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."
You make some good points. I don't really know where the truth ends and falsehood begins with Lucas, and I imagine no one but Lucas really knows. I just thought the interview was interesting.
"Darth" is a variation of dark. And "Vader" is a variation of father. So it's basically Dark Father. All the names have history, but sometimes I make mistakes -- Luke was originally going to be called Luke Starkiller, but then I realized that wasn't appropriate for the character. It was appropriate for Anakin, but not his son. I said, "Wait, we can't weigh this down too much -- he's the one that redeems him."
Right, well, just cherry-pick whatever you like to substantiate your arguments. If something Lucas said shores up your opinion, then by all means hold him to it. But if it disagrees with your view, he must be the master of revisionism!
Lucas himself openly said "Vader" is a bastardization of "Father" in a Rolling Stone interview about Star Wars. It's online if you do a bit of digging.
Yes, Bittorrent was at fault, and the economic impact was so huge, that Star Wars didn't make a single penny this weekend. And George Lucas is broke! John Williams is selling pencils on the street corner! Hayden Christensen... well let's not even talk about what he's doing to make ends meet!
I dub thee Pedanto, lord of picking obscure linguistic nits!
It's a sci-fi movie taking place "a long time ago in a galaxy" etc., so it's doubtful "thy" has the same etymology it does on Earth. GL was probably just going for a brief way to "formalize" the language, which passes muster just fine, I think, in a movie geared towards 12-year-olds.
Oh boy, a chance for more hackneyed, tired jokes about Star Wars! I don't get nearly enough cliched Star Wars humor from Slashdot! "It's as if a million geeks read a blog and then suddenly the server died AHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA I AM A COMEDY GENIUS!"
Lucas didn't direct or write the screenplay for Return of the Jedi either, but everyone still pins the Ewoks on him.
You Lucas-bashing types are all the same. Anything good about Star Wars -- must be the work of some other guy. Anything bad about Star Wars -- must be George Lucas's fault, no matter what the billing says.
I've got no love for the prequels or what's happened to Star Wars, but you anti-fanboys tend to be every bit as blinkered and devoid of reason as the slavering hordes you're criticizing.
I won't. Let me know when any of that happens. But, if you're insisting I explain the joke, sure.
It's a comic book movie to be penned by Joss Whedon. I've yet to see a comic book movie that required much crafstmanship beyond not walking into walls while wearing fifty pounds of latex.
God knows I appreciate Whedon's work, but I doubt the lead's acting challenges will be anything more complex than squinting into the middle distance while the soundtrack conveys her emotions. Should Charisma Carpenter get cast, I think she'd be more than equal to the task.
Look at the source material. It's an Amazon in a gold bustier who flies an invisible plane. Tell me you need the female equivalent of Olivier to pull this off with a straight face.
I appreciate that you think playing Wonder Woman will be an acting challenge of Herculean proportions. For my part, I doubt it. Please don't take it personally, because it's not meant as such.
And that's all I'm going to say about the acting challenges of a movie that has not yet been written.
Well, you're right. But I, as a Tolkien fan, would rather see them just not adapt the Silmarillion rather than see them make something heavily cut, compromised, and bastardized. I have high hopes for the Hobbit, but for everyone's sake, I hope they leave the Silmarillion alone.
The LOTR films didn't become massive blockbusters by throwing everything about the books straight out the window, either. They stayed true to the essential story and spirit of the books, without stripping out tons of material, or just dealing with a small part of it.
I think the point is the Silmarillion is orders of magnitude harder to adapt than LOTR.
Yeah, if there's anything Tolkien fans love, it's heavily compromised material. Shave 90% of the Silmarillion off and make a love story! They'll eat it up!
Good one! Well, actually, you're right. He's not oblivious. He just doesn't care.
He's made it abundantly clear in interviews that the fans don't mean shit to him. In an interview with CNN, his response to fans wanting an un-screwed with DVD of the OT was, "I'm sorry you fell in love with a half-finished film, but get over it."
George Lucas doesn't give a tin shit for his fans or how they (or film history) see him, and moreover, because so many of them pay him money regardless of what he does, he doesn't have to.
Look at it this way. You never have to see Futurama jump the shark.
Sooner or later, the quality of the show would dip, and you'd be left with the inevitable disappointment of "last season was so much better." This way, Futurama will always be great.
Which is pretty much how I feel about Firefly as well.
Slashdot Mirror
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."
You make some good points. I don't really know where the truth ends and falsehood begins with Lucas, and I imagine no one but Lucas really knows. I just thought the interview was interesting.
I didn't say I believed it one way or the other, I was just pointing out that's what he said.
Nope, this one:
6 6
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/_/id/73148
How did you get the name Darth Vader?
"Darth" is a variation of dark. And "Vader" is a variation of father. So it's basically Dark Father. All the names have history, but sometimes I make mistakes -- Luke was originally going to be called Luke Starkiller, but then I realized that wasn't appropriate for the character. It was appropriate for Anakin, but not his son. I said, "Wait, we can't weigh this down too much -- he's the one that redeems him."
Right, well, just cherry-pick whatever you like to substantiate your arguments. If something Lucas said shores up your opinion, then by all means hold him to it. But if it disagrees with your view, he must be the master of revisionism!
Lucas himself openly said "Vader" is a bastardization of "Father" in a Rolling Stone interview about Star Wars. It's online if you do a bit of digging.
Uh, this is Slashdot. Everyone already does put the blame for everything on Lucas.
Yes, Bittorrent was at fault, and the economic impact was so huge, that Star Wars didn't make a single penny this weekend. And George Lucas is broke! John Williams is selling pencils on the street corner! Hayden Christensen... well let's not even talk about what he's doing to make ends meet!
Thanks a lot Bittorrent, you killed Star Wars!
I dub thee Pedanto, lord of picking obscure linguistic nits!
It's a sci-fi movie taking place "a long time ago in a galaxy" etc., so it's doubtful "thy" has the same etymology it does on Earth. GL was probably just going for a brief way to "formalize" the language, which passes muster just fine, I think, in a movie geared towards 12-year-olds.
What's the matter, John, didn't have "time" to make a Slashdot account?
Hyuk hyuk
Oh boy, a chance for more hackneyed, tired jokes about Star Wars! I don't get nearly enough cliched Star Wars humor from Slashdot! "It's as if a million geeks read a blog and then suddenly the server died AHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA I AM A COMEDY GENIUS!"
No thanks, I'll skip it.
Lucas didn't direct or write the screenplay for Return of the Jedi either, but everyone still pins the Ewoks on him.
You Lucas-bashing types are all the same. Anything good about Star Wars -- must be the work of some other guy. Anything bad about Star Wars -- must be George Lucas's fault, no matter what the billing says.
I've got no love for the prequels or what's happened to Star Wars, but you anti-fanboys tend to be every bit as blinkered and devoid of reason as the slavering hordes you're criticizing.
Don't feel bad, Slashdotters bragging about how much pussy they get compared to all the other Slashdotters is funny any day of the week.
Can I attack the darkness?
Huh huh, YEAH RIGHT!!!
*dubs self The King of Comedy*
Well, we'll see what happens. Enjoy.
don't whine when people shoot them down.
I won't. Let me know when any of that happens. But, if you're insisting I explain the joke, sure.
It's a comic book movie to be penned by Joss Whedon. I've yet to see a comic book movie that required much crafstmanship beyond not walking into walls while wearing fifty pounds of latex.
God knows I appreciate Whedon's work, but I doubt the lead's acting challenges will be anything more complex than squinting into the middle distance while the soundtrack conveys her emotions. Should Charisma Carpenter get cast, I think she'd be more than equal to the task.
Look at the source material. It's an Amazon in a gold bustier who flies an invisible plane. Tell me you need the female equivalent of Olivier to pull this off with a straight face.
I appreciate that you think playing Wonder Woman will be an acting challenge of Herculean proportions. For my part, I doubt it. Please don't take it personally, because it's not meant as such.
And that's all I'm going to say about the acting challenges of a movie that has not yet been written.
Yeah, she might not be up to the rigorous acting challenges of playing WONDER WOMAN.
For fuck's sake.
Me, I think of God Hates the Scene, one of the funniest Chick parodies ever.
"Oh, snap! Suzy, you packin' chrome?!"
Well, you're right. But I, as a Tolkien fan, would rather see them just not adapt the Silmarillion rather than see them make something heavily cut, compromised, and bastardized. I have high hopes for the Hobbit, but for everyone's sake, I hope they leave the Silmarillion alone.
The LOTR films didn't become massive blockbusters by throwing everything about the books straight out the window, either. They stayed true to the essential story and spirit of the books, without stripping out tons of material, or just dealing with a small part of it.
I think the point is the Silmarillion is orders of magnitude harder to adapt than LOTR.
Yeah, if there's anything Tolkien fans love, it's heavily compromised material. Shave 90% of the Silmarillion off and make a love story! They'll eat it up!
Hah. No.
Good one! Well, actually, you're right. He's not oblivious. He just doesn't care.
He's made it abundantly clear in interviews that the fans don't mean shit to him. In an interview with CNN, his response to fans wanting an un-screwed with DVD of the OT was, "I'm sorry you fell in love with a half-finished film, but get over it."
George Lucas doesn't give a tin shit for his fans or how they (or film history) see him, and moreover, because so many of them pay him money regardless of what he does, he doesn't have to.
So yeah.
Judging from the article, it seems that the IDF is frowning upon LARPers...
And really, who doesn't?
Look at it this way. You never have to see Futurama jump the shark.
Sooner or later, the quality of the show would dip, and you'd be left with the inevitable disappointment of "last season was so much better." This way, Futurama will always be great.
Which is pretty much how I feel about Firefly as well.