logo Sign In

In Defense of Death Star II

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I've seen quite a few people ragging recently on the ol' Death Star II.  I wanted to share my thoughts on it, and then let you all rip me to shreds.

Sound like fun?  Here we go!

1. Within the scope of the original movie, the Death Star really is the most significant advancement in War technology ever invented.  The rebels are concerned that if it is allowed to exist for more than a week, it will bring the rebellion to a swift end and will enslave the galaxy to the evil empire forever more.

    1.a. We never get a good look at how interstellar War exists in the Star Wars galaxy prior to the introduction of the Death Star... *cough*what the prequels could have done...*cough* But I think the original movie tells us that this is a mega game changer.  The ability to destroy a planet is the ability to not have wars- just to wipe your enemy out in time for tea.

2. Not building a second Death Star would be like never buying a second car.  Yes, the Rebels found a flaw and exploited it to destroy the Death Star.  Yes, it must have cost trillions of space bucks, and the loss of life must have been a tremendous set back...  But seriously... if the idea was this good in the first place, a little thing like having it destroyed on it's maiden voyage would not convince you the whole idea was flawed to begin with.

3. In fact, if the Empire were still around to do it, I'd expect them to build a Death Star 3 and 4 and maybe even some Mini Death Stars.  As long as they had the technology, they would make them. 

4. Unless that even accounting for all of the shortcomings of each one, that they determined its size to make it too big of a centralized target and not one worth the effort.  But I think it would take a government several attempts before they would arrive at that conclusion and give up on the idea.

5. So: Death Star II represents consistency within the universe.  If it was worth building once, it was worth building twice.  Or, to quote Carl Sagan paraphrasing gov't spending: Why build one when you can build two at twice the price?

Screw in-universe consistency!  It was boring to redo the Death Star, we had already been there- done that.  Bring on something new! 

1. Fair enough.  But how much does Death Star II really re-enact Death Star I?  If you look at the structure of the movies (and I really hope you do...) The first movie is all about the Death Star.  The threat of it, and how the Rebellion is going to overcome it.  The movie is over once the DS is destroyed.  It takes all of the Rebels, but only our heroes can steal the plans, hide the plans, accidentally buy a droid containing the plans, rescue the princess that knows where to take the plans, deliver the plans, and shoot the magic missile so that the plans can be executed.  Or flank the enemy so that said magic missile can be delivered.

   1.a. Look at DSII.  Nameless, faceless Bothan's died to get the plans.  Luke doesn't really give a flip about DSII.  Han and Leia are involved with taking it out, but they have a different battle on their immediate hands.  Who takes out DSII?  Well, it's the 2nd stringers.  Wedge, Lando, Nien Nunb (AKA wrinkle cheeks).  Is the movie over once DSII is destroyed?  No.  Is there a twist involving DSII?  Yes.  The Rebels go to the DSII, instead of it coming to them.  And the Emperor's deliberately set a trap with it, to play off of the Rebels' confidence.  Is the tunnel run too similar to the trench run?  Perhaps.  Is it different enough?  Perhaps.  Is it exactly the same?  No.

2. Depending on what version of Lucas's explanation you buy, the "original" ending to the "third part of the trilogy" involved blowing up a Death Star.  This ending was compressed into the ending of the first part, so he should have come up with a different ending for the third part.  Maybe he should have.  Afterall, it worked in Superman/Superman II.  Just have the Emperor use a Dark Side kiss to make... Vader... forget that he's... Clark Kent. 

  2.a. Okay, I'm sure that zombie is going to debunk the above paragraph, so maybe we'll just go onto the next one.

3. Related to #1 here, the DSII is not the focus of RotJ, certainly not the same way that DSI was the focus of ANH.  So whatever it could have been- DSII, Hurt Ball VI, Kill Sphere MCXXVIII, Space Dock X... it wouldn't have been the focus of the plot.  Which requires least set-up and least distraction from what the true focus is?  I present- Death Star II.

Okay, I think I've run on long enough here.

And then the DSIII blows up.

THE /END.

IT'S MY TRILOGY, AND I WANT IT NOW!

"[George Lucas] rebooted the franchise in 1997 without telling anyone." -skyjedi2005

"Yeah, well, George says a lot of things..." a young 1997 xhonzi on RASSM

"They're my movies." -George Lucas. 19 people won oscars for their work on Star Wars (1977) and George Lucas wasn't one of them.

Rewrite the Prequels!

 

Author
Time

xhonzi said:

And then the DSIII blows up.

THE /END.

I literally actually scrolled past all the text to see if you included this.

:-)

Author
Time

xhonzi said:

2. Not building a second Death Star would be like never buying a second car.  Yes, the Rebels found a flaw and exploited it to destroy the Death Star.  Yes, it must have cost trillions of space bucks, and the loss of life must have been a tremendous set back...  But seriously... if the idea was this good in the first place, a little thing like having it destroyed on it's maiden voyage would not convince you the whole idea was flawed to begin with.

The Titanic would like a word with you.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

TV's Frink said:

xhonzi said:

2. Not building a second Death Star would be like never buying a second car.  Yes, the Rebels found a flaw and exploited it to destroy the Death Star.  Yes, it must have cost trillions of space bucks, and the loss of life must have been a tremendous set back...  But seriously... if the idea was this good in the first place, a little thing like having it destroyed on it's maiden voyage would not convince you the whole idea was flawed to begin with.

The Titanic would like a word with you.

Was the Titantic the last steamship ever built?  Or just the last one with a flaw in the "don't sink" mechanisms that turned out to be a bad idea?

Have they ceased Royal Cruise lines since 1912?

Did no one ever sail from Liverpool to New York again?

I think you proved my point.

IT'S MY TRILOGY, AND I WANT IT NOW!

"[George Lucas] rebooted the franchise in 1997 without telling anyone." -skyjedi2005

"Yeah, well, George says a lot of things..." a young 1997 xhonzi on RASSM

"They're my movies." -George Lucas. 19 people won oscars for their work on Star Wars (1977) and George Lucas wasn't one of them.

Rewrite the Prequels!

 

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Well, if you are saying they would have built the DS smaller so it could survive a run-in with a spaceberg, then I concede the point.

Author
Time

TV's Frink said:

 spaceberg,

Actual LOL

;-)

Forum Moderator
Author
Time

TV's Frink said:

Well, if you are saying they would have built the DS smaller so it could survive a run-in with a spaceberg, then I concede the point.

Q: What's a spaceberg?

A: Like an iceberg, but IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN SSSSSSSSSSSSPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

The Queen Anne is hardly smaller than the Titanic.

IT'S MY TRILOGY, AND I WANT IT NOW!

"[George Lucas] rebooted the franchise in 1997 without telling anyone." -skyjedi2005

"Yeah, well, George says a lot of things..." a young 1997 xhonzi on RASSM

"They're my movies." -George Lucas. 19 people won oscars for their work on Star Wars (1977) and George Lucas wasn't one of them.

Rewrite the Prequels!

 

Author
Time

Sorry, all I know about Titanic I learned from Leo and Kate.

Author
Time

It was worth it just for the sequence of the alliance fighters and the Falcon flying into the superstructure. Awesome.

I think I'll watch ROTJ when I get home.

 

“It is only through interaction, through decision and choice, through confrontation, physical or mental, that the Force can grow within you.”
-Kreia, Jedi Master and Sith Lord

Author
Time

I would have felt gypped if they didn't attack something. And the difference between calling it a death star or a control ship/ imperial base/facility/bomb factory/headquarters/ dam/bridge/Arby's/secret lab is too cosmetic for me to care.

Author
Time

That's why I liked the hubris of the original treatment.

Not only does the Empire plan to undo the Rebellion's one big moment but they want to double the threat by building two of the suckers and use them in a trap to wipe the whole Rebel fleet out like shooting unarmed ducks in a barrel with nukes.

Author
Time

This is never said, but one could infer that the Rebellion would de-centralize once the threat of the Death Star is apparent.  (It's just like when you realize your Terran opponent in Star Craft has nukes so you don't want all of your expensive units too close together anymore).  And that the Empire would draw them out of "hiding" by setting the TRAP with the DSII.

IT'S MY TRILOGY, AND I WANT IT NOW!

"[George Lucas] rebooted the franchise in 1997 without telling anyone." -skyjedi2005

"Yeah, well, George says a lot of things..." a young 1997 xhonzi on RASSM

"They're my movies." -George Lucas. 19 people won oscars for their work on Star Wars (1977) and George Lucas wasn't one of them.

Rewrite the Prequels!

 

Author
Time

xhonzi said:

1. Within the scope of the original movie, the Death Star really is the most significant advancement in War technology ever invented.  

...

5. So: Death Star II represents consistency within the universe.  If it was worth building once, it was worth building twice. 

Screw in-universe consistency!  It was boring to redo the Death Star, we had already been there- done that. 

1. Fair enough.  But how much does Death Star II really re-enact Death Star I?  ... ...

   1.a. ...  Is it different enough?  Perhaps.  Is it exactly the same?  No.

THE /END.

Well put.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

In ANH the Death Star is a one of a kind a single dragon that needed to be slain.

Having two in ROTJ would make the situation more dire because it would imply that the Empire if not stopped there and then would roll these things out all over the place like the heads of the Hydra.

No matter how many people could be convinced to join the Rebellion they wouldn't stand a chance.

Author
Time

That's an actual idea that would give both tension and weight to the story. That isn't allowed in ROTJ.

I guess it could be argued as part of Palpatine's ego that he would have to build another DS in order to repair his standing in people's eyes because the first one had been destroyed. Or maybe it was all a MacGuffin to get the Rebels all in one spot to get them completely wiped out and that is the reason why it is "tied" to the planet Endor.

But I don't think so. The destruction sequence does look great-but when Wedge and Lando get to the reactor it's just in a big empty chamber and sounds like a broken plate of glass when destroyed??

VADER!? WHERE THE HELL IS MY MOCHA LATTE? -Palpy on a very bad day.
“George didn’t think there was any future in dead Han toys.”-Harrison Ford
YT channel:
https://www.youtube.com/c/DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader

Author
Time

theprequelsrule said:

It was worth it just for the sequence of the alliance fighters and the Falcon flying into the superstructure. Awesome.

I think I'll watch ROTJ when I get home.

 

Funny thing is, one of the Japanese SW clones literally has the same sequence of events and was made almost five years earlier! The only difference is it's an entire planet that has been made into a roving Death Star clone.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOSmIJCHqcQ

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

xhonzi said:


In fact, if the Empire were still around to do it, I'd expect them to build a Death Star 3 and 4 and maybe even some Mini Death Stars.  As long as they had the technology, they would make them.


I must now provide Wookieepedia links ... purely for the lulz, of course.

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Battlemoon

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Darksaber

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Death_Star_III

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Death_Star_prototype

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Nocturn%C3%B4

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Tarkin_(superweapon)

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Habitation_sphere

Author
Time

I still maintain the Star Tours Death Star was merely a training ground for New Republic fighter pilots. Maybe someday I'll finally convince one of the EU writers of this and get the matter settled. =P

Forum Moderator
Author
Time

I have to agree with all the points, I never had a problem with it. Only from a storytelling point of view, it is kinda lazy. But it really would be stupid from the Empire to not even try building another one.

And in the time of greatest despair, there shall come a savior, and he shall be known as the Son of the Suns.

Author
Time

TV's Frink said:

xhonzi said:

2. Not building a second Death Star would be like never buying a second car.  Yes, the Rebels found a flaw and exploited it to destroy the Death Star.  Yes, it must have cost trillions of space bucks, and the loss of life must have been a tremendous set back...  But seriously... if the idea was this good in the first place, a little thing like having it destroyed on it's maiden voyage would not convince you the whole idea was flawed to begin with.

The Titanic would like a word with you.

The Britannic would like a word with you. Oh wait - that sank too...

Guidelines for post content and general behaviour: read announcement here

Max. allowable image sizes in signatures: reminder here

Author
Time
 (Edited)

The Olympic wasn't it went on to serve in WWI.

In fact with mutiny, the collisions, the war service etc it would make for a much more interesting Shipbiopic than The Titanic has ever been.

Author
Time

Wait. Star Tours is canonical?! Whaaaaaaat!!??

“It is only through interaction, through decision and choice, through confrontation, physical or mental, that the Force can grow within you.”
-Kreia, Jedi Master and Sith Lord

Author
Time

Wookieepedia said:

The canonicity of the events depicted in the original Star Tours experience has been disputed for many reasons, the most obvious being the inclusion of the Death Star. Since R2-D2's presence onboard the Starspeeder 3000 precludes the events taking place during the Battle of Yavin or the Battle of Endor, the Death Star seen in the ride video has been considered by some to be the Death Star prototype, as seen in Jedi Search and Champions of the Force and its destruction to be a depiction of the prototype's destruction at The Maw. However, it does not match that prototype's skeletal construction and R2-D2 is accounted for during that event, as well. Also, the Star Tours Death Star is very close to Endor, far from the Maw's location. This may indicate it is a so far unrevealed Death Star, or that the ride's events are simply not canonical. Others have suggested that the Death Star is one of the modified habitation spheres seen under construction over Coruscant. Leland Chee has tentatively named it the Death Star III.

ROTJ Storyboard Reconstruction Project