I wouldn’t call myself “pro-George” nor am I anti-George. That video (How Star Wars was saved in the edit) has been around a few years and I’ve posted it several places.
I see a lot of people on two sides where George is either a saint or the devil incarnate. That video is a conversation starter for both. I see comments claiming it’s misleading because George was actually hands on during the editing process and oversaw their work, while others use it as an example of how the people around George actually created Star Wars more so than he did.
Everyone references this or that article or interview, book and video. My interpretation is the truth falls somewhere between, as often is the case.
George’s star got really bright, and the creative contribution of some others got overlooked. Is this George’s fault? I’d say somewhat. They say every time you remember something, your brain changes it a little. It’s been over 40 years. George probably thinks a lot of things happened ways they actually didn’t.
Did George create everything or just chose what he wanted from the creative work of others? Did he invent technology or just push others to create it? Again, probably some of both.
I wish George would share the creative spotlight a little more and stop revising history. I wish he would be more of a brand ambassador like Stan Lee was for Marvel. But it is what it is. Star Wars wouldn’t be what it is without a lot of important people. Not sure you can remove any of them and be where we are today.
Agreed. George was the driving force behind it all…with Kurtz as wingman. There are a lot of quotes from George in the 1976-1984 period that show he understood how to make a great movie and was aware of his own deficiencies in certain areas.
As an aside Rodney, I also thought George was an uncredited editor of the final edit too. Can anyone clarify?