Anchorhead

skyjedi2005 said:

Peter Biskind in Easy Riders, Raging bulls accuses Lucas and Spielberg of just that destroying the future of cinema by making it about the blockbuster and special effects and not cinema but really just crap kiddie fare.

In 1975, 1977, and 1981 Lucas & Spielberg - separately as well as together -  changed pop culture and the summer theater-going experience with four blockbusters.  All four films placed substance over effects and all four excelled.  They've also stood the test of time because of it. 

No matter what Lucas & Spielberg have done since (some I like, some I've never bothered with), neither can be credited with destroying the future of cinema. That's where you and I see things very differently.  I choose to own & watch the films of theirs which I like, and I ignore the ones I do not.  You just seem to want to condemn all things Lucas because of the prequels.  At least that's how it often comes across.

And he got Marcia Lucas to agree with him.

Got her to?  She either did or she didn't.  Judging by her integrity, body of work in the 70s, as well as her role in stepping in and saving two of Lucas' films, I'd say she might very well agree.  That said, I'm forever indebted to her for helping shape two of my favorite films of all time.

Along with Kurtz recent comments of Lucas becoming a toys salesmen, i would say that unless taken with a grain of salt those are pretty damning.

Most everyone noticed & agreed that Lucas put profit over substance a very long time ago.  Kurtz is right on the money. No salt needed.

canofhumdingers said:

...my own personal version of the Star Wars universe consisting of the things i've watched or read that I liked & "felt like Star Wars". 

That's it for me exactly.  It's much easier than some people seem to think it is. Why they would let Lucas make those types of personal decisions for them is beyond my ability to comprehend.  Particularly since he has a habit of changing things on the fly, often times decades after the fact, and then lying about it.  ???

what Indy board?  I've browsed theraider.net occasionally

That's the one. 

These same types of discussions come up on the Indiana Jones board from time to time. My thoughts are the same for both - I find it absolutely hilarious that there are various classifications of canon.  It's all make-believe.  There isn't official make-believe - it's all fucking make-believe.

I'm with Frink on this one.  It's not something I give one iota of credence to.  I read what I like - ignore what I don't.  What George decides is real or not is of zero concern to me - other than the fact that the more he approves of something, the more I see it as a complete waste of time i.e - everything after 1980.  

I'll decide what's worth bothering with - not someone who has decided their make-believe is the official make-believe. A fucking website devoted to levels of official make-believe? - and people allow themselves to be governed by it?  That's pure fucking genius on the part of Lucas. 

He actually has followers who wait - and abide by - his decisions of what's real fake vs fake fake.  A tip of the hat to you, George.  You are one savvy son of a bitch.

DuracellEnergizer said:

A fluctuation in the spacetime continuum caused a miniature black hole to blossom in the center of the Earth, obliterating the planet and exterminating all terrestrial life.

Welcome back, Spock.

skyjedi2005 said:

Green Hornet is garbage but a nice film for those who love pulp, but it is really a movie making fun of the source material.

To further the thread derailage, I was looking forward to Green Hornet being made into a film.  That is, until I saw it was - yet another - Seth Rogen fratboy vehicle.  Too bad, man.  A huge missed opportunity.

Regarding Lucas' take on the end of all we know;  More bullshit.  If he really believed it, why would he bother with his state of home video 100 years from now statements?  Dude just opens his mouth and blathers whatever loosely fits the interview.

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..... 

;-)

Ziz said:

  If you're a graphics guru, you can't survive professionally without Apple products. 

As a graphics professional, I can say without reservation - that statement is just simply not the case anymore. 10 years ago - maybe, but most certainly not now.  I work solely on a high-end PC and most of the things I generate are gargantuan, super-complex, uber-high-res Photoshop documents that are headache-free.  I also orthorectify satellite photos for wall-sized presentations and trade-show booths (equally enormous files) and they flow smoothly as well.

Those sorts of designers vs secretaries arguments simply don't apply anymore.  In fact, I recently downed my Mac at home and went with a two-PC network.  I had been running a hybrid for several years, but the Mac was gathering dust (literally).

I don't dislike Apple, but their role in my personal computing world has been reduced to my personal phone\music provider.  I also have an iPad for business travel, but it's really just for work email and internet access - boarding pass check-in the night before a flight, schedules, that sort of thing.  Nothing that couldn't be handled just as easily with a laptop.

Apple\Jobs is wise to continue with the insanely egotistical "unveilings" every year because that sort of coolest personal entertainment device vibe is what they're going to survive with. 

Sky comes out of his meditative state whenever someone has anything positive to say about anything Lucas has ever been involved in.   ;-)

Leaning On The Everlasting Arms - Iris Dement

I don't remember when I made those points mentioned by Kev, but I certainly have (as well as others), several times over the years.  I will say, however, that the Lando\Han backstory - while definitely the least amateur of the story shrinking loops - could have been a little more inventive.  I've always felt it was way too convenient. 

Han & Leia out in the vastness of the universe and - oh, look, we're right by a planet that just happens to have an old friend of mine on it, who just happens to be the guy who used to own the Falcon.  To me, it would be instantly more credible if they would have searched out the guy specifically to seek his help.

As it's handled, it just serves to shrink the universe even more.  No matter how endless the universe is, every character seems to constantly be bumping into someone they know or are related to.

Fuck, man - 18 years ago I moved back to the city I grew up in and I haven't even come remotely close to running across as many people from my past as the Star Wars characters regularly do, and they have the vastness of space to move around in. Please.

That said;  Two years ago, while I was in Barcelona, I found myself standing at a bus stop next to a guy I had worked with in Houston 5 years earlier.  That was kind of weird. 

Of course, had it been a Lucas-written story, we would have stopped a few miles later, just by chance picked up his sister, all gotten off at the next stop, which was a factory run by her long lost step father, who happened to be the former next door neighbor of the bus driver, who turned out to be the college roommate of the person who started the bus company.

doubleofive said:

TK-421, the only canon stormtrooper named in the OT.

Even though we don't see it in the film - I bet he shot first too. Han was just defending himself.

;-)

Chewtobacca said:

The scenes when Threepio and Artoo are wandering in the deserts of Tatooine after the pod has landed are among my favorites.  I like the bones of the dragon and the music playing and find those scenes relaxing for some reason.

To this day, that's still one of the - if not the - very first passages I think of when I think about my emotional connection to the film.  It was very moving to me as a kid.  That feeling of being nowhere. Same for when I hear the music to the scene.  One of Williams' finest moments ever.

TV's Frink said:

Flattery will get you everywhere.  ;-)

At the age of 15 - and to this very day - this is the only Stormtrooper that ever stood out to me.  He changed the course of the entire story.  He overlooks that tiny piece - they leave the planet.  He found it - so our story began.

I love the way the shot is framed - the desolation, the sound, the voice, all of it.  A really fantastic scene that has moved me for 34 years.

^ Make that two.

TV's Frink said:

Anchorhead said:

Gargantuan summer blockbusters like Titanic & Avatar don't have the staying power that films of past decades had.

I wish you would clue TNT in on this ;-)

I've only seen about 20 minutes of Titanic, but I swear, I think it was on TNT.  ;-)

Bingowings said:

If Jaws was it's John The Baptist Star Wars was King Of Kings of it's time.

People talk about the huge turn outs and hubbubs surrounding films like Titanic and Avatar but like Gone With The Wind on the other side of the temporal balance those were big budget affairs with a degree of a buzz about them years ahead of the release.

Sure lot's of people were predicting Titanic would sink Cameron but at least it was getting tagged and followed.

Interesting thoughts and I agree, to a point.  In fact I wrote a piece that's on Kaminski's site about it and I also compared the cultural phenomenon of Star Wars to The Beatles.  When I mentioned in my first post that new films come along and replace the big ones, I was speaking specifically of a personal standpoint, as in each viewer's world, not the cultural world. 

I doubt we'll see another pop-culturally significant film event along the lines of - Gone With The Wind, Ben Hur, Sound Of Music, 2001, Godfather, Jaws, Star Wars, Raiders Of The Lost Ark et al.   The entertainment landscape is much different now, much different than it ever was before.  The 20-somethings of today have a mind-boggling array of entertainment options to move them.  Plus the movie-going public is less innocent and more jaded.

Gargantuan summer blockbusters like Titanic & Avatar don't have the staying power that films of past decades had.   The blockbusters that dominate an entire summer these days are released on DVD in time for Christmas, with the studio already working on the next big profit maker.  Bottom line first, cultural & artistic significance second.The target audience is told months ahead of time that the film will be an event not to be missed, the movie-going experience will never be the same, etc, etc. 

That's why I think Star Wars will settle into a different type of historical significance, with a core group of followers. For a perfect example of what I'm talking about with the different mindset of "fans" in the modern age, look at Star Wars itself.  There are original fans such as myself (now approaching 50) who only want the original, culturally significant (to us) version we saw in the theaters - and there are the TFNers who expect & want a regularly updated version.  They come from an entirely different entertainment world - a more fluid entertainment world, a disposable entertainment world.

My point, I guess, is that I agree with you, but for slightly different reasons.  If I'm reading you correctly, you see Star Wars as culturally significant because it probably won't ever be duplicated i.e. Bible, Shakespeare, Beatles.  I see it as culturally significant because it can't ever be duplicated - innocent culture.  That's my own jadedness showing.

RickWJ324 said:

Well, the Wizard of Oz movie has been around for over 70 years and I think its just as fondly enjoyed now as it ever was.

Funny you mention that.  My first thought when I read the question was - it will settle into a Wizard Of Oz\Gone With The Wind type scenario. It will have a core group of fans who may or may not know of the theatrical version of Star Wars 77 or its cultural significance.  There will be film historians and collectors who know and prefer the 1977 version, so it will always have some resonance.  Life goes on - with or without our preferences or favorites.  Other films will come along that mean just as much, and be just as deep. 

none said:

anyone got powerpoint?  here's some investors presentation from 2009 mentions TPM according to a google search, not sure what's in the second one:

www.reliancemediaworks.com/invst_pre/InvestorsPPT_Q3_09.ppt

http://www.reliancemediaworks.com/invst_pre/AdlabsBusinessUpdate.ppt

I downloaded & opened it.  It's just a basic business update for Adlabs.  Talking points on how they're India's fastest growing entertainment services, largest theater chain in Asia, largest radio station group, producing fifteen TV shows, etc, etc. Lowry is their film restoration arm.

I don't see any mention of Star Wars other than this name-check. Nothing specific.

Mumford & Sons - Little Lion Man

Davnes007 said:

 **Erica releases Frink from her force-choke**

Is that a good thing?  ;-)

TheBoost said:

Lucas dies. World mourns. Consumer and liscensee confidence in the "SW" brand drops.

The OOT is released in a pristine restored BluRay condition. Rereleased to theaters. Sells millions, revitalizing company.

Great - right about the time I turn 65....

"I haven't watched Star Wars since... oh, before you were born" 

doubleofive said:

 

Ripplin said:

It would be nice if the 1997 SE was an option, though, even if it just had that version of Jabba. I must say he looked way better in '97 than in '04. How hard was it to make him look like he does in ROTJ?! He looks like really gross oatmeal or something in the '04 SE!

Really? They both look really bad, 97 worse.

 

I agree, they both look terrible.  There should be another option...

TV's Frink said:

Harmy said:

I love having the films I like in some touchable form, I don't like this whole download thing, I don't feel like I have a film unless I can touch it.

There are so many jokes here...

(For what it's worth, I agree with you Harmy when it comes to movies.  Music, however...)

Plus one on both - the joke and the views.  For reasons I'm not sure of (nor really care to figure out), I prefer a pressed disc, substantial copy of a film.  For music, I'm much less concerned.  I buy CDs fairly often, but I'm completely ok with downloads as well.  Could be a cost thing, maybe.  If I lose a song, which has never happened (and I've legally downloaded more than I can count), I can always pay a buck and get it back.  Music seems forever gettable, but films seem like they may not be.  Completely unsubstantiated, I know.

That said;  A downloadable, properly presented copy of Star Wars77 - I'm all over it. Regardless of cost.