Back in my functional alcoholic days (so I’m either a dysfunctional alcoholic now or a better self-regulating one), I would swear by prickly pear extract, based on some articles I read in pop-sci magazines as well as some “really? Is this true?” googling on Pubmed and Google Scholar of actual studies.

Seems like that would’ve set up a predictable precedent where (given who’s available), we’d all know going into Ep. 9 that Luke would die.

Or it shows that adults can have different views without being dicks.

Sure, but we don’t go to the movies to see logic and odds work.

I don’t recall if it was ever fully explored how the First Order became so powerful vs. The Resistance. To me, “The Force Awakens” was just a modern retelling of “A New Hope,” which needed prequels to establish its own back-story and why things where what they were. But it was also established that the Resistance was…

I mean, your physics is right... but then again, applying actual physics to “Star Wars” is absurd. Fantasy and story-telling demand a certain level of belief suspension. Like I don’t think Lucas and Kazdan consulted physicists when writing the original trilogy; and all the better that they didn’t.

You’re right; they somehow managed to give her a wonderful last scene without foreknowledge.

That’s the saving grace here.

I think employing the term “kamikaze,” despite being an accurate descriptor of the strategy, also misleads us in terms of scale.

In retrospect, had they realized that Carrie Fisher would not be around for Episode IX, they probably would have had her make the decision to stay with the ship. And that would have made what was the best visual of the trilogy also the most meaningful had it been Leia to make the sacrifice.

Yes, fans (though not critics) are seriously underappreciating the unpredictability of this film, both in-movie and what it sets up.

I realize the silliness of debating war theory in a fantasy universe here, but theoretically, an opposing capital should be able to destroy an asteroid (or have developed some other defense plan, were this idea feasible and therefore happened).

Especially when the other side has way more resources to sacrifice.

Losing a capital ship is kind of a big deal. Think the U.S. would sacrifice an aircraft carrier despite having the most? What about a contingent of folks who only have one left?

I’m not saying that literally everyone is an irrational dullard. It’s entitely probable you’re an island of rationality in a sea of nuttiness.

If there was a prior, separate article portending Schiano’s hiring while referencing Penn State connections, I missed it. That’s on me! I commented without the benefit of being wholly aware.

I appreciate you giving me the benefit of the doubt.

“My” program? Here’s a hint: My avatar is CFB-related. Last time I checked, these aren’t Penn State colors.

I mentioned the “original version of the article” lacked the Penn State connection.

I don’t know how you’ve missed the multitude of my replies saying the very opposite. That must’ve taken some effort.