|
Grex > Scifi > #55: Definition of Star Wars canon. | |
|
| Author |
Message |
solo
|
|
Definition of Star Wars canon.
|
Mar 7 17:44 UTC 1995 |
to me, solo, by email or posting a response here. As far as a list of canon
novels, I'm working on it, so keep on meditating for the Return of the Jedi.
|
| 50 responses total. |
robh
|
|
response 1 of 50:
|
Mar 8 00:24 UTC 1995 |
solo - Please don't create a new item every time you want to respond
to somthing someone else has said. Instead of doing "enter" at
the respond or pass prompt, try "respond" instead.
|
phreakus
|
|
response 2 of 50:
|
May 30 16:24 UTC 1995 |
And make sure you type the WHOLE intro to an item :{
|
solo
|
|
response 3 of 50:
|
May 31 15:11 UTC 1995 |
Boy, are you so bored you can write everywhere but message 54,
Thrawn?
|
phreakus
|
|
response 4 of 50:
|
Jun 1 16:33 UTC 1995 |
Yes.
|
exar
|
|
response 5 of 50:
|
Dec 29 11:16 UTC 1996 |
ok this is a real st00pid item...whos the fooking idiot who entered this one!
|
albaugh
|
|
response 6 of 50:
|
Jan 30 18:12 UTC 1997 |
So what do you'all think about the reissued Star War movie (movies?) coming
out? I've just seen the ads this last week...
|
matthew
|
|
response 7 of 50:
|
Jan 31 22:57 UTC 1997 |
I just saw Star Wars this morning. I was impressed. After seeing it for years
on TV screens I'd forgotten how different it is on the 'big screen'. The
changes to the special effects and the added or new scens were all well worht
seeing.
|
drew
|
|
response 8 of 50:
|
Feb 2 02:03 UTC 1997 |
_Star Wars_ is of historical importance. This is the movie that made
interest in space transportation socially acceptable, even Cool, and no
longer so geeky. It was the breakthrough in popular entertainment.
But it's already been done, and it's 20 years old already. Time to go on to
something new, or at least finish up the other 6 movies. There is plenty of
excellent SF literature out there, every bit as exciting as the _Wars_
movies were when they came out, and it's much more intelligently written.
I *might* go see _Star Wars_, when it gets to the cheap theatres.
|
dam
|
|
response 9 of 50:
|
Feb 2 02:47 UTC 1997 |
I saw it at the bargain first show of the weekend. I liked the replaced
scenes, and it was really cool to see it on the big screen again. a lot of
people had their young children there.
|
anne
|
|
response 10 of 50:
|
Feb 23 19:26 UTC 1997 |
Well, I saw "Star Wars" a few weeks ago, but I loved it! Why does it
have to be time to go on to something new? Can't we take a moment
out of our time to remember the past? Does everything have to be about
forgetting what happened and just moving forward?
As far as I have heard, the first one will be released in 1999, and then
two and three sometime after that. I haven't heard whether or not he will
be making seven, eight, and nine.
|
drew
|
|
response 11 of 50:
|
Feb 23 23:56 UTC 1997 |
"Remembering the past" is well doable with one of the millions of copies of
the original floating around, for trivial cost compared to new release theatre
price.
|
matthew
|
|
response 12 of 50:
|
Mar 4 14:59 UTC 1997 |
I've said it before, I'll probably say it again. Yes you can go and get
numerous video tape copies of these movies. Unless you have a huge screen tv
and an incredible sound system you don't get the same experience, IMO. This
may not be for everyone, I understand. For many people thiugh it is well worth
it to pay a few dollars and re-experience it on the big screen. Also, these
new versions are not out on video yet.
|
anne
|
|
response 13 of 50:
|
Mar 15 17:02 UTC 1997 |
I liked seeing it on the big screen. I was too young the first time
it came out to remember it. The big screen makes a world of
difference in viewing. I'm glad they re-released them! I thought
the new editions they made were great! (I'm probably repeating
myself, but I really don't care.) I've loved Star Wars for a long
time, and I think it's great that little kids get a chance to see
it on the big screen. I was in Meijer the other day and overheard
a little boy talking to his mom about eeing it on the bigscreen and
how great he thought it was. (I admit that I was looking for a
Princess Leia action figure... couldn't find it... <grrr> )
(er that's seeing it, not eeing it...)
|
tpryan
|
|
response 14 of 50:
|
Mar 26 00:58 UTC 1997 |
Okay, now tht must of us have seen the re-release, What do
you like? What did you notice? Did you like the changes? Did
it Matter.
As I got to watching Empire & Jedi I got into watching
Yoda carefully. I can dare say Yoda did better face acting
than Mark Hammil did. More expression on his face for the emotion
to be conveyed.
Did anyone but me notice that the Mean Green Mother
From Outer Space's mother was that thing in the pit near the
beginning of Jedi?
|
bru
|
|
response 15 of 50:
|
Mar 28 15:21 UTC 1997 |
Audry? Was it really Audry? Did it sing?
|
tpryan
|
|
response 16 of 50:
|
Mar 29 17:41 UTC 1997 |
I thought I heard it say "Feed Me".
|
anne
|
|
response 17 of 50:
|
Apr 11 14:38 UTC 1997 |
Personally I liked the additions made to Jabba's palace. If you've
read the books then it appears that some of the things they
mentioned in the books appeared in Jedi...
(Although my sister and I were trying to find Mara Jade and
found it very hard.)
|
janc
|
|
response 18 of 50:
|
Apr 27 01:37 UTC 2001 |
I'm reviving this old Star Wars item because recently, for no good reason,
I've gotten fascinated with Star Wars. Largely I just noticed that the Lego
Star Wars models are cool, and now that I'm a grown up I can afford to buy
all the toys I want. But also the movies themselves are interesting under
their varnish of cheap commercialism.
Episode I is an interesting case in point. Before it was made, I'd been
wondering how Lucas was going to handle the first trilogy. After all, the
hero has to be Anakin Skywalker, and we already know that he's going to become
a traitor to all his friends and ideals, and turn into a murderous monster.
Hardly the kind of uplifting story of dewy-eyed heros bravely beating back
the forces of evil that made the original Star Wars movie such a popular
success. The question in my mind is, how is Lucas going to tell such a dark
nasty story while maintaining the popularity that is necessary to finance the
project and win it the attention it needs to stand out from the the crowd?
So on first viewing, I was disappointed in Episode I. Nothing much happens.
The good guys win and have a big celebration in the end, just like the first
movie. Lucas had dodged the problem of convincingly showing a hero turn evil
without losing his popular audience by postponing the whole issue. There's
no sign yet of the decent into evil that will turn Anakin into Vader and the
Republic in to the Empire.
But on second viewing, I belatedly noticed that the good guys didn't win.
They think they did, and most casual viewers of the film would think so, but
in fact, the forces of evil take a whomping. Probably all real fans (not me)
noticed that the Senator from Naboo, who get elected to be the new leader of
the Republic as a result of the Naboo/Trade Federation war has the same name
as the future Emperor. It's obvious that he manipulated the Trade Federation
into attacking his home planet so that he could embarrass the current leaders
and create enough sympathy for him to win him control of the Republic. The
scheme came off perfectly, and the fact that the Naboo won the war only fed
into his plans. All the bravery of the heros really only ends up advancing
the plans of the future emperor.
In other words, Lucas found a way to have it both ways. He depicted the
Emperor's rise to power, while making it look to the casual viewer as if
they were watching an ordinary, victory-of-the-good-guys kind of movie.
Rather a clever bit of cinematic sneakiness. Make big box office money
with a movie parents happily bring their kids to, that depicts evil conquering
good.
Can Lucas play this double game with the next two movies? It's hard to see
how. You can't exactly turn Anakin into Vader without people noticing. But
can you cast it as noble self-sacrifice?
This seems improbable. But recall the scene where Yoda tells Luke that if
he goes to rescue Han & Leia than he is taking a step down the path to the
dark side. Evidentally you can go a long ways toward the dark side by acting
heroically. (Obviously Anakin's mom has been set up as the victim who needs
rescuing or avenging and draws him closer to the dark side.)
Curiously, there seems to be more information around about what happens in
the last trilogy than in the rest of first trilogy. (If you don't want to
hear official Lucasfilm spoilers for films that probably won't be out for a
decade, stop here.) Leia marries Han and becomes the leader of the New
Republic, built from the ashes of the Empire. Luke marries someone (R2D2 is
his best man) and starts a Jedi school. The Emperor, however, is not dead
and gets himself resurrected in a cloned body. He draws Luke to him, and
Luke pledges himself to serve the Emperor, embracing the Dark Side of the
force in hopes that by pretending to server the Emperor he can find an
opportunity to destroy him. He finds, however, that he has underestimated
the power of the Dark Side, and that once in its clutches he can't escape
and he begins to serve it in truth. Eventually Leia manages to break him
loose, much as Luke got Anakin out, just in time to save Luke's kids from
continuing the cycle.
So not only does Lucas want to make a popular film about a hero decending into
evil, he wants to do it twice. The plot summary above pretty clearly shows
that most of the decent into evil will involve good motives, so he'll be able
to depict most of the trip as an act of rousing heroism, with the good guy
appearing to win all sorts of battles while quietly losing his soul.
So the heros, in guise of good deads are actually doing evil, and the movies
in guise of family entertainmnet are actually rather nasty.
So the Star Wars films are interestingly attractive and repulsive. Even the
comic relief characters (Ewoks, Jar Jar) whom everyone thinks are put in to
improve marketability to kids are actually rather repulsive upon nearer
inspection (the Ewoks are vicious when they aren't being cute, and Jar Jar
is a moronic step-and-fetch-it sterotype). Everything likable is dispicable
and everything dispicable is likable.
Well, not everything. Leia and R2D2 seem to be perfect beings. Han Solo was
supposed to be a good/bad guy in the original movie, but Lucas seems to have
later shifted him to the small pile of purely good guys - note that when he
remade the original Star Wars, the only actual telling change was that Han
Solo no longer shoots first when he kills the bounty hunter in the Cantina,
changing an act of pre-emptive murder into self-defense.
|