Marvel’s Kevin Feige Developing New Star Wars Movie
11 minutes ago, EchoZero said:
one of my biggest issues with Luke in the OT was how detached he seemed when people he loved and cared about die. Aunt and uncle lying dead burned to a crisp and it was a short nod and off to join the rebellion. I get the motivation it inspired, and even if it was anger he showed I'd have related, but he didn't...I just think I'd be a little more emotional.... Then his best friend gets vaporized, and we never see the pain or regret.
Back when I still the intended age for the movie, I found those scenes highly emotionally effective. Though I think your breakdown of which films Luke showed emotion, indicates it has as much to do with Lucas' directing as anything.
41 minutes ago, GooeyChewie said:We don’t have a complete history of military tactics in the Star Wars universe, so we can’t say for sure. I think the most likely explanation is that people HAD thought of such tactics, and concluded that such tactics aren’t sustainable. Which, if you consider what happened in the movie makes sense. The maneuver completely destroyed the Raddus, while only damaging the Supremacy. Kylo, Rey, Finn, Rose, BB-8, DJ and Phasma all survived, and the First Order was still able to marshall enough ground forces to assault Crait. The sacrifice play acted primarily as a diversion, not as a destructive military tactic.
Star Wars as a film series is almost completely composed of moments like this and the EU as a concept, is almost entirely composed of people making up overthought explanations for why something worked the way it did. Give it some time and I'm sure we'll get a full trilogy of something about the Supremacy dropping its forward shields to keep pace with the smaller ships or something.
It's also worth noting that part of the reason it comes up is its pretty much to my knowledge one of the few if only times in the franchise we've seen hyperspace be simultaneous usable but also not capable of being used to get to safety. Destroying a ship has rarely been a meaningful objective. They're treated more like giant monsters that have to be avoided and outwitted to survive.
21 minutes ago, R3dReVenge said:Let's say I have a red bucket and say that the bucket is red. Someone else comes a long and says that it's orange. The bucket is objectively red and all because this person thinks it's orange doesn't make it orange.
This may not actually be true.
Opening day in one of my college classes the professor came out with a book, held it up to the class and said, "this book is red" Looking at the book it was clearly black. Eventually someone spoke up and told him it was black. He argued that it was indeed red. After a few minutes of people arguing, he flipped the book over. one side was red, the other black.
The idea was to invite students to question what they believe to be objective observations..
"Against that positivism which stops before phenomena saying, 'there are only facts' I should say: no, it is precisely facts that do not exist, only interpretations…"
-Friedrich Nietzsche
21 minutes ago, R3dReVenge said:The same goes for TLJ. When I say the movie lacks character development which makes the movie predictable and is poorly choreographed (hence huge mistakes during battle scenes). These are objective statements (Watch a breakdown of the throne room scene. It's loaded with mistakes, yet people still defend the scene).
Again, this is your observation. There are those who do see character development.
Your judgement of what is good or bad in terms of choreography is entirely relative to your perspective.
What is the objective metric you use to measure and rate either of these two?
Fixed some faulty logic
6 minutes ago, R3dReVenge said:I think the biggest problem that people are having is their inability to differentiate between subjective and objective statements.
Let's say I have a red bucket and say that the bucket is red. Someone else comes a long and says that it's orange. The bucket is objectively red and all because this person thinks it's orange doesn't make it orange.
The same goes for TLJ. When I say the movie lacks character development which makes the movie predictable and is poorly choreographed (hence huge mistakes during battle scenes). These are objective statements (Watch a breakdown of the throne room scene. It's loaded with mistakes, yet people still defend the scene).
Now when I say TLJ is a dumpster fire. That's my opinion of the movie. I used the objective information in the movie to form an opinion.
There is nothing wrong with you liking a movie that I think is a dumpster fire. Maybe you enjoy the politics injected into most of the scenes. Maybe you enjoy the lack luster characters... There are plenty of bad movies that I enjoy too!
Red can be quantified by measuring light wavelength bouncing off the bucket (red is ~625-720 nm). That is a testable objective quantity. "Lacks character development" and "poorly choreographed" are subjective qualities only able to be made by the judgement of a human being. Unless there is some sort of device that measures choreography and character development that I don't know about.
Think about the words being used here. Poorly. What is poorly? Can poorly be quantified in some way? Is there a discrete quality defined as poorly? No. Thus it is your highly subjective opinion. The only objective information in the movie is the sound and light coming off the screen (and even that varies from device to device) from the moment it hits your eyes and ears you are analyzing that data and drawing your own subjective conclusions based on your perceptions, beliefs and biases. Even pointing to "mistakes" is not really relevant here since the dependent variable for a star wars movie is human enjoyment, another unquantifiable value, and if people are enjoying it despite mistakes, then that means those mistakes are not really relevant. Bob Dylan's music is full of "mistakes" yet that is what gives his music character and makes him incredibly popular.
I could care less whether or not you like a movie. I just don't like misunderstanding and misinformation being spread around.
18 minutes ago, TauntaunScout said:Back when I still the intended age for the movie, I found those scenes highly emotionally effective. Though I think your breakdown of which films Luke showed emotion, indicates it has as much to do with Lucas' directing as anything.
Don't get me wrong, those scenes still carry the gravity they should, but the character was much less relatable.
Maybe I'm just a grumpy old hermit on the inside and Cantankerous Hermit Luke is my spirit animal....
I mean, if we're going to use mistakes to hold a movie hostage, there's that whole "Carrie!" bit....
On that note, is there an EU story for that? Has someone introduced a character that Luke was more excited to see than Leia?
1 minute ago, LunarSol said:I mean, if we're going to use mistakes to hold a movie hostage, there's that whole "Carrie!" bit....
On that note, is there an EU story for that? Has someone introduced a character that Luke was more excited to see than Leia?
I think my favorite mistake from the original was the stormtrooper bashing his face on a door. I didn't notice it til about 4-5 years ago and had previously thought the sound was the comm static. Now I can't watch that scene without laughing.
Edited by EchoZero
6 minutes ago, LunarSol said:I mean, if we're going to use mistakes to hold a movie hostage, there's that whole "Carrie!" bit....
On that note, is there an EU story for that? Has someone introduced a character that Luke was more excited to see than Leia?
Whether you believe Mark Hamill or not is up to you but he debunked that mistake. Star Wars has plenty of other mistakes that it has embraced (like the stormtrooper hitting his head.) None of it stops me from ultimately enjoying the Series.
Edited by Draycos6 minutes ago, Draycos said:None of it stops me from ultimately enjoying the Series.
Ultimately the point. 
Interesting though!
On 9/26/2019 at 12:48 AM, Thraug said:Bring back Gary Whitta please.
NO! Last I heard he was working on a Last Starfighter Reboot/sequel and THAT is more important.
1 hour ago, EchoZero said:
Opening day in one of my college classes the professor came out with a book, held it up to the class and said, "this book is red" Looking at the book it was clearly black. Eventually someone spoke up and told him it was black. He argued that it was indeed red. After a few minutes of people arguing, he flipped the book over. one side was red, the other black.
Yeah... the color of an object could have been the worst example of objective fact to use among a bunch of painters...
Most "black" paints are very dark blues and reds, which is why using black to darken or deepen colors can have poor results. Much better darken using opposite colors.
Very few perfectly pure red, blue or yellow pigments exist. Most objects will therefore tend ever so slightly towards orange, green, or purple. The bucket was most likely a very red orange, if that debate arose between two observers.
Heck. Grey and brown don't even exist, they are cultural constructions that are just muted shades of something else. Broadly speaking, most "greys" are blue, and most "browns" are orange.
On 9/27/2019 at 2:15 PM, EchoZero said:I think my favorite mistake from the original was the stormtrooper bashing his face on a door. I didn't notice it til about 4-5 years ago and had previously thought the sound was the comm static. Now I can't watch that scene without laughing.
He was one of the last Clones of Jango Fett, who also hit his head.
Yes we have a backstory for everything.