4 ms·
Put more accurately, it's even softer sci-fi than Trek. The deuterocanonical "Expanded Universe" material[1] goes to a lot of effort to explain and justify stuf
by aaronem 11y ago
Put more accurately, it's even softer sci-fi than Trek. The deuterocanonical "Expanded Universe" material[1] goes to a lot of effort to explain and justify stuff like moon-sized space stations and jet-fighter-sized ships that can destroy stars, but if you don't just sort of turn your critical faculties off and go along for the ride, it gets too much to bear pretty quick.
[1] Now more properly called the "apocryphal pre-Disney Expanded Universe material", or so I gather.
- dcole2929 11y agoFor the record that's not what it's called. The official terms are legends. It's been re-branded as Star Wars Legends. Honestly the EU was a bit of a mess but by far the best parts of Star Wars were in there. Unfortunately books make less money than movies and no one was interested in doing direct translations of already told stories no matter how much they made sense.
- TillE 11y agoThe key problem with most of the best EU stuff is that, by the mid/late 90s, the original actors were far too old for it. Although, I'd love to see a (live action) TV series based very loosely on the early Han Solo stories, obviously with someone else cast in the part of a 20-something Han.