Status
Not open for further replies.
I think people over analyze the movies/shows, much like they are over analyzing this thread. There quite literally does not need to be a debate on every topic. People can want to talk about Star Wars without having to defend themselves. There is so much vitriol (intentional or not) in the entertainment section and people don’t want to participate because they get shat on for enjoying or disliking a movie and not wanting to have to defend their opinion. I honestly don’t care if someone else liked or disliked a movie/show. Quite simply, their perception doesn’t change mine.

But that’s just my opinion. ;)

Maybe we should have a Star Wars analysis/debate thread and one for regular discussion. I know which one I would visit.
 
Last edited:
I think people over analyze the movies/shows, much like they are over analyzing this thread. There quite literally does not need to be a debate on every topic. People can want to talk about Star Wars without having to defend themselves. There is so much vitriol in the entertainment section and people don’t want to participate because they get shat on for enjoying or disliking a movie and not wanting to have to defend their opinion. I honestly don’t care if someone else liked or disliked a movie/show. Quite simply, their perception doesn’t change mine.

But that’s just my opinion. ;)

Maybe we should have a Star Wars analysis/debate thread and one for regular discussion. I know which one I would visit.

Thanks, I hear ya. Apologies for monopolizing the thread. I'm done saying my piece, and I'm not above learning to open my own mind as well. I hope I've demonstrated that some.

That said...

There's a topic I find super interesting, and have since I was a teenager. It's been touched upon some in this thread, but I haven't read it all. So here's the question:

In ESB, What is the time jump from Hoth to Bespin? I think it's an important thing to consider, because it helps inform us about the depth of Han and Leia's relationship (how many weeks or months were they on the Falcon together getting to Bespin?). And also for Luke's training. After his failure at the Cave, he says, "but I've learned so much since then." Even Yoda's call back to the Cave suggests that it was sometime ago, like "remember that?" This helps us understand better just how much better trained Luke might be by the time he gets to Tatooine.

I know canon has tried to address this, but in head-canon, what would make more sense? "Bespin's pretty far but I THINK we can make it". It's gotta be 2-3 months at least, right?

Thoughts?
 
Given the context clues in the dialog, like the ones you mentioned, I would assume a few months at least? I mean the Falcon is traveling much slower because of the damaged hyperdrive, which would indicate that it's going to take much longer to get from system to system, and Luke clearly has spent a reasonable amount of time on Dagobah based on the progress he's made with Yoda. It can get confusing at times given the editing, though that has more to do with pacing/ tone than anything else. Plus I think the audience has a tendency to assume weeks if only for the fact that the characters don't change their costumes or seldom do, but based on the events, the dialog- I think it's reasonable to assume a few months have passed over the course of ESB.
 
If what you state is true, then film and literary criticism in general is meaningless. The Oscars are useless (which is kind of true) where The Room should be as lauded as Citizen Kane and Twilight should be considered to have as much literary merit as to kill a mockingbird.

I really dislike the “everything is subjective” and “there is no objective measurement” argument that is being made about art. Yes there is or there wouldnt be any way to judge what works are good or bad and does a disservice to the writers and directors that actually spend their time honing their craft. After all, their hard work is the same as the average youtuber pointing their camera at themselves and farting because “good art is subjective.”
I think the question is "good at what?" when it comes to "good art."

If it's "is this good at entertaining me?" then that's gonna be subjective. If it's "is this technically proficient?" then that'll be more objective.

Personally, I don't think everything is subjective. I think taste is, though. As in, what you dig, what moves you, what hits you viscerally in an enjoyable way. That's subjective.

Technique is usually objective. Like, there is objectively a right way to do a plie in ballet, and there are wrong ways to do a plie. If you've got one foot pointing forward, and the other to the side...you ain't doin' a plie, and that's not really up for debate or interpretation or "but I feeeeeeel like I am." You can feel like you are, but...you aren't. Your foot's pointing the wrong way.

There are things that objectively don't work, and things that subjectively don't work. And then there's stuff that's...perhaps up for debate, but not a whole lot of debate that is kind of in-between.

Some stuff objectively doesn't work. When people speak of "plot holes" and use that term accurately, what they're describing is something that (for example) violates logic in some way. Not "doesn't make sense" in terms of "I wouldn't do that," but actually violates something structural in either the universe as we know it or the universe as established in the story (or both). Like, if the story says "Wizards can only cast spells on Sundays," and then you have a wizard cast a spell on Thursday AND you don't explain how this wizard was able to do so, that's a plot hole. Objectively. You've established a rule in-universe, broken that rule, and haven't bothered to explain it. Or if a story says "Rey has the power to resurrect the dead," and then Finn dies and Rey says "Oh no! If only I could do something to save him! Oh well. I guess Finn is dead" and that's that, that's a plot hole. You've already showed that Rey has this ability, knows she has this ability, and now she's acting as if it doesn't exist without explaining the inconsistency. Again, objective plot hole. Not really open for debate. It'd be like Superman leaping off a building and plummeting to the ground without explaining that there's a Kryptonite ray blasting him when it happens. He just...falls. And the audience is left wondering "WTF?!"

Some stuff subjectively doesn't work. Luke's behavior in TLJ is a good example. People subjectively dislike it because it doesn't track with their understanding of the character as established in the OT. I think it works because I accept that Luke's behavior is informed by events that occurred almost entirely offscreen, but that -- if we take those as a given -- Luke's choices make sense, even if they're unpleasant. (And I think they make more sense than what you have to come up with to justify Luke being sidelined for the events of TFA.) BUT, I get that this is a subjective discussion, and I think it's reasonable to take issue with TLJ's characterization under the circumstances (those being that we didn't actually see anything that happened in between, except for the one "I ignited my sabre for one instant" Rashomon bit, which may not be enough for some people). I think it's valid criticism to say "That didn't work for me. It wasn't enough. If Luke is in this state, the filmmakers needed to do a lot more to explain why, beyond just this Rashomon bit." But again, all of this is subjective. Valid, but subjective.

Then there are things that are kind of in-between. Like, I mentioned up-thread that my 7-year-old finds Jar Jar annoying and not funny. In my experience, that's how most people view Jar Jar. However, I can imagine that there are at least some people who might find his antics funny. I've never met anyone who did, mind you. Like....ever. But I accept the possibility that it could happen. Still, I think this is one of those examples that is arguably subjective, but is so nearly universal that it looks almost objective (i.e., that Jar Jar isn't funny and is annoying).

It's ultimately that last battleground that I think most of the Star Wars debates are fought, and why people tend to appeal to mass opinion. It's an attempt to push something that would perhaps otherwise be subjective into the realm of "So widely believed that it might as well be objective fact." But because there are absolutely people who disagree with them...they push back, and now you have a forum fight on your hands (or at least a generally civil debate like we've had here because we're not a bunch of jackasses).

I agree. While I hate the ST in terms of its story, I do think they were able to get a talented cast and did right by not hiring a bunch of already famous actors to play the characters like Marvel is doing now. Yeah it seems the cast apart from Adam seem to struggle to find work thanks to the Star Wars curse (only one actor seems to get to experience a thriving film career after the films in front of the screen) but they were talented and did what they could with what they were given.

The staff also seemed to love star wars and the different ship designs with worn and used looks did look Star Wars ish. The ST had the trappings of star wars films with improved CGI that I think reached what Lucas really wanted and envisioned when he first thought of Star Wars and it makes it all the more of a shame how poorly the people at the top screwed it up.
I think the jury's still out on what the actors will do. I know John Boyega was incredibly proud of his role in Smallaxe (which I haven't seen yet, but plan to when I can figure out where to view it). Daisy Ridley, Boyega, and especially Kelly Marie Tran each experienced some truly reprehensible fan behavior. And separate from that, I think it's got to be pretty damn grueling to do three enormous Star Wars movies (especially when they're received with mixed reactions from the audience), so I can understand why many of them might shift to doing VO or stage work or whathaveyou, where they're not having to do press junkets and put up with a ton of lunatic "fans" who want to attack them personally.
Where do English teachers get off grading a student's short story? They guage their grade by how well the student expressed their ideas or used techniques like foreshadowing or symbolism (insert literary technique here) in their work. So either there is some sort of objective criteria to make a judgement on a work of fiction, otherwise a teacher's grade is arbitrary and they could fail a student because reasons , thus affecting that student being able to graduate. If the parameters are undefined, then grades are meaningless. Good and bad are meaningless. An A+ or an F- are equally valid.

Art and literature can't be entirely arbitrary and subjective. Personal preference will play a factor. It always does. Though literary tools are very real and it's intellectually dishonest to act like they don't exist or that they don't matter.
I think I've addressed this above, but I just want to reiterate that I'm not remotely suggesting that all criticism is subjective. As I said, some stuff is truly objective. I just think a lot of the discussions around these movies tend to claim objectivity about stuff that's actually subjective. Which still doesn't invalidate the subjective reaction, but does invalidate the claim of objectivity.
Yep, that's why Siskel and Ebert didn't always agree. See, the problem with saying art can be objectively evaluated, is that it then casts a disparagement on folks who don't like it. Citizen Kane is only one of the greatest films of all time because the vast majority of people recognize it as such. I personally think it's a boring, meandering slog; it's a performance and not a story with a point. Does this mean that I am lacking as a person in some way because I view it that way?
Yes. Now, present yourself for the ritual beatings. Sorry, I don't make the rules. :)
 
I figured I would add my brief opinion on what’s been made.

I love the OT. When I was younger ROTJ was my favorite. Now I find the Ewoks more annoying and Star Wars and Empire are tied for my favorite. I could watch them every week if I had time.

I liked the prequels when they came out even though I felt like I suffered through the dialogue and cgi. Now I enjoy them a lot more and wish there would be special editions to update the cgi.

Rogue One was fantastic.

I was very excited for the sequel trilogy. I enjoyed TFA for what it was. I saw a lot of Star Wars being retold but I also saw potential for what could happen. TLJ was my least favorite. Not because there weren’t compelling or interesting things happening. I really left the movies feeling like it was throwing me to the curb. Now I can watch it just fine and love the visuals. ROS was what it was. The action was great and it wrapped up the story. I felt like the OT cast was underutilized. They really didn’t need to be in it at all. I would have preferred if the sequels had more closely followed all of the books I had read, but of course that wasn’t ever likely.

As far as shows, I loved seasons 1 and 2 of Mando. Season three less so.

I liked Andor a lot. It was slow at times, but that didn’t bother me. We got to see a lot more “other stuff”.

Kenobi was fun for me, but not what I was expecting. There was a lot less Kenobi and more Leia and Reva. I see how it was needed for the storyline, but the titular character was more of a sidekick. It sort of deviated from the, “you served my father in the clone wars” aspect and should been, “come help me again. We‘ve met, remember?”

Ahsoka was also also enjoyable for me, but I watched Clone Wars and Rebels and really liked the style of Rebels with all the production artwork tie-ins.

I’ll watch whatever they make. They aren’t my stories to tell. I just like visiting the galaxy I enjoyed as a kid.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, they forget Leia, who:

-Told Darth Vader off
- Informed Han Solo that he was "braver than she thought" for rescuing her in the Falcon.
-Was a competent part of the Rebel Alliance command staff.
-Was more than capable of using a blaster (ask all the stormtroopers she shot in the Original Trilogy)
-Called Solo a "Scruffy Nerfherder".
-Stopped Chewbacca from strangling Lando with one word.
-Bluffed the fat, disgusting overgrown toad Jabba the Butt Hutt with a thermal detonator
-STRANGLED that fat, disgusting overgrown toad Jabba the Butt Hutt
-Got Jabba's Sail Barge Cannon pointed at the deck
-Could ride a speeder bike like nobody's business.
-Could use a lightsaber. (with Luke's training).

And we all just fell in love with that girl! :D
And I just don’t believe it’s in the nature of that character to physically assault a subordinate for disobeying orders.
That, to me, was more offensive than what was done to the character of Luke
 
ESB timespan from Hoth to Bespin -

It's a plot problem. Luke needs to be on Dagobah for as long as possible but Han/Leia/Chewie need to be on the Falcon for as short as possible. (How long could you stand being trapped inside that ship? With your ex, no less?)

IMO it's a flaw in the writing that they failed to address the issue somehow. They could have done a 3-minute scene where Han/Leia/Chewie put themselves into some kind of medically-induced hibernation aboard the Falcon.

Or they could have stopped off somewhere between Hoth & Bespin. Like maybe landing on a life-supporting planet or settlement for a little while on the way. Bespin could still be the closest place that's big enough to get the hyperdrive repaired. It could also be the next place on their trip that's big enough to provide Vader with a suitable ambush for Luke. (It would be kinda hard to sneak up on Luke and trap him and freeze him, all at a highway truckstop.) So if the Falcon did an intermediate stop on the way to Bespin (or even several) it could still work within the larger plotline.
 
Last edited:
Good points all. I like your ideas.

But I don't think Han and Leia were exes at the time? The way she kissed his cheek when they drifted away with the garbage?
And there were definitely some meaningful gazes in the Cloud City living quarters, when Leia was fretting about the Falcon being fixed....
 
ESB timespan from Hoth to Bespin -

It's a plot problem. Luke needs to be on Dagobah for as long as possible but Han/Leia/Chewie need to be on the Falcon for as short as possible. (How long could you stand being trapped inside that ship? With your ex, no less?)

IMO it's a flaw in the writing that they failed to address the issue somehow. They could have done a 3-minute scene where Han/Leia/Chewie put themselves into some kind of medically-induced hibernation aboard the Falcon.

Or they could have stopped off somewhere between Hoth & Bespin. Like maybe landing on a life-supporting planet or settlement for a little while on the way. Bespin could still be the closest place that's big enough to get the hyperdrive repaired. It could also be the next place on their trip that's big enough to provide Vader with a suitable ambush for Luke. (It would be kinda hard to sneak up on Luke and trap him and freeze him, all at a highway truckstop.) So if the Falcon did an intermediate stop on the way to Bespin (or even several) it could still work within the larger plotline.
Well, it could be that time dilation happens when you pass light speed.
 
Well, it could be that time dilation happens when you pass light speed.
While that's a fair point, it also introduces the problem of aging at different rates, and seeing your lover a year later, but who has now seemingly aged decades since you were gone.

Also, the Falcon's main hyperdrive was down (yes, I know the EU talked about a "back-up" hyperdrive), but NOT being able to travel at or above light speed REALLY doesn't make travel between different star systems only "months away." We don't know the "real world" distance from the imaginary Hoth system (where the Empire was chasing the Falcon) to the Bespin System, part of the Anoat Sector, other then Han saying "It's pretty far, but I think we can make it." There is ALSO the Anoat System which does not contain Bespin, although as near as I can tell they are adjacent.

Traveling from one star system to another without light speed/hyperdrive technology would take YEARS, no matter how fast your sub-light engines could propel you...

...and it also means that Boba Fett was tracking the Falcon for MONTHS (or years) without being detected.

In both Legends and newcanon, you can estimate the minimum distance between Hoth and Bespin from their listed distances from the Galactic Core. 50,250 light years for Hoth, 49,100 light years for Bespin. Minimum distance between the two - 1150 light years. July 11, 2020
 
ESB timespan from Hoth to Bespin -

It's a plot problem. Luke needs to be on Dagobah for as long as possible but Han/Leia/Chewie need to be on the Falcon for as short as possible. (How long could you stand being trapped inside that ship? With your ex, no less?)

IMO it's a flaw in the writing that they failed to address the issue somehow. They could have done a 3-minute scene where Han/Leia/Chewie put themselves into some kind of medically-induced hibernation aboard the Falcon.

Or they could have stopped off somewhere between Hoth & Bespin. Like maybe landing on a life-supporting planet or settlement for a little while on the way. Bespin could still be the closest place that's big enough to get the hyperdrive repaired. It could also be the next place on their trip that's big enough to provide Vader with a suitable ambush for Luke. (It would be kinda hard to sneak up on Luke and trap him and freeze him, all at a highway truckstop.) So if the Falcon did an intermediate stop on the way to Bespin (or even several) it could still work within the larger plotline.

While that's a fair point, it also introduces the problem of aging at different rates, and seeing your lover a year later, but who has now seemingly aged decades since you were gone.

Also, the Falcon's main hyperdrive was down (yes, I know the EU talked about a "back-up" hyperdrive), but NOT being able to travel at or above light speed REALLY doesn't make travel between different star systems only "months away." We don't know the "real world" distance from the imaginary Hoth system (where the Empire was chasing the Falcon) to the Bespin System, part of the Anoat Sector, other then Han saying "It's pretty far, but I think we can make it." There is ALSO the Anoat System which does not contain Bespin, although as near as I can tell they are adjacent.

Traveling from one star system to another without light speed/hyperdrive technology would take YEARS, no matter how fast your sub-light engines could propel you...

...and it also means that Boba Fett was tracking the Falcon for MONTHS (or years) without being detected.

In both Legends and newcanon, you can estimate the minimum distance between Hoth and Bespin from their listed distances from the Galactic Core. 50,250 light years for Hoth, 49,100 light years for Bespin. Minimum distance between the two - 1150 light years. July 11, 2020
I mean, the answer ultimately is "Stuff moves at the speed of plot." And really, that if the movie is good enough in other respects, or rather if it's compelling enough or connects with the viewer enough, then the astrophysics don't matter. Stuff happens when it needs to happen, and as long as what's happening drives the story effectively and supports the characters as established and as they are growing in the films, then you don't need to parse out how time dilation does/doesn't occur and/or why.

Hyperspace is a great method for ending a sequence in the story and making the characters "safe." It's also therefore ripe for being used as a "YOU'RE NO LONGER SAFE!!!" mechanism later on, through technological means. The problem comes in when "we can/can't track them" thing is used inconsistently, or when other stuff isn't effectively addressed (e.g., "Wait...TIE fighters have hyperdrives now? Since when?" and so on)
 
While that's a fair point, it also introduces the problem of aging at different rates, and seeing your lover a year later, but who has now seemingly aged decades since you were gone.

Also, the Falcon's main hyperdrive was down (yes, I know the EU talked about a "back-up" hyperdrive), but NOT being able to travel at or above light speed REALLY doesn't make travel between different star systems only "months away." We don't know the "real world" distance from the imaginary Hoth system (where the Empire was chasing the Falcon) to the Bespin System, part of the Anoat Sector, other then Han saying "It's pretty far, but I think we can make it." There is ALSO the Anoat System which does not contain Bespin, although as near as I can tell they are adjacent.

Traveling from one star system to another without light speed/hyperdrive technology would take YEARS, no matter how fast your sub-light engines could propel you...

...and it also means that Boba Fett was tracking the Falcon for MONTHS (or years) without being detected.

In both Legends and newcanon, you can estimate the minimum distance between Hoth and Bespin from their listed distances from the Galactic Core. 50,250 light years for Hoth, 49,100 light years for Bespin. Minimum distance between the two - 1150 light years. July 11, 2020
Well, on the bright side: it gave Luke plenty of time to grow up! lol
 
A couple reasons ESB is a superior movie

2A11E1A8-AEB1-417A-AEA7-5D818333A68E.png

32356EDF-C0E2-4D67-A78A-47498EC276C1.jpeg


Lucas revolutionized the technical side of filmmaking— twice.
 
I mean, the answer ultimately is "Stuff moves at the speed of plot." And really, that if the movie is good enough in other respects, or rather if it's compelling enough or connects with the viewer enough, then the astrophysics don't matter. Stuff happens when it needs to happen, and as long as what's happening drives the story effectively and supports the characters as established and as they are growing in the films, then you don't need to parse out how time dilation does/doesn't occur and/or why.

Hyperspace is a great method for ending a sequence in the story and making the characters "safe." It's also therefore ripe for being used as a "YOU'RE NO LONGER SAFE!!!" mechanism later on, through technological means. The problem comes in when "we can/can't track them" thing is used inconsistently, or when other stuff isn't effectively addressed (e.g., "Wait...TIE fighters have hyperdrives now? Since when?" and so on)

...exactly. It's a testament to HOW GOOD TESB is, that in the moment one doesn't realize/nit-pick/or really care about the technicalities of what's supposed to be happening but couldn't logically be true, even in a fantasy universe.

And I think that's where the debate about "well, what's a good film? what's a bad film? it's all subjective" may miss the mark. It's ALL subjective as to one's experience and enjoyment, but good films just have a gestalt about them that typically comes from:
1) story flow and pacing
2) the believability of the actors' performances (their responses and dialogue seem natural, not leaden and stilted), which makes them RELATABLE
3) the narrative being expressed
4) and the resolution of conflict(s), or unexpected LACK of resolution ala TESB

When those things jibe together, the film has a higher chance to increase brain dopamine levels in the viewer and thereby produce a euphoric emotional response that tells your brain: "That was FUN/GOOD!"
 
I mean, the answer ultimately is "Stuff moves at the speed of plot." And really, that if the movie is good enough in other respects, or rather if it's compelling enough or connects with the viewer enough, then the astrophysics don't matter. Stuff happens when it needs to happen, and as long as what's happening drives the story effectively and supports the characters as established and as they are growing in the films, then you don't need to parse out how time dilation does/doesn't occur and/or why.

Hyperspace is a great method for ending a sequence in the story and making the characters "safe." It's also therefore ripe for being used as a "YOU'RE NO LONGER SAFE!!!" mechanism later on, through technological means. The problem comes in when "we can/can't track them" thing is used inconsistently, or when other stuff isn't effectively addressed (e.g., "Wait...TIE fighters have hyperdrives now? Since when?" and so on)


Yeah, I just think it's on the filmmakers to spot these problems coming.

ESB works as it is, but they could have patched the problem much better with a harmless 2-minute scene about it. It's a matter of cost-benefit. It would have cost them nothing, dramatically or production budget, to cover the issue.
------------------------------------------------------------------

Han talking to Leia:
"Well, here's our situation. The Falcon's sub-light engines are pretty souped-up for smuggling. We can over-rev them into low-lightspeed range. It's gonna run them ragged but it should get us to Bespin in a few months.

We'll have to use the emergency medical hibernation rigs though. Even if we wanted to stay awake in here for that long, we don't have the food & air supply for it."


Leia:
"You mean we have to put ourselves through a whole hibernation cycle just to skip over a few months? Those cycles are exhausting."


Han:
(smirking) "I could keep you busy for a while if you want."


Leia:
(rolls eyes) "I'd rather have hibernation sickness."


Chewie:
"ha ha ha!"

(Han glares at Chewie)

Han to Threepio:

(points finger) "Listen up, Goldenrod. I want you to wake us ALL up if you see ANYTHING unusual. Anything at all. You got it?"

Threepio:
"Oh yes of course sir. I can read the communications of all major interstellar networks and most of the minor ones . . . .


(Han walks away)

Threepio
(muttering) "Impossible man . . . "
 
I've asked these before and still don't have an answer.

Who has the authority to decide who "gets" Star Wars, or whether the messages they got from it is "wrong"?

Who gave them that authority?
I'd say it's best to check them against what George intended. Which of course isn't so easy since George wasn't consistent. And what he says, and what he puts on screen don't always align. But there are certain things....

Like when in Trevorrow's episode IX script, Rey becomes the first Jedi to find balance in the Force. Yeah no. That's literally a part of the journey to become a Force ghost. Qui-Gon, Obi-Wan, Yoda, Anakin, Luke, they all found balance.

Or when people think balance and a gray Jedi, is a Jedi who uses the dark side along with the light, and is shooting lighting out of their fingertips like the best Sith Lord. (Though I get it, lightning is cool. And I do have a soft spot for the "Force judgment.")

Really, understanding the Original Trilogy should litmus test. Can someone explain why Luke failed in the cave. Why was it wrong for Luke to save his friends. Why does Luke win when throws down his lightsaber....Things of that nature. It's crazy how so many don't understand what the Dark Side is. Or "game-ify" the Force.

It's also interesting to note how someone views the Jedi and their role in the war and in Anakin's fall. Dave Filoni's views are pretty much contrary to George's. And he mistakes meta, out-of-universe point of views, with in-universe points of view. (See his Internet breaking, very stupid, "explanation" on the Duel of the Fates.)
 
I think people over analyze the movies/shows, much like they are over analyzing this thread. There quite literally does not need to be a debate on every topic. People can want to talk about Star Wars without having to defend themselves. There is so much vitriol (intentional or not) in the entertainment section and people don’t want to participate because they get shat on for enjoying or disliking a movie and not wanting to have to defend their opinion. I honestly don’t care if someone else liked or disliked a movie/show. Quite simply, their perception doesn’t change mine.

But that’s just my opinion. ;)

Maybe we should have a Star Wars analysis/debate thread and one for regular discussion. I know which one I would visit.
Very well said brother
 
...exactly. It's a testament to HOW GOOD TESB is, that in the moment one doesn't realize/nit-pick/or really care about the technicalities of what's supposed to be happening but couldn't logically be true, even in a fantasy universe.

And I think that's where the debate about "well, what's a good film? what's a bad film? it's all subjective" may miss the mark. It's ALL subjective as to one's experience and enjoyment, but good films just have a gestalt about them that typically comes from:
1) story flow and pacing
2) the believability of the actors' performances (their responses and dialogue seem natural, not leaden and stilted), which makes them RELATABLE
3) the narrative being expressed
4) and the resolution of conflict(s), or unexpected LACK of resolution ala TESB

When those things jibe together, the film has a higher chance to increase brain dopamine levels in the viewer and thereby produce a euphoric emotional response that tells your brain: "That was FUN/GOOD!"
Right, but this also underscores the point I was making earlier about how many in the fandom get bent out of shape about this or that specific "flaw" with the film, when that's not what's really bothering them in the first place. If I watch some anti-TLJ video where the person spends a bunch of time complaining about how the timing of the film doesn't make sense, it leaves me wondering "Why'd you bother to mention this?" Even if that person mentions how this also exists in ESB, the discussion of it is ultimately pointless because -- as you note -- there are a bunch of other things that are affecting one's view of the movie which are more deserving of analysis. This might be a thing that objectively "doesn't make sense" but that fact doesn't really matter because that's not what folks are bothered by with the movie.
Yeah, I just think it's on the filmmakers to spot these problems coming.

ESB works as it is, but they could have patched the problem much better with a harmless 2-minute scene about it. It's a matter of cost-benefit. It would have cost them nothing, dramatically or production budget, to cover the issue.
------------------------------------------------------------------

Han talking to Leia:
"Well, here's our situation. The Falcon's sub-light engines are pretty souped-up for smuggling. We can over-rev them into low-lightspeed range. It's gonna run them ragged but it should get us to Bespin in a few months.

We'll have to use the emergency medical hibernation rigs though. Even if we wanted to stay awake in here for that long, we don't have the food & air supply for it."


Leia:
"You mean we have to put ourselves through a whole hibernation cycle just to skip over a few months? Those cycles are exhausting."


Han:
(smirking) "I could keep you busy for a while if you want."


Leia:
(rolls eyes) "I'd rather have hibernation sickness."


Chewie:
"ha ha ha!"

(Han glares at Chewie)

Han to Threepio:

(points finger) "Listen up, Goldenrod. I want you to wake us ALL up if you see ANYTHING unusual. Anything at all. You got it?"

Threepio:
"Oh yes of course sir. I can read the communications of all major interstellar networks and most of the minor ones . . . .


(Han walks away)

Threepio
(muttering) "Impossible man . . . "
So, here's the thing. This would indeed solve the timing problem. But I don't see it as "cost-free" for the film for several reasons. First, it locks you into now-established in-universe "rules" about how hyperspace travel and hyperdrives and such work, when the film really isn't that kind of film. Hyperspace is kind of like "travel by map" in Indiana Jones or Muppet movies. It just is a quicker way to move people from A to B without having to accommodate the narrative for the time that it'd actually take. And what you solve in one instance can create problems in another. So, sure, now we can explain that Luke trained for months on Dagobah, while Han and Leia and Chewie hyperslept, but how does that work with what we saw in ANH, where the Falcon jumps from Tatooine to Alderaan in....what, a couple of hours? Maybe a day at most? Again, you can come up with explanations for it (e.g., backup hyperdrive, suped-up sublight engines, yadda yadda) but then that'll inevitably raise other questions (e.g., "Why in any universe where you have actual hyperdrives would you have backup drives? Why would Han need suped-up sublight engines in the first place, and if he has them, why doesn't he use them all the time to outrun everything else?" You end up having to twist yourself in knots to solve the problems you raised by solving the problem you initially created...especially when that "problem" isn't really a problem anyway.

As we've noted, nobody really cares about the "speed of plot" thing. Travel time, the scope and breadth of the galaxy, etc. isn't part of the storytelling of Star Wars. By contrast, look at something like The Hobbit or Lord of the Rings (especially the literary versions) where the size of the world matters for the narrative, both in terms of allowing time for the characters to undergo their own personal and emotional journeys, and to demonstrate just how much bigger the world is than the hobbits initially think when they live in the Shire. (This is also why the same "speed of plot" travel fails to work in The Rings of Power, because we've already established that this world is vast and travel time matters. You see similar issues in the latter seasons of Game of Thrones, too.) But within the Star Wars universe, it doesn't actually matter. Yes, it creates kind of a plot hole, but not every plot hole actually matters.
 
For something a bit lighter, here's some behind the scenes footage of Peter Mayhew speaking on set in the Chewie costume. So just like how David Prowse spoke the lines on set and was dubbed over in post, the same was done with Chewie with Peter speaking his lines in English and then being dubbed over with Wookie speech in post.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top