13 minutes ago, Ophion said:

Lando making documentaries about himself was pure gold.

That really was pretty awesome.

Wife and I commented on that on the way home - the adventures of Lando and L3 he was narrating out, there? Yeah, now that's a movie I'd want to see. Although, almost...honestly, it'd be a pretty entertaining TV series, too. (He apparently makes and loses fortunes a number of times - wins a moon, which turns out to be a money pit, runs into Aurra Sing, etc)

1 minute ago, Do I need a Username said:

More of audio dramas really. PLEASE Disney, release a Lando Audio book narrated by Donald Glover. It would be hilarious and amazing.

Hah, actually that could be even better! Especially in character as Lando narrating his own story. IE., clearly exaggerating things. It's play merry-**** with what counts as canon or not, but what a LOL...

2 minutes ago, xanderf said:

Hah, actually that could be even better! Especially in character as Lando narrating his own story. IE., clearly exaggerating things. It's play merry-**** with what counts as canon or not, but what a LOL...

I really want Disney to release a series of non-canon stuff al over the place with just odd sitcom stuff. Like, for example, a sit-com based around the Solo family household as Kylo turns into an adolescent, complete with school scenes featuring, in no particular order, Wedge, Luke, Ackbar, Poe, Phasma, Hux, Holdo, Rose, and some other people. I know it would probably bad for the canon, but also absolutely hilarious.

God, I hate hyperfuel

My headcanon is that hyperfuel is like uranium rods. The stuff that was given to the rebel marauder band could be used to construct reactor cores for rebel ships.

The fuel being transferred from the raddus to the transports was just to get as much fuel off the raddus as possible, considering how valuable it was. Maybe the raddus requires a higher grade fuel than other craft, and the degraded products could be used elsewhere.

And the reason why they didn't jump to hyperspace is because the core would have run out in X hours anyway. Might as well spend those hours getting to an abandoned friendly base, and if they jumped to one, the first order would be suspicious.

This baseless conjecture and mental gymnastics is less mental strain than acknowledging the current canon for me.

There is one benefit to Maul's appearence.

Lucasfilm may no longer be afraid of implementing elements of the Expanded Universe into the films.

It means Thrawn is suddenly on the table for a live action appearence.

7 hours ago, CommanderBurnham said:

God, I hate hyperfuel

My headcanon is that hyperfuel is like uranium rods. The stuff that was given to the rebel marauder band could be used to construct reactor cores for rebel ships.

The fuel being transferred from the raddus to the transports was just to get as much fuel off the raddus as possible, considering how valuable it was. Maybe the raddus requires a higher grade fuel than other craft, and the degraded products could be used elsewhere.

And the reason why they didn't jump to hyperspace is because the core would have run out in X hours anyway. Might as well spend those hours getting to an abandoned friendly base, and if they jumped to one, the first order would be suspicious.

This baseless conjecture and mental gymnastics is less mental strain than acknowledging the current canon for me.

Out of curiosity, what's so crazy about fuel?

Star Trek has Dilithium Crystals.

Star Wars use to have Tibanna Gas for capital ships.

Battlestar Galactica had fuel.

Thr only thing I disliked about Coaxium is that they made it seem incredibly rare, such as two or three planets. In a galaxy that's had spaceflight for millenia that seems dumb, though new deposits can be found and old deposits could have been entirely dug up.

Is it just the hyper part? Because to be honest I don't think that changes anything.

I went in expecting it to be “meh” and like alot of you i was just smiling nonstop through it. I loved alot of it and the parts i didnt enjoy weren’t big or bothersome by any means. Definitely top 5 of star wars movies for me, but not top 3

i just wanted to mention some awesome “lore-reference/nod” as no one else mentioned it. I personally loved the original Han origin books and i was excited to see these.

In the “Legends” story - Han falls in love with a girl named Bria, and she joins the Red Hand (rebel group) and ultimately leaves him to follow their cause.

In the now “Canon” story - Han falls in love with a girl named Qira and she joins the Crimson Dawn and leaves him i guess to follow their cause. (Though i was gunna say cause she has few morals and saw an opportunity to be an incredibly powerful person - which frankly is plenty reason to me)

i love it

Saw it last night. Found it boring, predictable and uninspired.

Cast was pretty good, but ultimately the whole affair was forgettable and unnecessary.

5 hours ago, Forresto said:

Out of curiosity, what's so crazy about fuel?

Star Trek has Dilithium Crystals.

Star Wars use to have Tibanna Gas for capital ships.

Battlestar Galactica had fuel.

Thr only thing I disliked about Coaxium is that they made it seem incredibly rare, such as two or three planets. In a galaxy that's had spaceflight for millenia that seems dumb, though new deposits can be found and old deposits could have been entirely dug up.

Is it just the hyper part? Because to be honest I don't think that changes anything.

I hate oil plots. One of the reasons star trek annoys me with the dilithium. It's just such an ingrained part of our culture that everything needs a direct oil substitute. One of the reasons I wish star trek had all the cores like the romulans. A small artificially generated singularity that they draw power from. I think it's lazy writing and excuses and furthers the illusion of the universality of one of the biggest deficits of our culture.

Also, if it's a nonrenewable like oil, it means that it's highly unlikely that the galaxy could sustain itself for the several millennia that it would need to be able to sustain itself for, for the old republic canon to have existed. Peak oil will always exist no matter the oil substitute.

30 minutes ago, CommanderBurnham said:

I hate oil plots. One of the reasons star trek annoys me with the dilithium. It's just such an ingrained part of our culture that everything needs a direct oil substitute. One of the reasons I wish star trek had all the cores like the romulans. A small artificially generated singularity that they draw power from. I think it's lazy writing and excuses and furthers the illusion of the universality of one of the biggest deficits of our culture.

Also, if it's a nonrenewable like oil, it means that it's highly unlikely that the galaxy could sustain itself for the several millennia that it would need to be able to sustain itself for, for the old republic canon to have existed. Peak oil will always exist no matter the oil substitute.

*shrugs*

There will always be something in limited supply. Some Star Trek episodes tried to spin that down to just experiences or knowledge, but something as straightforward as 'beachfront property'...I mean, there are only so many beaches, right?

No matter how much free energy you have, no matter how well your matter replicators work, even if you invent holodecks - there will always be something in limited supply. And so people will fight over it. So if you have a SciFi setting where you want to have conflicts over your limited-supply-items, you can either try to convince a modern audience that people are willing to go to war and die over un-replicated 'natural' eggplants (or whatever)...or simply substitute in something that 20th-century audiences will be as attached to as a 'critical and valuable thing' as 30th-century audiences - fuel of some kind.

It's narrative shorthand, but it saves hours of exposition that you risk breaking down halfway when a modern audience suddenly stops believing anyone would really kill anyone else over the future-MacGuffin you are using instead of fuel. But fuel? Sure, we easily believe people will go to war and/or steal from or betray each other over that...

6 hours ago, Forresto said:

Out of curiosity, what's so crazy about fuel?

Star Trek has Dilithium Crystals.

Star Wars use to have Tibanna Gas for capital ships.

Battlestar Galactica had fuel.

Thr only thing I disliked about Coaxium is that they made it seem incredibly rare, such as two or three planets. In a galaxy that's had spaceflight for millenia that seems dumb, though new deposits can be found and old deposits could have been entirely dug up.

Is it just the hyper part? Because to be honest I don't think that changes anything.

To be fair, Tibanna Gas was never fuel for the engines, it was something used in turbolasers. So it was a military-industrial-sort-of-thing.

(And fuel in Galactica was Tillium, apropos of nothing)

Agreed on the rareless of it, though. That feels weird unless, and I think this is what is supported by other canon material, it's simply one type of hyperfuel. For instance, in both Clone Wars and Rebels, they dealt with Rhydonium supplies as fuel for ships. (And this is apparently name-dropped as late as the TFA era, where some of the crashed ships on Jakku were using Rhydonium fuel, which was apparently sufficiently toxic to render some of the sands on the planet dangerous to travel through) I could have sworn there was at least one other type mentioned, too, so...maybe Coaxium is simply the "best" hyperfuel for use in a galaxy-wide Empire, and while it IS rare, that's not a massive issue as there are plenty of other options?

Yea the fuel didn’t bug me here as it served as something valuable to steal, not some dumb shallow plot point that could be subverted in like a million different ways...

1 hour ago, MandalorianMoose said:

Yea the fuel didn’t bug me here as it served as something valuable to steal, not some dumb shallow plot point that could be subverted in like a million different ways...

It also explodes rather well, so that's useful.

On 5/25/2018 at 12:10 AM, Alzer said:

The Kessel Run was really poorly handled, i felt the "use the maguffin fuel to go faster!" Was a MAJOR letdown to what could have been an excellent show of Han's piloting talents (ok, not that navigating through the maelstrom was unimpressuve, but the hyperspace jump was supposed to be a big part of that to my impressions)

I agree completely. Generally I enjoyed the film, but I felt the Kessel Run was the weakest part. I didn't find it particularly suspenseful nor did I find any of the crews' decisions in that portion of the film to be terribly cunning, surprising, or impressive. The giant monster was a little too goofy (Lovecraftian, perhaps) for me, and I find it hard to believe a giant creature which has lived so close to The Maw for a presumably very long time would have been reckless enough to just fly itself right into the Maw. I thought they'd at least do something clever, like put one of the MacGuffin canisters into the Escape Shuttle Attachment and launch that into the beast to kill it or something.

Also, the "Kessel Run" clearly wasn't a thing anyone in-universe would know or care about unless they were traveling to Kessel to transport machinery, spice, or slaves. And no one would have any reason to try to do the KR quickly except for our plucky heroes, so having done the Kessel Run in <20 Parsecs isn't something anyone else would ever try to do or need to do, so it's probably not all that impressive of a boast.

My only other critique of the film was Qi'Ra being reintroduced as she was. Her being the Lt to Scarface and just happening to be on the same luxury yacht as Han's first job is just one of those things that makes the universe of Star Wars feel soooooo small. I think it would have been better to just not have Qi'Ra share an origin story with Han (have some other love interest get killed during their attempted escape or something), or else at least have Scarface say something like "Oh, you're from the sewers of Corellia? So is one of my top lieutenants! Let me summon her here!" That, or have the Train Heist and Luxury Yacht stuff take place back on Corellia, so it's less preposterous that Qi'Ra ends up working there.



Other than that it was pretty fun, if not a wee bit predictable in the end.

I liked it, am going to watch it again.

It wasn't terribly deep, but Star Wars is moving away from that towards becoming a franchise like the marvel cartons, where depth is sustained across multiple movies, books, comics and toys rather than an individual movie. Thats why everyone hates TFA/TLJ in my opinion - it is just building the framework for them to fill in later, so is purposefully shallow.

At least it didn't have Iron man in it.

I watched it for a second time last night and flat out loved it. My (minor) reservations after the first screening were forgotten, and I got to revel in the fun, swashbuckling tone of the film.

Also, was that a Gozanti flying above Coronet City?!?

For me this movie did not shoot first.

It was more like an origin story checklist. Han meets Chewie, Han gets Blaster, Han meets Lando, Han wins Falcon, Han kisses girl, Han makes Kessel Run.

Some one compared it to firefly, the train heist does fit that a little, but the rest doesn't really fit at all. The Kessel Run was the weakest part as it felt more like an underwater cavern exploration and not a space exploration. I mean the space Kraken and the Space whirlpool were just unnecessary, don't forget obligatory fake out death even though we know who is going to live. Sure ESB had space slugs and mynocks but that was on an asteroid, not in space, but again you really couldn't call what they were in outerspace. More like some sort of space, underwater cavern thingy.

So I guess every Star Wars fan has a Star Wars movie that Disney made that they disliked. For me this one is mine. I liked R1 and TLJ which is odd for me to like those two and then dislike this one which has a lot of people praising it, but again I think that is just the Star Wars brand and hype much like how people praised Phantom Menace when it first came out. In the end, I would rather watch the Ewok movies again. The only reason Holiday is lower is because it had more wookie gurgeling.

I liked the movie, I thought the acting from just about everyone was very good. The story was a little weak and predictable. I did not like L3 and the I really didn't like the Lando L3 relationship, it was just a bit disturbing.

Maul had not been spoiled to me so I take that as the big reveal.

I was glad Han shot first, Chewie was great and I think they pulled off the Han/Chewie dynamic. It was interesting to hear Han speak Wookie but I hope we never have to listen to that again.

They may have made Han more the "good guy" then I would have liked.

Without doing a complete 1-10 ranking I would say it wasn't even close to R1 for me, it was better than all the prequels and about on par with TFA and TLJ, and to be clear I liked TLJ. So overall middle of the road for Star Wars but an enjoyable film which is really all I wanted out of it.

Just got out of the theater and thought it was great. The actors did pretty good, with Harrelson and Clarke stealing the show. L3 seemed a little too over the top trying to be comic relief, which just came off as annoying (so I was pretty happy when she got shot). And the Maul reveal just seemed awkwardly shoehorned, unless there is a sequel or something. It was also really great to see the Imperial Army. After decades of hearing how Stormtroopers were elite, it was nice to see how the are in comparison to life as an Imperial Infantryman.

Serious question: Is Star Wars in a bad place if the SW stories are better than the main story of the Sequel Trilogy (obviously my opinion)?

20 minutes ago, Admiral Calkins said:

Serious question: Is Star Wars in a bad place if the SW stories are better than the main story of the Sequel Trilogy (obviously my opinion)?

I have been thinking about this a lot recently and the answer I have come to is no. So far the SW stories have tied more closely in pace, theme, esthetic, and story with the original trilogy. That gives them an advantage I think. Most folks like me in the late 40 early 50 age range have a lot invested in the OT and I think we feel that time frame is what we like the best be it nostalgia or something else.

I do like the new trilogy but my biggest misgiving is we never got to see the big three all together again. I liked TLJ probably more that TFA but neither really caught me like the movies set during the Galactic Civil War.

50 minutes ago, Thrindal said:

I have been thinking about this a lot recently and the answer I have come to is no. So far the SW stories have tied more closely in pace, theme, esthetic, and story with the original trilogy. That gives them an advantage I think. Most folks like me in the late 40 early 50 age range have a lot invested in the OT and I think we feel that time frame is what we like the best be it nostalgia or something else.

I do like the new trilogy but my biggest misgiving is we never got to see the big three all together again. I liked TLJ probably more that TFA but neither really caught me like the movies set during the Galactic Civil War.

Not going to disagree with you. Definitely prefer the GCW and OT-feel of the stories. I think my overall gripe with the sequel trilogy is that I feel that they aren’t adding to the story as much as trying to recreate it. When watching TFA and TLJ, all that is going through my mind is “What was the point of winning the GCW if it didn’t change anything?” or “Didn’t this just happen but the factions had different names?”

Loved it. Man that was a fun movie.

That was fun. Watching the giant space squid get skinned alive was actually a bigger "holycrap" moment for me than Maul. Loved the depiction of Han & Lando. The ESB hug in reverse was beautiful at the end.

Solid Star Wars movie, that expanded the universe a fair amount.

8 hours ago, Admiral Calkins said:

Is Star Wars in a bad place if the SW stories are better than the main story of the Sequel Trilogy (obviously my opinion)?

I Don't know that they are for everybody. Some people like them more, (you included, obviously). some people preferred the sequel trilogy more (Me Included, soon-to-be-obviously). No one is wrong in this case, but I think you opinion has to do with what you have nostalgia for. If you grew up in the era during with the OT was popular, with new releases surrounding it, you will have more nostalgia for it. Conversely, the first star wars trailer I ever saw before I could see the movie (and knew what I was watching), was for TFA. I have fond memories of that moment, and I have no such memories for the OT. Does this make any one person "right" or "Empirically correct" no. (I also don't think you were intentionally making this argument, or even unintentionally. I just like to head it off early because if pops up A LOT). It also doesn't mean that anyone can tell another person that their opinion is less valid because, shockingly enough, you don't have the same context surrounding the release as a younger person. So, in conclusion, I don't think the Stories are in a better place but rather you have better memories of the source material than you do of the sequels, while I have the opposite and think the opposite. Part of this aggressive release schedule is to appeal to us both, and I love that. Sorry if I seemed aggressive, I don't really mean to be I just needed to vent about this.

21 minutes ago, Do I need a Username said:

I Don't know that they are for everybody. Some people like them more, (you included, obviously). some people preferred the sequel trilogy more (Me Included, soon-to-be-obviously). No one is wrong in this case, but I think you opinion has to do with what you have nostalgia for. If you grew up in the era during with the OT was popular, with new releases surrounding it, you will have more nostalgia for it. Conversely, the first star wars trailer I ever saw before I could see the movie (and knew what I was watching), was for TFA. I have fond memories of that moment, and I have no such memories for the OT. Does this make any one person "right" or "Empirically correct" no. (I also don't think you were intentionally making this argument, or even unintentionally. I just like to head it off early because if pops up A LOT). It also doesn't mean that anyone can tell another person that their opinion is less valid because, shockingly enough, you don't have the same context surrounding the release as a younger person. So, in conclusion, I don't think the Stories are in a better place but rather you have better memories of the source material than you do of the sequels, while I have the opposite and think the opposite. Part of this aggressive release schedule is to appeal to us both, and I love that. Sorry if I seemed aggressive, I don't really mean to be I just needed to vent about this.

I like what you said and it did not come off as aggressive. As I have said in previous posts, this is what discussion forums are all about. My daughters are growing up in the sequel era, and while I am not a big fan of it, they love Rey and BB-8 and I am going to support their love for it. Part of it is definitely nostalgia for the OT-era, so I'll give you that. But I always find myself asking too many questions with the Sequels, when I don't seem to have the same questions regarding the OT or the stories set in the OT-era. How does Rey know how to fix and fly the Falcon better than Han? How is the heck can someone (Han) manually time a ship to drop out of hyperspace in between a planetary shield and a planet's surface? Since when can you weaponize hyperspace? I don't necessarily want these questions answered by members, especially by stuff from legends or other material (comics, books, etc.), but I guess I feel I shouldn't even be having to ask them in such an established universe. Everyone has their own opinion though, and I am not going to judge anyone for having a different one.

Edit: I probably should add that visually, all four of the movies under Disney look and feel like Star Wars and that's awesome. My gripes are simply at the storylines of the sequels.

12 minutes ago, Admiral Calkins said:

-snip-

Edit: I probably should add that visually, all four of the movies under Disney look and feel like Star Wars and that's awesome. My gripes are simply at the storylines of the sequels.

Agreed.

Visually all these disney era sequels look and feel like star wars, they've absolutely nailed that aspect of star wars.

I similarly disagree with the storyline of the sequels.