Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Star Wars Exhibition Explores Human Identity

Unknown Lamer posted more than 2 years ago | from the psych-ward-far-far-away dept.

Star Wars Prequels 62

Hugh Pickens writes "The Telegraph reports that a new exhibition has opened at the Montreal Science Center that explores human identity through the Star Wars saga and its quirky characters combining the latest scientific research in areas of psychology, neuropsychology, and genetics with some 200 costumes, props, models, and artwork from the Lucasfilm archives to ask the fundamental questions: who we are and how do we become who we are? Visitors to the exhibition will rediscover their favorite Star Wars characters 'in a whole new light' while also developing a better understanding of their own complex identity. 'Since Star Wars takes place in a fantasy world, the characters need to be identifiable so that the audience can connect to them,' says Star Wars creator George Lucas. 'These larger-than-life characters come complete with friends, enemies, values, and beliefs. This exhibition examines how the Star Wars characters are like us, what we may have in common, and what makes up our individual identities.' Each visitor is given a bracelet, which records the decisions they make during the tour and each visitor's decisions combine to create an avatar, which is revealed at the end of the tour. 'When I finally took the tour with the audio guide and bracelet, it was thrilling,' says LucasFilm exhibits manager Kyra Bowling. 'When I saw my hero (avatar) at the end, I felt like a kid again. After I was done I immediately went through a second time and made different decisions so I could end up with a different hero.'"

cancel ×

62 comments

My finger you pull! (1)

spokenoise (2140056) | more than 2 years ago | (#39855065)

I hope they left Ja Ja out the back

Re:My finger you pull! (5, Funny)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | more than 2 years ago | (#39855085)

I hope they left Ja Ja out the back

I hope they shot Ja Ja out the back.

Re:My finger you pull! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39855125)

Feeding Jar Jar to a sarlacc would be fitting but is out of the question as it might spit Jar Jar out. Clearly that wouldn't be a desirable outcome.

Re:My finger you pull! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39855431)

I hope they left Ja Ja out the back

I hope they shot Ja Ja

FTFY.

Re:My finger you pull! (5, Funny)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | more than 2 years ago | (#39855457)

In the revised exhibition, Jar Jar shot first.

Re:My finger you pull! (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 2 years ago | (#39857123)

Jar Jar's not human so... wait a minute, NONE of the Star Wars characters are human -- they're all from a galaxy long long ago and far far away. So WTF does Star Wars have to do with human Identity?

You guys are going to make me RTFA, aren't you?

Great, remember to examine girlfriends too! (3, Funny)

StarTrekGirl (2629509) | more than 2 years ago | (#39855071)

Oh, wait what?

Re:Great, remember to examine girlfriends too! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39855753)

Says 'StarTrekGirl'...

Re:Great, remember to examine girlfriends too! (1)

hort_wort (1401963) | more than 2 years ago | (#39856435)

Says 'StarTrekGirl'...

The she-nerds always swing that way.

Re:Great, remember to examine girlfriends too! (1)

tehcyder (746570) | more than 2 years ago | (#39865665)

Says 'StarTrekGirl'...

The she-nerds always swing that way.

Further proof that women are more mature, intelligent people than men.

Prime example (2)

Chrisq (894406) | more than 2 years ago | (#39855127)

This exhibition examines how the Star Wars characters are like us, what we may have in common, and what makes up our individual identities.

The prime example is CowboyNeal and Jabba the Hutt.

Luminous beings are we (1)

Spy Handler (822350) | more than 2 years ago | (#39855159)

not this crude matter!

Re:Luminous beings are we (2)

vikingpower (768921) | more than 2 years ago | (#39855273)

Amen. Imagine a similar exposition, in which one would identify with heroes and characters from the Iliad or the Odyssey. Now that would be luminous, in contrast so such blunt figments of our own dark times.

Re:Luminous beings are we (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39855313)

Luminous beings?

They set Jar Jar on fire?

Re:Luminous beings are we (1)

zippthorne (748122) | more than 2 years ago | (#39855471)

Turns out that was just the inane mutterings of an old man. It was actually an internal form of the Venom suit, and there was a blood test for "the force" the whole time. No explanation was given for how we go from measurable, verifiable phenomena to crazy religion in the span of a generation in a galactic civilization....

Please don't give George any more money. He won't spend on good things.

Re:Luminous beings are we (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39857113)

Propaganda. Sort of how the Taliban went from being supported as freedom fighters to being removed as a repressive, terrorist-supporting regime in an even shorter span of time.

Or how a young woman testifying in front of Congress about how 'birth control pills' are often used for non-contraceptive treatments and should be covered by health insurance because it can often be cost prohibitive to the people who need it most, became a 'slut' and a 'prostitute' in the course of an afternoon for the Republican talking heads.

Re:Luminous beings are we (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39859185)

Oh give it a rest, douche bag. Do you have to spout anti-Conservative diatribes everywhere? This topic doesn't have a damned thing to do with politics, so just STFU.

Re:Luminous beings are we (1)

tehcyder (746570) | more than 2 years ago | (#39865703)

Oh give it a rest, douche bag. Do you have to spout anti-Conservative diatribes everywhere? This topic doesn't have a damned thing to do with politics, so just STFU.

Pretty much everything has something to do with politics. Certainly any extended piece of fiction is bound to have politics bound up in it somehow or other, unless it is extaordinarily abstract.

Re:Luminous beings are we (1)

ultranova (717540) | more than 2 years ago | (#39859085)

Turns out that was just the inane mutterings of an old man. It was actually an internal form of the Venom suit, and there was a blood test for "the force" the whole time. No explanation was given for how we go from measurable, verifiable phenomena to crazy religion in the span of a generation in a galactic civilization....

Who you're gonna believe? A 900-year old warrior monk who rises car-sized objects into air with the power of his mind, trains an apprentice in a few days well enough to actually survive a fight against Vader, and treats death as a minor annoyance, or an outcast who says it was all done by bacteria and then dies (and never shows up again)?

Is it me... (4, Insightful)

Richard_at_work (517087) | more than 2 years ago | (#39855279)

Or do "exhibitions" like this read more into the material than was ever originally there? I really don't think Lucas is deep enough to embed philosophical questions about psychology, neuropsychology, and genetics, or gave two hoots about our "individual identities"...

Its a series of films, people. Not much else.

Re:Is it me... (2)

coastwalker (307620) | more than 2 years ago | (#39855561)

Actually it was cowboys and Indians all over again. I thought it was derivative shit when it came out and I still think it is derivative shit. Like most blockbuster movies it has to be the lowest common denominator tosh in order to attract the maximum number of punters over the doorstep into the theaters. Don't get me wrong, it makes entirely suitable entertainment for children and grown ups with insomnia.

Re:Is it me... (2)

loufoque (1400831) | more than 2 years ago | (#39855687)

I think the advantage of Star Wars is that it contains pretty much every stereotype and cliché, making it easier to demonstrate the psychology pseudo-science.

Re:Is it me... (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 2 years ago | (#39857953)

I thought it was derivative shit when it came out and I still think it is derivative shit.

Every new book, movie, song, painting, is "derivative shit". Art is like engeneering and science, in that everything new comes from what has come before.

Romeo and Juliet has been rewritten thousands of times and will be rewritten thousands of more times..

Re:Is it me... (1)

El Torico (732160) | more than 2 years ago | (#39859273)

Romeo and Juliet is also a derived work. One possible source is the Lovers of Teruel [wikipedia.org]

Re:Is it me... (1)

tehcyder (746570) | more than 2 years ago | (#39865721)

I thought it was derivative shit when it came out and I still think it is derivative shit.

Every new book, movie, song, painting, is "derivative shit". Art is like engeneering and science, in that everything new comes from what has come before.

Romeo and Juliet has been rewritten thousands of times and will be rewritten thousands of more times..

Yes, but there are still great derivative works and absolutely shitty derivative works.

Romeo and Juliet and the Star Wars series are not artistically equal just because they are both derivatives.

Re:Is it me... (2)

Paul Slocum (598127) | more than 2 years ago | (#39855739)

Star Wars is directly influenced by the work of Joseph Campbell [wikipedia.org] , whose work I think is "deep enough" to analyze in this way. I hope they discuss this in the exhibition, but a quick Google search suggests that they may not.

Re:Is it me... (3, Interesting)

crazyjj (2598719) | more than 2 years ago | (#39856495)

Star Wars is directly influenced by the work of Joseph Campbell

That's just a bunch of horseshit Lucas made up years later (the man reedits his own history almost as much as he reedits his movies). The only mythology in Star Wars is cobbed from the Authurian legend (the boy king hidden away, the wizard Merlin, the Sword in the stone, etc.). And I suspect even that was taken third-hand from the Kurosawa films that Lucas studied at USC.

Re:Is it me... (1)

Paul Slocum (598127) | more than 2 years ago | (#39858923)

That's just a bunch of horseshit Lucas made up years later (the man reedits his own history almost as much as he reedits his movies).

link?

Re:Is it me... (1)

crazyjj (2598719) | more than 2 years ago | (#39861263)

We'll, I can't prove a negative, so why don't you give me a link to any interview before the mid-80's where Lucas even mentioned Joseph Campbell?

Re:Is it me... (1)

Paul Slocum (598127) | more than 2 years ago | (#39868839)

Hmm, interesting, haha. I searched a little and didn't come up with anything. It's a really interesting point, and I agree that Lucas could certainly be full of crap. I originally posted just because I'm a big Joseph Campbell fan, I don't know or care much about Lucas.

Re:Is it me... (1)

tehcyder (746570) | more than 2 years ago | (#39865795)

Anyway, the whole point of Joseph Campbell's work was that all hero-myths (for instance) share the same broad pattern. But that doesn't tell you anything about the quality of any particular piece of work using that myth

In broad structuralist terms, you could say that the Odyssey, Great Expectations and Uwe Boll's Alone in the Dark are similar, but that tells you precisely nothing about how good they are.

Re:Is it me... (2)

khipu (2511498) | more than 2 years ago | (#39857747)

Ooooh, directly influenced. As in "if we stick his name on it, it gives our work more cache than its crappy quality deserves."

And even if that were true, Campbell's own original ideas are clever soundbites without much substance. Most of his actual contribution has probably in getting people to look at the original myths again, where scores of Hollywood screenwriters, devoid of their own ideas, have copied plots and personalities from.

Re:Is it me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39855759)

Or do "exhibitions" like this read more into the material than was ever originally there? I really don't think Lucas is deep enough to embed philosophical questions about psychology, neuropsychology, and genetics, or gave two hoots about our "individual identities"...

Its a series of films, people. Not much else.

I agree. And I think Lucas admitted as much on accident during the whole "who shot first" debate. Both myself, and everyone I know personally who saw it, remembers Han shooting first in the theatrical release at the local movie theater. What Lucas is missing is that it was too close to really be sure, so the audiences saw what they wanted to see. He should have figured this out, but he didn't because he's an arrogant dick, and like you said he's really not deep enough to understand that it added an element of tension surrounding Han's character which added a lot of depth to the plot.

Besides, Han shooting first makes him a really excellent anti-hero who eventually becomes a real hero. Han shooting last makes for a pretty boring and rather trite "hero in disguise". A deep, intellectual thinker would have gone with the first Han, but Lucas went with the second.

Re:Is it me... (1)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 2 years ago | (#39857105)

Besides, Han shooting first makes him a really excellent anti-hero who eventually becomes a real hero. Han shooting last makes for a pretty boring and rather trite "hero in disguise". A deep, intellectual thinker would have gone with the first Han, but Lucas went with the second.

That's the sad thing: He's still an anti-hero who eventually becomes a hero. He's still a smuggler who cares only about wealth and saving his skin who is more than happy to solve his problems with a blaster. It's not like the changed shot establishes that he's unwilling to shoot first out of a sense of honor, just that he didn't in this case.

So instead, it just takes the edge off his character by not establishing that he definitely is willing to shoot first, makes him seem slow on the uptake, and establishes Greedo as a third-rate-at-best bounty hunter who makes Storm Troopers seem like Mark Wahlberg in Shooter.

If the goal was to change Han's character to a more noble one, then it failed. Instead it only makes the scene suck more.

Extended universe (1)

LongearedBat (1665481) | more than 2 years ago | (#39858311)

do "exhibitions" like this read more into the material than was ever originally there?

Yes, and that's partly why Star Wars is still so popular. There's always more stuff because it's still growing, and that is because people are allowed to add to the universe (mostly through books, computer games and the Clone Wars series).

I really don't think Lucas is deep enough to embed philosophical questions about psychology, neuropsychology, and genetics, or gave two hoots about

Agreed, but he also doesn't mind people building on, making fun of, and in other ways keeping the Star Wars universe popular.

I guess this is where we could start a discussion on the benefits(?)/limitations of copyright.

Re:Is it me... (1)

flabordec (984984) | more than 2 years ago | (#39858367)

The fact that the author did not intend to put it there does not mean it is not there. It could very well be that Lucas was going for space soap opera and he actually created believable, interesting characters who actually do tell us something about ourselves and answer some interesting philosophical questions. Also, many critics believe that, during the original trilogy filming, Lucas didn't have enough power to overturn any decision made by intelligent, creative assistants who actually know a lot about films. This, in turn, made a lot of the bad decisions he made in the new trilogy more apparent.

What have they been smoking? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39855325)

Explore human identity through it? some people are averse to Star Wars like the plague. Some of those costumes are the way they are becuase the only mask left in the props department was the funny one for 20 cent and that's why the alien looks funny. How the characters are like us?

People invent and write fiction out of their own life experience, obviously there will be some parallels between how human are and the stories they create.

Oh, did you know there is a re-release of star wars in 3D-BD? DID YOU KNOW THAT? DID YOU??

This Star Wars force feeding has reached emetic levels.

Is this the Dr. Phil website? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39855361)

Why is /. turning into such a teenie weenie tiny whiny website focusing on worthlessness?

Re:Is this the Dr. Phil website? (1)

MiG82au (2594721) | more than 2 years ago | (#39855583)

Because too many ACs bitch and moan about it without rating submissions in the firehose.

Re:Is this the Dr. Phil website? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39855791)

Because too many ACs bitch and moan about it without rating submissions in the firehose.

Plenty of us have accounts, we just post AC to avoid fanboy moderation. I never post under my account, for various reasons, but I do vote on the stories and try to put a dent in the bullshit moderation which goes on these days. Hell, I saw a first post on the main page a few weeks ago which consisted of "nigger nigger kike spic slope Obama fucking a goat" (or some similar string of slurs) and was moderated to +3 Informative.

"Exploration of human identity"? Ugh. (3, Interesting)

goodmanj (234846) | more than 2 years ago | (#39855371)

I am so sick of "the exploration of human identity" being the only question worth pursuing when discussing works of art. It seems like the only thing we expect of art is that it help us answer the question of what it means to be human, and it's not like anyone can articulate a straight answer to that question, except in that the art itself is its own irreducible answer. It's a "tree falls in the forest" kind of question: its main purpose is to make the person asking it look smart; no answer is required.

Sci-fi fandom is especially guilty of pushing this sort of treacle. But let's be honest here: human identity issues are not the most interesting aspect of Star Wars, and Star Wars is not a very interesting subject for the exploration of human identity. If you want to talk about what it means to be human, talk about District 9 and Source Code, just to pick two recent examples. And if you want to talk about Star Wars, let's talk about whether our own lives are all just sequels to our parents' stories.

But I get it. You just want to capitalize on a mass-market intellectual property to drive attendance at your science museum. Well, you can do it without the pompous psychobabble.

Re:"Exploration of human identity"? Ugh. (2)

I_am_Jack (1116205) | more than 2 years ago | (#39856463)

I am so sick of "the exploration of human identity" being the only question worth pursuing when discussing works of art. It seems like the only thing we expect of art is that it help us answer the question of what it means to be human, and it's not like anyone can articulate a straight answer to that question, except in that the art itself is its own irreducible answer.

Isn't that the entire point of art, that we see into it what we want to see into it, and it reflects that vision back to us? Sometimes it's clear what the artist intended; other times, not so much. I don't think that "art is its own irreducible answer." More like it's an opportunity for us to peer more deeply into things we might normally take for granted, or only see one way. That's the true beauty of art, and what makes it more democratic than people might think. One family might buy a mass-market print of a Monet water lily because they think it looks pretty. Someone else might buy a reproduction of a Warhol soup can because they think it makes them look hip or cultured or smart. Others collect art because it allows them to recall an experience or time they want to be reminded of. Art need not be complicated or abstruse, just personal. One can even say that something like Serrano's Piss Christ has value simply because it creates a reaction. It's never going to have the universal appeal of a Monet or Degas, but it does cause people to think and react, or not think and get angry. Either way, it brings out emotions.

It's a "tree falls in the forest" kind of question: its main purpose is to make the person asking it look smart; no answer is required.

There's a lot of Buddhist scholars who might take exception to your belief about the usefulness of a koan.

Re:"Exploration of human identity"? Ugh. (1)

khipu (2511498) | more than 2 years ago | (#39857701)

Sci-fi fandom is especially guilty of pushing this sort of treacle.

Really? A lot of SciFi is about fun and adventure. A lot is about technological possibilities. Some of it may be about "identity", but not in the moronic philosophical sense in which most classical literature deals with the topic.

If anybody is "especially guilty", it is pompous high literature and its academic devotees, the kind of people who traditionally are offended by SciFi.

Re:"Exploration of human identity"? Ugh. (1)

goodmanj (234846) | more than 2 years ago | (#39859789)

My point is that sci-fi has so *many* different Big Ideas, it's annoying that its serious reviewers and fans tend to focus only on the human identity question. I think they do so to emulate and prove themselves to pompous high literature devotees, who don't ask about other big ideas because their own genre has so little else to offer.

Re:"Exploration of human identity"? Ugh. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39879819)

It's a "tree falls in the forest" kind of question: its main purpose is to make the person asking it look smart; no answer is required.

I'm posting anonymously so as not to appear to be trying to "look smart"

On the surface this question sounds like one of making assumptions about that which is not directly observed. But this isn't such a silly question as you think because it really drives to your definition of "sound" which says a lot about you as an individual and how important you see yourself in the world.

If you define sound as the compression of air into "waves," then the obvious answer is "Yes." If you define sound as your own brain's interpretation of that air compression as what we call "sound," then the obvious answer is "No." So you have to pick. Does sound require a brain, and if so, then how much of what we interpret as reality requires a brain to process it to make it reality? For instance, ask the same question (with input adjusted appropriately) of all your other senses. Then think about what that means for what the Universe really is without our brains interpreting all these inputs into pretty colors and sounds. Obviously having a "consciousness enhancing substance" at your disposal for this type of thought experiment doesn't hurt.

If it doesn't (require a brain to be a sound), then do we really need to be here at all. Would the world or Universe give a flying rat's ass if life ever existed here? Of course, a flying rat would be pretty awesome.

What can we learn from Star Wards in this regard? (4, Insightful)

gsslay (807818) | more than 2 years ago | (#39855419)

Seriously? Star Wars is an expensive Space Opera, stocked full of shallow stereotyped characters. I wouldn't be my first port of a call in an analysis of human identity,

"ask the fundamental questions: who we are and how do we become who we are"

We are what we do, and we become who we are by taking responsibility for what we do. We do not get to go back in time, re-write history and change events because we got them wrong the first time.

What can we learn from Star Wards in this regard? Nothing. Hans shot first.

Re:What can we learn from Star Wards in this regar (2)

rleibman (622895) | more than 2 years ago | (#39859237)

Hans didn't shoot first. Han shot only.

Now I'm depressed (0)

Grayhand (2610049) | more than 2 years ago | (#39855453)

My Avatar was Jar Jar Binks so apparently I'm a pot smoking rastafarian. Not sure if it gets any worse. Most find that they are Jedi knights but I find I'm a stoner looser that everyone hates. There must be something lower in the Lucas universe like the trash monster. No, now that I think about it there isn't. Even the trash monster squid had some self respect.

Identifiable Characters? (5, Insightful)

psnyder (1326089) | more than 2 years ago | (#39855467)

'Since Star Wars takes place in a fantasy world, the characters need to be identifiable so that the audience can connect to them,' says Star Wars creator George Lucas.

Dear Mr. Lucas,

Please tell this to whomever wrote and directed episodes 1, 2, 3. A lack of identifiable characters the audience can connect with was one of the biggest problems. Please refer that guy to Plinkett's reviews [redlettermedia.com] and this guy [youtube.com] , who point this out, quite clearly.

In fact, you might consider firing that "director/writer" guy you've got, and finding talents like you did when you hired Lawrence Kasdan, Leigh Brackett and Irvin Kershner to write and direct Empire Strikes Back. Their story still holds up many years after the special effects have become dated. Lawrence Kasdan is still alive. Maybe he knows some good people. Maybe they could do a re-imagining of 1, 2, 3 that would actually be watchable.

Re:Identifiable Characters? (1)

AngryDeuce (2205124) | more than 2 years ago | (#39855783)

They should seriously bring Plinkett in as a consultant if they ever do anything with the Star Wars franchise again. His reviews were about 100 times more entertaining than the prequel trilogy and extremely insightful to boot.

His reviews of the TNG-cast Star Trek films were pretty good as well, but the Episode 1 review remains the best review of a film I've ever seen.

The Four Temperaments (1)

Registered Coward v2 (447531) | more than 2 years ago | (#39855551)

Keirsey's also Four Temperaments uses Star Wars Characters to illustrate for basic types of human behavior as well. Similar to Meyers briggs, it classifies people's personality types based on how the interact and make decisions.

If it gets kids into science.... (1)

fantomas (94850) | more than 2 years ago | (#39855599)

Sometimes you have to sweeten science with some sugar to engage children / the general public. Perhaps the exhibition teaches some really good science about genetics, personalities, psychology, etc, I am not sure. But it looks like they are using Star Wars as a way to engage the public. Perhaps we have to critically analyse what is being purported to being taught: is this education or entertainment? Maybe next year they will teach the same subject but use The Simpsons / Hello Kitty / other popular cultural phenomenon.... is it a problem if it gets more people to think about science and educates them on the way?

Re:If it gets kids into science.... (3, Informative)

happydan (948604) | more than 2 years ago | (#39856273)

Wife and I were in Montreal last week so popped over to this. It's very well done and there are quite a lot of models and props from the movies. The exhibition explores the idea that although Anakin and Luke were raised in similar environments they became very different people. You get to create your own character as you go along based around each of the sections as they are explained. There were even some original Ralph McQuarrie (RIP) paintings to view. Some photos (we take Toad with us for photos on our jollies): http://instagr.am/p/J71hLVodZj/ [instagr.am] http://instagr.am/p/J71ei1IdZe/ [instagr.am] http://instagr.am/p/J71f9oodZg/ [instagr.am] http://instagr.am/p/J71dsSIdZd/ [instagr.am]

Dune (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39856329)

A dune exhibit would be much, much more interesting.

I'm a fan of Star Wars, but at best its characters are archetypes at best (most would say stereotypes), not real people. Children can relate to Luke Skywalker. For adults, he's just not deep enough. Leia and Darth are one dimensional (with the exception of Darth's return to the light side). Even Han is fairly vanilla: he's always motivated by whatever will keep him in the story. Lando is the most interesting of the bunch, I think, but most of his stuff takes place "behind the scenes". And the most interesting elements for ALL the characters come from Empire. But these aren't character driven films.

Re:Dune (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39857531)

A dune exhibit would be much, much more interesting.

And have very few visitors.

The Dune filmography amounts to a goofy movie and two low-budget mini-series. Even throwing in the five licensed games, Dune's reach can't compare to Star Wars, a media-spanning merchandise empire well-known around the world.

Re:Dune (1)

a90Tj2P7 (1533853) | more than 2 years ago | (#39858079)

But it would give Sting something to do.

Jabba, you're a wonderful human being. (1)

hort_wort (1401963) | more than 2 years ago | (#39856469)

I've seen them try to make these connections before. Meh.

I like the way they show only one PT character (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39856891)

From the original trilogy:
YODA: You are wise and softly spoken.
VADER: Your are imposing and powerful. You act on your emotions immediately. Also you are black.
STORM TROOPER: Despite being one of countless identical copies, people still remember you and you're instantly recognisable.
C3P0: You are prissy and annoying, you only exist so that others may think of themselves more favourably by comparing themselves to you.
BOBA FETT: You are awesome.

From the Prequel Trilogy:
AMIDALA: You are a featureless drone with no discernible personality whatsoever. People can only describe you by your occupation, physical appearance and the clothes you wear.

The truth about the exhibit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39857599)

The thing is, this Star Wars crap has tons of artifacts and is as cheap as dirt to license. Just have to come up with some gimmick and we'll have an exhibit that will pack the lemmings in.

It is really no deeper than that, folks. There is no search for human identity, blah, blah, blah.

crappy art (1)

khipu (2511498) | more than 2 years ago | (#39857611)

Most of art and literature deals with "exploring human identity". Star Wars has to be one of the crappiest examples of that and gives SciFi a bad name.

Fp 7roLl (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39858545)

they 4re Come on [goat.cx]

Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39861253)

Does the phrase "fiddling while Rome burns" come to mind?

What a pathetic waste of time.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...