ST Starkiller Base Discussion Thread

Huh?

It's not about what they said. It's about their actions: the demonstrable evidence based on what they put on screen and into canon.

 

But again, based on what? That it's a piece of technology? Unlike every other piece of implausible technology in Star Wars?

 

It was pointed out to you that JJ said Star Wars isn't a science lesson. Then you said "A funny thing to say, given that they "really wanted it to be" science..."
Who were you quoting there, if it wasn't something the film makers said?

 

From what we see on the screen SKB operates more on the theatrical side then on any technological precedent from the OT or the PT. Yes, I suppose SKB works if you're watching a film but it doesn't if you're inside the film. This is the real issue. Yes, SW tech breaks the laws of physics but as has been mention it feels believable. This allows for suspension of disbelief so I don't have to get triggered every time I hear an explosion in space. SKB doesn't feel believable because it breaks more laws of physics than have already been broken and thus broke my suspension of disbelief when watching the movie in theaters. It reminded me I was watching a movie which was the worst thing JJ could have done. I doubt he intended that, but it is rather evident by the manner in which SKB works that he thought people would believe it. But once you apply math to it as you can with any SW technology, it falls apart even worse than it does onscreen (effectively becoming unnecessary).

 

I think it’s also a result of JJ wanting to create a harmless fun movie that recreated the feeling of watching Star Wars when he was a kid, but sometimes forgetting that the original Star Wars was presented in a way that was also appealing to adults.

Which is probably why the SKB felt more like an unfiltered idea that came straight out of a kid’s mind, instead of an idea that clearly came out of an adult’s mind but was adapted to a family-friendly narrative. It’s more an issue with presentation.

If you notice, the original Star Wars does tend to explain the “logic" of things a lot more than TFA or really any kid-oriented movie does: how hyperspace works is explained; how the Force works and how it influences the weak minds is explained; the political state of the galaxy is explained in a conference meeting full of “blah blah”; the ability to destroy a planet would take “thousand ships with more fire power than” what Han has seen is commented on (implying the Death Star is just using normal “in-universe” firepower increased tenfold).

These explanations and comments were not there for kids; they were there to establish a strong and coherent internal narrative logic that could be followed and “believed” by adults. That is something I wished it was more present in the movie.

 

I never put any statement resembling those words in quotes.

 

I said that as a bit of sarcasm.

 

Sorry, the additional quotes were a typo. I'm having a hard time figuring out how to edit or fix my posts here.

 

I understand. But my comments regarding the creators using scientific theories to formulate their ideas was not based on a quote. It was based on the design of Starkiller base.

 

There is a scientific explanation that can be adapted to everything, even the SKB blasts. Take GRB (gamma ray bursts) for example.

And making curves in space can be explained by manipulating space-time (gravitational lens are an example of this).

That said, science is a fine beer and Star Wars is a fine wine. Both deserve to be enjoyed in their pure form.

 

"Science" is a method of observation. When you say science you must be precise about which field of observation you are referring to.
I'm tired of repeating myself. Please consider my posts and give LordDallos some slack.

 

It has probably been said before, but the biggest issue that I take with SKB is that unlike the original Death Star, SKB isn't actually the center of the film's plot ('find Luke' is supposed to be). Thus it isn't well-developed enough to escape being confusing, and that's even before you get to questions of physics or simply whatthewherethe?

So, I say bad idea. The planet is fine - it just didn't need to house a weapon like that.

 

I would actually like to encourage everyone reading this thread to go back and read all of your posts in the last few pages. They contain very well articulated arguments and are carefully thought out. Even if you like SKB, at least recognize why some fans like hyrum and myself are critical of it.

 

Right. It actually pains me to think about how awesome the film would have been if it focused on developing the hunt for Luke as a storyline. As it stands, it's a really fun SW film that explores some interesting and new ground (particularly with Kylo). But it could have been much more than that.

As soon as the SKB popped onto the screen without explanation, and then fired with no setup, I knew that a poor storytelling decision had been made.

That said, I can't wait to see where TFA's characters go in TLJ and IX.

 

SKB is the Ewoks of TFA... not enough to ruin the film, but definitely a flaw

 

I thought SKB was kinda cool, but I don't need another one.

 

Where do you think they get all of the material to build all of the Death Stars and the StarKiller Base? That's a lot of raw material.

I did like SKB as well. Glad it wasn't the center focus of the film and the hunt for Luke being the main plot.

 

Since there are about a million inhabited worlds in the GFFA, there are probably at least tens of millions of uninhabited worlds that are easily accessible, not to mention asteroid belts in most systems. I'd expect the raw materials to be the easy part, compared to gathering enough skilled labor to assemble the whole structure in any useful timeframe.

 

The EU pushed this figure up a bit - making it a million or so full member worlds in the Republic - with a lot more minor worlds that are inhabited but have less in the way of "membership rights" (no Senator or Representative of their own).

 

Very good point. Hadn't thought of it like that. You're right though, gathering enough skilled labor would be really tough. Though maybe they could use droids and robots to take care of it.

 

No matter how SKB was built, it cheapened the Death Stars, and therefore the OT in my view. It took so long for the Empire to design and build the death star, and that was with the entire Galaxy at its disposal, how did the FO manage build an even greater superweapon as just a "shadow" of what the empire was? It makes it seems like superweapons are a dime a dozen in SW.

 

Complete Locations suggests that The Empire had already been working on kyber crystal superweapon projects on that planet - the First Order basically inherited the Empire's work and built on it.

 

I think I posted this a long time ago - but IMO SKB would have worked much better as some ancient and/or alien weapon the First Order found out in the Unknown Regions... well and also if it worked in a different and less ridiculous fashion

Also:

This can not be a serious post... right?

 

SKB is a cool concept if it was for ROTJ. That would have been cooler than seeing just another Death Star.

BUT, in the context of the entire series, SKB was a retread.

Not a good thing. I didn't hate it though. Just a missed opportunity to come up with something new and maybe even better. How about just a hidden base and invert the rebels vs empire of the OT and now the New Republic is looking for the terrorists striking from their hidden base? Keep the base but don't give it the mega weapon.

 

Now having seen R1, the destruction of Starkiller Base feels even more shockingly easy and unearned when considering what a herculean task it was for the Rebels to steal the Death Star plans and subsequently destroy the battle station.