|
Sitting at home and watching the prequels on TV all day has made me realize that TROS is a giant bloated mess and I hate it. There is absolutely no vision in it and reeks of hacky writing, hacky directing, and gutless production.
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 01:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 16:45 |
|
|
PeterWeller posted:Star Wars has never realistically dealt with the size and scope of space. The consensus best movie in the series handwaves both space and time. As I have said before, Star Wars functions on what Bakhtin calls "adventure time". Things are as near or far as they need to be for drama and excitement. Agreed, but with the destruction of the Hosnian system, you see several distinct explosions from Maz's planet. This isn't a question of exactly how long it takes to go on the hyperspace lanes, it's poor visual storytelling based on what is the general understanding of how seeing things far away works. You see that planets exploding, and that communicates an idea that they are close by, in fact sort of as close as the moon maybe. If you had a movie set purely on earth, and you saw a mushroom cloud rising just over the horizon, people would assume that just over the horizon is the city that got hit. You would say "oh whatever, space and time don't matter when you're telling a story". They'd be correct in that assumption because the visuals seem to be communicating that to you. Unless these movies were made for flat earthers or something, you don't need a giant leap to extrapolate that the new republic was very close to Maz's planet.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 01:14
|
|
|
Pook Good Mook posted:Sitting at home and watching the prequels on TV all day has made me realize that TROS is a giant bloated mess and I hate it. There is absolutely no vision in it and reeks of hacky writing, hacky directing, and gutless production. What does “hacky” and “gutless” mean?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 01:29
|
|
|
The Little Death posted:It's not like it takes an astrophysics degree to understand that for you to see something from a planet with the level of detail shown, it would have to be pretty close by. I guess they didn't care about appeasing that niche group of nerds, people who have ever looked up at night. Sometimes movies sacrifice logic for drama. I'm personally able to look past lapses in "tactical" or "scientific" accuracy in storytelling if its in service to drama, since drama is what I want to experience when watching a movie. If delivering said drama means having to bend a few rules and do things not entirely based in actual reality, then whatever. I'm game. Believing that things absolutely need to adhere to and/or be grounded in reality is a lame way to approach a story imo—especially one rooted in fiction/fantasy—but if that's how some people engage with the media they ingest, then  cool for them that they're able to point out all the fallacies I guess?[edit] Just to be clear, I think both ways to approach film/stories are valid. Just stating how if someone is able to look past any logical inaccuracies doesn't mean their opinion is any less valid because, imo, storytelling is first and foremost, about the drama. Sometimes a good story isn't concerned with being realistic (again, especially fantasy stories). teagone fucked around with this message at 02:12 on Jan 26, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 01:46
|
|
|
The Little Death posted:Agreed, but with the destruction of the Hosnian system, you see several distinct explosions from Maz's planet. This isn't a question of exactly how long it takes to go on the hyperspace lanes, it's poor visual storytelling based on what is the general understanding of how seeing things far away works. You see that planets exploding, and that communicates an idea that they are close by, in fact sort of as close as the moon maybe. Nah, I see people see those planets exploding and that communicates an idea that they're significant to those people. It's not "space and time don't matter when you're telling a story." It's "time and space are malleable when you're telling a story." And they're exceptionally malleable in Star Wars, which is why you can extrapolate that any location is very close to any other location.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 01:58
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:Star Wars has never realistically dealt with the size and scope of space. The consensus best movie in the series handwaves both space and time. As I have said before, Star Wars functions on what Bakhtin calls "adventure time". Things are as near or far as they need to be for drama and excitement. I expect you mean Empire? Always seemed off about the Falcon being able to get from Hoth to Bespin in realspace, but time? I guess you mean Luke's Dagobah training seeming longer than the Falcon gang being captured? Never really thought about it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 01:59
|
|
|
teagone posted:Sometimes movies sacrifice logic for drama. I'm personally able to look past lapses in "tactical" or "scientific" accuracy in storytelling if its in service to drama, since drama is what I want to experience when watching a movie. If delivering said drama means having to bend a few rules and do things not entirely based in actual reality, then whatever. I'm game. PeterWeller posted:Nah, I see people see those planets exploding and that communicates an idea that they're significant to those people. It's not "space and time don't matter when you're telling a story." It's "time and space are malleable when you're telling a story." And they're exceptionally malleable in Star Wars, which is why you can extrapolate that any location is very close to any other location. It didn't serve the drama thought, and the planets weren't significant to anyone who it happened to. No one there had any established connection to the planets, and they were all part of an organization specifically separate and different than the New Republic. all it did was make the universe feel that much smaller. it's not like the republic mattered to the resistance, we spent no time there, and no one cares afterwards. All you see is that they see it, instantly know it's the republic, and the only purpose that scene seemed to serve was to say "there, everybody is aware, moving on". And again, this is not about requiring that everything been grounded in reality, it's about what's communicated visually by the images on the screen. Are you supposed to assume that you just saw the centre of a galaxy spanning civilization destroyed, or are you supposed to assume that the planet next door blew up and that they were the Republic of New. In keeping with the other shoddy story telling in TFA, what we see is a location no one has talked about or gone to before, visually within (relatively speaking) close distance to the planet the rebels are on, explode and everybody is like "oh no, I guess they're gone" and then the only difference to the plot is C3P-0 commenting on the Republic fleet. It's lazy and dumb, and seems to visually communicate how small and hollow all the writing of the STs are. I feel like it's on par with the choice in Mass Effect Andromeda to go to another galaxy and have the aliens be a more boring version of things from our galaxy, and also have literally 0 comment on aliens from a different galaxy showing up. Like if you are writing with the idea of interstellar travel, you're evoking a sense of scale that is supposed to be massive and awe-inspiring. And nothing JJ Abrams writes ever feels that way to me, it all feels really like it's happening on film lots next to each other. But that's sort of tangential. I find it weird that people don't think you're supposed to infer spatial relationships from what is visually depicted on screen. Like, would it have been so hard to have a character in a ship nearby? Why do a scene that seems to visually communicate something that is the opposite of true? Beelzebufo fucked around with this message at 02:16 on Jan 26, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 02:12
|
|
|
BizarroAzrael posted:I expect you mean Empire? Always seemed off about the Falcon being able to get from Hoth to Bespin in realspace, but time? I guess you mean Luke's Dagobah training seeming longer than the Falcon gang being captured? Never really thought about it. Yup, you got it. And Empire's middle act is just the most obvious part where realistic considerations about space and time take a backseat to telling a compelling story. Really, it happens anytime there is a hyperspace jump. The Little Death posted:But that's sort of tangential. I find it weird that people don't think you're supposed to infer spatial relationships from what is visually depicted on screen. Like, would it have been so hard to have a character in a ship nearby? Why do a scene that seems to visually communicate something that is the opposite of true? Nobody is saying that. We're saying that in a work of fiction, true and realistic are not always the same thing. PeterWeller fucked around with this message at 02:29 on Jan 26, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 02:17
|
|
|
The planets being visually seen exploding is fine, the problem is none of that has any weight as its never discussed again or has any seeming impact on characters so having them see it exploding is meaningless. For all the film cares they could have read it in the paper in between sports scores. Its so compartmentalized that when JJ blows up another planet just for loving giggles in TROS and you dont even care anymore, youve been conditioned to accept that it means nothing
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 03:32
|
|
|
It's true, that scene might have bothered me less if it had not cut away immediately after Finn states that it's the New Republic.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 03:47
|
|
|
Barudak posted:The planets being visually seen exploding is fine, the problem is none of that has any weight as its never discussed again or has any seeming impact on characters so having them see it exploding is meaningless. For all the film cares they could have read it in the paper in between sports scores. Its so compartmentalized that when JJ blows up another planet just for loving giggles in TROS and you dont even care anymore, youve been conditioned to accept that it means nothing lol you just reminded me that even happened in TROS. With a Star Destroyer that had a small red laser, because
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 04:09
|
|
|
Barudak posted:The planets being visually seen exploding is fine, the problem is none of that has any weight as its never discussed again or has any seeming impact on characters so having them see it exploding is meaningless. The ultimate problem is that the entire point of this scene is that the Republic fleet is blown up. The planets aren’t actually important, yet all emphasis is on them. Like, it’s absolutely crucial to the plot that the New Republic has overwhelming military superiority - but this is effectively never shown. As with the offscreen ‘cloaking devices’ in TLJ, this is probably evidence of last-minute editing, reshoots, and ADR. It’s not like they were incapable of showing a thousand spaceships. Instead, they clearly repurposed the planet-exploding footage to flesh out the badly-edited Maz section of the film. (See also: the shot of Tie Fighters flying out of the sunset, repurposed from cut Jakku scenes.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 04:50
|
|
|
why doesn't the new republic just go to exegol and pay the sith to make them a new fleet 
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 05:35
|
|
|
Because they just killed All The Sith.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 05:39
|
|
|
If blowing up the planets blew up the ships around them (of which I remember not that many), the scene in TROS is more confusing since its a ship blowing up a planet while orbiting the planet. It also calls into question why exactly they need more ships in TROS since theyve already fully won, unless you assume in this alternate timeline there are other galactic powers who could fight the First Order and the new fleet is to take them on not the backwater Republic. It'd also make sense why losing Starkiller base would even matter, if you need it as your deterrent against other galactic big boys after making your demonstration on a small fiefdom they dont give a poo poo about losing it is a really big deal. It would also explain where Lando pulled a fleet from, its random people from the other governments putting together a deniable taskforce to wipe out the First Order as a favor to sexy space Ben Franklin Barudak fucked around with this message at 05:48 on Jan 26, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 05:44
|
|
|
Star Wars is not realistic but it has from the start offered nods to realistic space travel. The TIE fighter is clearly inspired by real space travel technologies of solar panels and ion engines. The Death Star has a magnetic field and needs to clear line of sight to fire. Hyperspace drives need to calculate paths to ensure they don't collide with anything in transit. Star Trek is the same way: it is not realistic, but it is rooted in a realistic aesthetic, with deflector dishes to clear the path ahead of starships, bussard ramscoops to gather fuel, dolphin tanks, etc. The sequels forgot this, completely and totally.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 06:23
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:The TIE fighter is clearly inspired by real space travel technologies of solar panels and ion engines. TIE fighters are called that because of their shape. The "Twin Ion Engine" nonsense obviously came later, because the ship models only have the one thing in back.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 06:26
|
|
|
Ingmar terdman posted:But the sequels are like...having Lobot show up at the battle of endor or something. Del Toro's character of course the exception I kinda wish they did have Lobot at Endor - I mean, I love the hell out of Nien Nunb, but it's weird that Lando's suddenly got a completely different weird sidekick.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 06:33
|
|
|
homullus posted:TIE fighters are called that because of their shape. The "Twin Ion Engine" nonsense obviously came later, because the ship models only have the one thing in back.   But yeah they do kinda look like bow ties
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 07:38
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:Star Wars is not realistic but it has from the start offered nods to realistic space travel. The TIE fighter is clearly inspired by real space travel technologies of solar panels and ion engines. The Death Star has a magnetic field and needs to clear line of sight to fire. Hyperspace drives need to calculate paths to ensure they don't collide with anything in transit. I like the solar sails and the light speed jump gates in the prequels. Not adding any real new designs in the sequels is just embarassing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 13:58
|
|
|
Come to think of it I guess they don't say TIE in at least the first movie. I think there's one guy in the rebel war room that says "incoming fighters"
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 17:44
|
|
|
Darko posted:I like the solar sails and the light speed jump gates in the prequels. Not adding any real new designs in the sequels is just embarassing. Rey should've had her own ship, instead of getting the Falcon.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 17:59
|
|
|
I’m gonna say it: the falcon is a lame piece of crap and the nerd infatuation with it is silly. Disney tried to turn that poo poo to eleven which worked to some extent. But anyway gently caress that thing. It’s invulnerable, as fast as the plot needs to and is ugly with the appendix-shaped-cockpit
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 18:11
|
|
|
The Falcon is cool, but that's the OT's ship. The prequels didn't need the Falcon. The sequels didn't either. Its only mention/cameo in the ST should've been when Rey called it garbage lol.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 18:22
|
|
|
teagone posted:Rey should've had her own ship, instead of getting the Falcon. Rey doesn't get her own anything. Her ship, her lightsaber, her grandfather, all hand-me-downs from the OT. SolarFire2 fucked around with this message at 18:31 on Jan 26, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 18:28
|
|
|
The United States posted:The ion engines are the red light thingies of which there are two George Lucas called them TIE fighters because they looked like bowties, and called them X-wings because the wings looked like Xs, et cetera. "Twin Ion Engine" was made up later for the fans who craved Star Wars "realism."
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 18:32
|
|
|
Darko posted:Not adding any real new designs in the sequels is just embarassing. The ST X- wings are particularly egregious.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 18:33
|
|
|
SolarFire2 posted:Rey doesn't get her own anything. Her ship, her lightsaber, her grandfather, all hand-me-downs from the OT. Yeah, and the character suffers for it  I like Rey, but feels like there was so much squandered potential in her writing—which is emblematic of the ST as a whole I guess, but at least TLJ owns.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 18:35
|
|
|
"The garbage will do" --JJ signing off on using designs that were rejected 40 years ago
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 18:37
|
|
|
homullus posted:George Lucas called them TIE fighters because they looked like bowties, and called them X-wings because the wings looked like Xs, et cetera. "Twin Ion Engine" was made up later for the fans who craved Star Wars "realism." You mean the toys. I would like to think that George just made a poo poo load of names up on the spot at a merchandising meeting. "Oh yeah this is, I don't know, I.....G, X, no,.....8,.....8. IG88"
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 18:58
|
|
|
happyhippy posted:You mean the toys. It's not as bad as his cousin, IG-Fourteen-Words.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 19:04
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:Star Wars is not realistic but it has from the start offered nods to realistic space travel. The TIE fighter is clearly inspired by real space travel technologies of solar panels and ion engines. The Death Star has a magnetic field and needs to clear line of sight to fire. Hyperspace drives need to calculate paths to ensure they don't collide with anything in transit. The TIE fighter stuff is from RPG sourcebooks and other ancillary material designed to give us nerds more details about the setting. The other things you mention are less there to establish a sense of realism and more there to establish drama. The Death Star's magnetic field works as a force field to set up the excitement of a dog fight over its surface. It needs line of sight to set up a tense deadline that can be conveyed visually. Hyperspace jumps need calculating to set up maneuvering and fighting through blockades before the heroes can escape.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 20:03
|
|
|
PeterWeller posted:The TIE fighter stuff is from RPG sourcebooks and other ancillary material designed to give us nerds more details about the setting. The other things you mention are less there to establish a sense of realism and more there to establish drama. The Death Star's magnetic field works as a force field to set up the excitement of a dog fight over its surface. It needs line of sight to set up a tense deadline that can be conveyed visually. Hyperspace jumps need calculating to set up maneuvering and fighting through blockades before the heroes can escape. There were uncountable methods they could have used to establish tension and drama. For example, they could have given the Death Star laser a charging time, and have a big bar appear saying "DEATH STAR LASER CHARGED IN 300...299...298...". They could have yammered some bullshit about coming into firing range. They could have destroy the moons of Yavin IV one by one until they could shoot the one they needed. The plucky rebels could have shielded their base with asteroids that needed to be destroyed. The methods that they chose to use were instead rooted in orbital mechanics and obtaining direct line of sight over the horizon of the gas giant. The magnetic field had virtually no contribution to the movie other than Space Nerdery. A giant ferrous space object has a magnetic field! It affects radio transmissions! The drama for the set up of the attack was established by Red 5, standing by, lock S-foils in attack position. George Lucas' contribution to the TIE fighter:  The concept artists and modelers that turned that into the actual TIE fighter in the original movie came up with both the aesthetic and the acronym. (I'm not even sure what that poo poo on the death star poles is supposed to be.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 20:36
|
|
|
'It's about adventure, not scientific pedantry!' does just feel like another iteration of 'just turn off your brain!'
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 21:13
|
|
|
SolarFire2 posted:Rey doesn't get her own anything. Her ship, her lightsaber, her grandfather, all hand-me-downs from the OT. Her speeder? Kinda sad to think that this was one of the few ST designs that wasn’t a tweaked version of an OT vehicle.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 21:52
|
|
|
Wild Horses posted:I’m gonna say it: the falcon is a lame piece of crap and the nerd infatuation with it is silly. -It's a flying saucer with a car taped to the side -It's a space bachelor apartment -It reads as aerodynamic and I don't know why -The cockpit is super well-designed and impactful. Go back to movies from the 50s where space ships are these big open spaces. The cockpit is smart because it brings the characters together in an easily film-able space. Look at TOS Star Trek when you have Spock to the side at his station compared to TNG which is designed so all the principals can easily be in the same shot. -It has a satellite dish which I feel is pretty sharp
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 21:55
|
|
|
Payndz posted:"Hello, Jabba." 
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 21:58
|
|
|
multijoe posted:'It's about adventure, not scientific pedantry!' does just feel like another iteration of 'just turn off your brain!' Turn off that idiot part of your brain. Keep the part that thinks about story, themes and character
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 22:22
|
|
|
Hemp Knight posted:Her speeder? Kinda sad to think that this was one of the few ST designs that wasn’t a tweaked version of an OT vehicle. It was luke's speeder on its side with a speeder bike seat
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 22:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 16:45 |
|
|
CelticPredator posted:Turn off that idiot part of your brain. Keep the part that thinks about story, themes and character But that just makes the films worse.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2020 22:35
|
|
