Heres the thing about science fiction: It has to play at least somewhat consistently by the rules of science that it establishes at a glance. If you show me a civilian wearing a jetpack, Ill assume that when I see soldiers in combat, Ill see that jetpack technology used to any logical combat applications it might have. The problem with the Claymore Lightsaber isnt that its poorly-designed. The claymore sword ITSELF wasnt the most efficiently-designed sword, thats why two-handed longswords werent the end of the evolution of swords in the 16th century. The problem with the lightsaber in the new trailer is that its designed in a way that DRAWS ATTENTION TO ITS POOR DESIGN. The Millennium Falcon isnt the most aerodynamic design for a flying craft, but we believe its the fastest hunk of junk in the galaxy because, presumably, spacecrafts speed in the SWU has more to do with the (fictional) science behind engines and fuel than what we visually recognize as fast designs. If you want us to believe that the claymore saber has a purpose other than OMG LOOK AT IT THAT IS SO COOL, then show us how its uniquely suited to battle, and dispel the obviously-observed seeming faults (namely that it would get chopped in half almost instantly if used, as a longsword is supposed to, to block a strike with the crossbar.) To do otherwise is to place an incredibly shallow sense of aesthetics above our logical understanding of form, and audiences are just more sophisticated than that.
Posted on: Sat, 29 Nov 2014 05:21:53 +0000
Trending Topics
© 2015