Tuesday, July 15, 2025

The LOTR trilogy rocks. The Hobbit... not so much.

I love The Lord of the Rings trilogy helmed by Peter Jackson. He pulled together an insanely talented and dedicated crew to realize a vision intended to honour Tolkien's vision. 

Sure, they trimmed some here and there, and they did up-level certain roles, but overall, the films feel very much like the books. At least to me. He had some of the most prominent Tolkien illustrators on the design team, so visually it tracks with a lot of paintings I'd seen in previous years. It fit my imagination, and in some cases, exceeded it.

I like the theatrical releases, to be honest; the director's cut adds a lot more stuff, but much of it doesn't feel essential and it slows the pacing of the film. Films are not books, and my attention span isn't what it used to be.

But the trilogy is undeniably a triumph of artistry, a rare case where film does justice to a beloved set of books.

The Hobbit trilogy, on the other hand, is something I can't say much positive about, so I will say nothing. 

We all know, from LOTR, that Peter Jackson can do right by Tolkien. We all know he believes passionately in doing so. I did not feel that came through with The Hobbit.

Then, in my caffeine fuelled deep dives into the darkest pits of the internet, I came across this video:

It explains so, so much.

This is why we can't have nice things.

Saturday, May 31, 2025

Aim and the Imperial Stormtrooper trope

Combat staging in the original Star Wars trilogy, particularly A New Hope and Empire, is actually surprisingly grounded. 

I understand we have assistant director Brian Johnston to thank for that.


In Rogue One, Jyn and Cassian just have to point their blaster in a random direction and a dozen stormtroopers drop dead. 


And I’m only slightly exaggerating. 


Not so in the original trilogy. Obviously, the stormtroopers can’t hit, because the only targets are the main cast. Always good to have a few expendables along for the narrative ride. But what many people ignore is that the heroes fire plenty of shots that don’t hit either.


This is true to actual combat: most shots don’t hit anyone, contrary to what playground battles would have you believe. Typically, an average of 60 shots are needed to take out an enemy combatant.


In other words, the people complaining are simply ignorant playground fantasists. 


Further, the bad guys (and heroes) use cover, and will duck in and out to fire. Again, quite realistic. You see this on the Tantive IV at the beginning, on the Death Star, and in Cloud City. 


As the Star Wars franchise has gone on, however, combat staging has become increasingly infantile. 


Jedi and Sith back flips, hundred foot leaps, whirling twirling and parrying blaster bolts by the dozen are the order of the day. 


I get that, they’re magical space wizards, but the grunts?


Clone troopers just walk around, standing straight up, across open terrain, making no effort to protect themselves or minimize likelihood of getting hit. They don’t drop prone, they don’t cluster behind vehicles or obstacles, they just walk in the open. Sane people don’t do that, unless egged on by sergeants or NKVD units threatening to shoot them if they don’t.


I get these sort of silly suicidal tactics for robots; droids can be programmed to have no self-preservation instinct. 


But for humans? Or clones who are supposed to be the best of the best, battle trained and genetically engineered from the galaxy’s greatest bounty-hunter warrior? 


Pft.


Perhaps this is meant to be evocative of the American Civil War, from which the clone GAR (Grand Army of the Republic) gets its name. In those days, troops were armed with largely inaccurate weapons that required massed firepower to be effective. The Civil War saw the introduction of repeater rifles and more accurate weapons with rifled (hence the name) barrels. These helical grooves on the interior barrel surface greatly increased accuracy. This was more expensive, so these weren’t distributed to the majority of troops, and were used primarily by snipers and cavalry. By the time of the Franco-Prussian War, however, they were more common, and the shift began towards taking cover and the German storm troop infiltration tactics of WWI (from which we get the name ‘stormtroopers’). 


But it doesn’t make sense here, because these weapons are no different than the ones used later, or thousands of years earlier at the advent of the Galactic Republic. Technology canonically hasn’t evolved substantially for thousands of years in Star Wars, so there’s no way they don’t understand basic infantry tactics, and there’s no reason why it has to be staged with such grandiose, blatant incompetence.


Combat staging in Andoron the other hand, is generally good, particularly in season one. The action sequences with the corporate cops trying to stop Andor are entirely believable.


True, the stormtroopers on Ghorman in season two stand in the open, sans cover, which doesn’t make as much sense… except here the Empire wanted to take casualties.


But in Andor? The troopers don’t bother. Every shot the heroes fire hits. Why? Because audiences expect heroes to hit with every shot, because that’s how they think combat actually works. They’re wrong.


On Jeda, Imperials pop on stage and fall like ten pins, with stunning narrative convenience. 


None of it feels remotely believable, even for space opera.


Given the amount of effort Gareth Edwards went to to create a believable, grounded setting, including 360 degree sets, incredible costume and set design, and fabulous cinematography, it’s sad it’s all undermined by combat staging designed by a six year old.


Incredibly, The Mandalorian is even worse: it undermines the villains deliberately, making them canonically incompetent, armed with weapons that don’t shoot straight: these boobs can’t even hit a stationary object a few feet away. 


What menace can they muster? Not much. What's the value of victory over the inept and incompetent? Small wonder the Empire collapsed.


And when the Impies gather to assault a bar, they don’t bother with cover, they stand in a big crowd out in the open, waiting to be shot. Have you ever seen a SWAT team do that? No, because they take cover behind whatever is available… because people don’t like getting shot.


If you want to have a believable fantasy world, you need to have the inhabitants behave in believable ways, or the bubble of disbelief pops like a Death Star shot up the thermal exhaust pipe. 


Making the villains a joke turns the franchise into playground pantomime, operating at the level of the children for whom it’s made. 

Friday, May 23, 2025

Why I prefer the Death Star design flaw

Have you ever worked at a megacorporation? 

Or better yet, for government? 

If you’ve worked on a megaproject, you know how often things go wrong, how much compromise is involved, and how easy it is for something to be overlooked. 


Because something always is.


Take America's Zumwalt class destroyers: a multi-billion dollar fiasco for the United States Navy that fired $800,000 a pop shells. 


The HE177, the LaGG-3, the A7V, and the Lockheed XFV-1 Salmon? 


Failures every one.


History is littered with weapons and vehicles that perform badly, posing an even greater danger to their operators than the enemy. Ships so top heavy they immediately capsize (lookin' at you, Vasa), tanks so heavy they sink into the ground and can’t cross a bridge or use a road, sonic weapons that require targets to remain stationary for several minutes, ammo magazines placed below the ship’s chimney (the HMS Hood, possibly an inspiration for the Death Star flaw), constantly jamming gun magazines, and much worse have all been inflicted upon unfortunate servicemen.


The original Panama Canal project, designed by Ferdinand de Lesseps (the same man who built the Suez Canal), ended in fiasco, bankruptcy and mass death from disease. Some 800,000 French citizens lost their savings when the Compagnie Universelle du Canal Interocéanique de Panama folded, almost bringing down the French government. 


The bottom line? Lesseps original idea of building the canal, without locks, was wrong headed and never going to work.


How's that for a mega-project gone wrong?


Even worse, the USSR's White Sea-Baltic Canal was so badly managed it resulted in the deaths of 25,000+ workers.


How about the more recent Bataan nuclear power plant, built for $2.3 billion (and never completed, thankfully) in an earthquake-prone zone, near a volcano? I mean, seriously?


How about Chernobyl


And it's not just in the realm of hardware: software absurdities abound. Max Tegmark's Life 3.0 has some delicious examples:


"On June 4, 1996, scientists hoping to research Earth's magnetosphere cheered jubilantly as Ariane 5 rocket from the European Space Agency soared into the sky with scientific instruments they had built. Thirty-seven seconds later, their smiles vanished as the rocket exploded in a fireworks display costing hundreds of millions of dollars. 


The cause was found to be buggy software manipulating a number that was too large to fit into the 16 bits allocated for it. 


Two years later, NASA's Mars Climate Orbiter accidentally entered the Red Planet's atmosphere and disintegrated because two different parts of the software used different units for force, causing a 445% error in the rocket-engine thrust control.... their Mariner 1 mission to Venus exploded after launch from Cape Canaveral on July 22, 192, after the flight-control software was foiled by an incorrect punctuation mark."


Even better, a missing hyphen caused the Russian Phobos 1 probe to issue an 'end-of-mission' command while en route to Mars, resulting in it shutting down. 


You read that right: a missing hyphen took out a multi-million dollar interplanetary probe designed by some of the smartest people on the planet.


It happens.


Tiny oversights can lead to catastrophic consequences.


Building a space station the size of a small moon... now that is a project of such mammoth complexity, it's practically inevitable that something crucial would be overlooked. The bigger they are, the harder they fall. 


Honestly, it's amazing the Death Star worked at all. 


The only down side: the Rebellion managed to analyze the flaw a little too easily, and the Imperials confirmed it as a risk during the Rebel attack. If it was that easy to discover the flaw, the Imperials would already know. Unless hubris and overconfidence prevented them for looking for that kind of flaw at all… which is actually... also kind of plausible. 


If the Empire had HACMS (high-assurance cyber military systems), they'd have spotted major flaws, whether deliberately placed or accidental. As Star Wars droids don't seem to be especially bright, I doubt this was a thing. 


Making the Death Star flaw an act of deliberate sabotage by a disgruntled anti-Imperial designer is just so much less fun it’s not funny.


I like my doomsday devices big and dumb.

Sunday, May 18, 2025

Recommended: Andor season two

Andor season 2 is as excellent as the avalanche of reviews claim.

The first six episodes are on the slow side, even for Andor standards, but the slow build pays off big time in the second half. 


Hands down, the best Star Wars material since The Empire Strikes Back.


On top of that, it’s smart and politically relevant.


Some people are really, really going to hate it. 


I loved it.


Go watch. 


Sunday, December 1, 2024

Denis Villeneuve hates Ewoks too

No less a figure than auteur sci-fi director Denis Villeneuve shares the widespread disdain for the Ewoks:

“I was 15 years old, and my best friend and I wanted to take a cab and go to L.A. and talk to George Lucas — we were so angry! Still today, the Ewoks. It turned out to be a comedy for kids," he said. "Star Wars became crystallized in its own mythology, very dogmatic, it seemed like a recipe, no more surprises. So I’m not dreaming to do a Star Wars because it feels like code is very codified.”

Can't argue with that. 

See the full article over at CBR.

I compiled my own thoughts on the weeble-wooble fuzzballs here

Saturday, August 31, 2024

Head canon: Star Wars edition

I like the idea of head canon, especially as I get older, and the franchises I loved get longer and longer in the tooth. 

It's inevitable that franchises will have ups and downs, golden eras and dark ages, fabulous creative teams and capricious greedy studio hacks who care nothing for the material, have nothing to say, and just want to milk it for every penny they can get their grubby cheeto stained fingers on. 

Or is it me with the cheetos? Whatever.

So I thought I'd put together a list of my own head canon. 


First up is Star Wars, because, honestly, that one is pretty easy.

My official (and completely irrelevant outside of my head) list: 

• Star Wars (just Star Wars, not the Very Special Edition with Blossom)
• The Empire Strikes Back (original cut)
• The Return of the Jedi (original cut, but only half of it)
• The Mandalorian season 1 (some of it) and season 2 (a little of it)
• Andor (all of it)

I'm not really a fan of the prequels, but George Lucas deserves his due: he didn't blatantly rehash the first trilogy, lazily reordering elements. He added to the whole, and he didn't blow up another d*mn Death Star (okay, that Trade Federation control ship came close). Still, it wasn't the creatively bankrupt hack job the sequel trilogy was.

Just as The Force Awakens regurgitates A New Hope, The Last Jedi recycles The Empire Strikes Back. It's so obvious, yet no one sees it (or they don't care). I still don't get why people swoon over this lacklustre film. It doesn't 'democratize' jedi or force powers: the jedi were shown to not have kids in the prequel trilogy already. Lucas set that up, so why this film gets the credit I have no idea. 

And as bad as I find Last Jedi, the Rise of Skywalker is an irredeemable, unwatchable abomination about which nothing further should be said.

Sadly, younger fans HATE Andor, they find it slow paced, boring, and insufficiently superficial with lots of bling bling. Not enough Death Stars blow up, and there isn't enough ostentatious back flipping. They'd probably prefer Swan Lake with lightsabers. 

Me? I think it's fascinating, smart, historically informed, and well constructed. It has slow builds that yield big payoffs. It's brilliant, far better than anything else put out since Empire Strikes Back

That said, Andor's NOT a kids show. Lucas famously declared himself a toymaker who also made movies (mostly to advertise the toys) and that the films were made for specifically for children. I think he's mistaken, in that the first two films are actually all-ages (despite muppet Yoda), and it's only with lame Ewoks and subsequent prequels that it smashed right into children's faces, rather than a general audience's. 

My head cannon reflects this. 

How the h*ll Andor ever got greenlit given the franchise focus on kiddies I can't explain, but it makes up for a lot Disney has put out. Not enough, mind, I'm still a disgruntled old fan who regularly yells at the younglings on his lawn (at least I don't dice them with a lightsaber, unlike Ani 'Are you an Angel' Skywalker), but a lot.

The Disney era for Star Wars has a few other highlights: they've put out some cool games (Rebellion, X-Wing, Armada) and... uh, okay that's about it. 

I've aged out as an audience member. As the feral kid says, it just lives now in my memories.

Thursday, August 29, 2024

What qualifies as a fan these days?

When I was a little kid, I got caught up in all the hype and fanfare over Star Wars. It was a cultural moment. I got toys, comics, books, the works. Later on I even played the RPG and bought miniatures to go with it. 

I read a ton of sci-fi as a teenager, and watched all (most) of the Star Trek shows. I watched Doctor Who as a kid, too, from around age 6 or 7.

And then... it all kind of faded away. I stopped reading sci-fi, stopped playing RPGs and boardgames, stopped watching the TV shows. 

Over COVID, I picked up some RPGs and boardgames again, and watched the Trek I'd missed decades ago. 

Do I still qualify as a fan? 

I think I did as a teenager, and while I still love the original era of Star Wars and Star Trek and Doctor Who (some of which is better not rewatched lest the nostalgia goggles fail), I've never really jibed with the newer installments. I liked the new Doctor, but it was never quite as good as the old stuff. Or perhaps more to the point, I was no longer as impressionable and open to it. 

The media we consume between say, 8 and 18, can have a greater impact than anything subsequent. Our minds are sponges. We soak up everything we can and then seek out more. 

For some people, this never ends. They remain hard core fans their whole lives. 

If I think, hey, I'm a fan of X franchise, I can look over (on the Internets, it's figurative, just roll with me) at uber fans who live and breathe it. I still have some books and merchandise. They have the pajamas, compendiums, encyclopedias, costumes, games, books, films, fan films, their own podcast, tattoos, etcetera. 

My enthusiasm pales by comparison to insignificance. Can I still call myself a fan? 

Given that 'fan' is derived from 'fanatic', maybe not. 

Franchises are story machine loops, constantly cycling, the same but different, running decade after decade. Eventually, we start to cotton on to how they work. How many times did they blow up the Death Star? How many times did the transporter get blocked by a magnetic storm or barrier or what have you? How many times did a paradox blow up a computer? How many times were they separated from the TARDIS? How many times did the ally turn out to be the enemy? How many times did Kirk get his shirt off?

You get the idea.

The most impactful material is what you first ingest, because that's the freshest, even if it isn't. Fresh is relative. A ten year old watching a tired old show will think the new stuff is the bomb because they haven't soaked up the previous 40 years of material yet. 

So... I like certain franchises, and within them, I like certain eras, largely because that's what I first saw. Of course, they're also better than any other era, I mean obviously, but it's a waste of energy trying to convince others of that.