Star Wars Reads Panel discussion

77 views
Star Wars Topics > Star Wars Superweapons

Comments Showing 1-17 of 17 (17 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Petter (last edited Sep 11, 2012 07:36AM) (new)

Petter Avén | 96 comments How do you like your Star Wars superweapons served: Round or angular? Huge or tiny? Epic or insidious? All the time or Not at all?


message 2: by Petter (last edited Sep 16, 2012 09:12AM) (new)

Petter Avén | 96 comments Gosh, how is the lack of interest in Superweapons to be interpreted? Haha! And here I thought I had come up with an interesting topic.

I can at least offer my own opinion, and it is this: For one space adventure movie the Death Star was awesome "... with enough power to destroy an entire planet". Save the princess - check. Escape - check. Blow up the Death Star - check. It worked very well. Once. But the concept grows old really fast, and the logic doesn't stand up to the close scrutiny that Star Wars is subject to from fans and authors alike.

The in-universe purpose of the Death Star was to sow fear of ultimate and terminal Imperial retaliation among rebellious segments of the Galactic population. There is probably no end to better and cheaper alternatives in gaining that objective. Seriously, why destroy a planet completely? Wouldn't sterilizing it suffice? We've been able to do that to Earth since the Cold War, using only the resources of one single world. The film artistic purpose of the Death Star had nothing to do with efficiency, but with creating something awesome - and it succeeded.

My point is that even if something is, or was, as cool as the Death Star, it doesn't mean it is necessarily a good idea to recycle that idea now that Star Wars has become so much more important and closely scrutinized than it was in 1977. I don't like to be asked to disregard from my sense of logic too much, and Superweapons (design, handling and implications) often require me to stop thinking rationally in order to buy into their existence.

To sum up: I like my Star Wars Superweapons plausible and very scarce in order to enhance their impact with readers and movie audiences. Much like my opinion on the Force, really, come to think of it. Perhaps it is more a general question of my fictional preferences than a specific one.


message 3: by Robert (new)

Robert Barker | 11 comments Impractical as they are, I love the epic impractical superweapons. The Death Star Super Laser, the World Devestators, the Suncrusher, the Starforge are all brilliant.

Star Wars is a contrast in scales. Often it deals with things you can get your head around like the relationships between characters. Then you see something that is so big or terrible you cannot really comprehend it. The super weapons give scale to things that the audience cannot wrap their head around.


Crystal Starr Light (crystalstarrlight) Sorry, I didn't see this topic until just now!

When I saw the Death Stars, I knew they were probably unwieldy and more trouble than they were worth, but they were ominous and intimidating. You don't have a million guns and weapons emplacements strewn all over the place. They look rather benign--until that crater opens up and destroys your homeworld!

The problem I have with Superweapons is their overuse and repetitive nature. There have been so many attempts to make new Death Stars (Darksaber, and I believe a book or two in NJO) that it's gotten silly. The Sun Crusher being more potent than the Death Star but smaller? Hard to believe. The Eye of Palpatine was supposed to be harmful? Seemed to only pick up random species. Not very efficient.

I prefer stories that require people to use wits and their brains to solve problems, instead of running to shut down some silly superweapon. Of course, there are exceptions to this rule. One can make a good story with a superweapon (as the original Star Wars movies can tell you!). But they need to be used sparingly.

Plus, how the hell did the Empire fund these??? The banks must be storming the government to bankrupt it!!


message 5: by Alex (new)

Alex Diaz-Granados | 51 comments I think that the overuse of Death Star-like "ultimate weapons" in SW literature is somewhat detrimental. As you say, Crystal Starr Light, when authors start recycling the Death Star or parts of its original design (as Kevin Anderson did in the Jedi Academy trilogy and Darksaber), it gets rather old...like year-old bantha poodoo...and boring.

I did like Dark Empire's World Devastators...its Galaxy Gun? Meh...not as much.


message 6: by Lynx (last edited Oct 05, 2012 12:01PM) (new)

Lynx | 31 comments I'm just wondering...where the heck did the Empire get all that metle?????!!!!!


message 7: by Tristan (new)

Tristan | 14 comments I like to stik wheth the pistl.


message 8: by Corey Bett (new)

Corey Bett | 3 comments I liked when the "weapon" became less technical. Biological warfare, political rumor-munging, deception: it's more intelligent and sneakier.


message 9: by Kathy (new)

Kathy I think biological warfare is easier to fund, easier to carry out, and pretty darn devastating. The obvious drawbacks are permanent damage to an ecological system, and instances like the Imperial Bioweapons Project I71A.


message 10: by Petter (last edited Oct 27, 2012 08:48AM) (new)

Petter Avén | 96 comments It seems like some preference among you guys is to "smart weapons". :) Less resources, less total and final destruction, etcetera.

To Corey and Kathy, do you comment on practical application of Superweapons, or their dramaturgical impact in a Star Wars story? It sounds that way with you, Corey (the drama). If that's the case, I totally agree (especially since it's so totally in line with something Thrawn would do; and he's probably my number 1. favorite villain). :)


message 11: by Lori (new)

Lori Walker (iggysaysno) | 9 comments I have to say that my favorite super weapon is Centerpoint Station. Who can deny the power and many recorded uses? Also, Hollowtown was a neat idea...


message 12: by Susan (new)

Susan (suebabyshampoo) | 3 comments The YVW/NJO era showed just how powerful "biological" weapons could be in completely transforming a planet and eradicating much of its native life in the process. The Yuuzhan Vong didn't care since they remade worlds for their own purposes anyway.

Imperial Era, you also have the virtual enslavement of the Noghri when Separatist toxin poisoned their planet, and Vader chose to institutionalize that poison under the guise of "cleanup". Far cheaper, and allowed the Empire to subjugate the population, exploiting their sense of "gratitude" to form death commandos, etc.


message 13: by Susan (new)

Susan (suebabyshampoo) | 3 comments Robert wrote: "Impractical as they are, I love the epic impractical superweapons. The Death Star Super Laser, the World Devestators, the Suncrusher, the Starforge are all brilliant.

Star Wars is a contrast in s..."


The Suncrusher is so over the top, so small and hard to destroy, I think it has to be the most potent of all the epic superweapons. Entire star systems gone at the push of a button, from a ship the size not much larger than a starfighter. Only real weakness was the engines and need to load more torpedoes eventually. Maybe it could have benefited from an ignition interlock or anti-theft device, too ;)


message 14: by Petter (last edited Nov 16, 2012 01:26PM) (new)

Petter Avén | 96 comments Sky wrote: "Robert wrote: "Impractical as they are, I love the epic impractical superweapons. The Death Star Super Laser, the World Devestators, the Suncrusher, the Starforge are all brilliant.

Star Wars is ..."


Haha, yes Sky, the Suncrusher is probably my least favorite Superweapon too. And how silly the decision to lower it into the gas giant Yavin! Just for plot convenience. But then again, I can hardly think of a single thing in the Jedi Academy trilogy that makes any sense at all. The list of weirdnesses is too long to relate, so I'll just stop right here. :)


message 15: by Alex (new)

Alex Diaz-Granados | 51 comments Petter wrote: "Sky wrote: "Robert wrote: "Impractical as they are, I love the epic impractical superweapons. The Death Star Super Laser, the World Devestators, the Suncrusher, the Starforge are all brilliant.

S..."


As much as I respect Kevin J. Anderson, I wasn't too enthused by the Jedi Academy trilogy. Maybe it was because they followed Bantam Spectra's earlier releases (particularly the Thrawn Trilogy), but those novels are just "meh...I'll read them for continuity's sake" but nothing to write home about.


message 16: by Timothy (new)

Timothy (jeditimothy) | 37 comments was'nt there two super weapons in the empire comic series. a gargantuan star destroyer and another super laser?


message 17: by Jonesmikey (new)

Jonesmikey | 34 comments I don't know how Kyp Durron could continue living after what he did. That one horrific act would pale any heroic act performed later. Anytime he'd feel happy or amused the guilt of having killed all those billions and billions of people would crush him to the ground.


back to top