back to article Apple LIGHTSABERS to feature in The Force Awakens

Apple design supremo Jony Ive met Star Wars: The Force Awakens director at a dinner party and offered him some thoughts on lightsaber design that made it into the forthcoming flick. So says The New Yorker in a profile of Ive. The story says “Ive once sat next to J. J. Abrams at a boozy dinner party in New York, and made what …

  1. PleebSmash
    Devil

    sith icon

    Well the analog, spitty part was clearly taken to heart.

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Retrogression of the "Force".

    I don't understand why you would make the light saber more primitive for films that take place AFTER all other events. If anything they should of done this in the pre-quels. Of course maybe it is just to reflect the idea that no matter how bad something is, it can always get worse (which would also reflect the franchise's new ownership).

    Also, if all it takes is to have a drunken conversation with a stranger to get ideas booted into movies, Disney is about to have a slew of new drunk ass material for the future. J.J. Abrams and Ive's should slot a bottle of Bourbon for their next meet so we can finally see Luke puke all over Mickey (Or maybe they'll both just get "throated" by a giant worm).

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

      Why is having a less "precise" light saber automatically a regression? Maybe keeping an exact beam wastes power, and a more 'analog' beam requires less recharging or otherwise makes them more powerful? I mean, one assumes light sabers must need some sort of charging to power them, unless they draw power directly from the force or something stupid like that :)

      Even if these light sabers are a step back, perhaps all the destruction left in the wake of the rebel defeat of the Empire caused technology to take a bit of a step back. I imagine Germany and Japan's technology took a bit of a step back after the end of WW II for similar reasons. Or hell, maybe the guys who were the galaxy's leading experts in building light sabers died during the war, and some secrets died with them...

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

        I "futurely" agree! However, light sabers do not require charging. To be honest, I've never read a reason, seen a reason, or heard a reason in any book, movie, or game that explains this. However, by the same examples, I have never seen a light saber used or operational by someone without the Force, so maybe it does draw from the Force? I did find this...

        "The Forcesaber was a precursor created by the Rakata, which would eventually evolve into the lightsaber. Users were able to channel the dark side of the Force through black laboratory-grown crystals which would create the glowing energy blades."

        "The first lightsabers came into being when the precursor Je'daii Order combined advanced offworld technology with a forging ritual, learning how to "freeze" a laser beam."

        http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Lightsaber

        Not sure what to make of that being those paragraphs seem to conflict heavily on light saber engineering, and do not conclude to a definitive answer. Answers there is, how to find them we ask? ~~~~~~~

        1. Fibbles

          Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

          Star Wars is not science fiction. The answer to any question involving the mechanics of the Force or lightsabers is always "a wizard did it".

        2. Any mouse Cow turd

          Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

          Han Solo used Luke's lightsabre to cut open the Tauntaun on Both to stuf a freezing Luke inside.

          1. Frank Bough

            Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

            Why let any kind of sense get in the way of a cash juggernaut?

        3. Mark 85

          Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

          "I "futurely" agree! However, light sabers do not require charging"

          Ah... sort of like the cowboys in some old movies where they could fire off a hundred shots with their 6-shooter and never reload?

          1. Vladimir Plouzhnikov

            Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

            They actually do require charging - I remember it being mentioned in one of the books...

            1. Graham Marsden

              @Vladimir Plouzhnikov - Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

              The quote was in Splinter of the Mind's Eye by Alan Dean Foster: "Leaning back, he regarded the mist silently as his father's ancient weapon sucked power"

              Of course Splinter... is an Expanded Universe story and they're not necessarily considered to be part of the Canon...

              1. Peter Gathercole Silver badge

                Re: @Graham Marsden Splinter of the Mind's Eye

                This was not just an Expanded Universe story. It's THE FIRST Expanded Universe story.

                It was published before The Empire Strikes Back was released, so is extremely non-canon.

                1. TRT Silver badge

                  Re: @Graham Marsden Splinter of the Mind's Eye

                  The force was dying out wasn't it? Jedi unable to focus and use it effectively. Now the foot's off the hosepipe.

                  I dunno. I don't even LIKE StarWars.

                2. Stevie

                  Re: @Graham Marsden Splinter of the Mind's Eye

                  It was published before The Empire Strikes Back was released, so is extremely non-canon.

                  And hence a damned sight more readable than much of what came after.

                  I thought I was the only person in the world who owned a copy of that book.

            2. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

              Perhaps lightsabers are hybrid. Petrol engine and a battery. Igniting your lightsaber by pulling a cord could be the first thing a padewan learns in the the temple. Jedi dueling with the sound of lawnmowers would add a certain atmos that's currently missing. A '4d' version could have the heady smell of 2 stroke oil sprayed into the cimema. It's just as well I've never spoken to a pissed up JJ really.

              1. Stevie

                Re: Perhaps lightsabers are hybrid.

                You mean like the recoil-start Rambo Knife was in the movie Hot Shots?

                I guess nothing new is old when its new. Or something.

              2. Michael Wojcik Silver badge

                Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

                Igniting your lightsaber by pulling a cord could be the first thing a padewan learns in the the temple

                Man, I wish lightsabers were pull-start. One of the best things about the rather haphazard1 Pioneer anime El-Hazard: The Mysterious World (the original series; everything went down from there) was that one of the characters had a pull-start magic weapon.

                This might have been an homage to Army of Darkness, which was released a few years earlier, and also features a pull-start hand-heldreplacement weapon. And in the same year we had Dead Alive, with an improvised pull-start weapon - the best thing Peter Jackson ever directed.

                1Wait for it...

        4. jai

          Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

          "I have never seen a light saber used or operational by someone without the Force"

          General Grievous uses four at once.

          And the aforementioned Han Solo's "I thought the smelled bad.... on the outside" moment.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

        Actually Germany technology didn't take any step back - and a lot of it was poured into USA and URSS one. Japan technology did a step up after the war - when someone started to sell cameras to the US troops...

        Sure, had they killed all those German scientists and technologists (and some, probably many - were compromised with the Nazis, even if they were clever people in their field) maybe the whole world would have took a huge step back.

        1. Peter2 Silver badge

          Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

          I've only ever read a few star wards books, but I seem to recall "I, Jedi" had them charging their lightsabers.

          German and Japanese technology actually improved after the war, courtesy of us bombing everything flat. Then the Americans made very generous loans and donations to allow them to rebuild with the latest technology. Sadly, as this same courtesy wasn't extended to their own citizens (or allies) this meant that after a decade our former enemies had a better tech base than the allies who won the war.

          Still, better than what happened after WW1...

          1. Norm DePlume

            Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

            > Sadly, as this same courtesy wasn't extended to their own citizens (or allies) this meant that

            > after a decade our former enemies had a better tech base than the allies who won the war.

            This is an unfortunate myth: in fact Britain was the largest recipient of funds under The Marshall Plan. We just blew it all on post-imperial dreams instead of investing it in useful infrastructure.

            > Still, better than what happened after WW1...

            I find not disagreement with that sentiment, however.

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

            Marshall Plan money was given to the UK. Atlee decided to spunk it on shiney shiney.

          3. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

            Yep - well, WWII happened after WWI because many Germans felt they had been forced to capitulate by their failed leadership - Germany was by no means soundly defeated. Onerous terms and financial hardship proved a fertile breeding ground for the Fascist movement. WWIII didn't happen because the Axis powers (Germany / Japan ) were soundly beaten in WWII and then peace in Europe was bought through investment by the Americans largely with the money that the UK had just paid the USA for military aid. The UK never recovered its industrial strength and the best German scientific brains went (willingly) to the USA or were taken (forcibly) to the USSR - few if any really came to Britain (why would they Britain was on it knees). So WWII was really very, very good for the USA, it was propelled out of the depression by British money and got some sophisticated German brains for it's now impressive war-capacity manufacturing capability and never suffered any attacks to home soil.

          4. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge
            Facepalm

            Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

            German and Japanese technology actually improved after the war, courtesy of us bombing everything flat. Then the Americans made very generous loans and donations to allow them to rebuild with the latest technology.

            This is beyond retarded and just proves a total misunderstanding of how an economy works, it's practically the picture-book-for-6-years-old view of the economy espoused by Keynesians.

            1) If you "bomb everything flat" it's over. There isn't even the wherewithal to build the machines to build the machines to build the machines. It's called the capital base. The skillbase is gone too.

            2) The "donations" you mention (aka "the Marshal Plan") mainly went to well-connected figures in Sweden and Greece, not germany.

            3) It took about 30 years and the effects of post-war liberalization to get Germany anywhere near an acceptable industrial base. And there were still bombed-out areas, shitty roads, bad services, limited resources and underdeveloped regions.

            4) US-based investors, meanwhile just could go on buying up everything, investing and expanding into Europe, and generally transforming most of the world into a dollar-dominated backwater. Of course the economic havoc of wartime and the subsequent "small wars" (not to mention the economic havoc of the preceding "New Deal") must have loped off a few hundred billion gold-based USD of lost revenue but hey, who is counting?

            1. Stevie

              Re Rebuilding Germany's Industrial Base

              It took about 30 years and the effects of post-war liberalization to get Germany anywhere near an acceptable industrial base. etc. Holes in cities. etc.

              Good. Doesn't make up for the rationing that went on for 10 years after VE Day in England or the big holes in Coventry, where I grew up, yea unto the early 60s or the war-caused power rationing that closed factories for hours every day so *England* couldn't get back up to speed at full, er, speed.

              Dear recently post WWII Germany: That's what you get for being a bunch of gits.

        2. Dave 126 Silver badge

          Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

          >I don't understand why you would make the light saber more primitive for films that take place AFTER all other events.

          Nor me, but hey, let's wait til we see the movie! There could be a dozen 'in-universe' explanations for the spitty look, ranging from a loss of knowledge (just as we lost the secrets of Damascus steel) to merely that the bad guy thought it looked cool!

          Anyhows, didn't the spacecraft in episodes IV -VI look more primitive than the craft in I-III?

          1. Professor Clifton Shallot

            Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

            "didn't the spacecraft in episodes IV -VI look more primitive than the craft in I-III"

            They did indeed - which IMO fits with the move from a decadent, peaceful republic where luxury and status were important to a civil war where just churning out relatively efficient fighting machines took precedence.

            Of course that doesn't preclude good design and while they don't match the elegance of Spitfires, the x-wings and tie fighters are iconic in their way.

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Boffin

            Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

            The 'secret' of Damascus steel wasn't lost as such; one explaination was the lack of supply of Indian steel from a particular region where the composition had a particular alloy mix not found elsewhere. As the sword makers didn't know why it worked they couldn't loose the secret. I imagine Sith or Jedi would know why their sabers work, not being that primitive in tech terms.

            BTW, the 'lost wax' process was never actually 'lost'

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

        "Why is having a less "precise" light saber automatically a regression?"

        If you recall Obi-Wan Kenobi's conversation with the young Luke Skywalker in the original Star Wars:

        "Your father's lightsaber. This is the weapon of a Jedi Knight. Not as clumsy or as random as a blaster. An elegant weapon... for a more civilized age."

        I completely get the Sith having cruder versions, which is in line with having given themselves over to the 'dark side', but not the Jedi - this would be completely contrary to their character and morals.

        1. Dan Paul

          Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

          Look back to Asimov's Foundation Trilogy (that Lucas clearly ripped off for Star Wars) and the "Empire" clearly degenerates as time progresses. So would the light sabers.

      4. sabroni Silver badge
        Happy

        Re: unless they draw power directly from the force or something stupid like that :)

        Indeed, that would really threaten the credibility of the piece. Just because the force can lift a little starship out a swamp doesn't mean it could have enough power to make a magic laser!

    2. MastaBlasta

      Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

      A popular hypothesis is that the guy in the cloak with the fuzzy lightsaber is someone who has been in stasis/asleep/whatever for a very long time.

      In that case is lightsaber would be an early example, perhaps built thousands of years before the era of the original movies.

      He's certainly stumbling around like someone who just got out of bed...

    3. Lloyd

      Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

      My understanding is that the character wielding the weapon is obsessed with Jedi relics, hence him using one.

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Childcatcher

      Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

      > Also, if all it takes is to have a drunken conversation with a stranger to get ideas booted into movies

      The usual way to guarantee getting an idea into a movie is to say: "I've got a great idea for a child's toy that you can incorporate..."

    5. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

      As for why the lightsabres might get more spitty. Well, let me think... hmm three seconds later I came up with the idea that possibly it's because all the other Jedi/Sith are dead and the couple who are left lost the previously refined art of constructing lightsabres and are trying to work it out from the beginning again, hence the technology is messier. Obviously three seconds thinking is too difficult for you.

      Also your comment re the "franchise's new ownership" marks you out as a fuckwit and shows your complete and total lack of knowledge re film history. Lets start with the basics. You do know Marvel films are Disney don't you? Probably. You do know Pulp Fiction is a Disney film, don't you? Probably not... What about Clerks? Sin City? Kill Bill? No??? Do any of them feature Mickey fucking Mouse? Well just fuck off and be stupid somewhere else then.

      1. Vladimir Plouzhnikov

        Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

        You are angry, AC. Anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering.

        1. The Indomitable Gall

          Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

          @Vlad,

          " You are angry, AC. Anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering. "

          Suffering leads to ???, and ??? leads to profit.

      2. The Indomitable Gall

        Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

        " As for why the lightsabres might get more spitty. Well, let me think... hmm three seconds later I came up with the idea that possibly it's because all the other Jedi/Sith are dead and the couple who are left lost the previously refined art of constructing lightsabres and are trying to work it out from the beginning again, hence the technology is messier. Obviously three seconds thinking is too difficult for you. "

        If you'd thought three seconds more, you'd have remembered that Luke Skywalker's Return of the Jedi light saber was built by Luke himself, seemingly after the death of Yoda, so with no ancient Jedi blacksmiths left to pass on the knowledge. Luke's entire Jedi training appears to have consisted of a week with Kenobi and a few months with Yoda, so it can't have been that hard.

        1. Stevie

          Re: it can't have been that hard.

          Well, Radio Shack has filed for bankruptcy.

          I wonder if it's a case of "Well, you can't get the parts these days".

      3. Mark 85

        Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

        Give in to your anger, AC. With each passing moment you make yourself more my servant.

    6. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

      > I don't understand why you would make the light saber more primitive for films that take place AFTER all other events.

      Well, I'd chalk that up as an acceptable deviation. A "reboot" if you will. Don't the old movies mention that lightsabers are an old weapon from a more civilized age? I mean, they seem to work much better than blasters in combat, right? Why would they have moved on from them?

      1. Vladimir Plouzhnikov

        Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

        "Why would they have moved on from them?"

        They haven't. All but a few have been killed under Order 66. No Jedi, no lightsabers (you need the Force to operated one or you'll sooner cut off your own head)....

    7. Steve Mann

      Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

      I don't understand why you would make the light saber more primitive for films that take place AFTER all other events.

      Obviously, lightsabers are now so ubiquitous with the clueless un-midiclorinated that they have become riddled with viruses, malware and trojans. These, and the active countermeasures the sabers now come with as standard, suck so much juice the actual blade gubbins are starved for power.

      Luckily, in Episode 8, Apple save the day by inventing the iSaber which uses a different operating system that "can't get viruses".

      Sadly, Apple turn out to be run by cruel and cynical Clonemasters who strictly limit the supply, and galactic civilization collapses as everyone spends all their time queuing outside the local SaberStore instead of running the galacti-banks or driving cabs or checking income tax returns for "errors".

      In episode 9, amid the anarchic chaos, some unsung hero invents the FOSSsaber, and it looks like the galaxy is saved again. Unfortunately, everyone plus their space-dog forks the design and now the iQueuers are entertained by gangs of people screaming at each other about who has the only real SaberSystem and how everyone else is deluded and dumb.

      This goes on until the long-ago galaxy in question is swallowed by the quasar at its center.

    8. Medixstiff

      Re: Retrogression of the "Force".

      "I don't understand why you would make the light saber more primitive for films that take place AFTER all other events"

      I read a heap of the books when I was younger, my favourite is still the Thrawn Trilogy, the expanded univers and even TOR is full of lore on lightsabers, however even a quick Google search of "lightsaber anatomy" shows they have a power source.

      All the different crystals do is change the colour and sometimes the length.

      I can't remember where I read it but it was explained that a lightsaber is an extension of it's owner, hence why there are so many customised versions, including curved hilts like the Emperor had in the last travesty they released and double sided ones like Darth Maul had.

  3. stucs201

    I really hope this is all he's come along and meddled with.

    Don't want to end up with this:

    http://www.dailymobile.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Apple-death-star.jpg

  4. Haku

    Rule 2. The Future is Old.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_joDNOpeWWo

    But Apple products are designed to be shiny and new...

    1. Fluffy Bunny

      Re: Rule 2. The Future is Old.

      Always shiny and new, because you have to replace them constantly. Me, I tend to function over fashion. Or do I mean fad-ism?

  5. Kevin McMurtrie Silver badge
    Gimp

    Warranty void if seal is broken

    I thought Jedis liked to customize their lightsabers. They won't go for a sealed disposable cutting appliance that takes a very long time to turn on.

    1. Haku
      Coat

      Re: Warranty void if seal is broken

      They'll probably have a standby mode, and an irreplacable fuel source that needs recharging every 24 hours.

      1. DrGoon

        Re: Warranty void if seal is broken

        Exactly - and it is this lack of user replaceable power source that has resulted in older lightsabers being more spitty and analog. Luke neglected to purchase the optional JediCare and hasn't had a chance to take his in to the Genius cantina.

      2. The Indomitable Gall

        Re: Warranty void if seal is broken

        "They'll probably have a standby mode, and an irreplacable fuel source that needs recharging every 24 hours."

        I'd be more worried about the fact that you can't plug it into a charger without it turning itself on. Kind of risky.

    2. Thorne

      Re: Warranty void if seal is broken

      Very hard to fight someone when you have to hold the lightsaber the right way to make it work.......

      1. Richard 81

        Re: Warranty void if seal is broken

        If you chop your own hands off, you're holding it wrong.

        1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge
          Coat

          Re: Warranty void if seal is broken

          Luke will be wearing a Jed-iWatch in the film. You mark my words...

          One thing a more spitty lightsabre might be useful for, is making kebabs. "Use the chilli sauce Luke."

          I'd best go now I think. Before I turn to the pun side of the force.

  6. Mark 85

    It's just a movie....

    If the light saber is the only thing wrong, I'll go see it. If it's a bad movie to begin with, it won't matter how great the light saber is, I'll ignore it.

    I love good to great Science Fiction. Seems the Star Wars flicks of late have fallen into the "hey, let's do a sequel" without any regard to making a good movie but just a fast profit.

    1. dan1980

      Re: It's just a movie....

      @Mark

      Fair point and it can seem like nerds splitting hairs at times (that is our forte, however . . .) but I view things like this as indicative of the mindset of the director.

      As most people who have a decent familiarity with Star Trek will tell you, JJ changed many things in his new movies and some of those seemed to be simply because he thought they would look cool, or needed changing to fit in with some other idea he thought was cool.

      Personally, I liked those movies, but only as thoroughly stand-alone affairs and only if I pushed my thought-processes right to the back of my skull.

      When you come into an existing IP - especially one that has such an important place in cinema and has some very passionate fans - you have to respect the existing universe and making things look cool is great but there should always be a good reason and explanation that works - not simply some cursory hand-wave.

      Seeing changes to pretty much THE most iconic part of Star Wars (the lightsaber) because the director wants it to look more 'menacing' does not necessarily fill a fan with confidence.

      It especially does not fill them with confidence if they are also a Star Trek fan still shaking their head at the boldness of undermining the entire setting of the franchise (space travel) by introducing the hand-wave of 'trans-warp teleportation' in order to get the main character back into the story after the somewhat touching but ultimately ridiculous and unbelievable co-incidence of being abandoned on the same planet as not only an 'old friend' but also, astoundingly, a crucial future friend who just happens to be the only being in the universe (so far as one can tell) who has the ability to get them back where they need to be.

      Oh and the escape pod of course crashes just far enough away from both these two people to provide some action thrills on the way but still be easily commutable, which is handy seeing as he appears to have been marooned without any supplies. Given this oversight, the fact that the local fauna were unknown (turning out to be quite dangerous) and the rather extreme measure of shooting someone off in an escape pod rather than, oh, say, locking them in the bloody brig, it's also somewhat strange that nothing comes of this rather odd, callous and life-threatening over-reaction. More so seeing as it's from someone who so values regulations that he relieves himself of duty due to another one.

      Essentially, he (and the writers) wanted to get from one place to another and ended up requiring plot devices that strained credulity to breaking point to achieve this. Sure, my partner didn't care and never thought about the implication being able to transport across the galaxy so it was a success in that regard but that is pretty much saying that 'only nerds will care so it's not important'. Fine for other movies; somewhat less so for Star Trek!

      So yeah, it's just a movie and it's just a visual effect but it's also a sign of how the director is approaching it and I am not sure that it shows him to be on the right track to satisfy fans. Whether he cares about that or not is another matter, of course!

      1. Mark 85

        Re: It's just a movie....

        I believe, no... I know you're right. The problem with dealing a franchise of movies is the changes. I sort of gave up on following these things quite some time ago as each succeeding sequel was worse then previous one... downhill slide. This lightsaber thing seems to be a hallmark of this type of stuff as does the Star Trek changes. Even Indana Jones had issues from film to film... But, one can try to take each film as a separate entity but sometimes, as in this case, it's really hard to do.

        1. Dave 126 Silver badge

          Re: It's just a movie....

          >Seems the Star Wars flicks of late have fallen into the "hey, let's do a sequel" without any regard to making a good movie but just a fast profit.

          Don't worry, George Lucas had nothing to do with this movie. He has even said that Disney have not used used any of the story ideas he gave them when they bought the IP. Phew!

          For sure, James Cameron and Ridley Scott have let us down in the last decade, but Neils Blomkampf, Duncan Jones and Alex Garland have been more-or-less on the money.

          1. Vladimir Plouzhnikov

            Re: It's just a movie....

            The Star Wars prequels are similar to Starship Troopers (the movie) in the sense that most people criticising them do entirely miss the plot. Don't see the wood for the trees, so to say.

            Everyone concentrates on effects, Jar-Jar (PBUH), wooden acting - but these are simple vignettes. Embellishments. The actual plot is about the abuse and manipulation of power in a supposed democracy and how those who were supposed to uphold it became so complacent that they missed the whole thing until the roof literally fell upon their heads.

            I can see direct parallels with what was and still is going on IRL. Iraq (clone?) wars, Ukraine (separatist alliance with Putin as Duku?), ISIS (Neimoidians?), dysfunctional EU (the senate?), well-meaning but inept Obama (Valorum?). The most interesting question is - who the hell is Palpatine? Tell me - not Miliband, please!?

            What I'm afraid the most of in the Disney's takeover, is that they will turn it back to being mindless "family adventure" and the fans will fall over themselves in orgasmic excitement about pissy lightsabers and crappy pseudo-vintage effects... We'll find out soon enough, I suppose.

            1. Dave 126 Silver badge

              Re: It's just a movie....

              >What I'm afraid the most of in the Disney's takeover, is that they will turn it back to being mindless "family adventure" and the fans will fall over themselves in orgasmic excitement about pissy lightsabers and crappy pseudo-vintage effects...

              The trailer has shown that physical sets and models have been used extensively for this new StarWars film. It would seem that the new director is very aware of the problems with the prequels, and is making an attempt to avoid them.... time will tell if he succeeds.

              In fact, the prequels contain more physical effects than the original films, but the slightly ropey CGI, characters and acting distracted from them.

              I enjoy political plotting and scheming, but that alone doesn't make a good movie if it is lacking in other areas. Sometimes a classic - archetypal, even - story of good vs evil is more fun, if done well. And let's not forget John Williams' score.

            2. The Indomitable Gall

              Re: It's just a movie....

              " The Star Wars prequels are similar to Starship Troopers (the movie) in the sense that most people criticising them do entirely miss the plot. Don't see the wood for the trees, so to say. "

              Not the right cliché. The plot was tiny, and hidden behind all the distracting fluff tacked on (which is not what vignettes are, incidentally. I'd say the plot was a clearing, which you couldn't see because the viewer was outside an Endor-sized forest with a whole moon's worth of trees between the viewer and the clearing.

              The theme held promise -- the corruption of power -- but the overall plot was ridiculous. Episode I in particular had a lot of people moving about for no clear reason. Episode II had two people who appeared more robotic than R2D2 deciding not only that they understood the concept of "love", but that they were in it. Episode II gave the opportunity for a good tragic twist when the Trade Federation told Kenobi that they were building the Death Star to fight against Darth Sidious, but then Lucas chickened out and made that a lie. The Greek-level tragedy of Obi-Wan destroying the galaxy's last hope against the founding of the Empire and personally delivering the plans for the Death Star to the future Emperor would have been a fantastic plot twist.

              And in the end, even the political intrigue needed a figure of ridicule to pull it off. It should have been someone we liked who messed up.

              1. Vladimir Plouzhnikov

                Re: It's just a movie....

                Well, I agree with that - they could have been made better.

            3. dan1980

              Re: It's just a movie....

              @Vladimir

              It seems that what you're saying is that we should ignore the visuals and the acting and concentrate on what is a good plot.

              There's something in that but mostly I would reply: "then read a book".

              Movies are stories visualised and acted out. If the visuals and acting fall down then you've kind of got a rubbish movie almost by definition.

              1. Vladimir Plouzhnikov

                Re: It's just a movie....

                In general, I agree - a bad movie with a good plot is still a not very good movie.

                But for SW, to me - and that's simply my personal impression and opinion of these movies - yes, the acting is from barely passable to outright bad in places, but I have no problem with the visuals.

                Having watched all of the SW movies in a relatively adult age, I don't have any nostalgic longing for the analogue-ness of the effects in the originals. It's not part of the appeal. Quite the opposite, when I watch these movies I'm having to mentally filter out the deficiencies of analogue chroma keying just as I do with the outdated artifacts of the early CGI.

  7. fearnothing

    It kind of makes sense that the sequels' lightsabers might be more analogue and less precise - after all, Palpatine did a pretty thorough job of scrubbing the galaxy of the Jedi order, leaving the technique of making lightsabers to be communicated from an old hermit with a speech impediment to a young hothead with a listening impediment. Seems very reasonable to me that the later models might not be up to standard.

    1. Thorne

      Except it's a red one so it's Sith......

      1. Dave 126 Silver badge

        There's no reason the Sith too couldn't have suffered a hiccup in their lightsaber supply chain.

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Apple patent on digital lightsaber

    Jony Ive was channeling Steve Jobs on this, saying he'd go nuclear if Abrams kept using a saber clearly copied from the Apple design. Either use the analog OR NONE AT ALL!

  9. king of foo

    is that lense flare?

    No, it's a power surge! Quick, drop it!

    Noooooooooooooooo!

    How Luke really lost that hand.

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Alert

    According to sources close to the source, in the film, Ive wanted some of the stormtroopers to queue outside a certain room in the Death Star for a week or so to upgrade their Sabers (sic) to a longer brighter version made entirely of aluminium. A sub-plot was to be that the old Sabers would get slower and slower, then just become torches.

    J. J. Abrams rejected the ideas: "who the hell would queue a week, then pay for an upgrade that did pretty much what the old thing did, only more expensively?"

    Jonny Ive just smiled. The force was strong in that one.

    1. Sir Runcible Spoon
      Trollface

      I don't get it.

  11. Longrod_von_Hugendong
    FAIL

    A civilisation that has FTL travel...

    Probably would have pretty advanced stuff, maybe they can get it to work well.

    As I have said about this film - I have a bad feeling about this.

  12. This post has been deleted by its author

  13. joeldillon

    'Reboot'

    You say that word. I do not think it means what you think it means

    (A prequel is not a reboot)

  14. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

    You're holding it wrong

    Scene 1:

    Obi-wan: It's your fathers light sabre.

    Luke Presses a button and the beam comes out of the back and through his chest

    Obi-wan: You're holding it wrong

  15. Joc

    Apple iSabers

    I think they have them in the prequels.... Count Dooku's definately looked like he's been keeping it in his back pocket.

  16. Captain Hogwash

    Jesus in a vacuum tube

    They look like those decorative neon lightbulbs with Jesus inside that were produced in the thirties but were still popular in Irish holiday lets in the seventies. Surely someone else can see what I mean?

  17. Benchops

    Jonny Ive design?

    More pastel coloured beams.

    1. TRT Silver badge

      Re: Jonny Ive design?

      No. The blade is totally flat since they've done away with skewymorphics.

  18. Joey

    Old is best

    A spitty light sabre is obviously a relic, like a well-worn 1959 Stratocaster. Very desirable!

  19. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Reboot?

    Am I the only one who objects to the term "reboot" being applied to Episodes 1-3 and 7 onwards?

    1. The Indomitable Gall

      Re: Reboot?

      Annakin, both the "I see dead people" version, and the "I see nothing but red" version, deserves to be booted out the airlock...

  20. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Apple iSabre?

    Surely the only thing Ives could contribute is that the lightsabre should avoid any controls or user serviceable parts, require a Jedi Council approved cable to recharge, come in a variety of luminous colours (red blue and green, so passe - where is the pink, yellow or puke green?), and of course, cost twice as much as the alternative.

    In fact, surely by the time of these new films everyone should have lightsabres, capable of controlling the beam length and width, and turning into blasters if needed.

  21. james 68
    Coat

    I can just imagine the conversation....

    I can just imagine the conversation....

    "I think your lightsabers infringe on our patents.... on screen they look like very long rectangles with rounded corners and could easily be mistaken for an iPhone®. If you don't want us to sue your ass off then you had better change them to be more raggedy and shitty."

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like