A question for Star Wars fans.

[Pegghead]

Well it's sort of like...Jade Empire if you ever played that game. Not only was there incredible steampunk technology in the game but there were many magical, mythological almost paranormal aspects of the setting. It gave the best of both worlds and a stark but beautiful contrast between the two and made it stand out from the crowd.

But then they went ahead and dispelled that element of ancient order, magic and the unknown by labelling the force as some kind of birth defect.

 

[Tranka Verrane]

well it was in space with spaceships and laser swords and aliens. i think its sci-fi.
and if it really isnt, "fantasy" makes it sound lame like WoW

With the greatest possible respect, you're wrong. And the setting of WoW is not what makes it lame.

 

[Billion Backs]

>Implaying that a magical mystical power can be scientifically analysed through some blood.

>Implying everything magical and mystical isn't simply a delusion, a work of skill (in case of all the awesome illusionists like David Copperfield) , or simply something that's not yet been studied hard enough.

Storm and lightning was magic or work of gods just a few centuries ago. Now, electricity - and weather - are well-understood things. Same applies to EVERYTHING. If something seems like magic or god, it's because of your ignorance.

Same applies to fiction. Frankly, I like the whole midiclorian thing.

 

[Billion Backs]

Star Wars, the original trilogy, is not science fiction. It is a sword and sorcery fantasy epic that contrives to add in to that the hardware, and therefore the visuals, of science fiction. The sword and sorcery is central to the action, the SF is secondary. By pushing it into the realm of fantasy rather than SF it gives the viewer permission to suspend disbelief and not analyse the SF elements too closely. Start analysing the science of Star Wars and it all unravels very quickly.

By adding in the midichlorians it is like Lucas is trying to argue that it is all SF. That simple action breaks the fourth wall, and calls attention to the million other inconsistencies.

Look at it this way: Star Trek is SF. It goes to great lengths to create an internally consistent universe, and can provide answers for any question you care to name about its science (accepting that some of the science relies on theories that have yet to be discovered). If Trek introduced something that could only be explained as magic then it breaks the genre and the story. It is as jarring as a rape scene in the middle of Sesame Street. In the same way the midichlorians are a painful and unnecessary device in Star Wars.

For another example of how to break a beautiful story by wrenching it out of its genre watch Highlander and then Highlander II. The sequel not only is rubbish, but breaks any nostalgic memories of the original.

well it was in space with spaceships and laser swords and aliens. i think its sci-fi.
and if it really isnt, "fantasy" makes it sound lame like WoW

Sci-fi isn't about spaceships, space, and aliens.

It stands for SCIENCE-fiction. Star Wars has very little in way of scientific elements, either realistic or made-up. It's only used for the setting, and with that out of the way, Star Wars is classic heroic fantasy.

 

[Nouw]

I'm no hardcore starwars fan, But I would be pissed too if I found out that the mystic mind over matter power that I had dreamed about controlling since I saw the first movie was just caused by bacteria.

This.

Since I watched Phantom Menance at a young age, I didn't really care.

Also, I still don't get Midi-Chlorians properly, and by the sound of people, I don't want to know. Guess they fucked up the concept of the Force right?

 

[Ivan Brogstog]

All the old-school Star Wars fans should get over it: it happened, it's there, it's a different generation, and it's still better than Star Trek.

HAHAHAHAHA! So true!

 

[Woodsey]

Never had a problem with it - The Phantom Menace is the first film I remember seeing at the cinema (I was 5) and I will always like it.

The midi-chlorians are there to explain Anakin's potential far more than they are to explain the force - they're hardly even mentioned. They're also there to imply that Anakin's "father" was also a Sith (Plagueis).

In relation to everything else people constantly whine and ***** about, they need to get over themselves.

Star Wars, the original trilogy, is not science fiction. It is a sword and sorcery fantasy epic that contrives to add in to that the hardware, and therefore the visuals, of science fiction. The sword and sorcery is central to the action, the SF is secondary. By pushing it into the realm of fantasy rather than SF it gives the viewer permission to suspend disbelief and not analyse the SF elements too closely. Start analysing the science of Star Wars and it all unravels very quickly.

By adding in the midichlorians it is like Lucas is trying to argue that it is all SF. That simple action breaks the fourth wall, and calls attention to the million other inconsistencies.

Look at it this way: Star Trek is SF. It goes to great lengths to create an internally consistent universe, and can provide answers for any question you care to name about its science (accepting that some of the science relies on theories that have yet to be discovered). If Trek introduced something that could only be explained as magic then it breaks the genre and the story. It is as jarring as a rape scene in the middle of Sesame Street. In the same way the midichlorians are a painful and unnecessary device in Star Wars.

For another example of how to break a beautiful story by wrenching it out of its genre watch Highlander and then Highlander II. The sequel not only is rubbish, but breaks any nostalgic memories of the original.

well it was in space with spaceships and laser swords and aliens. i think its sci-fi.
and if it really isnt, "fantasy" makes it sound lame like WoW

Sci-fi isn't about spaceships, space, and aliens.

It stands for SCIENCE-fiction. Star Wars has very little in way of scientific elements, either realistic or made-up. It's only used for the setting, and with that out of the way, Star Wars is classic heroic fantasy.

It's a space opera.

EDIT: Just found this from Wookieepedia:

"Midi-chlorians were intelligent microscopic life forms that lived symbiotically inside the cells of all living things. When present in sufficient numbers, they could allow their symbiont to detect the pervasive energy field known as the Force."

The force is still a separate entity then - something which only a minority are special enough to tap in to. That's really not wildly different to what we only knew in the original trilogy.

 

[TheRundownRabbit]

For me it was kinda a shootdown of the story, but if it was in the book Im aint arguin

 

[cuddly_tomato]

Because then being a Jedi and using the force aren't down to disipline, sacrifice, training and all that jazz, but due to being part of the Master Race.

 

[NickCaligo42]

So why all the rage over the midi-chlorians?

Two reasons...

One you've gotten a trillion times over with this thread by now. It's magic, it didn't need explaining, it takes a lot of the wonder out of the universe for the Force to be caused by germs.

some people got the misconception that the force was created by the midi-chlorians, which isn't what they said. The number of midi-chlorians in a person's blood determines a person's affinity to the force.

Personally, I don't mind it

Even if THIS is what you're buying, the second reason is inescapable. And that reason is... well, how does it feel to know you can never be a Jedi?

Think about it. If one's aptitude to use the Force is genetic, as midichlorians posits it is, that means that you can never, ever, ever, ever be a Jedi, ever, no matter how hard you try, no matter how much you believe in yourself, and no matter how much discipline and training you have unless you were bred to be one or happened to be lucky enough to be born with a high concentration of Force-germs in your blood. The possibilities that this highly elitist explanation for the Force, this emphasis on breeding over willpower closes off are FAR more aggravating than the de-mystification of it, turning the Galaxy into a smaller, pettier place than it was in the original Trilogy. It says greatness isn't a matter of drive, ambition, perseverance, or effort, it's a matter of genes. It says that the "common" people of the Galaxy don't matter and can't make anything of themselves; everything's just about the most elite on both sides pushing them around as pawns and using them as cannon fodder.

 

[dragonslayer32]

The Jedi and the force are spiritual, not biological. I think of it as a bit like the matrix, if you free your mind, anything is possible. Then, phantom comes along and says it is all biological, that only a select few can be a Jedi.

 

[jamescorck]

"The Force" is the magical element of the Star Wars universe. As explained by Obi-Wan in A New Hope, "it's the force that sorrounds us and keeps the galaxy united". A simple theory in a simple sentence, explaining a very important element in a Universe filled with talking androids, alien species and spaceships.

Star Wars has always had a very soft science in it, so having George Lucas trying to dig into what makes The Force tick just ruins everything. He needed a way to explain why Anakin Skywalker is so powerful, so instead of just saying: "Oh, he is more powerful than Yoda", he went into a tirade about biology. Which then proved pointless because

Spoiler

Obi-Wan kicks his ass at the end of the Third movie to turn him into Darth Vader

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

So why all the rage over the midi-chlorians?

Ooh, how best to explain?

Could it be that it denotes incest as the best way to gain in Force powers?
Could it be that "The Force is in everything, it surrounds us and binds us"?
Could it be that it invalidates bacta tanks?
Could it be that it invalidates the Hutts?
Could it be that you're explaining religion using biology?
Could it be that it's unwanted, unnecessary and uninspired?
Could it be that it denotes all xenobiology is dependent on human biology?
Could it be that one of the greatest Force users had extremely few biological parts?
Could it be that the prequels counteract the sequels?
Could it be that you're denoting a super-serum that could be fed to creatures like the Sarlacc, Banthas or others?
Could it be all of these and more?

Yeah. The last one I believe.

 

[ImprovizoR]

Dude, that movie didn't make any sense whatsoever, and here's why. Sorry if it was posted I never read all the comments:
http://techland.com/2009/12/16/the-best-review-of-phantom-menace-ive-ever-seen/

Watch it, all of it. It's so true and it's genius.

 

[Billion Backs]

Star Wars, the original trilogy, is not science fiction. It is a sword and sorcery fantasy epic that contrives to add in to that the hardware, and therefore the visuals, of science fiction. The sword and sorcery is central to the action, the SF is secondary. By pushing it into the realm of fantasy rather than SF it gives the viewer permission to suspend disbelief and not analyse the SF elements too closely. Start analysing the science of Star Wars and it all unravels very quickly.

By adding in the midichlorians it is like Lucas is trying to argue that it is all SF. That simple action breaks the fourth wall, and calls attention to the million other inconsistencies.

Look at it this way: Star Trek is SF. It goes to great lengths to create an internally consistent universe, and can provide answers for any question you care to name about its science (accepting that some of the science relies on theories that have yet to be discovered). If Trek introduced something that could only be explained as magic then it breaks the genre and the story. It is as jarring as a rape scene in the middle of Sesame Street. In the same way the midichlorians are a painful and unnecessary device in Star Wars.

For another example of how to break a beautiful story by wrenching it out of its genre watch Highlander and then Highlander II. The sequel not only is rubbish, but breaks any nostalgic memories of the original.

well it was in space with spaceships and laser swords and aliens. i think its sci-fi.
and if it really isnt, "fantasy" makes it sound lame like WoW

Sci-fi isn't about spaceships, space, and aliens.

It stands for SCIENCE-fiction. Star Wars has very little in way of scientific elements, either realistic or made-up. It's only used for the setting, and with that out of the way, Star Wars is classic heroic fantasy.

light speed isnt science? outer space isnt science? light sabers aint science?

Lightsabers "aint science". They never explain the theory, however fictional, behind how they work. Of course, all lasers in general in Star Wars world are fucked up without any explanation...

Any sci-fi element in Star Wars could be easily replaced with fantasy equivalent without disrupting the story. Lightsabers? Magic swords! Ships? Flying carpets or some shit! Outer space? Portals and alternative planes!

Science fiction relies on the scientific elements to tell the story, however bullshitty they are at times. Star Wars uses generic science-fictiony background just as a background.

 

[Brandon237]

I actually liked the movie, my problem though is this abomination to the living force:

 

[ImprovizoR]

I always assumed lightsabers have something to do with The Force and that's how they work. Then Lucas, the first class moron that he is decided it's a good idea to explain The Force. You see what happens when you get the answers (I'm talking to people who moan because of "lack of answers" in LOST).