8 ms·

New podcast analyzing every minute of Star Wars, individually

23 points by apeconmyth 13y ago

iterationx 13y ago
The analysis of "Minute 8" is 16 minutes and 14 seconds.
greedoinaspeedo 13y ago
Every minute of Star Wars gets 15 minutes of fame.
damon_c 13y ago
In my opinion, they could have gone into "a long time ago, in a galaxy far far away" a bit more...
- greedoinaspeedo 13y ago
  A dissertation could be written about "a long time ago, in a galaxy far far away." That phrase is also a hypnotic induction all by itself. And as that sinks in, consider that someone told me that Star Wars' past is Dune's present.
  - damon_c 13y ago
    I like to think that the light rays from that far away galaxy could just be arriving here any moment, treating all with a good enough telescope to a free showing of Star Wars from a really boring camera angle.
    - greedoinaspeedo 13y ago
      I like that idea. Similar to an episode of Star Trek, where the alien child's telescope allowed him to view earth live, yet in the past. Would this camera angle show who really shot first in the Cantina?
      - CapitalistCartr 13y ago
        There is no first, second, etc. Han Solo shot, period.
  - lukifer 13y ago
    My understanding is that Dune is Earth's future (http://dune.wikia.com/wiki/Earth http://dune.wikia.com/wiki/Earth), so that doesn't really fit. :) But the opening line of Star Wars is truly impressive in its economy and efficacy. It tells the viewer all that they need to know so that they have permission to accept the truly fantastic. No need to connect it to Earth or anything vaguely familiar, no reason to wonder if this "future" could really happen, because everything they're seeing has already happened. It even has a beautiful rhythm and cadence, despite never being spoken aloud. That iconic phrase is one of many little touches that prevents Episode IV from slipping into the silly B-movie niche occupied by so much prior sci-fi.
    - jonnathanson 13y ago
      Correct; Dune is meant to take place in the far future of our galaxy. Star Wars is a "far away" galaxy and in the distant past. The "long time ago / far away" disclaimer is brilliant in a number of ways, not the least of which is that it helps the viewer suspend disbelief. It's also an elegant way to future-proof the technology, clothing choices, etc., on display in the movie. If Star Wars had made a claim about being the future of our galaxy, it would age pretty badly (the way that the "futuristic" inventions in Star Trek tend not to age well; consumer technology tends to advance more quickly than projections thereof).
- speedyrev 13y ago
  What?!? and blast right past the cryptic Episode IV text? "Why is this movie starting at episode 4?"
  - Boshek 13y ago
    Because that wasn't there when it was originally released. It just said "Star Wars".
baddox 13y ago
I like this idea, but it would work better for films that actually have some substance.
- sentenza 13y ago
  Then maybe an acutal filmmakers perspective on why the prequels are bad might be the right thing for you. In case you haven't seen it before: http://redlettermedia.com/plinkett/star-wars/star-wars-episode-1-the-phantom-menace http://redlettermedia.com/plinkett/star-wars/star-wars-episo...
  - baddox 13y ago
    In fact, that's exactly what I was thinking of when I claimed that the Star Wars films have no substance.
tathastu 13y ago
...just in case reading HN doesn't waste enough of your time.
stopbits 13y ago
I have been doing a minute by minute podcast analysis of The Big Lebowski since last year and some of our episodes are almost two hours. http://gutterballs.tv http://gutterballs.tv
- JacksonGariety 13y ago
  I'm doing the same movie frame-by-frame: http://jacksongariety.com/journals/the-big-lebowski-project http://jacksongariety.com/journals/the-big-lebowski-project :)
  - HelpfulBot 13y ago
    By "frame-by-frame", do you mean "shot-by-shot"?
    - JacksonGariety 13y ago
      How is frame any less correct?
      - HelpfulBot 13y ago
        In film, a 'frame' is a single photographic exposure. A movie typically consists of 24 or 30 frames per second. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_frame http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_frame By contrast, a "shot" is "a series of frames, that runs for an uninterrupted period of time." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shot_(filmmaking) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shot_(filmmaking)
        sk00byd00 13y ago
        Personally I took the phrase 'frame-by-frame' to be a figure of speech. "A figure of speech is the use of a word or a phrase, which ascend from its literal interpretation." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Figure_of_speech http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Figure_of_speech I think the comment author was just trying to emphasize they were trying to be thorough, a bit like when police say they will search an area with a fine-toothed comb. No reasonable person expects the police to use actual combs.

23 points by apeconmyth 13y ago

iterationx 13y ago

The analysis of "Minute 8" is 16 minutes and 14 seconds.

greedoinaspeedo 13y ago

Every minute of Star Wars gets 15 minutes of fame.

damon_c 13y ago

In my opinion, they could have gone into "a long time ago, in a galaxy far far away" a bit more...

greedoinaspeedo 13y ago
A dissertation could be written about "a long time ago, in a galaxy far far away." That phrase is also a hypnotic induction all by itself. And as that sinks in, consider that someone told me that Star Wars' past is Dune's present.
- damon_c 13y ago
  I like to think that the light rays from that far away galaxy could just be arriving here any moment, treating all with a good enough telescope to a free showing of Star Wars from a really boring camera angle.
  - greedoinaspeedo 13y ago
    I like that idea. Similar to an episode of Star Trek, where the alien child's telescope allowed him to view earth live, yet in the past. Would this camera angle show who really shot first in the Cantina?
    - CapitalistCartr 13y ago
      There is no first, second, etc. Han Solo shot, period.
- lukifer 13y ago
  My understanding is that Dune is Earth's future (http://dune.wikia.com/wiki/Earth http://dune.wikia.com/wiki/Earth), so that doesn't really fit. :) But the opening line of Star Wars is truly impressive in its economy and efficacy. It tells the viewer all that they need to know so that they have permission to accept the truly fantastic. No need to connect it to Earth or anything vaguely familiar, no reason to wonder if this "future" could really happen, because everything they're seeing has already happened. It even has a beautiful rhythm and cadence, despite never being spoken aloud. That iconic phrase is one of many little touches that prevents Episode IV from slipping into the silly B-movie niche occupied by so much prior sci-fi.
  - jonnathanson 13y ago
    Correct; Dune is meant to take place in the far future of our galaxy. Star Wars is a "far away" galaxy and in the distant past. The "long time ago / far away" disclaimer is brilliant in a number of ways, not the least of which is that it helps the viewer suspend disbelief. It's also an elegant way to future-proof the technology, clothing choices, etc., on display in the movie. If Star Wars had made a claim about being the future of our galaxy, it would age pretty badly (the way that the "futuristic" inventions in Star Trek tend not to age well; consumer technology tends to advance more quickly than projections thereof).
speedyrev 13y ago
What?!? and blast right past the cryptic Episode IV text? "Why is this movie starting at episode 4?"
- Boshek 13y ago
  Because that wasn't there when it was originally released. It just said "Star Wars".

baddox 13y ago

I like this idea, but it would work better for films that actually have some substance.

sentenza 13y ago
Then maybe an acutal filmmakers perspective on why the prequels are bad might be the right thing for you. In case you haven't seen it before: http://redlettermedia.com/plinkett/star-wars/star-wars-episode-1-the-phantom-menace http://redlettermedia.com/plinkett/star-wars/star-wars-episo...
- baddox 13y ago
  In fact, that's exactly what I was thinking of when I claimed that the Star Wars films have no substance.

tathastu 13y ago

...just in case reading HN doesn't waste enough of your time.

stopbits 13y ago

I have been doing a minute by minute podcast analysis of The Big Lebowski since last year and some of our episodes are almost two hours. http://gutterballs.tv http://gutterballs.tv

JacksonGariety 13y ago
I'm doing the same movie frame-by-frame: http://jacksongariety.com/journals/the-big-lebowski-project http://jacksongariety.com/journals/the-big-lebowski-project :)
- HelpfulBot 13y ago
  By "frame-by-frame", do you mean "shot-by-shot"?
  - JacksonGariety 13y ago
    How is frame any less correct?
    - HelpfulBot 13y ago
      In film, a 'frame' is a single photographic exposure. A movie typically consists of 24 or 30 frames per second. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_frame http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_frame By contrast, a "shot" is "a series of frames, that runs for an uninterrupted period of time." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shot_(filmmaking) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shot_(filmmaking)
      - sk00byd00 13y ago
        Personally I took the phrase 'frame-by-frame' to be a figure of speech. "A figure of speech is the use of a word or a phrase, which ascend from its literal interpretation." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Figure_of_speech http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Figure_of_speech I think the comment author was just trying to emphasize they were trying to be thorough, a bit like when police say they will search an area with a fine-toothed comb. No reasonable person expects the police to use actual combs.