Sign In

Science Fiction or Space Fantasy - what is Star Wars — Page 7

Author
Time

Fairytale.

“Ryan Gosling staring off into the distance”

Author
Time

OutboundFlight said:

“No magic involved”

What about the lightning? Or the backflips? Or the super sense allowing the Jedi to parry so easily?

And your point? Did you miss my references to characters from Star Trek which most people seem to think is indeed science fiction? If those things didn’t make Star Trek a fantasy then they don’t make Star Wars a fantasy.

Author
Time

see, the insane part here is you denying that there’s fantasy in star wars, and that it’s just science fiction.

Author
Time

Why is that insane. If Star Trek is science fiction, so is Star Wars. I have read a lot of science fiction. I’ve watched a lot of science fiction. I do know the genre. If you are telling me that something in Star Wars does not belong in science fiction it means you aren’t as familiar with what you find in science fiction. Nothing found in Star Wars cannot be found in Star Trek (except light sabers, but those can be found in other science fiction).

There seems to be several people on the same page that thinks the force makes it fantasy and the Star Trek is science fiction. Well, Star Trek has more examples of the Force and it is by no means alone in the science fiction genre. Sometimes it is a machine that gives the powers, but usually it is some innate ability, just like in Star Wars. Jedi can lift things, so do characters in Star Trek. Jedi can read minds and implant ideas in other mind and so can characters in star trek. Star Trek characters can even make things appear from nothing, manipulate time, teleport, and a bunch of things Jedi don’t do. So… you can’t say Star Trek is science fiction and Star Wars isn’t. And both have stories based on myths and legends. In both is is people making decisions that drive the story. The force gives some characters tools to aid their journey, but the pivotal moments are all reality based character decisions and interactions.

Let’s take one Star Trek episode in particular. Plato’s Stepchildren. They encounter a planet where some aliens who interacted with the ancient Greeks live and all but one has great mental powers. They can levitate things, control the minds and bodies of others. Along comes Dr. McCoy and he figures how how their power works and concocts a formula to give the lone alien without powers and themselves the power (with a dose to make them stronger than the other aliens). McCoy’s concoction amounts to Midiclorians for all the science behind both. The episode never does really explain how the aliens have this power or how the concoction gives it to Kirk and company. It’s just that the aliens have this in their system so if we have it we would have the same powers. How is that not identical to the Force? And how, when this is a staple of science fiction in the first 2/3 of the 20th century, is Star Wars somehow not science fiction?

From my perspective, saying Star Wars is not science fiction is insane. Doubly so if you claim Star Trek is science fiction.

Author
Time

SF.

Yes it may have a fantasy feel and edge but it’s still SF. There’s no need to break down everything into multiple genres all the time, and despite Lucas saying it is also a Space Western it isn’t a Western either despite having some identifiable tropes.

There is realistic background in the OT for most everything and if you’re curious you can research the methodology of how things work in universe. I still think the used universe idea in the original helped not only ground it for a audience but also made it possible to bask in an SF landscape.
Reading the novelization feels like pure SF with some fantasy elements.

VADER!? WHERE THE HELL IS MY MOCHA LATTE? -Palpy on a very bad day.

“George didn’t think there was any future in dead Han toys.”-Harrison Ford

My review blog: thehificelluloidmonster.wordpress.com

Author
Time

yotsuya said:

OutboundFlight said:

“No magic involved”

What about the lightning? Or the backflips? Or the super sense allowing the Jedi to parry so easily?

And your point? Did you miss my references to characters from Star Trek which most people seem to think is indeed science fiction? If those things didn’t make Star Trek a fantasy then they don’t make Star Wars a fantasy.

Star Trek repeatedly explains all the fantastical stuff as hyper advanced technology. Theoretically, it could happen in our universe. Aliens probably exist in the endless universe, and who knows how advanced they are.

The Force, while explained as science in Ep 1, is still fantasy. It does not exist in our world.

Vader, a 7 in 1 edit of the entire Star Wars Saga

Maul, a clone wars edit

Author
Time
 (Edited)

yotsuya said:

OutboundFlight said:

“No magic involved”

What about the lightning? Or the backflips? Or the super sense allowing the Jedi to parry so easily?

And your point? Did you miss my references to characters from Star Trek which most people seem to think is indeed science fiction? If those things didn’t make Star Trek a fantasy then they don’t make Star Wars a fantasy.

Star Trek repeatedly explains all the fantastical stuff as hyper advanced technology. Theoretically, it could happen in our universe. Aliens probably exist in the endless universe, and who knows how advanced they are.

The Force, while explained as science in Ep 1, is still fantasy. It does not exist in our world. Therefore it cannot be sci-if, which by its official dictionary is a story routes in science set in the near or distant future.

Vader, a 7 in 1 edit of the entire Star Wars Saga

Maul, a clone wars edit

Author
Time

OutboundFlight said:

yotsuya said:

OutboundFlight said:

“No magic involved”

What about the lightning? Or the backflips? Or the super sense allowing the Jedi to parry so easily?

And your point? Did you miss my references to characters from Star Trek which most people seem to think is indeed science fiction? If those things didn’t make Star Trek a fantasy then they don’t make Star Wars a fantasy.

Star Trek repeatedly explains all the fantastical stuff as hyper advanced technology. Theoretically, it could happen in our universe. Aliens probably exist in the endless universe, and who knows how advanced they are.

The Force, while explained as science in Ep 1, is still fantasy. It does not exist in our world.

Well said. It’s all about how things are presented.

Author
Time

It is interesting how I answer your point and yet you quote something else. I specifically mentioned Plato’s Stepchildren which has no more explanation of the mysterious powers within the episode than Star Wars has. The episode mentioned the mysterious and undefined chemical compound kironide. It never explains how that chemical results in the psychokinetic powers the Platonians exhibit. Ben’s description of the Force as an energy filed created by all living things that surrounds and binds is a more detailed description than Plato’s Stepchildren ever gives. Such psychokinentic powers can not be proven to exist in our world, yet the Platonians have them and the Q have them to an even greater extent. Gary Mitchell was developing them, as was Dr. Dehner. None of these are ever given any detailed description. Isaac Asimov had his character of The Mule who could reprogram people’s minds. He didn’t have to touch them and could do a whole room full of people at once with the aid of a special musical instrument. He could even kill with his mind. He later (post ROTJ) expanded that to an entire planet with The Mule being an escapee. He had a robot initially learn the skill and teach another robot who in turn established the planet. Asimov is one of the three greats of science fiction and he didn’t hesitate to have characters with mental powers that defy science and logic.

So the argument that the Force makes Star Wars a fantasy does not hold up to comparison to established science fiction content.

Author
Time

Yeah, a creative person can call their creation whatever they like, that does not mean it does not fit nicely in an existing genre.

Author
Time

i didn’t say it isn’t sci fi. i don’t care if it is or if it isn’t or what do you want to call it. all i said is that it very clearlt has stuff from other genres too, and that denying that is crazy.

Author
Time

yotsuya said:

Yeah, a creative person can call their creation whatever they like, that does not mean it does not fit nicely in an existing genre.

He can and he did…That being said I would add a little more emphasis to his decision to call his creation that then some anonymous guy on the internet defines it. He wasn’t a rookie when he made SW and had been immersed in movie making and its history for some time. IOW he certainly knew what he wanted to call it.

Author
Time

yotsuya said:

It is interesting how I answer your point and yet you quote something else. I specifically mentioned Plato’s Stepchildren which has no more explanation of the mysterious powers within the episode than Star Wars has. The episode mentioned the mysterious and undefined chemical compound kironide. It never explains how that chemical results in the psychokinetic powers the Platonians exhibit. Ben’s description of the Force as an energy filed created by all living things that surrounds and binds is a more detailed description than Plato’s Stepchildren ever gives. Such psychokinentic powers can not be proven to exist in our world, yet the Platonians have them and the Q have them to an even greater extent. Gary Mitchell was developing them, as was Dr. Dehner. None of these are ever given any detailed description. Isaac Asimov had his character of The Mule who could reprogram people’s minds. He didn’t have to touch them and could do a whole room full of people at once with the aid of a special musical instrument. He could even kill with his mind. He later (post ROTJ) expanded that to an entire planet with The Mule being an escapee. He had a robot initially learn the skill and teach another robot who in turn established the planet. Asimov is one of the three greats of science fiction and he didn’t hesitate to have characters with mental powers that defy science and logic.

So the argument that the Force makes Star Wars a fantasy does not hold up to comparison to established science fiction content.

I see SW as having fantasy elements due to several things. The force being just one of them. The robes, the mystical elements that give nods to supernatural reasoning for things happening the way they do. The classic knight in shining armour trope with the (not so) damsel in distress etc.

The old wise man who is obviously a nod to the wizard type of character you would see in a typical Tolkienesque fantasy. The swords being used as a “elegant weapon of a more civilized age” definitely suggests a King Arthur and knights of the round table. The classic good and evil sides doing battle…that they take place in space is incidental in a lot of cases.

Author
Time

Creox said:

yotsuya said:

Yeah, a creative person can call their creation whatever they like, that does not mean it does not fit nicely in an existing genre.

He can and he did…That being said I would add a little more emphasis to his decision to call his creation that then some anonymous guy on the internet defines it. He wasn’t a rookie when he made SW and had been immersed in movie making and its history for some time. IOW he certainly knew what he wanted to call it.

Not some guy on the internet. We are talking an entire slice of the publishing industry (publishers, writers, reviewers, etc.). People can makeup whatever name they like for something they create and then it gets pigeonholed into whatever genre it fits in. Star Wars gets filed under Science Fiction/Space Opera.

Author
Time

Creox said:

yotsuya said:

It is interesting how I answer your point and yet you quote something else. I specifically mentioned Plato’s Stepchildren which has no more explanation of the mysterious powers within the episode than Star Wars has. The episode mentioned the mysterious and undefined chemical compound kironide. It never explains how that chemical results in the psychokinetic powers the Platonians exhibit. Ben’s description of the Force as an energy filed created by all living things that surrounds and binds is a more detailed description than Plato’s Stepchildren ever gives. Such psychokinentic powers can not be proven to exist in our world, yet the Platonians have them and the Q have them to an even greater extent. Gary Mitchell was developing them, as was Dr. Dehner. None of these are ever given any detailed description. Isaac Asimov had his character of The Mule who could reprogram people’s minds. He didn’t have to touch them and could do a whole room full of people at once with the aid of a special musical instrument. He could even kill with his mind. He later (post ROTJ) expanded that to an entire planet with The Mule being an escapee. He had a robot initially learn the skill and teach another robot who in turn established the planet. Asimov is one of the three greats of science fiction and he didn’t hesitate to have characters with mental powers that defy science and logic.

So the argument that the Force makes Star Wars a fantasy does not hold up to comparison to established science fiction content.

I see SW as having fantasy elements due to several things. The force being just one of them. The robes, the mystical elements that give nods to supernatural reasoning for things happening the way they do. The classic knight in shining armour trope with the (not so) damsel in distress etc.

The old wise man who is obviously a nod to the wizard type of character you would see in a typical Tolkienesque fantasy. The swords being used as a “elegant weapon of a more civilized age” definitely suggests a King Arthur and knights of the round table. The classic good and evil sides doing battle…that they take place in space is incidental in a lot of cases.

But those things don’t qualify for distinguishing genre. The robes came from Samurai films. So did the swords. Old wise men are found in all genres. What distinguishes Science Fiction from Fantasy is the nature of the story, not the characters. Star Wars, for all its use of the Force and Space Opera tropes, is a very grounded story about good and evil and rebellion against oppression. And it is the sort of good and evil we find in every day lives. Anger, fear, lust, passion, vs. calm, instincts, thoughtfulness, wisdom. The force is more about morality than it is about magic.

Author
Time

I think what Star Wars is even more than a space opera, is a space epic. It has more of Ben-Hur and The Ten Commandments about it than it does The Lord of the Rings.

Author
Time

yotsuya said:

Creox said:

yotsuya said:

It is interesting how I answer your point and yet you quote something else. I specifically mentioned Plato’s Stepchildren which has no more explanation of the mysterious powers within the episode than Star Wars has. The episode mentioned the mysterious and undefined chemical compound kironide. It never explains how that chemical results in the psychokinetic powers the Platonians exhibit. Ben’s description of the Force as an energy filed created by all living things that surrounds and binds is a more detailed description than Plato’s Stepchildren ever gives. Such psychokinentic powers can not be proven to exist in our world, yet the Platonians have them and the Q have them to an even greater extent. Gary Mitchell was developing them, as was Dr. Dehner. None of these are ever given any detailed description. Isaac Asimov had his character of The Mule who could reprogram people’s minds. He didn’t have to touch them and could do a whole room full of people at once with the aid of a special musical instrument. He could even kill with his mind. He later (post ROTJ) expanded that to an entire planet with The Mule being an escapee. He had a robot initially learn the skill and teach another robot who in turn established the planet. Asimov is one of the three greats of science fiction and he didn’t hesitate to have characters with mental powers that defy science and logic.

So the argument that the Force makes Star Wars a fantasy does not hold up to comparison to established science fiction content.

I see SW as having fantasy elements due to several things. The force being just one of them. The robes, the mystical elements that give nods to supernatural reasoning for things happening the way they do. The classic knight in shining armour trope with the (not so) damsel in distress etc.

The old wise man who is obviously a nod to the wizard type of character you would see in a typical Tolkienesque fantasy. The swords being used as a “elegant weapon of a more civilized age” definitely suggests a King Arthur and knights of the round table. The classic good and evil sides doing battle…that they take place in space is incidental in a lot of cases.

But those things don’t qualify for distinguishing genre. The robes came from Samurai films. So did the swords. Old wise men are found in all genres. What distinguishes Science Fiction from Fantasy is the nature of the story, not the characters. Star Wars, for all its use of the Force and Space Opera tropes, is a very grounded story about good and evil and rebellion against oppression. And it is the sort of good and evil we find in every day lives. Anger, fear, lust, passion, vs. calm, instincts, thoughtfulness, wisdom. The force is more about morality than it is about magic.

It does for me as I mentioned at the beginning of my post. The big picture I get from this thread is that the are so many facets to a movie genre. It’s impossible for many movies to be labeled with just one.

Author
Time

yotsuya said:

Creox said:

yotsuya said:

It is interesting how I answer your point and yet you quote something else. I specifically mentioned Plato’s Stepchildren which has no more explanation of the mysterious powers within the episode than Star Wars has. The episode mentioned the mysterious and undefined chemical compound kironide. It never explains how that chemical results in the psychokinetic powers the Platonians exhibit. Ben’s description of the Force as an energy filed created by all living things that surrounds and binds is a more detailed description than Plato’s Stepchildren ever gives. Such psychokinentic powers can not be proven to exist in our world, yet the Platonians have them and the Q have them to an even greater extent. Gary Mitchell was developing them, as was Dr. Dehner. None of these are ever given any detailed description. Isaac Asimov had his character of The Mule who could reprogram people’s minds. He didn’t have to touch them and could do a whole room full of people at once with the aid of a special musical instrument. He could even kill with his mind. He later (post ROTJ) expanded that to an entire planet with The Mule being an escapee. He had a robot initially learn the skill and teach another robot who in turn established the planet. Asimov is one of the three greats of science fiction and he didn’t hesitate to have characters with mental powers that defy science and logic.

So the argument that the Force makes Star Wars a fantasy does not hold up to comparison to established science fiction content.

I see SW as having fantasy elements due to several things. The force being just one of them. The robes, the mystical elements that give nods to supernatural reasoning for things happening the way they do. The classic knight in shining armour trope with the (not so) damsel in distress etc.

The old wise man who is obviously a nod to the wizard type of character you would see in a typical Tolkienesque fantasy. The swords being used as a “elegant weapon of a more civilized age” definitely suggests a King Arthur and knights of the round table. The classic good and evil sides doing battle…that they take place in space is incidental in a lot of cases.

But those things don’t qualify for distinguishing genre. The robes came from Samurai films. So did the swords. Old wise men are found in all genres. What distinguishes Science Fiction from Fantasy is the nature of the story, not the characters. Star Wars, for all its use of the Force and Space Opera tropes, is a very grounded story about good and evil and rebellion against oppression. And it is the sort of good and evil we find in every day lives. Anger, fear, lust, passion, vs. calm, instincts, thoughtfulness, wisdom. The force is more about morality than it is about magic.

I think a “grounded story about good and evil and rebellion against oppression” fits the war genre more than science fiction, which is usually a warning about the dangers of technology.

By your logic, one could also argue the Lord of the Rings is science fiction. It’s quite grounded (there are good people who make poor decisions when under pressure, and bad people who have been tormented by a specific thing) and concern a rebellion (last alliance) against oppression (Sauron’s empire). And I haven’t seen GROND anywhere, so it could take place in the future for all we know.

Vader, a 7 in 1 edit of the entire Star Wars Saga

Maul, a clone wars edit

Author
Time

OutboundFlight said:

yotsuya said:

Creox said:

yotsuya said:

It is interesting how I answer your point and yet you quote something else. I specifically mentioned Plato’s Stepchildren which has no more explanation of the mysterious powers within the episode than Star Wars has. The episode mentioned the mysterious and undefined chemical compound kironide. It never explains how that chemical results in the psychokinetic powers the Platonians exhibit. Ben’s description of the Force as an energy filed created by all living things that surrounds and binds is a more detailed description than Plato’s Stepchildren ever gives. Such psychokinentic powers can not be proven to exist in our world, yet the Platonians have them and the Q have them to an even greater extent. Gary Mitchell was developing them, as was Dr. Dehner. None of these are ever given any detailed description. Isaac Asimov had his character of The Mule who could reprogram people’s minds. He didn’t have to touch them and could do a whole room full of people at once with the aid of a special musical instrument. He could even kill with his mind. He later (post ROTJ) expanded that to an entire planet with The Mule being an escapee. He had a robot initially learn the skill and teach another robot who in turn established the planet. Asimov is one of the three greats of science fiction and he didn’t hesitate to have characters with mental powers that defy science and logic.

So the argument that the Force makes Star Wars a fantasy does not hold up to comparison to established science fiction content.

I see SW as having fantasy elements due to several things. The force being just one of them. The robes, the mystical elements that give nods to supernatural reasoning for things happening the way they do. The classic knight in shining armour trope with the (not so) damsel in distress etc.

The old wise man who is obviously a nod to the wizard type of character you would see in a typical Tolkienesque fantasy. The swords being used as a “elegant weapon of a more civilized age” definitely suggests a King Arthur and knights of the round table. The classic good and evil sides doing battle…that they take place in space is incidental in a lot of cases.

But those things don’t qualify for distinguishing genre. The robes came from Samurai films. So did the swords. Old wise men are found in all genres. What distinguishes Science Fiction from Fantasy is the nature of the story, not the characters. Star Wars, for all its use of the Force and Space Opera tropes, is a very grounded story about good and evil and rebellion against oppression. And it is the sort of good and evil we find in every day lives. Anger, fear, lust, passion, vs. calm, instincts, thoughtfulness, wisdom. The force is more about morality than it is about magic.

I think a “grounded story about good and evil and rebellion against oppression” fits the war genre more than science fiction, which is usually a warning about the dangers of technology.

By your logic, one could also argue the Lord of the Rings is science fiction. It’s quite grounded (there are good people who make poor decisions when under pressure, and bad people who have been tormented by a specific thing) and concern a rebellion (last alliance) against oppression (Sauron’s empire). And I haven’t seen GROND anywhere, so it could take place in the future for all we know.

LOTR lacks any science or technology in its world so it could not be science fiction. Besides, the entire story hinges on the ring - a magical device that gives Sauron life. Tolkien filled his world with magic and magical beings. Lucas filled his with science and technology with just a tiny hint of mysticism (what is considered reasonable for science fiction).

Author
Time

There is technology in LOTR, it’s just fantasy and primitive.

DESTROY ALL JEDI

My name is Sprite Pepsi and I’m abstinence till I die!

Author
Time

pleasehello said:

Kersh sets the record straight. All the proof I need 😉

https://youtu.be/YeB-uXGGaEU?t=1142

While some science fiction (like a lot of Star Trek episodes) does have technobabble, a lot doesn’t. A lot of books leave the technobabble to the descriptions and out of the character’s dialog. That is what Star Wars does. And it isn’t like Lucas got one of the new stars in science fiction to ghost write the novelization and it isn’t like he got the biggest science fiction imprint to publish it. The story in written format, which doesn’t really vary from the script, reads like science fiction.

Author
Time

Again, you are only willing to validate that which fits into your own preconceived opinion. You’d already decided that it is science fiction long before asking the question. So you’re not looking for a debate; you’re looking for validation.

TV’s Frink said:

chyron just put a big Ric pic in your sig and be done with it.