500th!

That's a common misperception, but actually...

about the youtube Phantom Menace review:

1.2M watched part 1, 556K part 2, down to 400+K or for the next 5 parts.

Side question: is there any great work of fiction or film in which everything - all motivations and sequences - is absolutely logical and watertight?

If so, it must not involve human beings.


In this genre, I really liked Scalzi's trilogy that starts with Old Man's War. As in most trilogies, the first is the best read. My taste is often not in sync with the crowd here, but if you like this thread and haven't read them, you might like it.

Side question: is there any great work of fiction or film in which everything - all motivations and sequences - is absolutely logical and watertight?

Actually, any story with a pretty short timeline has a good chance to work out logically. Something existentialist or nihilist.

Off the top of my head:

The Stranger
A Clean and Well-lit Place
Gatsby
Fathers & Sons (not sure, it's been a while)

That's a little different than what you meant, as part of the story's essence design comes out of its historical context. I'd probably add "The Possessed" (or "Demons" if that's your preferred translation), but that's just cause I mostly agree with FD.

I'd probably add "The Possessed" (or "Demons" if that's your preferred translation)

My favorite of all books.

The first thing I thought of was The Godfather. But there are a few little problems. I've never understood why Don Corleone was unguarded at the hospital - yes, I get that the cops chased away his strongmen, but why didn't any of them report this back to the family? Why was his extreme vulnerability only discovered when Michael happened to visit? Unless it was Tessio's branch in charge of the protection ... hmmmm.

I thought the movie LA Confidential added up pretty well.

My favorite of all books.

One of mine too. Crime and Punishment, and the Brothers Karamazov get the most press for Dostoyevsky, but the Possessed is my favorite.

I have a great story about reading Possessed. It involves the most hilariously depressing moment of my life. Wripped straight from a Coen Bros movie.

I had Possessed assigned for a Russian history class one year. It was a beastly assignment, reading this 700 page book, and it was only going to be covered in a single (2-3 hour) class. Most teachers wouldn't try something like that, and of course, only a handful of students actually finished the thing.

Anyway, I thought that it would be fun to stay at school over Thanksgiving break and tackle the thing over a few days with lots of peace and privacy. This ended up being a disaster of an idea. The campus was essentially empty - the only people on it were the weirdest foreign students, the Pakistanis that traveled in packs and the Romanians that dominated the computer lab, the ones that never made friends with Americans. One small dining room remained open, and I dreaded visiting it, because it was like volunteering to take the short bus. It was a dreary atmosphere, cold and lonely, although arguably a good one to enjoy a little Dostoevskian alienation. I had to spend most of my waking hours reading this thing.

On Thanksgiving night, the dining halls were closed and there was only one open restaurant, a nice homey place that was sure to be full of families, where as a solo diner I would have felt very awkward. The Chinese and Indian places were closed. The pizza place was closed. I had no kitchen, no microwave even, no hot pot, so no way to eat even Ramen noodles.

I had my Thanksgiving Dinner at a Citgo gas station. I picked up one of those supersize cans of Fosters, a small bag of potato chips, and a Hot Pocket. And here is the saddest moment of my life:

The cashier asked me, "Do you want to heat the Hot Pocket up here?"

And I said, "Yes."

Great story, Fish. I love things that so clearly fall under "It seemed like a good idea at the time."


As in most trilogies, the first is the best read.

A lot has been gone over here about Stephenson, but in the Baroque Trilogy, I found the opposite to be true. The second two were much better than the first.

I've been meaning to check out Scalzi, so perhaps I will grab one this week.

I cannot account for my spelling of "wripped."

is there any great work of fiction or film in which everything - all motivations and sequences - is absolutely logical and watertight?

If so, it must not involve human beings

True enough, but there's a by-definition catch to your riposte, Bunyon. Lots of great fictions about human beings involve a keen observation of fairly illogical behavior. I have been reading some Chekhov stories lately (Friday is his 150th birthday), and they usually seem to me to be perfectly plausible, precisely because they involve people doing things that aren't all that well thought out. "The Lady with the Dog" is about how the magnetism of falling in love can pull you somewhere you had no intention or good sound reason to go, and yet it makes perfect sense to me. I have known people like the woman in "The Darling," too, strange as her Zelig-like existence can seem.

There's also a postmodern way out of the compulsion to be logical, as when Billy Budd and Captain Vere go behind closed doors and the narrator – the omniscient narrator, mind you – tells you that he can't know what went on between them. He's gone to great lengths to explore Claggart's irrational evil, but he pulls up at trying to understand something else in his creation. We just see the results, not the logic behind them.

Seconded on the great story, PF.

as when Billy Budd and Captain Vere

Ever have a chance to catch Britten's opera, Bob?

Nope – does he show the scene that Melville won't?

No, it's offstage as well, but at least has some music to suggest a level of tender conversation and understanding.

You might really like it if it passes through whatever town you're in. Add it to the internal rolodex.

I can tell you guys my happiest moment ever also. That one involves Radiohead, one pill of ecstasy, and a sweatshirt.

The cashier asked me, "Do you want to heat the Hot Pocket up here?"

And I said, "Yes."

The embarrassment! The debasement! The humiliation!

How apropos.

In this genre, I really liked Scalzi's trilogy that starts with Old Man's War. As in most trilogies, the first is the best read. My taste is often not in sync with the crowd here, but if you like this thread and haven't read them, you might like it.

I read the first one. It had a lot of humor, and that's nice. I thought the characters were pretty hard to distinguish and that the plot went flat for long stretches. Good fun, though. Lots of aliens being splattered. I actually thought of this as an example of fiction where everything is airtight because, well, Scalzi mostly invents reasons for things to work as he goes along. Everything is explained away. That said, I thought a lot of his explanations were pretty hard to swallow.

Continuing the SciFi theme: just yesterday I watched District 9 for the first time. I liked it, but was ultimately disappointed. The most intriguing aspect of the situation was setting up these aliens to be totally unknowable. That is, truly alien (Scalzi does that pretty well, actually). But over the course of the story, the writers bend a bit and start taking the easy way out. Cute little alien baby. Kind and compassionate alien father. Incredibly evil villains. And so on. The lead really committed himself, and that was great, but the writers got kind of lazy. When you look at the special features, it's not really so surprising... They all but admit that they pretty much wrote the script on the fly.

Visually, it's a stunning production.

I can tell you guys my happiest moment ever also. That one involves Radiohead, one pill of ecstasy, and a sweatshirt.

Do go on.

Speaking only for myself, whenever there is a Hot Pocket involved, the situation can't be *too* unhappy.

As to why some fighters have hyperdrives... basically they are just like personal hyperdrive vehicles. It's just that TIE fighters (pretty much the only non-hyperdrive capable ships) are so cheap as to not have one installed. They also have essentially no shields (the only TIE fighter that ever survives anything like a direct hit is Vaders when it bumps into one) Perhaps to put it in SWU economic terms, building carriers is more expensive than 1000s of hyperdrive units.

But again think of the ergonomics of an X-Wing. Hyperspace travel takes days and weeks. You are in a cockpit. you have no where to go. You simply are not going to travel long distances in an X-wing. Food, bathroom breaks, sleeping, breathing, so on and so on would be a problem for all but the most shortest of hyperspace jumps. As for the shields, in the movies the shields are next to useless for pretty much all fighters except for Hero/Villian characters. Vader's Tie Fighter does have shields I believe and does have a hyperspace drive according the manuals. I believe that is how they explained him surviving and him getting somewhere after the Deathstar blew up.



Maybe X-wings cost 10x that of TIE fighters, but require 10 times the number of trained pilots (even more expensive than hyperdrive units, I am sure).

That have the people but they have yet to establish that they have the money. Plus that isn't how it works in practically any rebellion out there. The Vietnamese were not flying around in F-16's while we were flying around in P-51's. The only way that is possible is if some gigantic foreign source is funding the war. Does the Rebellion have a Soviet Union supplying them with MiG's?


Still your assumption that the SW economics is broken rests on the fact that starfighter hyperdrive engines are "hyperexpensive" when there is little evidence to indicate this. Maybe it's as relatively cheap as a supercharger on a 2000's automobile.

Probably the biggest reason why there is a Empire/Republic of many planets is because the economies of these worlds have gotten so huge that they require many systems working together to function properly. One planet simply cannot produce what needs to function so they have to develop a relationship with other planets. If that is so then building ships has to be extremely expensive. Just think about the vast amount of technology required to build these things and think about the vast amount of special resources required to actually put them together. A tiny ship with only a cockpit has almost no reason to actually have hyperspace capabilities. All the ships in the star wars universe except for fighters that have hyperspace capability are much larger ships than X-wings and they allow for passengers on those ships to move around freely. X-wings have hyperspace capability so that Luke can be a lone space cowboy/knight for George Lucas and that is the only reason for it.

I'm not even going to try and write my saddest day since that would probably depress the hell out of me which would create a depressing most-depressing day in my life story.

I hate how every single time one of my posts gets linked it turns into a discussion of science fiction economics and war tactics. It's like friggin' clockwork . .

If you want it to go a different way throw in some Tool references, Beetleejuice references, or Rubik's cube references into your articles instead historical references. But if you want us to actually to talk about your article, well, that just isn't the BTF way.

If the article is getting talked about, then you know it was a pretty ####### bad article.

Well, what WOULD a unit of currency have represented in a unique, rag tag fleet such as the new BSG one?

Maybe they used stone money

One thing that always bugged me about Empire is that Hoth "system" and Bespin "system" are in the same system! The Falcon's hyperdrive is busted, and they hide (attached to the star destroyer!!!) until the garbage is dumped, then limp SUB LIGHT to Bespin!!!

All space based sci-fi have trouble with time and distance. Star Trek was the worst. How many times did Picard, or Chakote, or someone take off in a shuttle for days or weeks, when the mother ship could get to the destination in a few seconds? There was an episode where the Federation was escorting some rebel leader from his base, in sub light shuttles, from one system to another. As bad as that concept was, it was mentioned that they were passing within 2,000 kilometers of the Cardassian border. WTF? That's like low Earth orbit distance.

All space based sci-fi have trouble with time and distance. Star Trek was the worst. How many times did Picard, or Chakote, or someone take off in a shuttle for days or weeks, when the mother ship could get to the destination in a few seconds? There was an episode where the Federation was escorting some rebel leader from his base, in sub light shuttles, from one system to another. As bad as that concept was, it was mentioned that they were passing within 2,000 kilometers of the Cardassian border. WTF? That's like low Earth orbit distance.

Even Star Trek's movies were horrible at it. For instance in the conspiracy Star Trek movie. They discover that there is a plot to kill Foreman's dad on the planet Earth so they race to Kenosha to save him but they don't actually drop out of warp in front of Earth. No they have to drop out of warp millions and millions of miles away and then fly there under impulse power meanwhile a cloaked ship is lurking about out there. Plus Earth is your Capitol of your federation and they are hosting a major gathering of the worlds while tensions are high with the Klingons and there is no freakin other ships out except some other ship that just warped in? Come on. Which is another flaw in STNG and all the movies. The Enterprise is routinely the only ship that can do anything no matter how close the Enterprise is to the well developed areas of the Federation.

And Han in carbonite, why? Han Solo is a major player in the Rebellion. He personally helped destroy the Deathstar. So you stick him in carbonite and the give him to a loan shark? Why on Coruscant would you do that? Darth Vader has absolutely no reason to turn over one of the most wanted men in universe over to some loan shark. That would be like the Soviets capturing Hitler and simply giving him to JP Morgan because he defaulted on some loans. It absolutely makes no sense. The whole Bespin plot is silly to begin with. Darth Vader has his entire fleet with him. 8 freakin Star Destroyers and he cuts a deal with Lando? When you have 8 freakin Star Destroyers you don't make deals. You simply tell people what to do or you kill them. The Millenium Falcon does not have a hyperspace drive it isn't going anywhere. Inside the Falcon is the heart and soul of the Rebellion. You don't take chances you don't let someone like Lando have control of the area. Not with 8 star destroyers at your disposal. then you know Luke is coming because the force is strong in him and you know that he knows it is a trap but he is coming anyway. So why the hell isn't everything locked down. Where the hell are the 8 star destroyers? Even if you say they are hiding behind some planet somewhere once he freakin lands you call them up and get them there on the double. You don't let the leader of the rebellion escape and then GO BACK and get the last Jedi Knight without a fight. You simply don't do that. I know I know the star destroyers pop up and they believe the hyperdrive is disabled but why the hell can the Falcon fly in the first place? What does the Empire accomplish by fixing the millenium and simply pulling a wire? The damn thing should have been turned to scrap once it landed.

That would be like the Soviets capturing Hitler and simply giving him to JP Morgan because he defaulted on some loans. It absolutely makes no sense.

This has the makings of a successful standup act, McCoy.

I'm pretty sure Han wasn't handed by the Empire to Jabba. He was given to Fett as a reward for tracking the Falcon and Fett took him to Jabba because that's where the money is.

I'm pretty sure Han wasn't handed by the Empire to Jabba. He was given to Fett as a reward for tracking the Falcon and Fett took him to Jabba because that's where the money is.

And Darth Vader not being stupid knows exactly what a bounty hunter is going to do with a person who has a price on his head. But even still it is extremely stupid to hand him over to a bounty hunter. I'm pretty sure the Empire can afford to pay Fett. Vader even says to Fett that he will be well compensated when Fett voices his concern. I'm pretty sure they were offering bounties on the rebel leaders which is why they had bounty hunters out there in the first place. Han Solo, trapped in carbonite, was still alive. At any time his friends could come and get him out of carbonite and poof you got a great rebel leader/hero out there loose again. That is a disaster for the Empire. Makes them look like the George Bush's administration. You don't hand over one of your greatest enemies to a loan shark because you enemy owes some money to him. He is a freakin loan shark afterall and he can be paid off. You really want Han Solo freed because somebody paid Jabba the Hut a few million chits? Plus let us say that everything goes FUBAR and the rebel leaders escape. Well, the silver lining would be that you still got Han freakin Solo tucked away in some star destroyer. You, being strong in the force, know that his friends will eventually try to rescue him. Wouldn't it be a good idea to keep an eye out for that and wouldn't it be even better to keep an eye out for that while he is nestled safely betweem a few thousand stormtroopers?

Yeah, but Fett wanted Han's reward - which was a mere pittance to the Empire. He was promised equal compensation if Han had been damaged in the freezing.

Of course, this gets to the heart of it. Han wasn't handed over to save money for the empire. He was handed over like that because it pleased Vader to humiliate an enemy by turning him over as a wall decoration. Anakin may have been tremendously strong, but he never showed great foresight - look at how easily he was turned, for instance.

You know, for all the misdirection in the first film about how poor Luke was being used as farm labor - he had a loving home to influence him, as opposed to being a slave as his father was when he was young. That probably goes a long way to explain why Anakin - trained at a relatively old age for a Jedi - was unable to resist a clever plea to turn evil, while Luke was able to resist it years later despite being trained as a Jedi at a far older age, with far less guidance.

Edit: Also, I doubt that Darth Vader really saw Han Solo as a threat. He was an adventurer, not a Jedi Knight and not even one of the strategic leaders of the rebellion. If Vader was going to have fun with one of the big three in the original trilogy, Solo would have been the one.

I'd like to know how Darth Vader could perk up and pinpoint Luke Skywalker's approach through the far reaches of space... but then had trouble finding him half an hour later, when Luke was evasively hiding behind walls and columns during their laser swordfight in the basement.

Side question: is there any great work of fiction or film in which everything - all motivations and sequences - is absolutely logical and watertight?

Waiting For Godot.

Yeah, but Fett wanted Han's reward - which was a mere pittance to the Empire. He was promised equal compensation if Han had been damaged in the freezing.

Of course, this gets to the heart of it. Han wasn't handed over to save money for the empire. He was handed over like that because it pleased Vader to humiliate an enemy by turning him over as a wall decoration. Anakin may have been tremendously strong, but he never showed great foresight - look at how easily he was turned, for instance.

You know, for all the misdirection in the first film about how poor Luke was being used as farm labor - he had a loving home to influence him, as opposed to being a slave as his father was when he was young. That probably goes a long way to explain why Anakin - trained at a relatively old age for a Jedi - was unable to resist a clever plea to turn evil, while Luke was able to resist it years later despite being trained as a Jedi at a far older age, with far less guidance.

Edit: Also, I doubt that Darth Vader really saw Han Solo as a threat. He was an adventurer, not a Jedi Knight and not even one of the strategic leaders of the rebellion. If Vader was going to have fun with one of the big three in the original trilogy, Solo would have been the one.

But he still has to answer to the Emperor and the Emperor still has to run an Empire and the Emperor was a pretty smart dude. Han Solo flouted the authority of the Empire on several occasions all the way up to being an active participant in the destruction of the most powerful and expensive weapon ever built. You don't simply hand him off to a bounty hunter and then forget all about him. Han was still alive when they handed him off. Jabba wanted him because Han owed him money. Fett wanted to give Jabba Han because Jabba had a bounty on his head. So Jabba is out the money he spent on the cargo Han dumped and then he is out the finder's fee. That is a lot of money and good loan shark and Jabba was supposed to be one of the best is going to want to recoup his investment. Han is still alive and can still bring Jabba money. Because of that if you are the Empire you don't give Han to Jabba period but if you do for some reason you don't forget about Han once you give him away. Secondly Jabba wanted Han alive why? If you are the Empire why would you hand over Han to a guy that wants him alive? He wants a corpse? Fine, give him the corpse but he wanted him alive and Jabba kept him alive. Why? A dead frozen Han mounted on the wall looks just as good as an alive frozen Han mounted on the wall. Throwing away and forgetting about an alive rebel hero trapped in carbonite is simply begging for trouble.

forgetting about an alive rebel hero trapped in carbonite is simply begging for trouble.

Yeah, but his corpse on the wall doesn't offer the visceral satisfaction of his live, "permanently" frozen body being on display. Luke was vital because he was Vader's son, and the last of the Jedi. Leia was vital as part of the brain trust of the rebellion. Han was a minor smuggler who got in the way once. He shouldn't have been viewed as the long term threat that Luke and Leia were. Rather, he was somebody upon which whims could be acted. I don't see it as being out of character that a short sighted character such as Vader would have fun with Solo in a way that wasn't wise. Vader wasn't written as a wise, long term planner. He was written as an evil mofo who would give in to impulses. As such, removing an annoyance in a manner designed to humiliate IS in character.

I'd like to know how Darth Vader could perk up and pinpoint Luke Skywalker's approach through the far reaches of space... but then had trouble finding him half an hour later, when Luke was evasively hiding behind walls and columns during their laser swordfight in the basement.

He felt him coming, perhaps a tingling sensation that grew in intensity, but once he is that close it probably really isn't all that easy to pinpoint him exactly.

Best I got.

I think you're underselling the power of Jabba, particularly if he could urge other Hutts to join him. I'm sure the Empire would win eventually, but it would be costly. The Empire probably also thought it would be better to have Outer Rim planets under the control of strong warlords instead of complete chaos.

Yeah, but his corpse on the wall doesn't offer the visceral satisfaction of his live, "permanently" frozen body being on display.

Why does the Empire even care what would make Jabba the most happy? Vader has already made it clear that should Han die he'll compensate Fett so just kill the guy and give Fett the money.




Luke was vital because he was Vader's son, and the last of the Jedi. Leia was vital as part of the brain trust of the rebellion. Han was a minor smuggler who got in the way once. He shouldn't have been viewed as the long term threat that Luke and Leia were.


Hoth doesn't happen immediately after the Deathstar's destruction. It happens awhile afterwards and Lucas created a filler story for what happened in between. Han even hints at it a bit when he reminds Leia about the bounty hunter they ran across a short time ago. Han is rapidly moving up the ranks and becoming more and more of an important part in the Rebellion. Han broke into the deathstar, freed a hugely im

I think you're underselling the power of Jabba, particularly if he could urge other Hutts to join him. I'm sure the Empire would win eventually, but it would be costly. The Empire probably also thought it would be better to have Outer Rim planets under the control of strong warlords instead of complete chaos.

The guy has star destroyers like a circus freak has tattoos. The last thing the Hutts would ever want to do is to have the Empire come down on them. That isn't how black market types operate. If the outer rim is full of rebels and break away war lords that is a perfect excuse for the Empire to simply come in and level everything. Hutts want commmerce to flow and war (with them being one side) is bad for business. Secondly Hutt isn't going to go to war against the empire because the empire kills Han.

That probably goes a long way to explain why Anakin - trained at a relatively old age for a Jedi - was unable to resist a clever plea to turn evil

There was a clever plea that helped to turn Anakin evil?

That must have been in some other movie, because I never saw any clever plea -- or any clever anything -- in the second trilogy. Anakin has been raised by the Jedi, then he sees the Chancellor/Emperor revealed as an evil Sith Lord, is arguing he should be taken into custody, and 30 seconds later he kills a Jedi and is swearing loyalty to the Sith, and then goes on a baby-killing spree. Really?

At this point, the absurd plot, the wretched acting and the wooden dialogue were in a three-way death race to see which could reach the furthest depths of crapitude the fastest, and I have to confess it looked like a 3-way tie to me.

Can I say that George Lucas should make a movie trilogy about Han/Leia and Luke's kids? (Although, its also a story about Luke)?

I've got a buggy connection and for some reason post 539 did not come complete.


Yeah, but his corpse on the wall doesn't offer the visceral satisfaction of his live, "permanently" frozen body being on display.

Why does the Empire even care what would make Jabba the most happy? Vader has already made it clear that should Han die he'll compensate Fett so just kill the guy and give Fett the money.




Luke was vital because he was Vader's son, and the last of the Jedi. Leia was vital as part of the brain trust of the rebellion. Han was a minor smuggler who got in the way once. He shouldn't have been viewed as the long term threat that Luke and Leia were.


Hoth doesn't happen immediately after the Deathstar's destruction. It happens awhile afterwards and Lucas created a filler story for what happened in between. Han even hints at it a bit when he reminds Leia about the bounty hunter they ran across a short time ago. Han is rapidly moving up the ranks and becoming more and more of an important part in the Rebellion. Han broke into the deathstar, freed a hugely important person in the rebellion, broke out of the deathstar, and then came back and helped destroy it and in the process almost killed Darth Vader. This is not an unimportant guy.

Rather, he was somebody upon which whims could be acted. I don't see it as being out of character that a short sighted character such as Vader would have fun with Solo in a way that wasn't wise. Vader wasn't written as a wise, long term planner. He was written as an evil mofo who would give in to impulses. As such, removing an annoyance in a manner designed to humiliate IS in character.


But the emperor was not some short-sighted guy. he has an entire empire to run. You have a guy in your possession that help destroy your greatest weapon. You don't give him away and then forget about him. Especially when all you have to do is push a button and the guy is dead.

That would be like the Soviets capturing Hitler and simply giving him to JP Morgan because he defaulted on some loans. It absolutely makes no sense.



This has the makings of a successful standup act, McCoy.

Hehehe.

There was a clever plea that helped to turn Anakin evil?

That must have been in some other movie, because I never saw any clever plea -- or any clever anything -- in the second trilogy. Anakin has been raised by the Jedi, then he sees the Chancellor/Emperor revealed as an evil Sith Lord, is arguing he should be taken into custody, and 30 seconds later he kills a Jedi and is swearing loyalty to the Sith, and then goes on a baby-killing spree. Really?

At this point, the absurd plot, the wretched acting and the wooden dialogue were in a three-way death race to see which could reach the furthest depths of crapitude the fastest, and I have to confess it looked like a 3-way tie to me.

I was watching Fanboys the other day. A movie about a bunch of star wars geeks that go on a quest to see Star Wars I early. About the biggest laugh out of it is the very last line in the movie. The remaining geeks have camped out at the theater, probably for days, and are now in their seats and the movie is about to begin. One guy turns to the rest and asks, "what if it sucks" and the rest of them just kind of look at him bewildered.

Those movies totally sucked. The movies were so bad they were almost comedies. I still remember the one scene in the second or third movie where Yoda and his clone army have landed and are fighting the trade federation. Natalie Portman is in some flying vehicle that is chasing after Dooku I believe and it gets hit. Natalie tumbles out of the ship and out onto the sand. A couple of scenes later they return to Natalie and she is laying in the sand. A clone comes up to her and asks if she is alright and she immediately jumps up and says yes and let's go. Everybody in the movie was laughing out loud at that scene. It was such bad acting.

Those movies are so bad that outside of the totally stupid climactic battle in the first movie I don't think I've ever stopped and considered how implausible or stupid the movie character's decisions were. At least with the first 3 movies they are good enough that you would want to think about them again after you watch them. With the latest three movies you simply want to forget them.

Can I say that George Lucas should make a movie trilogy about Han/Leia and Luke's kids? (Although, its also a story about Luke)?

I remember back in the early 90's when Zahn was creating a market for Star Wars novels that I thought the next 3 movies, which by that point everybody knew was coming, would be based on the Zahn novels. I was running around telling everybody that I knew what the next movies would be about. I was wrong but anyway Zahn's novel do have Han and Leia with twins, naturally, and of course Luke plays integral part in the storyline. I don't remember exactly but I do believe the villians make a try for the kids in the books.

When I discovered he was making the prequels I was dismayed. Prequels are so anti-climactic and can be tedious because they are simply explaining the backstory. You introduce Obi-wan and I know that no matter what happens he is going to live. I know Anakin is going to live and eventually turn into Darth Vader, so on and so on. There is simply no suspense and a lot of this is why so and so is like this. Big deal. If he wanted to do prequels he should have gone further back and not included any characters we see in Star Wars and on.

I enjoyed the Thrawn trilogy quite a bit. Clever blue-backed SOB.

the Emperor was a pretty smart dude

Really? I always thought that part of the joke was that this entire galaxy was made up of the severely retarded (think gungans and ewoks) and the mildly retarded (everyone else). That would help explain why the war-droids they built were so completely useless. It sort of reminded me of that episode of Star Trek TNG where Geordi is taken captive by a group of space faring morons who need someone to fix their space ship because they don't have a clue as to how it works. It was apparently the short school bus of star ships. Like Star Wars was the short school bus of galaxies.

Okay, comparatively speaking.

Even Star Trek's movies were horrible at it. For instance in the conspiracy Star Trek movie. They discover that there is a plot to kill Foreman's dad on the planet Earth so they race to Kenosha to save him but they don't actually drop out of warp in front of Earth. No they have to drop out of warp millions and millions of miles away and then fly there under impulse power meanwhile a cloaked ship is lurking about out there. Plus Earth is your Capitol of your federation and they are hosting a major gathering of the worlds while tensions are high with the Klingons and there is no freakin other ships out except some other ship that just warped in? Come on.

Not to nerd it up too much, but it's not Earth, it's Camp Khitomer. (Kirk needs to get the location from Sulu after he gets back on board the Enterprise, remember? It's near the Romulan border, I think they say.) You can fan-wank it away by saying that one of the conditions of the conference was no starships within X million miles of the planet to avoid a fight breaking out, although that kind of pact while only a couple of the races attending had cloaking device technology seems . . . illogical.

Really like that film.

Prequels are so anti-climactic and can be tedious because they are simply explaining the backstory.

That's why Star Trek Enterprise worked for me (sacrilege, I know. BTF Groupthink says we have to unconditionally despise that series.). It was set far enough in the past that the plots weren't too tightly constrained by canon. And when they did veer into familiar territory in the 4th season, they did it in clever and unexpected ways. Like the 3 or 4 part episode with Dr. Soong's ancestor which turned out to be an explanation of the human looking 60's era Klingons.

That's why the creators of the latest Star Trek film put it in an alternate universe, so they could deviate from canon.

It was set far enough in the past that the plots weren't too tightly constrained by canon.

Not that Star Trek has allowed canon to contrain it that much, anyway.

PF, that's a great story. But if that's the most depressing day of your life, you lead a pretty great life. I'll trade you.

That's why the creators of the latest Star Trek film put it in an alternate universe,

A universe where, apparently, #### movies are well-received.

Enterprise was okay. It got better as it went along. I'd put it a notch below DS9, which is a mile or two below TNG. I can't even comment on Voyager. TOS...some is good, some too shticky.

Edit: Now stop asking me how I'd rank the Star Trek television series, people. You're floodin' my inbox!

That must have been in some other movie, because I never saw any clever plea -- or any clever anything -- in the second trilogy. Anakin has been raised by the Jedi, then he sees the Chancellor/Emperor revealed as an evil Sith Lord, is arguing he should be taken into custody, and 30 seconds later he kills a Jedi and is swearing loyalty to the Sith, and then goes on a baby-killing spree. Really?

If we're lucky, Lucas won't put some godawful clause into his will restricting the use of his Star Wars IP. Then they can hand the concept over to someone who can actually write a freaking script, we'll get decent movies, and then we can all forget those stupid prequels.

For my money, if they ever make another Star Wars Universe blockbuster, it should be the War of Exar Kun.

Really? I always thought that part of the joke was that this entire galaxy was made up of the severely retarded (think gungans and ewoks) and the mildly retarded (everyone else). That would help explain why the war-droids they built were so completely useless. It sort of reminded me of that episode of Star Trek TNG where Geordi is taken captive by a group of space faring morons who need someone to fix their space ship because they don't have a clue as to how it works. It was apparently the short school bus of star ships. Like Star Wars was the short school bus of galaxies.

I used to think about the Emperor that way. But after the prequels, I decided to believe that the Emperor wasn't making a power-play for Galactic rule, but instead his machinations are a necessary part of a plan to somehow access or preform ancient Sith powers. I found it turned him from an above average character into one of my favorites [in any form of fiction].

Hyperspace travel takes days and weeks

Cite?

That have the people but they have yet to establish that they have the money. Plus that isn't how it works in practically any rebellion out there. The Vietnamese were not flying around in F-16's while we were flying around in P-51's. The only way that is possible is if some gigantic foreign source is funding the
war. Does the Rebellion have a Soviet Union supplying them with MiG's?

Poor analogy. The rebels are clearly not oppressed peasantry, but rather displaced aristocracy (even in the "democratic" sense).
Actually, I am struggling to come up with a good historical analogy. Republic->Empire->20 years->Open Rebellion by forces sympathetic to old Republic->Instant victory.
I get the sense from the movies that the rebellion isn't getting any NEW ships at all, they just have some older ones.

But after the prequels, I decided to believe that the Emperor wasn't making a power-play for Galactic rule, but instead his machinations are a necessary part of a plan to somehow access or preform ancient Sith powers.

Immortality? Some Sith version of how the Jedi's become One with the force?

[awesome thread tie-in alert]

I think this is why the Exar Kun plotline would be so cool. You model the script on something like "The Possessed" and show how the thirst for power leads to madness and death.

Friggin' Dostoyevsky in Space. With Lightsabers.

Friggin' Dostoyevsky in Space. With Lightsabers.

A good winter follow-up to summer's madcap screwball comedy, Honkballin'.

Poor analogy. The rebels are clearly not oppressed peasantry, but rather displaced aristocracy (even in the "democratic" sense). Actually, I am struggling to come up with a good historical analogy. Republic->Empire->20 years->Open Rebellion by forces sympathetic to old Republic->Instant victory.

The Republic was very much like the aristocratic Roman Republic before Caesar (or Actium, or the First Triumvirate, or whatever moment you choose). The Empire is sort of like the Roman Empire, but retaining fewer trappings of the old aristocratic rule. There was a ton of pro-Senate scheming and conniving in the first century or so of the Roman Empire. Though the Caesars never took the step of dissolving the Senate like Palpatine did. But that's where Lucas got it from.

Cite?

The star wars written materials and the movies where the characters sit around doing nothing for long periods of time while in hyperspace travel. Or do you really think Luke only got a 2 mintue tutorial on Jedi force from Ben before Luke could understand the ways of the force? Han has the fastest ship in the galaxy and it can go .5 past the speed of light as he says. here is a link to the officialtimes/

Poor analogy. The rebels are clearly not oppressed peasantry, but rather displaced aristocracy (even in the "democratic" sense).
Actually, I am struggling to come up with a good historical analogy. Republic->Empire->20 years->Open Rebellion by forces sympathetic to old Republic->Instant victory.
I get the sense from the movies that the rebellion isn't getting any NEW ships at all, they just have some older ones.

Virtually all of the rebels' fighters are advanced and brand new designs. The X-wing for instance was a brand new design that the rebels stole the plans for and built themselves.

These aristocrats have no home planet and no real resources to do anything. They are hunted down and forced to hide on undeveloped planets out in the backwaters of space. Yet somehow they are able to build the most advanced weapon systems in the galaxy and were to keep them well stocked to the point that some country bumpkin from the sticks can simply walk in and get one and fly in the most important mission in rebellion history.

I've never understood why Don Corleone was unguarded at the hospital - yes, I get that the cops chased away his strongmen, but why didn't any of them report this back to the family?

I always assumed they weren't chased away, but arrested, and thus incommunicado.

PF, that's a great story. But if that's the most depressing day of your life, you lead a pretty great life. I'll trade you.

Well, it wasn't really as depressing as, say, the death of a friend or family member. But everyone has those experiences. It's the best funny-depressing story I have.

I always assumed they weren't chased away, but arrested, and thus incommunicado.

I suppose this would make sense, but I had a feeling that there is a line that suggests that they are chased away.

Hey, guess what! So I looked at the Godfather script, and:

NURSE
Your father just had too many visitors. They interfered with hospital service. The police made them leave about ten minutes ago

So this seems weird. Why wouldn't they call? But:

MICHAEL (into the phone)

Listen -- I got here late. There's nobody here.

SONNY'S VOICE (over the phone)

What? Nobody?

MICHAEL (into the phone)

Nobody... no no no Tessio's men, no detectives, nobody. Papa's all alone.

So Tessio was in charge of the protection!

NURSE
Your father just had too many visitors. They interfered with hospital service. The police made them leave about ten minutes ago



So this seems weird. Why wouldn't they call?

Well, maybe. But how would the nurse know what happened to them once they left her floor? The cops could have told them to leave in front of the nurse, and then locked them up once outside.

Personally, I think that the Star Wars movies are just an excuse to use the Wilhelm Scream over and over.

#565 - Yes, that's true.

I thought of the Godfather because it's such an unusually tight movie, especially when it comes to the motivations of the characters. Whenever I watch it for someone else for the first time I end up explaining what occurs in the Salazzo meeting where Sonny speaks out of turn - it's so outstanding because it is a handful of fully-fleshed characters, each with discrete impulses, all reacting strongly but quietly to a single seemingly innocuous event that really spurs the action of the entire film.

Also from the script:

"CAPTAIN McCLUSKEY (entering the scene)

I thought I got all you guinea hoods locked up! What the hell are you doing here? "

Well, that settles it.

Actually, that's all pretty clever, with the way the nurse naively interprets it as "too many visitors," interfering with hospital business, as if the police had her interests in mind.

I never liked the fact that Brando's character was portrayed as a good guy in the neighborhood. At the end of the day he was still charginng businesses for protection and as we saw in the wedding scene "honest" citizens were still reluctant to get into business with him. The guy was a criminal and he made money by stealing from the average joe of his neighborhood.

McCoy, I understand the criticism, but the balance between hero/criminal is the significant theme of every single mafia movie. That is what makes the movie interesting, it is the foundation of everything good about it.

And, of course, the fact that Don Corleone can walk that line in a way that his children cannot is the tragedy of the whole thing, especially in the second film.

I just started Mass Effect. It is great, even though the story reminds me a lot of the novels of Alastair Reynolds. Which isn't a bad thing, as I think he might be the best sf writer writing today.

There was a clever plea that helped to turn Anakin evil?

That must have been in some other movie, because I never saw any clever plea -- or any clever anything -- in the second trilogy. Anakin has been raised by the Jedi, then he sees the Chancellor/Emperor revealed as an evil Sith Lord, is arguing he should be taken into custody, and 30 seconds later he kills a Jedi and is swearing loyalty to the Sith, and then goes on a baby-killing spree. Really?

It was much more complicated than that. Although plea was a mistake - plan is better. Palpatine had been working on Anakin for a long time, convincing him that a central power was better than the squabling of the Republic. He also played on Anakin, building him up as the strongest Jedi (which he was) and making him feel put upon for every slight (such as Anakin not being put on the Jedi Council because of his youth). Palpatine also emphasized how misunderstood the Sith were, and how they had to stay hidden because they were after such knowledge as using the force directly to save people's lives. Finally, the Jedis were opposed in principle to a Jedi marrying. Palpatine pretended that it was okay, and again emphasized that he could save Padme. So what was clever was not that one moment where Anakin had to decide one way or another irrevocably - what was clever was the years of maneuvering Anakin so that he would betray his friends and view them as the enemy. Once he went down that path, he was lost for years, and willing to do anything - as Yoda had alluded to in Empire Strikes Back.

Why does the Empire even care what would make Jabba the most happy?

The Empire doesn't care about Jabba. Darth Vader cares about humiliating one of his lesser enemies. He didn't anticipate Han being rescued, because he figured that he was about to get Luke and already had Leia and Chewbacca in his custody. So he indulged himself. Not the wisest course, but wisdom was never Anakin's strongpoint - and just because people do things that aren't perfectly logical does not mean that it's a plot flaw.

Why does the Empire even care what would make Jabba the most happy?

You don't mess with the Fett Man.

Incidentally, adding on about how people don't always do what is wise or best for them, even if they know what it is. The Greeks had a term about that, Aristotle used it extensively in his ethics. Akrasia . . .

edited because i am slow.

i liked the tessio angle from above, but i would say that was well before he turned.

oh darn. it's been a while since i watched the movie, and i forgot that mccluskey does walk in and say explicitly that he locked the men up, thus delaying their chance to make a phone call to sonny.

Godfather III versus Star Wars I, discuss.

Actually I never watched all of Godfather III. I was in a packed theatre at midnight for the first showing of Star Wars I, so I guess I loathe Star Wars I more.

People say Godfather III is okay if you don't go in with the expectations of GF I and II.

I don't care enough to watch it to determine on my own. Thoughts?

GF III is riciculous and unwatchable imho. i've tried to sit through it, but you really aren't invested in any of the characters and the violence gets silly and the attempts to make michael sympathetic are ludicrous. one of the great things about GF I and II is you see michael changing into a stone cold killer by the end and you're left with some complicated feelings about what motivates people.
not so much in GF III.

In Phantom Menace, Anakin is portrayed as the most dangerous potential Jedi in the galaxy. So who's his mentor after Qui-gon's death? The newest guy!

I actually liked the acting in Phantom Menace. I was embarassed by the romantic scenes in Attack of the Clones. Lucas should have written the story and left the screenplay and directing to his betters. How about directed by Ang Lee and with screenplay by Joss Whedon?

Palpatine pretended that it was okay, and again emphasized that he could save Padme.

This was the part that was supposed to absolutely be the most important, I think, growing from Anakin's vision of his mother that turned out true and his love for Padme. But the writing, editing, and film-making was so abysmal, and the chemistry between them so poor that it never really comes out. It couldn't even merit more than a line in McCoy's own argument. Sacrificing everything and killing everyone for someone you were truly in love with - when you were already turning out to be kind of a dick anyhow - would have worked out fine if Lucas hadn't sucked so badly.

What I always want to know about the films is how Obi-Wan's failure isn't given more weight. I mean, he trained him for HOW long and couldn't see this coming? Yoda, too. They should have tossed Anakin into a sun about halfway between Phantom and Attack.

I find it very lame that Anakin was turned into the Darkest Dude in the Universe because of his sad puppy love heart-breaking.

Lord Vader. Driven to that by a girl. ####.

People say Godfather III is okay if you don't go in with the expectations of GF I and II.

I agree with this.

I find it very lame that Anakin was turned into the Darkest Dude in the Universe because of his sad puppy love heart-breaking.

Lord Vader. Driven to that by a girl. ####.

There had to have been some girl that broke Lucas' heart when he was a young teen (well, obviously, because it happens to everyone). But, yeah, weird that you'd use love as the motivation to do extreme evil.

There was a clever plea that helped to turn Anakin evil?

Anakin never turned evil -- he was always evil. He left his mother as a slave for 10 years when he could have easily freed her or bought her at any time. He must have had something better to do like negotiate taxes or tariffs or whatever stuff the Jedis really did. The Jedis didn't seem to care about things like slavery at all. Anakin was a whiny jerk the entirety of episodes 2+3, always disobeyed, and never listened or showed anyone respect. One time he got mad when his mom died, so he decided to commit genocide: he killed all the men, women, and children of the tribe that kidnapped his mom, not that the sand people even killed her directly. The similarly terrible Padme (she must be modeled on a Space Eva Braun, I guess) told Anakin not to worry about it, because sometimes people get mad and chop up entire populations with a sword, especially the kids. Anakin beheaded an unarmed prisoner another time. When the Emperor said he'd give Anakin something if he'd help kill some Jedi kids, is it at all surprising that Anakin did what he does best, which is kill people whenever he feels like it?

But, yeah, weird that you'd use love as the motivation to do extreme evil.

Because this is so unheard of in past narratives dating back to the beginning of the written word?

You make some good points Josh1, but I feel like you're ahead of Lucas on this one--he didn't intend for Anakin to be evil, just a little naive and difficult to control. You're right though--sum it up like that and he seems like a dbag from day one. Which makes Obi and Yoda even worse.

And the mom thing is SO weird. You're a ####### Jedi! Go home, get her via either money or force, you've got enough of both.

But, yeah, weird that you'd use love as the motivation to do extreme evil.

Because this is so unheard of in past narratives dating back to the beginning of the written word?


Point taken. Just something has always seemed off about it to me. I suppose it could simply be that it was done badly.

Because this is so unheard of in past narratives dating back to the beginning of the written word?

Here's the thing: I have a really hard time imagining Darth Vader, a great big badass, being this sniveling, whiny, entitled, #####. Anakin Sky from the prequels is a loser sissy boy who I want to slap around for lunch money. That guy cannot become Lord Vader. It still cheeses me. CHEESES ME GOOD!

I suppose it could simply be that it was done badly.

Very.

I always thought of the new trilogy as a poignant commentary on why you should not listen to Emo.

If the years are right on wookipedia, Anakin's mom was freed (bought, freed and married by a moisture farmer) within 2 years of his leaving for the jedi. So he wouldn't really have had an opportunity to save her.

The horribleness of the writing for Anakin's descent is only exceeded by that of the acting. Christ.

And the mom thing is SO weird. You're a ####### Jedi! Go home, get her via either money or force, you've got enough of plenty.

I the novelization it was discussed that Jedis were supposed to cut off all contact with their families

anywho

Anakin's whole relationship with his mother and their "owner" was a might odd, he obviously wasn't afraid of his owner, who in his/its own odd way obviously liked Anakin...

Of course it turns out that when he did go to find his mother she'd been freed years earlier

Original Episode 2 script for the falling-in-love scene:

Anakin: Natalie, I mean Padme... I forgot your name for a second, because I've only spent a day or two with you in my entire adult life. I hate democracy and think things would be better if we got rid of the Senate of which you're a member and replaced it with a dictatorship. I also just murdered a bunch of women and children. Is that OK? Can you still love me?

Padme: That's sexy, let's get married right now!

Lucas: Cut! Print it! That's cinematic gold!

I don't blame the actors for being terrible, it's the script. Despite what most people say, I think anyone would have been terrible with that dialogue. Not to mention the fact that half the time they were acting without the other actor's presence - Lucas would shoot the scene twice, once with each actor, then put them together digitally.

Actually, I am struggling to come up with a good historical analogy. Republic->Empire->20 years->Open Rebellion by forces sympathetic to old Republic->Instant victory.

Actually, everything up to the "Instant Victory" part reminds me a lot of the China/Taiwan (or more accurately, PRC/ROC) civil war.

Lucas would shoot the scene twice, once with each actor, then put them together digitally.

Seriously? I didn't know that. Was there a point or was it just to be different?

In other sci-fi news, my second season of Torchwood was just delivered.

You make some good points Josh1, but I feel like you're ahead of Lucas on this one--he didn't intend for Anakin to be evil, just a little naive and difficult to control. You're right though--sum it up like that and he seems like a dbag from day one. Which makes Obi and Yoda even worse.

And the mom thing is SO weird. You're a ####### Jedi! Go home, get her via either money or force, you've got enough of both.

I think Josh1 made some good points, but to me Anakin's evil is nourished and driven by the evil of the Jedi order. Jedi aren't supposed to have close emotional attachments deeper than platonic friendship, and most Jedi are taken from their families when they're very small children, after which they're supposed to cut off relations. Even if Anakin wanted to go save his mother from slavery, he probably wouldn't have been allowed to go. Plus the official position of the Jedi towards slavery appears to be "Meh.". Awesome.

While I'm at it, the Jedi council probably deserves a fair share of the blame here as well. If Yoda and Mace Windu had tried, I don't know, BEING NICE to Anakin instead of acting like total jerkasses, maybe they could have avoided some problems down the road. For a guy who's supposed to be a master of wisdom and foresight, Yoda spends a lot of time carrying the idiot ball in the prequels.

Episode 1 had to have been a comedy.

Obiwan: We encountered a Sith for the first time in a thousand years, and we need to go fight him and an entire army occupying a planet. What should we do?
Yoda: Hundreds of Jedi have we, but we'll send just you two. Busy am I sitting my butt in this room. Too expensive Samuel L is to give more scenes.
Obiwan: Who else should we take? Hmm... The 5-foot politician, a couple of expendable guards, the farting alien... um, you think there's room on the ship for a six-year old boy?

I don't blame the actors for being terrible, it's the script.

Well Portman can act, but having seen Hayden Christensen in other roles, nope...