View Active Topics          Latest 100 Topics          View Your Posts          Switch to Mobile

Return of the Jedi - Blunders and Insults to Intelligence

Discuss Other Topics not related to the Paranormal or Conspiracies (within reason of course).

Return of the Jedi - Blunders and Insults to Intelligence

Postby Scepcop » 07 Dec 2009, 23:33

Return of the Jedi - Blunders and Insults to Intelligence

Many Star Wars fans feel that the third film in the original trilogy, Return of the Jedi, ruined the Star Wars saga. I feel the same and find it a total disgrace and disappointment, for many reasons which I will outline below.

The film contains so many blunders and attempts to dumb you down, that the intelligent viewer feels like his intelligence is being insulted by the film. What were they thinking when they made it? Or rather, what was Lucas thinking? I can't ever fathom why some consider it their favorite Star Wars film.

Upon casually watching it again recently, I noticed many obvious blunders that do not make the slightest sense. Examples:

- Lucas doesn't know the difference between sand and ice, and apparently thinks we don't either. When Boba Fett fell near the monster pit at the beginning of the film, after being knocked over by a blind Han Solo by accident, he hit a sandy slope and then rolled uncontrollably into the monster pit, as though he were sliding on ice.

I wish I could take Lucas to the Colorado Sand Dunes and show him that sand is a very different surface than ice. When you hit a sand slope, you do not roll down, but immediately stop. In order to continue rolling, you have to make a deliberate effort to roll down it. Anyone who plays on sand dunes knows that. But Lucas assumes we are as dumb as he is.

- Apparently, Lucas thinks it's funny to kill off a highly skilled and efficient bounty hunter like Boba Fett by a silly accident, such as a blind Han Solo knocking his jet pack by accident during a silly cliched battle. Now that might be funny for a Road Runner cartoon, but for Star Wars? I think it'd be far more funny to have a Stormtrooper polishing his blaster with wax and then accidentally setting it off and killing Solo. Or better yet, have it accidentally go off and kill Lucas. Now that would be something the audience would find funny.

- And what was it with that scene where Princess Leia choked Jabba the Hutt to death with a chain? That villain was HUGE! Choking him to death with his own chain would be like trying to drag a truck or tractor with a rope. Are we to believe that Princess Leia was that strong? How dumb do you think we are George Lucas? A kitten playing with a ball of yarn has as much of a chance of choking YOU to death with the yarn, Lucas! If it were that easy to kill Jabba, someone would have done it years ago, before the Prequels even.

- Lucas obviously knows nothing about wars or military history. In Return of the Jedi, the Rebel Alliance did absolutely NOTHING special at all to win the war. In fact, technically they didn't win the war. It just looked like they did cause Lucas' script said so. In the climactic battle scene, the Rebel fleet was clearly outgunned, outnumbered, and outpositioned. They did NOTHING to overturn that. NOTHING at all! Think about it. Just cause they meet some furry creatures on Endor with sticks and stones does not in the slightest way change the outcome of the situation. Maybe in Lucas' imagination it does, but not by any basic logic.

In a battle, when one side has superior firepower and numbers, they can win in a head on battle without any special strategy. But if one is outgunned, outnumbered and outpositioned, like the Rebels were, they have to do something special and extraordinary to win. That's what Alexander the Great and Napoleon did repeatedly. When they were outnumbered and outpositioned, they found a way to win, through brilliant strategies and a well trained army that they inspired confidence into. That's how Alexander the Great beat armies of ten thousand with his own army of two thousand.

But the Rebel Alliance did none of that. They had no extraordinary strategies or charismatic inspiring leaders. Instead, they had funny leaders like Admiral Ackbar, and Luke, Han and Leia, who in this film couldn't even act. None of these characters were capable of pulling off any brilliant strategies or decisive victories. They were just dumb and lucky, like the Road Runner was. Not impressive at all.

- After the Death Star was destroyed again, there was still a whole Imperial fleet that could have easily finished off the rest of the Rebel fleet. So either way, the Rebels lost. The Empire technically and logically won that final battle, and Lucas gives no explanation to the contrary.

But no! Lucas wrote that they just ran away! He would have us believe that the Imperial fleet just ran off, which is a cheap cliche. It's one of those overused sci fi plots where an unstoppable army is simply turned off, deactivated or freed simply by killing the central bad guy or destroying the central computer. That's not how wars are won, that's how cheap cartoons are made.

In real wars, killing off an emperor or dictator may cause an Empire to slowly deteriorate, if its foundation is unsteady, as was in the case of Alexander the Great's Empire. But it doesn't cause an Empire to simply cease and the other side to automatically win. An Empire will usually move to quickly replace its dead leader. Also consider the fact that after Genghis Khan's death, his empire continued for hundreds of years more.

If we are to believe Lucas' version of events, then we should also believe that after the Japanese fleet bombed Pearl Harbor and destroyed most of the US fleet, that the remaining US carriers ran away and vanished forever, and that the US war industry never rebuilt their fleet, and the war ended with the Japanese jumping up and down like the Ewoks did, and that the US never retaliated for Pearl Harbor. Yeah right.

If we are to believe Lucas' version of events, we should also believe that when President Roosevelt passed away before the Japanese surrendered, that suddenly all US naval campaigns in the Pacific Fleet ceased and vanished, and the Japanese jumped up and down in victory as the Ewoks did on Endor. Yeah right.

Why didn't Lucas study basic events of WWII first?

Furthermore, why didn't the Empire disappear forever after the destruction of the first Death Star in the first Star Wars movie? Just cause the Emperor was killed? What a cheap shot. Technically the Empire should return for vengeance, so the war should not be over yet.

In any case, technically the Imperial Galactic Fleet is still there. Lucas never solved that problem. There is no logical or valid reason for the Imperial fleet to suddenly run off or disappear. There is also no reason to believe that the Rebels won that final battle. No evidence is given for it.

Now I have no problem with the Rebel Alliance winning, since they are the "good guys" but why not have them win in a more plausible, brilliant and impressive manner, rather than a dumbed down way that makes no sense?

Have them find a way for instance, to divide the Empire against itself and destroy it from within through corruption. Or slowly destroy its resources. Or gather up the largest army in the galaxy from an alliance of many planets and mount a D-Day like invasion.

Lucas may be a talented artist, but he's obviously horrible at strategy and logic, and I would bet that he couldn't even beat the computer a Chess on level one.

- Also, there was no way Solo and his team could have gotten into the Shield Generator control room like that. When Han tricked Imperial squads inside the Shield Generator to come out, and then surrounded them with Ewoks, that was a total suicide mission. In that position, the Imperial squads had laser guns vs. the Ewoks' sticks and stones, so technically, they could have just gunned them all down right there, including Solo. There's no reason that Solo was able to capture the Shield Generator.

Plus, it would have been more sensible for the Imperial troops to stay and guard the Shield Generator during the crucial and decisive space battle above, rather than going way out into the forest pursuing some Ewoks. No commander would have ordered that, for there is nothing to gain by chasing fleeing enemies when everything hangs on protecting the generator.

- Speaking of the Shield Generator, they are usually inside the ship, not projected from some planet. There is no logical reason to have an external one, which would pose as a weakness that the other side can easily exploit. So it should have been inside the Death Star.

Also, there is no reason why the Rebel fleet couldn't have just launched missiles to destroy the Shield Generator on Endor, rather than sending in a risky low probability ground force strike against it without even a plausible strategy.

Furthermore, there is no logical or strategic reason for Vader or the Emperor to willingly let the Rebel team land on Endor, just cause they assumed that their legion of troops were impenetrable. That is the kind of strategy used by James Bond villians and cartoons, not serious strategists.

- Why would the Emperor build a bottomless pit in the throne room of his Death Star, so that he could be thrown into it? Did Julius Caesar or Napoleon build a bottomless pit in their throne rooms, so that they could be thrown into it by their enemies for dramatic movie effect? So dumb and senseless, like Lucas. Doesn't Lucas realize that not everyone is as dumb as he is?

- After Luke defeated Vader, he faced the Emperor and threw away his light saber, for dramatic effect. But a sensible person would have kept it, just in case the Emperor decided to attack him. As shown in the Prequels, light sabers can be used to deflect the Emperor's lightning bolts. The wise Luke made himself vulnerable for no logical reason, other than for his father to watch him get electrocuted and change his conscience so he could throw the Emperor into the bottomless pit.

In summary, the film was a big disappointment, let down and total disgrace to the Star Wars saga. It leaves you hanging and wondering WTF? I wish Lucas or someone brighter would just remake it with a more sensible plot, outcome and way to end the Empire's reign.

Have them find a way for instance, to divide the Empire against itself and destroy it from within through corruption. Or slowly destroy its resources. Or gather up the largest army in the galaxy from an alliance of many planets and mount a D-Day like invasion.
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29






Re: Return of the Jedi - Blunders and Insults to Intelligence

Postby Nostradamus » 08 Dec 2009, 03:56

And here I thought it was that people hated Ewoks.

Some good points there. Some idea though:

1. The material in the sand pit had a very high angle of repose making it possible it was not sand.
2. Could the alien anatomy of Hutts make them prone to strangulation?
3. The goal of the battle was to do in the death star, not destroy the other fleet.
4. The entire story had to be concluded in under 2 hours.
5. The reason for an external field generator was given in the movie.

Calling someone names is not so pretty. You might consider not stating an amazingly wealthy person that he is dumb. He had you watch the movie and agonize over it.

At the end you state:
In summary, the film was a big disappointment, let down and total disgrace to the Star Wars saga. It leaves you hanging and wondering WTF? I wish Lucas or someone brighter would just remake it with a more sensible plot, outcome and way to end the Empire's reign. Maybe like a WWII D-Day scenario or something?


If you think you could do better then go ahead and write a script. It could be worth tens of millions.
Scimitars were not available - beware January 19, 2038 is upon us.
User avatar
Nostradamus
 
Posts: 1761
Joined: 08 Aug 2009, 14:08

Re: Return of the Jedi - Blunders and Insults to Intelligence

Postby ProfWag » 08 Dec 2009, 04:30

Well, I certainly applaud your enthusiasm. Curious though--Jedi came out like 25 years ago, why the critique now?
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3845
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Return of the Jedi - Blunders and Insults to Intelligence

Postby ciscop » 08 Dec 2009, 05:19

hahahaha
i find it hilarious that YOU call George Lucas Dumb
hahhahaha
For every person who reads this valuable book there are hundreds of naïve souls who would prefer to have their spines tingled by a sensational but worthless potboiler by some hack journalist of the paranormal. You who now read these sentences join a small but wiser minority. Martin Gaardner (Psychology of the Psychic)
User avatar
ciscop
 
Posts: 1423
Joined: 22 Jul 2009, 12:04

Re: Return of the Jedi - Blunders and Insults to Intelligence

Postby Eteponge » 08 Dec 2009, 07:51

I thought it was the prequels that most Star Wars fans didn't like, not the third move, most seem to hold the original trilogy as flawless.
"I think Eteponge's Blog is a pretty cool guy. eh debates Skeptics and doesnt afraid of anything."
User avatar
Eteponge
 
Posts: 300
Joined: 06 Jun 2009, 13:26

Re: Return of the Jedi - Blunders and Insults to Intelligence

Postby Scepcop » 08 Dec 2009, 08:45

ProfWag wrote:Well, I certainly applaud your enthusiasm. Curious though--Jedi came out like 25 years ago, why the critique now?


Cause I watched it again recently. I played it to try to amuse my two year old baby. I wasn't looking to critique it. It's numerous blunders just came out at me and were too glaring not to notice. I'm sure if you guys watched it again you'd notice the same things.

Yeah Lucas is successful at producing films and is rich and is a talented artist, but history shows that when he has too much control over his films, they tend to suck and have lower ratings. He is dumb in some areas. I'd love to see him try to explain away all those obvious blunders above.
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Return of the Jedi - Blunders and Insults to Intelligence

Postby Scepcop » 08 Dec 2009, 08:51

Nostradamus wrote:And here I thought it was that people hated Ewoks.

Some good points there. Some idea though:

1. The material in the sand pit had a very high angle of repose making it possible it was not sand.
2. Could the alien anatomy of Hutts make them prone to strangulation?
3. The goal of the battle was to do in the death star, not destroy the other fleet.
4. The entire story had to be concluded in under 2 hours.
5. The reason for an external field generator was given in the movie.

Calling someone names is not so pretty. You might consider not stating an amazingly wealthy person that he is dumb. He had you watch the movie and agonize over it.

At the end you state:
In summary, the film was a big disappointment, let down and total disgrace to the Star Wars saga. It leaves you hanging and wondering WTF? I wish Lucas or someone brighter would just remake it with a more sensible plot, outcome and way to end the Empire's reign. Maybe like a WWII D-Day scenario or something?


If you think you could do better then go ahead and write a script. It could be worth tens of millions.


Even if there was a high angle, it is still easy to stop a roll in sand. I played at the Colorado Sand Dunes all day once, so I know. If you watch the film though, you will notice that it was sand cause as Fett was rolling, you could see the sand kick up. It was a sand planet for God sake.

I know what the reasons were, they just weren't plausible. Jabba's anatomy was that of a huge beast. His neck was not thin at all. He was a blob. How could he be strangled so easily? No plausible explanation was given.

Yeah the Death Star was destroyed, but Lucas gives you the impression that the whole war is over and the Rebels have won. That's the impression you're left with and that's the impression that Star Wars fans have. No logical reason to believe the war ended though.

It's the cliched cheap overused plot where an entire unstoppable army or force suddenly vanished by killing its leader or blowing out one central computer. Very typical.

Wealthy people are not always smart. Dan Quayle wasn't smart. Neither was George Bush. Neither is Britney Spears.
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Return of the Jedi - Blunders and Insults to Intelligence

Postby Scepcop » 08 Dec 2009, 08:53

Any of you ever notice in those original Star Trek episodes where you can find similar blunders? For example, in the episode "The Enemy Within", they can't beam up the landing party, who is freezing to death on the planet, cause of a transporter malfunction. So they fess over it during the whole episode. But never once did they realize that they could just use the shuttle craft to pick them up.

Blunders like that are common.

And villains usually take unnecessary risks so they can be thwarted, with no logical reason for the risk.
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: Return of the Jedi - Blunders and Insults to Intelligence

Postby Nostradamus » 08 Dec 2009, 10:19

The scientific blunders in these shows are staggering as well.

1. Non-Newtonian movements of people in hand to hand fights
2. Small kickback on hand guns
3. Exploding car wrecks
4. Bullets ignited gas tanks when shot
5. marginal injuries from being thrown through windows
6. lack of shrapnel from outer space explosion
7. visible laser beams
8. silent bullets (silencers do not make the flight of the bullet silent)
Scimitars were not available - beware January 19, 2038 is upon us.
User avatar
Nostradamus
 
Posts: 1761
Joined: 08 Aug 2009, 14:08

Re: Return of the Jedi - Blunders and Insults to Intelligence

Postby ciscop » 08 Dec 2009, 13:26

the more i read about it
the more it seems like one of those discussions nerd virgins have while role playing dungeons and dragons

fact 1. star wars is an awesome trilogy (the 1st one)
fact 2. george lucas is smarter than you
For every person who reads this valuable book there are hundreds of naïve souls who would prefer to have their spines tingled by a sensational but worthless potboiler by some hack journalist of the paranormal. You who now read these sentences join a small but wiser minority. Martin Gaardner (Psychology of the Psychic)
User avatar
ciscop
 
Posts: 1423
Joined: 22 Jul 2009, 12:04

Re: Return of the Jedi - Blunders and Insults to Intelligence

Postby ProfWag » 08 Dec 2009, 20:10

Scepcop wrote: I'm sure if you guys watched it again you'd notice the same things.

Actually, I've never seen it. I saw the original Star Wars and realized it wasn't my cup of tea, so I never wanted to watch another one.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3845
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Return of the Jedi - Blunders and Insults to Intelligence

Postby NinjaPuppy » 08 Dec 2009, 22:02

Scepcop wrote:And villains usually take unnecessary risks so they can be thwarted, with no logical reason for the risk.

That is a Hollywood standard. Since the silent movie times, villians have been tying up the maidens to train tracks rather than more conventional killing techniques. You can't get 2.5 hours of entertainment out of something if you shoot the hero in the head in the opening scene.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44

Re: Return of the Jedi - Blunders and Insults to Intelligence

Postby Nostradamus » 08 Dec 2009, 22:08

What about the slow moving light shot from the guns in the films? They move slower than bullets. In the Revolutionary War cannons could send a bouncing charge through troops. Back then you could see the approaching ball, i.e. the 'bullet' that kills you. In Star Wars you could see the light coming at you before you get hit.

Don't forget the wildly swaying rocks in the asteroid fields. That action would have damped down long ago.
Scimitars were not available - beware January 19, 2038 is upon us.
User avatar
Nostradamus
 
Posts: 1761
Joined: 08 Aug 2009, 14:08

Re: Return of the Jedi - Blunders and Insults to Intelligence

Postby NinjaPuppy » 08 Dec 2009, 22:17

Nostradamus wrote:What about the slow moving light shot from the guns in the films? They move slower than bullets. In the Revolutionary War cannons could send a bouncing charge through troops. Back then you could see the approaching ball, i.e. the 'bullet' that kills you. In Star Wars you could see the light coming at you before you get hit.

Don't forget the wildly swaying rocks in the asteroid fields. That action would have damped down long ago.

I know nothing of asteroid fields but I know of cannons and early guns. Neither were all that accurate or effective. Another Hollywood misnomer.
User avatar
NinjaPuppy
 
Posts: 4002
Joined: 28 Jul 2009, 20:44


Return to Off-Topic Board

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron