Originally posted by: JediFlyer06
Funny how so many artists seem to "get it", and Lucas just, well...

I'm sorry, but nothing in that quote points to David Gilmour 'getting it', nor does it show what George Lucas did was wrong, almost the opposite.

Gilmour may not even know what the interviewer is talking about when he mentions GL Syndrome, sure he may, but he would give the same response whether he knew or not.

He then goes on to say he worked on Dark Side of the Moon until they thought it was 'pretty well perfect', something Lucas never had the opportunity to do due to money, technology, history and the industry.

Pink Floyd were pretty popular before DSotM and had seven studio albums in their past. There would have been plenty of money for it because the labels pretty much knew what they were getting (though likely underestimated its future popularity). Not that much money is even needed for an album, it mostly needs time from the individual band members. They didn't need to develop any technology as everything they needed existed. There hasn't been that much development in music tech so there wouldn't be anything new that they'd have wanted to use back then (apart from speeding up production).

George Lucas wasn't that well known, he had one hit movie, but his name wouldn't have meant much back then. Sci-fi blockbusters didn't exist as sci-fi wasn't very popular at all before Star Wars. Money was therefore fairly scarce; there is so much more to lose when financing a large movie compared to an album. This money was definitely needed because movies require long term commitment from hundreds of people. The technology pretty much didn't exist, Lucas had to spend a lot of his budget developing that technology. In the next twenty years the tech is leaps and bounds ahead of where it was then, the ten years after that even more. There is so much more he could do now than he could do then.

You may think that he should be happy, he got most of his script on film and it is the writing stage that is so important and equally as cheap as writing music for an album. But while bands really have no limitations to work within while writing a song (except self-imposed limitations), Lucas had to consider a heap of limitations when writing his script. We really have no idea what Lucas actually wanted in his film back then.

Another thing to take into consideration is the nature of music artists. Generally they don't dislike their own past tracks because of a particular part of the track, usually they'll dislike the entire thing or the even the entire time period the track was made in! The reasons they end up disliking tracks are because their music tastes change and they end up embarrassed by the tracks of their youth or they simply get sick of it from playing it hundreds of times at concerts. Either of these reasons wouldn't make an artist want to touch that previous work again, quite the opposite, they want nothing to do with it. It spurs them on to creating entirely new pieces. Lucas on the other hand didn't have to 'perform' his own work hundreds of times and it is highly unlikely he would ever dislike the entire work even if his tastes changed a lot since there is usually so much more variety in a two hour visual and audio work compared to a five minute audio piece. I'm sure there could be early works of his he does totally dislike, but none of them were ever popular so very few people care.

While I don't agree with a few of Lucas' changes or his unwillingness for the original versions to be in the public, this quote gives no reasons why it is wrong or even backs your point of view; except for the fact that some unnamed interviewer feels the same.

Hmmm, just thinking about Lucas' unwillingness to re-release the work he doesn't like... Why is it fine that hundreds of music artists don't re-release their old works when they sell out because they don't like them?