Star Wars: The Last Jedi release thread (spoilers)

[Vympel]

Why would Rey have a locator beacon? The Resistance knows exactly where she is going: to Luke Skywalker on Ach'To.
She would only need to brind the Locator for the beacon Leia has in her possession.
And she only needs the Locator device because the Resistance is evacuating D'Qar without knowing where they are going to establish their new base, so they couldn't tell Rey to go there instead. (Why they didn't just tell her to go to a neutral system and meet a Resistance sympathiser there to facilitate contact... I blame the monkey)

Because they're a pair of identical devices, there's no reason to assume they'd only go one way.

See I got the impression they weren't able to communicate in such detail, and the beacon was, to use your expression, exactly what it said on the can. Not a relay or communicator but a simple beacon. It makes little sense, as I cannot believe Leia would not, having found him, at least want to talk to Luke. But there is zero communication between Rey and the fleet and Finn seems to think the only way to stop Rey returning to a 'doomed ship' is to get the beacon away. It doesn't seem to occur to him he can transmit a 'do not follow' code or for that matter, simply turn the thing off. To me that implies the device is on the simpler side and is just a beacon.

Yeah I don't think they can communicate, but I think each of them can do what the other can, i.e. tell the user where the other person is. Even that information would be enough for Leia to check on Rey - i.e. did Rey make it to Ach'To? If her signal isn't there, or is somewhere else and moving in a supicious manner, she'd have reason to suspect Rey's been caught.

Cloaking in general seems poorly handled though. The transports are 'cloaked' although we see the FO has telescopic lenses that can easily spot them, as well as sensors that are capable but simply not used to the full ability for unexplained reasons. The beacon is, well, stated to be a beacon and yet cloaked, a seemingly paradoxical device, like an intangible barrier. And of course DJ, who manages to somehow rig up a cloak on some pleasure yacht by plugging in his hackerbox. It's all a bit too technobabble for my liking.

I didn't like it either. TLJ has way too much technobabble. The entire scene with Rose and Finn talking about the tracker made my eyes glaze over.

The novel expands on the movie's "decloaking scan" shorthand, which makes it sound like there's a "detect cloak ships" button that simply isn't being pressed. It has Captain Peavey on the Supremacy express his surprise at Hux being actually a little competent:

The Mon Calamari warship's captain had clearly hoped that the transports fleeing its hangar would go undetected at long range - a gambit that might have succeeded if not for a tip from Hux, of all people, to zero in on trace emissions in the cruiser's vicinity.

Once the Supremacy's crews had analyzed the emissions, it had been relatively sraightforward for comm/scan to home in on their signatures, discover the ruse, and begin picking off the transports one by one.

TL;DR, 'decloaking scan' means search for trace emissions, analyse them, find their source, find 'cloaked' ship.

Why? The First Order fleet was sitting around D'Qar staring at the Raddus for several minutes. It's not too much of a stretch for one of their sensor or communications techs to notice that the Raddus is emitting a locator signal, which must be strong if it works over interstellar distances. At that point they don't need to do anything else but profile the tracking signal and start tracking it. Such a scenario would make Hux's statement that they have the Resistance on the end of a string make much more sense.

Yeah I'm talking about a 'captured beacon' scenario as opposed to a 'detect signal' scenario, which presumably is very difficult if not impossible since the signal is by default somehow cloaked.

[Rogue 9]

How the everloving fuck do you "cloak" a signal? It's broadcasting; a broadcast that can't be detected is absolutely worthless because the intended recipient can't detect it either.

[tezunegari]

Why would Rey have a locator beacon? The Resistance knows exactly where she is going: to Luke Skywalker on Ach'To.
She would only need to brind the Locator for the beacon Leia has in her possession.
And she only needs the Locator device because the Resistance is evacuating D'Qar without knowing where they are going to establish their new base, so they couldn't tell Rey to go there instead. (Why they didn't just tell her to go to a neutral system and meet a Resistance sympathiser there to facilitate contact... I blame the monkey)

Because they're a pair of identical devices, there's no reason to assume they'd only go one way.

The only thing said about them is the following:
Leia tugs up her sleeve.
Finn recognizes it immediately... "A cloaked beacon."
Leia only responds with "To light her way home."

That means the First Order is knows about them and even fresh Stormtroopers are able to identify them with a glance.
(an excellent excuse to have the First Order R&D work on a way to track them, and the FO to have a way to do that)

It is never said that these cloaked binary beacons are made in pairs with both ends capable of finding each other.

The only facts we have is that Leia has a homing beacon meant for Rey.
Implied is that the First Order knows about them (Finn recognizes one within moments by looking at it), that the beacon can only be found by the person they are meant for (they are "cloaked").

Binary could just imply that the device uses a binary code to keep the signal simple and easily missed.

If this beacon is based on the idea of quantum entanglement that might be true.
But there are limitations.
The simplest way to design a cloaked binary beacon based on Quantum Entanglement would be two devices, one with the ability to manipulate the state of the entangled particle, the other with the ability to read it.
Turning the device into a two way tracker would require that both device have the write/read ability (unless read/write is cheaper to achieve than read-only and write-only).

And with two-way tracking it would easily compromise security if the beacon falls into enemy hands.
They could then track the position of the counterpart and launch a raid to capture the spooks assisting the spy.
If there is only a beacon-tracker pair capturing the device only proofs there is a spy.

[Patroklos]

How exactly do you guys think quantum entanglement helps this situation? The only useful aspect of it that applies here is in the encryption of the signal, not the masking of it. the term "tracking" does not imply they discovered information for the location and just went straight to it, but rather they were following some persistent physical clue. Like a dog sniffing a scent or a missile homing in on a signal.

[FaxModem1]

So, there really is a scan for cloaked ships feature?

God, the Resistance really only survived due to the First Order being idiots. Poe doing a 'Got your nose' trick on Hux just became a viable alternative tactic.

[tezunegari]

How exactly do you guys think quantum entanglement helps this situation? The only useful aspect of it that applies here is in the encryption of the signal, not the masking of it. the term "tracking" does not imply they discovered information for the location and just went straight to it, but rather they were following some persistent physical clue. Like a dog sniffing a scent or a missile homing in on a signal.

For me it is mostly based on the Mass Effect 2/3 communications device the Normandy SR2 had and the way they explain it with QE.

The beacon Leia has somehow changes the state of an entangled particle (or group of) and this changes the state of the partnered particles in the tracker Rey has.

And as far as I understand the SciFi physics behind it the quantum state of the particles and their entanglement can only be known if you have access to them.

Otherwise the cloaked signal would need to be something that occurs naturally in the SW universe but can be filtered if you know about it.

So, there really is a scan for cloaked ships feature?

God, the Resistance really only survived due to the First Order being idiots. Poe doing a 'Got your nose' trick on Hux just became a viable alternative tactic.

Yup. The First Order confirms DJs claim that the Resistance is launching transports in the time it takes to go from Tracker Central to the landing bay where Phasma plans to execute Finn and Rose. Actually even less as we never see when DJs betrays them, only the confirmation and payment.

[Vympel]

The only thing said about them is the following:
Leia tugs up her sleeve.
Finn recognizes it immediately... "A cloaked beacon."
Leia only responds with "To light her way home."

First of all, that's wrong. Finn says "a cloaked binary beacon", not "a cloaked beacon".

It is never said that these cloaked binary beacons are made in pairs with both ends capable of finding each other.

We don't need that to be said, its obvious that they're a pair both capable of finding each other, since a. they're visually identical to each other and therefore can safely be assumed to have identical functionality and b. its right there in the name.

The only facts we have is that Leia has a homing beacon meant for Rey.
Implied is that the First Order knows about them (Finn recognizes one within moments by looking at it), that the beacon can only be found by the person they are meant for (they are "cloaked").

Binary could just imply that the device uses a binary code to keep the signal simple and easily missed.

It could, but since that adds absolutely nothing to our understanding of the device and ignores (as you continue to do) that they're both visually identical and therefore have the same functionality, we can safely dismiss it as clearly not the correct interpretation.

Also, nothing of importance turns on whether the First Order knows about them.

I don't even know why you're even trying to twist the movie as its written to make this work anyway. If you want to make it work, you can just make up an alternate script where the beacon is detectable.

How the everloving fuck do you "cloak" a signal? It's broadcasting; a broadcast that can't be detected is absolutely worthless because the intended recipient can't detect it either.

Who cares? When was the last time anyone in Star Wars explained how their technology worked? Ever? Whatever it is, it clearly can't be readily detected by a device other than the one it is paired with, hence the name.

The Visual Dictionary:

Leia wears a compact S-thread transmitter bracelet, with Rey holding the mated pair. In this way, Rey will be able to find the ever-mobile Resistance fleet once she recovers Luke Skywalker.

So, there really is a scan for cloaked ships feature?

No? There's focusing on trace emissions which normally would be beneath notice. The Resistance shuttles weren't truly 'cloaked' ala the stealth ship in Clone Wars in the first place.

[Patroklos]

Who cares? When was the last time anyone in Star Wars explained how their technology worked? Ever? Whatever it is, it clearly can't be readily detected by a device other than the one it is paired with, hence the name.

There is no evidence in the movie that the FO was not tracking Leia's beacon. Maybe I am misremembering but I don't think they ever made it to the tracker or were arrested just after getting there, but they never verify that their two minute back of napkin musings about it is how it actually works. either way they never confirm any of their suspicions. For all we know the facility on the ship they were trying to get to was the shit recycler. Or they were at the tracker device, but instead of working like they thought it tracks Leia's beacon. Or maybe it tracks the stick up Holdo's ass, its just as valid an assumption based on what the movie provides.

No? There's focusing on trace emissions which normally would be beneath notice. The Resistance shuttles weren't truly 'cloaked' ala the stealth ship in Clone Wars in the first place.

Its this like how we ignore all radar signatures that don't look exactly like a fighter jet because obviously a fighter jet always looks like a fighter jet, and fighter jets never try to not look like fighter jets?

Or is it like reality, where you don't ignore the obvious signs of what you are looking for just because the magnitude is not exactly whats expected? I am just asking because my job would be a lot easier if I can just look for nothing but the blatantly obvious in an enemy and ignore the rest.

[tezunegari]

[...]
We don't need that to be said, its obvious that they're a pair both capable of finding each other, since a. they're visually identical to each other and therefore can safely be assumed to have identical functionality and b. its right there in the name.

The only facts we have is that Leia has a homing beacon meant for Rey.
Implied is that the First Order knows about them (Finn recognizes one within moments by looking at it), that the beacon can only be found by the person they are meant for (they are "cloaked").

Binary could just imply that the device uses a binary code to keep the signal simple and easily missed.

It could, but since that adds absolutely nothing to our understanding of the device and ignores (as you continue to do) that they're both visually identical and therefore have the same functionality, we can safely dismiss it as clearly not the correct interpretation.

Also, nothing of importance turns on whether the First Order knows about them.

I don't even know why you're even trying to twist the movie as its written to make this work anyway. If you want to make it work, you can just make up an alternate script where the beacon is detectable.

How the everloving fuck do you "cloak" a signal? It's broadcasting; a broadcast that can't be detected is absolutely worthless because the intended recipient can't detect it either.

Who cares? When was the last time anyone in Star Wars explained how their technology worked? Ever? Whatever it is, it clearly can't be readily detected by a device other than the one it is paired with, hence the name.

The Visual Dictionary:

Leia wears a compact S-thread transmitter bracelet, with Rey holding the mated pair. In this way, Rey will be able to find the ever-mobile Resistance fleet once she recovers Luke Skywalker.

So, there really is a scan for cloaked ships feature?

No? There's focusing on trace emissions which normally would be beneath notice. The Resistance shuttles weren't truly 'cloaked' ala the stealth ship in Clone Wars in the first place.

(emphasis mine)
When is Reys beacon shown in the movie? I must have missed it.

If it is only shown to be a pair of identical devices in the visual dictionary:
Well sorry I haven't wasted 20 € on the extended material to a movie that could (and should) have SHOWN that detail.

The movie only tells us that Leia has something on her that will allow Rey to find the Resistance fleet - nothing more, and if I am wrong please correct me.

The name can be interpreted as it being a pair of identical devices, but also that it is just a pair with one device being the beacon and the other device being the tracker; and only these two devices work together.
Then there is the interpretation that the beacon uses a form of binary signal as well.

[ray245]

Are we debating the merits of the movie itself or including the EU materials for the sake of being "winning" this debate? Rian Johnson did not write the visual dictionary and use that as a rulebook on what is possible and not possible in Star Wars.

[Vympel]

When is Reys beacon shown in the movie? I must have missed it.

Yes, you did, since its super obvious. Leia's:



The scene transitions right to Rey's beacon after Finn picks up Leias:



We see it again when Rey is using it to find where the Resistance remnants are, at the end of the film.

If it is only shown to be a pair of identical devices in the visual dictionary:
Well sorry I haven't wasted 20 € on the extended material to a movie that could (and should) have SHOWN that detail.

I like it how you're being hypothetically indignant at your lack of attention to detail in the film.

The movie only tells us that Leia has something on her that will allow Rey to find the Resistance fleet - nothing more, and if I am wrong please correct me.

I did correct you, multiple times and in multiple ways.

The name can be interpreted as it being a pair of identical devices, but also that it is just a pair with one device being the beacon and the other device being the tracker; and only these two devices work together.

Then there is the interpretation that the beacon uses a form of binary signal as well.

Literally no reason to believe that's the case, since again, they're identical devices.

Are we debating the merits of the movie itself or including the EU materials for the sake of being "winning" this debate? Rian Johnson did not write the visual dictionary and use that as a rulebook on what is possible and not possible in Star Wars.

No, we are not. Rogue 9 questioned/complained how you cloak a signal, and since that is exactly the kind of technobabble detail that the movies have never cared about and has no relevance to the plot or the story, referring to the additional material for any additional detail was relevant.

[ray245]

No, we are not. Rogue 9 questioned/complained how you cloak a signal, and since that is exactly the kind of technobabble detail that the movies have never cared about, referring to the additional material for any additional detail was relevant.

How is it relevant? If the technobabble wasn't stated in the movies, they aren't relevant within the context of the movie. We are not debating the tech of SW, but whether certain technology can affect the writing process.

You seem to entirely miss the point of this discussion. A post-hoc explanation doesn't mean you cannot write the movie in a different way.

[Vympel]

How is it relevant? If the technobabble wasn't stated in the movies, they aren't relevant within the context of the movie. We are not debating the tech of SW, but whether certain technology can affect the writing process.

What you are debating and the fairly straightforward question Rogue 9 is asking are two different things. I wasn't aware you speak for Rogue 9.

You seem to entirely miss the point of this discussion. A post-hoc explanation doesn't mean you cannot write the movie in a different way.

Uh huh. Meanwhile, me, literally two posts ago:

"I don't even know why you're even trying to twist the movie as its written to make this work anyway. If you want to make it work, you can just make up an alternate script where the beacon is detectable."

[ray245]

Uh huh. Meanwhile, me, literally two posts ago:

"I don't even know why you're even trying to twist the movie as its written to make this work anyway. If you want to make it work, you can just make up an alternate script where the beacon is detectable."

But the movie itself doesn't say anything about technobabble. So that means alternative interpretation is valid.

[Vympel]

But the movie itself doesn't say anything about technobabble. So that means alternative interpretation is valid.

What the hell are you even talking about now? What 'alternative interpertation' are you referring to?

[ray245]

What the hell are you even talking about now? What 'alternative interpertation' are you referring to?

Whether the signals can be cloaked.

[Vympel]

Whether the signals can be cloaked.

The movie outright says the signals of the beacon can be cloaked. It's in the fuckn name. That is said by Finn in the goddamn movie. Jesus Christ:

"My alternative explanation for "cloaked binary beacon" is that it is not in fact cloaked at all".

[tezunegari]

Yes, you did, since its super obvious. Leia's:
[...]
The scene transitions right to Rey's beacon after Finn picks up Leias:
[...]

Then I stand corrected.

Leia flies through space and reenters the Raddus, Finn picks up her beacon, Reys beacon in her hand. Rey snorring outside Lukes hut. Chewie prepping a campfire close to Falcon and trying to eat a porg.

Though in my opinion the scene is not really memorable - being right between the Leia Poppins in Space scene and Chewies comical attempt at supper.