Star Wars: The Last Jedi release thread (spoilers)

[Crazedwraith]

I tend to see Poe and Holdo as foils in a way. Holdo is a much better officer. Whereas Poe is more of a charasmaric natural leader.

I dislike making out Holdo's stupid in-universe though, while I understand why people might saying I dont want to blame her character for arguably poor writing. (Like say Data is an idiot in ST because the writers botched science lines)

I dont get the impression Holdo is supposed to be an incompetant Admiral in TLJ, just not a great leader if that makes sense.

[The Romulan Republic]

I tend to see Poe and Holdo as foils in a way. Holdo is a much better officer. Whereas Poe is more of a charasmaric natural leader.

That is probably correct, based on what we see of them on-screen.

I dislike making out Holdo's stupid in-universe though, while I understand why people might saying I dont want to blame her character for arguably poor writing. (Like say Data is an idiot in ST because the writers botched science lines)

This is pretty much my point.

I do think that the film could have done a better job of setting up its subversion of Holdo as incompetent or a traitor. But in hindsight, she is clearly not intended to be that inept in-universe.

This is part of the problem with TLJ, though- it relies so heavily on subversion and misdirection that its a very easy film to misread, in some ways.

I dont get the impression Holdo is supposed to be an incompetant Admiral in TLJ, just not a great leader if that makes sense.

That's not far off, although I don't think her leadership was that bad (at least, not unambiguously so) based on what little we see and the situation she was dealing with.

She didn't do a good job of reassuring Poe, but Poe's actions also gave her little reason to trust him or take him seriously.

[Vendetta]

I believe this is the second time that you've claimed the entire film happened over 18 hours. I asked you before to cite evidence for that, since I don't recall a specific span of time being stated. Will you do so?

The timeframe is given, IIRC, as Rose and Finn are leaving for Canto Bight.

[The Romulan Republic]

I believe this is the second time that you've claimed the entire film happened over 18 hours. I asked you before to cite evidence for that, since I don't recall a specific span of time being stated. Will you do so?

The timeframe is given, IIRC, as Rose and Finn are leaving for Canto Bight.

Okay, fair enough then. Thanks.

And yeah, I do think the film would have benefitted from taking place over a longer period of time.

By the way, do we know if Rey's time with Luke lines up exactly with the rest of the film? Because it seems like she should have been there longer. IIRC we see two or three nights on the planet while she's there.

[Elheru Aran]

The only thing the timeframe helps (insofar as anybody cares) is in establishing that hyperspace speeds are absurdly awesome in Wars. Beyond that... there's really no reason that Rey couldn't have spent more time at Luke's island, nor that Finn and Rose couldn't have taken longer on their mission to get help for the Rebels. The only place it makes sense is the constant pursuit and bombardment of the Rebel fleet.

I suppose Luke's island planet could have a shorter day/night cycle than most? But if that was two or three nights during that roughly 18-hour period, that's a very fast revolutionary period...

[The Romulan Republic]

The only thing the timeframe helps (insofar as anybody cares) is in establishing that hyperspace speeds are absurdly awesome in Wars. Beyond that... there's really no reason that Rey couldn't have spent more time at Luke's island, nor that Finn and Rose couldn't have taken longer on their mission to get help for the Rebels. The only place it makes sense is the constant pursuit and bombardment of the Rebel fleet.

I suppose Luke's island planet could have a shorter day/night cycle than most? But if that was two or three nights during that roughly 18-hour period, that's a very fast revolutionary period...

We already had reason to believe that pan-galactic hyperspace travel in hours or less was possible (perhaps most notably Palpatine flying from Coruscant to Mustafar in time to save Vader in RotS), but the additional confirmation is nice.

However, I'd prefer to think that Rey's arrival on the planet (as shown at the end of TFA) took place before the Resistance evacuated their base, and that when we see Rey meet Luke in TLJ, its a slightly out-of-synch flashback, with maybe just her last night on the planet (when she goes to the Dark Side cave/fights Luke/leaves) taking place alongside the battle. Otherwise, it feels like too much crammed into too short a time.

Rose and Finn's mission, and the battle, taking place over those 18 hours I can buy. That's not a problem. If anything, it seems a bit long.

[Elheru Aran]

Yeah, it wouldn't have been very hard for anybody to say something along the lines of 'Rey left a week ago, why isn't she back with Luke yet' somewhere in the movie. That would've neatly established the timeline. Rey with Luke being a few days *behind* the actual action we see would be a bit of a stumbling block for most viewers though.

One solution might be to have shown more of the post-Hosnian Prime confusion and destabilization of the Republic, and the Rebels trying to hold things together as the First Order tries to track them down at D'Qar. Effectively divide the movie into two acts-- first act being mostly Rey and Luke with glimpses of what's going on with the Rebels, second act being mainly Rebels and a resolution to the Rey/Luke story. Instead of the extended (and kinda silly) pursuit of the Rebel fleet, simply have the Rebels evacuate to Crait, but somehow the First Order manages to track them there.

[The Romulan Republic]

Maybe. Though that could end up feeling like two separate films sandwiched together, maybe.

As it stands, I'm going to assume that Rey met Luke (as seen at the end of the previous film) some time before the evacuation of the Resistance, unless a canon source states otherwise.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

Apparently RJ didn't like JJ's script- imagine that. I got the impression that, like the audience Rey had had enough of attempting to convince Luke to get off his ass and do something and decided "fuck this, I'm out of here"; certainly that portion of the film dragged on way too long IMO.

A second viewing is needed to nail down some of the finer details, seeing as the home release is still a month away it's not going to happen immediately.

The whole 'cloak' fiasco was discussed about 10 pages back, one of many stupid things.

Remind me, was there a reason Holdo waited until most of the transports had been blown away before she did this?

I'm pretty sure Leia's relationship with Han meant that her being hetero was never in doubt though!

[Vympel]

Apparently RJ didn't like JJ's script- imagine that. I got the impression that, like the audience Rey had had enough of attempting to convince Luke to get off his ass and do something and decided "fuck this, I'm out of here"; certainly that portion of the film dragged on way too long IMO.

That is a classic misleading clickbait article headline. I really hate those fucking websites.

There's no evidence that JJ Abrams wrote a script for Episode VIII. Daisy Ridley says she thinks that JJ Abrams wrote 'drafts' for Episode VIII and IX, but what does that mean? Most likely - a summary treatment, maybe.

So this shithead website takes that and pretends that 1. Abrams had a script for VIII and 2. Johnson 'scrapped' it.

[The Romulan Republic]

Apparently RJ didn't like JJ's script- imagine that. I got the impression that, like the audience Rey had had enough of attempting to convince Luke to get off his ass and do something and decided "fuck this, I'm out of here"; certainly that portion of the film dragged on way too long IMO.

I think the feuding between directors that seems to be going on is a sign of lack of sufficient oversight and direction from management, to make sure that everyone is on the same page- something that a long-running franchise with multiple writers and directors really needs.

The MCU had some similar problems, IIRC.

A second viewing is needed to nail down some of the finer details, seeing as the home release is still a month away it's not going to happen immediately.

I thought it was sooner than that.

But yeah.

The whole 'cloak' fiasco was discussed about 10 pages back, one of many stupid things.

I don't see what's so stupid about it, if you're referring to the stealthed transports issue, but I may be misremembering.

Remind me, was there a reason Holdo waited until most of the transports had been blown away before she did this?

Her waiting until many were dead to ram is odd. I'd put it down, however, to kamikazes not being a typical Resistance tactic, and also, as I said, to Holdo having a naturally more cautious temperament.

I'm pretty sure Leia's relationship with Han meant that her being hetero was never in doubt though!

Well, she could be bi, but there's no real indication of that.

[Vympel]

I think the feuding between directors that seems to be going on is a sign of lack of sufficient oversight and direction from management, to make sure that everyone is on the same page- something that a long-running franchise with multiple writers and directors really needs.

There's no evidence at all of feuding between Rian Johnson and JJ Abrams AFAIK.

Her waiting until many were dead to ram is odd. I'd put it down, however, to kamikazes not being a typical Resistance tactic, and also, as I said, to Holdo having a naturally more cautious temperament.

The part in Sully where Tom Hanks explains to the board that their assumptions / simulation results about the plane being able to be landed elsewhere are based on perfect scenarios where the pilots know what will happen ahead of time is instructive in this regard.

[ray245]

I think the feuding between directors that seems to be going on is a sign of lack of sufficient oversight and direction from management, to make sure that everyone is on the same page- something that a long-running franchise with multiple writers and directors really needs.

The MCU had some similar problems, IIRC.

Regardless of how reliable the source is, it's quite apparent that there is a creative difference between TLJ and TFA. The subject matter both directors want to explore is quite different. Their idea of "what is SW" is also quite different. The issue is whether Kennedy has a creative vision for the franchise that she is going to enforce on directors?

The OT, despite having different directors and different people offering help, is still undeniably the vision of George Lucas. Lucas did change his mind quite often, but his approach towards storytelling has remained more or less intact.

With the ST, it's hard to see Kennedy's creative vision in her works. At the least, the Marvel movies retained a certain cohesive identity throughout the different movies.

[Crazedwraith]

The MCU had some similar problems, IIRC.

I'm not sure, the MCU has had more the opposite problem a lot of executive meddling to make the director's fit in with the MCU at the expense of the director's individual vision. (And just general interference and penny pinching from Ike Pearlmutter whuch ended up getting marvel comics and studios split up by Disney)

[Galvatron]

Turns out we missed seeing Luke mourn the loss of Han for pacing reasons.



I'm sure glad they left in so many other crucial scenes though.

[fractalsponge1]

Turns out we missed seeing Luke mourn the loss of Han for pacing reasons.



I'm sure glad they left in so many other crucial scenes though.

What a fucking joke. Take Canto Bight out if you want to improve the pacing.

[Civil War Man]

Turns out we missed seeing Luke mourn the loss of Han for pacing reasons.

Editors make the strangest decisions sometimes. The Hobbit movies also cut scenes like Thorin's funeral but was able to find enough room for several minutes of that lackey of Laketown's master cross-dressing in order to avoid participating in the battle.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

Makes you wonder if Luke could sense Han's death, it was obviously not something that could be shown in TFA. I don't recall Rey telling Luke that Ren murdered him, such a revelation would have hit him harder since he wouldn't have known exactly how it happened, just that it had.

Just saw a crappy upload on youtube on the final battle, I couldn't help but notice that when Poe encounters BB-8 again in the base, he fusses over him like a bloody dog!

The whole run at the siege cannon though... because of the offset cabin (which is horrible design choice to begin with) you could have the body of the speeder disappearing into the barrel of the cannon while the cabin crashes off to one side. Finn travelling along the beam's path is beyond stupid, it's not as though he couldn't simply approach at a slight angle instead.

[Elheru Aran]

A popular fan theory IIRC was that the last scene of TFA portrayed Luke mourning Han as Rey walks up behind him. Honestly it wasn't a *bad* idea, I thought, particularly as TFA definitely IMO seemed to suggest strongly that Leia sensed his death as well. Certainly, IMO, it works a little better than him getting all dressed up in the middle of nowhere to 'dissolve the Jedi Order' or whatever the visual dictionary/other materials suggested.

[The Romulan Republic]

I think the feuding between directors that seems to be going on is a sign of lack of sufficient oversight and direction from management, to make sure that everyone is on the same page- something that a long-running franchise with multiple writers and directors really needs.

The MCU had some similar problems, IIRC.

Regardless of how reliable the source is, it's quite apparent that there is a creative difference between TLJ and TFA. The subject matter both directors want to explore is quite different. Their idea of "what is SW" is also quite different. The issue is whether Kennedy has a creative vision for the franchise that she is going to enforce on directors?

The OT, despite having different directors and different people offering help, is still undeniably the vision of George Lucas. Lucas did change his mind quite often, but his approach towards storytelling has remained more or less intact.

With the ST, it's hard to see Kennedy's creative vision in her works. At the least, the Marvel movies retained a certain cohesive identity throughout the different movies.

The MCU had some similar problems, IIRC.

I'm not sure, the MCU has had more the opposite problem a lot of executive meddling to make the director's fit in with the MCU at the expense of the director's individual vision. (And just general interference and penny pinching from Ike Pearlmutter whuch ended up getting marvel comics and studios split up by Disney)

The MCU has a more consistent look/tone (sometimes too much so, GotG excepted). But there were some plot points that seemed to clash, like Tony blowing up all his suits at the end of Iron Man 3, or Whedon shipping Black Widow/Hulk while the Cap films seemed to be shipping Black Widow/Cap. That's what I was referring to.

I do think this sort of incoherence is to some extent inevitable in a large, long-running franchise, but I also wonder if this is something Disney in particular has a problem with. Then again, other than the DC films (which have their own problems), no one but Disney is really trying to do a large, multi-film series shared universe like this. So there's not much basis for comparison.

Turns out we missed seeing Luke mourn the loss of Han for pacing reasons.



I'm sure glad they left in so many other crucial scenes though.

What a fucking joke. Take Canto Bight out if you want to improve the pacing.

Frankly, this feels like click-bait designed to trigger OT fans.

Is how Han's death affects Luke important? Of course. But I don't need a scene dedicated specifically to Luke mourning Han. The death of one's brother in-law and best friend is not something that could be resolved in one scene anyway. We see hints of how Han's death has affected Luke throughout the film- in his initial reaction to Han's absence when the Falcon shows up, his wandering around inside the Falcon later, his taunting Kylo about Han's death during their fight, and his leaving that (illusory) momento of Han's when he talks to Leia. If you actually pay attention to the film, its quite clear that Han's death affected Luke, not just in one scene but throughout the film.

And frankly Galvatron, pacing is not a minor or trivial concern in film, and its something far too few films manage well. I don't know if that was the best cut to make, but it should not be dismissed as an insignificant concern.

The real fuck-up was killing Han in such a manner and at such a point in the story that we're unlikely to ever get a Han/Luke/Leia reunion on-screen. I mean, I understand it from a practical perspective, but as a fan, it pisses me off. But that's all on Abrams, not Johnson.

[CaoCao]

You have been, almost from the onset.

Actually, I have pointedly not made such accusations against Fax_Modem1, or Galvatron, for example, despite their disagreeing with me on this topic.

So let's see... if I acknowledge that sexism is a factor in the overall controversy without accusing anyone specifically, I'm passive aggressive, dishonest, and accuse everyone who disagrees with me of being a bigot. If I do call out a specific person on a specific point, then I'm accusing everyone who disagrees with me of being a bigot.

Why not call it what it really is? A dishonest deflection tactic to try to discredit my arguments and silence any discussion of the role prejudice plays by ad hominem.

You have tried to shut down anyone who disagreed with your view as an Alt right, nazi or sexist. Then, when asked, took it back, but your intent was clear and dishonest, yes. Most of what you acuse others of doing is what can be read in your posts.

If you were actually reading what I'm typing, instead of blindingly attacking, you would realize I meant "Holdo, at that point, had no blame about people trying to escape".

If I misread you, my apologies.

Although this would seem to perhaps contradict the points elsewhere where you use the desertions as an argument against Holdo's leadership.

Holdo's leadership fails at adressing the problem and letting it get out of hand, not of creating it. I'm not a fan of grand movie speeches, but a little pep talk was needed (and something more substantial than "have hope").

They are being chased, and attritioned, with low fuel. It's her job to be aware of that. The movie tells us everything happens in the span of around 18 hours, with morale dropping right at the beginning.

I believe this is the second time that you've claimed the entire film happened over 18 hours. I asked you before to cite evidence for that, since I don't recall a specific span of time being stated. Will you do so?

Though frankly, events happening over such a short time frame might actually be a point in Holdo's favor, as it suggests that she simply didn't have time to deal with every problem on board, given the situation and the limited resources she was working with (especially since moral collapsing to the point of mutiny that quickly would seem to strain credulity).

As to the overall situation faced by the Resistance, I don't disagree with anything that you just said. What I do question is weather there was anything more Holdo could reasonably have done under the circumstances that would have made a damn bit of difference to the moral situation, and weather the film shows the morale situation to be sufficiently bad that one would reasonably expect a mutiny to be imminent.

Remember, we don't see Holdo's interactions with everyone on board- mostly just Poe (and Leia, after Leia wakes up and the mutiny issue has been resolved). We don't know what percentage of the crew were demoralized or dissatisfied to the point of being inclined to desert or mutiny. We do know that Holdo was busy trying to survive the battle and organize an evacuation of a force she'd just taken command of after the leadership was decapitated, and that Poe finding out about what the plan was is what actually triggered the mutiny- not because there was no plan, but because Poe (a subordinate officer) decided unilaterally that his long shot plan was better than Holdo's, and that that made her a traitor.

As an aside, I suppose its only natural that sexists would take Poe's side, since not only is he a man trying to remove a female authority figure, but his whole attitude reeks of a profound sense of entitlement.

18 hours were the figure given by Rose and that's a lot of time in that situation. Holdo only orders the shuttles prepped near the end, and even during that time she could have done something else. She didn't do the work herself, which is fine as she is not the hanger crew, but she was not busy and didn't prepare anything, she could have addressed the morale issue.

And we see no crew member siding with her, but several siding with Poe.

As an aside, if she were shown to be competent or have a plan, there would be no discussion. Again you fail to see what a female authority figure is. An example: Leia (OT and ST).

And? The bombers, the way they made them, were useless against the Resurgents or the Supremacy. I understand Leia's concern was the loss of life.

Then why did you claim that Poe was demoted simply for insubordination, and not for incompetence (ie getting people needlessly killed)?

And you are probably correct that the bombers would have been useless in that battle. But that's with the benefit of hindsight, which the characters in the film would not have had at the time Poe lost the bombers.

He cleared the entire dreadnought of anti fighter canons and opened the way for the bombing. There was nothing else he could do and I can't see a way that craft would serve better some other time, even without hindsight. They make TIE fighters look well armored.

No we can't, that's the crux of the problem. Poe is the one that took out the dreadnought and Starkiller base (that is, he saved the whole Resistance twice).

He wouldn't have needed to save the Resistance from the dreadnought if they'd simply retreated when Leia ordered him to.

And being a war hero does not give you right to know every detail of your superior's plans, or to public confront them and question their leadership during a crisis. At least, I don't think it does. I'm not a soldier, but I'm pretty sure that's not how the chain of command works.

If you really think a just-demoted captain is entitled to demand details of battle plans from an admiral, and to publicly undermine her authority in a crisis, then I'm not sure why I or anyone else should take your arguments seriously.

The hyperspace tracker was already in effect and if they retreated then, they would have been followed by the dreadnought as well. My point was that no one in their right mind would think Poe could be a traitor (which is what you implied).

Again, situation they are being chased, losing cap ships, with no starfighter screen and there is a morale problem from the get go. You are thinking of an admiral in a cozy armchair making big secret plans. That is not the situation.

About Admirals, no they don't need to reveal the plans to everyone. They need to let on enough so that commanders know there is one. She didn't need to explain everything to Poe. And that's in a democratic state's military. In a voluntary resistance / rebellion, the chain of command is made out of trust, rather than rank. The type of military that works as you say is that of a totalitarian regime, like the FO (which is why Hux doesn't have to deal with mutinies).

I'm fairly sure that its not just authoritarian regimes that expect officers not to be blatantly insubordinate. This is simply absurd.

And yes, a commander should share their plans with the officers who need to know those plans. We don't know what Holdo told everyone on board, though she clearly told the transport crews something at some point, and she told Poe eventually as well (more on that shortly). Poe didn't need to know. Moreover, you are again ignoring that when Poe found out some of the plan, that was what pushed him to mutiny. Meaning that we have every reason to believe that revealing the plan to Poe would have accomplished jack shit, except maybe to make the mutiny happen sooner.

Also- I don't think anyone would whine about how, say, Ackbar or Thrawn needed to explain that he had a plan because otherwise his crew would assume that he had none. It comes off as sexist (weather it is or not) because of the history of female leaders having a higher burden to "prove" their fitness than their male counterparts. Though there may be other reasons for such favoritism, of course.

No credible commander keeps their staff completely in the dark in a limit situation. She may not be responsible for the fleet to be in such a situation, but she is responsible for her command choices. Again, she doesn't need to explain details, just show there is an idea.

Another thing you're ignoring is that the Resistance is not a formal military, so big adherence to the chain of command is not expected.

About other characters:

- Ackbar is leading a plan that was already explained to the entire rebellion and he had an open channel exchange with Lando. The plan was to give time to the Endor commandos to take down the shield.
- Thrawn not only always explains why he does things, he is in exactly the type of navy that requires little to no explanation.

What about Hux? Are critics about him sexist?

Holdo didn't retake the ship, Leia did. We only see her assistant helping her. Clearly, for someone with the highest ranking, she had 0 support.

Leia and Holdo both had a hand in it.

And we also don't see everyone in the hanger joining in against Holdo when she breaks free. Just a handful of people. That does not indicate that the crew was united against her.

Holdo had to deal with the hanger situation alone. The rest of the crew didn't join her either.

Yeap, it's a nitpick. The movie never stopped to give us the org. chart of the Resistance. By choosing him as her successor, Leia shows his the second in command.

She "chooses him as her successor", if you mean handing off leadership to him on Crait, at the end of the film, after he's shown that he's learned from his mistakes, and when all the other higher-ups and indeed all but about a dozen people are dead. That does not prove that he was her chosen successor earlier in the film (when she demoted him), nor that he was second after Holdo in the overall chain of command.

Pointing out when you are making false or unproven claims that have a bearing on the topic being discussed is not nitpicking.

If you read the comics, which are canon, you would see she is grooming him for leadership. And chastises him more than once.

But she should ultimately reveal there is a plan in the face of the morale drop that was happening.

She did, eventually, and it did worse than zero good.

We also have no way of knowing (unless its in EU material) what she told people other than Poe.

Nope she fueled the transports, which was explained by Poe (in the movie) as a bad choice and why.

If she had told anyone aside from her assistant, Poe would have never been able to mutiny.

That is an absurd assumption. Especially considering that Poe knew the plan when he decided to mutiny.

He clearly thought she was going to deliver them to the FO in a plate in those unshielded transports.

The transport bit is explained in the movie. It's explained it was a bad move to use unshielded transports (don't throw technobabble about stealth).

Its not a "bad move' if its all they had, and Poe's ranting is not an objective explanation.

Also, the transports were sufficiently concealed that the First Order missed them until tipped off to look for them by a turncoat, and trying to hand wave canon evidence as "technobabble" because it doesn't support your position is dishonest debating.

The engine baffling that could be uncloacked by pressing a couple of buttons is not technobabble?

Prove what?

That Holdo told no one about the plan.

Sorry, forgot the moment where everyone supported her against Poe.

That they were common transports with engine baffling made by Rose? That is the canon explanation. Do you know what stealth is?

Now you're the one nitpicking. I am using "stealth", obviously, as a short-hand way of saying "effectively concealed from detection." Which they were. That is what is materially significant to the argument. Quibbling about how you define the word "stealth" is just muddying the waters.

Not so effective. The FO could detect them once they woke up from the 18 hours nap. The shuttles were common and had no real stealth design which is why Poe believes its suicide (and he knows about craft)s.

He mutinied beacuse he thought the transports were visible to the FO and they were going to be sitting ducks. Which they were once another technobabble magic uncloacked them.

Which would have been no problem at all if not for DJ being a turncoat, which wouldn't have been an issue if not for Poe running his own risky side plan without consulting Holdo.

She had the oportunity of telling him or trying to talk it out. She didn't.

The planet and base were only known by Holdo (and, maybe her assistant) and Leia. Do you read what you type?

The base was secret. The notion that the crew cannot look at the scanners (or out the fucking window) and see that there is a planet in the system, and would therefore naturally assume that Holdo is just leading them to die, is what I am questioning.

They lose 2 cap ships under Holdo and are abandoning the most secure and 3rd for unshielded transports.

Oh stop the act.

Right, because you are so obviously correct that if anyone calls you out, it must just be an "act".

You don't know the first thing about gender equality.

And don't dodge the fact that Hux is being called bumbling fool by the most charitable (which is far worst than Pinky).

This is a false equivalency. No one is questioning Hux being called incompetent, because the film shows him to be incompetent, and acknowledges him as such, in a way that it does not Holdo.

Saying "There's no double standard in calling Holdo incompetent if you also call Hux incompetent, because Holdo is just as incompetent" is circular argument. You're basically trying to use your assertion to validate itself.

Those two are the only fleet commanders in the movie. Cannary and Ackbar hit the space too soon. To which other character do you want me to compare her with? To me she is just above Hux in compentency, but barely.

No one made a case of him being talk down for being a male.

Because there is not the same history of men having their leadership skills questioned for being men. And because the film clearly portrays Hux as inept, and clearly intended for him to be perceived as such.

What does history have to do wtih skills? Hux doesn't show skills, neither does Holdo. That Hux is treated as a joke doesn't mean Holdo is portrayed as competent. 18 hours in straight line...they should have eloped.

She never did, Leia did.

Again, they did so jointly.

And could Leia have done so solo if the crew overwhelmingly favored the mutiny? I honestly don't know.

Most are there because of Leia. So yeah, she could have done it solo.

And yes, she was on her side. But we are talking about the beginning of the mutiny, when Leia was still unconcious.

Very few people joined in on either side. At most, that shows that most of the crew wasn't willing to risk their lives at that point for either Holdo or Poe. Or possibly that they were more concerned with just doing their jobs and trying to stay alive.

I also think its telling that the most experienced and respected person in the fleet (Leia), one who later chooses Poe to take charge, backs Holdo up here.

Because she knows the plan.

She lost 2/3 of the fleet and they were running on fumes. Solid enough.

Saying she had lost two thirds of the fleet at that point is misleading, as it both ignores the fact that most of the crew was evacuated from at least one of those ships, and the relative value and size of the command ship compared to the two escorts.

And again, those ships were sacrificed to buy time for an evacuation.

Nope, those ships were left behind without attempting to escape or divert enemy forces. And it took the FO seconds to get them blasted.

I your own post, to which I replied that, you said:

In no reasonable person's mind was Holdo "a probable traitor". But good for you for letting the entire point of the subplot fly over your miniscule head.

Guess you only said that to throw an insult. Your concession is accepted.

As I said, I thought that they were setting Holdo up to be either a traitor or incompetent, not because it made sense, but because I'm used to the genre clichés. They were playing with audience expectations (and showing things predominantly from Poe's point of view), but that in no way proves that "Holdo is likely a traitor" was a reasonable conclusion in-universe.

You say it's unreasonable but never explain why. So I'm correct in that you only tried to throw an insult.

On a side note, the subversion could have worked, if they gave a really strong reason why she couldn't even say she had a plan. That way, both Holdo and Poe would have been right. But they didn't and the subversion's result is this.

There is an obvious reason (the possibility of spies on board), in addition to the obvious "Poe was a demoted subordinate who was being insubordinate and had no need to know the plan".

That that reason was never stated in the film is a flaw in the script, in my opinion, but it does not prove that Holdo is incompetent in-universe.

But in neither circumstance would Poe have been "right" in any way, shape, or form. And again, it is an assumption that Holdo told no one that she had a plan. Just as you are still ignoring that when she told Poe her plan, that is when he responded by calling her a traitor and mutinying.

Huh? So I have to prove everything, but anything you imagine is right? Again that doesn't work with the scenario we are given.

Huh? Blindly following people is not a good thing. Example: Waco.

Did I say that I support blind obedience under all circumstances? No. That's your straw man. I am a strong supporter of conscientious objection. I just don't think that it was warranted in this case, and that you are incorrect in claiming that the film is pushing a message of blind obedience to the hierarchy.

Also, of all the possible examples of the folly of blind obedience you could have picked, did you have to pick one that is a notorious trigger/talking point for the Right-wing militia crowd? And people criticize my politicization of the topic...

Huh? WTF? A religious sect following a leader to the tomb for ridiculous reasons is tied to what? I chose the least political related example, seeing that you couldn't. Man steer away from paranoia.

You don't understand what a stong female character is. In fact, what a strong character is. Disney's Lucasfilm group doesn't too, mind you. Leia, Padme, Ahsoka, Mara Jade, even Vestara (and all of them from SW universe) are strong female characters. Of them, only Ahsoka took more episodes to grow, but that's because of the format. The rest worked on their first movie/book and for a reason: there were good writers behind them.

There are many ways to write a strong female character, or a strong character in general, but they all share the same basic foundation: avoidance of stereotypes and other clichés, a focus on strength of character/personality over physical prowess/feats, and attention to continuity and detail.

That said, I don't think that Holdo is a particularly good example of a strong female character. I just don't think she's as incompetent as the bashers make her out to be.

If you asked me who the strongest female character of the new films is in terms of character development, I'd actually say Rose, at this point.

Did you take that from Wiki? Because ST female characters are the oposite of that. Rey uses physical prowess and raw power, with no character development. Holdo is the stereotypical aristocrat (in the movie) and her character coherence is sacrificed for the sake of subversion. If Disney is trying to empower women, they should hire Goerge Lucas.

[The Romulan Republic]

Jesus Christ, CaoCao. Your argument is one of the worst blends of dishonesty, defamation, broken-record debating, circular arguments, unsupported assertions, and flat-out ignoring both your opponent's arguments and canon evidence that I can recall ever seeing in an SF debate on this board.

I'm done. You can (and doubtless will) say that I'm quitting because I can't back up my arguments. But when I have posted multiple points that you have then misrepresented or ignored, while you continue to engage in broken record debating, I think I've done due diligence here.

And the false insinuation of plagiarism against me in the final paragraph makes this a matter for the moderators.

Reported for dishonest debating.

[FaxModem1]

Jesus Christ, CaoCao. Your argument is one of the worst blends of dishonesty, defamation, broken-record debating, circular arguments, unsupported assertions, and flat-out ignoring both your opponent's arguments and canon evidence that I can recall ever seeing in an SF debate on this board.

I'm done. You can (and doubtless will) say that I'm quitting because I can't back up my arguments. But when I have posted multiple points that you have then misrepresented or ignored, while you continue to engage in broken record debating, I think I've done due diligence here.

And the false insinuation of plagiarism against me in the final paragraph makes this a matter for the moderators.

Reported for dishonest debating.

I know my response is a formatted mess, but I would like your response, as we appear to be having a civilized dialogue.

[PhoenixKnig]

You have been, almost from the onset.

Actually, I have pointedly not made such accusations against Fax_Modem1, or Galvatron, for example, despite their disagreeing with me on this topic.

So let's see... if I acknowledge that sexism is a factor in the overall controversy without accusing anyone specifically, I'm passive aggressive, dishonest, and accuse everyone who disagrees with me of being a bigot. If I do call out a specific person on a specific point, then I'm accusing everyone who disagrees with me of being a bigot.

Why not call it what it really is? A dishonest deflection tactic to try to discredit my arguments and silence any discussion of the role prejudice plays by ad hominem.

If you were actually reading what I'm typing, instead of blindingly attacking, you would realize I meant "Holdo, at that point, had no blame about people trying to escape".

If I misread you, my apologies.

Although this would seem to perhaps contradict the points elsewhere where you use the desertions as an argument against Holdo's leadership.

They are being chased, and attritioned, with low fuel. It's her job to be aware of that. The movie tells us everything happens in the span of around 18 hours, with morale dropping right at the beginning.

I believe this is the second time that you've claimed the entire film happened over 18 hours. I asked you before to cite evidence for that, since I don't recall a specific span of time being stated. Will you do so?

Though frankly, events happening over such a short time frame might actually be a point in Holdo's favor, as it suggests that she simply didn't have time to deal with every problem on board, given the situation and the limited resources she was working with (especially since moral collapsing to the point of mutiny that quickly would seem to strain credulity).

As to the overall situation faced by the Resistance, I don't disagree with anything that you just said. What I do question is weather there was anything more Holdo could reasonably have done under the circumstances that would have made a damn bit of difference to the moral situation, and weather the film shows the morale situation to be sufficiently bad that one would reasonably expect a mutiny to be imminent.

Remember, we don't see Holdo's interactions with everyone on board- mostly just Poe (and Leia, after Leia wakes up and the mutiny issue has been resolved). We don't know what percentage of the crew were demoralized or dissatisfied to the point of being inclined to desert or mutiny. We do know that Holdo was busy trying to survive the battle and organize an evacuation of a force she'd just taken command of after the leadership was decapitated, and that Poe finding out about what the plan was is what actually triggered the mutiny- not because there was no plan, but because Poe (a subordinate officer) decided unilaterally that his long shot plan was better than Holdo's, and that that made her a traitor.

As an aside, I suppose its only natural that sexists would take Poe's side, since not only is he a man trying to remove a female authority figure, but his whole attitude reeks of a profound sense of entitlement.

And? The bombers, the way they made them, were useless against the Resurgents or the Supremacy. I understand Leia's concern was the loss of life.

Then why did you claim that Poe was demoted simply for insubordination, and not for incompetence (ie getting people needlessly killed)?

And you are probably correct that the bombers would have been useless in that battle. But that's with the benefit of hindsight, which the characters in the film would not have had at the time Poe lost the bombers.

No we can't, that's the crux of the problem. Poe is the one that took out the dreadnought and Starkiller base (that is, he saved the whole Resistance twice).

He wouldn't have needed to save the Resistance from the dreadnought if they'd simply retreated when Leia ordered him to.

And being a war hero does not give you right to know every detail of your superior's plans, or to public confront them and question their leadership during a crisis. At least, I don't think it does. I'm not a soldier, but I'm pretty sure that's not how the chain of command works.

If you really think a just-demoted captain is entitled to demand details of battle plans from an admiral, and to publicly undermine her authority in a crisis, then I'm not sure why I or anyone else should take your arguments seriously.

About Admirals, no they don't need to reveal the plans to everyone. They need to let on enough so that commanders know there is one. She didn't need to explain everything to Poe. And that's in a democratic state's military. In a voluntary resistance / rebellion, the chain of command is made out of trust, rather than rank. The type of military that works as you say is that of a totalitarian regime, like the FO (which is why Hux doesn't have to deal with mutinies).

I'm fairly sure that its not just authoritarian regimes that expect officers not to be blatantly insubordinate. This is simply absurd.

And yes, a commander should share their plans with the officers who need to know those plans. We don't know what Holdo told everyone on board, though she clearly told the transport crews something at some point, and she told Poe eventually as well (more on that shortly). Poe didn't need to know. Moreover, you are again ignoring that when Poe found out some of the plan, that was what pushed him to mutiny. Meaning that we have every reason to believe that revealing the plan to Poe would have accomplished jack shit, except maybe to make the mutiny happen sooner.

Also- I don't think anyone would whine about how, say, Ackbar or Thrawn needed to explain that he had a plan because otherwise his crew would assume that he had none. It comes off as sexist (weather it is or not) because of the history of female leaders having a higher burden to "prove" their fitness than their male counterparts. Though there may be other reasons for such favoritism, of course.

Holdo didn't retake the ship, Leia did. We only see her assistant helping her. Clearly, for someone with the highest ranking, she had 0 support.

Leia and Holdo both had a hand in it.

And we also don't see everyone in the hanger joining in against Holdo when she breaks free. Just a handful of people. That does not indicate that the crew was united against her.

Yeap, it's a nitpick. The movie never stopped to give us the org. chart of the Resistance. By choosing him as her successor, Leia shows his the second in command.

She "chooses him as her successor", if you mean handing off leadership to him on Crait, at the end of the film, after he's shown that he's learned from his mistakes, and when all the other higher-ups and indeed all but about a dozen people are dead. That does not prove that he was her chosen successor earlier in the film (when she demoted him), nor that he was second after Holdo in the overall chain of command.

Pointing out when you are making false or unproven claims that have a bearing on the topic being discussed is not nitpicking.

About the brig, she could of have and I wouldn't complain.

Well, then we agree on something.

But she should ultimately reveal there is a plan in the face of the morale drop that was happening.

She did, eventually, and it did worse than zero good.

We also have no way of knowing (unless its in EU material) what she told people other than Poe.

If she had told anyone aside from her assistant, Poe would have never been able to mutiny.

That is an absurd assumption. Especially considering that Poe knew the plan when he decided to mutiny.

The transport bit is explained in the movie. It's explained it was a bad move to use unshielded transports (don't throw technobabble about stealth).

Its not a "bad move' if its all they had, and Poe's ranting is not an objective explanation.

Also, the transports were sufficiently concealed that the First Order missed them until tipped off to look for them by a turncoat, and trying to hand wave canon evidence as "technobabble" because it doesn't support your position is dishonest debating.

Prove what?

That Holdo told no one about the plan.

That they were common transports with engine baffling made by Rose? That is the canon explanation. Do you know what stealth is?

Now you're the one nitpicking. I am using "stealth", obviously, as a short-hand way of saying "effectively concealed from detection." Which they were. That is what is materially significant to the argument. Quibbling about how you define the word "stealth" is just muddying the waters.

He mutinied beacuse he thought the transports were visible to the FO and they were going to be sitting ducks. Which they were once another technobabble magic uncloacked them.

Which would have been no problem at all if not for DJ being a turncoat, which wouldn't have been an issue if not for Poe running his own risky side plan without consulting Holdo.

The planet and base were only known by Holdo (and, maybe her assistant) and Leia. Do you read what you type?

The base was secret. The notion that the crew cannot look at the scanners (or out the fucking window) and see that there is a planet in the system, and would therefore naturally assume that Holdo is just leading them to die, is what I am questioning.

Oh stop the act.

Right, because you are so obviously correct that if anyone calls you out, it must just be an "act".

And don't dodge the fact that Hux is being called bumbling fool by the most charitable (which is far worst than Pinky).

This is a false equivalency. No one is questioning Hux being called incompetent, because the film shows him to be incompetent, and acknowledges him as such, in a way that it does not Holdo.

Saying "There's no double standard in calling Holdo incompetent if you also call Hux incompetent, because Holdo is just as incompetent" is circular argument. You're basically trying to use your assertion to validate itself.

No one made a case of him being talk down for being a male.

Because there is not the same history of men having their leadership skills questioned for being men. And because the film clearly portrays Hux as inept, and clearly intended for him to be perceived as such.

She never did, Leia did.

Again, they did so jointly.

And could Leia have done so solo if the crew overwhelmingly favored the mutiny? I honestly don't know.

And yes, she was on her side. But we are talking about the beginning of the mutiny, when Leia was still unconcious.

Very few people joined in on either side. At most, that shows that most of the crew wasn't willing to risk their lives at that point for either Holdo or Poe. Or possibly that they were more concerned with just doing their jobs and trying to stay alive.

I also think its telling that the most experienced and respected person in the fleet (Leia), one who later chooses Poe to take charge, backs Holdo up here.

She lost 2/3 of the fleet and they were running on fumes. Solid enough.

Saying she had lost two thirds of the fleet at that point is misleading, as it both ignores the fact that most of the crew was evacuated from at least one of those ships, and the relative value and size of the command ship compared to the two escorts.

And again, those ships were sacrificed to buy time for an evacuation.

I your own post, to which I replied that, you said:

In no reasonable person's mind was Holdo "a probable traitor". But good for you for letting the entire point of the subplot fly over your miniscule head.

Guess you only said that to throw an insult. Your concession is accepted.

As I said, I thought that they were setting Holdo up to be either a traitor or incompetent, not because it made sense, but because I'm used to the genre clichés. They were playing with audience expectations (and showing things predominantly from Poe's point of view), but that in no way proves that "Holdo is likely a traitor" was a reasonable conclusion in-universe.

On a side note, the subversion could have worked, if they gave a really strong reason why she couldn't even say she had a plan. That way, both Holdo and Poe would have been right. But they didn't and the subversion's result is this.

There is an obvious reason (the possibility of spies on board), in addition to the obvious "Poe was a demoted subordinate who was being insubordinate and had no need to know the plan".

That that reason was never stated in the film is a flaw in the script, in my opinion, but it does not prove that Holdo is incompetent in-universe.

But in neither circumstance would Poe have been "right" in any way, shape, or form. And again, it is an assumption that Holdo told no one that she had a plan. Just as you are still ignoring that when she told Poe her plan, that is when he responded by calling her a traitor and mutinying.

Huh? Blindly following people is not a good thing. Example: Waco.

Did I say that I support blind obedience under all circumstances? No. That's your straw man. I am a strong supporter of conscientious objection. I just don't think that it was warranted in this case, and that you are incorrect in claiming that the film is pushing a message of blind obedience to the hierarchy.

Also, of all the possible examples of the folly of blind obedience you could have picked, did you have to pick one that is a notorious trigger/talking point for the Right-wing militia crowd? And people criticize my politicization of the topic...

You don't understand what a stong female character is. In fact, what a strong character is. Disney's Lucasfilm group doesn't too, mind you. Leia, Padme, Ahsoka, Mara Jade, even Vestara (and all of them from SW universe) are strong female characters. Of them, only Ahsoka took more episodes to grow, but that's because of the format. The rest worked on their first movie/book and for a reason: there were good writers behind them.

There are many ways to write a strong female character, or a strong character in general, but they all share the same basic foundation: avoidance of stereotypes and other clichés, a focus on strength of character/personality over physical prowess/feats, and attention to continuity and detail.

That said, I don't think that Holdo is a particularly good example of a strong female character. I just don't think she's as incompetent as the bashers make her out to be.

If you asked me who the strongest female character of the new films is in terms of character development, I'd actually say Rose, at this point.

trr I notice three things about your argument that I have to question first can you Source when Poe was asking for details about the plan not asking if there was a plan second can you source how Poe was challenging and disrespecting and challenging her athority give me Elsa source that he had the details of the whole plan when Poe first saw transports?

[Vympel]

I remembered I can buy ebooks on my iPhone, so I grabbed TLJ on my iPhone for $12.99. Pretty reasonable for a new release, way cheaper than a hardcover.

Of course, I went straight to the hyperdrive ramming part to see what Jason Fry wrote about it, given he foreshadowed it in an interview back in January.

Under ordinary operations, the presence of a sizeable object along the route betwen the Raddus' realspace position and its entry point into hyperspace would have caused the heavy cruiser's fail-safes to cut in and shut down the hyperdrive.

But with the fail-safes offline and the overrides activated, the proximity alerts were ignored. When the heavy crusier plowed into the Supremacy's broad flying wing, the force of the impact was at least three orders of magnitude greater than anything the Raddus's inertial dampeners were rated to handle. The protective field they generated failed immediately, but the heavy cruiser's experimental shields remained intact for a moment longer before the unimaginable force of the impact converted the Raddus into a column of plasma that consumed itself.

However, the Raddus had also accelerated to nearly the speed of light at the point of that catastrophic impact - and the column of plasma it became was hotter than a sun and intensely magnetized. This plasma was then hurled into hyperspace along a tunnel opened by the null quantum-field generator - a tunnel that collapsed as quickly as it had been opened.

Both the column of plasma and the hyperspace tunnel were gone in far less than an eye-blink, but that was long enough to rip through the Supremacy's hull from bow to stern, tear a ragged hole in a string of Star Destroyers flying in formation with it, and finally wink out of existence in empty space thousands of kilometres beyond the First Order task force.

So - yeah - it sounds like the Raddus's experimental shields stayed up long enough to ensure that the column of plasma that the Raddus became got thrown into a hyperspace tunnel, it sounds like?

Kylo's attack run, shields being 'rebalanced':

The heavy cruiser had rebalanced its shield envelope to protect it against the turbolasers of the First Order vessels harrying its stern, but it left the cruiser vulnerable to the prowling TIEs - and Kylo had just ensured it wouldn't be launching starfighters anytime soon.

...

The explosion buffeted Kylo in his cockpit. If he had known, he could have stopped the torpedo - freezing it in space with a thought. But he had been surprised. Now he couldn't sense his mother - the shock had shattered his focus ...

More tomorrow, bedtime now.