where it's so bad it's "good."  But those moments are interspersed with vast tracts of the kind of boredom you can only possibly get from the unholy, incestuous hellspawn of C-SPAN and QVC.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on May 02, 2015, 11:53:51 pm
... (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0089110/)
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: jsh357 on May 02, 2015, 11:58:57 pm
So, here's my take on the Prequels. You can hate the bad acting, because there certainly is some. You can hate the bad writing, because there's certainly a lot of it. You can hate the cinematography, because, let's face it, George Lucas gets bored when he's just filming people talking.

What PISSES me off is when people start going on about "oh, it's all just politics, it's so boring, who cares about taxation and trade routes wahhhh" Like, seriously? Are you really that much of a spastic three-year-old that you need explosions and fight scenes every three seconds and can't be bothered to think about anything? The politics and all that is what I LIKE about the Prequels. Rather than just a straight good vs. evil story, it's a story about temptation and manipulation and corruption, which is far more interesting than just white hat vs. black hat cowboy shoot-em-ups.

What I really, *really* hope is that J.J. Abrams takes a philosophical, nuanced look in this new film. If it's just good guys vs. bad guys, I will be disappointed. It'll probably still be a decent movie with awesome special effects, but the Star Wars saga really deserves more than that at this point.

In principle I don't disagree with you on this, but there's nothing terribly interesting about the politics seen in the prequels.  It's so stale, awkward, and ham-fisted that they WOULD have been better off as pure action movies.  My biggest problems with the prequels are that they exist and if taken seriously serve to make me dislike (and I mean this in a bad way, not in a "wow this is cool that it changed my perception" way) characters that I enjoyed from the OT, especially Yoda and Obi-Wan.  The only thing I do actually like about the prequels is Palpatine.  He really hams it up in an entertaining way and is the one character that felt like he matches what we'd have expected if the films were produced directly after the OT.  Other than that, the rest of my opinions on these match Mr. Plinkett's for the most part so I'll not bother reiterating them.

Return of the Jedi is a great film.  It's worse than New Hope and Empire, but really only because of the Ewoks (the film just would have been far better served had they been Wookies for various reasons) and the totally random "Leia is your sister" reveal that failed to interest anybody and felt inserted for shock value.  There are some pacing issues, but they are not uncommon in these types of movies and don't detract a whole lot for me.  The climactic scenes of the film, especially the standoff between Vader, Luke, and Sidious, are among the best parts of the series.  The moment when Vader turns on the Emperor is such a thrilling part of his character arc that it truly touched me when I was old enough to understand all the implications of the scene.

My favorite Star Wars film is the original, although I love Empire as well.  I love how old and beaten-up everything looks; you actually get the sense that this is a real universe people have been existing in, whereas everything in the prequels is brand new and shiny (I can sort of understand that artistic decision, but it's beside the point here and it's still jarring to me).  The early dynamic between Luke, Han, Leia, 3PO, Chewie, and Ben is great.  I know that's a lot of characters, but the way they work together is very well-directed, and a lot of films could stand to learn from it.  Even though we don't know much about some of the characters as of this film, there is still a lot of weight to their big moments, like the duel with Darth Vader and Luke's faith in the Force helping him take down the Death Star. 
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on May 03, 2015, 12:20:15 am
Not everything in the prequels is new and shiny.  Tatooine certainly isn't.  Coruscant is deliberately new and shiny (except for the parts of it that deliberately aren't in Clones) because it's supposed to represent a facade of opulence hiding the decay of corruption.  The original trilogy is all worn and lived in because everything has gone to shit since the Empire was formed.  I just feel that, out of all the things to nitpick, this seems like a silly one to.

What I like most about the prequels, and what a lot of Star Wars fans seem to forget (or want to forget), is the worldbuilding done.  The backstory that frames the original trilogy.  The Jedi used to basically run the galaxy, there were thousands of them, but they had gotten stiff and stale and monastic, and were out of touch.  After Order 66, Obi-Wan and Yoda realize this is a problem, which is why they don't train Luke the way that they were trained.

However, if you think about it, it makes a bit of sense to have the Jedi be, at least to a certain extent, monastic and distant.  The Sith, particularly Anakin,  make it very clear what happens when a Force-user lets their emotions get the better of them.  We're talking about people who can warp reality to their very whim and maybe they should be trained to stay cool and collected and not try to, you know, take over the universe.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: jsh357 on May 03, 2015, 01:01:16 am
Edit: Man, I regret this post.  If you already read it, I apologize if it seemed insulting.  I was just really bummed by your first paragraph; you can express that point without insulting someone, you know.  This is why I try to avoid arguing on the internet at all.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on May 03, 2015, 02:00:21 am
The preview for Force Awakens looks really great in 3D :)
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on May 03, 2015, 08:18:46 am
Edit: Man, I regret this post.  If you already read it, I apologize if it seemed insulting.  I was just really bummed by your first paragraph; you can express that point without insulting someone, you know.  This is why I try to avoid arguing on the internet at all.

I apologize; it was late at night when I posted that, and I was rather harsh.  I'll edit my own post, though I have no idea what your post originally was.

The preview for Force Awakens looks really great in 3D :)

YES IT DOES
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on May 04, 2015, 09:24:29 am
NEW STUFF

http://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2015/05/star-wars-force-awakens-photos?fdfd
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Darth Vader on May 04, 2015, 10:12:40 am
Uh, excuse me? Episode II is freaking the worst. I lose my hand :'(
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on May 04, 2015, 10:13:30 am
Uh, excuse me? Episode II is freaking the worst. I lose my hand :'(

Pretty sure you lose more in Episode III...
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Darth Vader on May 04, 2015, 10:14:07 am
Uh, excuse me? Episode II is freaking the worst. I lose my hand :'(

Pretty sure you lose more in Episode III...

But I gained the Dark Side. And this awesome suit. And the entire Galaxy.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Titandrake on May 05, 2015, 06:13:15 am
Watched Empire for first time.

I like IV more. Every famous line from Empire is old to me. 95% of the plot was old to me. 90% of the scenes were old to me. Once all of that's been spoiled, the only parts I have left are the action...except a lot of the action was spoiled to me too, so I was barely in any suspense. I knew the walkers get taken down by harpoons; I knew Han went into the asteroid field and hides inside a space worm; I knew Lando would have misgivings at the last minute, and so on.

That being said, the Luke/Vader fight still holds up very well.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Awaclus on May 05, 2015, 07:05:18 am
Every famous line from Empire is old to me. 95% of the plot was old to me. 90% of the scenes were old to me. Once all of that's been spoiled, the only parts I have left are the action...except a lot of the action was spoiled to me too, so I was barely in any suspense. I knew the walkers get taken down by harpoons; I knew Han went into the asteroid field and hides inside a space worm; I knew Lando would have misgivings at the last minute, and so on.

But it's more fun when you know what's going to happen.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: silverspawn on May 05, 2015, 09:04:31 am
Watched Empire for first time.

I like IV more. Every famous line from Empire is old to me. 95% of the plot was old to me. 90% of the scenes were old to me. Once all of that's been spoiled, the only parts I have left are the action...except a lot of the action was spoiled to me too, so I was barely in any suspense. I knew the walkers get taken down by harpoons; I knew Han went into the asteroid field and hides inside a space worm; I knew Lando would have misgivings at the last minute, and so on.

That being said, the Luke/Vader fight still holds up very well.

well, you can't hold that against the movie though, right? I mean, it's just based on your context.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Titandrake on May 05, 2015, 02:19:18 pm
I'm not holding it against the movie, I'm only saying why I didn't like it as much. I still enjoyed it.

Re: fun to know beforehand: I tend to disagree. I can enjoy movies where I know the plot, but there's a difference between knowing "Rebels are on the ice world Hoth and have to fight against Imperial walkers" and "In the fight, Luke's ship is going to crash, at which point he'll run on foot to a walker, pull himself up, and use his lightsaber to take down a walker, after which Han takes Leia out on the Falcon and Luke goes to Dagobah where his ship will land in a swamp, and..."
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on May 05, 2015, 02:26:19 pm
I'm not holding it against the movie, I'm only saying why I didn't like it as much. I still enjoyed it.

Re: fun to know beforehand: I tend to disagree. I can enjoy movies where I know the plot, but there's a difference between knowing "Rebels are on the ice world Hoth and have to fight against Imperial walkers" and "In the fight, Luke's ship is going to crash, at which point he'll run on foot to a walker, pull himself up, and use his lightsaber to take down a walker, after which Han takes Leia out on the Falcon and Luke goes to Dagobah where his ship will land in a swamp, and..."
So, you dislike watching movies multiple times.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on May 05, 2015, 02:38:48 pm
I'm not holding it against the movie, I'm only saying why I didn't like it as much. I still enjoyed it.

Re: fun to know beforehand: I tend to disagree. I can enjoy movies where I know the plot, but there's a difference between knowing "Rebels are on the ice world Hoth and have to fight against Imperial walkers" and "In the fight, Luke's ship is going to crash, at which point he'll run on foot to a walker, pull himself up, and use his lightsaber to take down a walker, after which Han takes Leia out on the Falcon and Luke goes to Dagobah where his ship will land in a swamp, and..."
So, you dislike watching movies multiple times.

There's a difference between watching a spoiled movie, and watching a movie you've seen before.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kuildeous on May 05, 2015, 02:45:10 pm
I'm not holding it against the movie, I'm only saying why I didn't like it as much. I still enjoyed it.

Re: fun to know beforehand: I tend to disagree. I can enjoy movies where I know the plot, but there's a difference between knowing "Rebels are on the ice world Hoth and have to fight against Imperial walkers" and "In the fight, Luke's ship is going to crash, at which point he'll run on foot to a walker, pull himself up, and use his lightsaber to take down a walker, after which Han takes Leia out on the Falcon and Luke goes to Dagobah where his ship will land in a swamp, and..."
So, you dislike watching movies multiple times.

There's a difference between watching a spoiled movie, and watching a movie you've seen before.

I have to agree. There are plenty of movies I enjoy watching multiple times, but watching a movie for the first time is unique. Maybe you'll catch something new on the second or twentieth viewing, but those viewings are generally about the same. You can't re-experience your first time.

A great example of this would be Memento. I have seen that movie at least a dozen times, and they're all enjoyable. None of the subsequent viewings blew my mind like the initial viewing, though.

I can't really speak too much about the plot twists in the original trilogy. I was 8 when I saw Empire. While I recognized the father revelation, it didn't register as monumental to my kid brain. The sister revelation was grokked better by my 11-year-old brain, though, but not enough to realize how silly that was getting. I'm sure that Empire could have been really cool for the adults in the theatre. It would have been like a soap opera...but with lightsabers.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on May 05, 2015, 06:48:28 pm
This goes here:

http://imgur.com/gallery/26nvm
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: pacovf on May 05, 2015, 07:00:22 pm
The thing I am most looking forward to is people that grew up with the prequels behaving towards the sequel(s) the same way the people that grew up with the original trilogy behave towards the prequels.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on May 05, 2015, 07:02:36 pm
I'm just sitting here hoping they don't suck.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: pacovf on May 05, 2015, 07:12:14 pm
Is J.J. Abrams, it can't be terrible.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on May 28, 2015, 03:36:25 pm
So Andy Serkis' character is called Supreme Leader... Snoke.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kirian on May 28, 2015, 09:25:52 pm
Is J.J. Abrams, it can't be terrible.

...I guess you haven't seen the Star Trek reboot?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on May 28, 2015, 09:54:10 pm
Is J.J. Abrams, it can't be terrible.

...I guess you haven't seen the Star Trek reboot?

That wasn't terrible.  It just wasn't Star Trek.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kirian on May 28, 2015, 10:03:02 pm
Is J.J. Abrams, it can't be terrible.

...I guess you haven't seen the Star Trek reboot?

That wasn't terrible.  It just wasn't Star Trek.

A good point.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on May 29, 2015, 12:29:00 am
Is J.J. Abrams, it can't be terrible.

...I guess you haven't seen the Star Trek reboot?

That wasn't terrible.  It just wasn't Star Trek.

A good point.
I can't seem to find it online, but I read an article a couple years ago that compared JJ Abrams Star Trek to Star Wars and the similarities were, well, numerous.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Jorbles on May 29, 2015, 01:00:31 pm
He's basically a great fit for Star Wars and was a bad fit for Star Trek (despite making movies people liked, but Trekkies had mixed feelings about).
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on June 15, 2015, 09:01:57 am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gd5yB9Vmd6I
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Darth Vader on June 16, 2015, 02:17:13 pm
(http://images-cdn.moviepilot.com/image/upload/c_fill,h_356,w_800/t_mp_quality/lord-vader-battlefield-of-hoth-brutally-realized-in-these-epic-star-wars-paintings-jpeg-255827.jpg)

Awwwwwww yeah.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Archetype on June 16, 2015, 02:53:39 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIRQf0S3oD0
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on July 10, 2015, 07:03:14 pm
Eeeeeee the Star Wars panel at SDCC starts in an hour and a half.  Anybody in San Diego right now?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Darth Vader on July 10, 2015, 10:46:18 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTNJ51ghzdY
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: pacovf on July 10, 2015, 11:00:08 pm
It's kinda sweet to see the excitement and the I-can't-believe-I-am-doing-this-ness of the people involved.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Darth Vader on July 10, 2015, 11:10:53 pm
It's kinda sweet to see the excitement and the I-can't-believe-I-am-doing-this-ness of the people involved.

I'm just sad they didn't want me in the movie... They hired some actor instead.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Seprix on July 10, 2015, 11:41:35 pm
It's kinda sweet to see the excitement and the I-can't-believe-I-am-doing-this-ness of the people involved.

I'm just sad they didn't want me in the movie... They hired some actor instead.

Aww.. Poor Darthy...
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Darth Vader on July 11, 2015, 11:22:33 am
It's kinda sweet to see the excitement and the I-can't-believe-I-am-doing-this-ness of the people involved.

I'm just sad they didn't want me in the movie... They hired some actor instead.

Aww.. Poor Darthy...

Don't make me destroy you.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on July 11, 2015, 12:11:17 pm
It's kinda sweet to see the excitement and the I-can't-believe-I-am-doing-this-ness of the people involved.

I'm just sad they didn't want me in the movie... They hired some actor instead.

Aww.. Poor Darthy...

Don't make me destroy you.

Don't.  If you strike him down, he will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Darth Vader on July 12, 2015, 09:41:05 pm
http://www.starwarsringtheory.com/

I still don't like the prequels, but I can appreciate what Lucas tried to do.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kirian on July 13, 2015, 12:56:46 pm
http://www.starwarsringtheory.com/

I still don't like the prequels, but I can appreciate what Lucas tried to do.

That was a very interesting read.  I wonder how much of it is the literary/film equivalent of numerology though.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kirian on July 13, 2015, 12:58:56 pm
Speaking of numerology: three movies in a trilogy; three total trilogies.  Half-Life 3 confirmed?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Darth Vader on August 27, 2015, 04:13:24 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reYpChNJglA

Finn squaring off against Kylo Ren, Dark Jedi of the Ren Order. Not as cool as me mind you, but pretty awesome. Finn looks like he's not ready.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on October 18, 2015, 05:12:00 pm
New poster:

(https://i.imgur.com/ZOFkDOU.jpg)
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: pacovf on October 18, 2015, 10:13:03 pm
Yet Another Death Star?

Any idea who is the little big-eyed guy next to R2-D2?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on October 19, 2015, 10:14:46 pm
SQUEEEEE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGbxmsDFVnE
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on October 19, 2015, 11:28:43 pm
Every trailer I get excited to see new scenes of breathe-heavy black man.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Jimmmmm on October 19, 2015, 11:29:15 pm
Every trailer I get excited to see new scenes of breathe-heavy black man.

BHBM?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on October 19, 2015, 11:30:07 pm
Every trailer I get excited to see new scenes of breathe-heavy black man.

BHBM?

When the force awakens, it takes your breath away. 
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: LastFootnote on October 20, 2015, 12:14:54 pm
Well, that trailer made me neither more excited nor less excited for the film. It projects pure "epic", but what I want is "fun".
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Jorbles on October 20, 2015, 01:34:33 pm
Well, that trailer made me neither more excited nor less excited for the film. It projects pure "epic", but what I want is "fun".

So you want Guardians of the Long Time Ago Galaxy That Is Far Far Away?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Asper on October 20, 2015, 02:20:24 pm
Any idea who is the little big-eyed guy next to R2-D2?

Han Solo.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: LastFootnote on October 20, 2015, 02:21:46 pm
Well, that trailer made me neither more excited nor less excited for the film. It projects pure "epic", but what I want is "fun".

So you want Guardians of the Long Time Ago Galaxy That Is Far Far Away?

Yes, that exactly.

I guess another thing is that, I don't want the movie to be shackled to the previous ones. I don't want the film to constantly wink at me, asking, "Hey, remember this character/location/situation?" The less we see of characters from the previous films, the better. Naturally the trailers are doing as much of this goddamn winking as possible. I just hope the film itself does less of it.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kirian on October 20, 2015, 02:41:57 pm
Well, that trailer made me neither more excited nor less excited for the film. It projects pure "epic", but what I want is "fun".

So you want Guardians of the Long Time Ago Galaxy That Is Far Far Away?

I would watch that every day and twice on Sunday.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on October 20, 2015, 02:43:57 pm
Well, that trailer made me neither more excited nor less excited for the film. It projects pure "epic", but what I want is "fun".

So you want Guardians of the Long Time Ago Galaxy That Is Far Far Away?

Yes, that exactly.

I guess another thing is that, I don't want the movie to be shackled to the previous ones. I don't want the film to constantly wink at me, asking, "Hey, remember this character/location/situation?" The less we see of characters from the previous films, the better. Naturally the trailers are doing as much of this goddamn winking as possible. I just hope the film itself does less of it.

I do want it to be shackled to them - I want it to acknowledge and be aware of episodes I-VI - but not in a "wink, wink, nudge, nudge" nostalgia-driven way.  I want it to build on, expand upon, move naturally forward from what came before; to be aware of its history, but not be stuck in the past.

See Jurassic World for the wrong way to do this.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: GendoIkari on October 20, 2015, 04:37:21 pm
I just now learned what most people probably knew a while ago... this isn't produced by 20th Century Fox, thus no standard fanfare music before the Star Wars music. I'm quite disappointed. It's a small thing, but that music has always been part of Star Wars in my mind. Whenever I heard it, I mentally expect it to be followed by the Star Wars theme. It just won't be the same without it.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on October 20, 2015, 04:39:30 pm
I just now learned what most people probably knew a while ago... this isn't produced by 20th Century Fox, thus no standard fanfare music before the Star Wars music. I'm quite disappointed. It's a small thing, but that music has always been part of Star Wars in my mind. Whenever I heard it, I mentally expect it to be followed by the Star Wars theme. It just won't be the same without it.

Can someone make a patch for this?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: GendoIkari on October 20, 2015, 04:42:08 pm
I just now learned what most people probably knew a while ago... this isn't produced by 20th Century Fox, thus no standard fanfare music before the Star Wars music. I'm quite disappointed. It's a small thing, but that music has always been part of Star Wars in my mind. Whenever I heard it, I mentally expect it to be followed by the Star Wars theme. It just won't be the same without it.

Can someone make a patch for this?

I'll just bring a boombox into the speaker and play the fanfare at just the right moment.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on October 20, 2015, 05:59:16 pm
I just now learned what most people probably knew a while ago... this isn't produced by 20th Century Fox, thus no standard fanfare music before the Star Wars music. I'm quite disappointed. It's a small thing, but that music has always been part of Star Wars in my mind. Whenever I heard it, I mentally expect it to be followed by the Star Wars theme. It just won't be the same without it.

Can someone make a patch for this?

I'll just bring a boombox into the speaker and play the fanfare at just the right moment.

It's going to be a short John Williams fanfare over the Lucasfilm logo.  No Disney logo, no Bad Robot logo.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Watno on October 21, 2015, 08:47:08 am
They took those first two lines from Game of Thrones?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on October 21, 2015, 07:07:43 pm
Found this: http://imgur.com/a/4EcK2
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: eHalcyon on October 21, 2015, 09:49:23 pm
You guys might be interested in this (http://kaijuslayer.tumblr.com/post/110946043377/remember-revenge-of-the-sith-pretend-you-dont).
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Ampharos on October 21, 2015, 10:35:50 pm
You guys might be interested in this (http://kaijuslayer.tumblr.com/post/110946043377/remember-revenge-of-the-sith-pretend-you-dont).

Ties things together even more nicely than 3 did, but wouldn't be nearly as fun.  Fun little read though, thanks!
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on October 22, 2015, 12:43:28 am
You guys might be interested in this (http://kaijuslayer.tumblr.com/post/110946043377/remember-revenge-of-the-sith-pretend-you-dont).

Ties things together even more nicely than 3 did, but wouldn't be nearly as fun.  Fun little read though, thanks!

Eh.  Anakin's fall really needs to be a temptation - that's what the Dark Side is about.  It's not supposed to seem reasonable or anything, and it's mainly going on inside your head.  And personally I think the entire Order 66 sequence is the best in the entire Prequel trilogy.  It's something the Jedi simply were not expecting, and their overconfidence in their abilities, even blinded as they were, led to their downfall.  I know a lot of fans think they're supposed to be rooting for the Jedi, and get confused by this, but the Jedi were just as bloated, corrupted and self-absorbed as the Senate was at this point.  All those seemingly arbitrary restrictions and rules, all the condescension - all of this may have been in place to prevent a Jedi from turning, but in the end was what actually ended up causing Anakin to fall to the Dark Side.  The reason why Obi-Wan and Yoda are much more introspective and spiritual in the OT is because they've realized the ways of the Jedi had to change.  They failed not just because of the outside force of Palpatine, but because of inside hubris as well.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on October 22, 2015, 09:58:00 am
You guys might be interested in this (http://kaijuslayer.tumblr.com/post/110946043377/remember-revenge-of-the-sith-pretend-you-dont).

Han has First Strike $$$

(http://i.imgur.com/ZsLgetf.png)
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on October 22, 2015, 10:01:12 am
Ha okay, this too:

(http://i.imgur.com/ACN5Z34.png)
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: eHalcyon on October 23, 2015, 06:31:31 pm
Odessa converts Lenin statue into monument for Darth Vader. (http://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/oct/23/darth-vader-statue-erected-ukraine)
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kirian on October 23, 2015, 07:17:15 pm
You guys might be interested in this (http://kaijuslayer.tumblr.com/post/110946043377/remember-revenge-of-the-sith-pretend-you-dont).

Ties things together even more nicely than 3 did, but wouldn't be nearly as fun.  Fun little read though, thanks!

Eh.  Anakin's fall really needs to be a temptation - that's what the Dark Side is about.  It's not supposed to seem reasonable or anything, and it's mainly going on inside your head.  And personally I think the entire Order 66 sequence is the best in the entire Prequel trilogy.  It's something the Jedi simply were not expecting, and their overconfidence in their abilities, even blinded as they were, led to their downfall.  I know a lot of fans think they're supposed to be rooting for the Jedi, and get confused by this, but the Jedi were just as bloated, corrupted and self-absorbed as the Senate was at this point.  All those seemingly arbitrary restrictions and rules, all the condescension - all of this may have been in place to prevent a Jedi from turning, but in the end was what actually ended up causing Anakin to fall to the Dark Side.  The reason why Obi-Wan and Yoda are much more introspective and spiritual in the OT is because they've realized the ways of the Jedi had to change.  They failed not just because of the outside force of Palpatine, but because of inside hubris as well.

So much of this.  The Jedi as portrayed in the prequels were utterly useless, stifled by indecision, and morally bankrupt because they were unable to take any meaningful actions at all.

Oh, and they were separating children from their parents after giving them a blood test, because, despite being these supposed paragons of virtue, and magically powerful, no one was *volunteering* to become a Jedi.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: eHalcyon on October 26, 2015, 06:18:07 pm
(https://36.media.tumblr.com/4737099fee6d7e2fabbab5cf63aa303d/tumblr_nv8zhjb6rH1sqx8y7o1_540.jpg)

(https://40.media.tumblr.com/f5529e9dfe55c04a3d73f460218d9435/tumblr_nv8zhjb6rH1sqx8y7o2_540.jpg)
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: 2.71828..... on October 30, 2015, 02:06:53 pm
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/act-four/wp/2015/10/29/the-destruction-of-alderaan-was-completely-justified/
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: eHalcyon on November 03, 2015, 09:38:56 pm
Actually convincing theory: Jar Jar is a Sith Lord (https://www.reddit.com/r/StarWars/comments/3qvj6w/theory_jar_jar_binks_was_a_trained_force_user/).
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Jorbles on November 04, 2015, 01:10:07 pm
Actually convincing theory: Jar Jar is a Sith Lord (https://www.reddit.com/r/StarWars/comments/3qvj6w/theory_jar_jar_binks_was_a_trained_force_user/).

This is actually incredibly well thought out, including the meta reasoning for why it turned out he was never revealed to be one in the prequels.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: jsh357 on November 04, 2015, 02:33:53 pm
I am inclined to believe Jar Jar had a bigger role initially too. Lucas said in the TPM behind the scenes footage "Jar Jar is the key to everything" at one point. I think he was talking about getting kids interested in the film, but maybe he had a bigger plan too. Dooku did always seem like a random character thrown in there too. I'm not sure I buy that Jar Jar would be above Sidious, though. Perhaps he was intended to be a spy or even an apprentice. Well, I guess it's up to Lucas if that will ever be revealed. Great reasoning in the reddit post, with quality examples.

I still hate the prequels, though. That much hasn't changed.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: pacovf on November 04, 2015, 02:52:53 pm
Anyone that says that Including Christopher Lee is random is dead to me.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kuildeous on November 04, 2015, 04:44:57 pm
Just because Christopher Lee can make a character awesome doesn't mean that the character didn't feel random. It's not Lee's fault if the script seemed lacking when it came to his character. He took that character and owned the fuck out of it.

Jar Jar did kick off the civil war, which makes sense because when you put someone that stupid in charge of something, he's going to screw it up. So who put him in charge? *glare*
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kirian on November 04, 2015, 06:43:14 pm
Ultimate twist:  Jar Jar is Anakin's father.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: sudgy on November 04, 2015, 07:17:27 pm
Ultimate twist:  Jar Jar is Anakin's father.

I just tried to imagine Jar Jar saying the famous line, but I just couldn't do it.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kirian on November 04, 2015, 07:30:16 pm
Ultimate twist:  Jar Jar is Anakin's father.

I just tried to imagine Jar Jar saying the famous line, but I just couldn't do it.

"Did Qui-Gon ever tell ya what happened to yoosa father?"
"He told me I came from a single mother."
"No.  MEESA your father."
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Jimmmmm on November 04, 2015, 08:57:09 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWaLxFIVX1s
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on November 05, 2015, 11:37:23 am
(http://i.imgur.com/rksz44K.jpg) (http://imgur.com/gallery/rksz44K)
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on November 10, 2015, 08:29:00 pm
I just saw this commercial on TV

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBepue-3JwI

Sometimes I hate capitalism
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: eHalcyon on November 10, 2015, 10:44:12 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4is7h_cgzI
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: ashersky on November 11, 2015, 04:01:35 am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4is7h_cgzI

Isn't this just the movie scene re-enacted?

1/10, lacks originality.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kirian on November 11, 2015, 11:27:20 am
I just saw this commercial on TV

Sometimes I hate capitalism

Ugh.  I have a new candidate for Worst Thing Ever.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on November 24, 2015, 01:01:49 pm
Less than a month!
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on December 08, 2015, 11:23:37 am
So Star Wars DVD/Blue Ray set was pretty cheap over Thanksgiving, so I picked up Episode I--III.  I just watched Episode I yesterday; I don't think I've seen it since it was in theaters.  I was hoping it would be better than I remembered, but it was actually much worse :(  It's like every bit of drama, suspense, adventure, etc. is completely undermined by poor dialogue and a very feeble attempt to comic relief. 
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on December 08, 2015, 11:26:27 am
So Star Wars DVD/Blue Ray set was pretty cheap over Thanksgiving, so I picked up Episode I--III.  I just watched Episode I yesterday; I don't think I've seen it since it was in theaters.  I was hoping it would be better than I remembered, but it was actually much worse :(  It's like every bit of drama, suspense, adventure, etc. is completely undermined by poor dialogue and a very feeble attempt to comic relief.

There are really only two bits I like from Episode I - the scene where Anakin leaves his mother is surprisingly heartbreaking, and then the end battle is just balls out insane.  Everything else is just kind of... there?  It's like there are some good ideas, just executed poorly.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on December 08, 2015, 12:24:43 pm
So Star Wars DVD/Blue Ray set was pretty cheap over Thanksgiving, so I picked up Episode I--III.  I just watched Episode I yesterday; I don't think I've seen it since it was in theaters.  I was hoping it would be better than I remembered, but it was actually much worse :(  It's like every bit of drama, suspense, adventure, etc. is completely undermined by poor dialogue and a very feeble attempt to comic relief.

There are really only two bits I like from Episode I - the scene where Anakin leaves his mother is surprisingly heartbreaking, and then the end battle is just balls out insane.  Everything else is just kind of... there?  It's like there are some good ideas, just executed poorly.

I dunno.. rewatching, the scene where Anakin leaves was cringey for me.  I didn't really feel for the characters at all.  The final battle was okay, but again undermined by JarJar taking out dozens of droids and battle machines by pure stupidity, as well as Anakin doing... well, everything that he did.  I mean, I understand that in some sense you want to convey that in some sense these characters are guided and protected by the Force, even if they have no awareness of it, but it's just too.. light-hearted and goofy.

Even the humor in Return of the Jedi was much better done, and it was contrasted with dark and serious scenes (like Endor battle juxtaposed with Luke vs. Vader and the Emperor). 

I agree, though, that there are good ideas, but the execution was very bad.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: silverspawn on December 08, 2015, 12:49:46 pm
So Star Wars DVD/Blue Ray set was pretty cheap over Thanksgiving, so I picked up Episode I--III.  I just watched Episode I yesterday; I don't think I've seen it since it was in theaters.  I was hoping it would be better than I remembered, but it was actually much worse :(  It's like every bit of drama, suspense, adventure, etc. is completely undermined by poor dialogue and a very feeble attempt to comic relief.

I always (well, not actually always) thought the first movie was abysmal. but the second is much better! you should enjoy that one.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Asper on December 08, 2015, 01:08:33 pm
I sometimes wonder whether i'd hate episode VI if it came out today. I mean, the death star story is just a rip-off from episode IV, and what's with those teddy bears killing Storm Troopers Home-alone-style? When were those space-nazis replaced with Mr. Darkhood there, and how come R2D2 and C3PO can walk through the fire of battle without a scratch? I mean, i also prefer VI over the prequels, but i doubt the reason's anything but nostalgia.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: silverspawn on December 08, 2015, 01:29:49 pm
I sometimes wonder whether i'd hate episode VI if it came out today.

you would. the sixth is the second worst after the first.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on December 08, 2015, 01:52:34 pm
It's about time!

(https://scontent-ord1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/12346525_10208240211507715_8959874731492354367_n.jpg?oh=bdd31a8251ef75f225cbdfb8b8fc5150&oe=56DA972F)
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kirian on December 08, 2015, 03:58:44 pm
http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-ways-new-star-wars-could-be-disaster/

Just sayin'
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on December 08, 2015, 04:03:13 pm
http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-ways-new-star-wars-could-be-disaster/

Just sayin'

Really?  Two pages for five entries?  You go to hell, Cracked!  You go to hell and you die!
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: eHalcyon on December 08, 2015, 05:02:05 pm
How viable is this plan?

http://www.dorkly.com/post/76692/star-wars-a-new-hope-could-have-been-handled-in-5-seconds
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kuildeous on December 08, 2015, 05:19:20 pm
I sometimes wonder whether i'd hate episode VI if it came out today. I mean, the death star story is just a rip-off from episode IV, and what's with those teddy bears killing Storm Troopers Home-alone-style? When were those space-nazis replaced with Mr. Darkhood there, and how come R2D2 and C3PO can walk through the fire of battle without a scratch? I mean, i also prefer VI over the prequels, but i doubt the reason's anything but nostalgia.

Also, two burp jokes and a Tarzan joke.

I still enjoy Episode VI, but I acknowledge that it's just not that great of a movie.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Jorbles on December 08, 2015, 06:14:16 pm
How viable is this plan?

http://www.dorkly.com/post/76692/star-wars-a-new-hope-could-have-been-handled-in-5-seconds

Not very, light sabers can't cut through everything immediately, plus they have handles that would probably catch on something. Think about when Luke and Vader fight in Empire Strikes back, their sabers are constantly bouncing off metal things (see this video around 5 minutes) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-DeI3ohVbY

Plus look at Qui Gon cutting through the blast doors in Phantom Menace. This video around 2 minutes in here:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUbXyd-fK8Q

He can't cut through those blast doors particularly quickly.

If Obiwan had dropped his light saber it probably would have just gotten stuck in the floor and Vader would have picked it up after chopping Obiwan in two or if the floor was particularly flimsy he probably would have had some storm trooper pick it up a few floor down when it eventually hit something reasonably durable.

There's a more elaborate list of things that light sabers can't cut through if you look into the various Star Wars wikis too if you're curious, but I wanted to just use movie examples.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on December 08, 2015, 10:03:44 pm
Michio Kaku (physicist guy) once made a TV special on how you could make a realistic working lightsaber, and his plan involved a telescoping ceramic blade heated to unreasonable temperatures.  In that instance, it would certainly make sense for physical objects to resist, though still be melted by, a lightsaber.

However, if you're going by the crystals and contained plasma beam thing, it would start to get weird.  No matter how hot the lightsaber was, it wouldn't cut instantly through everything.  However, a plasma is a gas (sort of), even if contained by a magnetic field or whatever.  So if you tried to shove a lightsaber through something, the magnetic field would pass through the material, and the plasma would be compressed.  That would heat it up more, and it would start to melt through whatever you were cutting, but after a certain point, you'd no longer be able to push, as you no longer have the physical strength to compress the plasma further.

As for lightsaber combat, I'm pretty sure it's mostly down to the magnetic fields.  Blaster bolts are obviously not lasers, but bits of plasma, and so would interact with the lightsaber's magnetic field.  Dueling with a lightsaber, your magnetic fields would collide with each other.  And then vibroblades or whatever General Grievous' droid pikemen have are quite obviously electrically charged, and thus interacting magnetically as well.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on December 17, 2015, 10:36:23 am
I've got a bad feeling about this...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Poe flies an x-wing. Finn is a storm trooper. Kylo is not a Sith. BB-8 is carrying something. Rey is a scavenger. Leia and Han know each other. Luke is played by Mark Hamill. And lightsabers kill people.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Accatitippi on December 17, 2015, 10:55:56 am
I watched the new movie yesterday, I enjoyed it a lot. The best one since the Empire stroke back.
Spoiler, generally referencing how the plot is structured: It has got essentially the same story arch as a new Hope (and Episode VI for that matter). It's obviously not a vile remake, and there are sure some unexpected plot twists, but I hope they'll stray a bit more from the trodden on the next two movies, plot-wise.
The feeling is much much more Original Trilogy-ish, but without the '80ish feeling. There were a couple of dei ex machina to carry the plot forward that could have been easily avoided and they bug me a fair bit. (That's S2R2 randomly waking up with all the answers we'd been looking for just as the story hits a dead end. Also, the way Han Solo enters the movie felt cheap storywise.)
Overall, infinitely better than I expected.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kirian on December 17, 2015, 11:05:04 am
I've got a bad feeling about this...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Poe flies an x-wing. Finn is a storm trooper. Kylo is not a Sith. BB-8 is carrying something. Rey is a scavenger. Leia and Han know each other. Luke is played by Mark Hamill. And lightsabers kill people.

Vader kills Dumbledore.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on December 17, 2015, 11:35:14 am
I watched the new movie yesterday, I enjoyed it a lot. The best one since the Empire stroke back.
Spoiler, generally referencing how the plot is structured: It has got essentially the same story arch as a new Hope (and Episode VI for that matter). It's obviously not a vile remake, and there are sure some unexpected plot twists, but I hope they'll stray a bit more from the trodden on the next two movies, plot-wise.
The feeling is much much more Original Trilogy-ish, but without the '80ish feeling. There were a couple of dei ex machina to carry the plot forward that could have been easily avoided and they bug me a fair bit. (That's S2R2 randomly waking up with all the answers we'd been looking for just as the story hits a dead end. Also, the way Han Solo enters the movie felt cheap storywise.)
Overall, infinitely better than I expected.
My biggest issue was the small chasm ex machina between Rey and Kylo.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Accatitippi on December 17, 2015, 11:55:01 am
I watched the new movie yesterday, I enjoyed it a lot. The best one since the Empire stroke back.
Spoiler, generally referencing how the plot is structured: It has got essentially the same story arch as a new Hope (and Episode VI for that matter). It's obviously not a vile remake, and there are sure some unexpected plot twists, but I hope they'll stray a bit more from the trodden on the next two movies, plot-wise.
The feeling is much much more Original Trilogy-ish, but without the '80ish feeling. There were a couple of dei ex machina to carry the plot forward that could have been easily avoided and they bug me a fair bit. (That's S2R2 randomly waking up with all the answers we'd been looking for just as the story hits a dead end. Also, the way Han Solo enters the movie felt cheap storywise.)
Overall, infinitely better than I expected.
My biggest issue was the small chasm ex machina between Rey and Kylo.

Yeah, that one too! How could I forget to list it. Really annoying, and avoidable too. It's the kind of things that suddently puts your suspension of disbelief on high stress.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: LastFootnote on December 17, 2015, 04:59:33 pm
Spoiler, generally referencing how the plot is structured: It has got essentially the same story arch as a new Hope (and Episode VI for that matter). It's obviously not a vile remake, and there are sure some unexpected plot twists, but I hope they'll stray a bit more from the trodden on the next two movies, plot-wise.

Wow, that's pretty much exactly what I DIDN'T want the movie to be. Hopefully I'll enjoy it anyway. *grumble grumble*
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on December 17, 2015, 10:09:33 pm
I'm putting this in double spoilers because it's an ACTUAL spoiler, so don't scroll over if you don't want to be spoiled:

You've been warned!  Move your mouse away!

I felt that the way Rey's arc developed is the way Anakin should have been handled in the prequels.  The way she just instinctively picks up Force aptitude makes her far more likely to have been conceived by midi-chlorians or whatever.

Don't let your mouse go over the thing between these!
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kuildeous on December 17, 2015, 11:52:27 pm
I'm putting this in double spoilers because it's an ACTUAL spoiler, so don't scroll over if you don't want to be spoiled:

You've been warned!  Move your mouse away!

I felt that the way Rey's arc developed is the way Anakin should have been handled in the prequels.  The way she just instinctively picks up Force aptitude makes her far more likely to have been conceived by midi-chlorians or whatever.

Don't let your mouse go over the thing between these!


I agree with your spoiler, wero. I wasn't thinking about that while watching it, but you're absolutely right. Missed opportunity, and I'm glad that we got this.

I actually did not mind the rehash of Episode IV. It was pretty blatant, but it was kind of neat to see the various twists. Han instead of Obi-Wan. Bad-ass girl instead of whiny boy. Adorable droid instead of plucky droid. All rather enjoyable. I did roll my eyes at the chasm, though. Oh well, it's a space opera, and that fit the trope so easily.

I may have to go a second viewing when the crowds die down. There were some pretty amusing lines, and my theatre was small but full of uproarious laughter. I missed some lines. Watching it again will be no heartache for me, I can tell you.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on December 17, 2015, 11:59:25 pm
Oh, over the first half hour I just kept telling myself "I'm seeing this again."
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on December 18, 2015, 03:37:05 am
I actually like that Kylo is blatantly and emotional wreck like Anakin was, and they established how messed up and evil he is with the death of Solo.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kuildeous on December 18, 2015, 11:57:07 pm
I actually like that Kylo is blatantly and emotional wreck like Anakin was, and they established how messed up and evil he is with the death of Solo.

Yeah, it's like they're making up a lot for the unimpressive way they built up Darth Vader. I couldn't help but chuckle a little inwardly at how emo they make him look, but it actually works.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kirian on December 20, 2015, 05:17:24 pm
Kid 1 made it through 30 minutes before her complainto about it being too loud meant mom had to remove her from the theater.  Kid 2 lasted 15 minutes longer.  I'm posting here because I don't yet feel like asking for pity on Facebook right now.

The first 45 minutes were great though!
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on December 20, 2015, 05:49:56 pm
We can tell you what happened...
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: 2.71828..... on December 20, 2015, 09:41:05 pm
I really enjoyed the blatant "we have done this before" war council.

Also, who are rey's parents? As someone who has not read any star wars forums or anything like that, I like the idea she is kylo's twin and Luke wiped people's memories and hid her away to keep her safe. Or something like that. But that is just speculation with my friends (who are also not reading star wars theories and stuff) after we watched the movie
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on December 20, 2015, 11:09:57 pm
I kind of assumed she was Luke's.

She was, at least, under training as a child.  And being Luke's daughter would explain her strong natural ability
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on December 20, 2015, 11:14:32 pm
And re: deus ex machina, I'm not so bothered by it since the premise of the universe is The Force.  So, you know, destined encounters.

I'm more bothered by how a small explosion destroys a planet.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Titandrake on December 20, 2015, 11:15:58 pm
I kind of assumed she was Luke's.

She was, at least, under training as a child.  And being Luke's daughter would explain her strong natural ability



That was my interpretation too, but I based it more off the visions she saw when picking up Luke's lightsaber. It's also more likely if the trailer line where Luke talks about the Force wasn't filmed for just the trailer. However, I wouldn't be surprised if she was the daughter of someone else, or if she was naturally gifted in the Force. If they keep doing parallels, her parents will likely be the shocking reveal for VIII.

The ridge thing separating them, I agree, it's the Force. Destiny's real, fate and all that.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on December 21, 2015, 12:15:00 am
Though what was kind of confusing about the flashback, is that it seemed as if it was supposed to be Kylo Ren that attacked Luke's school when Rey was just a child.   That had to have been like ~15 years ago.  However, Ren can't be that much older than Rey himself.  I suppose he could have been a late teen/young adult at the time.  Or was it the big bad guy?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: jsh357 on December 21, 2015, 12:17:28 am
I loved this movie. Left the theater giddy and can't wait to see it again. Even more hyped to see episode 8.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on December 21, 2015, 12:29:28 am
And re: deus ex machina, I'm not so bothered by it since the premise of the universe is The Force.  So, you know, destined encounters.

I'm more bothered by how a small explosion destroys a planet.

It might seem that way, but remember that "weapon" had just charged up, so it is possible that the "small" explosion caused a weakness in the system that contains that energy, allowing that to destroy the planet. That certainly seems more likely than a couple mines taking it out.

I kind of assumed she was Luke's.

She was, at least, under training as a child.  And being Luke's daughter would explain her strong natural ability



That was my interpretation too, but I based it more off the visions she saw when picking up Luke's lightsaber. It's also more likely if the trailer line where Luke talks about the Force wasn't filmed for just the trailer. However, I wouldn't be surprised if she was the daughter of someone else, or if she was naturally gifted in the Force. If they keep doing parallels, her parents will likely be the shocking reveal for VIII.

The ridge thing separating them, I agree, it's the Force. Destiny's real, fate and all that.

Hate to ruin the trailer for you, but Luke's dialogue was entirely from Return of the Jedi.

Luke: You're wrong, Leia. You have that power too. In time you'll learn to use it as I have. The Force runs strong in my family. My father has it. I have it. And... my sister has it. Yes. It's you, Leia.

Simply move the "You have that power too" to after "my sister has it" and there you go.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: 2.71828..... on December 21, 2015, 01:14:08 am
yeah, or discussion about why she isn't Luke's kid basically was along the lines of "that means Luke would have had a 'love-child' with someone" "Disney/star wars is not going to make that how it happened." I mean, forbidden love is a thing (anakin/padme) but a straight up random bastard daughter? Doesn't fit the whole star wars style I think. Plus making it a sister v brother battle makes sense to me as far as plot goes.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Accatitippi on December 21, 2015, 01:52:16 am
The "hit here to blow up superweapon" trope didn't really annoy me, it makes ou wonder when the evil engineers will start building their planet-destroying weapons without a glaring weak point in them. At least it got a sort of explaination (the oscillation stabilizer blah blah blah). The chasm isn't even considered abnormal by the characters.
The war room scene was lovely, yes.
The fact that Rey can drive the Falcon so easily is also a hint that she's Han's daughter. The fact is, why doesn't he suspect that? Did Luke change his memory too?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: 2.71828..... on December 21, 2015, 05:02:46 am
Just thinking along those lines, maybe he does suspect, which is why he offered her a job. Abandoning someone causes all sorts of bad emotions, maybe unsure how she would respond and wanted to get to know her more first. I mean, still unconfirmed speculation

Also, what is a reasonable wait period before we quit using spoilers?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: pst on December 21, 2015, 06:25:27 am
Also, what is a reasonable wait period before we quit using spoilers?

I think that wait period must be over now. I didn't look at this thread at all between the release and I had seen SW:TFA and I think one can assume that others who care about spoilers do the same.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Teproc on December 21, 2015, 07:17:56 am
I think we're meant to believe she's Luke's daughter, everything points to that. But she could be Han and Leia's, yeah. She's definitelythe daughter (or granddaughter) of someone we know, certainly.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: jsh357 on December 21, 2015, 08:37:18 am
She's the daughter of Jar Jar
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Teproc on December 21, 2015, 08:42:31 am
She's the daughter of Jar Jar

I'm leaning towards Akbar actually. Because you know what he'd call all that foreshadowing.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: silverspawn on December 21, 2015, 09:38:56 am
Also, what is a reasonable wait period before we quit using spoilers?

I think that wait period must be over now. I didn't look at this thread at all between the release and I had seen SW:TFA and I think one can assume that others who care about spoilers do the same.

I love coming to this thread and looking at all the black lines
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: thespaceinvader on December 21, 2015, 10:13:45 am
I'm more bothered by how a small explosion destroys a planet.
It's not so much a small explosion destroying a planet as a small explosion destroying the containment device that was holding the entire power of the local star WITHIN the planet.  Which seems a little more reasonable.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on December 21, 2015, 10:23:40 am
I'm more bothered by how a small explosion destroys a planet.
It's not so much a small explosion destroying a planet as a small explosion destroying the containment device that was holding the entire power of the local star WITHIN the planet.  Which seems a little more reasonable.

Still, it's like, there's always one little spot that blows everything up, no matter how big it is. 

Also, how did everything manage to be within short walking distance even though the entire base was the size of a planet, or at least a large continent.  Where Kylo took Rey could have easily been hundreds of miles away (or, you know, five miles) from where the magic Achilles heel is.  I can understand Kylo being able to find Han once they're close (Force sensing and all that), but everything happening within a two-minute walk from everything else undermines the grand scale of how big this weapon is. 

I mean, if you had to track down a person and a special room at just a university campus, you'd spend a lot of time on just the legwork alone.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Voltaire on December 21, 2015, 01:18:40 pm
Can't decide how I feel about it.

R2DeusMachina was a huge eye roll.

Starkiller Base and the trench run was stupid. There were no stakes. If you're going to recycle do something interesting with it. God.

The pacing was the biggest problem. ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION ACTION movie over. Good action, sure. But why did we need the tentacle monster scene on the Falcon? We didn't. Let the characters talk!


But the new characters were all amazing.

And overall it felt like Star Wars and that's not nothing. So maybe I liked it?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on December 21, 2015, 01:27:28 pm
Yeah, I'm mostly happy with how flawed and vulnerable Kylo Ren was.  The armor and helmet he wears does an excellent job of making him seem intimidating, which is exactly why he wears it.  The reveal when he takes it off and you see he's only wearing it to be like granddad is great, and the vulnerability in his reaction when Rey realizes that he's afraid of not living up to Vader's legacy is really well done.  His entire intimidating persona is just entirely crushed by one line.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Teproc on December 21, 2015, 02:15:39 pm
R2DeusMachina was a huge eye roll.

Isn't this the case in literally every Star Wars movie ?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on December 21, 2015, 02:18:36 pm
R2DeusMachina was a huge eye roll.

Isn't this the case in literally every Star Wars movie ?

Force Ex Machina
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Teproc on December 21, 2015, 05:35:51 pm
R2DeusMachina was a huge eye roll.

Isn't this the case in literally every Star Wars movie ?

Force Ex Machina

I meant specifically R2D2 though.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: sudgy on December 21, 2015, 08:04:27 pm
Yay, I can finally read the spoilers here!


Anyway, I loved the movie.  I haven't seen any Star Wars movies in a long time (I have seen all six before this though), so I had no idea what to make of it.  Partway through, I was like "Hey, this is actually really good!"

Also, someone I know said that at the end of the movie he was expecting Luke, I am your daughter.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: GendoIkari on December 21, 2015, 10:35:22 pm
I feel completely opposite from a few posts I've seen here about Kylo Ren. For the beginning, I thought he was amazing. A perfect Vader replacement. Intimidating, evil, uncaring. This is what made Darth Vader such a great villain. And his voice... perfect. At least as good as Vader's. Vader had good character development eventually, but not in Episode IV.  In Episode IV he was simply an evil villain, and a great one. Ren started out the same. And then he took his helmet off and started whining about how being evil is hard and sometimes he wants to go back to being good. Man can you imagine if Vader had done that in Episode IV?

When Vader killed Obi Wan, he didn't hesitate. He didn't care that it was his former friend and mentor. He saw an opening and took it. Sure, father-son is a closer relationship, but even so I think it would have been much better if Ren had just killed Han without second thought. Not doing so while crying about it and second guessing himself. Basically, I felt like Ren suddenly went from being Vader from Episode IV to being Anakin from the prequels.

So as a whole I liked the movie a lot, but I thought Ren (after the beginning) was the worst part of it.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on December 21, 2015, 10:42:26 pm
I feel completely opposite from a few posts I've seen here about Kylo Ren. For the beginning, I thought he was amazing. A perfect Vader replacement. Intimidating, evil, uncaring. This is what made Darth Vader such a great villain. And his voice... perfect. At least as good as Vader's. Vader had good character development eventually, but not in Episode IV.  In Episode IV he was simply an evil villain, and a great one. Ren started out the same. And then he took his helmet off and started whining about how being evil is hard and sometimes he wants to go back to being good. Man can you imagine if Vader had done that in Episode IV?

When Vader killed Obi Wan, he didn't hesitate. He didn't care that it was his former friend and mentor. He saw an opening and took it. Sure, father-son is a closer relationship, but even so I think it would have been much better if Ren had just killed Han without second thought. Not doing so while crying about it and second guessing himself. Basically, I felt like Ren suddenly went from being Vader from Episode IV to being Anakin from the prequels.

So as a whole I liked the movie a lot, but I thought Ren (after the beginning) was the worst part of it.


That's exactly the point.  He was trying to be Vader; that's why he had the image.  He could almost make everyone else believe it.  But he never was, so this facade was fragile and it quickly collapsed.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: GendoIkari on December 21, 2015, 10:45:12 pm
I feel completely opposite from a few posts I've seen here about Kylo Ren. For the beginning, I thought he was amazing. A perfect Vader replacement. Intimidating, evil, uncaring. This is what made Darth Vader such a great villain. And his voice... perfect. At least as good as Vader's. Vader had good character development eventually, but not in Episode IV.  In Episode IV he was simply an evil villain, and a great one. Ren started out the same. And then he took his helmet off and started whining about how being evil is hard and sometimes he wants to go back to being good. Man can you imagine if Vader had done that in Episode IV?

When Vader killed Obi Wan, he didn't hesitate. He didn't care that it was his former friend and mentor. He saw an opening and took it. Sure, father-son is a closer relationship, but even so I think it would have been much better if Ren had just killed Han without second thought. Not doing so while crying about it and second guessing himself. Basically, I felt like Ren suddenly went from being Vader from Episode IV to being Anakin from the prequels.

So as a whole I liked the movie a lot, but I thought Ren (after the beginning) was the worst part of it.


That's exactly the point.  He was trying to be Vader; that's why he had the image.  He could almost make everyone else believe it.  But he never was, so this facade was fragile and it quickly collapsed.

Yeah, and I do get that. And as far as them showing that that's what was happening, they did a good job of it. I just think it would have made a much better character if he had actually been a new Vader, as opposed to someone who just wanted to be Vader.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: GendoIkari on December 21, 2015, 10:46:12 pm
Can someone tell me what line Han said immediately after "That's not how the force works"? He said that, then everyone was laughing and I couldn't hear the next line, which was something about "cold" and made people laugh even harder.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on December 21, 2015, 11:26:03 pm
Can someone tell me what line Han said immediately after "That's not how the force works"? He said that, then everyone was laughing and I couldn't hear the next line, which was something about "cold" and made people laugh even harder.

Pretty sure Chewie says something and Han responds, increduously, "You're cold?!"
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: thespaceinvader on December 22, 2015, 05:52:26 am
Pretty sure Chewie says something and Han responds, increduously, "You're cold?!"
Precisely so.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Infthitbox on December 22, 2015, 09:29:50 am
I feel completely opposite from a few posts I've seen here about Kylo Ren. For the beginning, I thought he was amazing. A perfect Vader replacement. Intimidating, evil, uncaring. This is what made Darth Vader such a great villain. And his voice... perfect. At least as good as Vader's. Vader had good character development eventually, but not in Episode IV.  In Episode IV he was simply an evil villain, and a great one. Ren started out the same. And then he took his helmet off and started whining about how being evil is hard and sometimes he wants to go back to being good. Man can you imagine if Vader had done that in Episode IV?

When Vader killed Obi Wan, he didn't hesitate. He didn't care that it was his former friend and mentor. He saw an opening and took it. Sure, father-son is a closer relationship, but even so I think it would have been much better if Ren had just killed Han without second thought. Not doing so while crying about it and second guessing himself. Basically, I felt like Ren suddenly went from being Vader from Episode IV to being Anakin from the prequels.

So as a whole I liked the movie a lot, but I thought Ren (after the beginning) was the worst part of it.


I feel like making a straight-up Vader replacement would have been a big mistake. The movie already plays pretty close to Episode IV Remaster, and having the villain play like Vader would have been too close. Also, Kylo being the way he is leaves a lot of room for Kylo-related plot that Vader-redux wouldn't. Also, I find the fact that he is actually just terrible at his job to be hilarious. Also, I fully condone senseless violence against inanimate objects.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on December 22, 2015, 09:55:55 am
Re: being a remake of ANH: having seen it a second time, I think the movie really stands on its own starting with the lightsaber battle in the snow.  Up to then, it's certainly entertaining and enjoyable, but the plot does tread very closely to IV.  But once Kylo, Finn and Rey start duking it out, you're immediately invested - it's just such a great fight, particularly with the fist-pumping moment of Rey snatching the lightsaber.  It's also where the movie parts ways from IV, and it's certainly better for it.

That said, the characterizations of each of the characters - Finn (Han/Luke), Rey (Luke), Poe (Han/Leia), Kylo (Vader), BB-8 (R2-D2) - are different enough from their OT analogues that the movie still stands on its own terms.  However, Hux is pretty much just a blatant ripoff of Tarkin, though with a more North Korea ish edge, rather than Nazi ish.

And that's another thing - Death Star III feels different because previously, the Death Stars were ultimate weapons of the nation already in power.  Basically just icing on top of their authoritarian cake.  More symbol than anything else, though still effective militarily.  But Starkiller Base feels more like if North Korea gets a nuke and starts bombing other nations.  No one's expecting it - it makes the dynamic between the players different.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: GendoIkari on December 22, 2015, 10:33:09 am
Re: being a remake of ANH: having seen it a second time, I think the movie really stands on its own starting with the lightsaber battle in the snow.  Up to then, it's certainly entertaining and enjoyable, but the plot does tread very closely to IV.  But once Kylo, Finn and Rey start duking it out, you're immediately invested - it's just such a great fight, particularly with the fist-pumping moment of Rey snatching the lightsaber.  It's also where the movie parts ways from IV, and it's certainly better for it.

That said, the characterizations of each of the characters - Finn (Han/Luke), Rey (Luke), Poe (Han/Leia), Kylo (Vader), BB-8 (R2-D2) - are different enough from their OT analogues that the movie still stands on its own terms.  However, Hux is pretty much just a blatant ripoff of Tarkin, though with a more North Korea ish edge, rather than Nazi ish.

And that's another thing - Death Star III feels different because previously, the Death Stars were ultimate weapons of the nation already in power.  Basically just icing on top of their authoritarian cake.  More symbol than anything else, though still effective militarily.  But Starkiller Base feels more like if North Korea gets a nuke and starts bombing other nations.  No one's expecting it - it makes the dynamic between the players different.


Agreed with all this.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: GendoIkari on December 22, 2015, 10:34:48 am
I feel completely opposite from a few posts I've seen here about Kylo Ren. For the beginning, I thought he was amazing. A perfect Vader replacement. Intimidating, evil, uncaring. This is what made Darth Vader such a great villain. And his voice... perfect. At least as good as Vader's. Vader had good character development eventually, but not in Episode IV.  In Episode IV he was simply an evil villain, and a great one. Ren started out the same. And then he took his helmet off and started whining about how being evil is hard and sometimes he wants to go back to being good. Man can you imagine if Vader had done that in Episode IV?

When Vader killed Obi Wan, he didn't hesitate. He didn't care that it was his former friend and mentor. He saw an opening and took it. Sure, father-son is a closer relationship, but even so I think it would have been much better if Ren had just killed Han without second thought. Not doing so while crying about it and second guessing himself. Basically, I felt like Ren suddenly went from being Vader from Episode IV to being Anakin from the prequels.

So as a whole I liked the movie a lot, but I thought Ren (after the beginning) was the worst part of it.


I feel like making a straight-up Vader replacement would have been a big mistake. The movie already plays pretty close to Episode IV Remaster, and having the villain play like Vader would have been too close. Also, Kylo being the way he is leaves a lot of room for Kylo-related plot that Vader-redux wouldn't. Also, I find the fact that he is actually just terrible at his job to be hilarious. Also, I fully condone senseless violence against inanimate objects.

The senseless violence against inanimate objects is something I can get behind. In fact, if they had had just that part without the helmet-off and whining parts, then I think that would have been a great way to make him not just a complete Vader clone. He'd be like Vader in all the scary/evil/powerful ways, but he'd have a big distinction as someone who cannot control his anger and temper, and still throws tantrums like someone who isn't as well trained.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on December 22, 2015, 10:35:55 am
Same. ;-)

I am actually reading a lot of my thoughts being said by other people. That's a good thing for this movie. We could see $1 billion internationally by the end of 2015...
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on December 22, 2015, 10:36:26 am
I liked how he kept pounding the wound in his side to build up anger/courage/adrenaline.  It's something that, if a true killer did, would be terrifying.  The way he did it seemed very... fake, I guess.  Like something that someone who isn't an experienced fighter would do because they think that is what an experienced fighter would do. 
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kuildeous on December 22, 2015, 02:51:16 pm
Also, I find the fact that he is actually just terrible at his job to be hilarious. Also, I fully condone senseless violence against inanimate objects.

It's hilarious but also terrifying because who knows what someone is willing to do to try to prove himself. I hope they play that part up a little. He overextends himself in order to try to be badass.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Jorbles on December 23, 2015, 10:03:39 pm
I quite liked Kylo's petulant rage, I thought it was a nice touch. He really did feel like a pawn in the whole thing.

I briefly started thinking about the physics of taking the energy of a star and putting it into some sort of doomsday device and then what would happen when that device blew up and would it just create a new star or would it cause a super nova. How did they plan on firing the weapon again after the star was drained? 7,000 Star Destroyers towing the planet sized weapon to another solar system? Then I remembered parsecs (as the movie did a nice job of reminding me) and that the Star Wars universe doesn't care about physics and left it at that.

Anyhow I thought it was great. Best Star Wars movie since Empire.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Davio on December 24, 2015, 07:29:14 am
I watched the new Star Wars in 3D this week and found it kind of meh. Don't get me wrong, it's still Star Wars so I definitely enjoyed it and didn't want my money back, but the story was pretty bad and it hinged a lot on nostalgia. I mean, there's this random stormtrooper suddenly turned good and a random girl who turns out to be the next Jedi. She's already wearing Jedi clothes on Jakku so it wasn't a big surprise. And the first part was basically the Solo show until he died of course, which was totally unsurprising to me. Kylo Ren didn't impress me much, but maybe it was intentional to have a bad guy who's struggling with himself instead of the awe inspiring Darth Vader in Empire Strikes Back. I don't know, maybe it's just me, but when the Death Star blew up Alderaan I was pretty shocked and when this Death Star thingy blew up the entire republic I didn't flinch much. The storytelling in the original trilogy is just much much better.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: silverspawn on December 24, 2015, 10:44:54 am
I don't think the storytelling in the original trilogy was better, but I also found the movie pretty bad. The plot has a million coincidences and a lot of things don't make sense.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Teproc on December 24, 2015, 11:04:12 pm
Well, coincidences are just fate. It's what the whole thing is. That's like saying "man, that Harry Potter guy, everything keeps happening to him, that's a lot of coincidences". That's just what the genre is.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Awaclus on December 24, 2015, 11:21:13 pm
Having neither seen the movie or any intention of ever watching it, I've got to chime in and say that lots and lots of unbelievable coincidences is great. That's one very solid way of delivering the "work of fiction" experience.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: silverspawn on December 25, 2015, 09:53:02 am
Well, coincidences are just fate. It's what the whole thing is. That's like saying "man, that Harry Potter guy, everything keeps happening to him, that's a lot of coincidences". That's just what the genre is.

I don't buy that the force is a free ticket for plot contrivances. Attack of the clones was a good movie that got by with a plot that made sense despite having the force.

And Harry potter doesn't have a lot of these kinds of coincidences - at least not the books. There are a few, but nothing to the degree of this movie.

Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: GendoIkari on December 25, 2015, 10:00:58 am

Attack of the clones was a good movie

 :o :o ??? ???
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: silverspawn on December 25, 2015, 10:03:35 am
Having neither seen the movie or any intention of ever watching it, I've got to chime in and say that lots and lots of unbelievable coincidences is great. That's one very solid way of delivering the "work of fiction" experience.

You should watch the movie, then.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Teproc on December 25, 2015, 10:38:08 am
Well, coincidences are just fate. It's what the whole thing is. That's like saying "man, that Harry Potter guy, everything keeps happening to him, that's a lot of coincidences". That's just what the genre is.

I don't buy that the force is a free ticket for plot contrivances. Attack of the clones was a good movie that got by with a plot that made sense despite having the force.

And Harry potter doesn't have a lot of these kinds of coincidences - at least not the books. There are a few, but nothing to the degree of this movie.

Well, Attack of the Clones is actually a perfect example for how overrated plot is. Attack of the Clones has a good plot, and not much else (well, Christopher Lee). TFA has a shakier plot, but is a much better movie overall.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: silverspawn on December 25, 2015, 10:52:22 am
Well, coincidences are just fate. It's what the whole thing is. That's like saying "man, that Harry Potter guy, everything keeps happening to him, that's a lot of coincidences". That's just what the genre is.

I don't buy that the force is a free ticket for plot contrivances. Attack of the clones was a good movie that got by with a plot that made sense despite having the force.

And Harry potter doesn't have a lot of these kinds of coincidences - at least not the books. There are a few, but nothing to the degree of this movie.

Well, Attack of the Clones is actually a perfect example for how overrated plot is. Attack of the Clones has a good plot, and not much else (well, Christopher Lee). TFA has a shakier plot, but is a much better movie overall.

Okay - why is TFA a better movie, then?

I also think AOTC has more interesting characters and themes.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: pacovf on December 25, 2015, 11:09:24 am
I never much cared for C3PO or R2, but I found BB8 to be ADORABLE.

Anyone know who the old guy that gives the map to Poe is supposed to be?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on December 25, 2015, 11:19:54 am
I never much cared for C3PO or R2, but I found BB8 to be ADORABLE.

Anyone know who the old guy that gives the map to Poe is supposed to be?


He is credited as Lor San Tekka.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on December 25, 2015, 12:01:54 pm
Well, coincidences are just fate. It's what the whole thing is. That's like saying "man, that Harry Potter guy, everything keeps happening to him, that's a lot of coincidences". That's just what the genre is.

I don't buy that the force is a free ticket for plot contrivances. Attack of the clones was a good movie that got by with a plot that made sense despite having the force.

And Harry potter doesn't have a lot of these kinds of coincidences - at least not the books. There are a few, but nothing to the degree of this movie.

Um, what?  You're talking about the Harry Potter and the Deus Ex Machina series?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: silverspawn on December 25, 2015, 12:08:02 pm
Well, coincidences are just fate. It's what the whole thing is. That's like saying "man, that Harry Potter guy, everything keeps happening to him, that's a lot of coincidences". That's just what the genre is.

I don't buy that the force is a free ticket for plot contrivances. Attack of the clones was a good movie that got by with a plot that made sense despite having the force.

And Harry potter doesn't have a lot of these kinds of coincidences - at least not the books. There are a few, but nothing to the degree of this movie.

Um, what?  You're talking about the Harry Potter and the Deus Ex Machina series?

I'm talking about harry potter book 1 to 7. Are you arguing that it has poor plot construction?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Awaclus on December 25, 2015, 12:20:46 pm
You should watch the movie, then.

No.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: silverspawn on December 25, 2015, 12:50:34 pm
You should watch the movie, then.

No.

Why not?  :(
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on December 25, 2015, 01:50:55 pm
Well, coincidences are just fate. It's what the whole thing is. That's like saying "man, that Harry Potter guy, everything keeps happening to him, that's a lot of coincidences". That's just what the genre is.

I don't buy that the force is a free ticket for plot contrivances. Attack of the clones was a good movie that got by with a plot that made sense despite having the force.

And Harry potter doesn't have a lot of these kinds of coincidences - at least not the books. There are a few, but nothing to the degree of this movie.

Um, what?  You're talking about the Harry Potter and the Deus Ex Machina series?

I'm talking about harry potter book 1 to 7. Are you arguing that it has poor plot construction?

No, I'm saying it makes blatant use of deus ex machina. 
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Teproc on December 25, 2015, 02:28:53 pm
Well, coincidences are just fate. It's what the whole thing is. That's like saying "man, that Harry Potter guy, everything keeps happening to him, that's a lot of coincidences". That's just what the genre is.

I don't buy that the force is a free ticket for plot contrivances. Attack of the clones was a good movie that got by with a plot that made sense despite having the force.

And Harry potter doesn't have a lot of these kinds of coincidences - at least not the books. There are a few, but nothing to the degree of this movie.

Well, Attack of the Clones is actually a perfect example for how overrated plot is. Attack of the Clones has a good plot, and not much else (well, Christopher Lee). TFA has a shakier plot, but is a much better movie overall.

Okay - why is TFA a better movie, then?

I also think AOTC has more interesting characters and themes.

TFA has much, much better acting. It has stronger characters, partly as a result of that : yeah Rey isn't inherently that interesting, but she's charismatic. Anakin is theoretically a very interesting, but doesn't work in practice, especialy in AotC.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on December 25, 2015, 02:54:00 pm
I don't think it's the acting, really.  It's the writing (e.g., dialogue) and directing.  The actors in the prequels are not bad, but the production makes them appear so.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Awaclus on December 25, 2015, 03:05:37 pm
You should watch the movie, then.

No.

Why not?  :(

Because it takes time and I'm pretty certain it's not going to be worth that time.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: silverspawn on December 25, 2015, 03:09:35 pm
Well, coincidences are just fate. It's what the whole thing is. That's like saying "man, that Harry Potter guy, everything keeps happening to him, that's a lot of coincidences". That's just what the genre is.

I don't buy that the force is a free ticket for plot contrivances. Attack of the clones was a good movie that got by with a plot that made sense despite having the force.

And Harry potter doesn't have a lot of these kinds of coincidences - at least not the books. There are a few, but nothing to the degree of this movie.

Well, Attack of the Clones is actually a perfect example for how overrated plot is. Attack of the Clones has a good plot, and not much else (well, Christopher Lee). TFA has a shakier plot, but is a much better movie overall.

Okay - why is TFA a better movie, then?

I also think AOTC has more interesting characters and themes.

TFA has much, much better acting. It has stronger characters, partly as a result of that : yeah Rey isn't inherently that interesting, but she's charismatic. Anakin is theoretically a very interesting, but doesn't work in practice, especialy in AotC.

I'm a bit biased when it comes to acting, because I was unfortunate enough to see the new starwars movie in german, and I'm so used to seeing movies in their original language that almost every line in the dubbed version is usually cringe worthy, and this was no exception. I don't think the acting in AotC is particularly good, so you might be right.

I think Anakin works well. He's not likable the way the girl in the new movie is, but he's interesting, and his place in the story is interesting. I see him as a not very bright, arrogant, but also gifted guy, while everyone else is much smarter than him, and is also aware of his flaws (even his love interest), but they're all torn because of the prophecy and because he's skilled and they would like to trust him. And it really does feel like a serious problem that intelligent people try but fail to solve. I thought that was by itself a better conflict than anything in TFA.

Also, the attack on the death star in the new one is basically, here is this GIGANTIC WEAPON THAT CAN SWALLOW SUNS AND OBLITERATE ENTIRE SOLAR SYSTEMS, and we will spontaneously launch an attack to destroy it in exactly the same way as we did the death star in episode IV... which we basically know will work, so the stakes are non-existent. At least episode IV made it feel like a big deal.

You should watch the movie, then.

No.

Why not?  :(

Because it takes time and I'm pretty certain it's not going to be worth that time.

Honestly, if you really like coincidences, I think the movie is worth watching, because it is pretty, has likable albeit uninteresting characters, and good fight scenes.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kuildeous on December 25, 2015, 03:21:17 pm
I don't think it's the acting, really.  It's the writing (e.g., dialogue) and directing.  The actors in the prequels are not bad, but the production makes them appear so.

I cringe watching Natalie Portman deliver her lines, because I know she's a really good actress, but the prequels don't show that. Ewan McGregor is also a good actor, but he's able to overcome much of this writing. I suspect it's because he was able to look back at how old Obi-Wan is performed and could base it on that. Portman was given crap in a vacuum, and her skills weren't enough to save it.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on December 25, 2015, 03:52:40 pm
Well, coincidences are just fate. It's what the whole thing is. That's like saying "man, that Harry Potter guy, everything keeps happening to him, that's a lot of coincidences". That's just what the genre is.

I don't buy that the force is a free ticket for plot contrivances. Attack of the clones was a good movie that got by with a plot that made sense despite having the force.

And Harry potter doesn't have a lot of these kinds of coincidences - at least not the books. There are a few, but nothing to the degree of this movie.

Well, Attack of the Clones is actually a perfect example for how overrated plot is. Attack of the Clones has a good plot, and not much else (well, Christopher Lee). TFA has a shakier plot, but is a much better movie overall.

Okay - why is TFA a better movie, then?

I also think AOTC has more interesting characters and themes.

TFA has much, much better acting. It has stronger characters, partly as a result of that : yeah Rey isn't inherently that interesting, but she's charismatic. Anakin is theoretically a very interesting, but doesn't work in practice, especialy in AotC.

I'm a bit biased when it comes to acting, because I was unfortunate enough to see the new starwars movie in german, and I'm so used to seeing movies in their original language that almost every line in the dubbed version is usually cringe worthy, and this was no exception. I don't think the acting in AotC is particularly good, so you might be right.

I think Anakin works well. He's not likable the way the girl in the new movie is, but he's interesting, and his place in the story is interesting. I see him as a not very bright, arrogant, but also gifted guy, while everyone else is much smarter than him, and is also aware of his flaws (even his love interest), but they're all torn because of the prophecy and because he's skilled and they would like to trust him. And it really does feel like a serious problem that intelligent people try but fail to solve. I thought that was by itself a better conflict than anything in TFA.

Also, the attack on the death star in the new one is basically, here is this GIGANTIC WEAPON THAT CAN SWALLOW SUNS AND OBLITERATE ENTIRE SOLAR SYSTEMS, and we will spontaneously launch an attack to destroy it in exactly the same way as we did the death star in episode IV... which we basically know will work, so the stakes are non-existent. At least episode IV made it feel like a big deal.

You should watch the movie, then.

No.

Why not?  :(

Because it takes time and I'm pretty certain it's not going to be worth that time.

Honestly, if you really like coincidences, I think the movie is worth watching, because it is pretty, has likable albeit uninteresting characters, and good fight scenes.
At first that scene does feel like that, but it was not THE ultimate goal in the story. The first Death Star was the final mission, in this one it was an obstacle on their search for Luke. So the stakes aren't there, but that wasn't really the intention. They were only attempting to disable the weapon, not destroy the planet. The real stakes were for Rey and, as a result, development of the Kylo character.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kuildeous on December 25, 2015, 03:59:33 pm
At first that scene does feel like that, but it was not THE ultimate goal in the story. The first Death Star was the final mission, in this one it was an obstacle on their search for Luke. So the stakes aren't there, but that wasn't really the intention. They were only attempting to disable the weapon, not destroy the planet. The real stakes were for Rey and, as a result, development of the Kylo character.

That's a good observation. The Death Star plot was indeed not the end goal. For that reason, I feel like they should not have included it. It's such a massive earth-shattering (literally) plot device that it felt kind of wasted in this movie. I think they could have done without it and have the stakes be a little smaller. Something capable of wiping out billions of people should be casually referenced. I liked the rest of the movie, but I definitely would have scaled back the Death Star plot to something more relatable.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Awaclus on December 25, 2015, 03:59:57 pm
Honestly, if you really like coincidences, I think the movie is worth watching, because it is pretty, has likable albeit uninteresting characters, and good fight scenes.

Well, I wouldn't say that coincidences are inherently good, they're just a means to and end. If you can write an incredible plot using coincidences, then that's great because now the plot is incredible. The original trilogy and the prequels were pretty lame, I haven't seen a reason to expect that this is much better in that regard, and if you're using coincidences to write a lame plot, the plot is still just a lame plot. Not that there necessarily needs to be an awesome plot for every movie, but Star Wars relies on its plot more than the plot can handle being relied on.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: silverspawn on December 25, 2015, 07:38:00 pm
At first that scene does feel like that, but it was not THE ultimate goal in the story. The first Death Star was the final mission, in this one it was an obstacle on their search for Luke. So the stakes aren't there, but that wasn't really the intention. They were only attempting to disable the weapon, not destroy the planet. The real stakes were for Rey and, as a result, development of the Kylo character.

That's a good observation. The Death Star plot was indeed not the end goal. For that reason, I feel like they should not have included it. It's such a massive earth-shattering (literally) plot device that it felt kind of wasted in this movie. I think they could have done without it and have the stakes be a little smaller. Something capable of wiping out billions of people should be casually referenced. I liked the rest of the movie, but I definitely would have scaled back the Death Star plot to something more relatable.

I didn't mean to say that it was the main plot. But that's another problem. It's a planet-sized weapon that swallows a sun to destroy entire planet system in a few hours. That's kind of something which should be a big deal.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: AHoppy on December 25, 2015, 08:04:14 pm
At first that scene does feel like that, but it was not THE ultimate goal in the story. The first Death Star was the final mission, in this one it was an obstacle on their search for Luke. So the stakes aren't there, but that wasn't really the intention. They were only attempting to disable the weapon, not destroy the planet. The real stakes were for Rey and, as a result, development of the Kylo character.

That's a good observation. The Death Star plot was indeed not the end goal. For that reason, I feel like they should not have included it. It's such a massive earth-shattering (literally) plot device that it felt kind of wasted in this movie. I think they could have done without it and have the stakes be a little smaller. Something capable of wiping out billions of people should be casually referenced. I liked the rest of the movie, but I definitely would have scaled back the Death Star plot to something more relatable.

I didn't mean to say that it was the main plot. But that's another problem. It's a planet-sized weapon that swallows a sun to destroy entire planet system in a few hours. That's kind of something which should be a big deal.

You mean 15 minutes...  I love Star Wars, but the time scale is always so skewed... "It's gonna fire in 2 minute!" 10 minutes later, Ren and Rey/Finn are fighting for about 5 minutes and it still hasn't fired...
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Teproc on December 25, 2015, 08:08:40 pm
Well, I'm not going to defend the whole Starkiller thing business. The bad guys in the Star Wars universe keep making big useless powerful stuff with a giant red autodestruct button, and it's pretty dumb. It works a little because it's a callback, but it's pretty bad, yeah.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: blueblimp on December 26, 2015, 02:54:11 am
TFA being deliberately similar to ANH highlights some flaws.

The big one to me is that there were kinda two plots going on that didn't have much to do with each other and don't mesh well. (Disclaimer: I've only seen TFA once and it's been a while since I watched ANH.)

In ANH, the entire story is defined by the death star. The plans R2-D2 is carrying at the beginning are the death star plans, which are used to destroy the death star in the final battle. In between, the death star destroying Alderaan establishes how deadly it is, and the escape from the death star shows how big it is.

In TFA, again the Empire-alikes are chasing info carried by a droid, but this time it's a map to Luke Skywalker. Comparing to ANH, you'd think that the movie's story would be defined by the search for Luke Skywalker. As you'd expect if that's true, the search succeeds in the final scene. Problem is, in between, what they're doing often doesn't have much to do with searching for Luke at all. Destroying the Starkiller base, instead of being a triumph itself, is just removing a distraction from the actual goal, especially since it turns out that R2-D2 already had the final piece of information anyway.

This creates a weird situation where the climactic battle doesn't actually do much to advance the plot.


My overall feeling about TFA is that it's a good Star Wars movie, though not really a good movie outside the context of the series. That's better than the prequels managed, so it's worth a watch if you like Star Wars at all.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: 2.71828..... on December 26, 2015, 07:48:46 am
Why does everyone only mention a new hope? The only thing similar to a new hope was the waiting around to die. The entire battle and everything was much more reminiscent of return of the jedi.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: 2.71828..... on December 26, 2015, 07:55:08 am
In my opinion, what TFA does is create that clean break from all other star wars movies. It pays tribute to the old (4, 5 and 6) while setting up characters to create new. I think this was done really well. No one will be waiting around hoping 8 will be full of old characters and stuff, but instead be able to focus on the new story lines.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Voltaire on December 28, 2015, 02:20:20 pm
There's a way to do co-incidences where they don't hit you in the moment, but only later when you're thinking about it heavily or talking about it on the internet. I don't mind those kinds of co-incidences. The stuff in 7 are the kind where I facepalm in the theater because wow, I am no longer in the fun space movie, I am in my seat thinking "oh god."

I saw it a second time with my family this weekend, and I have decided my opinion is...mixed! The new characters are all A+, the Starkiller plot is a weird C, the movie as a launching point for a new story is a B+, the move as a tribute/remix/nostalgia journey is a D (because too much repeat, not enough spirit).

Overall, I enjoyed it but it's a bit empty (similar to 2009's Star Trek). However, I feel great about 8 because of 7, unlike Trek 3 (which I saw the trailer of in my second viewing of 7 and my god, the horror).
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on January 11, 2016, 02:15:27 am
Congratulations to TFA on crossing $800 Million domestic! A strong opening in China this weekend basically guarantees a $2+ Billion worldwide total. Titanic is squarely in sight, but Avatar (worldwide) is a long way off (partially because of the weakened US Dollar in 2009-2010) but not unreachable. If this movie manages to hold well through February, it could see some very large numbers.

Also, do we think that we need to continue spoiler tags on discussion at this point? What is the general timeframe before it's safe to discuss the film openly?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kuildeous on January 11, 2016, 07:44:57 am
I think now spoiler tags are unnecessary. With all the various memes posted out there (including adorable Calvin and Hobbes spin-offs), people would have to be living in caves to avoid those spoilers.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: silverspawn on January 11, 2016, 08:09:18 am
I wish a good movie would be hyper successful for once :/
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on January 11, 2016, 09:51:09 am
Are you looking for a "good movie" based on objective or subjective criteria? I enjoyed this movie much more than the Cameron record holders.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Teproc on January 11, 2016, 10:12:52 am
Are you looking for a "good movie" based on objective or subjective criteria? I enjoyed this movie much more than the Cameron record holders.

Objectivity is a myth.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Accatitippi on January 11, 2016, 10:14:22 am
Are you looking for a "good movie" based on objective or subjective criteria? I enjoyed this movie much more than the Cameron record holders.

Objectivity is a myth.

That's just your opinion.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on January 11, 2016, 10:14:30 am
Are you looking for a "good movie" based on objective or subjective criteria? I enjoyed this movie much more than the Cameron record holders.

Objectivity is a myth.

Eh, that depends. 
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Teproc on January 11, 2016, 10:16:51 am
I knew I could count on you guys.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: silverspawn on January 11, 2016, 10:17:34 am
Are you looking for a "good movie" based on objective or subjective criteria? I enjoyed this movie much more than the Cameron record holders.

Objectivity is a myth.

Eh, that depends.

I'd say subjectivity is a myth, and every statement is objective by definition. But it really depends on how you define subjectivity and objectivity. No-one bothers to define it before using it, so it's just a fluffy cloud of nothingness.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Awaclus on January 11, 2016, 10:19:31 am
Objectivity is a myth.

It's not. Some movies are objectively better than others. It's impossible to accurately determine exactly how good something is objectively, though.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on January 11, 2016, 10:22:25 am
Objectivity is a myth.

It's not. Some movies are objectively better than others. It's impossible to accurately determine exactly how good something is objectively, though.

Objectively, subject to some set of standards.  (Though you can argue that those are the 'objectively' correct standards.)

Still, "everything is subjective" is just an empty statement. 
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Teproc on January 11, 2016, 10:24:39 am
Are you looking for a "good movie" based on objective or subjective criteria? I enjoyed this movie much more than the Cameron record holders.

Objectivity is a myth.

Eh, that depends.

I'd say subjectivity is a myth, and every statement is objective by definition. But it really depends on how you define subjectivity and objectivity. No-one bothers to define it before using it, so it's just a fluffy cloud of nothingness.

Yeah that works too.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on January 11, 2016, 10:27:43 am
Man, I was just trying to differentiate between "movie I like" and "movie that's well-made".

I should have known better.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on January 11, 2016, 10:30:04 am
Man, I was just trying to differentiate between "movie I like" and "movie that's well-made".

I should have known better.

As long as Avatar is off both lists, it's fine.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kirian on January 11, 2016, 03:09:46 pm
I feel completely opposite from a few posts I've seen here about Kylo Ren. For the beginning, I thought he was amazing. A perfect Vader replacement. Intimidating, evil, uncaring. This is what made Darth Vader such a great villain. And his voice... perfect. At least as good as Vader's. Vader had good character development eventually, but not in Episode IV.  In Episode IV he was simply an evil villain, and a great one. Ren started out the same. And then he took his helmet off and started whining about how being evil is hard and sometimes he wants to go back to being good. Man can you imagine if Vader had done that in Episode IV?

When Vader killed Obi Wan, he didn't hesitate. He didn't care that it was his former friend and mentor. He saw an opening and took it. Sure, father-son is a closer relationship, but even so I think it would have been much better if Ren had just killed Han without second thought. Not doing so while crying about it and second guessing himself. Basically, I felt like Ren suddenly went from being Vader from Episode IV to being Anakin from the prequels.

So as a whole I liked the movie a lot, but I thought Ren (after the beginning) was the worst part of it.


Unless I'm forgetting a scene, the whole "evil is hard and I kinda want to be good again" thing is a ruse to get his dad in a vulnerable position, thus removing a significant obstacle.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: GendoIkari on January 11, 2016, 03:13:34 pm
I feel completely opposite from a few posts I've seen here about Kylo Ren. For the beginning, I thought he was amazing. A perfect Vader replacement. Intimidating, evil, uncaring. This is what made Darth Vader such a great villain. And his voice... perfect. At least as good as Vader's. Vader had good character development eventually, but not in Episode IV.  In Episode IV he was simply an evil villain, and a great one. Ren started out the same. And then he took his helmet off and started whining about how being evil is hard and sometimes he wants to go back to being good. Man can you imagine if Vader had done that in Episode IV?

When Vader killed Obi Wan, he didn't hesitate. He didn't care that it was his former friend and mentor. He saw an opening and took it. Sure, father-son is a closer relationship, but even so I think it would have been much better if Ren had just killed Han without second thought. Not doing so while crying about it and second guessing himself. Basically, I felt like Ren suddenly went from being Vader from Episode IV to being Anakin from the prequels.

So as a whole I liked the movie a lot, but I thought Ren (after the beginning) was the worst part of it.


Unless I'm forgetting a scene, the whole "evil is hard and I kinda want to be good again" thing is a ruse to get his dad in a vulnerable position, thus removing a significant obstacle.

No, he says the same thing in another scene, when he's talking to his grandfather. And a mention of it when talking to his boss.

But the more I read about it, the more I think that when I see it again, I'll feel differently. Sometimes things seem bad because they're not what you expect. His character started out as a pure bad-ass, and so that's what I was expecting and enjoying. Now that I know what his character is and is meant to be, I very well may not have a problem with it when I see it again.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Teproc on January 11, 2016, 03:27:49 pm
@GendoIkari : I had the same reaction. I had those same problems the first time, ie the conflicted, adolescent Kylo Ren is more interesting but inconsisent with the earlier, badass Kylo Ren. Saw it again, and it worked, didn't feel as disconnected.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on January 11, 2016, 03:58:19 pm
Man, I was just trying to differentiate between "movie I like" and "movie that's well-made".

I should have known better.

As long as Avatar is off both lists, it's fine.

I actually enjoy Avatar, and think it's a well-made film as well.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on January 11, 2016, 04:12:11 pm
I really enjoyed the internal conflict they showed. You could tell her was really TRYING to be powerful and intimidating, but was still unsure of himself.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Seprix on January 25, 2016, 03:27:05 pm
Man, I was just trying to differentiate between "movie I like" and "movie that's well-made".

I should have known better.

As long as Avatar is off both lists, it's fine.

I actually enjoy Avatar, and think it's a well-made film as well.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/8e/The_Last_Airbender_Poster.png) or (http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BMTYwOTEwNjAzMl5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwODc5MTUwMw@@._V1_SX640_SY720_.jpg) ?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on January 25, 2016, 06:20:04 pm
I said "Avatar", not "The Last Airbender".
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: silverspawn on January 26, 2016, 01:19:45 pm
I think, depending on what exactly you mean with well-made, you would get anywhere from a few to basically everyone to agree with that.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Teproc on January 26, 2016, 01:38:05 pm
When I went to see Avatar, I had a choice between seeing it in 3D but dubbed, or in 2D with subtitles.

I made the wrong choice.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on January 26, 2016, 01:46:58 pm
I went to see Avatar.

I made the wrong choice.

Hindsight is 20/20.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: singletee on January 26, 2016, 02:05:00 pm
When I went to see Avatar, I had a choice between seeing it in 3D but dubbed, or in 2D with subtitles.

I made the wrong choice.

Of course you did; both of those choices are wrong.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Teproc on January 26, 2016, 02:16:32 pm
When I went to see Avatar, I had a choice between seeing it in 3D but dubbed, or in 2D with subtitles.

I made the wrong choice.

Of course you did; both of those choices are wrong.

Fair point.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: singletee on January 26, 2016, 02:17:24 pm
I went to see Avatar.

I made the wrong choice.

Hindsight is 20/20.

Hmm, I just noticed the subtle edit in WW's reply. Oh well, hivemind is 20/20.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: silverspawn on January 26, 2016, 02:19:16 pm
I saw avatar twice in theaters. It was pretty enjoyable.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Awaclus on January 26, 2016, 02:26:06 pm
I haven't seen Avatar.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: LastFootnote on January 26, 2016, 02:29:58 pm
I haven't seen Avatar.

It's kinda OK? I wouldn't spend money to see it again. I might spend a little money not to see it again, if it meant I could be doing something better with my time.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: silverspawn on January 26, 2016, 02:38:32 pm
I think it's pointless to watch it now. It's very much a movie that rides solely on its technical aspects, which get less and less impressive as time passes, and as such it's doomed to age very poorly. But that's no reason not to enjoy it as it came out.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on January 26, 2016, 02:47:48 pm
It was a very pretty movie. Beauty fades.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: WanderingWinder on January 26, 2016, 03:51:51 pm
I went to see Avatar.

I made the wrong choice.

Hindsight is 20/20.

Hmm, I just noticed the subtle edit in WW's reply. Oh well, hivemind is 20/20.

I haven't replied at all.

Kappa
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on January 26, 2016, 04:16:33 pm
I went to see Avatar.

I made the wrong choice.

Hindsight is 20/20.

Hmm, I just noticed the subtle edit in WW's reply. Oh well, hivemind is 20/20.

I haven't replied at all.

Kappa
You always replied. You always will.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on January 26, 2016, 04:20:19 pm
I went to see Avatar.

I made the wrong choice.

Hindsight is 20/20.

Hmm, I just noticed the subtle edit in WW's reply. Oh well, hivemind is 20/20.

I haven't replied at all.

Kappa
You always replied. You always will.

I'm sorry to differ with you sir, but you are the replier. You've always been the replier. I should know sir. I've always been here.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kirian on January 26, 2016, 05:29:16 pm
I haven't seen Avatar.

Nor have I.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Teproc on January 26, 2016, 06:02:01 pm
The real question is : has WanderingWinder seen Avatar ?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Polk5440 on January 27, 2016, 02:01:35 pm
VII was the most fun I've had at a movie since Star Trek (2009)! So that's a pretty big accomplishment, and pretty much exactly the type of experience I was expecting -- Star Trek was clearly an audition to take a crack at Star Wars for Abrams.

Questions for those in the know:

I don't know anything about the extended universe, but I am interested in how the new movie stacks up. The internet is not kind to those of us who know nothing. For those familiar with it, did VII honor extended universe plot lines? If not, can you give me/point me to a quick run down of how the extended universe deals with post VI events? (What I am interested in: Does the empire survive with another leader? Does it become the first order, or is that a new invention? Do the "rebels" with the jedi ever win back control of the military forces or form a functioning legitimate government?)
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on January 27, 2016, 02:15:09 pm
VII was the most fun I've had at a movie since Star Trek (2009)! So that's a pretty big accomplishment, and pretty much exactly the type of experience I was expecting -- Star Trek was clearly an audition to take a crack at Star Wars for Abrams.

Questions for those in the know:

I don't know anything about the extended universe, but I am interested in how the new movie stacks up. The internet is not kind to those of us who know nothing. For those familiar with it, did VII honor extended universe plot lines? If not, can you give me/point me to a quick run down of how the extended universe deals with post VI events? (What I am interested in: Does the empire survive with another leader? Does it become the first order, or is that a new invention? Do the "rebels" with the jedi ever win back control of the military forces or form a functioning legitimate government?)

I know that the Expanded Universe (now Star Wars Legends, apparently) is no longer cannon with Episode VII.  There are influences/similarities with things that happened, but it is a separate branch.    Basically nothing in the EU can be assumed to have happened.

I don't have extensive knowledge of EU, though.  I'd start by reading https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wars_expanded_universe.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kirian on January 27, 2016, 02:20:18 pm
VII was the most fun I've had at a movie since Star Trek (2009)! So that's a pretty big accomplishment, and pretty much exactly the type of experience I was expecting -- Star Trek was clearly an audition to take a crack at Star Wars for Abrams.

Questions for those in the know:

I don't know anything about the extended universe, but I am interested in how the new movie stacks up. The internet is not kind to those of us who know nothing. For those familiar with it, did VII honor extended universe plot lines? If not, can you give me/point me to a quick run down of how the extended universe deals with post VI events? (What I am interested in: Does the empire survive with another leader? Does it become the first order, or is that a new invention? Do the "rebels" with the jedi ever win back control of the military forces or form a functioning legitimate government?)


There is now a new-ish expanded universe.  This is an excellent summary. (http://io9.gizmodo.com/everything-we-know-about-star-wars-post-return-of-the-j-1729549100)
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on January 30, 2016, 10:01:42 pm
Has anyone else been watching Rebels?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on January 30, 2016, 10:09:26 pm
Has anyone else been watching Rebels?
Not yet. I am working my way through Clone Wars on Netflix.

Where in the timeline does Rebels occur?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on January 30, 2016, 11:07:44 pm
Has anyone else been watching Rebels?
Not yet. I am working my way through Clone Wars on Netflix.

Where in the timeline does Rebels occur?

Just before Rogue One and IV.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Accatitippi on March 13, 2016, 06:59:05 pm
If you haven't seen this yet, it's an impressively good fan-made short movie involving lots of exciting saberfights, and surprisingly high-level production!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Djo_91jN3Pk
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Darth Vader on March 13, 2016, 10:48:21 pm
Has anyone else been watching Rebels?

Definitely. I've been watching them DIE.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on March 26, 2016, 01:08:06 pm
Has anyone else been watching Rebels?

Definitely. I've been watching them DIE.

Even your old padawan?  You know, the one you nicknamed "Snips"?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Darth Vader on March 26, 2016, 08:33:43 pm
Has anyone else been watching Rebels?

Definitely. I've been watching them DIE.

Even your old padawan?  You know, the one you nicknamed "Snips"?

That name no longer has any meaning to me.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Darth Vader on April 01, 2016, 12:39:34 pm
Want an April Fools prank? Kylo Ren. What a wimp knock off of me.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: eHalcyon on April 21, 2016, 05:52:36 pm
(http://36.media.tumblr.com/e7377ae42a2824b564ed848b001e1165/tumblr_o5qihqraRZ1sli2eco2_500.png)

(http://41.media.tumblr.com/1e2597adb482c1e1549d7311f9e8ecb3/tumblr_o5qihqraRZ1sli2eco4_500.png)

(http://41.media.tumblr.com/fd7c6cdd297de4dadefa6b5c6011a59b/tumblr_o5qihqraRZ1sli2eco3_500.png)

(http://41.media.tumblr.com/2408cc0426f00fdb08f0c5f2b22f2b9f/tumblr_o5qihqraRZ1sli2eco5_500.png)

(http://40.media.tumblr.com/99337fb4e0682c17947047e9e74f001a/tumblr_o5qihqraRZ1sli2eco6_500.png)

(http://36.media.tumblr.com/12d2e4fd4a6ab78f27045e68385576d8/tumblr_o5qihqraRZ1sli2eco1_500.png)
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: silverspawn on April 21, 2016, 06:01:46 pm
I needed over 10 seconds to realize that this isn't snape.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on April 13, 2017, 10:58:00 am
Star Wars Celebration is this weekend, and a 40th anniversary panel is starting in a couple minutes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YI5QodTtlME
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: McGarnacle on April 13, 2017, 11:54:47 am
Has anyone else been watching Rebels?

Definitely. I've been watching them DIE.

How do you feel about Grand Admiral Thrawn?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: ThetaSigma12 on April 14, 2017, 08:13:36 am
I'm gonna go binge watch them all with my friends sometime soon! I had to watch the 6th for school, but I mean, you can't watch it out of context of course.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on April 14, 2017, 02:09:12 pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB4I68XVPzQ
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: pacovf on April 14, 2017, 05:08:33 pm
Well that was unexpected. Big departure from the Expanded Universe, assuming they stay close to the teaser. Then again, I guess Rey could disagree.

Wonder who's playing Leia.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on April 14, 2017, 05:56:54 pm
Wonder who's playing Leia.

Carrie Fisher.  She was still alive when they filmed it.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kuildeous on April 17, 2017, 07:56:11 am
From what it sounds like, Carrie Fisher will not be CGIed into Episode IX. One headline said this was bad news for Carrie Fisher fans. I disagree. I think fans of Carrie Fisher would prefer not making her into a cinematic zombie.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Awaclus on April 17, 2017, 08:05:31 am
From what it sounds like, Carrie Fisher will not be CGIed into Episode IX. One headline said this was bad news for Carrie Fisher fans. I disagree. I think fans of Carrie Fisher would prefer not making her into a cinematic zombie.

I wouldn't think that fans of Carrie Fisher are a homogeneous enough group that you can just generalize them all like that.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kuildeous on April 17, 2017, 09:28:44 am
I wouldn't think that fans of Carrie Fisher are a homogeneous enough group that you can just generalize them all like that.

They totally are. They're just like Scotsmen that way.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kirian on April 17, 2017, 04:09:52 pm
Well that was unexpected. Big departure from the Expanded Universe, assuming they stay close to the teaser.

Well, the Expanded Universe is pretty much gone.  They've already said that.  It's not a surprise.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on December 11, 2017, 11:16:10 pm
The Last Jedi trade screenings were today. Generally positive reactions. Seems like it may be better liked than Force Awakens, but I doubt it will match the numbers due to heavier competition for screen counts through the holiday weeks.

There's a thing that happens with a certain person that I won't even put in spoiler tags, just in case. Snoke is pretty strong, btw.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Beyond Awesome on December 15, 2017, 03:29:58 am
Disney has no idea what they are doing with Star Wars. I'm not going into spoilers, but they really drop the ball with this one.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: AndrewisFTTW on December 15, 2017, 03:51:52 am
Disney has no idea what they are doing with Star Wars. I'm not going into spoilers, but they really drop the ball with this one.

Well when was the last time a truly great Star Wars film was released? Be honest. My expectations are low for this franchise for the foreseeable future.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on December 15, 2017, 03:53:19 am
Disney has no idea what they are doing with Star Wars. I'm not going into spoilers, but they really drop the ball with this one.
I disagree. There was some fat they could trim out, but overall it felt like it fit.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Awaclus on December 15, 2017, 05:52:31 am
Well when was the last time a truly great Star Wars film was released?

Never?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on December 15, 2017, 09:10:07 am
I enjoyed it.  It's definitely a very different movie.  It is kind of funny that the reaction to VII was "this is too much of the same, do something different" and now the reaction to VIII is "this is too different, go back to doing the same thing".
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: schadd on December 15, 2017, 11:16:43 am
that was my favorite star wars movie
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: AndrewisFTTW on December 15, 2017, 02:32:12 pm
I enjoyed it.  It's definitely a very different movie.  It is kind of funny that the reaction to VII was "this is too much of the same, do something different" and now the reaction to VIII is "this is too different, go back to doing the same thing".

The reaction to VII wasn't "too much of the same", it was "this is almost literally the same plot as A New Hope". At least that's my gripe with it.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on December 15, 2017, 02:34:36 pm
I didn't mind TFA being similar to ANH, as a good story stays a good story. Look how many people love Avatar even though the story has been done a dozen times before?

So the people that liked the model got TFA, and the people that wanted something a bit different got TLJ.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: ThetaSigma12 on December 15, 2017, 03:48:56 pm
So the people that liked the model got TFA, and the people that wanted something a bit different got TLJ.

So who's episode 9 gonna please?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: AndrewisFTTW on December 15, 2017, 04:45:02 pm
I didn't mind TFA being similar to ANH, as a good story stays a good story. Look how many people love Avatar even though the story has been done a dozen times before?

So the people that liked the model got TFA, and the people that wanted something a bit different got TLJ.

It's one thing to be working off a model or using the original as inspiration. It's another thing to almost recreate scenes and plots from the original.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on December 16, 2017, 01:44:57 am
Jurassic World serves as a good example of re-creating a story. In fact, there is dialog acknowledging these flaws.

The same can be said about TFA when Han calls it "another deathstar" and they correct him. His reply is "so it's bigger, but there's always a way to blow it up." To me this is the acknowledgment of an expectation within the story based on the similarities of the two films. I enjoy TFA just as much as I enjoy ANH.

Episode IX will be a remake of the Pod races.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Seprix on December 16, 2017, 08:32:56 am
Well when was the last time a truly great Star Wars film was released?

Never?

(http://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/121701/2314745-anakin_skywalker_mourns_by_trueinnovator159-d3cfown.png)
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on December 16, 2017, 10:32:57 am
Jurassic World serves as a good example of re-creating a story. In fact, there is dialog acknowledging these flaws.

Jurassic World was garbage, and Fallen Kingdom looks even worse
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Seprix on December 16, 2017, 09:12:31 pm
I just saw Episode 8. Fuck all the negative critics, fuck all of the positive critics. Just go see the movie and see for yourself.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on December 17, 2017, 02:44:16 am
Everything you just said in that sentence is wrong.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Seprix on December 17, 2017, 04:54:03 am
Everything you just said in that sentence is wrong.

okay nice movie quote, so don't watch the movie is your recommendation?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: McGarnacle on December 17, 2017, 05:30:27 pm
I'm reading this thread to get excited to watch the movie myself. This is better than spoilers or trailers!
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: AndrewisFTTW on December 17, 2017, 06:37:04 pm
I just saw Episode 8. Fuck all the negative critics, fuck all of the positive critics. Just go see the movie and see for yourself.

(http://i0.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/017/886/download.jpg)
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kuildeous on December 18, 2017, 09:50:44 am
I mostly liked Ep8. Easily the best of the third trilogy, which is not a huge endorsement since Ep9 hasn't been released yet.

But like all sacred cows, the movie needs to face some criticism.

First off, the Finn/Rose relationship started off strong, but I ended up hating it. They invoked artificial drama with him ramming the ram in a way that just doesn't fit the physics of the universe. This thing is capable of tearing a hole in a massive door. How long can a speeder survive inside of that beam? And Rose chose to risk the Resistance to save her "love"? Granted, emotion can make people do stupid things, so I can't say this is unrealistic. But it seems like she should be court-martialed for this.

Although now that I think more on it, it seems like the main characters on the ship should all be court-martialed. Unless I misinterpret the sequence of events (possible with my hearing), the Resistance would have been better off without Poe sending Finn and Rose to recruit an unknown asset. And Poe sacrificed bombers against orders to take out one ship. It just feels like the entire movie is a lesson on how good intentions are not enough to win a war. I'm not convinced this is a bad moral though. But it looks like there is no repercussions for the heroes only because they're heroes in the eyes of the audience. We see consequences, but nobody seems to be pointing blame at these three.

Now onto the porg. This was an obvious cash grab for cute. And I didn't mind them when they were in their natural habitat. There were some fun scenes with them.  It does seem unwise to fill your cockpit with wild animals who could sit on various buttons or just get in the way. In fact, Chewie does end up knocking one off the console so he could fly the ship. From the trailer, I thought the porg was going to be of a sentient race who could co-pilot the Falcon. I'm slightly disappointed that it's just a dumb animal. But still, at least they weren't motherfucking Ewoks. They have that going for them.

I kind of like the Snokes arc. Some people weren't fond of it, but I feel it was different enough to stand out on its own. I was expecting a rehash of Ep6 (after all, Force Awakens was a rehash of Ep4), but they changed things up enough to satisfy me. The Finn/Rose arc was interesting in showing the unseen villains of the war, though it felt a little heavy-handed. Still, it was deeper than anything else presented in the Star Wars movies since Lando's concern for his people.

I felt rather proud that I knew enough Jedi lore to figure out right away that Luke was just a projection. I don't recall any Jedi being able to survive all those hits. I do know they can do crazy mind tricks, and it was confirmed in the duel with Kylo when Luke never actually parried anything. Kind of sloppy having the dice linger behind, but it was for drama purposes. Still, I really liked the dual sunsets as Luke moved on. It was a perfect counterpoint to Ep4 when we first see him with dual sunsets (or were they sunrises?). That was beautiful.

It had its issues, but I enjoyed it regardless. I might end up seeing it a second time, but I won't go out of my way to do so.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Robz888 on December 24, 2017, 03:34:18 pm
My thoughts on Star Wars, which I just saw. Not gonna spoiler tag it. Don't read this thread yet if you haven't seen it!

*************

I had low expectations going in, because everybody I know seemed to either hate it or at least have mixed feelings. Maybe the low expectations worked to the film's benefit. I liked it quite a bit! I'm tempted to say that it is the least flawed Star Wars film ever.

The highlight of the film was the relationship and interplay between Rey and Kylo and Luke. Rey and Kylo have genuine chemistry, and I very much enjoyed Luke's complicated relationship with both of them. His showdown with Kylo was good; Rey and Kylo taking down Snoke's guards was probably the best scene. Kylo stepping in to main antagonist territory was a welcome change of pace.

Leia was well used. Loved her use of the Force. Space combat remained enthralling: particularly the opening sequence / bombing of the dreadnought. Lots of terrific visuals: the ship tearing through the other ship, the representation of the Dark Side as a seaside pit, the red salt sequence.

The movie gets +1000 points for not employing a Death Star ex machina.

Less good was the Finn/Rose (is that her name? I don't even care) storyline. The casino detour was worse than pointless. I like the idea of the "inspiring the kids to #resist" but it just wasn't executed very well. Quite cheesy and generic.

The failure to explain Snoke whatsoever was glaring. They should have just made him the partly resurrected corpse of Darth Plagueis, betrayed once again by a more powerful apprentice. Rian Johnson said in an interview that he felt he didn't have time to do that, but okay, use your time more smartly (i.e., cut the casino subplot and do something else with Finn).

So yeah, I liked it a lot. I thought Leia and Luke both had a lot of great, respectful moments that made sense, but the movie didn't lean on them more than it needed to. Major props to Daisy Ridley, and also to Adam Driver for finally delivering the menacing, complicated, well-acted antagonist the Star Wars saga deserves.

Oh, the porgies. The porgies were fine, why do people even complain about the porgies? They can't all be the most essential cuddly little characters ever. (The Jedi nun aliens were genuinely hilarious.)
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Asper on December 25, 2017, 06:56:22 am
Fuck all the negative critics, fuck all of the positive critics.
Not everybody has that much time at their hands.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: silverspawn on December 25, 2017, 08:15:21 am
I, on the other hand, thought the movie was quite bad. It has the typical hollywood BS of, there a few good people and a lot of bad people and the good guys miraculously win at the last moment, but that's also true for movies 4-7, none of which I thought were quite as poorly written. Here, the writer literally pulled two really specific characters out of their head from nowhere when it was convenient to the plot. Kylo Ren makes no sense, everything about the Sith lord makes no sense, the implication that ghosts can summon lightning bolts is completely asinine, and Luke is a moron ala "you'll NEVER convince me oh never mind you convinced me in 30 seconds in the most obvious way possible".

Also Ė this is more episode VII's fault, but still Ė notice how having the good guys be so far outnumbered doesn't even make any sense after episode VI. It's bizarre how everyone just takes that for granted because it's a mainstream fantasy movie and that's what they do. The good side had won after episode VI, if it's just the default that a new bad power will form and outnumber them in a few decades, then that doesn't look good for the future, even after the inevitable happy end of episode IX.

I think most people are incredibly generous to these movies compared to others because of the brand.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: AJD on December 25, 2017, 10:01:47 am
The good guys didnít ďmiraculously win at the last momentĒ. They lost, and just barely managed to escape with a handful of survivors.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: silverspawn on December 25, 2017, 01:06:53 pm
Fair enough. They miraculously escaped at the last moment, and in the next movie, they'll miraculously win in the last moment. You know it's true  :P
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on December 25, 2017, 04:36:16 pm
Better than miraculously winning in the first moment. There wouldn't be much movie then.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kuildeous on December 25, 2017, 06:57:51 pm
So I wasnít intending to see this twice in the theatre, but friends of mine were going and wanted to go as a group. I wasnít opposed to it. Hell, I think I even saw Phantom Menace twice. But seeing it again with the knowledge of the film helped me pay attention to more scenes.

So, Poe is definitely the worst thing to happen to the Resistance. I honestly have no desire seeing him in Ep 9, but I know heíll be a hero and possibly redeem himself in that movie. I donít know if my attitude toward him can truly be reversed, but weíll see. It is interesting how the movie portrays him as every other maverick hotshot who, unlike all other maverick hotshots, had been hoisted by his own petard. It makes Poe a very unlikable character, but it does add something to the story.

I initially was not fond of the idea of Luke even thinking of killing his student. I was in agreement with fanboys who claimed that it was against his character. But you know, how many thought experiments have started with the question of whether weíd be willing to kill Hitler before he rose to power if we had access to a time machine? Luke was confronted with a Sith in the making, and he had a chance to end a lot of suffering. The fact that he overcame that instinct was a testament to his compassion. Itís just that Kylo woke up at the wrong time and assumed the worst (not entirely inaccurately either).

Also, since the Jedi were warriors, they have to react quickly to avoid getting killed. When you detect a threat, then getting into a fight response is appropriate. He didnít expect to see Snokeís influence. He must have suspected something unless he has a habit of reading the minds of each of his students (creepy). Iíve come to terms with this, and Iím actually satisfied with how these scenes played out, but the movie honestly could have played out the scenes better.

The Holdo sacrifice is still awesome. Even seeing it a second time, it was breathtaking. It was a great use of visual and audio. A co-worker of mine had an issue with how long it took her to come to this idea, costing the Resistance valuable people. It felt like a long time in the first viewing, but it didnít seem that long on my second. In my second viewing, I saw a lot of technical flaws with that scene. One scene showed like six or eight remaining ships, but then later we saw at least 15. The whole scene was inconsistently shot, and I wish the director did a better job with it. It deserved a better build-up for such an awesome climax.

The Kylo/Rey story is the most interesting thing. I had felt that Kylo was grossly undervalued in Ep 7. He was mocked by the fans for being too emo, but he honestly showed more angst and doubt during his tutelage in the Dark Side than Anakin ever did. The story held up well in Ep 8. I rather enjoyed the oblique way they handled the Snoke angle. It was all built up to resemble the throne room from Ep 6, and they turned that scene on its head. The only thing I didnít like is that Snoke had zero development. We have no idea how he came to be. Hell, we donít even know how he corrupted Kylo. Thatís a major oversight, but the rest of the franchise has its share of underdeveloped characters, so thatís just par for the course.

On my second viewing, I realized that there was another hint that Luke was not really there with Kylo. I figured it out right away when he miraculously survived several heavy blaster shots, but then I remembered on the second viewing that his lightsaber was taken by Rey. Of course, Kylo wouldnít have known that, but the audience did. I had hoped for other details like the wind not blowing his hair/clothes or him not casting a shadow. Alas, that was a level of detail the director did not consider or chose not to focus on. It was still a powerful scene as you got to see the fanatical hatred Kylo had toward Luke.

My second viewing brought even more hatred to the end of the Finn/Rose arc. I still dislike her saving his life at the cost of the structural integrity of the door, but hey, the whole theme of this movie is people doing stupid personal shit at the expense of other peopleís lives. But on top of that, Finn and Rose were stranded without a vehicle probably only 100 yards away from an AT-AT. Now, while all focus was on Luke, perhaps Finn was able to drag Rose back to the base, but before Luke came out, there were battle-ready gunners perfectly capable of blasting the rebels right in front of them (no quarter, no prisoners is what Kylo commanded). Such a huge plot hole.

I canít disagree that the casino scene is unnecessary, but it did present a new facet of the war: those who profit off of it. There was a Force-level amount of luck that Maz has a trusted codebreaker within range of the Resistance shuttles (and why canít they all take the shuttles to go hide and mingle in with that planet?), but it turns out there are two people with that level of skill in that city. Amazing! While I did enjoy the twist that DJ sold out the Resistance (not that much of a twist considering he was already an amoral thief), everything building up to that was so horribly contrived. Ultimately, the point of this arc was to cement the attraction that Rose has for Finn and present a way for the First Order to locate the cloaked transports. The latter couldíve been accomplished through any other scene.

Finally, I think the biggest crime is the underutilized talents of Mark Lewis Jones as Captain Canady. I honestly had no idea that I needed this man in my life. His IMDB entry is actually pretty impressive, and Iím not surprised that heís a theatre veteran. He commanded my attention immediately when he bellowed orders from the bridge of the dreadnought. His death was truly a tragedy in this movie. I know that rewrites are cost-prohibitive and difficult, but if I were directing this and watched Captain Canady at work, I would demand a rewrite where Canady pursues the retreating fleet and hurls insults at them like some sort of space-faring Ahab. Giving us this character and then snuffing him out is probably the biggest set of cinematic blue balls Iíve ever experienced. I weep for this loss.

The movie is still flawed, but itís still enjoyable. There are scenes that couldíve been shot better (Leiaís use of the force, BB8 somehow subduing and tying up three guards, Jedi ghosts summoning lightning [my unofficial Fight Club theory is that Luke set the fire and imagined Yoda doing it, but Iím not married to it]), but Iím mostly okay with the movie.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Awaclus on December 25, 2017, 07:43:36 pm
friends of mine

Platinum and Fool's Gold?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on December 26, 2017, 11:17:58 pm
"Fuck you, Poe."
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kirian on December 26, 2017, 11:44:54 pm
Last Jedi is the best Star Wars movie I've seen.  Fight me.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on December 26, 2017, 11:56:27 pm
Last Jedi is the best Star Wars movie I've seen.  Fight me.

I just wish they would stop dictating all the battle actions. Like you should have gone over your battle strategy long before the very unnecessary pause when the ships are just staring at each other. And us knowing their strategic details doesn't really add anything and only detracts, since it's all really contrived anyway.

The opening scene was particularly poor. After that, things were much better, though.

And this kind of thing has always been done throughout the Star Wars movies, so it's not a like a flaw of this movie alone. Maybe at this point it's stylistic homage. I wish they'd break from it, though.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: McGarnacle on December 27, 2017, 10:32:10 pm
I just saw Star Wars Episode 5 in theaters! It was great! I especially liked the part where they fight four-legged walkers in speeders, where the old jedi trains the new jedi, and we find out about the main character's parents!
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on December 27, 2017, 10:59:50 pm
Man I saw that in theaters weeks ago! ;)

Quote
NOV 26
Star Wars Sunday - Empire Strikes Back

Leading up to the opening week of Star Wars: The Last Jedi come check out the previous films every Sunday evening. For those attending, you are welcome to invite guests. Please remember to have them RSVP so we have an idea how many to expect! Thanks!

10/22 The Phantom Menace
10/29 Attack of the Clones
11/05 Revenge of the Sith
11/12 Rogue One
11/19 A New Hope
11/26 The Empire Strikes Back
12/03 Return of the Jedi
12/10 The Force Awakens
12/17 The Last Jedi
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: J Reggie on December 27, 2017, 11:59:05 pm
Last Jedi is the best Star Wars movie I've seen.  Fight me.

Agreed. Except I'm a pacifist so not so much with the fight me part.

Seriously, though. The more I think about it, the more I realize this is the best Start Wars movie yet.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: pacovf on December 30, 2017, 10:54:56 am
So I finally watched Star Wars a few days ago. I think overall my impression is positive, but it will depend on Episode 9. But I am afraid that the constant change of director is going to hurt the series. I won't bother putting spoilers that here, considering what's already been written in this thread.


The main good thing was Kylo Ren. First time I saw TFA, I was a bit disappointed about him, but on a second viewing he grew on me, and TLJ just cements that. He is definitely a new kind of threat, compared to all the other Star Wars. He is definitely no Emperor, so the journey feels less epic, but the story threading new grounds makes up for it. His relationship with Rey was the high point of the movie.

Other good things were visuals (hands down the most beautiful Star Wars yet), occasional bouts of humour (though I hope it won't become the Avengers in space), the central plot point about the remnants of the Resistance desperately trying to outrun the New Order fleet (though some details don't quite add up), the final showdown between Kylo Ren and Luke, the discussions both of them have about the legacy of the past (read: previous trilogies).


There were a lot of flaws, though:
-The opening sequence was downright stupid, with the New Order fleet behaving in the most incompetent way and making them look particularly nonthreatening, which made me kind of angry considering that they somehow managed to take absolute control of the galaxy despite the huge blow they received at the end of the previous movie.
-The casino plot was poorly done, unnecessary, or both. The parallels to ANH's den of scum and villainy were cute, but it didn't justify losing so much time there. And how the hell do they randomly run into another codebreaker in jail? And somehow that sideplot is enough to make Rose fall for Finn in a few hours? What the hell?
-Some people were mad that Luke considered killing Ben Solo. I thought that was fine, since it was just a brief moment of hesitation, and he was shown before to have some trouble with the Dark Side tempting him (cf. Dark Cave in ESB, for example). On the other hand, I don't really see him exile himself (yet give people a way to find him?), become bitter at the whole thing, and decide the Jedi way has to end. That just doesn't seem like something OT Luke would do (and definitely not Expanded Universe Luke would do, but ok that's not cannon anymore). Even less so when you consider that ghost Yoda was still appearing to him! Enough that he doesn't look very surprised to see him right before he tries to burn the tree. So, what gives? I would have expected him to right the wrongs he committed, not run away.
-I am bothered by how quickly Rey is becoming proficient at manipulating the Force or using a lightsaber (see the fight against Snoke's guards, or the lightsaber pull against Kylo). Even compared to Anakin, who we would expect to be one of the strongest Force users ever, and who started his training much younger. Eh.
-Are Ren's knights ever going to make an appearance?
-Snoke. I understand that he is not important to this trilogy's overall story, but he is very important to the general mythology of Star Wars. The second trilogy says that there are always two Sith, a master and an apprentice. In RotJ, both the Emperor and Vader die, so there should be no more Sith. Where the hell does Snoke come from? This is actually a large plothole for me. I would be fine with him being Darth Plagueis even, if properly explained, but don't just use him as a plot point, his existence is a huge problem for the mythology. Also, the whole "I see him strike his true enemy" thing was super on-the-nose, but ok whatever.
-Killing off Luke was lazy. I thought it was a cool difference with the OT that the powerful mentor character would survive, and still make a change in the last movie. And then he dies from exhaustion or whatever. Man. Yes, having a character with the power and knowledge of Luke is difficult to write around. But killing him off is the lazy way out of it.
-If Voldo had told people her plan, a lot of trouble would have been avoided. Poe is still kind of an ass, but he seems to be learning.

The movie seems very intent on doing new things, which is fine. Some of it works well (again, mostly Kylo/Rey), so I forgive them. But I would have preferred if they had done so while staying more true to the pre-established Universe.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on December 30, 2017, 05:06:42 pm
"Fuck you, Poe."

Because Diane from Twin Peaks.. that was the joke. I was happy she had someone antagonizing her so I could play this scenario in my head.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: silverspawn on December 30, 2017, 05:30:11 pm
I can't hear "Poe" without thinking of the Series of Unfortunate Events
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kuildeous on December 30, 2017, 09:38:42 pm
Also, the whole "I see him strike his true enemy" thing was super on-the-nose, but ok whatever.

If I recall properly, Snoke was basically reading Kylo's mind. He was taunting Rey that he knows everything his apprentice is doing. So I view that scene as Kylo manipulating Luke's lightsaber as he held his own so that Snoke saw his intent but was focused on what was ahead of him. It reminds me of the murder plot of the Minority Report movie. To mask the true intent, he mirrors the actions in order to commit the actual act.

Not that they said anything about that, so maybe I'm blowing smoke out of my ass. But if Snoke is pulling that directly from Kylo's mind, then it makes sense that he would frame it as "my true enemy" and not "Rey," since he had no intention of killing Rey. And he sure as hell couldn't telegraph killing Snoke.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: jonts26 on December 30, 2017, 10:27:06 pm
Just saw it. Thought it was one of the best star wars movies. Top 3 maybe. Though the bar isn't all that high for the series. Most of the faults I see are endemic to the whole series so I don't see why this is so much lower rated.

I'm really hoping for a novel about snoke though. That seems like a ton of wasted potential.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: J Reggie on December 30, 2017, 11:17:06 pm
Just saw it. Thought it was one of the best star wars movies. Top 3 maybe. Though the bar isn't all that high for the series. Most of the faults I see are endemic to the whole series so I don't see why this is so much lower rated.

I'm really hoping for a novel about snoke though. That seems like a ton of wasted potential.

I feel like I read somewhere that Rian Johnson's trilogy would involve Snoke, but I could be remembering wrong.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Witherweaver on December 31, 2017, 09:08:52 am
Just saw it. Thought it was one of the best star wars movies. Top 3 maybe. Though the bar isn't all that high for the series. Most of the faults I see are endemic to the whole series so I don't see why this is so much lower rated.

I'm really hoping for a novel about snoke though. That seems like a ton of wasted potential.

Definitely in the top 10.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Robz888 on December 31, 2017, 03:22:19 pm
I'm taking on the whole internet with my Twitter ranking of Star Wars movies.

https://twitter.com/robbysoave/status/947518976233525249
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on December 31, 2017, 04:26:26 pm
Amazing. Every word of what you just said was wrong.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: silverspawn on December 31, 2017, 05:55:49 pm
Not bad!

Here is the true ranking:

1. Attack of the Clones
2. The Empire Strikes Back
3. Revenge of the Sith
4. The Force Awakens
5. The Last Jedi
6. Return of the Jedi
7. A New Hope
8. Phantom Menace
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kirian on December 31, 2017, 06:06:58 pm
A friend posted a very.... interesting... ranking:

8, 5, 4, 1, R1, 7, 6, 3, 2.

I suggested that by his criteria, the real ranking should be:

2, 5, 7, 8, 4, 1, 6, 3, R1

What was his criterion?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: silverspawn on December 31, 2017, 06:14:54 pm
A friend posted a very.... interesting... ranking:

8, 5, 4, 1, R1, 7, 6, 3, 2.

I suggested that by his criteria, the real ranking should be:

2, 5, 7, 8, 4, 1, 6, 3, R1

What was his criterion?

Hm...

2 has the best plot. 5 has the second best plot. 3 doesn't have the worst plot, though.

Perhaps something like "not being outright unrealistic or stupid?" 3 would score low there. So would 6, with the woodland creatures fighting against sci fi soldiers and winning. 7 wans't so bad in that regard. I think the best formulation of that criterion would be "I can take that which happens seriously." Though that would put 5 over 2...
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on December 31, 2017, 06:26:35 pm
I'm terrible at ranking things, but I think they went something like this:

1. V
2. IV
3. VII
4. VIII
5. VI
6. RO
7. [Solo or IX will be better than I,II,III, guaranteed]
8. III
9. I
10. II
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: pacovf on December 31, 2017, 09:06:42 pm
Also, the whole "I see him strike his true enemy" thing was super on-the-nose, but ok whatever.

If I recall properly, Snoke was basically reading Kylo's mind. He was taunting Rey that he knows everything his apprentice is doing. So I view that scene as Kylo manipulating Luke's lightsaber as he held his own so that Snoke saw his intent but was focused on what was ahead of him. It reminds me of the murder plot of the Minority Report movie. To mask the true intent, he mirrors the actions in order to commit the actual act.

Not that they said anything about that, so maybe I'm blowing smoke out of my ass. But if Snoke is pulling that directly from Kylo's mind, then it makes sense that he would frame it as "my true enemy" and not "Rey," since he had no intention of killing Rey. And he sure as hell couldn't telegraph killing Snoke.

I get that Kylo was trying to muddy his thoughts so that Snoke wouldn't see what was going on. I don't have an issue with that.

It's the phrasing Snoke uses, "I see him strike his true enemy" (if memory serves right) that bothers me. What the hell did he see, that the best way to describe it is that? The "true" in particular is weird, why would Rey be his "true" enemy? As opposed to whom? If anything, that refers to Snoke much more than to Rey, who was the obvious enemy there, so how come Snoke doesn't get even a bit suspicious if he sees that?

I don't know, it broke my suspension of disbelief.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: sudgy on December 31, 2017, 09:09:49 pm
Also, the whole "I see him strike his true enemy" thing was super on-the-nose, but ok whatever.

If I recall properly, Snoke was basically reading Kylo's mind. He was taunting Rey that he knows everything his apprentice is doing. So I view that scene as Kylo manipulating Luke's lightsaber as he held his own so that Snoke saw his intent but was focused on what was ahead of him. It reminds me of the murder plot of the Minority Report movie. To mask the true intent, he mirrors the actions in order to commit the actual act.

Not that they said anything about that, so maybe I'm blowing smoke out of my ass. But if Snoke is pulling that directly from Kylo's mind, then it makes sense that he would frame it as "my true enemy" and not "Rey," since he had no intention of killing Rey. And he sure as hell couldn't telegraph killing Snoke.

I get that Kylo was trying to muddy his thoughts so that Snoke wouldn't see what was going on. I don't have an issue with that.

It's the phrasing Snoke uses, "I see him strike his true enemy" (if memory serves right) that bothers me. What the hell did he see, that the best way to describe it is that? The "true" in particular is weird, why would Rey be his "true" enemy? As opposed to whom? If anything, that refers to Snoke much more than to Rey, who was the obvious enemy there, so how come Snoke doesn't get even a bit suspicious if he sees that?

I don't know, it broke my suspension of disbelief.

I thought that Kylo was purposely thinking something like "I will strike my true enemy", and Snoke just paraphrased it.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: pacovf on December 31, 2017, 09:12:25 pm
Right! But if the concept of "true" is in his thoughts, that should have made Snoke at least a bit suspicious, IMHO.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kuildeous on January 01, 2018, 04:00:09 am
A friend posted a very.... interesting... ranking:

8, 5, 4, 1, R1, 7, 6, 3, 2.

I suggested that by his criteria, the real ranking should be:

2, 5, 7, 8, 4, 1, 6, 3, R1

What was his criterion?

Well, both of you put the movies in alphabetical order.

As for Snoke not being suspicious about the word play that Kylo may have done while having his thoughts read, remember that Snoke has flaws too. He interprets it as he wants to. He really wants Kylo to strike down Rey, so when Kylo's mind telegraphs killing his true enemy, Snoke wants very much for that to be Rey, so he doesn't think anything about it.

Lots of flaws in this movie, but I don't see any major flaws in the throne room. Aside from Snoke's horribly underdeveloped story, that is.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: LaLight on January 01, 2018, 04:51:48 am
"Fuck you, Poe."

Because Diane from Twin Peaks.. that was the joke. I was happy she had someone antagonizing her so I could play this scenario in my head.

oh yes!
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Polk5440 on January 03, 2018, 05:33:52 pm
I enjoyed The Last Jedi well enough as an action flick. I feel like Star Wars movies have the capacity to say something meaningful about power, corruption, government, and politics, but fall short.

Lingering questions for me:

1. Snoke says he is responsible for the connection between Kylo Ren and Rey, but that connection continues after his death. The movie also makes a big deal of pointing out the Luke/Leia sibling telepathic force connection or whatever it is first introduced in Empire. Are we supposed to infer that there is a chance Kylo Ren and Rey are blood relatives? That is, are we to infer that Kylo Ren is lying or mistaken about the origin of Rey's parents?

2. Is anyone else bothered that the film set up an attraction between Finn/Rey in VII, Finn/Rose in VIII, and only briefly had a scene of all three of them together at the end? Awkward...

3. Like silverspawn, I am also really bothered by the state of the Resistance. What happened after the Return of the Jedi? What happened after A Force Awakens? Normally I don't care about background that much, especially for action flicks, but it is weird (depressing?) to see such complete victories, but then by the end of the Last Jedi the totality of the military resistance fits inside of the Millennium Falcon.

4. Is it confirmed that Snoke/Kylo Ren are Sith? I didn't think so. While their journey mirrors the Sith (one master, one apprentice, apprentice kills master), I didn't think they were actually Sith.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kirian on January 03, 2018, 06:19:52 pm
3. Like silverspawn, I am also really bothered by the state of the Resistance. What happened after the Return of the Jedi?

There are four novels and a couple dozen short stories that apparently fill in a lot of this.

Quote
What happened after A Force Awakens?

From what I'm getting from Wookieepedia, almost nothing.  There appears to be very little time between the end of TFA and the start of TLJ, possibly as little as a few days, no more than a few weeks.

Quote
Normally I don't care about background that much, especially for action flicks, but it is weird (depressing?) to see such complete victories, but then by the end of the Last Jedi the totality of the military resistance fits inside of the Millennium Falcon.

The victory at the end of Force Awakens is a smaller one than we would hope.  Even though the Starkiller base is destroyed, they were able to destroy many of the New Republic's core worlds, leaving them fragmented, leaderless (destroying essentially the entire government) and without much of a military presence.

Quote
4. Is it confirmed that Snoke/Kylo Ren are Sith? I didn't think so. While their journey mirrors the Sith (one master, one apprentice, apprentice kills master), I didn't think they were actually Sith.

Well there was that whole idolizing Darth Vader on the part of Kylo Ren, so they're effectively Sith.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: silverspawn on January 03, 2018, 06:56:29 pm
What was the criterion?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kirian on January 03, 2018, 07:09:50 pm
What was the criterion?

A friend posted a very.... interesting... ranking:

8, 5, 4, 1, R1, 7, 6, 3, 2.

I suggested that by his criteria, the real ranking should be:

2, 5, 7, 8, 4, 1, 6, 3, R1

What was his criterion?

Well, both of you put the movies in alphabetical order.

Kuildeous was correct.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kuildeous on January 04, 2018, 10:36:05 am
1. Snoke says he is responsible for the connection between Kylo Ren and Rey, but that connection continues after his death. The movie also makes a big deal of pointing out the Luke/Leia sibling telepathic force connection or whatever it is first introduced in Empire. Are we supposed to infer that there is a chance Kylo Ren and Rey are blood relatives? That is, are we to infer that Kylo Ren is lying or mistaken about the origin of Rey's parents?

I interpreted that to mean that the connection between them is strong enough now that they could see each other without Snoke. I did not consider that blood relation is required to be attuned to someone else in the Force.

2. Is anyone else bothered that the film set up an attraction between Finn/Rey in VII, Finn/Rose in VIII, and only briefly had a scene of all three of them together at the end? Awkward...

While I saw potential for a Rey/Finn romance in TFA, I didn't think they were that interested in each other. Rey had a sort of hero worship for Finn when she thought he was part of the Resistance. But since nothing came about from them traveling together, I saw them as nothing more than friends.

Rose's hero worship was similar to Rey's, but hers obviously took stronger hold in her heart, and she fell in love with him. For all we know, it could still just be obsession and not real love, but it's real enough to her. We haven't seen any interest toward her though. I imagine that after her admission, the love will become reciprocated because of Hollywood, but then they didn't do much with Rey and Finn, so maybe not. 
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: jonts26 on January 04, 2018, 11:32:11 am
Why is no one including the Holiday Special in their rankings? Is it just so obviously #1 that it doesn't need to be said?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: enfynet on January 04, 2018, 12:19:46 pm
Haven't seen anyone include the animated Clone Wars film, either.

(Which, honestly, I saw as a huge missed opportunity to jump into the 3D market early)
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: GendoIkari on January 04, 2018, 12:59:32 pm
Why is no one including the Holiday Special in their rankings? Is it just so obviously #1 that it doesn't need to be said?

The other day someone claimed that they had just finished watching all the Star Wars movies, but they hadn't even seen the Holiday Special. When will people learn?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: silverspawn on January 04, 2018, 02:01:18 pm
What was the criterion?

A friend posted a very.... interesting... ranking:

8, 5, 4, 1, R1, 7, 6, 3, 2.

I suggested that by his criteria, the real ranking should be:

2, 5, 7, 8, 4, 1, 6, 3, R1

What was his criterion?

Well, both of you put the movies in alphabetical order.

Kuildeous was correct.

aaaaaaaaaaah pff >:(
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: GendoIkari on January 07, 2018, 08:33:07 am
A friend posted a very.... interesting... ranking:

8, 5, 4, 1, R1, 7, 6, 3, 2.

I suggested that by his criteria, the real ranking should be:

2, 5, 7, 8, 4, 1, 6, 3, R1

What was his criterion?

Should be 4, 2, R1, 5, 7, 8, 1, 6, 3.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: silverspawn on January 07, 2018, 03:59:10 pm
R comes before T. 4 > R1 > 2.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: theorel on January 07, 2018, 09:16:59 pm
R comes before T. 4 > R1 > 2.
Attack of the Clones doesn't have a "the" (unlike 5-8, 1, and 3).
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Haddock on January 08, 2018, 07:24:05 am
And how the hell do they randomly run into another codebreaker in jail?
I took this as meaning that the guy they meet in jail IS the one that Maz meant, and the other guy had some kind of altercation with him, somehow ending up with the rose symbol thing, with the other result being that the original guy ends up in jail.

Which is a bit of a stretch now that I think about it (implies that Maz's judgement is very shaky!), but more satisfying than "oh there were two of them".
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: GendoIkari on January 08, 2018, 02:49:12 pm
R comes before T. 4 > R1 > 2.

The second ordering given is alphabetical based on the movie subtitle; not the numbering. Kirian's ordering leaves off the "a" and "the", mine doesn't.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Seprix on March 10, 2018, 01:50:19 pm
(https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/306532367978332160/422092085106180116/f025fa3.jpg)
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on May 28, 2018, 12:06:27 am
Soooooo who's seen Solo?
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: 2.71828..... on May 28, 2018, 02:04:07 am
Soooooo who's seen Solo?

It met my expectations.  I wasn't blown away by it or anything, but I liked the story and excited about how it fits into Star Wars canon.

I absolutely loved seeing Maul at the end.  I could see the next movie leaving Han Solo behind and following up on a Maul story.  Perhaps bring Ahsoka into a live-action movie?  I would love that.  Although probably won't happen because the Ahsoka novel already covers the timeline that the story would have to be set in.  But yeah, there is definitely a story to be written about Maul from the time after the Battle of Mandalore until we see Maul again in Rebels. 

Also - this could potentially bring in some amazing Darth Vader action dueling Maul?  Maul will try to stay under the radar from the Empire given his defeat in his 2v1 fight against Sidius to bring his rule on Mandalore to an end, but I don't see how he will go completely unnoticed.  And we need a good lightsaber fight.  And it cannot be Obi-Wan (right?).  That will absolutely not work given Maul's story-line in Rebels (or would it work?).  Although who knows what they will actually do.  There are so many directions they can take, but I do think they need to leave Han Solo behind and let him just go work for the Hutts and where we find him in episode IV owing Jabba money.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: Kuildeous on May 29, 2018, 09:48:18 am
I liked Solo. I also wasn't blown away by it, but it met my needs. Considering I didn't think the story of Han Solo needed to be made, it met more than my needs.

I feel like it accomplished much the same that Rogue One did. It maintained consistency with the original trilogy. It looked like it would work as a standalone movie. It made references to the rest of the franchise without too much fanfare, though I did notice the tone changed when first encountering the Millennium Falcon and when we see Maul.

The story about his name was amusing, if a little forced. It probably felt forced because we've had his name burned into our brains for 40 years, so it seemed unnecessary to have a story on his name, but I think it worked.

I know I missed some of the callbacks to the original trilogy, but there were some nods that geeks could enjoy. We now know when the hyperdrive computer became so divisive, though that requires knowledge of the Falcon's hyperdrive outside of the movies. They made the fix to the Kessel run parsec gaffe official. And Han shot first.

I expected this to be overhyped, but it was better than I expected. Now, the Boba Fett movie I expect to be overhyped, but hopefully they'll prove me wrong again.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: werothegreat on April 27, 2019, 11:57:41 pm
I'm surprised no one has posted this yet!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adzYW5DZoWs
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: pacovf on April 28, 2019, 03:08:09 am
This trilogy got me confused. TFA was aping the first trilogy. TLJ made a point of breaking with all the legacy, even when that would annoy the fans. And now they seem to bring back Palpatine? I donít think they would reveal that in a teaser if he was just going to be a cameo.
Title: Re: STAR WARS
Post by: 2.71828..... on April 28, 2019, 04:34:55 am
More excited for clone wars season 7 and the Mandolorian.

https://youtu.be/nw7sRmD-ViY