Well, it is and can be an X-Wing. A new model. It's not a T-65 no, but something else, idk, T-70 or something, who knows?
All we know is that it IS most definitely an X-Wing.
Gaaaaah. As soon as you said T-70, my brain went off on a tangent.
"In New Republic, S-foils lock you."
I'm kinda dissapointed. Yes they are obviously referencing McQuire's work...but it still looks way too similar to the current design. This movie is 30-35 years after ROTJ, it should be new ships, or if they want newer versions of an existing ship, don't make them so similar.
Doesn't the United States Air Force still use jet fighters that are almost 30yrs old.
See: A-10 Warthog.
See: B-52
OK. i will admit to being less that thrilled about the way the wings split. i see no reason they couldn't have stuck with the original way
I'm kinda dissapointed. Yes they are obviously referencing McQuire's work...but it still looks way too similar to the current design. This movie is 30-35 years after ROTJ, it should be new ships, or if they want newer versions of an existing ship, don't make them so similar.
Doesn't the United States Air Force still use jet fighters that are almost 30yrs old.
See: A-10 Warthog.
See: B-52
Beat me to mentioning the Stratofortress. 62 years old and still going strong!
With plans to keep it working 'til 2040.
Crazy.
Give it a chance to grow on you. It was off-putting at first to me, but I'm slowly warming up to it. I think I'll have to see it in theaters kicking the crap out of Imperial Remnant forces before I say whether I truly like or dislike it.
Slowly warming up, seconded. I'm trying to stay open minded-about it.
I consider myself the world's leading authority on science-fiction aesthetic, so this is serious business.
Give it a chance to grow on you. It was off-putting at first to me, but I'm slowly warming up to it. I think I'll have to see it in theaters kicking the crap out of Imperial Remnant forces before I say whether I truly like or dislike it.
Slowly warming up, seconded. I'm trying to stay open minded-about it.
I consider myself the world's leading authority on science-fiction aesthetic, so this is serious business.
and I'm sure we will all respect your authoritah
The animation displaying how it's thought To work... Turns me off even more to it.
Going to look like some funky battle star galactica thing or something
First, I love the new look. 30-35 years in design doesn't look very different. Can you pick the aircraft that is from the 70's and the jet from 2010? There's 40 years between them.I'm kinda dissapointed. Yes they are obviously referencing McQuire's work...but it still looks way too similar to the current design. This movie is 30-35 years after ROTJ, it should be new ships, or if they want newer versions of an existing ship, don't make them so similar.
A casual fan would probably think they are the exact same ship.
umm...the F-15C is the older model; the Greek F-16 is a much newer post block 50 model with the conformal fuel tanks...so, yeah, I CAN tell them apart...
I'm kinda dissapointed. Yes they are obviously referencing McQuire's work...but it still looks way too similar to the current design. This movie is 30-35 years after ROTJ, it should be new ships, or if they want newer versions of an existing ship, don't make them so similar.
Doesn't the United States Air Force still use jet fighters that are almost 30yrs old.
See: A-10 Warthog.
Pretty much EVERYTHING the USAF uses is 30 years old or older lol. Other than the F-15Es, the drones, the F-22, and the new F-35s they are hoping to have...even the B-2 is 25 years old.
As long as he doesn't use that stupid beer bottling plant for the inside of a starship ever again I'm on board with this. It seems like he cares more about this than he did the Trek franchise.
Aside from all the Star Trek vs Star Wars neckbearding, I really like this thread. The new X-wing is kind of following pop culture as in, everything old is new again.
I never liked Star Trek growing up. JJ sold me on a much faster paced Star Trek and it got me excited to watch some of the original series on netflix. The same thing can go for episode VII. By returning to the gritty used up future, JJ can appeal to the OT fans who felt alienated by the prequels ( the die hard OT fans and people like me who just didn't enjoy them). He knows that people who love Star Wars know of Ralph McQuarrie's work and this particular X-wing design is easy to recognize for casual and hard core fans. While I may like the T-65B X-wing the best, there is room in my heart for this one too, just so long as it vapes many, many TIEs.
It is not outlandish to me to believe we may also see T-65B X-wings either. Some fighters stay looking the same after 30 years of use as demonstrated by viewing pictures of the 70's F-16A Block 1-10 Falcon side by side with the F-16C Block 50/52 Falcon (ignore the pictures of the ones with conforming fuel tanks those are Block 52+ and block 60, not used by USAF) The untrained eye will not see as many differences as someone who knows what to look for. Going further, the A-10A Thunderbolt II (warthog) has remained almost the exact same aesthetically as when it debuted in 1969.
I know I am re-stating some points that have already been discussed, but I'm posting from my phone and I don't want to deal with quoting.
What about the difference between this 1940s jet and the 1970s one?
Yeah, your right!
Someone splattered green paint on the top of this F-15!
It amazes me that a visual of a movie prop (from one angle, no less) can generate such heated discussion. Isn't it a little early to draw so many conclusions?
Keep an open mind, and see what happens as more is revealed.
It amazes me that a visual of a movie prop (from one angle, no less) can generate such heated discussion. Isn't it a little early to draw so many conclusions?
Keep an open mind, and see what happens as more is revealed.
Uh. The only real and viable conclusion is that it's the new X-Wing.
Most of what I hear is we want new movies but nothing new better happen 
Most of what I hear is we want new movies but nothing new better happen
Thats not really fair we just don't want what happened to star trek to happen to star wars.
Most of what I hear is we want new movies but nothing new better happen
Thats not really fair we just don't want what happened to star trek to happen to star wars.
Which is a legitimate concern. JJ's Star Trek movies have been wildly popular but they're not really Star Trek movies.
The good news is that JJ's Star Trek movies are pretty great Star Wars movies, so hopefully he'll do better with this franchise.
So, you don't want a fun movie made? As movie, Star Trek needed to be changed. I don't think a lot what is "Star Trek" works too well as a movie compared to a tv show.
JJ didn't know **** about Star Trek. He just used the Star Trek universe to make Sci-Fi action movies.
If he makes the Star Wars movies like his Star Trek movies, I think they'll be fine. They will never measure up to the OT, but they don't have to. They just got to be decent, they just got to bring you back for 2 and a half hours.
Edited by Jo JoJust starting to go through the post (end pg2) but have to say a 30 year old design may still see plenty of use. DIdn't the F-15 first fly in 1972, which is more than 40 years ago, and unless I'm really mistaken versions of it are still used today. Maybe the F-22 has replaced it in some places but its still used and it may take an expert of some kind to tell the difference between the earlier versions and the most recent version.
So, you don't want a fun movie made? As movie, Star Trek needed to be changed. I don't think a lot what is "Star Trek" works too well as a movie compared to a tv show.
I didn't find them fun they just made me mad so no i really really don't want a repeat of that, the story was stupid the design of the ship was just mind numbingly ridiculous and things like vulcan having a moon just an insult.
So, you don't want a fun movie made? As movie, Star Trek needed to be changed. I don't think a lot what is "Star Trek" works too well as a movie compared to a tv show.
^^ This.
The premise of Star Trek (a "continuing/five-year mission" of exploration and politics) works better when you can have multiple seasons and dozens of hours to tell the story.
Star Wars tells shorter (although still epic) stories that tend to have more action.
Ironically, Star Trek would've probably been a better vehicle for a story about a trade dispute between planets as a two-part episode.
So, you don't want a fun movie made? As movie, Star Trek needed to be changed. I don't think a lot what is "Star Trek" works too well as a movie compared to a tv show.
I don't agree with that. While some of the pre-JJ movies definitely did not work (The Motion Picture, Voyage Home) because they were too "Star Trek," several did (Wrath of Khan, Undiscovered Country, First Contact, Insurrection), and so did a lot of the 2-part TV episodes (the best example, of course, being TNG's "The Best of Both Worlds").
JJ's Star Trek movies had no "Star Trek" stuff in them. They were good action films but they weren't Star Trek.
All that being said, of course, I think he'll do a good job with Star Wars.
