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.

That was one thing that the EU was good for - finding creative ways to explain away the plot holes. Although their efforts were hindered somewhat by their tendency to introduce as many as they fixed...

The EU explaining away plot holes was like writing code to fix bugs.

99 bugs in the code, 99 bugs in the code, you change a line and take one out, 107 bugs in the code.

 d-usa wrote:
The rest of the dialogue, Kenobi talking about being as angeh. as Luke when he was being trained, doesn’t imply one of many teachers. The script shows that Yoda and Kenobi were Master/Apprentice, not Homeroom Teacher and Student #2746.

It’s an inconsistency that has always been there, but that somehow newer existed until Disney fethed it all up.

What are you talking about? It’s only been an inconsistency since the prequels existed, it was remarked upon instantly and constantly, and doesn’t matter because everyone hates the prequels anyway. I am baffled by your attempt to use hated, not-considered-Star Wars movies to justify why we should like the Sequels and consider them real Star Wars.

“Just as viable as the prequels, guys” is the worst defense you could make for a new Star Wars movie.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 insaniak wrote:
Indeed. The fact that they didn't explain exactly how long Yoda trained Obi-Wan for, what they did on every second Thursday, and where Obi-Wan went after class means that the entire movie series is ruined.

You have it backwards. The movie is crap, and that’s why these inconsistencies don’t get a pass. “Less than 12 parsecs” gets a pass* because Star Wars was a good movie.


*Yes, everyone makes jokes about the stupid line, but no one seriously argues that it ruined the movie, ruined continuity or ruined the rules and stakes of the setting.

Indeed. I'm starting a petition to ask Disney to replace the first half of TLJ with an hour of Palpatine buying shares in a transparisteel manufacturer and conducting job interviews for shipyard laborers.

 insaniak wrote:
Indeed. I'm starting a petition to ask Disney to replace the first half of TLJ with an hour of Palpatine buying shares in a transparisteel manufacturer and conducting job interviews for shipyard laborers.

You jest, but that would probably make for a more entertaining movie.

He probably used POW droid labor to build the things.

 d-usa wrote:
He probably used POW droid labor to build the things.

The setting “should” be crawling with von Neumann style droid fleets. If we want to extrapolate the Empire’s industrial capacity from what we’ve seen, especially if we include the prequels and other media, the problem isn’t that the second Death Star was built so quickly but rather that the hundredth Death Star wasn’t built quickly enough.

Hell, add in in-atmo hyperskipping, hyperramming, and droid automation, and Star Wars warfare should look like the Culture fighting the Lensmen.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:


What are you talking about? It’s only been an inconsistency since the prequels existed, it was remarked upon instantly and constantly, and doesn’t matter because everyone hates the prequels anyway.

It was popular to bash the prequels, but the truth is that both critic and audience opinions were and still are divided. ROTS is actually considered one of the better movies...because it has the highground.

SamusDrake wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:


What are you talking about? It’s only been an inconsistency since the prequels existed, it was remarked upon instantly and constantly, and doesn’t matter because everyone hates the prequels anyway.

It was popular to bash the prequels, but the truth is that both critic and audience opinions were and still are divided. ROTS is actually considered one of the better movies...because it has the highground.

It’s likely that the same people who have problems with the sequels had problems with the prequels, so please mentally add an appropriate disclaimer to my statement limiting it to the appropriate segment of the fandom. That is, one can’t convince fans who don’t uncritically accept the prequels that the prequels are a good reason to uncritically accept the sequels.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, a lot of people liking a thing does not make that thing actually good. See: Transformers movies.

The Transformers movies were good*

They were movies with giant robots beating each other up, and some eye candy thrown in to top it off. Same as the TMNT movies were good. Sometimes a good movie just has to entertain people enough to shut of their brain for a while and enjoy a movie that delivers exactly what is says on the poster. Some people expect more than what they were ever promised, but that’s not the fault of the movie.

For Star Wars, that has always been “space fantasy tropes loosely tied together with a half-baked storyline.”

*based on certain definitions of good




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Edit: but that just brings me back to my original argument, so we’re just gonna circle around over and over I would think.

 d-usa wrote:
The EU explaining away plot holes was like writing code to fix bugs.

99 bugs in the code, 99 bugs in the code, you change a line and take one out, 107 bugs in the code.

Hehe well done

And yeah, they did tend to raise several issues for each one they addressed. It didn't bother me much, though. Still wishing Thrawn had made it into the movie!

I trust the various shows to keep on handling Thrawn much better than any movie would.

This whole Yoda training Obi-Wan thing is a weird flex. The Prequels got that wrong. Nobody here is saying SW was not messed up until Disney.

EDIT: I see Bob is already on this.

 RiTides wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
The EU explaining away plot holes was like writing code to fix bugs.

99 bugs in the code, 99 bugs in the code, you change a line and take one out, 107 bugs in the code.

Hehe well done

And yeah, they did tend to raise several issues for each one they addressed. It didn't bother me much, though. Still wishing Thrawn had made it into the movie!

They also had a habit of filling in blanks that didn't actually exist - like Han's 'Bloodstripes' to explain that time he had red stripes down the leg of his pants, or Luke's grappling hook which some EU writers thought he brought with him from Tatooine, because they apparently missed the part where he pulled it out of the Stormtrooper belt he was wearing...

The Kessel Run was cool, though.

You know what? I'm convinced.

Let's make this episode 10.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_XWomD6TazQ

 insaniak wrote:

 RiTides wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
The EU explaining away plot holes was like writing code to fix bugs.

99 bugs in the code, 99 bugs in the code, you change a line and take one out, 107 bugs in the code.

Hehe well done

And yeah, they did tend to raise several issues for each one they addressed. It didn't bother me much, though. Still wishing Thrawn had made it into the movie!

They also had a habit of filling in blanks that didn't actually exist - like Han's 'Bloodstripes' to explain that time he had red stripes down the leg of his pants, or Luke's grappling hook which some EU writers thought he brought with him from Tatooine, because they apparently missed the part where he pulled it out of the Stormtrooper belt he was wearing...

The Kessel Run was cool, though.

Yeah, I think the biggest issue SW has had since it's inception is this pathological need to explain and write history for every single detail and relationship no mater how minor. Background characters with no lines in the movies have entire stories written about them. It's done a LOT of bad.

 d-usa wrote:
The Transformers movies were good*
<snip>

*based on certain definitions of good

They'd have to be definitions that factor in the idea that what people want out of Transformers movies is less giant robots and more generic B-list actors yakking and hiding from background footage of an actual movie happening somewhere else.

"I am directly beneath the enemy's scrotum." --a good movie.

saw it last night, I'll give it the s'alright and I liked they largely kept the main characters together this time (and very good news for any FO and Resistance X-Wing players )

So, when I watched Episode IX, I didn't really think too much about Emperor Palpatine's plans, but then afterwards took a look back and it seemed rather inconsistent. First he had Rey's parents killed via Ochi, a Sith assassin, told Kylo Ren that he wanted her dead, then when Palpatine meets up with her, he said he never wanted her dead and told her to strike him down and become Empress Palpatine, then tries to suck the life force out of her. So in short, he wanted her dead, then not, then he did. Or am I missing something here?

And then she kills him, which is what he wanted to happen a few minutes before, right after, puzzlingly, he attempts to kill her, but no worries, although she did kill him like he wanted I guess it wasn’t quite in the way he wanted because what he said would happen when she killed him didn’t.

 Psionara wrote:
So, when I watched Episode IX, I didn't really think too much about Emperor Palpatine's plans, but then afterwards took a look back and it seemed rather inconsistent. First he had Rey's parents killed via Ochi, a Sith assassin, told Kylo Ren that he wanted her dead, then when Palpatine meets up with her, he said he never wanted her dead and told her to strike him down and become Empress Palpatine, then tries to suck the life force out of her. So in short, he wanted her dead, then not, then he did. Or am I missing something here?

Darkside man tells fibs,surely not, the parents died because they refused to hand little Rey over, dangling King of the Universe in front of Kylo gets him to use FO resources into finding her and I suspect he knew Kylo couldn't / wouldn't kill her and with a bit of luck she'd kill his Skywalker butt, I'm assuming he wanted to possess Rey as whatever Sith tech cloned him a new body seemed shonky at best as he's barely little more than a corpse in 20-25 years, then lost his temper when she didnt serve his plans and went all sparkle hands crazy

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
"I am directly beneath the enemy's scrotum." --a good movie.

85% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes.
$700+ million worldwide.
#1 non-sequel film of 2007.

It was a good film.

It wasn’t deep. It wasn’t meaningful. It didn’t have any life lessons. But the vast majority thought it was good and fun.

Like Star Wars.

“If you liked Michael Bay’s Transformers movies, you’ll love Disney’s Star Wars movies.”

Sounds right to me.

 Manchu wrote:
And then she kills him, which is what he wanted to happen a few minutes before, right after, puzzlingly, he attempts to kill her, but no worries, although she did kill him like he wanted I guess it wasn’t quite in the way he wanted because what he said would happen when she killed him didn’t.

Palpatine also sees to be pretty chill with Snoke and/or Kylo potentially killing Rey in the previous two movies, despite apparently basing his plan on Rey needing to kill him.

 Manchu wrote:
And then she kills him, which is what he wanted to happen a few minutes before, right after, puzzlingly, he attempts to kill her, but no worries, although she did kill him like he wanted I guess it wasn’t quite in the way he wanted because what he said would happen when she killed him didn’t.

When Palpy asked Rey to kill him (to make the spirit transfer or whatever) he was attached to the Zombie-crane-lifesupport-thingy machine.

Palpy drained Reys and Bens life force to heal himself. He removed himself from the crane/machine thingy after being healed.

Rey kills Palpy, but nothing happens, no spirit transfer. Maybe the crane/machine thing was needed to be attached to Palpy to make the transfer possible?

Also, hyperspace ramming and Deathstar (and why the two newer met). Maybe Deathstar was equipped with the gravity well generators that the Interdictor had

A massive and experimental craft, the Imperial Interdictor was equipped with a gravity well. It could pull other ships out of hyperspace, making it a dangerous tool for the Empire.

So any ship approaching the DS will be pulled out of Hyperspace and be at the mercy of it's turbolasers? No Hyper ram is possible against DS (yes, I know, this is just a head canon).

Sith fleet at the Sith planet? Planets are big places, so there is plenty of room and resources in the planet itself for the shipyard(s). We weren't really shown the Sith planet at all, just the Palpys temple. So maybe the planet had lots of those Sith cultists for a work force. They seemed to live there with Palpy after all.

I took it that the Sith fleet was ready, but undermanned. Only skeleton crew on board most of the ships. That is why they needed the beacon to guide them out of the Sith planet?
The New Order officers were talking about needing to recruit lots of new people to crew the Sith fleet, so I don't think those ships were fully crewed. They were just pulled out of mothballs after all.
It didn't look like the Sith fleet were doing much fighting. Mostly some Ties flying among the Rebels and the New Order command ship doing any fighting. I didn't get any impression that the Sith fleet was battle ready at all.

 Manchu wrote:
“If you liked Michael Bay’s Transformers movies, you’ll love Disney’s Star Wars movies.”

Sounds right to me.

Studios have long figures out that this is a winning formula.

I’m not gonna feel bad about enjoying that I can turn my brain off for a few hours to watch a movie sometimes.

How do you think that would sound in the commercial?

“Critics are raving — ‘turn your brain off for a few hours.’”

They will cherry-pick sentences from reviews like they always have. All while sitting on their cash cows.

 d-usa wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
"I am directly beneath the enemy's scrotum." --a good movie.

85% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes.
$700+ million worldwide.
#1 non-sequel film of 2007.

It was a good film.

It wasn’t deep. It wasn’t meaningful. It didn’t have any life lessons. But the vast majority thought it was good and fun.

Like Star Wars.

1. You’re talking only about the first one, whereas I specifically quoted the second.
2. Rotten Tomatoes measures the percentage of people who thought the film was “okay” or better. The score is not the same thing as a quality rating.
3. Many fast paced films score well immediately after viewing and only later come into their legacy of awfulness. It took too many people a whole year to realize how bad Star Trek I to Darkness was, for example, and by then it had goosed its RT score to look like not a flaming sack of dog vomit. So, yeah, RT is unreliable. People often score movies while still coming down from the rush, especially JJ movies, and you can’t just point to box office as an indicator of quality.
4. Did you really watch TF and think “This is the level of quality films should aspire to.”? Really?