I agree that the idea of Star Wars ruining science fiction, or LOTR ruining fantasy is all a bit preposterous, given the volume and diversity in these genres subsequent to Star Wars and LOTR.
Whoever said Star Wars ruined sci-fi doesn't understand subgenres. Star Wars is not and was never meant to be Hard Science Fiction. It's Space Opera, following a long tradition of space opera flowing back to Flash Gordon, then forward through Star Trek to Firefly. Two totally different genres - Space Opera should never be judged as bad just because it isn't Hard SF...nor for that matter should near-future stories, Cyberpunk, Steampunk, or any other non-hard subgenres. (says the guy writing a near-future in a perpetual argument with Hard SF readers about realism and technology)
And I want to thank you, Lemex.... After your reply, I went back and read through my idea-comment again, and the close-out (the "...would that still bother.." bit), spins the whole tone of my comment into snark. Leaves the wrong tone, like the Twang! of an out-of-tune guitar string. I wish I could toss it, write in a new one. But it's out there now, nothing I can do. (and now I understand and appreciate why the moderators have the <edit> option expire shortly after we post). "No masterpiece is ever finished, only abandoned." - via Arthur C. Clarke. Same thing can be said about posts. I salute you, Mods. Very wise. Some feedback, and I can use it be a better writer! Isn't learning about becoming a better writer fun! - Dave Olden
I've never quite understood that just because something is a success in a particular genre, it somehow ruined that genre. Star Wars ruined sci-fi. Simon Cowell ruined music. Stephen King/ Dan Brown/ take-your-pick ruined literature. Michael Mann ruined the summer blockbuster. These very successful phenomena are always only a small part of the landscape. Take sci-fi as an example, yes you have Star Wars, but you also have Alien, 2001, BSG, Blade Runner, Terminator, Predator, Solaris etc. etc. all of which could be argued to have had a bigger impact on the genre, particularly given that Star Wars is fantasy and probably affected the LOTR movies more than anything else. Yes they may kick off a trend for a few years as people try to cash in on their success, but then they will become stale and a new trend will start. Again, I can't blame someone's success on the fact other people will produce cheap knock-offs. And their very success surely means a lot of people like them, and who can argue with popular opinion . As much as I dislike Michael Mann or One Direction their is obviously some maladjusted half-wit out there who likes them, and good luck to them, they are going to need it.
I would have trouble choosing between Sunshine and The Matrix. Sunshine was a damn good film, and a good sci-fi. I dunno I think he said Matrix because it is so mainstream and it was a good movie. And how about other mediums where sci-fi is applicable? Neon Genesis Cowboy Bebop Code Geass Space Battleship Yamamoto Gankutsou: the count of monte Cristo Eureka 7 Battle Star Galactica(new one) Stiens;Gate Venture Bros. All which I would recommend for different reason to different people. Although most of them are anime. America television has been pretty weak in this genre, compared to Japan. although if I did a similar list for other genre's in television it might turn out the same, for my taste anyway.
If Star Wars ruined science fiction, then soap opera's ruined fiction. In my opinion it just broadened the genre.
I'm sorry Dave, I can't do that. That's the first thing I think of when sci-fi comes to mind. But then, I'm old. So very, very old.
*Force Chokes* I find your lack of faith disturbing... *breath* But did Star Wars ruin sci-fi? Well, it's one of the first things most young folks like me think of, but no, it hadn't ruined sci-fi.
Space fantasy, then. Or perhaps, space opera, as it was originally meant to be. I love Star Wars and Star Trek both too much to have a valid opinion on this. I don't think they ruined in the genre. Science fiction is as vast and full of diversity as space itself, and I don't see reiterations of Star Wars everywhere I look. But again, I can't be impartial on this.
Yeah @Lyrical I think it is pretty much fantasy set in space. Star Trek runs a lot closer to the SF side of things, in my view. I like them both as well.
Well I wish I could agree but I the new series was my first exposure to show XD And they always say which ever Doctor you started with is your favorite forever lol That statement seems to be true....in my case anyway
It was mine as well. Actually, I started with Matt Smith and worked my way back. I haven't seen any of the most recent Doctor. There are a lot of good episodes, and I really like a lot of the writing, but there have also been some episodes that made me cringe due to the quality of writing or plot etc., and for some reason it seems like every time that happens Moffat is credited as writing the episode
Oh yeah there are totally bad episodes XD In any show going on for that long with that many episodes its going to have some bad episodes.....most of all the longer it goes on. Even though TV is getting flooded with them now I'm a big fan of these miniseries and anthologies. I think those have been better then a lot ongoing shows lately.
Hence the science part They are two different genres. It's like saying Pride and Prejudice ruined sci fi and that's just plain silly to me.
If Star Wars is fantasy (and it is) than Doctor Who is the Wheel of Time to series. The writers just throw shit at a wall and write whatever sticks. Being in space doesn't make it science, in the same way that being set in New York does not make a show a crime drama.
Yeah, Star Wars doesn't have much if any science in it. Warhammer 40K probably has more science that Star Wars, and they've got orks and elves running around in space.
"Science fantasy is a mixed genre within the umbrella of speculative fiction which simultaneously draws upon and/or combines tropes and elements from both science fiction and fantasy." Didn't know you could clone people with science in fantasy only movies. It's a Science Fantasy movies with all the space crafts and androids and whatnot along with all the "magic" with the jedi's and the force and whatnot.
Nonsensical to read, but I think I get you're meaning. Only, because they never explain anything about cloning, they might as well have waved a wand and magicked all the clones into existence. If Star Wars was speculative fiction you could expect the idea of creating artificial humans whose only purpose was to die in strategic ways would be addressed. But it isn't, because Star Wars isn't speculative fiction at all.
Replace "science" with technology. Without the Jedi vs Sith part of Star Wars the movie series and shows and comics and books etc. would just be science fiction. But since the Jedi and Sith and the whole "Force" aspect plays such a big role in the series then it makes it Science Fantasy. It is a mixing of genres. And a lot of sci-fi stories don't give you much (or any) information about cloning, it doesn't mean it adds to fantasy. If that were the case I would be writing science fantasy instead of science fiction.
No, technology doesn't mean science. There are advanced battering rams in The Return of the King, that doesn't make it "science" anything. I'm gonna bring the whole thing back to a definition I've used before (but not on this thread). In science fiction the concept constrains the story. There are no constraints in Star Wars. At one point in A New Hope the calculation time for hyperspace travel is brought up. And then it's never mentioned again. Even the distance between worlds offers no obstacle to the story. Characters leave and show up whenever the script calls for it, and there's no concept of distance or time. None of that is science, and there is no mixing of genres because Star Wars is straight up fantasy.
