UK Star Wars Fans Hired to Build R2-D2 for New Star Wars

Status
Not open for further replies.

Pummel

Honorable
Nov 9, 2013
113
0
10,710
18
What's wrong with Disney? They make some awesome movies.
Pirates of the Caribbean, Tron: Legacy, The Chronicles of Narnia, Alice in Wonderland, Wall E, The Lone Ranger.

Not to mention that J.J Abrams showed us with Star Trek that he can deliver on his promise.

Oh an technically, Disney owns Marvel, and Marvel has definitely delivered awesome movies (Iron Man, Thor, Avengers, Captain America, X-Men etc.)
 

dgingeri

Distinguished
Dec 4, 2009
2,123
1
20,460
212
@Pummel

I wouldn't say JJ Abrams delivered on anything regarding Star Trek. He broke some of the most basic laws of physics in those films, such as if a ship with artificial gravity were to lose power, people wouldn't be falling toward the front of the ship, they'd be weightless. I would call those two Star Trek movies the most shameful of the bunch. Star Trek is supposed to be among the most grounded of sci-fi, with little "magic" and more science, instead JJ made it into some of the most fanciful.
 

velocityg4

Illustrious
I don't see why everyone is so against this. If they are building an R2D2 we can take it as a hopeful sign that it will return to it's roots. Rather than the somehow more advanced super duper flying R2D2 in Episodes I-III.

Hopefully they won't go nuts with the CGI like Lucas. Although looking at Star Trek and every recent big Disney movie I'm not too hopeful.

Of the major studios I am glad that it is Disney. They are one of the few that still push for story and dialogue in their films. Most studios simply rely on CGI, action and explosions with no substance. I watched Cobra recently with Sylvester Stallone and realized that even this cheesy action movie from the 80's had a better script than 90% of the CGI fests have now. They have budgets of $200 million and can't afford a decent writer?
 

Spac3nerd

Distinguished
Oct 20, 2011
40
0
18,540
4


Disney didn't give you Jar Jar Binks.
 

soccerplayer88

Distinguished
Feb 1, 2010
227
0
18,680
0


Not to be stingy (or an ass) but it's called science FICTION for a reason.

The ships in Star Trek would have to be constantly spinning to even create a gravity field but obviously would look dumb on the big screen seeing the Enterprise doing barrels rolls through space.

They also obtain light speed whenever they want to. Short of their ship having zero or infinite mass, nothing will ever move at the speed of light except for of course light. About the only other way of obtaining the speed of light (which technical you wouldn't be doing anyways) would be sticking a black hole on the front of your ship to "bend" space.

But on point, SW IV - VI were really the only good ones. All the new crap Lucas put out (JarJar Binks anyone?) disgusted me.
 

teh_chem

Honorable
Jun 20, 2012
902
0
11,010
17
Disney scares me. I think of them as the combination of the NSA, DARPA, and NASA. But at least they provide an entertainment factor, so I'm cool with them. Except for the fact that they're Nazi's. ;)
 

teh_chem

Honorable
Jun 20, 2012
902
0
11,010
17

ROFL, get real. Let's completely overlook traveling at or beyond the speed of light, matter teleportation (and atom-by-atom reconstruction from pure energy with the aid of magical 'heisenberg compensators'), and everything else that was present in every star trek implementation up until these movies. But as soon as there's a deviation from gravity, let's freak out and call unfair! Star trek is no more scientifically-accurate (by our current understanding of the universe) than most other sci-fi ideas. The fact that they use jargon for their tech. that we might hear in our everyday life doesn't change that.
 

spdragoo

Splendid
Ambassador
dgingeri,

If you're talking about the 2nd film, you have to remember a couple of things:

1. The gravity didn't just "disappear", they were having problems with it fluctuating. Hence Kirk & Scott went from running on the floor down the corridors to running along the walls & ceilings, because "up" was fluctuating inside the ship. They were aware of it, however, & compensating by changing direction as they ran; other crewmen were, as shown in the film, caught by surprise or unable to adjust their positions, hence why they were sliding around in different directions.

2. Microgravity <> "zero gravity". Objects in orbit are *orbiting* because of the pull of gravity from the heavier object (i.e. Earth). Obviously, for their "artificial gravity" to work on a spaceship when its nose is pointing "down" towards a planet, it has to counteract the "natural gravitational pull" in some manner. Even spaceships & probes that have achieved "escape velocity" are still under the influence of gravity (including the Sun's); they're going fast enough that the pull of gravity won't bring them back down to the surface, but it will still affect their trajectory in space (which is why NASA & other space agencies spend a lot of time calculating when they can launch interplanetary probes, how much fuel they'll need, & how long it will take to get to the target). Heck, even the Sun's gravity will affect you long after the pull of Earth's gravity becomes nearly impossible to measure -- otherwise we wouldn't have things like the outer planets, Pluto, & the Oort Cloud orbiting the Sun. But if your "artificial gravity" isn't working properly for regular "up vs. down" operation, it's obviously going to have problems with counteracting outside gravitation forces.

3. No matter how high the realism factor is in a science-fiction film/show/book, the key word is *fiction*. If you're going to complain about a science-fiction film being "realistic" in its science, then you need to remember there are a whole host of things that aren't "real" but have been shown in science-fiction for decades:
-- transferal of information from a computer into an individual's memory, including the ability for them to not only remember the information but transform the information into instant "muscle memory" short-term modifications to the body's physical abilities (i.e. having the abilities of a lifetime student of martial arts without spending a single second practicing in the dojo);
-- genetic mutation caused by radiation/chemical/other source exposure that results in changes (usually granting "super-abilities") to the subject but don't result in real-world effects like cancer & death, or are able to drastically increase/decrease the size/shape/strength/intelligence/other characteristics of the subject (including non-human subjects like gila monsters, tarantulas, ants, locusts, gorillas, snakes, etc.);
-- human-sized powered exoskeletons allowing you to fly like a jet fighter, lift objects like a construction crane, run as fast as a motorcycle, & grant more firepower than a company of Abrams tanks;
-- Both FTL *and* STL drives & other systems (i.e. cryogenic sleep chambers) that allow people to reach other planets (including within the Solar System) within a regular person's lifetime;
-- hand-portable energy weapons that provide more punch than a Barett sniper rifle, but can be carried in a hip holster;
-- medical technology that allows for "near-instant" healing (i.e. healing time measured in seconds or minutes, instead of days/weeks/months) of cuts, bruises, scrapes, broken bones, gunshot wounds, & other trauma, or for the healing of illnesses & diseases that currently either don't have 100% successful cures or have no cures whatsoever;
-- cloning technology that allows for an entire creature to not only be "grown" within a matter of hours or days, but also allows for the near-instantaneous transfer of memories & personality traits into the subject;
And so on.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS