Is Star Wars science fiction?
The other day I saw a review of Batman and Robin, and it said its genre was fantasy. This bugs me considering Star Wars is widely regarded as science fiction when there is little scientific about it. In my mind, fantasy is something that could not be possible, whereas science fiction is speculative based on the premise of different technology. What are your thoughts on this? How would you classify Star Wars?
I suppose it's considered science fiction insofar as its setting is outer space, and it involves otherworldly characters and devices which have been, for so long, inseparably linked to the genre.
Granted, the "science" of it doesn't jibe with our notions of what's scientific, like, say, "Star Trek" does. Volumes have been written on how Trek technology is feasible (some of it is even reality, like the handheld communicators, laptops, etc). Meanwhile, the concept of the functioning light sabre still eludes us.
But, technically, it's a lot of things: action, comedy, drama, sci-fi, fantasy, even a little romance. Maybe that helps explain its broad appeal.
Originally posted by roundisfunny
I suppose it's considered science fiction insofar as its setting is outer space, and it involves otherworldly characters and devices which have been, for so long, inseparably linked to the genre.Granted, the "science" of it doesn't jibe with our notions of what's scientific, like, say, "Star Trek" does. Volumes have been written on how Trek technology is feasible (some of it is even reality, like the handheld communicators, laptops, etc). Meanwhile, the concept of the functioning light sabre still eludes us.
But, technically, it's a lot of things: action, comedy, drama, sci-fi, fantasy, even a little romance. Maybe that helps explain its broad appeal.
Oh wow. Handheld communicators. No-one had ever heard of radios in the 60s.
Star Trek is full of endless sci-fi nonsense. It is no less ridiculous than Star Wars, it just uses terms like 'tachyons' and 'superstrings' on the way.
Ush, there's a sizeable difference between the clunky, comparitively low-range handheld CB radios of the 60's and today's cell phone technology (which is closer to what the Trek crew had).
As to Trek's sci-babble, it's pretty much limited to the original series. The subsequent books/shows have taken measures to at least "sound" more futuristically feasible.
By "volumes have been written" on the possibility of Trek technology becoming reality, I mean books like these:
Beyond Star Trek: From Alien Invasions to the End of Time
Shall we go over what sci-fi is?
Science-fiction: Fiction that is based on or grounded in science; while seemingly farfetched it still has some basis in reality.
I'd say a lot of SW fits that definition...though I'd more place SW as a mixture of sci-fi and fantasy. After all, while the technology and such in SW is certainly sci-fi, the Force isn't, and is a fantasy-type concept.
Originally posted by roundisfunny
Ush, there's a [b]sizeable difference between the clunky, comparitively low-range handheld CB radios of the 60's and today's cell phone technology (which is closer to what the Trek crew had).As to Trek's sci-babble, it's pretty much limited to the original series. The subsequent books/shows have taken measures to at least "sound" more futuristically feasible.
By "volumes have been written" on the possibility of Trek technology becoming reality, I mean books like these:
Beyond Star Trek: From Alien Invasions to the End of Time
You ARE joking, aren't you? The modern series are WAY worse. My physicist friend is in hysterics at Trek- and he OWNS those books, because he is a hardcore fan. He says they are laughable, and at best take hypothetical future advances and say "You know, some things in Trek might actually be a little bit like this possible future thing, if only they had said this and this and done that instead of this other thing," which is criteria you could apply to virtually ANY sci-fi. And it is Voyager in particular that had this habit of justifying everything by superstrings.
Their communicators were ONLY smaller radios. It was a tiny leap of the imagination from what was already there. The idea that Star Trek is actually in any way a more realistically based sci-fi than most others is total nonsense- 99% of everything in it is just as mad as lightsabres, from their space physics to teleporters to time travel to artificial gravity to faster than light explosions. It is on an even footing with Wars. If you want realistic science, go watch 2001, and even that isn't perfect, and even THAT still counts as sci-fi.
well, however ridiculous star trek theories are, the series is based on scientific theory. with an exception to the original series, which mixed laughable action sequences along with science to solve the problems of that episode, most problems in the star trek universe are solved with science...as ridiculous as that science is.
when an alien threatens the lives of the crew of the enterprise or voyager, there is rarely a phaser fight, or even so much as a war of words. there is some scientific solution which they come up with and that is what saves the day.
in star wars, the problems are solved through action. granted, there are lightsabers, but they are not explained, they are not modified, or altered to suit a particular problem...they are just swords, swords for knights. the jedi are not explorers who discover new worlds, they are heros who fight to save the day. when you take away the technology and pseudo science from star wars, you can still have a story. its just another tale of heros and monsters and love and drama.
when you take the technology away from star trek...what do you have left?
I see Star Wars as Sci-Fi and not as Fantasy. The way I see it Fantasy involves mostly Magic and Swords. Where as Sci-Fi is mostly Technology and Super powers. Now of course you can argue that the Force is a form of magic, but I don't see that way. In LOTR magic plays an important role, thus making it a Fantasy. Whereas in Star Wars the Force also plays an important role, but is not magic.
Originally posted by .😖pace Opera:.
star wars is a SPACE OPERA! as described by lucas in the doc on the DVD! its a fantasy-like space opera period.<------
Agreed.
Let's not forget that Lucas, in making Star Wars, was
influenced by Westerns and japanese samurai films. He
basically wrote a medieval knight-in-shining-armor type
of story, but set it in space.
Science is never given a prominant role in the movies.
Ofcourse, if one doesn't want to get technical, then
Star Wars is science fiction...atleast until it is compared
to true science fiction like "Blade Runner" or "2001", or
even "Total Recall".
actually the creator of SW himself, i beleive his name is George or something, said he considers it sci-fi/fantasy. Theres a certain element of science in it, but its more so fantasy, as in traveling to worlds that DONT EXIST, using magical powers that DONT EXIST and never can. whats so scientific about it? really? the HULK is more along the lines of science fiction, they take a "scientific experiment" and have it create a super human of sorts (thats where the fiction comes in) and bam, you have a movie. They incorparate it in to our own commonly known Earth. They never once mention Earth in SW. Its fantasy with a touch of sci-fi, being as theyre in space. But at the end of the day...does it really matter what its classified as? Hell no, its the dopest movie evr and will remain so until the end of time.