All Things Star Wars (No Spoilers)

[gkIrish]

no. boba is in fact a clone of jango as well. he just doesn't have the growth accelerant. so, he grows at a normal pace and is told that mango is his father, when he really is a mere copy. a rocking badass copy.

Wookiepedia of Jango Fett

Following the conclusion of that conflict, Fett became a bounty hunter, quickly establishing a reputation as being one of the best in the galaxy. Later on, Fett agreed to serve as the genetic template for the clones that would form the bulk of the Grand Army of the Republic during the Clone Wars. When Master Obi-Wan Kenobi located Jango and Boba on Kamino, Fett fled to join Count Dooku. Though struck down by Mace Windu in combat, Fett's legacy would live on through his son Boba, as well as his cloned brethren, who would have a profound impact on galactic history.

Jango was the original and Boba/Stormtroopers are all his clones. Not sure what I'm misunderstanding.

 

[GATTACA!]

Wookiepedia of Jango Fett


Jango was the original and Boba/Stormtroopers are all his clones. Not sure what I'm misunderstanding.

It's irrelevant since both are just clones of Jar Jar

 

[gkIrish]

It's irrelevant since both are just clones of Jar Jar

 

[IrishAlum1997]

no. boba is in fact a clone of jango as well. he just doesn't have the growth accelerant. so, he grows at a normal pace and is told that mango is his father, when he really is a mere copy. a rocking badass copy.

Gold star to first person that gets a picture of Chris Kattan up here first. Haha, Mango.

I work in a movie theatre and cannot wait to press play over and over again. Episode 7 will fulfill everything we hoped Phantom Menace would be as the opening salvo in an epic trilogy. It's going to be a lot of fun, and will break Avengers record for biggest opening weekend of all time, if Avengers 2 hasn't done it by then.

And I'll go with "into the woods" for first SW trailer. Christmas Day Disney release. A year out feels right.

 

[Emcee77]

Right. I took a class at Notre Dame called "Philosophy of Science Fiction" and it basically boils down to two key distinctions. First, if things are explained by magic, it's generally fantasy. If they're explained by science, it's science fiction. "The Force" is much closer to magic than science. Second, the "science" in a science-fiction story plays a part in the plot, whether it's time travel, technology, artificial intelligence, etc.

That's a pretty superficial distinction. I think the biggest difference is metaphysical. Fantasy, as a literary genre, was basically created by the devoutly Catholic Tolkein, and every fantasy book and genre thereafter has been heavily influenced by his worldview. Star Trek, and the majority of science fiction, tends to be much more secular/liberal in its outlook.

I don't know ... I think I get what you are saying about metaphysics but I still think wizards makes an essential distinction, rather than merely a superficial one, and his insight is useful.

Take Dune, for example. Dune has its metaphysical elements. What makes it sci fi instead of fantasy? Imo, it's the focus on ecology. Science "plays a part in the plot," as wizards says. Star Wars doesn't have the normal trappings of fantasy, and appears superficially to be sci fi, but by wizards's formula, proves to be fantasy. I think that's right, by either standard. wizards's formula is a pretty good guide.

 

[Cackalacky]

I don't know ... I think I get what you are saying about metaphysics but I still think wizards makes an essential distinction, rather than merely a superficial one, and his insight is useful.

Take Dune, for example. Dune has its metaphysical elements. What makes it sci fi instead of fantasy? Imo, it's the focus on ecology. Science "plays a part in the plot," as wizards says. Star Wars doesn't have the normal trappings of fantasy, and appears superficially to be sci fi, but by wizards's formula, proves to be fantasy. I think that's right, by either standard. wizards's formula is a pretty good guide.

I would say that would be a starting point. Star Wars has elements of both. There is obviously the science fiction element. There is also the yin/yang transition of Luke and Anakin and the samurai nature of the Jedi/Sith. The "Force" has its roots in eastern mysticism. I don't think that is truly genre defining though.

Star Trek is truly science fiction though just as The Silmarillion is truly fantasy IMO. There is definitely a sliding scale.

 

[ACamp1900]

Dune is the single worst film in all of human history... it is known.

 

[wizards8507]

I don't know ... I think I get what you are saying about metaphysics but I still think wizards makes an essential distinction, rather than merely a superficial one, and his insight is useful.

I would say that would be a starting point.

Yeah I mean I said "basically." It was a three-line message board post, not my doctoral dissertation.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

I don't know ... I think I get what you are saying about metaphysics but I still think wizards makes an essential distinction, rather than merely a superficial one, and his insight is useful.

Does it really make much difference, from a narrative perspective, if the hero casts a fireball or shoots a laser gun?

Take Dune, for example. Dune has its metaphysical elements. What makes it sci fi instead of fantasy? Imo, it's the focus on ecology. Science "plays a part in the plot," as wizards says.

I'd say that Dune's metaphysics are precisely what make it science fiction (one of the best, for that matter). Its philosophy is secular and progressive, there are strong elements of transhumanism, a focus on how technology advances and man evolves with it, etc.

Star Wars doesn't have the normal trappings of fantasy, and appears superficially to be sci fi, but by wizards's formula, proves to be fantasy.

I agree that Star Wars is more fantasy than sci-fi, but that's mostly because it employs a dualistic metaphysics and follows the structure of a classical monomyth. The fact that its setting is "a galaxy far far away" and that the characters use apparently advanced technology is beside the point.

It's the philosophy underlying the plot that makes it "feel" like fantasy or sci-fi. The setting and equipment involved are mostly window dressing.

 

[Cackalacky]

This serious ish here. We don't need no visa ass experts.

Jojoblack

 

[Cackalacky]

This serious ish here. We don't need no bisa ass experts.

Jojoblack

 

[gkIrish]

This serious ish here. We don't need no visa ass experts.

Jojoblack

This serious ish here. We don't need no bisa ass experts.

Jojoblack

I agree with both of these

 

[Cackalacky]

Fack!

 

[TDHeysus]

Actually it was his father that was cloned--Jango Fett.

you sir are correct, Boba Fett was a clone that was given to Jango Fett for him to raise and not be raised as a clone.

 

[Pops Freshenmeyer]

Dune is the single worst film in all of human history... it is known.

All three versions.

Somebody is going to chop it up into multiple movies that will form a comprehensible whole (instead of trying to squeeze it into 2-3 hours) at some point, right?

EDIT: Actually, the more that I think about the less likely this seems. For one thing, the book ends with setting off a jihad across the universe. Not exactly a Spielbergian happy ending.

 

[Emcee77]

Does it really make much difference, from a narrative stand-point, if the hero casts a fireball or shoots a laser gun?

Well, it may, right? You might say it makes a difference in, say, War of the Worlds, that aliens are demonstrating their technological superiority by killing people with a laser but in the end, despite, their technological superiority, the aliens can't withstand the bacteria that we can withstand.

It's the philosophy underlying the plot that makes it "feel" like fantasy or sci-fi. The setting and equipment involved are mostly window dressing.

See, I think this gets it backwards. The philosophy stems from the window dressing. It may even be incidental to it.

Tolkien wrote his fantasy works, as he has said, because he needed people to speak the languages he created. True, he also said that he considered his work Catholic or Christian, but the essence of the effort was anthropological, creating "races" and cultures to speak his languages.

Similarly, Wells got the idea for War of the Worlds by strolling through the English countryside and imagining how various cottages and things might be destroyed in an alien attack. The "how" is the essential thing. "Science plays a part in the plot."

Either way, I think putting the philosophy before the window dressing is the cart before the horse. JMHO.

 

[Cackalacky]

I have always understood that science fiction expands our world and fantasy transcends it. The philosophy of the story is the mechanism for this action.

Greyhammer needs to drop the Star Ship Trooper dissertation right here....

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Similarly, Wells got the idea for War of the Worlds by strolling through the English countryside and imagining how various cottages and things might be destroyed in an alien attack. The "how" is the essential thing. "Science plays a part in the plot."

Let's apply this to Star Wars then. The "how" of Lucas' original films is quite obviously sci-fi, yet there's widespread agreement that it's more properly categorized as fantasy. Why is that?

I have always understood that science fiction expands our world and fantasy transcends it. The philosophy of the story is the mechanism for this action.

Brilliant. Much more succinct than my previous posts.

I can't think of a single sci-fi book or movie that incorporated the supernatural in a meaningful way.

 

[wizards8507]

Let's apply this to Star Wars then. The "how" of Lucas' original films is quite obviously sci-fi, yet there's widespread agreement that it's more properly categorized as fantasy. Why is that?

Someone touched on this early. Sure, we can presume that the Millennium Falcon uses some kind of science to travel at lightspeed, but we never see that science and don't much care. Conversely, the USS Enterprise travels at warp speed using a gravimetric field displacement manifold, and the science therein matters. There are actual equations and principles involved behind how a warp drive functions in the Star Trek universe.

I can't think of a single sci-fi book or movie that incorporated the supernatural in a meaningful way.

Comic books do it all the time. They blend things like genetics, time travel, and space exploration with magic, "powers," and gods.

 

[JughedJones]

Let's apply this to Star Wars then. The "how" of Lucas' original films is quite obviously sci-fi, yet there's widespread agreement that it's more properly categorized as fantasy. Why is that?



Brilliant. Much more succinct than my previous posts.

I can't think of a single sci-fi book or movie that incorporated the supernatural in a meaningful way.

You must set the bar for 'meaningful' pretty damn high, or perhaps we might have different definitions of 'supernatural.'

One of those have to be true because I can think of countless examples of the supernatural being used in meaningful ways.

Some of them being Star Wars. 'Stranger in a Strange Land' being another, Battlestar Galactica did pretty good if we want something a little more modern, and while I'm not a huge fan, Star Trek especially 'Deep Space 9' had more 'meaningful supernaturalness' than you can shake a womp rat at.


Further, I think the reason people label Star Wars fantasy and/or sci-fi is because how much Lucas pulled all of the timeless stories into one epic: Prodigal Son, Beowulf, etc etc. Plus, a lot of it isn't your normal 'glimpse into the future' as so many sci-fis are. "Long time ago...Far Far Away" leads one to believe it's something completely removed from anything human at all, so not really sci-fi in the conventional sense.

So, that's what I think.

 

[Rack Em]

Opened this thread and thought:

 

[greyhammer90]

I have always understood that science fiction expands our world and fantasy transcends it. The philosophy of the story is the mechanism for this action.

Greyhammer needs to drop the Space Trooper dissertation right here....

Bro I could type for days about Star Ship Troopers. That movie was such a perfect satire and critique of the war on terror (that hadn't even come close to happening yet) that I'm convinced the screenwriter was a time traveller.

Cracked did a pretty good write up on it, but still only scratched the surface: 6 Mind Blowing Ways 'Starship Troopers' Predicted the Future | Cracked.com

 

[Huntr]

Bro I could type for days about Star Ship Troopers. That movie was such a perfect satire and critique of the war on terror (that hadn't even come close to happening yet) that I'm convinced the screenwriter was a time traveller.

Cracked did a pretty good write up on it, but still only scratched the surface: 6 Mind Blowing Ways 'Starship Troopers' Predicted the Future | Cracked.com

It's funny because the point of the book is pretty much the opposite of the point of the movie.

ETA: Because Verhoeven, the movie director, never read the whole book.

 

[RyCo1983]

Bro I could type for days about Star Ship Troopers. That movie was such a perfect satire and critique of the war on terror (that hadn't even come close to happening yet) that I'm convinced the screenwriter was a time traveller.

Cracked did a pretty good write up on it, but still only scratched the surface: 6 Mind Blowing Ways 'Starship Troopers' Predicted the Future | Cracked.com

The book is good reading too!

 

[greyhammer90]

It's funny because the point of the book is pretty much the opposite of the point of the movie.

Yeah there was a lot of weird pro-Fascism in Heinlein's novel.

 

[rikkitikki08]

Better Trilogy Lord of the Rings or Star Wars? I may have kicked the hornets nest on this one

 

[Cackalacky]

You must set the bar for 'meaningful' pretty damn high, or perhaps we might have different definitions of 'supernatural.'

One of those have to be true because I can think of countless examples of the supernatural being used in meaningful ways.

Some of them being Star Wars. 'Stranger in a Strange Land' being another, Battlestar Galactica did pretty good if we want something a little more modern, and while I'm not a huge fan, Star Trek especially 'Deep Space 9' had more 'meaningful supernaturalness' than you can shake a womp rat at.


Further, I think the reason people label Star Wars fantasy and/or sci-fi is because how much Lucas pulled all of the timeless stories into one epic: Prodigal Son, Beowulf, etc etc. Plus, a lot of it isn't your normal 'glimpse into the future' as so many sci-fis are. "Long time ago...Far Far Away" leads one to believe it's something completely removed from anything human at all, so not really sci-fi in the conventional sense.

So, that's what I think.

I don't think anyone is really disagreeing here as the stories you mention are more soft sci-fi (apologize for the distinction). Star Wars definitely falls into this category but at the time the original was released it was definitely a sci-fi movie. Only later with the other two movies were we able to glimpse the yin/yang and eastern mysticism. The expanded universe (post Episode VI) has quite clearly settled into the sci-fi category, while the pre-Episode IV era is more soft sci-fi as its focus is on the Jedi and the ability to develop/use the Force.

When I think of true sci-fi or hard sci-fi, I think of a story with a distinct lack of religious overtones in the story (Mad Max Trilogy, V for Vendetta, Back to the Future, E.T., The Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy, 1984, iRobot, The Running Man, The Time Machine).That has always stood out to me. The stories always expand my world but there is really no supernatural actions/entities. Sure there may be characters that have powers humans don't but that is usually the result of a more evolved/non-humanoid anatomy or some other futuristic/technological advances.

The stories can occur in the past (via time travel) or more typically the near to not so near future. There are definite moral issues that arise, but they are typical dealt with via some technology or ability developed from a technology and not an appeal to some higher power.

Opposite this are Dragon Lance Chronicles, The Matrix Trilogy, Tolkien's body of works (specifically the Silmarillion), C.S. Lewis, and hell even the Game of Thrones, where there is clearly a transcendence in the environment via the story, characters, or themes. The time of the story is superfluous really.

These are the major and over-arching setups for me. Anything that falls in between is really a sub-genera of one or the other or just a piece of speculative fiction, like Dune. (IMO is truly science fantasy).

 

[Huntr]

Better Trilogy Lord of the Rings or Star Wars? I may have kicked the hornets nest on this one

LotR is better as a book than those movies (although they're decent enough and I liked them). That's 1 of my fave books ever

As far as movies go, SW original trilogy by a mile

Also, here's a pic of me and my friends:

 

[Cackalacky]

This me in a nutshell BTW:

Although I am distraught over the choice this is hilarious:
<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/AxAEo3CWeq8?feature=player_detailpage" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[rikkitikki08]

Fuck Clerks 2...hilarious but still fuck it.


Lord of the Rings by a mile for me