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."

4 of 679 comments (clear)

  1. Truth by BWJones · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.
  2. The Difference is the Fans by grimharvest · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  3. Differences in Jedi by zeus_tfc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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
  4. Re:Difference between old and new Star Wars by kfg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Also they tried to explain everything which before where just accepted. . .

    Groundhog Day is a great fucking movie. It is a great fucking movie for one primary reason:

    They never once, not even to the teeny, tiniest degree, tried to "explain" what was going on. They simply told the story. What happened.

    I wish more writers would grasp the essential idea that a story is simply what happens.

    Cinderella works, and has continued to work for over a thousand years, not because the paranormal events are well explained, but because they are not "explained" at all. It's magic. Everybody knows that.

    The second you try to invoke biological or "quantum flux" into the deal to give a plausable reason for the mice turning into horses you're just going to create an audience that sits there saying "Like, dude, that's completely retarded."

    We can accept magic in a story, even if we know there is no such thing, and enjoy it immensely, because magic is, up front and by definition, not subject to the rules of reason or physics and we have suspended our disbelief in such from the outset in order to enjoy the tale.

    Any attempt to impose rational explanation on magic simply ruins the exeperinece of the tale by creating obvious falsehood and makes it clear that the story teller is a hack who doesn't know his own business.

    Magic wands are perfectly "believable." Showing a .44 casing in a story that requires it to have been fired by a .38 is not. Magic need only be shown to be obeying the "laws" of magic. Reality needs to be shown to be obeying the laws of reality.

    Mixing the two up inappropriately innately creates an unbelievable mess.

    KFG