babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » right brain babble   » culture   » Star Wars TV

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Star Wars TV
Contrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6477

posted 26 April 2005 06:16 PM      Profile for Contrarian     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
CBC says two Star Wars TV series are planned, one live action and one animated. Link here.
quote:
...Lucas announced plans – already rumoured on the internet – for two shows, one of which will be an animated series, the other live-action.

The live-action show will be set in the time between Sith and the original Star Wars film...

...He said the series would feature existing characters, although not necessarily the main characters.

"There's a lot of issues that are connected, but you won't necessarily see a lot of the people that are connected," he said.

The animated show will be an expansion of the Clone Wars animated mini-adventures that ran on Cartoon Network, and will take place in the time between Attack of the Clones and Sith...



From: pretty far west | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
verbatim
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 569

posted 26 April 2005 06:23 PM      Profile for verbatim   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Ugh. How depressing.
From: The People's Republic of Cook Street | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 26 April 2005 06:26 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I've said it before, but... What I'd like to see re-run is the infamous Star Wars Holiday Special.

quote:
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away (Nov. 17, 1978), CBS broadcast a two-hour holiday event called "The Star Wars Holiday Special."

Never heard of it? That's because after its ill-fated premiere, "Star Wars" creator George Lucas banished it forever from the realm of human existence. But something of this much weight has a way of reaching the masses.

"Special" is certainly one word for that show. Other words one might choose to apply include "distressing," "appalling" and "bad."

Yes, it was that unprecedented. Yes, it was that bad.

Among the "Star Wars" faithful, it's taken for granted that their aloof Marin County Buddha wants every last trace of it expunged from the earth. Nearly every actor involved -- essentially the entire cast of the first film -- would probably rather forget his or her participation, especially Carrie Fisher. If you're unlucky enough to come across a 10th-generation dub of this underwhelming indignity, you'll find her performing a musical number.

A musical number with Wookies.

"The Star Wars Holiday Special" is like a massive train wreck -- you see it coming, it makes a whole lotta noise and it's really, really long.


And so forth. Priceless.


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Willowdale Wizard
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3674

posted 26 April 2005 06:33 PM      Profile for Willowdale Wizard   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
"the hills are alive ... with the sound of wookies"
From: england (hometown of toronto) | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
rasmus
malcontent
Babbler # 621

posted 26 April 2005 07:15 PM      Profile for rasmus   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
How uncanny! Quite independently, an colleauge and I were talking about the Star Wars Holiday Special earlier today.
From: Fortune favours the bold | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 26 April 2005 07:35 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Another good Salon piece, from the last time a Star Wars movie was released, debunked George Lucas's after-the-fact Joseph-Campbell-heroic-mythology interpretations of his movies.

quote:
Lucas himself was mum about any Campbell influence when the original Star Wars opened -- "The word for this movie is fun," he told Time in 1977 -- but he began name-dropping the retired Sarah Lawrence academic (who died in 1987) as the movie became a pop culture milestone. Feature writers took him at his word, unwilling to believe that a mere science-fiction flick could be so popular unless some deeper meaning was at work. Campbell, happy to have his work associated with the most successful film series of all time, returned the favor by praising Lucas' use of mythological motifs, though he had trouble keeping straight exactly which motifs were being used. The relationship built until the men have become as closely linked in the public mind as Chang and Eng.

...

Three years ago, when Lucas was about to revive the series with "The Phantom Menace," Time magazine sent Moyers to talk with Lucas about "the true theology of 'Star Wars.'" Their dialogue, duly transcribed for the April 26, 1999, issue, reads like the minutes of the College of Cardinals on laughing gas. Trouble is, nobody's laughing.

"With 'Star Wars' I consciously set about to re-create myths and the classic mythological motifs," Lucas says. "I wanted to use those motifs to deal with issues that exist today." For sheer pomposity, this is hard to beat, but Moyers does his best. "One explanation for the popularity of 'Star Wars' when it appeared," he says, "is that by the end of the 1970s, the hunger for spiritual experience was no longer being satisfied sufficiently by the traditional vessels of faith." So that's why everybody lined up in 1977; they wanted a spiritual experience, along with really cool laser explosions.

Moyers isn't the only institution in thrall to this proto-cult. A few months before the release of "The Phantom Menace," the Smithsonian Institution's National Air and Space Museum turned itself into a virtual annex of Lucasfilm by hosting "Star Wars: The Magic of Myth," a promotional tie-in disguised as an examination of how Campbell's ideas are used in the series. Even the normally sensible film critic Roger Ebert is part of the Greek chorus. "It was not by accident that George Lucas worked with Joseph Campbell, an expert on the world's basic myths, in fashioning a screenplay that owes much to man's oldest stories," Ebert intones in his "Great Movies" feature on "Star Wars." Thus is Campbell, who from his own accounts didn't even meet Lucas face-to-face until the 1980s, virtually elevated to the position of co-screenwriter.

Like many of mankind's oldest legends, this notion offers multiple levels of absurdity. First, if knowledge of "man's oldest stories" underlies the popularity of "Star Wars," then why is Lucas' non-"Star Wars" résumé so dismal? Apart from conceiving the "Indiana Jones" films, which owe their box-office impact to the kinetic genius of director Steven Spielberg, Lucas has produced an unbroken series of flops. Anyone here remember "Howard the Duck"? Or "Tucker: The Man and His Dream"? "Radioland Murders," anybody? And let us not forget "Willow," which is a virtual textbook of Campbell's mix 'n' match approach to mythology.

Second, and more damningly, the real roots of "Star Wars" are obvious to anyone not blinded by snobbery or the need for self-inflation. They lie not in "The Odyssey" or the "Upanishads," but 20th century science-fiction magazines such as Astounding, Amazing Stories and Galaxy. The "true theology" of "Star Wars" was written not by Virgil or Homer, but Isaac Asimov, Robert A. Heinlein, Frank Herbert, E.E. "Doc" Smith and a host of other S.F. writers.


[ 26 April 2005: Message edited by: 'lance ]


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Contrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6477

posted 26 April 2005 07:46 PM      Profile for Contrarian     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Myth and science ficition are not separate entities; many SF writers have delved into mythology and history for inspiration. Lucas might have read Campbell; or he might have read all sorts of stories by other people who had read Campbell. Nothing wrong with retelling a good old story in your own way.
From: pretty far west | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 26 April 2005 08:04 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Stephen Hart, author of the Salon piece, had an answer for that, too.

quote:
Campbell specialized in treating religious imagery as a set of metaphors divorced from historical context, a method that allowed him to talk, for example, about the Crucifixion as symbolizing the tree of life in an agrarian society, when in fact it was a very concrete reference to a particularly atrocious form of execution, rooted in a very specific period. Campbell's ability to generate whirlwinds of cross-cultural references makes his chatter sound tremendously erudite -- his disarming style reduced Moyers to an awestruck supplicant in the "Power of Myth" series -- but once the dust settles it's hard to grasp the point of it all. So it's no surprise that these alleged correspondences between mythical themes and "Star Wars" get a tad slippery when one tries to nail them down.

That "belly of the whale" business, for example, is supposedly evoked when the hero is swallowed up by a large monster. "This represents the entry into a mystical world where transformations occur, and the eventual escape represents a spiritual rebirth," explains the program to "Star Wars: The Magic of Myth," the exhibition that turned the Smithsonian into a "Star Wars" gift shop.

According to the program, this motif appears twice in "The Empire Strikes Back": first, when Han Solo and Princess Leia unwittingly fly into the gullet of an enormous space slug; later, when Darth Vader is shown chilling out in "an egg-like meditation chamber." But in neither instance does a significant transformation occur: Darth simply resumes his bad-guy duties, while Han and Leia keep on a-fussin' and a-feudin' until they declare their love near the end of the film.


Ur-daddy Joseph Campbell, on the other hand, found the motif in the original "Star Wars," when Luke, Leia, Han and Chewie fall into the Death Star trash compactor, which promptly sets to work squashing them. This is explicated in the most unintentionally hilarious section of the "Power of Myth" interviews. "My favorite scene was when they were in the garbage compactor," Moyers says, "and the walls were closing in, and I thought, 'That's like the belly of the whale that swallowed Jonah.'" Campbell replies that the scene is "a variant of the death and resurrection theme," in which the hero begins to discover his power.

All of this would make sense if Luke used the Force to hold back the crushing walls. But nothing of the sort happens in this scene: Luke and his friends escape only through the timely help of the dithering robot C3PO. Innumerable action-adventure heroes have had to fight their way out of rooms in which the walls or ceiling slowly close in. Campbell is taking a standard cliffhanger plot device -- one as hoary as having a mustachioed villain tie the heroine to a railroad track, or send her trundling toward a sawmill blade -- and trying to pump it full of significance, with predictably flatulent results.

Other links between "Star Wars" and classical mythology tend to evaporate when subjected to a little thought, a chronic problem with so many of Campbell's utterances. Jedi master Obi-Wan Kenobi, for example, is supposed to represent the "wise old sage" who instructs and guides the hero, Luke Skywalker, but Obi-Wan dies midway through the first film and reappears later only as a hologram offering supremely unhelpful advice, such as "Trust your feelings." If the Force already resides within the hero, what need then for sage advice -- especially when Obi-Wan sees no need to advise Luke that he is going off to duel with a villain who is, in fact, his father? That's a bit of information any idiot, let alone a wise old sage, might consider just a wee bit important.


Lucas is in show business, period. And there's absolutely nothing wrong that, as such. Why he or his fans have to pretend that his movies are anything more than live-action cartoons is beyond me.


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
arborman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4372

posted 26 April 2005 08:19 PM      Profile for arborman     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The first two movies were fun, and half decently written. After that Lucas started to feel like he was pretty smart, and it all went to shit.

I enjoyed the third movie, but I was 10 years old.

After watching the more recent two films, I was enormously disappointed in just. how. bad. the. writing. and. acting. were. I went back to watch the originals, and they were infinitely better.

I won't bother watching this summer's version, life is just too short to watch that kid try to emote.


From: I'm a solipsist - isn't everyone? | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged
Contrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6477

posted 26 April 2005 08:25 PM      Profile for Contrarian     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I wonder how much Campbell got from Frazer's The Golden Bough?. I haven't read either one; but Frazer was pretty commonly read I believe.

I agree with Hart that Stars Wars doesn't have a coherent mythology, or at most a shallow one; but there are old themes such as the special child who has to be hidden from enemies and raised in obscurity; and who returns to oust the usurper, as in Oedipus, Harry Potter and countless other ancient and modern stories.

And the wise old sage who produces nothing but enigmatic, useless prophecies also has appeared as Cassandra, Friar Lawrence in Romeo and Juliet, whoever prophesied that Oedipus would kill his father and marry his mother (he'd been warned but he went ahead and did it anyway).

I mean, you don't have a story if everyone is open and honest from the start. Atwood also has a point, when her wicked stepmother says "I'm the plot, baby, and don't you forget it."

[ 26 April 2005: Message edited by: Contrarian ]


From: pretty far west | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Jimmy Brogan
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3290

posted 26 April 2005 08:29 PM      Profile for Jimmy Brogan   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Why he or his fans have to pretend that his movies are anything more than live-action cartoons is beyond me.

And your stake in this is?


From: The right choice - Iggy Thumbscrews for Liberal leader | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 26 April 2005 08:31 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Just that a TV cartoon would seem a little redundant.

Edited:

No, it's more serious than that. I hold Lucas and Spielberg somewhat responsible -- not entirely, but significantly -- for the infantilization of Hollywood movies since the 1970s.

[ 26 April 2005: Message edited by: 'lance ]


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 26 April 2005 08:31 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
'lance, that review of Holiday Star Wars has me helpless. It's brutal!

quote:
Was Lucas high when he authorized this? Although technically only 120 minutes long, the "Holiday Special" has the futuristic ability to slow time, and one emerges from its vortex some six days later bearded, weeping, defeated and sporting a limp. It's the kind of experience that makes you want to go lie down in the road.

Yet, much as with "Schindler's List," perhaps everyone should be forced to watch it once, just so that nothing this abominable ever happens again.



From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 26 April 2005 08:56 PM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:

Luke Skywalker surfaces briefly, slathered in girlish makeup, and blathers incoherently for a while. Then there's a few more dance sequences, a cartoon that introduces Boba Fett, no fewer than four different high-larious characters played by Harvey Korman, a Tatooine Cantina ballad sung by Bea Arthur ("You're such a dear friend/You know I'm here, friend/Is that a tear, friend?") and a startlingly bad performance by Jefferson Starship.

Harvey Korman in 'Star Wars'??? Where I can I get my copy?


From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
bittersweet
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2474

posted 26 April 2005 08:59 PM      Profile for bittersweet     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Oy, Schindler and that psychotic Nazi commandant. Give for me break.

More oy...I just love projects that've been put through the myth grinder. Look! Here comes the Guardian at the Gate! Look! We're in the Innermost Cave! Look! The Shapeshifter! The writer's fed data into some program like DramaticaPro, and it's spat out (appropriate phrase) story, er, "suggestions." Or he's read "The Writer's Journey" based on Campbell's work. The result is artificial as hell. You have to cut the traces on a runaway cart full of steaming mythical bunk to let the horse get a decent shot at it. Paid many a bill with hated advice like that. And I like myth!

[ 26 April 2005: Message edited by: bittersweet ]


From: land of the midnight lotus | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Contrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6477

posted 26 April 2005 09:04 PM      Profile for Contrarian     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Try Artemus Fowl; kid's book with extremely high-tech elves and fairies. Stainless steel fairytale; original but weird!

[ 26 April 2005: Message edited by: Contrarian ]


From: pretty far west | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 26 April 2005 09:04 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Sure enough, you can download the Holiday Special from any one of several sites (scroll down).
From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
verbatim
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 569

posted 26 April 2005 09:07 PM      Profile for verbatim   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Stephen Hart's piece shows very little understanding of Comparative Theology, or the scholarship of Joseph Campbell. Hart makes him out to be an opportunistic, doddering old fool in that piece, which, if you know anything about Campbell's actual work (see: The Masks of God, The Hero With 1000 Faces, etc), only serves to vacate the credibility of Hart's thesis.

Lucas is another matter entirely, and I've never really believed that he'd thought beyond the original movie at all. Nevertheless, Hart's criticisms of the mythological themes and aspects of Star Wars are based on total ignorance of those themes.

In short, that is not a good article.


From: The People's Republic of Cook Street | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 26 April 2005 09:19 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
But Hart shows every sign of knowing the history of classic science fiction, which is a far more plausible source of inspiration for Star Wars and its sequels. Especially if, as he claims, Lucas never mentioned Campbell publicly before 1980.

[ 26 April 2005: Message edited by: 'lance ]


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
bittersweet
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2474

posted 26 April 2005 09:33 PM      Profile for bittersweet     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Yeah, this
quote:
Campbell specialized in treating religious imagery as a set of metaphors divorced from historical context, a method that allowed him to talk, for example, about the Crucifixion as symbolizing the tree of life in an agrarian society, when in fact it was a very concrete reference to a particularly atrocious form of execution, rooted in a very specific period.
is an ironic misinterpretation, because he's complaining about Cambell's lack of context, when he's the one who leaves it out. Kind of a neat trick.

From: land of the midnight lotus | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
verbatim
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 569

posted 26 April 2005 09:36 PM      Profile for verbatim   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Fine, then he could have focused on that aspect of it. I am certainly willing to believe that Lucas appropriated mythology after the fact. I am not willing to believe that Campbell was not genuinely identifying mythological themes he recognized in the movie, or that he was just making them up as he went along. It's an example of someone just winging it in an area where they're not particularly knowledgeable. If Hart is a big sci-fi expert, he should stick with what he knows.
From: The People's Republic of Cook Street | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Contrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6477

posted 26 April 2005 09:49 PM      Profile for Contrarian     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Also, I think Lucas has talked about some connection with westerns, which might be THE basic mythology of the USA, as the Arthurian legends are the "Matter of Britain".

The first time I heard of Star Wars was when someone described it to me as a cross between a comic book and video game (those were primitive times). The thing is that comic books tend to have mythical overtones, as well. A myth has to be a fairly simple story with not much deep psychologizing.


From: pretty far west | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518

posted 26 April 2005 10:12 PM      Profile for jeff house     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Campbell specialized in treating religious imagery as a set of metaphors divorced from historical context

But this IS Campbell's basic methodology, which he took from his mentor Jung.

He's also WAAAY too credulous, accepting as authentic ancient myths documents which first surfaced in 1850 or so, like the Popul Vuh.

In Jung's methodology, each myth-complex expressed the ancient, that is original, mental make-up of each "race."

While Campbell shied away from that, I think he did want to claim that the structure of the human mind can be deduced from myths. And so, like Jung, he thought that everyone admired a "hero", the man with a thousand faces.

Jung thought Der Hero was what the masses yearned for, too.


From: toronto | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
bittersweet
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2474

posted 26 April 2005 10:16 PM      Profile for bittersweet     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Contrarian, I think you'd really enjoy this book: Six Guns and Society: A Structural Study of the Western by Will Wright, a sociologist. It's fascinating, tracing the Western's evolution through 4 stages, Classical (Shane), Vengeance (High Noon), Transition, and Professional (Butch Cassidy). It may be a challenge to find, but a central library may have a copy. Here's a neat quote from the introduction:
quote:
Sooner or later...values and...institutions become more compatible; but meanwhile, a...dilemma exists for the people of the society, a dilemma which confronts traditional values with the attitudes inherent in institutional actions. It is this kind of dilemma and its solution in modern America that the Western symbolically addresses.

From: land of the midnight lotus | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Contrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6477

posted 26 April 2005 10:48 PM      Profile for Contrarian     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
It sounds interesting. Unforgiven was on CBC the other night; would that be yet another stage, I wonder? I guess Silverado would be a Professional one.

Chances are the book will be available in Calgary somewhere, or in Cochrane: Westwinds there has western and native history books and art.

[ 26 April 2005: Message edited by: Contrarian ]


From: pretty far west | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
bittersweet
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2474

posted 26 April 2005 11:49 PM      Profile for bittersweet     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I think "Unforgiven"'s still got a lot of the Professional plot going on, along with Transition. Not every aspect has to be present. It's an overview over time. Some pictures, like "Shane" are epitomes of a kind, others borrow here and there. The gist of the Professional plot is this: "The professional plot provides an alternative set of values to fill the vacuum caused by disenchantment with society started with the transition theme. In transition, the new group is a man and woman outside society, in the professional, it’s a group of men. Those outside the society are physically separated from those inside. Unlike classical heroes, the professional heroes are well-known by those inside society, but they end up being separated from it either because their job contract requires it, or because the job makes them outlaws. They can’t afford to be inside society or they’d lose their effectiveness."

If I remember correctly, the story starts with Wm. Munny in the middle of nowhere, on a farm once shared with his wife, but no longer sustainable. Then he hooks up with Morgan Freeman and that kid. And once he's done his dirty work (part vengeance), we're told in a brief graphic that he left the farm for good to become a shopkeeper--in San Francisco, I think. So there's that tiny nod to classic western plot resolutions at the end, where the hero returns to society. The action beforehand seems to be concerned with his professional exploits--but I may be forgetting.

Just like myth, this is fun stuff, but if I tried to pull off a Western using any of this, I'd hate to read it after.

[ 27 April 2005: Message edited by: bittersweet ]


From: land of the midnight lotus | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 27 April 2005 12:58 AM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
And the wise old sage who produces nothing but enigmatic, useless prophecies also has appeared as Cassandra, Friar Lawrence in Romeo and Juliet, whoever prophesied that Oedipus would kill his father and marry his mother (he'd been warned but he went ahead and did it anyway).

Pendantry: It's actually Oedipus's parents who are warned -- Oedipus being an infant at the time (at least, in Sophocles' version of the legend). They do what they can to prevent the prophecy coming true (and Oedipus, when he later hears of the prophecy, is so horrified as to flee Corinth, supposing his adoptive parents to be the ones referred to, and hoping never to see them again), but to no avail.

The point of the story is not that the prophecy is "useless." It's that no-one can defy the will of the gods, or alternately that no-one can escape his fate. Even Zeus himself has to obey fate. In that sense, the prophecy is useful -- to the hearers of the legend, and later to the audience for the Greek tragedies.


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Contrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6477

posted 27 April 2005 01:46 AM      Profile for Contrarian     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I was reacting to Hart's complaint that Obi-Wan didn't explain everything to Luke to begin with, which would pretty well kill the story. You need misunderstandings and mysterious prophecies to keep the action moving and the audience riveted, wondering what happens next.

Actually, it may not have worked that way for the Greeks; they knew how the story ended, that Nemesis would catch up with everybody. Maybe it was like a Columbo mystery where you know the killer, you just don't know how he is going to get caught.


From: pretty far west | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Doug
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 44

posted 27 April 2005 02:05 AM      Profile for Doug   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by verbatim:
Ugh. How depressing.

It could be good - if they keep George Lucas in a galaxy far, far away from it.


From: Toronto, Canada | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Screaming Lord Byron
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4717

posted 28 April 2005 08:22 PM      Profile for Screaming Lord Byron     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I can't find the source quote, but people often quote Joseph Campbell as saying George Lucas was the best student he ever had.
From: Calgary | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 28 April 2005 09:05 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Do you mean student in the formal sense? This page has a quotation from an interview Lucas gave in 1999.

quote:
When I started out making the movies, I was working toward making it modern mythology. I had studied anthropology in college, and social sciences was my major before I got into film. So, I'd taken a class in mythology and read some of his stuff there. I did more research before I wrote the screenplay for Star Wars. I read and reread Heroes of a Thousand Faces and a few other things he did. That was the extent of the influence he had on me. Later, after I did Jedi, someone gave me a tape of one of his lectures, and I was just blown away by it. He was much more powerful as a speaker than he was as a writer. Shortly thereafter, we became friends. I met him, and we were friends for a period until his death. In that time, he was a mentor. He was an amazing scholar and an amazing person, and I was privileged to be around him. That was later on, in my so-called "hiatus period." 2

[ 28 April 2005: Message edited by: 'lance ]


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Screaming Lord Byron
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4717

posted 28 April 2005 09:39 PM      Profile for Screaming Lord Byron     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The impression I got was that it was in a more informal sense. Like I say, it's one of those quotes you hear bandied about, but I've never seen the direct reference - so it's pretty inconclusive.
From: Calgary | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca