Star Wars: The Last Jedi (2)

[slikkerias]

I know ... Flogging a dead horse but it still just seems super impractical, bombs casually drifting down towards intended target based off of falling trajectory obtained from being deployed within ship and "falling" downwards due to ships faux gravity. Leaves a lot to chance, is slow, dangerous to own craft and seems wildly inaccurate. In WW2 it was the best they had given their current technology and those bombs didn't have to fall through space, now we use self propelled missles with on board targeting computers. In the OT they already had a better alternative with the Y-Wing bombers ... I just can't .... Rrrraaaaaaagh nerd rage brain implodes look what you did Rian Johnson you made me think

You are just getting too old and skeptical for SW. sorry! But that’s what it is. This stuff has been a part of the universe forever and if it annoys you that much now - EVEN when you have a totally plausible explanation for it - then you should just leave it alone! This is my nerd rage! [emoji6]

 

[Asta]

The Visual Dictionary explained that the bombs were drawn magnetically to the target's hull.

 

[Bravomite]

Hahaha you guys are both right. I saw Empire as a kid and definitely accepted it then, maybe because the bombs appeared to flash blue and I assumed therefore that they were some space tech, gave them a pass didn't think about it but probably because my physics wasn't so good and Empire was freaking awesome. In TLJ it was so in your face, they appeared to have no glowing blue space techyness about them and it seemed to happen in slow mo so my thoughts lingered on it .., plus as you said older me with better grasp of physics and less likely to be wowed and awed was watching. For whatever reason it seemed to stick out and made me less immersed in the movie.

 

[slikkerias]

The Visual Dictionary explained that the bombs were drawn magnetically to the target's hull.

Yes they had to explain it that way because you have to dumb it down. There was no need to make them magnetic. But yes, they are magnetic, but doesn’t mean they wouldn’t “fall” the same way if they weren’t.

GL and his people have made it clear since the beginning that SW is not sci fi, it’s space fantasy, meaning that the laws of physics don’t really matter that much. But still, in this case it actually makes perfect sense if you accept artificial gravity in ships.

 

[Khev]

Magnetic bombs are dumber than ones that simply get pulled by artificial gravity anyway IMO. Because if they're magnetized, what's to stop them from just fastening themselves to the bomber itself (oops) or if you say that the magnets only activate after artificial gravity has pulled them out into space then why overcomplicate them. Just say that the same artificial gravity that pulled them into space in the first place provides inertia for continuous movement along the same trajectory (which it would.) The end.

Stupid visual "guides."

 

[rushmore223]

Yes, objects in motion in space, will continue to move at the same rate of speed in a straight line until there is either an opposing force to slow it down or some force to speed it up. No need for magnets or propulsion. A strong gravitational force (like a planet) would eventually affect its trajectory, but that's not really applicable in this situation.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

 

[slikkerias]

Magnetic bombs are dumber than ones that simply get pulled by artificial gravity anyway IMO. Because if they're magnetized, what's to stop them from just fastening themselves to the bomber itself (oops) or if you say that the magnets only activate after artificial gravity has pulled them out into space then why overcomplicate them. Just say that the same artificial gravity that pulled them into space in the first place provides inertia for continuous movement along the same trajectory (which it would.) The end.

Stupid visual "guides."

Yep!! Also magnetism doesn’t work like this - for long distances and, as you said, they would probably be more attracted to the bomber than the target. So way to shoot them selves in the foot.
I thought the bomber scene was awesome by the way. The slowness of the bomber was a way to remind us of B-52s doing the Vietnam war - just like so many other things in SW were inspired by that war.

 

[Asta]

Magnetic bombs are dumber than ones that simply get pulled by artificial gravity anyway IMO. Because if they're magnetized, what's to stop them from just fastening themselves to the bomber itself (oops) or if you say that the magnets only activate after artificial gravity has pulled them out into space then why overcomplicate them. Just say that the same artificial gravity that pulled them into space in the first place provides inertia for continuous movement along the same trajectory (which it would.) The end.

Stupid visual "guides."

As science fiction the films have been dumb since 1977. Starfighters roaring noisily through the vacuum of space, with plucky yet suicidal rebel pilots not even wearing spacesuits or full-face helmets. It made about as much sense as Buster Crabbe's Flash Gordon serials.

It works on a base level, of visuals and escapism. Essentially pretty mindless, yet strangely compelling and enduring. Until we (or a visual guide) inevitably start to overthink it, and try to rationalise everything.

In Star Trek they usually try to explain everything scientifically, by inventing new scientific discoveries. Making magic part of the natural universe. I think Lucas was just more interested in the magic.

Spoiler

Lucas' downfall came when he introduced Midi-chlorians. He started to ditch the magic, at the same time as getting bogged down with political machinations and the casus belli that would ultimately lead to the Star Wars.

 

[slikkerias]

As science fiction the films have been dumb since 1977. Starfighters roaring noisily through the vacuum of space, with plucky yet suicidal rebel pilots not even wearing spacesuits or full-face helmets. It made about as much sense as Buster Crabbe's Flash Gordon serials.

It works on a base level, of visuals and escapism. Essentially pretty mindless, yet strangely compelling and enduring. Until we (or a visual guide) inevitably start to overthink it, and try to rationalise everything.

In Star Trek they usually try to explain everything scientifically, by inventing new scientific discoveries. Making magic part of the natural universe. I think Lucas was just more interested in the magic.

Spoiler

Lucas' downfall came when he introduced Midi-chlorians. He started to ditch the magic, at the same time as getting bogged down with political machinations and the casus belli that would ultimately lead to the Star Wars.

He/they always said that SW is not Science fiction. For that exact reason.

 

[Asta]

He/they always said that SW is not Science fiction. For that exact reason.

While physics operate in an atypical way in that universe, the story itself is also fantasy. You could even reduce it to the level of a fairy tale as the original trilogy played out: a farm boy who's never been further than his local town is suddenly whisked into space to unknowingly rescue his sister from their father.

The story is wholly contrived and full of fantastic coincidence. But it worked, in the same way the melodrama of a super hero comic book can work. It plays with simple emotions. At its heart is the spirit of adventure, and the exploration of a strange yet familiar universe.

 

[abake]

Interesting point about the bombing run on the asteroids, however, it was established that the asteroids (the larger ones) had their own gravity, so it's not as strange that the bombs "fall". Besides, they don't just "fall" ponderously towards the asteroid, they are clearly ejected at speed, very different from the WWII bombing raid look of TLJ (another proof that RJ and his team didn't understand how SW works, they probably just thought "hey Lucas was inspired by WWII fighters, let's do a WWII bombing run!" high fives, loud cheering ensues).
As for the artificial gravity idea, I've been thinking about it... If the larger ships have an artificial gravity -including the bombers in this case, as demonstrated by the all the stuff falling inside the bomber- shouldn't the gravitational pull end at the lower part of the hull? In that case, shouldn't the bombs just fall as far as that gravitational boundary? Or are the gravitational forces bound to the metal frame of the flooring/bay doors of the ships? In cases like this, when a movie makes you "think" about what you just saw, it's because it didn't really work. IMHO.

 

[e30ernest]

Interesting point about the bombing run on the asteroids, however, it was established that the asteroids (the larger ones) had their own gravity, so it's not as strange that the bombs "fall". Besides, they don't just "fall" ponderously towards the asteroid, they are clearly ejected at speed, very different from the WWII bombing raid look of TLJ (another proof that RJ and his team didn't understand how SW works, they probably just thought "hey Lucas was inspired by WWII fighters, let's do a WWII bombing run!" high fives, loud cheering ensues).
As for the artificial gravity idea, I've been thinking about it... If the larger ships have an artificial gravity -including the bombers in this case, as demonstrated by the all the stuff falling inside the bomber- shouldn't the gravitational pull end at the lower part of the hull? In that case, shouldn't the bombs just fall as far as that gravitational boundary? Or are the gravitational forces bound to the metal frame of the flooring/bay doors of the ships? In cases like this, when a movie makes you "think" about what you just saw, it's because it didn't really work. IMHO.

This is space. When an object gets accelerated by a force (in this case artificial gravity), there is nothing stopping that object from continuing with its trajectory.

Also noteworthy, the bombers dive toward the target when they get blown-up, which makes me guess the target was also massive enough to exert its own gravitational force towards the bombs and bombers.

But this is moot, since this is Star Wars.

 

[slikkerias]

Yes, the bombs would not stop at the bottom of the ship unless there’s a force pushing the other way to stop them. The bombs would “drop” as we see them do. Also, the bombs hang in lines in the ship pushing each other down creating momentum.
And therefor what we see on screen is pretty much how it would go if the bombs were ejected by the artificial gravity of the ship.
The asteroids in ESB having their own gravity strong enough to pull the bombs is a much “dumber” and less plausible possibility - but then again, it’s Star Wars. And asteroids and ships have gravity - so who cares!?

 

[Prime Clone]

Been thinking lately, RJ has been unfairly blamed for his portrayal of Luke when it was Kasdan and Abrams who put him in exile and said he "just walked away". If anything RJ redeemed him by having him open up to The Force again at the end.

Writing Luke… the first thing I had to figure out is, ‘Why is he on that island?’ That’s the first thing I had to crack. He’s taken himself out of the fight, his friends are fighting and dying the good fight, and he’s sitting on an island, hiding. So I had to come up with a reason he was there that was 1) active and 2) positive and 3) something that I could genuinely believe, I could think if I were in Luke’s shoes.

 

[slikkerias]

Been thinking lately, RJ has been unfairly blamed for his portrayal of Luke when it was Kasdan and Abrams who put him in exile and said he "just walked away". If anything RJ redeemed him by having him open up to The Force again at the end.

Writing Luke… the first thing I had to figure out is, ‘Why is he on that island?’ That’s the first thing I had to crack. He’s taken himself out of the fight, his friends are fighting and dying the good fight, and he’s sitting on an island, hiding. So I had to come up with a reason he was there that was 1) active and 2) positive and 3) something that I could genuinely believe, I could think if I were in Luke’s shoes.

Totally agree. And actually cutting him off from the force makes his story more likely and emphatic than Yodas and Kenobis. They still had connection to the force and still just hid from the Empire. At least Luke didn’t feel when Han was in danger and killed - as he would have since he did in ESB. RJ did the only thing he could with Luke.

 

[xipotec]

The "bombs" dropped by the TIE Bombers in ESB did the same thing. They "fell" in a straight line perpendicular to the ships dropping them just like real world bombs so I don't see the issue.

Said this so many times already.....theres a ton of stuff in TLJ thats dont in OT people pick on.

I mean hate he story, characters and plot.....but most of the powers and ship stuff we have seen before and it comes off as pretty desperate tactic from some folks to rationalize why everyone should think its a bad film.


Sent from the inside of a giant slug in outer space.....

 

[a-dev]

Been thinking lately, RJ has been unfairly blamed for his portrayal of Luke when it was Kasdan and Abrams who put him in exile and said he "just walked away". If anything RJ redeemed him by having him open up to The Force again at the end.

Writing Luke… the first thing I had to figure out is, ‘Why is he on that island?’ That’s the first thing I had to crack. He’s taken himself out of the fight, his friends are fighting and dying the good fight, and he’s sitting on an island, hiding. So I had to come up with a reason he was there that was 1) active and 2) positive and 3) something that I could genuinely believe, I could think if I were in Luke’s shoes.

I've made this point a number of times and I'm a ST 'hater'. It all goes back to TFA. I don't know why anyone likes that film but hates TLJ.

 

[Khev]

Yep, it will forever be Abrams who screwed the pooch on getting the Big Three back together. Okay fine Ford wanted Han to die. For the love of God write a story that has him sharing the screen with Luke *and* Leia first. They can't blame any of this on Carrie's untimely death. The failure was Abrams and Kennedy alone. She should have known better too.

 

[a-dev]

Yep, it will forever be Abrams who screwed the pooch on getting the Big Three back together. Okay fine Ford wanted Han to die. For the love of God write a story that has him sharing the screen with Luke *and* Leia first. They can't blame any of this on Carrie's untimely death. The failure was Abrams and Kennedy alone. She should have known better too.

Talk about the mother of all blown opportunities. We waited 32 years for that. See? JJ was ''subverting'' expectations before Rian Johnson merely took up the mantle.

 

[abake]

This is space. When an object gets accelerated by a force (in this case artificial gravity), there is nothing stopping that object from continuing with its trajectory.

Also noteworthy, the bombers dive toward the target when they get blown-up, which makes me guess the target was also massive enough to exert its own gravitational force towards the bombs and bombers.

But this is moot, since this is Star Wars.

Yes yes, that is clear. My point was -and this is pure nerdthink- if the ships have artificial gravity, then there has to be a boundary to this gravitational force. So the boundary must stop at the edge of the ship, ergo, shouldn't the bombs "dropped" in TLJ (as opposed to ejected, as it looks like in ESB) stop at that boundary? It's just silly nerdthink, nothing terribly serious.

Yes, the bombs would not stop at the bottom of the ship unless there’s a force pushing the other way to stop them. The bombs would “drop” as we see them do. Also, the bombs hang in lines in the ship pushing each other down creating momentum.
And therefor what we see on screen is pretty much how it would go if the bombs were ejected by the artificial gravity of the ship.
The asteroids in ESB having their own gravity strong enough to pull the bombs is a much “dumber” and less plausible possibility - but then again, it’s Star Wars. And asteroids and ships have gravity - so who cares!?

Agreed, that could probably generate enough momentum to break the boundary.
As for the second thought, disagree. Whether we like it or not, there's gravity on the big asteroid, so in the "logic" of the film, the asteroid has enough gravitational pull to make bombs fall. But that's just part of it, because, as I pointed out, it's quite clear the bombs are ejected at speed during the asteroid bombing run, they don't just "drop".

Again, it's the little details that make what you're seeing onscreen make sense within the logic of the movie. Something that doesn't happen in this particular instance that we're discussing.