The establishing shots of OOT compared to the '97 special edition and '04 DVDs.

"It's like, the guy used the CG for all the wrong reasons redoing these movies."

Ya hit the nail on the head. Personally, I've always preferred the pre-SE establishing shot of Ben's home over the new one. Why George felt compelled to change it absolutely baffles me...

Was it George Lucas who in an interview many years ago said something about how one of the biggest mistakes that directors of fantasy films make is that they spend so much money on sets that they end up spending too much screen time on them because the want to show them off, and it ends up ruining the pace of the film?

I searched on the internet, but I couldn't the exact quote, but I DID find this interesting & revealing Q&A with Dale Pollock (author of "Skywalking"):

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2005/05/06/DI2005050600821.html

Pollock Dale's book skywalking is the only real bio on old george as far as i'm concerned because it is not full of revisionist lies and missinformation.

i love these quotes.

"Dale Pollock: I think Lucas has become more interested in his digital technology and advances than character and emotion, which is his unfortunate arc from AMERICAN GRAFFITI to EPISODE 3. The depth of character and complex emotions present in the first three films are clearly absent from the first two prequels"

"Dale Pollock: Because essentially he hates directing, and has only directed the first three prequels only because they necessitate little actual direction of actors, and far more attention paid to effects. The great mystery to me is why Lucas has never bothered to make the personal films he vowed to make after the success of the first STAR WARS when he could have done anything he wanted. He has never explained this, yet he's still talking about doing it some day. I wouldn't hold my breath."

"Dale Pollock: I don't think he has any skill in directing good actors in any kind of film, big or small. To take talents like Samuel Jackson, Natalie Portman and Christopher Lee, and do so little with them, is almost criminal. I still don't think he enjoys directing, he only enjoys manipulating technology that doesn't talk back or have a different point of view."

i have to disagree with this one "He may be mercenary, but he's not greedy." referring to george.

New York, N.Y.: If Lucas has so little interest in directing, as you've said several times, then why didn't he have someone else do the job in the prequels? Other people did episodes 5 and 6, so why not the same for a prequel (or two or three)?

"Dale Pollock: Because he was so angry at how he felt Irvin Kershner and Richard Marquand ruined his vision with EMPIRE STRIKES BACK and RETURN OF THE JEDI, respectively. He felt he could not entrust the prequels to any outside director, and that he would make the "sacrifice" of directing them himself to keep the purity of his intentions."

"Dale Pollock: He had very specific outlines, which each ran 5-8 pages. I read them for a total of 12 films, so at least that many were planned. The most detailed synopses were for Episodes I-VI. He says he has no more STAR WARS features planned, but I still think he could change his mind, because I know he worked out stories that followed the original 3 films."

Yeah, I was a bit shocked at the frankness of some of the questions and answers. 

canofhumdingers said:

this is the clip you're thinking of Mielr.

Thanks, I knew I'd seen that somewhere recently!

Whoa, I think I am going to have to read Skywalking. Thanks for those quotes, sky. I really liked this quote and I think it is very true,

"Dale Pollock: I don't think he has any skill in directing good actors in any kind of film, big or small. To take talents like Samuel Jackson, Natalie Portman and Christopher Lee, and do so little with them, is almost criminal. I still don't think he enjoys directing, he only enjoys manipulating technology that doesn't talk back or have a different point of view."

As much of a movie whore Sam Jackson is these days, he is not a bad actor. A lot more could have been achieved with him than was. I do not find Natalie Portman to be all that great of an actress, but I hear she has pulled off some impressive roles since ROTS his the screens. And as for Christopher Lee, my goodness, this is where the Pollock quote rings the truest. How do you have a guy like this in your film and not throw him into as many scenes as you can? Instead George gives the guy less screen time than Ahmed Best! How does that happen? What wasted opportunities. In Ep. 3 George kills him off in his first scene, then replaces hims with a lame, over the top, 100% CG villain. Not sure how many serious writers or directors would do something like that when they have one of the greatest portrayer of villains of all time.

I also think Ewan is a pretty good actor, though in all fairness George did do a lot with him, and his scenes would have been the most entertaining to watch had they not been of the most mundane things (Ep.2 follows Jango Fett around the galaxy. Ep.3 follows General Grevious around the galaxy). Oh, that and the mullet from Ep.2, that thing was kind of hard to look at, glad when it was gone by the next film.

C3PX said:

Whoa, I think I am going to have to read Skywalking. Thanks for those quotes, sky. I really liked this quote and I think it is very true,

"Dale Pollock: I don't think he has any skill in directing good actors in any kind of film, big or small. To take talents like Samuel Jackson, Natalie Portman and Christopher Lee, and do so little with them, is almost criminal. I still don't think he enjoys directing, he only enjoys manipulating technology that doesn't talk back or have a different point of view."

I remember watching something years ago with Ron Howard.  In the interview, Howard basically said that while filming American Graffiti George took him out to lunch and essentially told him to get into animation, since he wouldn't have to deal with the actors at that point.  I believe the reason it came up is because Ron Howard had expressed an interest in directing in the future.

So it's really no secret, to those that have worked with Lucas in the past, that he'd much rather work with animation and animators than to work with actors.

I actually like the establishing shot of the X-Wings in the SE better than the original.  But I think that's the only establishing shot that looks better to me.  All the other ones look to hokey.  And I only like that shot because I agree that fighters in formation wouldn't look as perfectly straight as the original shot.

C3PX said:

Whoa, I think I am going to have to read Skywalking. 

As much of a movie whore Sam Jackson is these days, he is not a bad actor. A lot more could have been achieved with him than was. I do not find Natalie Portman to be all that great of an actress, but I hear she has pulled off some impressive roles since ROTS his the screens. And as for Christopher Lee, my goodness, this is where the Pollock quote rings the truest. How do you have a guy like this in your film and not throw him into as many scenes as you can? Instead George gives the guy less screen time than Ahmed Best! How does that happen? 

I haven't read 'Skywalking' either, but I did read 'Empire Building' which is also pretty rough on Lucas. 

Sam Jackson is good in some roles, but I think TPM just kind of revealed his acting limits. I've only seen bits and pieces of Natalie Portman in other roles, but from what I've seen, I'm not really impressed with her acting either.

I think Ewan McGreggor is a better actor than both of them, and his performance as Obi-Wan was decent. Liam Neeson gave a very good performance too, despite his being under-used as well (like Lee).

Dale Pollock: I think the unique way these films are made puts strain on any actor, particularly those with classical training like Liam Neeson (as it was for Alec Guinness, the only actor in STAR WARS who declined to be interviewed for my book because I was told he had nothing good to say about Lucas as a director. To be acting in front of a blue or green screen, holding objects that are not there and speaking to creatures who do not yet exist, is difficult for any actor, particularly when the director is not overly sympathetic.

Zombie84 said: I believe this is the quote you are referring to. I made this for use as my sig a while ago. I got the quote from The Making of ROTJ paperback.

This is the quote I meant (from the link canofhumdingers provided):

"One of the fatal mistakes that almost every science fiction film makes is that they spend so much time on the settings, you know, creating the environment, that they spend film time on it and you don't have to spend too much film time to create an environment. What they're doing is showing off the amount of work that they generated and it slows the pace of the film down and the story is not the settings the story is the story, it's the plot."

That is actually from the documentary from star wars to jedi.

My favorite quote is my sig

If you count the Ebert interview, the making of rotj book and from star wars to jedi.

You have 3 different sources where he basically says the stories and characters are more important than the special effects.

The worse case scenario happened Lucas went against his own advice, he focused too much on the cgi effects and not enough on the human element of the stories.

I can remember reading once upon a galaxy the making of empire strikes back and lucas yells at kersh and says "your ruining my movie!". He takes the film completely goes nuts and recuts it and it is shit.

You think things are really bad. 

Can you imagine a lucas directed empire strikes back or return of the jedi?

I am glad the did not direct them or the oot would be as bad as the prequels.

skyjedi2005 said:

That is actually from the documentary from star wars to jedi.

 

I remember now- I have a tape of that but I haven't watched it in years. I don't remember seeing the Ebert interview, though.

I wonder what Lucas doesn't like about Empire- what would he have done differently?

Which scene did he direct, SilverWook? Was it a 2nd unit shot or something?

According to Pollock in that Q&A, Kershner and Marquand resented Lucas' interference, so who knows what the hell happened on the ROTJ set. 

Dale Pollock: Both Kershner and Marquand resented Lucas' interference with their methods, and Lucas resented their resentment. Kershner still feels he directed the best STAR WARS film with EMPIRE, and personally, I agree with him. I also think very few established directors would have wanted to direct EPSIDOES I, II or III, given Lucas' reputation for creative control of this franchise.

Thanks! That's interesting. I have that book too, but I haven't read it in a long time. 

Yeah, it's a great book. I remember I just could not put it down when I started reading it- the interviews are especially fascinating. The ROTJ book is great, too.

Whoa, whoa, whoa. I don't own any making of Star Wars books, I didn't know so many existed, and I always figured the ones that did would be so inaccurate that they wouldn't be worth it. Now I heard about Skywalking I am incredible interested in getting my hands on a copy and reading it. But from the sounds of things, there are some other pretty good ones out there. Can you guys help clarify what making of books I might ought to be interested in picking up.

Mielr mentioned Empire Building and Silverwook mentioned Once Upon a Galaxy (which sounds like it is out of print and therefore probably selling for like $600 a copy on amazon), and finally Mielr made mention of a "ROTJ book" that was good too. What is the ROTJ book? Are these the best ones out there? Any others worth looking at?