I feel your pain.
If I had money and privacy, I’d just pay for it. Unfortunately, both are in short supply.
10 November 2002. So Wikipedia’s been around that long. Huh.
Au contraire! Cereal is better when there’s so much milk it turns to mush.
I couldn’t understand a word of Dooku’s
The EU leaning too far into pure science fiction is one of my biggest criticisms with it. It’s interesting because the issue usually doesn’t come up in conversations.
As someone who’s come to prefer hard(er) sci-fi to soft sci-fi, the physics of space travel/battle in SW began to rankle me. Then I came upon this thread, which allowed me to view the series from a whole different perspective.
If I ever get my SW Saga rewrite off the ground, I plan on playing up the wonky physics, just to drive home that this setting doesn’t take place in a universe anything like ours. Luminiferous aether, anyone?
i hate how it tries to make Star Wars science fiction instead of space fantasy/adventure.
I don’t think you can lay the blame for that on the NJO. That trend began with the WEG rulebooks, IIRC.
Hated Mara saying she didn’t believe the emperor reborn was Palpatine, that was Zahn taking a shot of Veitch.
I don’t know much about the early EU and how it came about past Veitch’s Dark Empire being originally wrote and set before Zahn’s Thrawn trilogy, but it got turned around somewhere along the lines by Lucasfilm or the publishers? Was there some disagreements or bad blood between the two writers?
Or was it more of friendly jibes and banter type of thing?
Zahn hated the idea of Palpatine returning, so refused to reference the events of Dark Empire in his trilogy. I don’t know what Zahn thought about Veitch personally, but he definitely wasn’t a fan of his story.
I should clarify, there’s nothing inherently wrong with a creative changing their mind about something. All stories evolve in the telling of them, and writers are dynamic people who’s vision of their own work is prone to shifting over time.
For example, when JRR Tolkien wrote The Hobbit, it was just a straightforward children’s fantasy adventure story, in his mind. It wasn’t meant to be the prelude to the epic fantasy of LOTR. The Ring was just a magic ring Bilbo found, not the Ring of the Dark Lord himself, who also happened to be the Necromancer of Mirkwood. Tolkien even went back and rewrote the ending to the Gollum chapter of The Hobbit, to make the Ring more consistent with its portrayal in LOTR. And even when Tolkien first started writing LOTR, it started out as merely a sequel to The Hobbit, before ballooning into something bigger and grander.
In a similar way, Star Wars started out as just “the adventures of Luke Skywalker” before ballooning into a drama about the Skywalker family.
The point is, it’s ok that George’s story ideas morphed over time. The problem is that George tends to forget or deny that the change ever occurred. He says “It was always meant to be this way,” when it clearly wasn’t. That’s what people take issue with. If he were more upfront about having changed his mind about things, then people wouldn’t be misled into thinking otherwise.
George’s ideas morphed over time. But unlike Tolkien who loved the work, his languages, and spent time answering letters from fans… George seems to actively hate the fans who made the OOT a success, and doesn’t really like directing movies. The overall denial vibe is also very weird, but I think if the changes were any good people would complain a lot less. Instead it’s like he’s always working on a once classic car and all the tinkering is … well…
I agree. To be honest, I personally think George doesn’t understand what makes the fans like Star Wars. That’s why I basically ignore everything George says and why I base my Star Wars opinions on a Death of the Author point of view, rather than a Word of God point of view. In fact, it could even said that I like Star Wars despite of Lucas’ opinions, rather than because of them. For example, I absolutely hate Lucas’ ideas about attachment and about how the Force works, I find them to be very simplistic and boring. What keeps me from saying: “Well, perhaps Star Wars is not for me as a whole” are the alternative interpretation of these subjects given by the EU authors and characters, like Vergere’s philosophy about the Force and Luke’s ideas about attachment in the Jedi Academy Trilogy and The New Jedi Order. Besides, it’s absolutely impossible to find two quotes from George that don’t contradict each other, because the man changed his mind all the time. Therefore basing your ideas on George’s vision is impossible as well, because (apart from certain very core elements) he never had a solid and stable vision in the first place. So, the better thing you can do to enjoy Star Wars without going crazy is ignoring George’s opinions (unless some of them make sense to you) and judging everything based on a purely Death of the Author point of view.
To quote Luke in ROTJ: “I’m with you, too.”
If only Lucas had foreseen how profitable the '77 film was going to be. Then he could’ve saved the Death Star run for the third movie. Alas…
You remind me of me, Spuffure, around the time I was your age. Unfortunately.
I consider the Thrawn trilogy really good fanfiction. Now, I’ve gotta emphasis “really good” over “fanfiction”. I think Zahn fell short with his description of how ysalamari powers work, not to mention inclusion of the Luuke clone and the improbable survival of Anakin’s lightsaber, but the pros far outnumber the cons in my book.
I’ll forever consider Zahn’s Clone Wars the real Clone Wars over Lucas’.
Catherine Mary Stewart
What’d be more interesting would be asking an AI to write a sequel to Rogue One, and seeing what story it’d come up with.
Not bad.
Too bad it doesn’t realize all the characters are dead.
I asked it that and it told me it would be a plot twist that they survived.
The Nolan Batman trilogy is overrated. And Batman 89 and Batman Returns are underrated.
I agree for the most part, but I really can’t watch Batman Returns anymore. DeVito’s Penguin is needlessly grotesque; he brings the movie down for me.
Before I decided to give up the EU altogether, I considered reading Survivor’s Quest, Allegiance, and Scoundrels first. Reading the Thrawn trilogy for the first time in 2008 reignited my interest in SW after the PT, NJO, and Legacy junk had quashed it; I figured it was fitting I also end with Zahn. But Allegiance failed to capture my interest after reading the first few chapters, and I heard over the grapevine that Survivor’s Quest was fairly liberal with prequel references, so I never bothered picking that one up. I haven’t touched a SW novel since.
I don’t get James Bond. I’m obviously biased; I don’t like the type of masculinity he represents.
The most enjoyment I’ve gotten out of the franchise is from Live and Let Die. Theme song is bitchin’, plus its Voodoo aspects (as stereotypically represented as they are, unfortunately) appeal to my love of horror.
‘One of the more common misconceptions about “Star Wars” is the idea that creator George Lucas directed and wrote the entire original trilogy.
This is a rather odd thing to say, given that it literally says “Directed by Irvin Kershner” at the end. This seems like padding to make the article longer.
I thought the same in the late '90s/early '00s. I was a kid, though, and not a very bright one.
“What an incredible smell you’ve discovered!”
*anprim sentiments rising*
Picnic at Hanging Rock.
Didn’t like it. Thought it was quite pretentious.
As Peter Griffin once said, it insists upon itself.
You already had me triggered something fierce. Then to add insult to injury, you referenced Family Guy.
I was under the impression his head was engulfed in flame, obfuscated by poor colouring.
Coming from an anti-copyright perspective, critiques of AI art borne of “muh property” are immaterial. I do believe artists who make art as a living should be adequately recompensed for their work. But once that’s done and their work’s out there in the world, it no longer belongs to anyone but to everyone. I see nothing unethical about an AI program using those pieces to make what are essentially seamless digital collages, so long as the persons using it aren’t pulling a Lichtenstein. Anti-capitalist critiques, along with critiques pertaining to the artistic merit of AI, on the other hand, are quite valid.
I began dabbling in AI art this past September. It was a fun toy to play with those first few weeks, but it quickly lost its lustre. From the creative standpoint, I found it an incredibly low-effort, unchallenging, soulless exercise. Since then, I’ve only used AI-generated images as components in digital collages, as “pure” AI art does nothing for me as a creator.
Ugh. That die-cast Disney brand fills me with endless revulsion. Dunk 'em in a vat of acetone and crush 'em into a cube.
