[net.sf-lovers] STAR WARS: Hollywood and the Force

gjphw (01/17/83)

     This comment is to argue against two items undergoing analysis  about  the
STAR WARS movie series.  The first comment is about movies in general while the
second discusses the Force.

     Other than for a few movie directors (e.g., Krubrick), I wonder about  the
attention  to  detail in SF movies.  Two movie reviews appearing in SF publica-
tions criticized the superfluous action and lack  of  care  to  detail  in  the
second  SW  movie  TESB.   The first movie lacked any depth to its plot but was
superbly action packed and did show a great deal of attention  to  detail.   I,
for  one,  had not seen a SF movie that appeared so "realistic".   The sets and
equipment generally looked used and made you believe that this SF  universe  is
occupied.  The second movie had more plot to it but introduced unnecessary set-
tings and situations.  There seemed no need to have the rebel base move to  the
ice planet just to to be discovered by the Empire again.

     From this, I must wonder how seriously the situations depicted in TESB can
be  trusted  for  detail.  The fact that Chewie does not get shot by Bobo Frett
may not mean that Chewbacca is the "Other" but merely that the actor was  given
general  directions,  crossed in front of another actor by mistake, and was not
caught.  The Wookie is a character that was not scheduled to die at this  time.
Books  generally  contain  only the details necessary to convey the environment
and story to the reader.  A movie must always include  sounds  and  actions  to
fill the film, and some of that may be unnecessary to the story.

     My second difficulty derives from a conflict between my  expectations  for
"The  Force"  and  its  development in TESB.  Specifically, I am looking to the
traditions that spawned the concept of "The Force".

     Almost all martial organizations and fighting individuals hold a belief in
some power or authorization that will permit them to succeed and live where the
enemy and fellows have died.   During  the  Middle  Ages,  the  men  in  battle
believed  that  God  was  with  the side that was in the right.  God's presence
would aid them in battle by guiding their swords and movements.  This is called
the  demiurge  (force  of  God?).   The  oriental  martial arts also have their
beliefs, though since they are often Buddist, the Christian God concept is  not
employed.   Karate, kung fu, etc. refer to the need to organize and direct this
force to achieve their goals.  The chi (Chinese) or ki (Japanese) is  the  life
force that training will allow one to utilize in battle.  In more modern times,
Tom Wolfe has made the belief in the Force among test pilots a legend with  his
book "The Right Stuff".

     What strikes me about all of these Forces is their  subtlety.   The  Force
gives  skill  to  the  user  and  grants a slight advantage to the virtuous.  A
fighter can only use this to increase his own wisdom and guide his sword  hand.
In SW, the Force looses this subtle expression and becomes quite blatant.  Even
though Yoda says that the best use of the Force is for knowledge and  skill  in
battle,  Darth  shows  us  that it can be used to throw the book (kitchen sink,
tool box, etc.) at an opponent.  For me,  this  removes  some  of  the  tension
because  a  mere mortal cannot catch him offguard and generally doesn't stand a
chance.  Also, a "true believer" does not have to stand his/her  guard  because
he/she isn't vulnerable.

     Again, we are treated to a clash of the supermen (ubermensh) as  the  only
significant plot in a SF action story.  In general, Hollywood appears unable to
handle subtlety in a major production.

                                                 Pat Wyant
                                                 *!iheds!gjphw