Well if it's an orbital gun platform, platforms are flat and static, that's the entire point. It's not about the ship, it's about the guns.
Star Wars: The Last Jedi (Pre-release)
- Thread starter rodneyfaile
- Start date
Well if it's an orbital gun platform, platforms are flat and static, that's the entire point. It's not about the ship, it's about the guns.
Bones_68
Sr Member
Sure, but it's an orbital gun platform in a space fantasy movie so they could have given it a little more character. It's okay, just not particularly inspired.
But that seems to be what they're going for with most of the First Order designs: gigantic, gray-black, somewhat nondescript. There's a certain air of totalitarian menace about these ships. They may not be exciting to look at but it makes sense in terms of who they represent.
mkstewartesq
Sr Member
I, too, have to see what the overall impression of the walker is going to be, how he walks and comes across when in action. But atm I do not like the design, since it looks like two separate concepts. If they had chosen to change the hind legs, too, okay, but that cross looks like its been split in the middle and does not know whether to be an elephant or an ape. Apephant, maybe? Or Gorrhino? Anyway, I am not particularly fond of several CW and PT designs, but the heavy cannon walker whatsisname looks totally coherent compared to this... beast
Agreed.
1. Not thrilled with the overt “gorilla” design, as a gorilla is an Earth animal. Sure, we’ve seen vehicles before that some people called “elephant walkers” or “chicken walkers” – but neither of those were truly evocative of/resembled an elephant or chicken per se. This seems a bit too “on the nose”.
2. As far as the front legs – I’ll reserve judgment until I see them in action. But if they really are shaped that way just to increase the “gorilla feel” – as opposed to allowing some specific movement or tactical advantage that the AT-AT didn’t have – I’ll be disappointed in the design. I have seen that the difference is “unlike more traditional AT-AT Walkers introduced in The Empire Strikes Back, the AT-M6 will bend at the knee to stabilize the cannon attached to its back” – let’s hope that makes the monkey look worthwhile.
3. If the “M6” in AT-M6 really stands for “Megacaliber Six”, well . . . let’s just pick another arbitrary non-SW name like AT-OKEwKFG (Optimus Kal-El-ius with Kung-Fu Grip).
M
I think giving most of us the bloody trailer would probably generate more interest than this : http://uk.ign.com/articles/2017/08/...-media-and-ar?abthid=599eed4cbcf05a6d7a000010
clancampbell
Sr Member
I still don't like any of the vehicle designs so far......and then i remembered this was leaked some time ago.....
I know it's just Lego, but how in the name of the Gods is this supposed to be a cool, impressive Star Wars design?????
This Assault Scout Walker looks like a reject from Robot Wars......
Rich
I know it's just Lego, but how in the name of the Gods is this supposed to be a cool, impressive Star Wars design?????
This Assault Scout Walker looks like a reject from Robot Wars......
Rich
gedmac66
Sr Member
Possibly a stupid question , but does anyone here think that the huge toy manufacturers have any imput into the design decisions being made by the filmmakers ?
Was a time when films were made , and if successful , sequels and merchandise were considered ... seems it's ( been ) the other way around for a long time now .
Was a time when films were made , and if successful , sequels and merchandise were considered ... seems it's ( been ) the other way around for a long time now .
mkstewartesq
Sr Member
IMHO - even if the toy manufacturers have no actual input, I suspect that future toy "value' is certainly a consideration on the part of the filmmakers (or their superiors), especially post-Disney, given their extensive experience in coupling films with (sometimes over-the-top) amount of merchandising. I do think there is an eye kept on the factor of "well, a 10-year old boy in 2017 wants something that looks more like a Transformer than a 37-year old AT-AT they've already bought - can't we jazz it up a bit?" That's also exactly why I cringed at the name "Megacaliber Six" - it sounds like it was given than name just because it would sound good when shouted by an announcer in a toy commercial.
But, again, just IMHO. Could be wrong.
M
No, that's likely exactly right. Also, I don't think Hasbro has any input in design.
Last edited:
cboath
Master Member
If that walker stands on it's hind legs, i'm just gonna say 'saw that coming'
Seems as if someone high up the chain is of the mantra bigger = better.
OT, Tie fighter = 1 seater
ST, Tie fighter =2 seater with more room inside than that
OT, Death Star = Size of a small moon
ST, Death Star WAS a large moon or small planet.
OT, Star Destroyer
ST, new SD is a piece of pizza 5 miles long.
Seems as if the First Order isn't doing anything different, they just have bigger stuff and more troopers.
Seems as if someone high up the chain is of the mantra bigger = better.
OT, Tie fighter = 1 seater
ST, Tie fighter =2 seater with more room inside than that
OT, Death Star = Size of a small moon
ST, Death Star WAS a large moon or small planet.
OT, Star Destroyer
ST, new SD is a piece of pizza 5 miles long.
Seems as if the First Order isn't doing anything different, they just have bigger stuff and more troopers.
mkstewartesq
Sr Member
Last edited by a moderator:
GL's view on your silly SWIQ...
・・・
The following is an excerpt from “Mythmaking: Behind the Scenes of Star Wars: Episode 2: Attack of the Clones”: One of the most intensely romantic scenes at the retreat finds Anakin and Padme sitting together in an intimate alcove, in front of a fire. There, in the firelight, they talk about their growing feelings for each other and the seeming impossibility of their sharing a life together. The scene typified the script's old-fashioned style. “Let's face it,” Lucas admitted, “their dialogue in that scene is pretty corny. It is presented very honestly, it isn't tongue-in-cheek at all, and it's really played to the hilt. But it is consistent not only with the rest of this movie, but with the overall Star Wars style. Most people don't understand the style of Star Wars. They don't get that there's an underlying motif very much like a nineteen thirties western or Saturday matinee serial. It's in that more romantic period of making movies and adventure films. And this film is even more of a melodrama than the others.” Photo credit: Nigel Parry
・・・
The following is an excerpt from “Mythmaking: Behind the Scenes of Star Wars: Episode 2: Attack of the Clones”: One of the most intensely romantic scenes at the retreat finds Anakin and Padme sitting together in an intimate alcove, in front of a fire. There, in the firelight, they talk about their growing feelings for each other and the seeming impossibility of their sharing a life together. The scene typified the script's old-fashioned style. “Let's face it,” Lucas admitted, “their dialogue in that scene is pretty corny. It is presented very honestly, it isn't tongue-in-cheek at all, and it's really played to the hilt. But it is consistent not only with the rest of this movie, but with the overall Star Wars style. Most people don't understand the style of Star Wars. They don't get that there's an underlying motif very much like a nineteen thirties western or Saturday matinee serial. It's in that more romantic period of making movies and adventure films. And this film is even more of a melodrama than the others.” Photo credit: Nigel Parry
Axlotl
Master Member
JD
Master Member
Jedi-72
Sr Member
Actually, I think it's George that doesn't get it. He's too close to it to recognize that's it cringe worthy and not at all believable or enjoyable to watch. GL has proven since 1999 to have perhaps the lowest SWIQ of all.
To add to the above, here's more of what George said about that dialogue in AOTC.
" ...I wanted to tell the love story in a style that was extremely old-fashioned., and, frankly, I didn't know if I was going to be able to pull it off. In many ways, this was much more like a movie from the 1930s than any of the others had been., with a slightly over-the-top poetic style - and they just don't do that in movies anymore. I was very happy with the way it turned out in the script and in the performances, but I knew a lot of people might not buy it. A lot of guys were going to see this movie, and most guys think that kind of flowery, poetic talk is stupid - 'Come on, give me a break.' More sophisticated, cynical types also don't buy that stuff. So I didn't know if people would laugh at it or throw things at the screen, or if they would accept it."
I've actually said what Anakin said to a girl before when I was a teen in very similar wording, so to me it's not exactly unrealistic.
" ...I wanted to tell the love story in a style that was extremely old-fashioned., and, frankly, I didn't know if I was going to be able to pull it off. In many ways, this was much more like a movie from the 1930s than any of the others had been., with a slightly over-the-top poetic style - and they just don't do that in movies anymore. I was very happy with the way it turned out in the script and in the performances, but I knew a lot of people might not buy it. A lot of guys were going to see this movie, and most guys think that kind of flowery, poetic talk is stupid - 'Come on, give me a break.' More sophisticated, cynical types also don't buy that stuff. So I didn't know if people would laugh at it or throw things at the screen, or if they would accept it."
I've actually said what Anakin said to a girl before when I was a teen in very similar wording, so to me it's not exactly unrealistic.
Last edited:
Bones_68
Sr Member
Please tell me you didn't give her the "sand" speech!
Similar threads
