Star Wars is Science-FANTASY? What is this madness!?

I've always thought that Star Wars is a classic and famous example of a "Science Fiction" movie. I've always referred to it as such, and to be honest, I think I'll continue to do so.

Yesterday was the first day of my second semester Science Fiction course (what fun!) and my nerdy "SF" teacher (he hates calling it "sci-fi") talks to all of us about science fiction in general, and we all have a good time.

During the discussion, I bring up Star Wars, and he tells me that Star Wars technically isn't a science fiction movie. WHAT? He tells me it's more of a "Science Fantasy" movie, primarily because it's not so much about hardcore pseudo-science as it is about faith in the Force (and religion, magic, and mysticism, in general). This actually makes good sense, although I've never thought about it like that before.


What do you all think? Is Star Wars Science Fiction or Science Fantasy? What makes it that? What's your opinion on calling it that? Any other comments?

Well, you can see starwars as an old pirate thing too....

George Lucas just changed "islands" to "planets" and "races" to "creatures" and pirates to "sith" and good guys to "Jedi" and...

It doesn't include modern things.... well it does, but not as much as some others....

Science-fantasy is apt. It's in the same boat as Warhammer 40k in that respect.

Star Wars hasn't always been classified as "science fantasy" but I believe that's only because the genre (which I consider a sub-genre of science fiction) didn't always exist. It does make sense that it would be classified that way, and I agree...science fantasy all the way.

I don't think it's as simple as a lack of pseudo-science and an inclusion of the force and jedi/sith...although that's definately a huge part of the reason for the classification. I agree with sajjad in that SW definitely has a swashbuckling element, and if you replace the space ships, planets, and laserguns/swords, with more medieval equivalents you'll be watching the movie "Dragonslayer" instead...or some other such obviously fantasy genre movie. There are other considerations as well...but I think we've about covered the "big" ones already.

I love the idea that the future is going to bring back melee weaponry. ^^

It does stand to reason that shipboard combat would require a less destructive weapon than one could use outside the vessel...and that would lead to the use of melee weapons, at least aboard ship.

Technically it's actually a Space Opera.

I would agree with it being fantasy. That is if you want the extra classification. But if you do sci-fantasy is a better fit in my opinion

Williamkaede wrote: Science-fantasy is apt. It's in the same boat as Warhammer 40k in that respect.

But with more awesome

EDIT:

If using the genre definition of fantasy it seems to become like a double negative sort of thing to me ie; science fantasy = scientific supernatural

I think there is enough in the movies to hold it up on its own without the supernatural Force. For its time it had a lot of scifi bang for its buck. I like the psychology definition for fantasy more then the genre definition, so using that I'm going to answer its both!?

Star Wars is a space opera.

Star trek used to be science fiction, but now that I see lithium used as power source in the real world, I think there isn't much of it that's actually fictional

Babylon 5 is the greates Space Opera ever made:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtrUhIuEqdY

Each season gets progressively more awesome and is one massively long story arc that makes sense right the way through

You don't know what a decent Sci-fi show is until you've watched Babylon 5 (Firefly would also be an acceptable choice)

Ahem...

Firefly?

Adder wrote: If using the genre definition of fantasy it seems to become like a double negative sort of thing to me ie; science fantasy = scientific supernatural

I don't think so, Big Bang is a scientific supernatural myth ..!

UPDATE:

I mean it's not something that doesn't exist....

The big bang is a theory. And a TV show I don't know how to feel about.

Scientific Supernatural could be an interesting genre. A setting where supernatural stuff gets explained by science, like for instance, vampires being a bloodborne disease, or ghosts/spirits being broadcast thought energy. If you've seen Pulse you'll know what I mean.

William, read that link, and you'll know what I'm talking about...! (well, it's a huge topic, you can read Daniel Quinn and Alan Watts books instead...well, they are even bigger.....)

Proteus wrote: Ahem...

Firefly?

Ok technically Firefly is a space western, but it is fantasticly awesome as well

DAMN YOU FOX!

going by my rough definitions of words

Fiction = Made up information told in a story format
Fantasy = Made up information told in a story format

Science Fiction = Science Fantasy

So it's both.

OMG - I love Babylon 5. I was raised on that, Star Wars and Star Trek TNG. ^.^ FOX is the very lowest evil. I mean they were evil before cancelling Firefly, but their actions in that regard forever earned them a spot amid the ranks of the Cthulhu. Murdoch can suck rocks.

Star Trek: Science Fiction
Stargate: Science Fiction/Space Opera
Firefly: Space Western/Science Fiction
Star Wars: Space Opera/Science Fantasy
Babylon 5: Space Opera/Science Fiction
Farscape: Science Fiction
Doctor Who: All of the above as well as "horror".
LEXX: You cannot describe this.

Akkarin wrote:

Proteus wrote: Ahem...

Firefly?

Ok technically Firefly is a space western, but it is fantasticly awesome as well

DAMN YOU FOX!

I usually see people consider Firefly a "western space opera" myself.

I would disagree about Firefly, I don't think it is an opera to be honest. It's Star Trek episodes but with cowboys and a greater focus on the characters than any overarching storyline