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

[Nemo Atkins]

Now, I'll admit that I don't hate the prequels as much as most of the internet seems to (put it down to me being six when Episode I came out if you wish), so I've gone into the idea of Episode VII not with the thought of "At least it'll be better than the prequels", but with "Let's see what the first hand being dealt is". That first teaser did not inspire confidence in me. Now, in fairness, with the film a bit over a year away, it's hard to judge the quality of the film just now, but I already have a few concerns which I'm going to lay out now (and do bear in mind that I know NOTHING about the EU, so explaining stuff in reference to that is not going to help much!):

1) Why does the film strike me more like it's trying to be a parody of a Star Wars film instead of an actual Star Wars film? Seriously, the intro would not have felt out of place in a Star Wars parody: just swap the Stormtrooper out for something like a confused tourist in a Hawaiian shirt and you'd basically have the start to one!

2) The cinematic quality seems like it's gone down from the prequels (put the pitchfork and torch down and let me finish my point). Maybe it's because I've got the feeling that it feels closer to a parody of Star Wars than an actual Star Wars film stuck in my head, but the end result of the trailer feels kind of amateurish to me, which is NOT a concern I have with the prequels (most of mine are strictly with the writing, which I will admit is not great). It's not as bad as an amateur film, thankfully, but it doesn't feel like the kind of result I'd expect from a professional film. Even avoiding examples that I really like to bring up as good examples of cinematic quality (the Marvel Cinematic Universe films) and picking films that I don't like much (the Amazing Spider-Man films...I should stress, I don't hate them or think they're terrible, I just don't find them particularly great, for the most part), I can think of several films released in the last few years that looked better than Episode VII does.

(In fairness, reports I've read indicates that the film HAS been filmed using non-digital cameras (specifically, 35mm film) like the original trilogy was, so it's possible they were aiming for an old fashioned look deliberately. It doesn't negate my complaint, but it sounds like this might have been a deliberate choice and, while I don't agree with it, can at least be fairly argued as an aesthetic choice, so I will consider this concern just a case of personal taste for now unless it does actively hurt the final film.)

3) The broadsword lightsaber. I know everyone else has brought it up and no doubt said the same thing I'm about to, but I'm going to point out my issues with it: those side parts are functionally useless against another lightsaber, which is what most lightsabers tend to end up being used against, and trying to deflect a shot with that lightsaber, if you're not careful, will result in you hitting yourself with them, which begs the question of why you even bother to block blaster shots if you're at risk of killing yourself by your own weapon. You can argue that the side parts (I don't know the fancy term for them) are designed to repel a lightsaber blast, but here's the thing: a lightsaber on ANYTHING resembling the power that a real lightsaber is used on will just be able to hack them off, as they seem unprotected against lightsaber attacks (there might be a force field on them, but, if so, that begs the question of why they're not standard design for ALL lightsabers?) and, due to not being made from lightsaber energy, another lightsaber will just go right through them without any difficulty (remember what happened in Episode II when Anakin had a lightsaber hacked in half while fighting Count Dooku? Yeah, same thing will happen here). While I do welcome the idea of unconventional lightsaber designs (Count Dooku's was a curved handle and Mace Windu had a purple lightsaber in the prequels alone, so what's to stop further hilts from being designed that aren't like the conventional ones?), I do have to question the practicality of this one in particular just because it seems like it's more dangerous to use than a typical lightsaber blade is.

However, I will say that, although those are issues for me that have curbed my excitement for Episode VII, I do still plan to see it (after all, I do like the Star Wars films, so I do owe it to myself to at least put my concerns aside long enough to sit through Episode VII before I even consider writing it off completely). I just have a sneaky suspicion that Episode VII is not going to live up to the hype it is being placed under OR will turn out to be better than the prequels.

 

[Ukomba]

Can anyone enlighten me as to exactly which version of the X-Wing those fighters are, as the wing span and engine intakes aren't in line the T-65 model we see in the original trilogy.

They're new, the old EU is GONE as far as this movie is concerned. Those x wings are something new that Abram's people came up with.

I dunno, from what I've seen they are taking elements from it, it's more just the over arching story that's gone but a lot of the tech and universe building that was done seems to be kept in tact.

For what it's worth the old EU did talk about new versions of the X-wing, but in the old EU the major change was the astromech slot was removed and those functions were integrated in a computer built into the X-wing.

There have been several X-wing variants in the EU. They keep getting faster, getting heavier weapons, and better shields. The latest version of the standard X-wing was said to have very little in common with the Yavin Model. Then there are the stealth X's/XJ's... well they're all gone now. Because why call it the already established T-65AC4 when you're an ego maniac and make pointlessly give it your own model name.

I'm more curious why they appear to be using old model tie fighters. There were really specific reason the empire used fragile and cheaper ships like that, that should no longer be the case. Even Tie Interceptors should be out dated by now. I would have expected some version of tie/adv at least.

 

[Darth Rosenberg]

I think they're mostly treated as weighted because the props they use, at least for the old movies, have a big tube attached to them. I don't remember if the new ones still use a tube or if it's all digital now. I wouldn't be surprised at the latter. But I've got to say, it'd be harder to have a lightsaber battle that way, and it's just not as satisfying to swing a sword-like weapon without a blade.

Here's the answer to that, re the prequels:

Problem is when nerdishly discussing lightsabers is that the 'established' idea of weightless blades has never matched up with what's on screen, so 'takes yer pick' is probably all anyone can say with regards to lightsaber properties and handling.

 

[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.
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.
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)

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.

 

[Ukomba]

He might as well add a blastersaber in next if he's going to be silly.

 

[dalek sec]

I kinda like the old style feel they have going with the camera's they used.

So far my only real issue with that damn lightsaber in the trailer, those little things on the side serve no purpose at all as far as I can tell.

I'm still a little miffed they gave everything in the EU the boot but I'm interested to see the full blown trailer when it comes out.

 

[killerbee256]

Can anyone enlighten me as to exactly which version of the X-Wing those fighters are, as the wing span and engine intakes aren't in line the T-65 model we see in the original trilogy.

They're new, the old EU is GONE as far as this movie is concerned. Those x wings are something new that Abram's people came up with.

I dunno, from what I've seen they are taking elements from it, it's more just the over arching story that's gone but a lot of the tech and universe building that was done seems to be kept in tact.

For what it's worth the old EU did talk about new versions of the X-wing, but in the old EU the major change was the astromech slot was removed and those functions were integrated in a computer built into the X-wing.

There have been several X-wing variants in the EU. They keep getting faster, getting heavier weapons, and better shields. The latest version of the standard X-wing was said to have very little in common with the Yavin Model. Then there are the stealth X's/XJ's... well they're all gone now. Because why call it the already established T-65AC4 when you're an ego maniac and make pointlessly give it your own model name.

I'm more curious why they appear to be using old model tie fighters. There were really specific reason the empire used fragile and cheaper ships like that, that should no longer be the case. Even Tie Interceptors should be out dated by now. I would have expected some version of tie/adv at least.

I'm not sure Interceptors even exist anymore, they were never seen on screen in a movie. I think they first appeared in the early 90's in a star wars video game. X-wing vs Tie fighter maybe?

 

[Ukomba]

Can anyone enlighten me as to exactly which version of the X-Wing those fighters are, as the wing span and engine intakes aren't in line the T-65 model we see in the original trilogy.

They're new, the old EU is GONE as far as this movie is concerned. Those x wings are something new that Abram's people came up with.

I dunno, from what I've seen they are taking elements from it, it's more just the over arching story that's gone but a lot of the tech and universe building that was done seems to be kept in tact.

For what it's worth the old EU did talk about new versions of the X-wing, but in the old EU the major change was the astromech slot was removed and those functions were integrated in a computer built into the X-wing.

There have been several X-wing variants in the EU. They keep getting faster, getting heavier weapons, and better shields. The latest version of the standard X-wing was said to have very little in common with the Yavin Model. Then there are the stealth X's/XJ's... well they're all gone now. Because why call it the already established T-65AC4 when you're an ego maniac and make pointlessly give it your own model name.

I'm more curious why they appear to be using old model tie fighters. There were really specific reason the empire used fragile and cheaper ships like that, that should no longer be the case. Even Tie Interceptors should be out dated by now. I would have expected some version of tie/adv at least.

I'm not sure Interceptors even exist anymore, they were never seen on screen in a movie. I think they first appeared in the early 90's in a star wars video game. X-wing vs Tie fighter maybe?

I think you're thinking of Tie Defenders (and ya those are probubly gone now ), but Tie Interceptors were in Return of the Jedi.

 

[UselessBurner]

I don't think many of you really appreciate how hard the people who make this movie are nerding out just as hard as most people when it comes to Star Wars is 48. HE WAS 10 WHEN THE FIRST STAR WARS MOVIE CAME OUT. Lets watch the trailer, we start with a slow build...Tatooine? hmmm, who is this cat? Wow okay some sleek brand new stormtrooper designs about to do their thing...what is she running from?...HOLY SH*T X-WI...sorry back to business, ah this Sith guy I can understa-whoah, did not expect a crossguard but I can roll with it...what light? and what does the trailer end on? A FU*KBUGGERING AERIAL SHOT OF THE MILLENIUM FALCON, do you really need more evidence to know that either A) This movie is being made by massive Star Wars fans who GREW UP WITH STAR WARS or b B) That they are planning to treat this franchise with anything but respect?

 

[Ukomba]

I don't think many of you really appreciate how hard the people who make this movie are nerding out just as hard as most people when it comes to Star Wars is 48. HE WAS 10 WHEN THE FIRST STAR WARS MOVIE CAME OUT. Lets watch the trailer, we start with a slow build...Tatooine? hmmm, who is this cat? Wow okay some sleek brand new stormtrooper designs about to do their thing...what is she running from?...HOLY SH*T X-WI...sorry back to business, ah this Sith guy I can understa-whoah, did not expect a crossguard but I can roll with it...what light? and what does the trailer end on? A FU*KBUGGERING AERIAL SHOT OF THE MILLENIUM FALCON, do you really need more evidence to know that either A) This movie is being made by massive Star Wars fans who GREW UP WITH STAR WARS or b B) That they are planning to treat this franchise with anything but respect?

As much as I want you to be right, this trailer could easily have been put together by someone who never saw any of the moves or read any of the books.

Tatooine, Storm Troopers, Astromech, Red Lightsaber, X-Wings, Tie Fighters, and the Falcon are 7 of the top 10 most well known Star Wars things. The only things missing was the Death Star, A protocol Droid, and Darth Vaders Helmet (And that's on a lot of the promotional material).

Still I really hope do hope you're right and I really want to love the movie, but the shenanigans with the EU has given me little hope.

 

[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