Jump to content

Seto Kaiba

Members
  • Posts

    12927
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Seto Kaiba

  1. It's an interesting idea... but, from a timeline/continuity perspective, there are some problems with the premise. The biggest problem would be the question of how that kid managed to leave our solar system. Rudimentary cold sleep technology was available to the military before the start of the First Space War, but the SDF-1 Macross was the only ship Earth had with a working space fold system (for as long as that lasted) until after the First Space War had ended and post-war production of ships for emigrant fleets had begun. The 55th Large-Scale Long-Distance Emigrant Fleet headed up by the titular emigrant ship Macross Frontier is something on the order of 25,000 light years from Earth in 2058, and had been underway for approximately 17 years at that point. Space fold systems weren't available when that kid's ship would've had to launch, and getting out that far without one would take hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of years at sublight speeds.
  2. Well, that'd rather depend on what kind of assistance you require. If it's questions about the setting, timeline, etc. there are many knowledgeable fans here who would be only too happy to help. Fellow writers could probably also be found via the Fanworks section of the forums.
  3. Now, call me a pessimist and I'll cheerfully cop to it... but the Obi-wan Kenobi series feels like Disney Star Wars trying to die on the same hill twice. Didn't they learn their lesson from the fiasco that was Solo: a Star Wars Story? Don't mess with established character backstory, it'll all end in tears.
  4. Well, yeah... but that's like saying "a better love story than Twilight". Anything looks good compared to that.
  5. Disney's whole reason for buying the Star Wars franchise from LucasFilm was because they saw it as an unsinkable, downright foolproof money spinner they could use to alleviate the studio's tendency to hemorrhage cash, possibly to hedge their bets for the inevitable bursting of the superhero movie bubble. I doubt they had anything like the grandiose plans the Marvel cinematic universe team had. They don't seem to have had much more in the way of a plan beyond expecting general audiences to eat up anything they put out as long as it had "Star Wars" in the title. It doesn't feel like there was much in the way of a strategy for expanding the Star Wars story beyond flogging tie-ins to the original trilogy. The idea that there's a strategy here kind of feels shot all to hell with conflicting reports, leaks, and rumors swirling around The Rise of Skywalker debating whether it's even done or not two weeks before its box office opening. Well, that and if they hadn't done everything in their mortal power to piss the Star Wars fans off. Much like Disney's original plans for the Star Wars movies, that'll be contingent on how successful they are. The Mandalorian is successful for now, but it remains to be seen if it'll have staying power enough to keep the spinoffs coming or if it'll go full Firefly. If The Rise of Skywalker fails to meet expectations, it could hurt the prospects of future Star Wars spinoff projects too.
  6. IIRC, didn't Disney's execs say that the Star Wars movie franchise was going on hiatus after The Rise of Skywalker a bit ago? It sounds like the next move is to back away from Star Wars a bit to avoid oversaturating the market they way they've been doing.
  7. Personally, I think that Star Wars's only way forward is to go anywhere that isn't contemporary to the existing trilogy of trilogies... go forwards, backwards, up and a bit to the left, ANYWHERE but in the vicinity of Episodes 1-9. That part of Star Wars has worn out its welcome in a big way thanks to the sequel trilogy. Put a couple centuries of distance between Star Wars and the Skywalker family's affairs. That Old Republic movie trilogy sounds like a good way to do that. My suspicion is that The Mandalorian will wear out the limited utility of its premise fairly quickly and Disney'll either cancel it after a season or two or they'll cling to the series as a Disney+ flagship and ride it down until it's as beloved as Solo: a Star Wars Story like CBS is doing with Star Trek: Discovery.
  8. Rapidly closing in on the ending of Jojo's Bizarre Adventure Part V: Golden Wind... and holy sh*t there are a lot of reveals piling up on each other.
  9. Kinda what I meant about "too big to fail". It's the finale of the Star Wars main series of movies, so people'll preorder tickets and pile into theaters with reckless abandon to see it just because of what it is... utterly without regard for quality. The side stories don't have the same protection.
  10. Then, for a change, we'll hear the same crowd complaining about how The Rise of Skywalker was too big to fail and turned a profit despite being sh*t simply because it was Star Wars. (Which will, for once, be something that's pretty easy to prove.)
  11. At least through the end of this film, it would appear that James Bond is still Daniel Craig. Frankly, I find him so appallingly bad in the role that I'll accept practically anything as long as it replaces him. There was talk for a while there that Idris Elba would be the next Bond, which'd be a nice reward for slogging through all the terrible roles he's been stuck with in the last decade. Prior to the James Bond soft reboot with Casino Royale, there was that fairly popular theory that James Bond was an inherited alias for the 007 codename to justify the differences in Bonds throughout the years.
  12. Brokeback Star Destroyer? I'm still inclined to suspect that Disney backed down from a ReyxFinn romance subplot for fear of a racist backlash, leading to the introduction of Rose as a replacement so they could pair Rey and Poe or Rey and Kylo. That said, Finn and Poe do seem to have quite the bromance going on there though.
  13. As of yet, still an unverified rumor... and an unfounded one, if Executive Producer Barbara Broccoli has her way. It seems to have gained a small amount of credence because of Pierce Brosnan and Daniel Craig voicing support for the idea of a female Bond in the future, and No Time to Die being tipped as Daniel Craig's final film as James Bond. There does appear to be a grain of truth at the heart of it, though, given the content of the first trailer for No Time to Die. Lashara Lynch's character Nomi is a British 00 agent. Maybe not 007, but a 00 nonetheless. Given how poorly Terminator: Dark Fate and Charlie's Angels did at the box office, I have a feeling the character won't test well with general audiences if the dialog in the trailer is a fair representation of the character. Hollywood's recent infatuation with sh*t-talking "tough girl" leads seems to be burning itself out via a string of box office flops. Telling James Bond to "stay in [his] lane" would, for any other Bond, be foreshadowing that that person's going to die later when he hits them with his latest cool car. For a variety of reasons, including the board's rules, please leave your personal politics out of this. (And let's be honest, almost nobody anywhere on the political spectrum wants to see a female James Bond.) Standard equipment from Q branch, or whomever is responsible for corralling Bond's love interests these days.
  14. Well, my bizarre adventure through David Production's adaptation of Jojo's Bizarre Adventure is almost at its end. I'm ten episodes from the end of Jojo's Bizarre Adventure Part V: Vento Aureo, and it's been a hell of a wild ride.
  15. To me, Daniel Craig's tenure as James Bond as a whole has felt eminently skippable. They're just... dull. Craig's Bond is just an utterly generic grizzled American action hero, who makes a few (incredibly forced) attempts to ape the dry wit and class of previous Bonds with little success because the actor has exactly one facial expression... staring into the middle distance like he can't remember if he left the oven on. Casino Royale is supposed to be a Bond origin story, but it removes so much of what makes film Bond iconic that it would probably be better if you took the James Bond name off of it altogether. I'll probably get No Time to Die when it hits home video, but I plan on skipping it in theaters as I did with Skyfall and Spectre.
  16. "Truth in television", as it were... both in terms of the bruised egos on the part of Henry Ford II and Enzo Ferrari, and in terms of the antagonism between Henry Ford II and Lee Iacocca. As Iacocca himself famously put it, "If a guy's over 25% jerk he's in trouble, and Henry was 95%."
  17. Since everything's digitally-animated these days, I dunno... maybe they can re-render stuff in 4K the way they'd do a new transfer from original reels.
  18. Not quite what I was getting at, but yeah... there is that aspect to it too. The last trailer and TV ad spots we've been seeing lately for The Rise of Skywalker feel like they belong to a movie where the producers know they have a turd on their hands, and used every good bit of the film in the promotional material in the hopes of getting as many butts in seats as possible during opening week before word can get around that it sucks and the box office revenue drops to practically nothing. That's not really something that you expect from a franchise like Star Wars, which until Solo: a Star Wars Story was considered essentially failure-proof. Really, I suspect the opposite... that the audience is going into The Rise of Skywalker so firmly convinced that it's going to suck that nothing will change their minds. After The Last Jedi went over like a neutron star matter balloon and Solo: a Star Wars Story landed in a broken heap with an almost audible splat, most Star Wars fans (and especially the YouTube gutter snipes) seem to be pretty convinced that Star Wars is Ruined Forever and are just bracing themselves for whatever knee-jerk idiocy J.J. Abrams pulls out of his hat to try to fix Kathleen Kennedy and Rian Johnson's compounding of his own mistakes. They're divided as to whether Abrams will fold or double down, but either way they're sure it's going to suck. I'm rather glad this movie comes out so late in December, because several of my coworkers are Star Wars fans and I won't have to hear the wailing and gnashing of teeth until after the new year so they'll have had a chance to get some of it out of their systems.
  19. At-home charging for BEVs is a bit of a sticky wicket right now, since most homes aren't wired to deliver more than 36 amps on a 240 volt branch (@50-60Hz). That's what all of the major charger standards are engineered around: SAE J1772 (US), IEC 62196 (Europe), and GB/T 20234.2 (China). Consequently, charging an electric vehicle is still a rather time-intensive operation. Using your garden variety American home electrical outlet at a nominal 120V 15A, you're looking at around 14 hours to recharge a 40kWh Li+ battery pack like those found on many PHEVs and light-duty BEVs. Something like a Tesla needs anywhere from 80 to 100 hours of charging from that same outlet to fully recharge a depleted pack (because their packs are 85kWh or 100kWh). Using a dedicated 240V charger, it's about 2 hours to recharge that 40kWh pack on a PHEV or light-duty BEV and between 9 and 11 hours to recharge the 85-100kWh pack of a BEV like the Tesla Model S. That's about the limit of what you can achieve with home charging right now. The twinned holy grails of BEV design are a battery pack with performance that won't deteriorate noticeably in cold weather (graphene!) and achieving a network of high-voltage DC current charging stations that can achieve near gas station-like "refueling" speed... so you can plug your car in, even in deepest midwinter, and be fully recharged in minutes instead of hours. SAE J1772 DC Level 1 fast charging is up to 450V at up to 80A and its gruntier Level 2 version can go up to 200A. DC Level 1 could charge something like that 40kWh pack in about 30 minutes, or the Tesla's 85-100kWh packs in a bit over 90 minutes. DC Level 2 could do that 40kWh pack in about 10 minutes and the 100kWh pack in about 30 minutes. That's a charger you're not going to want in your house though, because they're big and noisy and they require dedicated branch circuits that aren't normally built into a house. The ones I used when we were working on Phase III of the RAM 1500 PHEV (https://www.allpar.com/model/ram/electric-PHEV.html) for the USDoE were around the size of a vending machine and weren't exactly quiet with all the cooling fans and the big chunky contactors opening and closing. Newer models are slimmer and quieter, but they're still around a foot or two thick and six to seven feet tall with an operating noise like a restaurant-grade refrigerator. It's amazing stuff, and the idea of combining battery production with carbon capture and sequestration technologies really rubs me the right way. Turning pollution into batteries to store clean green energy? I am 200% ready for that sh*t. Yeah, kinda... though it's got more commercial applications than residential ones.
  20. Well, there is... but graphene batteries are still in the process of being scaled up to a usable level for something as big as a PHEV or BEV. Ten years or so down the road, we could get there. Graphene's got a major advantage over lithium since graphene batteries aren't temperature sensitive, eliminating a major roadblock to PHEV and BEV adoption. Yes and no... the US electrical grid is pretty damn dilapidated, but the communications infrastructure necessary to support grid-friendly "smart" charging has actually been in place for a while now. It's the same communications tech many of the more efficient models of water heater, furnace, AC, etc. employ. (IEEE 802.15.4 or ZigBee, and SEP2.) I actually used to be in charge of the SAE interoperability and security panels for this stuff. The actual physical charging stations are stupid easy to install if your house has a 240V branch accessible and they're pretty damn cheap too. The main problem is inadequate capacity in the grid itself, not a lack of infrastructure or difficulty in installing the requisite infrastructure. Depends where you are. Sensible countries that are adopting high levels of renewables and energy sequestration systems can easily support fleets of electric cars without burning fossil fuels. The ones who've doubled down on supporting renewables with nuclear DEFINITELY can. The only reason America can't is because the coal lobby has part of congress by the balls.
  21. Well, yes and no... as an engineer working forward model development, I can say (without breaking any NDAs) that you'll absolutely see more choice in electrification by 2023. That said, most of it is going to be in BSGs1, MHEVs2, and PHEVs3. You'll see a few more vehicle lines offering full BEVs4, but not many because the electrical grid here in the US just isn't ready for en masse adoption of 500V or 800V battery-electric cars and they're not as profitable due to the decrease in tax incentives to buy them in the last year or so. That will likely change with the next administration, though. If a hybrid truck or SUV would be on your radar, you may find yourself spoiled for choice by 2023. You probably heard Sergio Marchionne announcing before he passed that Jeep's entire lineup was going hybrid, and he bloody meant it. (That is literally my department.) Eh... you're 50% correct. We will absolutely see an increase in vehicle electrification in the coming years. Why? Because there is no f*cking way any automaker is going to meet the government-mandated fuel economy and emissions requirements for the next decade without going at least partially electric on most of their vehicle lines. ESPECIALLY for trucks and SUVs, which are not exactly the most fuel efficient of vehicles even under perfect world conditions. Autonomy is a stickier wicket. We'll likely see progress made towards universal adoption of SAE Level 1 and 2 autonomy features like lane stay and adaptive cruise control, but the Elongated Muskrat is living in a fantasy world if he thinks we're going to get workable Level 4 or 5 autonomy (true self-driving in all possible road conditions) anytime soon. There are just too many factors to be accounted for, the sheer level of sensor fusion and processing power necessary to make it workable just isn't practical for a consumer level car right now. SAE Level 4 or 5 autonomy might be workable in somewhere between twenty and fifty years on a consumer level, but definitely not in ten. Tesla's autopilot is a dangerously underequipped attempt at autonomy, which is why Teslas keep running into stationary objects (and why the government keeps riding the Muskrat's *ss about how unsafe it all is). Radar and ultrasonics just aren't enough to do it safely, you need high-precision cameras and LIDAR too. Autonomous taxi fleets will be a thing, but under rigidly controlled conditions in low speed environments like downtown areas in major cities where any speed collision caused by autonomous AI defect or meatbag failure will be easily survivable. Yeah, you'll likely end up with a hybrid... non-hybrid options are going to become something of an endangered species in the coming decade due to the aforementioned tightening CAFE and CARB requirements, and several European countries outright banning the sale of gasoline-only cars in coming decades. You'd probably have fun with a BEV minivan or D-SUV. Maximum torque available from 0rpm. That's beyond even the most optimistic assessments I've seen... but we may one day reach that point in the next fifty years or so. Right now, autonomous vehicle technology just isn't mature enough for that, no matter what the Elongated Muskrat might want to tell his customers. 1. Belt-mounted Starter Generator, for the more aggressive implementations of Auto-start/stop, the lowest-end MHEVs. 2. Low-voltage hybrids that contain one or more emotors to assist the gas engine, and utilize regenerative charging to refill their batteries. 3. High-voltage hybrids that contain one or more emotors that can either assist the gas engine or run independently of it, which use both regenerative charging and power from the grid to replenish the battery. 4. Battery Electric Vehicles, pure electric powertrains with no gas engine component.
  22. Well, that certainly... exists. The Rise of Skywalker doesn't feel like it's making much of an impact with these TV ad spots and trailers. This left the very distinct impression that this is going to be a bad movie, as the trailers are all action sequences with nothing to tease the story beyond the fact that this is the end.
×
×
  • Create New...