These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Out of Pod Experience

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123
 

I Hesitate to Post Star Trek: Into Darkness Reviews.....(But Now I Have)
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#41 - 2013-05-11 20:23:32 UTC
Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:



Science Fiction requires explicitly laid out rules concerning it's technology and worlds, which Star Wars does not have at all. It's free for all, with no explanations needed like in Fantasy.


And star trek does?

The rules change every episodeUgh
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#42 - 2013-05-11 20:42:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:
Science Fiction requires explicitly laid out rules concerning it's technology and worlds, which Star Wars does not have at all. It's free for all, with no explanations needed like in Fantasy.
Star Wars has physics rules, they just aren't always followed by George Lucas. The fans who write books, on the other hand, tend to be very particular in following the Star Wars canon physics.

Star Trek also has a habit of breaking canon to fit an episode. It's very annoying to the fans.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
#43 - 2013-05-12 09:18:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Akita T
Eurydia Vespasian wrote:
what i do know about it it seems pretty sci-fi to me lol. fleets of ships and explosions. different worlds and aliens. strange techy jargon and lightspeed. i've heard it called space fantasy. but is not fantasy inherently fiction?

All fantasy is inherently fiction, but fiction is not inherently science(-y).
And science-fiction doesn't necessarily have to have space travel and fleet combat or explosions (although it often is), nor vice-versa.

Star Wars can be called futuristic fantasy (although, it allegedly happens in the distant past, as claimed by the openings), or if you will, futuristic fiction, but there's very little in it you could call science.
At most, you can call SW a "very soft sci-fi", but calling it just fantasy fits the description better.

Star Trek for instance does not fare much better.
Sure, they have a lot more techno-babble and stuff, but it's best called "soft(-ish) sci-fi" for the majority of episodes.

For "hard" Sci-Fi, you mostly have to resort to books, as very few movies are actually "hard sci-fi".
You have more luck with animation (see: "Planetes").

P.S. See : http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MohsScaleOfScienceFictionHardness
Contrast the lowest "Science In Genre Only" (which is where most Star Wars films fall into) with the middle "Physics Plus" (where most of Star Trek series except the original series usually fit) and the near-top non-RL-like "Speculative Science" (very few movies barely qualify, like "Moon" or "Gattaca").

P.P.S. Funny enough, the "Mass Effect" game series actually rates higher than either Star Wars or Star Trek, as "(only) One Big Lie" (in this case the eponymous mass effect from which pretty much all of the game universe's sci-fi-ish tech is derived).

Akita T evewiki profile | | | Build your own EVE-ready PC
Elias Greyhand
#44 - 2013-05-12 12:17:05 UTC
I want to watch the movie for a couple of specific reasons which will probably seem stupid;

I like the cliche British villain thing, always makes me chuckle, but I also like Benedict Cumberbatch as an actor.

Some of the lines in the first movie were great, such as the contempt Spock could fit in to "Live long and prosper.", and I'd like to see what other verbal delights might feature in the new movie.

Also, despite these days the shows looking dated and continuity being pretty awful on occasion, I love Star Trek as a whole as an IP.

"That which is done cannot be undone. But it can be avenged."
Krixtal Icefluxor
INLAND EMPIRE Galactic
#45 - 2013-05-12 12:50:26 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
.....and Star Wars is a deep spiritual-political fantasy set in a lush and extremely expansive adventure.



Yeah, I coulda done without the constant political hand-wringing in the recent trilogy. But it was all part of George's goal to "make children's films", doncha know ? Lol

"He has mounted his hind-legs, and blown crass vapidities through the bowel of his neck."  - Ambrose Bierce on Oscar Wilde's Lecture in San Francisco 1882
Krixtal Icefluxor
INLAND EMPIRE Galactic
#46 - 2013-05-12 12:52:52 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:



Science Fiction requires explicitly laid out rules concerning it's technology and worlds, which Star Wars does not have at all. It's free for all, with no explanations needed like in Fantasy.


And star trek does?

The rules change every episodeUgh



The rules don't 'change'. They find new ones. The core technologies like Warp Drive and Transporters do not change.

But Star Trek is about as Utopian as SF ever gets, even more so than Heinlein.

"He has mounted his hind-legs, and blown crass vapidities through the bowel of his neck."  - Ambrose Bierce on Oscar Wilde's Lecture in San Francisco 1882
Krixtal Icefluxor
INLAND EMPIRE Galactic
#47 - 2013-05-12 12:54:54 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:


Star Trek also has a habit of breaking canon to fit an episode. It's very annoying to the fans.



Canon does not require any ties to technological aspects of a storyline or world construction. Canon is a completely different thing altogether.

"He has mounted his hind-legs, and blown crass vapidities through the bowel of his neck."  - Ambrose Bierce on Oscar Wilde's Lecture in San Francisco 1882
Kirjava
Lothian Enterprises
#48 - 2013-05-12 12:56:10 UTC
You could tell it was a kids movie, have you ever seen 2 year olds transfixed by the discussion of space tax treaties?
The debates and wrangling in the senate?

[center]Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. /人◕‿‿◕人\ Unban Saede![/center]
Krixtal Icefluxor
INLAND EMPIRE Galactic
#49 - 2013-05-12 12:56:39 UTC
Akita T wrote:
stuff



Someone who gets it........Big smile

"He has mounted his hind-legs, and blown crass vapidities through the bowel of his neck."  - Ambrose Bierce on Oscar Wilde's Lecture in San Francisco 1882
Krixtal Icefluxor
INLAND EMPIRE Galactic
#50 - 2013-05-12 12:59:10 UTC
Kirjava wrote:
You could tell it was a kids movie, have you ever seen 2 year olds transfixed by the discussion of space tax treaties?
The debates and wrangling in the senate?



I'm sure they were just fascinated.

I had heard George's comment about these films being strictly for kids, and as I sat there the next day watching it (in a theater with the oxygen seemingly sucked out of the room around the 2 minute mark), I was just astonished, really. It was like watching a 2 1/2 hour Disconnect from all the rules of filmmaking, and not in the good David Lynch way either.

"He has mounted his hind-legs, and blown crass vapidities through the bowel of his neck."  - Ambrose Bierce on Oscar Wilde's Lecture in San Francisco 1882
Kirjava
Lothian Enterprises
#51 - 2013-05-12 13:12:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Kirjava
If you haven't seen them already, I can't recommend Mr Plinketts review of Star Wars hard enough. It is hilarious and insightful, longer than the film itself and being infinitely better. Three's a part where he goes over the additional materials with a preview with Lucas, noone clapped at the end, just a confused "what did I watch" feeling and a slight dawning horror on Lucas. Its as if he wrote a series of scenes of stuff happening, then linked them together afterwards with a loose plot.

[center]Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. /人◕‿‿◕人\ Unban Saede![/center]
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#52 - 2013-05-12 13:17:55 UTC
Kirjava wrote:
If you haven't seen them already, I can't recommend Mr Plinketts review of Star Wars hard enough. It is hilarious and insightful, longer than the film itself and being infinitely better. Three's a part where he goes over the additional materials with a preview with Lucas, noone clapped at the end, just a confused "what did I watch" feeling and a slight dawning horror on Lucas. Its as if he wrote a series of scenes of stuff happening, then linked them together afterwards with a loose plot.


Still better than Eragon though.
Kirjava
Lothian Enterprises
#53 - 2013-05-12 13:19:18 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Kirjava wrote:
If you haven't seen them already, I can't recommend Mr Plinketts review of Star Wars hard enough. It is hilarious and insightful, longer than the film itself and being infinitely better. Three's a part where he goes over the additional materials with a preview with Lucas, noone clapped at the end, just a confused "what did I watch" feeling and a slight dawning horror on Lucas. Its as if he wrote a series of scenes of stuff happening, then linked them together afterwards with a loose plot.


Still better than Eragon though.

I know I watched that when it came out, friends were fans.

For some reason they never spoke of it again and I can't for the life of me remember a thing other than the fact it had a kid and a dragon.

[center]Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. /人◕‿‿◕人\ Unban Saede![/center]
Krixtal Icefluxor
INLAND EMPIRE Galactic
#54 - 2013-05-12 13:20:21 UTC
Kirjava wrote:
If you haven't seen them already, I can't recommend Mr Plinketts review of Star Wars hard enough.



I laughed so hard during the entire 'well over 2 hours' of length. I know how those guys felt in their reactions. The theater I saw it in was literally drained of oxygen at the beginning. You could palpably feel it leaving the room.

"He has mounted his hind-legs, and blown crass vapidities through the bowel of his neck."  - Ambrose Bierce on Oscar Wilde's Lecture in San Francisco 1882
Previous page123