Chuck Klosterman on SW

I once read something by Chuck Klosterman on ESB and what it means to GenXers and how Reality Bites is in a sense a sequel to ESB. But anyways he thinks SW is overrated because of what it did to cinema and he thinks its actually bad, much like any other SW detractor. ROTJ he believes is unwatchable. And the prequels he says is just like OT was in pandering to kids (he compares Jar Jar Binks as no different than R2D2). Anyways, has anyone read his article on ESB, and what does everyone think about detractors of the OT?

I've never heard Chuck Klosterman talk about SW but I've heard him several times on a podcast I listen to regularly and he's a bright, funny guy.

But it doesn't mean I always agree with him.

I dont think Star Wars deviated that much from the general mood of the 70s. It was experimental cinema in its day--FOX had planned Damnation Alley as its major sci fi film--SW was a little side project.

SW took place under a war and galactic dictatorship, lots of people died, and the bad guy lived to fight another day. Vietnam and the hippies  (the Force, Chewbacca ) are echoed in the story. R2D2 represents the technological comfort that sprang up with innovations in home appliances (I just made that up but I think it has some truth. lol)
It may have been influenced by serial adventures but it wasnt a straight update of them(the same is true of Raiders--how many 1940s serials had a main character with  a Polanski-like rape scandal?).


Audiences change too--the people who wanted to see foreign and alternative stories in the 60s  gave way to a different audience by the late 70s.

Although it probably killed serious science fiction films. Before SW the genre was geared at adults for the most part. Silent Running, Colossus the Forbin project,  Planet of the Apes, 2001, Forbidden Planet, Day the Earth Stood Still...After Blade Runner there hasnt been much in that vein from the major studios...

The  main change after SW was the multi national corporations buying the studios and the focus on merchandising.

I think its possible that the prequels were a more obvious damage to moviemaking--since they started appearing there was a noticeable shift towards franchises and a lapse in even the most basic attempt at character and dialogue. Coincidence? I wonder. Maybe the studios thought: hey, people are going to see these things no matter how bad they are...

Star Wars was not deep in either department but is practically Shakespearean compared to a Transformers or Clash of the Titans 2010. ROTJ despite its flaws is more emotionally involving than most of the big studio movies I watch these days.

Cameron isnt getting the same criticism because there isnt anything but franchise, remakes and comic book movies  from the studios, and the critics working now grew up after Star Wars.

You can't say that a movie is overrated "because of what it did to cinema" anyway. A movie is good or not. You like it or not.  People praising SW in 1977 did not care if the movie would change cinema or not. It was a success because people loved the movie, that's all.

You can of course debate about the good and the bad things SW and its sequels/prequels brought to cinema, but that is not talking about the movies themselves.

Side personal note: anyone who thinks Jar Jar = R2D2 can't pretend to be a serious movie reviewer.

If he in anyway compared the self-indulgent, masturbatory nonsense of "Reality Bites" to ESB, I have no time for him.

http://amondstien.wordpress.com/2008/03/29/the-empire-strikes-back-reality-bites-and-gen-x-love/

TV's Frink said:

http://amondstien.wordpress.com/2008/03/29/the-empire-strikes-back-reality-bites-and-gen-x-love/

 Thank you Frink. I am now stupider for having read that.

Ah, Gen X. Is there anything we can't suck the life out of?

Can't decide if that's a Yellow or Red Level offense.

Oh, the Klosterman article on ESB is in the book Sex,Drugs,and Cocoa Puffs. I was almost going to buy it, until the SW argument. Sorry I didn't mention it before.