Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
See the problem with "you can dodge it" is that you can't see it coming.

For a while now it's been canon that you can't sense things in hyperspace. In fact, it's even stated outright in TLJ: the whole "hyperspace tracking!?" fiasco.

So presumably, the hyperspace droid missiles are moving faster than the information that says they were even launched...

I assumed you'd have to be in sensor range and then they'd have to line up for the shot and then enter hyperspace. Could also require certain amounts of mass. I can think of a million reasons it's a known tactic and doesn't work but they all suppose some kind of rational thinking for how it works in the first place. Which we're never going to get so meh. It was a pretty shot and means the FO took a solid hit which can be used to grow a new rebellion.

So, Star Wars was always fundamentally a morality play about Good vs. Evil, right and wrong. What does this movie tell us about those things? What did Empire tell us about those things?

 Easy E wrote:
So, Star Wars was always fundamentally a morality play about Good vs. Evil, right and wrong. What does this movie tell us about those things? What did Empire tell us about those things?

Let the past and those pesky Jedi go. Or maybe not.
Sacrifice for a cause is noble. Well no wait, is not.
For sure, do not put authority in discussion. But no worry, if you do, you will not face serious consequences.
Ideals are important. But everyone is corrupt, so don't care about that.
Training is vital. No wait, you will just succeed because of the way you are born.

I supposes it says that the Sith are wrong, because only Sith deal in absolutes.
Boy, I miss the Emperor.

https://slate.com/arts/2018/01/the-last-jedi-is-a-star-wars-movie-about-fandom-and-the-lure-of-myth.html?via=recirc_engaged

I ran across this review that claims the movie is about Fandom and not for Fans.

According to Skywalking: The Life and Films of George Lucas, he chose to make “fairy tales” because he “wanted to return to more traditional values that held a special appeal for our rootless society.” Fairy tales belong to the realm of narrative that the critic Northrop Frye called “romance,” the presentation of an “idealized world” where “heroes are brave, heroines beautiful, villains villainous, and the frustrations, ambiguities, and embarrassments of life are made little of.” The counterthrust to romance is “irony,” exemplified by Don Quixote. Large swaths of our pop culture belong here, particularly stories about people with a “romanticized” idea of the world or of themselves. In a spoof like Spaceballs, the romantic fool is the implied author, the guy who thought he could forge a fairy tale for our rootless society. The winking irony of many Marvel movies does not qualify, as it functions not to undermine the romance but to make it more palatable.

That part makes a lot of sense and explains exactly why I do not like this film. I don't want Irony in my Star Wars, I want folk tales.

 Easy E wrote:
https://slate.com/arts/2018/01/the-last-jedi-is-a-star-wars-movie-about-fandom-and-the-lure-of-myth.html?via=recirc_engaged

I ran across this review that claims the movie is about Fandom and not for Fans.

According to Skywalking: The Life and Films of George Lucas, he chose to make “fairy tales” because he “wanted to return to more traditional values that held a special appeal for our rootless society.” Fairy tales belong to the realm of narrative that the critic Northrop Frye called “romance,” the presentation of an “idealized world” where “heroes are brave, heroines beautiful, villains villainous, and the frustrations, ambiguities, and embarrassments of life are made little of.” The counterthrust to romance is “irony,” exemplified by Don Quixote. Large swaths of our pop culture belong here, particularly stories about people with a “romanticized” idea of the world or of themselves. In a spoof like Spaceballs, the romantic fool is the implied author, the guy who thought he could forge a fairy tale for our rootless society. The winking irony of many Marvel movies does not qualify, as it functions not to undermine the romance but to make it more palatable.

That part makes a lot of sense and explains exactly why I do not like this film. I don't want Irony in my Star Wars, I want folk tales.

Its amusing how much time and effort was spent thinking up this BS to explain the bad stuff ini the TLJ - either the writer is the directors fanboy (somewhat ironically) and/or Disney are paying him more than most critics

Hulksmash wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
See the problem with "you can dodge it" is that you can't see it coming.

For a while now it's been canon that you can't sense things in hyperspace. In fact, it's even stated outright in TLJ: the whole "hyperspace tracking!?" fiasco.

So presumably, the hyperspace droid missiles are moving faster than the information that says they were even launched...

I assumed you'd have to be in sensor range and then they'd have to line up for the shot and then enter hyperspace. Could also require certain amounts of mass. I can think of a million reasons it's a known tactic and doesn't work but they all suppose some kind of rational thinking for how it works in the first place. Which we're never going to get so meh. It was a pretty shot and means the FO took a solid hit which can be used to grow a new rebellion.

Why would you have to line up the shot? Presumably every war-fleet has stationary support facilities / dockyards / whathaveyou that are vulnerable to a well-aimed strike.

As for it requiring a lot of mass, well, it is easier to strap engines to an asteroid than it is to build a starship, so you /still/ have the cost-effectiveness of capital ship problems.

Really, this is the first inkling we've had that it even works. A throwaway line in episode 4, something like "the death-star has plebotinium shields so our old Droid hyperspace weapons don't work" or even a line after-the-fact in TLJ with them saying "good thing it was a massive cruiser, an x-wing at hyperspace wouldn't have done anything!" or "boy really got the drop on them so they didn't turn on the phebotinium shields that every ship has that totally puts the kabosh on this tactic" or literally any indication of any reality other than one in which 'the entire military infrastructure of every organization that has ever existed is dumb.'

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
https://slate.com/arts/2018/01/the-last-jedi-is-a-star-wars-movie-about-fandom-and-the-lure-of-myth.html?via=recirc_engaged

I ran across this review that claims the movie is about Fandom and not for Fans.

According to Skywalking: The Life and Films of George Lucas, he chose to make “fairy tales” because he “wanted to return to more traditional values that held a special appeal for our rootless society.” Fairy tales belong to the realm of narrative that the critic Northrop Frye called “romance,” the presentation of an “idealized world” where “heroes are brave, heroines beautiful, villains villainous, and the frustrations, ambiguities, and embarrassments of life are made little of.” The counterthrust to romance is “irony,” exemplified by Don Quixote. Large swaths of our pop culture belong here, particularly stories about people with a “romanticized” idea of the world or of themselves. In a spoof like Spaceballs, the romantic fool is the implied author, the guy who thought he could forge a fairy tale for our rootless society. The winking irony of many Marvel movies does not qualify, as it functions not to undermine the romance but to make it more palatable.

That part makes a lot of sense and explains exactly why I do not like this film. I don't want Irony in my Star Wars, I want folk tales.

Its amusing how much time and effort was spent thinking up this BS to explain the bad stuff ini the TLJ - either the writer is the directors fanboy (somewhat ironically) and/or Disney are paying him more than most critics

WTAF did I just read? Hilarious.

Reading that felt like someone vomited out a dictionary.

I'm still not entirely sure there was a point in it... I think it's just a really long winded way of the common idea of: "TLJ subverted expectations and some people don't want their expectations subverted when it comes to their Heroes Journeys in SPAAAACCCEEEEE.

The subverting expectations thing is one thing but then there's being unbelievable.

It's crucial to recognize that expectations exist much of the time because something is believable. For example, if I release a pen in midair on the surface of the Earth, I expect it to fall.

Someone interested in making their primary angle "subverting expectations" might make the pen hover! HOW SUBVERSIVE!

But that just leaves me asking why? Why does the pen hover? Is there some rationality I am missing? What is happening here? This makes no sense!

 Manchu wrote:
Disney didn't commission a work of art. It commissioned a product meantbto appeal to as many people as possible. Now, it could have still appealed to a huge number of people had it been competent. But the bigger issue here is, it will still appeal to a huge number of people despite being largely incompetent.

That's what makes SW worth $4.5 billion to Disney. Lucas demonstrated you could trot out utter gak and make tons of money as long as the turds were SW brand turds.

It's obviously an artistic, creative endeavor like any other film. I applaud Disney for allowing the director to make his voice clearly heard.

 Mr Morden wrote:
Please tell me the real reason I didn't like it? I am intrigued as I was both bored and exasperated from about half an hour in and the other 11 people of varied age and gender I have chatted to face to face about it said the same.

As I said these are categories that many of us highlighted as being issues with the film that are completed unrelated to the either the "gender problem" myth or the "superfan" myth that is being propagated.

The issue is that all your comments are incredibly subjective. You see underutilized characters, others see characters they don't care to get to know anyway. Pacing serves a given story. Citing 'narrative flaws' is mostly just saying you didn't like the story. Etc.

When you get to 'characterization', I think that's closer to where the truth lies for a lot of the film's detractors. The movie simply wasn't what some expected or wanted it to be. And casual fans can be vulnerable to demands and expectations just like superfans -- those aren't unique to a certain audience segment, although the degree may be different.

 Xenomancers wrote:
What are the real critiques of the PM though?

Not The Phantom Menace. Twin Peaks (The Return). The reason I brought it up is because these fan battles are almost a blow-by-blow replay of what went on with fans regarding that show during the summer. TP actually made its point about demands and expectations in a harsher and clearer way, and it's what what woke me up and made me more aware of my ego when I engage with a creative work.

Gorgan - yes its subjective but do you think any of my points about what is see as the flaws in the narrative structive of the film are incorrect or are actually make sense somehow?

Did none of the points I raise cause any issues with your enjoyment of the film? Peronsally I could not reach the level of immersion in a film that allows me to ignore plot holes simply due to the pacing issues i found with it - and the highly varied group of firendfs, work colleagues and their families thought the same - so its not just me.

Do you think that Finn and Phasma are actual characters in the film , never mind well developed?

Can you articulate what the director was trying to say and why he neeeded to do it in a action movie franschise in this particular way apart from a gaurented audiance of course.

I recall Twin peaks first time round - quite enjoyed it but I found it became very self induglent and rambling - espeically when they had guest director of the week, hence I found it unsatisfying.

Real quick for another question that just occured to me:

Why didn't the First Order send half or a third of their star destroyers into hyperspace to jump in front of the rebel ships? Presumably you could cover 100 kilometers, 100,000 kilometers, or 500,000 kilometers in the blink of an eye, so the idea that FTL ships are too slow to keep up with other ships not-FTLing makes me wonder...

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I kind of agree, Hulksmash, and avoid it in my post just above yours, but the hyperspace missile thing realllllly bothers me. It shouldn't and I know it's nitpicking, but here's my $0.02 on the hyperspace missile thing:

Why? Why haven't we seen this before? I had always assumed it was because hyperspace stuff couldn't hit not-hyperspace stuff, like it was somehow nonphysical or in another dimension or whatever.

Now, I just don't know. In a universe where droid brains exist and therefore hyperspace-capable missiles exist, why wouldn't you use them? Why would capital ships be a thing at all? The military logic of the setting is ruined for me.

Anyways, that's all I'm going to say. I'm a bit upset that the whole military coherency of the setting is completely undone in one scene, but that's just me. I know it's nitpicky. Sorry.

100% agree. I understand that this is sci-fantasy but seriously...If hyperspace can be used as a weapon so easily - the entire concept of starwars is flawed. A death-star would be meaningless and easily destroyed by hyperspace kenetic weapons.

Pretty obviously it isn't easy to use hyper space missiles, because as you say, the Death Star, etc....

The fact that hyper missiles don't exist shows that the suicide attack by Admiral Hondo was an extreme situation.

 Manchu wrote:
Yes, I think that was at least part of the point of having him shirtless - so that Rey could see the big scar she left on him, which humanizes him a bit in her eyes as well as reminds her (and the audience) that they have some history already. Of course, it's also done to create some puzzling sexual tension between them.

Snoke's line about light rising to meet darkness isn't an explanation, really. Actually, the line itself is yet another thing that requires explanation. Is that really how the Force works? According to who? Since when? Is Luke a response to Vader and is Ben a response to Luke, if Rey is a response to Ben? Is this something that only started recently? Is that the Awakening? Is it speeding up? Should we expect a new bad guy to arise in response to Rey now?

@reds8n

As Bob pointed out, I think del Toro's part was designed (ultimately) to push the theme of Expect X But Receive Y, where X = things work out and Y = things get fethed. But I very much agree it was all confusing. I am not sure why Finn got a lecture about moral relativism, especially right after Rose just gave him a lecture on morality, too. None of this stuff sets up any conflict that Finn must resolve as part of his arc. I honestly don't know that Finn even has an arc in this movie.

Finn begins the film motivated by only his personal relationships ("Where's Rey" and taking his plan to Poe) and his anger. ("It was worth it to smash up this town."). By the end, Rose has taught (Er, lectured?) him not to act out of hate but from love (very ROTJ theme there), and Finn gives a speech about hope and the resistance or something, concepts that are bigger than just him and his friends.

As for the Force, it was all laid out in a previous film: there are equally many wise old beings as cruel dark beings, the wise teach while the dark usurp, when one light being dies his dark match also must die and vice-versa, and assembling the kyber crystal during the Triple Conjunction will restore balance to the Force, and Skeksis and Mystic will become one again.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I kind of agree, Hulksmash, and avoid it in my post just above yours, but the hyperspace missile thing realllllly bothers me. It shouldn't and I know it's nitpicking, but here's my $0.02 on the hyperspace missile thing:

Why? Why haven't we seen this before? I had always assumed it was because hyperspace stuff couldn't hit not-hyperspace stuff, like it was somehow nonphysical or in another dimension or whatever.

Now, I just don't know. In a universe where droid brains exist and therefore hyperspace-capable missiles exist, why wouldn't you use them? Why would capital ships be a thing at all? The military logic of the setting is ruined for me.

Anyways, that's all I'm going to say. I'm a bit upset that the whole military coherency of the setting is completely undone in one scene, but that's just me. I know it's nitpicky. Sorry.

100% agree. I understand that this is sci-fantasy but seriously...If hyperspace can be used as a weapon so easily - the entire concept of starwars is flawed. A death-star would be meaningless and easily destroyed by hyperspace kenetic weapons.

Pretty obviously it isn't easy to use hyper space missiles, because as you say, the Death Star, etc....

The fact that hyper missiles don't exist shows that the suicide attack by Admiral Hondo was an extreme situation.

But... why?

They obviously don't. But they should. Because it's ridiculously effective.

The only reason that I can think of why they don't is because the entire military infrastructure of every faction is clinically slowed.

Heck, the fething CIS during the Clone Wars series used a Venator as a bomb (or so my friend tells me) to try to hit a Republic meeting... and they don't hyperspace into the meeting with their droids because reasons?!?!?!

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Real quick for another question that just occured to me:

Why didn't the First Order send half or a third of their star destroyers into hyperspace to jump in front of the rebel ships? Presumably you could cover 100 kilometers, 100,000 kilometers, or 500,000 kilometers in the blink of an eye, so the idea that FTL ships are too slow to keep up with other ships not-FTLing makes me wonder...

Because the writter / director wanted a specific situation but could not be bothered to have any form of narrative that actually explained the situation

Yes they could have done that
Yes they could have swarmed them with fighters

There is no reason why they wouldn't. Maybe the inevitable novilisation will have something - when they get someone to try and sort out all the nonsense.

Pretty obviously it isn't easy to use hyper space missiles, because as you say, the Death Star, etc....The fact that hyper missiles don't exist shows that the suicide attack by Admiral Hondo was an extreme situation.

Promlem is that the Admiral made it look sooo easy - she just turned the ship round to vaguely face the enemy ship who were still ambling along and pushed the button - could not be more simple apparently.

"So easy even a droid could do it!" one might say.

And yeah. The movie just gets worse the more I think about it, at least from a military perspective.

Star Wars should be instead called Star Oops: with the subtitle And you thought some of the military blunders in Real Life were bad...

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
"So easy even a droid could do it!" one might say.

And yeah. The movie just gets worse the more I think about it, at least from a military perspective.

Star Wars should be instead called Star Oops: with the subtitle And you thought some of the military blunders in Real Life were bad...

but then they could not have a whole suicide attacks are good - but only when you do it with love - or something equally mad.

Man is so funny to watch and read all the back and forth on these movies. Obviously they mean a lot to many of us. My home office has a ton of Star Wars stuff (among other interests) including an original A New Hope era movie poster. Everyone who knows me thinks I am a massive fan, but that is only part true.

I recognize the appreciation and influence Star Wars had on me as a kid. Star Wars, GI Joe, and Japanese robots (I spent some time in Asia as a kid). What I love from Star Wars centers around A New Hope. Everything I need to know about the universe, the rebels, and the Empire are explained in that movie. Its a classic underdog vs the champ story, and has a great cast of characters that are still classic to this day. It's just Epic.

Throw in Rogue One, and I have two bookends for what I think is the most interesting time in the Star Wars universe. I love Empire Strikes back and feel Return of the Jedi is ok.

The rest of the movies range from crap to pretty good. I think if I were to read them in print without the movies, I might like them more, but its things like Jar Jar stepping in crap, or a two-headed pod-racer announcer, how disappointing emo-Anakin was, just loses me. Even though I DISLIKE more Star Wars films than LIKE, and I do not follow Rebels or read any novels, I still cherish part of the universe to be a big fan of it.

I guess you can say I take what I need, and dump the rest.

I think we can all agree though, I highly doubt fans are going to care about Rey, Fynn, and Poe in 30 years like most of us cared about Luke, Han, and Leia. Thats just the way that it is.

Speaking of books, has anyone read the old novels? I think they are all labelled Legends now. Like the Heir to the Empire? I never did, but since I do not like Disney's direction, I thought I would pick up a few of those books as they were best sellers in their day.

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
"So easy even a droid could do it!" one might say.

And yeah. The movie just gets worse the more I think about it, at least from a military perspective.

Star Wars should be instead called Star Oops: with the subtitle And you thought some of the military blunders in Real Life were bad...

but then they could not have a whole suicide attacks are good - but only when you do it with love - or something equally mad.

Yeah I didn't get that message at all.

Also, another minor nitpick, but in the next movie I really want to see a "trebuchet starship" and "ballista cheese-cutter" to go with the "battering ram cannon". Because whomever came up with the name "battering ram cannon" should be thrown out a window like one of those bad comics.

It's telling that at first, I thought Finn was joking. Like "oh, lol, battering ram cannon, that fits with all the other dumb humor in this movie." and then he was like "yeah miniaturized death-star tech" and I was like "oh. He's serious. That's literally the name. Oh."

Here's a name I made up in two seconds: AT-AG; all terrain assault gun.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Real quick for another question that just occured to me:

Why didn't the First Order send half or a third of their star destroyers into hyperspace to jump in front of the rebel ships? Presumably you could cover 100 kilometers, 100,000 kilometers, or 500,000 kilometers in the blink of an eye, so the idea that FTL ships are too slow to keep up with other ships not-FTLing makes me wonder...

Because it would have been boring if the First Order was able to use its massive numerical superiority easily to englobe and destroy the Rebel fleet.

Therefore you have to accept that there is a technical reason why such a manoeuvre was not attempted. E.g. there was only one ship with a hyperspace tracker, so splitting the fleet in half might just lose half of them out of communication range, and achieve nothing.

Or, it may be because the First Order thought they had a guaranteed win anyway, and didn't see any need to try different tactics.

Perhaps it's simply that Snoke enjoyed watching the Rebellion slowly running out of fuel and hope before their inevitable destruction.

 gorgon wrote:

The issue is that all your comments are incredibly subjective. You see underutilized characters, others see characters they don't care to get to know anyway. Pacing serves a given story. Citing 'narrative flaws' is mostly just saying you didn't like the story. Etc.

On the other hand, saying "well, that is just subjective" is not a great counter-argument.

Also, these movies are made now hiring cheap directors and actors that are under the orders of a committee. You are really overthinking this space ramming issue.
Is just crappy writing from mercenary hacks that do not care about the universe.
Cynical hacks, I have to add, like the article in Slate linked, and people even better pointed out in the thread days ago.
Cynical hacks that want a deconstruction of an ancient and epic archetype, burned down under post-modernist lenses. A sign of the zeitgeist I guess.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Real quick for another question that just occured to me:

Why didn't the First Order send half or a third of their star destroyers into hyperspace to jump in front of the rebel ships? Presumably you could cover 100 kilometers, 100,000 kilometers, or 500,000 kilometers in the blink of an eye, so the idea that FTL ships are too slow to keep up with other ships not-FTLing makes me wonder...

Because it would have been boring if the First Order was able to use its massive numerical superiority easily to englobe and destroy the Rebel fleet.

Therefore you have to accept that there is a technical reason why such a manoeuvre was not attempted. E.g. there was only one ship with a hyperspace tracker, so splitting the fleet in half might just lose half of them out of communication range, and achieve nothing.

Or, it may be because the First Order thought they had a guaranteed win anyway, and didn't see any need to try different tactics.

Perhaps it's simply that Snoke enjoyed watching the Rebellion slowly running out of fuel and hope before their inevitable destruction.

Or perhaps that sort of gak should be explained in the narrative so that I'm not forced to ask some random dude on the internet forum for a list of "possibilities" with no evidence whatsoever that any of them are more true than these following suggestions:

Perhaps the navigator droids were all hungover from a rad droid batchelor party and they couldn't jump.
Perhaps the hyperdrives catch fire unless you spray them with urine but there wasn't enough coffee to go around.
Perhaps the "hyperspace jump" button had an out of order sticker put on it as a prank that no one thought to remove.

I Exalted the post above.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As well as this one.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
"So easy even a droid could do it!" one might say.

And yeah. The movie just gets worse the more I think about it, at least from a military perspective.

Star Wars should be instead called Star Oops: with the subtitle And you thought some of the military blunders in Real Life were bad...

but then they could not have a whole suicide attacks are good - but only when you do it with love - or something equally mad.

Yeah I didn't get that message at all.

Also, another minor nitpick, but in the next movie I really want to see a "trebuchet starship" and "ballista cheese-cutter" to go with the "battering ram cannon". Because whomever came up with the name "battering ram cannon" should be thrown out a window like one of those bad comics.

It's telling that at first, I thought Finn was joking. Like "oh, lol, battering ram cannon, that fits with all the other dumb humor in this movie." and then he was like "yeah miniaturized death-star tech" and I was like "oh. He's serious. That's literally the name. Oh."

Here's a name I made up in two seconds: AT-AG; all terrain assault gun.

yeah that was bad - I think it just highlighted how lazy this film os - they know they have a vast audience they know they will watch it. They make sure the critics do as they are told

Why bother trying that hard.

KTG17 wrote:

I think we can all agree though, I highly doubt fans are going to care about Rey, Fynn, and Poe in 30 years like most of us cared about Luke, Han, and Leia. Thats just the way that it is.

The OT is memorable because it has the language of the Myth. The sequels are made by people without sense of wonder, or of poetry (not in the George Lucas meme sense) hired to please who watches movies "ironically" waiting for the cheap pleasure of a twist or of fast images moving. These are tv series made movies.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Real quick for another question that just occured to me:

Why didn't the First Order send half or a third of their star destroyers into hyperspace to jump in front of the rebel ships? Presumably you could cover 100 kilometers, 100,000 kilometers, or 500,000 kilometers in the blink of an eye, so the idea that FTL ships are too slow to keep up with other ships not-FTLing makes me wonder...

Because it would have been boring if the First Order was able to use its massive numerical superiority easily to englobe and destroy the Rebel fleet.

Therefore you have to accept that there is a technical reason why such a manoeuvre was not attempted. E.g. there was only one ship with a hyperspace tracker, so splitting the fleet in half might just lose half of them out of communication range, and achieve nothing.

Or, it may be because the First Order thought they had a guaranteed win anyway, and didn't see any need to try different tactics.

Perhaps it's simply that Snoke enjoyed watching the Rebellion slowly running out of fuel and hope before their inevitable destruction.

Or perhaps that sort of gak should be explained in the narrative so that I'm not forced to ask some random dude on the internet forum for a list of "possibilities" with no evidence whatsoever that any of them are more true than these following suggestions:

Perhaps the navigator droids were all hungover from a rad droid batchelor party and they couldn't jump.
Perhaps the hyperdrives catch fire unless you spray them with urine but there wasn't enough coffee to go around.
Perhaps the "hyperspace jump" button had an out of order sticker put on it as a prank that no one thought to remove.

Your ideas are very funny, but I think mine make more sense.

 Kaiyanwang wrote:

KTG17 wrote:

I think we can all agree though, I highly doubt fans are going to care about Rey, Fynn, and Poe in 30 years like most of us cared about Luke, Han, and Leia. Thats just the way that it is.

The OT is memorable because it has the language of the Myth. The sequels are made by people without sense of wonder, or of poetry (not in the George Lucas meme sense) hired to please who watches movies "ironically" waiting for the cheap pleasure of a twist or of fast images moving. These are tv series made movies.

Maybe, but lets also not forget that Star Wars version 1 was a disaster, and it took a team of editors led by Lucas's wife to make it something that we all love today: version 1.1.

Then Lucas ruined it again with version 1.2: The Special Edition.

I don't know if many of you are aware of this, but there was a big moment in TFA that Lucas wanted inserted into the movie, but JJ said no way, where Chewie, after hanging out with Han for decades, says in english, "Hey Han, what did the Apple say to the Orange?"

And Han, so shocked that Chewie said something in english, didn't have time was ask what before Chewie answered, "Or-ange you glad you aren't a Banana?"

True Star Wars history.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Also, another minor nitpick, but in the next movie I really want to see a "trebuchet starship" and "ballista cheese-cutter" to go with the "battering ram cannon". Because whomever came up with the name "battering ram cannon" should be thrown out a window like one of those bad comics.

It is obviously shorthand used by soldiers who cannot easily understand the physics of the weapon, probably don't care, and are primarily concerned with a "battering ram cannon" at the door.

KTG17 wrote:

Speaking of books, has anyone read the old novels? I think they are all labelled Legends now. Like the Heir to the Empire? I never did, but since I do not like Disney's direction, I thought I would pick up a few of those books as they were best sellers in their day.

They're great fun - particularly the Timothy Zahn trilogy.

Part of the reason why I can't get too upset about some of the things in the new movies I don't like. To me, they're one take on what could have happened after Return of the Jedi. The Zahn novels are a different take. I don't treat one as more canonical or authoritative than the other. (My Star Wars RPG games are set in the Imperial era rather than after, so I don't even have to managed shared expectations in that regard.)