modelcitizen
Sr Member
Re: Bandai (& Reboxed as Revell) 1/72 PG Millennium Falcon
twas reported long ago it's planet Batuu. carry on.
twas reported long ago it's planet Batuu. carry on.
Bandai 1/72 PG Millennium Falcon (also the Revell Germany rebox)
- Thread starter Jaitea
- Start date
Dedalus5550
Sr Member
Re: Bandai (& Reboxed as Revell) 1/72 PG Millennium Falcon
Notice the quotation marks I added. This feels A LOT like this: Okay, so we used the most obviously available references/CG available to us, then we added the crazy nose thingy. We knew (or later discovered through and onslaught of violent social media posts) that there was this whole debate about the landing gear and gear boxes. And the timeline is pretty clear. So we made one little scene where the landing gear seem to hit something and break off. Thank gosh it was only the two particular gear, and not the other ones that are basically right there. And, uh, Han Solo found out at the dealership it was cheaper to remove the rest of the very integrated gear boxes--that don't seem to break off in the scene--than just replace the gear struts. Then, he, uh, took the money from saving Leia and replaced the gear boxes when he realized that the extra gear was actually necessary.
In sci-fi, you get away with anything through flimsy excuses.
Somewhere, I posted a comment when I first saw the "Solo" MF. I said something like this felt like the 80s-90s movies where the hot girl is given glasses so we weren't supposed to recognize her hotness. Like half-way through, "Oh, crud, I think that was the MF all along. Dang!"
Whatever,
Mike Todd
Notice the quotation marks I added. This feels A LOT like this: Okay, so we used the most obviously available references/CG available to us, then we added the crazy nose thingy. We knew (or later discovered through and onslaught of violent social media posts) that there was this whole debate about the landing gear and gear boxes. And the timeline is pretty clear. So we made one little scene where the landing gear seem to hit something and break off. Thank gosh it was only the two particular gear, and not the other ones that are basically right there. And, uh, Han Solo found out at the dealership it was cheaper to remove the rest of the very integrated gear boxes--that don't seem to break off in the scene--than just replace the gear struts. Then, he, uh, took the money from saving Leia and replaced the gear boxes when he realized that the extra gear was actually necessary.
In sci-fi, you get away with anything through flimsy excuses.
Somewhere, I posted a comment when I first saw the "Solo" MF. I said something like this felt like the 80s-90s movies where the hot girl is given glasses so we weren't supposed to recognize her hotness. Like half-way through, "Oh, crud, I think that was the MF all along. Dang!"
Whatever,
Mike Todd
Re: Bandai (& Reboxed as Revell) 1/72 PG Millennium Falcon
I think it was handled well in Solo. Let me ask you this: How would you have had it been explained? Maybe the cost of repairing the gearboxes was more than just ripping them out? If we are going to debate the science or mechanics in a fictitious movie about having an invisible power called the force, then I think we' ve lost the magic that makes these movies great. In reality, none of what is in these films exists.
I think it was handled well in Solo. Let me ask you this: How would you have had it been explained? Maybe the cost of repairing the gearboxes was more than just ripping them out? If we are going to debate the science or mechanics in a fictitious movie about having an invisible power called the force, then I think we' ve lost the magic that makes these movies great. In reality, none of what is in these films exists.
Last edited:
modelcitizen
Sr Member
Re: Bandai (& Reboxed as Revell) 1/72 PG Millennium Falcon
"It's only a landing gear box".
"It's only a landing gear box".
Dedalus5550
Sr Member
Re: Bandai (& Reboxed as Revell) 1/72 PG Millennium Falcon
I would prefer silence--no explanation. I haven't heard an explanation for the fact that pilots wouldn't fit in the snowspeeder and I like it that way. The explanations for R2 units fitting in the Naboo fighter and the Jedi Starfighter are just hogwash. Since it is fictional and there are lots of scientific laws broken all over the place, and that force thingy, whatever. I have a friend at work and she describes herself as a total Star Wars nerd. She has several very authentic costumes from different movies. She even thought about getting the DeAgo MF when she heard about it. She never noticed the the landing gear and when I told her to go back and look, she said she kinda noticed it. The amount of people who even noticed enough to wonder is so small. Then to come out with explanations that insult my intelligence? I'd prefer to skip that part--for there to even be an explanation. Seems to me that the CG MF from EP 7 and 8 were based on the 5-gear falcon (then hosed up a bit by mirroring the sides). For subsequent movies, even those set before ESB, would use that CG work already done. I'm fine with that. And for modelers' purposes, we just need to take some of this into account. First, I don't like flimsy excuses. Second, I don't know how it helps me as a modeler. And modelers are the prime audience for excuses.
Now, alternately, some have said that the mandibles are meant to close and open in order to "bite" cargo boxes. In this way, they might be parallel or toed-in. And if they had vintage footage of ideas they had during ANH filming. Then, I say, there's legitimacy.
Mike Todd
I would prefer silence--no explanation. I haven't heard an explanation for the fact that pilots wouldn't fit in the snowspeeder and I like it that way. The explanations for R2 units fitting in the Naboo fighter and the Jedi Starfighter are just hogwash. Since it is fictional and there are lots of scientific laws broken all over the place, and that force thingy, whatever. I have a friend at work and she describes herself as a total Star Wars nerd. She has several very authentic costumes from different movies. She even thought about getting the DeAgo MF when she heard about it. She never noticed the the landing gear and when I told her to go back and look, she said she kinda noticed it. The amount of people who even noticed enough to wonder is so small. Then to come out with explanations that insult my intelligence? I'd prefer to skip that part--for there to even be an explanation. Seems to me that the CG MF from EP 7 and 8 were based on the 5-gear falcon (then hosed up a bit by mirroring the sides). For subsequent movies, even those set before ESB, would use that CG work already done. I'm fine with that. And for modelers' purposes, we just need to take some of this into account. First, I don't like flimsy excuses. Second, I don't know how it helps me as a modeler. And modelers are the prime audience for excuses.
Now, alternately, some have said that the mandibles are meant to close and open in order to "bite" cargo boxes. In this way, they might be parallel or toed-in. And if they had vintage footage of ideas they had during ANH filming. Then, I say, there's legitimacy.
Mike Todd
Re: Bandai (& Reboxed as Revell) 1/72 PG Millennium Falcon
Well... What I would say is that the only ones who would notice are modelers... And, since I consider myself a modeler, I'm good with the explanation. I think too much emphasis is place on how it should happen when we should be focused more on the story. I think the ILM guys who worked on Solo tried to appease the rivet counting modeler due to the inconsistentcies of the original movies, while at the same time making it exciting to watch. How else would we want this explained in a movie? Sure, we could have a tutorial as to the how and why in a book or manual, but what fun is that? If you're a studio scale purist, of course you would want a Hanes manual explaining how it happened... But the fact is that there are more fans that fall into the casual aspect of Star Wars and for anyone to pay tribute to the how and why of the three and five gear boxes in a major motion film speaks volumes to the people behind the movies I, and many, many others, love.
Well... What I would say is that the only ones who would notice are modelers... And, since I consider myself a modeler, I'm good with the explanation. I think too much emphasis is place on how it should happen when we should be focused more on the story. I think the ILM guys who worked on Solo tried to appease the rivet counting modeler due to the inconsistentcies of the original movies, while at the same time making it exciting to watch. How else would we want this explained in a movie? Sure, we could have a tutorial as to the how and why in a book or manual, but what fun is that? If you're a studio scale purist, of course you would want a Hanes manual explaining how it happened... But the fact is that there are more fans that fall into the casual aspect of Star Wars and for anyone to pay tribute to the how and why of the three and five gear boxes in a major motion film speaks volumes to the people behind the movies I, and many, many others, love.
ggriffaw
Sr Member
Re: Bandai (& Reboxed as Revell) 1/72 PG Millennium Falcon
I would think at least 95% of SW fans don't even know about the 3 gear/5 gear inconsistency. For them the scene in Solo was just part of the action and doesn't have any particular significance. It was put in specifically for a very small percentage of fans that worry about explaining inconsistencies that are just a part of making fantasy films in the real world. I look at it as a nod to the hardcore fans.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
I would think at least 95% of SW fans don't even know about the 3 gear/5 gear inconsistency. For them the scene in Solo was just part of the action and doesn't have any particular significance. It was put in specifically for a very small percentage of fans that worry about explaining inconsistencies that are just a part of making fantasy films in the real world. I look at it as a nod to the hardcore fans.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Analyzer
Master Member
Re: Bandai (& Reboxed as Revell) 1/72 PG Millennium Falcon
I wonder if Lucas ever thought about fixing it in the Special Editions?
i.e. Did it ever come up as a topic when looking at what should be fixed and he decided it was not worth it?
or was it a conscious choice to explain it away as Han tinkering with the Falcon between ANH and ESB
or did Lucas just ignore it and figured no one would notice only to retcon some story later about the change (kind of like how they retconned the explanation of making the kessel run in 12 parsecs)
I wonder if Lucas ever thought about fixing it in the Special Editions?
i.e. Did it ever come up as a topic when looking at what should be fixed and he decided it was not worth it?
or was it a conscious choice to explain it away as Han tinkering with the Falcon between ANH and ESB
or did Lucas just ignore it and figured no one would notice only to retcon some story later about the change (kind of like how they retconned the explanation of making the kessel run in 12 parsecs)
Re: Bandai (& Reboxed as Revell) 1/72 PG Millennium Falcon
Totally. I bet 99%.
It's like the scene in Solo where Beckett strips down the sniper rifle to reveal the Solo blaster. How many people know about the original Mauser, and how it was used in an earlier Frank Sinatra movie? If you're one of the tiny minority who does, then you go wheeee! If not, it's just some random scene.
Totally. I bet 99%.
It's like the scene in Solo where Beckett strips down the sniper rifle to reveal the Solo blaster. How many people know about the original Mauser, and how it was used in an earlier Frank Sinatra movie? If you're one of the tiny minority who does, then you go wheeee! If not, it's just some random scene.
Re: Bandai (& Reboxed as Revell) 1/72 PG Millennium Falcon
I did not know that... But I did appreciate how they included where Han gets his iconic blaster. It was a special moment in the film. There was a lot of fan service in Solo. It was a pleasure to watch... and rewatch... and watch again...lol
I did not know that... But I did appreciate how they included where Han gets his iconic blaster. It was a special moment in the film. There was a lot of fan service in Solo. It was a pleasure to watch... and rewatch... and watch again...lol
Re: Bandai (& Reboxed as Revell) 1/72 PG Millennium Falcon
That's the best kind of fan service. If you know the history of the Bapty weapon, then you enjoy that. If you simply recognize the Han blaster at the end, then that's fine too. If it's just a scene of a guy giving another guy a gun as part of the narrative, that's fine also. It works at all those levels.
That's the best kind of fan service. If you know the history of the Bapty weapon, then you enjoy that. If you simply recognize the Han blaster at the end, then that's fine too. If it's just a scene of a guy giving another guy a gun as part of the narrative, that's fine also. It works at all those levels.
Hunk a Junk
Sr Member
Re: Bandai (& Reboxed as Revell) 1/72 PG Millennium Falcon
The fan service in Solo felt appropriate. It's an origin story, so it's going to nod to stuff we already know. I thought they were pretty smart about it. Unlike the fan service in TFA that felt forced and cheap (at least to me). Like when Finn pulls out Luke's training remote on board the Falcon.
The fan service in Solo felt appropriate. It's an origin story, so it's going to nod to stuff we already know. I thought they were pretty smart about it. Unlike the fan service in TFA that felt forced and cheap (at least to me). Like when Finn pulls out Luke's training remote on board the Falcon.
gt350pony66
Master Member
Re: Bandai (& Reboxed as Revell) 1/72 PG Millennium Falcon
ya nailed it, completely agree:thumbsup
ya nailed it, completely agree:thumbsup
astroboy
Master Member
Re: Bandai (& Reboxed as Revell) 1/72 PG Millennium Falcon
On one level, I agree. Ultimately I think it's a better film.
The problem is that all of these tidbits leave us with the feeling that EVERYTHING happened on his first adventure. They had a checklist and they went through it.
But it means that nothing of consequence happened between solo and the moment we meet him in the cantina.
I would have been fine but if we didn't even see the falcon in this film. Or if chewie had been with him for years at this point.
The reality is that a character like solo doesn't have an origin. He has years of experience that make the man. Not one single day where everything happens.
Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
On one level, I agree. Ultimately I think it's a better film.
The problem is that all of these tidbits leave us with the feeling that EVERYTHING happened on his first adventure. They had a checklist and they went through it.
But it means that nothing of consequence happened between solo and the moment we meet him in the cantina.
I would have been fine but if we didn't even see the falcon in this film. Or if chewie had been with him for years at this point.
The reality is that a character like solo doesn't have an origin. He has years of experience that make the man. Not one single day where everything happens.
Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
Hunk a Junk
Sr Member
Re: Bandai (& Reboxed as Revell) 1/72 PG Millennium Falcon
Actually, I want one more Solo film because I don't think he's quite the man he is by the time of ANH. He's nowhere as cynical and world-weary as Ford's character. He's still the "I have a good feeling about this," guy. But it's a moot point because we'll never get that movie. So, as a one-off stand-alone origin story, I'm glad it ticked off enough boxes that it left me satisfied.
Actually, I want one more Solo film because I don't think he's quite the man he is by the time of ANH. He's nowhere as cynical and world-weary as Ford's character. He's still the "I have a good feeling about this," guy. But it's a moot point because we'll never get that movie. So, as a one-off stand-alone origin story, I'm glad it ticked off enough boxes that it left me satisfied.
Jaitea
Master Member
Re: Bandai (& Reboxed as Revell) 1/72 PG Millennium Falcon
Totally agree.....each time I watch it I like it more....& I would like to see more of the underworld....I’m not really a big fan of the ‘supers’ in Star Wars,.... I always preferred Han & Chewie moments than the Luke & the Force
J
Totally agree.....each time I watch it I like it more....& I would like to see more of the underworld....I’m not really a big fan of the ‘supers’ in Star Wars,.... I always preferred Han & Chewie moments than the Luke & the Force
J
Hunk a Junk
Sr Member
Re: Bandai (& Reboxed as Revell) 1/72 PG Millennium Falcon
BTW, before things get too far into the weeds on Solo, here's the nonsense I did to my PG lower gunport compared to the 5-footer.
Yeah, that's faux internal wiring I scratched up using left over electrical wire and brass tube sections. Doing my best to duplicate the 1977 5-footer, warts and all.
BTW, before things get too far into the weeds on Solo, here's the nonsense I did to my PG lower gunport compared to the 5-footer.
Yeah, that's faux internal wiring I scratched up using left over electrical wire and brass tube sections. Doing my best to duplicate the 1977 5-footer, warts and all.
Re: Bandai (& Reboxed as Revell) 1/72 PG Millennium Falcon
But have you drilled the side carrying holes, motorized the fans, added the metal wedge-shaped box under the rear engine quarter...
But have you drilled the side carrying holes, motorized the fans, added the metal wedge-shaped box under the rear engine quarter...
Hunk a Junk
Sr Member
Re: Bandai (& Reboxed as Revell) 1/72 PG Millennium Falcon
Drilled the side carrying holes -- check.
Did not motorize the fans. Thought about it, but decided it's not something we ever see functioning, even in behind the scenes video. I did, however, add a faux fan motor housing behind JoeCS's original cockpit, including some exposed wires. :$
The dusty original ---> 
What metal wedge-shaped box are you talking about?
But have you drilled the side carrying holes, motorized the fans, added the metal wedge-shaped box under the rear engine quarter...
Drilled the side carrying holes -- check.
Did not motorize the fans. Thought about it, but decided it's not something we ever see functioning, even in behind the scenes video. I did, however, add a faux fan motor housing behind JoeCS's original cockpit, including some exposed wires. :$
The dusty original ---> What metal wedge-shaped box are you talking about?
Last edited:
Similar threads
