[EveningStar]

Thread for original article

[EveningStar]

ping

[webheart]

Who the **** cares what some CNN reporter thinks?

[TMA62]

CNN is the worse thing that happened to journalism.

[ConorMacNessa]

The Farce is strong in this one!

"Dia shábháil ar fad anseo!"

This is the Arabic character "nun" – the first letter of the word "Nazarene." I post it as my avatar in solidarity with people of all faiths suffering persecution at the hands of Islam. Many of them are members of the oldest of our Christian Communities, dating from the days of the Apostles. They endure cruel, merciless and unrelenting persecution. They are Orthodox and Catholic, Protestant and Evangelical, Coptic, Pentecostal, and Baptist. To the persecutors they, and we, are all "Nazarenes."

[Celtic Conservative]

Star Wars isn’t science fiction. It’s romantic fantasy set in space.

CC

[PapaBear3625]

The author's favorite SF story is about a black woman who goes back in time to the pre-Civil-War South, and is enslaved. Thinks SF should be about race and gender.

Really hates SF about people overthrowing an oppressive government. SF about politicians who appear to be the good guy, turning out to be evil.

[Dr. Bogus Pachysandra]

I wish someone would do “The Mote in God’s Eye.”

[Mr Rogers]

Star Wars was a fun film, kind of like Raiders of the Lost Ark. But Hollywood isn’t about great thoughts. Hollywood thrives on mediocrity, and it does so because that is what a film maker can promise the money men.

Genius is great, but it isn’t something one can promise. A film maker can promise sex scenes, but he cannot promise romance between characters the audience cares about. The maker can promise violence, but he cannot promise suspense. In like manner, he can promise action, but not a stirring of the soul. And movies are financed by what can be promised, not by what one can hope for.

TV is actually a better medium, because 26 shows a season means a few can be special. The original Star Trek had some pee-poor episodes, but they had a few meant to provoke thought - like raisins in a muffin. A TV series can afford raisins. A movie only has one shot, and no one wants to take a chance.

[FredZarguna]

The author laments the shortcomings of Star Wars and then proceeds to tout the virtues of Kindred [in particular, and Octavia Butler, in general] which is -- all politically correct and puke inducing Hugo's and Nebula's to the contrary notwithstanding -- thoroughly wretched nonsense that is not ψφ

. Propaganda is propaganda, and is never art.

Star Wars is light fare. It hasn't ruined anything. It got people of a certain age interested in science fiction, and to the extent that it interested them in other, "deeper" ψφ fare it was not a bad thing. I seriously doubt about half of the "meaningful" ψφ the author of the piece obviously prefers and is overlooking in his silly rant would ever have been made had not Star Wars been a commercial success.

He's complaining because every cowboy movie isn't The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance or The Shootist while forgetting that silly Tom Mix serials and really stupid "singing cowboys" made those films possible.

D+.

[Nepeta]

Science fiction is a lot more than space opera. Good science fiction may have nothing to do with space, as shown by many Twilight Zone episodes.

I grew up watching Science Fiction Theatre. I read Andre Norton as a young teen. This was back in the era when the genre was believed to be consumed almost entirely by young males. In my teen summers, I worked my way through the library's stock of Asimov, Clarke, etc. I love science fiction. When I was old enough, I bought books and attended (chiefly male) science fiction conventions. However...

I dislike Star Wars. I disliked it in 1977. The Star Wars universe is a universe that could be stripped of its setting and be made as a western, a Chinese costume epic, a European period piece...it is eye candy, not idea candy.

Minus the special effects, what is there to talk about? The characters are predictable. I'm not even sure why the rebels are the "good guys," except that the actors are the prettier ones. The Leni Riefenstahl Triumph of the Will moment at the end of the first movie creeped me out.

Star Wars has stunted science fiction. There are many people who now believe science fiction IS space opera. Even space opera need not be predictable; Star Trek TOS holds up surprisingly well. Those episode actually can yield some interesting discussion without once considering special effects! And the Star Trek TOS future is a seriously American future, based on merit.

[BuffaloJack]

Star Wars isn’t Scifi
SciFi:
Time Travel
Travel By Black Holes
Space
War of the Worlds
Forbidden Planet
Fantasy:
Space Fantasy (Star Wars, Battle Star Galactica)
Other World Fantasy (Lord of the Rings, Farscape, ...)
Dragons
Magic, Sorcery
Not SciFi
Horror
Werewolves
Vampires
Frankenstein
Zombies
Ghosts
Goblins
Spirits
Devils and Angels
Monsters
Aliens

[yarddog]

I thought they were pretty good movies, not something you would have to concentrate much on, just enjoy the show.

Like most people, I think Jar Jar was a really dumb character as were the Ewoks. Actually, the Ewoks were more than stupid, they were disgusting.

[plain talk]

I liked this comment

“The thing is, he really is a SW fan. He’s just one of those neckbeards that stops liking something once everyone else likes it, then claims he hates it.”

[Flag_This]

"[Star Wars] ...has left all too many people thinking science fiction is some computer graphics-laden space opera/western filled with shootouts..."

Isn't that pretty much how Lucas described Star Wars back in '77?

[kidd]

I have always thought SW was campy, but it certainly didn’t ruin science fiction. A lot of great science fiction came out after SW

Some great non-space, non-horror sci fi:
- The Lost Room
- Cube
- and of course, The Matrix

[mountn man]

If anything, Star Wars has drawn millions of people to Sci Fi.

2001 was bold, but went over the heads of most who watched it. It was a great story, but as a movie, long and slow.

Star Wars took sci fi from the realm of cheese and camp, to fiction/possibility. It was ground breaking in its effects. Virtually overnight, special effects were changed, not only in how they were done, but how often. Today's special effects are taken for granted, because of what SW did back in the day.

I'd also say that SW opened the door for movies like Contact and Interstellar to be made. Gone are the days of sci fi being done on shoe string budgets, being relegated to strictly direct to video releases. Sci fi now is viewed as legitimate, where producers will put up big money, knowing that a movie CAN bring in big bucks.

Star Trek had a big following. But in reality, it was a fairly low budget, TV show. Star Wars opened the door for Star Trek to be made, the way Star Trek should be made.

I'd also say that Star Wars breathed life back into 2001. I was 14 when Star Wars (and Close Encounters) came out. From there I became very interested in anything sci fi. Reading was a joy for me and I had a reading class in school, where most of the books I read were sci fi, with the most prominent being 2001.

2001 was legendary, but it was more a film makers movie vs a theater goers. 2001 came out in 1968. 2010 came out in 1984, I would say, primarily from the success of SW and what it had done for 2001.

Because of Star Wars and because of my love for reading, I was later exposed to the writings of Clarke, Pournelle, Saberhagen, Herbert, Bujold and others.

I suspect millions of others also.

No...I don't think Star Wars ruined sci fi. Just the opposite. I think it pushed it farther in movies and literature than anything else has.

[Wingy]

Hey Mr. Beale. I've got an idea. Why don't you write a script, line up some financing, assemble a cast, and shoot a MOVIE! A movie we can all love, and shout out from the rooftops how your movie saved sci-fi from such cruddy films as Star Wars. Make sure that your movie has plenty of impenetrable "ideas" and such creativity that we are all made smarter simply by watching your movie. A movie that makes us all think warm and fuzzy thoughts whenever we think of "sci-fi".

Or not.

You see Mr. Beale, you are not the arbiter of "good sci-fi", at least in my eyes, so you may want to keep that in mind the next time you want to judge all things through your blurry lens of what is "good" or not.

[SamAdams76]

Good science fiction was intended to be read. Not adapted to two hour films with obligatory "special effects" and a gratuitous romance angle tossed in to draw in the females.

When I was a kid, I used to like to read science fictions stories up in my treehouse if it was warm or holed up in a corner of my house. Every now and then, I would look up to the sky and imagine that some of the stars up there contained planets studded with life forms and spaceships flitting back and forth between them.

Reading the books, usually borrowed from the library and checked out by the scowling librarian who always suggested something in non-fiction, and the short stories that used to be published in the magazine slicks back in the day, brought science fiction alive in a way that most people today will never experience.

TV and the movies kind of ruined science fiction for me. All that nonsense like "Lost in Space", "ET" and the "Star Wars" movies - which I find ridiculous.

[Jack Hydrazine]

We need Luke Starkiller on the set!

[Jack Hydrazine]

“...and made household names of characters like Darth Vader, Han Solo and Luke Skywalker.”

I was really hoping they were going to mention The Mooch!