logo Sign In

Go-Mer-Tonic

User Group
Members
Join date
13-Sep-2006
Last activity
28-Mar-2007
Posts
928

Post History

Post
#254741
Topic
Opinion Poll on Go-Mer-Tonic
Time
He has -never- once said that it was always 6 films.

It's what's called "seeing what you want to see for the purposes of demonizing Lucas".

In the other article you quoted Gaffer, there would have been another generation gap, but it would have taken that much longer to finaly vanquish the Sith. Sidious would have lasted another 20 or so years.

I know Lucas isn't the best communicator, but just try and see what he is actually talking about here.
Post
#254731
Topic
Opinion Poll on Go-Mer-Tonic
Time
That 1999 statement is prefaced with:
The long-standing perception has been that the complete Star Wars saga is a 9 film cycle, and after Episodes I through III were finished Lucas would move on to Episodes VII, VIII, and IX, resuming where Return of the Jedi had left off. "That's really not part of the plan AT THIS POINT, " he says. "When you see it six parts, you'll understand. It really ends at part six."
When he says he never came up with sequels for the 6 movies as they are now, he's talking about the fact that the story always ended with the Sith being vanquished. Originally, he was planning that resolution to take place in Episode 9, but he decided to cap it all with Episode 6.

In 1999 He's talking about sequels to the story he has now, which ends at episode 6.

Back then; he was talking about that same story taking 9 films.
Post
#254718
Topic
Opinion Poll on Go-Mer-Tonic
Time
Actually Gaffer, I went and transcribed proof (had to go home first), and you guys wouldn't listen to that.

Some of you were saying that Lucas was saying he never had any stories for sequels following ROTJ, and you took that as him saying he never planned on anything more than 6 films. When I found the full extent of what he said, it turns out he actually acknowledged that he was originally going to do more, but the only part of the quote you guys were ever presenting was the part where he said he never came up with sequels.

If you compare these two quotes out of context:
George Lucas, October 1979: There are essentially nine films in a series of three trilogies. I have story treatments on all nine.

George Lucas, February 1999: I never had a story for the sequels. It seems like you guys have caught him in a bold faced lie, but when you take the full extent of the 2nd quote into consideration:The long-standing perception has been that the complete Star Wars saga is a 9 film cycle, and after Episodes I through III were finished Lucas would move on to Episodes VII, VIII, and IX, resuming where Return of the Jedi had left off. "That's really not part of the plan AT THIS POINT, " he says. "When you see it six parts, you'll understand. It really ends at part six."

Whereas the prequel plotlines have their basis in the original treatment for Star Wars that Lucas wrote in the early 1970's, "I never had a story for the sequels, for the later ones," he says."
As you can see, he is actually talking about how 9 or more films is no longer the plan "AT THIS POINT", and that because the story is now meant to end with ROTJ, he never came up with anything beyond that resolution (The Vanquishing of the Sith which would have originally happened at the end of the 9th film) and as such never came up with material suitable to follow the current incarnation of Episode 6.

You don't see me getting all bent out of shape because you guys refuse to acknowledge my proof. What's the difference?

As far as the proof presented to me not being enough, I was merely asking for the proof to be presented -in the first place-.

Only one of two quotes was presented in this thread to support the accusation that Lucas was lying, and I kept asking for the second quote to be posted. You guys kept telling me it was posted somewhere in this board, but you guys couldn't be bothered to find it. I had to wait until I got home to find my own copy of Vanity Fair 1999 to personally transcribe this quote, and when it turned out that it really supported my stance instead of some of yours, that's when someone decided to make this wonderful thread.
Post
#254675
Topic
Opinion Poll on Go-Mer-Tonic
Time
I'm not saying you guys shouldn't be posting your opinions, I just grow weary of the flames and personal attacks.

I am really not worried about the people who can't handle an opposing view. I would feel bad if people wanted me to leave because I was flaming and insulting others, but I don't put much value in the opinion of any person who can't handle an opposing view in and of itself. Especially when it comes to matters of taste.
Post
#254653
Topic
Opinion Poll on Go-Mer-Tonic
Time
Go-Mer is just an idiot anyway. I don't see what's so hard about just letting him refute his own stance with his own ridiculousness.

Do you think anyone in their right mind would entertain, let alone buy into what he's saying?

The guy obviousy wants to have sex with Lucas, and he thinks if he comes here and defends him enough (whether he is making any sense or not) it's going to make Lucas notice him and invite him out to the ranch for a little hot tub action.

It's so obvious that we don't even need to comment on it.
Post
#254592
Topic
Official Star Wars newsletter from 1978
Time
He is talking about not having thought anything up beyond the vanquishing of the Sith.

Originally, that would have taken place in Episode 9, but he ended up pushing that resolution up to episode 6.

Hence he never came up with sequels to follow ROTJ.

Notice when you put that quote you just took back into context, he is actually acknowledging that his plan did change.

The long-standing perception has been that the complete Star Wars saga is a 9 film cycle, and after Episodes I through III were finished Lucas would move on to Episodes VII, VIII, and IX, resuming where Return of the Jedi had left off. "That's really not part of the plan AT THIS POINT, " he says. "When you see it six parts, you'll understand. It really ends at part six."

Whereas the prequel plotlines have their basis in the original treatment for Star Wars that Lucas wrote in the early 1970's, "I never had a story for the sequels, for the later ones," he says.
Post
#254584
Topic
Official Star Wars newsletter from 1978
Time
Beats the hell out of me. I don't know why anyone would even suggest that.

You guys were saying that he said they were never part of the plan, I am saying he wasn't saying that at all.

Here, Lucas is saying that it's no longer the plan at that point. That the story was instead designed to end with ROTJ.

He is aknowledging that he had changed his mind, not that he always intended to do 6 films.
Post
#254580
Topic
Official Star Wars newsletter from 1978
Time
Excerpt from Vanity Fair February 1999:
The long-standing perception has been that the complete Star Wars saga is a 9 film cycle, and after Episodes I through III were finished Lucas would move on to Episodes VII, VIII, and IX, resuming where Return of the Jedi had left off. "That's really not part of the plan at this point, " he says. "When you see it six parts, you'll understand. It really ends at part six."

Whereas the prequel plotlines have their basis in the original treatment for Star Wars that Lucas wrote in the early 1970's, "I never had a story for the sequels, for the later ones," he says. As such, he'll move on after Episode III to non-Star Wars projects, "and also, I'll be to a point in my age where to do another trilogy would take 10 years." (Lucas will turn 55 in May.) Would he be amenable to letting someone else carry on making Star Wars movies, much as he has permitted other writers to carry on the lives of Luke Skywalker, Han Solo, and Princess Leia in authorized novels, comic books, and CD-ROMs? "Probably not, " Lucas says. "It's my thing."
Post
#254536
Topic
Jedi as ninja
Time
I am not trying to imply anything about your intellect. I see your preference of having it more spelled out than it was as an artistic choice.

That's something to consider when you are making a movie is how obvious or subtle do you want to make any given point. Where you think it would have been better if it was further highlighted, I am saying that I think it's pretty self evident as it is, even if it does take the viewer to peice it together.

You are saying it doesn't convey that at all, and I'm saying it's just real subtle about it.

I do not mean to insult you at all.