Slashdot Mirror
Neal Stephenson on Star Wars in the NYT
SnapShot writes "Neal Stephenson has an editorial in the New York Times about the difference between the old Star Wars and the new Star Wars, and the difference between geeking out and vegging out. Oh, and computer scientists and engineers are the Jedi of the U.S." From the article: "Likewise, many have been underwhelmed by the performance of Hayden Christensen, who plays Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader. Only if you've seen the "Clone Wars" cartoons will you understand that Anakin is a seriously damaged veteran, a poster child for post-traumatic stress disorder. But since none of that background is actually supplied by the Episode III script, Mr. Christensen has been given an impossible acting task. He's trying to swim in air."
Old one didn't suck.
Scientists and technologists have the same uneasy status in our society as the Jedi in the Galactic Republic. They are scorned by the cultural left and the cultural right, and young people avoid science and math classes in hordes.
This quote from the article in particular resonated with me. We (scientists) have long been running an uneasy gauntlet between those that want us represent their theological, political or personal beliefs while trying to find truth where it is and for what it represents. Granted, these issues always arise within each one of us, but our training is to make hypothesis and then test them against what resources we can bring to bear. There are those that are not interested in truth and will twist facts and even scientists themselves to represent their perception or will which has always been part of the fascination I had with many of the original stories and sociological background behind the idea of the Jedi. (Disclaimer: The last Star Wars movie I thought was any good was "Empire Strikes Back").
The danger of course in not accepting rigorous scientific study of available facts leads us to confusion and obfuscation of truth which leads to jeopardy of person and country. Unfortunately, we have in the last few years gone quite far down this road through decisions made based upon data twisted to represent a prior beliefs rather than letting the data speak and then drawing conclusions from those data.
There has of course always been a fascination by many folks with power and "shiny things", but if we are to proceed beyond vanity and self obsessed cultivation of what others find attractive or desirable to find truth, we need to cultivate new generations of people interested in seeking the scientific and mathematical explanations of the universe.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
"The post is strong with first."
It's sad to see Stephenson become a doom-and-gloom guy. I mean, his early work was incredible. Most of the people I know who have read Snow Crash have always wanted, someday, to become a Deliverator.
Unfortunately, as bright as he is, he seems to have gotten this ugly little short-term political edge that has suddenly given me a nervous tic. Science fiction authors always have been futurists, but normally they're quite the idealists. This new generation of more hardcore dystopians is, well, depressing... They don't seem to realise that the pendulum swings, and right now we're in an ultra-Nixon era.
The slow, painful degredation of America that he sees is partially true. Unfortunately. But he's looking at the wrong things - this crass capitalism, the powerful and elite and supposed drivers of our economy and lives, and the people that are trying to look like them despite being too young who will eventually be good drones. That's the Baby Boomers of his generation, and their yuppie followers. The flipside of the coin has content. The flipside of the coin is the people who have grown up inundated with information and are slowly coming to the point where they are able to condense it. The best people of my generation, 'gen Y' aren't empowered yet. They're the ones doing community building projects, watching over teens in crisis, helping deranged children get over what they can, building a little bit here and there of themselves, trying out new things still. And while they may be completely disenfranchised at the moment, they're the people who both have my respect and will eventually come into the knowledge that they need some recognition and power to get what they need done done.
It's just a matter of time, as far as I can tell. Stephenson seems to have gotten caught up in the fact that the 'two Americas' crap is everywhere, and media is slowly getting crushed into Cheetos branded baby food. On the surface. But under that is the subcurrent of people slowly coming to their own.
He's right about the new Star Wars sucking, though. You need to have watched all this other stuff for it to be even mildly interesting, and I didn't so I wasn't really. The first movie was made to be a standalone, and the sixth (this one) was made to be a tie-in... There's nothing WRONG with that, as far as I'm concerned - Stephenson seems to forget that meetings with Powerpoints mean nothing but blanket summary to 90% of the people in them, and that last 10% that's really interested will go find out the information they need offline... I saw Revenge and decided it might be worth the effort of seeing the cartoons, but probably not, so I shrugged and went back to playing Galaxies. Suck me in one way, if you can't another, I guess.
My little site.
Mr. Christensen has been given an impossible acting task. He's trying to swim in air.
What's so hard about that? Birds do it all the time.
Impossible, maybe. But consdering Hayden Christensen never portrayed Anakin as anything but a piece of cardboard, I doubt he's without fault.
No soul-sucking required.
The real difference is character development.
In 4,5, and 6, Darth Vader was primarily the "bad guy". Sure, he had character, but it was primarily as the foil to the symbolic "light side" of the force that ran as an undercurrent in the rebellion / Luke's story.
By adding 1,2, and 3, Vader really becomes the central figure in the story, but he isn't given adequate plot time in 4 and 5. It's as if the writer of a tragedy changed focus in Acts 4 and 5, and then resumed Darth's story with his "return to the good side" in ep. 6. Darth and Obiwan (aside from the droids) are the only characters present in all 6 films, and Obiwan is only a ghost in 5 and 6. Darth is the only living character to speak in the 6 films, and this makes him central to the story, whether or not you like it.
And I don't like it. The story was good as Good vs. Evil rather than a "Look at how Power Can Corrupt the Good". Darth's story in 1-3, to me, totally shifts the focus of the films. That's why they can't actually be watched in their numerical order. Watching them that way totally screws with your perceptions of Darth in 4-6, and makes the plot seem convoluted and non sequitur. I mean, why should the films switch focus onto Padame's children when Darth Vader, the focus of the first three films, is still alive, kicking, and doing things in the Star Wars universe?
The people in this article are, "Two Star Wars fans are in a critical condition in hospital after apparently trying to make light sabres by filling fluorescent light tubes with petrol. A man, aged 20, and a girl of 17 are believed to have been filming a mock duel when they poured fuel into two glass tubes and lit it. The pair were rushed to hospital after one of the devices exploded in woodland at Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire." Granted they need practice but they are trying and soon the Force will be strong in them.
News Reporters Make Tasty Polar Bear Treats!
Gees! It must of killed him to be limited to so few words.
Four fifths of all our troubles in this life would disappear if we would just sit down and keep still. -C. Coolidge
Clone Wars is worth a watch. Volume 1 is on DVD, with volume 2 hopefully coming soon.
IN the spring of 1977, some friends and I made a 40-mile pilgrimage to the biggest and fanciest movie theater in Iowa so we could watch a new science fiction movie called "Star Wars." Expecting long lines, we got there early, and found the place deserted.
As we sat on the sidewalk waiting for the box office to open, others like us drifted in from the towns, farms and colleges of central Iowa and queued up behind. When the curtain in front of the big Cinerama screen finally parted, the fanfare sounded and the famous opening crawl appeared against a backdrop of stars, there were still some empty seats. "Star Wars" wasn't famous yet. The only people who had heard about it were what are now called geeks.
Twenty-eight years later, the vast corpus of "Star Wars" movies, novels, games and merchandise still has much to say about geeks - and also about a society that loves them, hates them and depends upon them.
In the opening sequence of the new Star Wars movie, "Episode III: Revenge of the Sith," two Jedi knights fight their way through an enemy starship to rescue a hostage. Ever since I saw the movie, I have been annoying friends with a trivia question: "Who is the enemy? What organization owns this vessel?"
We ought to know. In 1977, we all knew who owned the Death Star (the Empire) and who owned the Millennium Falcon (Han Solo). But when I ask my question about the new film, everyone reacts in the same way: with a sudden intake of breath and a sideways dart of the eyes, followed by lengthy cogitation. Some confess that they have no idea. Others think out loud for a while, developing and rejecting various theories. Only a few have come up with the right answer.
One hyperverbal friend was able to spit it out because he had read and memorized the opening crawl. Another, a hard-core science fiction fan, had been boning up on supplemental materials: "Clone Wars," an animated TV series consisting of "epic adventures that bridge the story arc between 'Episode II: Attack of the Clones' and 'Episode III: Revenge of the Sith.' "
If you have watched these cartoons - or if you've enjoyed some of the half-dozen "Clone Wars" novels, flipped through the graphic novels, read the short stories or played the video game - you will know that the battle cruiser in question is owned by the New Droid Army of the Confederacy of Independent Systems, which is backed by the Trade Federation, a commercial guild that is peeved about taxation of trade routes.
And that is not the only aspect of "Episode III" that you will see in a different light. If you watch the movie without doing the prep work, General Grievous - who is supposed to be one of the most formidable bad guys in the entire "Star Wars" cycle - will seem like something that just fell out of a Happy Meal.
Likewise, many have been underwhelmed by the performance of Hayden Christensen, who plays Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader. Only if you've seen the "Clone Wars" cartoons will you understand that Anakin is a seriously damaged veteran, a poster child for post-traumatic stress disorder. But since none of that background is actually supplied by the Episode III script, Mr. Christensen has been given an impossible acting task. He's trying to swim in air.
In sum, very little of the new film makes sense, taken as a freestanding narrative. What's interesting about this is how little it matters. Millions of people are happily spending their money to watch a movie they don't understand. What gives?
Modern English has given us two terms we need to explain this phenomenon: "geeking out" and "vegging out." To geek out on something means to immerse yourself in its details to an extent that is distinctly abnormal - and to have a good time doing it. To veg out, by contrast, means to enter a passive state and allow sounds and images to wash over you without troubling yourself too much about what it all means.
In corporate-speak, there is a related term used when someone has committed the faux pas of geeking out during a meeting
*sigh*
Maybe your friends think you're an idiot.
If you had read the crawler in the beginning of the movie, you would have read:
So, the enemy is Count Dooku. The ship is owned by the Separatists. The ship has the Chancellor on it. He was "kidnapped" by General Grievous. No viewing of the Clone Wars DVD was required to understand this.
This guy's point is that the old movies had "geek" sequences that told the story, but he claims the movies have no story, just "veg out" sequences. But he's wrong. Someone with at least rudimentary reading comprehension skills would have figured it out.
Maybe the fact that he saw Episodes IV-VI a million times is the reason why he understands the plot. Since he was seeing Episode III for the first time (and obviously not paying attention), that could be why he didn't understand. Has nothing to do with the quality of the movies.
As someone with an embarrassingly-encyclopedic knowledge of the movies*, I'd say Episodes I-III are as good as (and maybe better) than Episodes IV-VI.
This guy is in a long line of people who must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the new Star Wars movies are not as good as the original trilogy. (The rest of the line will be posting in this story about how George Lucas ruined their childhood, etc).
Insert simplistic political, ideological, or personal proselytization here.
seriously damaged veteran, a poster child for post-traumatic stress disorder.
Hmmm letme see. Anakin eats some worms AND HE LIKES IT! He says, humorously: "But master, you've always told me to feed from the force".
In his freeing the Nova warriors from the machines, the only traumatic experience was the loss of his already cybernetic hand. And then he built himself a new one! Oh, and this wasn't just a simple battle, it was the last test of a Jedi.
So tell me, what part of "post traumatic stress" did he experience? No, he was just a warrior who was constantly tempted to the dark side by the Sith. Remember how he killed that Sith in the jungle, by using his anger?
So will anyone explain me how the heck is he a "poor veteran suffering from PTSD"? No, the traumatic experience was the loss of his mother, and he NEVER recovered from it.
Oh yeah, the script still sucked. I'm sure he'd been given a much better chance to perform with a better story.
Wait. You read Snow Crash and you say that isn't apocalyptic? [or at least, as you say, Dystopian?].
Society in Snow Crash is totally different and essentially collapsed in comparison to present day.
Stephenson has always been like this, for the most part.
It was a great editorial, but the ending kind of left me hanging.
"Mr. Christensen has been given an impossible acting task. He's trying to swim in air" Especially hard when you don't even know hoe to swim in water
Here's a fun game to play the next time you watch the film: in every scene with just Padme and Anakin, add the word 'Broomstick' to the end of each line they say to one another, it makes the acting more believable!
e.g. Anakin to Padme: "I will never let you die... broomstick." (Variations like 'Mr./Ms. Broomstick', 'my sweet broomstick', or 'you lovely 2-by-4' add depth and drama!)
-- I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist. It's not my fault that life sucks so much. --
"you understand that Anakin is a seriously damaged veteran, a poster child for post-traumatic stress disorder. But since none of that background is actually supplied by the Episode III script, Mr. Christensen has been given an impossible acting task"
I work with "seriously damaged veterrans" every day, many of them the same age as Anakin is supposed to be. I can say with certainty, the background isn't required.
If he was damaged, it would be obvious in him like it is in most of my kids. But Christensen can't ACT. That's the bigger problem.
Several of my co-workers didn't understand some of the events in ROTS. I had to tell them of the Clone Wars cartoons and how it set things up for Ep 3. The cartoons were very cool, but why GL would create a script that sort of needs the viewer to have seen them beforehand (and most movie-goers haven't) is kind of silly.
In the 1970s/1980s, there was nothing else like Star Wars. It was like nothing that had come before. No previous movie had such effects. No other movie had been so successful, had been such a phenomenon. No other movie had so much merchandise or spawned so many cool toys. Movies that grossed a hundred million dollars did not come out every day. (By the way, I keep seeing comments in Slashdot that say "If those movies defined your childhood, you're a LOSER!" but they don't understand--I started kindergarten in 1977 and finished sixth grade in 1984. The Star Wars movies were released from 1977 to 1983. *Everyone* like Star Wars. It was always there. Everyone had the costumes and action figures. It didn't define my childhood, but it was a big part of it, and I've got a lot of happy memories playing with Star Wars toys, alone and with friends.)
Fast-forward a couple decades. We're totally saturated in big movies. We have several hundred-million-dollar-plus movies every summer and a never-ending series of fast-food tie-ins. George has shown us the way and *everything* is merchandised to the hilt. The world that the new Star Wars movies play in is very different from the world that the first movies played it. It's *not* just that we're all 20 years older now.
Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
If I didn't happen to crash at a friends houes after clubbing the week before and he showed us Clone Wars on his Tivo, I woulnd't have had the slightest clue what was happening in Episode 3. There was so much backstory, I think anyone who hasn't watched it will be left in the dark about a lot of things. My friend stated to me they should have made the cartoon into a live action movie and made it Episode 2, which I somewhat agree or least Episode 2.5 as a full length movie.
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
It's basically the same scenario as with the Matrix trilogy (well almost). Everyone just wanted to know how it ended exactly, if for no other reason than closure. Even though 90% of the people knew ultimately where the story was headed, everyone still wanted the little details.
Otherwise, the author of the article is right in that the newer movies really don't do a good job of explaining what's going on. The part about Anakin having mental problems from post traumatic stress disorder would have explained his character a lot better. Personally, I still think Hayden Christensen was a poor choice to play the part and would've ruined it anyhow, but they really could've given us a lot more.
Additionally, General Grievous just sort of popped into existance. Assuming that I would know all about him from the various other publications is a mistake. Thinking back on it, it really made the movie seem a little off.
While the hardcore fans of Star Wars will have read all the books, seen the cartoons, and read about other lore and history on the internet, there're a lot of us out there who haven't. Some of us saw the movie just for the sake of seeing it. And in the end, I guess the box office take is good enough to justify producing movies in that fashion.
Hayden Christensen is a terrible actor. Ignoring script and storyline issues he isn't able to convey much emotion through the screen. One easy test of good acting: are you able to forget the actor is anyone but the character they are portraying? In this case I saw the actor more than the character. I'm completely shocked that he was able to get this role. I'd be surprised if he got it any other way than knowing someone big on the inside. He simply isn't able to pretend to be someone else.
Developers: We can use your help.
Or Hayden Christensen is just a terrible actor, and a serious screw up by Lucas and co. The worst teen actor award is now between that kid that plays Harry Potter and Hayden Christensen. Both are like watching a plank of wood.
Just because writing computer programs is probably more intellectually demanding than collecting garbage or farming does not make us more essential to society. I hope that everyone reading this can easily see that the truth is the other way around. Although we do improve the efficiency of society, we are not so entrenched and important that modern civilization could not exist without us.
We don't have superpowers either, which is another common suggestion of Stephenson. Sure, the uninitiated look at what we do as mysterious and amazing. But look at a backhoe in operation. It is just as amazing how the operator in the cab can move a large and powerful piece of machinery with such precision. The difference is that our abilities are less familiar to people, so they seem somehow more amazing. If you get the chance, look into a chemical processing plant and you will see mechanisms and processes that are much more amazing still, but are just hidden from most people.
I don't read Stephenson's novels any more. It's just masturbation. That's not the way the world works.
Here's my summary of revenge of the Sith:
1. Anakin wants to be a good Jedi, but he keeps dreaming about his girlfriend's (Padme) death.
2. Anakin talks to Joda asking for help. Joda tells him he shouldn't worry because that's bad and he should accept the faith of Padme.
3. Anaking doesn't like that answer. (Why should he?) The Jedi answer pretty much sounds like a big "screw you". Of course he's gonna worry about Padme. I would.
4. The Emperor tells him he may or may not be able to save Padme, but he should at least try. However, trying goes against the Jedi dogma.
5. Anakin decides that the Jedi dogma is not correct, and joins the "dark" side. (Note: Dark doesn't mean evil. It means having an open mind and exploring both sides of the "force".)
6. The Jedi can't tolerate people that don't follow their religion, thus the emperor is forced to have this religious group killed.
7. Even though Anakin saved Obi-wan's life, Obi-wan is too blinded by his Jedi religion, and trys to kill Anakin. Trying to kill someone that saved your life is pretty low and evil in my book.
8. Anakin gets his arms and legs cut off, and his girlfriend dies. That makes him pretty pissed. (I'd be pretty pissed, too.)
9. Obi-wan doesn't even get a finger cut off, and he kidnaps Anakin's kids.
-- The End -
..but with a tiny bit of [university] acting experience as my guide, I think that what you aim at as an actor is "becoming" the person, not pretending to be them.
And that, I think, is Hayden's problem in this movie. Seems more like he's pretending to be Vader than he is becoming Vader.
picpix image polls. create - share - vote. fun!
As someone with an embarrassingly-encyclopedic knowledge of the movies*, I'd say Episodes I-III are as good as (and maybe better) than Episodes IV-VI.
;-)
Well, sure, anyone in your position would say that, to hide the embarassment.
If you had encyclopedic knowledge of the originals, you were a huge nerd, but at least other nerds respected and feared you.
But with the prequels... even the nerds look down on you!
You can't take the sky from me...
That might even beat Carrie Fischer in a gold bikini, frozen in carbonite!
excuse me, I need some personal time, I'll be in the mensroom...
It's why the Russians were so kick ass. No religion allowed. The cultural flourished under the Bolsheviks!
See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
Next person to post an article where I have to register to RTFA gets it...
Unti somebody tells me of a good reason to hand over details to a news site JUST to get access to the articles, I for one will be abstaining. Don't these people understand that the success of a site like slashdot is that you can type "slashdot.org[ENTER]" and within seconds be seeing the main latest headlines? The login process should be an optional extra step that I choose to take in order to get more from the site, not an intrusive details gathering technique. I suppose I'm meant to believe that the tick in the no-spam-please-box means something more than putting my details into a queuing system so I won't be able to trace back to who gave them away when they are later sold on.
Boy, does he take a turn into left field at the end there.
You know, I went to a pretty good school (Georgia Tech) and studied first engineering and then atmospheric science. There were people lining up to take science, engineering, and math classes... so much so that if you registered late, good luck getting into your required courses that semester.
Going back to high school, I checked my yearbook and about 40% of the students were going to college to study science of engineering. (I found it more interesting that 10% were going into law enforcement... but I digress.)
Why do people keep saying that "boys and girls run away from science and math?" I just don't see it. Kids younger than 12 are all about science, and based on my graduating class quite a few end up there at the end of high school. Sure, kids check out when they are teenagers, but who the hell doesn't? My personal opinion is that if you never skipped a class in high school, your priorities were a bit out of whack.
Is there any factual basis for Mr. Stephenson's claim? Or is the constant harping about "the young generation avoiding math" just more baby boomer bitching?
The cartoons were very cool, but why GL would create a script that sort of needs the viewer to have seen them beforehand (and most movie-goers haven't) is kind of silly.
To make people rush out and buy the cartoons, of course. The added profits from the shorts of the DVDs will be truly impressive.
If your frontal lobes (sarcasm center) are functioning correctly, The Daily Show is not at all inconsistent with reality. To get the humor, you need to know something about what's real, already. Even if you're not up on the news at the moment, you can tell from the dance what's in the middle, where the facts are.
The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
In the original trilogy, people were so happy there was a Star Wars that they were happy to overlook any and all flaws in the dialogue, storyline, plot elemenets, etc. They didn't mind that the Ewoks could defeat an elite stormtrooper legion, that an enormous Imperial fleet could simply go missing at the ROTJ, that Luke could become a full Jedi Knight in just a few years time. They didn't mind any of it, because the 70s and 80s were the time of action movies where Charles Bronson and Clint Eastwood were major stars, followed by the Governator, Van Damme, etc. And all they had to do was either shoot people or beat the shit out of them. Rambo, Dirty Harry, Rocky, the Terminator, take your pick. But times changed in the 90s. Moviegoers became a lot more critical, demanded more from filmmakers. Particularly once the internet came to be widely used, everybody and their brother became armchair film critics. Everybody suddenly was an expert on filmmaking, writing, acting, producing (especially Slashdotters)though most had no clue what it all entailed. Movie audiences steadily got spoiled over time by some truly great epics until finally, these days, very few if any movies are good enough anymore. Thus the complaints about the plot holes in the Prequels, questions regarding the acting, the dialogue, etc. All things that could have come up while critiquing the OT, but which didn't for one reason. Because once upon a time, people went to a movie and simply enjoyed it for what it was. They didn't spend the entire time ripping it to pieces and then running home to post on their lame websites every flaw that they perceived and how they themselves could have done it better people. Think about people. You're spoiled to the point where you are unlikely to ever enjoy many movies in the future. Any movie you can think of, I can find someone on the internet who will be happy to rip it to shreds. Because it deserves it? No, because people just like to bitch and whine. It doesn't matter what the topic is, and it's what keeps internet forum from becoming totally deserted.
He's trying to swim in air Use the force.
The ending felt kind of flat.
In the old ones, it was a story of Good versus Evil. We were following Young Skywalker is his understanding that the world that surrounds him will be consumed by evil if he doesn't do something to sop it. There's even great punches (ex: Leia and Luke ARE BROTHERS AND SISTERS!) It was a great story.
The new ones, well.. they change the focus. Its about power. Its about corruption. Its about the difference in democracy (the republic) and the empire. How can good visions become evil. And also, it spoils any punch that could exist in the old movies. How could you watch the 6 movies from beginning to start? There would be no "I'm your father" punch? How could there be a "You have a sister" punch? What about the focus? I think anybody not knowing about star wars and watching the whole thing from start to the end would be utterly confused and think its just badly made.
I wouldn't mind you in my head, if you weren't so clearly mad -Lews Therin Telamon
After all it's not as if he really thought the whole six movie plot out in advance.
Look at the lame attempt to escape from the corner he painted himself in when he had Darth built C3PO. Wiping C3PO's memory indeed. He should have wiped our memories instead. That would have solved all his consistency problems.
One of my gripes with the new vs the old is with the treatment of the Jedi.
In the original trilogy, the Jedi didn't really do much fighting. Yoda even tells Luke in Empire "the force is to be used for knowledge and defence, never for attack." When the Falcon gets pulled into the Death Star, Obiwan doesn't come out swinging, he sneaks around to free the ship. The part that gets me most is when Luke is fighting Vader in Jedi. When does Luke declare himself to be a Jedi? When he throws his weapon away. He STOPS FIGHTING. That was when he claimed is rightful status.
To watch the new movies, you get more of a sense of "Jedi can kill anyone they want! Jedi cut off
heads ALL the time and don't even think twice about it. These guys are so crazy and awesome
that they flip out ALL the time. I heard that there was this Jedi who was eating at Mos Eisly Cantina. And when some dude dropped a spoon the Jedi killed the whole town. My friend Mark said that he saw a Jedi totally uppercut some kid just because the kid opened a window."
It just doesn't mesh with:
There is no emotion, there is peace.
There is no ignorance, there is knowledge.
There is no passion, there is serenity.
There is no death, there is the Force.
I know it's not canon, but it clearly illustrates to me the Yin/Yang qualities that balance the light and dark sides of the force.
While watching the new movies, it was like a stone in my shoe that kept bothering me. I kept thinking "but a Jedi wouldn't act that way.
I know this may be more of a personal interpretation, but I think the original trilogy mesh with my view.
"...At the end of the day"..."when everyone goes home, you're stuck with yourself." RIP Layne Staley
So, first and foremost, I'm a programmer. Been programming for years, and it defines a hell of a lot about how I think.
I imagine I'm not the only one here like this. So, I gotta ask, does anybody else have problems ( internally, cognitively ) with this series being 1-indexed, instead of zero?
I mean, whenever I try to refer to "Star Wars: A New Hope" I always say "The third movie", because "Phantom menace" is the zero'th movie. This just makes more sense to me. Then I realize it's 1-indexed, and I stall cognitively like a backfiring yugo as I think... "shit, it's the *fourth*" movie...
Not that I'm suggesting they change the numbering, obviously. I'm just sayin'.
P.S. They *all* sucked.
lorem ipsum, dolor sit amet
Yeah, right. Neal Stephenson, writing a two-page article? The man can't describe a plain cardboad box in two pages! This is obviously the work of someone else.
The best Anakin was the old guy behind the mask from the original unedited "Star Wars: A New Hope"
-73, de n1ywb
www.n1ywb.com
First page of this article: Star Wars bashing. Ok great I like it.
Second page: What the hell? Does anyone know what he was talking about? Did he take two different articles and put them together?
The really sad thing is, judging from some of the current headlines, the field of science is next.
Breakfast served all day!
Some might say Nixon was one of the great liberal presidents of the last century! Odd you say? Read on:
That at least explains the incoherent plot and the lack of character development.
But that's not the worst part.
Darth Vader. DARTH fucking VADER!!! The most evil badass in the fucking galaxy, second only to the emperor but that guy's getting kinda long in the tooth.
I mean, I went to the Hard Rock Cafe in Chicago, and they have the Darth Vader suit behind glass, and it just seemed to exude evil. Gave me chills. This is one scary badass genocidal black-hearted motherfucker.
So, how did he become such a villain? What drove him to this abyss of the soul?
He wanted to save his sweetie.
WHAT????
He didn't really want to join the dark side, but he had to do it to save someone else? So really, it was self-sacrifice! It was an act of GOOD! He's a misunderstood good guy!
And why did he feel this step was necessary? Because (1) he had a dream she was gonna die, and (2) the chancellor tells him a story about one old Sith who supposedly could save people from dying. Does it ever occur to Anakin, when he finds out the chancellor is an evil sith lord, that maybe he shouldn't believe the evil Sith's little fairy tale? No! He becomes Vader because he's the most gullible Jedi in the fucking universe!
And then, the final moment. The helmet goes on. Darth Vader at last steps fully into his dark destiny. And what are the first words out of his mouth? "Where's Padme? Is she ok?"
This is evil???
And then, the horrible moment...when he throws back his head, throws up his arms, and screams "NOOOOOO" right out of a hundred other B-grade schlocky movies.
God. What horror. All I can do is tell myself, this isn't the real story. The real story of Vader is still untold. This is just the distorted vision of a senile old man.
And of course, there are a hundred other points you could pick apart. Even the fight scenes sucked. Phantom Menace wasn't a great movie, but the lightsaber fights with Darth Maul, those were cool. These were just flash flash flash, you couldn't even tell what was going on. And Padme, used to be a strong character, now she spends the whole movie snivelling.
And in all three movies...it used to be good vs. evil. Now, the essence of a Jedi is "no attachments." Anakin can't be a Jedi and fall in love. The power to heal is only on the Dark Side, the good Jedi just accept death and let people die. Ten years go by after taking Anakin away from Tatooine, and the great Jedi and the Queen never bother to buy their golden boy's mother out of slavery. Being a Jedi means not giving a shit about anybody.
When we watched the old movies, every kid, at least every boy, wanted to be either Han Solo, or a Jedi. These movies have no Han Solo-type character, and the Jedi are assholes. Gaagh, what a waste. These are not Star Wars. Star Wars had character. Where's amnesia when you need it.
That's the only good reason for a Bush vote I've ever heard.
But you're only the second person I've ever heard make that point, unfortunately; most Bush voters are simply horribly uninformed, and thought they were voting for lower gasoline prices.
Yep, that's what HanShootsFirst.org is all about...
Stephenson continues...
"Only a few have come up with the right answer.
One hyperverbal friend was able to spit it out because he had read and memorized the opening crawl."
The parent post wasted my time.
Where does that quote come from?
This is quite possibly the best Star Wars comment on Slashdot, ever.
One thing a lot of people here don't realize, is the immense age range on this site. We all assume everyone else is within a few years of age from us, and this comes up time and again: "my first computer was a 486" "I used punch cards, newb!" etc.
Us 80s kids (those that actually grew up in the 80s, not those born in them) are a very odd breed. We bridged the cultural gap between Leave it to Beaver and American Idol. Between transistor radios and mp3 players. Between pocket calculators and the latest G5s. Between Bugs Bunny and Pokemon.
Think about it: before Star Wars, mass merchandising almost didn't exist. Within 5 years of Star Wars, the movie industry changed entirely. Box office revenues became such a small portion of income as to be almost meaningless for many films. Saturday morning cartoons became an entirely different breed one the merchandise tie-ins became the important factor. We went from computers being these huge things you might have seen on television (back when there were 5 channels if you were lucky), to having one in your pocket that can SHOW television, all 300 channels of it.
When I was very young, the world was as my parents saw it. Pop culture came through the radio (been around for decades), television (a few channels, hasn't changed much other than the introduction of colour a while back - and most people only owned one), movies (theatres only, so you're only ever going to see a movie once or twice in your life) or newspapers. During my childhood nearly all of what we have today developed - the Internet, VCRs/DVDs, Cassettes/CDs, the 300 channel universe...
The world changed profoundly during the 80s. Those of you who were already adults just adapted, and in many cases, stayed away from the changes. Those of you too young to remember, well, you think the world has always been this way. There's a fairly small subset of society that's shared both experiences: the time from about 1945-1977, and today. Not just shared it, LIVED it. I cannot for the life of me explain to my parents just why a home computer is so cool. They'll simply never get it. And most kids these days just expect it. The magic is lost on them.
Insert Star Wars into my rant, and maybe you'll understand just why it's considered such a huge part of my generation's lives. What Star Wars did to the movie/toy industry is what we saw EVERY DAY while growing up.
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
a) I'm probably younger than you (born 81), and first watched Star Wars when there was plenty of other decent sci-fi out, and the hype had died down
b) I can still watch the original series, and love it. The soundtrack, the acting, the plot, pretty much all of it.
c) I still think that the prequels suck: bad acting, plot holes, and it generally seemed rushed. I would much rather sit with some popcorn and watch ep4+ than the crapulance that is ep1-ep3
Now, not to split hairs, but I do believe this is incorrect: Don't get me started on the idea that Anakin has no father. We should have found out in the end of ep2 that the Palpatine is his father. Palpatine's master was Anakin's "father." Though, I wouldnt' really call that a father. I prefer to say that Palpatine's master was Anakin's creator.
-KD
I hate responding to trolls but...
6.5. Anakin kills a Jedi master, proceeds to burn down the temple, and slaughters all within (including younglings/children).
You're confusing though the Jedi actions with the Jedi ideal. The Jedi are in some ways corrupt, as they are human. In the latter episodes the Jedi are almost all dead, and the ones left have learned from past mistakes.
A whole lot of time could have been saved if the crawl had been edited down to:
"NOOOOOOOOOOO!"
and then the end credits could have run, and we would have been out of there.
September 2011: Looking for Cocoa/iOS work in Boston area Cocoa Programmer Quincy, MA
Anakin Skywalker may have doomed his career, unfairly so. The guy has shown that not only can he act, but that he's actually a fine actor. Feel free to check out his performances in "Life As A House" and "Shattered Glass". After seeing these two films, my opinion of Lucas' skills as a director fell even further. I had heard that he was not an actor's director, but to take a fine young actor and elicit such wooden performances from him, Good Lord man!
It took a Neal Stephenson article to get me to register for that wretched website.
...the characters in the original trilogy weren't stupid, comic relief. The most comical bits in the original film, besides the interplay of R2 and 3PO and some other one-liners, were the little bot that Chewy howls at and runs away and the trooper hitting his head. There characters themselves didn't act as if everything was a fluke - they had some skill. Now, every bot makes stupid noises and every character has to have funny lines and most everything happens by sheer luck.
Yet somehow, he manages to drown.
One thing that's always irked me about the prequels that I've only recently put my finger on is the gratuitous use of lightsabers compared to what we saw in 4-6.
In Ep 4, lightsabers were shown quite sparingly:
Luke in Obi-Wan's house
Obi Wan in the Cantina
Luke practicing on the M.Falcon
Obi-Wan vs Vader
In the scene when Obi-Wan gives Anakin's lightsaber to Luke, he makes a point of telling Luke that it's a warrior's weapon that represents honour and grace. You would not expect a samurai to use his sword to cut sandwiches; merely drawing your weapon is a significant act in itself. Contrast with episode 1 when in the opening scene, all it took for Obi-Wan and Anakin to whip 'em out was a loud noise.
Of course, in 1977, the technology level wasnt there, so every second of lightsabre screen time cost a lot more than now when CGI is just a commodity, which probably explains it's scarcity in eps 4-6. However, Lucas' often gratuitous use of lightsabre battles in the prequels totally smacks of fan service. IMHO it really dilutes the mystique and significance of the lightsaber and makes the jedi look like gang members who think running around with dual beretta's held sideways is cool. Nothing at all like the introspective and disciplined order the jedi are supposed to represent.
No drama required.
"Derp de derp."
"The best people of my generation, 'gen Y' aren't empowered yet. They're the ones doing community building projects, watching over teens in crisis, helping deranged children get over what they can, building a little bit here and there of themselves, trying out new things still"
This is too rich. Except for the "gen Y" part that's something I expect has been said nearly verbatim by every generation. In particular you might check out that whole counter-culture thing that happened in the late 60's early 70's. I'm sorry Mr. Y but they had your generation beat in all these things by a mile - and they're the very same Baby Boomers and Yuppies you're castigating. And don't even get started with those who lived through the two world wars - those were generations that did something - and even then they too moved on to become the establishment.
Idealism is great, but when it's coupled with hubris and a lack of perspective, it's laughable at best, harmful at worst. Your generation didn't suddenly invent the worlds problems or the solutions to them, it's just that you've finally become aware enough to recognize them. The easiest thing to do at that point is to then say it's the fault of everyone else who came before me, and everyone in my generation is going to be extra special betterer and gooder. I hope your idealistic nature and that which you claim for the rest of "gen Y" is able to bear up as you continue through life, but history shows otherwise. Mainly because in every generation there are those that act (for better or worse) and everyone else who's happy just being alive. You'll understand better as you mature and find that the world is both more complex and more simple than thinking geekiness and good intentions will triumph.
Just ask the Who, who've gone from wanting to die before they get old to selling their songs to promote just about anything that will pay them to do so. That's their generation - it'll be yours in fifteen to twenty years.
Of course this is all entirely off topic and has fuck all to do with Star Wars - which is at the end of the day just a bunch of movies and related accessories.
Sean Hanity was just quoted as saying that Neal Stephenson gave aid and comfort to the enemy by makeing the following statement:
If the "Star Wars" movies are remembered a century from now, it'll be because they are such exact parables for this state of affairs. Young people in other countries will watch them in classrooms as an answer to the question: Whatever became of that big rich country that used to buy the stuff we make? The answer: It went the way of the old Republic.
"Oh, and computer scientists and engineers are the Jedi of the U.S."
I wonder if Neil is being metaphorical, or if he just means that most of us really do believe we're Jedi...
--Schda Sp-Sai of the Planet Motrin
and now back to the fallout shelter...
the Jedi are fallible as all living creatures are, despite their code. Especially in a time of war. The fact is the Jedi didn't kill anybody who weren't already attacking them.
Especially hard when you don't even know hoe to swim in water
Or Lava, for that matter.
More recently, science has been put on the back burner due to political issued. It seems the popularity of science has more to do with what it can do for you than for what it is. In the 60's they needed science to accomplish something. The way to do that is to unleash it with all the resources it needed. It worked great.
Today, political hacks don't want truth and they don't want progress. They want to push their own agendas. And for the most part science does not support their agendas. It either contradicts, or is mearly immaterial. The needs of the politician is to sweep science out of the way and let them do what they want. Thus you get the current pitiful state.
When we get another major goal that only science can achieve, then we'll see the rise of the "Rocket Scientist" again.
There is nothing so silly as other peoples traditions, and nothing so sacred as our own.
Not all copies of Episode I suck!
In fact, some are quite good.
Get your Unix fortune now!
Indeed. It worked very well for the Soviets. People were extremely interested in things that mattered: starvation, oppression, etc The Russians had other problems as well, The chinese have similar restrictions on religion, and they seem to be doing very well for themselves, financialy anyway.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
The bible claims that plants were on land before fish were in the sea, and before there was a sun and moon. Regardless of the length of period, it's still "scientificaly" wrong.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
The Mythology of Star Wars. (Crapply link I know. There are torrents out there...)
It's an interview with Lucas and was filmed before II and III... really helps you see what he is trying to do. I thought both movies (I & II) were "ok" but this makes you look a little deeper and realize that the vision did come to light.
If you are a Joseph Campbell fan, you'd get why the movies progress the way they do.
Get your Unix fortune now!
Okay. Here's a trick that I figured out.
LIE.
They don't come to your house, fingerprint you, take pictures of you, or do plaster molds of your DOG when you register. Make a separate Hotmail, or hell, even a free AOL e-mail account for to redirect the mindless drivel. But I am sick and tired about people bitching about how the NYT (and other similar folk) are invading their privacy when they won't take 15 seconds to figure out how to ROUTE AROUND IT.
-ahem-
Sorry. None of that was really directed towards you. It's just been an itch that's been building for a year or so. I'm done now.
'If you're flammable and have legs, you are never blocking a fire exit.'
would have been better.
I seem to remember that one of the people who was being considered as adult Anakin was Leonardo di Caprio. I also seem to remember that the universal feeling about Leo as Anakin was that this would be the unmitigated "worst thing in the universe."
However, I get this feeling that Leo would have pulled through and done right by Anakin/Vader. For one thing, he's a way better actor than Hayden Christenson. We first saw that when he played Arnie Grape in "What's Eating Gilbert Grape." We also saw it in his rendition of real-life poet/junkie Jim Carroll in "The Basketball Diaries." It was only after this that the concept of "Leo as Teen Idol" spoiled him for a whole generation of people who hate teen idols. Never mind that he's done great work since.
No, the roar was loud and long against Leo as Anakin from a billion billion geeks. I seem to remember I even got taken in by that. I forgot the transformation of another former teen idol who is now the best character actor of his generation, Johnny Depp. DiCaprio seems to be taking the same route Depp took out of teen idoldom, with a genuinely tour-de-force performance as Howard Hughes in "The Aviator" as renewed proof of his chops as an actor.
Would DiCaprio have done the dark anti-hero Anakin Skywalker justice? He certainly portrayed the dashing daredevil tycoon who turned into a tortured, sick shutin with a germ fetish quite well. And you have to admit that even at his nadir, as Jack Dawson in "Titanic," he wasn't all bad as the romantic ragamuffin hero. He could certainly have done more with Natalie Portman than Christenson did. And I suspect that he would have played the scene where he looks at himself as the masked Vader for the first time in a far more subtle way.
Perhaps in Universe B, Episodes II and III of the Star Wars saga don't suck. Perhaps in Universe B Lucas didn't bow to fan outrage and hired Leonardo DiCaprio as the adult Anakin. Perhaps this was also the universe where Lucas realized he wasn't so hot at directing as he was at producing and got other, more talented directors to direct the next two.
Perhaps I'm being too wishful here.
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
It's not his fault you're illiterate. I did enjoy the big-U, however.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
what part of "post traumatic stress" did he experience
The whole thing with the cave vision, and going on a rampage killing all of the guys who had converted the natives (sorry, can't remember the names) was pretty intense for him (especially since he fely he failed what test there was) - especially the vision which lays out all of epsiode III for him.
I think that was all in season 2 of the clone wars. In any case though it was a pretty key part.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Actualy I didn't bother to read the crawler text, nor did I care who owned the ship. As someone with an embarrassingly-encyclopedic knowledge of the movies*, I'd say Episodes I-III are as good as (and maybe better) than Episodes IV-VI. Knowledge, maybe. Taste? Certanly not.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
"Joda"?
Ha!
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I always thought that was one of the critical mistakes Lucas made in the second trilogy. In the first three, there was absolutely no talk of "balance" to the force, the dark side was something to be entirely avoided. Dark emotions like hatred and rage might give you a temporary boost of power, but in the end always corrupted both the results of your actions and your very personality. Take it far enough and this corruption would even change your body.
I think this original conception made more sense dramatically and philosophically. It resonated so much with people that it became akin to a religion to many. Lucas then fucked it up entirely by adding the concept of "balance" and "mitoclorians" and most especially the incredibly cliched "chosen one from prophecy" crap, thereby making the Jedi order just another hackneyed, forgettable, Saturday Morning cartoon group of characters.
During episodes 1-3, it was the Trade Confederation, who wanted money and unlimited trade power. Over those episodes, they gradually assumed the guise of the Separatists. Of course, what noone saw coming was that it was all a ploy by Palpatine to rule the galaxy: yet another quest for power.
During episodes 4-6, it was still a struggle for power, albeit it was justified by today's standards. The rebels were fighting to re-gain the power they had lost when Palaptine formed the Empire. They were fighting back for personal power. (As the US did in it's revolutionary war).
Taking this and applying it to the Jedi: their battle was also one for power. Sith have more influential/external power. The power eventually comes to "rule over you" -- much similar to a dictatorship & tyrrany. Meanwhile, Jedi have more hidden/internal power. As a Jedi, your focus is on controlling your urges, and striking a balance between yourself and everything around you. This has ties in with democracy & personal freedom.
Concerning war happening for no good reason... I agree, this war isn't for a good reason. However, it has reasons nonetheless.
And an interesting side note: Utopia originally meant "Nowhere" when it was fisrt used. The reasoning behind the epistomology was that a perfect place cannot exist. (Particualrly because humanity defines it's existence through misery & strife, but I digress).
Science has become both too specialized and too skeptical. There is little in the way of grand overview coming from scientists, and far too much by way of dismissal of normal human concerns, such as what to do with our freedom.
Many, perhaps most scientists these days are complete determinists who believe that freedom is only an illusion. Compare this to the religious leaders who believe that freedom is real, but that we owe it to "God" to renounce it. Well, these scientists are renouncing it without even a nod to "God." This is progress??
Okay, I haven't seen the latest Star Wars, or cared for the series much after the wonderful first movie. That first movie perfectly framed the freedom preserved by the few as the salvation of the enslaved many. Science was best represented by the Death Star. And that's about where it's going: to the mechanized service of empire, whether through robotics or cloning, and denial of the romance of the individual, or of the importance of the individual's struggle with character, with the difficulty of finding the truly good courses in life, with not being suckered into the bad merely because of the power and satisfaction available there.
"with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
NO one wants to fucking register to read news.
Haven't you fucking figured this shit out by now? Jesus christ...
We have secretly replaced these Slashdot mods' sense of humor with a rusty nail. Let's see if they notice!!
in Star Wars III, Vader turns back to the 'light side' and refuses to kill his son, Luke, despite the Emperor's urgings to do so. This seems more plausible after seeing Episode 3. Character development is hardly the focus of any of the films. To focus on character, you might come to the conclusion that the series is about R2D2 saving the galaxy!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signature_bloc
There are real monsters out there, and Star Wars is better off staying in the realm of lessons which can be learned from by those who are seeking enlightenment. Psychopaths don't learn from moral lessons about how attachment and fear and seeking control are roads to the Dark Side.
-FL
They WILL be remembered a century from now, but not because of the stories. They will be remembered because of their place in the history of film making, because of the technical advances brought forth in them.
Likewise, Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan will be remembered, as it had the first CGI shot (the "genesis effect" in the scientist's report).
So are Stephenson's latest doorstops not selling that well, that he's got to jump on the "esteemed sci-fi author shits all over Star Wars" bandwagon? David Brin has been inappropriately trying to tie Star Wars to The World We Live In since Phantom Menace.
I'm sorry if this view is unpopular, but I thought Stephenson's screed was snooty, pseudo-intellectual, self-important twaddle. Characterizing them as exact parables for modern times misses the mark by so far that it's barely worth mentioning; if you're going to level a criticism at Star Wars, it should be their clueless atavism, attempting to recreate old Saturday-afternoon pulp serials in a world that has little use for such things anymore.
What Stephenson is really saying, and hiding behind a lot of disingenuous language while he does so, is "Star wars is for dummies, and I'm super smart for being above it all."
The needle went all the way to the red, bent on the stop peg and shattered into a cloud of sparks.
Just use the mozilla suite with the bug-me-not extension.Long live the suite!
I found their courtship to be appropriate for a member of royalty involved with someone of a religious order. Romance is a rather modern, Western phenomenon, and other cultures (The film does have a large international audience) would find their reserve quite natural. Of course, Star Wars is an American movie, but "foreign" movies, Japanese films for example, have quite different standards of good acting. (The Japanese historically have had less interest in 'naturalness' and 'realism,' because it is a movie, not a documentary after all!)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signature_bloc
The problem with religion, as I see it, is that
1) there are more than one, each with different ideas about morality, religious figures, afterlife, etc. (despite similarities)
2) people incorporate religious ideas into their worldview and cling to them
3) a person's worldview is ridiculously difficult to change, for some unknown human reason, and people will sometimes fight to the death to protect it
There's just way too much action based on ignorance/lack of real communication/fear of the unknown in this world. I mean, OK, what if the particular miracle-performing prophet you've been indoctrinated to worship your whole life, wasn't the ONLY prophet? Would it be so bad? Would the sky fall? Is it possible that the founders of a new religion, perhaps even yours, had just a bit of self-interest going on? Is it possible that human interests over the years have distorted the original message of some of these prophets (especially the religions that are much older than Gutenberg's invention)? Why is it always that members of the OTHER religion are going to hell, or are the infidels, or what have you? Why must people constantly insist on thinking of everything using an "us vs. them" paradigm?
Is the practice of brainwashing a human from birth with just 1 holy book (whether it's the bible, the koran, the torah, or whatever), as opposed to educating children about ALL religions, really going to help us communicate our religious needs/feelings, as a people? Are we that afraid that someone, perhaps even one of our very children, is going to like "their" religion more? And would that be so terrible?
(A good friend of mine's family practically disowned his sister because she converted to orthodox judaism. I say, let it be.)
Open your minds and stop the fighting, folks.
Disclaimer: While raised Catholic (I was even an altar boy, once), I took a few religious studies electives in college and they were VERY eye-opening. To the point where I felt angry for having been kept in a "catholic bubble" for the first half of my existence. While I am not strict any more, I feel in my gut that there is some kind of spirituality to life as we know it.)
several people here seem to have taken this to be a troll, but I think the poster was going for Funny. One of the things I liked about the movie is that one can almost sympathize with Anakin (which is probably why they didn't actually show the slaying of the 'younglings') Its understandable how he became enamoured of the dark side.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signature_bloc
He was a crook. He did a lot of good for the country, but he also harmed it greatly, with his "second rate burglary" that forced his resignation; by choosing a crook as his first #2 (who went to prison for tax evasion before his term was out); by his wage-price controls that resulted in workers' wages effectively going down while corporate profits were up; by his "war on drugs" that led to Reagan's war on drugs which resulted in the Crips and teh Bloods (et al); and by appointing a second #2 who became the first American president to NOT be elected into even the VP post.
He was the first President I was sorry I voted for. He truly screwed the world up in ways that will never be fixed.
Your father... was seduced by the Dark Side of the Force. He ceased to be Anakin Skywalker and BECAME Darth Vader. When that happened, the good man who was your father was destroyed. The story shifted to being about Anakin Skywalker, who only truly existed in episodes 1-3 and 6.
9,000 Star Wars stories on Slashdot and everyone uses the (admittedly idiotic) midichlorian line to claim continuity errors.
In the original trilogy, there were many references to "the Force is strong with this one", and "the Force runs in my family". It was always clear that some people were more inclined to have it than others.
My take on the whole issue, after seeing episode I, was that the degree of Force a person could wield was REFLECTED in the midichlorian count, not the other way around. Not until everyone on Slashdot started hollering about this did it even occur to me that the midichlorians were some sort of genetic inheritance that CAUSED the Force to be exhibited.
So, some people are more in touch with the Force than others. This is reflected by their midichlorian test. As they develop in Force abilities, other Jedi can just pick this up, but maybe when they're very young a blood test is needed. The Jedi recruits children who seem more likely to be strong in the Force, and trains them. Much like athletic skill is partially inherited, there's still some natural ability in all of us and training can give anyone at least some of it. There's no magic blood test to see "will be good at basketball", but we can look for indications that with the right training, someone is more likely to be.
I never once saw any indication that it was some exclusive, genetically-inherited power. I truly don't understand where people came up with this.
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
Are they now one with the force? Will they be coming back as blue ghosts?
Hell, yeah. If they carry on much longer they'll both have the required prosthetic limbs...
A beast made of the meanest parts of other (some also mythical) beasts? I can't think of any interpretation if either chimera or phantom menace that equates the two.. (ok I can think of one, but it involves taking the definition of chimera and cutting it off after "A mythical beast...")
But 'myth' does not mean 'nonexistant' The menace of episode one WAS nonexistant, made up for the purpose of setting up future events. Even the "menace" of Darth Maul was exaggerated. As far as I can tell, all he did was walk around looking badass and fought two jedi, accidentally killing one.
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
I signed up for nytimes.com about 2 years ago. I used a unique e-mail address for it that is tracked in my database to the site I gave it to. So far, it hasn't had any spam on it.
Wrong, Wrong, and wrong.
Religion is based on faith. Ex.: if you violate the tennates of the faith in this life, you will get some sort of retribution in the next.
Science is based on fact. If you walk off the side of a building you will fall, each and every time.
Religion doesn't have to be repeatable. When was the last time you actually walked on water? When was the last recorded event of somebody walking in water?
Science is repeatable, when was the last time you stepped in a swimming pool and had to deal with boyancy?
Religion and science do not have to conflict. Religion ad science conflict because we have religous hippocrits. Take the nutcases who are trying to get creationism back into schools. When was the last time these wankers got out of their boat and walked on water? If they put their faith where their mouth was they would be doing exactly that.
Not sure if this is exactly on-topic with Neal Stephenson's review of Revenge of the Sith, but Douglas Adams has already conclusively answered everything that needs to be said about science versus religion.
"Give a man a fish and he will ask for tartar sauce and French fries!"
Neal is the kinda writer who will give you 900 pages of backstory on Anakin and no turn into Darth Vader. Is anyone actually surprised this is his opinion?
What, that he thinks one of the big problems with ep 3 is that you need to know too much about the backstory in order to be able to understand it? Obviously you were right onto him there.
Unfortunately, Lucas has an ego problem. He just could not allow another person to take over. To understand the arrogance, Lucas even gave parts (though they were non-speaking) to members of his immediate family. Such is the first and final sign of total arrogance.
Yes. Lucas did rape my childhood. He took the magic and fantasy of Star Wars IV, V, and (ugh) VI and twisted them into some sort techno-sci-fi babble like midichlorians.
Unlike other people, my childhood was horrible, and Star Wars gave me hope. I was brutally abused by my parents, and Stars War made me feel happy by giving me a sense that there was hope at the end of the tunnel. Now, I know that there is none.
I sit here now, with a loaded firearm pointed at my head. What reason do I have to live? Give me 1 fucking reason.
Because midichloreans are clearly a corruption of mitochondria. Mitochondria are most definitely inherited.
Beyond that, even if it isn't an inconsistency, it is stupid.
The story of Ep 4 is the same as many other stories. A young nobody farm boy in the ass-end of space turns out to be very important, in fact, perhaps the most important person in the world.
It's the same story as "The Princess Diaries". It's the same story as the Harry Potter books. The story is told many times, because people who feel perhaps their life is worthless (and they are worthless) are very receptive to it. It gives people hope that perhaps they are that undiscovered diamond in the rough.
But this story is greatly undercut if you can be accurately tested for your ability (and thus importance) at birth. It becomes virtually impossible for someone to be classified as no one and actually be a big deal. It definitely undercuts the force of the story, because it removes hope that that nobody reader really was already determined to be truly nobody and not an undiscovered gem.
See GATTACA. It's a story of a person truly exceeding their parameters determined of birth. That's a much better story than "we knew he could do this all along".
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
It's not just RotS, as this classic post illustrates. (I take no credit for this, I just had it bookmarked.)
But I think he was more likely to remember who created him than understand the soap opera details of the twin's birth. Does C3PO even understand sex?
In any case, there wasn't any good reason for him to be present at the birth anyway except to justify the memory wipe.
Your separation of religion / social constructs / culture makes no sense. Spend some time in Latin America (for example) and see if you don't think Catholicism is inextricably linked to social constructs & culture.
"Stop throwing the Constitution in my face, it's just a goddamned piece of paper!" - George W. Bush Nov. 2005
> Good point. Not that it's germane to this article. I just wanted to
> point out that I don't mean to criticize the whole article.
I meant to type, good point, but that's not germane to my post. In other words, I agree with what he wrote there, but the point of my post was to show where I disagreed with article.
Lest anyone think I was just trashing his article, I wanted to point out a part I thought he said well.
Back to your regularly scheduled program.
Insert simplistic political, ideological, or personal proselytization here.
Exactly. What was cool about this movie is that it's not so black and white. It's not pure evil vs. pure good.
You forgot the scenes where Anakin goes on murderous rampages, killing women and children, just because they are "Jedi" and not "Sith".
Failed it, you have.
The enemies of Democracy are
I can't remember why, maybe I was in the student union or something but I saw an interview of George Lucas on Oprah, Rosey or something else that I would normally avoid like the plague. During the interview he started talking about Joseph Campbell and how the 'myth' of Star Wars was echoing ancient themes. The first three Star Wars movies, Lucas was telling a story and didn't worry about what it meant. In the second three Lucas tells the story and thinks it matter what it means. It is entertainment not philosophy, I know Shakespeare did themes but then again he had mastered character development as well.
I have so far skipped the ROTS and will probably wait until it is on cable at 2am rather than waste money on it. But that is probably because I didn't like the first two. Is it because special effects are in so many films that there is nothing special about the SW films other than the tie in to an 'original' concept.?
I wasn't a kid the first time I saw Star Wars (nee episode 4). In almost every discussion of the "real" meaning of the Star Wars story, this is the film that's most overlooked. It epitomized what Stars Wars was, is, and ultimately should have been going forward.
Star Wars took it's inspiration from the old movie serials of the 40's and 50's. From the opening scrawl (lifted right out of the old serials) that updated the audience on what's happened; to the type of film dissolves Lucas used in transitioning one scene to the next (again lifted right out of the old serials) to the basic, uncomplicated, instantly accessible good v. evil story line, Star Wars was first and foremost a stylistic homage to the old serial movies.
Just as the old serial movies never preached to the audience beyond the central themes of good v. evil and resolving on the sole purpose of good old-fashioned entertainment, crafting Star Wars out of the old movie serials was brilliant. It was the perfect nexus of modern film-making blended with classic old-school, serial-influenced story telling that made the film resonate with it's audience. No one had seen anything like this before.
And Star Wars did it in 70 millimeter grand scale. Maybe the special effects aren't on par with the technologies today, but the original Star Wars still had sfx chops like none before it. From the opening sequence showing the solitary small unassuming rebel ship escaping off-screen enemy fire, then suddenly eclipsed by the slowly evolving, mysterious, shadowy overhead pass of a gigantic Imperial cruiser in pursuit, it set the tone in a "big" way for the entire movie that was to follow. In my opinion, none of the sequel's opening shots had such an impressive impact. Practically forgotten these days is when the Falcon first made the "jump to hyperspace" The streaking, doppler effect of the stars as seen by the audience from the first person cockpit perspective may seem tame by today's standards, but back then it was absolutely mind-blowing. No one had seen anything like it before. All of the spacecraft and interiors were all intricately detailed in a way not seen since 2001: A Space Oddessy, almost ten years earlier. And whereas 2001 was a "serious" sci-fi movie, Star Wars made no such pretension and offered far more variety of detailed spacecraft, interiors, planet systems, and so on.
Unless you were alive at the time, then you do not know the power of seeing the first Star Wars in a 70mm theater for the first time. It was unforgettable. And for months after the film was released, the audience never lost it's enthusiasm. They would still spontaneously "boo" when Vader first appeared on the screen, erupt into applause when the Falcon made the hyperspace jump, and more applause when Luke nailed the death star's exhaust port. That kind of spontaneous reaction (from adults, no less)was almost unheard off for movies during that time, almost anytime. And along the way, Lucas managed to do what few directors these days can do. He indelibly established ALL of the principle characters in the film, in one swing at bat. Some directors seem to have a problem establishing just one character. Like a Beatles reunion (or maybe the first classic Trek movie) you just couldn't imagine a Star Wars sequel without ALL of the principle characters returning.
Most of all, the original Star Wars succeeded on it's simplicity. It's story revolved around two basic, interwoven dramatic themes: What can ordinary people (Skywalker) do when thrust into extraordinary circumstances; and how can "evil" be defeated when "good" is hopelessly outmatched? You don't need a microscope (midi-what???) to understand it. The original Star Wars proved that the story can be simply - compelling. Just sit back and enjoy. I think that's where all of the prequels lost their compass.
Yeah! Great idea! And while we're all holding Dick's dick, let's just forget the fact that he commonly used the power of the federal government to punish his enemies! Let's forget that the only reason he got away with an actual, you know, CRIME was that his vice-president pardoned him! Yeah! Let's hold Richard fucking Nixon up as a shining example to our kids! "Billy? Is that Johnny giving you trouble? Tell the teacher he tried to touch your wee-wee, then he'll get expelled! Thanks, Dick!"
"What we elect to call imagination is mere combination of things not heretofore combined." - Frank Norris
The above post should correctly read:
"science seeks the FACTS and religion claims to be the truth."
Sigh. That is exactly what it is. Good vs Evil. The Jedi are Pure Good. The emporer is Pure Evil. Being a selfish piece of crap like Anakin and killing all your friends on the off chance it might help save your wife is Pure Evil.
why is this modded up? the links just go to a login screen.
One thing I liked about the 50's science fiction, is that a smart, level headed guy (usually a scientist), would be the one to identify a problem and the goto guy to fix it.
Over time, the Dr. Frankenstein plots seemed to take over. We became cynical of the "cure for everything" mentality. So, the knowitall became a myopic danger. Most plot lines revolved around the hubris of the scientist and his eventual downfall.
In the 80's, he got a bad Russian accent.
Now on to the 90's and the scientist can be a stand-in for the "take your pick of villains", either drug lord, megalomaniac business tycoon, or scientist.
The problem is, that most heroes have devolved from someone who is an expert at "something". To the average joe. Then below the average joe, to the guy who has no use for all that "figur'in stuff". Seemingly endowed by God with the right instincts. Usually there is a plot device to make sure the hero proves just how not-intellectual he is. The main plot point in these action pictures seems to be, that the hero is the only one smart enough to use a bigger gun. I liked Indian Jones, but the shadows of that character got to be annoying.
Having grown up a smart kid in an anti-intellectual environment. I'm ready for a return to the great scientist hero--or at least a little McGyver. McGyver proves my point by how much he was the butt of jokes (OK, sometimes quite a stretch to NOT use a gun). The moral compass is great for dealing with family issues, but the modern world really requires some brains to unravel what actually a person can do to effect positive change. Setting an example is a great hero. But fighting crime and international intrigue definitely requires brains. I think the popularity of the "Borne Identity" shows that a smart character doesn't have to be a geek and can really win box office.
That's why I really LIKE the back story and message of the Star Wars saga. I've read complaints that "he changed the meaning from simple Good vs Evil". But you have the simple message and then the adult message. Driving home the simple message gets boring. But what is really different about Star Wars, that I now MORE appreciate (even though I hated the rushed acting in the past three films), is that Star Wars big message is that Power does not win the day. Luke wins in the end where Anakin fails because he stays true to his faith in good and not in his own power. Darth basically plays with Luke, trying to anger him, and is totally the dominator. But it is Luke's reaching out to his fathers compassion that is more powerful than the death stars and all the weaponry.
Darth could have killed Luke at many times, but he wanted to corrupt him more. That was his weakness. He had to prove that nobody could withstand the lust for power that warped him. When he looked at Luke's ruined mechanical stump, he realized that his son would gain nothing from more power, than to become a clockwork machine of destruction. I've always thought that, that moment when he turns on the Emperor was one of the most satisfying in a movie.
George Lucas has two massively powerful death stars that get wiped out by a few people. An empire toppled by one moment of compassion. So, in a sense, it is a very hopeful epic. The "bad guys" can seem to have everything in their favor, to be all powerful, and then, they get tripped up by someone less powerful and good.
>>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
If the Jedi were pure good, the black Jedi wouldn't have tried to kill the emperor. He should have arrested the emperor and given him a fair trial.
Is that PETA and hippies make up a very small fringe portion of "the left", whereas bible-thumping science haters seem to make up a majority of "the right"
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
well, very nice points. I have no problem accepting that it's not about spam then... It still pisses me off that these idiots can be so far from understanding (or caring about) what we want from their site.
Later I took other stuff that seemed more practical, but I'll never forget the time a 7th-degree blackbelt in this form of aikido threw me. It was a big complicated throw, pulling me all the way around his body, before finally dropping me. Somehow, I got all focused on my grip on his wrist, and didn't even notice I was moving until I was falling at the end. Until then, I was actually getting embarrassed for the guy because I thought his throw wasn't working. I got up all dumbfounded, and he just chuckled and walked away.
The other students who got thrown all got up with dumbfounded expressions too, so I don't think it was just me.
You also recieve the previous seven years' prizes in the same category, as you're the first in all that time to be eligible.
"A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
If you remember the recent massive power outage in northeast a few years back, you'll be familiar with my argument.
Many modern systems run much more efficiently than they use to, due to the integration of computer controls into so many parts of the system. However, more efficiently also means they're running with narrower safety margins, which means a failure in the computer control can lead to massive failures in other parts of the system.
Imagine a world where food is delivered in a just-in-time manner. Food spends less time sitting in warehouses, moving along the food pipeline, reducing the cost of food. Modern society redirects the savings into other areas of life.
Now let's say the computers controlling that just-in-time delivery. The system fails, bringing cargo movement to a halt. No big deal, though, we got along just fine before, we can move it all the old-fashioned way, right? It might take a few more days, but we'd manage, right?
The problem with this is three fold. First, bringing back the old system has a non-zero startup cost, as you need to bring back all those workers who were replaced by automation for a temporary stint, review the old procedures, botch the first few runs until the system is moving smoothly again, etc. The second problem is that the infrastructure may simply not exist--warehouse space may no longer be sufficient to do it the old way, as it's been redirected for other, more productive uses. The final problem is growth--demand for food keeps going up with the population, so the old way of doing things has never been scaled to the demand.
What might be the result of such disruption? It might be weeks before food finally gets delivered. Weeks is plenty of time for significant portions of the population to die of starvation. A city of millions might disappear as residents are forced to scavange the country side in search of food. It'd be like the day after a nuclear war.
This scenario isn't so far-fetched. Estimates of how long it'd take to get aid moving into Los Angeles in the event of the Big One are in the range of months, not days. Getting sufficient aid to a whole city... a much bigger problem. If people aren't sufficiently prepared with emergency food stocks, starvation could result.
Nobody really trusts computers all that much, real computer people most of all, so modern society hasn't become so reliant on computer programmers per se that they're the equivalent of some secret technocratic priesthood. We've certainly become very reliant on technology in general, though.
Asimov's Caves of Steel imagines an Earth where mankind has become sequestered into ultradense cities where even breathable air can only be maintained through the herculean efforts of mighty machinery. If the fans fail for but a single hour, billions may suffocate. It's the point taken to the extreme, but as technology becomes more reliable and progressively more integrated, allowing ever-higher margins of efficiency, that's where we'll end up.
Likewise, Clinton was the last great conservative president.
A balanced budget. Reduced overall government spending by every metric: in real dollars and as a fraction of GDP. Pro-business environment and economic growth. Worldwide free-trade agreements. The list goes on.
I think part of the reason Clinton is so deeply vilified by the right is that he actually DID for the economy and for economic policy what so many republicans have only PROMISED for so long. That makes him a threat to the myth of "The GOP is the party of financial responsibility". Well, okay, dubya has buried that myth a good bit deeper, now.
I stole this sig from someone cleverer than me.
Seriously, it has to be Lucas' atrociously bad character directing.
Because there are other people in the film, like Ewan McGregor and Samuel L. Jackson, who are fine actors elsewhere and squeeze out the most wooden performances of their life in SWIII.
Look at Obi-Wan when he's "bowing out of the political moment" and talking to Anakin after the crash at the beginning of the movie. Pay attention to the ridiculous, unnatural arm gestures he's making - then try to find McGregor body-acting that badly in any other movie. Or watch Mace Windu's overacted nod in response to Yoda's "a prophecy which misread, might have been" or listen to the lines opposite Palpatine: "He controls the courts! He is too dangerous to leave alive! I am over-acting!"
Those moments are so wooden and overacted - by actors I KNOW are better than that - that I can practically see Lucas on the edge of the set when they filmed them. Jackson gives a nice, subtle, natural nod of agreement to yoda's line and Lucas says "No, Sam, we really need to see that you agree with Yoda. Make that head-bob a bit more forceful."
Everywhere you look, you see the hand of a director who doesn't understand subtlety, natural movement, or natural tone of voice. He's always urging the actors to ham it up a bit more, unaware of what a hash he's making of the character moments. It's the same kind of Aspergers' syndrome personality that can write lines like "hold me the way you did on Naboo, back before the war, when it was just us" and think it's a natural romantic moment.
Lucas simply doesn't "get" natural human emotion and interaction.
Which is too bad, really, because he writes a pretty damn entertaining story and can visualize vast action sequences like nobody else.
I stole this sig from someone cleverer than me.
on the other hand, i saw the original movie recently and it really didn't suck as much as i thought. it's kinda tart and cynical in a way that pays homage to 1930s movies the same way both star wars and indiana jones rip from 1930s serials. and still my mother-in-law (!!!) got it right that solo is way cooler than goofy old luke.
Expanding a vast wasteland since 1996.
...blah blah blah shouldn't have to route around anything blah blah blah... /* retort */ ...blah blah blah their article, gotta respect blah blah blah...
Is that why Chris Lee said the following (obviously referring to Christensen, although the context seems to have been the Lord of the Rings):
Legendary Actor's Scathing Attack on Young Film Stars
By Sherna Noah, PA Showbusiness Correspondent
Movie legend Christopher Lee has criticised today's generation of younger stars for being "over-hyped".
Lee, 82, who has more than 200 films to his name, described some actors' performances as "holes in the air".
The actor, known for playing villains such as wizard Saruman in Lord of the Rings and Dracula, told Total Film magazine: "Johnny Depp, as far as I'm concerned, is number one.
"Of his generation, there's no one who can touch him.
"Some performers today, it's like looking at holes in the air."
The British actor, who made his name in the Hammer films, said: "You get these young, over-hyped stars with very little experience, pitched into big-budget movies in major roles and they can't begin to handle them.
"It's extremely dangerous because it means they're not going to last long."
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
"There are no true pulling forces in Newtonian mechanics."
Gravity? Magnetism?
Why are you so against pulling forces (philosophically)? Does it make things simpler?
OK, that's 4 questions
About time somebody picked up on that one.
MY first computer was a Mac IIse, nya...
Rise up in the cafeteria and STAB them with your plastic forks!
No that would be what Neutral would do. Good must destroy Evil. Haven't you been drinking the latest Bush kool-aid?
I want to offer my many thanks for using the words begs the question correctly for all the readers to see.
You are a shining beacon among the rabble.
I hope everyone that follows will use your post as the definitive example of a thoughtful followup.
(I figured since you were already modded all the way up, I may as well just thank you personally.)
Read Heinlein's 1953 Revolt in 2100, now more than ever.
BugMeNot + Firefox = no need to register with the NY Times.
In the prequels, it's cool to be a Jedi and you can bust out your lightsaber whenever it's handy. In 4-6, it's illegal to be a Jedi and using a lightsaber in public will put the Emperor on your trail.
Frankly, the lightsabers and the spaceships are the only reason I am into Star Wars. In 1977, seeing these impossibly cool things in such realistic detail, my inner gadget-loving geek found Nirvana.
I frickin' love it anytime they ignite a lightsaber. Phantom Menace's climactic saber-battle is far and away the best part of the movie, and maybe the whole prequel trilogy. I really was disappointed by the lightsaber battles in AOTC; I expected them to top TPM, not back away. And in ROTS, I expected Obi-Wan vs. Anakin to top them all, but no, Maul vs. Qui-gon and Obi-Wan remains supreme. (Although you should watch Neeson in "Rob Roy" if you want to see the best-ever on-screen swordfight.)
MY TOP 5 COMPLAINTS ABOUT LIGHTSABERS:
5. In Attack of the Clones, the camera goes for Christopher Lee close-ups in Dooku's duel with Anakin, and we can't see a damn thing.
4. They all look cool, but try dueling with one of them. The hilts are so un-ergonomic it's ridiculous.
3. In ESB, Yoda doesn't give Luke a single lightsaber lesson. Great way to get him ready to fight Vader.
2. Sometimes there's blood (Wampa), sometimes not (Dooku).
1. In Return of the Jedi, Luke whacks a dozen bad guys on the skiff with his green saber, and not one suffers visible damage, not even to their clothes. WTF?