If you view Star Trek as the end of the evolution of Campbell's idea of sci-fi (though Space : 1999 may have been the true final hurrah for this type), then Star Wars is sort of an answer in the pulp/space opera/Burroughs/EE Smith type direction. The original Battlestar Galactica (RIP Richard Hatch), while ostensibly being a TV answer to Star Wars, still probably owes more to Star Trek. After that though, even Star Trek moved in a Star Wars direction.
Post by themirrorthief on Feb 9, 2017 18:22:20 GMT -5
I dunno, recently I saw The Passengers which has true sci fi elements in it and it was much more interesting than Rogue. I suppose some will always see books like 1984 and Fahrenheit 451 as stuffy and pretentious and far inferior to Buck Rogers, Star Wars, Flash Gordon, and Zombies but I suppose there are some of us who are simply easily bored.
life might be so much easier if we could only forget
Post by themirrorthief on Apr 4, 2017 14:50:52 GMT -5
I have seen a slew of better flicks with much better effects...The Great Wall, Kong Skull Island, The Passengers, Ghost in the Shell, John Wick 2, The Jungle Book, World of Warcraft...all more interesting unless you are a hardcore Star Wars fan
life might be so much easier if we could only forget
Not really. Empire A new Hope deserve all the praise they get and Return of the Jedi, despite it's flaws, is decent enough (Luke is at his best and Vader's relationship with Luke exceeds numerous other relationships.) Star Wars could be cheesy but by and large it deserves all the praise it gets. The special effects were great for the time and still hold up well even today.
But I'll agree with Deuce that incestuous thinking has dragged it down. WE saw that with the spinoffs
Before it was decanonized the spinoffs had many similar formulas. There'd usually be an ancient sith lord, a rogue warlord, some super weapon, and a galaxy spanning threat. It got kinda old eventually even though some of the books (the Thrawn Trilogy, the Thrawn duo logy, the Xwing books) rose above the grain. Hell the Thrawn Duology worked because it deconstructed the formula to a great degree (the imperial radicals are portrayed as fanatics who can't accept that they've lost the war, and once the truth is out they fall quickly, attempts to develop super weapons went bust).
In 1999, Del Ray realized this and so launched the NJO series, featuring a massive series of 19 books told over 4 years involving a massive alien invasion by aliens from beyond the galaxy. It was pretty dark in many ways (Chewbacca dies in the first book, and the aliens do wreak a lot of havoc.) It also raised some debate about the nature of the force (the Yoda figure Vergere has a more...grey interpretation of the force that was open to interpretation.) At the time it was pretty controversial, since many thought it went too far. However it was successful too. Unfortunately some people were kinda bummed out by it (in fairness 9/11 and the Iraq war happened halfway through the run and since the series was pretty dark it kinda depressed people) and so they tried to go TOO far in the other direction. As a result they created series that most people agree are utter shit (Legacy of the Force was a terrible rehash of the prequels, Fate of the Jedi saw the Jedi become fascists and we're meant to agree with them).
The NJO was controversial at the time but in hindsight it's become more respected because despite it's flaws (and there WERE flaws) it tried to be something different and managed to capture the spirit of the films pretty well (in the end the aliens are defeated but the way is open to rehabilitate them, the galaxy is finally united for the first time in decades, and the Jedi are finally accepted by the people at large).
Tl;dr: The NJO series tried to do something new, and though it had problems has in hindsight become more well regarded by the fanbase since it not only tried something new but did them competently
First films, fine. I think the problem then is, that because this thing has become hugely successful they have to make more films. The problem is that the plot for the first one was written on the back of a cigarette packet. So they then have to retro-build the world/universe and try and fit in all those disparate little elements that were put in purely for dramatic effect.
Film wise I find the huge reliance on CGI these days is detracting from good plots and stories. The Avengers films are a good example. I enjoyed the first one, then....oh they save the world in a big CGI pitched battle again
Compare this with the richness of Tolkien or the detailed world-history of the Hyborian Age or even GoT. You can imagine all sorts of spin-off plots and in-depth storylines in those. The foundations have to be there before building the structure I think
Honestly I have to disagree. Empire strikes back is not only one of the best sequels it's one of the best FILMS. The world building rocks (it's up there with tolkein and game of thrones) and is done in a way that it's a fluid extension.
THat's a fair point; I said before that the spinoffs had a hard time; the NJO series should have been the climax of the spinoffs focusing on small scale adventures; for what it's worth there were long periods of peace (1600 years and 1000 respectively)