Star Wars: The Last Jedi discussion thread(Warning: Spoilers!) (1 Viewer)

[BobO'Link]

The way I see it is that all the ships have artificial gravity in their interiors. As long as the bombs were inside the ship, they would fall normally. Momentum would do the rest once the bombs exited the ship.

Maybe. More likely it was some type of launching/pushing mechanism. It just looked, and acted, gravity fed. It's one of those things where the more I think about it the more it doesn't play right. It didn't seem odd at all when I saw the scene in the film - just later when it hit me there's no gravity to pull the bombs out and "fall" onto the ship. It's no "deal breaker," just a bit odd...

They would still need the engines running which I assume power the rest of the ship. So they would still be burning fuel even if they were up to speed.

You wouldn't run the thrusting engines just to provide power. That's incredibly wasteful. You'd have generators for that which should require minimal fuel compared to the thrusters.

 

[WillG]

You wouldn't run the thrusting engines just to provide power. That's incredibly wasteful. You'd have generators for that which should require minimal fuel compared to the thrusters.

Perhaps, but you would still be required to burn fuel.

 

[Tino]

You are correct. I was going on a wikipedia article which seems to indicate that it does by stating "original roll" on the open. I checked my copy after posting that and found it's not there. That means it was created from a print that did not have that on the open.

So you’re still sticking with your story then?

 

[Greg.K]

Even Empire was being referred to as "Episode II" originally.

The Empire Strikes Back was initially known only as “Star Wars Sequel” in its first draft by screenwriter Leigh Brackett in February 1978. But handwritten title pagesby Lucas, who always wrote scripts in longhand, label the second draft of the sequel as “Episode II.” Eventually the typed second draft by co-screenwriter Lawrence Kasdan in August of that year changes to Episode V in accordance with the new numbering scheme. At that point the movie had been registered with the MPAA as “Episode II (Two): The Empire Strikes Back,” but subsequent drafts afterwards always labelled it as the fifth chapter of the series, and the movie was released theatrically as “Episode V” in its opening crawl.

https://www.inverse.com/article/137...-it-explains-our-cinematic-universe-obsession

Some early storyboards with "Episode II" still in the crawl from "The Making of The Empire Strikes Back", after the script itself had changed to Episode V.

 

[TravisR]

Even Empire was being called "Episode II" originally.

Also, issues 1,2 and 4 of the Official Star Wars Fan Club newsletter (which would soon to be retitled Bantha Tracks) from 1978 refer to the "Star Wars sequel" as being the "second of nine stories in George Lucas' Adventures Of Luke Skywalker" and that "[t]he second film will be a continuation of the first film...".

You can see all the issues of Official Star Wars Fan Club/Bantha Tracks here: http://www.jeditemplearchives.com/specialreports/banthatracks/

 

[questrider]

@Greg.K and @TravisR on the case!

 

[BobO'Link]

So you’re still sticking with your story then?

Yes. I know what I saw and what I said when that roll appeared.

 

[Tino]

Yes. I know what I saw and what I said when that roll appeared.

Fascinating.

Bob, don’t you think that “if” your claim was true, that most of the prints of a Star Wars in 1977 said Episode IV, that it would have been mentioned in the thousands of reviews and articles written about the film at that time? I mean that’s a big deal and would have warranted questioning as to why it’s labeled “Episode IV. “

And yet every review of the film and article written at the time of its release make no mention of this claim.

How do you explain that?

Isn’t it more likely that your memory is faulty? It’s certainly happened to many of us swearing we remember a certain scene or line when in fact it was our memory playing tricks on us. You were wrong about the DVD. Isn’t it possible you’re wrong about this too ?

Anyway I don’t want you to feel like I’m badgering you so I’ll drop it. Sorry if I offended you.

Cheers.

 

[TravisR]

Yes. I know what I saw and what I said when that roll appeared.

Maybe you saw it again on re-release and wondered why Star Wars Part 1 was now "Episode IV"? Or why the second or third movies were "Episode V" and "Episode VI"?

 

[AshJW]

I haven't seen Star Wars on its initially release in 1978 (it started later in Germany), but when I saw Empire in 1980 I was wondering about the "Episode V" in the scrawl and thought I missed some films.
I saw Star Wars right after Empire when some theaters showed it again, but I don't remember if there was the Episode IV in the scrawl. I don't think so but I can't say for sure.

 

[Tino]

I haven't seen Star Wars on its initially release in 1978 (it started later in Germany), but when I saw Empire in 1980 I was wondering about the "Episode V" in the scrawl and thought I missed some films.
I saw Star Wars right after Empire when some theaters showed it again, but I don't remember if there was the Episode IV in the scrawl. I don't think so but I can't say for sure.

There was Ash as the Episode IV addition was added for the Star Wars re-release in 1981. This whole “Episode” business started with The Empire Strikes Back being labeled Episode V.

 

[BobO'Link]

Fascinating.

Bob, don’t you think that “if” your claim was true, that most of the prints of a Star Wars in 1977 said Episode IV, that it would have been mentioned in the thousands of reviews and articles written about the film at that time? I mean that’s a big deal and would have warranted questioning as to why it’s labeled “Episode IV. “

And yet every review of the film and article written at the time of its release make no mention of this claim.

How do you explain that?

Isn’t it more likely that your memory is faulty? It’s certainly happened to many of us swearing we remember a certain scene or line when in fact it was our memory playing tricks on us. You were wrong about the DVD. Isn’t it possible you’re wrong about this too ?

Anyway I don’t want you to feel like I’m badgering you so I’ll drop it. Sorry if I offended you.

Cheers.

Maybe you saw it again on re-release and wondered why Star Wars Part 1 was now "Episode IV"? Or why the second or third movies were "Episode V" and "Episode VI"?

I never saw it in the theater other than that one time in May 1977.

I'll be the first to admit that memory is fallible. I'm not offended in the slightest that you guys don't believe me. There's no real proof other than my memory and a couple of mentions elsewhere that have no backing documentation to support the claim. Still, I'm 100% certain I saw that on the roll in the theater during that viewing. Had I fist seen it on subsequent, home video, viewings I'd have noticed that addition and commented about it not being on the original film. And who's to say I actually didn't see it originally but later on a home video release and have simply commingled the memories over the ensuing years. Stranger things have happened. So... I'll finish by saying we simply agree to disagree and leave it at that. You all go on thinking I'm nuts and I'll consider you crazy.

I did see TESB in the theater upon release and didn't think twice about it being subtitled on the roll as "Episode V." What bothered me about that one was the "ending," or to be more precise, the non-ending. I was so mad about the cliff hanger ending that I refused to see ROTJ for over 10 years. When I finally caved and rented a copy to watch, solely because by then I had kids and my son loved the first two and wanted to see how it ended, I found the series had been dumbed down for the kid crowd which further angered me. He, of course, loved it. After that one viewing I refused to watch any of the films other than Star Wars (you can call it "A New Hope" if you wish - it's still Star Wars to many of us) until they saw DVD release. Since that time I've seen TESB and ROTJ a half dozen or so times each. I'm still upset about the non ending of TESB and still dislike the Ewoks and kiddifyiing of ROTG. At least now I can simply put in ROTG as soon as the credits roll on TESB and continue the story, then later just skip the rather inane party and annoying song at Ewok central. The pair of films still feels overly long and ponderous but tell a rather good story.


And... back to the original topic:

In this article, I read that an "expert" thinks Kylo Ren is who this trilogy is actually about. I can kind of see it but, other than him being Han and Leia's son, why do I care? There's no emotional attachment to the character. I've gotten more of a feeling it's about Rey.

 

[TravisR]

And... back to the original topic:

In this article, I read that an "expert" thinks Kylo Ren is who this trilogy is actually about. I can kind of see it but, other than him being Han and Leia's son, why do I care? There's no emotional attachment to the character. I've gotten more of a feeling it's about Rey.

The movies are definitely about Rey or, more specifically, the passing of the Jedi torch from the Skywalkers to Rey & whoever she helps bring to a new Jedi order. If only because Luke saved Vader at the end of Return Of The Jedi, Kylo Ren won't be brought back from the dark side so it's not going to be a tale of redemption for Ben Solo.

 

[BobO'Link]

The movies are definitely about Rey or, more specifically, the passing of the Jedi torch from the Skywalkers to Rey & whoever she helps bring to a new Jedi order. If only because Luke saved Vader at the end of Return Of The Jedi, Kylo Ren won't be brought back from the dark side so it's not going to be a tale of redemption for Ben Solo.

That's exactly how I see things in the two films we have so far. I was somewhat caught off-guard by a claim the films were even remotely about Kylo and his redemption. In a way, you have partial redemption when he killed Snoke but he then tried very hard to get Rey to join forces and become the Dark Force to take over the universe. That, to me, pretty much screamed "I'll never be redeemed! Mom and dad didn't support me enough, Uncle Luke tried to kill me, so I'm taking over! I even killed Supreme Badness Snoke! I'll show 'em who's boss!"

 

[AshJW]

There was Ash as the Episode IV addition was added for the Star Wars re-release in 1981. This whole “Episode” business started with The Empire Strikes Back being labeled Episode V.

Well, I saw Star Wars in late 1980 or maybe January 1981. And I'm sure the theater(s) (I'm not even sure there were more than this one theater I watched it at least twice) used prints from 1978 when they showed it again.
The first film didn't get a grand re-opening here in Germany, not as far as I can remember.

 

[MattBradley]

Have we seen Kylo's eyes turn yellow like the Sith would do from time to time in the previous films?

 

[Tino]

Have we seen Kylo's eyes turn yellow like the Sith would do from time to time in the previous films?

No

 

[TravisR]

That's exactly how I see things in the two films we have so far. I was somewhat caught off-guard by a claim the films were even remotely about Kylo and his redemption. In a way, you have partial redemption when he killed Snoke but he then tried very hard to get Rey to join forces and become the Dark Force to take over the universe.

What's funny to me is that after The Force Awakens, I said how Kylo Ren was completely irredeemable because he killed Han Solo. Even if the story worked out that he was redeemed, I thought the audience wouldn't accept it because he killed a truly beloved character. Then when he killed Snoke in The Last Jedi and I thought he had turned to the light, I was completely on board with him becoming a good guy. I'm a fair weather friend.

 

[Tino]

There is no way Kylo will be redeemed.

No
Way

 

[Jeff Cooper]

It's the Mandala Effect! That episode of The X-Files from last week was right!!

I'm sorry, the what? Are you referring to the Mengele Effect?