Sign In

Why all the negative coments about george lucas?

Author
Time
I like to know why (some but not all) some people say negative coments about George Lucas? I mean I yes there are some things about the SE I don't like but I like the changes to the films. I'm glad Mr. Lucas is releaseing the original verson of the original trilogy to dvd. And about the changes he's made to his movies. He has the right to change what ever he want in his flims there his movies and I like him his is one of my favortie directors along with steve spielburg and most of the other good hollywood and independent film directors. Any coments about this topic?
Kenneth Kraly Jr.
Author
Time
I too am glad GL is releasing the "originals"and also wondered alot, why all the hatred and negative remarks,after all these are HIS films he made them,i personally like the SE editions,and now to have a perfect copy of the OT,i cannot wait,no more friggin LD captures,i am glad it is a dead issue now,kind of sick of LD's as of late.
DJ
Author
Time
You said it best dark_jedi. thank you for you coments.
Kenneth Kraly Jr.
Author
Time
There is nothing wrong with changing your movie, and playing around with "what could have been." What is not okay is when you completely neglect the original film, the film that made it what it is. Even if the new cut is better than the original, it is wrong to simply cast out the original, which is exacly what Lucas is doing. Yes, he is releasing the originals, but it seems to more like Lucasfilm did, and Lucas just begrudgingly gave permission (as his quotes suggest). I have very little respect for a man who doesn't respect his own work.

Gentlemen, you can’t fight in here, this is the war room!

Author
Time
from what you write i sense that you would agree with the "auteur" theory, which says that the director is the only creator of his/her films, and that only in such directors can one find a consistency of themes, imagery and mise-en-scene in the movies.
but, those who disagree with this theory say that it does not apply because a director, unlike a writer, is NOT the only person working on a movie. they need a screenwriter, a set designer, a cinematographer, actors, effect coordinator, costume designer and so on and so on.
so, what about those people? do you think they are happy about those changes? they have been working hard on the original fils and then have to see how Mr. Lucas thanks to CGI destroys most or maybe even all of their work, because he his not happy with "his" movies? the most blatant example is Sebastian Shaw being replaced by Hayden Christensen. or contardicting Harrison Ford's interpretation of Han by making him shoot only in self-defense. or Rick Baker whose puppets were obviously not good enough for Mr. Lucas that he had to add CG cartoons to a lot of scenes.
It's not only disrispect of the fans, who liked the movies just as they were and who brought Mr. Lucas where he is now, it's disrespect for all his collaborators who helped him out a lot since his involvment in most of the original trilogy was kept to a minimum.

i do think that some of the comments here are a bit harsh towards him, but for me it's just because i am deeply disaapointed. it gives me the impression that the greatness of the OOT was only a fluke, just random circumstances related to the fact that the SFX were not "good enough" back then.

(sorry for all the theoratical blabla at the start but i have a film studies exam on saturday, thought it would be a good oppprtunity for some revision )
"Last night, Darth Vader came down from planet Vulcan and told me that if I didn't take Lorraine out that he'd melt my brain."
Author
Time
I think that creating a movie is like raising a child. You spend your allotted amount of time creating and shaping it, doing the best you can, working around the problems, in order to release the best product you are able to come out with. At that point, when you release the film, you have to let go of it, and trust that your hard work all this time is enough to let the film flourish on its own. George doesn't seem content with that. Although the child has shown itself numerous times to be more than capable of living on its own, George keeps dragging it back to the nest for a few more crash sessions in "parenting."

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: Gaffer Tape
I think that creating a movie is like raising a child. You spend your allotted amount of time creating and shaping it, doing the best you can, working around the problems, in order to release the best product you are able to come out with. At that point, when you release the film, you have to let go of it, and trust that your hard work all this time is enough to let the film flourish on its own. George doesn't seem content with that. Although the child has shown itself numerous times to be more than capable of living on its own, George keeps dragging it back to the nest for a few more crash sessions in "parenting."


Well said.
Author
Time
a few more negative remarks,LOL,damn who the hell cares now,they are coming out(which we ALL KNEW they would eventually)so lets just go buy them and keep the discs we want and just put the rest in the trash,since MOST people think the OT is the ONLY way to watch these FANTASTIC films,i personally like ALL versions,as stated above,i IMHO see nothing wrong with GL trying to make his movies better,shit in the future he might change around the Prequel Trilogy,if he does this,is everyone gonna start crying over this as well?i hope he does tweak them,that just means more versions,fine with me,bring em on GL,I LOVE YOUR WORK,always have always will.
sorry for the rant guys,but the negativity on this issue i could NEVER figure out
DJ
Author
Time
You said it best dark_jedi. thanks again for your coments.
Kenneth Kraly Jr.
Author
Time
If you ever get a chance, see An Evening with Kevin Smith. It's Smith doing Q&A at various universities and he go into his experiences making a documentary with Prince and his comments at the end of that and how an artist can turn one from love to hate like that kind of apply. It's kind of like a feeling of betrayal, really.
Author
Time
I have never understood the Lucas-bashing. Don't get me wrong, the SE and PT suck. But I've always thought that Lucas was doing what he felt was best for his films, even if he was horribly wrong. All the great film-makers of his generation (Coppola, Scorsese, Spielberg, DePalma) have turned out progressively worse films in their later years, but I don't hate any of them either. Suppressing the OUT was his worst crime: and that was bad, but not badly intentioned I think.
Author
Time
For many of us, the theatrical experience of the OT was a life changing event. I was 8 yrs old in 1977 when I first saw Star Wars. Without that early influence, my life would probably have been very different. Hell, our entire culture was changed by the experience. I was all in favor of the SEs when they came out especially since it gave me a chance to see the OT on the big screen again. However, after viewing them several times and going back to the OT, they just don't hold up. Many of the additions and changes completely changed the tone of the films. This is especially true in ANH. Many, including myself, fealt these changes were for the worse. GL denying the release of the original cuts was like a slap in the face to us. There was no sound reason other than his own hubris.
Arcadayn
Author
Time
I'm with you all the way until "a slap in the face to us". I don't think GL has anything against his fans, he just (misguidedly) wanted his altered version to be the only version, because he liked them better.
Author
Time
The fact that someone was misguided does not absolve them of wrongdoing or provide a shield against criticism. That seems to have been the theme of the Prequel Trilogy -- everyone was misguided, they ended up killing billions of people, and it took Anakin twenty years to redeem himself of his mistakes. Mistakes born of trying to do what he thought was right.

Fortunately, if this DVD release is any good, George has patched things up in ten. So he's not quite as evil as Darth Vader.
"It's the stoned movie you don't have to be stoned for." -- Tom Shales on Star Wars
Scruffy's gonna die the way he lived.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: arcadayn
For many of us, the theatrical experience of the OT was a life changing event. I was 8 yrs old in 1977 when I first saw Star Wars. Without that early influence, my life would probably have been very different. Hell, our entire culture was changed by the experience. I was all in favor of the SEs when they came out especially since it gave me a chance to see the OT on the big screen again. However, after viewing them several times and going back to the OT, they just don't hold up. Many of the additions and changes completely changed the tone of the films. This is especially true in ANH. Many, including myself, fealt these changes were for the worse. GL denying the release of the original cuts was like a slap in the face to us. There was no sound reason other than his own hubris.


I used to like the SE too until the year 2000 when the trilogy was released again, only this time, the words "Special Edition" were nowhere on the packaging. It was at this point that I realized they weren't supposed to be an alternate version but the only version, and they were misleading fans into thinking it was the only version. Continue this trend in '04 and '05.

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: Scruffy
The fact that someone was misguided does not absolve them of wrongdoing or provide a shield against criticism.

Agreed. I'm not against criticism - I think Lucas should be criticised for suppressing the OUT. I have frequently criticised him in the past for exactly that. My point is that civil criticism has a chance of being taken seriously, whereas bashing (by which I mean personal insults, which there are a lot of on these forums) has no such chance.

I think we're all more or less on the same page here.
Author
Time
I must have missed the personal insults. But please keep in mind, I spent an hour yesterday on the TF.N forums, which have a big picture of Lucas at the top with a "Thank the Maker" banner. Coming back to OT.com, where dissent is allowed, can sometimes lead me to ... over exuberance.

(If you really want to see how heavy-handed the mods on TF.N are, look up some of the threads about Karen Traviss on stardestroyer.net.)
"It's the stoned movie you don't have to be stoned for." -- Tom Shales on Star Wars
Scruffy's gonna die the way he lived.
Author
Time
I don't have a problem with criticism towards George Lucas - I don't hate him, but I certainly don't feel the urge to lick his boots. The reason there's an OOT release on DVD is that influential people at LFL seem to have started an ongoing argument about the commercial potential of releasing it (along with specific merchandise like "han shot first" t-shirts) and Mr. Lucas merely agreed in hope that it is commercially unsuccessful to quiet his critics within LFL by proving them wrong. To quote my favourite prequel character: "Greed, can be a powerful ally."

If he would have done this, because he finally realized his cultural responsibility as an artist, he would have reearned my respect.
Author
Time
Sorry, I have to disagree. If you have the idea, and make it for your own use, you maintain ownership. Once you are charging fans for this, they are investing money, time and sentiment with the product. A movie then becomes like a publicly traded company and the fans become shareholders of sorts. Lucas is a greedy bastard and should make a cleaned up, widescreen, no alterations version for sale. The jabba in Star Wars one still sucks and Hayden as the ghost is eye-roll worthy. Give me a break, anyone who is not outraged by this (including the fact that you have to buy the remastered version twice) has a problem.
Author
Time
Originally posted by: kenkraly2004
Any coments about this topic?

Yes: next time, please check your spelling. Oh, and your other "favorite" director's correct name is "Spielberg", btw.
Taylor: Oh H, whatever happened to the way of the warrior??
Harold: The way of the warrior doesn't stand a chance against the way of the wife.
('K2', 1991)
Author
Time
Why can't we criticize Lucas? When someone displays behaviors of hypocrisy, disrespect and outright childishness, plus he's a public figure---he's fair game. Making fun of his neck or his plaid shirts is just lowball. That I won't do, but if he's being conniving and devious---Damnit! I'll call him on it! He would deserve it. If it's undeserved, I won't. Lately, it's been deserved.
Author
Time
Somebody mentioned 'Auteur' theory. Seeing as Lucas didn't direct Empire or Jedi, it's a moot point. Why all the negative comments about Lucas? Because he's an insane, contradictory, lying bell-end, that's why. He directed one good movie (2 if you count American Grafitti) and he seems intent on ruining that one.

I understand that there are elements of Star Wars he doesn't like and wants to change. TheBattle of Yavin probably didn't look as cool and crazy as he intended. The blob under the landspeeder and the stationary Dewback do look crap. I myself am an artist, and I totally understand his desire and urge to keep fiddling and fixing. But the originals were released and embraced by many, and to deny that and claim they no longer exist is madness. George Lucas could have gone down in history as a great, but he's fast becoming a joke. I hear what you're saying when you defend him, but it's gone too far. The original trilogy as Bonus Material? For Fuck Sake!!

War does not make one great.

Author
Time
Hello everybody! Im new here and Im glad this site exists. Im with Dug about bashing GL. Ive read and listened to too many interviews with him declaring the SE's version 1.0 and 2.0 as his "vision". He's also disrespected me and other OOT fans numerous times. He has such a huge ego and I wonder how he navigates that swelled head of his through the doorways of ILM. I just want the OOT in DVD anamorphic format in a quality presentation. But he doesnt seem to want to do that. Im totally against the SE's and PT altogether. Ny heart will always lie with the theatrical cuts.

"There's no cluster of midiclorians that controls my destiny!" -Han Solo, from a future revision of ANH

Author
Time
As I’ve said numerous times I don’t hate George because I don’t hate anyone. Still fans have a right (some would say an obligation) to be critical of the artists they adore. I do see George as hypocritical, egotistical and intellectually dishonest.

I’m willing to bet that virtually NO ONE would have had any issues with the release of the OT on DVD if it had been handled correctly. Put the OOT on one side of the disk and then put the SE OT on the other side. This has worked for home video releases for decades. The original film is presented on one disk or tape and the directors cut is provided on a second side/disk/tape. That way fans have the original film they fell I love with, but know that the other film is what the director originally had in mind. In fact if George really wanted the majority of his fans to adopt the SEs that was the only way to do it.

By the same token George has allowed his political views and social mores to alter the feel and indeed believability of his films. There is the much lamented Han/Greedo scene that was only altered to appeal to George’s new ideas about what a “good guy” should do. That would be just great if we were discussing the clean-cut, goodie-two-shoes hero, Luke Skywalker. Unfortunately we are talking about the sell my mother up the river, cut throat, anti-hero, Han Solo. Now it’s no surprise that Han shows up to rescue Luke at the end; that’s what heroes do.

Then there is the jab at the President that George threw into ROTS. I don’t have a problem with George taking a jab at George, but I do have a problem with the fact that it was obvious, poorly executed and lied about:

“Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists.” – George W. Bush

"If you're not with me, then you're my enemy." – Darth Vader

“Only Sith deal in absolutes.” – Obi-Wan

Really Obi-Wan? Let us look at what the grand masters of these two orders have to say:

“No! Try not. Do. Or do not. There is no try.” – Yoda

“Anakin, if one is to understand the great mystery, one must study all its aspects, not just the dogmatic, narrow view of the Jedi. If you wish to become a complete and wise leader, you must embrace a larger view of the Force.” – Darth Sideous

It looks to me like the Jedi are the conservative order. They believe in black and white and they believe that anyone that embraces anything other than white is evil. Meanwhile the Sith draw on black, white, gray or any other shade that will bring them power. Of course according to Lucas I’m imagining this jab at Bush41 because he wrote all of this during the Nixon administration. Really? Lucas had all of the dialog for ROTS written prior to August 9, 1974? I’m calling bull shit on that one.

I’m a Moderate/Independent so I have no horse in the Liberal/Conservative Republican/Democrat race, but I’d be offended if I did. If I was a Bush supporter I would be mad at the obvious jibe at the president. If I was a Bush hater I would be upset that my position was being represented by such a flawed and contradictory argument. If I had been able to maintain my suspension of disbelief up until that point in ROTS that one sequence of dialog would’ve jerked me back and it only happened because George has his priorities mixed up.
"Look, going good against bashers/gushers is one thing. Going good against the living? That's something else."
- Darth-Adroit

“I also thought George could be turned back to the good side. It couldn't be done. He is more CGI now than story. Twisted and evil.”
- Darth-Adroit
Author
Time
I think any attempt to find political or moral messages in the PT is doomed to failure. Any indicator of such a message is so muddled that it could be interpreted as

a) poorly handled nuance, or

b) poorly handled superficial exposition.

Case in point: The contradictory argument that "Only Sith deal in absolutes." Is this supposed to be an indictment of the Jedi Order? Clearly, there are many parallels between the Jedi and the most odious and venal quasi-military groups today (recruiting children, religious indoctrination, use of force apart from legal authority). Was this the clincher, the final bit of proof we needed that Star Wars is morally relativistic and the Jedi are just as bad as the Sith?

On the other hand, George does not seem capable of such topical or profound statements. His latest hobby horse is the idea that Star Wars is a "Saturday morning serial," and anyone looking for a plot will be shot, etc.

Is George an inspired filmmaker who just isn't inspired enough to take a thematic stand, or is he a blind man wandering into a useful, if confused, narrative?
"It's the stoned movie you don't have to be stoned for." -- Tom Shales on Star Wars
Scruffy's gonna die the way he lived.