Despite their discovery a century and a score ago, binary stars weren't prominent in film and TV that I recall. In 1977, the choice was one of a thousand details to follow Jaws in 1975 that ampliflied the expectations of a summer film. The term "blockbuster" comes from those two films, I thought. Their combined success was another of the cycle of "disruption" to the steady-state Aether of the studio system. That's the film studies dogma, anyways.
Lucas' indulgence of attribution is a boys' club camaraderie that emerges years later. For example the opening crawl was not simply inspiration from the cinema of his childhood, but according to De Palma (I think it is), Lucas' acceptance of criticism the opening was too confusing for too long and some framing was necessary. Lucas extended this claim of inspiration from serial Saturday movie houses to why he had conceived 9 Chapters.
To blow up another death star in Chapter 6.
So, yeah, he lies a lot. He's a filmmaker. Know any successful ones? They lie a lot. Their success resonates and everyone wants explanation when film is one of the most collaborative enterprises known to man except war, or so Cecile B. DeMille said. A simple answer is preferred over the details of actuality. Marcia Lucas' deference to Lucas' authorship is a humility approaching the privilege of Lucas' father's generation.
All Lucas knew for sure was the reveal of a hero and villain being the dutch word for father obscured by a Germanic-sounding title-- the commonly exercised examination of how power is generational, a twist on redemption as ancient as the opening crawl plainly states. It's the same all over?
As a kid, the binary stars...I simply hadn't seen on the big screen and their anomaly evoked awe and Astronomy went from block drawings of Galileo and Newton and a diminishing memory of Moon landings to...Sagan, with Spock somewhere between. It made Astronomy as cool as sports.
When I read much later how filmmakers echo one another (the Kurosawa and Hashimoto connection), of how cross-cultural art is whether it's music (Beatles & Beach Boys) and painters...well, copying each other is expected to even join their conversations.
I liked the articles. I liked the science standing on the shoulders of previous observations. Most overnight posters are like, I dunno, throwing tomato3s and celery stalks at Melies adaptation of Verne's story and howling about production values.
As a kid, the binary stars...I simply hadn't seen on the big screen and their anomaly evoked awe and Astronomy went from block drawings of Galileo and Newton and a diminishing memory of Moon landings to...Sagan, with Spock somewhere between. It made Astronomy as cool as sports.
When I read much later how filmmakers echo one another
Actually, astronomers have known for a long time that most brighter star systems are binary [csiro.au]. Their appearance in science fiction movies isn't because filmmakers are copying eac
Their appearance in science fiction movies isn't because filmmakers are copying each other. It's because someone involved with making the film wanted to make their science fiction a little more founded in science fact, and had an astronomer review the script.
I'm curious - where did you learn that having an astronomer review the script of scifi movies was common?
Their appearance in science fiction movies isn't because filmmakers are copying each other. It's because someone involved with making the film wanted to make their science fiction a little more founded in science fact, and had an astronomer review the script.
~Solandri
I wrote what I did without drafting, and you are correct to point out "isn't because filmakers copy each other". Filmmakers frequently acknowledge artistry from colleagues in other nations/cultures and even "echo back" within and across genre. I'm not studied in film, only a cinephile, but the information is out there: ___ film influences ___ film. American versions of Japanese and back again...French, Italian, Swedish, and Russian...largely between early 60s thru 90s when (conveniently ignoring Bollywood)
Anyway, the two suns on Tatooine? After reading about Lucas' purposeful referencing of Kurosawa, acknowledging its inspiration, and his central theme of fathers and sons and the histories of conquest, or invasion (vader/father), the two suns were metaphor for his sensibility of dualities separating and inexorably uniting humanity's search for meaning within the constraints of violence.
Computers can figure out all kinds of problems, except the things in
the world that just don't add up.
Tomato3s and Celery Stalks (Score:3, Interesting)
Lucas' indulgence of attribution is a boys' club camaraderie that emerges years later. For example the opening crawl was not simply inspiration from the cinema of his childhood, but according to De Palma (I think it is), Lucas' acceptance of criticism the opening was too confusing for too long and some framing was necessary. Lucas extended this claim of inspiration from serial Saturday movie houses to why he had conceived 9 Chapters.
To blow up another death star in Chapter 6.
So, yeah, he lies a lot. He's a filmmaker. Know any successful ones? They lie a lot. Their success resonates and everyone wants explanation when film is one of the most collaborative enterprises known to man except war, or so Cecile B. DeMille said. A simple answer is preferred over the details of actuality. Marcia Lucas' deference to Lucas' authorship is a humility approaching the privilege of Lucas' father's generation.
All Lucas knew for sure was the reveal of a hero and villain being the dutch word for father obscured by a Germanic-sounding title-- the commonly exercised examination of how power is generational, a twist on redemption as ancient as the opening crawl plainly states. It's the same all over?
As a kid, the binary stars...I simply hadn't seen on the big screen and their anomaly evoked awe and Astronomy went from block drawings of Galileo and Newton and a diminishing memory of Moon landings to...Sagan, with Spock somewhere between. It made Astronomy as cool as sports.
When I read much later how filmmakers echo one another (the Kurosawa and Hashimoto connection), of how cross-cultural art is whether it's music (Beatles & Beach Boys) and painters...well, copying each other is expected to even join their conversations.
I liked the articles. I liked the science standing on the shoulders of previous observations. Most overnight posters are like, I dunno, throwing tomato3s and celery stalks at Melies adaptation of Verne's story and howling about production values.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, astronomers have known for a long time that most brighter star systems are binary [csiro.au]. Their appearance in science fiction movies isn't because filmmakers are copying eac
Re: (Score:2)
I'm curious - where did you learn that having an astronomer review the script of scifi movies was common?
Re: (Score:2)
Their appearance in science fiction movies isn't because filmmakers are copying each other. It's because someone involved with making the film wanted to make their science fiction a little more founded in science fact, and had an astronomer review the script.
~Solandri
I wrote what I did without drafting, and you are correct to point out "isn't because filmakers copy each other". Filmmakers frequently acknowledge artistry from colleagues in other nations/cultures and even "echo back" within and across genre. I'm not studied in film, only a cinephile, but the information is out there: ___ film influences ___ film. American versions of Japanese and back again...French, Italian, Swedish, and Russian...largely between early 60s thru 90s when (conveniently ignoring Bollywood)
Re: (Score:2)
Anyway, the two suns on Tatooine? After reading about Lucas' purposeful referencing of Kurosawa, acknowledging its inspiration, and his central theme of fathers and sons and the histories of conquest, or invasion (vader/father), the two suns were metaphor for his sensibility of dualities separating and inexorably uniting humanity's search for meaning within the constraints of violence.