Print

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

[Sirus]

Heh, while we're on the Star Wars topic for a while, I saw some "physics-based" critique of the Death Star's design on youtube which didn't make a single lick of sense. The main criticisms were these:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZ8mRS5zAro

This one claims it would take 830,000 years at current rates of steel production to make enough for a death star, then you'd have to blast it all into space on rockets, thus leaving the Earth's atmosphere uninhabitable. So, no Death Star. Uh, really, that's a terrible argument. Common sense would suggest that you'd use material in the asteroid belt to make it, and once you have space industry kickstarted, then you'd clearly expect capacity to grow exponentially. Assuming that steel production capacity never increases from right now is plainly idiotic. How could anyone think that such a line of "logical" argument made any sense at all?

also this one:

https://arstechnica.com/science/2018/09/the-math-of-why-its-so-hard-to-build-a-spherical-death-star-in-space/

a sphere is the maximally symmetric shape. But it's hell on the aerodynamics, since how much force an object experiences from air molecules as it travels through an atmosphere
...
As Grand Moff Tarkin points out, unlike the sensibly designed Star Destroyers, where air molecules mostly glance off the sides as the spacecraft travel through the atmosphere

What "air molecules"? It's in space, dickhead. For a physicist you're really good at the math calculations but obviously not so great at common sense.

That brings up another issue. The Death Star was constructed in space, a realm where massive things (moons, planets) tend to take on a spherical shape due to gravity. But when Orlin did the calculations, he found that the size at which objects take on the shape of a sphere is about 400 kilometers in diameter, which is significantly larger than the ~160km Death Star.

What sort of retarded point is this? Can you see the labored train of logic that lead to this brain-melting point. Massive things don't form into spheres due to gravity until 400km diameter. The Death Star is less than 400km diameter, therefore it cannot be a sphere. Checkmate, atheists.

It's as if a million nerds and physicists cried out in agony...I fear we have witnessed terrible idiocy.

[Dunamisdeos]

Hey now I am 100% for fictional universe minutiae.

[scriver]

If you look at the history of the universe, you can see that the steel production has increased significantly over time.

Therefore, one can conclude that "a long time ago", steel production wouldn't just be less than on earth in 2018, but perhaps even negative.

Chess tape, magnetits

No sir, I challenge your logic. What we can infer is that since the production of all metallic substances was obviously much higher a long long time ago, that steel production on a cosmic scale has in fact DECREASED at a worrying overall rate, and that by this logic within the next 100 years we may find that we can no longer produce it.

Time is the only thing that can melt steel beams.

Oh no

Time to buy steel I guess!

[Enemy post]

(Undignified squealing noise)

[Egan_BW]

Shiny. I like the warrior dudes in shiny armor.

[Reelya]

Dude? It's probably a girl Mandalorian. At this stage they're in balls-deep and if they introduce a white male main character that's not going to end well for them. The ideal choice would be a pacific islander / maori-looking person but realistically they'd probably pick between a black male or white female.

Too bad they completely wasted Gewndolyn Christie in the main series, or they could have used her in this.

[Kagus]

Dude? It's probably a girl Mandalorian. At this stage they're in balls-deep and if they introduce a white male main character that's not going to end well for them. The ideal choice would be a pacific islander / maori-looking person but realistically they'd probably pick between a black male or white female.

Then they remove the helmet and reveal: Nelson Mandela Mandala

[Reelya]

Thinking about gender in films made me think of this article, which is relevant to current direction in Star Wars:

You Don't Deserve A Female James Bond Or A Lady Indiana Jones

Which sounds harsh, but the article's point is that literally none of these people crying out for "lady Bond" or "lady Indiana Jones" got out to see the new Lara Croft Tomb Raider movie, female-led action spy thriller Atomic Blonde, or female-led action spy thriller Red Sparrow. All got enough decent reviews, but all bombed at the box office. Ladies wanna see more action ladies? Go support original ideas starring women and not just gender-flipped rehashes or old IP that's been dredged up. And one perspective on this gender-flipping is that it kind of sends the message that if women want to be taken seriously they have to play "dress-ups" as a previously male-identified character, rather than have a unique character built around a female identity from the ground up. Gender-flipping an entire existing character is almost like a reverse-drag cosplay rather than an actress making the character her own. Imagine a male Tomb Raider movie with "Larry Croft" doing an imitation of Lara's defining characteristics. It's not going to ring true.

If people want "lady bond" and "lady indiana jones" but they constantly turn their noses up at original adventure and spy movies featuring female lead characters, what exact message is this sending to Hollywood? It's not that audiences want more original works with women in, the actual message is then that you play it safe by having original works with male lead, exhaust the possibilities of that with a trilogy or two, then gender-flip it purely to get publicity and squeeze some life out of a dying franchise, and these gender-flip movies then acts as "proof" that the studio is committed to "diversity", thus absolving them of the onus to make more female-lead originals.

At this stage it's not just Star Wars, I'm at the point that I'm saying "you know what? I'm done with franchises and Hollywood".

[Urist McScoopbeard]

If people just accept that Hollywood is literally the scummiest place on Earth run expressly by business leaders lacking social consciousness or the desire to cultivate one, with no concern for form or content past the revenue it can generate, people will be a little less angry. Go support indie films instead, there are a lot of excellent ones!

[scriver]

I mean I don't want to draw too many conclusions from one singular photo but that photo looks perty good I must say.

Then again I often say that the best of the new Star Wars movies was the trailer for Force Awakens. That trailer was a fucking masterpiece. Had me so hyped.

[Dunamisdeos]

Dude? It's probably a girl Mandalorian. At this stage they're in balls-deep and if they introduce a white male main character that's not going to end well for them. The ideal choice would be a pacific islander / maori-looking person but realistically they'd probably pick between a black male or white female.

Then they remove the helmet and reveal: Nelson Mandela Mandala

Played by Will Smith

[Rolan7]

Thinking about gender in films made me think of this article, which is relevant to current direction in Star Wars:

You Don't Deserve A Female James Bond Or A Lady Indiana Jones

Which sounds harsh, but the article's point is that literally none of these people crying out for "lady Bond" or "lady Indiana Jones" got out to see the new Lara Croft Tomb Raider movie, female-led action spy thriller Atomic Blonde, or female-led action spy thriller Red Sparrow. All got enough decent reviews, but all bombed at the box office. Ladies wanna see more action ladies? Go support original ideas starring women and not just gender-flipped rehashes or old IP that's been dredged up. And one perspective on this gender-flipping is that it kind of sends the message that if women want to be taken seriously they have to play "dress-ups" as a previously male-identified character, rather than have a unique character built around a female identity from the ground up. Gender-flipping an entire existing character is almost like a reverse-drag cosplay rather than an actress making the character her own. Imagine a male Tomb Raider movie with "Larry Croft" doing an imitation of Lara's defining characteristics. It's not going to ring true.

If people want "lady bond" and "lady indiana jones" but they constantly turn their noses up at original adventure and spy movies featuring female lead characters, what exact message is this sending to Hollywood? It's not that audiences want more original works with women in, the actual message is then that you play it safe by having original works with male lead, exhaust the possibilities of that with a trilogy or two, then gender-flip it purely to get publicity and squeeze some life out of a dying franchise, and these gender-flip movies then acts as "proof" that the studio is committed to "diversity", thus absolving them of the onus to make more female-lead originals.

At this stage it's not just Star Wars, I'm at the point that I'm saying "you know what? I'm done with franchises and Hollywood".

Before I try to critique the film industry, I should say that I've long been at the point you reach at the end.  I am way out of touch with cinema, particularly recent stuff.  Case in point, I assumed that Tomb Raider was referring to the 2001 film, and hadn't heard of the new one.  I just don't pay attention.

...Like, holy crap, the Angelina Jolie movie was in 2001?  Wow, I was going to base my argument on it, but nevermind.

Anyway to say that we don't deserve female imitations (like the dozens of male imitations) of James Bond and Indiana Jones IS harsh.  They're making it sound like Lara Croft is a female Indiana Jones, and that we've already got what we asked for.  But that's ignoring that Lara Croft carries immense baggage, having been THE postergirl for videogame sexualization until, like, Bayonetta.

Bizarrely, both characters have *really strong* games and stories.  There's nothing at all wrong with liking the games.  It's just that to the general public, the characters are merely pinups for those weird video gamers.  Because that's how they were advertised, for years.

I think Tomb Raider 2013 (Named "Tomb Raider", because of course) may have shifted this perception in a strange way.  She's certainly less sexualized and more human.  But at the same time she went from badass to vulnerable...  rather infamously vulnerable.  The general public doesn't get that the final act has her smashing through an entire terra-cotta army, just that there are a dozen grisly scenes of her gasping to death on environmental hazards.  I'm pretty curious about the 2018 game.

I'm rambling.  I'd counter their argument with The Force Awakens and The Hunger Games, which did amazing with new characters who were treated with respect from the beginning.  Audiences did respond to strong female characters.  Lara Croft is not a good example, and certainly isn't Indiana Jones But Female.

[Dunamisdeos]

Not sure if I am in the majority here, but the vidja game reboot of Tomb Raider might be my favorite modern game/series now.

I got them on sale, and to me nothing else has ever done that whole... Indiana-Jones-esque thing where a hard-proof field scientist goes up against possibly supernatural forces thing quite as well. I'm bad at describing it, but it really, really nails that whole feel. The old Lucasarts adventure games had the same feel this does to me. I think she does Indiana Jones better than Indiana Jones.

She also starts out as a goddam archaeologist. Not like, ha ha I'm an archaeologist with a gun and a whip and 16 contacts in Mumbai, but like a "I've literally never fired a gun before" kind of person. Her transition from that to survivalist is rad as hell. At no point did I get a Mary Sue vibe from this game. Even at the end of the game I felt barely prepared to handle what was happening, but in a good way.

Also doggo is fukkin' terrifying. I admit there is a truly exorbitant number of environmental death scenes. Also, her bones must be made of adamantium with the amount of punishment she takes from various cutscenes/set pieces.

[scriver]

I feel like Reelya was using Lara Croft movies as an example of something that isn't a "female Indiana Jones" or a "female Bond" but her own IP.

[Rolan7]

So I see, but I was arguing more against the article:

You Don't Deserve A Female James Bond Or A Lady Indiana Jones

Also I also enjoyed Tomb Raider (2013) (the game), I think it got a lot of undeserved criticism as "violence porn" and such.  Like I pointed out, she does become a legendary badass by the end.  However, I also understand people being leery of the series.  "She's not just big boobs like we've always advertised her as - now she's a mousy survivor who gets stabbed a lot!  Like, in amazing detail, also we're really proud of her ponytail physics!"

Unfortunate optics for an actually laudable attempt to bring the series into Current Year...