Flying R2-D2: Essential Plot Device or CGI Overkill?

It's that or a very clever nod towards his critics that said the same thing about elements in TPM, including the scene to purposefuly annoy the fans with no imagination of their own. If you want an answer to why R2 doesn't use his jets, they broke and probably don't machine the right parts to replace them with. By the OT R2 is an old droid anyway, he's like finding a betamax player in today's blu-ray society.

 

The "opportunity of cost" is an excellent way of putting it. Is R2D2 flying around for 60 seconds worth creating an eternity of meaningless fanboy arguments on the internets? Probably not.

 

I know what the supposed explanation is. It doesn't take much imagination to come up with an explanation. There's always A solution to these things, whether it's a convincing one or not is another question.

All I'm asking is why create an unnecessary inconsistency over such a minor aspect of the film?

 

When you get bombarded with hate mail for creating something new in a character I think it would be safe to assume you would speak out with a rushed story to shut people up. In this case GL came up with a warranty excuse. Now if you really can't be asked to make something up about something so trivial on your own then having a story about a warranty will just have to do, let alone be the least of your worries.

 

What do you mean by "can't be asked"?

 

Standard expression meaning can't be bothered to do something.

 

Like I said before, they shoulda blamed it on being captured by the Jawas...
No fuss, and a whole lotta sense.

 

Then you have your jawa story, I have my betamax story and GL has his warranty story. It's a minor detail that should differ from person to person, not be taken as gospal.

 

Oh, you mean...

can't be arsed (British taboo!)
if you can't be arsed, you will not make the necessary effort to do something (often + to do sth) I can't be arsed to go to the party. It's too far away.

 

Exactly. It isn't rocket science.

Rocket science!

Geddit?

Well, why not? If Lucas can make Vader into Luke's daddy and subvert the entire story, I'm sure he can give one little astromech droid the gift of flight.

 

I'm very open when it comes to talking about bottoms, you should here me talk when Megan Fox is the subject of discussion. They are different expressions with the same meaning.

 

I agree about Megan. I could definitely be asked / arsed there...

Back to R2 - Don't get me wrong, I don't really care whether he flies in the PT or not. I tend to see the PT and OT as two separate series, so it doesn't bother me much. It just intrigues me that in order to show off a bit with the old CGI, he quite happily creates these things which will invariably be seen by some as inconsistencies, even when it's in a fairly trivial matter such as this.

 

I think GL's stance on the fan base intruding on his story telling is pretty clear myself, and it's the whole reason why the PT is so hotly debated. I admire the man for sticking to his guns while making the films, and the R2 jet pack scenario is one of the things I'm sure he considered and applied somewhere appropriate, he did cut out a similar sequence from TPM to begin with because he felt it was gimicky and served no purpose.

It's up to the individual to nit pick over something so minor, I myself think it's pathetic.

 

R2 flying kind of had the feel that a lot of science fiction franchises get when they suddenly come up with a heretofore unheard of technological capability:

Star Trek: "Captain, I think if we direct a tachyon pulse through the main deflector dish..."

Stargate Atlantis: Something's about to blow up and there's no way to stop it. Wait! If Rodney McKay taps furiously on his tablet computer everything will instantly be fine.

The difference is that in the above scenarios, basically the writers create an impossible situation and then use a deus ex machina cop-out to avoid the trouble of actually having to come up with a solution to their plot contrivance. In R2's case, having him use an elevator or simply roll away on wheels would have been sufficient. We have a deus ex machina without the impossible situation.

 

Like I said, I don't really care either way. It just interests me that the man who is so keen for us to see the 6 films as one coherent saga is quite happy to create unnecessary inconsistencies between them.

 

I see it as a man trying to keep the forms of mental creativity in the fan base that was there before the PT. GL is a famous supporter of fan films and fan fiction, so it would make sense that he leaves things open to interperatation. Although hardly going to inspire epic fan fic, this is one of those cases.

 

It's simple: There was no way to make R2 fly back in 77, and no real way to fix it now. That's more than enough for me....

 

Exactamundo-!! I doubt that anyone really has any beef with R2 zipping around, but I'm sure that the warranty RETCON is something MANY of us could live without. Tacking on some piss-poor explanation; just because you didn't think things through, is absurd no matter how you score the game.



PS. This red text is awful on the eyes, Strilo

 

I don't see why he needs to explain why R2 doesn't use his rockets in the classic trilogy, he simply doesn't.

In the classic trilogy they kept adding features to R2's bag of tricks, and nobody was like: Hey, why didn't R2 use that circular saw in ANH or ESB?

Why? Because people weren't trying to rake Lucas over the coals like they were on the prequels.

Now that it's past 1990, suddenly Lucas can't add features to R2 without him using said features in past films made?

I think some people just aren't willing to suspend their disbelief anymore.

Call it growing too old, call it losing your sense of wonder or optimism.

But it's not Like Lucas ever changed his approach.

 

Go-Mer you know better than to discuss the fans. You've also been told not to make "psychoanalyzing" comments like your growing too old/sense of wonder comment. It's insulting to people, so stop it.

 

I'm not psychoanalyzing, I'm just pointing out that nobody ever had a problem with R2's sudden possession of a circular saw in ROTJ, so I don't see why it's suddenly a problem for him to have booster rockets.

Are we not allowed to note a double standard when we see it?

 

For the hundreth time, your point is not the issue. Your comments about other fans are. And the next time you argue with a moderator in a thread like this, you will be banned. You've been told repeatedly to bring it up in PM and not derail a thread.

 

Here's the rub, Bub... if the "stupid warranty RETCON" hadn't been offered to us in the first place, there'd be nothing to discuss. Adding an explanation just for explanation's sake doesn't make anything better, in fact it DRAWS attention to something as minor as R2's booster rockets.

Telling me "the warranty expired" is like spitting at my face.
Seriously.

I mean, Han and Chewie can work on hyperdrives with a hydrospanner and a pair of plyers.
And a 14 year-old is capable of refilling a propane tank all by themselves, so refueling/recharging a booster rocket shouldn't be soo complex.

Given all the tinkering we've seen and heard about in the GFFA, the warranty issue is patently absurd.

The point isn't really valid because there was no inturnetz back then.

Besides, we came to expect gadgets and ingenuity on R2's behalf... so more tricks was a good thing in the OT. The reverse of that is not true. As evidenced by the majority of the posts in this thread.

My suspension of disbelief with 'R2's booster rockets' was fine until someone tried to tell me that the reason he DIDN'T use them in the OT was due to an expired warranty. I almost choked on my coffee when I read that. My FIRST thought was: "What? Are we(fans), stupid?"

I found that particular RETCON to be highly insulting.

 

You have me on the Threepio thing. But what if Luke's hand had been chopped off in ESB and not replaced. Then, in ROTJ, he has a new hand, but no one mentions anything about it.

Would this have actually been a problem?

Seriously. Pretend that the "new hand" scene in ESB wasn't in there. We just see a still-handless Luke hanging out on the ship with Leia and the droids, figuring out his next move.

Now, as it happens, Luke's hand carries some sort of important symbolic value that carries into ROTJ and such, so it was appropriate to have that scene; it visually showed that the main characters are regrouping/rebuilding, and it also gave us that moment where Luke looks at his own hand in ROTJ.

But is it important from a 'plot' perspective?

I seriously doubt people would be on this message board thinking, "UGGH, stupid ROTJ, giving Luke a new hand without explaining it." Any fool could draw his own conclusion about the hand; maybe a prosthetic, maybe a robotic thing, maybe a biological stem-cell thing like how they grew an ear on that mouse once.


If you don't like the 'warranty' explanation on Artoo, you don't have to accept it. I don't think much of it myself. But it's not like the film looks at you and says 'this is why we only see him fly in movies 2 and 3'. No, you can draw your own conclusions, as DarthBoba did.

And you know what? I understand the point made earlier that things will invariably be seen by some as inconsistencies. The thing is, such inconsistencies just plain aren't important. I mean, hell, "Hamlet" can't seem to make a definitive statement on how old the character is. But science fiction fans (ALL science fiction, this isn't unique to SW) enjoy details and technical things -- the Lucasfilm empire has made plenty of money selling books full of little tidbits like this -- and so the 'warranty' explanation has been provided as a bone to those who genuinely prefer a Definitive Statement from Above to their own imaginations.


I mean, I remember when ROTS came out I was disappointed that they cut the "Yoda goes to Dagobah" scene because I thought it was important. Then I actually saw the scene on the DVD, and realized, wait, that added nothing, I'm glad they cut it.



Rick McCallum loves you!

 

Is that why a thread was created with the question, "Flying R2-D2: Essential Plot Device or CGI Overkill"? Not only was no explanation tended in the opening post, but the author focused on asking whether there was a point to R2 flying in the PT or not. The idea of there existing an official explanation for the purported change in R2 between the PT and the OT is a separate issue. I'm not saying it isn't a valid issue, but it's a branch that developed later in the thread. If one looks at the discontent expressed on this site time and time again, then it's obvious that the more fundamental grievance is the way things were done in the PT at all, not ad hoc minutiae superficially offered up to "explain" things at a later date.

Strilo edit: My request to not debate moderator decisions in thread applies to you as well.