Do Star Wars fans not know that the series is intended for children?

bhsup

Deity
Joined
Jan 1, 2004
Messages
30,387
This puzzles me. Grown men and women like a series specifically intended for the entertainment of ten year olds.

The plot of the movie is incredibly simple, intended for children, not for sophisticated adults. Various aspects of the series are clearly intended for children, such as R2-D2, C3PO, Ewoks, and Jar-Jar Binks.

Most significantly, George Lucas himself said that the series is intended to be for children:
George Lucas said:
The movies are for children but they don't want to admit that.
George Lucas said:
The big complaint about the first film was that it was a special effects movie and that there was no character to the story. It was a children's film, and that is pretty much the way the critics have addressed all the movies.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/394542.stm

Time Magazine in 1977 in its review of Star Wars said:
Time Magazine said:
It's aimed at kids - the kid in everybody.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...914964,00.html

So why do mature adults desire to regress into an earlier phase in their social and psychological development in watching this film series? Why the infantilization? Why don't they instead watch movies of far superior enjoyment and aesthetic taste?
 
Why shouldn't adults like entertainment intended for children? Are the Muppets any less awesome since we're grown?
 
I should note that I admit I actually like the movies, but do so realizing they are children movies. I also liked The Land Before Time and Jumanji.
 
This puzzles me. Grown men and women like a series specifically intended for the entertainment of ten year olds.

The plot of the movie is incredibly simple, intended for children, not for sophisticated adults. Various aspects of the series are clearly intended for children, such as R2-D2, C3PO, Ewoks, and Jar-Jar Binks.

Most significantly, George Lucas himself said that the series is intended to be for children:


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/394542.stm

Time Magazine in 1977 in its review of Star Wars said:

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...914964,00.html

So why do mature adults desire to regress into an earlier phase in their social and psychological development in watching this film series? Why the infantilization? Why don't they instead watch movies of far superior enjoyment and aesthetic taste?
The question is what portion of Star Wars is aimed at Children.
The movies clearly are aimed at Children.
The novels and comics are clearly not.
 
I will continue to be a fan of Pokemon until the day I die. That doesn't keep me from appreciating Asimov and Wells.
 
I don't think its so much that they're intended for children that bothers people, it's just that it's something that also can be enjoyed by adults. Ewoks, Jar Jar, and that little Mary-Sue from Clone Wars tend to ruin the parental/adult bonuses because it's super-geared towards kids so blatantly.

Notice a lot of really great kids shows/movies can also be enjoyed when you're not a kid anymore. It's what makes them pretty great.
 
The question is what portion of Star Wars is aimed at Children.
The movies clearly are aimed at Children.
The novels and comics are clearly not.

Comics are by definition aimed at children.
 
Comics are by definition aimed at children.

Not really. The comics deasl with some dark topics, as do the novels.

I mean,
Spoiler :
the death of Chewbaca
almost made me cry, I don't know what it would do to little kids.


And yeah, the movies are intended for kids, but episode II and III especially strayed a little from that. I mean he murdered younglings. That's just not cool.
 
Incanam said:
almost made me cry, I don't know what it would do to little kids.
I'm sure the death of Bambi's mother made little kids cry, too.
 
I should note that I admit I actually like the movies, but do so realizing they are children movies. I also liked The Land Before Time and Jumanji.
I love Jumanji. I loved The Land Before Time as a kid, but haven't seen it in so long I can't say anymore. Big fan of Shrek and Toy Story.

I'm also a big Star Wars fan. My main problem with the post-ESB films is that, while Lucas targeted the films at children, the first two movies didn't assume that children were the sole audience. Compare Han Solo getting frozen in carbonite, or Obi-Wan getting cut down in cold-blood. Does anything that traumatic happen in the later films? The closest I can think of is the execution of Order 66, and most of those Jedi were little-developed characters. Padme dies pretty peacefully, and Qui-Gon dies in battle, not murdered in cold-blood or tortured by Darth Vader after capture. Those things will scare children, but then the heroes overcome all, and they're happy again.

Lucas seemed to forget that just because a movie is aimed at children, doesn't necessarily mean that the movie should be, well, childish. Shrek certainly has humour that is above the heads of most children - "do you think he's compensatin' for somethin'? Certain pop-culture references, etc. - but that's because it's a family movie. It's a film that both children and adults can enjoy. The original two Star Wars films were also family movies. It's only the later films that became more childish, in such a way that they were targeted solely at children. That's not really a good business decision, as it upsets the adult part of that family audience.

I also don't think it helps that there is so much bad acting among the principles in the prequel films. The original films had some bad acting, but it wasn't on this scale, and I think the fact that most of the people that loved Star Wars as kids didn't recognise the poor acting in it then probably makes the poor acting in the new films stand out more.

That explains the complaints about the new movies, which isn't really what you asked about anyway. As for why people enjoy them despite having poor acting, plot development, etc., well, why do people enjoy The Simpsons, despite the fart jokes and "look, Homer fell down!" Having the intelligence to enjoy high-brow entertainment does not necessarily mean that one ceases to enjoy low-brow entertainment. It means, to paraphrase Professor Frink, that you can enjoy it on more levels.

Star Wars will never be as good as The Shawshank Redemption, as there's simply nothing as high-brow in Star Wars as Shawshank. That doesn't mean one can't enjoy the lower-brow Star Wars though. Hell, there's some low-brow stuff in Shawshank. "Alexander Dumbass!"
 
I'm sure the death of Bambi's mother made little kids cry, too.
My brother laughed. I'm worried about him.

Chewie's death didn't make me cry, but his funeral did. And the comics deal with some pretty adult topics - not the Marvel Star Wars comics, which are awful for both children and adults - such as Luke Skywalker's fall to the dark side, Boba Fett's wife being raped (not a smart move on the part of the rapist), etc..

Obviously, the novels are more adult than the comics, but that doesn't mean that comics can't deal with adult issues. They are usually aimed at adolescents though, but not always.
 
Comics are by definition aimed at children.

Frank Miller, Alan Moore, and the nation of Japan would like a word with you.
 
So are train sets and breasts, but who gets more use out of them?
I'm pretty sure children get more use out of breasts than we do, unfortunately. I know if I wake up in the middle of the night and want one, I'm likely to get slapped and told she has a headache. Frigging babies get all the luck.
 
Does this work in reverse?

Just because porn is intended for adult viewing doesn't mean I didn't like it as a child.
 
Japan's culture is entirely based on the sexualization of childhood, so try again.

Hang on, I think your Middle School History teacher is on the other line.
 
Japan's culture is entirely based on the sexualization of childhood, so try again.

The entire population of Japan, the Manga community of Singapore, Malaysia, Korea, Hong Kong and Taiwan, would like to drag you to the park and beat you.
 
Back
Top Bottom