In Defense of Death Star II — Page 3

xhonzi said:

(*whew*  Almost had to type this a third time!  Apparently I wasn't logged in, so it made me log in and reset the reply form.  Good thing I could 'back' my way up to it.  Or else the third version would have basically said "Screw it, I give up!")

I love this blog. :p

Magritte!

[quote=xhonzi]

But one thing is clear:  It's either a typo, or someone decided that DSII was RIDICULOUSLY bigger than DSI. (if you believe the "official" numbers, that is)

It isn't a typo.  The original numbers were canon once (120 and 160), but then somebody with too much time on thier hands started calculating the sizes of the stations in relation to the ships as they enter hangar bays, the Executor crashing, the size in relation to Endor, etc.  Thereafter the sizes were inflated with DSII being ridiculously large at 900 km, with DSI a mere 160 km.

skyjedi2005 said:

In the new Zahn book choices of one we find out death star II was being built 8 months after the first one was destroyed, even before the events of empire strikes back, even before the rebels were on hoth.

I know that is EU and not G-Canon but it would not be any less ridiculous if it was.

 Well, according to G-canon as well, the DSI had labor strikes and that sort of thing holding it up for years, while everything was perfected by the time DSII was on the way.  Of course this still doesn't make much sense, and the way I figure, the DSII must have actually already been under construction by the time DSI was completed.

Hmmm...just noticed that for some reason you're ignoring me, so I guess you'll never read my reply.  I guess that's what I get for sparring with 2/4, or for being silly about the spelling thing in the first place...or maybe that cloned thread problem.  Who knows?  All else may bask in my wisdom.

I would not waste time worrying about why skyjedi is ignoring you if I were you.

I wear it like a badge of honor ;-)

I just rediscovered this thread and wanted to give it a holler.  I like the DSII and don't see it as a rehash.  It's a similar station with the same name and similar, though more advanced design.  But as far as plot devices go, it's a very different beast.

Saying the Death Star sucked by virtue of being a repeat is like saying the third Bourne movie sucked because Jason had to fight more black ops agents who see him as a threat to the US gov't...and they all used guns!  Yes, it's a rehash.  But it's also done differently, and therefore keeps our (at least my) interest.

Building more Death Stars makes sense.

If the Soviets had destroyed the fourth Nuke the US would have built three more and probably have used them too.

Two Death Stars would have been better but a whole cluster of the buggers would have been better still.

It would be like the Emperor saying, "Well done little Alliance, you blew up the first of my Battlestations, now try blowing all these up!"

Even if the Rebels had failed at blowing the first one up I'd imagine the Empire would have built more.

Cinematically though it looks a bit dull just to have another one that isn't even finished.

That's why I suggested that the Emperor feed the Rebels the location of an unfinished one when he already has a finished one, but both are fully functional.

Other designs would have been interesting too.

Another obvious possibility for the Sequel trilogy is what does the New Republic do with this technology.

Do they make their own for defense knowing that someone else will eventually make another one?

The EU in the early days was full of superweapons and that became boring very fast.

Bingowings said:

Building more Death Stars makes sense.

If the Soviets had destroyed the fourth Nuke the US would have built three more and probably have used them too.

Two Death Stars would have been better but a whole cluster of the buggers would have been better still.

It would be like the Emperor saying, "Well done little Alliance, you blew up the first of my Battlestations, now try blowing all these up!"

Even if the Rebels had failed at blowing the first one up I'd imagine the Empire would have built more.

Realistically, yes

Cinematically though it looks a bit dull just to have another one that isn't even finished.

I personally disagree, though I respect your opinion.  There's something I like about the two different designs (as they do look significantly different).  My personal wish is that we only were able to see different faces of the DSII instead of always the same side.

That's why I suggested that the Emperor feed the Rebels the location of an unfinished one when he already has a finished one, but both are fully functional.

I too like this idea.

Other designs would have been interesting too.

Another obvious possibility for the Sequel trilogy is what does the New Republic do with this technology.

Do they make their own for defense knowing that someone else will eventually make another one?

An interesting moral dilemma for a less black and white trilogy :)

The EU in the early days was full of superweapons and that became boring very fast.

I will agree with you completely and then some.

It's too ridiculous and removes any sense of grounding. Sort of like lightsaber battles in PT.

I don't mind them eventually attempting to build another one, but having only a single movie without 'stars is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyy too soon.

Multiple death stars is out of the question. One is ridiculous enough.

Can you believe that Picard and his crew had to face more than one Borg cube!?  It's ridiculous and removes any sense of grounding.  No.  No, wait.  No it doesn't.  They're still different stories and they are defeated in different ways.

Borg cubes were never implied to have been built over the course of a few months. They also are not the size of small moons nor do they have to generate enough power to obliterate a planet.

Not even comparable.

Double toast.

I agree completely that the DSII shouldn't have been built so fast. I personally hold that the Empire was actually building it shortly after the construction on the DSI had begun. But other than that, I do think they're comparable. I mean no disrespect (in spite of my snotty previous comment--sorry), but the Borg cubes were just as frightening as the Death Star to me. A single cube was sent to assimilate earth. Of course it failed. So what did the Borg do? They sent another single cube to assimilate earth! Yet I love The Best of Both Worlds and I love First Contact. The reason being that the stories are well told in spite of repeated elements.

Building a second station is logical in many ways. Look what the US is doing. We're nearly done constructing new World Trade Centers, i.e. new prominent terrorist targets.

The DSII wasn't the most original idea for ROTJ. But in my opinion, it wasn't really that bad. The stakes did need to be raised, and I personally have yet to really enjoy any of the other superweapons existing in the Star Wars universe, except perhaps Centerpoint Station which was large and required massive amounts of power, was still vulnerable (e.g. no stupid Sun Crusher armor), was stationary, and destroyed its targets in a different method. Every other superweapon idea throughout the EU was honestly just plain stupid.

BmB said:

Not even comparable.

There seems to be an outbreak of twooffour-in-mouth disease here lately.

Sorry.

"That's not an ant, sir...."

Eh, I still don't like it. It smacks of outright unoriginality. A better idea would have been to have gone with a souped-up Star Destroyer or something along those lines.