Yeah I get that, but it feels too rushed, under-developed and thus kind of poorly executed. It's not just background noise, it's badly done background noise.
Star Wars: Rogue One Story Trailer
- Thread starter Biggest-Geek-Ever
- Start date
- Status
Yeah I get that, but it feels too rushed, under-developed and thus kind of poorly executed. It's not just background noise, it's badly done background noise.
The Force is a major theme in ANH, and is a constant presence throughout the movie. I'm guessing you haven't watched it in a long time.
They are different ways of doing things but I'm not sure one is inherently better than the other.
TFA's probably could have been executed better, but just because ANH did it one way doesn't mean thats the only "correct" way of doing it.
Heck, this is a good example of how ANH and TFA are superficially similar but when you examine them more closely, they are doing significantly different things.
brandonh83
Banned
Yeah, Starkiller isn't as central to the plot of TFA as the Death Star is to ANH. The search for Luke and his lightsaber is.
In many ways, Luke is the Resistance's (Rebellion's) "Death Star", the weapon that will help them win the war against the First Order (Empire).
At the end of the movie, the good guys have the upper hand because they acquired a weapon that will help them defeat their enemy, while at the same time leveling the playing field by destroying an enemy's weapon.
It's like poetry, it rhymes.
The film is called "The Force Awakens". The Force is a major theme throughout the film. Definitely sounds like it's time for a rewatch.
The focus of A New Hope is destroying the Death Star. The focus of Force Awakens finding Luke Skywalker and general Force shit.
I really wish I could find the person who started the whole "ANH/TFA are the same movie" shit and slap him or her across the face because they're really only similar at a surface level.
I really wish I could find the person who started the whole "ANH/TFA are the same movie" shit and slap him or her across the face because they're really only similar at a surface level.
Right, and I totally agree with you except the bolded. I'd say ANH only uses the Death Star as a plot device to drive home how powerful the force is and the role it plays in the hero's journey. The only reason the DS wad destroyed in the first place is because of Luke's ability to wield the force, even if untrained. Vader himself reminds us that "the ability to destroy a planet is insignificant next to the power of the force".
ANH is first and foremost about Luke and discovering the power of his own abilities (via The Force). I know it's sort of retconned, but the DS ends up being no more important than Starkiller base. SW's focus is always The Force and the hero's journey (although the prequels are a jumbled mess I still can't quite figure out, in that regard).
Superweapons have always been a background plot device to help drive home the hero's journey.
Id argue that ANH is about a collective group of underdogs destroying the Death Star through any means necessary. The role The Force had in destroying the Death Star is kind of minor in the bigger scheme considering all of the other factors that lead to it
- Spies stealing the plans
- The droids making it off the ship
- The Empire simply underestimating the Rebellion
- The Rebellion actually analyzing and finding a way to destroy the Death Star
- Han bailing out Luke at the end
- Luke using The Force to blow it up
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
JJ Abrams?
That's like half the internet man.
I GOT A LOTTA SLAPS TO GIVE
Thinking back, I would agree with you that there is more of a focus on the DS in ANH in comparison to SKB in TFA, but I still think these superweapons are used as plot devices to push the hero along his/her journey. There's definitely more of a DS presence though, you're right. But the point of the movie is for the hero to use his ability (the Force) with guidance/obstacles provided by the good and bad "masters" in order to save the day. And, especially when you consider the events from ESB and ROTJ, it becomes even more apparent. As a stand alone film, had there been no sequels, I still think the film is about the hero overcoming evil, but it's even more apparent since there are.
Ultimately I think we're on the same page here. Just slightly different perspectives.
For sure. I think the major point I was trying to make is the focus of SW, at its core, is about the hero discovering and using his/her great abilities to overcome challenging odds (guided with help).
Lol. I really hope that conversation is finally dead..
Well, at least for the next year and a half.
Nope just someone who's capable of critical thinking.
Are there any explanations why Stardestroyers can now hover right above the ground?
In ANH and especially in ESB/ROTJ they felt like your typical sci-fi giant ass mothership that you encounter outside of gravity wells.
I don't think there is one Ralph McQuarrie painting that has them close to the ground, which indicates he didn't think/want them to be able to.
It feels like what little physical reality and internal world consistency SW had, has retreaded in favor of an increase of the "what looks cool in frame" factor?
Why were there no SDs hovering right above the Endor forest? Why none on Cloud City? Why none on Hoth? Vader always was in need to take a shuttle.
Might be nitpicking in a fantasy universe like this, but if there are no rules for this stuff everything becomes a bit arbitary.
Granted, SDs hovering right above ground is peanuts compared to hyperspace shooting starkiller bases but still..
In ANH and especially in ESB/ROTJ they felt like your typical sci-fi giant ass mothership that you encounter outside of gravity wells.
I don't think there is one Ralph McQuarrie painting that has them close to the ground, which indicates he didn't think/want them to be able to.
It feels like what little physical reality and internal world consistency SW had, has retreaded in favor of an increase of the "what looks cool in frame" factor?
Why were there no SDs hovering right above the Endor forest? Why none on Cloud City? Why none on Hoth? Vader always was in need to take a shuttle.
Might be nitpicking in a fantasy universe like this, but if there are no rules for this stuff everything becomes a bit arbitary.
Granted, SDs hovering right above ground is peanuts compared to hyperspace shooting starkiller bases but still..
Sorcerer
Member
The focus of A New Hope is to introduce to The Force, not the Death Star.
The scene with Luke in Kenobi's homestead is the crucial scene in the movie that sets up the universe.
The Elite
BOSS
Their predecessors in ATOC launched from the ground I believe.
I think this is more toward where I was going. And the DS is used as a plot device (a good one too).
Yep, this. Prequel era (*shudders*) Star Destroyers could land on planets and stuff
I always thought this scene was more about establishing some backstory to why The Empire was bad (since it drives home the whole "the galaxy was better before these dicks took over") thing. But yeah, it could definitely be interpreted as the way to introduce The Force.
I thought "maybe it's just a rocky trailer" the first time.. but now I'm genuinely worried.
-Plasma Reus-
Service guarantees member status
*Lucasfilms makes SW prequels*
"This is shit. Star wars was perfect already, just make it more like the original trilogy. Here's some scenes from the original trilogy that show how to do Star Wars".
*Lucasfilms take that advice and makes the same kind of movie based on those criticisms.*
"Wtf this was the same as ANH!"
You can't win with nerds.
"This is shit. Star wars was perfect already, just make it more like the original trilogy. Here's some scenes from the original trilogy that show how to do Star Wars".
*Lucasfilms take that advice and makes the same kind of movie based on those criticisms.*
"Wtf this was the same as ANH!"
You can't win with nerds.
Well I would regard the prequel era stuff as questionable as well.
That is when the fanboys took over and gave Lucas ideas what "looks cool".
Basically the whole Geonosis battle was coming from the previs department.
Maybe I'm too much of a McQuarrie purist...
It just feels with such an overabundance of anti-grav tech where you can have whole cities hover above ground and also have super fast hyperspace travelling, why would anybody still live on hellhole shit planets?
That is when the fanboys took over and gave Lucas ideas what "looks cool".
Basically the whole Geonosis battle was coming from the previs department.
Maybe I'm too much of a McQuarrie purist...
It just feels with such an overabundance of anti-grav tech where you can have whole cities hover above ground and also have super fast hyperspace travelling, why would anybody still live on hellhole shit planets?
The new canon has retconned it so that ISDs can enter the atmosphere. This was actually something of a plot point in Battlefront: Twilight Company, where the villain's Star Destroyer wasn't able to escape Sullust only because it was damaged.
Per the Star Wars wiki:
I think they wanted to just give authors and directors more leeway so they can do cool stuff and not get bogged down in technicalities.
My headcanon was always that Star Destroyers simply didn't enter atmospheres because they were huge and it would require a ton of power to leave the planet's atmosphere and gravity. That fits in with the recurring idea that the Empire loves building giant shit that have flaws to them.
That is the canon! The old canon was that they just couldn't enter/leave the atmosphere period because they weren't strong enough to escape at all without some sort of assistance like the repulsorlift cradle attached to Lusankya.
Thanks for the answers. So the canon WAS changed. Was it because of the AOTC scene with the CG troopers boarding the proto SDs?
Canon shouldn't be changed if it paints whole scenarios in the OT in a weird light though. Then it becomes a game of "why didn't they do this before?"
Nightshade
Member
There aren't really enough instances in the OT where this could have happened to seem weird. It's a massive risk to the Empire's investment to operate a ship in the atmosphere. So it seems like more of an exception than the rule. Most of the instances where we saw a shuttle being used to seem to make sense given the scenarios. Plus in AOTC those ships were being christened/used for the first time. So it seems like they were fresh from the factory.
Well, that was just an example of George not caring what the EU had previously written. The official EU explanation for that was that Clone Wars era Acclamators and Venators were able to land but not Imperial-class for...some............reason (which was never really explained). I think everyone kind of just went with the explanation that Sephzilla said in the other post ("the Empire loves building giant shit that have flaws to them") because it represents how everything degraded under the boot of the Empire.
Maybe that had an affect on the LSG's decision to change things, I don't know. But the change didn't come into effect until after the sale to Disney.
Jack Scofield
Member
There is a middle ground between these two extremes.
I meant to comment on this thing earlier. I was super impressed by the trailer.
I was probably going to see the movie because Star Wars, but this trailer really sold me on it. The cinematography looks incredibly tight. Really digging the look of the movie.
Dialogue is Star Wars all right. The franchise has always been about the melodrama. That's not a negative, by the way.
I think the trailer showed us too much, but damn did it look good. Genuinely interested in seeing it. I'm still fearful of the next anthology movies though.
I was probably going to see the movie because Star Wars, but this trailer really sold me on it. The cinematography looks incredibly tight. Really digging the look of the movie.
Dialogue is Star Wars all right. The franchise has always been about the melodrama. That's not a negative, by the way.
I think the trailer showed us too much, but damn did it look good. Genuinely interested in seeing it. I'm still fearful of the next anthology movies though.
Probably because they didn't have the budget to depict them like that or simply chose not to. You see ISDs hovering on planets like Endor in Battlefront, and they're hovering above city areas from time to time in Rebels.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMmiNeVrbDk
Rogue One fanedit trailer+classical music ;-)
I like this one better than original and use of the Imperial klaxxon - pure genius.
Rogue One fanedit trailer+classical music ;-)
I like this one better than original and use of the Imperial klaxxon - pure genius.
But that was my point. Ralph McQuarrie never chose to depict them like that.
There is even a cut scene in ANH where Luke witnesses the battle above Tatooine with those binoculars of his and it is tiny in the sky.
To me it seems the ISDs were originally conceived as ships that are only operating out of gravity wells.
Wouldn't you, as the Empire have these mofos hang above every major city as a reminder of who is boss if they were capable of it? Like German Zeppelins.
Not to say the OT was anywhere near sci-fi, but it seemed slightly more coherent in that regard to me. Or it was the fact that the universe was not as built out yet but they seemed to have some base rules down.
What ships can do cloaking, have a hyperdrive, what can land and what can't. How long it takes to get from system to system. This all seemed to take even more of a backseat when the PT and now TFA came out. It is purely about visuals these days.
15 years ago was probably the last time I was considering myself a MAJOR fan but 15 years are also able to change a man so I don't know if it is not my own fault I had somewhat of a falling out with my SW love
I still like her though and watch her from a distance, but the cuddling times are over..Missing more of a consistent logic that goes together with the visuals to tickle my brain vs. just being satisfied with looking at fireworks.
The more this took a backseat in favor of coolness and visuals, the harder I can justify investing in the mythology. It is all a bit too arbitrary for me.
For all the returning to the McQuarrie well they do nowadays, it feels like it is running dry for me still.
fastford58
Member
The predecessor to the Star Destroyer could hover at the ground in the prequels. Why would they downgrade.
- Status