Adventure Forums - "Star Wars is sooooo done! Get over it!"

Adventure Forums (https://adventuregamers.com/archive/forums/)

- Chit Chat (https://adventuregamers.com/archive/forums/chit-chat/)

- - "Star Wars is sooooo done! Get over it!" (https://adventuregamers.com/archive/forums/chit-chat/8046-star-wars-sooooo-done-get-over.html)

"Star Wars is sooooo done! Get over it!"

http://www.bbspot.com/Images/News_Fe...arth_vader.jpg

Episode VII: Revenge of the Writers
The New York Times
By HENRY FOUNTAIN
Published: May 1, 2005

Quote:

MILLIONS of "Star Wars" fans are awaiting the release of "Revenge of the Sith" later this month, the sixth and final film in George Lucas's epic series. In it, the young hero Anakin Skywalker is seduced by the dark side and becomes Darth Vader.

Science fiction writers, however, are awaiting the release for a different reason. To them, "Star Wars" is nothing more than a space opera, and if the big guy in the black cloak is finally singing, that means the show is over. The saga continues no longer.

"That's the past of science fiction you're talking about," said Richard K. Morgan, the British cyberpunk-noir writer whose most recent novel is "Market Forces."

Mr. Morgan is one of a newer breed of science fiction writers who have moved far beyond the whiz-bang technological vision of Mr. Lucas's blockbusters.

"It's just such a huge shame," he said. "Anyone who is a practitioner of science fiction is constantly dogged by the ghettoization of the genre. And a lot of that comes from the very simplistic, 2-D Lucasesque view of what science fiction has to offer."

If truth be told, sci-fi writers say, their work and "Star Wars" never had much in common.

Like science itself, science fiction has evolved since the days of H. G. Wells and Jules Verne in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Since the end of World War II, the genre has shifted its focus from space and time travel to more complex speculations on how the future, whatever its shape, will affect the individual.

That shift has only accelerated in recent years, as biotech and genetic engineering have moved to center stage in science and captured writers' imaginations, and as the lines between science fiction and other genres begin to blur. "We're starting to look inward, rather than outward," Mr. Morgan said. "There are exciting and scary things going to be happening in our bodies."

One problem with "Star Wars," science fiction writers say, is that it is not, ultimately, concerned with science, but rather with a timeless vision of good and evil. Mr. Lucas has said that his story, especially the journeys of his central characters from innocence through trials by fire to wisdom and acceptance, were rooted in Joseph Campbell's comparative studies of world mythologies, and especially in his popular book, "The Hero With a Thousand Faces."

What Mr. Lucas may have seen as eternal, however, science fiction writers have tended to see as antique.

"It started out 30 years behind," said Ursula K. Le Guin. "Science fiction was doing all sorts of thinking and literary experiments on a totally different plane. 'Star Wars' was just sort of fun."

"It takes these very stock metaphors of empire in space and monstrously bad people and wonderfully good people and plays out a bunch of stock operatic themes in space suits," she said. "You can do it with cowboy suits as well."

Science fiction, on the other hand, "is a set of metaphors," Ms. Le Guin said. "It's useful for thinking about certain things in our lives - if society was different in some way, what would it be like?"

The narrative is not the only thing that feels dated (or archetypal, if you're a fan) in "Star Wars." The science, too, often feels stock.

Larry Niven, the author of the "Ringworld" series and other works, noted that the faster-than-light travel in the films is very familiar. And that's not surprising. "Most writers, if they need to get somebody between two points faster than light, they invent their own hyperdrive," said Mr. Niven, who counts himself among the inventors. As a filmmaker, though, Mr. Lucas had an advantage. "They did special effects and made you believe it," Mr. Niven said.

Those effects were a double-edged light saber, however. The first "Star Wars" film helped usher in an era of highly technical filmmaking where character development sometimes took a back seat.

"We're still stuck with this legacy of - 'Oh yeah, sci-fi, that's when you have a big budget and lots of special effects,' " Mr. Morgan said.

Ray Bradbury said that the end of "Star Wars" was long overdue. Mr. Lucas should have quit while he was ahead, Mr. Bradbury said - perhaps 28 years ago, when the first movie came out to critical acclaim.

"The problem was he made a sequel," Mr. Bradbury said. "People have tried to get me to do a sequel to 'The Martian Chronicles,' but I've never done it. Sequels are a bad idea."

Mr. Lucas, of course, made sequels - and prequels - in spades. As if hyperdrive rendered historical continuity irrelevant, the first "Star Wars" film was actually Episode IV, and the last is Episode III. In the eyes of nonfans, of course, it doesn't really matter where one lands in the saga; after the second film ("The Empire Strikes Back") the whole thing went downhill.

"I fell asleep during the third one, when they brought out the Care Bears," said Mary Doria Russell, author of "The Sparrow" and "Children of God." The third movie, "Return of the Jedi," was the one that had those dancing, furry little creatures called Ewoks.

That kind of cute, sunny woodsiness seems particularly out of place in current science fiction. For as sci-fi has turned inward, it has also turned darker. "It's a rather quieter and more disturbing kind of science fiction," Mr. Morgan said.

"Star Wars" can hardly be called quiet or disturbing. But there is a film, made around the same time as "The Empire Strikes Back," that does fit that description: "Blade Runner." Many people, including Mr. Morgan, consider the film, directed by Ridley Scott, to be one of the best sci-fi movies ever made, because it was as much about what's inside as what's outside. It, not "Star Wars," was truly ahead of its time.

"You've got the gun battles and all that stuff," Mr. Morgan said, "but the movie is very much about internal factors, like robots yearning to be humans."

"And even now, 20 years later, it still looks like the future," he added. "That's a neat trick."

:) What do you guys think?

Personally, I like the 'Joseph Campbell school' of storytelling about the archetypal hero's journey, it never gets tiring. You seem that in all sorts of mythology from all sorts of cultures, past and present, from the Bible to Native American fables to The Matrix.

It's just that I think George Lucas sucks at this kind of storytelling through his directorship. He's a weak director, and resorts to black and white stereotypes and stock elements, reducing the whole thing to a typical Saturday morning cartoon romp when it has so much potential for great depth. Instead, we get the f#&king annoying Jar Jar Binks.

And on that I do agree with Richard K. Morgan and Ray Bradbury and the others, it's time to move on. Seriously, even though I'm not a fan of the genre, the last sci-fi movie I found intriguing was Gattaca.

I think those guys are just jealous.

I personally find space operas more enjoyable than hard science fiction.

Quote:

I think those guys are just jealous.

Spot on.

Quote:

reducing the whole thing to a typical Saturday morning cartoon romp

That was, in fact, the whole point. The best thing about the original films is that they are what they are. They don't try to reveal any deep scientific revelations, they just tell an enjoyable story. They have no pretentions to be anything else but a rollicking adventure film, and should be judged as such. But all things considered, Lucas is a prick.

Quote:

Originally Posted by omloflump

Omloflump, you know it makes me question my entire belief system when you and I are of the same opinion about anything, but when you're right, you're right...I agree 100%.

ScottMate

I found Gattaca rather weak. Yet another sci-fi about not fitting into someone's vision of a perfect world. Its about the perceived value of human life being determined by genetic screening/manipulation technology. Where have I seen that before? Generally speaking in too many science fiction stories. Specifically? how about Brave New World. Even Lucas himself did something similar in "THX 1138".

Nobody points to "Days Of Our Lives" and says 'that's the reason no one takes my interpretative dance theatre production seriously'. And canning D.O.O.L. Wont bring a more receptive eye to their production.

Star Wars is like a gentle introduction to science fiction, I find it pap now too and wish it was more gritty, but I didn't think that back when I was 11 years old and watching it for the first time. If someone had sat me down to watch Gattaca when I was 11 its relationship to the real world would have gone right over my head. I'd see a boring film about some guy who goes to work, runs on a treadmill and makes his wheelchair bound boyfriend pee into a bottle and keep it in the fridge. If I stayed awake through it (I still have difficulty staying awake through it).

I'm not going to beg George to make 3 more, but I'm sure someone will take up the torch of 'dumbing down' sci-fi, padding interesting ideas with loads of frivolous drama or add modern interpretative dance to it in order to appeal to larger and younger audiences. Good on them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ursula K. Le Guin

"It takes these very stock metaphors of empire in space and monstrously bad people and wonderfully good people and plays out a bunch of stock operatic themes in space suits [...] You can do it with cowboy suits as well."

Damn right you can, Firefly is hella fun to watch. Mixing the cowboy and sci-fi (nyah nyah) genres together to good effect.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crunchy in milk

I'm not going to beg George to make 3 more, but I'm sure someone will take up the torch of 'dumbing down' sci-fi, padding interesting ideas with loads of frivolous drama or add modern interpretative dance to it in order to appeal to larger and younger audiences. Good on them.

I hear there's going to be a Star Wars television show. Well, two, but one's going to be a 3D cartoon on Cartoon Network. The other will be a live-action show on the Sci-Fi Channel. Or so I've heard. For frivolous drama, we could just hold out for Star Wars version of Law & Order.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crunchy in milk

Damn right you can, Firefly is hella fun to watch. Mixing the cowboy and sci-fi (nyah nyah) genres together to good effect.

Sigh... I miss that show. The Fox network can be so stupid.

I find Star Wars episodes 1 and 2 to be total bullshit, but I find that article to be so as well. Can you imagine anyone taking an article seriously that berated a certain type of realistic fiction for not doing what other outspoken writers of fiction are doing? It's absurd. These authors, though very talented, are only serving to pigeonhole their genre, by claiming that their goals are the only valid ones.

I despise George Lucas. That is all.

Lucas is an editor. He hates writing.

I have a nagging suspicion that at least some of the opinions are taken out of context. I mean, Ursula LeGuin, of all people? I am not familiar with her most recent career, but she did fantasy, the "timeless vision of good and evil" stuff! (see A Wizard of Earthsea and its follow-ups). Looks as the author collected comments about Lucas' saga from various established writers, and reshaped it to fit his thesis.

Either that, or I'll lose faith in all quoted authorities. Saying that a film with futuristic decorations must indeed try to predict the future, is as silly as claiming that a film set in the past should be a historical drama dealing with serious sociological issues of depicted era - otherwise it's passe!

It's been too many years since I've last seen Blader Runner.

Now where's that Ridley Scott mega dvd version, that was rumoured about years ago?

Quote:

Lucas is an editor. He hates writing.

It shows.

My favourite Star Wars movie will always be the very, very first one. That is, um......Episode IV (that right?). Not because I had fond childhood memories of it (I am not, nor every was, a Star Wars whore), but because it was an awesome romp. The writing was spot on, the humour, how the scenes played out....everything. The whole thing was cheesy and wonderfully absurd. In terms of quality, I think the true successor of that movie was Raiders Of The Lost Ark.

As for what those writers say about Star Wars today, I think it's partly petty snobbery, partly petty arbitration, and partly truthfulness.

Are you sure this isn't the adventure game discussion :D

Uhm I agree totally with Omloflump . What is wrong with a rompy fun adventure? Sky Captain and The World of Tommorrow was similar and I had a blast watching that movie.

It can't all be grim recitals of a deadly future - gets a little depressing as a steady diet. *D

... there are people that consider Star Wars sci-fi? o_o

*reads a couple of posts*

... there are people HERE that consider Star Wars sci-fi? o_@

Seriously, though, I consider Star Wars fantasy. The technology isn't anywhere near the focus of the story [or if it is, I missed it], magic is far more important ('The Force'). If it's really a wide-spread opinion that Star Wars is sci-fi, then I can understand why one would complain that it is sort of "bastardizing" the genre, though that's not Star Wars or Lucas doing that, it's the people who watch it and label it that.

So I don't find the article paticularily credible.

For the record, I neither hate nor love Star Wars. It's a movie, and it's way too much fantasy for my proper liking, but the technical aspects were awesome and some of the ideas were very cool. Still, it all balances out and so the movie will never be on my top-movies-of-all-time list, nor on a worst-movies-ever list.

I have to agree that it's good to give the franchise a rest, though, after so many years. Not because it's damaging anything (regardless if it is or not), but simply because. It's hard to define why I think so - perhaps because I think it'll make a better impression if it gets wrapped up nicely and turns into a well 'digestable' package. FYI, I'm serious, not sarcastic. I think that would be good. I'd appreciate that anyway.

I loved Sky Captain. Probably because the movie succeeded (in my eyes) to be what it was trying to be: Pretty. As opposed to that, Star Wars was (in my eyes) always trying to be deeply meaningful, and that just never came across (as in, beyond the intention). :) Oh well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pinkgothic

... there are people that consider Star Wars sci-fi? o_o

*reads a couple of posts*

... there are people HERE that consider Star Wars sci-fi? o_@

I'm not sure who here said anything like that (the closest to this being Crunchy's "Star Wars is like a gentle introduction to science fiction", which still is not contradictory to your own belief). In fact, "space opera" (used in post #3), if I understand the term correctly, is exactly that: a fantasy story in a sci-fi setting. Hey, if people were generally of different opinion, I don't see why SW fans would be that enraged by introducing the freaking midichlorians in Episode I.

That said, I do see it often reasonable to deal with fantasy and science fiction together. I can't find its equivalent in English at the moment, but Polish word "fantastyka" encompasses both. So does, I believe, "science fiction" in the quoted article (see my LeGuin example), and - of course - inappropriately so.

Not to mention the borderline between the two is blurry. How would you describe Dune, for instance?

Why so people like this crap so much? I mean, that robot dude with the green face is so annoying. His name is data or something, and he doesn't even look like a robot.

Quote:

Originally Posted by temporaryscars

Why so people like this crap so much? I mean, that robot dude with the green face is so annoying. His name is data or something, and he doesn't even look like a robot.

You're sure you don't mean Star Trek? It had Data, though his face was rather white than green.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AFGNCAAP

You're sure you don't mean Star Trek? It had Data, though his face was rather white than green.

No, i'm talking about star wars. Ya know, the dudes with the rippled foreheads and the other dude with the death grip or whatever, and that yeti and indiana jones.

Quote:

Originally Posted by temporaryscars

Why so people like this crap so much? I mean, that robot dude with the green face is so annoying. His name is data or something, and he doesn't even look like a robot.

you talkin to me, bitch?

Is sci-fi a real genre at all, or just a theme/setting?

Star Wars = peasant becomes knight, fights evil king yada yada, i.e. a fairytale
Firefly = character-based action series
The new Battlestar Galactica = character drama mostly?
Gattaca = essentially a parable about genetics
H2G2 = a comedy

So basically all these "sci-fi" things are all super different, each using the "sciencey" contrivances for other purposes.

Sci-fi is what we say is sci-fi, really. So in the end, who cares. :)

Bumping this old thread.
Did not want to create another STAR WARS thread.
And the thread title matches the intention of this post:

To add fuel to the fire I want to post redlettermedias Prequel Reviews,
since he released the final one on new years eve:

For those who haven´t seen it yet, there´s foul language and the reviewer has a twisted sometimes even graphic sense of humour + you have get used to his alter ego´s (Mr. Plinkett) voice.
But the observations he has about these movies & Mr. Lucas himself can be pretty insightful.

This is for all people who like or even love the original classic STAR WARS trilogy but alway sensed that there´s somethin´ fishy about those Prequel disasters (as I like to call them).

THE PHANTOM MENACE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxKtZmQgxrI

ATTACK OF THE CLONES
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfBhi...eature=related

REVENGE OF THE SITH
http://www.redlettermedia.com/plinkett.html
not posted on youtube yet

My ranking of the movies (cause I like rankings)

1.) The Empire Strikes Back
2.) Star Wars
.
3.) Return of the Jedi
.
.
.
.
.
.
4.) Revenge of the Sith
.
.
5.) Phantom Menace
6.) Attack of the Clones

You can also now preorder the movies on Bluray. (Sept release)

$45 for each trilogy or $80 for all 6 movies.

Waiting for the live-action TV series. Never coming. :(

My best friend linked me to RedLetterMedia's videos. I've only seen the first, but I absolutely loved it.

The only problem is finding a free hour and a half in which I can feel happy sitting in front of the laptop. If I could only download them...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hammerite (Post 568628)

http://fanedit.info/SW.html

You can download them there via download manager (like JDownloader) and burn them on DVD.
Yes, it´s legal :)

just search for redletermedia on the site

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lucien21 (Post 568609)

You can also now preorder the movies on Bluray. (Sept release)

$45 for each trilogy or $80 for all 6 movies.

I really doubt it.
I´m not interested in owning another Special Edition copy (even if it´s HD quality).
For specials I´ll check youtube or borrow iot from a friend.
IF I should get one box than only Episodes IV-VI (I don´t like calling them this way BTW)

Want to watch some magnificent version of the first STAR WARS (1977) ?
Check out Adywan´s restored cut of it.
It´s what the Special Edition should have been in the first place.

No crappy additions like Jabba scene & cartoon overkill but good changes all around (most of them technical).

http://fanedit.org/517/
click on VIEW next to CUTLIST or just burn it on DVD, watch it & be surprised :)

There´s also a purist edition without three major editions he did

Spoiler:
1.) new Death Star & Imperial Fleet establishing shot
2.) Added music to lightsaber duel (Battle of the Heroes)
3.) New shot of approaching TIE fighters whilst Battle of Yavin

EDIT:
Oh, and Empire Strikes Back Adywan version is on it´s way

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sotha (Post 568622)

Waiting for the live-action TV series. Never coming. :(

Maybe it´s for the better ...

I know what you mean, but ... damn it why not? It could be really great. :P

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sotha (Post 568643)

I know what you mean, but ... damn it why not? It could be really great. :P

if they only could hire the writers & directors of LOST (which are huge Star Wars fans, at least the writers)

then it could be :9:9:9 indeed !

PS
Please no LOST spoilers.
Still have to watch seasons 5 & 6 :)

Wow, there's some hardcore thread necro.

I think Sci-Fi and Spec Fic fans in general are more adaptable than some authors like. Sure, space opera is kind of the bastard son of the various threads of science fiction that proud sci-fi authors like to bang on about, but let's face it, every generation of future sci-fi author starts with whatever pulp magazine, comic book, movie or TV show introduced them to sci-fi, regardless of its pedigree.

Remember, most sci-fi fans of 50s sci-fi only had Lost In Space and Plan 9 From Outer Space, and fans of 60s sci-fi had Star Trek and Doctor Who. The 70s was actually lagging behind pretty badly by the time Star Wars came along, and though it did very little to advance 'real' science fiction in popular culture, it sure brought the genre up to date as far as how it looked and how engaging it could be for non-science geeks.

I think George is quite over-rated, but he still performed a very important service to science fiction (and science in general) with his work. that his work is muddled and irrelevant hardly matters. It got young geeks like us thinking about living somewhere other than here and now, and brought in a whole raft of science fiction stories that got us all wondering again.

And as far as I'm concerned, the greatest space opera was Farscape. At least that show did what science fiction traditionally did, which was introduce strange science fiction ideas and told character-driven stories to illustrate them, unlike ST:NG and B5 (really just ST:NG with a Blade Runner sensibility), which mostly just dressed up traditional soap opera plots with some overused sci-fi concepts ripped off from the original series or from Doctor Who.

Okay, I'll go fetch the shovel to rebury this thread. ;)