AT-AT Height Discussion

[Captain Seafort]

You're not getting this but I never said that the 30m point didn't make sense or that it would be wrong if someone with a ruler, a step stoll and the ability read confirmed it.

I'm fully content agreeing that it SHOULD be 28m+.

I never disputed any of that. The issue is that the argument, like so many of the Wars arguments we get into, isn't about the nominal cause but about the intricacies of canon.

However, its not up to me, just like its not up to you.

Databank IS canon, you don't have to like, I don't have to like, God doesn't have to like it, but it still IS canon. GL says so and thats all there is to it.

I agree that the Database is canon. What I'm pointing out, as usual, and what you, as usual, aren't getting, is that Star Wars has multiple levels of canon regarding what can override what, and the movies trump all. If a lower canon source is contradicted by Lucas' original work then that lower source is wrong. It doesn't have any effect on the canonicity of the rest of the Databank, or even the rest of the AT-AT entry, but simply means that the Databank got the height wrong. Hell, even in the Databank entry itself the height of the AT-AT is entered under the heading "from the movies", which is blatantly false as we both agree that the movie shows a 30m AT-AT.

[Mark]

Come on you two....play nice.

[Captain Seafort]

Hey, it's me and Deep - this is nice.

[Mark]

Oh yeah, I forgot.

Carry on

[Deepcrush]

Come on you two....play nice.

I have been nice.

[Deepcrush]

I never disputed any of that. The issue is that the argument, like so many of the Wars arguments we get into, isn't about the nominal cause but about the intricacies of canon.

Which is the whole point of the Databank. To put things down in writing to avoid such problems.

I agree that the Database is canon. What I'm pointing out, as usual, and what you, as usual, aren't getting,

Okay, this right here required its own response... really, with as many times as you've been caught openly LYING about what is or isn't canon. What on this earth makes you think that you somehow have the high ground needed to pull the "someone doesn't get it" even when that person has slapped you around the forum for the last two years over the same topic. You've even had another Mod catch you and lets face it. How often do the mods have the balls to catch anyone around here?

Back to topic.....

I agree that the Database is canon. What I'm pointing out, as usual, and what you, as usual, aren't getting, is that Star Wars has multiple levels of canon regarding what can override what, and the movies trump all. If a lower canon source is contradicted by Lucas' original work then that lower source is wrong. It doesn't have any effect on the canonicity of the rest of the Databank, or even the rest of the AT-AT entry, but simply means that the Databank got the height wrong. Hell, even in the Databank entry itself the height of the AT-AT is entered under the heading "from the movies", which is blatantly false as we both agree that the movie shows a 30m AT-AT.

What we have is a single visual which could easily be written off as an SFX error. VS, the rest of the film which is intended for the 15m point.

(I know you guys want me to post pics but I fail at cutting that stuff so sorry if its a bit tough for any of you but here's a youtube link.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6pu4W1OrUE

Next time you watch ESB, notice that when Luke's snowspeeder is crushed he is setting and is still over half the height of the foot. Now give it some room for error and you still have Luke being the same height as the foot mount. In the pic you posted, Luke is less then half that height. Which means for your pic to be right Luke would have to be just under 1m tall. Do you really want to tell me that Luke is the same height as Yoda?

Sorry for the delay, another snow storm is hitting and I needed to shovel for a bit.

[Tyyr]

We also have evidence from the film. Veers opened fire on the shield generator at 17.28 km. The distance to the horizon from the top of a 15 m AT-AT is less than 14 km, and even less from the height of the guns. A vehicle twice the height can much more reasonably achieve that range through line of sight (although it may still be necessary to invoke the "north ridge" to lift it up a bit, despite the lack of a visible rise in the film - a rise of a few metres is much more likely to be unnoticeable beside a 30m AT-AT than a rise of over 10 metres beside a 15 m AT-AT).

I feel compelled to point out that distance to the horizon is entirely dependant upon the size of the planet in question. Nothing in the film states the size of Hoth or its size in relation to any other celestial body we do have dimensions for. Hoth could be quite a bit larger than Earth but made of lower density stuff (not unreasonable given the apparent youth of the system) allowing everyone to act in near Earth normal gravity but have a horizon much farther away. Not getting into the rest of this just pointing out that basing the height off distance to the horizon is dependant upon one big variable we know nothing about.

[Mark]

Be better to base the height in relation to the people on the ground running.

[Deepcrush]

Be better to base the height in relation to the people on the ground running.

Look at the link I posted. Its a live action scene with Luck right next to the AT-AT foot. Pretty clear shot too.

[Mark]

Be better to base the height in relation to the people on the ground running.

Look at the link I posted. Its a live action scene with Luck right next to the AT-AT foot. Pretty clear shot too.

Luck huh?

But isn't he like 5 feet tall?

[Deepcrush]

Luck...

But isn't he like 5 feet tall?

Well, if he is then that makes the AT-AT even shorter. Either way, he's the same height as the foot mount.

[Captain Seafort]

(I know you guys want me to post pics but I fail at cutting that stuff so sorry if its a bit tough for any of you but here's a youtube link.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6pu4W1OrUE

Next time you watch ESB, notice that when Luke's snowspeeder is crushed he is setting and is still over half the height of the foot. Now give it some room for error and you still have Luke being the same height as the foot mount. In the pic you posted, Luke is less then half that height.

1) Luke is much closer to the viewpoint than the AT-AT when he hits the ground.

2) I agree that Luke is about the same height as the AT-AT's foot in that clip. I.e. about the same height as in the picture I showed earlier.

[Deepcrush]

1) Luke is much closer to the viewpoint than the AT-AT when he hits the ground.

Close up shot plus live action is always a good thing.

2) I agree that Luke is about the same height as the AT-AT's foot in that clip. I.e. about the same height as in the picture I showed earlier.

Not even close... In the pic you showed. Luke with his arm at full stretch is shorter then the foot. In the live action shot, Luke is the same height as the whole foot mount!

[Tsukiyumi]

I'm with Deep on that.

Clearly, this is an FX f*ckup. So, when we have two contradictory pieces of visual evidence in the same movie, what source do we go to for canon?

[Deepcrush]

If two items from the same source go against each other then you use the information given in the Databank.