Warbler

suspiciouscoffee said:

Yay!!!

Good. Taking away the red trunks was almost as bad as letting him have long hair.

chyron8472 said:

Warbler said:

I am not sure how to answer that.

Give it a think. I created the thread to ask that specific question.

maybe I will have more later but, it is why this

was a big deal while this

wasn’t.

chyron8472 said:

Warbler said:

chyron8472 said:

You also have said if a movie is canon and its novelization is canon (or vice versa), and dialogue in one is not the same as the other, then which one ought to be canon? So I want to know which one you would consider canon and why, or whether it matters to you and why not if it doesn’t.

I think someone in another thread said that those in charge said that where the book and movie differ, the movie takes precedence.

I would think the original work takes precedence. That is, the Star Wars movies trump the books; but the Harry Potter books trump the movies.

makes sense.

chyron8472 said:

Warbler said:

Supplemental explanations from unofficial sources don’t excuse a plot holes or continuity errors in movies.

Why not?

Because the creators themselves didn’t explain it. Also the creators aren’t required to obey the explanation from an unofficial source.

unlike Star Trek books, Star Wars books are officially considered canon. So I guess explanations in them do count.

But why does official canon matter to you? Why do you care? I don’t say you shouldn’t; I ask why you do.

I am not sure how to answer that.

chyron8472 said:

You also have said if a movie is canon and its novelization is canon (or vice versa), and dialogue in one is not the same as the other, then which one ought to be canon? So I want to know which one you would consider canon and why, or whether it matters to you and why not if it doesn’t.

I think someone in another thread said that those in charge said that where the book and movie differ, the movie takes precedence.

I’m sure what you want me to say. If you want to have your head canon, that is fine by me. But head canon and official canon are two different things. Official is official. Supplemental explanations from unofficial sources don’t excuse a plot holes or continuity errors in movies. I will say I was wrong about Star Wars books. Apparently, unlike Star Trek books, Star Wars books are officially considered canon. So I guess explanations in them do count.

moviefreakedmind said:

Warbler said:

paja said:

Hey, you wanna buy some deathsticks?

Go home and rethink your life.

I’ve always wondered if you’d ever seen Star Wars because I’d never seen you talk about it or mention it until recently when you said you saw TLJ.

Of course I’ve seen Star Wars!

I like the early episodes of the Jeremy Brett series.

paja said:

Hey, you wanna buy some deathsticks?

Go home and rethink your life.

dahmage said:

Warbler said:

huh?

ok, next time just don’t post “huh?” and save me the trouble of responding.

I didn’t (and still don’t) understand either post so I said huh.

huh?

ok, I give up. think whatever you want. I can’t continue to argue against so many. I’m done.

adywan said:

Warbler said:

adywan said:

Warbler said:

adywan said:

Warbler said:

SilverWook said:

Warbler said:

SilverWook said:

I thought Yoda was just guiding the lightning not creating it.

sure looked like he created it to me.

Big difference between manipulating the weather to create lighting and firing it out of your fingertips. It’s been suggested in the past Yoda used the Force to make sure Luke crashed in just the right spot on Dagobah. That was some choppy weather he hit coming into the atmosphere.

I don’t think he just manipulated the weather.

And yet he did. There is a wide shot where you see the storm clouds above the island and you can see the lightning coming out of the clouds around the island and not just the bolt that strikes the tree. Have you seen the film just the once? Because it seems like you just missed that bit, but you’re refusing to listen to people that have seen the film multiple times or noticed what was happening.

I’ll be glad when the blu-ray comes out so we can post screenshots.

there is nothing in the movie that says force ghosts require storm clouds to bring down lightening.

You mean apart from the fact that the lightning emanated from the storm clouds and not just magically appeared from thin air or from a cloudless sky? That’s a visual explanation right there. Yoda manipulates the weather.

maybe.

**sigh

If people don’t want me sighing anymore, no one else should sigh either.

dahmage said:

Warbler said:

CHEWBAKAspelledwrong said:

Warbler said:

adywan said:

Warbler said:

adywan said:

Warbler said:

adywan said:

Warbler said:

2. the minor interaction with surroundings we see in ROTJ don’t matter near as much as finding out that force ghost Obiwan and Yoda maybe could have appeared before the Emperor and Vader and zapped them.

But Yoda didn’t just zap the tree out of thin air like the force lighting the Emperor uses. This has already been explained to you.

Whatever you want to call it, it sure would have been nice if had used it on the Emperor in ROTJ after Yoda died.

Please point me to the scene in the Emperors throne room where there were storm clouds over head so we could have had the same lightning and then i’d agree with you.

He needs storm clouds? That is never explained. What if in a future movie a force user does it without storm clouds, then can I ask why force ghost Yoda doesn’t zap the Emperor in ROTJ?

The fact that there are storm clouds coming in overhead and the lightning comes from those clouds that we clearly see in the film, isn’t enough to explain where the lightning comes from? What more did you need? Ric Olie suddenly popping his head from behind a rock to explain where it came from? 😉

We are talking about the force here, he doesn’t necessarily need storm clouds.

Says who? Where is this explained in a movie?

the movie never said he required storm clouds. For all know, he doesn’t need them.

Do you even know what point you’re trying to make now cuz I certainly don’t anymore.

when it me verses so many people? maybe I don’t what point I am trying to make anymore.

chyron8472 said:

Warbler said:

3. You can either offer an explanation to make it make sense or you can take it out of the movie.

Warbler said:

chyron8472 said:

TV’s Frink said:

yotsuya said:

How is Leia a princess?

When a prince and a woman love each other very much, they get “married” and the woman becomes a princess.

Actually, Leia is a princess because her adoptive mother was a queen.

It is not explained in the films. But as has been said, Warb, just because something is left unexplained does not mean it is unexplainable. Before you call out TLJ for not explaining things you wish it had, I suggest you read the novel because it might answer those questions.

again, [explanations] aren’t canon.

If it’s not in the movie, then you apparently don’t accept it as canon. If you don’t accept novels as canon, you also won’t accept our explanation as canon. If you don’t accept our explanation as canon, and you only accept canon, then why do you want explanation?

If you only want to complain because there is no in-film explanation, then that’s your own fault for not accepting external sources of information as relevant. You choose to not accept them.

It is not the movie’s fault. It is by your own choice.

it is not unreasonable to only accept explanations that come from official canon.

adywan said:

Warbler said:

adywan said:

Warbler said:

SilverWook said:

Warbler said:

SilverWook said:

I thought Yoda was just guiding the lightning not creating it.

sure looked like he created it to me.

Big difference between manipulating the weather to create lighting and firing it out of your fingertips. It’s been suggested in the past Yoda used the Force to make sure Luke crashed in just the right spot on Dagobah. That was some choppy weather he hit coming into the atmosphere.

I don’t think he just manipulated the weather.

And yet he did. There is a wide shot where you see the storm clouds above the island and you can see the lightning coming out of the clouds around the island and not just the bolt that strikes the tree. Have you seen the film just the once? Because it seems like you just missed that bit, but you’re refusing to listen to people that have seen the film multiple times or noticed what was happening.

I’ll be glad when the blu-ray comes out so we can post screenshots.

there is nothing in the movie that says force ghosts require storm clouds to bring down lightening.

You mean apart from the fact that the lightning emanated from the storm clouds and not just magically appeared from thin air or from a cloudless sky? That’s a visual explanation right there. Yoda manipulates the weather.

maybe.

CHEWBAKAspelledwrong said:

You’re unhappy ghost Yoda conjured up lightening but never did/could before. You ask for an explanation from the movie. We give it to you. You say that’s dumb.

I didn’t use the word dumb.

It’s the force. He shouldn’t need existing clouds.

no I am saying it is force, so for all we know he doesn’t need existing clouds.

You just came full circle. Just try to work through the logic.

huh?

oojason said:

Warbler said:

ChainsawAsh said:

Warbler said:

chyron8472 said:

We don’t need to have everything explained by the film. There are other non-film sources with which to draw on for relevant information to people who would care.

Those other sources aren’t canon.

Actually, yeah, they are. Unless they were published before the Legends EU rebranding.

I am pretty sure the novels are not canon. If they are, explain the differences between the novels and the movies.

The novels are canon - http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Canon#2014_reboot

http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline_of_canon_books#js

well dialogue in the novelizations of the movies better match with the movies word for word or you’ve inconsistency. If the dialogue differs what did the character say, what is written in the book or what is said in the movie?

example ROTJ

in the book the Emperor says “Your puerile skills are no match for the power of the dark side”

in the movie the Emperor says “You feeble skills are no match for the power of the dark side”

yet both sources are canon. So which did the emperor say?

CHEWBAKAspelledwrong said:

Warbler said:

adywan said:

Warbler said:

adywan said:

Warbler said:

adywan said:

Warbler said:

2. the minor interaction with surroundings we see in ROTJ don’t matter near as much as finding out that force ghost Obiwan and Yoda maybe could have appeared before the Emperor and Vader and zapped them.

But Yoda didn’t just zap the tree out of thin air like the force lighting the Emperor uses. This has already been explained to you.

Whatever you want to call it, it sure would have been nice if had used it on the Emperor in ROTJ after Yoda died.

Please point me to the scene in the Emperors throne room where there were storm clouds over head so we could have had the same lightning and then i’d agree with you.

He needs storm clouds? That is never explained. What if in a future movie a force user does it without storm clouds, then can I ask why force ghost Yoda doesn’t zap the Emperor in ROTJ?

The fact that there are storm clouds coming in overhead and the lightning comes from those clouds that we clearly see in the film, isn’t enough to explain where the lightning comes from? What more did you need? Ric Olie suddenly popping his head from behind a rock to explain where it came from? 😉

We are talking about the force here, he doesn’t necessarily need storm clouds.

Says who? Where is this explained in a movie?

the movie never said he required storm clouds. For all know, he doesn’t need them.

Mrebo said:

Warbler said:

Mrebo said:

Warbler said:

adywan said:

Warbler said:

adywan said:

Warbler said:

2. the minor interaction with surroundings we see in ROTJ don’t matter near as much as finding out that force ghost Obiwan and Yoda maybe could have appeared before the Emperor and Vader and zapped them.

But Yoda didn’t just zap the tree out of thin air like the force lighting the Emperor uses. This has already been explained to you.

Whatever you want to call it, it sure would have been nice if had used it on the Emperor in ROTJ after Yoda died.

Please point me to the scene in the Emperors throne room where there were storm clouds over head so we could have had the same lightning and then i’d agree with you.

He needs storm clouds? That is never explained. What if in a future movie a force user does it without storm clouds, then can I ask why force ghost Yoda doesn’t zap the Emperor in ROTJ?

The point is that we can draw these inferences about what we did see. We don’t need to exactly pin it down. Does the idea that Yoda could influence the path of lightning bother you?

no. However if it would have been convenient to influence the path of lightning at some point in the OT and he didn’t, that would bother me.

Lets say in some future movie, force users can force transport themselves wherever they want. Now, wouldn’t you then question why Obiwan didn’t do this in TPM and get past the shield in the Maul fight?

Obviously.

As others have said, we can infer that Yoda simply affected the path of the lightning. If Yoda did show up in Snoke’s thrown room and start pulling lightning down…well then I’d agree with you. But what actually happened in this film was far more constrained than that.

maybe, but the movie never says he needs storm clouds.

Mrebo said:

Warbler said:

Mrebo said:

Warbler said:

DominicCobb said:

The problem, warb (and others), is there’s some ambiguity and you’re taking that ambiguity and assuming automatically that it must be an inconsistency, whereas you could just as easily explore all the other possible explanations for it. Just because it’s not explained doesn’t mean it’s unexplainable. Movies, and Star Wars especially, are all about the possible, not the impossible. So to go right to the latter is essentially watching it wrong.

But sometimes things do need to be explained. Again if in the next movie Han(not a ghost) suddenly walked into a room, wouldn’t that require an explanation?

What if in a future movie it is found out that sith can appear as force ghosts and kill people, wouldn’t it need to be explained why we haven’t seen that before, why dead Emperor, Maul, and Dooku don’t come back force ghosts can get revenge?

Trying to explain spiritual happenings leads to dumbness. Like Dom says there is a difference between ambiguity and inconsistency. The truth is we know very little about the Star Wars afterlife.

When we are talking about a power that would have made sense to use in the OT and wasn’t it is an inconsistency.

Even accepting your view that Yoda made the lightning, that’s not an inconsistency, just a possible missed opportunity.

oh come on.

But it may be that Force ghosts are limited in where they can show up.

This is never said in the movie.

adywan said:

Warbler said:

SilverWook said:

Warbler said:

SilverWook said:

I thought Yoda was just guiding the lightning not creating it.

sure looked like he created it to me.

Big difference between manipulating the weather to create lighting and firing it out of your fingertips. It’s been suggested in the past Yoda used the Force to make sure Luke crashed in just the right spot on Dagobah. That was some choppy weather he hit coming into the atmosphere.

I don’t think he just manipulated the weather.

And yet he did. There is a wide shot where you see the storm clouds above the island and you can see the lightning coming out of the clouds around the island and not just the bolt that strikes the tree. Have you seen the film just the once? Because it seems like you just missed that bit, but you’re refusing to listen to people that have seen the film multiple times or noticed what was happening.

I’ll be glad when the blu-ray comes out so we can post screenshots.

there is nothing in the movie that says force ghosts require storm clouds to bring down lightening.

CHEWBAKAspelledwrong said:

Warbler said:

SilverWook said:

Warbler said:

SilverWook said:

I thought Yoda was just guiding the lightning not creating it.

sure looked like he created it to me.

Big difference between manipulating the weather to create lighting and firing it out of your fingertips. It’s been suggested in the past Yoda used the Force to make sure Luke crashed in just the right spot on Dagobah. That was some choppy weather he hit coming into the atmosphere.

I don’t think he just manipulated the weather.

Well then, frankly, that’s your problem.

sheesh.

What else could it be?

lightening created by ghost Yoda via the force?

dahmage said:

Warbler said:

chyron8472 said:

TV’s Frink said:

yotsuya said:

How is Leia a princess?

When a prince and a woman love each other very much, they get “married” and the woman becomes a princess.

Actually, Leia is a princess because her adoptive mother was a queen.

It is not explained in the films. But as has been said, Warb, just because something is left unexplained does not mean it is unexplainable. Before you call out TLJ for not explaining things you wish it had, I suggest you read the novel because it might answer those questions.

again, the novels aren’t canon.

They are if they are.

huh?

chyron8472 said:

Warbler said:

chyron8472 said:

We don’t need to have everything explained by the film. There are other non-film sources with which to draw on for relevant information to people who would care.

Those other sources aren’t canon.

And why do you need an officially-canon explanation?

because either it is explained in canon or there is no explanation. Non-canon sources don’t work.

Why are explanations for things subject to the whims of the production studio? Lucas at one point said The Force Unleashed video games were canon.

I didn’t know this.

I don’t know if they still are. And recently the powers-that-be said The Clone Wars tv show is canon.

stands to reason that movies and tv shows are canon and books are not, just like Star Trek.

If you so desire explanation for why something works the way it does or why an apparent inconsistency has occurred, why do you only accept the official answer given by the studio in the form of film rather than working it out with other hardcore fans (including book authors) to come to a conclusion that makes sense to you?

I have no problem trying to work something out with other hardcore fans, it is not the same as an official explanation. It is not on the same level. Also the fans conclusion doesn’t excuse the film maker not explaining something they should have explained.