George Lucas leaves Lucasfilm — Page 10

Zombie said:

And yeah, I'm willing to bet the OOT is included in that. I'm sure they're sitting on it for long-term investment reasons. Maybe the 50th anniversary, once Lucas is out of the way?

Shame; Frink will surely be long gone by that point. Maybe we could arrange for Ziggy to purchase a copy of the OOT when the time comes and leave it at Frink's graveside...

^ Nice article, zombie. Only things I disagree with are that the TPM's problems can largely be placed on CGI and that Jar Jar as a character isn't more ridiculous than Chewbacca.

The issues in the prequels ultimately fall on the script. The CGI is marvelous spectacle but it's just a hollow distraction from the writing woes. In ANH, the special effects served the story while also flexing their muscle. Plus, like that writer said, miniatures and models look and feel real, not like pixels.

Jar Jar looks AND acts like a buffoon, but I bet that if written differently he could have been received more positively. Same way that if Chewbacca were written like a mindless oaf (but physically unchanged), he would have been a completely different character and much less endearing.

I like to think of it more along the lines of George being a dad and kicking the UOT out of the house at adulthood. But the UOT found a nice home elsewhere. :)

none said:

As more tvs ship with 3D capability, eventually a network will want 3D content and guess what franchise is ready to step in to fill the void.  The Clone Wars cartoon in 3D is probably an easy jump for LFL to do as well.  Box Office numbers are a dwindling portion of LFLs profits:

http://www.wired.com/business/2012/05/tell-jabba-ive-got-his-money-star-wars-revenue-throughout-our-galaxy/

yup, mentioned it here, and you replied

in that thread: 

---------

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/star-wars-retail-infographic-showing-money-made-off-star-wars/topic/14285/

zombie84 said:

I followed a link from that wired page. Did anyone see this? It's brilliant.

 

 

http://www.wired.com/underwire/2012/05/opinion-starwars/

yup, also mentioned it here:

------

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Happy-35th-Star-Wars/post/580197/#TopicPost580197

http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Happy-35th-Star-Wars/post/579589/#TopicPost579589

also, contacted the author via email and told him

about these forums and projects.

later

-1

Fang Zei said:

Hell, even George himself said this time around that "it would be too expensive" to properly restore and remaster the OOT. I think he knows the excuse that the originals "don't exist anymore" died the moment he put out the GOUT. Not that "it's expensive" is any kind of excuse either, but at least he's not kidding us anymore: it's about money.

What always bugged me about the GOUT was how half-assed it was. If the answer is no, the OOT is never coming out again, then stick to your guns. If the OOT had never been released since 1995, I certainly wouldn't like it, but at least Lucas would have stuck to his principles. Now he just looks like a fool.

I've always maintained that what they should do is release the OOT in a big giant box, fuck you fanboy, you have to buy the SE and the PT too. There is NO PRICE I WILL NOT PAY if the OOT comes out CORRECTLY, remastered and restored properly. But Star Wars isn't a cult property, it's as mainstream as possible, and I reiterate my previous statement that most people will just buy whatever has the brand name on it. The minority don't matter, and clearly Star Wars still clicks with kids, the video games and toys still sell like crazy and they show no signs of slowing down. And unless there's something to put a big enough dent in Star Wars profits to make them think about releasing the OOT, I don't see it happening. And there isn't. I always hoped for a grassroots movement from social media or the idea of that ad in the magazines, but it's all for naught, we're just a drop of water in the ocean.

zombie84 said:

I dont really agree with his criticism of either trilogies, I was more impressed by his dose of reality: the 35th anniversary of Star Wars is really the 15th anniversary of the SE. Star Wars never had a 35th anniversary because it died at age 19.

Not even that, even though we try to forget, we all remember this fella:

Not only a weak and completely unnecessary scene but probably one of the worst CGI creations ever put on film. The current Star Wars is actually only a few months old.

That looks more like the original Jabba puppet than the '97 DigiJabba does.

Had the original scene been included in the '77 film, Declan Mulholland would probably just been dubbed by another actor. Would be nice to have the complete original deleted scene in good quality, as Ford's performance in that scene is quite good.

evan1975 said:

I didn't like that article's Hamill-bashing.  I always felt he's been wrongly maligned.  But I suppose that's for another thread.

Hamill is an amazing actor and is hugely under-rated.  I can only assume he had a lazy agent in the 80's!

I also don't understand this Hamill bashing. He managed to take really badly written dialogue ("I was going to the Toshi station to pick up some power converters!") and make it believable - something 2/3rds of the PT cast couldn't manage to do.

I must also agree that what he said in the article was a little too harsh on Hamill's acting ability, but I can sort of see where he's coming from, with the risk of being attacked now, IMO Hamill's performance in Star Wars was kind of mediocre but I definitely don't blame Hamill for it, the lines and the directing is probably the reason for most of it as he delivered a damn solid performance in Empire, truly underrated.

I also think what the writer of the article tried to convey, is that not every single element of that film was completely perfect but it worked beautifully anyway, something Lucas will never understand. The film is just becoming more and more unfinished every time he tinkers with it.

The more he tinkers with it, the more it exposes the flaws.  I've always believed that SW was a great film primarily because of the masterful editing.  The more changes, the more it upsets the original editing that turned a mish-mash of potentially corny scenes into a perfectly paced masterpiece.

I remember reading somewhere that the editors chose to edit based on the performances rather than on the original planned timings.  That may be why the performances seem so good in the original, and get gradually worse as Lucas re-edits around his ideas, rather than around the performances.

The actors were just doing what they were told.

"Faster. More Intense."

LOL.