The weird thing about Star Wars

Why is it that I adore the Star Wars setting - when I think Lucas is a complete hack. Pretty much everything in his movies is stolen and changed slightly - and the story as a whole is a complete cliché.

I mean, what the hell?

But he had a talent for special effects and the visual side of things, there's no denying that.

But it's not just Lucas - it's everything since then by all the others who have contributed. I hate the new movies, and yet I still adore the setting and I can't get enough of it.

Was IS it about Star Wars that works so well?

The buffét.

Star Wars relies on blending genrés, western, fantasy, Biggles, war, mystery, politics inspired by the real world etc. Almost every story can be told in the Star Wars universe.
Similar to Lord of the Rings, Star Wars do not put it's weight on a single protagonist, but a whole group with separate agendas and lives that partially mix together.

Thus the movies have a wider appeal since there's usually something in it to like for everyone. Ask people and they will give you different stories about what they like about the movies. This is the strength of width.

In general, chasing for the one-ultimate-formula and one-target-group will over time kill the product. Something to think about in relation to RPG's. The strength in RPG's have been that it cater to a wide range of different joys, whether you like chess-like strategy, blood-pumping action or grand dramas on the theatre. Scale of what you personally do not enjoy or cater only to the largest subgroup and you remove a large chunk of what drags people to it.

Isn't almost everything cliche now though? The original movies have many obvious influences, but I never really considered them cliche, at least not considering when they were released. I also think the cast in the original trilogy had great chemistry, and that's one major reason it was so much better than the newer movies.

Personally, I'm completely burned out on anything Star Wars for a long time. I also despise what Lucas has become.

JDR13 said:

Isn't almost everything cliche now though? The original movies have many obvious influences, but I never really considered them cliche, at least not considering when they were released. I also think the cast in the original trilogy had great chemistry, and that's one major reason it was so much better than the newer movies.

Click to expand...

To me, there are degrees of cliché

But I'm not talking about the movie as a whole, but the story of the boy turned hero, who rescues a princess and triumphs over darkness.

The way the movie was made and presented, however, was really quite new at the time.

I agree that the cast was better and had better chemistry - but that's case with thousands of movies.

There's something utterly unique about Star Wars - and I'm just not quite sure what it is, or rather - why I'm so fond of the setting.

I guess it's the whole thing about the force, and the Sith/Empire Jedi/Republic stuff. It's like so many other conflicts - but I guess the force thing is the key. Even moreso than "magic" in fantasy movies.

Like JemyM says. It's a kind of … playing with clichés. A playing with "universal motivs", so to say. There has been written literature on that, too.

It' a tiny bit like … Tolkien drew from almost all european legends, sagas, myths etc. . George Lucas did basically the same, only ore moern.

There is one factor which is now lrgely forgotten, though : The "fary-tale aspect" of Star Wars. Even the 3 Prequel movies don't have that anymore. "The Force" is a kind of equivalent to magic. In the novelsit went completely lost. The novels are almost only pure Sci-Fi nowadays (with one rare exception : The very last story from the "Tales from the Mos Eisley Cantina", which imho unique in the whole Star Wars universe, not from its setting, but from its emotions.) The only *real* book still transporting the "fairy-tale aspect" of Star Wars is this "Splinter Of The Mind's Eye" book, ghost-written by Alan Dean Foster (that title would NEVER NEVER NEVER made it literally translated into Germany ! Germany is sooo infamous for bad titles, both of movies & books !).

Well put together bunch of clichés/archetypes, good pacing, good chemistry between characters, good special effects, well established lore and sorta naive romanticism make it an entertaining space fantasy escapism.
One specific aspect to note is the presentation of the universe/lore - there isn´t much of exposition in this regard, most of the time it sorta works in the background as matter-of-fact elements which characters are aware of, but viewers have to tie the knots on an indirect basis - this gives the viewers sense that there´ s a lot of depth to the world despite not much of it actually being present. Lucas used this "method" more pronouncedly in his directional debut, THX 1138.

The above only concerns A New Hope and Empire Strikes Back, which are the only two films in the series I like.

Also, I recommend Kurosawa´s Hidden Fortress to any Star Wars fans - the film influenced Star Wars in major ways and it´s a great one (and, rather untypically for Kurosawa, features comedy element).

You can point out to almost any movie in the industry and see a cliche. I don't think that's the issue with Star Wars since as it was mentioned before, all the cliches are well integrated in the movies. What makes SW so good probably depends on many factors like why do you like the movies, or at what age have you seen them, are you a SF fan in general etc?

First time I saw the old ones I was 5 years old and my mind was blow away by the awesomeness. At that point I didn't care much about the story and any other character except Vader. I was just looking at the movie for the battle scenes, the special effects, Vader with his awesome voice etc. Only later at about 8 or 9 yo I started to get interested in the story. It's also build as a fairy tale, with the force as some kind of magic, the good guy vs the bad guy etc.

All in all the old movies were great and even today I enjoy looking at them.

ps : The new movies SUCK ASS!!!11111oneoneone

offtopic : thumbs up for The Hidden Fortress or any of Kurosawa's movies for that matter.

To the original question about Lucas, you have to realize that Star Wars and Empire were the result of far more than his influence, and I'm not talking about other movie influences, but people. Guys like Gary Kurtz and Irwin Kershner were what kept Lucas basically in check during the first two films which created the foundation for the Star Wars Universe. Obviously Lucas was a big part of it too, but where he wanted to go outlandish, it was guys like them that fought to refine it.

Unfortunately after ESB, Lucas essentially had total control and we ended up with Ewoks, Jar Jar Binks, and the Special Edition (and newest Special Edition) of the original trilogy. Not that there weren't some awesome things that Lucas did after ESB in regards to the Star Wars Universe, but its painful to think about what could have been if Lucas didn't have total control.

Star Wars is my favourite sci-fi universe, but I have to admit I find my own feelings towards the setting a bit odd. I find the plot holes especially annoying, and not just in the extended universe or the new movies - even the original trilogy had plenty of weird scenes and stuff that didn't make any sense (imperial trooper accuracy, anyone?).

Still, there's something about the concept that's fascinating. I like the Jedi and the Sith. I like the Force a lot, it combines fantasy with sci-fi in an excellent way. Well, it's a great concept as long as you ignore midichlorians.

I think the somewhat original ideas and concepts in Star Wars is what makes the setting so great for me. It's definitely not the specific stories or characters of the setting.

But yes, most of the extended universe is borderline fan fiction, and a lot of the movie scenes make no sense whatsoever. Still, as long as I weed out all the nonsense and make my own "version" of it, it's a great place for fiction.

blatantninja said:

Unfortunately after ESB, Lucas essentially had total control and we ended up with Ewoks, Jar Jar Binks,

Click to expand...

I have nothing against those. In fact, for me, they are a more-than pleasant departure from a rather grim and dark universe. Like those 2 droids, too.

In fact, I read, that :r. Lucas had originally planned to use Wookies instead of Ewoks, originally, but somehow tht wasn't made (not feasible ?). Hence the use of the Wookies at the end of ROTS. Which kind of closes the circle again.

The two imho underrated Ewok movies are among the movies I like most. Not because they are great (in fact they are relatively flat), but because they do give a (far too smal, imho) view on what this universe is like *without* its conflict going on ...

Ahhh, Star Wars = . I love the whole concept, the OT, the PT, the spin-offs, the old and new animation series (yes, including the Ewoks). It's pure, simple entertainment with a great fairy tale atmosphere that makes me all warm and fuzzy inside ... and it has stormtroopers. Nothing beats stormtroopers. Except for clones, of course.

Did I mention that the TCW 3rd season DVDs arrived today :?

Alrik Fassbauer said:

I have nothing against those. In fact, for me, they are a more-than pleasant departure from a rather grim and dark universe. Like those 2 droids, too.

Click to expand...

Its weird for me. On one hand, I much prefer the setting of BG1 over BG2 because the world in BG1 is much 'brighter', yet for movies, I tend to like the darkness because I think it helps make things more dramatic. And that's really the difference to me. While SW and ESB are still fun, they are dramatic (ESB more than SW of course). ROTJ has some dramatic scenes in it, but overall its a step down and the entire new trilogy outside of a handful of parts completely fails on the drama. They're fun, they're beautifully done, but they're far more visual than cerebral.

In fact, I read, that :r. Lucas had originally planned to use Wookies instead of Ewoks, originally, but somehow tht wasn't made (not feasible ?). Hence the use of the Wookies at the end of ROTS. Which kind of closes the circle again.

Click to expand...

Well the entire ROTJ script was going to be different too. The short synposis was that it would have taken place on the Wookie homeworld, there would not have been a second death star, Han was going to die, Luke was going to sort of fly off into the sunset so to speak at the end and Leia was going to be left to put back together the shattered remnents of the empire into a republic. (and of course Leia wasn't Luke's sister) It was to be done in the vein of basically these three random people come together, do this incredible thing and then, just as in life, their lives go separate ways.

After Raiders of the Lost Ark though, Lucas became convinced (correctly) that audiences just really wanted a roller coaster right and they could make just as much money making a good enough story as a great story, so long as it was fun and 'pretty.' Kurtz split ways with him because of that (as did the original person slated to direct ROTJ but I can't remember his name).

From what I have read, the idea of the Ewoks came about primarily due to merchandising.

The two imho underrated Ewok movies are among the movies I like most. Not because they are great (in fact they are relatively flat), but because they do give a (far too smal, imho) view on what this universe is like *without* its conflict going on …

Click to expand...

One thing I really did like about the new trilogy was that it really opened up the SW universe. If you think about it, the old trilogy only shows this tiny glimpse of what is going on and its confined to sparsely populated areas on the outer fringe of the galaxy. In the new trilogy you see a large, diverse and heavily populated segment of that galaxy that lends itself to a much broader narrative.

Star Wars = modern fairy tale with fantasy science fiction setting.

blatantninja said:

[snip] tend to like the darkness because I think it helps make things more dramatic. [snip]

Click to expand...

I think this is a common misconception. "Darker" doesn't automatically mean "more dramatic". Imho this is nonsense.

Yes, it DOES add very much to the overall "feel" of a scene, of a setting - but "drama" is added by the author's skills, not by the setting per se.

Sadly I don't have any example of a comedy in a dark setting (apparently no-one does this), but you can have the opposite very well.

The setting is nothing but a supporting tool to the author. As an author, you can "play" with the readers' emotions, feelings, yet even thoughts. Or "program" them, s Terry Pratchett put it in one interview. The horror genre is an excellent example o it - and just read "The Gold Bug" by Edgar Allan Poe to see how it turns out !

Yes, you can even FOOL people doing s if you were adressing a certain setting ! I did it once in a tiny experiment : Buil up a good horrifying experience, a setting, dark and filled with unpleasant emotions - and then - at the end - make the reader realize that everything was nothing but / just a joke !

Darkness might help making things more dramatic - but if you use too much of it, you become spoiled.

HiddenX said:

Star Wars = modern fairy tale with fantasy science fiction setting.

Click to expand...

This is the common view on it, yes. I agree a lot.

Alrik Fassbauer said:

I think this is a common misconception. "Darker" doesn't automatically mean "more dramatic". Imho this is nonsense.

Yes, it DOES add very much to the overall "feel" of a scene, of a setting - but "drama" is added by the author's skills, not by the setting per se.

Click to expand...

I don't completely disagree, though to be clear, I don't necessarily mean 'Darker' in the visual sense but rather in the tone.

Sadly I don't have any example of a comedy in a dark setting
(apparently no-one does this), but you can have the opposite very well.

Click to expand...

I've watched a couple 'dark comedies' (example Very Bad Things - 1998) and I haven't enjoyed a single one of them. It may be possible to write an entertaining 'dark comedy', but I just haven't seen it.

I actually like the new movies, too (*ducks*)

However, for me Star Wars always was just a great, awesome adventure, more like a crazy fairytale than actual science-fiction. I was a kid when I saw the first ones, and I loved them how kids love stuff like that -unquestioning, loyal, and always on the lookout for more. I love it for that till this day, and I guess it's because I never dug deeper that I was also able to enjoy the newer films.

I usually watch the movies in a row. It puts IV-VI in perspective. Darth Vader becomes a more tragic figure and the Emperor becomes even more evil. The third and the fifth one are the best ones as far as I concern and I would probably rate even the second above the sixth.

blatantninja said:

It may be possible to write an entertaining 'dark comedy', but I just haven't seen it.

Click to expand...

Dr. Strangelove, Brazil, Fargo...

GhanBuriGhan said:

I actually like the new movies, too (*ducks*)

Click to expand...

I enjoyed them and still watch them when they are one, but its more mindless entertainment than passion for me.

JemyM said:

I usually watch the movies in a row. It puts IV-VI in perspective. Darth Vader becomes a more tragic figure and the Emperor becomes even more evil. The third and the fifth one are the best ones as far as I concern and I would probably rate even the second above the sixth.

Click to expand...

Parts of ROTJ are amazing (the sequence with Luke, Vader and the Emperor for instance), but others are just a total face palm.

My issue with the NT, as many have, is that I don't feel it puts IV-VI in perspective. At least not the perspective that we grew up with. When viewing the OT growing up, Darth Vader was the badest mofo in the galaxy. He was the embodiment of pure evil, created by a corrupt thirst for power. He is turned back at the end, but it doesn't detract from Vader being such an absolute bad ass.

The NT makes him look more just like a kid who lost his way. He's 'forced' into seeking the Dark Side because of the poorly done love story. That's much less compelling to me than the idea that he was undone by his ambition for power. I think they could have made a much more compelling story if what turned him to the Dark Side was his battle with Dooku, and the Republic is losing the war. He gets defeated by it and becomes obsessed with finding a way to defeat Dooku and save the Republic. And like so many others, he becomes exactly what he is trying to defeat.

We were told in the OT that he was basically the most, or one of the most, powerful Jedi that had ever lived, but became corrupted by the Dark Side. Instead, we see a bratty kid that may have lots of power, but we never really see it, and then he gets corrupted by love. Meh.

DeepO said:

Dr. Strangelove, Brazil, Fargo…

Click to expand...

Yeah, I guess Dr. Strangelove falls in that category, but it doesn't seem that dark to me at first thought (Yeah nuclear war is dark of course, but that is only implied in the movie). Haven't seen the other two.

The best thing about the Star Wars movies is Darth Maul, the baddest Sith of them all. Not only did the first movie establish in STONE that Maul would destroy Vader in mere minutes, it showed how you don't need a freaking talky villain with emo dialogue and a retarded costume (honestly, Vader looks like he has a bucket on his head) to give off cool vibes.