|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Aug 10, 2019 4:01:34 GMT
This is just a rumor at the moment, although the BBC's response has been...strange.
|
|
|
|
Post by ironhold on Aug 10, 2019 6:37:26 GMT
Merchandising and licensed products can be *huge* sources of revenue, so it's believable that the BBC would ask Chibnall to be mindful of such matters.
It's also believable that a prideful director could get into a snit fit over such a situation as being told to change their stuff up so that it can sell more toys.
So this doesn't sound wholly far-fetched to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by wvengineer on Aug 10, 2019 12:44:59 GMT
Take a look at the way DC handled Wonder Woman vs the way Lucasfilm handled The Star Wars Franchise or Chibnall has handled Doctor Who; DC; Its a film about Wonder Woman, Patty Jenkins will be directing as the first female director to helm a film of this size. Customers comment on the ending being a little flat; DC; Humm, OK. to be fair, DC is used to customers saying their films are a little flat. For DC films, "a little flat" is wonderful news. Up until that point, their recent films were widely panned and derided. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Aug 10, 2019 14:29:52 GMT
to be fair, DC is used to customers saying their films are a little flat. For DC films, "a little flat" is wonderful news. Up until that point, their recent films were widely panned and derided. also to be fair, I don't recall hearing anyone complaining about Wonder Woman being a Mary Sue. in fact, I actually DID see people complaining about Rey and Mar-Vel being females. I DID see them complaining that they were Mary Sues. I DID see them complaining that they were getting above their station. in short, even if there were valid criticisms of their shows - they were also right that there were petulant boys griping because they had a female getting uppity. |
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Aug 10, 2019 15:04:24 GMT
Merchandising and licensed products can be *huge* sources of revenue, so it's believable that the BBC would ask Chibnall to be mindful of such matters. It's also believable that a prideful director could get into a snit fit over such a situation as being told to change their stuff up so that it can sell more toys. So this doesn't sound wholly far-fetched to me. Chibnall is the showrunner and head writer on the series, or at least meant to be. I noted that the article that appeared earlier in the year about them starting filming season 12 said that 'He {Chibnall} will remain on the show in some capacity'. This was a strange thing to say and at the time I said I thought this might be an indication some of his duties might have been given to others by a BBC who were getting concerned about how the show was being run behind the scenes. I've also noted that both Whittaker and Chibnall would have been contracted for 3 years, and with the series being placed on hiatus for a year this would mean that their contracts would therefore run out before they could start filming a third season together. (Their contracts most likely run out late this year or early next year. Certainly before they could film more than a couple of episodes of a third season) If there is truth to this rumor it may be that while neither of them has actually been fired they have been told that their contracts will not be renewed at the end of the year. Best guess is that they told Chibnall his contract would not be renewed and Jodie then refused to extend her own contract. I'd love to say that Jodie would be professional enough not to just walk off the set in protest, as doing so in such a situation would end her acting career even if it never became public*. However while I want to think she would know better, her general unprofessional attitude towards the role (mainly taking the job when she didn't want it and refusing to educate herself on the franchise when she did) does give me pause for thought. I'll give the lady the benefit of the doubt and imagine that IF the rumor has any truth to it Jodie left the set after hearing the news to talk to the BBC and make it clear that she wouldn't work on the series unless Chibnall was showrunner. (*If she broke a contract and had to be forced back to work under threat of legal action, all because she didn't like a production decision, word would get around within the industry. Such an act would result in no production company wanting to employ her as she would be viewed as difficult to work with. And unlike some other actors she lacks the success or draw to offset such a reputation.) I'm expecting the BBC to wait for a while, probably until the season has finished filming, before announcing that neither Jodie or Chibnall will be returning for another season. They will go on to say that this was their decision, and that they had stated was always the plan. All of which would technically be true (there were rumors they only wanted to do two seasons shortly after they were announced) and would also mean that technically they were not fired. This would probably be an agreement to help Chibnall and Whittaker to save face, and the prospects of future employment, by not more or less saying 'We fired them' which would make them unemployable in the future. What will be more interesting will be to see if either of them works for the BBC again. If they don't it would be fairly safe to imply that they were basically fired. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Aug 10, 2019 15:26:38 GMT
Merchandising and licensed products can be *huge* sources of revenue, so it's believable that the BBC would ask Chibnall to be mindful of such matters. It's also believable that a prideful director could get into a snit fit over such a situation as being told to change their stuff up so that it can sell more toys. So this doesn't sound wholly far-fetched to me. Chibnall is the showrunner and head writer on the series, or at least meant to be. I noted that the article that appeared earlier in the year about them starting filming season 12 said that 'He {Chibnall} will remain on the show in some capacity'. This was a strange thing to say and at the time I said I thought this might be an indication some of his duties might have been given to others by a BBC who were getting concerned about how the show was being run behind the scenes. I've also noted that both Whittaker and Chibnall would have been contracted for 3 years, and with the series being placed on hiatus for a year this would mean that their contracts would therefore run out before they could start filming a third season together. (Their contracts most likely run out late this year or early next year. Certainly before they could film more than a couple of episodes of a third season) If there is truth to this rumor it may be that while neither of them has actually been fired they have been told that their contracts will not be renewed at the end of the year. Best guess is that they told Chibnall his contract would not be renewed and Jodie then refused to extend her own contract. I'd love to say that Jodie would be professional enough not to just walk off the set in protest, as doing so in such a situation would end her acting career even if it never became public*. However while I want to think she would know better, her general unprofessional attitude towards the role (mainly taking the job when she didn't want it and refusing to educate herself on the franchise when she did) does give me pause for thought. I'll give the lady the benefit of the doubt and imagine that IF the rumor has any truth to it Jodie left the set after hearing the news to talk to the BBC and make it clear that she wouldn't work on the series unless Chibnall was showrunner. (*If she broke a contract and had to be forced back to work under threat of legal action, all because she didn't like a production decision, word would get around within the industry. Such an act would result in no production company wanting to employ her as she would be viewed as difficult to work with. And unlike some other actors she lacks the success or draw to offset such a reputation.) I'm expecting the BBC to wait for a while, probably until the season has finished filming, before announcing that neither Jodie or Chibnall will be returning for another season. They will go on to say that this was their decision, and that they had stated was always the plan. All of which would technically be true (there were rumors they only wanted to do two seasons shortly after they were announced) and would also mean that technically they were not fired. This would probably be an agreement to help Chibnall and Whittaker to save face, and the prospects of future employment, by not more or less saying 'We fired them' which would make them unemployable in the future. What will be more interesting will be to see if either of them works for the BBC again. If they don't it would be fairly safe to imply that they were basically fired. I looked and was unable to find any suggestions that whittaker didn't want the role, and the statement about her not watching previous doctors was "I prefer to read my research than watch it, and I don't want to be worried about 'did I nick this?"' |
|
|
|
Post by ironhold on Aug 10, 2019 15:36:34 GMT
For DC films, "a little flat" is wonderful news. Up until that point, their recent films were widely panned and derided. also to be fair, I don't recall hearing anyone complaining about Wonder Woman being a Mary Sue. in fact, I actually DID see people complaining about Rey and Mar-Vel being females. I DID see them complaining that they were Mary Sues. I DID see them complaining that they were getting above their station. in short, even if there were valid criticisms of their shows - they were also right that there were petulant boys griping because they had a female getting uppity. The term "Mary Sue" was coined to refer to any character who is depicted as being game-breaking in some fashion, usually because the normal "rules" of whatever world they're in have been bent to make them far superior to other characters. In fact, if you watch the Throne Room fight in "The Last Jedi", you'll see that Disney went back and digitally altered parts of it to hide the fact that IRL Rey would have been killed during the fight because she exposed her back to someone who was dual-wielding; in particular, they had to digitally edit one of the guy's daggers out to cover for the fact that they had to re-set the fight sequence with him having only one dagger. Actual experts in martial fighting have gone over that movie and discussed to length how awful Rey's form and technique are and how unrealistic it is for her to be so successful in battle. Why "Mary Sue"? A woman of that name created an infamous character of the same name for some Star Trek fan-fiction, and it stuck. But the term has been used to refer to characters of both genders, and in fact my go-to example of such a character is Snake-Eyes from the Marvel Comics US run of "G. I. Joe". Writer Larry Hama was so obsessed with the character that by the time the series had ended, he'd re-worked Snake-Eyes' backstory to the point that the entire universe revolved around him and would not have happened if he hadn't existed. So yeah... Not helping matters any is the fact that Carol Danvers hasn't been able to carry a solo comic in well over a decade yet Marvel refuses to get it; whenever one of her books is about to be cancelled, they just re-number it back to #1 and treat it as a new re-launch. Fans are tired of Danvers, they want Monica Rambeau back in the position, and neither Marvel nor Disney seem to care. |
|
|
|
Post by ironhold on Aug 10, 2019 15:39:45 GMT
Chibnall is the showrunner and head writer on the series, or at least meant to be. I noted that the article that appeared earlier in the year about them starting filming season 12 said that 'He {Chibnall} will remain on the show in some capacity'. This was a strange thing to say and at the time I said I thought this might be an indication some of his duties might have been given to others by a BBC who were getting concerned about how the show was being run behind the scenes. I've also noted that both Whittaker and Chibnall would have been contracted for 3 years, and with the series being placed on hiatus for a year this would mean that their contracts would therefore run out before they could start filming a third season together. (Their contracts most likely run out late this year or early next year. Certainly before they could film more than a couple of episodes of a third season) If there is truth to this rumor it may be that while neither of them has actually been fired they have been told that their contracts will not be renewed at the end of the year. Best guess is that they told Chibnall his contract would not be renewed and Jodie then refused to extend her own contract. I can easily see this as a subtle way of dealing with someone the Beeb regards as a prima donna director: stall production so that his time-based contract runs out, point to something external (like poor merchandise sales) to justify "changing the formula up", and then quietly showing him the door. |
|
|
|
Post by ironhold on Aug 10, 2019 15:43:23 GMT
Also, I remember a minor to-do right after Jodie was announced as the new Doctor.
A licensed calendar showing "all of the new Doctors" was released that didn't include her, leading some people to think that the people who put the calendar together were being sexist against her.
I personally felt that perhaps the calendar was being assembled before the announcement and so the company didn't have any official images of her they could use (if they knew about her at all), but now I'm wondering if perhaps the company hadn't been slyly told not to include her, either because the Beeb didn't want them to spoil things or because the Beeb knew she wasn't going to be around that long.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Aug 10, 2019 16:09:28 GMT
Also recall there are 12 months in a year and Jodie is the 13th Doctor.
She was offered the role twice before accepting it third time around.
In an interview, I think with David Tennant, she admitted to having tried to watch a couple of episodes and giving up as she didn't understand it and that it 'wasn't for me'.
In both cases these should have been warning signs that there could be major problems. If an actor turns down a role like the Doctor once fair enough, that could be just concern about the role. But if they turn it down twice that should be a sign that they are really not interested and their heart will not be in it if you do cast them.
If your actor expresses that a show 'isn't for me' and gives up doing research on it as a result you should give them two choices; Buckle down and do your homework or leave.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Aug 10, 2019 16:21:03 GMT
also to be fair, I don't recall hearing anyone complaining about Wonder Woman being a Mary Sue. in fact, I actually DID see people complaining about Rey and Mar-Vel being females. I DID see them complaining that they were Mary Sues. I DID see them complaining that they were getting above their station. in short, even if there were valid criticisms of their shows - they were also right that there were petulant boys griping because they had a female getting uppity. The term "Mary Sue" was coined to refer to any character who is depicted as being game-breaking in some fashion, usually because the normal "rules" of whatever world they're in have been bent to make them far superior to other characters. In fact, if you watch the Throne Room fight in "The Last Jedi", you'll see that Disney went back and digitally altered parts of it to hide the fact that IRL Rey would have been killed during the fight because she exposed her back to someone who was dual-wielding; in particular, they had to digitally edit one of the guy's daggers out to cover for the fact that they had to re-set the fight sequence with him having only one dagger. Actual experts in martial fighting have gone over that movie and discussed to length how awful Rey's form and technique are and how unrealistic it is for her to be so successful in battle. Why "Mary Sue"? A woman of that name created an infamous character of the same name for some Star Trek fan-fiction, and it stuck. But the term has been used to refer to characters of both genders, and in fact my go-to example of such a character is Snake-Eyes from the Marvel Comics US run of "G. I. Joe". Writer Larry Hama was so obsessed with the character that by the time the series had ended, he'd re-worked Snake-Eyes' backstory to the point that the entire universe revolved around him and would not have happened if he hadn't existed. So yeah... Not helping matters any is the fact that Carol Danvers hasn't been able to carry a solo comic in well over a decade yet Marvel refuses to get it; whenever one of her books is about to be cancelled, they just re-number it back to #1 and treat it as a new re-launch. Fans are tired of Danvers, they want Monica Rambeau back in the position, and neither Marvel nor Disney seem to care. that wasn't rey's fault. that was the fight choreographer's fault. and how is that different from EVERY OTHER JEDI IN THE FRANCHISE? I mean apart from the ones who the plot called for them to be killed in order 66. how is that different from Luke, who would have been a plasma ball in episode IV except for Vader taking time to fiddle with his targeting scanner instead of just lighting him up? |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Aug 10, 2019 16:27:37 GMT
Also recall there are 12 months in a year and Jodie is the 13th Doctor. She was offered the role twice before accepting it third time around. In an interview, I think with David Tennant, she admitted to having tried to watch a couple of episodes and giving up as she didn't understand it and that it 'wasn't for me'. In both cases these should have been warning signs that there could be major problems. If an actor turns down a role like the Doctor once fair enough, that could be just concern about the role. But if they turn it down twice that should be a sign that they are really not interested and their heart will not be in it if you do cast them. If your actor expresses that a show 'isn't for me' and gives up doing research on it as a result you should give them two choices; Buckle down and do your homework or leave. in the interview that popped up when I searched on whittaker not wanting the role, she said she was looking forward to binge watching it after she "handed over the shoes" (or a similar phrasing involving shoes) so I am not entirely sure what to make of it. I have series 11 on queue, and will watch it, unless I decide I don't like it once I start watching. It does kind of sound to me, from the pieces I read, that the artistic decisions are more from the showrunner than from her. |
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Aug 10, 2019 17:17:08 GMT
Luke didn't beat Vader, his force sensitivity allowed him to survive Vaders attack longer, and not without R2 being hit. This bought time for Han to turn up on the Falcon and take Vader out of the battle - not by shooting Vader but by shooting one of his wingmen causing the other one to panic and collide with Vaders fighter.
Lukes ability to fly was set up, or at least hinted at, very early on in New Hope; In the garage he is seen playing with a model aircraft (actually a T-16) and there is a real one in the background on the right in that same scene. When Han asks 'Who's going to fly her kid, you?' in reply to Luke noting they could almost buy their own ship for the price Han is asking. Luke replies 'You bet, I'm not such a bad pilot'. Then later during the briefing on the Death Star attack he comments about 'bullseyeing Womp rats in his T-16 back home'.
Even so his performance in the battle itself shows his inexperience. He nearly gets himself killed strafing the Death Star by getting too close to the explosions, and later runs into serious problems dealing with a Tie Fighter and has to be saved by Wedge.
Compare this to Ray, who is never set up as knowing anything about piloting but yet is able to outfly two trained fighter pilots in an old freighter she states hasn't flown in years and therefore she clearly hasn't flown in before.
The Jedi seen fighting in the prequels were highly trained, and even then not invulnerable as a number of them are seen to get killed (or at least hit) during the fighting in the arena towards the end of Attack of the Clones. So the lightsabre battles in the prequels are between combatants with years of training behind them. The battles in the original trilogy are between an old man who is humoring an inexperienced and partly trained opponent who he doesn't actually want to kill. And between two old men in New Hope.
It is also notable that in both trilogies the inexperienced hero loses to their more experienced opponent first time around, and both Anakin and Luke only overcome their opponents in the end by giving into the darkside for a time.
Even between more equally matched opponents the Jedi don't always win, in fact statistically they lose more often than win in the films. Qui-Gon is killed by Darth Maul, Yoda loses to Sidious who in turn took out three Jedi masters and would have lost to Mace Windu had Anakin not intervened.
In short the heroes in the first two trilogies are not perfect, they lose fights and even when they succeed (or just survive) it is due to the help and actions of others; Luke was only able to destroy the first Death Star because Han showed up to deal with Vader and earlier because Wedge shot down a fighter that would have killed him. Even in his last battle Luke didn't 'win' either the lightsabre battle or the temptations of the Dark Side on his own. The former was motivated by a desire to protect Leia, his latter by understanding his father and the cost such power came with. Likewise it wasn't Luke who beat Palpatine it was Anakin, who in turn was only able to do so due to the actions and influence of Luke.
Indeed the only hero to actually win any battles without any direct or indirect aid in the first six films is Obi-Wan. Who beat Maul and Anakin alone, although he nearly gets himself killed against Maul. Even so Obi-Wan does lose twice to Dokou. {Edit; I was incorrect in stating that Obi-Wan defeated Darth Maul without any aid. He had to use Qui-Gon's lightsabre having lost his own, meaning that he did get indirect help from someone else. It is only his battle against Anakin in Revenge where he beats an opponent without any outside help. Against General Grevious earlier he had the aid of the Clone Troopers against the droid army present.}
So the Lucas-era heroes do not overcome the tests in front of them, or simply survive, without the aid of others. The Disney 'heroes' however overcome their trials all on their own. Because they are perfect and magically gain whatever skills and experiences the excuse for a plot requires them to have in the name of spectacle. So Ray isn't able to throw the Falcon around the sky or outfight a group of highly trained fighters because she has any logical or established skills and experience to do so. She is able to do these things because the 'writers' are incapable of anything resembling logical or consistent plotting or character development.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Aug 11, 2019 3:30:56 GMT
Luke didn't beat Vader, his force sensitivity allowed him to survive Vaders attack longer, and not without R2 being hit. This bought time for Han to turn up on the Falcon and take Vader out of the battle - not by shooting Vader but by shooting one of his wingmen causing the other one to panic and collide with Vaders fighter. Lukes ability to fly was set up, or at least hinted at, very early on in New Hope; In the garage he is seen playing with a model aircraft (actually a T-16) and there is a real one in the background on the right in that same scene. When Han asks 'Who's going to fly her kid, you?' in reply to Luke noting they could almost buy their own ship for the price Han is asking. Luke replies 'You bet, I'm not such a bad pilot'. Then later during the briefing on the Death Star attack he comments about 'bullseyeing Womp rats in his T-16 back home'. Even so his performance in the battle itself shows his inexperience. He nearly gets himself killed strafing the Death Star by getting too close to the explosions, and later runs into serious problems dealing with a Tie Fighter and has to be saved by Wedge. Compare this to Ray, who is never set up as knowing anything about piloting but yet is able to outfly two trained fighter pilots in an old freighter she states hasn't flown in years and therefore she clearly hasn't flown in before. The Jedi seen fighting in the prequels were highly trained, and even then not invulnerable as a number of them are seen to get killed (or at least hit) during the fighting in the arena towards the end of Attack of the Clones. So the lightsabre battles in the prequels are between combatants with years of training behind them. The battles in the original trilogy are between an old man who is humoring an inexperienced and partly trained opponent who he doesn't actually want to kill. And between two old men in New Hope. It is also notable that in both trilogies the inexperienced hero loses to their more experienced opponent first time around, and both Anakin and Luke only overcome their opponents in the end by giving into the darkside for a time. Even between more equally matched opponents the Jedi don't always win, in fact statistically they lose more often than win in the films. Qui-Gon is killed by Darth Maul, Yoda loses to Sidious who in turn took out three Jedi masters and would have lost to Mace Windu had Anakin not intervened. In short the heroes in the first two trilogies are not perfect, they lose fights and even when they succeed (or just survive) it is due to the help and actions of others; Luke was only able to destroy the first Death Star because Han showed up to deal with Vader and earlier because Wedge shot down a fighter that would have killed him. Even in his last battle Luke didn't 'win' either the lightsabre battle or the temptations of the Dark Side on his own. The former was motivated by a desire to protect Leia, his latter by understanding his father and the cost such power came with. Likewise it wasn't Luke who beat Palpatine it was Anakin, who in turn was only able to do so due to the actions and influence of Luke. Indeed the only hero to actually win any battles without any direct or indirect aid in the first six films is Obi-Wan. Who beat Maul and Anakin alone, although he nearly gets himself killed against Maul. Even so Obi-Wan does lose twice to Dokou. {Edit; I was incorrect in stating that Obi-Wan defeated Darth Maul without any aid. He had to use Qui-Gon's lightsabre having lost his own, meaning that he did get indirect help from someone else. It is only his battle against Anakin in Revenge where he beats an opponent without any outside help. Against General Grevious earlier he had the aid of the Clone Troopers against the droid army present.}So the Lucas-era heroes do not overcome the tests in front of them, or simply survive, without the aid of others. The Disney 'heroes' however overcome their trials all on their own. Because they are perfect and magically gain whatever skills and experiences the excuse for a plot requires them to have in the name of spectacle. So Ray isn't able to throw the Falcon around the sky or outfight a group of highly trained fighters because she has any logical or established skills and experience to do so. She is able to do these things because the 'writers' are incapable of anything resembling logical or consistent plotting or character development. Luke survived the death star trench because Vader waited to take his shot. as for Rey's unprecedented piloting skills - keep in mind she was FAMILIAR with the characteristics of the ships on the lot. which kind of implies she'd seen how they performed - and while she outmaneuvered two TIE fighters in the opposite of their preferred environment, she nearly failed to outmaneuver a slow moving ball of rock - and managed to get away from the TIE fighters because of the abilities of a gunner in the belly turret. compare: anakin was able to translate being able to fly a podracer into flying a nubian starfighter. Rey's interactions with people on her homeworld showed she wasn't entirely inexperienced with that stick she carried - and Kylo's fighting style relies more on aggression than technique. the fact of the matter is, Star Wars has always been space opera. the heroes have always been issued plot armor, they've always had bonus proficiencies, and the dialogue has always been on the cheesy side. in my opinion, half the problems with the prequel trilogy and the final trilogy come from the fact people are expecting Star Wars to be fine cinema. |
|
|
|
Post by ironhold on Aug 13, 2019 12:05:47 GMT
Another rumor coming out of the current situation:
Someone claiming to be an anonymous whistle-blower is saying that part of the dispute between Chibnal and the BBC involved Chibnal's plans to bring back Rose Tyler. Specifically, the BBC looked at an early version of his proposal, rejected it, and things went from there.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Oct 12, 2019 17:12:33 GMT
Seen not flown. I've seen an F-18 perform at an airshow that doesn't mean I could fly one let alone fly one well enough to survive an encounter with a trained fighter pilot.
She also outright states that the Falcon hasn't flown in years and is meant to be around 18-19 years old at the time of the statement. She may, MAY know the controls for a spacecraft and the basics of flying. But in all the logical ways she might have been taught this would not involve throwing it around the sky like a fighter to find out what the ships performance limitations were. It makes sense for Luke to have these kinds of skills because of his experiences flying a T-16 - But even then as I noted Luke's inexperience nearly gets him killed twice, which in the case of the strafing run was probably down to inexperience and unfamiliarity with the performance of the X-Wing.
What would have made far more sense would have been for Finn to have been flying the Falcon; Add in a line with Poe as to how he either tried out as a Tie pilot or had been trained to pilot transports should the need arise. This would explain what Finn's plan for escaping was, and getting Poe's help still makes sense as he was a fully trained and experienced pilot and therefore much more likely to be able to avoid the Star Destroyers guns or outfight any patrolling fighters they might run into.
Then after taking out the fighters in the Falcon, Finn could breathlessly exclaim that he 'didn't know he could do that' (Giving a nice moment where Rey could say or give him a shocked look of 'now you tell me!'). Rey, as gunner, could in the course of that fight pull off a manually aimed shot at the last second that hinted at her force sensitivity.
Hell, this would allow Rey to be somewhat more grounded by herself admitting that she didn't know she could pull off a shot like that. As well as giving the two of them a bonding moment.
All Finn had to do was hit the trigger in the last case, as Rey inexplicably managed to pilot the Falcon to line up the damaged and locked belly gun with a fast moving target.
Yes and no. The controls were similar enough that he realized what they could do in terms of direction, both using a control 'wheel'. However he doesn't actually outfly the enemy fighters and shows very two dimensional thinking; 'Lets go right' and 'rolling is a good trick' being examples. To his Credit Anakin realizes he's no match for the fighters and decides to try and hide...which is when he manages to crash onto the Trade Confederation ship and due to his lack of knowledge stall the fighter in the middle of the flight deck.
Just as importantly is that for most of the 'battle' Anakin isn't actually piloting the fighter. The only reason he ended up in the middle of events is due to him accidentally activating the autopilot and having no idea as to how to disengage it. Heck, destroying the command ship wasn't due to some wild fancy trick Anakin tried to pull off. He accidentally triggered and fired the fighters torpedoes. His escape, in which he was piloting, would be easy for him due to the fighters controls being similar enough to his pod racer and the 'course' being a two dimensional one similar to the racing tracks he was used to.
No. Her interactions showed that the knockoff Jawa's were unwilling to risk a fight with a stranger who appeared to be armed. The Jawa's in New Hope were easily chased off by Luke in Mos Esley and he clearly wasn't armed. There is nothing specifically in the film that shows that she has any particular skill in the use of the staff. She raises it and threatens people with it, and belts an unsuspecting Finn with it. That's all.
Kylo's aggressive technique is actually in keeping with Dark Jedi. His loosing his fight, or more specifically Finn (someone who clearly had actual combat training) being able to hold his own against him is actually explained in the film.
Yes I do give credit where credit is due.
In this case Kylo had been badly wounded after Chewie shot him, and Kylo is seen to be bleeding heavily before facing Finn. So as powerful as Kylo is reported to be, he is clearly not at the top of his game at this point and could therefore struggle against an opponent who is a trained fighter. This could also explain Rey's ability to hold her own...except she doesn't.
She is NOT a trained fighter and starts the battle by magically perfecting 'force pull' to a degree she can overpower someone with actual training and experience in the force while she herself has zero training. 'Force Pull' is a trick Luke failed to pull off first time after some training under Obi-Wan. She then doesn't hold her own, she is actually winning the fight. Against a trained and experienced opponent. Using a type of weapon she hadn't so much as turned on at this point and had only held once before.
Lets see, plot armor. Well yes, but that is a standard of stories to a greater or lesser degree.
Bonus Proficiency's. As in a skill or ability a character suddenly develops for which there is no logical reason for them to possess based on their background, vocation or which is in some way stated or alluded to prior to that point?
Like what? Luke's piloting skills are, as I noted, alluded to and stated early on. His ability to use the guns on the Falcon would be down to familiarity with the targeting system, and even so he is delighted when he eventually manages to actually hit something.
Han's 'hot wiring' the bunker door in Return is not that out of keeping for a 'scoundrel' and in any case whatever skill Han may possess clearly isn't enough as he is unable to open said door.
Leia working on repairing the Falcon in Empire doesn't show her possessing any real engineering skills. Rather she seems to be doing fairly simple work, presumably something fairly minor so the real mechanics (Han and Chewie) could focus on the more difficult and complex repairs. Given the conditions we saw on Hoth, and Leia's nature, it is not unreasonable that she could have picked up some very basic engineering/mechanical skills between Hope and Empire. And as I said she's not showing any indication that she has any real skill's in those areas. Indeed considering that she seems to be spending more time in the cockpit than working on the Falcon it is unlikely she had the skills to be of that much use.
Even Obi-Wan doesn't magically obtain new skills or abilities, or none that would be utterly out of keeping with the training he would have got as an actual Jedi. And Obi-Wan is the closest to a 'Mary-Sue' character the actual Star Wars has - and even he ends up getting his backside (or in Attack of the Clones his leg) handed to him twice by Dooku.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Oct 12, 2019 18:41:58 GMT
Luke didn't bounce his x-wing off the surface of the moon of Yavin multiple times, either.
why don't you mention that rey had no way of knowing about the ship dealer putting that fuel regulator or whatever it was on the falcon, either. or knowing it was incompatible with the falcon's fuel systems.
yes, Kylo had been shot by Chewie - then gone rounds with Finn, and only THEN did he throw down with Rey. - who had already been shown she had some sort of mystical bond to Anakin's saber when IT called to HER in the bar.
the fact of the matter is, I believe you are biased against Rey and Danvers. this entire argument has been me pointing out how other characters managed to have a history that gave them skills above the average schlub - and why Rey and Danvers had histories that could account for their extra skills. and you have spent the time arguing how it couldn't be so. and why couldn't it be so? because if it was so, they wouldn't be a mary sue.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Nov 26, 2019 15:44:10 GMT
watched the first episode of series 11 last night, and I find the new doctor more pleasant to watch than the grumpy scotsman. her habits and mannerisms are, to me, much closer to the habits and mannerisms of the other second-generation doctors without being simple copycat tics.
|
|
