HigHurtenflurst said:
When the Death Star fires at the MonCalamari ship, it always bothered me that the beam didn't just punch right through like it was made of paper and keep going. It can destroy a whole planet, so a ship shouldn't have stopped it... Maybe it could even take out another ship(s) in the background.
This is a good one. I've always thought the same, myself.
When Boba Fett pulls his gun on Boushh the shot has been flipped. I guess this was because of the 180 rule in editing or something. Stupid really.
The repeat shots of the Death Star gunners from 1977 may not be an error as such but it was noticeable even in 1983.
DuracellEnergizer said:
HigHurtenflurst said:
When the Death Star fires at the MonCalamari ship, it always bothered me that the beam didn't just punch right through like it was made of paper and keep going. It can destroy a whole planet, so a ship shouldn't have stopped it... Maybe it could even take out another ship(s) in the background.
This is a good one. I've always thought the same, myself.
I believe the official explanation is that the second Death Star had a variable energy output so they could dial it down to destroy a ship, or dial it up to destroy a planet.
Keep Circulating the Tapes.
END OF LINE
(It hasn’t happened yet)
"We are not going to attack"
The way that line is delivered makes me cringe.
John Williams score to Return of the Jedi Remastered/Remixed:
http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/JOHN-WILLIAMS-Star-Wars-Episode-VI-Return-of-the-Jedi-Remastered-Edition/topic/14606/page/1/
Tyrphanax said:
DuracellEnergizer said:
HigHurtenflurst said:
When the Death Star fires at the MonCalamari ship, it always bothered me that the beam didn't just punch right through like it was made of paper and keep going. It can destroy a whole planet, so a ship shouldn't have stopped it... Maybe it could even take out another ship(s) in the background.
This is a good one. I've always thought the same, myself.
I believe the official explanation is that the second Death Star had a variable energy output so they could dial it down to destroy a ship, or dial it up to destroy a planet.
Something about that explanation just never sat right with me.
fishmanlee said:
"We are not going to attack"
The way that line is delivered makes me cringe.
"Stay on topic". That's not an error.
VIZ TOP TIPS! - PARENTS. Impress your children by showing them a floppy disk and telling them it’s a 3D model of a save icon.
DuracellEnergizer said:
Tyrphanax said:
DuracellEnergizer said:
HigHurtenflurst said:
When the Death Star fires at the MonCalamari ship, it always bothered me that the beam didn't just punch right through like it was made of paper and keep going. It can destroy a whole planet, so a ship shouldn't have stopped it... Maybe it could even take out another ship(s) in the background.
This is a good one. I've always thought the same, myself.
I believe the official explanation is that the second Death Star had a variable energy output so they could dial it down to destroy a ship, or dial it up to destroy a planet.
Something about that explanation just never sat right with me.
why? because it makes sense?
Ryan McAvoy said:
fishmanlee said:
"We are not going to attack"
The way that line is delivered makes me cringe."Stay on topic". That's not an error.
Why did you say "Stay on topic" with quotes around it? Just curious lol
DuracellEnergizer said:
Tyrphanax said:
DuracellEnergizer said:
HigHurtenflurst said:
When the Death Star fires at the MonCalamari ship, it always bothered me that the beam didn't just punch right through like it was made of paper and keep going. It can destroy a whole planet, so a ship shouldn't have stopped it... Maybe it could even take out another ship(s) in the background.
This is a good one. I've always thought the same, myself.
I believe the official explanation is that the second Death Star had a variable energy output so they could dial it down to destroy a ship, or dial it up to destroy a planet.
Something about that explanation just never sat right with me.
Why not? It doesn't make sense to use the full power of the superlaser just to blow up something as tiny as a capital ship. Reducing the power level in exchange for a faster rate of fire not only makes sense, but would also help explain why the Death Star in Star Wars spent 30 minutes traveling around Yavin to to get in range of the Rebel base instead of blowing up Yavin and then blowing up the Rebel base two minutes later.
Klasodeth said:
DuracellEnergizer said:
Tyrphanax said:
DuracellEnergizer said:
HigHurtenflurst said:
When the Death Star fires at the MonCalamari ship, it always bothered me that the beam didn't just punch right through like it was made of paper and keep going. It can destroy a whole planet, so a ship shouldn't have stopped it... Maybe it could even take out another ship(s) in the background.
This is a good one. I've always thought the same, myself.
I believe the official explanation is that the second Death Star had a variable energy output so they could dial it down to destroy a ship, or dial it up to destroy a planet.
Something about that explanation just never sat right with me.
Why not?
If I knew why, I'd be able to say why. Perhaps I just find the idea of the Death Star using its main laser to destroy tiny little ships silly in the first place, so essentially making it a giant phaser only adds to the silliness.
Lord Haseo said:
Ryan McAvoy said:"Stay on topic"
Why did you say "Stay on topic" with quotes around it? Just curious lol
It's this SW meme...
VIZ TOP TIPS! - PARENTS. Impress your children by showing them a floppy disk and telling them it’s a 3D model of a save icon.
Klasodeth said:
DuracellEnergizer said:
Tyrphanax said:
DuracellEnergizer said:
HigHurtenflurst said:
When the Death Star fires at the MonCalamari ship, it always bothered me that the beam didn't just punch right through like it was made of paper and keep going. It can destroy a whole planet, so a ship shouldn't have stopped it... Maybe it could even take out another ship(s) in the background.
This is a good one. I've always thought the same, myself.
I believe the official explanation is that the second Death Star had a variable energy output so they could dial it down to destroy a ship, or dial it up to destroy a planet.
Something about that explanation just never sat right with me.
Why not? It doesn't make sense to use the full power of the superlaser just to blow up something as tiny as a capital ship. Reducing the power level in exchange for a faster rate of fire not only makes sense, but would also help explain why the Death Star in Star Wars spent 30 minutes traveling around Yavin to to get in range of the Rebel base instead of blowing up Yavin and then blowing up the Rebel base two minutes later.
Why not? Well because the only "official" explanation would be whatever is in the movie in the first place and not some fan-boy EU crap. The emperor says it's "fully armed and operational," and nobody says anything different. What you say makes 100% sense, but once the ship explodes the beam would have gone through. Visually it would be a much more dramatic demonstration of the beam's supposed power.
That matte painting behind Han and Lando with the falcon is maybe the worst effect in the OT. It's not an error per se but a real error in judgement!
ratpack1961 said:
That matte painting behind Han and Lando with the falcon is maybe the worst effect in the OT. It's not an error per se but a real error in judgement!
It is mostly the colours on the SE DVDs/BluRays that are off. The background does not have a blue tint all over it in the original version.
When Lando turns around and moves towards the Falcon, he steps out of the light on the greenscreen set turning him into a black silhouette. Also, it is clear that the other people in that shot have been composited in, because a couple of them would have collided with ghost-Lando ...
HigHurtenflurst said:
Klasodeth said:
DuracellEnergizer said:
Tyrphanax said:
DuracellEnergizer said:
HigHurtenflurst said:
When the Death Star fires at the MonCalamari ship, it always bothered me that the beam didn't just punch right through like it was made of paper and keep going. It can destroy a whole planet, so a ship shouldn't have stopped it... Maybe it could even take out another ship(s) in the background.
This is a good one. I've always thought the same, myself.
I believe the official explanation is that the second Death Star had a variable energy output so they could dial it down to destroy a ship, or dial it up to destroy a planet.
Something about that explanation just never sat right with me.
Why not? It doesn't make sense to use the full power of the superlaser just to blow up something as tiny as a capital ship. Reducing the power level in exchange for a faster rate of fire not only makes sense, but would also help explain why the Death Star in Star Wars spent 30 minutes traveling around Yavin to to get in range of the Rebel base instead of blowing up Yavin and then blowing up the Rebel base two minutes later.
Why not? Well because the only "official" explanation would be whatever is in the movie in the first place and not some fan-boy EU crap. The emperor says it's "fully armed and operational," and nobody says anything different. What you say makes 100% sense, but once the ship explodes the beam would have gone through. Visually it would be a much more dramatic demonstration of the beam's supposed power.
The official explanation IS the movie.
The Death Star can blow up a planet. It can also blow up a ship. This is totally clear in the film. It requires no further exposition in the film, nor any outside discussion.
YOU made up a rule "once the ship explodes the beam would have gone through" that doesn't fit with what's in the film. The film is not in error.
TheBoost said:
HigHurtenflurst said:
Klasodeth said:
DuracellEnergizer said:
Tyrphanax said:
DuracellEnergizer said:
HigHurtenflurst said:
When the Death Star fires at the MonCalamari ship, it always bothered me that the beam didn't just punch right through like it was made of paper and keep going. It can destroy a whole planet, so a ship shouldn't have stopped it... Maybe it could even take out another ship(s) in the background.
This is a good one. I've always thought the same, myself.
I believe the official explanation is that the second Death Star had a variable energy output so they could dial it down to destroy a ship, or dial it up to destroy a planet.
Something about that explanation just never sat right with me.
Why not? It doesn't make sense to use the full power of the superlaser just to blow up something as tiny as a capital ship. Reducing the power level in exchange for a faster rate of fire not only makes sense, but would also help explain why the Death Star in Star Wars spent 30 minutes traveling around Yavin to to get in range of the Rebel base instead of blowing up Yavin and then blowing up the Rebel base two minutes later.
Why not? Well because the only "official" explanation would be whatever is in the movie in the first place and not some fan-boy EU crap. The emperor says it's "fully armed and operational," and nobody says anything different. What you say makes 100% sense, but once the ship explodes the beam would have gone through. Visually it would be a much more dramatic demonstration of the beam's supposed power.
The official explanation IS the movie.
The Death Star can blow up a planet. It can also blow up a ship. This is totally clear in the film. It requires no further exposition in the film, nor any outside discussion.
YOU made up a rule "once the ship explodes the beam would have gone through" that doesn't fit with what's in the film. The film is not in error.
This is the correct answer. The DSII is depicted as having variable-strength firepower. That's not a crazy concept.
Ryan McAvoy said:
Lord Haseo said:
Ryan McAvoy said:"Stay on topic"
Why did you say "Stay on topic" with quotes around it? Just curious lol
It's this SW meme...
^WRONG PHOTO!
DominicCobb said:
Here's a pretty handy list: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086190/trivia?tab=gf&ref_=tt_trv_gf
and there are more:
timdiggerm said:
TheBoost said:
HigHurtenflurst said:
Klasodeth said:
DuracellEnergizer said:
Tyrphanax said:
DuracellEnergizer said:
HigHurtenflurst said:
When the Death Star fires at the MonCalamari ship, it always bothered me that the beam didn't just punch right through like it was made of paper and keep going. It can destroy a whole planet, so a ship shouldn't have stopped it... Maybe it could even take out another ship(s) in the background.
This is a good one. I've always thought the same, myself.
I believe the official explanation is that the second Death Star had a variable energy output so they could dial it down to destroy a ship, or dial it up to destroy a planet.
Something about that explanation just never sat right with me.
Why not? It doesn't make sense to use the full power of the superlaser just to blow up something as tiny as a capital ship. Reducing the power level in exchange for a faster rate of fire not only makes sense, but would also help explain why the Death Star in Star Wars spent 30 minutes traveling around Yavin to to get in range of the Rebel base instead of blowing up Yavin and then blowing up the Rebel base two minutes later.
Why not? Well because the only "official" explanation would be whatever is in the movie in the first place and not some fan-boy EU crap. The emperor says it's "fully armed and operational," and nobody says anything different. What you say makes 100% sense, but once the ship explodes the beam would have gone through. Visually it would be a much more dramatic demonstration of the beam's supposed power.
The official explanation IS the movie.
The Death Star can blow up a planet. It can also blow up a ship. This is totally clear in the film. It requires no further exposition in the film, nor any outside discussion.
YOU made up a rule "once the ship explodes the beam would have gone through" that doesn't fit with what's in the film. The film is not in error.
This is the correct answer. The DSII is depicted as having variable-strength firepower. That's not a crazy concept.
Exactly my point. If it was supposed to have gone through, it likely would have. As much as we bemoan so-called "deliberate creative decisions" as regards to Star Wars on this site, this would likely have been done differently if the intent was different than it was.
Keep Circulating the Tapes.
END OF LINE
(It hasn’t happened yet)
One has to wonder how a superlaser fired from a battle station the size of the moon has such a narrow beam, though. You'd think such a beam would be thick enough to envelop and pass right through a conventionally-sized ship regardless of its overall intensity.
JEDIT: I think I just figured out what my problem with the Death Star II's beam blowing ships out of the sky is.
I would have had the smaller beams firing independently at ships and only coming together to smash planets (thus giving the second stations a different look) but it's more a desire for a different direction than the isolation of an error.
Two Death Stars is a similar direction preference.
DuracellEnergizer said:
One has to wonder how a superlaser fired from a battle station the size of the moon has such a narrow beam, though. You'd think such a beam would be thick enough to envelop and pass right through a conventionally-sized ship regardless of its overall intensity.
JEDIT: I think I just figured out what my problem with the Death Star II's beam blowing ships out of the sky is.
Turn down the power, the beam is narrower.
The Death Star II must have some nifty focusing technology if it can make its beam that narrow.
Surely the 6-->1 beam focusing setup confirms the presence of nifty focusing technology