Do you like star wars?
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Game of Thrones
kuuul — 9 years ago(December 28, 2016 02:39 PM)
Why are people so obsessed with star wars i don't get it. There are lots of flaws in lucas's world. First, it is very black and white, there is no grey area, unlike GoT, most of the characters are not pure good/evil which is more natural. Also why are aliens fighting with stupid swords why why? Also, don't get me started on AI. It should be a lot more advanced than what is depicted in star wars.
-
gabste — 9 years ago(December 28, 2016 02:55 PM)
When it was released in 1977 it was far ahead of it's time in terms of special effects and science fiction telling. It was a unique movie and story. People couldn't wait for the next movie. I can see if you didn't know the nostalgia of it back then how you wouldn't understand why so many people like it now. People in their 40s and older remember the original Star Wars series.
I like the movies and it saddened me to see Fisher pass away. I was a big fan of Star Wars when I was a kid.
" t t t t" -
CharlesTheBold — 9 years ago(December 28, 2016 09:15 PM)
When it was released in 1977 it was far ahead of it's time in terms of special effects and science fiction telling.
Nonsense. Writers like Bradbury, Heinlein, Asimov, and Clarke were telling much better stories much earlier.
I'm in my 60s and, yes, I remember the original series. Nothing but special effects used to dazzle the audience and make them think they're seeing something important. -
gabste — 9 years ago(December 28, 2016 09:20 PM)
All those writers are fantastic but not too many of their stories were made into a movie at that time. You must admit it was different at that time vs other movies. Blade Runner is another example or Alien. I was 7 when Star Wars was released. My siblings and I were big fans.
" t t t t" -
CharlesTheBold — 9 years ago(December 29, 2016 06:20 AM)
All those writers are fantastic but not too many of their stories were made into a movie at that time.
Bradbury: Farenheit
Clarke: 2001 Space Odyssey
Asimov frankly admitted that "I don't have a visual imagination" and that makes it difficult to translate his stuff to film. Also he lost a job as a "film consultant" because he pointed out too many science bloopers in the movie.
Heinlein is probably too argumentative to fit into Hollywood. His so-called "juveniles" might fit the modern genre of "young adult science fiction", but nobody ever thinks about it.
Sometimes their ideas get into TV scifi indirectly. Commander Data on Star Trek was based on Asimov's robots. Heinlein's "Rolling Stones" inspired "Troubles with Tribbles". Al Bester's "Demolished Man" was made into a big subplot on "Babylon 5". -
CharlesTheBold — 9 years ago(December 28, 2016 09:12 PM)
I hate Star Wars. There was one movie I think Phantom Menace where Obiwan persuades a friendly young boy to participate in a dangerous race so that Obiwan can bet on the boy and make money. Sounds like HUNGER GAMES, except that Obiwan is supposed to be the HERO. All this was contrived so they could add in an exciting (and utterly irrelevant) race scene.
Oh, and the boy had a sort of babysitter, presumably several years older. The next movie, for plot purposes, they are the same age.
Then, same movie, Vader's mother said she gave birth to him without having sex. As far as I can tell ( I haven't seen all the movies), absolutely nothing was made of this, just a Christian idea thrown in out of the blue for no reason.
There's another movie, I think EMPIRE STRIKES BACK, where Han Solo flies through an asteroid belt and is surprised to find a planet on the other side. But you can see planets through asteroid belts ask any astronomer, or for that matter any high school nerd. This blooper was put in because it was necessary for the plot.
Don't they ever plan things out and get the kinks out of them at the early stages? -
Fred_Baratheon — 9 years ago(December 29, 2016 10:25 AM)
You have to look at it as a silly space adventure film. That's when it really comes to life. It's like Fury Road. If you look at that movie as a summer action film, it's absolutely perfect, but if you look at it as a drama it's clearly lacking.
Star Wars is just a fun movie with characters who are distinctive archetypes. The Empire Strikes Back abandons much of the silliness for a more nuanced approach and then Return of the Jedi can't make up its mind regarding tone. -
kuuul — 9 years ago(December 29, 2016 12:49 PM)
I don't classify Fury road as silly, I found it a very entertaining action movie, and it does have deeper philosophical themes like religious brain washing, theocracy in a dystopian society, etc
Silly defines Michael bay movies, and I don't watch them anymore. I find Tom Cruise movies to be more much more entertaining than star wars, and yet some of them have silly elements.
I think any martin scorsese/quentin tarantino/nolan movie is much more entertaining and a lot smarter than any of those in the star wars saga. -
Fred_Baratheon — 9 years ago(December 29, 2016 01:16 PM)
I agree, Fury Road isn't silly. I wasn't equating Fury Road to Star Wars on a tonal level, but as films that can fall apart if watched from the "wrong" perspective.
To me, silliness is basically embodied by Luke and Han beating up two Storm Troopers so they can wear their armor and then traveling across a space city to the exact location where a princess is being held captive and rescuing her. But again, as a silly space adventure, Star Wars is basically perfect imo.