|
|
Post by tarkintino on Mar 27, 2024 22:58:08 GMT -5
I firmly place Star Wars in the science fantasy category as well, as the first movie is essentially a medieval romance with sci-fi trappings. Agreed, although I use the term Space Fantasy because that's the term Lucas used in 1976 and 77, and so too did the early Marvel comics. But same difference. It annoys me when I see SW described as sci-fi. "Sci-Fi" was lazy shorthand for anything dealing with the trappings involving the usual: future tech, robots, outer space, aliens, etc., and at first glance, the average 1977 moviegoer saw Star Wars as a "sci-fi" film, despite the major subplot of the spiritual / mystical Force and its practitioners who had a significant influence over that galaxy's history and events.
Lucas emphasizing the "fantasy" description tried to keep Star Wars in the fairy tale realm, but that was a lost cause, especially after Lucas and his LFL authorized endless technical manuals and pseudo-scientific explanations for characters, vehicles, etc., which have become canon, rendering the "fantasy" part of "Science Fantasy" a quaint, short-lived view of Star Wars as a concept. |
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,200 
Member is Online
|
Post by Confessor on Mar 28, 2024 4:27:16 GMT -5
Agreed, although I use the term Space Fantasy because that's the term Lucas used in 1976 and 77, and so too did the early Marvel comics. But same difference. It annoys me when I see SW described as sci-fi. "Sci-Fi" was lazy shorthand for anything dealing with the trappings involving the usual: future tech, robots, outer space, aliens, etc., and at first glance, the average 1977 moviegoer saw Star Wars as a "sci-fi" film, despite the major subplot of the spiritual / mystical Force and its practitioners who had a significant influence over that galaxy's history and events. Lucas emphasizing the "fantasy" description tried to keep Star Wars in the fairy tale realm, but that was a lost cause, especially after Lucas and his LFL authorized endless technical manuals and pseudo-scientific explanations for characters, vehicles, etc., which have become canon, rendering the "fantasy" part of "Science Fantasy" a quaint, short-lived view of Star Wars as a concept. I'm not sure I'd go quite as far as to say that SW as a whole is no longer Space Fantasy, but I do agree that the "Fantasy" aspect has been diminished considerably over the decades. |
|
|
|
Post by driver1980 on Mar 28, 2024 6:20:03 GMT -5
One reason I like Masters of the Universe is because of the mix of sci-fi and fantasy. There are various sophisticated vehicles in the show, and science-based villains such as Hordak and the Horde Troopers, but plenty of magical stuff too, such as Skeletor, Shadow Weaver, etc. It was the perfect mix for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by zaku on Mar 28, 2024 6:41:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by MDG on Mar 28, 2024 8:48:39 GMT -5
While I appreciate Conan and I’m a fan of Howard’s writing, I’m of the opinion that the biggest thing Conan had going for him is that he caught the eye of a big name SF writer in L. Sprague de Camp and Howard’s estate had a very aggressive literary agent in Glenn Lord. Barring either of those and it’s likely that Howard and Conan are as nearly forgotten as Seabury Quinn and Jules de Grandin. People don’t seem to realize that Weird Tales had a pretty low circulation for a pulp and was viewed as being barely better than the “shudders.” Fritz Leiber’s Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser did just as much to codify sword & sorcery as Conan, and did it in magazines with a much larger circulation. Yeah--during this conversation, I was thinking that, if you were to ask a "civilian" to name an S&S character who's not Conan, what you would get. On the whole it's not a popular genre.
Also, there was a 60s bump in sales by folks buying the Conan paperbacks for the Frazetta covers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2024 11:37:25 GMT -5
"Sci-Fi" was lazy shorthand for anything dealing with the trappings involving the usual: future tech, robots, outer space, aliens, etc., and at first glance, the average 1977 moviegoer saw Star Wars as a "sci-fi" film, despite the major subplot of the spiritual / mystical Force and its practitioners who had a significant influence over that galaxy's history and events. Lucas emphasizing the "fantasy" description tried to keep Star Wars in the fairy tale realm, but that was a lost cause, especially after Lucas and his LFL authorized endless technical manuals and pseudo-scientific explanations for characters, vehicles, etc., which have become canon, rendering the "fantasy" part of "Science Fantasy" a quaint, short-lived view of Star Wars as a concept. I'm not sure I'd go quite as far as to say that SW as a whole is no longer Space Fantasy, but I do agree that the "Fantasy" aspect has been diminished considerably over the decades. Star Wars never really had traditional sci-fi appeal, that's part of why it became such a big phenomenon. It took the excitement of fantasy storytelling and just placed it in a sci-fi setting. It was the fusion that was part of the genious. Traditional sci-fi just didn't have that kind of audience reach in general. It's not "thinky" traditional sci-fi, as many a hardcore Trekkie has pointed out over the years. It's "space fantasy" all the way. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2024 11:39:20 GMT -5
One reason I like Masters of the Universe is because of the mix of sci-fi and fantasy. There are various sophisticated vehicles in the show, and science-based villains such as Hordak and the Horde Troopers, but plenty of magical stuff too, such as Skeletor, Shadow Weaver, etc. It was the perfect mix for me. Absolutely, it doesn't get as much love here probably based on average age, but far from just a "toy commercial" even though that was one big part of it. It's an absolutely fascinating world. |
|
|
|
Post by MRPs_Missives on Mar 28, 2024 13:28:56 GMT -5
While I appreciate Conan and I’m a fan of Howard’s writing, I’m of the opinion that the biggest thing Conan had going for him is that he caught the eye of a big name SF writer in L. Sprague de Camp and Howard’s estate had a very aggressive literary agent in Glenn Lord. Barring either of those and it’s likely that Howard and Conan are as nearly forgotten as Seabury Quinn and Jules de Grandin. People don’t seem to realize that Weird Tales had a pretty low circulation for a pulp and was viewed as being barely better than the “shudders.” Fritz Leiber’s Fafhrd and the Gray Mouser did just as much to codify sword & sorcery as Conan, and did it in magazines with a much larger circulation. Yeah--during this conversation, I was thinking that, if you were to ask a "civilian" to name an S&S character who's not Conan, what you would get. On the whole it's not a popular genre. Also, there was a 60s bump in sales by folks buying the Conan paperbacks for the Frazetta covers.
To be fair, there was a time before the 21st century if you asked a civilian to name a super-hero who wasn't Supes/Bats/WW/Spidey or Hulk who all appeared in other mediums like TV, you weren't likely to get anything either. Super hero comics were just as niche as S&S in the 20th century, and it wasn't until the '90s when super-heroes other than those icons began to break out in the mass consciousness. Doesn't make Superman any less foundational in defining what the super-hero genre was though. Many of us, as comic book fans, have a skewed perspective on the popularity and pervasiveness of super-heroes in mass culture prior to the mass wave of super-hero popularity in othe rmediums beginning in the 90s (just as many of us S&S fans have a skewed perspective on it). -M |
|
|
|
Post by driver1980 on Mar 28, 2024 18:06:58 GMT -5
Anyone have any views on Sláine?
|
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Mar 28, 2024 20:38:21 GMT -5
Anyone have any views on Sláine? Love the early material, less enamored once Simon Bisley drew him like Conan, though it looked "cool," at first. That was my introduction, in Heavy Metal. I soon found the Titan books reprints of the earlier material and liked them more, for story content. |
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Mar 28, 2024 21:37:58 GMT -5
I read Slaine for the first time just a few years ago when I was reading a few other 2000AD series. I liked that it tried to bring a different set of influences or sources to the sword and sorcery genre: I had read a lot of Irish mythology years previously and recognised some of them. On the other hand, I found the 2000AD format with its short, 5 or 6 page installments sometimes made it feel as if whenever some interesting philosophical idea was introduced it was treated in an offhand or trivial manner.
I'd have to go back and check to see which artists I liked best, but some of the black and white stuff was really nice. I've never been a huge fan of Bisley's style but I've come to like it a little more now than I did when I first saw it (like Codystarbuck, in the pages of Heavy Metal).
|
|
|
|
Post by Marv-El on Apr 1, 2024 18:22:38 GMT -5
I never had much of an appreciation for Conan, until the past few years, when I bought a bunch of the Dark Horse "Essential" style phonebooks of Savage Sword material... and now I LOVE the character, and have gone back and bought the Epic Collections of the Marvel color stuff. I am amazed at how Roy Thomas really brought him to life (along with BWS and Buscema) on the page without compromising his character. In the introduction to the KULL omnibus, Thomas mentions that in Conan, he never uses thought bubbles, or sound effects... I thought that was pretty cool, and did serve to set those tales apart from the rest of the Marvel universe. I agree. Yes, I'd read REH stories before (mainly through those reprints with the Frazetta covers) but never gave much thought to Marvel's comics till recently. For whatever reason, I'd thought that they were mainly reprints/adaptions of the prose stories but after diving into the chunks of the run, I must say I am very impressed with Thomas/Buscema's work especially how Thomas filled in depth and details within those REH stories. The level of continuity within the title itself is amazing which only added to my overall enjoyment of the title. That being said, I'm still adjusting to the King Conan title. Something doesn't sit right with me yet about Conan being king, the focus shifts from this solitary thrilling adventures to palace intrigues and dangers involving more of a cast beyond Conan...though Prince Conn is growing on me. |
|
|
|
Post by berkley on Apr 1, 2024 18:39:10 GMT -5
I never had much of an appreciation for Conan, until the past few years, when I bought a bunch of the Dark Horse "Essential" style phonebooks of Savage Sword material... and now I LOVE the character, and have gone back and bought the Epic Collections of the Marvel color stuff. I am amazed at how Roy Thomas really brought him to life (along with BWS and Buscema) on the page without compromising his character. In the introduction to the KULL omnibus, Thomas mentions that in Conan, he never uses thought bubbles, or sound effects... I thought that was pretty cool, and did serve to set those tales apart from the rest of the Marvel universe. I agree. Yes, I'd read REH stories before (mainly through those reprints with the Frazetta covers) but never gave much thought to Marvel's comics till recently. For whatever reason, I'd thought that they were mainly reprints/adaptions of the prose stories but after diving into the chunks of the run, I must say I am very impressed with Thomas/Buscema's work especially how Thomas filled in depth and details within those REH stories. The level of continuity within the title itself is amazing which only added to my overall enjoyment of the title. That being said, I'm still adjusting to the King Conan title. Something doesn't sit right with me yet about Conan being king, the focus shifts from this solitary thrilling adventures to palace intrigues and dangers involving more of a cast beyond Conan...though Prince Conn is growing on me.
I liked King Conan but felt they stole a bit from Kull for some of those stories. Fair enough, in a way since it's possible that REH himself saw Kull as little more than a dry run for Conan, one that ended up being a bit of a dead end for him as a writer, if that's what we are to conclude from the small number of Kull stories he wrote.But I feel that even given some inevitable similarities due to the similar situation King Conan was in to that of the Kull stories, there was still a difference between the two characters that was muddied a little King Conan.
|
|
