MovieChat Forums > Star Wars (1977) Discussion > Light sabers are depicted ALL WRONG

Light sabers are depicted ALL WRONG


First of all, why would something made of 'all-penetrating light' be STOPPED by another beam of 'all-penetrating light'? Wouldn't something as light as light (sorry for the pun) easily penetrate another light (beam)?

I mean, why does light become a SOLID when it hits another light (beam)?

It makes no sense, especially since this is supposed to be a 'penetrating light' that penetrates and goes through everything - even regular light would easily go through another light (beam), so why wouldn't the penetrating version of light do the same, and penetrate even better?

Second point I wanted to make is that .. light has no weight.

Light sabers' 'blade portion' (if it can be called such) should NOT have weight. But you can clearly see from the movements, the inertia, and all the other physical law-obeying stuff that it DEFINITELY has weight. The way actors wield these swords is almost no different than wielding an ACTUAL sword with a lot of definite weight on its blade.

But light sabers should have just as weightless light as a flashlight does; only the HANDLE has weight, so you could basically do RIDICULOUSLY fast movements with it, because twirling a flashlight around has got to be N times faster than twirling around an actual metal sword.

However, in these movies, it's NEVER shown to be that - the 'light' portion ALWAYS has enormous amount of weight (considering it's supposed to be LIGHT!).

Just imagine how much better and cooler (and dangerous) these 'light saber fights' would look if the light WAS depicted as actual light; first of all, two lights meeting would NOT stop each other from moving, and secondly, the light wound be weightless, allowing super SUPER fast movements of a destructive blade.

Imagine an all-destroying sword blade that's completely weightless - or at least for all intents and porpoises. You could swing it around like you could a ballpoint pen and yet cut your opponent to tiny slivers quickly.

But no, we have these HEAVY, massive light beams that cling to each other like actual metal blades would (how boring! Moviemakers have NO balls to show us somethig unseen-before, but always the same physical rules we've already seen in swordfights).

Just because it makes an 'interference sound' doesn't make it exciting. They should have applied a completely new style of fighting and new physics, since old physics do not apply to light blades. (Or at least not as far as my point is concerned)

I keep dreaming of moviemakers with some kind of vision and actual courage to show us a world we have not yet seen in movies.. all THESE movies do is 'make the blade glow and destroy a couple of seemingly insignifigant props' (I mean, why did they even build the things Darth Vader destroys easily with light sabers, if it doesn't matter if they're destroyed? Surely they must've served SOME function that was disrupted)

As long as we're on this topic, I always hated the way one of these movies show the light sabers being all bright, glowing and shiny, and then the ACTUAL explosive effect that was used to show how a light saber can slice through something metallic is shown to be SO DIM. It's completely counter-intuitive that a light could look so dim.

Of course we get to another point from this; the monitors, TVs and such that are weirdly really dim compared to how bright a silver screen projection is, so an light effect just looks dim and unrealistic, dull and unexciting.

It's incredible that we advance in technology while also at the same time going backwards so much. A film can show way more shades than 256, but a modern computer GPU and monitor can't (well, HDR is supported by SOME GPUs and monitors, but not yet on a massive scale, and Dolby's groundbreaking innovation, 'Brightside' (or whatever it was called) was shelved, because masses don't understand these things, so they won't demand them).

Our old PAL/NTSC interlace system could basically support 50 and 60 fps, but then we got digital cameras that support video with 25 and 30 fps.

How can we call it a progress when it's regressing at the same time..?

In any case, I guess this became a multi-topic rant, but damn, this world sucks and so do its movies. At least compared to what I could imagine a world and its movies could be like.


reply

Have you ever seen a movie you actually liked?

reply

You better not watch Spaceballs then!

reply

The OP would hate getting their Schwartz twisted, lol xD

reply

Does the word “fantasy” mean anything to you

reply

Have you heard of suspension of belief. It's a big part of the sci-fi and fantasy genres.

reply

The Force is strong in this one.

reply

This is what is wrong with modern viewers

reply

OP, are you RETARDED or WHAT?

reply

Here's Mark Hamill being Harrison Ford and basically responding to this:
https://youtu.be/onMm0DLg8CE?t=55

reply