Get your fill of sci-fi, science, and mockery of stupid ideas
http://stardestroyer.dyndns-home.com/
http://stardestroyer.dyndns-home.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=167614
I will say, given that it's Star Wars? I'm actually fine with this. I had more issues with pacing, some unneeded plots, and other things that could've been massaged to be better, but there was a fair amount to like in TLJ.Kane Starkiller wrote: ↑2018-08-29 01:19pm The "Wine Tasting Short Movie" at 38:30 mark is a perfect encapsulation of the "expectation subversion" in this movie: straight up plagiarize a scene from Empire Strikes Back or Return of the Jedi and then add ridiculous twists (ice planet but it's salt!, throne room climactic scene but it's in the second movie not the third! etc.).
Ultimately that's Poe's fault more than theirs. Poe was the one who sent them out on this foolhardy mission, after all.Kane Starkiller wrote: ↑2018-09-01 10:41am Watching the review I realized I was under the mistaken impression that Finn and Rose were completely useless in the movie. They were in fact actively detrimental to the Resistance and their misplaced trust in a complete stranger actually led to First Order being able to detect the escaping transports and nearly annihilate every last one of them.
How is that 'technobabble'? It's expository dialog of which I'm not a fan, but its not in any way technobabble. It's meant to convey information to the audience. There's no need to explain to the audience why only the lead ship would be engaged in the tracking, because its irrelevant information that isn't required for the plot to function. You may as well ask why ray shields don't stop proton torpedoes.I was also reminded of the way the director had Finn and Rose characters finishing each other sentences as they were hatching up their ridiculous plan:
Rose:"Hyperspace tracking is a new tactic but the principle must be the same as any active tracker."
Finn and Rose in unison: "So they are only tracking us from the lead ship"
At no point is any explanation given as to why "active tracking" would mean they were being tracked from only one ship but because they said it in unison the implication to the audience is that it's the most obvious thing in the world so no explanations are really necessary. Remember it's not nonsensical technobabble if the characters are finishing each other sentences with it.
Well that is certainly a convenient excuse: dumb characters making dumb decisions that end in a debacle was intentional so it's OK. Well no it isn't OK. It's still a dumb plotline that ends nowhere. Of course there are plenty of excellent movies that deal with arrogant and dumb people making terrible mistakes but those movies explore the character flaws of their characters as well as the consequences of their actions and how others react to it.Vympel wrote:Ultimately that's Poe's fault more than theirs. Poe was the one who sent them out on this foolhardy mission, after all.
I do like how Plinkett points out the characters fuck things up is presented like its some sort of meaningful critique. I mean - yeah, this is a movie that revolves around characters making all sorts of mistakes. Welcome to a pretty obvious theme of the movie?
I especially liked the comparisons to TNG - yeah, if only the movie was more like Star Trek, the Next Generation, a series built on the creator's insistence that there be no conflict between the core cast, making drama impossible.
Star Wars: The Movie Where Everyone Sits Around Making Perfectly Logical and Correct Decisions In Order To Achieve The Optimal Outcome.
Technobabble usually is expository dialogue it's just that it's completely meaningless since the audience has no idea what they are talking about. Certainly "active tracking" is not "reversely polarized tachyon beam" but what does it say to the audience exactly? How do you jump from "active tracking" to "only lead ship is tracking"?Vympel wrote:How is that 'technobabble'? It's expository dialog of which I'm not a fan, but its not in any way technobabble. It's meant to convey information to the audience. There's no need to explain to the audience why only the lead ship would be engaged in the tracking, because its irrelevant information that isn't required for the plot to function. You may as well ask why ray shields don't stop proton torpedoes.
Again, it's a pretty obvious theme of the movie, so yes, it is intentional. Unless you think Rian Johnson is just the stupidest man alive and deliberately wrote his characters making mistake after mistake without realising he was doing so? That'd be quite an achievement.Kane Starkiller wrote: ↑2018-09-01 05:38pm Well that is certainly a convenient excuse: dumb characters making dumb decisions that end in a debacle was intentional so it's OK. Well no it isn't OK. It's still a dumb plotline that ends nowhere. Of course there are plenty of excellent movies that deal with arrogant and dumb people making terrible mistakes but those movies explore the character flaws of their characters as well as the consequences of their actions and how others react to it.
Rubbish. Again: that the mission was a debacle that led to deaths in the Resistance is on Poe - not Finn and Rose. It was Poe who authorised them and enabled them to go after agreeing with their plan, and for that he bears responsibility. Him doing so is another expression of the flaws we see him grapple with since the beginning of the movie - a preference for high-risk / high-reward cockamamie plans that in other films would be rewarded with success. Poe finishes the movie having learned from his mistakes and refusing (twice) to throw away lives in an impossible fight just because there are slim chances of success.Nothing like this exists in this movie: Finn and Rose never come to regret their decision to embark on the mission in the first place nor do other characters in the movie react to the aftermath of their mistakes. They just go on a new adventure taking on gigantic AT-AT walkers with rickety amusement park cars. Woooohoooooo! Try spinning Finn that's a good trick!
Who gives a shit how a leader should behave? Why should anyone care a fuck about this, as a concept, at all? It doesn't carry with it any inherent value, drama, or quality.The comparison with TNG was right on point. Picard is how a leader should behave
I thought it was pretty riveting, yeah. I don't get any particular thrill of watching people sit around making perfect decisions to lead to perfect outcomes. That's fucking boring, and its the precise opposite of good cinema.Holdo plot is badly manufactured drama for the sake of yet another TWIST! and only serves to make both Poe and Holdo look like idiots. Except the First Order is also filled with idiots so they don't react when the Rebel cruiser slooowly turns straight towards them and just stand there as the ship rams them.
Oh yeah I forgot that's the point of the movie: just a bunch of idiots floating around in space. Riveting, riveting stuff.
It doesn't matter. Since both people in the conversation know the principles involved, that it is presented as truth to the audience is the only relevant outcome. Nothing is gained by wasting time on interrogating this concept, because this isn't a class on active tracking in a movie.Technobabble usually is expository dialogue it's just that it's completely meaningless since the audience has no idea what they are talking about. Certainly "active tracking" is not "reversely polarized tachyon beam" but what does it say to the audience exactly? How do you jump from "active tracking" to "only lead ship is tracking"?
A more appropriate anaklogy would be "if Finn commented that the First Order is using ray shields and then both Finn and Rose exclaimed in unison "...which means they can't stop proton torpedoes!"It's one thing to accept that there is this technology called "ray shields" and only proton torpedoes can punch through it but if Finn commented that the First Order is using ray shields and then both Finn and Rose exclaimed in unison "...which means they are only using it on the lead ship!" I would scratch my head and ask how the fuck do they know this. How does one lead to the other?
Writing up a dumb script is hardly an achievement and excusing the dumb script with "oh it was intentional" doesn't make it any less dumb even if it was intentional.Vympel wrote:Unless you think Rian Johnson is just the stupidest man alive and deliberately wrote his characters making mistake after mistake without realising he was doing so? That'd be quite an achievement.
No it's not rubbush it's exactly what happens in the movie. Show me where Finn and Rose regret their actions. Show me where other characters blame them for their mistakes.Vympel wrote:Rubbish. Again: that the mission was a debacle that led to deaths in the Resistance is on Poe - not Finn and Rose. It was Poe who authorised them and enabled them to go after agreeing with their plan, and for that he bears responsibility. Him doing so is another expression of the flaws we see him grapple with since the beginning of the movie - a preference for high-risk / high-reward cockamamie plans that in other films would be rewarded with success. Poe finishes the movie having learned from his mistakes and refusing (twice) to throw away lives in an impossible fight just because there are slim chances of success.
Finn's story-arc (of which Rose and DJ are supporting cast) serves an entirely different purpose - namely, Finn discovering another moral plane to care about as opposed to just the fate of his immediate friends (i.e. Rey).
Sure sure the characters in The Last Jedi are one step removed from being "paragon of leadership" and "without any real flaw". You really couldn't make them a smidgen smarter without making them perfect.Vympel wrote:Who gives a shit how a leader should behave? Why should anyone care a fuck about this, as a concept, at all? It doesn't carry with it any inherent value, drama, or quality.
You may think having the Resistance fleet led by a paragon of leadership who always makes correct command decisions is some sort of inherent good, but it really isn't. If Poe in particular is already a Picard-type figure and incapable of making mistakes, then prospects for growth, drama or any sort of meaningful arc are dramatically reduced.
This is why "but in TNG!" is such a retarded-ass argument. The idea that a syndicated television series built on slamming down the reset button at the end of every episode - where all of the characters are almost always fundamentally without any real flaw - constitutes a useful model for character development in a film is so fucking dumb it shouldn't have to be stated.
Bikini Model: Hi guys we're on a national bikini tour and we're looking for two oil boy who can grease us up before each competition.Vympel wrote:I thought it was pretty riveting, yeah. I don't get any particular thrill of watching people sit around making perfect decisions to lead to perfect outcomes. That's fucking boring, and its the precise opposite of good cinema.
I couldn't care less how "active scanners" work and you know it. The reason I brought the scene up is that they used mumbo jumbo dialogue to handwave the need to neutralize other ships in the pursuing fleet. Oh yeah only one ship is tracking and we know which one. No need to worry about the other ships kids! It's lazy, dumb writing.Vympel wrote:It doesn't matter. Since both people in the conversation know the principles involved, that it is presented as truth to the audience is the only relevant outcome. Nothing is gained by wasting time on interrogating this concept, because this isn't a class on active tracking in a movie.
No that wouldn't be a more appropriate analogy. The appropriate analogy is exactly what I said. They introduced a new technology with certain characteristics and then jumped straight to which and how many ships in a particular fleet are equipped with it as some kind of unspoken logical deduction (They said it at the same time! It's sooo obvious! Dude trust me!). The logical leap is in no way justified and it's nothing but a lazy attempt to remove the other ships from the equation as I noted above.Vympel wrote:A more appropriate anaklogy would be "if Finn commented that the First Order is using ray shields and then both Finn and Rose exclaimed in unison "...which means they can't stop proton torpedoes!"
The only difference between 'how active trackers work' and 'how ray shields work' is that you've internalised one and not the other.
That's just wrong. To wit:Kane Starkiller wrote: ↑2018-09-02 07:40am Writing up a dumb script is hardly an achievement and excusing the dumb script with "oh it was intentional" doesn't make it any less dumb even if it was intentional.
What makes a movie filled with dumb characters a smart movie is the exploration of the consequences of those actions and how the others react to it. That doesn't exist in this movie. It plays like a standard adventure movie except adventures end in miserable failure because the characters are idiots.
You completely ignored my argument. I pointed out that the foolhardy mission is actually Poe's responsibility, not Finn and Rose's and its in service of Poe's growth as a character that he breaks free of his preference for high-risk cockamamie schemes that involve blowing things up, stops, and thinks. Poe's a character in the movie too, and that's his arc.No it's not rubbush it's exactly what happens in the movie. Show me where Finn and Rose regret their actions. Show me where other characters blame them for their mistakes.
I am not a military judge and couldn't care less what exactly the military responsibility is. The point is whether Finn and Rose as human beings show any remorse for what they have done and they don't. To other characters acknowledge their mistakes and change their views on them accordingly? No they don't.
Finn's attempt at sacrifice is thwarted by Rose who explains that it's about love not sacrifice and then plants a kiss on him as the Rebel base explodes in the background. It's beautiful.
I'm sorry, is there any reason for me to believe the complaining would be at all mitigated if they made undefined less serious errors? I highly doubt it.Sure sure the characters in The Last Jedi are one step removed from being "paragon of leadership" and "without any real flaw". You really couldn't make them a smidgen smarter without making them perfect.
Poe's destruction of the dreadnought was not based on foreknowledge of the fact that the First Order could track them, it was based on nothing but his sheer bloody-mindedness and desire for executing bad, unnecessary plans with long odds, without regard to the bigger picture. He's not exculpated for his bad judgement by facts of which he had no knowledge at the time he made the judgement, and that this was a lesson he needed to learn was made pretty obvious by the fact he then laucnhed yet another bad plan with long odds which achieved nothing but blowing the Resistance's escape plan.The only character who gets his decision constantly rubbed in his face is Poe even though he managed to destroy a city sized ship with something like 5 bombers and even after they realize the First Order can track them. So the Dreadnought would be joining the chase right? How would that affect the final outcome if Poe didn't destroy it? And that is the decision they choose to criticize?
Fine.See these are two characters one upping each other in making stupid decisions. I find that funny but not riveting. If you find people making idiotic mistakes riveting that is obviously your personal taste and not up for discussion. So I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.
It's a contrivance. They're used all the time.I couldn't care less how "active scanners" work and you know it. The reason I brought the scene up is that they used mumbo jumbo dialogue to handwave the need to neutralize other ships in the pursuing fleet. Oh yeah only one ship is tracking and we know which one. No need to worry about the other ships kids! It's lazy, dumb writing.
No, because the 'unspoken logical deduction' exists in both instances. You just find one more acceptable than the other.No that wouldn't be a more appropriate analogy. The appropriate analogy is exactly what I said. They introduced a new technology with certain characteristics and then jumped straight to which and how many ships in a particular fleet are equipped with it as some kind of unspoken logical deduction (They said it at the same time! It's sooo obvious! Dude trust me!). The logical leap is in no way justified and it's nothing but a lazy attempt to remove the other ships from the equation as I noted above.
There is a big gap between those two concepts, but there'll always be disagreement on what constitutes an 'idiot plot'. The same people who will spit chips at the First Order's incompetence in TLJ for example are often the exact same people who will go out of way to excuse the superficially 'cold and calculating' Empire (as Plinkett argues) Empire for all their bad decisions in the OT.Civil War Man wrote: ↑2018-09-04 11:34am I'd just like to point out that there's a lot of ground to cover between "Idiot Plot" and "Everyone Makes Perfect Decisions." A little incredulity on the part of Holdo and the crew could have made that part of the plot make more sense. Everyone just seems to take Finn's claim that they are being tracked using technology that none of them previously thought was even possible at face value. If, instead, there was an assumption from the command staff that there was a mole on board, and Finn was either wrong, exaggerating, or lying, Holdo would have more reason to keep people in the dark. Poe especially, since by that point the movie already establishes that she has a very low opinion of hotshot pilots, so she'd just assume he'd get careless and end up leaking the information to the spy (which is not far from what actually happens in the movie).
Just that one change makes it so she's making a smart decision, but it's not a perfect one because it's based on a reasonable premise that happens to be wrong.
Fair enough, it's been long enough since I've seen it that I forgot that part. I mostly remember Finn's involvement since he's established to be the guy who knows the layout of every First Order ship and facility because he was a janitor (which, while some people complain about that, I find perfectly reasonable, because low-ranked laborers see and hear a lot of stuff because elites often ignore them).
The whole point is that there isn't actually a mole, but that you could create more effective and believable tension in the Resistance sections by having major players think there is one. Perhaps they justify your question by pointing out that the mole could have been recently arrived, and start casting suspicions in Finn's direction, what with him being a former stormtrooper that very recently defected. Perhaps, they rationalize, Finn's plan for the Starkiller base assault was an attempt to lure the Resistance forces into a trap that didn't work out. Unfortunately, only 3 people can personally vouch for Finn's actions during that mission, and of those 3 one of them is dead and the other two are not with the fleet. Then, when Finn and Rose sneak out for Canto Bight, it further fuels the paranoia of the Holdo faction, since obviously the "ex"-stormtrooper fled because his cover was blown, and he must have had help getting off the Raddus, so that means there are still traitors in their midst.The idea of a 'mole' looks attractive but IMO it doesn't make much sense if you dive into it. If the First Order had a mole in the resistance, why didn't the mole just tell them where the Resistance base was ages ago and render the finale of TFA totally moot?