4 ms·

"The Force" never sat well with me. It was the one weird supernatural thing in the Star Wars universe that pushed the whole franchise into "magic" territory. T

"The Force" never sat well with me. It was the one weird supernatural thing in the Star Wars universe that pushed the whole franchise into "magic" territory. The less Force, the better in my opinion. Save super-powers for comic-book movies.

meowface 1y ago
A bit of it is interesting. When they're just flinging objects/debris/rocks at each other for 10 minutes it's pretty silly, but the force-choking scenes are some of the most iconic Star Wars moments. Adds something to the world.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
WD-42 1y ago
I thought it worked in the original trilogy because it was much more subtle, but still powerful. You watch Luke struggle to harness it over the span of 3 movies. In the recent Disney movies (Andor being the exception) it’s like they gave everyone the force, everyone is a super hero, it’s bombastic and annoying.
- atoav 1y ago
  This is btw. what I hate with so many modern RPGs, you are a nobody but within 5 minutes of playing you are already extremely awesome and look like a shiny knight on a white horse. Let me run around with a rock and a stick for the first hour. Then give me a sword that looks cheap but I will cherish it. Then take it away. Let me earn it when I am awesome in the end. To many games treat you like a toddler that wants shiny things. Yeah I want shiny things, but I want them when I deserved them. Similarily, yeah, I want powerful heros, but they have to earn it as well.
  - mrunkel 1y ago
    Check out the Kingdom Come Deliverance series. Sure, you'll be a badass at the end, but you're going to earn it. :)
  - cropcirclbureau 1y ago
    Check out FromSoft games. EldenRing drops loot and equipment so rarely it drove me up a well.
gmueckl 1y ago
Star Wars was never science fiction. It has always been treated as fantasy with space ships by its creators. The nature of its setting is really much closer to Harry Potter than e.g. the Expanse.
- krapp 1y ago
  I don't know, plenty of "science fiction" has telepaths and psionics, especially from the 1970s and 80s. Star Trek had it since the original series. If your standard for what science fiction is us The Expanse then almost all of what's considered science fiction is fantasy.
  - gmueckl 1y ago
    Even the Expanse has fantastical elements like the protomolecule and the Epstein drive. The difference is that it is closer to classic science fiction authors like Asimov, Clarke or Niven in that this body of work tries hard to keep some grounding in extrapolated scientific models. Star Wars doesn't even claim to attempt this. It is a world of entirely made up rules and places for the sake of the story. There is nothing wrong with that. But it completely misses this key feature of sci fi. There isn't a very clear delineation between the two genres. Star Trek also crosses this line into pure fantasy pretty consistently (an anomaly that compells everybody to sing and eventually produces a Klingon boy band performance? Or one that gives everybody amnesia and turns them into actors in Shakespeare drama - costumes and all?).
    - krapp 1y ago
      Most science fiction is closer to Star Wars than The Expanse, and Star Wars is more grounded in plausible reality than Star Trek, which no one tags as "science fantasy." If Andor didn't have "Star Wars" branding, I don't think anyone would have a problem considering it science fiction in the grand tradition of a lot of MilSF. I'm not saying the distinction doesn't exist - The Hobbit isn't SF and Ringworld isn't high fantasy, but I am saying that between the extremes, it's mostly just vibes. There is no objective reason not to consider Star Wars science fiction, some people just find the space wizards too silly (while having a bookshelf full of "The author's barely disguised fetish or hyperfixation but In Spaaaaace.")
atoav 1y ago
The force was okay for me when it was treated seriously and not as a plot vehicle that could suddenly do things that are not plausible within the rules of the universe so far.

meowface 1y ago

A bit of it is interesting. When they're just flinging objects/debris/rocks at each other for 10 minutes it's pretty silly, but the force-choking scenes are some of the most iconic Star Wars moments. Adds something to the world.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

WD-42 1y ago

I thought it worked in the original trilogy because it was much more subtle, but still powerful. You watch Luke struggle to harness it over the span of 3 movies. In the recent Disney movies (Andor being the exception) it’s like they gave everyone the force, everyone is a super hero, it’s bombastic and annoying.

atoav 1y ago
This is btw. what I hate with so many modern RPGs, you are a nobody but within 5 minutes of playing you are already extremely awesome and look like a shiny knight on a white horse. Let me run around with a rock and a stick for the first hour. Then give me a sword that looks cheap but I will cherish it. Then take it away. Let me earn it when I am awesome in the end. To many games treat you like a toddler that wants shiny things. Yeah I want shiny things, but I want them when I deserved them. Similarily, yeah, I want powerful heros, but they have to earn it as well.
- mrunkel 1y ago
  Check out the Kingdom Come Deliverance series. Sure, you'll be a badass at the end, but you're going to earn it. :)
- cropcirclbureau 1y ago
  Check out FromSoft games. EldenRing drops loot and equipment so rarely it drove me up a well.

gmueckl 1y ago

Star Wars was never science fiction. It has always been treated as fantasy with space ships by its creators. The nature of its setting is really much closer to Harry Potter than e.g. the Expanse.

krapp 1y ago
I don't know, plenty of "science fiction" has telepaths and psionics, especially from the 1970s and 80s. Star Trek had it since the original series. If your standard for what science fiction is us The Expanse then almost all of what's considered science fiction is fantasy.
- gmueckl 1y ago
  Even the Expanse has fantastical elements like the protomolecule and the Epstein drive. The difference is that it is closer to classic science fiction authors like Asimov, Clarke or Niven in that this body of work tries hard to keep some grounding in extrapolated scientific models. Star Wars doesn't even claim to attempt this. It is a world of entirely made up rules and places for the sake of the story. There is nothing wrong with that. But it completely misses this key feature of sci fi. There isn't a very clear delineation between the two genres. Star Trek also crosses this line into pure fantasy pretty consistently (an anomaly that compells everybody to sing and eventually produces a Klingon boy band performance? Or one that gives everybody amnesia and turns them into actors in Shakespeare drama - costumes and all?).
  - krapp 1y ago
    Most science fiction is closer to Star Wars than The Expanse, and Star Wars is more grounded in plausible reality than Star Trek, which no one tags as "science fantasy." If Andor didn't have "Star Wars" branding, I don't think anyone would have a problem considering it science fiction in the grand tradition of a lot of MilSF. I'm not saying the distinction doesn't exist - The Hobbit isn't SF and Ringworld isn't high fantasy, but I am saying that between the extremes, it's mostly just vibes. There is no objective reason not to consider Star Wars science fiction, some people just find the space wizards too silly (while having a bookshelf full of "The author's barely disguised fetish or hyperfixation but In Spaaaaace.")

atoav 1y ago

The force was okay for me when it was treated seriously and not as a plot vehicle that could suddenly do things that are not plausible within the rules of the universe so far.