David Brin's commentary on AOTC and what it reveals...

Discussion in 'Attack of the Clones' started by Kiki-Gonn, Sep 19, 2002.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Kiki-Gonn Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 26, 2001
    star 6
    Hope no one's addressed this yet...
    link
    So, what does that reveal?
    Giant plotholes...
    Lucas' utter lack of skill...
    The fraud that is SW...

    No, it reveals simple petty jealousy.
    Doesn't the between the lines cry of "My stories should be that popular, not SW!" just jump off the page? Not to mention
    "I'm smarter than Lucas, really I am!"

    This childish behavior is very sad from a supposed artist. Its one thing to see a hateful movie critic bash SW but a fellow creator? That's unprofessional, tacky and very unbecoming of an artist.

    Now to the actual criticism...
    1) There's no Campbellian hero in TPM!
    -TPM is chapter one of a 6 part hero's journey. Anakin is the hero but his journey is just beginning.

    2) The dark siders never give in to anger
    -Vader choking one guy to death by hand and another through the force.
    The Emperor's palpable anger as he retorts to Luke in ROTJ (especially "So be it, Jedi"), followed by his frying Luke with lightning.
    Darth Maul... anger in a bottle.

    3) "So, all the men who got mad at Adolph Hitler ran right out and joined the Nazi Party, right?"
    -and if they didn't, that proves that anger leads to the dark side is wrong?
    How about this... Hitler played on the people's fear of and anger towards the Jews to turn them to the dark side (genocide is pretty dark)!

    So David, go back and gnash your teeth over why The Postman wasn't as popular as Star Blazers, much less Star Wars and keep your brilliant thoughts to yourself.

  2. The_Abstract Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 16, 2002
    star 4
    I was going to start a thread just like this but I figured it would be baiting people who didn't like the movie.

    Look, this guy doesn't even like Star Wars, so what's the point of taking him seriously. He admitted he doesn't like Yoda, and the only movie he likes is, suprise, ESB.

    Plus, he seems to have philosophical and political differences with Lucas that he brings into the "review".

    Maybe I'd comment more, but seeing as it took him 4 months to write this, I really don't see the point.
  3. SWfan2002 Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 28, 2002
    star 4
    I remember reading Orsen Scott Card's review of AOTC, and I am almost positive that the reason he as so harsh was because he is jealous of GL. His big book, Ender's Game, came out in 1977 and was obviously overshadowed by Star Wars.

    And where does this Brin guy get off critisizing GL? He's not even a pimple on GL's you-know-what. ;)
  4. Durwood Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    May 18, 2002
    star 5
    It's just another list of unoriginal rants--do any of these critics have a single, original thought?--wrapped up in hackneyed snobbery. If Mr. Brin cared to spend just a few moments reading some of the threads on this forum, I think he'd find reasonable answers to many, if not all, of his questions.
  5. elfdart Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Apr 1, 2001
    star 2
    Check out the Letters section on Salon.com. Under the heading "Galactic Gasbag", there is a pretty clever rebuttal to the nonsense spewed by Lucas-haters at the end.

    David Brin's constant assertion that Star Wars, Lord of the Rings and romanticism in general promote fascism is every bit as stupid as the claim that Mr. Potatohead promotes racism.

    What he can't get through his pointy head is that Lucas is an ARTIST. He's not a congressman, supreme court justice or president. He makes movies to entertain people. Nothing more, nothing less.

    Because there is so much happening visually in Star Wars, Lucas (smartly, in my opinion) prefers to keep the story and characters simple and straightforward, with a few exceptions. In her enlightening study of myth and fairy tales entitled "No Go The Bogeyman", Marina Warner explains why storytellers use such archetypal characters as the king, the fool, the princess, the witch, the ogre et al. When the storyteller does that, he/ she is essentially turning the character into a chess piece which will only have certain roles to play and certain moves to make. In other words it's shorthand.

    Lucas helps himself in three ways by doing this:

    1) Just about anyone (except the terminally pretentious) can relate to it.
    2) It doesn't overshadow imagery.
    3) It sets the stage in such a way that when one of the characters does something that his position on the board doesn't allow, it provides a surprise that many didn't see coming.

    So no, Lucas isn't trying to promote monarchy, let alone fascism.
    This just goes to show that David Brin, "PhD" is proof positive that that "PhD" stands for "Piled High and Deep".

  6. The_Abstract Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 16, 2002
    star 4
    "Mr. Potatohead promotes racism."


    Whaaaaaa?

  7. Rhane-1138 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Nov 9, 2001
    star 1
    Now to the actual criticism...
    1) There's no Campbellian hero in TPM!

    Actually, Jar-Jar follows the adventure of the hero pretty damn closely.

    2) The dark siders never give in to anger
    yeah, other people have already pointed out that this is false.

    3) "So, all the men who got mad at Adolph Hitler ran right out and joined the Nazi Party, right?"
    Just because they didn't, doesn't mean that George's point about "anger making you evil" is entirely wrong. First of all, he says anger leads to evil, it's not an automatic thing. (afterall, Luke gets angry...) But, all those men who got mad at Adolph Hitler who didn't join the Nazi party did something else: they joined the army and went and killed people. Maybe all the people they killed deserved to die. But I doubt it. If you murder people who do evil things, is it ok? Is that what this guy is saying? What if you kill sandpeople who've beaten your mother to death? Is that not evil, or evil?
  8. elfdart Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Apr 1, 2001
    star 2
    A couple of years ago, some crank group claimed that since Mr. Potatohead had brown skin and big lips, he was a racist charicature of black people. Silly me, I thought he had brown skin ( er, peel) and big lips because he was.................................. Mr. Potatohead!

    This just goes to show what can happen when you drink bongwater.
  9. one-armed-man Jedi Padawan

    Member Since:
    Jun 25, 2002
    When did Brin critique Lord of the Rings??
  10. Ree Yees Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Apr 6, 2000
    star 5
    Why do you always assume that whenever Star Wars: Attack of the Clones get negative reviews, it is because of jealousy? What kind of thinking is that? So all the movie reviews in the world are just written by jealous journalists who can't write their own scripts? Oh my God. From a technical viewpoint, the film does suck big time. So what? You can still like it if you wish.
  11. VadersLaMent Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Apr 3, 2002
    star 9
    Oh wow, I was gonna post this today. BTW, at the bottom of that a page is a link that talks about the Empire NOT being evil. Lots of bad points but one or two good ones.
  12. elfdart Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Apr 1, 2001
    star 2
    The whole "anger/ evil" business is obvious to anyone whose IQ number is equal to or greater than his shoe size number.

    Star Wars is mostly a movie for eight-to-twelve-year-olds (Of course many who are older enjoy them, too.). When Lucas' mentor characters (the Jedi), warn against anger it is a simplified way of saying: "Don't ape the behaviour of your enemies. Don't stoop to their level."

    Brin keeps bringing up the Second World War and saying that the Allies were right to be angry about the atrocities committed by Hitler, Hirohito & Co. Does Brin think this anger justified the firebombing of German and Japanese civillians? Or the mutilation of the corpses of Japanese soldiers for souvenirs? Or the large-scale rape, torture and murder of German civillians (especially in the East)? Or the deportation of Japanese-Americans to concentration camps? Or the deportation of the Chechens in 1943 by Stalin?

    As I said before, the moral to Star Wars is that a person shouldn't act out of anger or fear, since those who do tend to imitate their enemies.
  13. Darth_Sprocket Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Sep 3, 2002
    star 4
    <<From a technical viewpoint, the film does suck big time>>

    Incorrect....it's a technical masterpiece...much better than FOTR.....and the film anti-sucks......
  14. sr_spielbergo1 Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Sep 8, 2002
    star 1
    Ree Yees--from a technical point of view you suck big time.
  15. elfdart Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Apr 1, 2001
    star 2
    Brin took a swipe at LOTR (the books) in The Skeptic a few issues back. He even linked LOTR to -surprise, surprise- Nazism! He went into his usual schtick about how romanticism is evil, blah, blah, blah.

    Again, he doesn't understand art, which should be clear to anyone who watched The Postman.

    As public policy, romanticism (longing for the good old days) is crap. An ARTIST, however, is handicapped without it. Since George Lucas is an artist, he needs it.

    On the other hand, egalitarianism and representative goverment tend to work better as public policy, but are death to art. One of the reasons 99.9% of movies, TV, books and music aren't worth the trouble is because most are made by committee, with hacks who don't understand art calling the shots. Cf. "The Postman".
  16. yodaschum Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 9, 2002
    star 4
    He makes some interesting points. What I didnt get was his idea for episode III that Anakin are Obi are conspiring against the Emporer in IV-VI. Why on earth would they conspire against Yoda?
  17. VadersLaMent Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Apr 3, 2002
    star 9
    I have always wanted to read his Uplift series. I tried to start with what is supposed to be a prequal..Sundiver...and honestly although somewhat interesting it was kinda boring, I could not finish it. Because of that I did not move on to the main series despite the good things I always hear about it.

  18. Only_2 Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    May 21, 2002
    star 3
    I didn't see any interesting points. I see the same rhetoric everywhere. Yes Ree-Yees, it is based upon jealousy. Denying that only furthers the theory. Denial and jealousy are best friends.

    Lets see here:

    30,000,00 plus who liked the movie to some degree, most of whom enjoyed it tremendously.

    A few 1,000 critics who jumped on the Lucas bashing bandwagon because a few of them were spurned by GL when he chose not to work within the kiss-ass, payola influenced, political BS plant that is Hollywood.

    This man would fit in a Star Wars movie as an extra very well. He is green.
  19. elfdart Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Apr 1, 2001
    star 2
    Actually, Ree-yees, it's well known that those whocan, do. And those who can't become critics.

    Roger Ebert is a failed soft-core porn writer. Think about just how bad you have to be to wash out writing for Russ Meyer.

    Rex "I don't know how these CDs ended up in my pocket, officer." Reed was horrible in Myra Breckenridge, a movie so bad that Gore Vidal (who wrote the book the movie was based on) wouldn't sell movie rights to his books for almost twenty years.

    Critics are like horoscopes, since they are pure moonshine, why bother?
  20. DarthTerrious Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 16, 2001
    star 5
    Oh well I read the first few sentences and didnt read on.

    He doesn't understand Star Wars and its not surprising coming from an author of a genre which is different from the genre of Star wars (despite popular belief Star wars is fantasy).

    And considering he has moaned about Star Wars before what do you expect from another article on something he clearly doesn't understand nor want to.

    I don't need to read another persons' personal problems dressed out in an ignorant review.
  21. yodaschum Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 9, 2002
    star 4
    Roger Ebert is a failed soft-core porn writer. Think about just how bad you have to be to wash out writing for Russ Meyer.

    Hey don't diss meyer! :) He made some awesome movies. I'm serious. Really under-under-appreciated director.
  22. elfdart Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Apr 1, 2001
    star 2
    Sorry yodaschum. Isn't Russ Meyer (or was it Andy Sidaris?) the one who said that the greatest special effects ever shown on a movie screen were women's breasts?

    I just hope the ILM people didn't read that!
  23. Go-Mer-Tonic Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Aug 22, 1999
    star 6
    David Brin acts like there were no female Jedi until AOTC. Anyone remember Yaddle? Depa Billaba? or Adi Gallia?

    He says this is the first SW film where there is an action twist, completely ingoring ROTJ's "it's a trap", and then he goes on to say that it is the first SW film where the action is resolved without blowing up a space station's reactor. I see his point about the recurring themes, but really, it's like he doesn't even know what he is talking about half the time.

    I have to give him kudos for speaking out against the ridiculous racisms claims, but his interperetation that Lucas is saying heroism is futile is so missing the boat of reasonable logic, that I can't even read it without rolling my eyes, I tried, and it is physically impossible.

    I also take issue with his saying that Lucas proclaims himself an expert on Campbells mythological study. He was very respectful of his findings, but he never claimed to be an expert. He does seem to know more about it that Brin seems to.

    Another thing that frosts my biscuits is Brin acts like using the term "federation" has to be some sort of slam on Star Trek just because they happen to use that term as well.

    What kind of childish conslusion is that?

    I am surprised anyone takes this guy seriously as a professional.
  24. Kiki-Gonn Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 26, 2001
    star 6
    Finally getting a chance to check in here.

    I guess what really bothers me about him (and Card) is that they're not just critics.
    Like I said, critics are easy enough to ignore because their whole job is to knock the work of others (is there a lower existence?).
    These two, though, would fancy themselves as artists and I can't think of anything more antithetical to the artistic impulse than to bash someone else's creation.
    That's why jealousy is the impulse I see, with critics, its their job. With these guys, something else is driving them.
  25. yodaschum Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 9, 2002
    star 4
    Why do you let it get to you? He's entitled to his opinion. If he doesn't "get it" than that's his problem.

    He just looks like an irritating twerp with a bald head, who calls himself "a scientist" and pretends to be an author. I\ve never heard of this guy, or read any of his books, but I'm pretty damn sure I'd like Star Wars more.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.