HBO - Song of Ice&Fire Series -Varsity Thread - no TV only whiners (2 Viewers)

[Frostillicus]

Still waiting for the link to where it shows I dislike Sci-Fi, Mr. Woodward.

Star Wars is for the gays.

Face

 

[Good Posting Judge]

You guys...are ####### nerds.

 

[Ilov80s]

I hope the budget is increased big time. Im tired of them using that as an excuse.

It is already the most expensive show on TV. I doubt their budget will increase much. IMO, money well spent, I have never seen a show with level of production.

 

[Good Posting Judge]

I hope the budget is increased big time. Im tired of them using that as an excuse.

It is already the most expensive show on TV. I doubt their budget will increase much. IMO, money well spent, I have never seen a show with level of production.

The big battle at the end of season 2 looked like a spirited game of beach football.

 

[Charlie Frown]

"The Wanderers" Richard Price

"Tapping the Source" Kem Nunn

"No Country for Old Men" Cormac McCarthy

"White Noise" Don DeLillo

"The Handmaid's Tale" Margaret Atwood

I have read those three. They were OK but I think the only one I have recommended is White Noise (and that was a long time ago). It seems you are more into the theme(s) that a book addresses and the story is somewhat secondary. I am more drawn to characters and world building. Out of curiosity - have you read Ender's Game? I have been trying to convince a friend of mine that teaches high school English to integrate it into her classes' reading list.

Our 6th grade teacher had us read it. He was awesome. Dunno if it holds up, but I loved it at the time.

Ender's Game is one of my absolute all time favorite books. I've read it more than I like to admit. It would be a great book to put into a high school English class, if for no other reason than to introduce a few more people to reading books, particularly sci-fi/fantasy types, than might have ever picked it up on their own. Plus there are a number of moral dilemmas faced throughout the book, but both adults and the children. that could make for good in-class discussions.

Are you guys talking about the series of books by Orson Scott Card? If so, are all of them that good, or just the first one? I just finished Fire and Ice and I am looking for a new series.

The others (specifically, Speaker for the Dead, Xenocide and Children of the Mind) are decent in their own right, but people who finish Ender's Game and love it are often disappointed by the following books, because they are a big diversion from the original storyline, picking up almost hundreds or thousands of years later, if I recall. Card tries to delve deeper into the morality of the events in Ender's Game and beyond, and there are definitely times where you stop and go..."what the ...?" Slower paced, different story, but I enjoyed them. Just don't go in thinking they are a sequel, cause they really aren't except that they follow some of the same characters.Some of the more recently written books, the "Shadow" series, like Ender's Shadow and Shadow of the Hedgemon, which follow Bean, one of the other characters in Ender's Game, are pretty good. They actually take place before and during Ender's Game, even narrating some of the same scenes, but from Bean's point of view. I thought that was pretty cool; others thought it was just Card ripping off the success of Ender's Game. I thought it actually took some skill as an author to write a set of different books that overlap in the timeline of his original in that universe.

Here is a decent "chronology" map of the books (blue = books, pink = short stories) that shouldn't really have any spoilers: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ender%27s_Game_Chronology_Updated.png

I would have like to seen them film "Ender's Shadow" at the same time as the first one. Just to keep the kids looking the same (ages and such).

 

[Ilov80s]

I hope the budget is increased big time. Im tired of them using that as an excuse.

It is already the most expensive show on TV. I doubt their budget will increase much. IMO, money well spent, I have never seen a show with level of production.

The big battle at the end of season 2 looked like a spirited game of beach football.

I disagree, I thought it looked great. What other show has ever pulled off something that big?

 

[Chaka]

I hope the budget is increased big time. Im tired of them using that as an excuse.

It is already the most expensive show on TV. I doubt their budget will increase much. IMO, money well spent, I have never seen a show with level of production.

The big battle at the end of season 2 looked like a spirited game of beach football.

I disagree, I thought it looked great. What other show has ever pulled off something that big?

Rome. The final battle of Mark Anthony vs. Augustus at the end of season 2. The opening battle at the beginning of the first episode was also pretty darn large scale. Both looked better than the production values of GoT, but I commented earlier that I am happy they are not wasting budget on big battles. They spent their largest share on the wildfire sequence and that was great but there was little need to spend more to choreograph the battle at the gate.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

I hope the budget is increased big time. Im tired of them using that as an excuse.

It is already the most expensive show on TV. I doubt their budget will increase much. IMO, money well spent, I have never seen a show with level of production.

largest cast on tv as well. it is what it is.

 

[shuke]

Still waiting for the link to where it shows I dislike Sci-Fi, Mr. Woodward.

[QUOTE='RudiStein]Star Wars is for the gays.

Face[/QUOTE]BURN

 

[Ilov80s]

I hope the budget is increased big time. Im tired of them using that as an excuse.

It is already the most expensive show on TV. I doubt their budget will increase much. IMO, money well spent, I have never seen a show with level of production.

The big battle at the end of season 2 looked like a spirited game of beach football.

I disagree, I thought it looked great. What other show has ever pulled off something that big?

Rome. The final battle of Mark Anthony vs. Augustus at the end of season 2. The opening battle at the beginning of the first episode was also pretty darn large scale. Both looked better than the production values of GoT, but I commented earlier that I am happy they are not wasting budget on big battles. They spent their largest share on the wildfire sequence and that was great but there was little need to spend more to choreograph the battle at the gate.

Right, one other show ever and Rome had an even bigger budget tha GoT.

 

[Chaka]

I hope the budget is increased big time. Im tired of them using that as an excuse.

It is already the most expensive show on TV. I doubt their budget will increase much. IMO, money well spent, I have never seen a show with level of production.

The big battle at the end of season 2 looked like a spirited game of beach football.

I disagree, I thought it looked great. What other show has ever pulled off something that big?

Rome. The final battle of Mark Anthony vs. Augustus at the end of season 2. The opening battle at the beginning of the first episode was also pretty darn large scale. Both looked better than the production values of GoT, but I commented earlier that I am happy they are not wasting budget on big battles. They spent their largest share on the wildfire sequence and that was great but there was little need to spend more to choreograph the battle at the gate.

Right, one other show ever and Rome had an even bigger budget tha GoT.

Yes but the actual battle in GoT, after the wildfire, was pretty pedestrian. Again that in no way diminished it for me but it was obviously shot with very little budget.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

I have to be honest, if season 2 was my first Ice and Fire experience, im not sure it would have drawn me in as much as Im obsessed now with the series. Season 1 was one of the best seasons of TV, period. I think season 2 was challenging because of all the new characters, but i also feel it just felt a little too fragmented.

 

[Marvin]

I'm a pretty little princess named Honey Cup

 

[Marvin]

Still waiting for the link to where it shows I dislike Sci-Fi, Mr. Woodward.

[QUOTE='RudiStein]Star Wars is for the gays.

Face[/QUOTE]Star Wars isn't really Sci-Fi, Frodo.

 

[Chaka]

Star Wars isn't really Sci-Fi, Frodo.

I can't wait to hear the defense of that statement.

 

[Marvin]

Star Wars isn't really Sci-Fi, Frodo.

I can't wait to hear the defense of that statement.

It's pretty obvious that it is more fantasy than Sci-Fi.

 

[Marvin]

Finished Dance with Dragons.

GRRM and his family are a ####.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

I hope the budget is increased big time. Im tired of them using that as an excuse.

It is already the most expensive show on TV. I doubt their budget will increase much. IMO, money well spent, I have never seen a show with level of production.

The big battle at the end of season 2 looked like a spirited game of beach football.

I disagree, I thought it looked great. What other show has ever pulled off something that big?

Rome. The final battle of Mark Anthony vs. Augustus at the end of season 2. The opening battle at the beginning of the first episode was also pretty darn large scale. Both looked better than the production values of GoT, but I commented earlier that I am happy they are not wasting budget on big battles. They spent their largest share on the wildfire sequence and that was great but there was little need to spend more to choreograph the battle at the gate.

Right, one other show ever and Rome had an even bigger budget tha GoT.

Band of Brothers? The Pacific?GoT is one of my favorite shows of the last decade, but it's pretty annoying to constantly hear about how they don't have the budget to do big battles when several shows have done a much better job on battles with a smaller budget. I've been rewatching Band of Brothers again recently and the production values in the "action" scenes blow GoT out of the water. "Blackwater" was allegedly an episode that they saved up tons of budget for AND got extra money (on top of already being the most expensive show on tv) for AND shot at night to save even more money, yet outside of the wildfire scene it was still very unimpressive from a visual standpoint. The fight by the gates looked like a high school production (obviously hyperbole, but it was not up to the standards of what they'd been building up towards and it felt very fake).

 

[sn0mm1s]

Band of Brothers? The Pacific?

GoT is one of my favorite shows of the last decade, but it's pretty annoying to constantly hear about how they don't have the budget to do big battles when several shows have done a much better job on battles with a smaller budget. I've been rewatching Band of Brothers again recently and the production values in the "action" scenes blow GoT out of the water. "Blackwater" was allegedly an episode that they saved up tons of budget for AND got extra money (on top of already being the most expensive show on tv) for AND shot at night to save even more money, yet outside of the wildfire scene it was still very unimpressive from a visual standpoint. The fight by the gates looked like a high school production (obviously hyperbole, but it was not up to the standards of what they'd been building up towards and it felt very fake).

Per wikipedia Band of Brothers had a budget of 125 million for 10 episodes plus another 15 million for advertising.GoT had 50-60 million for the first season and 55-69 million for the second season. Band of Brothers basically had twice the budget of a GoT.

The Pacific had an even higher budget than BoB.

 

[Marvin]

I hope the budget is increased big time. Im tired of them using that as an excuse.

It is already the most expensive show on TV. I doubt their budget will increase much. IMO, money well spent, I have never seen a show with level of production.

The big battle at the end of season 2 looked like a spirited game of beach football.

I disagree, I thought it looked great. What other show has ever pulled off something that big?

Rome. The final battle of Mark Anthony vs. Augustus at the end of season 2. The opening battle at the beginning of the first episode was also pretty darn large scale. Both looked better than the production values of GoT, but I commented earlier that I am happy they are not wasting budget on big battles. They spent their largest share on the wildfire sequence and that was great but there was little need to spend more to choreograph the battle at the gate.

Right, one other show ever and Rome had an even bigger budget tha GoT.

Band of Brothers?

My link

 

[Ilov80s]

Band of Brothers? The Pacific?

GoT is one of my favorite shows of the last decade, but it's pretty annoying to constantly hear about how they don't have the budget to do big battles when several shows have done a much better job on battles with a smaller budget. I've been rewatching Band of Brothers again recently and the production values in the "action" scenes blow GoT out of the water. "Blackwater" was allegedly an episode that they saved up tons of budget for AND got extra money (on top of already being the most expensive show on tv) for AND shot at night to save even more money, yet outside of the wildfire scene it was still very unimpressive from a visual standpoint. The fight by the gates looked like a high school production (obviously hyperbole, but it was not up to the standards of what they'd been building up towards and it felt very fake).

Per wikipedia Band of Brothers had a budget of 125 million for 10 episodes plus another 15 million for advertising.GoT had 50-60 million for the first season and 55-69 million for the second season. Band of Brothers basically had twice the budget of a GoT.

The Pacific had an even higher budget than BoB.

The Pacific and BoB were miniseries as well.

 

[Ilov80s]

Also, how can anyone complain about S2's production value, it blows S1 away.

 

[Chaka]

Star Wars isn't really Sci-Fi, Frodo.

I can't wait to hear the defense of that statement.

It's pretty obvious that it is more fantasy than Sci-Fi.

Fantasy with laserbeams, laser swords, space ships, robots and aliens. That, my friend, is sci-fi. Heck by some definitions Star Wars is a western (and a remake of Kurasawa's Hidden Fortress) but it's still sci-fi first and foremost.IIRC you really enjoyed Blade Runner, so much so that it was the only film you mentioned when I asked you for examples of sci-fi films you enjoyed (find your own link). BR has robots and space ships does that make it fantasy or are aliens and laser beams required to tip the scales from sci-fi to fantasy in your mind?

 

[JerseyToughGuys]

Still waiting for the link to where it shows I dislike Sci-Fi, Mr. Woodward.

[QUOTE='RudiStein]Star Wars is for the gays.

Face[/QUOTE]:snicker:

 

[netnalp]

George RR Martin (a Jets fan/Patriots hater) recently told fans about a passage in A Dance with Dragons slyly referencing the Giants and Patriots.

"The galley was also where the ship's books were kept... the fourth and final volume of The Life of the Triarch Belicho, a famous Volantene patriot whose unbroken succession of conquests and triumphs ended rather abruptly when he was eaten by giants. (pg. 439 of the US Hardcover)"

http://www.reddit.com/r/asoiaf/comments/w0ply/football_reference_the_life_of_the_triarch/

 

[Abrantes]

George RR Martin (a Jets fan/Patriots hater) recently told fans about a passage in A Dance with Dragons slyly referencing the Giants and Patriots."The galley was also where the ship's books were kept... the fourth and final volume of The Life of the Triarch Belicho, a famous Volantene patriot whose unbroken succession of conquests and triumphs ended rather abruptly when he was eaten by giants. (pg. 439 of the US Hardcover)"http://www.reddit.com/r/asoiaf/comments/w0ply/football_reference_the_life_of_the_triarch/

Martin is a child.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

Oh come on, that's funny!

 

[babydemon90]

Wasn't Rome cancelled because it was too expensive? These super big budget shows just do not last

 

[Ilov80s]

Wasn't Rome cancelled because it was too expensive? These super big budget shows just do not last

Rome also never drew 10 million viewers like GoT.

 

[Marvin]

Star Wars isn't really Sci-Fi, Frodo.

I can't wait to hear the defense of that statement.

It's pretty obvious that it is more fantasy than Sci-Fi.

Fantasy with laserbeams, laser swords, space ships, robots and aliens. That, my friend, is sci-fi. Heck by some definitions Star Wars is a western (and a remake of Kurasawa's Hidden Fortress) but it's still sci-fi first and foremost.IIRC you really enjoyed Blade Runner, so much so that it was the only film you mentioned when I asked you for examples of sci-fi films you enjoyed (find your own link). BR has robots and space ships does that make it fantasy or are aliens and laser beams required to tip the scales from sci-fi to fantasy in your mind?

But notice that the "sciency" stuff in Star Wars is not supposed to give us a glimpse into the future or "things to come". Hell, the first freaking title card says "a long time ago". Star Wars isn't futuristic in terms of the droids, lightsabers etc. One of the biggest plot elements in Star Wars is The Force...it's magic, not science. Notice that technology or possible future technologies rarely impact the plot of Star Wars. There is nothing to do with machines becoming sentient or mankind's impact on the world around them or the discovery of new things in Star Wars. Spaceships and laser blasters are secondary to magic and wizardry. There are sci-fi elements in Star Wars but when you get down to it...it is fantasy.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

Star Wars isn't really Sci-Fi, Frodo.

I can't wait to hear the defense of that statement.

It's pretty obvious that it is more fantasy than Sci-Fi.

Fantasy with laserbeams, laser swords, space ships, robots and aliens. That, my friend, is sci-fi. Heck by some definitions Star Wars is a western (and a remake of Kurasawa's Hidden Fortress) but it's still sci-fi first and foremost.IIRC you really enjoyed Blade Runner, so much so that it was the only film you mentioned when I asked you for examples of sci-fi films you enjoyed (find your own link). BR has robots and space ships does that make it fantasy or are aliens and laser beams required to tip the scales from sci-fi to fantasy in your mind?

But notice that the "sciency" stuff in Star Wars is not supposed to give us a glimpse into the future or "things to come". Hell, the first freaking title card says "a long time ago". Star Wars isn't futuristic in terms of the droids, lightsabers etc. One of the biggest plot elements in Star Wars is The Force...it's magic, not science. Notice that technology or possible future technologies rarely impact the plot of Star Wars. There is nothing to do with machines becoming sentient or mankind's impact on the world around them or the discovery of new things in Star Wars. Spaceships and laser blasters are secondary to magic and wizardry. There are sci-fi elements in Star Wars but when you get down to it...it is fantasy.

Scientists today compare the force to dark matter which 96% of the universe is made up of and connects everything. So being able to control dark matter would be like the force. Light-speed, sentient robots, hydro-lift technology; that all sounds like science to me. It's a mix of myth and science.

 

[Marvin]

Star Wars isn't really Sci-Fi, Frodo.

I can't wait to hear the defense of that statement.

It's pretty obvious that it is more fantasy than Sci-Fi.

Fantasy with laserbeams, laser swords, space ships, robots and aliens. That, my friend, is sci-fi. Heck by some definitions Star Wars is a western (and a remake of Kurasawa's Hidden Fortress) but it's still sci-fi first and foremost.IIRC you really enjoyed Blade Runner, so much so that it was the only film you mentioned when I asked you for examples of sci-fi films you enjoyed (find your own link). BR has robots and space ships does that make it fantasy or are aliens and laser beams required to tip the scales from sci-fi to fantasy in your mind?

But notice that the "sciency" stuff in Star Wars is not supposed to give us a glimpse into the future or "things to come". Hell, the first freaking title card says "a long time ago". Star Wars isn't futuristic in terms of the droids, lightsabers etc. One of the biggest plot elements in Star Wars is The Force...it's magic, not science. Notice that technology or possible future technologies rarely impact the plot of Star Wars. There is nothing to do with machines becoming sentient or mankind's impact on the world around them or the discovery of new things in Star Wars.

Spaceships and laser blasters are secondary to magic and wizardry. There are sci-fi elements in Star Wars but when you get down to it...it is fantasy.

Scientists today compare the force to dark matter which 96% of the universe is made up of and connects everything. So being able to control dark matter would be like the force. Light-speed, sentient robots, hydro-lift technology; that all sounds like science to me. It's a mix of myth and science.

wat

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

Star Wars isn't really Sci-Fi, Frodo.

I can't wait to hear the defense of that statement.

It's pretty obvious that it is more fantasy than Sci-Fi.

Fantasy with laserbeams, laser swords, space ships, robots and aliens. That, my friend, is sci-fi. Heck by some definitions Star Wars is a western (and a remake of Kurasawa's Hidden Fortress) but it's still sci-fi first and foremost.IIRC you really enjoyed Blade Runner, so much so that it was the only film you mentioned when I asked you for examples of sci-fi films you enjoyed (find your own link). BR has robots and space ships does that make it fantasy or are aliens and laser beams required to tip the scales from sci-fi to fantasy in your mind?

But notice that the "sciency" stuff in Star Wars is not supposed to give us a glimpse into the future or "things to come". Hell, the first freaking title card says "a long time ago". Star Wars isn't futuristic in terms of the droids, lightsabers etc. One of the biggest plot elements in Star Wars is The Force...it's magic, not science. Notice that technology or possible future technologies rarely impact the plot of Star Wars. There is nothing to do with machines becoming sentient or mankind's impact on the world around them or the discovery of new things in Star Wars.

Spaceships and laser blasters are secondary to magic and wizardry. There are sci-fi elements in Star Wars but when you get down to it...it is fantasy.

Scientists today compare the force to dark matter which 96% of the universe is made up of and connects everything. So being able to control dark matter would be like the force. Light-speed, sentient robots, hydro-lift technology; that all sounds like science to me. It's a mix of myth and science.

wat

Just watched something the other night with some crazy asian scientist stating that George Lucus's concept of the force and its connecting of the universe etc. is similar in theory to dark matter and what they are discovering as far as energy with it (not the powers and being able to control things and thought though).

 

[Marvin]

Star Wars isn't really Sci-Fi, Frodo.

I can't wait to hear the defense of that statement.

It's pretty obvious that it is more fantasy than Sci-Fi.

Fantasy with laserbeams, laser swords, space ships, robots and aliens. That, my friend, is sci-fi. Heck by some definitions Star Wars is a western (and a remake of Kurasawa's Hidden Fortress) but it's still sci-fi first and foremost.IIRC you really enjoyed Blade Runner, so much so that it was the only film you mentioned when I asked you for examples of sci-fi films you enjoyed (find your own link). BR has robots and space ships does that make it fantasy or are aliens and laser beams required to tip the scales from sci-fi to fantasy in your mind?

But notice that the "sciency" stuff in Star Wars is not supposed to give us a glimpse into the future or "things to come". Hell, the first freaking title card says "a long time ago". Star Wars isn't futuristic in terms of the droids, lightsabers etc. One of the biggest plot elements in Star Wars is The Force...it's magic, not science. Notice that technology or possible future technologies rarely impact the plot of Star Wars. There is nothing to do with machines becoming sentient or mankind's impact on the world around them or the discovery of new things in Star Wars.

Spaceships and laser blasters are secondary to magic and wizardry. There are sci-fi elements in Star Wars but when you get down to it...it is fantasy.

Scientists today compare the force to dark matter which 96% of the universe is made up of and connects everything. So being able to control dark matter would be like the force. Light-speed, sentient robots, hydro-lift technology; that all sounds like science to me. It's a mix of myth and science.

wat

Just watched something the other night with some crazy asian scientist stating that George Lucus's concept of the force and its connecting of the universe etc. is similar in theory to dark matter and what they are discovering as far as energy with it (not the powers and being able to control things and thought though).

So it really has nothing to do with what I'm talking about then.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

Star Wars isn't really Sci-Fi, Frodo.

I can't wait to hear the defense of that statement.

It's pretty obvious that it is more fantasy than Sci-Fi.

Fantasy with laserbeams, laser swords, space ships, robots and aliens. That, my friend, is sci-fi. Heck by some definitions Star Wars is a western (and a remake of Kurasawa's Hidden Fortress) but it's still sci-fi first and foremost.IIRC you really enjoyed Blade Runner, so much so that it was the only film you mentioned when I asked you for examples of sci-fi films you enjoyed (find your own link). BR has robots and space ships does that make it fantasy or are aliens and laser beams required to tip the scales from sci-fi to fantasy in your mind?

But notice that the "sciency" stuff in Star Wars is not supposed to give us a glimpse into the future or "things to come". Hell, the first freaking title card says "a long time ago". Star Wars isn't futuristic in terms of the droids, lightsabers etc. One of the biggest plot elements in Star Wars is The Force...it's magic, not science. Notice that technology or possible future technologies rarely impact the plot of Star Wars. There is nothing to do with machines becoming sentient or mankind's impact on the world around them or the discovery of new things in Star Wars.

Spaceships and laser blasters are secondary to magic and wizardry. There are sci-fi elements in Star Wars but when you get down to it...it is fantasy.

Scientists today compare the force to dark matter which 96% of the universe is made up of and connects everything. So being able to control dark matter would be like the force. Light-speed, sentient robots, hydro-lift technology; that all sounds like science to me. It's a mix of myth and science.

wat

Just watched something the other night with some crazy asian scientist stating that George Lucus's concept of the force and its connecting of the universe etc. is similar in theory to dark matter and what they are discovering as far as energy with it (not the powers and being able to control things and thought though).

So it really has nothing to do with what I'm talking about then.

Well it does ..... From a certain point of view. See marvin, you're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view.

 

[Gatorman]

Star Wars isn't really Sci-Fi, Frodo.

I can't wait to hear the defense of that statement.

It's pretty obvious that it is more fantasy than Sci-Fi.

Fantasy with laserbeams, laser swords, space ships, robots and aliens. That, my friend, is sci-fi. Heck by some definitions Star Wars is a western (and a remake of Kurasawa's Hidden Fortress) but it's still sci-fi first and foremost.IIRC you really enjoyed Blade Runner, so much so that it was the only film you mentioned when I asked you for examples of sci-fi films you enjoyed (find your own link). BR has robots and space ships does that make it fantasy or are aliens and laser beams required to tip the scales from sci-fi to fantasy in your mind?

But notice that the "sciency" stuff in Star Wars is not supposed to give us a glimpse into the future or "things to come". Hell, the first freaking title card says "a long time ago". Star Wars isn't futuristic in terms of the droids, lightsabers etc. One of the biggest plot elements in Star Wars is The Force...it's magic, not science. Notice that technology or possible future technologies rarely impact the plot of Star Wars. There is nothing to do with machines becoming sentient or mankind's impact on the world around them or the discovery of new things in Star Wars.

Spaceships and laser blasters are secondary to magic and wizardry. There are sci-fi elements in Star Wars but when you get down to it...it is fantasy.

Scientists today compare the force to dark matter which 96% of the universe is made up of and connects everything. So being able to control dark matter would be like the force. Light-speed, sentient robots, hydro-lift technology; that all sounds like science to me. It's a mix of myth and science.

wat

Just watched something the other night with some crazy asian scientist stating that George Lucus's concept of the force and its connecting of the universe etc. is similar in theory to dark matter and what they are discovering as far as energy with it (not the powers and being able to control things and thought though).

So it really has nothing to do with what I'm talking about then.

I find your lack of faith....disturbing

 

[Chaka]

The Matrix - Sci fi or fantasy?

 

[Marvin]

The Matrix - Sci fi or fantasy?

Other: dog crapBut if pressed I would say that it was obviously more sci-fi than fantasy.

 

[sn0mm1s]

The Matrix - Sci fi or fantasy?

Other: dog crapBut if pressed I would say that it was obviously more sci-fi than fantasy.

What? The first Matrix was a solid film (other than the whole battery aspect of it). The other two movies could easily be classified as dog crap.Star Wars is more fantasy than sci fi though.

 

[netnalp]

The Matrix - Sci fi or fantasy?

Other: dog crapBut if pressed I would say that it was obviously more sci-fi than fantasy.

What? The first Matrix was a solid film (other than the whole battery aspect of it). The other two movies could easily be classified as dog crap.Star Wars is more fantasy than sci fi though.

To me the first Matrix felt like a rip off of Total Recall

 

[bonesman]

Star Wars isn't really Sci-Fi, Frodo.

I can't wait to hear the defense of that statement.

It's pretty obvious that it is more fantasy than Sci-Fi.

Fantasy with laserbeams, laser swords, space ships, robots and aliens. That, my friend, is sci-fi. Heck by some definitions Star Wars is a western (and a remake of Kurasawa's Hidden Fortress) but it's still sci-fi first and foremost.IIRC you really enjoyed Blade Runner, so much so that it was the only film you mentioned when I asked you for examples of sci-fi films you enjoyed (find your own link). BR has robots and space ships does that make it fantasy or are aliens and laser beams required to tip the scales from sci-fi to fantasy in your mind?

But notice that the "sciency" stuff in Star Wars is not supposed to give us a glimpse into the future or "things to come". Hell, the first freaking title card says "a long time ago". Star Wars isn't futuristic in terms of the droids, lightsabers etc. One of the biggest plot elements in Star Wars is The Force...it's magic, not science. Notice that technology or possible future technologies rarely impact the plot of Star Wars. There is nothing to do with machines becoming sentient or mankind's impact on the world around them or the discovery of new things in Star Wars.

Spaceships and laser blasters are secondary to magic and wizardry. There are sci-fi elements in Star Wars but when you get down to it...it is fantasy.

Death Star

 

[bonesman]

Star Wars isn't really Sci-Fi, Frodo.

I can't wait to hear the defense of that statement.

It's pretty obvious that it is more fantasy than Sci-Fi.

Fantasy with laserbeams, laser swords, space ships, robots and aliens. That, my friend, is sci-fi. Heck by some definitions Star Wars is a western (and a remake of Kurasawa's Hidden Fortress) but it's still sci-fi first and foremost.IIRC you really enjoyed Blade Runner, so much so that it was the only film you mentioned when I asked you for examples of sci-fi films you enjoyed (find your own link). BR has robots and space ships does that make it fantasy or are aliens and laser beams required to tip the scales from sci-fi to fantasy in your mind?

But notice that the "sciency" stuff in Star Wars is not supposed to give us a glimpse into the future or "things to come". Hell, the first freaking title card says "a long time ago". Star Wars isn't futuristic in terms of the droids, lightsabers etc. One of the biggest plot elements in Star Wars is The Force...it's magic, not science. Notice that technology or possible future technologies rarely impact the plot of Star Wars. There is nothing to do with machines becoming sentient or mankind's impact on the world around them or the discovery of new things in Star Wars.

Spaceships and laser blasters are secondary to magic and wizardry. There are sci-fi elements in Star Wars but when you get down to it...it is fantasy.

Scientists today compare the force to dark matter which 96% of the universe is made up of and connects everything. So being able to control dark matter would be like the force. Light-speed, sentient robots, hydro-lift technology; that all sounds like science to me. It's a mix of myth and science.

wat

Just watched something the other night with some crazy asian scientist stating that George Lucus's concept of the force and its connecting of the universe etc. is similar in theory to dark matter and what they are discovering as far as energy with it (not the powers and being able to control things and thought though).

Probably Michio Kaku.

 

[Chaka]

The Matrix - Sci fi or fantasy?

Other: dog crapBut if pressed I would say that it was obviously more sci-fi than fantasy.

Well I think it fits almost all the criteria you used to call Star Wars fantasy.Wouldn't it be fair to say that all sci-fi is fantasy but not all fantasy is sci-fi?

 

[Chaka]

Star Wars isn't really Sci-Fi, Frodo.

I can't wait to hear the defense of that statement.

It's pretty obvious that it is more fantasy than Sci-Fi.

Fantasy with laserbeams, laser swords, space ships, robots and aliens. That, my friend, is sci-fi. Heck by some definitions Star Wars is a western (and a remake of Kurasawa's Hidden Fortress) but it's still sci-fi first and foremost.IIRC you really enjoyed Blade Runner, so much so that it was the only film you mentioned when I asked you for examples of sci-fi films you enjoyed (find your own link). BR has robots and space ships does that make it fantasy or are aliens and laser beams required to tip the scales from sci-fi to fantasy in your mind?

But notice that the "sciency" stuff in Star Wars is not supposed to give us a glimpse into the future or "things to come". Hell, the first freaking title card says "a long time ago". Star Wars isn't futuristic in terms of the droids, lightsabers etc. One of the biggest plot elements in Star Wars is The Force...it's magic, not science. Notice that technology or possible future technologies rarely impact the plot of Star Wars. There is nothing to do with machines becoming sentient or mankind's impact on the world around them or the discovery of new things in Star Wars.

Spaceships and laser blasters are secondary to magic and wizardry. There are sci-fi elements in Star Wars but when you get down to it...it is fantasy.

Death Star

Aren't the Clone Wars based upon robot armies battling clone armies for dominion of the universe?

 

[Gr00vus]

Soooooooooooooo....

Who's got the best nickname? Imp? Kingslayer? Young Wolf? Littlefinger? Mountain? Hound? Rattleshirt?

 

[The Juggernaut]

Soooooooooooooo....Who's got the best nickname? Imp? Kingslayer? Young Wolf? Littlefinger? Mountain? Hound? Rattleshirt?

Knight of flowers...

 

[sn0mm1s]

Well I think it fits almost all the criteria you used to call Star Wars fantasy.Wouldn't it be fair to say that all sci-fi is fantasy but not all fantasy is sci-fi?

Not really - the powers in the first Matrix weren't based on real world phenomena any more than the ability to fly in a video game.

 

[sn0mm1s]

Soooooooooooooo....Who's got the best nickname? Imp? Kingslayer? Young Wolf? Littlefinger? Mountain? Hound? Rattleshirt?

Knight of flowers...

Lord Snow? The Bull? Hot Pie?

 

[bonesman]

Soooooooooooooo....Who's got the best nickname? Imp? Kingslayer? Young Wolf? Littlefinger? Mountain? Hound? Rattleshirt?

Knight of flowers...

Lord Snow? The Bull? Hot Pie?

Anderson "The Spider" Varys... by far and away the best nickname.

 

[Mjolnirs]

Soooooooooooooo....Who's got the best nickname? Imp? Kingslayer? Young Wolf? Littlefinger? Mountain? Hound? Rattleshirt?

How dare you try and change the subject back! Tangent hater.