Jump to content
THIS IS THE TEST SITE OF EUROBRICKS! ×
THIS IS THE TEST SITE OF EUROBRICKS!

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 3.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Posted (edited)

I don't know. I wouldn't mind seeing her as a live action Ashoka but in the past as Ashoka must remain dead. Death is already so rare in Star Wars that when it happens its important. To resurrect her as it were would be to diminish any of the impact of Rebels season 2 and for me feel like a cop out.  

 

Also whats up with the angry Yoda profile. It seems to be popping up quite a bit? :tongue:

Edited by Forresto
Posted (edited)

It looks like someone called out a celebrity with their wish list for a live action Asohka film, and the celebrity responded saying yes. Hardly an official announcement from Lucasfilm about anything. Just because a celebrity has interest in a role doesn't mean the role even exists, and if it did what would guarantee them to be casted? Just some hoopla to get some nerds interested in her Twitter page probably and increase her follower count. :tongue:

 

Edited by xboxtravis7992
Posted
14 minutes ago, xboxtravis7992 said:

It looks like someone called out a celebrity with their wish list for a live action Asohka film, and the celebrity responded saying yes. Hardly an official announcement from Lucasfilm about anything. Just because a celebrity has interest in a role doesn't mean the role even exists, and if it did what would guarantee them to be casted? Just some hoopla to get some nerds interested in her Twitter page probably and increase her follower count. :tongue:

 

Yeah, it's funny how some news sites make it sounds like Ahsoka's DEFINITELY appearing in a Star Wars movie now. Someone just asked her if she'd do it, and she was like "ya sure" :laugh:

Posted

I just learned something from an article that is mind blowing in an embarrassing way. Apparently it was to most of the ILM staff too when working on Rogue One.

I have long assumed that the original famous Star Wars trench run, the one we have all seen a million times, is in the equator trench that bisects the Death Star. You know the giant trench that you always see? well that is where the obvious problem lies.The equatorial trench is massive ehich we see can have many large hanger bays stacked on eachother and still have lots of space. The trench run on the other hand occurs in a space barely wide enough to fit two starfighters side by side.

That is when you realize A New Hope shows you the real location in Dodonna's briefing. The Trench run occurs above the superlaser dish in a trench going north to south. 

Posted
5 hours ago, Forresto said:

I just learned something from an article that is mind blowing in an embarrassing way. Apparently it was to most of the ILM staff too when working on Rogue One.

I have long assumed that the original famous Star Wars trench run, the one we have all seen a million times, is in the equator trench that bisects the Death Star. You know the giant trench that you always see? well that is where the obvious problem lies.The equatorial trench is massive ehich we see can have many large hanger bays stacked on eachother and still have lots of space. The trench run on the other hand occurs in a space barely wide enough to fit two starfighters side by side.

That is when you realize A New Hope shows you the real location in Dodonna's briefing. The Trench run occurs above the superlaser dish in a trench going north to south. 

:wall::wall::wall: I did not know that! I always assumed it was the equatorial line. Isn't that called the Death Star trench?

Also can you post a link to the article, I'd love to read/share it!

EDIT: It's not the central trench. It's near the North Pole of the Death Star. Wookieepedia says so.

Posted

I've always wondered why they couldn't just, once locating the exhaust port, fly straight in to deliver those torpedoes. Shooting straight forward instead of flying in the trench and having to get them 90 degrees down. Did the DS have shields that made the trench run the only possible way?

Posted
Just now, Error404 said:

I've always wondered why they couldn't just, once locating the exhaust port, fly straight in to deliver those torpedoes. Shooting straight forward instead of flying in the trench and having to get them 90 degrees down. Did the DS have shields that made the trench run the only possible way?

Maybe because if they flew straight in they wouldn't be able to turn in time (given how narrow it is they would crash) and would die?

Or perhaps Lucas just decided it would be more exciting to do a trench run ;)

Posted

Yeah, but that's why I'm thinking of flying straight in towards the port once they've located it and know where to aim. But I agree that the trench run makes it more exciting, and Lucas probably had his reasons to do it that way.

Posted (edited)

Because of the videogames, I always assumed that the Death Star surface was too cluttered with turrets to make a straight run for the exhaust port. In the Rogue Squadron games, for example, the turrets will shoot you down if you go over the trench. So the rebels enter the trench at a location that is relatively light on turrets and only have to deal with a handful of them during the trench run, which they can avoid more easily. If they were targeting the exhaust port from open space, without any cover, concentrating on getting an aim on such a small target would make them extremely easy targets for the turrets to pick one by one. Especially with such a tricky shot that they have to pull off, it would require the rebel pilots to go down directly on the port in a pretty straight line at a high velocity. The turrets will have an easy time to calculate your vector and shoot you down if you go too slow, and the high speed comes with the risk of crashing into the surface if you can't pull away in time.

Going through the trench, on the other hand, gives you cover from most of the shooting, and lets you get your vehicle in a good position to take aim and make your shot in a way more timely fashion. It really does make sense from a strategic point of view, even if the plan initally seems unnecassarily convoluted.

Edited by Cody Startale
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, cheerfortheking said:

Do you like the idea of a new director every movie? I wouldn't mind some consistency, not sure if it'll work having 3 different directors.

Isn't Rian Johnson directing the final two movies? WHAT? I just saw that Colin Trevorrow is...I don't know if i'm happy with that. Safety Not Guaranteed was great but Jurassic World was so tepid...I'm a huge Rian Johnson fan so to hear he's only doing one now is very disappointing. 

The Original Trilogy had three different directors so I don't see that as a big problem. 

Edited by Forresto
Posted
2 hours ago, Forresto said:

Isn't Rian Johnson directing the final two movies? WHAT? I just saw that Colin Trevorrow is...I don't know if i'm happy with that. Safety Not Guaranteed was great but Jurassic World was so tepid...I'm a huge Rian Johnson fan so to hear he's only doing one now is very disappointing. 

The Original Trilogy had three different directors so I don't see that as a big problem. 

Rian Johnson is still writing 9, so he's not leaving after TLJ. :classic:

Posted

I believe there was speculation or plans before the release of TFA, of JJ Abrams coming back to direct IX, but he/they decided against that due to schedules or whatever.

I don't mind a new director for each movie as long as everyone involved give it their best work to make the movies as good as possible.

Posted
7 hours ago, cheerfortheking said:

Do you like the idea of a new director every movie? I wouldn't mind some consistency, not sure if it'll work having 3 different directors.

I don't really like it. You could have two great directors that make the first to movies great, but then you could have a final director which drags the whole trilogy underwater.

Still, I'm hoping for the best, especially after how well Gareth Edwards handled Rogue One.

Posted
On 25/1/2017 at 3:23 PM, Error404 said:

I've been thinking about the title and come to the conclusion, personally, that The Last Jedi probably is singular. Right now, Luke is the last Jedi alive.

Rey might become a full Jedi at some point, but she needs time and training and we might not see that happen until IX. So at least until we get to watch the movie, I think The Last Jedi is singular, meaning Luke.

It's plural

The spanish version is "Los Ultimos Jedi", the portuguese title is "Os Últimos Jedi" and the german version is "Die letzten Jedi", which are all plural

That means, "The Last Jedi" is plural

Posted
14 hours ago, Robert8 said:

It's plural

The spanish version is "Los Ultimos Jedi", the portuguese title is "Os Últimos Jedi" and the german version is "Die letzten Jedi", which are all plural

That means, "The Last Jedi" is plural

Interesting that you placed an accent on the Portuguese title but not the Spanish one. :tongue:

Posted
1 hour ago, BrickHat said:

Interesting that you placed an accent on the Portuguese title but not the Spanish one. :tongue:

Ugh. Spanish is so tricky. I just don't get it :wacko::laugh:

 

  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

Announcements

  • THIS IS THE TEST SITE OF EUROBRICKS!

×
×
  • Create New...