Watch Star Wars Episode VII's First Official Trailer Right Here

[Olas]

And then you don't have to worry about this:

Except Luke's saber blade was out in a direction where a cross guard wouldn't have helped, so that's not correct.

Spoiler

What about that scene suggests Luke would still have a hand if he had a cross guard?

Look, I was just trying to illustrate why hand protection would be nice. Whether that one specific example would have benefitted from a cross guard isn't really that important, clearly you can see the value in having something to protect your hands (and the hilt of your weapon) without me needed to present anecdotal cases?

The issue is,
1. the cross guard is a solution to a non-existent problem as there has never been a case where one blade has slid down and cut the hand or saber of anyone.

Argument from ignorance fallacy. Even if there were no known instances of this happening, it would hardly prove the problem to be "non-existent". However, I've posted a clip above showing that there's at least one example of this in the movies, and since apparently I need to, I'll post it again.


But even ignoring this, simple common sense would indicate the need for some sort of guard, why would it be useful for swords but not lightsabers? The fact that the issue hasn't come up in previous films should itself be seen as a flaw, not the fact that the new movie appears to be trying to rectify it.

2. The cross guard, as shown, wouldn't work to protect the hand anyways unless the hilt is Mandalorian iron, at which point you don't the saber part anyways.

Yes, I know, I already said this myself. The design is flawed, unless, like you said, it's made of something impervious to lightsabers. However, assuming Mandalorian iron isn't cheap, I can see why you wouldn't make an entire guard out of it.

3. It prevents certain weapon motions due to danger of self inflicted wounds. (There's a reason rl swords don't have spiked or edged guards)

At best this argument is highly exaggerated. Ignoring the obvious fact that Jedi and Sith are trained swordsmen somehow capable of deflecting lasers in mid air, and therefore can probably handle this, what motions would this actually prevent? Even if it would limit motion in some ways, it's something that needs to be balanced with the advantages of having a cross guard.

Hand and weapon protection would be good, but it's done wrong. The sad thing is, the EU had perfectly reasonable things that could have been used in it's place, if he'd been a true fan of Star Wars he could have grabbed a number of things from KOTOR that would have been functional and looked better. I would have loved to see a live action Echani Dueling Shield.

Maybe he's just a "true fan" of the Star Wars movies, and not every other piece of media someone has created that happens to be set in the same universe. And maybe he wants to expand on the universe by adding things of his own rather than just recycling already existing ideas the way fan-fiction often does. And maybe, just maybe, he wants to appeal to general audiences and therefore doesn't want to build his story on stuff from the EU that most people haven't heard of.

That would be my guess.

 

[Ukomba]

And then you don't have to worry about this:

Except Luke's saber blade was out in a direction where a cross guard wouldn't have helped, so that's not correct.

Spoiler

What about that scene suggests Luke would still have a hand if he had a cross guard?

Look, I was just trying to illustrate why hand protection would be nice. Whether that one specific example would have benefitted from a cross guard isn't really that important, clearly you can see the value in having something to protect your hands (and the hilt of your weapon) without me needed to present anecdotal cases?

The issue is,
1. the cross guard is a solution to a non-existent problem as there has never been a case where one blade has slid down and cut the hand or saber of anyone.

Argument from ignorance fallacy. Even if there were no known instances of this happening, it would hardly prove the problem to be "non-existent". However, I've posted a clip above showing that there's at least one example of this in the movies, and since apparently I need to, I'll post it again.


But even ignoring this, simple common sense would indicate the need for some sort of guard, why would it be useful for swords but not lightsabers? The fact that the issue hasn't come up in previous films should itself be seen as a flaw, not the fact that the new movie appears to be trying to rectify it.

2. The cross guard, as shown, wouldn't work to protect the hand anyways unless the hilt is Mandalorian iron, at which point you don't the saber part anyways.

Yes, I know, I already said this myself. The design is flawed, unless, like you said, it's made of something impervious to lightsabers. However, assuming Mandalorian iron isn't cheap, I can see why you wouldn't make an entire guard out of it.

3. It prevents certain weapon motions due to danger of self inflicted wounds. (There's a reason rl swords don't have spiked or edged guards)

At best this argument is highly exaggerated. Ignoring the obvious fact that Jedi and Sith are trained swordsmen somehow capable of deflecting lasers in mid air, and therefore can probably handle this, what motions would this actually prevent? Even if it would limit motion in some ways, it's something that needs to be balanced with the advantages of having a cross guard.

Hand and weapon protection would be good, but it's done wrong. The sad thing is, the EU had perfectly reasonable things that could have been used in it's place, if he'd been a true fan of Star Wars he could have grabbed a number of things from KOTOR that would have been functional and looked better. I would have loved to see a live action Echani Dueling Shield.

Maybe he's just a "true fan" of the Star Wars movies, and not every other piece of media someone has created that happens to be set in the same universe. And maybe he wants to expand on the universe by adding things of his own rather than just recycling already existing ideas the way fan-fiction often does. And maybe, just maybe, he wants to appeal to general audiences and therefore doesn't want to build his story on stuff from the EU that most people haven't heard of.

That would be my guess.

1. NOPE, not having this argument, it's already really old. The next step would be me pointing out he didn't slide it down the bladed and instead lifted it off and struck obi-wan in the shoulder, not the hand or the hilt. Why don't we avoid rehashing what will eventually turn into a stalemate of opinion and drop it.

2. nothing to discuss really, all true.

3. True, but negated by point 2. Either the design is bad and the cross guard doesn't work giving no advantage, or the hilt is saber resistant in which case you don't need baby light saber coming out of it as you'd have the desired protection. Can we stop pretending they're anything but a style choice to set it apart from other sabers?

-

Ah, you mean a Common Fan who only bothers watching the movies. I certainly wouldn't call someone who think the Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones are better than the Thrawn and Corellian Trilogies a True Fan.

Pretty sure I never said anything about having him recycling ideas. I am, in fact, of the opinion that he would have to toss out everything from the Vong War on due to the difficulty of explaining why the post Vong universe is the way it is. As a result he'd have over a decade of original stuff to make up as well as completely original movies.

I've seen this argument before and I've got to call BS right now. Abrams is already going to be throwing out a lot of new stuff most or everyone hasn't heard of. Or do you know who all those characters shown are? Say he adds a few new human Jedi with Luke as the Grand master. Why not Name one Coran Horn or Kyle Katarn? Would those names some how be MORE confusing than Taran Wallbanger or what ever? It would be a nice nod to the fans is what I'm saying, with no effect on the general viewing audience. Are the Marvel movies hurt in any way by the subtle nods to the source material? Makes for a richer viewing experience in my opinion, and I've read exactly 0 Marvel comics. I'm the Marvel Equivalent of this Star Wars lowest common denominator your keen on appealing to.

Simply put, if there are Solo Children, and he doesn't use the EU names, it's kind of a dick move. Seems like a strange business model to purposefully alienate your most hardcore fans when it's unnecessary. Even Lucas adopted Coruscant.

 

[Olas]

1. NOPE, not having this argument, it's already really old. The next step would be me pointing out he didn't slide it down the bladed and instead lifted it off and struck obi-wan in the shoulder, not the hand or the hilt. Why don't we avoid rehashing what will eventually turn into a stalemate of opinion and drop it.

It's a little rude to refuse to have a conversation with someone just because you've already apparently had it with someone else.

Again, not that it really matters to the overall point, but Dooku obviously slid his lightsaber down Obi-Wan's. The saber may have hit Obi-Wan's shoulder before his hand, but it was clearly going to make contact with him sooner or later because there was nothing to stop it.

3. True, but negated by point 2. Either the design is bad and the cross guard doesn't work giving no advantage, or the hilt is saber resistant in which case you don't need baby light saber coming out of it as you'd have the desired protection. Can we stop pretending they're anything but a style choice to set it apart from other sabers?

I can think of 4 reasons for the "baby light sabers".

1. To make the lightsaber more portable and streamlined. The guard is almost as long as the handle, if it was solid it would make the lightsaber into a giant T when not out, hardly convenient.

2. Like I said above, it saves on material and Mandalorian iron is expensive and rare.

3. Intimidation factor. Half the battle is psychological. A guard made out of laser looks scarier.

4. It's one more thing you can try to hit the enemy with if they get up close, swords have been known to have sharpened pommels for this purpose.

Now the real reason for it is probably, like you said, to look cool. In fact I'm pretty sure this is what the original lightsaber and pretty much all sci-fi weapons are for. Why not just make guns that shoot regular bullets? Today's firearms are way more effective than the blasters in Star Wars. But just because something truly exists to look cool, doesn't mean we can't at least try to justify it based on the rules of the universe it's in.

-

Ah, you mean a Common Fan who only bothers watching the movies. I certainly wouldn't call someone who think the Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones are better than the Thrawn and Corellian Trilogies a True Fan.

When the fuck did I say that? What you're describing doesn't even make sense. How can anyone think the prequel trilogies are better than the Thrawn trilogy if they haven't even read the latter? Anyway, you're false dichotomy when it comes to fandom couldn't sound any more pretentious and elitist.

Some people are huge into the movies, some people are huge into the EU, some people are into both. I know a guy who can practically recite the entire dialogue from the original movies, but has never played any of the games and has only read a few of the books. According to you he's not a "true fan" because he hasn't immersed himself in the material that you deem superior. If this is really how you feel then you can go fuck yourself, you're what's wrong with fandoms and I don't imagine JJ Abrams is making this movie for people like you.

I've seen this argument before and I've got to call BS right now. Abrams is already going to be throwing out a lot of new stuff most or everyone hasn't heard of. Or do you know who all those characters shown are? Say he adds a few new human Jedi with Luke as the Grand master. Why not Name one Coran Horn or Kyle Katarn? Would those names some how be MORE confusing than Taran Wallbanger or what ever? It would be a nice nod to the fans is what I'm saying, with no effect on the general viewing audience. Are the Marvel movies hurt in any way by the subtle nods to the source material? Makes for a richer viewing experience in my opinion, and I've read exactly 0 Marvel comics. I'm the Marvel Equivalent of this Star Wars lowest common denominator your keen on appealing to.

Okay fine, I'll give you this point. Still, not including something obscure from the EU isn't the same thing as erasing or ignoring the EU, you're being completely overreactive to this.

Simply put, if there are Solo Children, and he doesn't use the EU names, it's kind of a dick move. Seems like a strange business model to purposefully alienate your most hardcore fans when it's unnecessary. Even Lucas adopted Coruscant.

Sure, when it's unnecessary, and if there's any instances of him doing so I'll happily allow you to gripe in peace. That being said, expecting him to try and stay consistent with decades of lore is a bit of a creative constraint when trying to tell a good, original story. If I were him I would try to leave as much alone as possible, but I wouldn't actively try and work around the EU where it's clearly a blockade for the story I want to tell. Any artist who feels that he needs to appeal to existing fans isn't really an artist if you ask me.

Anyway, you're free to reject these movies if you don't like them. The idea of "canon" has always seemed very subjective to me. I don't see how these movies, whether they're true to EU or not, somehow de-legitimize the EU, since it's all just make-believe anyway.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Guys, the fucking crossguard is not only a traditional medieval accoutrement but it's also canonical. People are so excited to go right up Abram's ass for shitting on the canon because of lens flare in Star Trek that hardly anyone stopped to check.

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Crossguard_lightsaber

If you want to have a discussion about the nature of lightsabers and how the appropriate fighting style for one would be fencing as opposed to heavy slashing, you can, but throughout the majority of the previous films and the entirety of the original trilogy the fighting style employed is the sword of heavy sweeping strikes you'd make with a broadsword or Katana, not the defensive probing you'd make with a rapier. It is what it is. Star Wars is escapist fantasy, not hard science fiction.

As for the little doodads on the side just getting sliced off, there's like half a dozen or more materials in Star Wars canon that deflect lightsabers. From the flickering nature of the beam, it also looks like an unstable crystal was used, either deliberately for effect or because the builder didn't know WTF they were doing. I've heard everything speculated from "it's a primitive blade" to "it's deliberately built that way to be more dangerous".

 

[Hutzpah Chicken]

I'm not certian, but was that Rogue Squadron?

 

[Ukomba]

1. *Clipped, don't care, we'll have to agree to disagree here*

3. True, but negated by point 2. Either the design is bad and the cross guard doesn't work giving no advantage, or the hilt is saber resistant in which case you don't need baby light saber coming out of it as you'd have the desired protection. Can we stop pretending they're anything but a style choice to set it apart from other sabers?

I can think of 4 reasons for the "baby light sabers".

1. To make the lightsaber more portable and streamlined. The guard is almost as long as the handle, if it was solid it would make the lightsaber into a giant T when not out, hardly convenient.

2. Like I said above, it saves on material and Mandalorian iron is expensive and rare.

3. Intimidation factor. Half the battle is psychological. A guard made out of laser looks scarier.

4. It's one more thing you can try to hit the enemy with if they get up close, swords have been known to have sharpened pommels for this purpose.

Now the real reason for it is probably, like you said, to look cool. In fact I'm pretty sure this is what the original lightsaber and pretty much all sci-fi weapons are for. Why not just make guns that shoot regular bullets? Today's firearms are way more effective than the blasters in Star Wars. But just because something truly exists to look cool, doesn't mean we can't at least try to justify it based on the rules of the universe it's in.

Japanese Katana's (the original inspiration for light sabers) get by with a very small guard, easily less material than those emitters and have and provide 360° of hand protection with no loss of movement dexterity. You could have even made it 20% cooler by making the guard a micro ray shield and have it glow mass effect style.

I don't accept hitting with a guard as a good enough reason for it to be there. having the guard be sharp on a standard long sword or claymore is fine, it's just changing the style of what's already there. Adding bulkier and intrusive sharp guard to a Katana or fencing saber would be a very strange thing to do.

In the end, that style of weapon, to me, suggests a low skilled bruit who simply tries to batter his opponent down, a dumbed down Juyo without the grace.

I do have to admit that a large part of the dislike is due to the poor design. If they adjusted the design so the hilt wouldn't take a hit from a slid light saber, I wouldn't have nearly the as much of a problem. I don't want to justify poor design. The problem is compounded by the silly looking droid which I would also classify as poor design, it makes me worry about what else he's adding that'll be bad. We didn't let Bioware get away with creating a 'Jedi Wizard' class, this shouldn't just slide.

-

Ah, you mean a Common Fan who only bothers watching the movies. I certainly wouldn't call someone who think the Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones are better than the Thrawn and Corellian Trilogies a True Fan.

When the fuck did I say that? What you're describing doesn't even make sense. How can anyone think the prequel trilogies are better than the Thrawn trilogy if they haven't even read the latter? Anyway, you're false dichotomy when it comes to fandom couldn't sound any more pretentious and elitist.

Some people are huge into the movies, some people are huge into the EU, some people are into both. I know a guy who can practically recite the entire dialogue from the original movies, but has never played any of the games and has only read a few of the books. According to you he's not a "true fan" because he hasn't immersed himself in the material that you deem superior. If this is really how you feel then you can go fuck yourself, you're what's wrong with fandoms and I don't imagine JJ Abrams is making this movie for people like you.

Check your language.

Yes, I wouldn't call him a fan of the franchise, I'd call him a fan of the movie. Much in the same way I like the lord of the rings, but I wouldn't call myself a true fan as I don't know all the Silmarillion. You know who did dive into the lore of the Silmarillion? Peter Jackson. True fans of Spiderman should have read the comics, I don't care if you can quote the Toby McGuire movie word for word.

If you're going to keep making things personal like this, I'll simply stop talking to you. I don't need personal attacks like that.

I've seen this argument before and I've got to call BS right now. Abrams is already going to be throwing out a lot of new stuff most or everyone hasn't heard of. Or do you know who all those characters shown are? Say he adds a few new human Jedi with Luke as the Grand master. Why not Name one Coran Horn or Kyle Katarn? Would those names some how be MORE confusing than Taran Wallbanger or what ever? It would be a nice nod to the fans is what I'm saying, with no effect on the general viewing audience. Are the Marvel movies hurt in any way by the subtle nods to the source material? Makes for a richer viewing experience in my opinion, and I've read exactly 0 Marvel comics. I'm the Marvel Equivalent of this Star Wars lowest common denominator your keen on appealing to.

Okay fine, I'll give you this point. Still, not including something obscure from the EU isn't the same thing as erasing or ignoring the EU, you're being completely overreactive to this.

Simply put, if there are Solo Children, and he doesn't use the EU names, it's kind of a dick move. Seems like a strange business model to purposefully alienate your most hardcore fans when it's unnecessary. Even Lucas adopted Coruscant.

Sure, when it's unnecessary, and if there's any instances of him doing so I'll happily allow you to gripe in peace. That being said, expecting him to try and stay consistent with decades of lore is a bit of a creative constraint when trying to tell a good, original story. If I were him I would try to leave as much alone as possible, but I wouldn't actively try and work around the EU where it's clearly a blockade for the story I want to tell. Any artist who feels that he needs to appeal to existing fans isn't really an artist if you ask me.

Anyway, you're free to reject these movies if you don't like them. The idea of "canon" has always seemed very subjective to me. I don't see how these movies, whether they're true to EU or not, somehow de-legitimize the EU, since it's all just make-believe anyway.

Wrong. It is erased. Or is there another Legacy book coming out after Crucible? How likely are they to make another Dark Forces game with Kyle Katarn? Could a KOTOR 3 be made now? How are the Legacy Comics doing? ERASED. They canceled EVERYTHING. Any fan who was following any of the current series just had everything canceled on them. Anyone hoping for a squeal to a beloved game, have had those hopes dashed. Even the horrible Force Unleashed Series is never going to have it's story line completed. De-legitimizing the EU means no new entries into those stories. THAT'S my problem. I wouldn't care if the EU was largely ignored, the Prequels did that (to their detriment imo), it's their whole sale destruction that I don't like. And then they expect me to buy their new novels? They were more respectful with their Star Trek reboot.

Also, if you don't want to work around and with the lore of a pre-existing property, I would recommend creating a new IP. It would be like buying the Game of Thrones Franchise, making a more magic intensive, add in elves and orcs, and canceling the ongoing tv series and having it reboot with your new lore. Not sure fans would appreciate that.

So, yes, I'd prefer they went the Mass Effect rout.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Also, if you don't want to work around and with the lore of a pre-existing property, I would recommend creating a new IP. It would be like buying the Game of Thrones Franchise, making a more magic intensive, add in elves and orcs, and canceling the ongoing tv series and having it reboot with your new lore. Not sure fans would appreciate that.

So, yes, I'd prefer they went the Mass Effect rout.

It's a half-reboot of a campy IP that never earned much in the way of critical accolades for its writing or world building, and was even openly derided by some of the original actors. Your Game of Thrones comparison is probably a tad disingenuous on that front. The Battlestar Galactica reboot would've been a better comparable.

Reboots are usually judged on their quality as perceived against the original. Did the original material warrant a reboot, yes/no. Did the reboot improve upon the original or at least do it justice, yes/no. And on and on. It would be odd in the extreme to reboot a series like Game of Thrones, which hasn't even finished its initial run. Star Wars has the three prequel disasters and a decade of soiled franchise to contend with, so they need to try and strike a balance between engaging fans of the original properties and divorcing themselves from the clown show that preceded their stewardship of the IP.

None of us have any idea whether or not their efforts will have been successful until the film airs and we have a chance to digest it. Drawing conclusions on its quality today, absent any information beyond a teaser trailer, would require extraordinary amounts of optimism or salt.

 

[Bart XB]

Just think, in a couple years, everyone will be reminiscing about the good old days of the prequel trilogy.

I'd say it's genetically, existentially, and metaphysically impossible to make a worse Star Wars film than Phantom Menace... and the other two didn't exactly measure up to anything, either.

Those two Ewok movies and that animated movie are actually even worse

 

[Ukomba]

Also, if you don't want to work around and with the lore of a pre-existing property, I would recommend creating a new IP. It would be like buying the Game of Thrones Franchise, making a more magic intensive, add in elves and orcs, and canceling the ongoing tv series and having it reboot with your new lore. Not sure fans would appreciate that.

So, yes, I'd prefer they went the Mass Effect rout.

It's a half-reboot of a campy IP that never earned much in the way of critical accolades for its writing or world building, and was even openly derided by some of the original actors. Your Game of Thrones comparison is probably a tad disingenuous on that front. The Battlestar Galactica reboot would've been a better comparable.

Reboots are usually judged on their quality as perceived against the original. Did the original material warrant a reboot, yes/no. Did the reboot improve upon the original or at least do it justice, yes/no. And on and on. It would be odd in the extreme to reboot a series like Game of Thrones, which hasn't even finished its initial run. Star Wars has the three prequel disasters and a decade of soiled franchise to contend with, so they need to try and strike a balance between engaging fans of the original properties and divorcing themselves from the clown show that preceded their stewardship of the IP.

None of us have any idea whether or not their efforts will have been successful until the film airs and we have a chance to digest it. Drawing conclusions on its quality today, absent any information beyond a teaser trailer, would require extraordinary amounts of optimism or salt.

I'm not a Battlestar Galactica fan in any way and have no knowledge of the franchise or the reboot so I couldn't use it as an example. I used Game of Thrones exactly because it was on going still and has story lines still progressing. There are plenty of Star Wars story lines that were still developing when this happened.

How about Star Trek then? Lets say Abrams reboot happened in 1993 and he dropped the time travel plot, making it a pure reboot. TNG is still going strong, DS9 is starting up and BOOM, Abrams Star Trek happens and Paramount suddenly cancels TNG, DS9, all the Books are canceled, Video Games in the works are canned, Movie ideas are tossed, ext ext. Suddenly the announcement from on high is all that stuff is now non-cannon and any non-original sires character never existed. Like Picard? To bad, he can't even guest star in future movies, books, shows, games ext. Everything post post ~2260 has been essentially hit by the Krenim weapon ship. I think a move like that would alienate a lot of the people you need to interest to be successful.

Yes, I know. I am about equal parts hopeful and dreading. As much as I liked the Vong story arch and enjoyed the legacy stuff, I wouldn't mind dropping everything post 24 ABY, post 20 ABY would be a little more painful. Better would just be to loose the nonsense books like the Jedi Prince series.

 

[Bart XB]

Well at least this means we'll get another Star Wars Plinkett review.

Don't be so sure. There hasn't been a Plinkett review in years, I think they are done with that in favor of their other shows.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBEdgPFoBjY

He already did the trailer

 

[Evil Smurf]

It looks dumb, and pretty. I'll see it, but I don't think it'll be great.

 

[Barbas]

It looks dumb, and pretty. I'll see it, but I don't think it'll be great.

It's gonna be great. It looks a lot darker than the others. Hopefully it'll work.

 

[TheBanMan_v1legacy]

I leave it to Colbert to explain all that needs to be known on the matter...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TiabUnjU84w&feature=player_embedded

 

[maninahat]

Judging from the trailer, there isn't an awful lot of new things going on. We have storm troopers, and an R2-D2 look alike, and x-wings, and Tatooine, and the Falcon, and a Darth Maul gimmick lightsaber. The only new thing in the trailer is that they let a woman drive a vehicle for once in the Star Wars movie.

 

[DayDark]

I leave it to Colbert to explain all that needs to be known on the matter...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TiabUnjU84w&feature=player_embedded

Can't see it mate :/