Is the Star Wars dick sucking ever going to end?

[Lindz]

Yes? No?

Never saw the movies and got no attachment to 'em. Yup I get that they are super popular wether it be nostalgia or genunine goodness. What I don't get is why nothing else out of that era is so widely loved on. SW has to be one of the most parodied things ever and I don't just me quick one-liners. What else gets entire episodes of so many tv shows devoted to it? Just an honest question from an outsider looking in. >.>

[Sylar]

Star Wars is awesome. :O And that doesn't really answer your question. xfd

I think the truth is, at the time, there wasn't much known about the first film. Then, when it came out, it was all "OMG that rocked!" So then, it became a cinematic success, and a cult phenomenom at the same time I guess. Also, when it first came out, even the people making it didn't expect it to be so popular, since they just called it "Star Wars" rather than "A New Hope" straight out.

The best way to look at it is by thinking of something you like a lot, then wondering how people can't like it.

To be completely honest, I have no idea why I like Star Wars so much. xd But for some reason, I find myself being Special Editions, Clone Wars Cartoon on DVD, and even Puzz 3D Millenium Falcon. =3

In simpler words, I can't explain it. >>;

[Doppleganger]

Sylar summed up the initial impressions. The Empire Strikes Back topped the success by being a lot more character-driven, rather than organization-driven, but still had the "larger than life" epic feel of the first movie. Return of the Jedi tied up all the loose ends in a legendary fashion.

The problem with the prequels is that, well, they're not "larger than life". Instead of a war, we've got some silly people trying to keep a dumb, broken Republic together. Sideous really made those first movies - he was a great character.

I adored Star Wars because of the space battles, not the Jedi stuff. One of my favourite games of all time is Tie Fighter and even today, hearing the Imperial March stirs my soul almost as much as any of the three US military themes (which just goes to show how great a game it was).

[Raptor Jesus]

The prequels were pretty bad. The original 3 were pretty good. Who would have ever thought 20 something years of movie making technology wouldn't help?

The dialog is pretty bad sometimes. The remakes of the original three had some stupid moments. Like when Gredo shot first. WTF?

As it goes, Star Wars < Star Trek. Star Trek actually has some factual science while Star Wars is like LOTR in Space. Light Sabers are scientifically impossible. The death ray on the Death Star isn't possible. The force is bogus. etc. Star Trek has some bullshit too, but not nearly as much as Star Wars.

[Sylar]

As it goes, Star Wars < Star Trek. Star Trek actually has some factual science while Star Wars is like LOTR in Space. Light Sabers are scientifically impossible. The death ray on the Death Star isn't possible. The force is bogus. etc. Star Trek has some bullshit too, but not nearly as much as Star Wars.

That's what hooks in all the nerds though, since they're all thinking "Imagine if that's possible in the future!" even though it so blatantly won't be. :roll:

[Doppleganger]

That's what hooks in all the nerds though, since they're all thinking "Imagine if that's possible in the future!" even though it so blatantly won't be. :roll:


Some of the stuff imagined by Jules Verne have been built already and are seeing regular commercial use - while I agree Star Trek is a bit elitist toward the clearly fantastical Star Wars, the stuff we see in it could happen some day. It's just that someday is several hundred years into the future.

And the world ending in five years will be quite a hindrance toward that true end. =/

[Talon87]

I dunno if I'd say "Star Trek is better because it's more realistic," but I'll definitely agree with Loki's LotR analogy. Star Wars is definitely "the original LotR ... in space!"

Star Wars doesn't really presume to justify why there are so many more humans in the galaxy compared with other alien species, while Star Trek flatout says "most of the space we humans are exploring is bound to have more of us and less of other humanoids". I always sort of wonder when I see Star Wars why so many M-class worlds are dominated by humans (e.g. Corellia, Talus, Tralus, Coruscant) and why such worlds didn't seed their own human-level sentient life or why they didn't get conquered by other competing spacefaring humanoids (like the Mon Calamari) first. At least in Star Trek, there is only one planet that really harbors a population of humans greater than 5 billion: Earth. Everywhere else is just a colony, be it old (like the Moon, where Riker grew up) or new (like 99% of planets we find humans on in Star Trek).

Star Trek's pseudoscience is (in all fairness) just as circumspect as Star Wars'. But as a teen, I definitely did agree with Loki, and I wonder if (subconsciously) I still do, even though I'm consciously contending the point with him right now. I dunno. But let's look at the sci-fi tech and really see what it's setting out to do ...

1 - Transporters. He~llo. Please explain to me how matter from Location A is going to be magically "transported" to Location B. Question 1: is the matter actually being made to move through space and then being reassembled; or, is the matter being disassembled at Location A and then, using natural resources at Location B, being reassembled? Scenario 2 can't be the answer based on Star Trek's several episodes where we see people being teleported into the middle of outer space (where there wouldn't be enough matter to reconstruct them). One that comes to mind is in the Original Series where Kirk accidentally sends two men to their doom when he thinks that the Enterprise is still in orbit above an M-class planet and ... well ... it's not. But Scenario 1 doesn't make any sense either! :lol: If the matter is being somehow "transported through space" from Location A to Location B, how is it that the matter doesn't get blown off course by solar winds? Enemy fire? Rogue spaceships? How is it that the matter manages to "push its way" past the planet's atmosphere and get to the planet's surface where it magically reassembles in perfect order? And perhaps most damning of all ... how do you determine the location of every atom in the human body simultaneously? To truly do an instantaneous assessment of the position of every atom in the body at once, you'd need as many sensors as you have atoms in your body. It's unfathomable. And then (as if people are nothing more than Lego buildings with the blocks arranged in a prescribed order) you'd propose to dismantle and reassemble them. Absurd! Atoms are just side by side -- they're in constant movement and many of them are bonded to their nearest neighbors! It's all just so insanely daunting. I'm not saying it "can't be done," as per Doppel's optimism and wise citing of Jules Verne. But I will say that I don't think we'll see it in the next five centuries easy. It will take "the new millenium's equivalent of the previous millenium's Einstein and Newton and Galileo" to figure that one out.

2 - Inertial dampeners. These are a really cute catchphrase in Star Trek that magically make "slamming the brakes to go from Warp 9 to 0 mph in 2 seconds not kill you" a real possibility seen time and time again in every Star Trek series. The only problem is ... what the hell is an inertial dampener, anyway? :lol: Nobody knows. It's just this word tossed about on the air. It's some "thing" which magically "dampens ... inertia!" hahahahaha :lol: Is it an energy shield? Is it something that changes the local laws of physics? Just what the fuck is it and how would one proposedly work? At least with the transporter, we have some idea of what we're talking about; but the inertial dampener! Oh! It's just pure frustration! :lol: :) There was some nerd out there who realized the very real problem of Star Trek's writers proposing that Captain Kirk could go to Warp 9 and then go to 0 mph in just a few seconds and not become bug splatter; unfortunately, his answer to the problem created an even bigger problem to be solved! :lol:

3 - Warp. This has actually begun to see some real credence as more and more scientists acknowledge that gravity may actually work based on a fundamental particle, or gravitron, which locally distorts time and space; and that gravity may be likened to "a well or depression in the space-time fabric". A "warp bubble" (allegedly) could be envisioned which would allow one to create so much gravity, i.e. warp the fabric of space-time to such an extent, that points A and B are brought closer together, e.g. one can "go to warp" and make the trip from Earth to Alpha Centauri in 2 hours. But beyond these abstract mathematical defenses of Star Trek's warp technology, a lot remains to be seen before we can really count this one in as one of "the Star Trek techs which became real."



Still, I have to agree that I like warp better than the even-more abstract "hyperdrive" (which purports to take Han Solo from one side of the galaxy to the other in just under a day -.-), phasers are certainly more realistic than the infinitely-cooler lightsabers, and Star Trek's shuttlepods and other small spacecraft (which dissipate breathable air throughout the entire cabin) seem more realistic for the future of human exploration than George Lucas's X-Wings, Y-Wings, etc. which all (short-sightedly?) display fighter pilots still donning their fighter pilot helmets and oxygen tanks. What the fuck good does an oxygen tank do you if your X-Wing is blown up in the middle of space? Your a-gonna asplode when you depressurize, cupcake. ;p

[Doppleganger]

2 - Inertial dampeners. These are a really cute catchphrase in Star Trek that magically make "slamming the brakes to go from Warp 9 to 0 mph in 2 seconds not kill you" a real possibility seen time and time again in every Star Trek series. The only problem is ... what the hell is an inertial dampener, anyway? :lol: Nobody knows. It's just this word tossed about on the air. It's some "thing" which magically "dampens ... inertia!" hahahahaha :lol: Is it an energy shield? Is it something that changes the local laws of physics? Just what the fuck is it and how would one proposedly work? At least with the transporter, we have some idea of what we're talking about; but the inertial dampener! Oh! It's just pure frustration! :lol: :) There was some nerd out there who realized the very real problem of Star Trek's writers proposing that Captain Kirk could go to Warp 9 and then go to 0 mph in just a few seconds and not become bug splatter; unfortunately, his answer to the problem created an even bigger problem to be solved! :lol:


Kinoko Nasu of all people has something simmilar to that - Kishua Zelretch of the Second Magic is able to stop any sort of force heading toward him by dispersing the energy through an infinite number of parallel universes.


What the fuck good does an oxygen tank do you if your X-Wing is blown up in the middle of space? Your a-gonna asplode when you depressurize, cupcake. ;p


Just to clarify, all Rebel Alliance starfights were equipped with life-support and their pilot suits were virtually useless, while the Imperial attire were more simmilar to current spacesuits. Both starfighters had ejection seats, but it wasn't auto for the Rebel Alliance fighters since they were more expensive and the pilot would die in space anyay. When a Tie Fighter took critical damage, that is, anything below a 10% hull, it would auto-eject - theoretically, this made the pilot safer if destroyed by a starfighter, not very safe if hit by a turbor laser, and dead if hit by any warheads. Rebels could survive multiple warhead hits - a fully shielded X-Wing, Y-Wing, and B-Wing could withstand multiple bloody Proton Torpedos!

[Muyotwo]

Yes? No?


No.

[Sylar]

(like the Mon Calamari)

That just reminded me. Without Star Wars, we never would've had Admiral Ackbar! :O