Sorry. I didn't mean to imply that was the case. To keep my video title brief I needed an umbrella term for the new era of Star Wars production and couldn't think of anything more apt. Any suggestions? That said, I don't think it's been established whether or not Kathleen Kennedy held discussions with Disney's executives regarding the direction the franchise should take. A joint decision by them to play it safe and rely on nostalgia would indirectly influence the design of the films.
I'd just go with "newer" Star Wars. Maybe "post-Lucasian". The last cinematic offering was in 2005. There's a whole new generation for whom this is the first Star Wars they're seeing in theaters.
Or, since there's such aesthetic difference between Clone Wars, TFA, Rebels, and Rogue One, I'd go so far as to call out specific entries or ships. It's been three and a half decades and I still find the B-Wing design ludicrous (despite loving it). Some things are practical considerations. The TFA FO troop transport setpiece (pretty much just the interior and ramp) was intended to be reused for the Resistance transport (I prefer the concept design to the final result -- but the final result was what happens when you change your mind too late to change the thing), and did get resued for both the cargo shuttle and TIE Reaper in Rogue One. It is always cheaper to reuse already-built pieces if you can.
Most of my issues with any of the newer craft stem from inadequate context in the films. For instance, I hated the First Order snowspeeder until I found out it wasn't a combat craft, or even patrol, but a utility lorry, basically. The Resistance troop transport was redesigned from a decent landing craft to an atmospheric shuttle when a later draft of the script had Maz's castle and the Resistance base on the same planet. That got changed even later, but it was too late to build all new models and setpieces. I hate it as a spaceship, but it'd be fine as a planetary shuttle. Things like that.
Everytime I watch TFA I wonder how on earth that shuttle managed to land in that SD. The length and height of those wings seemed to exclude it from getting into or even safely landing in any of its dock.
The wings offset and the upper halves drop for almost their whole length, putting the shuttle's height well within
Lambda-class range:
The "problem" with some of the newer ship designs is that they don't apply the old common sense rules to the actual purpose of the craft, so that then all the engineering choices put into them look off.
That, and much of what you said after. Ralph McQuarrie spent most of his pre-Star Wars career as an illustrator was doing technical work. I really do think people like McQuarrie and Matt Jeffries bring an engineer's aesthetic to their designs that pure artists lack. Fantastical elements are fine, as long as there's
some evident purpose to them. Why I wish the wings on Kylo's shuttle swung out further -- as they are, it fails even the "it looks cool" metric of all the other articulated wings in Star Wars. I level the same accusation against the ARC-170, for that matter. Pointless (even the rationalization makes me cringe) "s-foils", just so they can have the "lock s-foils in attack position" line in ROTS. *sigh*
So whilst I liked most of the new choices made for "Rogue One", I still sighed heavily when I saw the stupid blade command bridge sticking out of the bottom of Mon Calimari hull
Never mind the "flying city/ark" thing, they were always, in the old EU, civilian ships repurposed. I guess the Admiral was confident in his shields...
why the Tie Striker didn't have a more hawk like instead of pill shaped body
Cuz it still has to have a TIE cockpit. Streamlining of parts procurement, and otherwise it wouldn't be a TIE. Even TIEs with more than two engines (like Vader's prototype) are still TIEs. It's become a style designator.
and I wondered what the hell use the old rebel frieghter transports (from TESB) were doing there at the end
Unless they were in case they needed to land troops, I got nothin'.
The same went for TFA, I liked the inclusion of alot of the old stuff, I thought the updated X wings were great, but I hated the glimpses of the PT like craft ie Reys "parents" chrome craft,
Which we barely saw in the final film:
Doesn't look "chrome" to me. A bit of sun-glare, but that's all... I think it looked fine in the ultimately-unfilmed "handoff" shot:
the "Quad jumper" that just seemed to be all engines
It is. It's a tug.
the newer Tie fighters that had guns sticking out all over them at odd angles
The standard First Order TIE Fighters are the same old design with new color scheme. The Special Forces TIE Fighter has those weird "cogs" at the wing attach points, an antenna cluster to the right of the cockpit, and a rear turret for the gunner.
the Pokerball "Death Star"
The design of the Starkiller made sense to me. How else are you going to build such a weapon into a planet? The resemblance is coincidental. Do we say the creators of Pokemon ripped off the original design of the Death Star?
Leias flying "Brick" and Hans LEGO frieghter
I already addressed the former further above, and as for the latter... I do prefer some of the concept designs. He needed a big bulk hauler to be able to have room to bring the
Falcon aboard. I think they just didn't want it to be a cool enough design it overshadowed the
Falcon.
--Jonah
