TIE Fighter.

[Mad78]

I must admit that if i was at the head of a space station the size of a small planet i wouldn't be worried by a few fighters.

[Peregrinus]

Attack of the Zombie Post!!

 

Weiging in on all of this after a couple more years have passed. I would like to point out that at the time of the Battle of Yavin, the X-Wings had been in the Rebellion's hands only for a short time (according to the EU, whtever credence to want to ascribe that). And even if not, of the thirty Rebel fighters sent against the Death Star, twenty-seven were destroyed outright. If the battle station had not blown up when it did, if Han had not returned to disrupt Vader's attack against Luke, Yavin IV would have been destroyed a few seconds later and Vader and his two wingmen (plus however many surviving TIEs from outside the trench) would have quickly mopped up the remaining three fighters -- at least two of which were damaged.

 

And the situation was most definitely dynamic. At the next battle, both sides had more advanced starfighters than they had the previous time.

 

An empire might be the only way to make civilization in the galaxy work. As we saw in the prequels and in the New Republic-era novels, the Senate gets almost nothing useful accomplished, due to so many opposing viewpoints and cultural ethics. And, as we see in Legacy, when it isn't led by a Sith Lord, a benevolent Empire is possible.

 

The policies of the Empire in the movies are fairly clear. Although the Rebellion started with mainly or entirely humans (largely due to budgetary isses), we saw women holding positions of authority in all three movies only in the Rebellion. We saw non-humans serving only in the Rebellion (albeit only in Episode VI). And the EU has supported and built on this.

 

That said, the EU isn't perfect. It has created and perpetuated some silly or downright wrong notions, such as the existence of Rogue Squadron, the five-mile Super Star Destroyer, lightsabers as optical phenomena... I object to what the EU materials say about the clones. I know my biology. The Kamnoans accelerated the clones' growth. Growth and ageing are completely separate processes. I object to the EU materials saying the 501st in the Original Trilogy era was the only Legion still composed exclusively of Jango clones. This was contradicted in Episode IV, if nowhere else.

 

But I pick my battles. Just because the EU gets some things wrong doesn't mean it gets everything wrong. And just because something is in the movies doesn't make it right. *heh*

 

Now back to my rooting through the archives...

 

--Jonah

[Mad78]

And just because something is in the movies doesn't make it right. *heh*

Well since the major SW canonicity is from the Movies I guess that if it was in the movies then it IS right.

[JediHunter]

And just because something is in the movies doesn't make it right. *heh*

Well since the major SW canonicity is from the Movies I guess that if it was in the movies then it IS right.

I have to totally agree with you Mad. Personally, i think if the EU did anything for the Star Wars Universe it was help destroy it. Granted now, I haven't read very many of the books but there is a reason to it. I knew from the get go that all the books were going to be was someone trying to explain some minute detail to please some obscure group of uber-nerds and thus end up ruining some portion of the film or story we all loved...... i know the EU did do some good things at some point, but i think that was when it was only expanding on the story AFTER the movies... cuz.. we all saw what the prequels and the related stories did to some beloved characters...

[Peregrinus]

I wrote a whole long rant here, and at the last minute dicided otherwise. I saw this paragraph again:

 

"I have to totally agree with you Mad. Personally, i think if the EU did anything for the Star Wars Universe it was help destroy it. Granted now, I haven't read very many of the books but there is a reason to it. I knew from the get go that all the books were going to be was someone trying to explain some minute detail to please some obscure group of uber-nerds and thus end up ruining some portion of the film or story we all loved...... i know the EU did do some good things at some point, but i think that was when it was only expanding on the story AFTER the movies... cuz.. we all saw what the prequels and the related stories did to some beloved characters..."

 

You say the EU has helped destroy the Star Wars univer, but you've not actually read many of the books. Hard not to make a personal comment here, you know. Of course the EU focusses on the minutiae and trivia. Every life is a biography, and every ship has a history -- same as in the real world. It's the nature of the differences of the two media. Most World War II films don't focus on the day-to-day details of the people fighting. That's what the History Channel and Ken Burns are for. But those stories are there, regardless.

 

Of course the EU is going back and expanding after the fact. There was no Star Wars universe prior to 1976 to expand on, but the expansion started immediately. I have the novel, where already we're seeing things outside the scope of the movie. Let alone Splinter of the Mind's Eye or the Han Solo adventures, and a lot of the stuff in the Marvel comics and Archie Goodwin's daily comic strip have survived the test of time as worthwhile additions to the fabric of that universe.

 

As for the prequels, George has good ideas, but isn't a good writer or director. He needed Larry Kasdan and Irvin Kirschner back, and a healthy humility in the face of what his low-budget sci-fi flick has become. But my point of there being a lot of errors and inconsistencies in the movies stands, especially between trilogies.

 

--Jonah

[DarthTex]

And just because something is in the movies doesn't make it right. *heh*

Well since the major SW canonicity is from the Movies I guess that if it was in the movies then it IS right.

A question then: When I saw the original showing of STAR WARS on the big screen, Han shot first! It's in the movie, therefore "canon". Oh no, but wait, GL in a fit of lunacy (and "PC" disease) edits the movie and Han doesn't shot first. It's in the movie, therefore "canon". Oh no, but wait (again), he's not done screwing things up. Now Han shoots simultaneously with Greedo. It's in the movie, therefore "canon".

 

I'm expecting the next version to have Han "talk his way out of a confrontation with Greedo" When will the insanity stop! So, which is "canon": A) Han shot first; B) Han shot second; or C) Han shot simultaneously?

 

If your answer is anything but A, then GL has brainwashed you. Get a lobotomy. GL is NOT infallible, therefore you can conclude that the movies might be "canon" but it doesn't mean they are without error(s).

[Eagle]

Interesting thread you´ve digged out there. Gotta read it all soon.

 

Just want to add that according to the former SW Producer, Gary Kurtz ( Star Wars, The Empire Strikes back), after "Indiana Jones - Raiders of the Lost Ark" GL had a change of mind in doing movies. He thinks that people don´t want to see movies with a good written story or well created characters. His opinion seems to be that people just want to see the rollercoaster ride. And when you think back of all SW Movies after TESB, that´s what we all got from there on (Speederbikerace, Deathstar Attack, Podrace, spectacular Lightsaberfigths).

 

You can read the full interview here. But take your time, it´s very long, but also very interesting.

[JanDeis]

I think that whatever has been the most recent edit should be considered canon. But that is just my perspective. I'm not out to start a canon war (although you guys have effectively done that yourselves...) but I agree with whatever has been done in the latest edit.

 

Where does Han shoot at the same time? I only know of him shooting first and then second.

[JediHunter]

Of course the EU focusses on the minutiae and trivia. Every life is a biography, and every ship has a history -- same as in the real world.

Of course the EU is going back and expanding after the fact. There was no Star Wars universe prior to 1976 to expand on, but the expansion started immediately. I have the novel, where already we're seeing things outside the scope of the movie.

This isnt what upsets me about the EU, as a matter of fact I find that part to be quite enjoyable.. This isn't really the part of the EU that I dislike.

As for the prequels, George has good ideas, but isn't a good writer or director. But my point of there being a lot of errors and inconsistencies in the movies stands, especially between trilogies.

I didnt really want to touch on that, but seeing yours and Tex's subsequent comment, I guess I need to..

When will the insanity stop! So, which is "canon": A) Han shot first; B) Han shot second; or C) Han shot simultaneously?

 

GL is NOT infallible, therefore you can conclude that the movies might be "canon" but it doesn't mean they are without error(s).

Don't get me wrong Tex, Peregrinus, I dont think GL is infallible.. he definately came along and screwed up something we all loved.. Tex, your example was perfect!.. Han shot first, and to go back and change it just because some people whined or argued is pure madness.. (or is it Sparta?! haha.. not sure that joke will ever get old..)... Anyway, I don't mean to say that what you see is what you get with the movies, or even that the movies are totally 100% correct... (especially when looking at their most recent incarnation!).. however, I consider the original cut, released in theaters, is what is to be held constant... if something were to come along and contradict what has been already said.. well, it has the possibility of being disregarded as pure rubbish.

Now, to say that a book which is written by some author who may or may not have seen the movies, or read the other books, is greater than that which was once already stated thirty years ago is pure lunacy.. at least in my opinion... even when it comes to GL.. I think that him taking the already established lore (backstory... or whatever) of a character or event and perverting it into something sickening, such as MIDICHLORIANS!!.. or Boba Fett! (why would you turn the most bad ass bounty hunter into a freaking Kiwi clone in space?!?!?! why god?... why?...). anyways.. him doing that is just complete stupidity.. ok and now i really need to get back to work so im gonna cut it way short..

[Peregrinus]

To answer a hanging question first, in the 2004 DVD release of Star Wars, Lucas altered things further, including the aforementioned alteration to the Greedo scene.

 

Now I get where you're coming from, JediHunter. If you like, I can give you a recommended-reading list of novels and comics. *heh* That interview with Kurtz and the one with Lucas are both very illuminating, and I want to echo the urge to read them. Lucas had a good idea, and fortunately was ignorant enough to do it right the first time out. Everything since, he's just been getting more and more in his own way. He actually considers Empire to be the worst of the movies. o_O

 

Read the development of Return of the Jedi. There were some good ideas in the early drafts (and some clinkers, let's be fair) that all got watered down or left out of later editions. The roller-coaster ride is awesome if it has a purpose. The prequels were utterly devoid of anything I could sink my teeth into -- but they had a strong enough inspiration that it's like having the perfect steak dangled just out of reach.

 

One of my scriptwriting professors gave me what was probably the best advice I'll ever get. Watching movies and TV to see how others do it is part of learning the craft, and he said, "If you're watching something and you find you don't like it, don't just sit there bitching about it -- get a copy of the script and see if you can do better!" I've rewritten Episodes I, II, III, and VI (and Star Trek I, II, III, V, Nemesis, and the premise of Enterprise, but that's not Star Wars, so...). Everyone I've shown or told about my efforts have been amazed and sad and wished those were the movies that had been made. And it didn't even take all that much effort. Hell, if nothing else, just swapping the last two scenes of Episode II yields a better movie. *heh*

 

You can have a tight, intelligent story and whiz-bang effects. Lucas seems to have forgotten two things from his early film-making days.

 

First, the setting is only where the action takes place. Don't lavish too much attention on showing off the work you put into the sets.

 

And second, Hitchcock's distinction between storytelling styles. In one version, he said, you see a couple dining at a restaurant, chatting about banal things, when suddenly a bomb that was under their table explodes. In the other, you start focussed on the bomb, and can hear the couple chatting somewhere above the tabletop, and as the last few seconds tick away, you're anticipating the explosion. Lucas has switched his storytelling style from the former to the latter. The best stories I've seen -- including the original trilogy -- are those where the audience knows less than the characters, or find things out at the same time. By knowing everything in advance, thanks to the prequels, it totally changes the tenor of the original trilogy.

 

The revolving-door cast of villains in the prequels didn't help either. Nor did dismissing dialogue of events from the original trilogy. And so, the whole suffers.

 

--Jonah

[ElvisMiggell]

Just going back to the TIE fighter issue... i have a theory...

 

Space is a big place yeah? So why have hyperdrive equipped fighters at all?!?

 

You've got a Star Destroyer to carry and refuel them in much greater levels of comfort, so they can maintain focus.

 

Using the WWII analogy - most fighters were short range jobs, far more of them than the P51 Mustangs with drop tanks. Fighters aren't supposed to be long range ships. That's why you have capital ships.

 

Thus the Imperials are well justified in not bothering with hyperdrives - adding more mass, when they have a perfectly good fleet of ships that can carry them.

 

The Rebellion however doesn't have too many capital ships, so is justified in having hyperdrive equipped ships.

 

Hope that makes some sort of sense, it does in my head!

Edited October 30, 2007 by ElvisMiggell

[Darth_Rob]

I'd have to agree with that logic.

[Eagle]

Though still haven´t read any of those EU-Novells, I recall the OT and can´t remember any scene where an X- or A- or whatever-Wing could have stand any shot of a Tie´s canon. The story about the shields only appeared in those classic games, which should come alive again.

[Peregrinus]

The idea of the X-Wings having shields is mainly from the battle scenes of ANH. Several fighters took hits that caused a diffuse glow to cover the impact site for a second and then faded with no visible scorching or blown-off components. Red Leader, Wedge, and Luke all had this happen to their fighters.

 

That said, I think the EU materials drastically overestimated their effectiveness. The shields seem to be more proof against glancing shots than a direct hit.

 

FOr that matter, there's very little evidence of shielding of ships in the original trilogy anywhere. The Tantive IV's shots against the Devastator elicited metallic clanging, as of impacts against hull armour. The Falcon was seen to take a lot of impacts without showing lasting damage, though, so maybe those scenes warrant closer scrutiny...

 

And back to the whole question of TIEs... Cost was only part of the equation the EU materials came up with for leaving off shields and hyperdrive. Lack of shielding also encourages reliance on one's wingman, whilst lack of hyperdrive encourages reliance on mothership/base. Both emphasise the pilot as part of a larger whole, rather than an independent element. And we all know the Empire discourages individuality.

 

--Jonah

[DarthTex]

... The Falcon was seen to take a lot of impacts without showing lasting damage, though, so maybe those scenes warrant closer scrutiny...

I believe there was that scene when engaging the Ties after fleeing the DS, where a "grid" popped up with a couple of flashing "squares". I just assumed that this corresponded to the Falcon's shields taking hits.

 

And back to the whole question of TIEs... Cost was only part of the equation the EU materials came up with for leaving off shields and hyperdrive. Lack of shielding also encourages reliance on one's wingman, whilst lack of hyperdrive encourages reliance on mothership/base. Both emphasise the pilot as part of a larger whole, rather than an independent element. And we all know the Empire discourages individuality.

Also, should any Tie pilot start having an attack of "conscience", then he can't hyperspace out to defect

[Peregrinus]

*lol* Although, as hinted at in the Star Wars novel/cut scenes from ANH, and shown explicitly in the Empire comic anthology, it can force a group of like-minded pilots to stage a mutiny.

 

--Jonah

[DarthTofu]

I always considered those grids to be targeting brackets- "Inbound fighters at ten-thirteen" would refer to the coordinates on those brackets.

 

Granted, one would think we'd have a "Z" coordinate as well when referring to the inbounding coordinates, space being 3D and all...

[Peregrinus]

I think that's why they rotated freely -- to indicate the approach vector. Whilst the grid showed where in the possible directions it could go it was going.

 

--Jonah