It allows you to search the
messageboards, send and receive private messages, give yourself a
custom usertitle, turn ads on or off, create a custom style for your
profile, get a nifty badge under your username, and gives you a special
warm glowy feeling! Oh, and it gets rid of this annoying message, too!
On the contrary...seems like the author is asking people NOT to take Star Wars so seriously. He claims that it's just pulp action stuff, not archetypal myth.
I don't find it cynical, just a different viewpoint. Quite a refreshing change from the tendency to elevate Star Wars to the canon of Great Works. Especially when that elevation makes George Lucas seem like a scholar of myth (which he may be) and unlike a collector of film motifs (which he definitely is).
I mean, Star Wars is a great flick. The Odyssey is a Great Work.
GREATER POOP: Are you really serious or what? MAL-2: Sometimes I take humor seriously. Sometimes I take seriousness humorously. Either way it is irrelevant.
Last edited by Tom Cashel; 10th April 2002 at 04:41 PM..
So it's not ok for people to point out that George takes his "holy" trilogy + 2 a little too seriously? Besides the article only points out a more likely source of inspiration rather than completely debunking the Campbell mythology tie. Honestly I think it's much more reasonable to look at aspects of Star Wars as being an adaptation of space opera of the 1950s with the framework of Akira Kurosawa's plot
I thought the article was pretty insightful. George Lucas himself has admitted that he takes inspiration for the titles of his Star Wars movies from pulp sci-fi literature, so why not also admit that the literature is also an inspiration for the Star Wars stories as well? The author's comparison of the Jedi to the Lensmen is also pretty telling.
I do think that Star Wars touches on some mythical elements as well (Luke and Vader's relationship, the Force, the seperated siblings, etc.), but I also think that it is fundamentally a pulp action story--albeit one that has touched a lot of people deeply.
__________________ Wolfspider
Founder of BADD - Bothered About Disposable Dragons
"Provide evidence of this claim, or retract it because it's a dishonest statement." -- Mourn, laying down the law
"The sins of the previous edition don't excuse the sins of the next." -- Kamikaze Midget, giving words to my thoughts
this was telling (from the end of the article).....
"About the writer
Steven Hart is a freelance writer and novelist based in New Jersey."
uh huh. those who cannot do, teach. and those who cannot write, critique. am i the only one that smell sour grapes?
__________________ "The king's brothers are the ones giving Cersei sleepless nights....Lord Stannis in particular. His claim is the true one, he is known for his prowess as a battle commander, and he is utterly without mercy. There is no creature on earth half so terryfying as a truly just man".
I don't think he has ever denied that pulp action aci-fi and such was a great inspiration for Star Wars. . . but that stuff touches on certain archetypes as well. . .
and let there be no doubt, the article WAS a hatchet job on george lucas and, to a lesser extent, lawrence kasden. the guy went out of his way to take swipes, in fact.
anyone that doesn't think so is lucas-hater-one-week-boycotter.
__________________ "The king's brothers are the ones giving Cersei sleepless nights....Lord Stannis in particular. His claim is the true one, he is known for his prowess as a battle commander, and he is utterly without mercy. There is no creature on earth half so terryfying as a truly just man".
I'll gladly take the role of Lucas-hater, although I consider myself more of a Lucas-disdainer.
Yes, I've seen all the movies, and I still think the first trilogy was a great achievement in film.
But the new trilogy lacks a lot of what made the first trilogy good. Some of these things are just the nature of prequels--there's no real surprises in Phantom Menace/Attack of the Clones simply because we know where the story is going to go in the future. Lucas based the first trilogy on pulp fiction/film, which is known for cliffhangers--something sadly absent in Phantom.
The bad acting (not just from the inexperienced kid, but also from the "star" names) cannot be excused, and has to be attributed to Lucas, because these actors have acted better in other films.
Visually, the films remain stunning. In fact, the second time I saw the Phantom Menace (I had promised my class that I would take them before I found out how bad the film was), I simply turned my ears off and simply watched the film for the backgrounds and the effects. There are so many shots that seemed to have jumped right off the cover of Amazing magazine, but yet are "realistic" in the context of the world.
Story-wise, the new stuff just doesn't match up.
I truly hope that Attack will be better. But I don't plan to see the film the first week for sure, and people are going to have to come back from it and let me know that there's more of the kind of stuff shown in the second trailer than the first to be able to convince me to go.
anyone that doesn't think so is lucas-hater-one-week-boycotter.
Quote:
Thus, my assertion that it is both. .
I don't think he has ever denied that pulp action aci-fi and such was a great inspiration for Star Wars. . . but that stuff touches on certain archetypes as well. . .
And this is my feeling as well, as I said above.
You have to admit, though, that the author makes a great point about how the trash compactor scene was interpreted and how it really is just an action story/movie staple....
Also, I think the author is dead-on when it comes to discussing George's tin ear when it comes to dialogue. Bashing? Perhaps.
But is it bashing if it's true...?
HOWEVER...bad dialogue aside, Star Wars is famous for its great one-liners....
Hmmm...I'm of two minds here....
__________________ Wolfspider
Founder of BADD - Bothered About Disposable Dragons
"Provide evidence of this claim, or retract it because it's a dishonest statement." -- Mourn, laying down the law
"The sins of the previous edition don't excuse the sins of the next." -- Kamikaze Midget, giving words to my thoughts
Last edited by Wolfspider; 10th April 2002 at 05:15 PM..
I loved the article, and I think it's dead-on. Star Wars was, is, and always will be the ultimate B-Movie. Nothing more, nothing less, and there's nothing wrong with B-Movies at all. But to say that the films satisfy "the hunger for spiritual experience (which) was no longer being satisfied sufficiently by the traditional vessels of faith" is just plain silly.
Quote:
The original "Rocky," released the year before "Star Wars," follows Campbell's mythic template much more closely than "Star Wars": just imagine Burgess Meredith as the wise old sage, Burt Young as the guardian of the threshold and Carl Weathers as Darth Vader.
LOL - I loved this example in particular. Because it's so true. Star Wars fans waving the banner of "spiritual experiences" need to realize that MOST films and stories can be shoe-horned into a mythic template, if you press hard enough. This certainly isn't unique to Star Wars.
__________________ "There is no land beyond the law
Where tyrants rule with unshakable power.
'Tis but a dream from which the evil wake
To face their fate...their terrifying hour."
I don't think Star Wars is the second coming in film, don't get me wrong, but I also despise the snearing attitude the writer takes in article as he bashes just about everything he can get his hands on. Which is why I wrote "stop taking himself, and everyone else, so seriously." I don't think the majority of Star Wars fans get as worked up as he imagines, or that they give Star Wars as much blind worship as he thinks they do.
This article wasn't a critical discussion; this was an attempt to piss on something because it's 'kewl' even though he doesn't like it. A lot of folks are guilty of that. And certainly Star Wars isn't the only thing out there that gets analyzed to both depth and death. Welcome to academia, where if you look hard enough, you invariably find what you're looking for.
Star Wars is pulp space opera. I don't think anyone really denies that. It's fun and it may or may not have some myth reflected and/or imbeded in it, consciously or unconsiously. Everything comes from something. All stories have been told. We just have different characters and different scenery. Sometimes stuff has deeper meaning and sometimes it was just plain cheaper to go with this over that when it came down to filming.
__________________ NUTKINLAND!
*Do not go in.
*Not for the faint of heart!
*Don't say I didn't warn ya!
http://www.nutkinland.com
Last edited by Ashtal; 10th April 2002 at 05:18 PM..
LOL - I loved this example in particular. Because it's so true. Star Wars fans waving the banner of "spiritual experiences" need to realize that MOST films and stories can be shoe-horned into a mythic template, if you press hard enough. This certainly isn't unique to Star Wars.
Yeah, I loved that example, too.
__________________ Wolfspider
Founder of BADD - Bothered About Disposable Dragons
"Provide evidence of this claim, or retract it because it's a dishonest statement." -- Mourn, laying down the law
"The sins of the previous edition don't excuse the sins of the next." -- Kamikaze Midget, giving words to my thoughts
Last edited by Wolfspider; 10th April 2002 at 05:19 PM..
First, if knowledge of "man's oldest stories" underlies the popularity of "Star Wars," then why is Lucas' non-"Star Wars" résumé so dismal? Apart from conceiving the "Indiana Jones" films, which owe their box-office impact to the kinetic genius of director Steven Spielberg, Lucas has produced an unbroken series of flops. Anyone here remember "Howard the Duck"? Or "Tucker: The Man and His Dream"? "Radioland Murders," anybody? And let us not forget "Willow," which is a virtual textbook of Campbell's mix 'n' match approach to mythology.
=============================================
nice swipe there.....
"The scale of the action in the Lensman books is broader than anything in the Lucas universe -- not content with wiping out whole planets, Smith's Lensmen detonate entire solar systems without breaking a sweat -- but the quality of the writing is about the same, which is to say awful."
==============================================
ahh, the voice of a frustrated writer.
Though the film's credits list her as screenwriter along with Lawrence Kasdan, Pollock says Lucas had to throw out her draft and start from scratch with Kasdan's help. This is hard to swallow, bearing in mind that Lucas and Kasdan also co-wrote "Return of the Jedi." The strengths of "The Empire Strikes Back" echo those of Brackett's own work as surely as the mediocrity of "Return of the Jedi" matches that of Kasdan's subsequent films, all built from secondhand materials
==============================================now accusing lucas of lying? what proof is offered?
Obi-Wan dies midway through the first film and reappears later only as a hologram offering supremely unhelpful advice, such as "Trust your feelings." If the Force already resides within the hero, what need then for sage advice -- especially when Obi-Wan sees no need to advise Luke that he is going off to duel with a villain who is, in fact, his father? That's a bit of information any idiot, let alone a wise old sage, might consider just a wee bit important.
==============================================
any moron knows that ben was appearing as a spirit....not a hologram. a hologram? that, as well as the rest of the crap is proof that this guy has a bug up his butt about george lucas, probably due to the fact that he thinks he is more talented than george but will never achieve any of lucas' success.
__________________ "The king's brothers are the ones giving Cersei sleepless nights....Lord Stannis in particular. His claim is the true one, he is known for his prowess as a battle commander, and he is utterly without mercy. There is no creature on earth half so terryfying as a truly just man".
You can tell by the mere timing of this article that it's an attempt to bash. He's talking of things from an interview and T.V. program two to three years ago and AToC is right around the corner.
I'm a huge Star Wars fan and I don't buy into all the overly significant religous mumbo-jumbo either. I do think that it tapped into something common in the human psyche (whether on purpose or not I have'nt a clue).
But the fact, that this article is on Salon negates it alone. They always seem to enjoy bashing Star Wars or anything to do with it. And it's Salon...it's like the "E channel" of the internet.
And why, oh why, Wolfspider are you always posting things about Star Wars if you dislike it so much? Why are you always the first one to give your two cents into a thread about how much you dislike it? We all know you hate it. We all know you're gonna boycott it the first week (although I actually thought I had talked you into boycotting it in it's entirety a few months ago).
I can't stand Star Trek but I don't go around posting threads on it to let everyone know how much I think it sucks. If you don't like it don't watch it, don't buy it, don't support it.
__________________ Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. - Philip K. Dick
Originally posted by King_Stannis a few quotes from the article:
First, if knowledge of "man's oldest stories" underlies the popularity of "Star Wars," then why is Lucas' non-"Star Wars" résumé so dismal? Apart from conceiving the "Indiana Jones" films, which owe their box-office impact to the kinetic genius of director Steven Spielberg, Lucas has produced an unbroken series of flops. Anyone here remember "Howard the Duck"? Or "Tucker: The Man and His Dream"? "Radioland Murders," anybody? And let us not forget "Willow," which is a virtual textbook of Campbell's mix 'n' match approach to mythology.
=============================================
nice swipe there.....
So even if something's true it's still a swipe?
Quote:
"The scale of the action in the Lensman books is broader than anything in the Lucas universe -- not content with wiping out whole planets, Smith's Lensmen detonate entire solar systems without breaking a sweat -- but the quality of the writing is about the same, which is to say awful."
==============================================
ahh, the voice of a frustrated writer.
You appear to be using this frustrated writer label fairly liberally. What part of this statement is untrue? I've read Lensmen and while cool, the writing was very pulpy, the same can be easily said of Lucas. As far as him being a frustrated writer, he was published in Salon, which whatever you might say about it is still a very respected internet magazine.
Quote:
Obi-Wan dies midway through the first film and reappears later only as a hologram offering supremely unhelpful advice, such as "Trust your feelings." If the Force already resides within the hero, what need then for sage advice -- especially when Obi-Wan sees no need to advise Luke that he is going off to duel with a villain who is, in fact, his father? That's a bit of information any idiot, let alone a wise old sage, might consider just a wee bit important.
==============================================
any moron knows that ben was appearing as a spirit....not a hologram. a hologram? that, as well as the rest of the crap is proof that this guy has a bug up his butt about george lucas, probably due to the fact that he thinks he is more talented than george but will never achieve any of lucas' success.
This is a pretty geeky nitpick, yeah he got that wrong. So what? That does not immediatly invalidate everything else, and once again you use this frustrated writer argument which you seem to apply to everything without any evidence of it's existance.
Besides when all is said and done Salon publishes "This Modern World" sure it's not KoDT but it's good enough for me
And why, oh why, Wolfspider are you always posting things about Star Wars if you dislike it so much? Why are you always the first one to give your two cents into a thread about how much you dislike it? We all know you hate it. We all know you're gonna boycott it the first week (although I actually thought I had talked you into boycotting it in it's entirety a few months ago).
Like I said, I need to learn to keep my trap shut.
Seriously, I never said that I disliked Star Wars. On the contrary, I LOVE Star Wars. I've still got all the action figures from when I was a kid. I own all the movies. I've got the role-playing game and every suppliment for it. I even had a subscription to Star Wars gamer before it went belly up. I absolutely LOVE Star Wars. The original trilogy is a fun and exciting set of movies, although I do think that Episode I was a let-down. But that doesn't stop me from watching it almost every week with my six-year old daughter, who absolutely loves the movie (but hates Jar Jar with a passion).
I saw the article this morning and read it completely, enjoying the points that the author made and generally agreeing with them. Knowing that some people on the board read Salon.com, I scanned the topics on the front page to make sure the article hadn't already been mentioned, and then I started a thread of my own. I had no intention of bashing Star Wars myself, since I think so highly of Star Wars myself.
The world would be a much less glorious place to be without Star Wars.
Quote:
I can't stand Star Trek but I don't go around posting threads on it to let everyone know how much I think it sucks. If you don't like it don't watch it, don't buy it, don't support it.
Where have I said in this thread that Star Wars sucks? In fact, where in ANY thread here at ENWorld have I said that Star Wars sucks?
I still plan on boycotting the first week of AotC, but mainly so I can get a good feel of the movie from reviews and from comments here. Plus, the more that I think about it the more I realize that it was really unpleasant being in a packed movie theatre a few years back when i saw Episode I....
__________________ Wolfspider
Founder of BADD - Bothered About Disposable Dragons
"Provide evidence of this claim, or retract it because it's a dishonest statement." -- Mourn, laying down the law
"The sins of the previous edition don't excuse the sins of the next." -- Kamikaze Midget, giving words to my thoughts
Last edited by Wolfspider; 10th April 2002 at 05:56 PM..
Where have I said in this thread that Star Wars sucks? In fact, where in ANY thread here at ENWorld have I said that Star Wars sucks?
I never said you said it sucked. I was simply trying to illustrate the point that if you don't like something then why wear it like a badge, why constantly bring it up and keep talking about it? Life's to short man let go of some of that baggage.
I'm glad to hear you like Star Wars I guess it was just hard to figure out because typically you always seem to be this negative voice that keeps creeping up whenever the subject is raised.
__________________ Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. - Philip K. Dick
![[Star Wars] Salon.com Article: "Galactic gasbag"](http://www.enworld.org/forum/iconimages/media-lounge/star-wars-salon-com-article-galactic-gasbag_ltr.gif)
Linear Mode
