Star Wars IX The Rise of Skywalker

[Spence]

19 minutes ago, zslane said:

In effect, yes, but they at least had the good sense to dress it up as something science-y: an energy field created by all living beings, a fundamental force of the universe, just like gravity or the electromagnetic forces. It's just that this one is special because living beings can tap into this force without the aid of technology, thus it gets the distinction of being called the force.

 

Now they do.  But in the original series it was pure mystical mumbo jumbo.  They added the M-whats-its later, I'm guessing in an attempt to make it more science-y.  But they were doing seances, speaking with the dead, casting auguries and all that in the beginning. 

 

So it was all magic'y for the first three shows?  I think so. 

[Greywind]

Star Wars is a fairy tale.

[Starlord]

In order for it to be Space Opera, Queen has to perform the soundtrack. 

[Bazza]

Star Wars reminds be more of a sword & sorcery setting in space. 

 

And thinking about it, I reckon it’s possible to do a Neoplatonist Jedi/Sith Order based on Iamblichus’ theurgy. 

[Pattern Ghost]

14 hours ago, Spence said:

 

Weber's Honorverse and Baldwin's Helmsman series are really good Space Operas

 

I don't know about the second one, but the Honorverse is considered military science fiction, which is pretty from Space Opera.

[Duke Bushido]

1 hour ago, Pattern Ghost said:

but the Honorverse is considered military science fiction, which is pretty from Space Opera.

 

Considered to be, perhaps.  But it's a really romanticized version.  It's always felt very operatic to me. 

 

But I'm no expert.  

 

Seriously. 

 

 

I'm not. 

 

 

The military might really work that loosely. 

 

 

 

[zslane]

15 hours ago, Spence said:

Now they do.  But in the original series it was pure mystical mumbo jumbo.

 

To an extent, yes. But my description comes directly from Obi Wan in A New Hope. And I'm not even talking about the whole Midichlorians nonsense, which did not need to be introduced to make The Force into a (pseudo-)scientific principle. It already was one in the earliest films, even if it was portrayed with the air of mysticism.

[Spence]

3 hours ago, Pattern Ghost said:

 

I don't know about the second one, but the Honorverse is considered military science fiction, which is pretty from Space Opera.

Nope,

I fully understand that people are constantly changing definitions to add their own biases.  But I  stick to the definition as I can still read it in my deadtree dictionary.

 

"Space opera is a subgenre of science fiction that emphasizes space warfare, melodramatic adventure, interplanetary battles, chivalric romance and risk-taking. Set mainly or entirely in outer space, it usually involves conflict between opponents possessing advanced abilities, futuristic weapons, and other sophisticated technology."

 

Weber's Honorverse is textbook Space Opera.

I personally add the requirement to be consistent within the "technology" for the universe, but that is just me.

 

Star Wars has to much magic, mysticism and literally no tech consistency between shows, which is why I personally call it Space Fantasy, not Space Opera.

 

But YMMV

 

 

 

 

 

[zslane]

3 minutes ago, Spence said:

Star Wars has to much magic, mysticism and literally no tech consistency between shows, which is why I personally call it Space Fantasy, not Space Opera.

 

I mean, that does make a certain amount of sense to me. However, the history of the term seems to include many works that feature some kind of "space magic" (i.e., rubber science).

 

For instance, as per Wikipedia:

 

   "...the author cited most often as the true father of the genre is E. E. "Doc" Smith."

 

His work had no tech consistency either, primarily because the tech was entirely made up, entirely constructed from handwavium, and entirely unimportant to the broader narrative(s). The Rule of Cool was born from these works, and endeavoring to have the science and technology actually make sense to any contemporary standard was not a priority.

 

And then there's this:

 

   "By the early 1980s, space operas were again redefined, and the label was attached to major popular culture works such as Star Wars."

 

So while your working definition of space opera excludes Star Wars, that doesn't seem to be the case for most people who use the term.

[pinecone]

On 12/10/2019 at 12:35 PM, zslane said:

 

I mean, that does make a certain amount of sense to me. However, the history of the term seems to include many works that feature some kind of "space magic" (i.e., rubber science).

 

For instance, as per Wikipedia:

 

   "...the author cited most often as the true father of the genre is E. E. "Doc" Smith."

 

His work had no tech consistency either, primarily because the tech was entirely made up, entirely constructed from handwavium, and entirely unimportant to the broader narrative(s). The Rule of Cool was born from these works, and endeavoring to have the science and technology actually make sense to any contemporary standard was not a priority.

 

And then there's this:

 

   "By the early 1980s, space operas were again redefined, and the label was attached to major popular culture works such as Star Wars."

 

So while your working definition of space opera excludes Star Wars, that doesn't seem to be the case for most people who use the term.

Yeah, I think I can see your point. Replace "Jedi" with "Lensmen" and it does kinda fit...

[Badger]

On 12/7/2019 at 12:49 PM, Christopher R Taylor said:

Its going to make a ton of money off nostalgia and being "THE END OF THE SAGA" so no, its not burning out.  Disney will take that as proof that Solo was a one-off and people lurve them some Star Wars movies, so they go back to pumping one out a year or more.

 

Wonder how much I can make, if I stamp the SW logo on the back end of a cow, and film it for 2 hours.

[BarretWallace]

15 minutes ago, Badger said:

 

Wonder how much I can make, if I stamp the SW logo on the back end of a cow, and film it for 2 hours.

 

Big moo-lah?

[Pattern Ghost]

On 12/10/2019 at 10:00 AM, Duke Bushido said:

The military might really work that loosely. 

 

I haven't read the series*, but my understanding is that the tech is more realistic, on the hard SF side. As far as structure, it might be more fast and loose if it's based on an age of sail naval situation, and if limitations on communication are in place. I dunno. I know Weber has done more Space Opera stuff, but I've always seen the series described as more of a military SF with harder SF leanings than  you get in what I'd consider Space Opera.

 

On the other hand, Space Opera derives from Horse Opera, which itself doesn't carry any implicit lack of hard SF elements. Most classic examples of Space Opera aren't hard SF,  but I suppose that hard SF elements aren't precluded.

 

*I did read the first few chapters of the first book, and it read like typical military SF with a hard SF flavor for the tech.

[Pattern Ghost]

On 12/10/2019 at 12:21 PM, Spence said:

I fully understand that people are constantly changing definitions to add their own biases. 

 

On 12/10/2019 at 12:21 PM, Spence said:

I personally add the requirement to be consistent within the "technology" for the universe, but that is just me.

 

😁

[Pattern Ghost]

On 12/11/2019 at 1:02 PM, pinecone said:

Yeah, I think I can see your point. Replace "Jedi" with "Lensmen" and it does kinda fit...

 

I'd say it's a pretty good fit. Starwars has a lot of Lensmen elements (from Wikipedia):

 

E.E. 'Doc' Smith's writings contain elements central to the Star Wars universe.[7] These elements include:

• Spherical, moon-sized spaceships.
• Smaller, spherical, jet-less fighters with accumulators for beamed power.
• Spacehounds of IPC includes light swords of slicing "blade of flame" and "planes of force" wielded by spherical ships, also attested in melee combat.
• Smith's Lensmen have the telepathic powers of the Jedi derived from crystalline lenses mirroring Kyber crystals in Star Wars.
• In Triplanetary, a "tractor beam" from an artificial planetoid captures another vessel and a damsel in distress adventure ensues.
• Space armor with a general focus on melee combat using space axes.
• Norlaminian worship of "the all-controlling Force" along with general use of "force" powers throughout.
• A Golden Meteor is the emblem and insignia of the galactic protectors.
• A galactic trade in drugs which are used as currency: Thionite in Smith, Spice in Star Wars.
• A galactic corps of heroes with telepathic powers. (Note: Lensman was written 10 years before Green Lantern)
• Benevolent guardians seeking to fight evil. (Called Arisians in Lensman; Aquillian in the second draft script for Star Wars.)
• A dark, unseen enemy seeking galactic domination. (Called Boskone in Lensman; Bogan in the second draft script for Star Wars.)
• Special powers running down through family lines, with twins playing a significant role.
• Epic space battles involving fleets of ships.
• Large-scale weapons including a free-roaming planet-sized fortress[8] and the sunbeam[9] (capable of focusing the sun's rays, similar to Starkiller Base in The Force Awakens).
• Jettisoning a space lifeboat with a data spool containing secrets of the enemy's ultimate weapon, the 'Grand Base'.[10]
• Training with a helmet with a blast shield, yet able to 'see' due to special powers.[10]
• Passing a ship off as a chunk of loose metal.[10]
• Numerous users of the word coruscant, a term which had declined in use after the 19th century.[11]

[Bazza]

4 hours ago, Pattern Ghost said:

 

I'd say it's a pretty good fit. Starwars has a lot of Lensmen elements (from Wikipedia):

 

E.E. 'Doc' Smith's writings contain elements central to the Star Wars universe.[7] These elements include:

• Spherical, moon-sized spaceships.
• Smaller, spherical, jet-less fighters with accumulators for beamed power.
• Spacehounds of IPC includes light swords of slicing "blade of flame" and "planes of force" wielded by spherical ships, also attested in melee combat.
• Smith's Lensmen have the telepathic powers of the Jedi derived from crystalline lenses mirroring Kyber crystals in Star Wars.
• In Triplanetary, a "tractor beam" from an artificial planetoid captures another vessel and a damsel in distress adventure ensues.
• Space armor with a general focus on melee combat using space axes.
• Norlaminian worship of "the all-controlling Force" along with general use of "force" powers throughout.
• A Golden Meteor is the emblem and insignia of the galactic protectors.
• A galactic trade in drugs which are used as currency: Thionite in Smith, Spice in Star Wars.
• A galactic corps of heroes with telepathic powers. (Note: Lensman was written 10 years before Green Lantern)
• Benevolent guardians seeking to fight evil. (Called Arisians in Lensman; Aquillian in the second draft script for Star Wars.)
• A dark, unseen enemy seeking galactic domination. (Called Boskone in Lensman; Bogan in the second draft script for Star Wars.)
• Special powers running down through family lines, with twins playing a significant role.
• Epic space battles involving fleets of ships.
• Large-scale weapons including a free-roaming planet-sized fortress[8] and the sunbeam[9] (capable of focusing the sun's rays, similar to Starkiller Base in The Force Awakens).
• Jettisoning a space lifeboat with a data spool containing secrets of the enemy's ultimate weapon, the 'Grand Base'.[10]
• Training with a helmet with a blast shield, yet able to 'see' due to special powers.[10]
• Passing a ship off as a chunk of loose metal.[10]
• Numerous users of the word coruscant, a term which had declined in use after the 19th century.[11]

 

So no Ewoks. 

[Bazza]

It turns out, all our teachers were wrong. The correct way to count is 4, 5, 6, 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9 -- well, at least from a certain point of view. 

[Badger]

On 12/12/2019 at 4:02 PM, BarretWallace said:

 

Big moo-lah?

 

Well, it would be better than the sequels.

 

 

 

What?

[Badger]

On 12/13/2019 at 6:08 AM, Bazza said:

 

So no Ewoks. 

 

No Ewoks, could be a good thing or bad thing.

 

Ewoks as done in ROTJ=Good

 

If you add Ewokhunters into the equation=Bad  

 

[Old Man]

I have seen this film and was pleasantly surprised.  It is 142 minutes long and has no mid- or post-credits scenes.  There were no gaping plot holes, just a few of the normal sized ones.  And some nice callbacks to the original trilogy.

 

Most importantly, I now have closure.

[Bazza]

I had closure in 1977 & 1983. 

[death tribble]

On 12/13/2019 at 11:08 AM, Bazza said:

 

So no Ewoks. 

 

On 12/15/2019 at 6:55 AM, Badger said:

 

No Ewoks, could be a good thing or bad thing.

 

Ewoks as done in ROTJ=Good

 

If you add Ewokhunters into the equation=Bad  

 

 

No Ewoks means no Badgers.

So a bad thing.

[death tribble]

1 hour ago, Bazza said:

I had closure in 1977 & 1983. 

You would not have closure until 2007. That is Closure came out in 2007 and is the other title of Straightheads.

[Bazza]

19 minutes ago, death tribble said:

 

 

No Ewoks means no Badgers.

So a bad thing.

No Ewoks are bad. 

[Bazza]

18 minutes ago, death tribble said:

You would not have closure until 2007. That is Closure came out in 2007 and is the other title of Straightheads.

 

Maybe I need to find this film and give it a look.