Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JustinAlexander" data-source="post: 6122321" data-attributes="member: 6700092">That's not the same thing.If we want to talk about an applicable example from Star Wars, let's consider the end of the first movie: It establishes a specific rule ("the only way to destroy this thing is to fire a photon torpedo into the exhaust port") and then structures the end of the film around it.Now, let's imagine that instead of the movie we actually saw Lucas had delivered a different movie: Luke's attack run fails. Oh no! C3-PO turns to Princess Leia and says, "You have to help him you stupid cow!" And then Princess Leia says, "Wait!" She <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8qgehH3kEQ" target="_blank">types furiously for a few seconds</a> and then the Death Star blows up. Leia smiles, "I just suddenly realized I could reverse the polarity of the shield generators!"Ta-da!That's <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> writing. And it's still not as bad as the ending in "Hide", because at least it doesn't explicitly rule out reversing the polarity of the shield generators (not once, but twice) only to present that as the solution (not once, but twice) without any justification for how the situation has changed beyond Clara calling the TARDIS a cow.The equivalent to the "Han Solo in the asteroid field" moment would have been something like:Doctor: We'll use the TARDIS to go pick her up!Clara: Is that dangerous? Doctor: Well... if we stay there longer than 10 seconds the TARDIS might blow up. But I'm pretty sure if we'll be fine... I mean, we'll be fine. I'm sure we'll be fine. Fine-ish.Clara: Next time, just say "no".It's a dialogue that just says "this will be really dangerous, so appreciate how nifty I am".Having re-skimmed the episode, I think the intention may have been that the psychic's efforts somehow made it possible for the TARDIS to go to the pocket dimension and safely return. But if that's the case, the writer completely failed to deliver it in a coherent fashion.</blockquote>

Verification