Women ALWAYS find out.
Finally, a weapon that needs to suck a star dry in order to power it but which is incapable of powered movement seems like a pretty bad idea....Now that you put it that way, I finally know, what that Starkiller-thing reminded me of: The Star Forge from Knights of the Old Republic. And a masked Dark Jedi/Sith also sounds quite like Revan, doesn't it?
Well, in this film, we are continually confused by the relationship between the Republic, the Resistance and the First Order; When the superweapon fires, is the Republic now materially affected? What about the Republican Fleet? How could this First Order build a superweapon without anyone knowing about it?I don't think that Abrams himself ever asked a single one these questions. If he had done so, we wouldn't have to do it now.
And... "Snoke"? Snoke? What the hell kind of a name is "Snoke"? Yo Snoke, wazzup man? Seriously?yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyup :|
And Luke doesn't say a single frakking word. He's just standing there, looking at Rey and that's it. They could have ended the movie right after the Falcon departing to search for Luke and there would not have been anything lost or gained.My feeling with that is that they set up the meeting here so they can start ep8 several months later, way into Rey's training, without needing to put a flashback to set it up.
assuming that moncal wasn't ackbar and that sulustean pilot wasn't the one from ROTJ
It's definitely watchable, but the whole thing felt pretty thinly strung together to me. The characters have personalities so it's already way better than the prequels, but it's also weak in areas where SW is usually strong. The editing of the climax was especially floppy compared to the stuff it's rehashing, and then the extended coda just didn't work at all for me.
The score seemed pretty uninspired at first audition, with the new themes getting buried and the OT leitmotifs getting all the big moments. The title crawl fanfare was just off. I dunno if it was a bad take or poorly mic'd/mixed or it just really misses the 20th Century Fox fanfare to establish the key or what, but it sounded pretty anemic coming out of the gate.
The cinematography often felt more like a modern comic book movie than the 1930s Buck Rodgers jam that the OT is all about, which I think probably contributed to the awkward editing. I was very aware of the camera in several action scenes.
It's 2015 and the talking CG alien characters are still completely unconvincing and immersion breaking. The alien lady who tries to give Rey the lightsaber and Emperor Snookie were both giving me the Jar Jar vibe. Stop screwing around and give us the muppets we crave!
Anyway it's pretty much what I expected after what Abrams did with Star Trek. I am curious to see where this trilogy goes. We've had a trilogy start at visionary and decline to watchable, we've had one start at abysmal and come up to almost watchable, but we've never had so-so as the starting point. The possibilities are...several!
I didn't like this movie very much. The characters were fantastic but I thought the script and editing let them down. Most of the back half of the movie feels like it's checking off callbacks without providing the connective tissue that made them work.
All that said, yeah, the scene vs the Stormtrooper with the stick that could block lightsabers was kinda dumb.
Can we all appreciate how REAL all this felt, though? The actors interacted with their surroundings! They picked things up and moved through space! It surprised me how much of a relief this was after the prequels.
The similarity was probably just insurance to send the message "this is still star wars, chill out fans". I expect the future episodes to be less constrained on that point now that the ground work has been laid.
Final verdict: worse than Revenge of the Sith. Possibly worse than Attack of the Clones. Still better than Jar-Jar. Immeasurably worse than the Thrawn Trilogy. I'm hoping it's made better by the next two movies. Which is entirely possible.
Guess that sums everything up, that's to be said on the negative side.
Disney made a fatal mistake in declaring the old EU non-canon and then coming up with something, that's not even on par with Episode III (the only prequel I kinda liked), so now fans are disappointed. As you mentioned, the story set around Thrawn would have been way better and so would have other storylines from the EU.
The prequel movies were bad because they were just poorly acted, poorly written, poorly paced, and felt artificial because of the dependence on CGI. All that had nothing to do with how "Star Wars" they were. Just from a cinematic perspective, TFA blows them away by not falling into any of those traps. We can argue or disagree on whether we feel like this is the Star Wars we wanted to see, but at least JJ Abrams made a good and enjoyable movie. Acting, visuals, and pacing were all solid. There wasn't anything that made me cringe like I did so often through the entire prequel trilogy. That's a giant step in the right direction for me.
Aside from the plot, the only thing I was annoyed about were the fighter battles - It was great and a lot of fun and all, but X-Wings and TIE Fighters!? Where were the Y-Wings? A-Wings? B-Wings? The TIE Interceptors? TIE Bombers? The TIE Advanced???
I think J.J. is a good fit for the Star Wars franchise; I absolutely hated what he did with Star Trek - Star Trek is supposed to be the more cerebral of the two, based around exploration, discovery, moral dilemmas and cool tech, but he turned it into a straight-up action flick. Star Wars OTOH is all about action and adventure, and his style just fits it so much better.
Question, was it ever stated as an actual, hard, unbreakable rule that those things can't happen in any of the movies?
If you think about things for two seconds the movie falls apart and it basically walks all over the originals.Well maybe if you think about things for more than two seconds, you'd realize that comparing the falcon's capabilities and han's piloting skills from ANH, to the gazillions of changes the falcon certainly undertook in 20 years and the vast experience han has gathered in that time, puts things in perspective.
If you think about things for two seconds the movie falls apart and it basically walks all over the originals.Well maybe if you think about things for more than two seconds, you'd realize that comparing the falcon's capabilities and han's piloting skills from ANH, to the gazillions of changes the falcon certainly undertook in 20 years and the vast experience han has gathered in that time, puts things in perspective.
Again, noone here is denying the movie has issues. We just acknowledge them and move on to appreciate the good things and the potential this movie has brought to the new continuity.
Well maybe if you think about things for more than two seconds, you'd realize that comparing the falcon's capabilities and han's piloting skills from ANH, to the gazillions of changes the falcon certainly undertook in 20 years and the vast experience han has gathered in that time, puts things in perspective.
If hyperspace can take you from a ship's hangar to a planetary surface, that's not a mode of transportation, that's teleportation, and there's a huge loss of dramatic potential as Akalabeth Angel pointed out.On the other hand you could do things with that similar to what they did in nuBSG, where the FTL could literally bring you from location A to location B in virtually zero time (Remember when Galactica was falling through the atmosphere launching her vipers and then departed just before she would have hit the ground). But that wouldn't be a Hyperdrive anymore, as Galemp just said, yet what the Falcon uses to travel is one, and therefor it would not be Star Wars anymore as well.
A universe, even a fictional one, needs to have some internal consistency. It doesn't matter what new rules for the universe are introduced, just so long as those rules are followed consistently. This is true even in worlds governed by magic not science.Most definitely. That TFA doesn't follow the rules set up in the previous movies (including even the prequels here) is my biggest and almost my only real problem with this movie.
Ok, I'll be in a minority here, but I can't see why people hate Prequel Trillogy so much. It's like hating Heroes V just because they are not Heroes III. I like OT, but aside from technical aspects that are obviously better in PT as it's newer, I find PT much more deep and thrilling because:
- There is no such strong black-and-white separation that drives us through the whole OT. We see PT galaxy as evil, cruel place where "good" republic is corrupted and unstable, various groups of interests clash and exploit the weak for their own benefit and beyond Republic's borders slavery and barbarism takes the upper hand over civilization and law.
- Palpatine - IMHO one of the best antagonists in whole SciFi. He hides in the shadow, manipulates others, poses as a good guy, starts a civil war to make peace-keeping Jedi generals, sends them to the frontline, slowly weakens the Jedi Order and diminishes its position within the Republic only to turn the clone army against its Jedi commanders in a crucial moment - for me it's a masterpiece that fighting evil Empire by a group or rebels can't be even compared with. Also the way he manipulates Anakin and risks deconspiration to seduce him to the Dark Side - it was thrilling.
- Bad guys win - watching Jedi making their stand trying to resolve a plot and discover Sith's identity knowing they will ultimately fall was great. Both in prequels itself and the Clone Wars which did a great job expanding PT universe.
- Anakin - a complex character in whom both good and evil are present and clash each other as plot goes forward. His seduction to Dark Side was a result of multiple experiences that struck him and altered his personality and the choices he made under influence of Palpatine.
As for the prequels. I hate them because of their execution. While the elements of a good story might exist, the execution is terrible with gag-worthy dialogue, bad story-telling, boring characters, boring battles, etcetera. It's another set of movies where if you stop and actually use your brain for 2 seconds, things don't make much sense at all.I agree that dialogues are bad at some moments, especially between Anakin and Padme in Episodes II and III, but they never disturbed me much in enjoying the main plot. But anyway, I never found OT dialogues very well either. There are certain phrases that became symbolic, like "May the force be with you" or "I have a bad feeling about that", but besides that, they're quite average.
Like do you realize that Padme marries Anakin after he confesses to murdering an entire village? He literally goes and kills like 50 civilians and her only response is "to be angry is to be human". Wtf? Maybe if she were some psychotic murderer herself I could get behind that relationship but she's supposed to be some do-gooder championing peace.First of all, he slaughters savages who kidnapped and tortured his mother, not only innocents. And he is frustrated with himself being not strong enough to save her. Padme does not justify his actions, she tries to calm down Anakin's extraordinarily high expectations about himself. Perhaps her attitude would be different if she were there and saw with her own eyes what Anakin did.
The other problem is that nearly everything that is said in the OT about the past doesn't match up with the PT. Something simple like Leia's mother dying when she was young is portrayed incorrectly. Taken as a part maybe it's no big deal but when nothing matches up at all, it simply feels wrong. This is exemplified by the fact that Lucas has obviously changed the story in order to appeal to fans and by doing so is also trying to rewrite the original trilogy as well, saying its really "about Darth Vader destroying the Sith" (horse****).Agreed on this one, but can point out more mismatches? Leia's memories about Padme were the only one I noticed watching prequels.
Like do you realize that Padme marries Anakin after he confesses to murdering an entire village? He literally goes and kills like 50 civilians and her only response is "to be angry is to be human". Wtf? Maybe if she were some psychotic murderer herself I could get behind that relationship but she's supposed to be some do-gooder championing peace.First of all, he slaughters savages who kidnapped and tortured his mother, not only innocents. And he is frustrated with himself being not strong enough to save her. Padme does not justify his actions, she tries to calm down Anakin's extraordinarily high expectations about himself. Perhaps her attitude would be different if she were there and saw with her own eyes what Anakin did.
QuoteThe other problem is that nearly everything that is said in the OT about the past doesn't match up with the PT. Something simple like Leia's mother dying when she was young is portrayed incorrectly. Taken as a part maybe it's no big deal but when nothing matches up at all, it simply feels wrong. This is exemplified by the fact that Lucas has obviously changed the story in order to appeal to fans and by doing so is also trying to rewrite the original trilogy as well, saying its really "about Darth Vader destroying the Sith" (horse****).Agreed on this one, but can point out more mismatches? Leia's memories about Padme were the only one I noticed watching prequels.
Well, I liked it. I get the impression that some of you went into the movie looking for a reason to not like it, or had expectations so high (seriously, why would you do that to yourselves?) that no movie could have possibly met them. I mean, what would a perfect new trilogy be like for you all?
Seems some also forgot that RotJ was also pretty much a clone (pun intended) of ANH, so it's like there's now a series of 4 chronological movies in which 3 of them follow basically the same overarching plot.
Yeah. Band of rebels work with someone strong in the force to take down a (spherical) superweapon built by followers of a Sith Lord.
That is _the_ comparative example. What do you mean I didn't give you one? That's the overarching plot, which is exactly what I said earlier. I'm not trying to defend statements I never made.
Just because the OT didn't mention the term Sith, doesn't mean it's not canon that Vader and Palpatine were Sith. It is canon, so I'm pretty sure that my statement still stands. Are you just nitpicking at minor term usage now?
Question, are you serious?
Question, are you serious?The Falcon did not go to lightspeed inside a hanger in ANH. We do not know why. We only know they didn't. There's obviously a reason, for that time, but we were not told it. Without knowing what that reason was, all your efforts to deny it for TFA are sophistry.
Akalabeth Angel's complaints in this regard ultimately stem from the movies not bothering to explain every single detail. Personally, I don't mind this stuff; I don't particularly care why one strategy was used in this film but not used in another. I don't need an in-universe explanation of how every i is dotted and every t crossed because I'm in this for the ride. If I needed or wanted an in-depth explanation of everything, I'd be reading David Weber, not watching Star Wars.
No my complaints stem from the movie not making any sense. Not being a believable world.No, it's just not hard sci-fi. SW never was hard sci-fi. You don't have to explain every little detail for it to globally make enough sense to work. It's actually usually best if you don't try, it distracts from the rest of the show.
No my complaints stem from the movie not making any sense. Not being a believable world.No, it's just not hard sci-fi. SW never was hard sci-fi. You don't have to explain every little detail for it to globally make enough sense to work. It's actually usually best if you don't try, it distracts from the rest of the show.
Plot armour. Welcome to Holywood.
Great, because I'm not here to be a good fan, I'm here to enjoy SW. Too bad for you that you hate fun.
So what are you arguing for exactly?
You're arguing that all of the circumstances surrounding when a ship did and did not enter lightspeed in the previous movies is not explained in full, so when a ship in the new movie acts completely contrary to that behaviour, all of the circumstance are explained not by logical deduction and observation but by the sudden absence of some third unspoken and not obvious factor?
Nah. I just have fun in other ways. Unlike a baby I need more than movement and pretty lights to enjoy what's going on.Well I'm having fun, you don't. Pretty easy to see who is having the best time here.
The fact that Rey and Finn can fight with a lightsaber without lopping their arms off despite having never touched one before annoys me far more than the hyperspace thing. Not that the hyperspace thing isn't dumb, but I don't care much about it.Finn has stormtrooper CQC melee training (see the "traitor!" stormtrooper). As for Rey, she also demonstrates ability with her metal stick at the beginning, and her ability with the Force seems to strongly hint that something else is going on with her.
You're being dense. We are never told the complete set of rules of hyperspace in the Star Wars universe. Your claim that TFA violates the rules is therefore spurious.
Akalabeth Angel's complaints in this regard ultimately stem from the movies not bothering to explain every single detail . . . I don't need an in-universe explanation of how every i is dotted and every t crossed because I'm in this for the ride.
The fact that Luke could fly an X-Wing well enough to survive the Death Star assault despite never having touched one has always annoyed me.
Actually, no, wait, it didn't.
Nah. I just have fun in other ways. Unlike a baby I need more than movement and pretty lights to enjoy what's going on.Well I'm having fun, you don't. Pretty easy to see who is having the best time here.
This looks like a clear case of "how dare you enjoy what I don't" to me.
Yeah except that you're replying to me, not the other way around.Yes, yes I am. You're a big boy, you'll figure out why.
If you actually contributed to this thread before responding to me I didn't read it.Well that's certainly an interesting admission from you.
You're being dense. We are never told the complete set of rules of hyperspace in the Star Wars universe. Your claim that TFA violates the rules is therefore spurious.Akalabeth Angel's complaints in this regard ultimately stem from the movies not bothering to explain every single detail . . . I don't need an in-universe explanation of how every i is dotted and every t crossed because I'm in this for the ride.
So if you don't need an explanation of how things work why are you criticizing my argument based on a lack of explanation?
Something tells me you don't actually know what you're arguing for you're just being contrary for the sake of being contrary. You like a film but you cannot explain why so you grasp at whatever straw presents itself in the moment no matter how contrary it is to your previous statement.
The fact that Luke could fly an X-Wing well enough to survive the Death Star assault despite never having touched one has always annoyed me.
Actually, no, wait, it didn't.
And do you know why it didn't annoy you?
If you actually contributed to this thread before responding to me I didn't read it.Well that's certainly an interesting admission from you.
I don't need an explanation. You apparently do.
Yes. Do you know why it doesn't, or why I do not care about what you deem to be plotholes and errors and universe-destroying rule breakings?The fact that Luke could fly an X-Wing well enough to survive the Death Star assault despite never having touched one has always annoyed me.And do you know why it didn't annoy you?
Actually, no, wait, it didn't.
Difference being that (AA's complaints notwithstanding) the changes to the hyperspace rules in TFA do not actually represent a complete invalidation of plot points in previous films (or, in ST's case, TV series).
Dude, I know how hyperspace works. It's made clear from the previous movies and the choices that characters make in specific circumstances within those movies. In fact Han Solo even tells you how it works in the original movie, requiring precise calculations and requiring the avoidance of objects. It's even clear from the visual effect that the ship accelerates in normal space before entering a different state.
Take Star Trek 2009. I know that things in that movie don't make sense. I know that they're broken, particularly in terms of Star Trek but I enjoy it so I give them a pass. I don't make up reasons for why it may or may not be different I just accept that overall, I enjoy the movie, but that certain elements are stupid.
Force Awakens doesn't get a pas, because overall I can't enjoy the movie. The faults of the movie outweigh its positives.
Oh I know why it doesn't annoy me, just wondering if you knew why it didn't annoy you, so far the jury is still out as to whether you know or not.
What hyper space rules? You said you don't know the rules. What are the rules of hyperspace? How about you list out the rules and we can apply those rules to each situation.
The biggest problem in Star Trek 2009 and Into Darkness is not the teleporters. The problem is the Warp Drive. It's again, a teleportation device.
Hyperspace is a form of FTL travel that requires specialized equipment. That's the only firm rule we know of. We do not know the absolute speed attainable (Han says ".5 past light speed" in the OT, but it's not like that allows us to extrapolate anything), we do not know what conditions must be met for a hyperspace jump to be possible (but it's reasonable to assume that large objects like Planets inhibit travel), however we do know that a ship can jump from within another ship (although we do not know what happens to the ship that is jumped out of). We also have little information about the conditions for successful hyperspace exit; the only firm rule seems to be that exiting within another solid body is probably not a good idea.
There's also the handwavium part where the Falcon can go from Hoth to Bespin without a hyperdrive. Have fun explaining that.
Ep7 has issues, but OT has its fair share of inconsistencies as well.
So if we know that a ship can jump to light speed from within another ship (from TFA), why didn't they go to hyperspace from within the death star which has an open hangar in Episode IV?
And where do you get the idea that exiting light speed within a solid body is not a good idea? Where is this shown in the movie? You said Han is not a reliable source of information so what onscreen evidence do you have to support that claim?
So if we know that a ship can jump to light speed from within another ship (from TFA), why didn't they go to hyperspace from within the death star which has an open hangar in Episode IV?
We do know that the Falcon had to break atmosphere before jumping away from Tatooine. We also know the same was true of the Naboo royal transport and the transports from ESB. That let's us extrapolate that being in a gravity well at the very least degrades, of not outright inhibits, hyperspace entry. We also know that the first Death Star is a massive machine, maybe massive enough to disrupt hyperspace entry.
Who says the Falcon had to break atmosphere before jumping? Maybe they just chose to. After all, no one told you that they need to leave the atmosphere.
I mean in Return of the Jedi, the rebel fighters flew to the front of the fleet before the entire fleet jumped to hyperspace in sequence from front to back, but clearly they chose to do that, because it would look cool right?
It's never explicitly stated that an X-Wing couldn't just jump to lightspeed through a Mon Calamari or vice versa, so just because we don't see it happen doesn't mean it's not possible. You can argue that a Mon Cal would have too much gravity for a ship to jump out of but you cannot say that a Mon Cal could not jump through its own fighters because surely they don't have enough gravity.
Who says the Falcon had to break atmosphere before jumping? Maybe they just chose to. After all, no one told you that they need to leave the atmosphere.
If that wasn't the case, why did the Naboo royal transport and the transports at Hoth break atmosphere before jumping? In both cases, the planet they fled from was under blockade; If they could have jumped sooner, why didn't they? The assumption that a ship needs to be out of atmo, or at least a certain distance away from the planet before going to hyper is a natural one to make (Not to mention that, without such a limitation, blockades would not be practical at all). As far as we can tell from the films, this seems to be a very firm rule.
QuoteI mean in Return of the Jedi, the rebel fighters flew to the front of the fleet before the entire fleet jumped to hyperspace in sequence from front to back, but clearly they chose to do that, because it would look cool right?
It's never explicitly stated that an X-Wing couldn't just jump to lightspeed through a Mon Calamari or vice versa, so just because we don't see it happen doesn't mean it's not possible. You can argue that a Mon Cal would have too much gravity for a ship to jump out of but you cannot say that a Mon Cal could not jump through its own fighters because surely they don't have enough gravity.
Maybe it makes tactical sense to have a bunch of fighters be the spearhead? Maybe jumping through something adds complications best avoided before launching a huge offensive? Not that this digression matters.
Wow, you seem to be making the assumption that just because the Falcon survived the jump under the shield, that this means that jumping into a planetary atmosphere is in any way safe or reliable. Han specifically refuses to tell Leia his idea because she won't like it; presumably, wouldn't like it to the point of refusing to allow him to go through with it at all. How do you know it isn't a split-second timing differential between ending up on the outside of the shield (and splattering all over it) or jumping too close to the planet's surface (and splattering all over it)?
while Leia Fisher's face was stretched by Disney so much she couldn't open her mouth to talk.How dare Carrie Fisher get old? Women aren't allowed to do that!
The fact that Luke could fly an X-Wing well enough to survive the Death Star assault despite never having touched one has always annoyed me.Right, because those were totally treated the same way. It's not like it took Luke two movies to actually fight with a lightsaber (a fight he lost). Nope, it's exactly the same. Because Luke could fly an X-Wing, it's perfectly ok for someone to have instant Jedi skills the moment they pick up a lightsaber. Doesn't cheapen Luke's arc at all. Nope.
Actually, no, wait, it didn't.
Right, because those were totally treated the same way. It's not like it took Luke two movies to actually fight with a lightsaber (a fight he lost). Nope, it's exactly the same. Because Luke could fly an X-Wing, it's perfectly ok for someone to have instant Jedi skills the moment they pick up a lightsaber. Doesn't cheapen Luke's arc at all. Nope.
He wasted his time going to see Yoda, didn't he? Becoming a Jedi is obviously really easy.
ANH tells us that Luke is a gifted pilot. It doesn't show us, mind you, it alludes to the fact by having Luke play with some toy and have Obi Wan point out that his father was remarkably gifted in that area. There are deleted scenes where Luke talks about wanting to join the imperial Academy to become a pilot, but that's all there is to it.
Obi-wan says that he's heard Luke's a good pilot, Luke claims he is to Han in the cantina, and even Biggs assures that he can handle the X-wing because he's the best bush pilot (not in the original release). Whether it's realistic or not, it's repeated plenty of times.
Still though, it is not until the Battle of Yavin that his abilities are actually shown to the viewer.
Because "show don't tell" is a pretty good rule to follow in storytelling? It's generally easier to get the audience to go along with a given characterization if they can make that characterization themselves, instead of having the narrative tell us about it.
So killing children is okay just so long as you kill a bad guy too?I didn't say it was okay. I said Anakin had reasons to feel anger for Tuskens.
I don't think people think that way.
Imperial General laughing at Vader's "sad devotion to that ancient religion" - Does this seem like something you would say if only 20 years previous the Jedi had a huge temple on Coruscant with hundreds of Jedi, each of which was fighting in the armies?In the light of what we saw in Episode III, the world "ancient" could've been used sarcastically, to diminish significance of the Force. "Ancient" means here something we regard obsolete, worse, what we despise. Remember all these officers have been brainwashed by propaganda for the past twenty years. Not every quotation from OT must be took literally.
The empire made up by clones even though all the bridge officers are obviously regular dudes.What's so strange in that? The Empire has no clones in OT. Stormtroopers are not clones. Among officers non-clones were present even during the Clone Wars - eg. Admiral Yularen and Captain Tarkin. Clones have been in Empire's regular service only for a short time after Jedi Purge as Kaminoans began to resist.
Leia saying "years ago you served my father in the clone wars". Did Obi Wan fight for the Alderan guy? Don't think so. He's just a senator. The Jedi were all military leaders in the PT.I never thought "My father" refers to Bail Organa. I guess Organa told her that she is adopted, her father fought in the Clone Wars and he also mentioned Obi-wan - that's why Leia tries to call Obi-wan for help in the first place.
The idea of Jedi vs Sith when the OT only talks about Dark vs Light.What's the problem with that? In OT Luke discovers only snippets of knowledge about the Force Jedi had in PT. It's simply forgotten as there are almost no old Jedi left.
Obi Wan saying Uncle Owen was against Anakin following OW on some "damned fool crusade". Did Owen even know Anakin? He met the guy for like 5 hours. Obi Wan talks as though they grew up together. Aunt Beru talks the same way as well "too much of his father in him", this suggests knowing his spirit. You don't know a guy from meeting him for a couple hours.They saw him rushing to save his mother, then returning with her body, then crying on her tomb. Enough to know he is impulsive and emotional.
Furthermore does the conflict in the PT mirror a Crusade? Bearing in mind that the Crusades were expeditions to liberate the holy land. Not the defense of a political state.How can I even comment that? It's just a term. It's origins can be totally different as we are in alternate universe.
Obi Wan saying that his father was already a great pilot when he met him. This is wrong for many reasons. First of which, Obi Wan didn't meet Anakin. Anakin wasn't a pilot, he was a pod racer. Obi Wan doesn't mention he was a 10 year old boy, something that he realistically should have said. This dialogue is more applicable to Finn meeting Po for example. Is Anakin even a great pilot during the show? Honesty Han Solo arguably does more interesting things than Anakin ever does.He had a natural talent for flying and technology. He quickly adapted to new situations involving driving air or space ships. Apart from the pod race, he was thrown into the middle of space battle in a fighter he never flied and we has able to survive, regain control, penetrate the station's defences and destroy it from inside. In EII he manoeuvrers among the numerous shuttles on Coruscant, in EIII takes part in a huge space battle. Is that not enough?
Obi Wan saying he took it upon himself to train Anakin. Horse**** he did, he trained him because Qui Gon asked him to. Would a guy not mention this?Maybe, maybe not. "What-if" is not a proper argument in a discussion.
Obi Wan saying that Anakin helped hunt down the Jedi. No he didn't. The Jedi all got killed by stormtroopers. Assaulting a temple is not "hunting down".What? Did you even watched/read/played anything between EIII and EIV? Anakin was leading the clone assault on the temple, himself killed a bunch of younglings and probably some Jedi too. Then, as Vader, he was hunting Jedi for many years. It'd be strange if PT showed events that took place after PT :P. But the other SW-universe productions mention that. Ever played The Force Unleashed?
Palpatine calling the Lightsaber a Jedi weapon. Yet he uses one in the PT. Is he a Jedi? No. So why is he using a Jedi weapon?Agreed, this one could be a mismatch. I assume he called THIS (green) lightsaber a Jedi weapon. Sith all have red.
Even the idea of Obi Wan calling Luke's father a "good friend" is a stretch. They goof around in the movies but they don't act much like friends and they complain about each other constantly.This one defends itself. Fact they're arguing doesn't imply after all these years Obi-wan cannot mention good moments with Anakin. Besides, in EIII Anakin is a knight, not a padawan, he's almost equal to Obi-wan, he only has not master title. At some point Obi-wan tells Anakin "You became a greater Jedi than I ever thought".
Now most fans would say "If you think about it from this obscure angle, it kinda sorta makes sense". No it doesn't.I can only laugh at how OT fans will find and complain on even the most insignificant mismatches in PT, but are absolutely tolerant on OT.
And I'd definitely argue that in the case of ANH, it's much better that it's only being told, not shown, because then the showing acts as a payoff for all that telling. If his speeder on Tatooine had been a fighter and he'd have been pulling off crazy stunts in the canyons, there wouldn't be any tension or doubt about whether he can handle the X-wing and live up to what's been told.
To compare with for example Rey's lightsaber skills, sure, she's good with her staff. Is that clear enough characterization to justify her being able to handle a lightsaber ok'ish later? I guess for someone it is, for someone else it isn't. But I'm pretty sure that if in addition to the pilot helmet, she had been shown playing with a broken lightsaber having a little imaginary lightsaber fight (which would have been silly for other reasons), then that would have been enough for almost anyone; it'd have established that she knows what kind of weapon it is and has thought about how they would be used and has had lots of mental practise. Or if she had been shown being generally good with improvised melee weapons or something once or twice.
P.S. The real problem in ANH is why Red leader would name the newbie to lead the last attack run and to "take" two veterans as his wingmen. :lol:
QuoteFurthermore does the conflict in the PT mirror a Crusade? Bearing in mind that the Crusades were expeditions to liberate the holy land. Not the defense of a political state.How can I even comment that? It's just a term. It's origins can be totally different as we are in alternate universe.
I never thought "My father" refers to Bail Organa. I guess Organa told her that she is adopted, her father fought in the Clone Wars and he also mentioned Obi-wan - that's why Leia tries to call Obi-wan for help in the first place.
What? Did you even watched/read/played anything between EIII and EIV? Anakin was leading the clone assault on the temple, himself killed a bunch of younglings and probably some Jedi too. Then, as Vader, he was hunting Jedi for many years. It'd be strange if PT showed events that took place after PT :P. But the other SW-universe productions mention that. Ever played The Force Unleashed?
While I understand that Star Wars is an emotional topic for many of us, and I'm all for having spirited debates about it, I need everyone to do a better job of being civil. I'd really rather not have to delete anybody's posts here, but if I see any further personal attacks (or anything even resembling it) I will do so. Consider yourselves warned.Ok, sorry. We'll restrain ourselves not to use ad personam arguments.
Now...carry on, and may the force be with you.
#1 We're not in an alternate universe. We're in a Galaxy Far Far AwayA "galaxy far far away" is a galaxy developing independently from ours, not a future of the Milky Way, therefore words used in SW could've been originated from very different forms than ours. So the argument that the word "crusade" used in this context does not match its historical meaning is invalid.
#2 If this is your mentality in this discussion then there's really no point in having it. If you're going to wantonly disregard the meaning of a word then you're going to wantonly disregard anything you see as not concrete in order to maintain your own opinion.
Critical analysis require a little more reliance on reality, and a lot less reliance on your own imagination.The problem is some facts are simply not stated clearly in SW films, therefore there is much room for individual viewer's imagination. Leia's plot is a good example, as it is not explained clearly in NH if she knew she was adopted. When in RotJ Luke asks Leia about her mother, her memories may refer her foster mother, Queen Breha of Alderaan, not Padme, as Luke tells her he's her brother a few moments later. If she didn't know that before, "you served my father" is a mismatch, but "do you remember your mother" is not. If she knew, it's the opposite.
Incidentally, but just for your information, the Force Unleashed isn't canon.Ok, let's take fully canonical SW: Rebels which includes the Empire and Vader hunting down the last Jedi. I think there is a consensus in all, both canon and non-canon SW stories and films that Jedi hunt took place EIII and EIV and that Vader, emperor's right hand, was one of its top executors.
Nothing is canon except for the 7 movies, the animated movie, the Clone Wars and Star Wars Rebels. Plus any materials released after 2014
A "galaxy far far away" is a galaxy developing independently from ours, not a future of the Milky Way, therefore words used in SW could've been originated from very different forms than ours. So the argument that the word "crusade" used in this context does not match its historical meaning is invalid.
The problem is some facts are simply not stated clearly in SW films, therefore there is much room for individual viewer's imagination. Leia's plot is a good example, as it is not explained clearly in NH if she knew she was adopted. When in RotJ Luke asks Leia about her mother, her memories may refer her foster mother, Queen Breha of Alderaan, not Padme, as Luke tells her he's her brother a few moments later. If she didn't know that before, "you served my father" is a mismatch, but "do you remember your mother" is not. If she knew, it's the opposite.
As it was said a few posts earlier, films rarely explain things as clearly as you would want.
Ok, let's take fully canonical SW: Rebels which includes the Empire and Vader hunting down the last Jedi. I think there is a consensus in all, both canon and non-canon SW stories and films that Jedi hunt took place EIII and EIV and that Vader, emperor's right hand, was one of its top executors.
You argued that Vader was not murdering Jedi in RotS apart from Jedi temple assault. He did it between RotS and NH, throughout the 18 years from turning to dark side to NH. It would be strange if PT included event that took place after PT :P. There is no conflict between PT and OT here.
Flying an air/spacecraft doesn't seem to be a terribly special thing in the Star Wars universe. It's treated like driving a car. Even Luke, a somewhat poor farmer of a ****hole planet owned one of these (http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/T-16_Skyhopper). Sure, moving instantly from flying that to flying a main-line starfighter might be a bit of a stretch, but it isn't that much of a leap since, as mentioned before, Luke's skills are talked up a lot. It isn't a terribly special skill, and Luke was also flying with a droid specifically meant to assist in flying and maintaining fighters in combat conditions, and he never actually goes up against any enemy pilots one on one in ANH (unlike Rey flying the Falcon in this movie).Right, because those were totally treated the same way. It's not like it took Luke two movies to actually fight with a lightsaber (a fight he lost). Nope, it's exactly the same. Because Luke could fly an X-Wing, it's perfectly ok for someone to have instant Jedi skills the moment they pick up a lightsaber. Doesn't cheapen Luke's arc at all. Nope.
He wasted his time going to see Yoda, didn't he? Becoming a Jedi is obviously really easy.
You're comparing Luke's evolution as a swordfighter with Reys, but that's not the comparison I was making.
ANH tells us that Luke is a gifted pilot. It doesn't show us, mind you, it alludes to the fact by having Luke play with some toy and have Obi Wan point out that his father was remarkably gifted in that area. There are deleted scenes where Luke talks about wanting to join the imperial Academy to become a pilot, but that's all there is to it. If we apply the same standards you're using to judge Rey's ability to fight with swords, then the fact that Luke gets his own X-Wing and manages to survive in a rather hostile environment, then we see that he too seems to be "instantly skilled the moment he grabs the flight stick".
Now, TFA actually takes the time to show that Rey is capable in close quarters fighting. At the moment she grabs the saber, her abilities as a fighter are better established than Luke's piloting skill when the battle for Yavin starts, and yet you take offence at Rey? I find that a bit disingenuous, really.
And that's why this whole thing annoys me. In the span of one movie, Rey does pretty much everything Luke does over the course of the original trilogy.
The problem I have with people saying "Scrubs like Finn and Rey shouldn't stand a chance against a fully-trained Dark Jedi" is that it glosses over what's actually going on in that scene. First off, Kylo is in seriously bad shape even at the start of that fight. He's just suffered a massive wound, and even more pressingly, he's no doubt in all sorts of emotional turmoil given the confrontation that just happened. The only times we see Kylo, or really any Jedi, pull off notable feats is when they're emotionally focused, whether in calmness or anger. Kylo's nowhere near that state, so expecting him to do the likes of freeze a blaster bolt (so badass) isn't gonna happen. And the fight itself? Sure, Finn holds his own for a minute or two, no doubt drawing on his own combat training, but he gets royally ****ed up and nearly killed in short order. And Rey? I wouldn't call most of what she was doing "fighting" so much as "running the hell away." She's constantly backpedaling, flailing away, putting more effort into getting some distance from Kylo than actually striking at him. It isn't until that final moment where she instinctively calls on the Force that she can be said to have the upper hand. Before that, I don't think she was really making out much better than Luke did against Vader in Cloud City, and that's keeping in mind that Vader was a far stronger Jedi than Kylo.The issue isn't that it makes sense for her to beat him. You can come up with a dozen handwaves for why that could happen, but it doesn't make it any better. If a TIE fighter got shot down and crashed on Kylo Ren during the fight and killed him instantly, it would still make perfect sense in-universe.
She shouldn't win that fight, and she shouldn't be fighting with a lightsaber proficiently because she hasn't earned these things. Luke did. Luke went through two movies before he could fight with a lightsaber competently. He worked for that, and that's what made the first Luke-Vader duel so good: it shows you how far Luke's come. Flying a fighter was never treated as a significant step. Being a pilot isn't the end-state of Luke's character arc, and it stops mattering the moment ANH ends because of the very action that ends the movie: he uses the Force for the first time. That was the significant step, not him being a pro pilot (how many TIEs did he kill in that battle anyway? One?). And the next movie pretty much revolves around his gradual shift from his blaster pistol to his lightsaber as his go-to weapon.
the problem is that they make Kyle Ren more powerful than VaderWat.
the problem is that they make Kyle Ren more powerful than VaderWat.
What wat? That's the only conclusion you can arrive to from those things, as far as Force powers are concerned anyway.Double wat.
the problem is that they make Kyle Ren more powerful than VaderWat.
What wat? That's the only conclusion you can arrive to from those things, as far as Force powers are concerned anyway.
it's spelled out multiple times during the film than Ren isn't as powerful as Vader, and that he's trying to become as powerful as Vader.
If you have someone freeze a laser bolt in mid-air and keep it there without even concentrating, then they're clearly being portrayed as more powerful than Vader as far as Force powers go.Ok, just so you know, repeating the same thing again without any additional reasoning doesn't make it more true. This premise does not lead to that conclusion.
What wat? That's the only conclusion you can arrive to from those things, as far as Force powers are concerned anyway.Double wat.
Since when having different powers makes you more powerful. A low-level cleric is not more powerful than a high-level warrior, even though the warrior cannot use support spells.
I mean, it's spelled out multiple times during the film than Ren isn't as powerful as Vader, and that he's trying to become as powerful as Vader.
Guys. Srsly.
Show, don't tell. What does Vader actually do in the OT? He chokes a couple of officers, steals Han's gun and senses things a few times.Are we still firmly into “only the movies count and not other non-movie canon material” territory here? Because Rebels and Marvel’s canon comic series have both been doing an awful lot of showing.
Show, don't tell. What does Vader actually do in the OT? He chokes a couple of officers, steals Han's gun and senses things a few times....and stops point-blank blaster shots with his bare (robot) hand, and flings multiple massive objects at Luke while simultaneously dueling him, and probably one or two other things that I'm neglecting. Most importantly, he manages all of this while staying calm and focused, attributes that we've seen allow one to unleash one's actual Force potential.
Seriously, I can't see at all how someone can sit through what this film shows and come away thinking, "Kylo Ren is way better than Vader."
You yourself did: "Kylo Ren was portrayed as more powerful than Vader." My response is that the film shows us the exact opposite, and Ren himself knows this.
Yes, he was first portrayed as more powerful than Vader, and then as weaker than Vader. No one was saying that there weren't moments when he was weaker than Vader, but that there were moment(s) when he was stronger than Vader.Did you consider that he might just have had a different bag of tricks than Vader? The only time I clearly saw him do something Vader probably couldn't was the scene with the blaster bolt. Seeing as Vader could absorb one into his hand (dunno if that was using the Force, or if it was just his glove being though), he didn't really need that particular power. With the amount of things you can do with the Force, even an experienced Sith won't know every technique. They trained under different masters, so there might have been some specific areas in which Kylo was better than Vader. As far as I saw it, though, they were few and far between. Unless, of course, by "powerful" you meant "raw natural" power, that is, midichlorians each of them was born with. That could very well be (we don't know how inheriting midichlorians works), but then raw power doesn't make up for his lack of skill.
What wat? That's the only conclusion you can arrive to from those things, as far as Force powers are concerned anyway.Double wat.
Since when having different powers makes you more powerful. A low-level cleric is not more powerful than a high-level warrior, even though the warrior cannot use support spells.
I mean, it's spelled out multiple times during the film than Ren isn't as powerful as Vader, and that he's trying to become as powerful as Vader.
Guys. Srsly.
He breaks somebody's will in an interrogation cell. Vader/Anakin is able to do this, too.
Conclusion: Kylo Ren is trying to be Galaxy's Next Darth Vader (evidenced by Vader's old helmet/mask)
Did you consider that he might just have had a different bag of tricks than Vader?
Honestly I'm not even sure why it's necessary to assume the blaster bolt is any different from any other time we've seen a force user use telekinesis. As the blaster bolt is either massless or has very little mass because it's a blaster bolt, it's also the weakest use of it in the series.
there's no reason to assume it was some kind of reality-warping time-stop power we should all be in awe of.
Do you not understand the difference between picking up a box and stopping a bullet?
Force users are shown, repeatedly, to be able to stop bullets. They don't simply hold out their hand and make them stop in mid-air usually, but stopping a "bullet" is something we've seen them do before, many times. Vader just sucked one up. Dozens of Jedi in the prequels as well as Luke were shown to be able to stop them or redirect them with a lightsaber, and even just dodge them even at times when by rights this shouldn't be possible.
Well, Yoda once caught and redirected a bunch of force lightning...
He breaks somebody's will in an interrogation cell. Vader/Anakin is able to do this, too.
Neither Vader or the Emperor ever interrogate anyone with the force.
They only read emotionally-charged surface level thoughts from Luke.
Conclusion: Kylo Ren is trying to be Galaxy's Next Darth Vader (evidenced by Vader's old helmet/mask)
Yeah and if that scene wasn't in the show, would you have the same opinion? "I wanna be Vader, therefore the audience will believe I'm not as good as Vader even though I'm displaying much more powerful abilities". In nerd speak, that scene is a mind trick to make you believe he's not as good as vader even though everything in the movie points to him being superior than the "chosen one"
Show me one example in any of the other six Star Wars movie where a force user stops a blaster shot in mid-air using only his mind.
Stopping a blaster bolt in mid-air would have been perfectly achievable. Having Darth Vader stretch out his hand and try to mind-rape leia would have been the same.No, in 1999 they weren't. Hoisting a bullet up by a string is easy, it's a physical object like any other. Hoisting up a bolt of light and making it look good? Not so much. And no, it certainly wouldn't look the same as a lightsaber. At the time the OT was filmed, it'd probably have to be some dorky-looking light. Maybe it could be made to look good, but this would be hard. Also, the first film had a rather small-ish budget. In general, at that time a simpler effect would've made much more sense. A blaster bolt hanging in midair would in no way change the plot enough to justify its expense.
Here's a question.
Do you know what movie came out in 1999? The Matrix. Do you know what Neo does in that movie. He stops multiple bullets in mid-air.
Do you know how many Jedi in Episode 2 (2002) and Episode 3 (2005) could have benefited from being able to stop bullets in mid air? Pretty much all of them.
Special effects are easy.
He didn't have some superhuman enhancements, he had sufficient control of the Force to prevent it from damaging his hand.
If he didn't need to stop them why did he use his hand? Where is your logic man?If you believe a certain horrible book, only the glove was indestructible (but would still give the proper impression). If you don't, well, he had blinkenlights on his chest, so maybe he decided that it'd be better to use his hand. Or maybe it was about the dramatic gesture. Vader was not a showoff, but he certainly preferred the people to fear him. He appeared intimidating and was quick to underline he means business (for example, force-choking Motti for expressing doubt about the Force. It was not like he couldn't refute his point in civil discussion, but that's not exactly his style).
Wait, let me guess, he armoured the palm of his HANDS but not his chest plate right? Or maybe he wanted to impress him in two different ways, both by catching them and not crying out.
Because everyone knows that Vader is such a big show off. He lives on the approval/fear of others.
Oh **** it's a good thing they didn't use laser swords then. That would have looked terrible.Those were vital to the plot, so it makes sense to spend money on that. If you read about how they did them, it was quite a complex setup and a chore to work with for the cast.
So now you're claiming that Leia used the force to resist but Vader didn't realize she was using the force? Because you do know that Vader never knows that Leia is a force user. Even in Return of the Jedi he only knows that Luke has a sister. Arguably he would know its Leia at that point but clearly before that he did not know.Maybe it doesn't even take Force aptitude. Since we're not told the exact rules, mind manipulation might only work on the weak-willed. Kylo Ren might have simply never encountered anyone strong enough to resist him before. It's been established that even simply being of a certain species can make one immune to Jedi Mind Trick. This could extend to more invasive techniques as well.
So why is there smoke? If it didn't hit his hand, why is there an impact?He allowed it to dissipate, that's why. There's no visible damage to his hand, so either the bolt hit some Force barrier, or it was stopped and allowed to dissipate. That was probably easier than what Kylo did (as he likely had to hold the bolt together, normally they last for a few of seconds), but the end result was just the same.
But this whole Kylo vs Vader thing just sounds like a comic book store argument of my superhero can beat up your superhero, based on over-extrapolated data from a limited amount of exposure to the universe at hand. I can tell because we've done some over-extrapolation in our time. And by the pixels.Well, you're right, but at the same time it's a pretty big plot point. We're essentially arguing if it fell flat or not. Kylo Ren was intended to come off as inferior to Vader, I think that this was pretty explicit in the movie. Whether he actually did is, I think, the whole point of this argument.
There's no arguing with people who ignore direct and plain on-screen evidence as well as basic logic and pattern recognition in favour of their own complicated fantasies.Good point. Just remember that the scene with Vader's mask happens to be direct and plain on-screen evidence. :) If whoever replaces Abrams is any good, the second movie will settle that anyway.
Fixed that for youThat is ad hominem, completely untrue and completely pointless. Though seeing that I go quite a bit beyond basic logic into more advanced kinds, I can understand why you may have trouble following (yes I know, Chief, that was uncalled for).
For over a thousand generations, the Jedi Knights were the guardians of peace and justice in the Old Republic.
A young Jedi named Darth Vader, who was a pupil of mine until he turned to evil, helped the Empire hunt down and destroy the Jedi knights. He betrayed and murdered your father.
Explaining too much about the fundamental nature of the Force would rob SW universe of much of its mystique.
Vader is his grandfather and mentor figure.
That is ad hominem, completely untrue and completely pointless. Though seeing that I go quite a bit beyond basic logic into more advanced kinds, I can understand why you may have trouble following (yes I know, Chief, that was uncalled for).
So Vader is a force capacitor now? Who doesn't get his power from a connection to the world but because he sucked up a laser bolt?
When would a Jedi have wanted to stop a laser bolt? Every single time a Jedi died from a blaster bolt.
Good point, and well said. Should've pointed out those logic flaws instead of resorting to petty jabs. Perhaps I should get back to it tomorrow/whenever I'm not tired. And yeah, I agree that it's essential that we keep the discussion in-universe. Doylist arguments are irrelevant here.So Vader is a force capacitor now? Who doesn't get his power from a connection to the world but because he sucked up a laser bolt?
Do you deny that there was energy there, and that he absorbed it or nullified it somehow? It went away, we know that much. Your disdain for the notion is amusing, but it's all you have. You can't disprove it, so you just act like it's silly when you haven't got a lick of evidence.When would a Jedi have wanted to stop a laser bolt? Every single time a Jedi died from a blaster bolt.
You are being deliberately dense.
They already have a method to stop a blaster bolt: their lightsaber. The lightsaber, in fact, not only gives them a chance to stop the blaster bolt from hitting them, it gives them the ability to send that bolt back at the thing attacking them, making it stop shooting altogether! The methodology of using a lightsaber to redirect the bolt is a clearly superior one to simply stopping the bolt in midair for a time.
Every time the Jedi didn't stop a bolt in mid-air, indeed pretty much every time they died, they were under fire from dozens of blasters, or taken by surprise in pretty much the only way possible in the case of Order 66. Kylo Ren managed to stop one bolt. Just one. A lightsaber user is shown to be able to cope with being shot at by at least six to eight people at once, and for a decent length of time in terms of how it's measured in combat. ore powerful than anything we've seen before? Not with those results. By all evidence to hand it is a fundamentally inferior method of coping with blasterfire.
Indeed, even Ren seems to think so. When he was getting shot at continuously by Rey, he used his saber.
Your digression about The Matrix is you once again reaching for something outside the universe to explain in-universe logic. This is not a discussion of Doyle, but of Watson, so it's pointless. (If you don't understand the reference go back to literary criticism 101 and don't return until you've finished it.) Similarly, your digression about arguments proves only that you are ignorant. You don't know enough about how the universe of the story works to disprove any of these hypotheses you heap scorn upon. They don't fit your vision, but in the end scorn is all you have, that and your own vision of how things would work. You don't know any of this.
You don't even know how evidence works. You're arguing that the absence of evidence is evidence of absence. That's not the way it works. The absence of evidence is not the same thing as a null result; nobody does something can be a simple event of random chance, or a judgement that it was not useful.
Mentoring someone requires that the person be alive. Vader was dead before this twerp was even conceived. It's amusing that you think 2nd-hand knowledge is any sort of replacement for witnessing events first-hand. The audience has experienced Anakin's life first-hand for 6 movies and officially, the clone wars cartoon. No history book is going to detail what happened in more than half of the events portrayed and the events portrayed were the most important events of his life.Bah, you're obviously right on that count. I meant the role model, just used the wrong word. You'll have to argue with someone else for the next couple of hours. I'm off to bed.
It should be noted that while it was thrown out with the rest of the EU, it used to be canon that Vader was, in fact, absorbing at least part of the energy of the blaster bolts and redirecting that energy into telekinesis, so NGTM-1R isn't just pulling the idea out of a hat or something.
Maybe if you had Kylo Ren waiving his hand around saying "you will tell the information that I want" and Po repeating his words you could assume it was the related, but that's not what happens.
Even after the Disney take over there are no less than five tiers of canon. The Clone Wars and Rebels series are canon, but they're not as canon as the movies are.Big nope here. Clone Wars and Rebels are fully canon. The tiers of canon occurred before Disney, not after. The whole point of killing the EU was to simplify what is and isn't canon.
Maybe if you had Kylo Ren waiving his hand around saying "you will tell the information that I want" and Po repeating his words you could assume it was the related, but that's not what happens.
But there you exactly tell the difference between light side and dark side methods of influencing somebody's mind (and that's the similarity between the two things: using the Force to influence a weak mind)
Light side: Kindly asking you to do something. A bit of handwaving, telling you what I want you to do/say.
Dark side: Simply forcing you to do it. Ripping the information from your mind without even caring about if you get hurt in any way.
“IN CANON LIMBO”
- The MMO game The Old Republic uses a lot of non-canon information and concepts. Even though there is a current effort to make it more compatible with the canon timeline, bringing the entire game into canon would require retconning a lot of stuff. As a result, the MMO doesn’t officially count as canon yet.
- The Holiday Special. Might be canon, might not be. No one really dares say anything serious about it because it would require digging up some painful memories.
or the existence of the Interdictor Cruiser
Sorry for not mentioning this sooner, but seeing this bulleted reminds me that the Jedi aren't all that great at being good guys when the Sith are involved:Maybe if you had Kylo Ren waiving his hand around saying "you will tell the information that I want" and Po repeating his words you could assume it was the related, but that's not what happens.
But there you exactly tell the difference between light side and dark side methods of influencing somebody's mind (and that's the similarity between the two things: using the Force to influence a weak mind)
Light side: Kindly asking you to do something. A bit of handwaving, telling you what I want you to do/say.
Dark side: Simply forcing you to do it. Ripping the information from your mind without even caring about if you get hurt in any way.
Since all the other things have been dealt with before my ****ty internet decided to work again I've got nothing to add there.
In a recent interview, I believe the developers of TOR states that it is part of the Legends continuity and not new canon so that it can do whatever it wants.“IN CANON LIMBO”No love for the Ewok movies.
- The MMO game The Old Republic uses a lot of non-canon information and concepts. Even though there is a current effort to make it more compatible with the canon timeline, bringing the entire game into canon would require retconning a lot of stuff. As a result, the MMO doesn’t officially count as canon yet.
- The Holiday Special. Might be canon, might not be. No one really dares say anything serious about it because it would require digging up some painful memories.
Also notable since this is canon: You don't have to be force-sensitive to resist Jedi mind-tricks. Cad Bane is a talented Bounty Hunter, second to Jango Fett in fame, but not Force-sensitive. Ordinary people with strong enough WILL, it stands to reason, can prevent themselves from being forced to give any information to Kylo Ren.I'm not sure if anyone here still wants to include the midi-chlorians in their explanations, but I would surmise that there are a far greater number of people in the galaxy that, while not having enough midi-chlorian concentration to be classified as force-sensitive and marked for later Jedi training (at least during the Republic days), they probably have a moderate concentration, enough to perhaps be considered "force latent". Even with proper training, the best someone like this might expect to be able to do with the force would be some precognition to enhance their reflexes, mild telekinesis (like a pitcher being able to give the ball a bit of extra oomph), and possibly mind-trick resistance. Aside from certain species that are mind-trick-immune, perhaps those that are not "weak-minded" also are force-latent. Just something to consider.
Remember that a degree of Force sensitivity is present in every living being (or almost every one, though Ysalamiri and the Vong are non-canon now). Everyone is "force lantent" to a degree. With enough willpower, whatever Force capability one has can presumably be put to use, such as resisting mind tricks and "having a (bad) feeling" about certain things. :)
Remember that a degree of Force sensitivity is present in every living being (or almost every one, though Ysalamiri and the Vong are non-canon now). Everyone is "force lantent" to a degree. With enough willpower, whatever Force capability one has can presumably be put to use, such as resisting mind tricks and "having a (bad) feeling" about certain things. :)
Citation needed.
Further, saying that all people are low-level force users diminishes the relevance of Jedi and their opposites.You keep mistaking "Force user" for "person with Force potential". Force users use the Force. :) People can have a low-level sensitivity (which would manifest, for example, in "hunches" people have from time to time) without actually being able to consciously use the Force. They can still interact with it, however. "Will of the Force" isn't something that only the select few are involved in. Indeed, this is presumably why Force powers work on people in first place. You couldn't "mind trick" an inanimate object, or a droid (though there probably are alternate techniques for dealing with those), simply because they're not alive and thus don't have this connection to the Force.
And saying that one's ability to resist is not based on willpower but latent force use diminishes individual importance as well because they succeed because of factors outside of themselves.
And ironically this statement is coming from the same guy (Dragon) who said he appreciates the "mystique" of the force.
To be fair in ANH when Ben uses the Force to "not the droids your looking for" past the checkpoint he states: "The Force can have a strong influence on the weak-minded." not the low on parasites. :PIt would make sense that you need strong will to call upon your Force connection in first place, however small. A weak minded person wouldn't even think about resisting. Also, any "regular" use of the Force seems to be based on strength of one's mind as well. See the scene in which Luke is trying to pull the X-Wing out of the swamp.
I still can't believe that midichlorians are canon but Thrawn isn't.
Nothing you say makes any sense.You're just plain wrong on that count. First of all "interaction" doesn't mean you have a say in it, or that you know about it. The Force influences (and manipulates) you, so it must be aware of you. Therefore, your presence influences the Force (it wouldn't be doing what it's doing if you weren't here), while it influences you. In SW universe, this happens all the time, yet only the select few are aware of it.
Interacting with something is literally acting upon it, you cannot unconsciously act upon something.
Inanimate objects do have a connection with the force. Yoda explicitly says that force is within trees and rocks, the land, the X-wing in Empire Strikes back.I always took the line as stating that Dagobah itself is "saturated" with the Force (BTW, trees are alive and the land on Dagobah might very well be, too. You can presumably interact with what passes for tree's "mind" using the Force. It's not as ridiculous a statement as you probably think it is). Remember, it is not only in the living beings, some places also seem to have an "aura" of sorts. Does that mean they're "alive"? It's never stated, but it might. It does seem that it's the living beings who need the Force, not the other way around (a nice bonus of that reasoning would be that it'd imply that the Force is far more than just Midichlorians being somewhere or not).
The fact you cannot mind trick a rock isn't because it's not connected with the force, it's because it's a rock.
I still can't believe that midichlorians are canon but Thrawn isn't.I can't agree more. I weep a bit every time midichlorians are mentioned.
The more important part here is that midiclorians might be 'canon' according to the implications of some press release by Disney, but I'll bet good money that they will never be mentioned in the new film series.This is my best hope as well. Goes along with what Zookeeper said about "Sith" vs "Dark Side". Good stuff.
Which reminds me that one thing I really appreciate is that they never mention the word "sith". It's always just "the dark side"... as it should be.
I always took the line as stating that Dagobah itself is "saturated" with the Force (BTW, trees are alive and the land on Dagobah might very well be, too. You can presumably interact with what passes for tree's "mind" using the Force. It's not as ridiculous a statement as you probably think it is). Remember, it is not only in the living beings, some places also seem to have an "aura" of sorts. Does that mean they're "alive"? It's never stated, but it might. It does seem that it's the living beings who need the Force, not the other way around (a nice bonus of that reasoning would be that it'd imply that the Force is far more than just Midichlorians being somewhere or not).
I'm pretty sure they mention the Sith in Force Awakens do they not? I though evil hologram#2 says that at some point or, someone lists off a bunch of force-users.
When Maz lists all the forms evil takes, she mentions the Sith.I'm pretty sure they mention the Sith in Force Awakens do they not? I though evil hologram#2 says that at some point or, someone lists off a bunch of force-users.
Well, I'm not 100% sure because I can't check, but at least Han doesn't, and I don't recall Snokey or Maz doing so either.
A bit of quick googling didn't seem to outright confirm it either way.
The main point is that not everything is explained by "the force".No, I'm not forgetting about free will. The Force manipulates people, not forces them to do its bidding. It's powerful, but clearly not omnipotent. There is ambiguity about what "will of the Force" can do, but as evidenced by the existence of the Dark Side, it can't do everything. Yes, it's will is largely God's Plan, except that the "God" is a rather bizarre alien here. Leia could have resisted interrogation by reflexively calling upon the Force, but she wasn't made to do it (however, the Force might have ensured, through unknown means, that she was the one carrying the plans). Porkins' death had nothing to do with neither Sith or Jedi (aside from how he ended up in the battle in first place), so it was a matter of his own skill. On the other hand, Han was probably influenced by the Force when he came back. If he had no conscience, it wouldn't have worked, but he had it.
If everything is dependent on the force then people cease to matter.
How did Leia resist interrogation? The force
Why did Han come back to save Luke? The force
Why did the Droids find Luke? The force
Why did Porkins have to die? The force
Nothing matters.
Attributing the force to everyone person's success, action or failure is the most dehumanizing philosophy you can have.
Basically the force becomes God's Plan and people cease to have free will. But people forget that even in the Christian philosophy, people have free will. They're free to choose or reject God. Without that choice, life is meaningless, and similarly without choice in Star Wars, with everything attributed to the force, everything is meaningless there as well.
Also it's explicitly stated multiple times that living beings create the force, not the other way around so it's not even a god-like entity it's more like a connection between people and each-other and the environment.
As Han says, "The Force doesn't work that way!"Said just before things kind of worked out exactly how they wanted. :) Well, except for Han's encounter with Kylo Ren. What are the odds that the shield generator controls, Rey, Phasma, Kylo Ren and the Starkiller's only weak point were all inside a single building at that precise time? That's the sort of contrivance I'm talking about.
Said just before things kind of worked out exactly how they wanted. :) Well, except for Han's encounter with Kylo Ren. What are the odds that the shield generator controls, Rey, Phasma, Kylo Ren and the Starkiller's only weak point were all inside a single building at that precise time? That's the sort of contrivance I'm talking about.
Said just before things kind of worked out exactly how they wanted. :) Well, except for Han's encounter with Kylo Ren. What are the odds that the shield generator controls, Rey, Phasma, Kylo Ren and the Starkiller's only weak point were all inside a single building at that precise time? That's the sort of contrivance I'm talking about.
I'd call it lazy writing....
I'd call it lazy writing....Generally, I wanted to avoid slipping into Doylist perspective and keep to a purely Watsonian outlook, but if you look at it that way, the real reason we're having this discussion is explaining away lazy writing. :) The Force is a convenient element that can cover a lot of that up, but I really wish this was more thought-out.
IMO, trying to explain away weak plot points using in-universe mechanics doesn't work very often. And that also pertains to Ren's characterization. At the beginning I also perceived him as being a quite strong dark jedi, though not fully trained but with a lot of potential. However, his defeat in the end shows him to be rather weak (maybe as strong as Luke at the end of ESB), which also confused me. And I suspect that the writers did not or could not (maybe because of time constraints) care about consistency. They wanted to show off a bad-ass villain, but also needed a victory and happy-end for Rey. And that didn't work out.
Generally, I wanted to avoid slipping into Doylist perspective and keep to a purely Watsonian outlook, but if you look at it that way, the real reason we're having this discussion is explaining away lazy writing. :) The Force is a convenient element that can cover a lot of that up, but I really wish this was more thought-out.
Watched a vid today from the EP Daily guys, one of whom is a huge star wars nerd to the point where he loves everything. But even he had a lot of criticisms, how Chewbacca for example barely gave a **** after Han got killed. Even when they land on Yaavin Part 2, he walks right by Leia, doesn't stop and give her a hug even though they both have a ton of grief to share. This is the same wookie who cried over c3po. Instead Leia hugs Rey who is a virtual stranger. They're obviously trying to pass the torch so to say but, the old characters didn't really play the roles that they should have.You mean the same shot where they show Chewie just sitting there, obviously lost in grief? Just because it wasn't explicit sobbing doesn't mean he wasn't really feeling it.
Watched a vid today from the EP Daily guys, one of whom is a huge star wars nerd to the point where he loves everything. But even he had a lot of criticisms, how Chewbacca for example barely gave a **** after Han got killed. Even when they land on Yaavin Part 2, he walks right by Leia, doesn't stop and give her a hug even though they both have a ton of grief to share. This is the same wookie who cried over c3po. Instead Leia hugs Rey who is a virtual stranger. They're obviously trying to pass the torch so to say but, the old characters didn't really play the roles that they should have.You mean the same shot where they show Chewie just sitting there, obviously lost in grief? Just because it wasn't explicit sobbing doesn't mean he wasn't really feeling it.
This explains everything.As far as I've seen, it's you who are trying, very hard, to find a reason not to like it. Also, you presumably don't like OT, either, because the Force is used in a similar way there. Sure, it's a bit more deliberate in the OT, but fundamentally, a lot of things still happen "coincidently". You should mind that it's very, very hard to avoid an unusual number of lucky coincidences happening over the course of a story, especially if you're making a movie (which has a very limited runtime). Star Wars made a point out of it, which I think worked out pretty well. It's a perfect explanation of contrivances and my advise is: roll with it. If you spend the movie looking for a "hole in the whole" (as goes a surprisingly well translatable Polish saying), you're only spoiling your own fun.
Do you ever feel, as a consumer of media, that you shouldn't need to work so hard to like something? And that maybe, just maybe, it's okay to not like it?
Your main explanation is that the force or lightspeed is not completely explained.
That's not an explanation. That's simply avoiding the issue.
The particular instance I was talking about (everyone and everything important on Starkiller being in a single building on an entire planet) was about the only thing that raised my eyebrow as "lazy" there. Really, they should've taken a train or something, perhaps to the central compound (you know, the one with the view of the big gun) and found Rey there, as opposed to her being in the oscillator building along with everything else.
The Star Wars movies have a history of lightspeed operations which follow consistent behaviour. Situations in the movies (like the Death Star Escape or the blockade in Episode I) implicitly set limitations on its use.
The Star Wars movies have a history of lightspeed operations which follow consistent behaviour. Situations in the movies (like the Death Star Escape or the blockade in Episode I) implicitly set limitations on its use.
Which, given that we lack all the necessary ground and facts, could be literally anything.
The only actual supporting detail for this, which makes anything explicit, is Expanded Trashcan, and indeed, your argument here is easily defused even if we accept that.
The Falcon is shown, earlier in ANH, as needing to make calculations, pre-jump. In the Death Star, considering the Death Star itself is in motion (and has possibly hyperspaced) and the Falcon has a relatively small window on the universe it is probably unable to maintain an updated solution. They need to buy time for a hyperspace calculation before they jump; hence the tractor beam. Dogfighting the TIEs and combat maneuvers probably complicate this as well and the ship's entry point to hyperspace changes. The Death Star itself is also sufficiently massive that even if we accept your EU-derived shenanigans this doesn't necessarily mean a ship would be able to hyperspace near it.
Aboard the freighter: A: the Falcon has a marginally better view as it's closer to the docking bay entrance, B: the freighter is a friendly vessel and could easily be rigged to downlink its sensor feed or its own calculations to the Falcon and there is time where we are not observing Chewie and Han for them to do this, C: not sufficiently massive to prevent a hyperspace jump if we accept that as a limitation (it's never been said to be one, but if we're going to accept that your EU-derived hard statement is true, it must be pointed out that small ships hyperspace in close proximity to large ones all the time by that measure).
All of which allow the movie to work, regardless of your "because they couldn't"s. You just want it to be wrong. That's all it is here.
For what it’s worth, gravity having an effect on hyperspace is not EU speculation.
The Immobilizer-class Interdictor, as depicted in the canon novel Tarkin and the canon TV show Rebels, is explicitly stated to prohibit hyperspace travel by generating a massive gravity shadow around itself.