Lets talk all things Star Wars

[ConvergencePro]

The bombs on the Tie Bombers always looked like they had a blueish glow to me so I always just assumed they were launched somehow almost like a depth charge/torpedo combo

 

[Joek3rr]

Joek3rr, the science doesn't hold up because the movie shows Our Heroes walking around outside the ship in seemingly 1g. Only rationalization is that that particular asteroid is rich with heavy metals. Maybe a lot of uranium ore that confuses Imperial sensors. Don't go into anything about the constraints of shooting on Earth. If they'd deemed it important enough, there are easy ways to simulate low gravity on a soundstage.

Psab keel, the bombers in TLJ were the least of my issues. I need to watch it again, but I think I remember hearing the word magnetic used regarding the bombs. I just figured the launch rails were electromagnetic launch guides. Rail guns.

And the space battle in ROTJ is a jumbled mess. Unfinished shots, Lucas changing his mind over and over, ILM getting pissed at him for ordering an entire new sequence in two days and then deciding he didn't want it, and then Lucas editing things together in the most exciting way, regardless of whether it makes sense. The same actor calls in as Gray Leader and is addressed as Red Two. Lando's call for "Red Group, Gold Group -- all ships, follow me" is answered by only Red Group ships. To this day, I have no idea what other ships were even in, or supposed to be in, Gold Group. And, most irritatingly to me, when one of the Executor's sensor clobes is destroyed, it then cuts to an officer informing Piett that "our bridge deflectors are out", leading generations of fan publications and, later, official sources that cited them to mislabel those things as deflector shield generators. And because the B-Wing miniatures didn't work right, we never got to see them doing their capital-ship-killing thing, even though we saw the one Star Destroyer they took out exploding in the background of one shot...

Here's hoping B-wings get more screen time in TROS

 

[Psab keel]

The bombs on the Tie Bombers always looked like they had a blueish glow to me so I always just assumed they were launched somehow almost like a depth charge/torpedo combo

I got that sense too.

 

[Psab keel]

That's interesting view. But the logic doesn't quite check out for me. A planet is going to have a much greater gravity well, then asteroid.
View attachment 1058938

Now you bring up a very interesting point about the changing of tone. This obviously varies from person to person. But I've yet to find the tonal changes in these new films jarring. Particularly when compared to the TPM or ROTJ. Those films seem to have some pretty extreme tonal jumps during the climax. Going from intense, to fun, to goofy, and back again. Just slightly off topic, but how did you feel about The Amazing Spider-Man 2? I ask because for me that film's tone felt all over the place, and was very jarring for me.

Joek3rr, the science doesn't hold up because the movie shows Our Heroes walking around outside the ship in seemingly 1g. Only rationalization is that that particular asteroid is rich with heavy metals. Maybe a lot of uranium ore that confuses Imperial sensors. Don't go into anything about the constraints of shooting on Earth. If they'd deemed it important enough, there are easy ways to simulate low gravity on a soundstage.

Psab keel, the bombers in TLJ were the least of my issues. I need to watch it again, but I think I remember hearing the word magnetic used regarding the bombs. I just figured the launch rails were electromagnetic launch guides. Rail guns.

And the space battle in ROTJ is a jumbled mess. Unfinished shots, Lucas changing his mind over and over, ILM getting pissed at him for ordering an entire new sequence in two days and then deciding he didn't want it, and then Lucas editing things together in the most exciting way, regardless of whether it makes sense. The same actor calls in as Gray Leader and is addressed as Red Two. Lando's call for "Red Group, Gold Group -- all ships, follow me" is answered by only Red Group ships. To this day, I have no idea what other ships were even in, or supposed to be in, Gold Group. And, most irritatingly to me, when one of the Executor's sensor clobes is destroyed, it then cuts to an officer informing Piett that "our bridge deflectors are out", leading generations of fan publications and, later, official sources that cited them to mislabel those things as deflector shield generators. And because the B-Wing miniatures didn't work right, we never got to see them doing their capital-ship-killing thing, even though we saw the one Star Destroyer they took out exploding in the background of one shot...

I was merely citing my logic of how I think it was done better in Empire simply using your example. I'm often not too concerned with the technical aspects of Star Wars because we are dealing with space opera (space fantasy) and not science fiction like we would be if we were debating Trek. My issues have more to do with script, character motivation, theme, tone and the writing aspects of the film. That's where I'm often looking to understand the motivation of the filmmakers and more often that not I could care less about the class system of different ships or what type of hyperdrive they use. If I want that kind of specificity I will, again, watch Star Trek.

Honestly I don't recall much of ASM2. I liked it well enough when I saw it, though I never took it too seriously, and I never gave it much thought after leaving the theater.

Again, we all eat at the Star Wars buffet. I like the chicken fingers, you like the spaghetti. There's enough food here for everyone and all are welcome. There's no reason we all have to like the same things. We take what we like and we leave the rest. Thank you ThreadSketch once again for this analogy because I think it's truly apt!

 

[sztriki]

But surely you can see how dang confusing it can be? I often hear, on here and places, 'oh well I don't like the film because of this or that'. And I'm over here going 'but obviously your fine with this or that in other films...' And yeah there's the whole "Jar Jar Binks effect."

I know and I'm not disputing that there are people who can only bring these small plot contrivances. But most of the people who are crazy enough to still hang around and have these disputes and dislike the film are not really these just as the ones who do are not the ones frothing at the mouth and calling people names.

But.... Here's the question I have for you all to ponder. Is it remotely possible that films like TFA or TLJ are actually good films? But they just don't appeal to you. But just because it doesn't appeal to you, doesn't mean it's a bad film. It just means you don't like it. But maybe the idea of not liking a Star Wars film is subconsciously repulsive, and therfore it must be a bad film. And if it's a bad film, then there has to be reasons for you to dislike it. And so you point to the flaws.

Ha, I like this. It shows that it's a bit like window cleaning: dirt is always on the other side, because I have the same thought that lot of people would find it sacrilige to dislike a SW movie therefore they're patching it up to try and make it work. Insert Palpatine "Ironic" here...
To actually address: I admittedly changed my stance on TFA. I didn't like it when it came out. Then I kinda warmed up to it and the last time I watched it I really enjoyed. It doens't mean the reasons I disliked it initially went away. Those are still there: lack of setting the stage, too much retread of ANH, quite a few plot issues...but overall I like the movie because it made me feel that old buzz eventually and it looks good, acted well (for most part). JJ is actually very good at making you excited for the adventure, and a movie really has to work hard to make me feel that these days. I just saw too many movies and kinda grew numb of the usual movie tropes and nigh immune to special effects. The problem is that he has the emotional filmmaking nailed but lacks the part to make it actually tight and really well written, he kinda glides over that or doesn't think it's important. So regarding TFA there are plenty of shortfalls but I can enjoy it for what it gets right.
TLJ I'll try to keep it short, it's fun to pick apart bits and bobs, ultimately I think the movie fails because:
1. Tone, most serious scenes are sabotaged by some silly joke
2. Nothing really happens, no relationships grow, characters are very similar to where they were and the only thing that really matters is that Luke and Snoke are dead. This is why most people quote the Force-Skype scenes as positives, those are where there is at least some development in characters which is then swept away in the end.
3. Rian Johnson seemed to want to fill it with themes and make it more intellectual or more contemporary but he did that at the expense of the plot and characters.
It's not the nitpicks or the small (or even larger) plot problems. I'm still okay with the hyperspace ramming. Whatever, I do believe that experimental shield thing is just reaction to people questioning it but I can live with that. To me it's the structuring, editing, the themes that were pushed to the forefront and the lack of taking it into any new exciting direction.
I don't have qualms for liking or not liking a SW movie. ROTJ is not a great movie. Plenty of issues there but I still like it. Solo was a pretty decent movie (apart from being so damn dark) in a lot of ways a better one than TFA but it didn't hit the same emotional marks for me so I like TFA better.
As for good movie vs bad movie/like it vs dislike it...
Let's look at some entries from the Halloween series. The first one is indisputably a masterpiece. Great movie, maybe a bit dated in pacing compared to modern horrors but it works on all levels. Halloween 4 is a safe but decent retread of 1 that they did after Halloween 3 flopped (which was going to take the series in a completely new direction). It's a pretty good slasher flick. Let's gloss over 5 and stop at Halloween 6. The movie was shot, edited then half of it was reshot and reedited. The result is a freaking mess of a movie trying to take a semi-new direction while failing to pull it off and ultimately cutting the development in half. As for my own likes: I don't care much about H4, it's okay, but whatever. H6 I like a lot. It's a really bad movie, stupid plot with tons of issues, really messy story, half of it doesn't even make sense, but for some reason I like it a lot. Maybe because it's really dark, maybe because it's surprisingly violent and serious, maybe because of the mask, I don't know really. But it's a really bad movie that I realy like and not in a "so bad it's good" way.
And here I wrote another fkin essay, wish I could shut up sometimes...

 

[ThreadSketch]

I feel like I should be getting roped back into this conversation but I'm just not in the mood for eternal circular arguments. Especially when I can have more fun just ogling my fave character. (¬‿¬)

Awwww yeah. (っ˘ڡ˘ς)

..............oh, sorry, what were we discussing again? I got distracted.

Anyway, thanks for the shoutout, Psab keel.

 

[Halliwax]

What the heck did I miss... dang

 

[Bigdaddy]

So then why is it some can view a "flaw" in one film and say that it's forgivable? But if a similar "flaw" shows up in another film. Not only is that unforgiveable, but it's used as evidence to show that it's a bad film.

This is a silly example. But it illustrates what I'm talking about. I've had people tell me that seeing bombs dropping in space broke the immersion. So I have ask them why TIE bombers dropping bombs in space doesn't phase them? To date nobody can answer me.

Or earlier I was talking about how Imperial/First Order officers are almost always arrogant or inept. And this allows our heroes to get away. But when TLJ does it, it's bad writing, and it's a bad movie for that. But when ESB does is, sure it's bad writing, but oh well, I love the film so I'm going to overlook it.

I guess what I'm trying say, is when someone points out a flaw in one of the new films as evidence to show that it's a bad film. While ignoring the same flaw in an OT film. Thou art barking up the wrong tree.

I just wish more people could acknowledge the flaws in all the films, rather then conveniently picking and choosing. That's how I've come to love them all. It's because I've accepted that they all have their flaws
Some more then others *cough, Attack of the Clones, cough*

Why quote me if you are just going to ignore my post and raise a strawman?

 

[Bigdaddy]

This is soooo my life:

 

[ConvergencePro]

This is stupidly long but it's hands down my favorite breakdown of what's wrong with TLJ and the ST as a whole, much like with what RLM does with the Plinket reviews. This guy actually does a lot of really good video essays

 

[Ron]

So then why is it some can view a "flaw" in one film and say that it's forgivable? But if a similar "flaw" shows up in another film. Not only is that unforgiveable, but it's used as evidence to show that it's a bad film.

This is a silly example. But it illustrates what I'm talking about. I've had people tell me that seeing bombs dropping in space broke the immersion. So I have ask them why TIE bombers dropping bombs in space doesn't phase them? To date nobody can answer me.

Or earlier I was talking about how Imperial/First Order officers are almost always arrogant or inept. And this allows our heroes to get away. But when TLJ does it, it's bad writing, and it's a bad movie for that. But when ESB does is, sure it's bad writing, but oh well, I love the film so I'm going to overlook it.

I guess what I'm trying say, is when someone points out a flaw in one of the new films as evidence to show that it's a bad film. While ignoring the same flaw in an OT film. Thou art barking up the wrong tree.

I just wish more people could acknowledge the flaws in all the films, rather then conveniently picking and choosing. That's how I've come to love them all. It's because I've accepted that they all have their flaws
Some more then others *cough, Attack of the Clones, cough*

I know you have a broader point Joek3rr but I just wanted to give my thoughts on the bombers in TLJ if I could and why I think that sequence doesn't work.

While it's clear that Rian wanted to emulate the WWII imagery used in ANH, his mistake was that he took it literally. He decided to also incorporate WWII tactics alongside it. Tactics are tied to the technology you have. As technology evolves, so do tactics on the battlefield. With the advent of missiles and jet engines, slower moving bombers in tight formation dropping free falling ordnance is no longer the most effective means of bombardment. Militaries, including the US, still employ that type of ordnance but it's used much less frequently than guided missiles, rockets, smart bombs, etc. and when it is used, it's delivered much more efficiently and safely than in the days of WWII.

So with all the futuristic tech in the Star Wars universe, why use such an outdated battle tactic? If you have long range projectiles like proton torpedoes at your disposal, why would you use bombs that require your ships to fly in at dangerously close distances to their target? When you have faster moving bombers like Y-wings, why use slower moving SF-17s that seem to have very little to no shield capability when their poor speed & maneuverability implies it's crucial they be balanced with superb shield protection. The fact that they were blown up so easily made the Resistance leadership look incredibly incompetent for even using them.

I can forgive the TIE Bombers in ESB for a few reasons:
1. They were not being shot at so speed and maneuverability were not imperative.
2. They were not attacking a moving target so again, speed and maneuverability AND precision strikes were not imperative.
3. It's a minor scene showing how the Empire is attempting to root up the hidden Falcon. The battle in TLJ was a major plot event that needed a well thought out logical fight.

The awesome shot of X-wings diving out of formation in ANH was a callback to aerial footage of WWII fighters doing the same. Just a great visual. Nothing more because it's not supposed to be anything more. Rian Johnson and his team looked at that callback and interpreted it as though they had to reenact an actual WWII battle sequence and in doing so completely failed to understand the nuance of it. That's what I find lacking in these new movies. A lot of the attempts to mirror the OT just come off as shallow and amateur.

 

[Ron]

The bombs on the Tie Bombers always looked like they had a blueish glow to me so I always just assumed they were launched somehow almost like a depth charge/torpedo combo

I thought the same.

 

[JoeG]

I dont give a damn about what the rest of you are arguing about, but since this is an all things Star Wars thread, I just wanted to take a sec and talk about how I just got a copy of the 4K77 edit of Star Wars. I don't remember the last time I enjoyed watching the OT this much. To me, this is how Star Wars should look only because its exactly how I remember it. Much better than the Harmy version in my opinion. If you have a chance and haven't already, pick up a copy. Especially if you already own official releases. Worth every penny. Maybe spend some time focusing on what you love about Star Wars instead of what you don't love about it.

 

[ConvergencePro]

I dont give a damn about what the rest of you are arguing about, but since this is an all things Star Wars thread, I just wanted to take a sec and talk about how I just got a copy of the 4K77 edit of Star Wars. I don't remember the last time I enjoyed watching the OT this much. To me, this is how Star Wars should look only because its exactly how I remember it. Much better than the Harmy version in my opinion. If you have a chance and haven't already, pick up a copy. Especially if you already own official releases. Worth every penny. Maybe spend some time focusing on what you love about Star Wars instead of what you don't love about it.

View attachment 1059191

When did this come out? Any word on an unbastardized ESB?

 

[Ron]

When did this come out? Any word on an unbastardized ESB?

It's in the works as we speak. The same team also released an ROTJ (4K83) cut last year.

 

[Joek3rr]

Why quote me if you are just going to ignore my post and raise a strawman?

Sorry just kinda thinking out loud.

 

[Joek3rr]

I know you have a broader point Joek3rr but I just wanted to give my thoughts on the bombers in TLJ if I could and why I think that sequence doesn't work.

While it's clear that Rian wanted to emulate the WWII imagery used in ANH, his mistake was that he took it literally. He decided to also incorporate WWII tactics alongside it. Tactics are tied to the technology you have. As technology evolves, so do tactics on the battlefield. With the advent of missiles and jet engines, slower moving bombers in tight formation dropping free falling ordnance is no longer the most effective means of bombardment. Militaries, including the US, still employ that type of ordnance but it's used much less frequently than guided missiles, rockets, smart bombs, etc. and when it is used, it's delivered much more efficiently and safely than in the days of WWII.

So with all the futuristic tech in the Star Wars universe, why use such an outdated battle tactic? If you have long range projectiles like proton torpedoes at your disposal, why would you use bombs that require your ships to fly in at dangerously close distances to their target? When you have faster moving bombers like Y-wings, why use slower moving SF-17s that seem to have very little to no shield capability when their poor speed & maneuverability implies it's crucial they be balanced with superb shield protection. The fact that they were blown up so easily made the Resistance leadership look incredibly incompetent for even using them.

I can forgive the TIE Bombers in ESB for a few reasons:
1. They were not being shot at so speed and maneuverability were not imperative.
2. They were not attacking a moving target so again, speed and maneuverability AND precision strikes were not imperative.
3. It's a minor scene showing how the Empire is attempting to root up the hidden Falcon. The battle in TLJ was a major plot event that needed a well thought out logical fight.

The awesome shot of X-wings diving out of formation in ANH was a callback to aerial footage of WWII fighters doing the same. Just a great visual. Nothing more because it's not supposed to be anything more. Rian Johnson and his team looked at that callback and interpreted it as though they had to reenact an actual WWII battle sequence and in doing so completely failed to understand the nuance of it. That's what I find lacking in these new movies. A lot of the attempts to mirror the OT just come off as shallow and amateur.

Except they are using tactics from WW2 in the other films. The fact that even the light bombers still have to line up for a torpedo run, is so WW2. Just look how close the X-wings and Y-wings get before releasing their payloads in Rogue One. And the dogfights, so WW2. The TIE attack on the Falcon, so WW2.

Modern military aircraft use rockets as their primary weapon. Going in guns a-blazin' is what happens only when they've exhausted all their stores of missiles. Not to mention most simulations of modern war have fighters shooting at each other at beyond visual range, with either medium-range or long-range radar-guided missiles. Some of those long-range missiles have a range of 100+ miles. If they wanted to show the Star Wars universe being modern then all the starfighters should carry air-to-air style missiles.(Think Colonial Vipers from BSG) And instead of bombers, they should just launch big cruise missile-like weapons from the cruisers and destroyers.

 

[Joek3rr]

I know you have a broader point Joek3rr but I just wanted to give my thoughts on the bombers in TLJ if I could and why I think that sequence doesn't work.

While it's clear that Rian wanted to emulate the WWII imagery used in ANH, his mistake was that he took it literally. He decided to also incorporate WWII tactics alongside it. Tactics are tied to the technology you have. As technology evolves, so do tactics on the battlefield. With the advent of missiles and jet engines, slower moving bombers in tight formation dropping free falling ordnance is no longer the most effective means of bombardment. Militaries, including the US, still employ that type of ordnance but it's used much less frequently than guided missiles, rockets, smart bombs, etc. and when it is used, it's delivered much more efficiently and safely than in the days of WWII.

So with all the futuristic tech in the Star Wars universe, why use such an outdated battle tactic? If you have long range projectiles like proton torpedoes at your disposal, why would you use bombs that require your ships to fly in at dangerously close distances to their target? When you have faster moving bombers like Y-wings, why use slower moving SF-17s that seem to have very little to no shield capability when their poor speed & maneuverability implies it's crucial they be balanced with superb shield protection. The fact that they were blown up so easily made the Resistance leadership look incredibly incompetent for even using them.

I can forgive the TIE Bombers in ESB for a few reasons:
1. They were not being shot at so speed and maneuverability were not imperative.
2. They were not attacking a moving target so again, speed and maneuverability AND precision strikes were not imperative.
3. It's a minor scene showing how the Empire is attempting to root up the hidden Falcon. The battle in TLJ was a major plot event that needed a well thought out logical fight.

The awesome shot of X-wings diving out of formation in ANH was a callback to aerial footage of WWII fighters doing the same. Just a great visual. Nothing more because it's not supposed to be anything more. Rian Johnson and his team looked at that callback and interpreted it as though they had to reenact an actual WWII battle sequence and in doing so completely failed to understand the nuance of it. That's what I find lacking in these new movies. A lot of the attempts to mirror the OT just come off as shallow and amateur.

And also remember Star Wars not only borrows WW2 tactics for it's fighters and bombers. But it uses freaking Napoleonic tactics for the big ships. It the Battle of Coruscant the big ships are broadsiding each other like a couple of old first rate ships of the line.

 

[Psab keel]

This is a silly example. But it illustrates what I'm talking about. I've had people tell me that seeing bombs dropping in space broke the immersion. So I have ask them why TIE bombers dropping bombs in space doesn't phase them? To date nobody can answer me.

We have answered your question in great detail now. We see it differently. Agreed?

This isn't going to become a green eggs and ham situation where by the end one of us changes our mind. You stated your opinion, I stated mine. We move on. There really is nothing to gained by beating it to death.

 

[Bigdaddy]

Sorry just kinda thinking out loud.

That's what blogs are for. In the future l'll keep in mind that your questions are rhetorical musings rather than an attempt at actual discourse.