Star Wars Star Wars Discussion Thread - LET THE PAST D-! Oh, wait, nevermind

[Skallagrim]

And yet they ended up treating the OT characters so horribly.

Sheer stubbornness on the part of Ford (who insisted Han must die in VII). Sheer incompetence on the part of Arndt (who introduced the idea that Han and Leia should be separated and unhappy, but at least wanted Han to survive and be re-united with Leia at the end) and Abrams (who combined 'Han dies' with 'their marriage is broken' to foolishly create the most depressing option possible). Sheer malice on the part of Johnson (who deliberately sought to ruin Luke's characterisation, among other things).

The death of Carrie Fisher is just a sad reality that made things worse, of course.

 

[The Immortal Watch Dog]

Which for a lot of new "fans" is the problem; its existence makes their sacred cow look bad, which in turn is taken as an attack on their ideology.

Chiss society is the ultimate meritocracy where the elites aren't feckless idiots but disciplined warriors and citizen soldiers who serve their people gladly, some to the point that they set aside wealth and privilege for a an austere life as a monk dedicated to starship combat.

That's why Social Justice types hate the original Thrawn trilogy basically.

 

[Captain X]

They didn't really get into that in the Thrawn trilogy itself, though, so I'm guessing their hatred has more to do with the bad guys being shown as actually competent and intelligent, and their world-view sees bad guys being bad guys because they're stupid. Also, Luke is still basically the hero, and they hate Luke, and they also hate Mara Jade because she disproves all their bullshit about fans only disliking the Disney Wars because they hate "strong female characters."

 

[Skallagrim]

[T]hey also hate Mara Jade because she disproves all their bullshit about fans only disliking the Disney Wars because they hate "strong female characters."

I have a theory that it goes beyond even that. A lot of these people who are active in this online bubble and constantly yell about "strong female characters" and claim that characters like Rey (...the female Wesley Crusher...) are strong and badass. So anyone who disagrees must be a hatebigotnazi. So sure, they hate characters like Mara Jade because those supposed hatebigotnazis all think she's cool, so it proves they can't really be hatebigotnazis. They hate that Mara's existence proves this, so they hate the character. Sure.

But it's worse than that, for them. Characters like Mara Jade also prove what actually well-written strong female characters look like, and thus provide a direct contrast with total Wesleys like Rey, who aren't strong or well-written at all. And these folks already love Rey and hate Mara Jade, as per the above. Which means that the existence of Mara Jade proves that, in fact... they are the ones who hate strong female characters.

You can check it out, in any fandom where this issue pops up. It keeps coming back. Example of a female Wesley? These people love her. Example of an actually well-written female character? They hate her. And the supposed "bigots" show the opposite reaction. It completely unmasks them, every time.

 

[Zachowon]

One thing that helped the ST was a younger generation having something to be apart of.
Older fans had all these older series they grew up on and had all of them brand new, could be surprised.
Now adays? Not so much

 

[Arch Dornan]

 

[ATP]

somebody must write this long ago...but why starfighters with lasers was digfighting each other? planes during WW1 and WW2 do that only becouse their HMG had short efficient range,if they try hit something in air.
If they could do from few miles/lasers/ ,then nobody would play in dogfighting.

 

[Skallagrim]

somebody must write this long ago...but why starfighters with lasers was digfighting each other? planes during WW1 and WW2 do that only becouse their HMG had short efficient range,if they try hit something in air.
If they could do from few miles/lasers/ ,then nobody would play in dogfighting.

Because this is not The Expanse. This is Star Wars, and Star Wars is basically sword-and-planet space fantasy. It's not hard sci-fi. Not remotely.

The ancestry of SW, at its core, looks like this:

John Carter > Flash Gordon > Star Wars

It's that simple.

 

[Bear Ribs]

somebody must write this long ago...but why starfighters with lasers was digfighting each other? planes during WW1 and WW2 do that only becouse their HMG had short efficient range,if they try hit something in air.
If they could do from few miles/lasers/ ,then nobody would play in dogfighting.

Blaster bolts are pretty slow, significantly slower than an HMG bullet. They appear to generally need loads of shots to hit an enemy at a range of 100 meters, trying to hit a target twenty miles away would just be a waste of time even if the blaster bolt does hold together that far.

 

[BlackDragon98]

Blaster bolts are pretty slow, significantly slower than an HMG bullet. They appear to generally need loads of shots to hit an enemy at a range of 100 meters, trying to hit a target twenty miles away would just be a waste of time even if the blaster bolt does hold together that far.

Blaster bolts are slow enough that a force sensitive can deflect them with their lightsaber.
Slugs (bullets in the SW universe) are just as good as the bullets in our world.
Aurra Sing and some other bounty hunters use them specially to kill Jedi, as they are so much faster than a blaster and much harder to counter.

 

[KilroywasNOTHere]

Because this is not The Expanse. This is Star Wars, and Star Wars is basically sword-and-planet space fantasy. It's not hard sci-fi. Not remotely.

The ancestry of SW, at its core, looks like this:

John Carter > Flash Gordon > Star Wars

It's that simple.

And that's OK.

 

[Lord Sovereign]

Because this is not The Expanse. This is Star Wars, and Star Wars is basically sword-and-planet space fantasy. It's not hard sci-fi. Not remotely.

The ancestry of SW, at its core, looks like this:

John Carter > Flash Gordon > Star Wars

It's that simple.

Pretty much. Indeed, my only problem with space battles is capital ships being scenery and not using their big sharp teeth to rip each other apart (diminished explosions is big sad).

 

[AnimalNoodles]

And yet they ended up treating the OT characters so horribly.

Its part of the pattern of any space these people take over and occupy. In order legitimize thier takeover they have to discredit and cancel the past culture of the space. Its not enough to add Rey to the pantheon of star wars heroes, Luke had to be deconstructed and discredited to make Rey shine all the more.

 

[Buba]

Sheer stubbornness on the part of Ford (who insisted Han must die in VII).

The killing of a major character - by his son no less - was IMO the best thing about Ep.VII.

 

[Skallagrim]

The killing of a major character - by his son no less - was IMO the best thing about Ep.VII.

I don't necessarily disagree with the idea, although I'm personally a strong proponent of not invalidating happy endings (which makes sequels to stories that ended in a satisfactory manner difficult by default, I realise).

The major problem is that they had one idea ("Han dies") and then another ("Han and Leia's marriage has broken up and Han has regressed to a caricature of his ANH self"). And they did both. That was a mistake.

A potential secondary problem pertains to Han's son killing him, specifically in that this renders a redemption arc a lot more difficult. Some people are more willing to accept that, but as far as I'm concerned, this moment should have been the dividing line, whereafter Kylo Ren is indisputably evil and redemption is off the table. If they want to keep playing with the possible redemption arc and make that credible (to me), then he can't murder his unarmed father.

(Arguments about how Vader did a lot worse etc. need not apply here. It's not about such rational criteria. It's about how a story works. If a guy muders his unarmed father who is offering him forgiveness for all his crimes, then that means something. You make that narrative choice, then you must also commit to following that through to the ultimate consequence. They didn't do that. They went with a half-assed redemption after all.)

 

[ATP]

I don't necessarily disagree with the idea, although I'm personally a strong proponent of not invalidating happy endings (which makes sequels to stories that ended in a satisfactory manner difficult by default, I realise).

The major problem is that they had one idea ("Han dies") and then another ("Han and Leia's marriage has broken up and Han has regressed to a caricature of his ANH self"). And they did both. That was a mistake.

A potential secondary problem pertains to Han's son killing him, specifically in that this renders a redemption arc a lot more difficult. Some people are more willing to accept that, but as far as I'm concerned, this moment should have been the dividing line, whereafter Kylo Ren is indisputably evil and redemption is off the table. If they want to keep playing with the possible redemption arc and make that credible (to me), then he can't murder his unarmed father.

(Arguments about how Vader did a lot worse etc. need not apply here. It's not about such rational criteria. It's about how a story works. If a guy muders his unarmed father who is offering him forgiveness for all his crimes, then that means something. You make that narrative choice, then you must also commit to following that through to the ultimate consequence. They didn't do that. They went with a half-assed redemption after all.)

It still could be worst.Han could not only divorce Leia,but become white nationalist voting for Trump.And his son would kill him in name of lgbt and blm.And help create lgbt Empire with Palpatine leading every lgbt parade.
In that case,redemption would not be needed.Good guys win,yes ?

 

[Buba]

The major problem is that they had one idea ("Han dies") and then another ("Han and Leia's marriage has broken up and Han has regressed to a caricature of his ANH self"). And they did both. That was a mistake.

I'm not sure if it was a mistake or not. Personally I don't mind "Leia dumps never-grows-up petty-criminal" but YMMV , I'm fine with that.

Full agreement on Darth Emo being unredeemable (plotwise) - but the plot (whatever there is) drifted into Draco Malfoy in leather pants territory so we ended up with viewers shipping Unstable Homicidal Slimeball with The Bimbo.

 

[LordSunhawk]

John Boyega as the Sith Warrior, Daisy Ridley as Yvette.

Sith storyline, now that would be interesting.

 

[Urabrask Revealed]

John Boyega as the Sith Warrior, Daisy Ridley as Yvette.

Sith storyline, now that would be interesting.

Hmm, I wanted to say that Sith Inquisitor would be a better idea, but then I realized it might be taken as stereotyping.
But in my opinion, the Sith Warrior has to be a trueblooded Sith, if only for the optimistic message that even the worst cultures can spawn someone who looks at his own and say "This is wrong."

 

[Captain X]

(Arguments about how Vader did a lot worse etc. need not apply here. It's not about such rational criteria. It's about how a story works. If a guy muders his unarmed father who is offering him forgiveness for all his crimes, then that means something. You make that narrative choice, then you must also commit to following that through to the ultimate consequence. They didn't do that. They went with a half-assed redemption after all.)

The really cruddy part of that is that this seems to be because they were trying to appeal to the Rey/Kylo 'shippers who seem to make up so much of the leftist audience they seem to want.