I was just looking for screenshots in breakdowns for this trailer, and in the two links I looked at, both of them questioned the same section of the trailer, but got it wrong.
The first one had a screenshot of the space tentacles, questioning how a creature can survive in the "vacuum" of space, and then brushed it off as just being Star Wars.
The second link has this exact quote: "If anything, a Star Destroyer coming out of space-fog just looks cool, even if it’s scientifically nonsense."
Scientifically nonsense! Have these people never heard of a NEBULA? Have they never heard of stellar gas clouds?
Nothing impressive here. Gas clouds in space are pretty common knowledge, as far as I'm concerned. The best-looking, and most well-known images from the Hubble are shots of a nebula or gas cloud of one form or another.
You'd think before tossing out nitpicking, someone might at least bring up Google and type "are there clouds in space."
Exactly -- And that's what makes it doubly amusing. Nitpicking something that doesn't matter (from a teaser, no less), but then simultaneously being incorrect with the nitpicking. Then of course I was amused that it was the same nitpicking on the only two sites I looked at, a perfect 2 for 2 score.
It was the second one that really tickled me, though, going so far as to literally say "scientifically nonsense."
I am a big fan of irony, that's the heart of the matter here.
Just because it's you Froggy and because I love to pick nits; nebula only look cloudy when seen from very far away and only then because they're so very fucking big. They are for the most part comprised of absolutely nothing (much like your posts - just kidding!). Up close they'd be invisible.
You're such an idiot, Harry. Your weak little posts like this just prove it time and time again. This "gravity works" post here is literally meaningless, and it just shows how immature you are, you little butthurt baby.
Hell, this part: "Or each other..." -- That doesn't even make sense. The gas is gravitationally bound to "each other"??? Do you know how English works??? Are you perhaps referring to the individual molecules for some reason? Or were you just drunk AGAIN?
Anyway, to further show you how stupid you are, in this topic I have been describing the Maw area which makes up the "Kessel Run," I just hadn't linked to a description of it.
Then last night I randomly noticed an actual "map" of the run based on descriptions from the books (or perhaps it was in one of the books), which was handy. I didn't even think to find a visualization: https://www.wired.com/images_blogs/underwire/2013/02/kessle_map.jpg
The Maw cluster is approximately three orbiting black holes that are sucking in the Maw nebula around them. The area is very turbulent and the gases get dense, more like what you'd find in a stellar gas cloud before a star is born.
From what it looks like, the movie is probably sticking pretty close with this established lore, but we don't know for sure yet.
Do you EVER know what YOU are talking about, Harry? EVER?
Secondly, gotta chuckle at Reality following me around with his butthurt peanut gallery commentary after I ripped him up yesterday. After 5 years of his obsession, he has become quite an amusing little stalker.
I had already known the Maw cluster (where the Kessel Run runs through) was a nebula-like area made dense by some black holes, and it looked like they were going for that in the movie instead of tossing out previously established lore.
Of course, the dense and turbulent gases become more like the kind of stuff you'd really see happening before the birth of a star, aka a stellar gas cloud (I also like those things).
But we also know that sci-fi regions are often made much more interesting than pure reality would allow. The asteroid field in Empire Strikes Back is much more dense than a real asteroid field, plus they wouldn't be flying in random directions. Star Trek ships always meet "top up," and get AWFULLY close so they can fit into the frame.
The second one, the quote, came from The Verge, which is more movie-centric. I think the first one was from Entertainment Weekly's website, but I'm not sure.
Each genre has its rules. In Space Opera you usually have spaceships behaving in space as they were airplanes... which is complete fantasy but it's accepted (inside the genre, don't do the same in 2001 Space Odissey). But there's limits: if you suddenly place a D&D dragon flying in the middle of the space, that breaks the immersion. Universes, included fantasy and scifi ones, must have some consistency.
The shot with the giant tentacles in the middle of the space fits more Lovecraftian horror than Star Wars. It seems that they jumped the shark.
And this was a "almost jumped the shark" moment in the original trilogy. I remember playing star wars rpg with friends, back in the day, and talking about that scene. And the general consensus was "this is like, well... too much".
But the difference, from the public perspective, between "almost jumped the shark" and "definitely jumped the shark" is huge. You can see it in the Indiana Jones franchise, that, as good pulp, walks constantly on the edge... until it went full ET (Indiana Jones 4 ending) and definitely jumped the shark.
Speaking of which, don't forget that Indiana Jones has its own "jump the shark," way earlier than the ET ending... "Nuke the fridge"!
I'm getting the feeling again... That movie was like a bad dream. But the motorcycle stuff in the beginning was awesome.
I know I'm really diverting onto Crystal Skulls here, but it's in my head now. One of the moments that made me the SADDEST in that movie was this part near the end, they slide down into the temple thingy or whatever, and there's that room with the "final door" that needs to be opened before they get to the skull lair where the ending goes down.
That room with the final door... It looked so sad, and so fake. Indiana goes up to the door and messes with the latch or something, I forget, but it was all so obviously styrofoam, and it was so big that the people looked like kids playing make believe. "Solving" the door was also ridiculously simplistic. It's like everyone just stopped trying to make the movie at that point.
ANYWAY... I think we'll have to just agree to disagree on the space slug, because I personally LOVE the concept of mega life forms that can live in space, or at least live in gas clouds. I also like superstructures, so Star Wars is right up my alley (and there is some in Star Trek too, like that station/city early in Star Trek Beyond).
>> That movie was like a bad dream. But the motorcycle stuff in the beginning was awesome.
The first 30-60 minutes are just awesome, as good as the original ones. Then it goes full retard. In defense of Spielberg, he didn't agree with the script, but he did it for the sake of friendship with Lucas.
>> "Solving" the door was also ridiculously simplistic. It's like everyone just stopped trying to make the movie at that point.
I honestly think it's Lucas the one to blame at that point. In my (subjective) opinion, the guy is like a brilliant source of ideas... that needs around people who know when to say "no". Spielberg didn't dare to say "no" because he was his friend. And the lesson that he probably learned is that friendship sometimes is saying "no".
>> I think we'll have to just agree to disagree on the space slug, because I personally LOVE the concept of mega life forms that can live in space
For me it's a risky concept. It can work as long as they are pacific entities that do near to nothing. But it's risky because it can go towards giant monsters mode (like kaiju in space), or towards Lovecraft horror (primordials) mode, none of them work well in non-horror space opera scifi.
But anyway, disagreeing is the best part of forums ^_^
By the way, I was not stating that breaking the rules of the genre and introducing external elements is a bad thing. For example, Guillermo del Toro has created an amazing universe introducing Lovecraft elements into traditional fantasy. But he has a very clear idea of what he wants to do.
When it's about: "Ok, let's take the Asteroid scene from Empire Strikes Back, but let's make it more spectacular! let's make the monster bigger! much bigger! and with lots of tentacles!"... that doesn't end well.
Nope they are canon. There are this kind of creatures in Star Wars lore. Look for the "Purrgil" in Star Wars Rebels, which you liked or not is canon.
I am not saying the monsters in the Solo trailers are Purrgil (though they can be), but that, in the canon, creatures living in deep space and with tentacles actually exist.
But those are more like giant pacific space whales (you had an episode of Dr.Who with a very similar creature). This is not the same as the Lovecraft primordial horrors fully tentacled, which is closer to what the trailer shows.
Don't I know it! I would never expect scientific accuracy in Star Wars, and I don't know why these people were even commenting on it.
But, it's even worse for them to nitpick and then incorrectly assume that gases and clouds couldn't be found in space.
Hell, the edge of our atmosphere is technically gases found in space... And as I alluded further up in the topic, these people don't even know what the scenes are showing. The ships could be near a mass like a forming star, or flying through gases orbiting a black hole (which are found in the Kessel Run), who knows.
If it wasn't for that hilarious "scientifically nonsense" blurb, I would have just moved on, but I found it too cute and had to share it.