|
Not sure why people are hating on Snoke.
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 01:02 |
|
|
enraged_camel posted:Not sure why people are hating on Snoke.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:05
|
|
|
khy posted:The more I think about the 'starkiller' or whatever the planet-weapon was called I literally cannot stop asking questions in my head about how the hell it works. It feels so contrived and ridiculous the way it was presented in the movie. They managed to assault and destroy one of the most heavily fortified locations in the galaxy within a few hours (?) of knowing it existed. They also respond to an intelligence report in under an hour with a couple fighter squadrons. That's not unimpressive. Notice the First Order guys never commit more than some fighters and transports either. Not sure why you think they're ill-equipped.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:06
|
|
|
khy posted:Other stuff that I cannot stop questioning. Why was the Resistance so ill-equipped? They were backed by the Republic but they had a few squadrons of X-Wings. I didn't see a single capitol ship. Was the republic busy elsewhere? Did the Republic just not take the New Order seriously and only gave the Resistance token support to make Leia happy? They weren't backed by the New Republic, merely tolerated. They were pretty much a guerilla force. That's why they had no capitol ships. The New Republic's fleet, or at least the part of it that's in that region of space, got blown up by Starkiller Base along with the planets. General Hux alludes to this in his speech.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:06
|
|
|
H13 posted:This was necessary because of how godawful the prequels were. JJ Abrams needed to regain the trust of the audience before anybody could play with Star Wars again. 'Cos the last time we let somebody play with Star Wars we got loving Jar Jar. Can someone explain this criticism to me? I've seen it a million times and I don't understand the logic. Am I meant to believe that IF a person who hated the prequels was shown an Episode VII that "played" with Star Wars, _even if_ it was in most respects a movie they liked, they would hate it and not buy movie tickets and toys because it didn't rehash the OT? I'm just trying to imagine this from such a person's perspective. "Well, I liked the acting, the visuals, the music, the dialogue. But it just felt too much like its own movie picking up after ROTJ, and not a 'bridge' movie to ease me in. C+ at best!"
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:07
|
|
|
Not like the First Order ever used their one Star Destroyer. If you want to know where the fleets went, there's kind of a big glaring answer in the film. The opening crawl suggests (and everyone has been saying) that the Empire collapsed after Endor and Jakku and the Republic, Rebel Alliance, and notional Imperial leadership eventually settled a negotiated peace. The Republic, Empire, and New Republic are clearly an unbroken chain of successor states so it's not like the New Republic would stay on a war footing forever anyway. They don't need to fight the Empire, they were the Empire. Coruscant rebelled in the Jedi special editions, the wreckage of the Imperial fleet is rusting on Jakku, there's nobody left to fight. Or so they believed, I guess Leia didn't agree. As for Luke, sectarian violence among the Jedi is nothing new and everybody outside the story would probably be relieved that it had nothing to do with galactic politics this time. Arglebargle III fucked around with this message at 19:14 on Dec 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:08
|
|
|
Eau de MacGowan posted:Do any of the tie-in books or comics explain why C3PO's arm is now red, or was it written in solely for the best line in the movie? Though I think it's smart of them to toss in some strange things like that. If nothing else, it gives more of that "lived-in" feel to Star Wars - things happen, even though we don't see them as an omniscient observer. Like the Bothans dying to retrieve the Death Star II plans. Or these strange things can be expanded upon later, to tie everything into one cohesive narrative (I'd put money on the Bothan thing becoming a movie down the road).
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:10
|
|
|
zen death robot posted:I assumed starkiller base was somewhat disposable, it drained it's energy source and then whatever. It's like any other WMD only that it serves as a base while it's being built. It serves a different purpose than the Death Star in this case. The Death Star was meant to keep systems in line without the senate in place. Starkiller base was built as a sort of revenge weapon against the Republic. It already did it's job aside from not wiping out the resistance base as well. It fired once, and then was about to fire a second time though. Which suggests that it could travel (unless that particular star system had two suns, which I guess is possible).
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:11
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:They managed to assault and destroy one of the most heavily fortified locations in the galaxy within a few hours (?) of knowing it existed. They also respond to an intelligence report in under an hour with a couple fighter squadrons. That's not unimpressive. Notice the First Order guys never commit more than some fighters and transports either. Not sure why you think they're ill-equipped. Regarding the fast response times, I am convinced that this entire movie took place within a single solar system given the planets visibly being destroyed in the sky because there is literally no other explanation that makes the tiniest modicum of sense. I swear to god JJ Abrams takes the phrase "Sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" literally, because both this movie and Star Trek have some of the most goddawful science ever. Also at least the First Order was shown as having an entire SD at its disposal, though it was pretty much just used as a mobile transport for lighter ordinance. Still, that's a HELL of a lot more than the resistance ever had. khy fucked around with this message at 19:14 on Dec 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:11
|
|
|
khy posted:The more I think about the 'starkiller' or whatever the planet-weapon was called I literally cannot stop asking questions in my head about how the hell it works. It feels so contrived and ridiculous the way it was presented in the movie. No these are things I thought as well. There aren't answers, there is handwaving and a new generation of EU bullshit to justify extremely lazy storytelling. It's a shame they felt making a truly new star wars was too risky a proposition - the search for Luke would have been compelling on its own. Instead we get the laziest of retreads.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:11
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:It fired once, and then was about to fire a second time though. Which suggests that it could travel (unless that particular star system had two suns, which I guess is possible). Are you serious? You really think a loving planet could jump into light speed? Good lord
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
Why do you need a scientific basis for a cold dark weapon planet that literally destroys light? This is a fantasy film. Nobody has actually invented a functioning solar murder cannon. Presumably because they are lazy frat boys. A planet could presumably go light speed in Star Wars because you don't need aerodynamics in space and it would be awesome.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:15
|
|
|
khy posted:Regarding the fast response times, I am convinced that this entire movie took place within a single solar system given the planets visibly being destroyed in the sky. The Rebel Alliance has never relied on motherships to deploy its fighters though. You're confusing a difference in doctrine for a difference in capability. The Resistance fighter/attack squadrons achieve much more than their New Order counterparts in the film.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:16
|
|
|
Ammanas posted:No these are things I thought as well. There aren't answers, there is handwaving and a new generation of EU bullshit to justify extremely lazy storytelling. It's a shame they felt making a truly new star wars was too risky a proposition - the search for Luke would have been compelling on its own. Instead we get the laziest of retreads. I'll post this again. Basically there's a lot of background story covered in Star Wars: Aftermath, which I guess is still considered canon. A lot of the things in the film make more sense when you take all that into account. Here's a list of everything that's part of the "new canon".
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:16
|
|
|
Ammanas posted:Are you serious? You really think a loving planet could jump into light speed? Good lord A moon made entirely of metal does so a bunch of times in the OT.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:16
|
|
|
Ammanas posted:Are you serious? You really think a loving planet could jump into light speed? Good lord Considering everything else we have seen, a planet jumping into light speed would be one of the more credible things.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
Danger posted:Yea, the entire point of Snoke's character is that he is artificial and virtual. I'm sure it's possible to get that across without the cg looking bad, like they did with the still-lovely chess thing on the Falcon. quote:Probably because he appears as a grainy hologram. I don't mean that, something about how it looked and moved. I'd have to watch it again to describe it better.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
khy posted:Regarding the fast response times, I am convinced that this entire movie took place within a single solar system given the planets visibly being destroyed in the sky because there is literally no other explanation that makes the tiniest modicum of sense. Star Wars is literally space fantasy. Lightsabers are magic swords. Obi-Wan was a wizard. How did you come so close to this realization only to turn away at the last moment and assume this was somehow the director's mistake?
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:18
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:It fired once, and then was about to fire a second time though. Which suggests that it could travel (unless that particular star system had two suns, which I guess is possible). If you want to get pedantic, it's more than likely. Multiple-star systems constitute the majority of star systems in the universe, and the New Order would presumably understand the operating principles of their own superweapon and build it in a convenient location.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:19
|
|
|
khy posted:I swear to god JJ Abrams takes the phrase "Sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" literally, because both this movie and Star Trek have some of the most goddawful science ever. You mean, as opposed to almost every single sci-fi author ever who does the same as well? Everything in Star Trek is magic. Not to mention that Star wars verse literally has a universal magical spiritus sancti that is literally magical. JJ's thing is actually that he doesn't give a poo poo about science or the world operating by its own rules or whatever, he won't let rules (physical or fictional) get in the way of what he considers to be an epic scene.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:21
|
|
|
RBA Starblade posted:I'm sure it's possible to get that across without the cg looking bad, like they did with the still-lovely chess thing on the Falcon. Related: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sexd06I8mzg
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
I think that the planet can fly, at light speed. I believe in the planet.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:25
|
|
|
It's not even the first time a planet jumping into light speed would have happened if they hadn't gotten rid of the EU. The entire Corellian system was made up of planets that got pulled through hyperspace and placed there.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:25
|
|
|
Supercar Gautier posted:I think that the planet can fly, at light speed. I believe in the planet. Pfft what you think somehow faith and magic are going to accomplish anything in Star Wars???? It says STAR right in the title which means Science.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:26
|
|
|
khy posted:The more I think about the 'starkiller' or whatever the planet-weapon was called I literally cannot stop asking questions in my head about how the hell it works. It feels so contrived and ridiculous the way it was presented in the movie. I think you're asking all the wrong questions. The technical details of the Starkiller have nothing to do with your feelings. The main problem with the Starkiller is that it is not built up over the film. In fact, it's barely mentioned. When it first shoots, it exceeds the power of the Death Star fivefold. (?) It's literally a bolt from outer space. That's why it seems contrived. Had the plot been about "oh poo poo Starkiller Base we need to deal with this" it would seem less ridiculous, like the Death Star, but then the movie would be even more a beat-for-beat remake of IV. Ironically Leia is on a similar mission in VII as she was in IV, but this time she's blind-sided by the existence of a new super-weapon. I like the theme that Episode IV is happening again and everybody's trying to find Luke, when they should be dealing with the situation themselves. Eventually they do and discover they are up to the task.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:29
|
|
|
Star Wars is a fantasy story dressed up with sci-fi trappings and it has never been anything but. Anyone trying to complain about it not being scientifically plausible is correct but also effectively arguing that their ice cream is too cold and sweet. That is the intended purpose. You don't have to enjoy ice cream but it's odd to expect anything else from it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:29
|
|
|
It is a law of hyperspace travel that a station the size of a small moon can reach lightspeed but a station the size of a planet can't.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:32
|
|
|
Also the only things that are implausible are those without OT precedent. If something new happens it is bad and false. Otherwise my lifetime of memorizing technical details from the essential guides was all for nothing and admitting that is too hard.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:35
|
|
|
"THAT'S not how the FORCE works" was an awesome nod to that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:37
|
|
|
Daric posted:It's not even the first time a planet jumping into light speed would have happened if they hadn't gotten rid of the EU. It also uses tractor beams and controlled stars.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:38
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:I think you're asking all the wrong questions. The technical details of the Starkiller have nothing to do with your feelings. The main problem with the Starkiller is that it is not built up over the film. In fact, it's barely mentioned. When it first shoots, it exceeds the power of the Death Star fivefold. (?) It's literally a bolt from outer space. That's why it seems contrived. Had the plot been about "oh poo poo Starkiller Base we need to deal with this" it would seem less ridiculous, like the Death Star, but then the movie would be even more a beat-for-beat remake of IV. Ironically Leia is on a similar mission in VII as she was in IV, but this time she's blind-sided by the existence of a new super-weapon. Honestly the idea that death stars went from being a one of a kind super weapon that was this big monumental one off thing to a dime a dozen thing that can pop up anywhere with enough resources to do it is a real world fear we really in the real world deal with with our best super weapons.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:40
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:The technical details of the Starkiller have nothing to do with your feelings. New thread title
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:40
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Honestly the idea that death stars went from being a one of a kind super weapon that was this big monumental one off thing to a dime a dozen thing that can pop up anywhere with enough resources to do it is a real world fear we really in the real world deal with with our best super weapons. As also seen in the noted historical documentary "Metal Gear Solid 2".
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:41
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:It fired once, and then was about to fire a second time though. Which suggests that it could travel (unless that particular star system had two suns, which I guess is possible). I had assumed that it used 50% of the sun for the first shot, and the other 50% for the second. But your explanation is as good as mine, because it's fantasy, and whatever mental gaps we (as the audience) need to fill to satiate our technical suspension of disbelief is a ok
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:45
|
|
|
Sarkozymandias posted:Star Wars is literally space fantasy. Lightsabers are magic swords. Obi-Wan was a wizard. How did you come so close to this realization only to turn away at the last moment and assume this was somehow the director's mistake? emanresu tnuocca posted:You mean, as opposed to almost every single sci-fi author ever who does the same as well? Everything in Star Trek is magic. I know it seems pedantic to mock the Starkiller in a universe with the Force and Lightsabers and such, but the thing that gets me is it's INCONSISTENT. If a show/movie/whatever makes a rule then I want it to play by that rule, and not to change the rules whenever it's convenient. If a stormtrooper dies instantly from a shot from the bowcaster while wearing stormtrooper armor, then I want to know why someone who's visibly NOT wearing that armor is still jumping around swordfighting. Is he using other more effective armor? Why not give all the troops more effective armor? Likewise, in one shot the bowcaster is strong enough to send two people flying through the air so why doesn't a point-blank hit from it at least knock a guy off a catwalk? Likewise, if this is set in space, why are the distances ridiculously small? If George Lucas had included a bonus scene in the original Star Wars where the people milling about in Mos Eisley looked up to the sky and saw Alderaan exploding people would be making GBS threads all over the scene, so I refuse to give TFA a pass on this either.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:46
|
|
|
Leia wasn't on her way to Tatooine to see obi wan at all. Wtc.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:46
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:He looked dope as gently caress. His scenes were like going into a temple and talking to a statue of Zeus. I think I read an interview with Abrams where he said they were going for looking like the Lincoln Memorial. But your observation still stands. enraged_camel posted:I'll post this again. Aftermath is considered canon because it came out after The Great EU Purge (the buying out of Lucasfilm), and actually just came out a couple of months ago, specifically to give everyone their first real look at the post ROTJ world (...a comic or two may have come out first that takes place after ROTJ, I can't remember for sure). The book even says "Journey to Star Wars: The Force Awakens" across the top. Basically, "still considered canon" is an odd way of putting it, because it was designed to BE the new canon. Granted, doesn't make anything you said wrong. Just sayin'.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:48
|
|
|
Sarkozymandias posted:Also the only things that are implausible are those without OT precedent. If something new happens it is bad and false. Otherwise my lifetime of memorizing technical details from the essential guides was all for nothing and admitting that is too hard. I awoke in a panic when I realized the other night that I now know more about any one of the Star Trek, ASOIAF or eventhe Mass Effect universe than I know about Star Wars. And Harry Potter. As long as we're on the subject of hyperspace, this is your reminder that Han Solo would be at least a few years younger than Leia at this point after all those years spent jumping around at FTL speeds. tadashi fucked around with this message at 19:52 on Dec 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:49
|
|
|
khy posted:Likewise, if this is set in space, why are the distances ridiculously small? If George Lucas had included a bonus scene in the original Star Wars where the people milling about in Mos Eisley looked up to the sky and saw Alderaan exploding people would be making GBS threads all over the scene, so I refuse to give TFA a pass on this either. The thing with this is that almost the exact same thing happened in ST09, which nerds DID poo poo all over. Now that that specific nerdrage has been come and gone, when they see it in TFA they just go, "Eh, that's just JJ."
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 01:02 |
|
|
There is no time dilation in SW. Even if there's were hyperspace is different than traveling at relativistic speeds.
|
|
#
?
Dec 22, 2015 19:55
|
|