George Lucas leaves Lucasfilm — Page 2

generalfrevious said:

We are nasty to him because he shows contempt for us.

So why did'nt you bash George in 1977 when he filmed star wars on the inferior 35mm(compared to 70mm) format?

Why didn't you bash him for opting to use an optical mono track  for the prints that would be seen(and heard) by the majority of  cinema goers  in the U.S and around the world in 77'/78'?

Why didn't you bash him in 1981 when he appended the Episode IV title onto Star wars for  that year's re-release?

She was involved on Crystal Skull people, i see no optimism in her being chosen.

Does this mean no Indiana Jones V.  Thank the Maker!

http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/06/01/whos-replacing-george-lucas-at-lucasfilm

"I also care deeply about our fans and it was important to have someone who would carry on the passion and care that I've given the films over the years."

"Care deeply about his fans", give me a break.

Sure, if he really have given the films this passion and care over the years, why did a film collector need to save his ass back in the '90's when he couldn't find a print of Star Wars in good condition for his so called "restoration". Why is the original negative deteriorated, why are the color separation masters incomplete. Why does he refuse to provide The National Film Registry with prints. Why oh why doesn't he let a true restoration happen?

Lucas: "You have to go through and do a whole restoration on it, and you have to do that digitally." "It’s a very, very expensive process to do it."

But the passion and care is there, right?

Yeah I'm not too optimistic about her taking over. George is already talking about how he's happy to have found someone who will "continue to represent (his) vision". "His Vision" being the bluray releases and no originals.

msycamore said:

http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/06/01/whos-replacing-george-lucas-at-lucasfilm

"I also care deeply about our fans and it was important to have someone who would carry on the passion and care that I've given the films over the years."

"Care deeply about his fans", give me a break.

Sure, if he really have given the films this passion and care over the years, why did a film collector need to save his ass back in the '90's when he couldn't find a print of Star Wars in good condition for his so called "restoration". Why is the original negative deteriorated, why are the color separation masters incomplete. Why does he refuse to provide The National Film Registry with prints. Why oh why doesn't he let a true restoration happen?

 

Lucas: "You have to go through and do a whole restoration on it, and you have to do that digitally." "It’s a very, very expensive process to do it."

But the passion and care is there, right?

Oh come on dude----Star wars was incredibly popular----that meant that  the original camera negative(OCN) was used extensively to create "new prints" from 1977 to 1981(long before any thoughts were given to preservation)

It is pretty much symptomatic of the era----the OCN of Taxi Driver, The Godfather and Jaws are  in woeful condition too------so much so that the OCN of the Godfather cannot even be passed through a pin registered mechanism anymore without falling apart(but Coppola does not get the type of vitriolic hate that is often attribued to Lucas because of it)----whilst Taxi Driver and Jaws exibited severe tears in certain areas ------which have been fixed in their respective digital scans------but the the actual physical negatives are fucked.

Kathleen Kennedy will restore balance! She is the most wonderful person in the world!

Seriously, though, George will most likely provide his input on various matters and very much remain executive on major decisions. Still, I hope that the fans refrain from saying anything negative about her or anyone else (e.g. Lucas' daughter).

I have very low hopes and expectations for the UOT on blu ray. Even if it happened, it would be a low effort appendage to a rerelease of the current versions of the films a la 2006. I won't say never, because anything is possible, but I'm not holding my breath, either.

Bingowings said:

danny_boy said: Why didn't you bash him in 1981 when he appended the Episode IV title onto Star wars for  that year's re-release?

Believe it or not some people did but I guess the bulk of us were pumped by the prospect of ten more episodes as good and maybe better than The Empire Strikes Back.

The first time I ever saw SW was back to back with Empire in April 81'---and whilst I don't remember the content of the crawl I do remember seeing the crawl!------and this is the point----the advent of home video from the early 1980's onwards has allowed an entire generation to analyse every frame of a movie like SW to the point of saturation.

SW was never designed to be seen that many times----Lucas even says as much in the DVD commentary------the prequels on the other hand---being made in an era where home video was firmly established have been created with the "pause,slo-mo and rewind" generation in mind---hence why every frame is densily packed with visual info.

danny_boy said:

Oh come on dude----Star wars was incredibly popular----that meant that  the original camera negative(OCN) was used extensively to create "new prints" from 1977 to 1981(long before any thoughts were given to preservation)

It is pretty much symptomatic of the era----the OCN of Taxi Driver, The Godfather and Jaws are  in woeful condition too------so much so that the OCN of the Godfather cannot even be passed through a pin registered mechanism anymore without falling apart(but Coppola does not get the type of vitriolic hate that is often attribued to Lucas because of it)

Dude, that's because he have taken care of the issue, these films have been given the care and passion they deserve, they are safe. When Lucas found out about the state of Star Wars, what did he do? not a restoration, that's for sure and that is a pretty big difference. If Coppola had treated The Godfather films in the same way that Lucas have treated Star Wars and its fans the last fifteen years, you would see quite frustrated comments attributed towards him. If you don't get why people are upset, then I don't know what to say, there is actually a reason behind all of this. Do you see George Lucas as a man who really cares deeply about the fans of these films?

msycamore said:

http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/06/01/whos-replacing-george-lucas-at-lucasfilm

"... passion and care that I've given the films over the years."

.....

But the passion and care is there, right?

 lucas had a reputation for completely lacking passion and care for filmmaking going back at least 30 years - for about 15 of those it was a pretty well-kept secret.

kinda perplexed about kathleen kennedy.  i thought she already had her own company with husband frank marshall?  and she was branching out to producing other films, so she wasn't just a the luckiest produce in the world who had spielberg as a director.  wonder why she would take this.  Maybe the article explains, but i refuse to read another 'interview'. 

I'd be curious if other people turned this gig down.

doesn't matter.  No OOT, expect nothing to change.  wouldn't surprise me if it ended up that was part of the deal.

msycamore said:

Do you see George Lucas as a man who really cares deeply about the fans of these films?

 Only our discretionary income.

CP3S said:

danny_boy said:

The first time I ever saw SW was back to back with Empire in April 81'---and whilst I don't remember the content of the crawl I do remember seeing the crawl!------and this is the point----the advent of home video from the early 1980's onwards has allowed an entire generation to analyse every frame of a movie like SW to the point of saturation.

SW was never designed to be seen that many times----Lucas even says as much in the DVD commentary------the prequels on the other hand---being made in an era where home video was firmly established have been created with the "pause,slo-mo and rewind" generation in mind---hence why every frame is densily packed with visual info.

This may well be some of the most retarded stuff I have ever read on this forum, and I am used to hanging out in the Off Topic section, so that is saying a lot!

I guess the truth hurts huh?

Baronlando said:

danny_boy said: the OCN of the Godfather cannot even be passed through a pin registered mechanism anymore without falling apart(but Coppola does not get the type of vitriolic hate that is often attribued to Lucas because of it)--

 

Hey, remember when Coppola ran the Godfather negative through a 90s computer in order to put Moe Greene on a cartoon dinosaur and to paste Andy Garcia's head on Abe Vigoda's body?

And I guess you don't remember this:

the first two Godfather films had sustained additional damage in the 1980s, when Paramount sent them to an optical house to make new prints. The original rolls were disassembled and then reassembled incorrectly, a cheaper but chemically damaging fill was used, and the films’ lyrical 12' and 16' dissolves were replaced with dissolves of generic length for ease of printing.

http://www.theasc.com/ac_magazine/May2008/PostFocus/page1.php 

CP3S said:

danny_boy said:

CP3S said:

danny_boy said:

The first time I ever saw SW was back to back with Empire in April 81'---and whilst I don't remember the content of the crawl I do remember seeing the crawl!------and this is the point----the advent of home video from the early 1980's onwards has allowed an entire generation to analyse every frame of a movie like SW to the point of saturation.

SW was never designed to be seen that many times----Lucas even says as much in the DVD commentary------the prequels on the other hand---being made in an era where home video was firmly established have been created with the "pause,slo-mo and rewind" generation in mind---hence why every frame is densily packed with visual info.

This may well be some of the most retarded stuff I have ever read on this forum, and I am used to hanging out in the Off Topic section, so that is saying a lot!

 

I guess the truth hurts huh?

Errr, damn, I was wrong. That as a response was the most retarded thing I have ever read on this forum. Hands down. It is a pretty elementary and cliched comeback, not to mention it doesn't even work in the context of what I said.

So you are only on-topic when you bash ol' George or his work or both!

Baronlando said:

danny_boy said:

And I guess you don't remember this:

the first two Godfather films had sustained additional damage in the 1980s, when Paramount sent them to an optical house to make new prints. The original rolls were disassembled and then reassembled incorrectly, a cheaper but chemically damaging fill was used, and the films’ lyrical 12' and 16' dissolves were replaced with dissolves of generic length 

Hey no shit, what does that have to do with anything? Some lab goon working for Paramount home video did that.   

Everything.

Where was the fan outrage between the early 1980's to 2006/7  that should have been induced by this error to one of the most influential films in american cinema?

Can't seem to find it anywhere-----it's probably because The Godfather had not been dissected frame by frame by narrow-minded "so called fans" who had/have nothing better to with their time.