Subject:
|
Re: Jawa Sandcrawler '02
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.starwars
|
Date:
|
Thu, 11 Apr 2002 16:44:38 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
501 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.starwars, Dave Schuler writes:
> In lugnet.starwars, Steve Bliss writes:
>
> > Another thing that made a big difference (IMO) is that before Star Wars,
> > there was a fairly long drought of 'big' science fiction movies. Sure,
> > there were some movies around, but not many. So I think people were
> > much more receptive to Star Wars in 1977 than they would have been if it
> > came out a couple of years later, after Close Encounters of the Third
> > Kind, and some other late-70's movies.
>
> I think this is exactly right, and I would suggest that the other
> late-70's might not have been possible or successful without many of the
> techniques established during Star Wars, not to mention the
> market-credibility of science fiction following the 1977 blockbuster release.
>
> Dave!
I believe that most sci-fi after Star Wars used Lucases own special effects
production company, ILM, to do the effects in their movies. Before this,
most studios did cheesy effects 'in house' (2001 being a noteable exception,
those were pretty good effects for a space movie)
I dunno how if I remember this correctly but Paramount was loathe to release
a Star Trek flick during the 70's *1. When the new television series for
Star Trek fell thru, and all the sets 'n costumes were made and such,
someone had an idea to make a movie. Execs said 'Sci fi movie?? Never
work!' Then Star Wars came out and proved them wrong, and Star Trek, The
Motion Pic was release like a year and a half later.
What was the Star Wars phenom, could have been the Star Trek Phenom *2 only
if, as usual, *any* studio exec had a Vision(tm) and knew what the viewing
audience really wanted, instead of feeding us eye candy
*1 I could go into the whole Star Trek movement during the '70's that was so
big that a letter writing campaign to Jimmy Carter got the first Space
Shuttle named to Enterprise but I won't 'cause for those 'in the know' it
was a great time, and for those that couldn't give a flying fig about Star
Trek, I won't bore you with details...).
*2 tho, in its own right, Star Trek is an entity in and of itself ;) *3
*3 George Lucas vs Gene Roddenberry - Say whay you want, I'll choose Gene
any day of the week. Anyone who goes up against Network Brass to get his
Vision(tm) out there has my appreciation. Sure, if you have lotsa money,
your own production company, and really no one to answer to, you can crete
your own Vision(tm), but on an extremely limited budget, and the network
saying 'People just won't get it!!' and trying to change and/or cancel your
show lotsa times... Gene, you're inspirational.
p.s. I was a Trekkie thru most of my life, tho now not so much. That said,
I am appreciating the new series, and will probably see ST:X (tho not
opening night like the previous 9 movies)
Dave
-Who really does like Star Wars, honest!--just like Star Trek more ;)
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Jawa Sandcrawler '02
|
| (...) I doubt this would have been true mostly because ST the Motion Picture was just a little to slow. It was closer to 2001 ASO then it was SW. SW had blasters firing and a much faster script. Plus ST tries to base in self in some sort of "future (...) (22 years ago, 11-Apr-02, to lugnet.starwars)
| | | Re: Jawa Sandcrawler '02
|
| (...) I dunno-- I'm almost tempted to say that Star Trek could've hurt the sci-fi market for SW had it been first. First off, effects. One of the HUGE things SW did was the great effects. Chances are ST would've had the same cheezy effects that (...) (22 years ago, 11-Apr-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Jawa Sandcrawler '02
|
| (...) I think this is exactly right, and I would suggest that the other late-70's might not have been possible or successful without many of the techniques established during Star Wars, not to mention the market-credibility of science fiction (...) (22 years ago, 11-Apr-02, to lugnet.starwars)
|
23 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
