All Things Star Wars Thread (Spoilers)

[Cackalacky]

I have aslo been thinking about the bombing criticism.

IMO the bomber clearly has an internal gravity based on the movements of the pilot and the scene where the trigger was moving all over inside the bomber.

The bottom of the bomber had a forcefield indicating it was a physical and gravity barrier relative to outside space. We have seen this so many times this isnt a question in Star Wars universe.

So given that the bombs were accelerated by falling or by mechanical means inside the normal gravity condition inside the bomber, it is very clear once the bombs leave the gravity of the bomber and enters space it already has mass and acceleration so it would simply continue in the direction it left the bomber which was down towards the First Order cruiser.

This would also be augmented by the gravity present around the massive cruiser and even more if there is an interdiction field.

Its really not even an issue so I think this criticism is poorly founded.

 

[ShamrockOnHelmet]

So, a question for you all... how did Kylo and Rey force connect at the end of the movie (after Snoke's death) if Snoke was dead? Was Snoke the actual conduit? If so he is likely not dead.

Fever dream

 

[Cackalacky]

I have aslo been thinking about the bombing criticism.

IMO the bomber clearly has an internal gravity based on the movements of the pilot and the scene where the trigger was moving all over inside the bomber.

The bottom of the bomber had a forcefield indicating it was a physical and gravity barrier relative to outside space. We have seen this so many times this isnt a question in Star Wars universe.

So given that the bombs were accelerated by falling or by mechanical means inside the normal gravity condition inside the bomber, it is very clear once the bombs leave the gravity of the bomber and enters space it already has mass and acceleration so it would simply continue in the direction it left the bomber which was down towards the First Order cruiser.

This would also be augmented by the gravity present around the massive cruiser and even more if there is an interdiction field.

Its really not even an issue so I think this criticism is poorly founded.

Ftr I expect reps for this sensible and science based analysis.

 

[wizards8507]

Ftr I expect reps for this sensible and science based analysis.

Except you're wrong.

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk

 

[Cackalacky]

Except you're wrong.

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk

Lol. I didnt say anything wrong. But given I didnt have access to knowledge of the magnetic aspects of the bombs .... haha yeah...

 

[Domina Nostra]

So they redesigned their weapons to be artificially constrained like ancient, gravity-limited bombers in a manner that forces the bomber to be exposed to the maximum extent? It's part of the sci-fi game that you try to come up with cool stuff, but inevitably some nerd points out why it doesn't work. But RJ doesn't seem like he was trying very hard. It's like he's a little too cool to play.

And for those in denial that the story was driven by females with feminist agendas, behold, I offer you the New York Times!

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/12/...st-jedi-women-run-universe.html?_r=0&referer=

 

[fightingirish26]

And for those in denial that the story was driven by females with feminist agendas, behold, I offer you the New York Times!

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/12/...st-jedi-women-run-universe.html?_r=0&referer=

Are you saying that like it's a bad thing, or am I just misunderstanding you?

 

[Domina Nostra]

Are you saying that like it's a bad thing, or am I just misunderstanding you?

Yes, in the sense that the story telling suffered as a result of having some artificial, politicized purpose other than just continuing George Lucas' story in the most interesting, consistent way they could.

For example, if the Harry Potter movie had decided that, say, injecting pro free market messages in the plot was a priority, the stories would have suffered. They take on that artificial quality that Ayn Rand stories have because their purpose become political. They become a form of propoganda. Some propoganda can still be pretty entertaining or successful, but it loses something essential.

A lot of people picked up on that with this Star Wars movie. It felt as if the writers/director clearly re-cast some established characters to serve an end outside of the story. And it turns out that they were right.

Just because some think it's a worthy message, that doesn't mean it worked. It's not a matter of whether the political message is good or not, although that may affect how much it bothers a particular person. For example, a particular MLK movie may not be an appropriate vehicle for telling the story of how Catholic's influenced the civil rights movement, although it's true. Catholics may not have had prominent roles in the key dramatic moments of the story that you are telling, but if a committee insists that you get the shot of Fr Hesburg marching along side of MLK and a bunch of dialog from other Catholics into the 2 hour story, it's likely to feel forced or wooden. Catholics and ND alumni might really appreciate it, buts it's likely to feel a little fake to others based on its proportion to the rest of the events in the film.

Or Dunkirk may not be the best movie for talking about the contributions of African-Americans to the Second Wolrd War. There is obviously more flexibility in a fictional story, but there is also a ton that is already established in some, like SW. And many felt like the "feminist" elements in the TLJ were obvious, forced, and detrimental to the story.

 

[Cackalacky]

Yes, in the sense that the story telling suffered as a result of having some artificial, politicized purpose other than just continuing George Lucas' story in the most interesting, consistent way they could.

For example, if the Harry Potter movie had decided that, say, injecting pro free market messages in the plot was a priority, the stories would have suffered. They take on that artificial quality that Ayn Rand stories have because their purpose become political. They become a form of propoganda. Some propoganda can still be pretty entertaining or successful, but it loses something essential.

A lot of people picked up on that with this Star Wars movie. It felt as if the writers/director clearly re-cast some established characters to serve an end outside of the story. And it turns out that they were right.

Just because some think it's a worthy message, that doesn't mean it worked. It's not a matter of whether the political message is good or not, although that may affect how much it bothers a particular person. For example, a particular MLK movie may not be an appropriate vehicle for telling the story of how Catholic's influenced the civil rights movement, although it's true. Catholics may not have had prominent roles in the key dramatic moments of the story that you are telling, but if a committee insists that you get the shot of Fr Hesburg marching along side of MLK and a bunch of dialog from other Catholics into the 2 hour story, it's likely to feel forced or wooden. Catholics and ND alumni might really appreciate it, buts it's likely to feel a little fake to others based on its proportion to the rest of the events in the film.

Or Dunkirk may not be the best movie for talking about the contributions of African-Americans to the Second Wolrd War. There is obviously more flexibility in a fictional story, but there is also a ton that is already established in some, like SW. And many felt like the "feminist" elements in the TLJ were obvious, forced, and detrimental to the story.

The same can be said about people who think that the SW universe should not or cant have strong female characters. I think people nowadays look for SJW's anywhere they can because they are experiencing post Reagan white male greivance issues.


Lol at Dunkirk. Cmon man.... AA's and women contributed so much to the history of the world and so many times they are never acknowledged or even adequately reported. I am fine getting to see or understand even a little of their contributions in history. Geez.... how miserable must a person be to think that exploring non-white male minority contributions in a movie like Dunkirk is bad. Guess what there were black people involved in getting the US rockets to the moon. Black women to be more specific. You watch Apollo 13 and there isnt a black person to be had in that movie. Whitest movie ever. They didnt even mention that women and specifically black women did many calculations by hand or wrote the guidance program from the rockets.

I love reality, the good and the bad. Strong women characters are fine. Its ok. It really is. It doesnt make white males any less important.

 

[Domina Nostra]

The same can be said about people who think that the SW universe should not or cant have strong female characters. I think people nowadays look for SJW's anywhere they can because they are experiencing post Reagan white male greivance issues.


Lol at Dunkirk. Cmon man.... AA's and women contributed so much to the history of the world and so many times they are never acknowledged or even adequately reported. I am fine getting to see or understand even a little of their contributions in history. Geez.... how miserable must a person be to think that exploring non-white male minority contributions in a movie like Dunkirk is bad. Guess what there were black people involved in getting the US rockets to the moon. Black women to be more specific. You watch Apollo 13 and there isnt a black person to be had in that movie. Whitest movie ever. They didnt even mention that women and specifically black women did many calculations by hand or wrote the guidance program from the rockets.

I love reality, the good and the bad. Strong women characters are fine. Its ok. It really is. It doesnt make white males any less important.

It's really amazing what you assume about people. You think you are so open-minded, but you just squeeze everyone into neat and tidy categories and don't engage the argument at all. You just turn it back to a hyper-over-simplified argument which boils down to: strong women = good OR strong women = bad. I wasn't saying either. THE NYT has a story to show they have an all-female story telling committee committed to injecting strong female characters into the story. Well, that's exactly what it felt like to me. The work of a committee.

I NEVER said that exploring AA's contribution to anything was bad. What silly, self-gratifying nonsense. I said Dunkirk would not have been the place to do it, because it was about the British. Americans aren't British. African Americans weren't prominent figures in the Dunkirk operation. So if someone decided to distort the story so that it was primarily about the struggles of AAs, it is just bad story telling-- unless you are making a much more limited story about just a few people that happened to be there.

It may have been bad story telling to keep AAs out of Apollo 13. If the story featured the people who did those equations, and some of them were AA, but they left them out, that is bad historical story telling. You noticed this and think there was a white-washing agenda. That makes the story annoying to you. THAT'S MY WHOLE POINT. Political or social agendas that come at the expense of the story, or history, are annoying.

As far as Star Wars and strong women, get over your self. It's been about strong women since the beginning.

ANH opens up with Darth Vadar intimidating and/or killing every man around him. Then a 5 foot woman comes in with no fear at all and starts arguing with him and threatening him. We find out she has stole something from him and is leading an escape. She stares down Vader and his evil male boss, Tarkin, and can still compose herself after her home planet is blown up. Shortly thereafter, she immediately takes over her rescue the minute she's let out of jail. She then goes on to lead the rebellion, giving orders to generals on Hoth, etc.

Rogue One and TFA both have female leads that beat up larger men and neither I, nor many others, thought anything of it. It worked within the stories.

This movie was different. The strong female stuff did not naturally flow with the story. It was jammed in there inartfully, apparently--according to the NYT--to satisfy certain interests. Sounds like yours, possibly. I thought it hurt the story. If you didn't, great. I don't see why you have to lazily make this about sexism (like the Lucasfilm people did).

 

[fightingirish26]

I think Laura Dern was miscast. But other than that, none of the female roles seemed out of place or forced to me.

There is obviously more flexibility in a fictional story, but there is also a ton that is already established in some, like SW.

I'm not sure I understand this argument. Females are rightfully gaining influence in our society as time is progressing, don't see why that can't be the same in the SW universe.

 

[Cackalacky]

It's really amazing what you assume about people. You think you are so open-minded, but you just squeeze everyone into neat and tidy categories and don't engage the argument at all. You just turn it back to a hyper-over-simplified argument which boils down to: strong women = good OR strong women = bad. I wasn't saying either. THE NYT has a story to show they have an all-female story telling committee committed to injecting strong female characters into the story. Well, that's exactly what it felt like to me. The work of a committee.

I NEVER said that exploring AA's contribution to anything was bad. What silly, self-gratifying nonsense. I said Dunkirk would not have been the place to do it, because it was about the British. Americans aren't British. African Americans weren't prominent figures in the Dunkirk operation. So if someone decided to distort the story so that it was primarily about the struggles of AAs, it is just bad story telling-- unless you are making a much more limited story about just a few people that happened to be there.

It may have been bad story telling to keep AAs out of Apollo 13. If the story featured the people who did those equations, and some of them were AA, but they left them out, that is bad historical story telling. You noticed this and think there was a white-washing agenda. That makes the story annoying to you. THAT'S MY WHOLE POINT. Political or social agendas that come at the expense of the story, or history, are annoying.

As far as Star Wars and strong women, get over your self. It's been about strong women since the beginning.

ANH opens up with Darth Vadar intimidating and/or killing every man around him. Then a 5 foot woman comes in with no fear at all and starts arguing with him and threatening him. We find out she has stole something from him and is leading an escape. She stares down Vader and his evil male boss, Tarkin, and can still compose herself after her home planet is blown up. Shortly thereafter, she immediately takes over her rescue the minute she's let out of jail. She then goes on to lead the rebellion, giving orders to generals on Hoth, etc.

Rogue One and TFA both have female leads that beat up larger men and neither I, nor many others, thought anything of it. It worked within the stories.

This movie was different. The strong female stuff did not naturally flow with the story. It was jammed in there inartfully, apparently--according to the NYT--to satisfy certain interests. Sounds like yours, possibly. I thought it hurt the story. If you didn't, great. I don't see why you have to lazily make this about sexism (like the Lucasfilm people did).

I am actually not making it about sexism. Sexism is literally not even in my purview regarding Star Wars franchise. I have never even once considered Star Wars as male dominated or female dominated or white dominated or humanoid dominated. And StarWars was absolutely not about strong female characters. It HAS strong female characters, which is ok. Its littered with them. Its almost like having a highly techinological space faring galaxy wide society will have strong characters of many races and genders like Star Trek. Lol. Shocking. I think I am not articulating my point very well and I apologize but I have heard multiple times that they are just injecting on purpose, feminism and SJW, not just from you outside of this forum. I dont see it. I posted an article about it earlier. I dont look at Rey as a female Luke. I dont look at Holdo or Leia out of place realtive to Poe or Hux. I dont look at all the reistance leaders being female as anything. There have been and are tons of male leaders in all the movies on both sides. I think having Holdo do what she did was brave regardless of storytelling and it could have been anyone of the resistance who did it. We always talk about soldiers making the ultimate sacrifice but now all of a sudden when a women does it in a fake space movie its forced femenist bullshit? I dont get it and I think its looking for crap to confirm people's own biases.

My whole family are total Star Wars nerds. We know a ton about the universe and the movie making aspects, we have read a large majority of the EU and no one has ever thought that Star Wars was biased or SJW and that includes TLJ. I think people are so hell bent on criticizing the movie that they are clearly looking for things. Shocking, I know. I like to consider myself open minded. I do however know a great deal about the universe and I am sorry if my calling out the over analyzation of a fictional space galaxy drama is abrassive.

 

[wizards8507]

Yes, in the sense that the story telling suffered as a result of having some artificial, politicized purpose other than just continuing George Lucas' story in the most interesting, consistent way they could.

For example, if the Harry Potter movie had decided that, say, injecting pro free market messages in the plot was a priority, the stories would have suffered. They take on that artificial quality that Ayn Rand stories have because their purpose become political. They become a form of propoganda. Some propoganda can still be pretty entertaining or successful, but it loses something essential.

A lot of people picked up on that with this Star Wars movie. It felt as if the writers/director clearly re-cast some established characters to serve an end outside of the story. And it turns out that they were right.

Just because some think it's a worthy message, that doesn't mean it worked. It's not a matter of whether the political message is good or not, although that may affect how much it bothers a particular person. For example, a particular MLK movie may not be an appropriate vehicle for telling the story of how Catholic's influenced the civil rights movement, although it's true. Catholics may not have had prominent roles in the key dramatic moments of the story that you are telling, but if a committee insists that you get the shot of Fr Hesburg marching along side of MLK and a bunch of dialog from other Catholics into the 2 hour story, it's likely to feel forced or wooden. Catholics and ND alumni might really appreciate it, buts it's likely to feel a little fake to others based on its proportion to the rest of the events in the film.

Or Dunkirk may not be the best movie for talking about the contributions of African-Americans to the Second Wolrd War. There is obviously more flexibility in a fictional story, but there is also a ton that is already established in some, like SW. And many felt like the "feminist" elements in the TLJ were obvious, forced, and detrimental to the story.

You know I'm probably a top-10 anti-SJW poster on this board and I couldn't disagree more. Yes, LucasFilm deliberately cast the sequel trilogy to be diverse, but I don't think it had any negative impact on the story whatsoever. The anti-1% drivel on Canto Bight made me roll my eyes, but it wasn't especially pervasive.

If they decided to make a gay romance between Poe and Finn, I'd be right there with you.

I am actually not making it about sexism. Sexism is literally not even in my purview regarding Star Wars franchise. I have never even once considered Star Wars as male dominated or female dominated or white dominated or humanoid dominated. And StarWars was absolutely not about strong female characters. It HAS strong female characters, which is ok. Its littered with them. Its almost like having a highly techinological space faring galaxy wide society will have strong characters of many races and genders like Star Trek. Lol. Shocking. I think I am not articulating my point very well and I apologize but I have heard multiple times that they are just injecting on purpose, feminism and SJW, not just from you outside of this forum. I dont see it. I posted an article about it earlier. I dont look at Rey as a female Luke. I dont look at Holdo or Leia out of place realtive to Poe or Hux. I dont look at all the reistance leaders being female as anything. There have been and are tons of male leaders in all the movies on both sides. I think having Holdo do what she did was brave regardless of storytelling and it could have been anyone of the resistance who did it. We always talk about soldiers making the ultimate sacrifice but now all of a sudden when a women does it in a fake space movie its forced femenist bullshit? I dont get it and I think its looking for crap to confirm people's own biases.

My whole family are total Star Wars nerds. We know a ton about the universe and the movie making aspects, we have read a large majority of the EU and no one has ever thought that Star Wars was biased or SJW and that includes TLJ. I think people are so hell bent on criticizing the movie that they are clearly looking for things. Shocking, I know. I like to consider myself open minded. I do however know a great deal about the universe and I am sorry if my calling out the over analyzation of a fictional space galaxy drama is abrassive.

This.

Though Chuck Wendig's Aftermath trilogy is SJW AF. I absolutely love those books for their Star Wars content, but if they tried to tell those stories in film it absolutely would adversely impact the narrative.

 

[ACamp1900]

There is a TON wrong with TLJ... SJWs and their impact on the story is so far down that list it's hardly worth mentioning imo.

 

[Wingman Ray]

Went and saw it this past weekend with the wife. I would give it a solid six out of ten. No more. Nothing bad, just nothing good. And too dang long. 2.5 hrs of vanilla isnt a good idea.

I really dislike this girl power crap Hollywood keeps pushing down everyone's throat where the women are kicking the crap out of men left and right. Gets really old. Im not blaming this movie for it as it is rampant now with all the movies but this movie didnt change anything.

The Luke movie part was lackluster to put it mildly.

 

[IrishLion]

You know I'm probably a top-10 anti-SJW poster on this board and I couldn't disagree more. Yes, LucasFilm deliberately cast the sequel trilogy to be diverse, but I don't think it had any negative impact on the story whatsoever. The anti-1% drivel on Canto Bight made me roll my eyes, but it wasn't especially pervasive.

If they decided to make a gay romance between Poe and Finn, I'd be right there with you.

Good thing Disney really likes money.

For real though, anything along those lines would be "forced." Poe and Finn are bros that get along well. You don't need to push it further than that just to make a statement.

None of the females leads felt forced to me, or like they were there just to make a statement (unless the statement is "the galaxy is a diverse place"). It just felt like they cast females into important roles, and they were roles that made sense in terms of the existing structure IMO.

 

[Domina Nostra]

If they decided to make a gay romance between Poe and Finn, I'd be right there with you.

That's fine. But a lot of people wouldn't, which is also fine.

A lot of people thought the movie was very mediocre (which to me is bad, in SW world), and was inconsistent with what came before it.

Some people, including myself, think that ONE OF THE REASONS that the storytelling suffered was that they seemed to want to really push strong, calm, sensible female characters, and relegated Poe, Luke, and Finn's characters to foils to achieve this end at times. I didn't feel that way with Rogue one or TFA, but that's how this one felt.

It seems to me that the fact that they have a permanent committee devoted to making sure the stories have strong female characters is a good explanation for what seemed pretty ham-fisted to me.

That's it.

Good thing Disney really likes money.

Corporations like money, but corporate employees get graded on all kinds of things, not just money. Hollywood is certainly willing to ruin a movie to make an unpopular political point that will get internal applause within Hollywood circles.

 

[ACamp1900]

Holdo's entire story-line was awful... I'll say that much.

 

[Domina Nostra]

Holdo's entire story-line was awful... I'll say that much.

Why was an admiral dressed like this in the middle of an emergency evacuation? Did she get up early to do her hair?

The men and women behind her look like military leaders. She looks like she's on her way to a cocktail party.

And if there were only like a couple hundred or so Resistance people left, how come Poe didn't recognize her? She's an Admiral? It would make sense in a big Rebellion, but that confused me.

 

[IrishLion]

Corporations like money, but corporate employees get graded on all kinds of things, not just money. Hollywood is certainly willing to ruin a movie to make an unpopular political point that will get internal applause within Hollywood circles.

Sure, but Disney isn't going to risk a significant portion of their Christian fanbase boycotting a film from their biggest money-making franchise by making two of the main characters gay.

 

[ACamp1900]

Why was an admiral dressed like this in the middle of an emergency evacuation? Did she get up early to do her hair?

The men and women behind her look like military leaders. She looks like she's on her way to a cocktail party.

And if there were only like a couple hundred or so Resistance people left, how come Poe didn't recognize her? She's an Admiral? It would make sense in a big Rebellion, but that confused me.

She looks like that, in a smallish group of fighters, is some major figure apparently, but one of the top fighter pilots in the entire group has never seen her before..... and is obviously taken back by her being female.... now THAT felt forced. The rest of her story-line was just bad/lazy imo.

 

[Cackalacky]

Why was an admiral dressed like this in the middle of an emergency evacuation? Did she get up early to do her hair?

The men and women behind her look like military leaders. She looks like she's on her way to a cocktail party.

And if there were only like a couple hundred or so Resistance people left, how come Poe didn't recognize her? She's an Admiral? It would make sense in a big Rebellion, but that confused me.

Oh the humanity!

General on deck!

Poe is a pilot! How dare he be out of uniform all movie!

 

[Domina Nostra]

Cackalacky,

You are definitely convincing me that you are a true SW nerd. Every issue with the film seems to be a direct affront to your being.

1) Mon Mothma was not military.

2) The criticism goes for Leah too, but it was not as distracting, and I guess I was figuring she was more of the commander in chief than a rank and file general. But her costume made a whole lot more sense to me in TFA.

3) Poe being out of uniform is one thing, but he's not wearing a tux. Being in eveningwear during a surprise evacuation seemed dumb to me.

She looks like that, in a smallish group of fighters, is some major figure apparently, but one of the top fighter pilots in the entire group has never seen her before..... and is obviously taken back by her being female.... now THAT felt forced. The rest of her story-line was just bad/lazy imo.

Exactly.

Snoke's costume looked silly to me too. Gold robe made him look like Hugh Hefner at times.

The problem with sci-fi is that you are stuck with audience expectations. Everyone in 2089 could be wearing bell bottoms and tie-dye, and have big moustaches and beards for all we know, but in a movie it would look like a bunch of space hippies.

 

[Cackalacky]

Cackalacky,

You are definitely convincing me that you are a true SW nerd. Every issue with the film seems to be a direct affront to your being.

1) Mon Mothma was not military.

2) The criticism goes for Leah too, but it was not as distracting, and I guess I was figuring she was more of the commander in chief than a rank and file general. But her costume made a whole lot more sense to me in TFA.

3) Poe being out of uniform is one thing, but he's not wearing a tux. Being in eveningwear during a surprise evacuation seemed dumb to me.

Haha I ma having fun. Dont take me too seriously.

But seriously.....Mon Mothma was the leader of the Rebellion. She was by every measure the leader in charger. The CiC if you will. So yeah.... the imagery of a crazy hair colored woman in a battle cruiser doing leadery things while in "evening wear (lol) is soooo crazy and forced. Its almost like they wanted us to get the feels from the OT by having Holdo "echo" (gasp) Mon Mothma. Heresy!!!!

 

[Domina Nostra]

Haha I ma having fun. Dont take me too seriously.

But seriously.....Mon Mothma was the leader of the Rebellion. She was by every measure the leader in charger. The CiC if you will. So yeah.... the imagery of a crazy hair colored woman in a battle cruiser doing leadery things while in "evening wear (lol) is soooo crazy and forced. Its almost like they wanted us to get the feels from the OT by having Holdo "echo" (gasp) Mon Mothma. Heresy!!!!

But she became leader literally minutes after Leah got in her Mary Poppins coma, and so she must have been dressed like that as an admiral during the evacuation.

I think your theory is probably right, though, which is why the RJ style seems to contrived to me. He was creating atmosphere without worrying about the minutia, which is great for art house movies, but unsatisfying for a SW movie where, again, they literally sell encyclopedias that will discuss her wardrobe.

 

[Cackalacky]

But she became leader literally minutes after Leah got in her Mary Poppins coma, and so she must have been dressed like that as an admiral during the evacuation.

I think your theory is probably right, though, which is why the RJ style seems to contrived to me. He was creating atmosphere without worrying about the minutia, which is great for art house movies, but unsatisfying for a SW movie where, again, they literally sell encyclopedias that will discuss her wardrobe.

Yep. There are new(er) books that tell about her and Lea's growing up together and all the political stuff they did togehter. IIRC she became an admiral out of necessity much more than militarily Anyway, its things like this that dont matter or shouldn't matter unless you are engaged in the other media outside of the movies (which most people are not).

 

[wizards8507]

But she became leader literally minutes after Leah got in her Mary Poppins coma, and so she must have been dressed like that as an admiral during the evacuation.

I think your theory is probably right, though, which is why the RJ style seems to contrived to me. He was creating atmosphere without worrying about the minutia, which is great for art house movies, but unsatisfying for a SW movie where, again, they literally sell encyclopedias that will discuss her wardrobe.

Did you watch the movie, dawg?

Amilyn Holdo was the commander of the cruiser Ninka when the movie began, i.e. she was already the head of her own ship and already had the rank of Vice Admiral. She moved over to the Raddus and assumed overall command of the Resistance when Leia was incapacitated and the Ninka ran out of fuel (I don't recall which happened first), but it's not like she was promoted from fry cook.

 

[Cackalacky]

The problem with sci-fi is that you are stuck with audience expectations. Everyone in 2089 could be wearing bell bottoms and tie-dye, and have big moustaches and beards for all we know, but in a movie it would look like a bunch of space hippies.

I would first argue Star Wars is not Sci-Fi. It is fantasy Like LOTR.

Also, Star Wars is a movie for everyone. It has to appeal to kids, adults, nerds like me who comb Wookiepedia, and people who just like movies and not the other media etc. Much of the questions are resolved in books, cartoons or the visual guides. Most people only see the movies and for them to have such vociferous objections is hard to argue with as the movies leave many things unaddressed which are clearly addressed or better addressed in other media.

Most people who see the movie are imposing their own ideas on what the movie "should be" instead of what it is. Like you say above, you would think that the costume of Snoke would be like HH. Why does it have to be related to an Earth person? It makes no sense to me. He is a humanoid of power and wealth. He was not a Sith. He also was not a military person. What should he have worn? A three piece suit? Too elitish. Pants? ok. A jacket just like every other protogonist? Robes like mystic figures always do? Idont know what level of importance these are. They are humanoids. There are only a set number or clothing items that work. Considering Jedi and Sith are based in part on warrior monks, it makes storytelling sense that mystiacal people have robes.

 

[Domina Nostra]

Did you watch the movie, dawg?

Amilyn Holdo was the commander of the cruiser Ninka when the movie began, i.e. she was already the head of her own ship and already had the rank of Vice Admiral. She moved over to the Raddus and assumed overall command of the Resistance when Leia was incapacitated and the Ninka ran out of fuel (I don't recall which happened first), but it's not like she was promoted from fry cook.

huh? My point was that she was dressed like she was going to a party. Hair done-up, long formal dress, not functional, no indication of military.

That makes some sense if she was the commander-in-chief, and is straddling the line between civilian and military leader, and got caught in the middle of a battle by accident. But, as you said, she was a Vice Admiral in the middle of an evacuation turned fight-for-their-existence.

Her clothes seemed really strange in those circumstances. I found it jarring as a viewer.

it reminded me of some of Padme's outfits in episodes 1 and 2.

 

[Domina Nostra]

I would first argue Star Wars is not Sci-Fi. It is fantasy Like LOTR.

Also, Star Wars is a movie for everyone. It has to appeal to kids, adults, nerds like me who comb Wookiepedia, and people who just like movies and not the other media etc. Much of the questions are resolved in books, cartoons or the visual guides. Most people only see the movies and for them to have such vociferous objections is hard to argue with as the movies leave many things unaddressed which are clearly addressed or better addressed in other media.

Most people who see the movie are imposing their own ideas on what the movie "should be" instead of what it is. Like you say above, you would think that the costume of Snoke would be like HH. Why does it have to be related to an Earth person? It makes no sense to me. He is a humanoid of power and wealth. He was not a Sith. He also was not a military person. What should he have worn? A three piece suit? Too elitish. Pants? ok. A jacket just like every other protogonist? Robes like mystic figures always do? Idont know what level of importance these are. They are humanoids. There are only a set number or clothing items that work. Considering Jedi and Sith are based in part on warrior monks, it makes storytelling sense that mystiacal people have robes.

Right. You have to be creative. SW almost always pulls it off, but sometimes they don't. Like the Asian puppets trade federation guys.

I thought Holdo and Snoke's costumes were fails. I got the gold robe idea, but it ended up looking kind of hokey to me.

I also thought Snoke was basically a tragic repeat of Darth Maul. Bring in a kick-ass villian. Show everyone how awesome he is. Kill him off.