Sign In

Expecting too much?

Author
Time
I was thinking this morning that maybe I have been too hard on Lucas. The more I analyze his personality traits, the more I think that perhaps he was simply in over his head in making the special editions and the prequel trilogy and still doesn't realize it nor ever want to realize it. Maybe he truly just can't see what he's doing to the entertainment franchise he helped create. Maybe he actually doesn't know better.

It seems like, in everything that Lucas has done with Star Wars, he has had a million different logical approaches that all seem to contradict each other. He wants it be a great dramatic epic and a corny adventure film at the same time. He wants it to be a comedic tale told from a droid duo's point of view and a serious mythological tale touching upon ethics and spirituality at the same time. He can't even keep his sensibilities straight when it comes to a given character's motivations or history. This speaks to a mind that is very messy and unorganized.

It's like, at every turn, he comes up with a new idea or a new approach and adds it into the mix because that appeals to his fancy at that given moment. He expresses no problems with the contradicting concepts and feelings or any of the hanging threads he creates. It’s as if he just doesn't care about that sort of thing. Perhaps George just has personality traits that aren't suited to creating an intricately massive piece of art, and if that's the case, then who am I to level personal criticisms at a man for his honest mistakes? We all have deficiencies after all.

Now, I still believe that George Lucas is greedy, and values his money over his art, which is wrong, and I also believe he is callously self-centered and stubborn. But, beyond these traits, from now on I believe I'll go easier on George as a person.

George Lucas definitely has artistic skills, but his open-ended mind is too chaotic and I suppose he just doesn't know when to quit.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
I simply can't agree with that. Oh, I have no problem laying off George as a person. But as an artist and a businessman, I continue to hold him in complete contempt. Not possessing the type of mind to adequately create the art that so much intense effort and money went into ... well, there's no excuse for that on an artistic or business level.

If he had failed at a finger painting, I could willingly sluff it off as the artist having a bad day, or not the type of mind to dabble in digit art. But multi-million dollar motion pictures involving countless manhours of thousands of artisans, as follow-ups or purported enhancements to some of the most world-renowned and near-universally-beloved films ever created .... well, I cannot and will not excuse a sloppy mind for botching that so horribly.

It's his right to do it, of course. But just because a thing can be done doesn't mean it necessarily should be done. Many a man has failed to make that distinction. But rather than give George a pass for succumbing to what so many before him have succumbed to, I hold him in the same disdain as I do those whom he will join in the 13th circle of despicably bad judgment hell.


.
Author
Time
Its because he goes back and changes it so much. Star Wars was a lighthearted adventure film, nothing more. ESB turned the series into a deep, mythological fantasy film for adults. ROTJ turned it into a poignant tale of redemption. And in each film he used as an opportunity to indulge in one of his fantasys, eccintricities and tastes (i.e. interconnected epic, primitives versus technology, pirate battles, artificial characters, visual tone poems). The Lucas that made ROTJ was not the same Lucas that made ANH. And in TPM he was a completely different person, so the PT is completely and utterly different in its style and tastes because Lucas was different. But because he was making all of these as one connected tale he was forced to assert and present them as continuous and consistent, even though the material and content was very inconsistent. Had he made them each as their own self-contained series or film this problem wouldn't exist, but he tried this in 1987 with Willow and it failed--so rather than develop new material he allowed himself to experiment and indulge his various sensibilities by selling the material as "Star Wars." To complicate matters, he had inadvertently created a modern mythology and a cultural phenomena, which he clearly did not intend nor want any part of (who would?). Fans demanded more and if he didn't then he would be publicly hounded (ie what happened from 1984-1992, as well as now with the OOT) and so he gave in--its just that he could not stay in the same bubble forever, so even if he said he was making films with the Star Wars title, inevitably he was a different man inside and thus the films were not the same, nor completely consistent--I don't even think he notices, let alone cares. Its too hard to be objective when you are so close to the material. Star Wars has, unfortunately for him, become his life, and he has been cursed with tunnel vision ever since 1980, as inevitably happens.

The Secret History of Star Wars -- now available on Amazon.com!

"When George went back and put new creatures into the original Star Wars, I find that disturbing. It’s a revision of history. That bothers me."

--James Cameron, Entertainment Weekly, April 2010

Author
Time
I really don't mind that each installment has different tones or meets a different need. After all, like zombie just said, the original trilogy does that, and each of them are quite good in their own ways. So it can be done successfully. Television does that every week. It's really just the "now" attitude that he has. Whatever mindset of the week he has is what everything he's ever done has to be. Sometimes that manifests itself simply in the way he talks about things (i.e. I always meant this scene to be perceived this way...) even though it's obvious he's talking out of his ass. Sometimes it manifests itself in him actually going back to old material and changing it to fit his new viewpoint rather than accept that he's changed and deal with it.

There is no lingerie in space...

C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don't exist... then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks... and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming... Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.

Author
Time
Originally posted by: Obi Jeewhyen
I simply can't agree with that. Oh, I have no problem laying off George as a person. But as an artist and a businessman, I continue to hold him in complete contempt. Not possessing the type of mind to adequately create the art that so much intense effort and money went into ... well, there's no excuse for that on an artistic or business level.

Yeah, I don't really mean to excuse that. He's a very arrogant person to weild his power the way that he does. I'll agree to criticize him on that level. But, that still doesn't mean that some of his artistic mistakes and problems are not honest on his part. He might actually think that what he is making is good. He certainly has enough idiots worshipping him, and with his arrogance in the way it isn't hard to imagine that he'd lose perspective.


Originally posted by: zombie84
Had he made them each as their own self-contained series or film this problem wouldn't exist, but he tried this in 1987 with Willow and it failed--so rather than develop new material he allowed himself to experiment and indulge his various sensibilities by selling the material as "Star Wars."


Very good point. Again, I think that problem goes back to his greed. He purposely kept changing one franchise because he knew he could keep using its popularity for material gain. I'll criticize him there any day.


Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape
It's really just the "now" attitude that he has. Whatever mindset of the week he has is what everything he's ever done has to be. Sometimes that manifests itself simply in the way he talks about things (i.e. I always meant this scene to be perceived this way...) even though it's obvious he's talking out of his ass. Sometimes it manifests itself in him actually going back to old material and changing it to fit his new viewpoint rather than accept that he's changed and deal with it.


Good way to put it. He goes too far. But, I believe that's because his mind just isn't sufficiently rigid enough to remain faithful to certain concepts. He accepts and rejects ideas far too easily. What we have left is headache of chaotic elements.

(Perhaps that's why Gary Kurtz had a falling out with Lucas, when Lucas changed his mind too much from what had been previously agreed to.)

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
It's not so much that he changes his mind. I mean, that happens in the creation of fiction all the time, and it's really quite interesting to see how a story can evolve away from what you originally intended it to be. But he either refuses to believe it ever changed or tries to convince us by changing his movies that it never changed. It was always meant to be this way, and anything that differs from that is just either the technology of the time or the crappy studio system that prevented him from doing it the way he wanted it.

There is no lingerie in space...

C3PX said: Gaffer is like that hot girl in high school that you think you have a chance with even though she is way out of your league because she is sweet and not a stuck up bitch who pretends you don't exist... then one day you spot her making out with some skinny twerp, only on second glance you realize it is the goth girl who always sits in the back of class; at that moment it dawns on you why she is never seen hanging off the arm of any of the jocks... and you realize, damn, she really is unobtainable after all. Not that that is going to stop you from dreaming... Only in this case, Gaffer is actually a guy.

Author
Time
George Lucas has isolated himself to a point where he can no longer see the forest for the trees. All artists at some point get too close to their art, and lose objectivity. That is why it's so important for creative people to get feedback from others in order to gain perspective.

Since George Lucas now insists on surrounding himself with ass-kissing, brown-nosing yes-men, his movies now suck.

Author
Time
Yeah, its too bad that Lucas is too insecure to take honest criticism.

Originally posted by: Gaffer Tape
It's not so much that he changes his mind. I mean, that happens in the creation of fiction all the time, and it's really quite interesting to see how a story can evolve away from what you originally intended it to be. But he either refuses to believe it ever changed or tries to convince us by changing his movies that it never changed. It was always meant to be this way, and anything that differs from that is just either the technology of the time or the crappy studio system that prevented him from doing it the way he wanted it.


I know. You'd think he'd admit the truth of everything and not act like some infallible god. He's sloppy-minded person however, and perhaps he can't actually see his own hypocrisy and lies with clarity. It's possible that he actually believes his own bullshit. Hmm, then again, some of his nonsense is way too extreme for that, and he'd have to actually be crazy if he was not a liar. I don't know.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005

Author
Time
Since George Lucas now insists on surrounding himself with ass-kissing, brown-nosing yes-men, his movies now suck.


Rick McCallum, you mean?

As long as he isn't hurting anyone, I have no problem with George as a person, by and large. But his decisions to disregard his fans repeatedly are a reflection of him in some ways. I really don't have a problem with George per se. I wish him a long, happy, healthy life. I just want properly restored OOT DVDs.

“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.”

Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death

Author
Time
My personal conviction is that he should have stuck to writing the story and then passing that on to a screenwriter (or screenwriters) to develop.
Don't you call me a mindless philosopher...!
Author
Time
Not possessing the type of mind to adequately create the art that so much intense effort and money went into ... well, there's no excuse for that on an artistic or business level.


If he didn’t “possess the mind” they why are people still talking about SW 30 years later? Was ANH a fluke? Did he get lucky?

He didn’t possess the mind to create the art that you wanted to see. That’s it. Disagree with his choices all you want, but he made the movie he wanted to make. Some folks didn’t like it, some did. But you not liking the SE or the prequels doesn’t make the artist inadequate.

Casino wasn’t as good as Goodfellas. Is Scorsese an inadequate artist? I wanted Casino to be as good as Goodfellas and it wasn’t, should I hold him in “complete contempt” because of his inability to entertain me as much as he did before? Did Orson Welles ever top Citizen Kane? Did Ridley Scott top Alien? Are they inadequate too?

And on a business level… I’d say the SE and the Prequels worked out just fine… the hundreds of millions of dollars they made seem to contradict your poor LFL business analysis.




"Among many things I have to be thankful for are you, the fans. I know that some of you haven't liked every single thing that I've done with the saga, and that you have a strong sense of ownership over all things Star Wars. But take that passion and devotion and channel it into a creative project of your own."
-George Lucas
Author
Time
Originally posted by: JediRandy
Not possessing the type of mind to adequately create the art that so much intense effort and money went into ... well, there's no excuse for that on an artistic or business level.


If he didn’t “possess the mind” they why are people still talking about SW 30 years later? Was ANH a fluke? Did he get lucky?

He didn’t possess the mind to create the art that you wanted to see. That’s it. Disagree with his choices all you want, but he made the movie he wanted to make. Some folks didn’t like it, some did. But you not liking the SE or the prequels doesn’t make the artist inadequate.

Casino wasn’t as good as Goodfellas. Is Scorsese an inadequate artist? I wanted Casino to be as good as Goodfellas and it wasn’t, should I hold him in “complete contempt” because of his inability to entertain me as much as he did before? Did Orson Welles ever top Citizen Kane? Did Ridley Scott top Alien? Are they inadequate too?

And on a business level… I’d say the SE and the Prequels worked out just fine… the hundreds of millions of dollars they made seem to contradict your poor LFL business analysis.


No one is disputing that they made a lot of money. But notice: if Casino doesn't meet my expectations, I can watch a high-quality version of Goodfellas in crisp, anamporhic widescreen taken from a hight quality master. If I don't like Welles's or Scott's work after the mentioned films, then I can just watch Alien and Citizen Kane again. But unless I watch a VHS tape, a laserdisc, or a subsandard DVD transfer, I cannot watch Star Wars, The Empire Strikes Back, and Return of the Jedi, and by that I mean the films released in 1977, 1980, and 1983. If I don't like the prequels or the SEs, you're saying that I shouldn't buy them, which is fine. But I don't have any other choice. Scorcese, Welles, and Scott have all given their viewers acceptible choice between the versions of their films. Lucas continually insults the fans who have made him rich. No one is denying the prequels or the SEs. Many people here do not like them, but there's nothing that we can do about that. But we cannot (not won't, can't) go and watch the OOT in high quality. Lucas continues to insist that it does not exist, when millions of people love it. I really don't care what he does to the films. I really don't. I want to sit down in my basement and watch the original theatrical version of Star Wars, The Empire Strikes Back, and Return of the Jedi in high quality. I don't have anything against Lucas per se. I'm not denying him his vision. I just want the originals to watch in high quailty. Just release them. After that, it doesn't matter. Oh, and not to be a smart aleck, but Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers: The Movie make millions of dollars too. That doesn't make it a good movie. It doesn't mean that hold Brian Spicer in contempt. I can just choose to watch something else. If I don't like The Phantom Menace, I can't go watch the OOT in high-quality. That's all that there is to it. I'm not insulting Lucas. As long as he's not hurting anyone, he's free to do whatever he wants. I just want a good OOT. Until I get that, I won't be satisfied with his actions.

“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.”

Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death

Author
Time
Furthermore, if Scorcese and Scott had gone on to make only pure crap after their earlier triumphs, I would hold them in the same artistic and business disdain I hold Lucas.

And yes, it's my mere opinion that the prequels suck. That's what we express around here, our opinions.


And yeah, the prequels made a ton of money. But perhaps there would have been a few hundred thousand less Yoda Pepsi cans left over if the films had actually been well-received as opposed to preordainly viewed. (In other words, even more money to be made if the films had actually been good. Funny how almost everyone saw them, but almost everyone also hated them. Yet saw the next one and the next, and hated them all. And I use purely anectodal evidence for my claim of "almost everyone.")

Then again, perhaps it was capitalist genius to put the Star Wars names on films that otherwise would have sunk like a stone. I don't exactly fault George for this. Who among us could resist packaging something in such a way that would guaranty movie-admission paid by every living, breathing soul on earth?


.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: Mike O
Originally posted by: JediRandy
Not possessing the type of mind to adequately create the art that so much intense effort and money went into ... well, there's no excuse for that on an artistic or business level.

If he didn’t “possess the mind” they why are people still talking about SW 30 years later? Was ANH a fluke? Did he get lucky?

He didn’t possess the mind to create the art that you wanted to see. That’s it. Disagree with his choices all you want, but he made the movie he wanted to make. Some folks didn’t like it, some did. But you not liking the SE or the prequels doesn’t make the artist inadequate.

Casino wasn’t as good as Goodfellas. Is Scorsese an inadequate artist? I wanted Casino to be as good as Goodfellas and it wasn’t, should I hold him in “complete contempt” because of his inability to entertain me as much as he did before? Did Orson Welles ever top Citizen Kane? Did Ridley Scott top Alien? Are they inadequate too?

And on a business level… I’d say the SE and the Prequels worked out just fine… the hundreds of millions of dollars they made seem to contradict your poor LFL business analysis.

No one is disputing that they made a lot of money. But notice: if Casino doesn't meet my expectations, I can watch a high-quality version of Goodfellas in crisp, anamporhic widescreen taken from a hight quality master. If I don't like Welles's or Scott's work after the mentioned films, then I can just watch Alien and Citizen Kane again. But unless I watch a VHS tape, a laserdisc, or a subsandard DVD transfer, I cannot watch Star Wars, The Empire Strikes Back, and Return of the Jedi, and by that I mean the films released in 1977, 1980, and 1983. If I don't like the prequels or the SEs, you're saying that I shouldn't buy them, which is fine. But I don't have any other choice. Scorcese, Welles, and Scott have all given their viewers acceptible choice between the versions of their films. Lucas continually insults the fans who have made him rich. No one is denying the prequels or the SEs. Many people here do not like them, but there's nothing that we can do about that. But we cannot (not won't, can't) go and watch the OOT in high quality. Lucas continues to insist that it does not exist, when millions of people love it. I really don't care what he does to the films. I really don't. I want to sit down in my basement and watch the original theatrical version of Star Wars, The Empire Strikes Back, and Return of the Jedi in high quality. I don't have anything against Lucas per se. I'm not denying him his vision. I just want the originals to watch in high quailty. Just release them. After that, it doesn't matter. Oh, and not to be a smart aleck, but Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers: The Movie make millions of dollars too. That doesn't make it a good movie. It doesn't mean that hold Brian Spicer in contempt. I can just choose to watch something else. If I don't like The Phantom Menace, I can't go watch the OOT in high-quality. That's all that there is to it. I'm not insulting Lucas. As long as he's not hurting anyone, he's free to do whatever he wants. I just want a good OOT. Until I get that, I won't be satisfied with his actions.


No one is disputing that they made a lot of money.

there's no excuse for that on an artistic or business level.


Business means money, no? Call GL a poor filmmaker, director, etc.... but to call him a bad buisnessman is silly. He's a billionaire who made his money through his movies during a time when directors couldn't even dream of making billions. Don't let your distaste for the SE cloud the obvious.

And I totally understand your desire to want a high quality OOT DVD. The comment I commented on, didn't seem to be about that. There was nothing about DVD quality, etc.

His statement was about GL's inadequacy as an artist. He doesn’t possess the type of mind to adequately create the art”. A statement I think is total rubbish.



Furthermore, if Scorcese and Scott had gone on to make only pure crap after their earlier triumphs, I would hold them in the same artistic and business disdain I hold Lucas.

And yes, it's my mere opinion that the prequels suck. That's what we express around here, our opinions.

And yeah, the prequels made a ton of money. But perhaps there would have been a few hundred thousand less Yoda Pepsi cans left over if the films had actually been well-received as opposed to preordainly viewed. (In other words, even more money to be made if the films had actually been good. Funny how almost everyone saw them, but almost everyone also hated them. Yet saw the next one and the next, and hated them all. And I use purely anectodal evidence for my claim of "almost everyone.")

Then again, perhaps it was capitalist genius to put the Star Wars names on films that otherwise would have sunk like a stone. I don't exactly fault George for this. Who among us could resist packaging something in such a way that would guaranty movie-admission paid by every living, breathing soul on earth?


I'm expressing my opinons too... only they contradict yours. It's more fun to discuss differing opinions, IMO.

I'd comment on the rest of your conjecture, but since you had no reply to my statement... I'll wait until you try something better than the standard "The Prequels sucked" fare.

"Among many things I have to be thankful for are you, the fans. I know that some of you haven't liked every single thing that I've done with the saga, and that you have a strong sense of ownership over all things Star Wars. But take that passion and devotion and channel it into a creative project of your own."
-George Lucas
Author
Time
Furthermore, if Scorcese and Scott had gone on to make only pure crap after their earlier triumphs, I would hold them in the same artistic and business disdain I hold Lucas.


Yes, but you'd still have Alien and Citizen Kane to watch in high qualit in their original form.

“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.”

Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death

Author
Time
Originally posted by: JediRandy
If he didn’t “possess the mind” they why are people still talking about SW 30 years later? Was ANH a fluke? Did he get lucky?

He didn’t possess the mind to create the art that you wanted to see. That’s it. Disagree with his choices all you want, but he made the movie he wanted to make.


ANH was created and imbued with qualities that gave it longevity by many more artists than just Luca$h. He was just the one that Luca$hed in.

And Luca$h still hasn't made the movies he wanted to make. Count on it.
Don't you call me a mindless philosopher...!
Author
Time
Originally posted by: Mike O
Since George Lucas now insists on surrounding himself with ass-kissing, brown-nosing yes-men, his movies now suck.

Rick McCallum, you mean?

Rick McCallum being the biggest, followed by Steve Sansweet (who pretty much just does George's bidding), among many others who GL has hired not to criticize him.

Originally posted by: auraloffalwaffle

And Luca$h still hasn't made the movies he wanted to make. Count on it.

Yeah, the SE OT still doesn't suck enough to match the PT....

Author
Time
Originally posted by: auraloffalwaffle
Originally posted by: JediRandy
If he didn’t “possess the mind” they why are people still talking about SW 30 years later? Was ANH a fluke? Did he get lucky?

He didn’t possess the mind to create the art that you wanted to see. That’s it. Disagree with his choices all you want, but he made the movie he wanted to make.


ANH was created and imbued with qualities that gave it longevity by many more artists than just Luca$h. He was just the one that Luca$hed in.

And Luca$h still hasn't made the movies he wanted to make. Count on it.


yeah, he wrote it and directed it..... but in the grand scheme of things, he had very little to do with it.

Good call.

"Among many things I have to be thankful for are you, the fans. I know that some of you haven't liked every single thing that I've done with the saga, and that you have a strong sense of ownership over all things Star Wars. But take that passion and devotion and channel it into a creative project of your own."
-George Lucas
Author
Time
Originally posted by: JediRandy
If he didn’t “possess the mind” they why are people still talking about SW 30 years later? Was ANH a fluke? Did he get lucky?

He didn’t possess the mind to create the art that you wanted to see. That’s it. Disagree with his choices all you want, but he made the movie he wanted to make. Some folks didn’t like it, some did. But you not liking the SE or the prequels doesn’t make the artist inadequate.


Actually, I'd say he didn't make the movie he wanted to make, not originally. The movie he wanted to make still hasn't been made yet. He quite clearly doesn't "possess the mind" to think on a practical level, which is why he needed all those people before to tell him "No, it can't be done that way". He needed that in order to come up with different ways to get his vision across. Of course, no one tells him no now, and it shows.

Yeah, he wrote it and directed it, but it takes more than a writer and director to make a movie. Let's take away all the actors and crew and see what we're left with

Unlike like other directors that flat out say "I made the movie I wanted to make the first time out" he doesn't say that. At last check, I think he said he's still only 90% happy with it. That doesn't sound like someone telling us he's made the movie he wants to make. It sounds more like someone saying "well, it's not quite what I wanted, but it's getting close" as they continually go back and tinker.
F Scale score - 3.3333333333333335

You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.

Pissing off Rob since August 2007.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: JediRandy
Originally posted by: auraloffalwaffle
Originally posted by: JediRandy
If he didn’t “possess the mind” they why are people still talking about SW 30 years later? Was ANH a fluke? Did he get lucky?

He didn’t possess the mind to create the art that you wanted to see. That’s it. Disagree with his choices all you want, but he made the movie he wanted to make.

ANH was created and imbued with qualities that gave it longevity by many more artists than just Luca$h. He was just the one that Luca$hed in.

And Luca$h still hasn't made the movies he wanted to make. Count on it.

yeah, he wrote it and directed it..... but in the grand scheme of things, he had very little to do with it.

Good call.


How good would Star Wars be without John Williams's powerhouse musical score? How good would The Godfather be without the masterful performances from Brando and Pacinco? How good would Goodfellas be without Thelma Schoonmaker's masterful editing? No one is denying what Lucas did. But a film is not made by one person.

No one is disputing that they made a lot of money.


Nor am I.

And I totally understand your desire to want a high quality OOT DVD. The comment I commented on, didn't seem to be about that. There was nothing about DVD quality, etc..


With all due respect, I believe that when it was first announced that the OOT DVDs would be substandard, you made a variety of statement to the contrary of that one. For full details, check the "New DVDs no 16X9" thread and observe some of the comments that you made. Please understand, I in no way want to attack you, so please do not misinterpret this. I just want to point out what you said. At not point have I criticized Lucas in this thread other than his desire to deny fans the OOT. That's it. I have repeatedly stated that as long as I have the DVDs I want, I don't care what Lucas does. It's not my movie. I know. But I do not have those DVDs.

I wonder why it is that discussion of the SEs always seems to lead to Lucas feeling that people who dislike the SEs dislike him?

“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.”

Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death

Author
Time
Originally posted by: Mike O
his desire to deny fans the SEs.


You might wanna edit that post, Mike!

Luca$h may have come up with the screenplay and directed ANH but, as discussed elsewhere, there were many people with him (Ralph McQuarrie, Gary Kurtz, John Mollo, Joe Johnston, John Dykstra, Ben Burtt, Richard Chew, Paul Hirsch, Marcia Lucas and many more) that shaped Luca$h's material into what people saw on 25/05/77. You can't lay it all at Luca$h's feet, like you would with a true auteur filmmaker. The reason that we have a shit PT is that Luca$h has been convinced that he is an auteur when he really never was.
Don't you call me a mindless philosopher...!
Author
Time
Originally posted by: auraloffalwaffle
Originally posted by: Mike O
his desire to deny fans the SEs.


You might wanna edit that post, Mike!

Luca$h may have come up with the screenplay and directed ANH but, as discussed elsewhere, there were many people with him (Ralph McQuarrie, Gary Kurtz, John Mollo, Joe Johnston, John Dykstra, Ben Burtt, Richard Chew, Paul Hirsch, Marcia Lucas and many more) that shaped Luca$h's material into what people saw on 25/05/77. You can't lay it all at Luca$h's feet, like you would with a true auteur filmmaker. The reason that we have a shit PT is that Luca$h has been convinced that he is an auteur when he really never was.


Whoops! Right away.

“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.”

Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death

Author
Time
I don't think we've been hard on lucas at all. I've come to the conclusion that he hates us OOT fans, so it is O.K. to hate him right back.
otherwise he wouldn't treat the unaltered version like a disease to wipe out of existance. There is no other reason for his anamosity towards the OOt and its fans.

Author
Time
I must point out that, whether deserved or not, Star Wars fans have a reputation for being socially inept, borderline-retarded geeks.

I am honored to know dozens of die-hard Star Wars fans who do not fit that description at all ... but have also come across many who fit the stereotype to a "T."


I might also suggest that Lucas has had contact with or information about only the geeks who are star-struck or fantatical enough to have tried to get in contact with him, tried to break into Lucasfilm headquarters, or bothered him or his minions at public appearances. I would not be surprised if he has a skewed vision of Star Wars fans ... though I most certainly fault him for not bothering to find out the truth ... that there are tons of such fans who are wonderful people that can function just fine in society, will indeed have sex with their girlfriends, and don't need to press a button on their stormtrooper costume to have their mother come pick them up.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: JediRandy
If he didn’t “possess the mind” they why are people still talking about SW 30 years later? Was ANH a fluke? Did he get lucky?

Uhg, please don't take my thread off topic. The last few posts have been completely unrelated to the original discussion thanks to you.

I'm seriously exploring Lucas as an artist and why his most recent work objectively destroys the continuity and quality of his previous work. This isn't a thread for your random "opinions" or your subjective preferences.

If you had paid any attention to what Obi Jeewhyen and the rest of us were discussing, then you would know that we are not stating that ANH was merely some "fluke" on Lucas' part. Nor do we necessarily believe that his newest works had to be quite so bad. Some of us may believe these things, but that’s not the focus of the debate. The point of this thread is the messy nature with which George has assembled everything related to Star Wars over the years; that he took other potentially good ideas and ruined them by tacking them onto older ideas that were then also ruined as a result. If you want to debate that point, then you are welcome to join in.

In my opinion, Lucas accomplished so much with ANH precisely because it was a fresh effort on his part. He wasn't making anything complicated or altering anything that was well established and so there weren't many mistakes for him to even make. His artistic talent was able to shine. Plus, he had many collaborators on ANH who were able to give life to a lot of the cold and generic ideas he personally brought to Star Wars. Then, of course GL directed/edited the film well. I'm not going to detract from what he accomplished and organized well. It the mess he made later that is the problem.


Originally posted by: Blackjack
I don't think we've been hard on lucas at all. I've come to the conclusion that he hates us OOT fans, so it is O.K. to hate him right back.
otherwise he wouldn't treat the unaltered version like a disease to wipe out of existance. There is no other reason for his anamosity towards the OOt and its fans.


But when will the hate stop?! At some point someone has to desire peace and love!

Personally, if George wants to hate me because I'm a fan of the original theatrical releases of Star Wars then that's his choice. It's not hurting me at all. I'd rather analyze how he hurts himself, hurts the people he worked with in the past, and hurts the classic films he helped create.


I was also thinking, because George has such a messy and unorganized mind, perhaps that's why there is such animosity between him and his fans. Fans (or fanatics) are, by definition, strongly attached to something. George on the other hand has no loyalty to the intended content he has control over. He'll contradict or change things that fans have become completely attached to and not give a care in the slightest. The biggest problem of course is when he removes something that was clearly and objectively great in terms of artistic achievement and then replaces it with something clearly inferior.

"Now all Lucas has to do is make a cgi version of himself.  It will be better than the original and fit his original vision." - skyjedi2005