Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

David Brin on "Attack of the Clones"

Posted by michael on from the when-yodas-attack dept.

dpt writes "Science fiction author and scientist David Brin caused quite a stir at the time with his article on The Phantom Menace, and now here are his thoughts on Episode II. Not being as harsh, it hasn't received much attention, but it's an interesting read anyway."

49 of 533 comments (clear)

  1. The Biggest Problem... by tjensor · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... with the new star wars films is nostalgia. We look back on the original three films with rose-tinted glasses, when really the dialogue sucked, the plots were generic, and acting not up to scratch.
    The only new crime of the new trilogy is the over-reliance on CGI.
    PS this isnt a troll I actually love Star Wars :-)

    --
    <fnord>OBEY</fnord>
    1. Re:The Biggest Problem... by MoneyT · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But the thing about the original films was that they had a believeable flow. There was an empire and giant evil machine with drones to do their bidding. There were the remnants of the Jedi, calmly biding their time until the events allowed Luke to be brought into his own and hopefuly push forward and bring them back from near extinction. There were the Rebels, a small on the run group constantly trying to stay one step ahead of the empire. Hit and run attacks, going for weak points instead of all out brute force. And then there was the rest of the world. They didn't like the control they were under, but they didn't have a lot of say, so they just lived on. The worlds had believeability, the machines had believeability. The big energy guns had big cables, the ships and switches and dials and buttons, not just lights on a pannel. The problem with the new star wars movies is things aren't believeable, there are no motives, just actions.

      --
      T Money
      World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
    2. Re:The Biggest Problem... by NanoGator · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "The only new crime of the new trilogy is the over-reliance on CGI. "

      Not true. The original trilogy had character. Without a Han Solo'ish character, Jedi are quite boring.

      Plot is nowhere near as important as the characters. Don't belive me? Ask people why they like Monsters Inc. 0 people will say "Because I think it's cool how Sully provided power to the Monster world without scaring children!"

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    3. Re:The Biggest Problem... by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Then why does the younger generation, many of whom have just recently seen the originals as well as the new movies, still agree that the new ones suck? My younger sister saw all the SW films, old and new, within the last couple years -- and was in agreement that the originals were far better movies.


      The suckage of AotC goes way beyond "not living up to the nostalgia." If the originals had been this bad, they would have been consigned to the trash heap, and these new ones would have never been made.


      And no, I have no intentions of wasting my five dollars and three hours on the third movie. I'll find a decent book to read and do something enjoyable with my time.

      --

      How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
    4. Re:The Biggest Problem... by mblase · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We look back on the original three films with rose-tinted glasses, when really the dialogue sucked, the plots were generic, and acting not up to scratch.

      True, but recognize that "Star Wars" was superior to almost any other science fiction/space opera out at that time. The special effects alone deserved accolades, and some of them still do. The concept of the Force was something the non-book-reading public had yet to encounter in sci-fi.

      Up until then, sci-fi in tv and movies was almost all about robots, aliens, spaceships, invasions, monsters and laboratory experiments gone awry. All the general public had to know about sci-fi was the original "Star Trek", "Battlestar Galactica", "Space 1999", "Buck Rogers". Nothing too cerebral there.

      The Force was a good concept to add to an otherwise pretty, but ordinary movie like "Star Wars", and "The Empire Strikes Back" made it even better with some clever plot twists and delightful character development that was ten times deeper than what "Star Wars" had bothered with. "Return of the Jedi" tied it all up with by far the best F/X of the trilogy and lots of great action.

      We expected too much from the new trilogy, is the problem -- the basic story is good, but the acting just isn't there and the digital special effects have overwhelmed the characters completely. Plus there's been a decade and a half with some really good science fiction since then. "The Matrix" alone, which opened mere weeks before "The Phantom Menace," showed everyone that sci-fi didn't have to be about spaceships and aliens in order to kick butt.

    5. Re:The Biggest Problem... by Watts+Martin · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "Battlestar Galactica" came out in 1978 and "Buck Rogers" in 1977--both were capitalizing on Star Wars to some degree. ("Rogers" was probably in the planning stages before Star Wars' release but they clearly knew of the movie, and "Galactica" never made much effort to hide its influences. And, while I'm honestly not much of a "Star Trek" fan, when the original series was good it was good on a level that George Lucas never came close to. The Empire Strikes Back made an effort, but mostly thanks to screenwriter Leigh Brackett (who's almost certainly responsible for the clever plot twists and delightful character development).

      I really didn't expect too much from the new trilogy because I lost a lot of respect for Lucas the more I watched his career and the more I learned about the development of Star Wars itself. (The Phantom Menace is much closer to his original draft for Star Wars, before people convinced him that he needed to have a mythic story and turned him on to Joseph Campbell.) I had, however, expected that Lucas might have been wise enough now to recognize his limitations and to bring other screenwriters on from the start. Instead. Sadly, that doesn't seem to be the case.

    6. Re:The Biggest Problem... by susano_otter · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Aristotle was not a movie maker. Nor is his advice valid today, as hundreds of years have passed since he supposedly said that.

      Aristotle is talking about stories and storytelling, is he not? The nature of stories is timeless, and while storytelling techniques may have changed since Aristotle's time, storytelling principles--being closely bound to the nature of stories--have not.

      Since Aristotle is talking about things that don't change over time (the nature of stories and the principles of storytelling), if his advice is not valid today, it must never have been valid. He was just as wrong about stories "hundreds of years" ago as you say he is today.

      Advice doesn't have to be contemporary to be valid. "Don't murder people" has been around far longer than you or I (or Aristotle), but just because we've forgotten who "supposedly" said it first, that doesn't mean it's suddenly now bad advice.

      As for the question of whether Aristotle really said it or not is irrelevant to your argument: the wisdom of the statement can easily be tested without resorting to argument by authority. In fact, arguing that it must be good advice because "Aristotle said it" is just as foolish as arguing that it must be bad advice because "Aristotle is dead now". But I digress.

      --

      Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.

    7. Re:The Biggest Problem... by susano_otter · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think that you are confusing "design" with "implementation". I don't dispute that modern storytelling techniques are often radically different from those techniques used in the past--though not as different as you might think. This is different from the nature of stories.

      But what is the nature of stories, anyway? A simple answer might be that the nature of stories is to communicate. This seems like a reasonable answer, and if we look into the past we see that it applies just as much to pre-historic cave paintings as to the contemporary novel. Looking forward, it's reasonable to assume that this nature will not change in the future. Likewise, the nature of storytelling is to communicate the story. A storyteller of any age, using any technique, can be judged against this standard. The thing being communicated is different in different times and places, but the fundamental principle of communication that defines a "story" does not.

      If we take "communication" as the unchanging nature of stories, then we can interpret Aristotle as follows: "Plot is more important than character, in order to successfully communicate the story." The question then becomes "is Aristotle correct?"--and this question can be applied just as appropriately to modern stories as ancient ones. By the same token, his assertion will be just as correct in the ancient context as in the modern one, so if he's wrong today, then he was wrong back then, and if he was right back then, he will be right today.

      Unless, of course, he has also confused implementation with design: his audience might have better received plot-driven communication than character-driven, leading him to believe that the implementation of his time was inherent to the nature of stories themselves. If he is wrong at all, I suspect that he is wrong in this way--and that he always has been wrong.

      --

      Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.

  2. Hes right but.. by trevinofunk · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Its a smidge late isnt it??

    I mean, shouldnt a critique of the movie be out, say, within a month or two of the movie being released??

    1. Re:Hes right but.. by babbage · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Nah -- initial review tends to come out immediately, but it seldom amounts to more than "what was the movie about and would you want to pay to see it now". More thoughtful literary criticism tends to come later, and really that's what this review is an early example of (note how a lot of it seems like just crib notes in no particular order -- I can see Brin turning this stuff into a book later if he wanted to).

      Literary criticism can actually get more interesting as time goes on. What if anything does "Blade Runner" have to say now that we have cloning? Does "Seven Samurai" or "Magnificent Seven" inform the debate on terrorism today? How does a character like Charles Foster Kane illustrate what we now see in people like Rupert Murdoch or, for that matter, Bill Clinton?

      Every generation gets to reintrepret stories, whether those stories are Star Wars movies, Shakespeare's plays, or the epics of the Greeks & Romans. The first generation gets a first crack at such review, but really it takes time for the first wave of interesting stuff to fall out, and the revisionism that later generations can bring can be even more interesting, even if it makes purists wince. Compared to that slower, more thoughtful criticism, the puff pieces you get to see right when the movie/book/etc comes out are for the most part pretty boring & useless.

      --
      DO NOT LEAVE IT IS NOT REAL
  3. At least Lucas appreciates irony... by brooks_talley · · Score: 5, Funny

    From Time magazine, as quoted in the Brin piece:

    [Anakin] can't let go of things. It makes you greedy. And when you're greedy, you are on the path to the dark side...

    Cheers
    -b

  4. Re:By David Brin, Ph.D. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny
    Mod this guy up. He's gott a Ph.D. and OBVIOUSLY knows more than the others.

    -A. Coward Ph.D

  5. Evil by mmarlett · · Score: 5, Interesting
    From the article:
    "[Sith] are cold and calculating, almost robotic -- in the standard Hollywood motif of offering audiences snidely-superior villains to hate. In fact it's almost silly the way they calmly keep telling Luke to give in to his anger, reminding him of what he's been warned about. But they don't seem to give into anger themselves."

    A girlfriend of mine had a cat that would sit and watch you all day long, not moving, not reacting to anything. If you got close enough, it would try to claw your eyes out. If you escaped and could still use your eyes, you would see the cat sitting there looking at you calm and cool. That cat was evil.

    Giving into anger is more about making a person evil than it is about displaying emotion. Any master is calm, cool and collected. Luke was a student, not a master. They wanted him to be an evil student, and the quick path to that is anger.

    Overall, I don't think that article was any more accurate or insightful than the movie it chose to criticize. It, too, was somewhat obvious and full of factual errors. (Lucas did not direct all five movies, for example.) I'm glad he found it entertaining, though.

  6. Twinge of Jealousy? by theRhinoceros · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The biggest irony is this -- I could scribble a 3 paragraph outline that would save Lucas. It would explain every awful inconsistency/paradox in his universe.

    To me, something about Brin's vehemence moves him from "critique for criticism's sake" into "personal beef with Lucas"-land. Or more likely he envies Lucas' success compared to what he considers more legitimate and well-written sci-fi (his own work?).

    1. Re:Twinge of Jealousy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Sorry, not anonymous, just lazy. This is David Brin, inviting you all to drop by http://www.davidbrin.com/

      Also there's a Hard Science fiction discussion group - one of the oldest & best on the internet - that you could check out at http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

      And of course I would prefer the world pay me as much as Lucas & give me his resources. Like any american egotist I think I'd do a better job. So? I recognize the irony and acknowledge it with a smile.

      The point you miss, with your leap to diss my character, is that I have laid out for you all the elements that could make GL's universe actually make sense. It's right there and I'm not the only one who could weave the elements together. Elements that would make Anekin's struggle and fall less of a silly farce and more of a truly intense and surprising(!) twist.

      I'll bet some of you can figure it out.

      No, it ain't jealousy. It's the deep resentment of a movie goer and sci fi fan with high standards. EMPIRE STRIKES BACK promised us a fantastically wonderful story, enjoyable by the adult in all of us, as well as the kid.

      We haven't been given that. I have as much a right as anybody to complain.

      With cordial regards,

      David Brin
      www.davidbrin.com

      PS come on by and talk about some real science fiction

  7. What AotC Needed... by secondsun · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I think what would have really put Episode 2 over the top would have been if Count Dookoo was fighting the Dark Side. If he had seen the Sith's rise and the Jedi's incompetence, he should have moved to build an army and defeat the Sith before it took over the Senate, or at least gather enought power to form a decent resistence. Then everything mostly could have worked in the plot. Why kill Obi-wan? Because obi-wan knew where they were. Why fight the Jedi? The Jedi were being used as pawns of the Sith and had to be stopped before they caused too much damage.

    Of course this is just one CS majors ramblings, but I would have liked to see that.

    --
    There is nothing wrong with being gay. It's getting caught where the trouble lies.
    1. Re:What AotC Needed... by Geckoman · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I wholeheartedly agree! Right up until Dooku met Palpatine at the end, I was hoping he really was fighting against the Sith.

      In fact, I was really hoping/expecting that he'd be killed at the end, and his dying words would be, "You've just destroyed the only force in the galaxy that could have stopped the Sith...."

      I love the idea of Palpatine manipulating his enemies into destroying eachother so that he could seize control. Kind of nihilistic, I know, but it lays a far richer foundation for Episode 3.

  8. The Case for by wiredog · · Score: 5, Interesting
    the Empire


    In all of the time we spend observing the Rebel Alliance, we never hear of their governing strategy or their plans for a post-Imperial universe. All we see are plots and fighting. Their victory over the Empire doesn't liberate the galaxy--it turns the galaxy into Somalia writ large: dominated by local warlords who are answerable to no one.

    Which makes the rebels--Lucas's heroes--an unimpressive crew of anarchic royals who wreck the galaxy so that Princess Leia can have her tiara back.

    --

    Best Slashdot Co
  9. Lucas' peers by GuyMannDude · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Yes! Lucas needed to whittle the Jedi down in a tragic and colorful way. But couldn't he have shown them suffering calamity despite behaving cleverly and well? Doesn't he have peers to workshop this stuff against?

    Good question but I suspect that Lucas honestly believes that he has no peers. It's unfortunate because the scripts that came out of his colaboration with Kasdan were pretty good, IMHO. Yes, I know Lucas co-wrote AOTC with someone from Indiana Jones Chronicles but I argue that this guy was just a yes-man for Lucas. Lucas really needs to team up with a good, known writer to come up with an interesting story for Episode 3. Maybe he'll come to his senses and realize that he needs some help in the script department for his final Star Wars film. We can only hope.

    GMD

    --
    watch this
  10. Re:Blah by rgmoore · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Those who can't do, bitch.

    So what? Brin is most definitely not in the "can't do" category. He's a fantastic author who's won a stack of awards for his Science Fiction writing. I'll admit that the one movie made from one of his books was awful, but the blame for that lies clearly on Kevin Costner's shoulders, not Brin's.

    --

    There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.

  11. Beauty is only skin deep... by sphealey · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Beauty is only skin deep - ugly goes to the bone.

    The problems and holes in TPM could have been fixed with some quick editing and a couple of reshot scenes. It wouldn't have approached the first Star Wars, but then again very little does.

    AotC was so utterly, unredeemably bad that it is unfixable. Sheesh - once glance between Harrison Ford and Carrie Fisher in ESB carried more romantic tension than 30 minutes of moping between what's his name and Natalie. "Let's go to the mall Anni". As my 8 y.o. said "Yuck". How perceptive is the mind of a child.

    sPh

    1. Re:Beauty is only skin deep... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Anakin acted like a 19 year old who was in lust and confusing it with love. That is because he was portraing a 19 year old who was having a great deal of trouble getting his hormones under control. BTW, I am the parent of a 19 year old. I've seen some awfull sappy scenes, and heard some terroribly corny dialoge, comparable to the worst in AotC, not from a movie, but from my sons room.

    2. Re:Beauty is only skin deep... by (trb001) · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You make an interesting point, were that I hadn't posted already and could mod you up.

      I think part of the real irony of people bashing the romance between Anakin and Padme is that they are holding these characters up to a higher level than what the characters should be at in real life. Anakin is late teens, Padme is early/mid 20's. They play the romance exactly as it would be in real life. You have Anakin who has never loved before all of a sudden getting this rush of feelings (remember your first HS crush? compare...). Add Padme, a 20-something who doesn't take this kid seriously and attempts to brush off his advances. Mind you that she has never loved before either since her life has been spent in the political spotlight. Two first loves in the later part of their life? Come on, you can't tell me that half the 20-something computer geek virgins wouldn't have a romance dialogue similar or WORSE than what AOTC had.

      --trb

  12. Re:Blah by Dark+Paladin · · Score: 5, Funny

    Biggest damn plot hole in the history of all plot holes:

    C3PO: Hi, I'm a droid.
    Owen: Hey, didn't I meet you before?
    C3PO: No, I don't think so.
    Owen: Yeah, you're C3PO. Build by Anakin Skywalker, right? You're the one who told everybody how itchy you were so you could get Padme to oil you up.
    C3PO: I have no idea what you're talking about.
    Owen: My dad married his mom! We worked together for about 10 years or so. Remember the whole sandpeople incident, where they came and kidnapped her for no reason? Or how we've been raising her grandson - your creator's son - for 18 years now? By the way - why didn't he ever come back and look in the local phone directory under "Skywalker" - he might have found out his son was right here.
    C3PO: (Waves his hand before Owen.) We are not the droids you remember.
    Owen: (Dazed.) You are not the droids I remember.
    C3PO: (Waves hand again.) You want to purchase us. And give me an oil bath.
    Owen: Bath.

    Call me strange, but I think there was just a little plot hole there. Maybe a small one.

    --
    52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
  13. Re:By David Brin, Ph.D. by Dannon · · Score: 3, Funny

    My father (who also has a doctorate) would quote the first Austin Powers movie on this:

    "I didn't go through four years of evil medical school to be called Mr. Evil."

    --
    Good judgment comes from experience.
    Experience comes from bad judgment.
  14. Cheech and Chong by DaytonCIM · · Score: 5, Funny

    Next movie will surely have a Chicano low rider caricature help Obi-Wan
    make his escape with the twins.

    Anyone know if Cheech and Chong are free?

  15. Darth & Obi Wan ... a team? by mustangdavis · · Score: 5, Interesting

    His crazy plot for Ep III sounds interesting ...
    It would definately make Lucas look like a genius, but like the good doctor, I don't believe that Lucas would be smart enough (or would let his ego deflate enough) to use this terrific plot that has been presented infront of him.
    Consider the possibilities: Yoda and the Emperor working together the whole time .... Darth & Obi-Wan setting this whole thing up to bring balance to the force ... how crazy would this be! Lucas would forever be known as a movie genius!
    This would also answer the question of how the Emperor became so powerful with the force ... we still don't know where he learned the ways of the Dark Side ... maybe it was Yoda that taught him ... That would REALLY mess things up!
    Think about it ...Yoda trained Dooku, who has obviously played a part in Anakin's turning to the dark side by showing him how powerful it is. Yoda trained Qui-Gon ... who trained Obi-Wan, who trains Vader. And if Yoda trained Sidious!!! WOW! At that point, maybe the universe should have been focused on pointing a death star at the little green bastard! ... or maybe Yoda was so smart that he knew this would rid the Universe of the Jedi and prevent the Jedi from taking over (for the long haul) ....
    That story line definately has possibilities!

    --
    HallmarkOrnaments.Com
    1. Re:Darth & Obi Wan ... a team? by Crispy+Critters · · Score: 3, Interesting
      His crazy plot for Ep III sounds interesting ...I don't believe that Lucas would be smart enough (or would let his ego deflate enough) to use this terrific plot that has been presented infront of him.

      One of Brin's Salon articles from 1999 contains this quote: "How come we never see Yoda take on an enemy with a light saber? Come on master, fire it up and battle a Sith Lord! That's a battle I'd pay to see!" Maybe Lucas does pay attention.

      He certainly dropped that stupid midichlorian crap quickly enough.

  16. the fix-all? by jdjensen · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I read David Brin's article and noticed that he keeps mentioning how the whole series can be "redeemed" should Lucas decide to do "something special" to the plot. Of course, Brin never enlightens us to his fix-all plot twist.

    Well, I think I might be on to what he's talking about. How cool would it be if Anakin's drop into the Dark Side was manipulated and guided by Yoda (and maybe some other elite Jedi) with the expectation that he'd eventually bring balance to the force in VI: ROTJ? Yoda ( or perhaps a council even higher than the ovenmit?) allows certain attrocities to go unchecked because he has a higher prophecy to fulfill. When I think about the possibilities, this could really put a brilliant and completely new spin upon the Star Wars universe. If done correctly, it really could be the next Empire Strikes Back in terms of having a plot that is more than predictable pubescent garbage (don't get me wrong, I love Star Wars).

    But at any rate, those are my thoughts, and I'll admit that I don't read the forums and gossip websites at all. Does anyone else have any ideas as to what this "something special" which David Brin is referring to might be?

    1. Re:the fix-all? by wiredog · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Here

      All evidence points to Yoda as co-villain with the emperor all along -- one lightside of the force lying-pompous-schmuck and one darkside heavybreathing-sadist-schmuck. QuiGon was dimly aware of this problem, which is why he tried bypassing Yoda -- twice! -- and yearned for balance. So did Obiwan. And their student? How esthetic it would be for QuiGon and Obiwan to turn out to have been right and Yoda wrong!

      How about this? Annakin self-hypnotized an inner core of himself to hide behid a mask while pretending to be the emperor's lackey, getting ready for a day of reckoning with BOTH of those sanctimonious bastards, Yoda and Palpatine! It works!

      Here's part of the SALON article that never got included:

      Oh, wait. I get it. Annakin was actually a secret agent spy all along! Here's the secret facts:

      Vader's the one who sent the secret plans to Leia's ship! He arranged for the droids to get away, and coincidentally land just a few miles from his hidden son! (It explains why Obiwan "hid" Luke on the one planet Darth (I mean Anniken) was most familiar with in the whole universe. The same PART of that planet. It only makes sense if the two were really in cahoots!)

      Remember how, a little later, Vader talks Tarkin into "letting them go so we can trace them"? Likewise, he's the only close-up witness to Obiwan disappearing, when he supposedly "killed" his master in that sword fight! (Maybe he actually helped Obiwan pull a vanishing act.) Note that the "fight" with Obiwan distracted the guards & helped let Luke get away!

      But there's more! Remember how Vader "chased" Luke in that Tie fighter... which had the chief effect of turning off all the antiaircraft guns and giving the boy a clear shot to blow up the first Death Star! (From which event, Vader is conveniently the only Imperial survivor.)

      Recall how in The Empire Strikes Back Vader offered to make Luke co-ruler? (Presumably it would thus be a nicer dynasty than the emperor's). Then in Jedi recall how Vader brought Luke aboard the second Death Star? Could it be because he knew the kid would irritate the emperor and get him upset enough to finally let Darth get a crack at him from behind?

      I knew there had to be some reason why Vader didn't seem to detect his own daughter -- all filled with that magic force shit -- when he grabbed her arm and looked into her eyes in Episode... um... IV is it? Then he drug-interrogated her, without detecting any Force? Can there be any explanation except that he already knew?

      Pah! He let them both get away deliberately! And whenever they needed guidance, there were the droids... his own special droids, assigned to help and guide his children to their destiny.

      --

      Best Slashdot Co
    2. Re:the fix-all? by Aexia · · Score: 3, Informative

      Does anyone else have any ideas as to what this "something special" which David Brin is referring to might be?

      Anyone who read the *entire* article might.

      In fact, a scenario is possible, if Vader and Obi-Wan conspire together against BOTH Emperor and Yoda. Go on, follow all the movies with this possibility in mind.

      Why else would Obi-Wan 'hide' Vader's son in Vader's home town? Their final 'deathfight' distracts the guards to let Luke/Han/Leia get away. How else do you explain that Vader grabs/interrogates Leia, yet never detects her force? Watch carefully... Vader's 'chase' of Luke in the first film clears all the other Imperial fighters off his son's back and halts the antiaircraft guns, giving the kid a clear shot! And guess who's the only Imperial survivor?

      It goes on and on! (Including the coincidence of whose droids carry the message.)

  17. Re:Blah by unicron · · Score: 3, Informative

    Except for the countless times people on this board have mentioned that in the Star Wars universe, droid routinely have there memories wiped out. Shit man, it's like the most posted message on this site.

    --
    Finally, math books without any of that base 6 crap in them.
  18. Dissent is Good by DaytonCIM · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There are many who will take offense at Brin's comments. But as a fan of Sci Fi it is Brin's duty to question Lucas and call him on his mistakes.
    If more people step up and speak the truth about how much of a "let down" both of the "new" Star Wars films have been, maybe George will spend a little more time writing the third and less time worrying about the CGI.

  19. Re:Good vs Evil by Mr_Matt · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Exactly.

    Reading this guy's article, I was amazed at how seriously he took SWII. Taking entire paragraphs to point out plot inconsistencies, complaining about the simplistic notion of Jedi thoughts on anger, Anakin's mother, etc., etc. makes me wonder if he doesn't realize that for George Lucas, this whole Star Wars thing is pure escapism - a giddy, whimsical throwback to B-grade kiddie serial flicks from another time. Of course there's no Spielbergian display of 'inner conflict of the human hero' - that's how the genre works. The Lone Ranger would have been out of place in Saving Private Ryan but he'd be in familiar company in a Star Wars flick. Even special moments of angst (Luke looking at setting twin suns, Han contemplating a return to attack the original Death Star) are stock B-movie cheesy moments. It's What Makes Star Wars Fun.

    Don't get me wrong - the guy's allowed to take Star Wars seriously. But this whole 'disgruntled fan-boy' criticism just seems like a waste of time, kind of like posting about it on Slashdot.

    Hey, wait a minute... :)

    --


    But what does my opinion matter, I just vote here. It's not like I have any money or anything.
  20. Re:Meaning what...? by brooks_talley · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So you think it's just coincidence, or lack of foresight or something, that LucasFilm is notorious for releasing not one, not two, not three, but *four or more* versions of each film to the home video market? The initial ones being downright crippled, then gradually getting better?

    How about the fact that they had to scale back the number of merchandising tie-ins for AotC because there was so much press about how TPM was basically a 2 hour vehicle for cross-promotions of toys, ties, and KFC

    His lifestyle, which you point out, actually argues my point: when people are greedy, they often *don't* have mansions, yachts, harems, etc, because it isn't about enjoying wealth, but rather accumulating it.

    George Lucas definitely had some potential, but speaking in present tense, he's about as much of an "artist" as Brittney Spears -- he may be in complete technical control of movies, but he is absolutely a slave to public opinion when it comes to what to make, because he's greedy and the primary interest is in maximizing revenue, not producing quality movies. Sometimes it works in our favor (everyone hates Jar-Jar, we get less Jar-Jar), sometimes it works against us (must include a cheesy romance to capture the female demographic). That's par for the course in Hollywood, I know, but my point is that he's no exception... and that, with customer-abusive attitudes in video release and merchandising, he is actually one of the worst.

    Cheers
    -b

  21. Re:Blah by eric+peterson · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well, that works for half the equation. Maybe Owen is a droid too.

  22. Re:Star What? by hey! · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Chalk it up to movies 2001:A Space Odyssey.

    We'd been conditioned to see space as an antiseptic place, full of glaring bright light, shiny technology, and alien experiences. The original thing about the first SW movie was the way it visually reimagined space to be grungy, bange-up, and lived-in, full of low life characters who were perfectly comprehensible even if they spoke some weird electronic lanuge and looked like a pile of congealed excrement. Star Wars opened up outer space to the great unwashed.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  23. Post-Sundiver suggestions... by freeBill · · Score: 3, Informative

    ...obviously start with Startide Rising, a much better book set in the same universe (The Uplift Saga, which has six volumes). The Uplift War is just as good, even though I suspect it was conceived as a giant pun. It may also appeal to your Libertarian instincts.

    Then you're faced with a choice. If you just can't get enough Uplift, the last three books of the saga are really one story or trilogy and introduce many new and interesting ideas. But the climax is not as satisfying as Startide or Uplift War.

    If you liked the eco-libertarian side of The Uplift War and (especially) Startide Rising, Earth develops these ideas much more fully, but it may not be entirely non-unsettling to a true believer in the Libertarian Cause.

    If you liked the puns in The Uplift War, Kiln People delivers puns at a rate which has to be seen to be believed. This book also does a lot better job of transferring the mystery genre to sci-fi than Sundiver. And he even explains why his gumshoe maintains a running dialog in his head.

    If you like Asimov's Foundation, then Foundation's Triumph will be of interest. Otherwise ignore it.

    Perhaps his most interesting book was written with Gregory Benford -- Heart of the Comet, biological sci-fi set in deep space.

    --
    Eternal vigilance only works if you look in every direction.
  24. Lucas wants it both ways by MichaelPenne · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Right, but, Lucas seems to want folks to feel there _is_ a message in his films, claiming to be inspired by the work of Campbell (who definitely claimed that even 'escapist' cultural myths reveal the underlying philosophy of a culture).

    So Brin is critiqeing from the view that Lucas does want to be taken seriously.

    I happen to agree that Lucas just wants to make a bunch of money and play with some cool new digital toys & that he is using Campbellian patterns in his stories because they are recepies for popularity, not because he actually wants or expects his stories to teach or shape the culture.

    But a central theme to Campbell's work was that popular myths _do_ shape and teach...

  25. Did you read the addendum? by mekkab · · Score: 5, Informative

    Bottom of the page.

    I don't care if he's jealous. His addendum RAWKS!

    God, it's so good, I wish I'd thought of it!

    note to self: read more of his books!

    --
    In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
  26. Bitter much? by Dirtside · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Brin makes some interesting points in these anti-Lucas screeds of his, but the strongest feeling I get from them is one of bitter resentment. I think Brin has a particular idea of what constitutes "real" SF, and Lucas's success with his paltry "pseudo-SF" is grating. That, I can understand, but it does Brin no good to come up with spurious logic and silly accusations to try and denigrate Lucas... to what purpose, I can't tell.

    For example, Brin is fond of pointing out how unhealthy it is to repress your emotions -- something he claims the Jedi faith is based on. The problem is that the Jedi have no problems with the existence of negative emotions -- merely with acting on them. Controlling yourself to the point where you don't even have any negative emotions is nigh-impossible; but recognizing when you are having those emotions, and waiting until you are calm before you act, is where the wisdom lies.

    Brin also makes the odd assumption that just because Lucas shows a character doing something in a movie, means that Lucas thinks that real people should act that way in real life. His quote from Orwell is almost apropos, except that a movie is different enough from a gas chamber that the comparison is silly. I'm not saying Brin has to like Lucas's beliefs or philosophy, but to claim that there's some crime being perpetrated against humanity because of the entirely fictional things that happen in a movie, is just dumb. Criticizing a movie for bad writing, bad direction, and bad acting is certainly fine, but why does Brin see such a threat against real adult morality from these films?

    --
    "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
  27. Brin is right by Animats · · Score: 3, Insightful
    He really is right. Lucas is a great producer and a good director, but he also does his own scriptwriting, at which he is at best mediocre. He has his own studio, so he doesn't have anybody above him to tell him when he sucks. As Brin says, "Doesn't he have peers to workshop this stuff against?". No, he doesn't; he only has subordinates.

    What Lucas is good at is production-value overload. In Episode I, there's a new major set every 90 seconds. That's really what keeps people from being bothered by the bad dialogue and inept action.

    Yes, it makes money, but so does Pokemon.

  28. Re:Blah by Marasmus · · Score: 3, Interesting

    1. Owen had VERY little interaction with the droids in AotC.
    2. The droids are all named by their model number. In a universe, it's clear that there are likely millions of each model droid. There'd be no reason to think that a C3PO is the C3PO he dealt with about 20 years prior.
    3. Droid memory erasures, as mentioned by many people.
    4. If you watch the original film, Owen goes out of his way not to select C3PO or R2D2. It's Luke who's so damn adamant about getting C3PO, and they only get R2 because the other unit burnt out before it moved 50 feet... My thought is that he had some sort of subliminal memory of droids like these ones, and thus didn't like them. If memory serves, he actually bitches about them to Luke in Episode IV. He's also very pushy about Luke taking them up to Anchorhead to have their memories erased. Interesting. :)

    Though I do like your comment about Padme and the oil bath. :)

    --
    .... um, i lost you after "0110100001101001".
  29. Good Point: Y O D A by SomeOtherGuy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There has to be more to Yoda than meets the eye. First he (apparentlly) has no clue as to what is going on around him in the most recent films. Second -- Their is a questionable amount of mystery as to why he went into hiding during the last 3 star wars movies. I think Brin has a good theory that Lucas could use to tie up the MANY loose ends in this story. I just can't help but think that Yoda's mysterious actions and apparent ignorance is the biggest outstanding mystery of all.

    --
    (+1 Funny) only if I laugh out loud.
  30. Why that article is crap by chazzf · · Score: 3

    Okay, I'm tired of seeing this thing linked to, so I will post my rather extensive rebuttal. Even if the author was joking, which I don't think he was.

    I'm not going to deal with his ignorance of the Expanded Universe, I don't like his reasons but I'll let it be. I'll refute him with the movies.

    The notion that the Emperor was a benign dictator like Pinochet--I don't know where to start. I'm sure Chile would be most impressed to learn that Pinochet was "benign." Thousands killed for political reasons is not "benign."

    Now, he has a point that Alderaan was probably armed. Most planets are. That's not illegal. Destruction of those weapons would have been a legitimate military exercise. Now, I ask you this: is it legitimate to slaughter civilians to destroy those targets? Especially if you're doing it to blackmail a resistance leader? Who happens to be a member of your own governing body? That would be akin to Bush nuking New York because Hillary Clinton would blow him. I mean, really. Who's the author trying to kid?

    He speaks of the system of regional governors, owing their fealty to the Emperor, and what a nice system was and how the Emperor's death would shatter it all. First of all, it's not much of a system if it takes one man (in a galaxy of quadrillions or more) to hold it all together. That they would squabble speaks poorly of Palpatine's judgement.

    Yes it's true that the Empire is a meritocracy. Do what we say or we kill you. Do it right while doing what we say or we kill you. Never does he question the ethics of such a policy.

    How are Uncle Owen and Aunt Beru traitors? They bought two droids secondhand from junk dealers. The droids weren't stolen, so all you can get them on is harboring fugitives. Except, those droids were abandoning ship. Hell, C-3PO didn't even know what R2-D2 had. If you want to get technical, R2-D2 should be gotten for possessing stolen goods, 3P0 for aiding a felon...There were no grounds for executing them, especially since without the droids there was no proof. I didn't see the Jawas give Owen a receipt.

    As for his bashing of the Jedi, I will suggest to him "hubris," and ask him if the Jedi ever killed innocent people at random. Moreover, the Jedi are elevated by biology, and the cultivation of resultant abilites. A meritocracy, of sorts. Isn't that what he thought was so great about the Empire?

    As for the Republic putting down the rebellion...they were simply a regime fighting a violent group committed to their overthrow...like the Empire.

    His article is amusing, but I see people taking it seriously, thus I must point out these inconsistencies and logical fallacies. The Empire benign? Please...

    ~Chazzf

    --
    No statement is true, not even this one.
  31. Re:Phantom Menace by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Same thing that Hitler did, several of the Roman emperors, and so on.

    In the first movie, he gets the largely ceremonial post of Supreme Chancellor; he officates the Senate, which basically means he gets to 'recognize' who is speaking. Also, he likely gets to form 'subcommittees' for things that the Senate has decided to 'investigate' such as the problems on Naboo. Otherwise, probably lots of kissing babies and opening bridges.

    Also, and far more insidiously, he plants the idea that the Senate is too big and bloated to actually do anything in a timely fashion.

    In II, he engineers a war crisis. Then, he gets himself granted 'emergency powers.' The analog here is Republican Rome; an Emperor would appoint a Dictator (Speaker) who would wield absolute power during times of war, then hand control back to the civilian gov't when the crisis was past.

    Now that he has those powers, he can keep them until HE decides that the 'crisis' has passed. But it won't have. He'll next put into place the command struture of the Empire; Moffs rule systems, Grand Moffs rule sectors, and report back to him. The Senate, at this point, is rubber stamping things. Then, as we hear at the start of IV, he dissolves them, and the Republic becomes the Empire.

    Also, expect him to do something to turn the Galaxy at large against the Jedi; he'll probably point out how they were completely incapable of stopping the Kamino insurrection, for example. Then, he'll have them hunted down and killed behind the scenes.

    --
    Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  32. Sure there is! by sharkey · · Score: 3, Funny
    "Look back over the series, and you notice a lot missing from his universe: memorable talk and wit..."

    Just a few:
    • What an incredible smell you've discovered!
    • Will somebody get this big, walking carpet out of my way?
    • Laugh it up, fuzzball!
    • You Rebel scum!
    • Angle the deflector shields.
    These beg the question, "Where do they come up with this stuff?"
    --

    --
    "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
  33. Top Ten Sexually Tilted Lines in "Star Wars" by mgblst · · Score: 3, Funny


    "She may not look like much, but she's got it where it counts, kid."
    "Curse my metal body, I wasn't fast enough!"
    "Look at the size of that thing!"
    "Sorry about the mess..."
    "You came in that thing? You're braver than I thought."
    "Aren't you a little short for a storm trooper?"
    "You've got something jammed in here real good."
    "Put that thing away before you get us all killed!"
    "Luke, at that speed do you think you'll be able to pull out in time?"
    "Get in there you big furry oaf, I don't care *what* you smell!"

    Top Ten Sexually Tilted Lines in "The Empire Strikes Back"

    "And I thought they smelled bad...on the outside!"
    "Possible he came in through the south entrance."
    "I must've hit it pretty close to the mark to get her all riled up like that, huh kid?"
    "Hurry up, golden-rod..."
    "That's okay, I'd like to keep it on manual control for a while."
    "But now we must eat. Come, good food, come..."
    "Control, control! You must learn control!"
    "There's an awful lot of moisture in here."
    "Size matters not. Judge me by my size, do you?"
    "I thought that hairy beast would be the end of me!"

    Top Ten Sexually Tilted Lines in "Return of the Jedi"

    "Rise, my friend."
    "Open the back door!"
    "Hey, point that thing somewhere else!"
    "It's just a dead animal..."
    "Not bad for a little fur ball."
    "How can they be jamming us if they don't know we're coming?"
    "Come here, I won't hurt you. You want something to eat?"
    "Keep on that one, I'll take these two"
    "I want you to take her. I mean it, take her!"
    "I don't think the Empire had wookies in mind when they designed her, Chewie."

  34. Re:The reason it will never happen by Saint+Fnordius · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I agree. This can turn out to be a "what have I done?" sort of realisation. With a broken, dispirited Yoda fleeing to Degobah and the High Council doing penance for his sin (getting slaughtered covering his escape).

    I always felt that the hate that fuels the most powerful of the Dark Side is self-loathing. Vader hating himself for what he has become, and what he must do to maintain order. Palpatine could be driven by a hated of all that opposed his dream of a unified government, of all of those bickering fools. And probably a good deal of self-loathing for realising what price he paid for power.

    Yoda's lesson at the end of Episode 3 could be that in denying all emotion, the Jedi imbalanced their souls. That with their concentration on the science of the Force, they forgot that it was a mystic power above science and "midichlorians". The Balance that Anakin/Vader brings is the balance between rational logic and passion. A spiritual illumination (rathar than a metaphysical balancing) that almost comes too late.