Sign In

How come nobody stopped George Lucas from creating the bad films he created?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

When I'm watching the SE and the prequels, some of the acting and special effects are so bad, I wonder how did they even got past quality control? Didn't George Lucas hire anybody to do that kind of work for him? Nobody said, um George, this looks fake, or um George, these performances were really lousy. Who ever did quality control on the prequels/special editions needs to get fired.

Author
Time

George Lucas owns Lucasfilm.  He is quality control.  He can fire anyone who disagrees with him.  Do you really think anyone working for George Lucas - the man who created Star Wars - would tell him he's doing Star Wars wrong?

a trolling bantha

Author
Time

We all think Gary Kurtz would have saved them, but Lucas grew balls around 1982.

Gary would have been fired as soon as he looked like he was gonna say George's story sucked.

"The other versions will disappear. Even the 35 million tapes of Star Wars out there won’t last more than 30 or 40 years. A hundred years from now, the only version of the movie that anyone will remember will be the DVD version [of the Special Edition], and you’ll be able to project it on a 20’ by 40’ screen with perfect quality. I think it’s the director’s prerogative, not the studio’s to go back and reinvent a movie." - George Lucas

<span> </span>

Author
Time

I know Jake Lloyd's acting was iffy but I don't think it's because George molested him...

Author
Time

Pretty much all the actors did a terrible job in the prequels. Its not their fault though. Portman can act, Neeson can act, McGregor can act, Diarmid can act alright perhaps Lloyd can't. Christensen can act too.

But in the prequels it was very very bad. The Director has control over that. Lucas fault.

Just a shame someone didn't have a dirty little secret they could hold over George so they wouldn't get fired when they should of told him "your doing it wrong"

Even Yodas backward talking was a bit over the top.

"Around the survivors a perimeter create" WTF

 

Irvin Kershner at the helm would of been great. Hell, get Spielberg to do it they are friends I doubt Lucas would of sacked him.

 

I wish I lived in an alternate universe where the prequels were as good as the originals and were heralded as cinema master pieces.

What could of been.

 

Battle droids the robotic incarnations of Jar Jar Binks.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I think the effects bother me more than anything else, every time that CG Yoda pops up I just can't help but stare at how fake he looks. The effects look incredibly dated and distracting already, even more so than the old effects in say, The Empire Strikes Back.

Probably would've been best if Lucas just penned the overall story and acted as a general advisor, and let other directors and writers and everything else handle the actual production. He doesn't seem to trust other people with his "vision" for some reason though.

Pretty much all the actors did a terrible job in the prequels. Its not their fault though. Portman can act, Neeson can act, McGregor can act, Diarmid can act alright perhaps Lloyd can't. Christensen can act too.

I think is says a lot that Lucas managed to coax a crummy performance out of someone as experienced and talented as Christopher Lee.

Author
Time

Quackula said:

Probably would've been best if Lucas just penned the overall story and acted as a general advisor, and let other directors and writers and everything else handle the actual production. He doesn't seem to trust other people with his "vision" for some reason though.

Pretty much all the actors did a terrible job in the prequels. Its not their fault though. Portman can act, Neeson can act, McGregor can act, Diarmid can act alright perhaps Lloyd can't. Christensen can act too.

I think is says a lot that Lucas managed to coax a crummy performance out of someone as experienced and talented as Christopher Lee.

I forgot to add Lee as well. Good point.

And your right on the money with Lucas just penning the story and supervising rather than taking the reigns of everything.

The Empire Strikes Back is the best example. Done right.

Battle droids the robotic incarnations of Jar Jar Binks.

Author
Time

Let's just say he paid the families affected by his terrible acts a lot of money too keep quiet...

 

Wait, your talking about the prequels?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Bingowings said: GB Please change the title of this thread ASAP.

WTFWYT?

I entirely agree.  Ghostbusters, giving a thread such a title is a reprehensbile thing to do, whatever your opinion of Lucas and his work.  The man has adopted and cared for three children and founded an educational foundation.  I too would ask you to reconsider your choice of thread title.

Author
Time

[Actually, playin devil's advocate and all, calling the films "child(hood?) molestations" is a fun exaggeration of the common silly "prequels ruined my childhood" complaint - if it's meant seriously, it sucks, but come on... bad adaptations are constantly referred to as "abominations" and "raping the originals" and what not, and mostly it's all tongue-in-cheek.]

Yea, but come on - you're seriously acting as if the prequels were the only bad films ever released to cinema. Just how many movies in cinematic history have TRULY bad effects, horrific acting and asinine plots? How comes you can view them all on DVDs, or on Youtube / the internet?

The CGI isn't even that horrible, SOME of the environments (Kamino and Jedi temple, mostly) and creatures look "kinda fake", but still safely on the (stylized?) photorealism side.

Neeson, McGregor and Lee are all fairly decent, and nowhere as bad as Portman, or the Anakins in I and II.

 

And you know why the films weren't prevent from being released by some space cinema police? FUCKING MONEY. All of them were very successful financially, so one after the other was made and then sold on DVD.

The audiences are at fault - but not really, because no viewer has any obligation to specifically boycott movies.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

The old perennial "George Lucas Gift Wrapped My Childhood" is a bit near the knuckle and I can understand some people not enjoying the possible trivialisation of a very nasty crime but the object of that statement is an abstract notion of a period time not a child.

Child molestation is too raw a metaphor, especially in a discussion forum thread title.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6Dp2OfIT_M

Author
Time

twooffour said:

[Actually, playin devil's advocate and all, calling the films "child(hood?) molestations" is a fun exaggeration of the common silly "prequels ruined my childhood" complaint - if it's meant seriously, it sucks, but come on... bad adaptations are constantly referred to as "abominations" and "raping the originals" and what not, and mostly it's all tongue-in-cheek.]

Fun?

...

...

FUN????????

FFS

Author
Time

I'm with Frink, Baron, Tobacco, and Bingo -  title was too low brow for a serious discussion, or even a ranting\venting post. Want to be taken seriously (and as a board, we do), then the angry guy on the internet posting needs to be toned down.

Besides -  the "Lucas has completely destroyed the future of cinema as we know it" threads are best left to a professional..... 

;-)

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

"Why are you here, Rey from nowhere?”

Author
Time

twooffour said:

Yea, but come on - you're seriously acting as if the prequels were the only bad films ever released to cinema. Just how many movies in cinematic history have TRULY bad effects, horrific acting and asinine plots? How comes you can view them all on DVDs, or on Youtube / the internet?

btw, I sort of halfheartedly defend the prequels, but you can't compare the PT to Stop! Or My Mom Will Shoot when it comes to disappointment.

Author
Time

title was too low brow for a serious discussion

Then why post, the thread creator hasn't bothered....

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Screw you guys I thought it was funny. I thought the "creative adjective" would be more amusing than "bad".

Now you guys are probably going to go on and on and on about me being a troll.

Save your breath.

I really want to know though how such awful things like the "I love you dialog" in ROTS got to screen? Or how Anakin's motivation to the dark side was not questioned by anyone? Did anybody object anything to George Lucas in the prequels?

Author
Time

Ghostbusters said:

Screw you guys I thought it was funny. I thought the "creative adjective" would be more amusing than "bad".

Yes, child molestation is hilarious.

Author
Time

TV's Frink said:

twooffour said:

Yea, but come on - you're seriously acting as if the prequels were the only bad films ever released to cinema. Just how many movies in cinematic history have TRULY bad effects, horrific acting and asinine plots? How comes you can view them all on DVDs, or on Youtube / the internet?

btw, I sort of halfheartedly defend the prequels, but you can't compare the PT to Stop! Or My Mom Will Shoot when it comes to disappointment.

Don't know that movie, but yea, sure I realize the difference between the prequels and Troll 2. 

The thing is, the very reason this particular bad - mediocre series of movies ended up so disappointing, is exactly the same reason why they ended up being so famous and financially successful, and as such, wouldn't give any producer or quality nazi to prevent them from release, especially if said dude had a palantir to see into the future ;)

Author
Time

Ghostbusters said:

I really want to know though how such awful things like the "I love you dialog" in ROTS got to screen? Or how Anakin's motivation to the dark side was not questioned by anyone? Did anybody object anything to George Lucas in the prequels?

ChainsawAsh said:

George Lucas owns Lucasfilm.  He is quality control.  He can fire anyone who disagrees with him.  Do you really think anyone working for George Lucas - the man who created Star Wars - would tell him he's doing Star Wars wrong?