Do you know whats really stupid about all these Star Wars movies?
The fact that you can hear explosions and ships zooming by in space. Don't they know that theres no air in space? All sounds should be completly silent.

The lasers they fired in space not only made noises, but they had reverberation and sometimes an echo to them. Thats not possible because there are no walls or reflective surfaces in space!

And the most ridiculous of them all, when you can hear stuff outside from inside a space ship. That would mean that the ship is leaking air, and everyone would die.

It would be interesting if in SW:EPII they finally figure this phenomenon out, and rely on John Williams to create something to define the power of explosions, shots and engines in space.

Hmmm

I think Elliot Goldenthal could pull it off.

It's a movie! There are a lot more things to criticize about Star Wars than this minor detail. Like the plot for example. I think it's great that Hollywood uses sound effects in space where there aren't any--that's part of the magic, it just makes the movies more exciting. There's no London Symphony Orchestra out in space either. You want Star Wars without a score too? I do like the idea of a score filling in for sound that isn't supposed to be there, but it's still as artificial as sound effects that aren't supposed to be there.

You want space without sound, watch 2001, and there sound would be totally inappropriate actually. Even if there were sound in space, you'd want silence in 2001. And there you still get Strauss and Lygeti in space.

I remember Lynch's Dune, there is travel between planets in some iron spaceship and if it didn't go klang/chunk when it docked, it just would have felt wrong.

The point: films are fantasy. Don't wish for proper physics, you might get it. Then where would you be.

This reminds me of a conversation I had about Fantastic Voyage. Doesn't the submarine de-miniaturize and split the guy's head open? I countered, look that's minor, they try to explain that one by having the sub dissolve. The real botch is that there's no light inside the body, the sub wouldn't be able to see anything and neither could we, there's no way to even have this movie.

You gotta suspend your disbelief. On the other hand, you don't. Criticize everything you don't buy--that's your right too. If it bugs you, it bugs you. Still, I suggest you save the steam for the fights that really matter.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lou Goldberg:
I remember Lynch's Dune, there is travel between planets in some iron spaceship and if it didn't go klang/chunk when it docked, it just would have felt wrong.

---

I still haven't seen that film, but when a spaceship docks, the sound should really be heard inside. (And even if it's shown from the outside, that doesn't necessarily mean that the "point of hearing" is also there).

Like I said at the FSM board (but I think I've found better words for it now), I think sounds in space are necessary to provied the right atmosphere for most films. Of course they're wrong, but they are used in nearly every film, and I think that's a good thing.

-matt

I can't believe, intelligent, grown-up human beings are having this discussion.

Scott

Jeron

I am being prissy? I'm not the one complaining about an imagined story and the improbablities of science holding up in them. HELLO!

...and then they wanna clone us...

Scott the Priss

NP:ATC - Around the World

Lancelot--For once we agree, Scott is a priss, isn't he?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lou Goldberg:
Lancelot--For once we agree, Scott is a priss, isn't he?

---

Hey,Lou,

I agree with you too (really seem to have not much of a choice)

Scott the Priss

quote:

---

Originally posted by Scott:
I can't believe, intelligent, grown-up human beings are having this discussion.

---

You know, making fun of others' minutia is just taking an easy shot. The above statement could apply to most of the threads on this board from the perspective of those who have no interest in our kinds of music, yet here we all are, taking the time, arguing about Zimmer. Little details matter in the areas where people have passions. If Tim T has an interest in cinematic honesty, why shouldn't he bring it up using the very examples which just raised it in him? If others have thought on the subjects themselves, why shouldn't they reply?

As you can see, this little issue led to bigger ones, like the relevance of a film's already being fantasy, the common acceptance of non-diagetic music (score, non-source music)... these are int'resting things, and the discussion of them sharpens the participants, even if it doesn't get a starving child fed, or provide someone with track listings to a boot.

I'm thinking back to that Simpson's episode when Lisa's resites a saying; 'If a trees falls in the middle of the wounds and no one's around, does it make a sound?'

When jets are in the air they make tons of sound and we on the ground, who are near its presence can hear it...and...

goddam it, it's STAR WARS! I'm tired of explaning nonsense, it's a friggin movie with excellent sound effects for a fantasy world movie like it is. And yes it is fantasy, not sci-fi, not entirely that is.

If you were to go into a theater and buy a ticket for Star Wars and you go into the moive, do you want to hear silent? Would you pay $10.00 to hear scientific space silence? NO! You want your ear drums to pop! I know that's what I'd want if I pay for a $10.00 ticket, goddam it!

I'm sorry if I sound hostile, but it's 4:22 in the moring and I'm struggling to stay awake.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jeron:
I have just one question: Tim, where did your imagination go? Once you've found it, please come back and talk to us.

Jeron

[Message edited by Jeron on 03-10-2001]

---

quote:

---

To my knowledge, besides 2001, which purposefully stressed the silence of space, none of the notable science fiction movies towards the end of the 20th century really showed space for what it was...a vacuum devoid of sound.

---

The only "outer space" sound was the sound of your own breathing - which is what you would hear if you were in a space suit. Kubrick wanted to give people the feeling of what it would be like to be in space.

I´ll shut up now.

Lorien, first off, yes I made fun of an issue that I find rather...hmm...(use your imagination), yet we all crack each other up on this board, it's part what makes us unique and so darn entertaining out there. Now, I've never said that the thread was useless...dumb...or shouldn't be posted, perhpaps you are giving away to too much assumptions here, which of course is ok just remebember assuming is the mother of all screw ups. Furthermore, I think I have the right to give my opinion, whether it's posititve or negative, whether you agree with it or not.

Many have been here long enough to know where I am coming from and are quite knowledgeable that I am not in the business of offending people. But if I have offended anyone, especially you TimT, I apologize. Somehow I don't think TimT was offended as you were Lorien. So, I apologize to you as well...just remember...I'm Scott the Priss (Lancelot says so...hehehe, oh yea and Lou).

Now to the issue on hand. I made the comment because I find this discussion amazingly shortsighted. The average age of everyone here is...what?...let's say 25-30? We are all intelligent human beings (well, not me perhaps...but whatever). All of us know that you can't hear sound or even see laser light in space. I mean...common. Now, I can see this argument if the film was a documentary or based partly on reality (Apollo 13 comes to mind) but Star Wars? What is next? Hey you know Superman sucks because people can't fly? Hey Disney's Tarzan is a joke, drawings can't move? Oh, how come Mel Gibson who got shot in this movie is still waliking around in Patriot? Is there really so much need to disect something on the basis of possibilties and realities when all they were designed to do is entertain? If we can't sit down for an hour and a half, and let imagination take over and engulf ourselves into somehting that is pure fantasy ,without having to justify every single nuance, every singe mistake every single scientific impossibilty...then we really have lost a very big essence that is part of the human psyche.

Yet, if discussed the matter must be, then discussed it should be. I will not stand in the way of it. I find it rather interesting, for I understand certain members more now. After all, I participated in it. I just chose to let the comment I wrote speak for itself, for I often don't have the time and skills to write war and piece novels Daniel2 style all of the time (I'm getting better at it though). I am a person who likes to have fun and doesn't get easily offended (priss, priss, priss), and I believe in communictation. Again, yes, I don't agree with Tim and many here, but please do not accuse me of things I didn't say. Dont' try to read between the lines, just read what is there. I said I cna't believe intelligent (that is a compliment to everyone on this board) gorwn up (a little of a generaliziation perhapst) human beings (a fact...I hope) are having this discussiong. In other words, what I am saying is , why do we, who know the reality of things discuss this over a movie that is really not based on much reality at all? I just don't get it. But I don't have to get it. You guys do. Great. I just made a comment. Some understood that comment. Some didn't. Big deal.

But you know what. My neph just asked me why I am writing a book. So, I just told him. After explaining about the reality of space, Star Wars and the thread here, he really summed it up pretty well. Looking at me, with those big, bambi liked brown eyes, he proceeded to his playstaion and said " So?"

My sentiments exactly.

Scott the Priss

NP: The wonderful sounds of the keys smashing and crashing through space.

He's no priss!

remember, this is the man who threatened to drown me!

so violent...much fear I sense in him.

I am your father!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jeron:
Why are your struggling to stake awake? Submit to the sandman...

---

Hahahahahaha!

We all know that there's a lot of people around them and they are basically talking to a camera inside a studio! Who are they trying to fool????

Ridiculous!!!!

P.S.: Thanks to TimTim for this great, remarkable topic!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Greg Bryant:
The only "outer space" sound was the sound of your own breathing - which is what you would hear if you were in a space suit. Kubrick wanted to give people the feeling of what it would be like to be in space.

---

A goal sought and achieved, according to Buzz Aldrin. Sometime in the late 70's Roger Ebert found himself sitting next to Adrin on a plane. They got to talking, and Aldrin said that 2001 was the only movie that really made one feel like being in space, like it felt being there.

Scott:

Nope. Offended is not right. A ... misassumption? I don't really care who disagrees with whom, or with me, about almost anything. You do have the right to your opinions, and to your opinions of those of others, etc. So do I.

When I encounter them, I will always speak up in response to what I see as stifling posts.
You've seen them,
"Will all of you shut-up?"
"This is supposed to be a film-music forum, not a movie review site"
"How many CDs have YOU produced?"
"Stop with all this off-topic stuff!"
"Reality check..."
"You can't say what the BEST score is, just what your FAVORITE is"
"Stop whining here, fanboy, and go tell that to John Williams himself - here's the address."
"Please talk about religion on alt.religion.fanatics"

. . . they're certainly much more direct and rude than what you wrote, but can you see how "I can't believe, intelligent, grown-up human beings are having this discussion." might be perceived similarly, and divert a fun conversation, or embarass some people about joining in? I'm sorry, but it really does say "that the thread was useless...dumb".

Now I honestly couldn't care less what you deem intelligent or not so. And I'm not jumping in to defend Tim T's potentially bruised emotions. We don't know each other. You're a name on a page, so am I. That's not why I spoke up. I simply happen to think it's less than polite (not objectively wrong, not not a right, perhaps not even tecnically inappropriate, just not polite) for someone to do the equivalent of standing by and listening to a group conversing and only adding derision as comment. It's a mild form of bullying, which I see as objectively wrong, so I always step up in the face of that. It might (yes, only might) dampen things, but it certainly doesn't elevate anything in the conversation, so why bother? Why not just move to another thread and enjoy a topic that interests you (the royal 'you', not you Scott specifically), and if someone spouts in with annoyance that your conversation is occurring, swat them down and chat on.

Now I offer all of that as an explanation for my actions, not to re-qualify yours. Judging by your response, that's not what you were doing. It's just what I read. You were apparently joking around with your chums. Perhaps we haven't occupied enough threads together that I would know how to read your communicative proclivities, just as might be needed for one to come to the realization that Mr. Rutherford is not forever and always questioning the parentage of this group's members in his posts. It's just a mode of talk, and nothing malicious.

Well, this is one of my proclivities. It's probably knee-jerk. I have a similar reaction to anti-hype. It's really the same mechanism. I can stomach a million more times the number of posts about Star Wars than I can about asking people to shut up about Star Wars. In such cases as these, I speak up. I am anti-antihype. I stifle stifling. I bully bullying. That's just me.

Thanks for clarifying your point. It's well-taken, all of them are. You're right, no one else seemed bothered. I hope I haven't further irritated you with this explanation of my habits. Crack away at your chums. Seems they like it.

And if you really did think the subject was dumb, shame on you for backpeddling, and kindly go away.

I know perfectly well that SFX enchanced Star Wars. I was just bringing up some facts.
The movies are like two worlds; One just intended for the audience, and the other for the people and things in the movie.

Luke does not hear Williams' Force theme while concentrating, but in the audiences world they do! Han does not see the subtitles in his world, but in the audiences world they do.
But they present sound effects in the movie as if its in thier world, because they act and respond to it. And they don't explain how its possible, implying that it is fact and as truthful as the stars and sun in space. I think that this is where they mess up.

It would be interesting to see a large war in space, that is animated and scored like the Fantasia movies. Where everying is just visuals based on music. The sound you'd hear are radio transmisions of the pilotes, or things within the cockpits of the aircrafts.

I have no problem with the whole "sound in space" thing in Star Wars. It is not science fiction, it is a fantasy story (as is Star Trek, The Last Starfighter, Dune or any other film in which human characters have faster-than-light space vessels).

However, I had a huge beef with the overbearing and obnoxious effects heard in Apollo 13. Every time an exterior was shown, my subwoofer went crazy. This took me out of the diegesis of the movie real fast.

There's nothing wrong, I think, with creating a soundscape in which one hears sound in a subjective way (i.e. the breathing effects in 2001 or the radio broadcasts in The Right Stuff), but when showing a dramatization of a true story (especially when so much attention was paid to the technical accuracy of Apollo 13), then one must find a way to make your film dramatic without violating the laws of physics.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=1 face=arial>quote:</font><HR size=1>Technically, there is sound in space. There is just usually no mechanism for transmitting it to the listener's ear. If one were inside an atmosphere-filled spaceship when it's left engine were blown off, it would be heard. If one were outside a spaceship with his ear to the hull as the engines charged, he would hear it. Noise is being made by these machines and events<HR size=1></BLOCKQUOTE>
Actually, "noise" is a concept based on a sense that we have. "Noise" does not exist in and of itself. We percieve vibrations as "noise" and that is the label we give it. True, those vibrations are occurring whether you can "hear" them or not, but the fact that you can't proves they are not making "noise" as we define it.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swashbuckler:
Actually, "noise" is a concept based on a sense that we have. "Noise" does not exist in and of itself. We percieve vibrations as "noise" and that is the label we give it. True, those vibrations are occurring whether you can "hear" them or not, but the fact that you can't proves they are not making "noise" as we define it.

---

Say this about noise then. I hold that we cannot eliminate the use of a term for that which exists regardless of perception. "Sound", which I spoke of, is a cause; it is not merely a phenomenon of perception. Hearing is the effect, that perceiving of the sound. If a tree falls and no one hears it, it has still made a sound. That's the 'it' not heard. Sound is to hearing as light is to seeing. Light exists whether seen or not. A blind person in a lit room is in the presence of light. A person trapped in a 3'X 3'X 3' sealed, lead box that is sitting in a large, lit room is a person in a large room with light in it, though said light is unseen to the trapped individual.

We define light (colloquially) based upon our experience with it (it is that part of the electromagnetic spectrum which our eyes can detect), but the defenition is not of the experience, but of the thing experienced. It's definition doesn't change based upon our experience with it. Those who are colorblind are not said to have their own light and non-light, rather they are so defined because of their inabilities to perceive what has a set definition.

So it is with sound. We define as sound the generation of those wavelengths which our ears could perceive, not the hearing of them. A dog whistle is even said to make a sound - though we cannot hear it. We know that dogs do hear it, therefore the effect of blowing through the whistle merits the designation 'sound', though it is wholly unperceived by us as such.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Swashbuckler:
It is not science fiction, it is a fantasy story (as is Star Trek, The Last Starfighter, Dune or any other film in which human characters have faster-than-light space vessels).

---

While I agree that Star Trek has many fantasy aspects, the technical ideas behind the Warp drive are actually quite plausible - because they DON'T make the ship move faster than light.