I mean, you're wrong, the designers of the ships do put thought into them.
Now whether the FX people look at those notes, that's the question.
Spoilers The Ships of Lower Decks
- Thread starter Tuskin38
- Start date
Now whether the FX people look at those notes, that's the question.
I don't know. As I said, I'm not too deep into Star Wars lore, so this may just have been a knee-jerk reaction on my part when seeing those bombers and the bombs falling “down” in space. It just looks stupid to me as a concept, that's all. It didn't break the movie for me.
Funnily enough, the kind of mental gymnastics you are employing to justify how those bombers actually could work within the Star Wars universe are the same thing people have been using forever to rationalize oddities and mistakes in Star Trek, like where this shuttle emerged from the Cerritos for example. They are different animals, of course, and I think it's a little unfair to compare a movie series with years long production times with a television/streaming show and reasonably expect the same level of attention to detail.
Indeed. It always blows my mind at how the gymnastics are used to justify things in one but not in the other. It's the same type of gymnastics,
It's probably just me, but having nothing but the nacelle pylons being the only thing connecting the primary and secondary hulls irks me a little bit; but that's just my only nitpick. Other than that, I'm enjoying it.
I am in no way trying to start a Last Jedi discussion, not really the place. But I do want to quickly point out that the bombs falling "down" in space is 100% accurate to how the physics would work. The gravity in the ship allows the bombs to fall down as they would normally, and once they exit the lower drop hatch, inertia continues them on that "downward" path. It's really no different than the countless "space jump" scenes we've seen in Trek, you simply rotate the camera sideways and any direction can be "down" in space. Makes me wonder what you think would be the correct way to portray the bombs, if not the way we saw.
The four indents on the underside, along with the triangular shape at the back, suggest that maybe modules can be attached there. The pylons for the nacelles / engineering don't look like they elegantly fit in with the saucer so they might pop off and a secondary hull (like on the Galaxy-class) can be attached or the modules / pods depending on the mission. In general this class of ship seems to be adaptable depending on what mission it is on.
More importantly it is 100% consistent with in universe portrayal.
I was talking about the entire production.
Astromech droids don't fit in the wings of the Jedi Starfighters. They should stick significantly out the bottom, but just...don't.
Yeah, agonizing over details and justifications came much later, usually in the incredible cross section books.
Hm, I guess you are right. Frankly, I hadn't given it this much thought. When I saw it in the movie I was just judging it on a knee-jerk visual level. I mean, Star Wars is a universe where they have laser swords, laser guns, faster-than-light hyperdrive (as-fast-as-the-plot, really) and planet destroying superweapons as big or bigger as a moon. Again, without giving it all that much thought, it just seems kind of dumb to me to then also have ships that use gravity to throw bombs on ships “below” them.
But yeah, I can see that that maybe wasn't the best example to make my point.
As I said, I'm not all that into Star Wars, but I have a hard time believing there isn't tons of stuff that doesn't immediately make sense without some rationalisations on the audience's part. Another example I could think of was how they used the hyperdrive to destroy a gigantic ship in one movie, but never try it in any of the others.
The hollowing out of the planet was done over time, way before the sequel trilogy, as seen in Jedi: Fallen Order game. The planet in question was Ilum, one where Kyber crystals grow naturally (hence the massive energy output). The Empire had been harvesting the crystals from just after the prequels and 60 or so years later the starkiller structure had been built.
https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/s...d1/Ilum.png/revision/latest?cb=20191122210646
But yeah, OTT super weapons are kind of a thing in SW, but my point is thought was put into it.
Clues that Ilum became Starkiller Base surfaced far before the release of the game, but Fallen Order made it official. The reference book to the Force Awakens that came out on the film's release date had the diameter of Starkiller Base to be the same as Ilum, which fyi, is tiny: 660km (Earth is nearly 13 thousand km)
So, in an effort to retcon absurd technology, they've introduced problems with planetary physics - I don't think there's any way to have a breathable atmosphere on a planet only 600-some kilometers. Just not enough gravity, unless the magical nature of the Kyber crystals (or some other magic) increases the mass of the planetoid to make life sustainable without space suits.
Not to mention how they managed to split the beam at designated intervals to hit all the New Republic planets at once, which all appeared to be in the same star system, by virtue of the doomed people looking up in the sky and seeing all the other planets get smoked.
Don't get me wrong, I liked the 3rd trilogy movies, for various reasons, but they were immensely problematic on multiple levels to the near-point of wrecking suspension of disbelief. Sadly, that same kind of scene watching planets get blown up was used in Trek'09, when Spock somehow saw Vulcan get munged by the Red Matter from Delta Vega. I doubt he should have been able to see that, but I suspect that Abrams wanted to sacrifice scientific accuracy with dramatic effect.
Not to mention how they managed to split the beam at designated intervals to hit all the New Republic planets at once, which all appeared to be in the same star system, by virtue of the doomed people looking up in the sky and seeing all the other planets get smoked.
Don't get me wrong, I liked the 3rd trilogy movies, for various reasons, but they were immensely problematic on multiple levels to the near-point of wrecking suspension of disbelief. Sadly, that same kind of scene watching planets get blown up was used in Trek'09, when Spock somehow saw Vulcan get munged by the Red Matter from Delta Vega. I doubt he should have been able to see that, but I suspect that Abrams wanted to sacrifice scientific accuracy with dramatic effect.
Last edited:
There was no retconning, the size of Starkiller Base was literally shown on screen in the film.
I agree that some of the stuff is weird like seeing the New Republic homeworlds blown up (put that down to JJ), but Star Wars was never supposed to be a science fiction, it's a fantasy space opera.
Star Wars bullshits with the best of them, if one likes it they'll eat it up and defend it, if one doesn't, then they see the issues.
Even as "space opera" you would think people would want them to get basic physics right.
Similar threads
