• Lauchs@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    It can be both. It’s also a world with armored bounty hunters and political stakes, so saying it’s only for dwarf space bears is a little disingenuous.

    I mean, it has political stakes in the same way that Indiana Jones has political stakes.

    Star Wars is able to encapsulate the inane with themes that struggle with in the real world

    Like, I feel this is just mythologizing our childhood movie. The theme is the same as pretty so many other children’s action adventure movie, a small band of rebels vs a bad tyrannical emperor/overlord/dictator. That doesn’t make these political or statements unless you want to go incredibly broad with a “fight against the odds” story which is pretty much every movie.

    With the context of Andor, to make it lighthearted would be a disservice to the deaths of the rebels who made the events of Episode IV possible.

    I mean, episodes 1 - 6 are pretty lighthearted stuff and a lot of rebels, jedi and Nabooians etc die to make those happen.

    I’m not saying Andor can’t accomplish certain goals, highlight something different or show another side of the story. All I’m saying is that to me, personally, it’s Star Wars minus the joy. What’s left is an attempt to be serious in a very unserious galaxy. Nothing wrong with enjoying it, it’s just not for me! To consider the opposite, I would also have trouble if the Wire also had wisecracking aliens or something.

    • emeralddawn45@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      I feel like you’re the one mythologizing your childhood, and the original movies only seem ‘lighthearted’ when viewed through a lens of nostalgia and time passed. The original movies really aren’t that lighthearted if you really think about them, stuff filmed in the 70s just has that Patina of age that makes it hard to take seriously.

      • Lauchs@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think I’ve mostly said silly and fun rather than lighthearted.

        But the basic idea is that they are at the same level of adventure, stakes and seriousness as most children’s movies. You wouldn’t call the Lion King a serious film would you? Even though it’s probably not light-hearted if you think about it. (Same is true for most children’s movies, think Land Before Time, most big Disney/Pixar classics etc.)

        A more serious film, for example, probably grapples with Alderaan’s destruction and mentions it outside of two immediate reactions.

          • Lauchs@lemmy.worldOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah, honestly I’m a little surprised. In the wider community (or at least, my highly non scientific polling of a soccer team, volleyball group and movie friends) it seems pretty understood that Star Wars is a great kids movie that mostly works for all ages.

            Heck, even George Lucas has said they were for kids "I wasn’t supposed to say this then, or now, but it’s a film for 12-year-olds,” he says. “In the real world … critics … certain fans. They’re not very nice.”

            But damn are people riled up about that and instead insisting it’s a very serious series and definitely not for kids.

            It’s kinda wild.

            • neptune@dmv.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              The magic of a good kids movie is that it engages the adults too. So I mean yeah, star wars is at least on some level pretty serious.

              Luke did see his adoptive aunt and uncle roasted by the government. I mean that’s pretty serious. So is genocide and torture. Three things we witness in the first hour if the first move.

              • Lauchs@lemmy.worldOP
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I mean, on the same level of seriousness as most Disney films. Think 101 Dalmatians which is a bunch of puppies trying not to be skinned alive. Or Shrek which has torture, family separation/imprisonment (one of whom is later skinned and turned into a rug), floating eyeballs, a tyrannical monarchy etc.

                And just like Star Wars, it would feel a little odd to put a gritty/serious movie in either of those universes without a dramatic retooling a la Cruella, which even then wasn’t wildly serious. In my opinion at least.

                (Also, I don’t think we see any genocide in New Hope. Are you thinking the Jawas? Because that struck me as standard killing, not a “kill all Jawas.”)

                  • Lauchs@lemmy.worldOP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Ahhhhh. I’d never figured they were their own race but I getchya. We don’t really have a good word for “murder a whole planet.” At least, not until GRR Martin starts writing sci fi.

    • Algaroth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Do you remember how Indiana Jones had actual Nazis in it? I’d say that’s about on par with the empire who were also inspired by the Nazi regime. Sure, there’s a lot else going on but Star Wars has always clearly been political.

      • Lauchs@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        If you really want to call Indiana Jones a political movie, that’s uhhh, your call. That seems a pretty silly reading of it but to each their own.