Star Wars is not Sci Fi!

[tinyp3nis]

So if the sci is not the governing part of the story, or atleast not very important to the theme, then it's not sci-fi anymore? Lotr is very similar to to sw, yes, only the environment is different. But environment is a lot still.

[Edan]

IIRC, Science Fantasy ("SF") is the superset of Science Fiction and Fantasy (and horror too, I think, as well as pieces that include parts from more than one of the genere).

[Imran Siddiqui]

You smoking something .

Star Wars is of course Sci-fi! Science Fiction involves science and fiction. Star Wars fits .

[Immortal Wombat]

how does Star Wars involve science?

[SKILORD]

Technically it's a space opera. (or summat to that effect, there is a name for the genre but i am unable to produce it from my meager mind)

[Imran Siddiqui]

how does Star Wars involve science?

It's kinda hard to have spaceships (and repair spaceships) without science .

And seeing as the story is based on those ships, it is sci-fi .

[Az]

It's rather hard to have rifles and planes without science. so how did you like that Sci-fi flick, "Saving private Ryan"?

[Imran Siddiqui]

But they don't focus on the rifles and planes as being central to the story do they?

And its history. Sci-fi is about the future .

[Immortal Wombat]

Not so. GePap already mentioned Frankenstein. War of the Worlds, any Jules Verne novel you care to name...

And technically, the central theme of Star Wars is the force, which is not science, but fantasy.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Star Wars is not a fantasy. It doesn't happen to have all that magic and orcs and whatnot.

Frankenstein, War of the Worlds, and Jules Verne ALL dealt with the future. I don't understand how you can say that the people writing them were thinking their stories happened in the past!

[vee4473]

Star Wars is Sci-Fi because it takes basic elements of science and expands them into areas that current science says is impossible.

such as light speed. That alone makes it science fiction stupid.

[vee4473]

Originally posted by Azazel
It's rather hard to have rifles and planes without science. so how did you like that Sci-fi flick, "Saving private Ryan"?

Saving private ryan doesn't take rifles and planes to levels that current science says is impossible, therefore saving ryan is not science FICTION




stupid...

[Immortal Wombat]

I don't understand how you can say that the people writing them were thinking their stories happened in the past!

They all happened in the author's present, but they all had science as a central theme. They weren't far-future weirdo tech SciFi. Journey to the Centre of the Earth could have happended! (Certain large lumps of molten iron and rock notwithstanding) - but they were SciFi.

Restricting your view of fantasy to solely stuff with magic and orcs in is somewhat narrow-minded Imran
"The Force" is a nat's bollock away from magic anyway.

[vee4473]

from the dictionary:

science fiction
n.
A literary or cinematic genre in which fantasy, typically based on speculative scientific discoveries or developments, environmental changes, space travel, or life on other planets, forms part of the plot or background.




Frankenstein IS sci-fi because it has elements of cloning a living thing....currently possible, buit at the time impossible

star wars is sci-fi because it takes real life science like space travel and lasers and elevates them to a level that current science says is impossible.

for pete's sake, this is a ridiculous thread...how stupid...star wars isn't sci-fi...only someone whodoesn't know what sci-fi is would even start such a theread


good Lord



my oh my


holy cow

[Immortal Wombat]

Originally posted by vee4473
Saving private ryan doesn't take rifles and planes to levels that current science says is impossible, therefore saving ryan is not science FICTION

I happen to agree with you. But Saving Private Ryan is still FICTION because it did not in fact happen.