hmm I can imagine anakin without the force. he would have died a long time ago and the movies would have been better for it. Moron.
Imagine the first half of kotor II, you know, the boring part where you run around desperately seeking a lightsaber and dont wear any star wars clothing, dont run into any star wars badguys and dont use any star wars weapons....
that would be star wars without jedi.
Originally posted by Schecter
the presupposition is that no other interesting and compelling elements would be included in place of the jedi/sith which is completely fallacious.
many scifi character have supernatural abilities. not just the jedi.
let that soak into your fanboy brains. repreat after me:
george lucas did not invent the concept of superhuman abilities
george lucas did not invent the concept of superhuman abilities
george lucas did not invent the concept of superhuman abilities
george lucas did not invent the concept of superhuman abilities
george lucas did not invent the concept of superhuman abilities
Originally posted by Schecter
many scifi character have supernatural abilities. not just the jedi.let that soak into your fanboy brains. repreat after me:
george lucas did not invent the concept of superhuman abilities
george lucas did not invent the concept of superhuman abilities
george lucas did not invent the concept of superhuman abilities
george lucas did not invent the concept of superhuman abilities
george lucas did not invent the concept of superhuman abilities
I know that, but the superhuman ABILITIES are not the important part in this conversation, it is the nature of the force, Light and Dark that made the Jedi what they are. It is what made the Galaxy what it is. Without it, Star Wars would not exist as it does today.
Also, think about it, what aspects bring out the Western aspects of Star wars the most? The empire? No. The Massive space battles? No. The rebel and imperial armies? No. The scenery of the visited planets? No. Or the battle between the Jedi and the Sith... Light and Dark? well... yea.
Think on it, Jedi and sith meet, in a classic shoot-out style. You have the "White hat" hero, and the "Black hat" Villan. Etc, etc.
Originally posted by LORD JLRTENJAC
I know that, but the superhuman ABILITIES are not the important part in this conversation, it is the nature of the force, Light and Dark that made the Jedi what they are. It is what made the Galaxy what it is. Without it, Star Wars would not exist as it does today.
the force is just another representation of the supernatural. it could have ben presented in another form, with another form of follower/practicer and still been a success. light/dark use of magic is a theme as old as...well...the very act storytelling.
stop trying to sell the concept of the force/jedi as a cool idea. we were already sold on that by george lucas long ago.
just dont buy into the hogwash that it had to be exactly that story and every element, to a tee, to have been a success. thats just delusional.
Originally posted by LORD JLRTENJAC
[B]I know that, but the superhuman ABILITIES are not the important part in this conversation, it is the nature of the force, Light and Dark that made the Jedi what they are. It is what made the Galaxy what it is. Without it, Star Wars would not exist as it does today.
And you think simply the nature of the Force (basically magic, or the supernatural, both old concepts) is what made Star Wars what it is? By that silly logic, Eragon, Hawk The Slayer and just for the hell of it, Le Morte d'Arthur should be as big as SW in the public conciousness. You really don't have any grasp on what you are talking about.
Also, think about it, what aspects bring out the Western aspects of Star wars the most? The empire? No. The Massive space battles? No. The rebel and imperial armies? No. The scenery of the visited planets? No. Or the battle between the Jedi and the Sith... Light and Dark? well... yea.
Jedi and Sith bring out the elements of the Western? Well, you've finally understood that Star Wars is a Western, but you have highlighted the only element which is problematic in the Western context. Disregarding the fact that George Lucas admits that Star Wars is a Western in futuristic garb, it is quite alarming obvious. Add in a few WWII spitfire battles, a few tensions about the fear of executive power and an exagerrated Western Fronter in the shape of Tatooine and you have Star Wars.
Think on it, Jedi and sith meet, in a classic shoot-out style. You have the "White hat" hero, and the "Black hat" Villan. Etc, etc.
You know nothing about the Western fs that, seriously, is your answer.
Originally posted by exanda kane
And you think simply the nature of the Force (basically magic, or the supernatural, both old concepts) is what made Star Wars what it is? By that silly logic, Eragon, Hawk The Slayer and just for the hell of it, Le Morte d'Arthur should be as big as SW in the public conciousness. You really don't have any grasp on what you are talking about.Jedi and Sith bring out the elements of the Western? Well, you've finally understood that Star Wars is a Western, but you have highlighted the only element which is problematic in the Western context. Disregarding the fact that George Lucas admits that Star Wars is a Western in futuristic garb, it is quite alarming obvious. Add in a few WWII spitfire battles, a few tensions about the fear of executive power and an exagerrated Western Fronter in the shape of Tatooine and you have Star Wars.
Ok, I will lay this out to you clearly. It is a combination of every aspect of Star Wars that has made it popular. The Force in Star Wars is what stands out and makes it what it is. This discussion was NEVER about what made it popular, but what made it what it is.
I just believe that, were the series without the force, and thusdifferent it would not be as popular.
Your move.
Originally posted by LORD JLRTENJAC
Ok, I will lay this out to you clearly. It is a combination of every aspect of Star Wars that has made it popular. The Force in Star Wars is what stands out and makes it what it is. This discussion was NEVER about what made it popular, but what made it what it is.I just believe that, were the series without the force, and thusdifferent it would not be as popular.
Your move.
I called Check Mate a few posts a go.
If you want to go with deniability route, then go for it; you look like a fool and end the discussion with your trousers by your ankles. Fact is, the Western elements that shine through in Star Wars (and which George Lucas admits too) are the underlying factor in Star Wars' success, purely because they fill the gap left behind by the popularity of the Western. End of really.
(Note, I missed the part where you have NO evidence.)
Originally posted by exanda kane
I called Check Mate a few posts a go.If you want to go with deniability route, then go for it; you look like a fool and end the discussion with your trousers by your ankles. Fact is, the Western elements that shine through in Star Wars (and which George Lucas admits too) are the underlying factor in Star Wars' success, purely because they fill the gap left behind by the popularity of the Western. End of really.
(Note, I missed the part where you have NO evidence.)
Listen, I really don't give a rat's @ss what Lucas has and hasn't admitted to. If he wanted to keep his stories 100% to his vision he shouldn't have allowed so many people to create stories in his galaxy far far away. What Star Wars was origionally intended to be and what it is are not the same. I admit that western influence is shown greatly in the original movies, and some in the prequals but it isn't what shines in the story as it is. Everyone, Including the "AllMighty" George Lucas, needs to understand that the EU exists, that it is the only future for Star Wars, and if you only base what you know of Star Wars on the movies and what GL spouts when he is feebally trying to reclaim the story to himself then you have made yourself ignorant to what Star Wars truly has become, which is a story inwhich the Force shines, and the Western element has become little more than a a dull ember.
And even the prequils didn't live up to GL's origional vision. (I.E. in EPV obiwan said that Yoda trained him, but in EPI it was Qui-gon. And in EPIV Vader said that he left obiwan when he was a learner, but in EPIII he is a jedi knight.)
It's not the fact the of whether you agree with whatever George Lucas says or not, it's the fact that I have proof to back up my opinion and you don't.
I don't like George Lucas myself, but the matter of the fact is that as the creator of Star Wars, his opinion dicks on all. Fortunatedly, what he says here is one of the only things that makes sense. He backs up what I believe is the most appealing and succesful characteristic of Star Wars; a reinvention of the Western.
For your gestation, the majority of EU is poorly written and just plain daft. The dull ember in Star Wars is the silly Jedi business, not the Western influenced characters, who's remergence as the top dogs of Star Wars shows the franchise still has some balls. The popularity of Boba Fett ever since his inception is more proof, which weighs heavily on your scrawly argument.
You are out of your depth.
Originally posted by exanda kane
It's not the fact the of whether you agree with whatever George Lucas says or not, it's the fact that I have proof to back up my opinion and you don't.I don't like George Lucas myself, but the matter of the fact is that as the creator of Star Wars, his opinion dicks on all. Fortunatedly, what he says here is one of the only things that makes sense. He backs up what I believe is the most appealing and succesful characteristic of Star Wars; a reinvention of the Western.
For your gestation, the majority of EU is poorly written and just plain daft. The dull ember in Star Wars is the silly Jedi business, not the Western influenced characters, who's remergence as the top dogs of Star Wars shows the franchise still has some balls. The popularity of Boba Fett ever since his inception is more proof, which weighs heavily on your scrawly argument.
You are out of your depth.
The fact is that he has allowed people to add to his story, and it is part of his story now weather he or you movie honkies like it or not. Once again, you have used popularity of one part of a story as proof, an act which is born of pure ignorance.
You really should just give up. It's embarrasing to pummel you with facts, especially now you're trying to turn this into a tirade against George Lucas, idiot though he may be.
I mean, come on; Boba Fett survives because of the EU, and has endorsed the EU as what even Rick McCallum considered the most popular character. He's The Man With No Name, Lucas has even said as much. There's your Western right there, in the EU, alive and well. You're ridiculous.
And you talk of ignorance? You wouldn't know reason if one of your little geek pals came and hit you over the head with a toy lightsaber. You've been presented with proof that you are wrong, end your embarrasment now kiddo, because it'll be a big stain on anything interesting you might have to say in the future.
Star Wars works because it's a Western. The Jedi are all moot. Go home.
Star Wars without Jedis would be way Less epic... I mean, the lightsaber embodies the most violent kind of hand to hand conflict. The jedi embodies the Image of a Hero, such has not been written about since Achilles (with the exception of all lord of the rings characters)
Epics have 5 main characteristics:
1. The hero is of imposing stature, of national or international importance, and of great historical or legendary significance. (totally lost without jedi and the force, you just have a bunch of equal western characters)
2. The setting is vast, covering many nations, the world, or the universe.
3. The action consists of deeds of great valor or requiring superhuman courage. (lost without jedis, as everyone without the force becomes average)
4. Supernatural forces—gods, angels, demons—interest themselves in the action. (no jedis? no supernatural forces in star wars, this is lost.)
5. A style of sustained elevation is used.
So, with all of that, evidence is against this being the Kind of story you rant about, and they do documentaries about its legendary story on the history channel. It wouldnt be as good as "The Wrath Of Khan" and would suck as bad as the rest of Star Trek.
they wouldnt have this many geeks debating on forums about it (yes I am a geek, i just said so... so stfu)
So, it would suck pretty bad without jedi and sith.
so there you go... it might be a dang good western without Jedis/sith and epic duels, but it certainly wouldnt be a vast epic on the same level with beowulf, The Oddessy, and Lord of The Rings....
or did you just mean if there werent jedi and there were sith? in which case, the sith corrupt themselves and civil war rages in between them, and then next thing you know, one sect of sith is nicer then the other and has more elegant motives and ways of getting things done, and now they are the good guys... so pretty much no matter what you do, without jedis, some sith eventually become jedis...
oh yes, and what I said above about the 6 main elements of a Epic is true, its taught in all classes of english literature... it is CANON in rl...
everything else is my opinion, not intended to start a debate. Dont debate with me over my own opinion, you arent going to change it. Sorry.
And dont call me noobaris, youngling. It really makes me mad.
Yes, youngling, this means you! gunsmilie
Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11
Star Wars without Jedis would be way Less epic... I mean, the lightsaber embodies the most violent kind of hand to hand conflict. The jedi embodies the Image of a Hero, such has not been written about since Achilles (with the exception of all lord of the rings characters)
Yeah, you try and define epic in light of the Western. First off, the lightsaber is a gimmick. Ever seen Blade Runner? The handles of the umbrellas glow like lightsaber and do they contribute to the telling of the story? No. Second, who defines Star Wars as epic? I'm pretty sure it wouldn't have made an arrival in discussions before the Prequels came. The Prequels do take snippets out of the epics, but as they came later, with 30 years of nostalgia, it is hard to measure there success in entertaining audiences in the same way as the Originals did. The void left by the Western was already filled. Third, before I begin to clarify, remember this is a film, not a piece of literature, thus when you try and cottonball a Western into ill suited parameters like the Historical Epic, you're gonna get "hop-ons" as one would say.
Here you generalise and say that the Jedi is the embodiment of the Hero, yet obviously that would not be true if you lump Anakin Skywalker, Aurra Sing, Count Dooku, Jacen Solo, Revan and Malak in that box, just to name a thing. Understand that Jedi is not a blanket term for a protagonist. You have your innocent Hero luke and your tragic Hero Anakin, it has nothing to do with them being Jedi or not. You also reference Lord of the Rings after skipping out a good couple o' thousand years of literature. Bit silly.
Epics have 5 main characteristics:1. The hero is of imposing stature, of national or international importance, and of great historical or legendary significance. (totally lost without jedi and the force, you just have a bunch of equal western characters)
Assuming Western characters are equal is also a tad ignorant. Let me again reiterate that this is film and not literature we are speaking about, even if we acknowledge the influence of said literature. Again, I can return to Boba Fett, a Western character with "great historal and legendary significance." He fulfills your chararcteristic of the Epic and is, to extents a Hero.
2. The setting is vast, covering many nations, the world, or the universe.
I don't understand why you felt the need to put this in. Jedi have nothing to do with it.
3. The action consists of deeds of great valor or requiring superhuman courage. (lost without jedis, as everyone without the force becomes average)
Deeds of great valor of both ability and moral are carried out by Han Solo in Star Wars: A New Hope and the rest of 'em. Han Solo undertakes a similar predicament to that of the Ringo Kid in the eyes of Luke. You may argue too, that Luke Skywalker still fits into the parameters of the Western in the first few films; think of Shane and so on, and you get your innocent Hero. I do note that you used "superhuman courage," which either seems to me to be a bit of bollocks, a problematic phrase and just plain incorrect.
4. Supernatural forces—gods, angels, demons—interest themselves in the action. (no jedis? no supernatural forces in star wars, this is lost.)
Again, why is this important? Star Wars is not an Epic in the literary or even Ben-Hur sense of the word. Understand that, you'll get this a lot easier. Again, the supernatural forces are purely aesthetic and could be summised as an analogy of faith and religion in another plane of reality.
5. A style of sustained elevation is used.
This is a classic example of why your intepretation does not work! Do you even know what sustained elevation is? Star Wars does not practice sustained elevation in anything but the scrolling prologue, other than that, the story moves by edits and a classical narrative. George Lucas isn't a poet, he is a director-producer. Understand that.
So, with all of that, evidence is against this being the Kind of story you rant about, and they do documentaries about its legendary story on the history channel. It wouldnt be as good as "The Wrath Of Khan" and would suck as bad as the rest of Star Trek.
Evidence is with me. Any kind of deductive thought you try is simply curbstomped by the fact that George Lucas says that Star Wars is a Western in futuristic garb, and I don't even have to mention any other sources because of the importance and significance of that. I hope this clarified things for you.
Originally posted by Lord Knightfa11
so there you go... it might be a dang good western without Jedis/sith and epic duels, but it certainly wouldnt be a vast epic on the same level with beowulf, The Oddessy, and Lord of The Rings....
Again that is entirely subjective reasoning and quite a lot of bollocks at the same time. Of course, it disregards the fact that Star Wars is only an Epic in a small number of ways, while not being a poem or another piece of literature either. If you are genuinely illuminating some kind of connection between the 50's historical epics then that is also overly optimistic, as they have very little in common. But would you say Stagecoach, High Noon, Once Upon a Time in the West weren't epic to a degree? Same thing with Star Wars kiddo.
oh yes, and what I said above about the 6 main elements of a Epic is true, its taught in all classes of english literature... it is CANON in rl...
Well, they may be truthful as bulletpoints, but really, your descriptions have no depth whatsoever. I'm guessing you aren't too familiar with them either, considering you mentioned sustained elevation, which simply contradicts anything you say. Again, they may be true, but you've got the wrong end off the stick, so they don't really hold on as a succesful argument.
everything else is my opinion, not intended to start a debate. Dont debate with me over my own opinion, you arent going to change it. Sorry.
That's all well and good, you're allowed that opinion, yet the fact that you've been preseneted with plenty of fact to the contrary doesn't give you any sustained argument.
Originally posted by exanda kane
You really should just give up. It's embarrasing to pummel you with facts, especially now you're trying to turn this into a tirade against George Lucas, idiot though he may be.I mean, come on; Boba Fett survives because of the EU, and has endorsed the EU as what even Rick McCallum considered the most popular character. He's The Man With No Name, Lucas has even said as much. There's your Western right there, in the EU, alive and well. You're ridiculous.
And you talk of ignorance? You wouldn't know reason if one of your little geek pals came and hit you over the head with a toy lightsaber. You've been presented with proof that you are wrong, end your embarrasment now kiddo, because it'll be a big stain on anything interesting you might have to say in the future.
Star Wars works because it's a Western. The Jedi are all moot. Go home.
I have seen little to no proof from you, other than George Lucas this and Boba fett that. Star Wars works because of a combination of EVERYTHING most of all the Jedi. Go to someone and ask them "What stands out to you in star Wars?", and they will say "the Jedi." or "The force."
Besides, Boba Fett is nolonger the man with no name, the Prequils made sure of that.
Edit: Oh yea, I forgot, your final bits of proof, Popularity this and Load of Bullocks that. How can I stand up to such well constructed arguments.
Assuming Western characters are equal is also a tad ignorant. Let me again reiterate that this is film and not literature we are speaking about, even if we acknowledge the influence of said literature. Again, I can return to Boba Fett, a Western character with "great historal and legendary significance." He fulfills your chararcteristic of the Epic and is, to extents a Hero.
Film is an extention of literature.
Evidence is with me. Any kind of deductive thought you try is simply curbstomped by the fact that George Lucas says that Star Wars is a Western in futuristic garb, and I don't even have to mention any other sources because of the importance and significance of that. I hope this clarified things for you.
Once again GL said this: George Lucas is no longer the soul creator of Star Wars stories, it origionated with him, he made it popular, but it is no longer completely his. And besides, the Western influence was even minimised in HIS prequils.