[Star Wars] Salon.com Article: "Galactic gasbag"

[Wolfspider]

salon.com just plain sucks. end. of. story.

anyone that doesn't think so is lucas-hater-one-week-boycotter.

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....

 

[CrusaderX]

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.

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.

 

[Ashtal]

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.

 

[Wolfspider]

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.

 

[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.....


"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.

 

[Wolfspider]

*grumbles*

I just need to learn to keep my trap shut....

 

[Wild Karrde]

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.

 

[EOL]

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?

"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.

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

 

[Wolfspider]

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.

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....

 

[Wild Karrde]

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.