Something went wrong. Try again later

Giant Bomb News

242 Comments

Off the Clock: Space Opera Millennials and Their Grand Narratives

Over the holiday break, I got to watch Star Wars: The Force Awakens a couple of times. I have some thoughts.

Welcome to Off the Clock, my weekly column about the stuff I've been doing while out of the office. Among other things I did over my holiday break, I spent some of my free time watching and thinking about…

Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens

No Caption Provided

(Heads up, I’m going to talk frankly and openly about elements of The Force Awakens.)

After my first viewing of The Force Awakens, on my way out of the theater, I rushed to tweet a joke I’d been holding back throughout nearly the whole film: “Star Wars: Episode VII: The Millennials Will Be Okay.” I say “joke,” but like a lot of jokes based in observation, I kind of meant exactly what I said. It seemed like an obvious reading. The major members of the new “generation” of Star Wars characters--Rey, Finn, and Kylo Ren--all stood in the shadow of a past in different ways. Or said differently, each is a sort of “fan” of the same Star Wars stories that we know and love, and they all find themselves struggling with the canon.

Towards the start of the movie, Rey’s fandom is on full display in the form of a vintage X-Wing helmet and a doll of a rebel pilot--probably Luke, whose sandy footsteps Rey seems to be following in. Finn, a First Order stormtrooper gone AWOL, struggles to distance himself from the group he was born into--a group that (despite a fairly complex history) likely conjures for the viewer only the image of faceless totalitarianism. Kylo Ren dwells on the good ol’ days of Darth Vader, frustrated like a 20-something who thinks that Baby Boomers are right about the rest of his lazy generation.

Like most of us in our own lives, each of these characters has a limited understanding of the universe, and especially of the past. What do other worlds look like? What was “the Galactic Empire” really? Is the Force real, and if so how does it work? Nowhere is this difference in understanding illustrated better than in how these characters view Han Solo: For Ren, he’s an uncaring father, for Finn, he’s a brilliant war hero, and for Rey he’s a legendary smuggler. Each finds their understanding challenged by a more complicated truth: Han was an absent dad because he cared so much; the great Rebellion war hero is a scoundrel without a plan; even seemingly invincible legends die.

In confronting the fact that the world might not quite be what they thought it was, these characters are unmoored from their senses of self. In some moments, Finn can’t seem to tell if he’s really just trying to escape the First Order or if he has nobler motives. Rey and Ren both struggle with their connection to the Force--the former wanting nothing to do with it despite aptitude, the latter wanting the control he thinks is his birthright. These dilemmas are pretty classic space opera, but look past the laser swords and they're not so different than the struggles of real people (millennial or otherwise). "Who am I and what the hell is my place in this world?" is the sort of question people have been asking themselves for as long as there have been people.

And this is where it gets interesting.

Beyond "The Hero's Journey"

No Caption Provided

While (depending on your feelings on metaphysics) the real world leaves us to try to find some subjective meaning for our lives, the world of Star Wars defines the roles of its inhabitants actively--or at least, it's supposed to. It's a universe that seems to present fundamental, inescapable truths. There is a Force that ties us all together. There is a moral Light side and a selfish, immoral Dark side.

The world of Star Wars is (or at least has been) filled with capital T "Truths." This is what made me turn on the series back in my late teens/early 20s. Despite growing up with the franchise, I stopped calling myself “a Star Wars fan” during the prequels. That was partly due to the quality of the those films, yeah, but also because the moralism of the series had begun to grate on me. I was moving into a period of my life where I became more interested in complex understandings of ethics and politics, and I was bored of reading again and again about how the Hero’s Journey was the One Way to Tell Stories, and I was especially frustrated by stories that wielded Good and Evil like hammers.

I stand by those developments in my thinking, but what I don’t stand by is the brash, Dawkins-esque elitism that they were accompanied by. That elitism led me to dismiss things I didn’t like instead of thinking about them. What a huge mistake. It was facile to dismiss that Star Wars morality as being “too black and white.” Yeah, of course it is--that's what they're going for. That shouldn't have been a stopping point for thought, it should've been a first step. Not only should I have asked “Why don’t I like this as much as I used to?” but also “What is it doing with this sense of morality and how does it do it?” Not just "Ugh, stop talking about the hero's journey," but "What is the academic heritage of Campbell's famous "monomyth," how does Star Wars utilize those things in a cinematic context? And to what end?"

That heritage is (among other things) a school of 20th century thought called Structuralism. Building on the work of linguist Ferdinand de Saussure and anthropologist Claude Levi-Strauss, structuralists identify and analyze what they see as common, foundational elements inside of any given set of human activity. While others in the field of linguistics were studying how a given language changed over time, Saussure was trying to figure out what was core to the way all languages must work. Levi-Strauss expanded on Saussure’s work, looking not only at human language but also at the structure of human stories and mythology. For both Saussure and Levi-Strauss, answering these questions about human activity was key to figuring out universal and intrinsic truths about humans.

Over the decades that followed, structuralist work expanded into analysis of economic, cultural, and political realms. It was often incredibly productive, since it gave people the tools to look not only at individual instances but also broader trends and practices. But structuralism eventually found pushback from folks who doubted that so much was truly "universal." Structuralist thought sometimes minimized real differences between different phenomena, and it often led to grand claims that prioritized the world views of the powerful and established. Some "post-structuralists" kept the toolset of structuralist analysis, but emphasized that the "structures" they were studying were ever-changing, not eternal: "Yes, we can analyze the structure of myths, but that changes as economic, social, technological, and emotional contexts do."

When I finally brought all of this to bear on Star Wars, I realized that it didn't only lean heavily on supposedly "universal" elements of myth-making, but also featured a fictional setting that itself presumes structuralism to be accurate. There is a fundamental organization and underlying structure to all sapient activity in Star Wars: The Force. And as Han says, "It's real, all of it." It's a claim that ancient alien bar-owner Maz Kanata supports, too: In a long enough timeline, "the same eyes appear in different people"--and whether she means that Star Wars characters are literally reincarnated or just that we're looking at a world of endless, thematic recurrence, the point is clear: There will always be a Luke and a Leia and a Darth Vader, even when they're a Rey and a Finn and a Kylo Ren.

Star Wars communicates its structuralism not only narratively, but also with a fierce cinematic cudgel. It hits you with black masks, with bright blue and red lasers, with orchestral swells, and with the sort of panoramic wide shots that seem to reach out and say “Yes, there is a transcendent, capital T Truth out there.” The lonely, desert sunsets of Tatooine and Jakku; the surge of heroism as an X-Wing squadron drifts in-formation over the waters and forests of Takodana; the Evil of General Hux's gathered mass of potential violence, his stormtroopers, his red banners, his technological supremacy, his eagerness to destroy populations we've barely met. At its highest points, Star Wars is crafted with such mastery that it is easy to convince oneself that it touches something fundamental to all humans, something eternal and real.

"A Man, Nothing More"

No Caption Provided

The Force Awakens does something surprising, though: It pairs all of this with techniques that destabilize and historicize. The film features endless panoramas, but also a jittery camera inside of a stormtrooper transport. Supreme Leader Snoke is a massive, growling personification of cruelty and ambition, but as his hologram diffuses so does our confidence that he is actually so threatening: Is he just another Wizard of Oz, someone who pulls all the right levers to convince us of his stature? And when General Hux delivers his speech, he isn't channeling some platonic form of Evil. He's channeling what we, the viewers, know and recognize from 20th Century fascism. His face carries the same combination of self-delusion and self-doubt that many ideologues wear--and Kylo Ren's does the same.

It was a surprise to see Ren's human face, and the reveal has been divisive. For many, it transformed a hateful, masked figure into an angsty little boy. Given the rest of the film's focus on destabilizing the mythic, I suspect that was the point. There is a similar scene towards the end of Knights of the Old Republic II: In the right circumstances, Darth Nihilius--a wordless being who devours the lifeforce of whole planets--can be unmasked to reveal what one of your companions describes as "a man, nothing more." The same could be said for Kylo Ren, or, in a way, even the mega-weapon that the First Order wields to devastating ends. Starkiller Base is not the mechanical, pseudo-moon monstrosity that the Death Star was. It is a planet converted into a weapon in the same way that Kylo Ren is a man converted into a killer The Force Awakens reminds us that evil doesn't need to look like any of the strange alien beings of the Star Wars galaxy. Sometimes it looks just like us.

This is a key thing to remember when considering the anxious response some have had about The Force Awakens' diversity and the heroic competence of Rey, the protagonist who some call a "Mary Sue" (and sometimes do such with the same temper-tantrum tones of an unmasked Kylo Ren). The film recognizes that the heroes of Hollywood--and thus the heroes of modern western mythology--have had wide appeal, but offer shallow representation. To twist Orwell: The stories of Luke, Leia, and Han are universal, but they're more universal for some than others. As much as Star Wars has spoken to a wide audience, it hasn't always spoken for that audience. To address this, the heroes of The Force Awakens are just as adept as the protagonists of the past, but now they're played by a much more diverse crew.

Between Hux's fascism and Ren's anger at Rey's natural prowess, The Force Awakens anticipated some of its most ardent critics well enough to personify them in the film. Ren's frustration is particularly ironic. He believes in a twisted meritocracy: Those who practice drawing upon anger and hate will one day learn utilize the force's full potential. When he is met with a person who--with no training--is able to outperform him, his worldview is so threatened that he takes drastic steps to try to reinforce it. But there are those in the world of Star Wars who are seemingly born with advantages others don't have, and this is as infuriating to Ren as it is to Rey's real life critics. Of course, this has been an uncomfortable fact about the world of Star Wars for as long as there have been Jedi, but before Rey, it went unchallenged. Suddenly, given the form of Daisy Ridley, old fans find an old truth undesirable.

Hux and Ren--and, I think, those angry fans--look backwards towards an elusive (and fictional) past where things were simpler, but The Force Awakens wants us to look forward instead, even though that might be challenging. The world is unfair, it says, and unstable. The things we thought were structural and eternal are in fact man-made and mutable. They're just very, very convincing. Addressing the challenges of the future will require not only people who are preternaturally skilled, like Rey, but also people like Finn, who will do what is needed when others refuse. I am thrilled that The Force Awakens is embracing this unsure future.

It is telling that the despite the heroic successes of its protagonists, the final moments of the film are not rendered in one of the series' bold, enveloping wide shots. Instead, we see Rey and Luke--his face intimating a well of history and thought and just a little confusion.

They stand on a hill on an island on a planet of oceans, the camera spinning around them in a wide, almost dizzy crane shot. The camera shakes, just slightly, hit by wind and a whispered doubt about what's to come.

No Caption Provided

I also spent some time over the break...

And A Question For You

Above, I wrote that Star Wars is able to use certain cinematic techniques to convey common feelings in a really evocative way. Can you think of any games that do this, whether with gameplay mechanics, controls, aesthetic design, or something else? If so, how do they do it? My favorite example of this is probably the way that Cart Life requires the player to purchase a watch in order to learn to make accurate predictions about travel times--without one, everything is unpredictable and incredibly stressful.

If I have time to, I'm also going to continue to collect and highlight my favorite comments at the end of the week. If you'd prefer your comment not be included in that post, let me know and I'll respect that.

242 Comments

Avatar image for dubiouscomet
DubiousComet

14

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Towards the end of Spec Ops: The Line, the loading screen messages that started out as tips or objective reminders start to become the nasty thoughts at the back of the player character's mind. One of them just says "This is all your fault." Reading those was the most chilling part for me of a game that was otherwise not too subtle. Loading screen messages are typically meant for the player; their being used to speak to the PC directly made it harder for me to distance myself from him, in a way that made me uncomfortable.

Avatar image for asko25
AsKo25

234

Forum Posts

10

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I've really been enjoying reading all the hubris around this film. This piece has given me a lot to think about, thanks Austin!

I saw it once during the 1-7 marathon event and then again a few weeks later, it has way better dialogue, acting, and action than the prequels, however it's also pretty heavily reliant on the older films for a lot of its story beats. I know there are people on both sides of that fence, but it was highly apparent to me especially after the marathon. I don't think that makes it a bad film, just not a fantastic, groundbreaking one like IV or V imo. Regardless, I'll be pumped for VIII as long as they take a few more risks and add something unique to the Star Wars universe.

Also, as a lifelong Star Wars fan, I'm really jealous that The Force Awakens is the one that the current 15 year olds get while I'm stuck with my "fond" high school memories of pretending to enjoy Revenge of the Sith. The Ubisoft game was dumb fun at least, even on the GBA. However, TFA is a masterpiece of a movie in comparison to the Lucas prequels, and I'm stoked that everyone everywhere is now excited about Star Wars again.

In regards to your question, I think Five Nights at Freddy's does a good job of using cinematic techniques for its storytelling. You can't leave the security office, you have limited power, you can only look left and right, and you are basically defenseless. Everything about the game is deliberately restrictive, even down to the graphical style. Being in a dingy, creepy place isn't unusual for horror, but having such harsh limitations on your character really heightens the sense of terror; it could be over at literally any minute if you don't know what you're doing. Other survival horror games give you a sense of agency that prepares you for the terror, but this game does away with all of that and only gives you the bare minimum.

There's a mission in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 where Russia invades a suburban neighborhood in Virginia, and you as Americans are deployed to defend it. You have shootouts in people's backyards, in a plaza parking lot, and more. Maybe I'm wrong, but I haven't seen a ton of military combat in this setting in the media. Usually, war settings are reserved for the Middle East, so I found it interesting that we get to see what it would look like if the US got invaded by another country, and even participate in it. It's easier for us to comprehend current images of war in third world countries because it doesn't look like our world, but seeing it in our reality seems so ridiculous, and scenes like this could break down that way of thinking. It's a highly implausible scenario for sure, but it gave my 19 year old self something to bring up when discussing images of war in history class, only to have the dialogue turn sharply into a lukewarm debate on video game violence at the mere mention of the CoD franchise. Oh well. I think the first two Modern Warfare campaigns do a good job of providing explosive action while also condemning the war machine, which is a difficult balance to achieve.

Back to Star Wars, I really hope there's some more games planned for the new universe. I'd love a Jedi Academy reboot that serves as a prequel to The Force Awakens, since they do discuss Luke training a new generation in the film. You could even choose to side with Kylo Ren or Luke, sort of like how you make a moral choice at the end of the original game. It could also have loads of custom options and all that, and if it uses the Battlefront engine then aww yeah. Platinum would do the combat, in my dreams.

Avatar image for dirtyplatinum
Dirtyplatinum

51

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Good read. I personally liked the film. And yes, I was one of those people saying the unmasking of Kylo Ren kind of ruined his presence. He just had this air of unknown about him. Mystery. It was appealing. I probably wouldnt have minded just the unmasking with Rey scene but when the entire climax was helmetless... it just bothered me.

And while I unfortunately also see Rey as Mary Sue, I will also admit it wasnt until it was pointed out to me. Her seeming need for no outside help, her innate ability to be amazing at practically anything she wanted, her immediate understanding of the force when she realized she was sensitive, she understood both Chewbacca and BB:8, etc. She did damn near everything perfectly. But thats merely my outlook on it, that I had help painting with some outside observations. But all in all I thought it was a great film. And the effects were fantastic. A lot of people say its basically Episode IV but I didnt care. I am one of those casual Star Wars fans. I bought Battlefront and liked it you know? As Jeff put it, I am one of those guys who is simply, "Look at that dude! Hes a Stormtrooper! Thats awesome!".

As to your question this week I really dont have much to add. I feel MGS:4 used tons of cinematic devices to get quite a bit across. From the (what I feel is) amazing camera work to the end portion where you need to hammer on that damn X button to get Snake down that microwave hallway and the entire time you are doing it it is showing you the flashes of what is unfolding around you and the more you mash on that button the more tired your hand gets but the images of your comrades going through the same pain you are pushes you to go forward no matter how bad your hand starts to hurt. You just kind of feels Snakes desperation in it all. Probably one of the most emotionally intense button mashing sequences in any game, ever.

Avatar image for jayzilla
Jayzilla

2709

Forum Posts

18

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 7

Brilliant read. As someone who was 8 when RotJ came out, I grew up with this series. All of the new characters are great. Hopefully they utilize Oscar Isaac's skill as an actor more than they did in TFA though. He was way too brofist for me. Rey is an incredible character. Her hope transcends everything. When she finally closes her eyes per Maz's instructions she gets it and nothing can stand in her way.

Luke is my favorite character in the franchise simply because he puts his own self preservation on the line to the point of death to save his friends on multiple occasions and his self sacrifice ultimately shows his father that the light is the right way. Real power isn't in, "Might makes right" but in loving others more than yourself. When Luke does this, his father fulfills the prophecy of bringing balance to the Force by hurtling Palpatine into the bottomless pit. Rey displays this as well in a different way. With her unbridled hope.

Avatar image for vrighteous
vRighteous

16

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By vRighteous

@langly: I'm guessing, because of the seemingly supernatural reverence Rey has for Luke in the film, that things like the "Jedi mind trick" are probably the kind of things she'd hear in a fairy-tale.

Avatar image for oni
Oni

2345

Forum Posts

5885

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 26

User Lists: 12

@austin_walker I urge you to check out the prequels again. If there's one thing they do well, it's complicate the what you state as an absolute truth of the SW universe: That Light side is inherently good and Dark side evil. In fact, I think even the end of ROTJ does this, when Luke rejects what Yoda and Obi-Wan tell him, that he must kill Vader to become a Jedi. The prequels depict a failing Jedi Order which has become complicit in oppression. I suspect/hope that this new trilogy will "destabilize" that false Light/Dark dichotomy further.

It's also more than a little petty to paint everyone who critiques Rey's character as an angry man-child. Yeah, there are a lot of angry nerds out there, but I've also seen plenty of people say "Yeah, she's a Mary Sue, but so what?" Her character works in the mythical framework of the story because we already KNOW who she is, and her unexplained prowess with the Force will surely be explained in the next film.

Last point: rather than destabilize Star Wars' mythic framework, I think this film further cements it. Have you read the Ring reading? I highly recommend it.

Avatar image for tadthuggish
TadThuggish

1074

Forum Posts

334

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 41

This might be my very favorite piece to appear on the site, Austin. It's exactly what I was thinking while watching TFA. Instead of being another Star Wars film, TFA is a film about being another Star Wars film. Its self-awareness and play with narratology is astounding and something that might only be able to exist this deep within a series with this large of fan expectations. I wish I had written this and I'm excited to explore its thematic purpose further!

Avatar image for logicaldash
LogicalDash

1

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By LogicalDash

My favorite technique for manipulating the player's emotions in a videogame is also one of the most common: scarcity. Forcing the player to make hard choices about who gets medicine, who gets bed rest, and who will tough out that cough they have (This War of Mine); whether that one squadmate is valuable enough to save despite how far away they are (XCOM, Invisible Inc); or even just decide what weapon to use, is a reliable way to ratchet up the tension, to direct the player's attention where you want it, and even provoke empathy for the character. If you can make the player act protective of that character, sooner or later they start to feel protective, as well.

That scarcity is also the basis of challenging tactical gameplay is a happy coincidence.

Avatar image for harletron
Harletron

57

Forum Posts

259

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Bioshock, the original Bioshock makes a point very well.

In Bioshock there is the big "would you kindly" twist near the end of the game. This is a great narrative trick that is basically mocking the player and all video games that purport to be "open world."In the game there is a big yellow arrow always pointing you to the next objective. Areas in the game are also sort of wide funnels pushing you from one place to another. You can deviate and learn a bit more about the world, and pick up ammo, but the arrow is always there.

It's not until that second half that the game actually opens up, once the wool has been lifted. Now you are able to return to any area of the game, and explore a huge new area. But at the other end of this area is your objective, and your big yellow arrow tells you go there and ignore all detours. Many players do just that. Players are by this point mighty, and any additional padding is unnecessary. You've been funneled down a path, told to do this. In fact, the game has weapon upgrades in limited supply, so you are told to use them specifically on weapons you prefer. Plasmids can be upgrade to, but the resources there are also limited. At this late stage in the game you are given the option to seek out tools to augment yourself further, but many players simply sprint to the finish.

Bioshock is saying something bigger about narrative and structure in games, not just in it's story, but it's execution. Players moving through it are lead by the nose to the next objective to tackle, like a dog on a leash. But late in the game when the leash is removed players will still follow knowing nothing else. Because that's how narrative in video games works. You follow or stagnate, the end. Like Grand Theft Auto San Andreas, the open world gameplay is fun, but if you wanna see more, you have to do as you're told. Bioshock pulls the leash of at the very end and what does the player do? What they were supposed to do, what they're trained to do, win the game. Like autopilot brainwashed soldiers.

Avatar image for pilgore
Pilgore

315

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@oni said:

@austin_walker I urge you to check out the prequels again. If there's one thing they do well, it's complicate the what you state as an absolute truth of the SW universe: That Light side is inherently good and Dark side evil. In fact, I think even the end of ROTJ does this, when Luke rejects what Yoda and Obi-Wan tell him, that he must kill Vader to become a Jedi. The prequels depict a failing Jedi Order which has become complicit in oppression. I suspect/hope that this new trilogy will "destabilize" that false Light/Dark dichotomy further.

It's also more than a little petty to paint everyone who critiques Rey's character as an angry man-child. Yeah, there are a lot of angry nerds out there, but I've also seen plenty of people say "Yeah, she's a Mary Sue, but so what?" Her character works in the mythical framework of the story because we already KNOW who she is, and her unexplained prowess with the Force will surely be explained in the next film.

Last point: rather than destabilize Star Wars' mythic framework, I think this film further cements it. Have you read the Ring reading? I highly recommend it.

They tell Luke to confront Vader, not kill him.

Avatar image for seif
Seif

4

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Seif

Thanks, Austin! This is really valuable stuff. I love your contributions to the site. Keep it up!

Avatar image for bigglesworth42
Bigglesworth42

23

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Bigglesworth42

Excellent article Austin. It really hits at the heart of what I've been feeling about TFA. It's both a retelling and a deconstruction of the monomyth, as seen through the lens of the generation that grew up with it. And the more I think about it after watching, the more I like it.

To answer the question: the fixed camera angles in Until Dawn create a sense of dread and paranoia that subtly draws you into the game. It's clearly inspired by the way horror movies are shot, but it's also something that hasn't been used much in games since early in the Resident Evil series.

@hassun mentioned slowing down when injured, and I think The Last of Us is a great example of that with Joel in the Colorado section. Also Journey, when you get near the summit in the snow. You almost feel like you can keep going, because you have to keep going. You've become invested in the world and the struggle, and through force of will alone, you will take that next step. But controls become sluggish, unresponsive. You can't move like you want to. Then you stumble. It's a powerful feeling.

Avatar image for williamflattener
williamflattener

195

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Well I didn't expect Ferdinand de Saussure to be invoked... in an insightful Star Wars commentary... on my video game review outlet of choice. Armchair linguist here, and bravo.

Austin, there's just a ton crammed into this film, to its credit and otherwise.

Multiple heroes-on-journeys, some shorter than others, and all seem like avatars of the original trilogy's protagonist. Desert-planet denizen eking out an existence, meant for something greater... ace pilot who saves the day... feisty rebel sticking to the empire--all manifest in their own characters in TFA, all exhibited in Luke in the original trilogy. I was surprised at how well those all fit together, but it makes a weird kind of sense to consider them as the "multiple aspects of Luke Skywalker."

However, this makes for some bizarre pacing issues that gave me a bit of whiplash.

Star Wars now has its own near-mythical beats that, it seems, Must Exist in the plot: a big holographic bad guy who is ugly; a big superweapon (again) (UGH) that threatens all freedom and all sapient life, etc. Where the original trilogy felt like processing literally ancient ideals into something adventurous and relatable, TFA occasionally feels like a big ol' rehash.

All that said, Episode VII really works as the beginning of a Titanomachia--a reverential re-introduction of the characters of this fiction, and then BAM, punting them right out of the way to make room for a dynamic new generation of characters to gather round and worship, nerdfully.

Avatar image for longmasterwolf
LongMasterWolf

244

Forum Posts

290

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 1

Reading this brings me back to my college Phil/Poly Sci/Eng classes. God I need to go back to school, it's been 4 years since I graduated and it feels like an eternity.

Avatar image for oni
Oni

2345

Forum Posts

5885

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 26

User Lists: 12

@pilgore said:
@oni said:

@austin_walker I urge you to check out the prequels again. If there's one thing they do well, it's complicate the what you state as an absolute truth of the SW universe: That Light side is inherently good and Dark side evil. In fact, I think even the end of ROTJ does this, when Luke rejects what Yoda and Obi-Wan tell him, that he must kill Vader to become a Jedi. The prequels depict a failing Jedi Order which has become complicit in oppression. I suspect/hope that this new trilogy will "destabilize" that false Light/Dark dichotomy further.

It's also more than a little petty to paint everyone who critiques Rey's character as an angry man-child. Yeah, there are a lot of angry nerds out there, but I've also seen plenty of people say "Yeah, she's a Mary Sue, but so what?" Her character works in the mythical framework of the story because we already KNOW who she is, and her unexplained prowess with the Force will surely be explained in the next film.

Last point: rather than destabilize Star Wars' mythic framework, I think this film further cements it. Have you read the Ring reading? I highly recommend it.

They tell Luke to confront Vader, not kill him.

True, but Luke says "I can't kill my father", and then Obi-Wan says "Then the Emperor has already won", which as we know isn't what happened. Neither Yoda nor Ben ever encouraged Luke to appeal to the human being in Vader, to use his compassion. But that turned out exactly to be Luke's greatest strength, and as we know, the Jedi teach you to let go of your attachment to others. Luke didn't, and succeeded BECAUSE of it, not in spite of it. That pretty solidly undercuts the dogmatic views of the Jedi imo.

Avatar image for taquitobandito
TaquitoBandito

2

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By TaquitoBandito

Great read, Austin. Off the Clock is quickly becoming one of my favorite features of the site.

Avatar image for twolines
TwoLines

3406

Forum Posts

319

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By TwoLines

@oni said:
@pilgore said:
@oni said:

@austin_walker I urge you to check out the prequels again. If there's one thing they do well, it's complicate the what you state as an absolute truth of the SW universe: That Light side is inherently good and Dark side evil. In fact, I think even the end of ROTJ does this, when Luke rejects what Yoda and Obi-Wan tell him, that he must kill Vader to become a Jedi. The prequels depict a failing Jedi Order which has become complicit in oppression. I suspect/hope that this new trilogy will "destabilize" that false Light/Dark dichotomy further.

It's also more than a little petty to paint everyone who critiques Rey's character as an angry man-child. Yeah, there are a lot of angry nerds out there, but I've also seen plenty of people say "Yeah, she's a Mary Sue, but so what?" Her character works in the mythical framework of the story because we already KNOW who she is, and her unexplained prowess with the Force will surely be explained in the next film.

Last point: rather than destabilize Star Wars' mythic framework, I think this film further cements it. Have you read the Ring reading? I highly recommend it.

They tell Luke to confront Vader, not kill him.

True, but Luke says "I can't kill my father", and then Obi-Wan says "Then the Emperor has already won", which as we know isn't what happened. Neither Yoda nor Ben ever encouraged Luke to appeal to the human being in Vader, to use his compassion. But that turned out exactly to be Luke's greatest strength, and as we know, the Jedi teach you to let go of your attachment to others. Luke didn't, and succeeded BECAUSE of it, not in spite of it. That pretty solidly undercuts the dogmatic views of the Jedi imo.

Or maybe "kill Vader" means destroy Vader and bring back Anakin. Just like they say Anakin, or "your father" died. They consider Vader to be something different. They consider it to be the embodiment of evil residing in Anakin. They use a lot of metaphors, and it was Luke's last test. Confront your father, kill Vader. As a kid I always thought that was the plan. To somehow bring him back into the light, not, like, use your laser sword to cut off his head. That was the whole point of the encounter in the cave! If you kill your dad, you will become him.

Besides, it was obvious with the whole Jedi training bullshit and the nanochondria or midi-whatevers that Lucas wanted to go into Sci Fi more than Fantasy in the prequels. Which is why we have all that bullcrap.

But hey, I don't know. It just seems like the philosophy of the 4, 5 and 6 was much more defined and overall smarter (and more coherent) than the thing that was in 1, 2 and 3. Gosh, those movies are so bad.

Avatar image for d_w
D_W

1973

Forum Posts

2440

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 21

This was a great piece. Though whenever I read "The Force Awakens" I think they mean "The Force Unleashed" for whatever reason.

Avatar image for quantris
Quantris

1524

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@oni said:

@austin_walker I urge you to check out the prequels again. If there's one thing they do well, it's complicate the what you state as an absolute truth of the SW universe: That Light side is inherently good and Dark side evil. In fact, I think even the end of ROTJ does this, when Luke rejects what Yoda and Obi-Wan tell him, that he must kill Vader to become a Jedi. The prequels depict a failing Jedi Order which has become complicit in oppression. I suspect/hope that this new trilogy will "destabilize" that false Light/Dark dichotomy further.

It's also more than a little petty to paint everyone who critiques Rey's character as an angry man-child. Yeah, there are a lot of angry nerds out there, but I've also seen plenty of people say "Yeah, she's a Mary Sue, but so what?" Her character works in the mythical framework of the story because we already KNOW who she is, and her unexplained prowess with the Force will surely be explained in the next film.

Last point: rather than destabilize Star Wars' mythic framework, I think this film further cements it. Have you read the Ring reading? I highly recommend it.

+1. Jedi == good and Sith == evil is the mantra of the old order, but at least for me is not the message of the story itself. Sadly it does seem like Lucas kind of forgot about the important thing being the "balance of the force" when writing certain parts (arguably could attribute this to the story largely following "the good guys"), but I agree that overall the theme is present in all the movies that neither monochromatic view is the "correct" one. I would presume that Luke came to this conclusion and that it is the reason for his exile, and hope they delve into it in the next film.

I only hope that Rey is not related to Luke somehow which is a fan theory that gets thrown around a lot. It would beggar belief a little too much. There were tons of Jedi before Skywalker so it's not like every force prodigy has to be related to him.

Avatar image for valorianendymion
ValorianEndymion

146

Forum Posts

169

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 12

Above, I wrote that Star Wars is able to use certain cinematic techniques to convey common feelings in a really evocative way. Can you think of any games that do this, whether with gameplay mechanics, controls, aesthetic design, or something else? If so, how do they do it?


Don´t know if this fits in, but in Nobunaga´s Ambition, they use a lot the aesthetic of taiga dramas - from the way the officers look (in many case they look like actors), the music, graphics and dialogue have this very taiga drama feeling that gives the game a unique epic feeling (I mean different from other games of its kind).


Avatar image for robotman
robotman

1

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Very very cool stuff to think on.

I really love the beginning in Fez when you start off without your rotational powers. Gomez wakes up in his small room and simple life on this 2D floating island. He talks with the other villagers who scoff at the idea of there being more to their world. Then his whole world is flipped (quite literally) when the eyepatch wearing old man calls Gomez to the top of island and a god-like cube bestows on him the knowledge of the full world (and also a sweet hat). He's plopped back into his home but with the ability to see everything and the world becomes brand new as he discover ssecrets in the very place he's been living his whole life.

I love that game and that moment a whole lot, especially now that I've recently started college gaining a better understanding of the world and finding out what hother eDucati on actally is. Much like Gomez learning if the 3D world from an giant powerful cube, starting school has made me realize there's a whole other world of events and thoughts and personalities and its very very imtimidating but so so gosh darn cool.

Avatar image for drm2thej
DrM2theJ

325

Forum Posts

11

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Generally, a very well written piece.

I think what this film conveyed far better than other Star Wars movies is that the "Dark Side" represents "Order". It, more than any of the original trilogy (and ignoring the prequels because they are terrible), starkly contrasts the adherents and servants to the Dark Side (the First Order in this case) with the rest of the more natural galaxy. Hell, the "bad guys" are literally called the "First Order". That's about as hamfisted a symbol as you can get.

In the original movies, one of the starkest examples of this is the way all the Storm Troopers and members of the empire are human. When they bring aboard a colorful assortment of bounty hunters of various races in The Empire Strikes Back, there is an uttering from an Imperial saying, "We don't need their scum". The bounty hunters stand out very dramatically against the backdrop of grays and whites and blacks and dark browns of the Imperials.

In The Force Awakens, the First Order is incredibly ordered. It is very explicit that their goal is to bring order. And, frankly, through order comes peace, albeit via means that our society's cultural norms would say are immoral. I think what I find interesting about that, though, is that the goal of such order can actually be represented in a noble light. Essentially, order of that type can lead ultimately to peace. It's always an interesting thought experiment to apply completely amoral thought towards how to achieve something like universal peace.

Think about Soma's story for example. What if you had an AI that had one ultimate command: Universal Peace. What would that AI do, given a complete lack of morality. Presumably it would remove all elements that do not fit the definition of peace. Possibly this would mean wiping out life all together, as life's function is essential to disturb the peace--to bring entropy to order.

Then again, as any good biologist or physicist will tell you, there is nothing more fundamental to our universe than entropy. To attempt to apply order to the natural state of things is to attempt the impossible.

Anyway, I found the film thought inspiring as well as entertaining. I do like your representation of it as having some relevance to generational issues, and I think that's spot on (and fully intentional).

One small comment:

I stand by those developments in my thinking, but what I don’t stand by is the brash, Dawkins-esque elitism that they were accompanied by. That elitism led me to dismiss things I didn’t like instead of thinking about them.

"Dawkins-esque elitism", eh? I fully realize it's nit-picking, and I usually despise such nit-picking, but I can't help myself in this case. I'm not sure that conveys exactly what you mean it to, at least to those of us who know a bit about Richard Dawkins. When Dawkins refers to his own "elitism", he actually does so sarcastically. He doesn't consider it elitist to be thoughtful or intelligent--that's the point of his "elitism". I'm not really an adherent of his (though I do think The Selfish Gene is a seminal work), but I think you're using his name out of turn. I suppose what you meant to convey with that choice of flourish was the brashness of his supposed "elitism" were it taken at face value rather than recognized as sarcasm. Then again, you literally said "brash" right before "Dawkins-esque". Perhaps you think that Dawkins "dismisses things he doesn't like instead of thinking about them" to paraphrase your subsequent sentence, but I don't think that's the case at all. The man is indeed brash, and he does have strong opinions, but his "elitism" isn't actually elitism--to paraphrase him, "I don't believe knowing that 2+2=4 is elitism." Then again, arguing about Richard Dawkins is about the dumbest thing I can think of arguing about at the moment, so have at it.

Avatar image for superdomino
superdomino

214

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@langly said:

One thing I do want to point out is that Rey really does seem to know way more than she should at the time that she does. I think it's a realistic question to put to the movie that doesn't really have a good answer.

In the first Star Wars movie, Luke is preternaturally good with the force, but he also does essentially nothing with it other than hear voices and shoot a missile well. He's also shown several force techniques before Ben dies. He doesn't pull a lightsaber until the next movie (and I think a year passes?) and he doesn't use the mind trick until the third movie and yoda. So, it's not like Luke was doing the things that Rey was doing in a new hope but since she's a girl people are flipping out. That might be why some are, but the difference in ability is stark.

Personally, I was thinking about this, and I think that decision was purposeful, and I think her vision she received when she touched the lightsaber kind of osmosis force trained her, like a holocron in the Expanded Universe might do. Because like, how would she even know what a mind trick *is*. She's never seen one. Or maybe she literally learned from Ren while he was interrogating her. I think the movie could have done a better job of relaying this sort of thing if that was what it was going for.

My issue with her is that, being so powerful so quickly means theres less of an arc. Luke spendz the entire first movie failing or getting beaten up (tuscan raider, guy in the bar, letting his aunt and uncle get killed etc.) We got to see a hint of his ability at the end when he accepted the force. Then in Empire we get to see him struggle through training, and survive by courage alone against Vader.

Your idea about force osmosis may be correct, but if it's true it robs us of getting to see her learn all those things she learned in that split second. I love the idea of Rey's character, but when she can just do everything so well so quickly, what is there to overcome?

Avatar image for deactivated-6150d5f8cc841
deactivated-6150d5f8cc841

65

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I think my problem with Rey comes entirely from how I came to understand the Star wars universe. The first bit of Star Wars fiction I took in was Knights of the Old Republic, and I loved it, the problem is that KOTOR presents the no force to full force story, and in that narrative it is considered astonishing that a person who A) knew the force at one point, and B) was considered one of, if not the single strongest in the ways of the force to ever live, could only gain even competent use of the force in WEEKS of training. something seemed really off-putting about Rey accidentally discovering the force and being so seemingly powerful in it. The idea of Rey with no training being stronger than Revan with no training breaks everything for me, even if the KOTOR stuff is non-cannon.

Avatar image for oni
Oni

2345

Forum Posts

5885

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 26

User Lists: 12

@twolines said:

Or maybe "kill Vader" means destroy Vader and bring back Anakin. Just like they say Anakin, or "your father" died. They consider Vader to be something different. They consider it to be the embodiment of evil residing in Anakin. They use a lot of metaphors, and it was Luke's last test. Confront your father, kill Vader. As a kid I always thought that was the plan. To somehow bring him back into the light, not, like, use your laser sword to cut off his head. That was the whole point of the encounter in the cave! If you kill your dad, you will become him.

Besides, it was obvious with the whole Jedi training bullshit and the nanochondria or midi-whatevers that Lucas wanted to go into Sci Fi more than Fantasy in the prequels. Which is why we have all that bullcrap.

But hey, I don't know. It just seems like the philosophy of the 4, 5 and 6 was much more defined and overall smarter (and more coherent) than the thing that was in 1, 2 and 3. Gosh, those movies are so bad.

I think you're right about that Yoda/Obi-Wan, now that I think about it. I disagree that the prequels made the universe less coherent (the midichlorians thing is literally just one throwaway line) - they just complicated it a little bit. I think all those movies have at least some redeeming qualities, even if a lot of the individual components are kind of bad. I'm just so over dismissing them entirely "cuz bad" - it's more interesting to look at what they tried to do and how Lucas expanded the mythology of the universe. Read that Ring theory I linked, it's super fascinating.

Avatar image for bryanedwardhill
BryanEdwardHill

1

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

When I was younger, I found structuralism confining, I emotionally rejected it. Now I embrace objective truth because I feel, and it is only a feeling, that it makes my creative work more effective. I believe the difference was that my early writing (I write fiction professionally, comics and screenplays) was largely cathartic and I didn't want to be reduced to a mythological path in order to tell a story. When that changed and my work became more about exploring a thesis and delivering a message to readers, structuralism became a trusted alley. Anthropological and mythological structures became a backdoor I could use to work the story into the reader's mind, a door that I believe mono-mythical structure can always open.

Avatar image for nushi
Nushi

40

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

Great article really enjoying them.

As for the question, It's low hanging fruit, but In Spec-Ops: the line, I really like how FPS conventions are subverted to confront the player. By compelling the player to commit atrocities with use of objectives, it allowed the games characters to level blame at the players avatar and thus the player. It made me re-asses my role in shooters as more than passive . I'm articulating this poorly so I'll link a book I read about spec ops that breaks it down a lot better than I could.

http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/16162864-killing-is-harmless

Avatar image for alkusanagi
AlKusanagi

1667

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

@austin_walker Speaking of space operas, you caught the Macross Delta preview episode yet?

Avatar image for vonsoot
vonsoot

249

Forum Posts

60

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 1


@austin_walker Do a Mechwarrior Online Quicklook please! I've downloaded it but can't bring myself to open it, so much other games, make me believe, make me double click!

Avatar image for thermonuclear
Thermonuclear

65

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Thermonuclear

This analysis could pretty much translate straight over to 'A New Hope'. Which is ironic when some people feel it is largely a re-imagining of that original movie. Some of the differences are interesting especially based off this sort of analysis of the movie.

The 20th century fascist analog in episode IV had a very old face or older in the likes of Tarkin, the Emperor, Vader when you saw it and also all other major Empire figures you saw throughout the movies like Veers and Piett. The Rebel Alliance to restore the republic was the youth overthrowing the obvious fascist analog. In VII the fascist analog and resistance have roles reversed somewhat as the First Order is full of very youthful looking people in Hux and Ren, even Finn was originally part of them. The resistance is now what is viewed more as the older generation with Leia, Han, Chewbacca even the likes of R2-D2 and C-3PO which related back to the old generation and some of the new high ranking faces you first meet on the resistance base are old.

It is almost as if you had a generation that fought against fascism and created the Republic only for a new generation to come along, millennials you call them, just to destroy it all even if that involves killing their parents in the process. With the exception of a few that rejected the idea of the youth to fight with the past generation fighting for what the new generation want to destroy.

Of course I don't believe any of this nonsense, you can pull anything out of subjective meaning but it is more interesting to view things as someone else may believe it rather than just making everything conform with your own as it is important to challenge your own beliefs rather than try to reinforce them in everything you see.

Avatar image for ozzie
Ozzie

663

Forum Posts

1453

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 3

Great article.

And to answer your question. Brothers A Tale of Two Sons that moment after your brother dies. The little brother can't swim and you have to use his brother's action button to get him across. It took me a few moments to figure out what to do but when I did it really hit me.

Avatar image for griffinmills
Griffinmills

335

Forum Posts

34

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

For the question at the end, the fact that there was no soundtrack by default in Capcom's Steel Battalion unless you bought a little portable radio as an upgrade and jammed it in the corner of your cockpit. Gave a greater heft of weighty gravitas to the game and wasn't easily circumvented but, rather, reinforced by the alternative.

Avatar image for auzurafi
auzurafi

65

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

In response to A Question For You, the very first game that came to mind was Papers, Please. And when I think of that game, I think of anxiety and empathy and how well it uses them. The anxiety stems from having an increasing set of details you must compare for every potential entrant across the border, combined with the weight of your family’s well-being, dependent on you maintaining accuracy in your job. Not to mention you only get paid per person who successfully enters Arstotzka, adding another level of frustration to the people who do not have their papers in order. But it’s hard to be too angry, as the statutes update every day, and it is apparent that not everyone is made aware. Everyone is trying to make due in this dystopian society, and it shows in a number of the people who come to your border crossing. The line of people as presented in the top half of the screen are featureless until they walk in and meet you face to face, where you are then flooded with information about them. Where they live, where they are going, why they are coming here. We even see bits of personality in some characters, either from something as minor as a smarmy quip to a curse thrown your way when you deny someone with an expired passport wanting to see their family.

And this is where the empathy starts rolling in. As you progress further into the game, you meet more and more people with varying plights, not all relevant to the main “story” of the game. For example, there are a series of women who will advertise a brothel in Arstotzka, until the last one warns of a man on a hunt for them. When he arrives, his papers are in order and he by all means is allowed to enter. What do you do? Do you follow the letter of the law? You get money, after all. Your son is sick, the housing is cold, and rent increased recently. But if this man enters, that brothel will be attacked and several women will be killed. You could detain him, or just deny him entry. Papers, Please doesn’t have a penalty for denying someone who could have entered, but you don’t get the money you at this point most certainly need. It turns into a moral dilemma, and it is not the only one in the game.

The game really drives this home in one of the endings, where you realize you need to leave the country. You obtain counterfeit papers and must walk through a border crossing just like the one you manned previously. This was going to be an additional challenge at one point, until the developer decided against it. I understand why (another fail state right at the end? no thanks) but at the same time, a puzzle of getting seeing what IDs and official papers you need and getting them in line to present could have been a real turn around.

I wish more games presented these vignettes into lives many people are not really familiar with. You mentioned Cart Life, which I attempted to play a year or so ago but it kept crashing, so I didn’t get far before giving up on it. I may try it again sometime.

Thanks for poking at my brain with that question, Austin. Just wish I was a better writer.

Avatar image for giantbombshell
GiantBombshell

2

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

(Spoilers!)

In preparation for the release of Star Wars: The Force Awakens I re-watched the original trilogy (Episodes IV-VI) and Belated Media's What If series for Episodes I, II, and III (highly recommended). To date, I have seen The Force Awakens twice (with intentions to see it several more times before it is out of theaters). After viewing number two I couldn't help but think about the parallels between these characters and those in another piece of pop culture, Harry Potter (which in turn loops back to share similarities with the original Star Wars trilogy).

Rey is our Harry equivalent. As a possible orphan, Rey is a downtrodden character with no inkling of her own heritage or potential. Initially she denies what she is, but before long she embraces her birthright and discovers that this new way of life seems to come to her almost effortlessly. Already she has power and skill beyond what she could ever have imagined before being pulled from her meager existence.

Although a clear Hermione isn't apparent among our heroes as of yet, Finn shares qualities with both Ron and Neville. He is not as skilled as his friends, and is as likely to want to run from a fight as to pitch in, but in the end he can be counted on to stand up for what's right.

Ren shares a shocking resemblance to Severus Snape, not only in appearance and wardrobe but also in his chosen path. He is our sympathetic villain who is torn between ambition and conscience. Seeing himself as having been failed by his father, Ren finds a new male figure to look up to in Snoke, a power-hungry embodiment of evil intent on using his followers for his own gain (not unlike Voldemort or the Emperor). Ren also kills Han, Rey's surrogate father figure and mentor with a larger than life persona due to his past deeds, much like when Snape killed Dumbledore, who was in many ways like a father to Harry.

Fans will likely see further similarities as the saga unfolds and Rey continues to expand upon her powers and Ren (likely) follows the tragic path of Snape and Vadar before him.

Avatar image for caketeleporter
CakeTeleporter

72

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By CakeTeleporter

@darwinning:Dawkins is a horses arse though he represents atheism ,especially pragmatically minded atheism, about as well as the prequels represent star wars, never mind the mud he's basically slung at himself on various public platforms.

https://newrepublic.com/article/119596/appetite-wonder-review-closed-mind-richard-dawkins

This Article lead me down a rabbit hole which ended with a terribad article on Jacobin, normally their stuff is okay but this is trollish and deals in certitudes and absolutes in a comical manner.

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2015/12/star-wars-the-force-awakens-empire-joseph-campbell-george-lucas/

But what I wonder now is whether the problem with some critics analysis of heroic stories and pop and nerd culture in general, no matter how closely they cleave to the monomyth, is that they are often seen as implicit fictional ratifiers of the (risable) great man theory of history, causing them to be abberant to many critics.

Avatar image for qreedence
qreedence

130

Forum Posts

705

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 24

This is so good. Thanks for the read, Austin.

Avatar image for drm2thej
DrM2theJ

325

Forum Posts

11

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

@caketeleporter: Like I said, I'm not going to argue about peoples' opinion of Richard Dawkins.

I'll excuse John Gray for expressing his opinion of Richard Dawkins, knowing who both men are. I would say, given my PhD is in genetics and my career is geneticist that I feel I'm more qualified than Gray to determine precisely how close Dawkins is to Darwin. In that I would say Gray does not give Dawkins enough credit. The Selfish Gene is a seminal work of substantial importance in genetics. It's no Origin of Species, but it certainly is an important scientific work.

Horses arse or not, invoking him as some paragon of mindless elitism seems to miss the mark, to me at least.

Avatar image for maxb
maxB

414

Forum Posts

737

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

@thatoneguy830: He was weakened after getting shot by Chewie, plus he got hit once or twice in his fight with Finn before fighting Rey.

Avatar image for spicyrichter
SpicyRichter

748

Forum Posts

102

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I like that this film points to, and forces its characters to accept and adapt to an uncertain, challenging future, but I'd argue that this isn't a modern viewpoint at all.

Modern life seeks to expose destroy anything that is considered challenging or uncertain, in order to protect the 'fragility' of society. Everything now needs to be considered absolute and without compromise, which has resulted in a massive divide our peoples.

I even see this in the scientific community, which is very, very troubling.

Avatar image for shadowswordmaster
ShadowSwordmaster

1119

Forum Posts

714

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

This a great piece Austin.

Avatar image for austin_walker
austin_walker

568

Forum Posts

5245

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@digitaloctopi: The long and short, as someone with very little time right now, is that the Austin that I'm describing there was a major Dawkins (and Hitchens, for that matter) booster. After a decade of reading and re-reading, and especially after the last few years of Dawkins' public behavior, I've distanced myself. No regrets about what I've said here.

Avatar image for austin_walker
austin_walker

568

Forum Posts

5245

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@griffinmills: God damn, is this from the ORIGINAL Steel Battalion?

Avatar image for knaganalf
knaganalf

45

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@smellylettuce: They revealed the baddie in the helmet early on, they might subvert this expectation too (I hope).