Film Poll Semifinals: Poll Harder

[Ocicat]

Okay folks - it had to happen.  The first and original Star Wars vs. it's highly regarded first sequel.  Which is the true pinnacle of the original (and only) trilogy?  Only one can represent the hopes of the Jedi in the film poll final!

[Swamp]

I surprized myself and went with Star Wars, mostly due to the sheer impact of the film on me as a kid and its originality and the images it sets forth.

[stePH]

As I type this I'm the lone vote for Empire against 3 for Star Wars.

[Darwinist]

I surprized myself and went with Star Wars, mostly due to the sheer impact of the film on me as a kid and its originality and the images it sets forth.

Seconded

[wintermute]

As I type this I'm the lone vote for Empire against 3 for Star Wars.

I was strongly thinking about voting for Empire. But in then end, if any movie is going to represent Star Wars, it has to be Star Wars.

[Bdoomed]

As I type this I'm the lone vote for Empire against 3 for Star Wars.

I shall join your cause!
2nd vote for Empire

[stePH]

I shall join your cause!
2nd vote for Empire

Woooooooo! 

[cue "Imperial March"]

[Russell Nash]

For the last twenty, including earlier in the polling, I have always called Empire the best Star Wars film, but when t came time to vote, It was a no brainer.  I voted for Star Wars.  I surprised myself.

[DKT]

Wow, this is surprising.  I voted for Empire, but it's cool to see all the love for the original.  Empire's still my favorite, but either way, it looks like the Jedi are going to make a showing.

[birdless]

I surprized myself and went with Star Wars, mostly due to the sheer impact of the film on me as a kid and its originality and the images it sets forth.

Seconded

Thirded

[Windup]

Gotta go with the original.  As great as Empire was, it didn't have the impact of the original, which totally remade the "look" of visual science fiction.  Consider the smooth curves and stilted presentation of spaceships and other gagetry in films just a few years older with the "hardware look" immortalized in the Millineum Falcon and the "realistic" movements of the TIE fighters, and you see the sea change. (OK, I know that's not the way TIE fighters or anything else would really move in a vacuum, but to our earthbound, atmosphere-soaked perspective, if was far more viscerally "real" than the "spaceship on a string" stuff that preceded it.)

[eytanz]

I also went with Star Wars, even though in some ways I certainly think Empire is a better film - the main reason is that Star Wars is better as a self-contained film. To fully enjoy Empire, you need to see Star Wars first so you can get to know the characters, and Jedi next so you know how it ends. Star Wars does not require any sequels (or, *shudder*, prequels) to be enjoyed.

[Russell Nash]

Gotta go with the original.  As great as Empire was, it didn't have the impact of the original, which totally remade the "look" of visual science fiction.  Consider the smooth curves and stilted presentation of spaceships and other gagetry in films just a few years older with the "hardware look" immortalized in the Millineum Falcon and the "realistic" movements of the TIE fighters, and you see the sea change. (OK, I know that's not the way TIE fighters or anything else would really move in a vacuum, but to our earthbound, atmosphere-soaked perspective, if was far more viscerally "real" than the "spaceship on a string" stuff that preceded it.)

The thing about the tie fighters is that they had pilots.  They needed to bank and turn similar to being in an atmosphere so that the pilots could handle the g-forces.  (Comment is withdrawn if there was a different movement you were referring to)

[wintermute]

Gotta go with the original.  As great as Empire was, it didn't have the impact of the original, which totally remade the "look" of visual science fiction.  Consider the smooth curves and stilted presentation of spaceships and other gagetry in films just a few years older with the "hardware look" immortalized in the Millineum Falcon and the "realistic" movements of the TIE fighters, and you see the sea change. (OK, I know that's not the way TIE fighters or anything else would really move in a vacuum, but to our earthbound, atmosphere-soaked perspective, if was far more viscerally "real" than the "spaceship on a string" stuff that preceded it.)

The thing about the tie fighters is that they had pilots.  They needed to bank and turn similar to being in an atmosphere so that the pilots could handle the g-forces.  (Comment is withdrawn if there was a different movement you were referring to)

OK, I have to confess that I don't know for sure, but I have a hard time understanding how changing your orientation would affect how you can handle g-forces, especially in a well-designed seat that offers good support. And if it does make a difference, wouldn't it be better to bank further, so that your longitudinal axis is parallel with the direction of the force?

This is going to kill my productivity today, while I try and answer that...

[Russell Nash]

Gotta go with the original.  As great as Empire was, it didn't have the impact of the original, which totally remade the "look" of visual science fiction.  Consider the smooth curves and stilted presentation of spaceships and other gagetry in films just a few years older with the "hardware look" immortalized in the Millineum Falcon and the "realistic" movements of the TIE fighters, and you see the sea change. (OK, I know that's not the way TIE fighters or anything else would really move in a vacuum, but to our earthbound, atmosphere-soaked perspective, if was far more viscerally "real" than the "spaceship on a string" stuff that preceded it.)

The thing about the tie fighters is that they had pilots.  They needed to bank and turn similar to being in an atmosphere so that the pilots could handle the g-forces.  (Comment is withdrawn if there was a different movement you were referring to)

OK, I have to confess that I don't know for sure, but I have a hard time understanding how changing your orientation would affect how you can handle g-forces, especially in a well-designed seat that offers good support. And if it does make a difference, wouldn't it be better to bank further, so that your longitudinal axis is parallel with the direction of the force?

This is going to kill my productivity today, while I try and answer that...

Ideally you want the g-forces to go straight backwards.  The worst part of g-forces is when the blood gets pulled out of your head.  I going to say the reasons you don't want the forces pushing you straight sideways is that our bodies can't structurally handle to much force that way and that it limits arm movement.  The smart flyer would then always turn so that the forces went straight front to back.  Problem there is that he cn't see where he's going.

I'm not going to call the tie fighter's movements ideal, but I don't think they're that far off.

[wintermute]

Ideally you want the g-forces to go straight backwards.  The worst part of g-forces is when the blood gets pulled out of your head.  I going to say the reasons you don't want the forces pushing you straight sideways is that our bodies can't structurally handle to much force that way and that it limits arm movement.  The smart flyer would then always turn so that the forces went straight front to back.

Right. Having been doing some basic research, it seems that, to maximise the tolerance of a human pilot, you'd want to turn so that you were facing the centre of the hypothetical circle around which you're turning. Given the spherical nature of TIE-fighter cockpits, it seems like it would by trivial to have them mounted on gimbals, so that this happened automatically. X-wings would obviously require turning the entire ship, which would cost valuable delta-V.

Problem there is that he cn't see where he's going.

Well, true. You do have to assume some advanced technology like, I don't know, cameras. Or mirrors. Maybe they could adapt those targeting computer thingies?

I'm not going to call the tie fighter's movements ideal, but I don't think they're that far off.

Moving towards a "feet down" position (as they are seen to do) seems that it would have a minor benefit. But I'm not convinced it would be a significant enough bank to be worth the effort.

[Tango Alpha Delta]

The question was "Which do you like better?"  Well:

1. More Han Solo  ("I love you"/"I know")
2. More Darth Vader being badass ("I AM your father!")
3. More Big Honkin' spaceships
4. C-3PO being blowed up
5. Hoth Battle
6. The Empire March!


As a 5-year-old, Star Wars blew me away; as a - counts badly, quickly, and innaccurately - 7-year-old, Empire took over my life.

So there.

[Ocicat]

I'm really surprised by the margin that Star Wars is winning by!  Of course, I suppose my passion for the original may have swayed some, though I tried to keep that in the comments of previous threads, and not so very much in the first posts of the threads.

And it's not that I don't love Empire.  I do.  There's a lot to love, even though it isn't a "complete film".  It made the Star Wars saga much, much richer than it ever would have been if there had only ever been one movie.  But the first movie still holds the magic for me, and has that great Campbell "hero's journey" story all in one package.

[lowky]

While I love the original star wars I had to go with the slightly darker etc. Empire.  I loved both and it's a close call.