MovieChat Forums > Star Wars (1977) Discussion > Losing your religion?

Losing your religion?

posted 4 years ago by CheekyMonkey (584)
36 replies | jump to latest

Is this the cause of so much pain on the various Star Wars forums?

It seems like a reaction to sacrilege... a desecration of what is dear to the fans hearts...

But also a loss of innocence... That pure childlike wonder is gone... Perhaps even a worldview that has been shattered... The sense of disillusionment prevails in these discussions; depression, anger, loneliness pervades the posts...

I was never attached to this series, so I didn't experience the newer (yes, lesser) movies as profane... but I can recognise grief when I see it...

I think it would be useful for you guys to recognise that you aren't alone... there are millions of you who have gone through this together... Your pain has been recognised widely, not just by those like you, but also by other movie fans, industry commentators and the public at large... Even gamers have seen the same thing happen to their beloved classics...

You can move forward... There are other movies to enjoy... Your memories of the original are still there, still valid... When the time is appropriate for you, don't feel bad about moving on... Letting go of fighting last year's battle... Move forward...

The news StarWars can still suck, but without trapping you in sadness... And without hurting your wallets and mindshare...

[–] arflexit (2376) 4 years ago

I don't think people should or are responding to the downgraded quality of star wars like a lose of religion. It is a source of real disappointment sure; to see almost all the franchises that provided years of entertainment and joy get turned into a dumpstare fire.

People should not let entertainment and media rule their emotions to such a degree; but you are right people idolize star wars to an almost religious level; and they shouldn't. We can have fun discussing how bad it has gotten but we should also stop paying for the product if it is no longer to our liking, that is all star wars is a product. if enough people stop buying; then maybe the producers will change the product.

Now there is something in this topic of new star wars that actually does disturb me; it is not the disappointed fans, it is the Disney era star wars defenders. The story and character quality of the new star wars is obvious and objective garbage; and yet there is this insane level of denial, bad gets professed as good or even great. this is attributable to people valuing and recognizing only their subjective feelings on a topic and difficulty admitting objective reality. this goes along with the modern phenomenon of this strange idea of "your truth" or the idea that Gay characters should be in Star Wars because gay people exist in real life (like a bizarre notion that because something exists in reality it should also exist in fantasy). there is a serious problem of people not being able to distinguish between their subjective views, fantasy universes, and actual objective reality. That is actually concerning.

[–] moviechatterer (13284) 4 years ago

Dont burn me at the stake , but , is it possible that the holy trinity , the "original 3" were
" The story and character quality of the (original) star wars is obvious and objective garbage"
too?

I mean , its the old story :
Boy runs off to join revolution ,rescue princess ,defeat evil , featuring hokey religion , charismatic vagabond, and old wise man.

Standard shit really?

Done in a new(kinda) setting with decent effects for the time cemented our rose colored glasses.

[–] arflexit (2376) 4 years ago

No, it is not objective garbage. The story and character of the original trilogy are objectively good (maybe not great but at least good); I think they are great and could provide reasons for it but I don't have time at the moment.

Yes it is an old story (that is what archetypes are); almost all narratives are based on old stories anyway; if you studied the history of narrative basically all stories follow a pretty formulaic arc. In the case of Star Wars it was about how well it was executed in a new (original) setting that featured interesting and fun characters. Oh and were pretty solid action films while doing all of that as well.

If Star Wars in "standard shit" it means around 90% of all film and stories are 'standard shit' as well. Again it is about execution. The Original Trilogy took an old standard narrative structure and launched it into a new setting and executed it well. Can't really do much better than that.

The reason why we have rose colored glasses about the OT is because of how good those films are. The rose colored glasses wouldn't be there if they were shit in the first place. Otherwise why didn't a film like Dark Star have such a audience reaction (not a bad movie by any means) but there are no rose colored glasses over it?

[–] AmeriGirl26 (12299) 4 years ago

I'm with you on the newer fans. I can't really understand it at all, why anyone would like such dog crap. The most pathetic among them are the girls who had bad boy and goth boy fantasies about Crylo Ren, and then cried when he croaked in the 3rd movie. The second-most pathetic are people who refuse to see the serious story/character flaws in this entire series, flaws so obvious, even a child could point them out.

I mean, the prequels weren't exactly stellar either, but at least when Lucas made them, he not only had a plan in mind, he at least tried to make them stay canon with Star Wars lore from the original trilogy. He even made it so his characters were not completely invincible, and most of them were not completely one-dimensional (I will admit that Hayden Christensen is a terrible actor, but at least his Anakin had more character development than Rey), which is more than I can say about the Disney Shit Trilogy in its entirety.

[–] stickman38 (3016) 4 years ago

My goodness, did girls really get all hot and heavy over Ren?

Adam Driver is so weird looking. lol...

He looks like Keanu Reeves with a much larger nose.

[–] arflexit (2376) 4 years ago

I really hope there was not that many women that found him 'hot'. more like the crazed 3rd wave feminist (you know 'larger than life' type women) those seem to be the type that find such a weird looking dude that is playing a whiny and wimpy character attractive.

[–] AmeriGirl26 (12299) 4 years ago

You forgot his puffy face and very underwhelming physique. I also never found his mask intimidating. He looked like an evil black metal elephant whose trunk and ears had been chopped off. Snoke unfortunately was telling the truth when he cruelly told the guy he was little more than a child in a mask. Kinda like a pathetic Vader fanboy than a villain to take seriously.

I'd rather drool over Han Solo or Luke than that loser.

[–] arflexit (2376) 4 years ago

I really hope there was not a large percentage of women that had bad boy gushing for Crylo; if that is their definition of bad boy then my goodness have men become pathetic. the 2nd group of people that refuse to see the complete and utter disaster that TFA set up was bothersome; but then when the disaster was revealed to them in TLJ; they shifted all the blame to the film that made the disaster obvious and not what created the disaster. Like going after the symptom but ignoring the underlining condition.

yeah, the over arching story of the PT was solid and lucas at least had a vision; but he was not good at putting that vision together; but the ST is just a mess all the top down.

[–] AmeriGirl26 (12299) 4 years ago

My brother and I, (and many other Star Wars fans) refuse to even consider the ST canon, nor are we acknowledging it exists anymore. I could happily watch the prequels, the OT, The Mandalorian, and Clone Wars any day of the week compared to that crap. We're fine with playing Star Wars the Old Republic because it still keeps up Star Wars lore pretty well, and takes place thousands of years in the past before the prequels ever started.

[–] arflexit (2376) 4 years ago

As much as I agree and just choose to ignore it as canon; which is easier to do because the creator (Lucas) was not involved and absolutely hates what they did; there is one problem. Even rejecting it as canon cannot help with the fact that what happens in the ST is in the back of your mind while watching the OT.

That is one big difference with quality of the PT and the ST; both are bad but the PT did not interfere with my enjoyment of the OT; in some way it enhanced my enjoyment of the OT; Vader's redemption arc has a little more emotional weight to it knowing how he was manipulated by Palpatine and put into a very disenfranchised position with the Jedi order. So seeing him redeemed has a bit more impact. There is no such enhancement of joy when thoughts of the fate of the galaxy and of the heroes in the ST. the ST only sucks away at what we loved away about the OT.

[–] stickman38 (3016) 4 years ago

I don't talk about SW that much, so I must ask, what is 'canon'?

And I assume, ST stands for Sequel Trilogy and PT is Prequel Trilogy? Would that be correct?

[–] arflexit (2376) 4 years ago

Yes ST means Sequel Trilogy; or it is also often called DT (Disney Trilogy). PT = Preqeul Trilogy.

"what is 'canon'?"

Canon is not limited to Star Wars; the idea of canon in fiction is whatever is the accepted 'official' story for the fictional universe.

There are 2 trains of thought on this. The first being a legal standard, canon is whatever is produced by whoever 'owns' the Intellectual property (IP). So if someone buys the ownership rights from an original content creator; the canon can then become whatever the new owner(s) decide it is. The other train of thought is more along the lines of artistic ownership; canon is and can only be what was created (or in some cases approved) by the original content creator, or a way of saying it is the art cannot be divorced from the artist. So if you follow this train of thought, then the Disney era Star Wars cannot be canon because (even though Disney owns the rights) it was not produced by the original creator (and in addition the original creator vastly disapproves of the new production).

[–] stickman38 (3016) 4 years ago

I see, thanks for the info.

[–] arflexit (2376) 4 years ago

np (no problem). :)

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7401) 4 years ago

I think using the term losing your religion is a strong way of saying it since a lot of the times people quit on a religion because they have someone close to them die tragically and it makes them stop believing in a God. That doesn't really compare to the problems Star Wars franchise has. The real problem with the OT is that they were changed by George Lucas cause he didn't like the original way they were made. So he forcibly added in a bunch of CGI effects into the movie and then later on added other changes to the OT on DVD years ago. While George Lucas is a jerk for not allowing the original versions of the films to be released in good format (the versions of the original versions he released on DVD were in fullscreen), it really doesn't compare to the whole phrase of losing your religion. Just saying.

[–] CheekyMonkey (584) 4 years ago

I agree that "losing your region" is hyperbole... but some of the fans act as if it is at that level... the outpouring of pain on these forums and social media over the movies has extended for the past several years... it's only recently that we're able to discuss the issue online without causing hysteria...

I like your perspective about Lucas being the first to tinker with things and changing them... it's worth keeping in mind so as not to lose perspective... even though the latest iterations (The Last Jedi is the last one I saw) are quite different from his movies...

[–] stickman38 (3016) 4 years ago

The OT will always hold a special place in my heart. I really enjoyed them when I was young. However, the fan zealotry makes Star Wars fans look kind of bad. The fact is, when the prequels came out, the magic of the OT kind of died at that time. Episode 1 and 2 were soooooo bad, that pretty much was the end of the SW experience for me. Although, episode 3 is pretty good. Honestly, out of all the prequels and the new trilogies, it's the best one of the bunch.

But I have not seen ROS, so I can't really say for sure but judging by what fans say, it's doesn't sound like it is. I kind of lost interest in the franchise after episode 7 and 8 not sure when I'll finally sit down and watch it. never maybe....

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7401) 4 years ago

I hadn't thought of it but Rise of Skywalker and Revenge of the Sith have almost the same abbreviations. I do agree Episode 1 and 2 weren't very good.

[–] stickman38 (3016) 4 years ago

Hmmmm... true. good call... yeah, I was referring to Rise Of Skywalker.

The only thing I liked about 1 and 2 was the epic battle scene in Attack of The Clones, I believe it's called the battle of Geonosis. That was impressive and the fact that Christopher Lee was in it also made the film slightly better, he's always good. But the rest of the two films leave a rather empty feeling. They just don't feel like Star Wars films even though they are.

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7401) 4 years ago

You didn't even like Darth Maul in Episode 1?

[–] stickman38 (3016) 4 years ago

Maul is alright, don't like, don't hate. But I don't care for the little horns coming out of his head. Looks too much like the devil. Which, the SW universe has nothing to do with the abrahamic religions of planet earth. Take off the horns and he might be a better villain. He's probably better than Kylo Ren though. Ren is almost laughable.

And don't get started on Jar Jar Binks. Godawful character. lol...

[–] brux (14666) 4 years ago

I've always hated supernatural, horror movies, time-travel or ESP/telekinesis type movies. Movies are fantastical enough ... as in "fantasy" ... without all that nonsense. Give me real stories, or thoughtful science or speculative fiction stories that could be true, but magic, and crackpot religions are things I can do without.

[–] stickman38 (3016) 4 years ago

Brux,

There are some very good fantasy films out there but I do typically prefer more realistic stuff.

Sounds like you've never seen any of the Star Wars films but there is one character in this franchise you would probably like and that's Han Solo played by Harrison Ford. He too doesn't care for "hokey religions" either. But I did read one of your other posts that indicates you don't like Ford. how funny... haha..

Although, the religious side of SW works really really well in episodes 3, 4, 5 and 6. In fact, I would say, without it the films would probably be trash and not near the hits they turned out to be. 'The Force' as explained in the SW films is very similar to what you might find in eastern philosophies like Taoism and Confucianism. Which are not exactly religions but rather philosophies. It made the SW universe so much more interesting/fun than your average sci-fi film. It was like watching samurai's in space.

If you haven't watched any of then, you should at least check out EP-5: Empire Strikes Back and probably EP-4 A New Hope too. They're just fun to watch...

[–] brux (14666) 4 years ago

You know, you and seemingly most people on the Internet should learn that you cannot make judgements about people based on either things they say about themselves ( they could be lies or misunderstandings, or just a troll ) and even if you hit a truthful comment from someone you one's inferences about that person cannot have any coefficient of truth value, that is one's own intuitions about other people, or rather the configuration of words that appears in an online comment.

It might not be that one is wrong, but the discussion of faulty or uncertain data is just not worth the time.

All that in leading up to say I have seen all the Star Wars movies, the older ones mostly by chance multiple times - usually by watching them with other people or kids.

Again, your logic seems ... sorry, but pointless. Han Solo is a character in a movie. I don't know what one can say about a viewer's emotional attachment to a character or an actor, but giving qualities to people in movies such as Harrison Ford is kind of a mental malfunction - unless done completely in fun, even then it is a waste of time.

Han the character is also problematic since as you mentioned he doesn't like hokey religions ... but he exists in a world where magic stuff happens all the time, so how smart is he to deny his own first hand experiences. If the Force is so powerful, why is Han so dead in the head as to not acknowledge it, and to not explore it himself? No, I don't really care, I'm just saying that point out why I think these movies are yucky in fact.

Also, I don't think you know much about Taoism or "eastern philosophies". That you think you can link Star Wars to eastern philosophies and give it some link to credibility in a religious context is borderline retarded.

[–] brux (14666) 4 years ago

But I can comment on your opinion that they are fun to watch. Therein lies my problem with them. Media has turned into being all about commercials, advertising, mind manipulation, and what Star Wars does in a way is a kind of seduction to waste people's time, thinking they are doing something useful or getting something out of the money they paid to see the movie. Hollywood and marketing - and political is now all about measuring audience's neuroscience metrics and then using this data to push the limits of behavior modification. This is ugly dangerous stuff - another reason to dislike it, even if it does seem fun - and to ignore your feelings about the people who are involved in it. Think of Harvey Weinstein before his takedown. Who knows what the real people behind this stuff are like?

[–] stickman38 (3016) 4 years ago

wow... I was not expecting that kind of reply at all. You feeling okay, brux?

I mean, by your logic I guess we should just not watch movies ever or listen to music or read books, you never know, the people behind them could be assholes. Hell, Confucius himself could have been an asshole when he wasn't talking philosophy. who knows....

Your post is just a rant about a whole lot of nothing. I was in no way trying to judge you nor do I even care whether you like SW or not, I was merely going by a VERY short post of yours in which it kind of sounded like you haven't seen any of the films, which is okay, I don't care. I find them entertaining and you don't. So, where do we go from here? Looks like the conversation is over.

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7401) 4 years ago

But I can comment on your opinion that they are fun to watch. Therein lies my problem with them. Media has turned into being all about commercials, advertising, mind manipulation, and what Star Wars does in a way is a kind of seduction to waste people's time, thinking they are doing something useful or getting something out of the money they paid to see the movie. Hollywood and marketing - and political is now all about measuring audience's neuroscience metrics and then using this data to push the limits of behavior modification.

I find this whole thing your'e saying dumb since as the other poster said most movies are made to be entertaining and your whole way of thinking is that they are a waste of time. Which you're right. Truth be told maybe we should all spend more time helping our fellow human beings and just going out and buying poor people good they can eat. Or comforting those who are depressed. But people do what they want with their free time. But that doesn't mean they don't care about other people. And it is rather judgmental of you to just dis people for watching movies on a site dedicated to talking about movies. I feel you don't even belong here if you are going to complain most movies are a waste of time. Like why are you even on the Star Wars board if you haven't even seen the movie and don't want to? Just to preach at people on what they should do?

[–] brux (14666) 4 years ago

> and your whole way of thinking is that they are a waste of time.

Yes, thank you for getting my point ... and a waste of money too.

I am not dissing people for watching movies, you just made that up.
That is the kind of thing I am dissing people for ... not even taking the
time or mental energy it requires to think about what you are saying.

> I feel you don't even belong here if you are going to complain most movies are a waste of time.

I don't think it is up to you to make that judgement.

What I am here for is to say what I said. I appreciate intelligent responses, even if they disagree with me.

[–] stickman38 (3016) 4 years ago

The brux logic...

"I have 5472 posts on moviechat.com but movies are a waste of time and money"

LMAO... classic.... thanks for the heads up, my man (or girl). You really taught me a valuable lesson.

[–] brux (14666) 4 years ago

Cheap shot ... obviously I don't feel ALL movies are a waste of time. Why do you have keep at this trying to find a way to attack me? Over-exaggeration, sarcasm?

[–] arflexit (2376) 4 years ago

So movies you like, not a waste of time, movies other people like but you don't total waste of time? I got that right?

Wow, just wow. You are what is wrong with chats and discussions on the internet. I would love to see how you interact with people in real life. I get the sense you are passive coward so you take out all your pent up aggression on the internet.

Welcome to my ignore list. Don't bother replying I won't see it. I want nothing to do with toxic individuals that want to derail the fun others are having.

[–] Satan2016 (23347) 4 years ago

Brux claims to have a long ignore list. His Marxist religion requires him to denounce other religions.

When Star Wars came out in 77 I ignored it because 2001: SO and Star Trek were real Sci Fi. Grew out of that.

[–] arflexit (2376) 4 years ago

You are giving an awful lot of thought time and attention on a discussion forum over a movie that is both heavily a fantasy with magic and deep ties to eastern religions. Seems kind of pointless to do such a thing, if you have no emotional investment in it, why dedicate so much emotional investment discussing it? 'me thinks she doth protest too much'.

I am sorry I if I am getting this wrong but I am getting a real sense you are just trying to be edgy and say 'I think religion and star wars is for idiots; look how cool I am'.

oh and a response to you first paragraph, you are as a person are not being judged on a internet discussion forum. If you take the judgment of your words as a judgement of your character you have to understand 1. it is stupid to think that judgement of who you are within a discussion is a judgement of your whole character; it is just a discussion forum and not to be taken as a reflection of real life. 2. Your words are what is being judged, not you personally. All we have to go off of is what you write, and that is what gets judged. Don't take it personally.

[–] brux (14666) 4 years ago

Dude .... just read and understand my words and their logic or illogic and what you have to say about it. Don't worry about my psychology - you cannot understand that, and it is a lame attempt, a lame strategy in life that merely tries to assume cleverness to get over on someone.

You cannot know my motivations for engaging with these comments, so why do you pretend.

Your words and arguments contradict each other.

[–] arflexit (2376) 4 years ago

okay you are clearly a troll and have no intention of making discussions in good faith. You are just going to try to contradict anything anyone tries to say to you. I keep it short; if you aren't into fantasy films, and don't care about religion; and don't like magic in films; then here is a thought; don't comment on them. NO one is forcing you to participate in something you are not interested in.

I cannot know you personally; but I can fully judge your words. You are being an idiot. goodbye.

[–] brux (14666) 4 years ago

> okay you are clearly a troll

The true sign of a real troll.