Star Wars: The Last Jedi (Post-release)

What did you think of Star Wars: The Last Jedi?

  • It was great. Loved it. Don't miss it at the theaters.

    Votes: 154 26.6%
  • It was good. Liked it very much. Worth the theater visit.

    Votes: 135 23.4%
  • It was okay. Not too pleased with it. Could watch it at the cinema once or wait for home video.

    Votes: 117 20.2%
  • It was disappointing. Watch it on home video instead.

    Votes: 70 12.1%
  • It was bad. Don't waste your time with it.

    Votes: 102 17.6%

  • Total voters
    578
Except that the Supremacy and the Raddus are both far larger than either of those vehicles, so the perceived distance between them is larger. Where as the chase in ANH was probably a kilometer of two apart, the Supremacy and the Raddus were a couple hundred thousand kilometers apart at the least.

I wish I had a screen shot of that chase...unless my theater's screen was that huge to catch the whole scene..

I have to admit.. it was kind of like...and I looked at my wife saying,,,"JUST LOOK OUT THE WINDOW!"

Just a pet peeve I guess.. just seemed like a dragged out scene
 
I, too, am 51. I think that was the perfect age to have seen Star Wars in 1977.

There was nothing more disruptive to my childhood than RotJ and that's where you and I diverge. Today I'm not as bothered by inconsistencies in tone or concept because RotJ already set the precedent for corrupting Star Wars that still remains unparalleled. While much can be said about the new films they still have not been blasphemously awful as RotJ ... IMO.

The immutable truth is that different fans get different things out of Star Wars. What's meaningful to me isn't necessarily going to be meaningful to you or anybody else, for that matter, no matter what their age.

There’s really no point to arguing about how good or bad TLJ might be because it’s not a logical debate. I wouldn’t even bother to try and convince you to like TLJ. It makes no more sense than you trying convincing me that RotJ isn’t, by FAR, the worst insult to franchise - even today.

I think you're making my point. :cheers For all the effort I and others put into defending and singing the praises of what we loved about the PT, it was more or less wasted effort within the first few hours of release. People dig in. The same is going to be true for TLJ. Films don't get the kind of response we're seeing and then magically everyone says, "You know, after reading your reasoned analysis I suddenly realized how wrong I was." Even if JJ comes back and makes an awesome Ep IX that somehow resolves the biggest fan issues, the detractors will say, "Yeah, but why couldn't they just do that in TLJ? It was a wasted movie." Or something to that effect. I think most people would agree ROTS is better than AOTC, but that fact probably hasn't convinced anyone who hated AOTC that suddenly it's a misunderstood masterpiece. So, I'm not trying to convince anyone that TLJ is trash or a treasure, it's just that getting into a phallus measuring contest is just going to lead to frustration. Take it from a guy with a ruler. :lol
 
One more thing on fresh/bold....

A lot has been said about the pointlessness of the Canto Bight plot. And while a lot of the criticisms of it are valid (choppy storytelling and pacing for me), I think the sequence serves a few important functions (even if it achieves mixed success with each). The first is that it's making a point about Poe's leadership. Leia and Holdo both rebuke for his impulsivity (well, mutiny for the latter). Poe sends Rose and Finn out on this crazy mission which just totally fails. Leia's message to Poe is basically "cool your jets, the Resistance is bigger than you." And the end seems to be a passing of the torch to Poe and sets up the question of how Poe leads the rest of the Resistance moving forward. His hot shot routine at the beginning of the movie blew up a ship, but ultimately did help and lives were lost. How does he react next time?

The second is that Rose and Finn really come into their roles as the everyman/woman. Luke was definitely something of an everyman in ANH, the scrappy kid who just wanted to go to Tosche station. But after that, he's the hero, that's the point of the hero's journey structure, he's transformed by the experience and becomes a Jedi by ROTJ. In opposition to that, Finn is the guy who was literally swept up in the conflict but really wants out. Rose comes to represent the moral heart of the Resistance. Aside from the most obvious line for this ( "save what you love"), she's the one sweet talking kids and and freeing animals. In terms of rank, Rose is a nobody in the Resistance, but she's fighting for all the right reasons. She's an 'in' for the audience....maybe not for all of the OT fans, but definitely for the new fans.

Third, world building. Rose also gets all the expository dialogue here, explaining the seedy underbelly of Canto Bight to Finn. The particular focus on arms dealers selling to both sides rings to me like it could be a thread in whatever Rian is cooking up for Trilogy #2. Whether or not that pans put, it exists here to expand the nature of the conflict between the First Order and Resistance. Hopefully we'll get a scene debating trade blockades in ep. IX (joking, obvs). But now we know there's another force at work in the universe (no pun). Which I suppose is kind of what the prequels tried to do with the Trade Federation and Banking Clan, but definitely out of the purview of the OT or TFA.
 
You know, now that you brought up the opening of A New Hope... how, exactly, did the Star Destroyer find the Tantive IV? At the end of Rogue One, we see the Tantive jump to hyperspace. Hyperspace tracking is, presumably, not YET a thing. And why did the Tantive IV drop out of hyperspace anyway? Wouldn't the opening of A New Hope make more sense if hyperspace was never involved?

Why did people like Rogue One again? ;)

Tracking device. Heck, Vader and stormtroopers were literally at the door or the Tantive IV when it took off at the end of Rouge One.


Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
 
Why do you classify it as poor writing? I'm honestly curious.

The film tells us clearly what is going on: 1) The Resistance ships have enough fuel for one jump to hyperspace, which they can't do because they are being tracked. So they must try to buy time and outrun the First Order at sub-light speed. 2) The First Order came out of light speed too far away for the effective range of their heavy weapons. 3) The First Order *could* send TIE Fighters in, but the Resistance ships still have THEIR heavy weapons. 4) Holdo's plan was to buy time (and distance) to try to sneak smaller ships away to Crait and let the First Order believe they destroyed all of the Resistance ships.

Knowing that the Resistance literally can't go anywhere, the siege tactic of waiting them out actually makes logical sense. By all of the information the First Order has, they can destroy the Resistance with little to no casualties. This is VERY clear in the film.

I will grant you that, historically, the Empire / First Order mentality has not been to preserve individual troops, but even so, none of this scenario struck me as "poor writing." In my view, both sides had logical reasons for behaving the way they did. If you saw it differently, I'd like to know why.
I call it poor writing because ANH begins with a Star Destroyer chasing a Corvette. It damages it, disables it, overtakes it and boards it. And in ESB we see Star Destroyers chasing the Millenum Falcon at sub light speeds... we also see Destroyers disabled by Ion Cannons, which the Supremacy has. So the idea that after suffering it's main hangar bay being destroyed and and losing it's bridge, that the Raddus can continue to render a huge opposing fleet impotent, makes no sense. When the Executor has it's bridge destroyed, it crashes into the Death Star. Why didn't Hux say, their bridge is down and their hangar is destroyed, scramble all our squadrons?

You can simply look at the Raddus and see that it's not covered in defensive turbolasers. The damage it took should have caused total chaos, at the very least. Look how big the Supremacy is... don't make something arbitrarily big without showing what it can do. It's absolutely poor writing to have a ship this big facing no resistance and not flex it's considerable muscle by sending in all the fighters it has. The "heavy weapons" of the Raddus and it's 2-3 support ships could not hold off 5 squadrons of TIEs, much less 20 squadrons, and that's the kind of numbers we are talking about with a capital ship the size of the Supremacy. I define it as bad writing because the scenario is not exciting, it goes nowhere and it takes a long time to get there. If you think it makes sense, I can respect that, but I have seen the movie twice now and it still bothers me.

supremacy-comparison-credit-ivefallennicantgetup-reddit.jpg
 
I think you're making my point. :cheers For all the effort I and others put into defending and singing the praises of what we loved about the PT, it was more or less wasted effort within the first few hours of release. People dig in. The same is going to be true for TLJ. Films don't get the kind of response we're seeing and then magically everyone says, "You know, after reading your reasoned analysis I suddenly realized how wrong I was." Even if JJ comes back and makes an awesome Ep IX that somehow resolves the biggest fan issues, the detractors will say, "Yeah, but why couldn't they just do that in TLJ? It was a wasted movie." Or something to that effect. I think most people would agree ROTS is better than AOTC, but that fact probably hasn't convinced anyone who hated AOTC that suddenly it's a misunderstood masterpiece. So, I'm not trying to convince anyone that TLJ is trash or a treasure, it's just that getting into a phallus measuring contest is just going to lead to frustration. Take it from a guy with a ruler. :lol

I never thought PM was that bad. :cheers
 
I've been thinking more on this, and trying to understand why some of the differences in this movie that delighted me were problematic for some others. I'm starting to think it may be related to a perception of risk, and different ideas as to if that has a place in Star Wars.

I watched the OT as a young child, and while I don't specifically remember the first viewings anymore, I don't recall ever feeling the core heroes were truly at risk. They were always going to survive, and going to win because that is what the good guys do, and the movie was about me watching the adventure of how that happened. A character like Lando may have died in ESB, but once he returned for ROTJ and was flying the Falcon, he was safe from major harm and one of the good guys.

The PT I watched as an adult, but I have similar feelings. While we had some character deaths in the PT, they were new characters that were present for a single movie only, the core characters were always safe (or were Padme who we expected would die) as we knew the outcomes for those characters from the OT. Again, to me it was about watching the adventure to see the specifics of how it all happened, but the destination was expected. Even in the EU everyone was always safe, the only significant death was Chewie, and they dropped a moon on him which was so ridiculous it pulled me out of that narrative and didn't have the emotional impact it could have.

In TFA I had the same experience, there was no real risk to the core characters, and Han's death was so telegraphed and expected (both in the movie, and from the unlikely chances that Harrison Ford would sign up for the whole trilogy), that it didn't shock me, instead it left me wondering about the future of Kylo's story. Han's death did however raise the stakes for the sequel trilogy, which I think R1 did also through showing us main character death and loss in a ways not done in Star Wars before (even if it was completely expected).

In TLJ I was often on the edge of my seat, and gasped out loud at different points, which I loved experiencing in a Star Wars movie. Some of the characters like Rey and Kylo I felt were safe and would be back in the next movie, but I went in thinking we may lose Luke and/or Leia (partly due to Carrie's passing), and across the movie I also found myself feeling that we could well have a death from characters like Poe, Finn, Rose etc. despite their being major characters. There was a feeling of genuine stakes, risk, and some anxiety associated with that which I don't think I've ever experienced in a Star Wars movie before, and wasn't dissipated for me by the pacing of ships flights etc.. Star Wars movies have always been popcorn adventures where things turn out right in the end, the good guys win, and there aren't major shocks to expectations. So I can see how those sorts of changes would be unwanted by many.

This change is something I enjoyed about the movie however, and part of the reason I was so engrossed watching it. I was genuinely anxious about what the outcomes were going to be, and what the costs would be to the main characters. To have so much loss and failure occurring was unexpected, and it thrilled me to see and pulled me into the movie rather than out of it. I don't know if this is what some people object to or I'm putting words into folks' mouths, but it's a theory that helps me make sense of why my experience of many of the same features was so positive when others felt it was out of character or out of genre for a Star Wars movie and thus a negative. While I'd not want to see an R1 style ending in the next movie, I'm looking forward to going in knowing that bets are off, and I hope JJ delivers something less predictable than TFA and builds on the foundation of shakiness that Rian has created.
 
I call it poor writing because ANH begins with a Star Destroyer chasing a Corvette. It damages it, disables it, overtakes it and boards it. And in ESB we see Star Destroyers chasing the Millenum Falcon at sub light speeds...

I fail to see how either of these infer poor writing for The Last Jedi. These are completely different situations.


we also see Destroyers disabled by Ion Cannons, which the Supremacy has.

Does it? Was this mentioned in one of the films somewhere? If so, I missed it...Honest question.


So the idea that after suffering it's main hangar bay being destroyed and and losing it's bridge, that the Raddus can continue to render a huge opposing fleet impotent, makes no sense. When the Executor has it's bridge destroyed, it crashes into the Death Star. Why didn't Hux say, their bridge is down and their hangar is destroyed, scramble all our squadrons?

But why would they scramble all squadrons when all they have to do is literally wait them out? You seem to be operating from the perspective of the omniscient observer, knowing that the Resistance has a plan. From the First Order's perspective, however, they've already won. It's just a matter of time. Why the urgency when they can savor the thought of the Resistance losing hope as their ships are destroyed one by one?

It's absolutely poor writing to have a ship this big facing no resistance and not flex it's considerable muscle by sending in all the fighters it has.

Who is it flexing its muscles for? Like I said, from their perspective, the First Order believes they have already won. Literally, all they have to do is wait and pick off the ships as they run out of fuel. They believe they will be wiping out all of the Resistance, so who would they be showing off for?


I define it as bad writing because the scenario is not exciting, it goes nowhere and it takes a long time to get there.

Well, that's a matter of opinion. I don't require non-stop action for excitement in a film. I found this entire sequence to be exciting in the sense that it created suspense with the looming peril of the Resistance.

I can respect that, but I have seen the movie twice now and it still bothers me.

I've also seen the movie twice, and I actually liked the way this entire sequence played out even better the second time. The one thing that did bother me about it, though, was that as the First Order ships were lobbing their barrage fire ("let them know we're still here"), the shots arced like trebuchet fire. In space. I kind of cringed at that. I mean, I accept a lot of the weird Star Wars physics, but that was just...off.
 
There was nothing more disruptive to my childhood than RotJ and that's where you and I diverge. Today I'm not as bothered by inconsistencies in tone or concept because RotJ already set the precedent for corrupting Star Wars that still remains unparalleled. While much can be said about the new films they still have not been blasphemously awful as RotJ ... IMO.

I won't go so far as "corrupting" or "blasphemously awful", but ROTJ was a sour note for me, too -- even if it took me some years to start putting my finger on why. The movie came out when I was 8. I had instantly fallen in love with the Emperor's Guards and the Biker Scouts and the B-Wing, and that obfuscated the discordancies for me for a bit. Thanks also, probably, to the fact that I saw it one-and-a-half times in the theater, and it was some years before I saw it again on VHS. This was before I had more Star-Wars-nerd resources than Bantha Tracks. So it was little pieces of info that started to get filled in as I got into junior-high and high school, from Starlog and Cinefantastique and the making-of and art-of books and so forth. I started learning about how George had modified his original concept for Star Wars, then again for Empire, then again for Jedi. And, we now know, again for the Special Editions, and again for the Prequels.

I accept the story elements in Star Wars that were not originally part of that phase of the story in George's original notes. He thought he only had one chance at this, so felt free to grab from elsewhere in the saga to make a nice, self-contained story. I feel his big revision for Empire added to the story, rather than taking away. But Jedi was, indeed, where what we got started diverging from what I see as a far richer and better-told story potential. This is why I'm about twenty years in to my admittedly-pointless mental exercise of re-writing it all into a more coherent, multi-generational, non-Skywalker-oriented epic (using as much from the extant material as possible, even if it means re-revising every year or so). How I feel about it is somewhere between "might have been" and "should have been". Do I like what we got? Some bits yes, some bits no. Do I think it could have been done better and still given George the raw material he wanted in the editing bay without him meddling in the earlier production stages he doesn't like and has said he's not good at? Oh, hell yes.

The immutable truth is that different fans get different things out of Star Wars. What's meaningful to me isn't necessarily going to be meaningful to you or anybody else, for that matter, no matter what their age.

"What's in this movie?"

only-what-you-take-with-you.jpg


You know, now that you brought up the opening of A New Hope... how, exactly, did the Star Destroyer find the Tantive IV? At the end of Rogue One, we see the Tantive jump to hyperspace. Hyperspace tracking is, presumably, not YET a thing. And why did the Tantive IV drop out of hyperspace anyway? Wouldn't the opening of A New Hope make more sense if hyperspace was never involved?

In TESB, the Avenger apparently had the capability to determine all systems on the Falcon's "departure" vector (you know, had it not been a ruse). We can figure that Leia was hoping to get to Tatooine and gone again before they were caught up with, rather than potentially taking an evasive course with one or more legs on different vectors. Remember, she was going to fetch Obi-Wan. Hence why they dropped out of hyperspace there. My problems with R1 are Prequel-ish problems -- what we see doesn't line up with what we're told in the OT. "Several" transmissions were not beamed to that ship, and Leia's ambassadorial cover story is moronic in the extreme, what with being in the frikkin' Rebel flagship at a deliberate strike against an Imperial facility, and almost boarded by the very Imperial emissary she tried to bluff hours (?) later. But the Tantive IV going to Tatooine, and Vader being able to figure it out, are not issues I have with either ANH or R1.

--Jonah
 
I think it's just time to stop having theories.

At this point I think even Lucasfilm doesn't have a clue what's happening.

I've shamelessly stolen the rest of this post from elsewhere as I thought it was excellent -

For younger viewers who want to understand how uncomfortable and pointless watching TLJ was:
If RJ did a ‘Lord of the Rings’ sequel
Aragon is living in hiding. He met somebody else with a ring and this time he took it, undoing all he achieved in not making the mistake of Isildur, and there’s no explanation why. But there’s cheap drama and ‘subversion’ of ‘your expectation that this makes sense or fits with what came before.’
Gandalf appears, he’s now Gandalf the Grey, despite having progressed to Gandalf the White halfway into the first movie. They felt people would remember Gandalf the Grey easier, so don’t care about what else was revealed about him after.
Tollo Taggins from The Commonwealth found a ring which has to be destroyed. At first he had visions of the other ring and stuff and there seemed to be a connection as a coherent sequel, but then the twist was there’s no coherent connection here and all that was just wasting your time and getting your hopes up with foreshadowing to nowhere.
Another dark lord has come along and created a ring, identical to the last one, there’s no explanation why. We’re told it doesn’t matter, it’s really deep this way.
The group starts out called ‘The Group’, then spends a lot of time making on-the-nose quips about how “We’re the FELLOWSHIP now”. It appears everything is undone.
You never see any of the towns or people of the world or anything, everybody is action heroes all the time 100%. The movies develop an almost hysterical aversion to explaining anything about what’s going on in the larger picture.


Tollo Taggins’ entire story takes place in 48 hours in which he’s kidnapped, mind-raped, thrown against trees, fights a desperate battle to not die, has a friend whose spine is sliced, and watches the enemy kill their own parent who Tollo quite liked. But suddenly the enemy takes off their shirt and Tollo begins blushing and making flustered comments, and wonders if maybe they were wrong. This definitely isn’t fan-fiction / day-time soap level story. This is a critical masterpiece which Lord of the Rings has sorely needed.


Two of the Group - er, Fellowship, like in the other movie - go halfway across Middle Earth to find an elf and a dwarf, because they need somebody to fight the orcs who are 50 metres behind them. They are told to do this by a computer game cutscene which gandalf magics up. They will need to somehow get into the centre of the orcs’ army but don’t worry about that. Instead of finding the heroes who they were supposed to, they have long exposition dumps where a character tells us how much we should hate people who should be pretty easy to hate if the movie just showed us. They all get murdered by a stampede of CGI so we hope the character is right. In their cell they happen to find another great warrior who breaks them out and appears to have been able to do so at any time, so surely must have something deeper which motivat- oh no, he betrayed them and never had any goal except wealth, so it’s not clear why he was even remaining in prison, with all those skills which should have made him a king there already.


The Group won’t listen to the one character among them who has actually done anything constructive and who blew up the enemy’s super weapon in the first part and saved them all, and instead aggravate him with and imply there’s no plan for the orcs chasing them and picking them off one by one, then sneer at him when he doesn’t automatically trust them, which apparently no longer has to be earned or thought about, so long as it accomplishes everybody’s ~favourite~ story trope of the heroes failing because they refuse to talk sensibly to each other. We learn that swords can be thrown backwards into armies far larger than them and basically destroy them, and always could be. There’s no hint of explanation for why they didn’t do this with all the earlier people who died with swords in this story, let alone the other stories. Swords are hella powerful now. We’re told it’s shallow to care about a coherent story when the graphics are really fancy.


Entire scenes and lines of dialogue appear to be directly copy-pasted almost beat-for-beat from the original Lord of the Rings, except far less coherently and without the worldbuilding and history behind them this time. Critics praise it as a fresh of breath air and a nice exploration of new territory for Lord of the Rings.


Two characters who barely even look at each other and just share exposition scenes appear to develop a romance purely because they’re the opposite sex and the only minority characters in the movie, who the director clearly had zero idea what to do with. Critics praise it as a nice maturing for Lord of the Rings.


The characters defeat certain rivals in the first movie. In the second movie, the rivals return and the characters defeat them again, quicker and easier this time. The rivals also teleport miles away between scenes when they are seconds away from executing the heroes.


There are ‘your Momma’ jokes where characters appear to reference 21st century day-to-day life concepts for a long draw-out humour scene where the lead ringwraith is made to look completely non-threatening. They become the target of physical slapstick jokes for the rest of the movie. The only threatening thing about them was their leader, Saurlon, who for some reason is a big eye on a tower who whispers the same rather unique lines to the heroes as Sauron did in Lord of the Rings. Critics call this a breath of fresh air for the Lord of the Rings movies. The apparently competent eye dies to the least competent character yet shown in a moment of raw luck, and we’re left with the slapstick comedy duo. We’re supposed to care about the threat which they apparently pose in yet another movie, somehow.


Aragon for some reason left a secret map to where he is, but it turns out he wanted nobody to know where he was and wants to die. Despite getting over his desire to run away from the throne in the original movies, he ran away from the throne.
 
In TESB, the Avenger apparently had the capability to determine all systems on the Falcon's "departure" vector (you know, had it not been a ruse). We can figure that Leia was hoping to get to Tatooine and gone again before they were caught up with, rather than potentially taking an evasive course with one or more legs on different vectors. Remember, she was going to fetch Obi-Wan. Hence why they dropped out of hyperspace there. My problems with R1 are Prequel-ish problems -- what we see doesn't line up with what we're told in the OT. "Several" transmissions were not beamed to that ship, and Leia's ambassadorial cover story is moronic in the extreme, what with being in the frikkin' Rebel flagship at a deliberate strike against an Imperial facility, and almost boarded by the very Imperial emissary she tried to bluff hours (?) later. But the Tantive IV going to Tatooine, and Vader being able to figure it out, are not issues I have with either ANH or R1.

Oh, this is just a minor nitpick introduced by the new hyperspace tracking introduced in Last Jedi. Even without that, I feel like the timing is incredibly off. Vader wasn't even aboard his Star Destroyer when the Tantive jumped to hyperspace. How long does it take his shuttle to get back over there? 5 minutes? 10 minutes? You'd think that's enough of a window that there's no chance of them catching up. So it's a flaw introduced with or without tracking.

The bigger issue is that the entire scene, much like a bigger chunk of the film, exists as poorly done fan service. Want to do fan service right in one of these movies? Yoda as an actual puppet. That's how you do it right.

Rogue One was the first big opportunity to depart from the standard Star Wars structure. It had a great premise, but dropped the ball with lousy characters and too much fan service.I didn't hate the movie, in fact I really liked it at first. But the more I thought about it, the less satisfied I was.

I really like the characters introduced in Force Awakens and I felt they were handled well in Last Jedi. While it's fun to debate the finer nitpicks, the bottom line is that I enjoyed the overall story and I cared about what happened to the characters. It's a win for me in many of the ways Rogue One was not.
 
You know, now that you brought up the opening of A New Hope... how, exactly, did the Star Destroyer find the Tantive IV? At the end of Rogue One, we see the Tantive jump to hyperspace. Hyperspace tracking is, presumably, not YET a thing. And why did the Tantive IV drop out of hyperspace anyway? Wouldn't the opening of A New Hope make more sense if hyperspace was never involved?

Why did people like Rogue One again? ;)

Tracking device. Heck, Vader and stormtroopers were literally at the door or the Tantive IV when it took off at the end of Rouge One.


Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

How Vader and the Devastator located the Tantive at Tatooine was an unanswered plot point, but not one that ever bothered me. It wasn't important to the story how, all that mattered was that they located it somehow. R1 provides some answers, in that the Profundity and it's crew were captured. Vader most likely force-choked his way through the crew until someone mentioned Tatooine, and that's all Vader needed. Fortunately he learned nothing about the plan to locate Obi-Wan.
 
Last edited:
A tracking device placed via missile etc on the Raddus before it jumped away the first time would be such a simple and useful explanation behind it being tracked, they can't jump away until they find it, and teams can't scour the external hull as they're under fire constantly. Job done.
 
A tracking device placed via missile etc on the Raddus before it jumped away the first time would be such a simple and useful explanation behind it being tracked, they can't jump away until they find it, and teams can't scour the external hull as they're under fire constantly. Job done.

Don't even get me started on this. Oh wait.

- - - Updated - - -

How Vader and the Devastator located the Tantive at Tatooine was an unanswered plot point, but not one that ever bothered me. It wasn't important to the story how, all that mattered was that they located it somehow. R1 provides some answers, in that the Profundity and it's crew were captured. Vader most likely force-choked his way through the crew until someone mentioned Tatooine, and that's all Vader needed. Fortunately he learned nothing about the plan to locate Obi-Wan.

Yes.

The most obvious explanation to me at the time was that Leia was on the Profundity with everybody else ,preparing to jump to Tatooine , whilst they waited for the data transmission from Scarif , but it was only after Vader disabled the engines that they had to use the secondary craft (The Blockade Runner) now, rather than later.
It must have been fairly easy to pull the coordinates from the nav computers on the Profundity or to torture remaining crew members to find out where they were originally headed. And given that when travelling through hyperspace its all in predetermined straight lines (no steering) , calculating the planets that lie within a few degrees to either side of that course is not difficult either, which is why you hear that statement in TESB.
I had a huge issue with what they did with all this in TLJ but thats for another post.
 
This thread is more than 3 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top