The Future of Sci-Fi -- All Star Wars Knockoffs?

[Solo4114]

So, I'm 32. I'm part of a generation that grew up with Star Wars as THE cultural touchstone for sci-fi (yes, yes, we can quibble on what qualifies as sci-fi). Basically, I figure if you were born between about 1968 and 1982 or so, Star Wars left an indelible mark on your psyche -- for good or bad.

The JJ Trek/Series discussion, as well as my own ideas about developing sci-fi stories got me thinking, though. I'm naturally drawn to more "epic" style heroic myth stories, which naturally end up boiling down to "Star Wars knockoffs" if you set them in sci-fi settings. Especially if anyone has extraordinary powers, or if there's some order of super-powered warriors involved. You can dress it up how you like, you can set it in whatever setting you want, but everyone will still say "Star Wars knockoff."

The thing is, not all sci-fi is Star Wars. I know, big revelation, right? But hear me out. For a certain demographic, sci-fi BEGINS with Star Wars. Not even fanboys, mind you, just kids who grew up in that era. Sure, you've seen Blade Runner, and the Alien films. Sure, you've seen Mad Max (which isn't really sci-fi so much as speculative fiction). Sure, you've seen the old Trek films and series, and maybe other shows like Babylon 5, BSG, Firefly, etc.

But we all grew up with Star Wars. It's hard-wired into the DNA at this point. And it makes me wonder how filmmakers, writers, etc. of my relative age -- who are now starting to become the new storytellers -- are going to tell their stories. Will they all be Star Wars knockoffs? God knows I've played around with developing an idea that in no uncertain terms is HEAVILY influenced by Star Wars (but I like to think goes a bit farther in terms of setting, story, and other influences). Or will the future of sci-fi be reactions AGAINST that? IE: people who don't want to be labeled as "star wars knockoffs", and therefore seek to put their own spin on sci-fi?

I tend to think that we'll see a good bit of "star wars knockoff" projects, or at least sci-fi films that are definitely influenced by Star Wars. I also think that sci-fi has, in many ways, kind of fallen on hard times in the wake of comicbook movies, pirate movies, franchise resurrections, remakes, and the like. I would say that sci-fi could go the way of the western, but I tend to think that's less likely simply because sci-fi is a more malleable concept and less rooted in specific imagery the way westerns are.

Anyway, just ruminating on the subject.

 

[darth_myeek]

Star Wars is not science fiction. It's space fantasy.

 

[Larry Young]

Star Wars is not science fiction. It's space fantasy.

That didn't take long.

 

[themanwoaname]

i like mad max more than i like starwars. anything dealing with post apocalyptic earth tickles my fancy.

 

[Too Much Garlic]

I think it will be very difficult to make a science fiction movie in that upbeat classical hero's journey mode without getting the label thrown at you that you are a Star Wars knock-off. Lucas was the one who cemented the fairly tale into outer space. There will always be something that will remind people of Star Wars, Alien or some of the great science fiction of the late seventies, early eighties.

The thing is... either you get the association with Star Wars or Alien... it's either those two. But then again... many writers seem to have a tendency to not really be all that creative with wanting to make a hint at those movies and end up basically doing the crappy version of those movies instead of what they intended.

There are still possibilities to avoid the association at all... but then the question is... would people watch those movies?

 

[RICHIES ARMOR]

I think SW is somewhat past its influencial mark. I think films are deviating in new directions without much influence from SW.

Richie

 

[Solo4114]

Star Wars is not science fiction. It's space fantasy.

Oh, I agree. And yet, people consider it sci-fi. But labels notwithstanding, I question two things:

1.) Is it possible to do a scifi or space fantasy heroic myth and NOT have it be labeled a Star Wars knockoff?

2.) Will my (our?) generation's filmmakers do yet more knockoffs, or will they do other wildly different stuff?

I think it will be very difficult to make a science fiction movie in that upbeat classical hero's journey mode without getting the label thrown at you that you are a Star Wars knock-off. Lucas was the one who cemented the fairly tale into outer space. There will always be something that will remind people of Star Wars, Alien or some of the great science fiction of the late seventies, early eighties.

The thing is... either you get the association with Star Wars or Alien... it's either those two. But then again... many writers seem to have a tendency to not really be all that creative with wanting to make a hint at those movies and end up basically doing the crappy version of those movies instead of what they intended.

There are still possibilities to avoid the association at all... but then the question is... would people watch those movies?

Yeah, or occasionally you get Blade Runner knockoffs.

I suspect in time aside from blatant ripoffs attempting to cash in, we'll see more Matrix-esque knockoffs as kids who came of age in THAT era make movies, but I don't know if the Matrix films had as much cultural impact.

I agree with you, though -- if you make any kind of epic myth using the Campbell model (not his, yeah, but his description), I think people will say "Star Wars knockoff."

Makes me wonder if it's worth even trying to differentiate yourself, or if you just embrace those elements and say "But there's more to it than just that."

And there's still the question of what filmmakers will make. Abrams, I think, would LOVE to be the next Lucas. His version of Trek certainly hints at that. And, I think, hints at similar levels of ability, if not necessarily ability to luck out into a cultural zeitgeist. (Although, I'm with Han on this one -- I call that luck.)

I think SW is somewhat past its influencial mark. I think films are deviating in new directions without much influence from SW.

Richie

In some respects, I agree. The heyday is LONG over. I don't think Star Wars product that's out now will have anything CLOSE to the long-term impact of Star Wars product in the late 70s/early 80s.

But in terms of the long-term impact of the original three films and what happened around them between about 1977 and 1987 or so, I think the effects will be felt for a LONG time.

It's this reason that I can see people saying "You know what? That was its own thing and I'm not even going to bother heading anywhere near that. I'm doing my own film about something TOTALLY different."

 

[CessnaDriver]

There is a "sandtrap" of sorts for mainstream big and small screen SF, common elements include space warfare and combat, aliens, robots, faster then light travel, monsters, time travel, post apocolypse (it's a whole genre in itself really), and mutant super powers if we want to add in some comic based films.

I don't expect that to change much, but it's nice to see the ball hit out of the sandtrap now and then. Or at least some spin put on the ball.

 

[Pwrsrce]

I don't expect that to change much, but it's nice to see the ball hit out of the sandtrap now and then. Or at least some spin put on the ball.

Very well said...

I am currently working on a sci-fi screenplay of my own, and have wrestled with this very question over and over again.

Ultimately I decided that I need to tell the story that I want to tell and let the chips fall where they may. I just make sure to write scenes that stand on their own feet, and are not easily stood up next to anything from the SW universe.

And I always remind myself that there is a fine line between giving a nod to something I appreciate, and ripping it off entirely.

Jason

 

[JOATRASH FX]

One factor that comes into play is where the authors (be it for screen of other) draw their inspiration.

I get the sense that an alarming number of people, when tasked with creating something new, sit down and watch/read/play the top 50 scifi "classics" to get in the right frame of mind, which of course usually results in a poor mishmash of ideas treading over all-too-familiar territory. The Games Industry is especially guilty of this. I've seen it with my own eyes. Most game stories are complete amateur hack jobs and I'm doing what small part I can to change it. I really wish more people would look in other directions or genres, far away from spaceships and dragons for inspiration.

The western themes in Firefly for example, while very heavy and pronounced, came about after Joss Whedon had read novels taking place during Victorian times. The flavoring may have been too strong for some, but it was nevertheless something that felt very different with some slightly epic themes even though it was devoid of Fantasy. There are other good examples of varying degrees of quality: B5, Galactica, Riddick and so on. Has anyone seen Mutant Chronicles? Not the best movie ever (the budget was probably excruciatingly low) but it was pretty epic and had some very cool ideas.

 

[CB2001]

Well, for me, as someone going into the field of filmmaking, I can tell you, I don't think I'd do a "Star Wars knock-off" if I ever got to be a writer/director). To be honest, "Star Wars" is a monomyth knock-off, as is "The Matrix" and "The Lord of the Rings" (just to name a few). Honestly, if I did decide to do a knock-off, I'd do something more along the lines of the "Battlestar Galactica" re-imagining, or in a much clearly description: 'naturalistic science fiction.' Basically, with the reimagined "Battlestar Galactica" series, the science and technology not only felt real, but it also didn't interfere with the overall storyline (like it does many times throughout all "Star Trek" series). The same thing applies to movies like "Sunshine", "2001: A Space Odyssey", "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind" and many others. Basically, it looks and feels real, but doesn't over extend itself to the point of absurdity. And before anyone begins, "Star Trek" was made in the 1960s and inspired many technological advances. But in that period of time, the technology did not exist and seemed so farfetched to exist by 1960s standards, so don't start saying "Star Trek" counts as naturalistic sci-fi. In fact, it's "Star Wars", "Star Trek" and even "The Fifth Element" (to name a few) that makes me NOT want to do science fiction of the same type. It's films like "Sunshine", "Solaris" and "2001: A Space Odyssey" (just to name a few) that makes me want to make good science fiction. I can thank Richard Matheson and his novel "I Am Legend" and Ronald D. Moore and David Eick for the RIS "Battlestar Galactica" for that.

But, when it comes to science fiction fantasy, the closest thing I would ever want to do is something along the lines of William Gibson's work and the "Tron" films/video games.

I will also admit: my story universe, Reality 423, borderlines on many genres, including science fiction, fantasy, horror and so on, but first and foremost, it's always a drama. And so far, the only science fiction story I have in there is a time-travel story similar to Timerider, and an Endgame story that deals with a technological advancement that threatens to rip three universes (one of them being a fictional reality that is connected to two real ones) apart, but that's about it.

 

[Bryancd]

STAR WARS is a knockoff, so why should the trend be any different?

 

[lingarn]

It seems like people will associate anything new with things they already know.

In some cases, this is appropriate -- Tolkien, for instance, unapologetically lifted material from Beowulf and the Volsunga saga. He had written a lot about them as literature, so this isn't especially surprising, and the parallels have been deconstructed at length by other people writing about literature.

In other cases, this is inappropriate -- we've all read the ridiculous post about how the recent movie "Wolfman" ripped off Twilight. (For those that haven't: The Letter is Here) Clearly the writer is new to, well, life, and so even though the chronology is very clear in their minds, it has little to do with what is original and what isn't.

The fact is, most of the major themes and even the kinds of technology discussed in Star Wars weren't original, or unique to the film. The specifics, the details, the trademarked and copyrighted names and faces, those are unique. But the story itself really isn't.

A great example of a new Sci-fi film that avoids Star Wars and Alien and Blade Runner comparisons is Avatar. Instead, it was compared to Pocahontas and Fern Gully. :lol

 

[themanwoaname]

STAR WARS is a knockoff, so why should the trend be any different?

of what?

"everything" is an unacceptable answer.

 

[Wes R]

Sadly with the way the entertainment industry loves formulas that work for books and movies I think most large movies will be knockoffs while smaller films will pop up from independent directors and such. I'm a post apocalyptic fan too and to be honest i'd rather watch a 1950s scifi marathon on TCM then watch nearly any modern scifi movie. The string of remakes has me thinking that original ideas are something nobody wants to try and have anymore and the fact that formula based movies are greenlit so fast guarantees it.
Starwars isn't so much a knockoff of anything as to the fact that it is a bad attempt by Lucas to represent the of flashgordon space opera type serials you used to be able to see in theatres that he likes. That and he was a huge fan of Jospeh Cambell and that man's work on myths and legends in human history.

 

[firesprite]

of what?

"everything" is an unacceptable answer.

Philosophy and religion in Star Wars - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Many of the themes within Star Wars reflect elements of Greek tragedy (Oedipus, House of Atreus), Arthurian Legend, Roman mythology, and Japanese chambara such as the prominence of prophecy and the inability to control one's destiny. For example, Luke's relationship with his father is very reminiscent of Greek tragedy, while the original film contained elements which were interpreted by some as analogous of the Arthurian myths: Luke's lightsaber (a "magic sword") was inherited from his father, just as Excalibur once belonged to Arthur's father. The wise mentor, Obi-Wan Kenobi, can be seen as a Merlin figure; and a "round table" appears aboard the Millennium Falcon.

Many concepts featured in the saga also feature prominently in Persian mythology. A central theme of the story concerns the struggle between the forces of good against the forces of evil – this good-versus-evil duality is a central concept of Persian mythology; in which the benevolent creator deity Ahura Mazda is locked in a constant cosmic struggle against his antithesis, Angra Mainyu.

The Star Wars films also show considerable similarity to Asian Wuxia "Kung Fu" films. In films of this genre, the protagonist almost always begins with a clear objective to avenge the death of someone dear (an old master, his father, or his entire family). Starting as an apprentice, he grows to become the most powerful Master of his art in Kung Fu and rightfully settles old scores inflicted to his loved ones. The influence of Japanese pathos is obvious in the technique of the lightsaber being similar to the use of the Japanese Samurai swords, and the etiquette-conscious Jedi humility to the Japanese bows in greetings (the word Jedi comes from the Japanese term "Jidai Geki", which translates as "period drama"(see Jedi[citation needed]). The Jedi also live by a code of conduct and battle similar to the Samurai Code (or Bushido) as well as providing protection without being soldiers for a particular Nation or Government, which could also be related to Shaolin Monks.

How's that blow up your skirt?

As for the original question, I think it's now inevitable that anything that any work of 'space opera' (which is the proper literary term, for those keeping notes ) will be compared to Star Wars. As you've said, it's become SO deeply ingrained in our societal consciousness that I believe it's just impossible for those comparisons not to happen. Same with Star Trek, to a different degree.

 

[sycor]

STAR WARS is a knockoff, so why should the trend be any different?

Glad I didn't have to say it. :lol Hell, Star Wars even takes a lot from the Dune stories. Which of course got them from elsewhere.

 

[Bryancd]

^^Exactly. I LOVE Star Wars and think they are the most wonderful derivation of what has come before, but they are still derivative. But they are my favorite copy.

 

[Wes R]

Good scifi takes what came from before and adds a new twist to it. Look at all the good android books and movies that came from Assimov's ideas. The three laws are now part of pop culture and in most all scifi. Sadly alot of what's around these days doesn't add to what came before or even remotely build on it.

 

[themanwoaname]

How's that blow up your skirt?

lol, im aware of the themes that are used in starwars from the heroes journey, kirosawa, flash gordon etc. i wanted to hear it from him to see if he knew what they were. unfortunately, i just got an "echo" statement. :unsure