A link to petition to name one of the stages at the Pinewood studios Cardiff after Richard Marquand

https://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/pinewood-studios-name-one-of-the-stages-at-the-new-pinewood-studios-cardiff-after-the-late-richard-marquand#share

I don't mean to be nasty but Richard Marquand??

Other than being Lucas's directorial prophylactic he didn't do much.

The Richard Burton stage would make more sense, he seemed to like the other Pinewood.

Bingowings said:

I don't mean to be nasty 

And yet you do. You could easily omit this entrance and cut to the chase.

Other than being Lucas's directorial prophylactic he didn't do much.

 1. This thread was created merely to pay homage to the director of ROTJ by giving a link to the petition, not to discuss what you personally think or not of him. There have to be lots of threads dedicated to this subject you may want to visit instead.

2. If you wanted my opinion on the whole matter of ROTJ/Marquand then I expressed it in one started for this purpose (ROTJ is the best Star Wars movie), though, I guess, I wrote too much for someone to read it from cover to cover - there're too many letters, that's forgivable (sarcasm). 

  3. If you don't want to support this petition, it's your choice. Other than that I don't see any sense to start a similar debate here. Especially, to chew over one and the same crapola coming from many years of internet gossip, various agenda-driven media sources and persons.

The Richard Burton stage would make more sense

What does Richard Burton have in common with the Star Wars? And if you think so you can start your petition too at change.org. Hope you'll succeed. Oh, and May the Force be with You!

Bingowings said:

Other than being Lucas's directorial prophylactic he didn't do much.

 Oh, that's lovely. Like other director could say.

What does Richard Burton have in common with the Star Wars? 

Richard Burton was Welsh, which is the reason some Star Wars fans are suggesting Marquand who was Welsh for a name memorial at the new Pinewood studio in Cardiff which in Wales.

Think it through.

Other than his work on Jedi what work of major significance did Marquand do?

Burton was a theatrical and cinematic giant, with a huge body of work behind him many of which were filmed at Pinewood.

It's well known that Richard was hired because he would not make waves, would be on budget on schedule and act as yes man to Lucas' production requirements.

When Lucas made the PT his reputation fell through the floor, when Jedi was getting criticism for things like the Ewoks it was Richard who diverted much of the attention away from George. Ergo my description.

 This thread was created merely to pay homage to the director of ROTJ by giving a link to the petition, not to discuss what you personally think or not of him. There have to be lots of threads dedicated to this subject you may want to visit instead.

You made a thread on a DISCUSSION BOARD not a shrine site. If you wish there to be no discussion just a notification there are lots of sites (like Twitter or Youtube) where you can make an announcement and block discussion.

I started a thread over on the off topic section which has links to petitions.

I fully expect some people to discuss the topics and express their opinions on the petition subjects. That's what these boards are for.

Off-topic section? I overlooked this, had I known I would've started it there. My mistake.

Bingowings said

 It's well known that Richard was hired because he would not make waves, would be on budget on schedule and act as yes man to Lucas' production requirements.

It seems to me, you're oversimplifying the whole issue and since I presume you have read Rinzler's "Making of Jedi" - which by the way I find not sufficient regarding Marquand's actual work and directing methods unlike he did that with Kershner, resurrecting Arnold's account - it's strange to hear such words.  

First of all, I'm embarrassed by such speech patterns as "it's well known", "it's considered"... By who, would be my question? And, correct me if I'm mistaken but there was a time when "it was well known that the Earth is flat and square, reshored by 4 whales (elephants)" etc. etc. Personally I try to avoid such cliches and have cultivated in me a strong distrust for any kind of statements that begin with the words "it's well-known" because I think it automatically leads to mob thinking rather than encourages critical mind. "It's well-known" = "it's unknown".

Second, what is "would not make waves"? What "waves"?

Third, your claim combines some elements that may be considered as reflecting objective reality with either misunderstood or misinterpreted ones: the latters are represented by your words "he was hired because he... would be on budget, on schedule". True. Is it so negative in the eyes of yours? Do you think, this made Marquand unique in this case? Considering Lucas' criteria for looking for a new director any of them would be forced to obey this requirement, be it Hitchcoke, Spielberg or Linch, from this perspective any could became "a yes-man" if he agreed to helm the movie. But "to consider the budget" isn't synonymous with "dancing attendance to Lucas". 

Fourth, Marquand was chosen from a very long list and was one of two remaining candidates. There were two prime reasons Lucas decided to go with him:

1. Lucas was impressed with his artistic vision of his own films,  particularly with "Needle of the eye", his professional skills and his human attitude. According to Kasdan Lucas needed different kind of person than Kersh and not because he wanted more of control (as Kurtz suggests), but because 3rd installment was to be relief and Marquand had lighter view of the world than Kersh. [By the way, many tend to forget that a director depends not entirely on himself, his own wishes but on screenwriter as well and the tonal scale of the trilogy was envisioned in advance by Lucas and Kasdan (light-dark-light) and even not by Kershner or Marquand or whoever would direct]. That was the key issue.  

2. Linch's refusal to direct ROTJ.

And that's it. Not for "he's a perfect candidate to be my puppet".

Fifth, all this gets sharper if we recall Lucas' own despisal for directing and whatever you may think of Marquand but he at least loved to work with actors. Hammill liked his style more than Kershner's, by the way; Lucas was mainly second unit director. The most important part of directing actors belonged to Marquand, not Lucas. Whenever on the set, we always hear and see Marquand. Also many ignore the ultimate condition under which Marquand agreed to work on Jedi: close contact with Lucas. The nature of their relations was kind of collaboration, not of knuckle-down. And you know, you may disagree, since it's purely subjective, but after watching his other movies I tend to observe some similarity between them and ROTJ, and indeed there's some romantic  operatic smell, camerawork he spoke of, that could be brought to by Marquand. Apart from that let's not pass by the fact that thank to him we saw Yoda dying on- and not off-screen. 

Other than his work on Jedi what work of major significance did Marquand do? 

Burton was a theatrical and cinematic giant, with a huge body of work behind him many of which were filmed at Pinewood.

You forget one very significant aspect of the whole issue: Marquand died at the age of 49. We'll never know how his career would have succeeded, however he displayed his talent and individuality enough to expect high-promising future.  I personally like his movies he did around the time very much and still find a pleasure to rewatch them many times. Aside "Needle", "Jagged Edge", "Until September" are remarkable movies enough to remember and to resonate with.

  Maybe, Burton deserved more of this honor than Marquand, though I don't pay much attention to such formalities Being-Within-Self(awards, tributes, etc): the only honor that any artist deserves is to be in the memory of people. But there's a human aspect, a very subjective one that is I'm a SW admirer (forgive me if I dislike "a fan") and naturally am sentimental about many things and people related to it, so I din't find anything abnormal about the fact that SW fans want one of the leading men, who helped to create the trilogy, to be honored in some way.

When Lucas made the PT his reputation fell through the floor, when Jedi was getting criticism for things like the Ewoks it was Richard who diverted much of the attention away from George. 

Do you think seriously that Lucas planned to hire some man just to cover his ass? C'mon!  Since when Lucas was so preoccupied to sustain his public credit?? From what I've read he has always had and edge on criticism and it's been the main leit-motif of his interviews. That's why I think this statement fails.

Marquand died at the age of 49, which is an awfully young age to die but most directors who are going to make a mark do it by then.

Herzog, Allen, Spielberg, Kubrick, Coppola, Truffaut, Polanski, De Palma etc had all had significant success in their 30's.

Hitchcock and Bergman didn't get their big hits until their 50s but they too had been astonishingly prolific and accomplished long before that.

Marquand was a safe pair of hands, a journeyman director after Kirsh and his 'artistic' over-budgetness.

And yes Lucas was once concerned with what people thought of his work.

He was notoriously frustrated by what he saw as flaws in the first film, even when it was a hit.

He was winding down the series that made him famous and solidifying an Empire of his own (while going through a messy marital situation).

The last thing he needed was A) someone letting art get in the way of delivering his contractual obligation movie on schedule without having to go cap in hand to Fox or the banks again B) not getting his name attached to a critical and commercial flop while setting up the ranch.

By AOTC Lucas stopped caring what those twerps had to say.

Richard seemed to be a nice guy but I'm pretty sure there are Welsh film makers, actors, technicians who deserve an honor such as this one before him.

I love Star Wars too but if I were to create a Termuera Morrison stage in New Zealand it wouldn't be for his Star Wars work.

Soundstages of this type don't get christened often in the UK (especially not in Wales). Angharad Rees died more recently and probably had more of an impact than Marquand. Like Richard she was born in the city and like Burton filmed at Pinewood.

Perhaps there are hundreds of the things in Pennsylvania (enough for one to be named after Kersh over all those other famous film guys and gals there).

Mavericks said:

Bingowings said:

I don't mean to be nasty 

And yet you do. You could easily omit this entrance and cut to the chase.

Thanks for the link.  Interesting for sure.

As for the comments, you will find that this happens a lot here.  This is an open forum but most every forum like this will have groups of people that don't necessarily consider tact as something they need to show, at least every once in awhile even, because it's not in the list of rules.  For some, it's just the nature of their personality.

Either way, don't sweat it. 

Jetrell Fo said:

Mavericks said:

Bingowings said:

I don't mean to be nasty 

And yet you do. You could easily omit this entrance and cut to the chase.

Thanks for the link.  Interesting for sure.

As for the comments, you will find that this happens a lot here.  This is an open forum but most every forum like this will have groups of people that don't necessarily consider tact as something they need to show, at least every once in awhile even, because it's not in the list of rules.  For some, it's just the nature of their personality.

Either way, don't sweat it. 

 ^THIS.

Jetrell Fo said:

As for the comments, you will find that this happens a lot here.  This is an open forum but most every forum like this will have groups of people that don't necessarily consider tact as something they need to show, at least every once in awhile even, because it's not in the list of rules.  For some, it's just the nature of their personality.

Bingowings said:

 This thread was created merely to pay homage to the director of ROTJ by giving a link to the petition, not to discuss what you personally think or not of him. There have to be lots of threads dedicated to this subject you may want to visit instead.

You made a thread on a DISCUSSION BOARD not a shrine site. If you wish there to be no discussion just a notification there are lots of sites (like Twitter or Youtube) where you can make an announcement and block discussion.

I started a thread over on the off topic section which has links to petitions.

I fully expect some people to discuss the topics and express their opinions on the petition subjects. That's what these boards are for.

 Wow, Bingowings was really being a dick wasn't he?  We should make this sort of thing (discussion) against the rules.

Considering Pinewood's association with Bond the Burly Chassis stage would make even more sense.

If you were going to start naming Pinewood buildings after people, wouldn't people connected to Bond be first in line?  Nothing against Marquand.

EDIT:  Whoops, didn't see that Bingowings beat me to that.

Internet denizen #47: Overly Defensive Internet Guy

Anchorhead, "in a nutshell" doesn't equivalent to "accurate", "comprehensive".

I repeate once again: when I dropped the link I didn't consider it to be looked upon in the deserved/non-deserved fashion. I don't mind credentials at all, I don't watch all these Baftas, Oscars, Nobels etc. My intention was as stated: to make an attempt to draw attention on the site dedicated to the ORIGINAL TRILOGY on the part of members of this community to an opportunity to pay tribute in some minimal way to the man who directed one of the parts of the beloved Saga purely of human considerations. Everyone is free to sign or NOT this petition, that's all. I would sign alike petition regarding any former SW alumni. 

Bingowings said:

Marquand died at the age of 49, which is an awfully young age to die but most directors who are going to make a mark do it by then.

Herzog, Allen, Spielberg, Kubrick, Coppola, Truffaut, Polanski, De Palma etc had all had significant success in their 30's.

Hitchcock and Bergman didn't get their big hits until their 50s but they too had been astonishingly prolific and accomplished long before that.

Richard seemed to be a nice guy but I'm pretty sure there are Welsh film makers, actors, technicians who deserve an honor such as this one before him.

To each his own. Everyone has its own destiny. There's no and can not be the formula of success. But what I do know is that some artists, who later gained world-wide acknowledgement, began their careers relatively lately and came from different backgrounds. I don't want to go through a multitude of other directors and actors of theater and cinema, but I'll take as an example another SW director: Irvin Kershner. His first full-length motion picture came when he was in his 30s (it means over 30). He'd done much photographing, painting, playing music. Marquand booted up his career as that of an actor and continued  going to direct on TV. Both Marquand and Kershner were semi-obscure for large audiences before SW. You could say that Kershner had done more movies (as obviously your lines above imply), but I disagree with this approach by several reasons:

- I think mastery is matter of quality, not quantity. There're a number of examples from all branches of art that illustrate this. 

- Kersh was of older generation than Marquand and, naturally, started his way earlier. In most ways the careers of both had been developing at equal speeds with Kersher slightly ahead: by the age of 45 (when he became involved with SW) Marquand had done 4 movies (2 TV from which 1 was documentary) plus 4 other TV projects to count in, participating as producer and writer, Kersher by the similar age had done 7 full-length movies. The most difficult is what variable we should introduce to measure such entity as "experience"? Is there such need at all? Maybe some critics need but I doubt the directors do. Any experience - bad or good, small or large - contributes to formation of directorial skills. What is better 7 or 4? Of course 7. Does this assume that one who did 4 motion pictures plus other credits is a worse director than one who did 7 motion pictures? I don't know, depends on how one who directed 4 approved himself and the same applies to the other guy and it's important what the merits every of those movies had. Also it depends on what works we tend to remember and associate a director most often with: speaking of Kersh (pre-Empire) I can recall "A fine madness" and "The eyes of Laura Mars" and Marquand (pre-Jedi) evokes "Needle of the eye" and "The Legacy". And if I were fan of the Beatles then I would add "The Beatles" doc (I'm more into metal, so..). However we shouldn't be limited to SW and should move past it: Kershner got involved with 2 block-busters and Marquand had done 3 little-budget movies. It should be noticed, however, that while Kershner worked on action movies, Marquand went onto life-drama sort of things that dealt with personal emotions, psychology and its speaks volumes about his predilections that were far from "faster, more intense!": that's why, though SW had a lots of things about action, the decision to hire Marquand (taking into account the situation Lucas faced at that time) for the final chapter was as good as to hire Kersh for the middle one. It lets me to conclude to the highest degree of probability that if Lucas did take on Jedi for real, then we had it "faster and more intense" even with Kasdan at the table. Besides, from what I read I can make an impression that Marquand was under much less favorable conditions and not because he hadn’t had experience with blockbusters, but  because budget and timeline restrictions: I’m far from filmmaking professionally but if I were then the only thing that would cause me a lot of tension would be these requirements. Artist needs  psychological freedom. Kershner had it but Marquand had less of it. As everyone in Lucas company and the latter is on Lucas‘ conscience. One should also not forget that Kershner’s career ended by 1990 meanwhile Marquand’s career had been gaining momentum (his last film «Heirs» was released posthumously). Who knows maybe 90s and 2000s would see the high noon for him? Maybe not? By the way, one of the greatest talents of camera Alan Hume liked Marquand very much, teamed up with him on several subsequent projects and was looking forward to work with him on even more of these. 

Marquand was a safe pair of hands, a journeyman director after Kirsh and his 'artistic' over-budgetness.

First of all, not «Kirsh», but Kersh. Second, in the forefront of mass Empire idolatry erupted later with advent of Internet and subsequent manipulation with public opinion on the part of media in favor of this movie that led to birth of some urban myths that are still strong, people forgot (or maybe never knew) what the press of the era figured out (and very well) about who’s who in Lucas’ kingdom, namely, that both Kershner and Marquand whatever good or bad they were, used to be, in your words, «journeyman directors», tools of Lucas and interpreters of the Kasdan’s script. And let me remind you that none other than Lucas said the golden words: «there are three rules in the real estate business:location, location, location; and three rules in the movie business:script, script, script.» A director doesn’t operate in an open vacuum: he collaborates with a scriptwriter or, to be more precise, fulfills a written script.  I was astonished when read that after Brackett completed the awful and silly 1st draft, Lucas was forced to write the 2nd one by himself (!!!) and it already contained many key elements as well as plot twists and style of some dialogues that entered the final movie with Kasdan reworking the rest of dialogues and omitting some scenes. Considering Lucas problems with writing it looks like a giant accomplishment! You may dislike that but it seems in composing structure of Empire we now have pleasure to watch  Lucas and Kasdan held more important position than Kershner. Interestingly, everybody mentions him more frequently than Larry Kasdan, who determined the tone of Empire and deserved his fame no less than Kersh if not more. And with all Kershner’s talent, expertise, wisdom and vision, but if the script was shitty so would be the movie and I doubt he would be able to save the day. Kersh could, of course, change some minor dialogue (Marquand also did this, by the way) - that’s what he did eventually, but Kersh couldn’t write the entire script. Hell, maybe we should start to worship John Williams - he was the guy who gave us Imperial March, earlier  - the crawl music, Binary Sunset, Throne Room themes and music in SW is on the same equality with visuals as in opera, so maybe John Williams is the true hero? Or maybe we should do the same regarding everyone from ILM, beginning with Jim Bloom? Who’s standing in queue else - Peter Suschitzky? Frank Oz - thank to him Yoda gained his remarkable character and who’s gonna claim that such prominent portrayal could be delivered by someone other? Maybe Frank Oz was true discovery and the piece de resistance of ESB?

So, let’s come to earth and be more realistic. I understand all this «the best in the series», «the greatest director» sentimental dithyrambs but let’s stay objective. Filmmaking is a teamwork.

And yes Lucas was once concerned with what people thought of his work.

By AOTC Lucas stopped caring what those twerps had to say.

I was talking not about «people», I was talking exactly about critics. But anyway, I’m throwed aback! Where did you get this info from to calculate exactly that «Lucas stopped...» just by AOTC (2002)?  I remember reading an interview with him on the opening day of the first release of TPM in London (1999) (might be mistaken) in which he said he didn’t care of what critics were saying, that the prime criteria for him were box office receipts! So, continuing to pull the term back we could reach the true day Z, I think (one more sarcasm). And maybe someday we will realize that this day never existed as didn’t the sources to provide verified support for opposite claims, the sources I’ve never come across. 

He was notoriously frustrated by what he saw as flaws in the first film, even when it was a hit.

He was winding down the series that made him famous and solidifying an Empire of his own (while going through a messy marital situation).

So???

I love Star Wars too but if I were to create a Termuera Morrison stage in New Zealand it wouldn't be for his Star Wars work.

Well, Marquand played much more significant part in making a SW movie than Morrison and his Jango Fett which I never cared of anyway and...we’re talking about the OT, not the PT here, right?

Your subjective opinion on Morrison's Star Wars significance has the same in utility as my subjective opinion on Marquand's Star Wars significance.

Sure quality over quantity any day but as much as I like Star Wars is any Marquand film up there with the Shirley's greatest hits?

Is any Marquand film as good as Morrison's performance in Once Were Warriors?

Bingowings said:

Your subjective opinion on Morrison's Star Wars significance has the same in utility as my subjective opinion on Marquand's Star Wars significance.

Exactly. Did I say something that would imply opposite? To each his own.

Sure quality over quantity any day but as much as I like Star Wars is any Marquand film up there with the Shirley's greatest hits?

Is any Marquand film as good as Morrison's performance in Once Were Warriors?

Short answer: it's a matter of taste.

Longer answer: once again, your thinking style derives from supposition that there some established, sacrosanct criteria exists, sort of paper patterns given by the Heaven once and for all. It's illusion. It's all up to your likes and dislikes: I watched Once We Were Warriors but would never watch it again. I found it unimpressive. But that doesn't mean it's bad, maybe it's quite contrary. Again, how many people out there who are able to recognize: "I don't like it, but it's good"? Rather than that you're going to hear "I don't like it and hence it's bad".

Good and bad is all subjective. Especially in art which is a product of personal psycho-emotional (= subjective) experience. It's all not about some ephemeral "generally" accepted rules of beauty, it's about how every single "recipient" reacts to this product. I don't know even who that Shirley is, but I've watched many other movies for sure and my inner aesthetical sense of what is "good" and "bad" for me personally has fleshed out my taste and selected what types of movies (music, painting, literature) I prefer. If to return to Marquand then my inner aesthetical sense gave thumb up. In the case of Once We Were Warriors, Space Odissey 2001 , it gave thumb down. Quit simple if you reject figmental "standards". I watch movie=>I like it=>good movie.

You are making my case for me you do realise this?

Using the reasoning you deploy you must recognise that not everyone sees ROTJ or its director the same way you do so it makes sense that not everyone is going to see the merit in signing the petition. This becomes a source of debate which is why your attempts to close down the debate are retromingent on a discussion forum.

Mavericks said:

I repeate once again: when I dropped the link I didn't consider it to be looked upon in the deserved/non-deserved fashion. I don't mind credentials at all, I don't watch all these Baftas, Oscars, Nobels etc. My intention was as stated: to make an attempt to draw attention on the site dedicated to the ORIGINAL TRILOGY on the part of members of this community to an opportunity to pay tribute in some minimal way to the man who directed one of the parts of the beloved Saga purely of human considerations. Everyone is free to sign or NOT this petition, that's all. I would sign alike petition regarding any former SW alumni. 

 Having not read the rest of your post, I will sign the petition for $10.

Bingowings said:

retromingent

 I'm not afraid to admit I had to look this up.  I was not disappointed.

TV's Frink said:

Bingowings said:

retromingent

 I'm not afraid to admit I had to look this up.  I was not disappointed.

 I use the word too much...it's too good.