Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Reelya]

I don’t remember at what point in the movie he showed up at the conference, but there’s at least a day, at minimum, of C3PO and R2D2 wandering around before getting captured by the jawas, an unknown amount of time riding the sandcrawler, and from there, at least two days before getting to Mos Eisley. So, with hyperdrive, plenty of time for him to get to the meeting. Doesn’t seem like any complex contortion needed to explain it away. Heck, a couple hours might be enough.

That wasn't the point, the original question was whether he traveled in his star destroyer, or took a shuttle service.

But remember details such as: Luke and Obi-Wan have their "we have to get to Alderan" moment in Obi Wan's house, right before they cut to Tarkin ordering the Death Star to travel to Alderan. So Leia and Vader were already on the Death Star well before the heroes went to Mos Eisley.

EDIT:

I went and checked it out, there is an actual shot of a Star Destroyer approaching the Death Star, just after Obi Wan gives Luke the light saber. After that, Vader is on the Death Star. So I was correct, Vader did in fact travel to the Death Star in his Star Destroyer which was shown at the start of the movie, just to clear up that particular debate.

So a rough time line is that Vader captures Leia, can't find the plans, orders a ground troop detachment, then we see a shot of Vader's Star Destroyer moving away from the planet. The next time we see it, it's approaching the Death Star. So what this suggests is that Vader immediately left for the Death Star after ordering a ground troop detatchment to secure the contents of the escape pod. But remember, at that point in time, Vader only said the plans are in the pod. e.g. they had no reason to have a blockade, yet.

But hey, two nights are shown to pass between Vader leaving orbit around Tatooine and getting to the Death Star. And one night is shown passing between him ordering the pod retrieval and the troops finding droid parts. if additional Star Destroyers were ordered to Tatooine* to support the ground troops after the droid parts were found, they might have gotten there not long before the Falcon even took off. So there could definitely be a big gap in their air superiority coverage, going off what's shown in the film.

This is precluding two possibilities: (1) that there was a permanent detachment of Star Destroyers at Tatooine, which I find unlikely given Obi Wan's decision to choose that as a hiding spot, or (2) that there are additional, unseen, Star Destroyers traveling with Vader during his chase with Leia, and that he left three of them to merely pick up ground troops who'd been sent to secure the contents of any empty escape pod.

[scriver]

Or 4, the other star destroyers was dispatched to Tatgooine when Bader left to go to the Death Star.

[Reelya]

There's still a gap of 1-2 days for new ships to arrive in either case (judging from how long it took Vader to get to the Death Star after giving orders). And the three ships did in fact fail to work as any sort of blockade of the planet. So yeah, Vader could have ordered all three ships there just in case, but they would have arrived pretty late and it ended up being too little to prevent the plans escaping, in any case.

[Dunamisdeos]

One could also leave extra star destroyers in case the rebels showed up with a fleet after hearing that princess leia had been captured and/or the plans were not found with her.

The rebel intelligence network has been shown to be quite effective.

[Madman198237]

One could also leave extra star destroyers in case the rebels showed up with a fleet after hearing that princess leia had been captured and/or the plans were not found with her.

The rebel intelligence network has been shown to be quite effective.

Well, when you have enough sacrificial Bothans, many things can be accomplished that some would consider unnatural.

[Kagus]

One could also leave extra star destroyers in case the rebels showed up with a fleet after hearing that princess leia had been captured and/or the plans were not found with her.

The rebel intelligence network has been shown to be quite effective.

Well, when you have enough sacrificial Bothans, many things can be accomplished that some would consider unnatural.

Indeed, the only reason the Bothan race still exists at all is because of a massive dark ritual that spilled catastrophic amounts of Bothan blood, but secured the survival of their species for eternity.

The cost, well... They became a race of sacrificial lambs, doomed to serve as offerings for the rest of time.

[Dunamisdeos]

One could also leave extra star destroyers in case the rebels showed up with a fleet after hearing that princess leia had been captured and/or the plans were not found with her.

The rebel intelligence network has been shown to be quite effective.

Well, when you have enough sacrificial Bothans, many things can be accomplished that some would consider unnatural.

Indeed, the only reason the Bothan race still exists at all is because of a massive dark ritual that spilled catastrophic amounts of Bothan blood, but secured the survival of their species for eternity.

The cost, well... They became a race of sacrificial lambs, doomed to serve as offerings for the rest of time.

[Reelya]

One could also leave extra star destroyers in case the rebels showed up with a fleet after hearing that princess leia had been captured and/or the plans were not found with her.

Yeah, but Vader was only shown pursuing Leia with a single ship the whole time, across both movies where it's relevant. So, point being he's not shown to, nor is their dialogue suggesting, that he has extra ships that he's ordered to remain at Tatooine. All Vader says is "send a ground troop detachment to secure the pod" before his one ship scoots out of orbit.

While some other ships could have gotten there later, clearly they weren't there when Vader captured Leia. His ship was chasing hers, thus no time to travel in formation or anything. Her ship did manage to stay ahead of his for the entire trip from Scariff to Tatooine after all, meaning both ships were hitting the accelerator hard.

[Dunamisdeos]

Hmm. Didn't they call for reinforcements from Scariff? That's why Vader showed up, wasn't it? Presumably Vader could have called em' up on the space phone and told them to meet him en-route to Tattooine.

EDIT:
Just spitballin', there's no scene to support. Just sayin' I think we  can logic our way around it I think.

[Starver]

Following on from:

That "door in the planetary shield" thing (totally stolen from Spaceballs!) seems to indicate zero practical movement w.r.t. the planetary surface (and looks too close to be a FOOsynchronous point, but does somewhat depending on Planet FOO's own spin and day-length).

...etc,  I just saw this and pretty much think that it copies all my thoughts on the above  subject, and the whole Space Bomber thing.

[Reelya]

The Solo movie is apparently under-performing against predictions, leading people to speculate as to why. Is it the quality of the movie itself, or is it something to do with how polarizing the last movie was? For me personally, I'm not going to see it, and I'd say pretty confidently that if I'd actually enjoyed TLJ then I probably would have scrounged money for a Solo ticket.

The budget for Solo was $250 million and it pulled only $65 million in world-wide box office over the opening weekend. Compare that to TLJ which say a $220 million opening weekend, against a $217 million budget. Given the budget boost then this can't be hand-waved off as an off-season release.

According to a bunch of news articles:
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/solo-star-wars-hero-feminist-gender-new-film-a8365446.html

Solo: A Star Wars Story shows us the hero all feminist men have been waiting for

Sounds great, all 4% of men in the UK who-self identify with the feminist label (from actual surveys) will be sure to see this movie. Nothing wrong with being feminist or self-identifying as that, but if only 4% of guys do then it seems kinda dumb that you market a $250 million dollar movie at specifically that segment. And that's not being judgemental. e.g. if only 4% like giant robot anime, then if you want to make a $250 million giant robot movie you need to add things that appeal to someone else rather than just giant robot anime nerds like me. This is the problem when any world view claims to be ascendent whether left or right. Culturally dominant ideologies (which means, people who work in the media all agree that it's the thing, while Average Joe might disagree) have a habit of deluding themselves that everyone is going along with the ideology. Which makes you do silly things such as spending $250 million on a movie and filling it with things that only appeal to a tiny sliver of latte-drinking bohemian "cool people" who have high-paying jobs in cosmopolitan inner city areas.

However, note that the articles about Solo's box office take, merely put the abysmal opening weekend down to "Star Wars Fatigue" as if three Star Wars movies was just too much for a publc who's lapped up like 20 Marvel movies over the past few years. e.g. nobody in the mainstream press is willing to suggest that the drop in ticket sales is due to people who didn't like the last movie sitting this one out.

[smjjames]

I’ve found an article or two wondering if it’s just Star Wars fatigue or something.

[Reelya]

I just covered that briefly in an edit. Calling it "star wars fatigue" is a convenient (and evidence-free) way that they can hand-wave away TLJ backlash as explaining the drop in ticket sales. The Transformers movies were way more repetitive yet didn't suffer from "fatigue" but then they never aspired to be more than simply delivering what people expect. it's not "fatigue" with the setting. Avengers: Infinity Wars comes at the head of 18 other movies leading up to it. No "fatigue". The same with Jurassic Park movies: completely repetitive to the point you can barely tell which bit happened in which movie. Yet, still going strong without box-office fatigue.

e.g. the dominant media narrative is that everyone loved TLJ except for a tiny sliver of neo-fascist haters. e.g. if the "male feminist" Solo thing is real (and it seems real given how the article is saying it's a good thing), then this movie was their chance to prove that the haters really are just a tiny, loud and non-representative group. Obviously, if that was true then overtly doubling-down on feminist stuff in the movie shouldn't tank the box-office take, since there shouldn't be enough "haters" out there to tank the sales. But of course, if you were already wedded to the narrative that sidelined the haters as a tiny irrelevant minority, then you'd always find another reason to explain away why Solo ticket sales collapsed (confirmation bias, circular logic, etc).

Personally, my view is that people much easier get "issue fatigue" than franchise fatique. e.g. sure, I strongly support gay rights, but if every movie contained an overt sub-plot about gay oppression, no matter if it's a western, fantasy or sci-fi setting, even gay people would get sick of it, very quickly. e.g. just make an "issues movie" that's actually about that issue as the main plot, and leave "entertainment movies" alone. Don't try and force people to care about "issues" by shoe-horning issue sub-plots into each and every "entertainment movie". nobody wants that, even people who care strongly about those issues.

e.g. some creators see their movie-creating position as a pulpit to promote whatever specific pet issues the creators have. It doesn't matter how noble-minded your pulpit is, injecting moralizing into an unrelated work makes for poor entertainment, especially when it gets repetitive, and if you're part of a blanket movement to inject the same issues into every movie regardless of genre and setting, then people are just going to start tuning out those sources of entertainment completely. e.g. mass media is over. The people not going to see TLJ or Solo can in fact just play the new Doom game or some other non-"social issues" media. There are alternatives available when people decide that some franchise is just going to annoy the hell out of them rather than be a good time.

[Harry Baldman]

Might also be because Solo's not very good. I've heard it compared to prequel movie from 2005 in overall quality? As fun as it is to blame feminism for literally everything, it wasn't what turned people off from TLJ and it's probably not what's happening here.

[Reelya]

Might also be because Solo's not very good. I've heard it compared to prequel movie from 2005 in overall quality? As fun as it is to blame feminism for literally everything, it wasn't what turned people off from TLJ and it's probably not what's happening here.

I'm not saying "feminism" is what actually turned people off either. e.g. Rogue One should have fallen under that, but did not.

my main point was that people who didn't like TLJ, for all reasons, are less likely to be going to see Solo. Because a lot of people do in fact feel like we're being told "if you didn't like TLJ you're a just a bad person, a far-right fascist or 'more accurately' a Neo Nazi". And why would I feel like I'm being told that? Because of actual wide-spread articles making that claim. Well, fuck you, media, if you're calling me a Nazi for not liking some particular corporate product that I spent money on why on Earth would I go buy more of that product? Why? So you can call me a Nazi again if it so happens that the new version of the product is still not to my liking? I have the cash here that I could use to go see Solo, and if it weren't for how offended I felt by not being "allowed" to dislike the last movie, I'd probably go give this one the benefit of the doubt.

However, articles like the Independent lauding Solo as a "male feminist" movie don't help. Those ones are actually buying into the "feminist Star Wars" thing. Because like I said "male feminist" is 4% of the male population of the UK, so it's not exactly promising that someone said that was the "selling point" for this movie. It's akin to saying something is a "Christian values" movie. Sure, many movies are compatible with "Christian values" but actually labeling it as such or making a movie that's overtly that are going to put off many prospective viewers. And that doesn't mean those people are "evil" or against Christian values or any of that. Pushing something as "Feminist Sci-Fi" is going to have similar effects to telling people it has "Christian Values". it's the perception that you're about to get preached at.

However, TLJ had the whole PETA/animal rights thing - e.g. they let specially-bred racing animals loose - which would be highly irresponsible / criminal stuff to do in real life. And it had the whole "occupy wall street" sort of thing in the casino arc. So it's definitely not a given that Solo won't cram in a whole #MeToo related subplot or something else similarly jarring and topical.