All Things Star Wars Thread (Spoilers)

wizards8507

Well-known member
Messages
20,660
Reaction score
2,661
He's being a clown, don't waste your time. His entire position is completely devoid of logic and embarrassing to anyone that knows anything about war or physics or even common sense.

Hell, there wouldn't even be a need for a Death Star in the first place if you could just "hyperspace" into stuff:

Step 1: Make a big ship with a hyperdrive.
Step 2: Use a droid to pilot it.
Step 3: Fly it into a planet and destroy it.

DERP.
Are you dumb? The hyperspace component is absolutely irrelevant.

We have fighter jets, right? Fighter jets crashing into targets could fuck those targets up, right? Then why do we load our fighter jets with weapons? We should just crash drones into shit when we want to attack it.

It's economics. You don't blow up your own ships when you have weapons and you definitely don't build ships specifically to suicide them because ships are a fuckton more expensive than weapons so you use the weapons.
 
Last edited:

wizards8507

Well-known member
Messages
20,660
Reaction score
2,661
Even taking that for granted, what does that have to do with the Death Star battles? Surely in that case they could spare one transport? They were willing to risk the whole fleet to take it down! They even had time to plan for the second battle.
They weren't "willing" to risk the whole fleet. The DS was going to wreck them no matter what happened. Tarkin and Vader put a tracking device on the Falcon, which led the Empire to Yavin IV. The Alliance didn't instigate that battle, the Empire came to them.
 

Domina Nostra

Well-known member
Messages
6,251
Reaction score
1,388
They weren't "willing" to risk the whole fleet. The DS was going to wreck them no matter what happened. Tarkin and Vader put a tracking device on the Falcon, which led the Empire to Yavin IV. The Alliance didn't instigate that battle, the Empire came to them.

I'm talking about the second DS. The first movie didn't have a fleet.

They flew in. They started getting capital ships picked off. Ackbar said they needed to leave. Lando said they needed to give Han more time because they weren't going to have another chance to destroy the DS. Then he told them to go point blank with the SDs because that was better than getting picked off one by one.

They obviously knew they were going to lose some ships in the process.

The best explanation I've read is that hyperspace ramming is considered a heinous war crime, one that would lose the Rebellion a lot of support. Not sure how well that holds up though.

Now there is a theory! Although it has tons of its own problems.
 
Last edited:

wizards8507

Well-known member
Messages
20,660
Reaction score
2,661
I'm talking about the second DS. The first movie didn't have a fleet.

They flew in. They started getting capital ships picked off. Ackbar said they needed to leave. Lando said they needed to give Han more time because they weren't going to have another chance to destroy the DS. Then he told them to go point blank with the SDs because that was better than getting picked off one by one.

They obviously knew they were going to lose some ships in the process.
1. They flew in thinking they had enough intelligence to eliminate DS2 without much loss. "Many bothans died..."

2. Strategically, Ackbar was right. They should have left. But Lando is a charismatic hot head and got his way.

Seriously though, why do different characters 30 years apart need to make decisions consistent with one another? In a given situation, Ackbar might do one thing, Mon Mothma might do something else, and Holdo might blow herself to space bits. That's not a plot hole.
 

wizards8507

Well-known member
Messages
20,660
Reaction score
2,661
Sorry Wiz, I didn't mean to turn this into a shit on you thread...
It's cool. My nerd game is skrong. These fools can try to out-physics me but they can't out Star Wars me.

604a4127eb5a8c55861f5eff723dc390.jpg
 

Domina Nostra

Well-known member
Messages
6,251
Reaction score
1,388
It's cool. My nerd game is skrong. These fools can try to out-physics me but they can't out Star Wars me.

604a4127eb5a8c55861f5eff723dc390.jpg

Haha! It's like when the Goonies call out Chunk on claiming Michael Jackson came over to his house to use the bathroom.

"Okay, Brand. Michael Jackson didn't come over to my house to use the bathroom. But his sister did."

Just because you have an answer for everything, doesn't mean it's even mildly convincing. ;)
 

ACamp1900

Counting my ‘bet against ND’ winnings
Messages
48,951
Reaction score
11,234
This. All over just one of the many bs aspects of that film... I’d say this, as just a film on its own it’s just an average to below film. As a Star Wars movie that should fit in the greater mythos without damaging its predecessors, it’s one of the more troubling flms ever made imo... fuck that movie sideways
 

IrishLax

Something Witty
Staff member
Messages
37,545
Reaction score
28,995
Are you dumb? The hyperspace component is absolutely irrelevant.

lol how?

We have fighter jets, right? Fighter jets crashing into targets could fuck those targets up, right? Then why do we load our fighter jets with weapons? We should just crash drones into shit when we want to attack it.

It's economics. You don't blow up your own ships when you have weapons and you definitely don't build ships specifically to suicide them because ships are a fuckton more expensive than weapons so you use the weapons.

DERP DERP DERP

None of this even comes close to addressing what I posted. Answer this straight up or be labeled a troll --

If you could just fly a droid piloted ship into a planet "really really fast" and destroy it WHY WOULD YOU NEED A DEATH STAR much less why would it matter? Because a small ship sure as hell isn't more expensive than a Death Star.

And your economics angle is absolute garbage, because in a purely economic game of attrition you'd just build a "ship" that is a droid piloted piece of garbage and "hyperspeed" it at a much more expensive thing and you win on an economic angle. You're using completely idiotic rationale to side step the three obvious plot holes I pointed out.

"It's too expensive" to do suicide runs with something that is already about to be blown up literally makes no sense as a logic point.
 

IrishLax

Something Witty
Staff member
Messages
37,545
Reaction score
28,995
Because it was Holdo's idea! I don't understand this weird obsession people have with movie characters needing to exhibit flawless tactics and impeccable logic at all times. Holdo decided to sacrifice herself and she wasn't going to ask anyone else to do the same thing. It's not any more complicated than that.

This right here is actually the dumbest thing you could possibly say.

If your position is that in the THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS of years that "hyperspeed" has existed and the MILLIONS of people who have flown ships that she is the very first one to say "hey, I should hyperspeed at that thing because I'm about to get blown up anyways".... you are too stupid to have a discussion with.

Especially considering how basic a concept ramming something at full speed is... humans have been doing it since boats. And once we invented piloted aircraft, people immediately did the same thing with them in moments of desperation.

Moreover, she was in command of the whole fleet the entire time and could've ordered them to do it instead of just dying feebly.

Shill more, please.
 

GATTACA!

It's about to get gross
Messages
15,108
Reaction score
12,945
lol how?



DERP DERP DERP

None of this even comes close to addressing what I posted. Answer this straight up or be labeled a troll --

If you could just fly a droid piloted ship into a planet "really really fast" and destroy it WHY WOULD YOU NEED A DEATH STAR much less why would it matter? Because a small ship sure as hell isn't more expensive than a Death Star.

And your economics angle is absolute garbage, because in a purely economic game of attrition you'd just build a "ship" that is a droid piloted piece of garbage and "hyperspeed" it at a much more expensive thing and you win on an economic angle. You're using completely idiotic rationale to side step the three obvious plot holes I pointed out.

"It's too expensive" to do suicide runs with something that is already about to be blown up literally makes no sense as a logic point.


This thread is like Groundhogs Day. We've had this same exact conversation 10 pages ago.

Just gonna repost this.

My best guess is that it has to do with something called an interdiction field. Very large ships are able to produce a gravity well that prevents other ships from performing hyperspace maneuvers, basically exactly what people are complaining about. The First Order had to have theirs turned off because they needed to be ready to jump and follow the Resistance at a moments notice.

This is all cannon btw.

So no all space battles aren't ruined. The Death Star 100% has an interdiction field to prevent this exact problem. I'm sure Buster or Shamrock Theories will say "Then why didn't they explain any of this in the movie?!".

I got bored just typing it out. They banked on general audiences just accepting the scene for the amazing spectacle that it is and not needing a technical breakdown of how it fits into established cannon technology. They were right. The movie is sitting at what 93% on RT?
 

IrishLax

Something Witty
Staff member
Messages
37,545
Reaction score
28,995
This thread is like Groundhogs Day. We've had this same exact conversation 10 pages ago.

Just gonna repost this.

I mentioned interdiction fields a few posts earlier, they don't explain away the plot holes. "Having the interdiction field turned off" still doesn't explain --

1. Why they wouldn't have done this before with other ships running out of fuel.
2. Why the first order would do such an insane maneuver (having interdiction fields off) leaving them so obviously vulnerable then to a basic countermeasure that could cripple their whole fleet. It also doesn't make sense that they had to follow them "at a moment's notice" because they knew they did not have fuel to make multiple jumps and could track them to wherever they were jumping to.
3. Why you would need a Death Star in the first place to be a planet destroyer if you could just hyperspeed a tugboat or w/e into a planet like a superspeed asteroid for cheap and destroy it.

Interdiction fields exist to stop ships from going to hyperspace and to knock them out of hyperspace. They have never, ever been explained to be a "stop ships from hyperspeed kamikazeeing" because that is not how hyperspace works until now. Jumping to hyperspace is supposed to be dangerous for the ship doing the jumping and you're supposed to be in another dimension of sorts where you loosely interact with other shit... until now, where you can apparently destroy the fuck out of stuff with the almighty power of hyperspace.

Again, we're supposed to believe that no one else ever in the history of Star Wars tried or thought about doing that until now until Holdo. Come onnnnnnnnn..........

Interdiction field | Wookieepedia | FANDOM powered by Wikia
Hyperspace | Wookieepedia | FANDOM powered by Wikia
 

IrishLax

Something Witty
Staff member
Messages
37,545
Reaction score
28,995
To be clear, the issue is that when you accept what Holdo did as being possible it raises multiple other large plot holes that put it beyond the pale. I've mentioned a handful already, and there are many others without good (much less plausible) explanations.

So it's either got to be impossible, and then everything else fits -- the First Order's actions, the Resistance fleets actions, etc. all make sense. Or it's possible, and then everything else falls apart. There is no scenario where you can do something that basic to destroy their capital ship and the whole sequence plays out how it does from start to finish. It's illogical. And that's before you even start getting into all of the other problems it causes with the other stuff outside of this movie.
 

GATTACA!

It's about to get gross
Messages
15,108
Reaction score
12,945
1. Why they wouldn't have done this before with other ships running out of fuel.

This hyperspace tracking is brand new. The rebels/resistance would have never tried it in the past because they would have always correctly assumed the empire/first order had their interdiction field up.

2. Why the first order would do such an insane maneuver (having interdiction fields off) leaving them so obviously vulnerable then to a basic countermeasure that could cripple their whole fleet. It also doesn't make sense that they had to follow them "at a moment's notice" because they knew they did not have fuel to make multiple jumps and could track them to wherever they were jumping to.

Again this is brand new technology. They have never encountered this set of circumstances before. They probably also assumed that they would have time to react if they saw someone moving into position to attempt that maneuver. Instead they were distracted by the escape pods and didn't notice what Holdo was doing until it was too late.

We don't know how long it takes to switch between hyperspace capabilities and their interdiction field. What if it takes 30 minutes? By the time they jumped to the resistance location they would be long gone without having to make another jump.

3. Why you would need a Death Star in the first place to be a planet destroyer if you could just hyperspeed a tugboat or w/e into a planet like a superspeed asteroid for cheap and destroy it.

Snokes special destroyer was maybe 3x the size of a regular destroyer. That still makes it magnitudes smaller than a planet. Who knows if that would even be possible on something that big.

Also reusability. You build one space station that can (in theory) destroy an unlimited number of planets vs having to construct a new massive hyperspace capable ship that you're simply going to kamikaze.

Interdiction fields exist to stop ships from going to hyperspace and to knock them out of hyperspace. They have never, ever been explained to be a "stop ships from hyperspeed kamikazeeing" because that is not how hyperspace works until now. Jumping to hyperspace is supposed to be dangerous for the ship doing the jumping and you're supposed to be in another dimension of sorts where you loosely interact with other shit... until now, where you can apparently destroy the fuck out of stuff with the almighty power of hyperspace.


I mean they've been mentioned in two instances in all of Star Wars lore. Neither in a main line movie. This is not some well defined canonical element of the series. Just reading by the wookieepedia article seems to leave room for either or both interpretations.

Again, we're supposed to believe that no one else ever in the history of Star Wars tried or thought about doing that until now until Holdo. Come onnnnnnnnn..........

First of all we don't know that no one has tried it. Secondly this is a new unique set of circumstances due to the hyperspace tracking/ interdiction field being off. This literally wouldn't have been possible in almost all other situations we've seen.
 
Last edited:

IrishLax

Something Witty
Staff member
Messages
37,545
Reaction score
28,995
This hyperspace tracking is brand new. The rebels/resistance would have never tried it in the past because they would always, correctly, assumed the empire/first order had their interdiction field up.

No. That doesn't track.

1. They get followed through hyperspace.
2. The first ship is running out of fuel
3A. You can let the ship die idly.
3B. You could try to kamikaze it.

There is no logic, period, that says you would ever just let the ship get shot to bits. You would try something, even if you thought there was only a low percentage chance it would work.

So, like everything else, the only explanation for not trying it earlier is "they didn't think of it" or "they were acting illogically"... both of those explanations are shit and amount to plot holes.

Again this is brand new technology. They have never encountered this set of circumstances before. They probably also assumed that they would have time to react if they saw someone moving into position to attempt that maneuver. Instead they were distracted by the escape pods and didn't notice what Holdo was doing until it was too late.

We don't know how long it takes to switch between hyperspace capabilities and their interdiction field. What if it takes 30 minutes? By the time they jumped to the resistance location they would be long gone without having to make another jump.

There are at least four implied premises in these paragraphs that are required to even get to a point where the First Order would have their interdiction field down AND the Resistance wouldn't try anything AND it would work when they did finally try it.

The first is that hyperspeed kamikaze at a ship actually works, and accepting that opens up a whole bunch of other issues (like the planet thing addressed below).

The second is that they have to follow them IMMEDIATELY for some reason. This doesn't really make sense given any description of what they're doing and the fact that they can't jump and then make a second jump because they're out of fuel.

The third is that even though we've never, ever seen it take more than a minute or two for a ship (large or small) to jump to hyperspace that'd somehow in this instance take them an impossibly long time to turn off their interdiction fields which, per your logic, they normally have up all the time. If it was a thing that interdiction fields took a long time to take down, then the Resistance would know from the very beginning that they didn't have them up because the First Order followed them immediately after their first jump. So logically this whole thing really falls apart... either they take a long time to take down and the Resistance would've immediately known after being quickly followed that they must've had them down OR they don't take a long time to take down. You have to pick one.

The fourth is that all of these ships that are out of the range of their lasers... so it wouldn't matter if they saw them turning around, cuz they can't reach them... wouldn't be instructed to test and see if these fields were down or try anything at all. No, their orders were "sit there and die" because... reasons.

So given all of that... where do we stand? The First Order knowingly went with a plan that would leave their ships open to a massive vulnerability for no reason... and then got lucky for a really long time while all the other pilots were totally cool dying as sitting ducks until Holdo finally was like "oh man you know what just dawned on me and no one else thought of!"? Sure.

And how did that go in the meeting with Snoke?

Hux: "So, like, we can track them through hyperspace so they can't run from us."
Snoke: "That's awesome!"
Hux: "But there's a catch... per Rian Johnson, they can hyperspeed kamikaze us... and, actually, it turns out they have always apparently been able to do this despite it never happening or having been tried in any book or movie to this point and it ALSO turns out that basically we've just been having these super-important interdiction fields up to stop this from happening. Still with me? OK well the catch is we have to take these fields down in order to be able to follow them at a moment's notice."
Snoke: "Eh fuck it, let's roll the dice that no one will turn around and try to ram us. And you know what I feel like living EXTRA dangerously so I'll be on the lead ship following them. This is a totally rational decision to make, and after we know they're running out of fuel and couldn't possibly make two consecutive jumps let's STILL keep them down because #YOLO."

Snokes special destroyer was maybe 3x the size of a regular destroyer. That still makes it magnitudes smaller than a planet. Who knows if that would even be possible on something that big.

It's substantially bigger than that -- https://www.polygon.com/2017/9/1/16...-toy-supreme-leader-snoke-mega-star-destroyer -- it's triple the size of the Executor, and Executor was like 10x times the size of a normal star destroyer per Google.

And that's also irrelevant to the point... the point is that scientists say a 300 mile diameter asteroid traveling "slow" would have enough energy in its impact to basically wreck a planet. So, even something that is a mile across but traveling wayyyyyyyy faster would have as much energy and have the same effect.

Also reusability. You build one space station that can (in theory) destroy an unlimited number of planets vs having to construct a new massive hyperspace capable ship that you're simply going to kamikaze.

It'd obviously be way cheaper to build a whole fleet of bare-bones 1 mile diameter blob ships that only have a hyperdrive than a giant space station that's 80 miles in diameter AND took insane amounts of R&D to develop it's planet killing laser. But this point doesn't really matter, it's only tangentially related to this whole thing.
 

GATTACA!

It's about to get gross
Messages
15,108
Reaction score
12,945
No. That doesn't track.

1. They get followed through hyperspace.
2. The first ship is running out of fuel
3A. You can let the ship die idly.
3B. You could try to kamikaze it.

There is no logic, period, that says you would ever just let the ship get shot to bits. You would try something, even if you thought there was only a low percentage chance it would work.

So, like everything else, the only explanation for not trying it earlier is "they didn't think of it" or "they were acting illogically"... both of those explanations are shit and amount to plot holes.

Or 3C you can make the last jump that you know you have fuel for and hope you jump somewhere you can find safety. 3D you can let them catch you and hope they board your ship and take some of your crew as prisoners. 3E you can turn around and try to fight them. There are countless other options.

They don't have to have been acting illogically to not do something that up to that point in their universe was impossible.

There are at least four implied premises in these paragraphs that are required to even get to a point where the First Order would have their interdiction field down AND the Resistance wouldn't try anything AND it would work when they did finally try it.

The first is that hyperspeed kamikaze at a ship actually works, and accepting that opens up a whole bunch of other issues (like the planet thing addressed below).

The second is that they have to follow them IMMEDIATELY for some reason. This doesn't really make sense given any description of what they're doing and the fact that they can't jump and then make a second jump because they're out of fuel.

The third is that even though we've never, ever seen it take more than a minute or two for a ship (large or small) to jump to hyperspace that'd somehow in this instance take them an impossibly long time to turn off their interdiction fields which, per your logic, they normally have up all the time. If it was a thing that interdiction fields took a long time to take down, then the Resistance would know from the very beginning that they didn't have them up because the First Order followed them immediately after their first jump. So logically this whole thing really falls apart... either they take a long time to take down and the Resistance would've immediately known after being quickly followed that they must've had them down OR they don't take a long time to take down. You have to pick one.

The fourth is that all of these ships that are out of the range of their lasers... so it wouldn't matter if they saw them turning around, cuz they can't reach them... wouldn't be instructed to test and see if these fields were down or try anything at all. No, their orders were "sit there and die" because... reasons.

1. The hyperspeed kamikaze would work and I'd assume that's part of the reason the whole idea of the interdiction field was created because someone looked at someone else in a writing room and asked the same questions were discussing.

2. It does make sense. These are spaceships. They travel really fast even when they aren't going through hyperspace. So logically if the resistance makes their jump and the first order has to wait some amount of time, the resistance would be able to get away. Go through an asteroid belt, land on a planet, you name it.

3. Again you're glossing over the fact that this is a brand new piece of tech. Holdo and the resistance don't have any way of knowing that them being able to follow and track them immediately means that they had to drop their interdiction field. In the end Holdo basically either says fuck it it's worth a shot or figures it out.

4. They could stop and turn on the indiction field, they themselves could jump, or they could scramble their smaller ships. They were saving their tie fighters because why not? In their minds they were just waiting for the resistance to run out of fuel. They were taking the safer approach.

They can do one of two things protect themselves from a hyperspeed kamikaze or continue to be able to track the resistance. Obviously they made the wrong call.


So given all of that... where do we stand? The First Order knowingly went with a plan that would leave their ships open to a massive vulnerability for no reason... and then got lucky for a really long time while all the other pilots were totally cool dying as sitting ducks until Holdo finally was like "oh man you know what just dawned on me and no one else thought of!"? Sure.

And how did that go in the meeting with Snoke?

Hux: "So, like, we can track them through hyperspace so they can't run from us."
Snoke: "That's awesome!"
Hux: "But there's a catch... per Rian Johnson, they can hyperspeed kamikaze us... and, actually, it turns out they have always apparently been able to do this despite it never happening or having been tried in any book or movie to this point and it ALSO turns out that basically we've just been having these super-important interdiction fields up to stop this from happening. Still with me? OK well the catch is we have to take these fields down in order to be able to follow them at a moment's notice."
Snoke: "Eh fuck it, let's roll the dice that no one will turn around and try to ram us. And you know what I feel like living EXTRA dangerously so I'll be on the lead ship following them. This is a totally rational decision to make, and after we know they're running out of fuel and couldn't possibly make two consecutive jumps let's STILL keep them down because #YOLO."


They haven't been using this hyperspace tracker for very long. At least not long enough that no one from the resistance has any idea what going on when they are followed. None of them have seen this before.

I'd think the meeting went something like...

Hux: We've tracked down the ressistance. They're running out of fuel and can't escape.

Snoke: Killer bro

Hux: Should be send out our fleet of smaller ships to finish them off?

Snoke: Nah man just play it cool.


And they both forgot about the one possibility that we've never seen happen in the star wars universe before because we've never seen this very specific set of circumstances, including something that didn't exists before the start of TLJ.

It's substantially bigger than that -- https://www.polygon.com/2017/9/1/162...star-destroyer -- it's triple the size of the Executor, and Executor was like 10x times the size of a normal star destroyer per Google.

And that's also irrelevant to the point... the point is that scientists say a 300 mile diameter asteroid traveling "slow" would have enough energy in its impact to basically wreck a planet. So, even something that is a mile across but traveling wayyyyyyyy faster would have as much energy and have the same effect.

The executor is 60km wide and like 10km thick max. Not even close to comparable to a planet. The earth is what? Like 4,000km wide? Also a ship is going to be largely hollow.
 
Last edited:

wizards8507

Well-known member
Messages
20,660
Reaction score
2,661
3. Why you would need a Death Star in the first place to be a planet destroyer if you could just hyperspeed a tugboat or w/e into a planet like a superspeed asteroid for cheap and destroy it.
Wtf are you talking about?

Yeah, the tugboat would be a cheaper way to destroy a single planet, but the point of the Death Star was never to destroy a single planet. The Death Star could presumably destroy an infinite number of planets and an infinite number of enemy ships.
 

wizards8507

Well-known member
Messages
20,660
Reaction score
2,661
To be clear, the issue is that when you accept what Holdo did as being possible it raises multiple other large plot holes that put it beyond the pale. I've mentioned a handful already, and there are many others without good (much less plausible) explanations.

So it's either got to be impossible, and then everything else fits -- the First Order's actions, the Resistance fleets actions, etc. all make sense. Or it's possible, and then everything else falls apart. There is no scenario where you can do something that basic to destroy their capital ship and the whole sequence plays out how it does from start to finish. It's illogical. And that's before you even start getting into all of the other problems it causes with the other stuff outside of this movie.
Something being "possible" doesn't meant it must have happened in the past. There's a first time for everything. Every single military maneuver in history was once the brainchild of some commander. "Well shit, we never thought of that" is a perfectly reasonable explanation.

Also, another thing you're entirely ignoring... the Star Wars galaxy was relatively peaceful, at least on an interplanetary level, for most of the Republic era. There weren't constant space-based galactic civil wars where these tactics would have been fleshed out over the centuries.
 

phork

Raining On Your Parade
Messages
9,863
Reaction score
1,019
I'll take Wizs side on the it was Holdo's idea take. When presented with the finality of a situation your mind can go to some dark places. This very well might have been used as a tactic before but certainly not something that was common place. Perhaps in draining her ideas dry that was at the end of the list.

Either way, the bottom line is you guys are arguing over a movie. I wouldn't say it was particularly good, or bad. Just entertaining. Arguing over physics in a Sci-Fi movie is just plain dumb.
 

IrishLax

Something Witty
Staff member
Messages
37,545
Reaction score
28,995
I'll take Wizs side on the it was Holdo's idea take. When presented with the finality of a situation your mind can go to some dark places. This very well might have been used as a tactic before but certainly not something that was common place. Perhaps in draining her ideas dry that was at the end of the list.

Either way, the bottom line is you guys are arguing over a movie. I wouldn't say it was particularly good, or bad. Just entertaining. Arguing over physics in a Sci-Fi movie is just plain dumb.

giphy.gif
 

IrishLion

I am Beyonce, always.
Staff member
Messages
19,128
Reaction score
11,077
Star Wars isn't even Sci-Fi, though.

It's a space fantasy.

Arguing about the way the Star Wars universe works is like arguing about Gandalf being able to create a magic shield against the Balrog, but refusing to zap foes with lightning, even though it was probably possible based on what we knew.
 

zelezo vlk

Well-known member
Messages
18,012
Reaction score
5,055

Hey you can't steal whiskey's gif. That's his

Star Wars isn't even Sci-Fi, though.

It's a space fantasy.

Arguing about the way the Star Wars universe works is like arguing about Gandalf being able to create a magic shield against the Balrog, but refusing to zap foes with lightning, even though it was probably possible based on what we knew.

Writers not following the internal logic within the story though has a name. It's called being a shitty storyteller
 

IrishLax

Something Witty
Staff member
Messages
37,545
Reaction score
28,995
Or 3C you can make the last jump that you know you have fuel for and hope you jump somewhere you can find safety. 3D you can let them catch you and hope they board your ship and take some of your crew as prisoners. 3E you can turn around and try to fight them. There are countless other options.

They don't have to have been acting illogically to not do something that up to that point in their universe was impossible.

This is exactly the point and why it was a plot hole. Sitting there and letting your ships meekly get shot to bits until final moment of desperation on your very last ship is a plot hole.

And you have to choose... is it impossible? Or is it something one would know would work because it's established in the universe you can do it? Because there's a 0% chance no one had tried it before, and if they had tried it before and there was a countermeasure that was created to stop it then the idea they just weren't using it because #YOLO is a bad writing and a plot hole. "Incomprehensible stupidity" is not a "good explanation."

Writer 1: We could have them kamikaze the thing at hyperspeed for an awesome shot.
Writer 2: Why hasn't anyone done this before then in the many scenarios where it would've been a good idea?
Writer 3: Well, there is nothing that it's physically impossible. And they have these things called interdiction fields to stop hyperspace travel so we can just say those have been up all the other times.
Writer 2: Why would it be down this time if they're up in every other battle?
Writer 1: Let's just say Hux is so dumb that he took it down, or like it had to be down for this tracking to work well or whatever.
Writer 2: OK but then why wouldn't the other ships have tried it? And why would she only try it at the very end? How did Holdo realize it was down then but didn't realize it before? And if you can do things like this, why haven't people done similar stuff on objects or ships that wouldn't have these interdiction fields?
Writer 1: Oh who cares most people won't question it and we'll find a way to justify or retcon it if necessary.

And that's how you get a plot hole, where every explanation is convoluted and hand waves at the bigger issues. Because Rian Johnson wanted an aesthetically pleasing shot.

1. The hyperspeed kamikaze would work and I'd assume that's part of the reason the whole idea of the interdiction field was created because someone looked at someone else in a writing room and asked the same questions were discussing.

2. It does make sense. These are spaceships. They travel really fast even when they aren't going through hyperspace. So logically if the resistance makes their jump and the first order has to wait some amount of time, the resistance would be able to get away. Go through an asteroid belt, land on a planet, you name it.

3. Again you're glossing over the fact that this is a brand new piece of tech. Holdo and the resistance don't have any way of knowing that them being able to follow and track them immediately means that they had to drop their interdiction field. In the end Holdo basically either says fuck it it's worth a shot or figures it out.

4. They could stop and turn on the indiction field, they themselves could jump, or they could scramble their smaller ships. They were saving their tie fighters because why not? In their minds they were just waiting for the resistance to run out of fuel. They were taking the safer approach.

They can do one of two things protect themselves from a hyperspeed kamikaze or continue to be able to track the resistance. Obviously they made the wrong call.

This is going to be too long of a post, so I'll just address the bolded. This is in conflict to the whole idea of the field taking a long time to bring up or down.

1. The Resistance knows from the very beginning that they were followed immediately.
2. Given this fact, if "taking a long time" for them to turn on or off was a thing they'd IMMEDIATELY know that it was down and that is completely independent of knowing anything at all about the tracking technology. That only requires knowing something about interdiction, which they all would as trained military commanders.

They haven't been using this hyperspace tracker for very long. At least not long enough that no one from the resistance has any idea what going on when they are followed. None of them have seen this before.

I'd think the meeting went something like...

Hux: We've tracked down the ressistance. They're running out of fuel and can't escape.

Snoke: Killer bro

Hux: Should be send out our fleet of smaller ships to finish them off?

Snoke: Nah man just play it cool.


And they both forgot about the one possibility that we've never seen happen in the star wars universe before because we've never seen this very specific set of circumstances, including something that didn't exists before the start of TLJ.

Again, you have to pick one. Either this is a thing that can totally happen and accordingly they've had interdiction fields up as SOP to prevent against it OR it's not a thing that can happen.

Like every piece of technology in human existence, the first thing that happens when it's invented is that people test the military applications of it. So it's unrealistic that in the thousands upon thousands of years they've had hyperdrive that people didn't try to do this before. Assuming that they did, and then interdiction was invented as a countermeasure, then every military commander would know how they work and their importance.

"Both just forgot" is a plot hole. There is no explanation for a countermeasure of that importance just not being used because someone "forgot".

The executor is 60km wide and like 10km thick max. Not even close to comparable to a planet. The earth is what? Like 4,000km wide? Also a ship is going to be largely hollow.

Huh? Did you read what I said?

1. I was saying *the flagship* was much bigger than the Executor.
2. I was saying you don't need a large object to do damage to a large object. It's proven that an object 0.001% the volume of earth hitting it moving relatively slowly would have enough energy to basically kill all life on the planet. So you could destroy planets with any moderately size hunk of steel moving really fast.
 

IrishLax

Something Witty
Staff member
Messages
37,545
Reaction score
28,995
Wtf are you talking about?

Yeah, the tugboat would be a cheaper way to destroy a single planet, but the point of the Death Star was never to destroy a single planet. The Death Star could presumably destroy an infinite number of planets and an infinite number of enemy ships.

The primary goal of the Death Star, which was revolutionary technology, was to keep planets in line through fear.

With the Holdo Maneuver, they've established you could keep a planet in line with a big hunk of steel that has a hyperdrive acting as a super speed asteroid. Ergo, someone would've already made a bunch of those thousands and thousands of years before ever needing a Death Star. Seeing Alderan destroyed wouldn't be cataclysmic, Leia would've been like "yeah well any idiot with a hyperdrive could've done that, Darth."

DERP.
 

IrishLax

Something Witty
Staff member
Messages
37,545
Reaction score
28,995
Something being "possible" doesn't meant it must have happened in the past. There's a first time for everything. Every single military maneuver in history was once the brainchild of some commander. "Well shit, we never thought of that" is a perfectly reasonable explanation.

So let's follow this to conclusion:
1. Hyperdrive has been around for THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS of years.
2. Ramming ships has existed since the beginning of nautical warfare and piloted aircraft with humans. It doesn't take high cunning or brilliance, you just run your thing into another thing at full speed.
3. Given all of that, none of the BILLIONS of people in the Star Wars galaxy NEVER tried to ram something at hyperspeed before Holdo. This is also despite the fact that new technology is *always* tested for military application, and sending an object really really fast through something is as basic as military gets.

Yeah, that's totally plausible and great writing. Not a plot hole at all. Nope.

94N5.gif
 

zelezo vlk

Well-known member
Messages
18,012
Reaction score
5,055
The one and only TLJ remake I'll ever watch

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">I’ve written a script for the Last Jedi remake. Make this, you cowards: <a href="https://t.co/eHSRxCyISb">pic.twitter.com/eHSRxCyISb</a></p>— popular comedy account “the pixelated boat” (@pixelatedboat) <a href="https://twitter.com/pixelatedboat/status/1009900792751403008?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 21, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 

Domina Nostra

Well-known member
Messages
6,251
Reaction score
1,388
Star Wars isn't even Sci-Fi, though.

It's a space fantasy.

Arguing about the way the Star Wars universe works is like arguing about Gandalf being able to create a magic shield against the Balrog, but refusing to zap foes with lightning, even though it was probably possible based on what we knew.

It's not about fantasy writers having to obey certain pre-ordained rules. The standard is whether the story holds the listener, and its just a fact of human experience that you can lose people by EITHER: (1) setting up dumb rules in the beginning or (2) not obeying your own rules in a plausible way later.

If Luke had, say, turned into a 60 foot tall metal giant in his battle with the Emperor, picked him up like a doll, and chucked him into space--then explained that he had discovered a syringe full of midichlorians on his travels, people would not have been impressed. Lucas could have done it, but it would have been dumb.

The fighting teddy bears overcoming the Emperor's best troops lost some fans. I was young enough that I thought the Ewoks were amazing. As an adult, I chalk some of it up to Lucas making kids movies and not really wanting to show the violence that it would have taken (you just have to kid of take their word for it). But it's arguably questionable. Not every moment has to be satisfying to make the story fun, but certain stuff breaks the came's back.

And it does make sense to argue about where, say, Peter Jackson condensed JRRT's story in a satisfying manner. In the book there was an express theme that both Gandalf and Aragorn were not meant to reveal themselves in their full strength until an unknown, but preordained time. Some of that was just kind of like a special forces scout who tries not to just start firing off rounds and chucking grenades until there is no other option. But some of it was in a deeper sense that the characters needed to trust that they would be given what they needed when they needed it, and using more than necessary was somehow wrong for them. The Balrog was the first time Ganald was truely as put to the test.
 
Last edited:

wizards8507

Well-known member
Messages
20,660
Reaction score
2,661
Star Wars isn't even Sci-Fi, though.

It's a space fantasy.

Arguing about the way the Star Wars universe works is like arguing about Gandalf being able to create a magic shield against the Balrog, but refusing to zap foes with lightning, even though it was probably possible based on what we knew.
This guy gets it.
 

IrishLion

I am Beyonce, always.
Staff member
Messages
19,128
Reaction score
11,077
Writers not following the internal logic within the story though has a name. It's called being a shitty storyteller

Is JRR Tolkien a shitty storyteller?

The Eagles in LotR are a giant plot hole, essentially... Tolkien wanted to show some badass giant creatures that commune like humans but act like the majestic and regal beasts that they are. There were enough of them, and they were proficient enough, that the fellowship probably could've just flown straight to Mordor at some point had Gandalf asked. Tolkien tried to fill the plot hole with a throwaway "they owe me a favor" line from Gandalf, as if he can only ask their help one time.

In reality, logic would dictate that the Eagles would see the need for risking a flight and battle above Mordor, and yet it didn't happen early in the plot, because reasons... aka, Tolkien needed to write an interesting story, and the Eagles were just a cool and convenient "out" to use as a one-off. BUT THEN, they show up again for the final battle anyway, and it turns out that they held their own even though the Nazgul were on wingback and knew the Eagles were coming.

They totally could've taken a secret, nighttime flight to Mordor and dropped the Fellowship onto the Gorgoroth plains before Sauron was fully aware of why he felt the Ring so strongly and so suddenly.

Was Tolkien a shitty storyteller because he didn't think all of those things through? No. He saw a need for something cool, and risked a plot hole to include it. Sometimes that happens in fiction.

I view the Holdo Kamikaze in the same vein... you get one shot at doing something cool, because otherwise it breaks the plot. And that's okay!

Perhaps there are unspoken reasons as to why something can only happen once, or why it's taboo and totally unpredictable, which I think Wiz and Gattaca have been kind of saying, but I don't think it's worth getting worked up over either way. The viewers are never hip to all of the canon, as Domina says below.

It's not about fantasy writers having to obey certain pre-ordained rules. The standard is whether the story holds the listener, and its just a fact of human experience that you can lose people by EITHER: (1) setting up dumb rules in the beginning or (2) not obeying your own rules in a plausible way later.

If Luke had, say, turned into a 60 foot tall metal giant in his battle with the Emperor, picked him up like a doll, and chucked him into space--then explained that he had discovered a syringe full of midichlorians on his travels, people would not have been impressed. Lucas could have done it, but it would have been dumb.

The fighting teddy bears overcoming the Emperor's best troops lost some fans. I was young enough that I thought the Ewoks were amazing. As an adult, I chalk some of it up to Lucas making kids movies and not really wanting to show the violence that it would have taken (you just have to kid of take their word for it). But it's arguably questionable. Not every moment has to be satisfying to make the story fun, but certain stuff breaks the came's back.

And it does make sense to argue about where, say, Peter Jackson condensed JRRT's story in a satisfying manner. In the book there was an express theme that both Gandalf and Aragorn were not meant to reveal themselves in their full strength until an unknown, but preordained time. Some of that was just kind of like a special forces scout who tries not to just start firing off rounds and chucking grenades until there is no other option. But some of it was in a deeper sense that the characters needed to trust that they would be given what they needed when they needed it, and using more than necessary was somehow wrong for them. The Balrog was the first time Ganald was truely as put to the test.

This is absolutely true, and probably my favorite theme from the books and from Tolkien's appendices. Gandalf (and other Wizards that lost their way) was sent by the Valar to be a guide for mortals (and Elves) in dark times. He was forbidden from taking control of history himself, as that would have defeated the purpose of his creation within the higher order of Maiar... but he totally had the power to do so, if he wanted.

But movie viewers aren't privy to all of that canon knowledge. It appears to be a plot hole, but it's really not. They just don't know every detail of the world that exists outside of the films.

The same applies for Star Wars, IMO. There's probably some creative director somewhere who fleshed out the reasons for Holdo's maneuver after Johnson came up with it, just like Tolkien built limitations on his powerful creations as he was working on building his world.

Long story short, I think it's okay to intro something that might break previous plots, and then retcon reasons as to why it hadn't happened before or as to why it's acceptable now. I don't think it's worth being mad about, considering it's all make-believe, and even the established rules don't really make sense, either, when you think about it.

(Lightsabers are a looping field of energy, rather than a halted laserbeam, as people believe. There's no logical reason as to why this should be possible, even within the Star Wars universe and half-hearted explanations of the technology, and yet that's just the way it is. We don't consider Jedi weapons to be plot holes.)
 
Top