{g}
]]>so what?
"hero storms fortress to defeat villain"
has been played out in a hundred movies and zillion books
Star Wars part 4 being just a single spectacular instance
it is in how the tale is told, hmmm?
When it FIRST came out Star Wars wasn't "part 4" yet and it was like nothing I'd ever seen in a Sci-Fi movie. It was a good stand-alone story, but got less & less so with each additional sequel and prequel (although I did like "Rogue One".
Looking back on it now, 2001 has much better special effects and Star Wars doesn't really measure up - in 2001 the space ships "moved" like REAL space ships.
The best thing about Star Wars was the special effects weren't all cheesy like previous Sci-Fi films had been. Even if the Millennium Falcon moves like a WW1 dogfight, at least you couldn't see the wires & the exhaust smoke didn't curl up. đ
]]>It sort of was. At least in Lucas' notes. But I think he figured starting in the middle was the easiest story to tell in case it became the only movie.
And he said his notes and thought changed a lot over the years after the first 3 (middle 3?) were made.
]]>Oh, it happens from time to time.
But in Aotearoa at least the number of businesses big enough to make such offers is small, smaller still if the job is to be a sinecure. "go to work for big businesses"
Result, not many offers, and no guarantees.
So it is not SOP, as we get the impression that it is the USA.
JHomes
]]>Even in the US these folks seem to drop out of sight. But when folks dig deep they find them in such slots. Especially on the boards of corporations. Tidy sums for giving advice which is good. For having a Rolodex of the current officials private cell phone numbers, well a bit slimy.
Yes you have a less than 10% of the US population there are still plenty of seats on boards and such to go around.
]]>The job prospects for someone who was briefly a senator are largely unaffected by the political excursion unless it counts as a career break in which case good luck to them. And we have quite a few single-term senators due to the multimember electorate system (viz, in a "huge swing" election we might go from 5 Liberal+4 ALP to 4 Liberal+5 ALP senators, leaving the most junior Liberal senator needing to find another way to fill their days. Minor parties tend to pop in and out - with 9 major party senators there's likely 1-5 minor party ones, and Bob's Best Political Party can easily go from 2% of the vote getting a senator elected to 2.4% not getting one. Sorry Bob).
We definitely do have some jobs for the boys, but they tend to the mendacious. Someone with close ties to the property development industry who did them some major favours over a couple of decades loyal service is likely to find themselves with an office somewhere once they exit politics. But the other 90% are just out of a job.
]]>Most of the rest were just marketing vehicles, but the camp and spectacle of the original was fun enough to blow my 7 year old mind.
]]>Minor quibble. The 'first' movie was always dubbed 'Episode IV'. Literally the first thing we saw as the text rolled up the screen.
The original 1977 theatrical release was NOT. The studio didn't know how well the film would do and hadn't committed to a sequel. Labeling a standalone film "Episode IV" would have just confused audiences.
"Episode IV" and the subtitle "A NEW HOPE" were added for the film's theatrical re-release in April 1981 AFTER "The Empire Strikes Back" was released as "Episode V" in 1980.
Most of the rest were just marketing vehicles, but the camp and spectacle of the original was fun enough to blow my 7 year old mind.
I thoroughly enjoyed it. It's only in retrospect, with the sequels that I realized the special effects shortcomings having the space ships move like airplanes. The other effects
]]>And I can remember being at a showing at Leicester Square and the huge "huh?" when "Episode V" came rolling up the screen (a few of us SF fans already knew about this, but clearly the average audience didn't).
]]>Howard NYC @142
*Go on, with your story, it will "only" be one of the Old Ones, anyway" - U K Le Guin
Charles Sheffield made the same discovery, re-writing Orpheus/Euridice, without realising, until he'd done it.
Incomplete thought:
"The other effects" were much better than anything I remember from previous Sci-Fi films.
]]>So you're saying that in Australia and most other countries that retired politicians can't go to work for big businesses at big salaries?
In Germany there were some high-profile cases of retired (or voted-out) politicians then working for companies or for lobby-organisations close to their former field. This often led to (minor) outcries. Former chancellor Gerhard Schröder's position with Russian giant Gazprom (since 2006) led to some major outcries, particularly after February 2022. There are other high-profile cases like former minister for transportation Matthias Wissmann becoming the chief lobbyist for car manufacturers after his tenure.
So, the cases exist, but on the other hand there is an awareness that this has an unpleasant smell and is not worthy of a public servant.
Since 2015 there is a law at the federal level prescribing a sanitary period ("Karenzzeit") for cabinet members and the people one level below them (we call them "StaatssekretÀre") after they leave their positions. For 18 months afterwards they have to declare any position they accept that could lead to a possible conflict of interest to the government, and if the government recognizes a conflict of interest it can prohibit them from taking the job (see this info document, prepared by the Bundestag's research service (in German only)). In many states there are now analogous laws in place.
This is of course still too little, and there are transparency organisations that call for a total ban on government politicians taking industry or lobbying jobs for up to five years after leaving their positions.
So no, the USian "revolving door" practise is not necessarily viewed as normal or even as desirable in other countries.
Of course, still nothing prohibits ex-politicians to write books or go on speaking tours for exorbitant fees after their retirement.
]]>So no, the USian "revolving door" practise is not necessarily viewed as normal or even as desirable in other countries.
Seems to me like somewhen in the 1980s (the "Greed is good" decade) many U.S. politicians lost the concept of elected office being public service and it became just another path to wealth accumulation.
]]>