Official George Lucas Discussion Thread (Now w/ Civility..?)

Which director made the best films, made the best visuals, or smelled the best? This is the forum to find out.

What do YOU think about George Lucas?

No Talent Hack
8
20%
One of the All-Time Best
15
37%
Grow up, fanboys.
18
44%
 
Total votes : 41

Official George Lucas Discussion Thread (Now w/ Civility..?)

Postby Lady Sheridan on Wed Jan 02, 2008 6:59 pm

EDIT-Split off from the Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull Thread. --Gaffney

EDIT 2-Cleaned up of all EFBR material (posts not deleted!) and moved to the Movie Reviews Forum for further discussion on Lucas' abilities MINUS the vitriol. --Gaffney 01/03.08

[quote]“The fans are all upset,â€
User avatar
Lady Sheridan
RED
 
Posts: 5035
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 6:09 pm
Location: Croft Manor

Postby Chilli on Wed Jan 02, 2008 7:03 pm

[quote]“The fans are all upset,â€
User avatar
Chilli
The Unfriendly Ghost
 
Posts: 6869
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2005 10:13 am
Location: Wales

Postby bluebottle on Wed Jan 02, 2008 7:05 pm

Ahh, but this:

Rather than update the franchise to match current styles, Lucas and Spielberg decided to stay true to the prior films’ look, tone, and pace.


Gives me faith that they CAN pull it off.

Spielberg and Lucas have both admitted that they are different filmmakers than they were 20 years ago. Nothing reflects that more than the SW prequels.

I'm hoping that Speilberg gets that more than Lucas, and will steer this thing in the right direction.

He's trying so hard to keep it consistent in terms of the look and the feel, he knows that the script has to match up. I don't think Spielberg would do it if he didn't like the script - alll three of the players had to agree on it.
User avatar
bluebottle
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 5354
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 3:17 pm
Location: Canada

Postby Ribbons on Wed Jan 02, 2008 7:09 pm

Bluebottle wrote:He's trying so hard to keep it consistent in terms of the look and the feel, he knows that the script has to match up. I don't think Spielberg would do it if he didn't like the script - alll three of the players had to agree on it.


Then again, Lucas was the only one who vetoed Darabont's script, which seems to imply that either 1) Lucas doesn't have a sense for quality scripts, 2) Spielberg's less demanding of the script's quality, or 3) both.

I'd actually heard a rumor that they didn't have a complete script going into production, so maybe by this point they all just want to get it over with.
User avatar
Ribbons
SQUARE PEG
 
Posts: 13991
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:00 am

Postby buster00 on Wed Jan 02, 2008 7:40 pm

I want the tagline on the one-sheet to read, "This Summer...Get Some Skull!"
User avatar
buster00
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 6401
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 7:12 pm

Postby Chairman Kaga on Wed Jan 02, 2008 7:44 pm

[quote="Chilli"][quote]“The fans are all upset,â€
Chairman Kaga
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 7660
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:49 am

Postby Zarles on Wed Jan 02, 2008 7:54 pm

[quote="Chairman Kaga"][quote="Chilli"][quote]“The fans are all upset,â€
User avatar
Zarles
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 3773
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:52 am
Location: Bringing something to the table

Postby Chairman Kaga on Wed Jan 02, 2008 7:59 pm

[quote="Zarles"][quote="Chairman Kaga"][quote="Chilli"][quote]“The fans are all upset,â€
Chairman Kaga
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 7660
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:49 am

Postby minstrel on Wed Jan 02, 2008 8:20 pm

Zarles wrote:The biggest detractors to geek movies are the people that call themselves their biggest fans. It's one of the few aspects of geekdom that truly pisses me off. You're not a kid anymore, (I'm speaking generally here, not to anyone in particular) and you're not going to have the same reactions you did to these types of movies no matter what they end up being like. Deal with it.


Zarles has hit the nail on the head here.

Certain movies, TV shows, songs, and whatnot hit you very deeply when you're young and easily impressed. And you love them for the rest of your life, because they reproduce some part of that emotion and vision that blew your mind when you were a kid.

But you're an adult now, and nothing hits you that way anymore. Nothing produces that innocent joy and wonder. Indy 4 could be a great movie, but it won't reproduce in you the experience that Raiders did, not because it's a poorer movie, but because YOU aren't the same young kid anymore.

It's easy to blame the filmmakers for not wowing you like they used to. But the fact is, now that we're all grown up, we just aren't as easily wowed. It's us, not them.
"Everybody is equally shitty and wrong." - Ribbons
User avatar
minstrel
Leader of the Insquirrelgency
 
Posts: 12634
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 2:03 pm
Location: Area 52

Postby Lord Voldemoo on Wed Jan 02, 2008 8:39 pm

minstrel wrote:
Zarles wrote:The biggest detractors to geek movies are the people that call themselves their biggest fans. It's one of the few aspects of geekdom that truly pisses me off. You're not a kid anymore, (I'm speaking generally here, not to anyone in particular) and you're not going to have the same reactions you did to these types of movies no matter what they end up being like. Deal with it.


Zarles has hit the nail on the head here.

Certain movies, TV shows, songs, and whatnot hit you very deeply when you're young and easily impressed. And you love them for the rest of your life, because they reproduce some part of that emotion and vision that blew your mind when you were a kid.

But you're an adult now, and nothing hits you that way anymore. Nothing produces that innocent joy and wonder. Indy 4 could be a great movie, but it won't reproduce in you the experience that Raiders did, not because it's a poorer movie, but because YOU aren't the same young kid anymore.

It's easy to blame the filmmakers for not wowing you like they used to. But the fact is, now that we're all grown up, we just aren't as easily wowed. It's us, not them.


This is 1000% true.

But even as a 6 year old I think I would have found Jake Lloyd annoying...
Image
User avatar
Lord Voldemoo
He Who Shall Not Be Milked
 
Posts: 17641
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 1:18 pm
Location: Pasture next to the Red Barn

Postby Lord Voldemoo on Wed Jan 02, 2008 8:48 pm

Lady Sheridan wrote:Spielberg's involvement is the only thing that gives me any hope that it could be good.


I'm with you here.

There aren't many people in Hollywood with the ability to be heard when they say "That's fucking stupid, George" but Spielberg should be one of them.

If it sucks....we can pretend it didn't happen and wait for Dark Knight and Iron man to come out.
Image
User avatar
Lord Voldemoo
He Who Shall Not Be Milked
 
Posts: 17641
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 1:18 pm
Location: Pasture next to the Red Barn

Postby MonkeyM666 on Wed Jan 02, 2008 8:51 pm

Lord Voldemoo wrote:
Lady Sheridan wrote:Spielberg's involvement is the only thing that gives me any hope that it could be good.


I'm with you here.

There aren't many people in Hollywood with the ability to be heard when they say "That's fucking stupid, George" but Spielberg should be one of them.

If it sucks....we can pretend it didn't happen and wait for Dark Knight and Iron man to come out.


I'm just wondering, do you guys really think that Spielberg is enough to pull this one through the wuds? He's gotten soft and it's a big project with a lot of fans thumping at their door about it. I wonder if anything can save us from George.
Image
User avatar
MonkeyM666
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 5406
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2006 8:00 am
Location: Australia

Postby Lord Voldemoo on Wed Jan 02, 2008 8:54 pm

MonkeyM666 wrote:
Lord Voldemoo wrote:
Lady Sheridan wrote:Spielberg's involvement is the only thing that gives me any hope that it could be good.


I'm with you here.

There aren't many people in Hollywood with the ability to be heard when they say "That's fucking stupid, George" but Spielberg should be one of them.

If it sucks....we can pretend it didn't happen and wait for Dark Knight and Iron man to come out.


I'm just wondering, do you guys really think that Spielberg is enough to pull this one through the wuds? He's gotten soft and it's a big project with a lot of fans thumping at their door about it. I wonder if anything can save us from George.


I think he's nearly the only one who CAN. George is an ego-maniac...I think. I've never met the man but that's how he's always come across to me. He respects Spielberg, which is more than can be said for his feelings toward 99% of the rest of Hollywood.

Steve HAS gotten soft, but this is a return to his bread and butter. I think if ANYONE can save this it's him, and I'm not even that huge of a Spielberg fan.
Image
User avatar
Lord Voldemoo
He Who Shall Not Be Milked
 
Posts: 17641
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 1:18 pm
Location: Pasture next to the Red Barn

Postby minstrel on Wed Jan 02, 2008 8:55 pm

Lady Sheridan wrote:See, I don't entirely buy that. Why do people watch Raiders and the original SW trilogy over and over again if they've grown out of them?


I didn't say we outgrew them. I said those films give us some bit of the same juice they gave us when we were kids and saw them the first time.

My point was that if a sequel (or prequel) comes out much later, after we've grown up, we aren't as easily wowed. The original still has the power to trigger the original emotions through our memories, but the new one doesn't.

I think Lucas, Spielberg, et al should just leave these trilogies alone (Star Wars and Indy, I mean). The SW prequels shouldn't have been made, because the audience had grown up. Likewise, it's tough to sell a new Indy movie 20-some-odd years after the last one. The audience has grown up.
"Everybody is equally shitty and wrong." - Ribbons
User avatar
minstrel
Leader of the Insquirrelgency
 
Posts: 12634
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 2:03 pm
Location: Area 52

Postby Retardo_Montalban on Wed Jan 02, 2008 9:00 pm

I don't know about this "nostalgia" theory you guys are talking about. I have 7 nephew and neices, with a 13 year gap between them and none of them really have any die hard movies that they love. The only exceptions I can think of are Ghimli movies and Pixar. Movies that have a very different creation process than the blockbusters that we've come to expect to wow us. I just don't see excitement in them that me and my sister's had when we were their age. Them kids hardly watch anything more than once, except for Labyrinth and T2, which are waaaaay before their time.

Movies aren't made the way they used to be. Not the big budget blockbusters that were the hallmarks of our youth at least. Now a days with all the screenings and focus groups and armies of producers and banks cutting funding depending on how much you appeal to a certain demographic. These huge movies often become generic messes. Of course, this doesn't apply to George Lucas. He bankrolls his movie out of his own pocket. He's just lost his will to create and is thriving off past successes. Until these studios create a new business model for their big pictures, we're going to be hard pressed for the magic of our childhood.
Image
User avatar
Retardo_Montalban
doubleplusungood
 
Posts: 3682
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 12:28 am

Postby Ribbons on Wed Jan 02, 2008 9:01 pm

minstrel wrote:My point was that if a sequel (or prequel) comes out much later, after we've grown up, we aren't as easily wowed. The original still has the power to trigger the original emotions through our memories, but the new one doesn't.

I think Lucas, Spielberg, et al should just leave these trilogies alone (Star Wars and Indy, I mean). The SW prequels shouldn't have been made, because the audience had grown up. Likewise, it's tough to sell a new Indy movie 20-some-odd years after the last one. The audience has grown up.


Although I think the original trilogy will stand the test of time compared to the prequels, which probably will not. Then again, it's still hard to get a completely accurate read because if you go in thinking one's a classic and the other's not, it might influence how you see the film.
User avatar
Ribbons
SQUARE PEG
 
Posts: 13991
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:00 am

Postby Lady Sheridan on Wed Jan 02, 2008 9:02 pm

minstrel wrote:I think Lucas, Spielberg, et al should just leave these trilogies alone (Star Wars and Indy, I mean). The SW prequels shouldn't have been made, because the audience had grown up. Likewise, it's tough to sell a new Indy movie 20-some-odd years after the last one. The audience has grown up.


Now that I agree with.

I think there *was* hope for the prequels--but quite possibly, they should have just been done as books and not movies. Who knows.

But I think Indy belongs to the past. It's time for new heroes and new stories, not trying to revive the 80's. This just smacks of Rocky-Rambo-Die Hard to me--Lucas, Spielberg and Ford still trying to prove they've "got it" against the Peter Jacksons, the Christopher Nolans, the Christian Bales...

A new age has begun! And there's a lot to be said for recognizing it and bowing out gracefully.
User avatar
Lady Sheridan
RED
 
Posts: 5035
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 6:09 pm
Location: Croft Manor

Postby Chairman Kaga on Wed Jan 02, 2008 9:07 pm

Ribbons wrote:
minstrel wrote:My point was that if a sequel (or prequel) comes out much later, after we've grown up, we aren't as easily wowed. The original still has the power to trigger the original emotions through our memories, but the new one doesn't.

I think Lucas, Spielberg, et al should just leave these trilogies alone (Star Wars and Indy, I mean). The SW prequels shouldn't have been made, because the audience had grown up. Likewise, it's tough to sell a new Indy movie 20-some-odd years after the last one. The audience has grown up.


Although I think the original trilogy will stand the test of time compared to the prequels, which probably will not. Then again, it's still hard to get a completely accurate read because if you go in thinking one's a classic and the other's not, it might influence how you see the film.


I think that perception only stands for people who lived through the gap. My friends kids who are now just 4-5 don't harbor dislike for one trilogy over the other. The most glaring differences they see are FX wise not quality wise. Once the generations who grew up while these were made have died I think "history" will have a very different perception of the films.
Chairman Kaga
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 7660
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:49 am

Postby Lady Sheridan on Wed Jan 02, 2008 9:08 pm

Ribbons wrote:
minstrel wrote:My point was that if a sequel (or prequel) comes out much later, after we've grown up, we aren't as easily wowed. The original still has the power to trigger the original emotions through our memories, but the new one doesn't.

I think Lucas, Spielberg, et al should just leave these trilogies alone (Star Wars and Indy, I mean). The SW prequels shouldn't have been made, because the audience had grown up. Likewise, it's tough to sell a new Indy movie 20-some-odd years after the last one. The audience has grown up.


Although I think the original trilogy will stand the test of time compared to the prequels, which probably will not. Then again, it's still hard to get a completely accurate read because if you go in thinking one's a classic and the other's not, it might influence how you see the film.


Well, I think accuracy can be found in looking at the generation who saw the prequels, quite possibly, before they saw the OT. I don't know a single child who idolized Anakin Skywalker or Obi-Wan Kenobi the way we did Han and Luke. They lacked the original attachment, but failed to make one with the prequels. I wonder if George "I made them for kids" Lucas even recognizes he failed them just as badly...

I'm sure he'd just say that it was "those darn kids today," totally dismissing the fact that they worship H@rry Potter, Aragorn and Jack Sparrow.
User avatar
Lady Sheridan
RED
 
Posts: 5035
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 6:09 pm
Location: Croft Manor

Postby MonkeyM666 on Wed Jan 02, 2008 9:11 pm

Nostalgia... it's interesting how so many films coming out in the last couple of years have heavily relied on old successful concepts to pull them through the financial doldrums they're confronted with at the moment. Reminds me of that discussion about Big Trouble in little China, and how I just didn't like it that much.

The film is always going to be compared, that's pretty obvious but I for one hope that they don't lean on older jokes and throwbacks to the previous movies. The Jones name is a peak in action adventure films, and even though there's every chance that they'll try they're darnedest I can see big FX, flashy stunts and a Die Hard 4 type situation. It'll be enjoyable but it was totally feel like an Indy film.
Image
User avatar
MonkeyM666
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 5406
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2006 8:00 am
Location: Australia

Postby Chairman Kaga on Wed Jan 02, 2008 9:12 pm

Lady Sheridan wrote:
Ribbons wrote:
minstrel wrote: My point was that if a sequel (or prequel) comes out much later, after we've grown up, we aren't as easily wowed. The original still has the power to trigger the original emotions through our memories, but the new one doesn't.

I think Lucas, Spielberg, et al should just leave these trilogies alone (Star Wars and Indy, I mean). The SW prequels shouldn't have been made, because the audience had grown up. Likewise, it's tough to sell a new Indy movie 20-some-odd years after the last one. The audience has grown up.


Although I think the original trilogy will stand the test of time compared to the prequels, which probably will not. Then again, it's still hard to get a completely accurate read because if you go in thinking one's a classic and the other's not, it might influence how you see the film.


Well, I think accuracy can be found in looking at the generation who saw the prequels, quite possibly, before they saw the OT. I don't know a single child who idolized Anakin Skywalker or Obi-Wan Kenobi the way we did Han and Luke. They lacked the original attachment, but failed to make one with the prequels. I wonder if George "I made them for kids" Lucas even recognizes he failed them just as badly...

I'm sure he'd just say that it was "those darn kids today," totally dismissing the fact that they worship H@rry Potter, Aragorn and Jack Sparrow.


Odd from my experience any kids that like I've known who fit that bill are super obsessed with Obi Wan, Yoda and Anakin atleast as much as Potter et al. On top of that most kids I knew at the time enjoyed Jar Jar.
Chairman Kaga
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 7660
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:49 am

Postby Lord Voldemoo on Wed Jan 02, 2008 9:16 pm

Chairman Kaga wrote:
Lady Sheridan wrote:
Ribbons wrote:
minstrel wrote: My point was that if a sequel (or prequel) comes out much later, after we've grown up, we aren't as easily wowed. The original still has the power to trigger the original emotions through our memories, but the new one doesn't.

I think Lucas, Spielberg, et al should just leave these trilogies alone (Star Wars and Indy, I mean). The SW prequels shouldn't have been made, because the audience had grown up. Likewise, it's tough to sell a new Indy movie 20-some-odd years after the last one. The audience has grown up.


Although I think the original trilogy will stand the test of time compared to the prequels, which probably will not. Then again, it's still hard to get a completely accurate read because if you go in thinking one's a classic and the other's not, it might influence how you see the film.


Well, I think accuracy can be found in looking at the generation who saw the prequels, quite possibly, before they saw the OT. I don't know a single child who idolized Anakin Skywalker or Obi-Wan Kenobi the way we did Han and Luke. They lacked the original attachment, but failed to make one with the prequels. I wonder if George "I made them for kids" Lucas even recognizes he failed them just as badly...

I'm sure he'd just say that it was "those darn kids today," totally dismissing the fact that they worship H@rry Potter, Aragorn and Jack Sparrow.


Odd from my experience any kids that like I've known who fit that bill are super obsessed with Obi Wan, Yoda and Anakin atleast as much as Potter et al. On top of that most kids I knew at the time enjoyed Jar Jar.


Not me, sadly my experience has been the same as LS's. My friend Angie, for example, has 5 brothers and sisters ranging in age from 24 to 10. None of them were into the prequels at ALL. I don't think they even saw RotS. They worship at Potter's feet and love Pirates, but Star Wars just doesn't resonate with them at all. I sat them all down once to watch Attack of the Clones (I know, bad example but still) and the youngest two fell asleep...

I've heard similar things from my friends with kids that are younger than 10. I don't really know of any kids that are into the prequels, sadly.
Image
User avatar
Lord Voldemoo
He Who Shall Not Be Milked
 
Posts: 17641
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 1:18 pm
Location: Pasture next to the Red Barn

Postby papalazeru on Wed Jan 02, 2008 9:17 pm

Chairman Kaga wrote:Although I think the original trilogy will stand the test of time compared to the prequels, which probably will not. Then again, it's still hard to get a completely accurate read because if you go in thinking one's a classic and the other's not, it might influence how you see the film.


I think that perception only stands for people who lived through the gap. My friends kids who are now just 4-5 don't harbor dislike for one trilogy over the other. The most glaring differences they see are FX wise not quality wise. Once the generations who grew up while these were made have died I think "history" will have a very different perception of the films.[/quote]

In 100 years time, people will look back at the 70's and 80's and mark them as the 'Spielberg/Lucas' years where the idea was to create a fine balance between a good movie, a marketable product and 1000 squillion toys. Thus began the Capitalism years were new clauses were wrote into Hollywood contracts (a lot like when the web began to appear lucrative hence the WGA strike). George and Steve raised million of kids on fantasies, for which they will be praised, but future generations live with the consequences of merchandising, adverts for everything you could ever not need in association with a film (like the Tie Bomber Tampon) all spawned by two men on a mission to make a fortune.
Papa: The musical!

Padders: "Not very classy! Not very classy at all!"
So Sorry "I'll give you a word to describe it: classless."
Cptn Kirks 2pay: ".....utterly unclassy....."
DennisMM: "...Decidedly unclassy..."
User avatar
papalazeru
Not very classy! Not very classy at all!!
 
Posts: 11475
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 5:26 am

Postby Lady Sheridan on Wed Jan 02, 2008 9:18 pm

Chairman Kaga wrote:Odd from my experience any kids that like I've known who fit that bill are super obsessed with Obi Wan, Yoda and Anakin atleast as much as Potter et al. On top of that most kids I knew at the time enjoyed Jar Jar.


Maybe it's regional!

It was weird--I was baby-sitting a little boy at the time The Phantom Menace came out. He was totally obsessed with Star Wars. I said "Oh, you know the new one is coming out this summer right?" I've never seen such a blank look on a kid's face. It hadn't even occurred to him to wonder how Anakin became Darth Vader.

They moved away before the movie came out, so I never did get to find out what he thought of it. I saw him at the theatre though...
User avatar
Lady Sheridan
RED
 
Posts: 5035
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 6:09 pm
Location: Croft Manor

Postby Chairman Kaga on Wed Jan 02, 2008 9:20 pm

Good Point Papa. The two men who shifted all of hollywood from the studio system to one part of a multi-national coporation system.
Chairman Kaga
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 7660
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:49 am

Postby Chairman Kaga on Wed Jan 02, 2008 9:21 pm

Lady Sheridan wrote:
Chairman Kaga wrote:Odd from my experience any kids that like I've known who fit that bill are super obsessed with Obi Wan, Yoda and Anakin atleast as much as Potter et al. On top of that most kids I knew at the time enjoyed Jar Jar.


Maybe it's regional!

It was weird--I was baby-sitting a little boy at the time The Phantom Menace came out. He was totally obsessed with Star Wars. I said "Oh, you know the new one is coming out this summer right?" I've never seen such a blank look on a kid's face. It hadn't even occurred to him to wonder how Anakin became Darth Vader.

They moved away before the movie came out, so I never did get to find out what he thought of it. I saw him at the theatre though...


Maybe. We do grow them softer in the head down south...
Chairman Kaga
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 7660
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:49 am

Postby papalazeru on Wed Jan 02, 2008 9:21 pm

Chairman Kaga wrote:Good Point Papa. The two men who shifted all of hollywood from the studio system to one part of a multi-national coporation system.


Cheers CK. Never really had a valid point. I feel honoured.
Last edited by papalazeru on Wed Jan 02, 2008 9:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Papa: The musical!

Padders: "Not very classy! Not very classy at all!"
So Sorry "I'll give you a word to describe it: classless."
Cptn Kirks 2pay: ".....utterly unclassy....."
DennisMM: "...Decidedly unclassy..."
User avatar
papalazeru
Not very classy! Not very classy at all!!
 
Posts: 11475
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 5:26 am

Postby bluebottle on Wed Jan 02, 2008 9:23 pm

the other possibility (regarding LV and LS' earlier comments) is that ultimately, Lucas felt that the mythos is his (which it is) and decided to go with his own storyline.

now you and i know that he's a little older, he hasn't sat in the directors chair for a long time, he's not the man he used to be - probably not the best choice for writing and directing these films.

but HE DOESN'T KNOW THAT.

take "egotistic" out of it... what about just plain "ego".

i work on a story for NINE years, then decide to revisit it twenty years later, and you're going to tell me i'm not competent enough to write it? fuck you! i created it, i'm going to finish it!

and then everyone ends up hating it?

well fuck you even more because i'm just doing my best.

if lucas believed 1% of what the fans say, he would have slit his wrists by now.

i'd like to see any of you admit that you can't do your job to millions of people.
User avatar
bluebottle
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 5354
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 3:17 pm
Location: Canada

Postby Lord Voldemoo on Wed Jan 02, 2008 9:35 pm

Bluebottle wrote:the other possibility (regarding LV and LS' earlier comments) is that ultimately, Lucas felt that the mythos is his (which it is) and decided to go with his own storyline.

now you and i know that he's a little older, he hasn't sat in the directors chair for a long time, he's not the man he used to be - probably not the best choice for writing and directing these films.

but HE DOESN'T KNOW THAT.

take "egotistic" out of it... what about just plain "ego".


I wonder if anyone told him?

They must have. The cutting of Jar Jar as a major character going forward was clearly, to me, a concession on his part. He must have known that there were issues.

He's turned over some creative control before with the OT...to Kasdan and to Kershner, with great success. He was able to put his ego aside. Unfortunately he wasn't able to, for the most part, with the prequels.

Here, Koepp is writing the screenplay and Steve is directing...hopefully something good will come out of that.
Image
User avatar
Lord Voldemoo
He Who Shall Not Be Milked
 
Posts: 17641
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 1:18 pm
Location: Pasture next to the Red Barn

Postby Chairman Kaga on Wed Jan 02, 2008 9:42 pm

Another good point BB. To add to that I think Fandom is wrong or delusional or both to expect the same product from any artist years down the line.

I wonder if anyone told him?

They must have. The cutting of Jar Jar as a major character going forward was clearly, to me, a concession on his part. He must have known that there were issues.

He's turned over some creative control before with the OT...to Kasdan and to Kershner, with great success. He was able to put his ego aside. Unfortunately he wasn't able to, for the most part, with the prequels.

Here, Koepp is writing the screenplay and Steve is directing...hopefully something good will come out of that.


I don't think it's ego so much that Lucas had major stress related issues on Star Wars that kept him away from directing for years.
Chairman Kaga
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 7660
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:49 am

Postby Peven on Wed Jan 02, 2008 9:45 pm

Retardo_Montalban wrote:I don't know about this "nostalgia" theory you guys are talking about. I have 7 nephew and neices, with a 13 year gap between them and none of them really have any die hard movies that they love. The only exceptions I can think of are Ghimli movies and Pixar. Movies that have a very different creation process than the blockbusters that we've come to expect to wow us. I just don't see excitement in them that me and my sister's had when we were their age. Them kids hardly watch anything more than once, except for Labyrinth and T2, which are waaaaay before their time.

Movies aren't made the way they used to be. Not the big budget blockbusters that were the hallmarks of our youth at least. Now a days with all the screenings and focus groups and armies of producers and banks cutting funding depending on how much you appeal to a certain demographic. These huge movies often become generic messes. Of course, this doesn't apply to George Lucas. He bankrolls his movie out of his own pocket. He's just lost his will to create and is thriving off past successes. Until these studios create a new business model for their big pictures, we're going to be hard pressed for the magic of our childhood.



my kids, who are 16,15,11, and 10, would say without a doubt that the LOTR films were a magical part of their childhood.


i was very pessimistic about this movie at the start but after seeing a few pics now i am just mildly pessimistic
Image

perversely contrarian since 2005
Peven
Is This Real Life?
 
Posts: 14687
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 10:45 am
Location: Group W bench

Postby Lord Voldemoo on Wed Jan 02, 2008 9:51 pm

Chairman Kaga wrote:Another good point BB. To add to that I think Fandom is wrong or delusional or both to expect the same product from any artist years down the line.

I wonder if anyone told him?

They must have. The cutting of Jar Jar as a major character going forward was clearly, to me, a concession on his part. He must have known that there were issues.

He's turned over some creative control before with the OT...to Kasdan and to Kershner, with great success. He was able to put his ego aside. Unfortunately he wasn't able to, for the most part, with the prequels.

Here, Koepp is writing the screenplay and Steve is directing...hopefully something good will come out of that.


I don't think it's ego so much that Lucas had major stress related issues on Star Wars that kept him away from directing for years.


Well that's true, I remember the stories of him being hospitalized during the filming of A New Hope for hypertension.

I'm just saying that he'd delegated in the past...with great success. I wish he'd been able to do a bit more of it with the prequels.

For the record, I never called into question his right to make the prequels however he wanted to. As Blue correctly points out, it IS his story to tell. That doesn't mean I have to like the story he tells, and it doesn't mean that the story will be successful.

This all sounds way more harsh than I intend it to be. I like parts of the prequels, and I like pretty much all of RotS...quite a bit. The expectations placed on the prequels were ridiculous. Nothing could have lived up to the hype. Still...well...everyone knows the problems that the prequels had...and they begin with George's writing.
Image
User avatar
Lord Voldemoo
He Who Shall Not Be Milked
 
Posts: 17641
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 1:18 pm
Location: Pasture next to the Red Barn

Postby bluebottle on Wed Jan 02, 2008 9:51 pm

Chairman Kaga wrote:I don't think it's ego so much that Lucas had major stress related issues on Star Wars that kept him away from directing for years.


That's right, by the time Empire came down the line, he was too busy dealing with all the other stuff to write and direct.

That's not to say he didn't want to. I'm sure he would have if he could have.

I'm more upset that Spielberg didn't get to direct ROTJ than I am over the whole prequel debacle. And that definitely wasn't Lucas' fault, he WANTED Spielberg to direct that one.

What I find funny here is that Lucas was once heralded as a visionary and a rebel for bucking the system... But now, even though he still holds those same ideals, fans hate him because he wants to do everything himself, and they don't trust him with the materials that he created in the first place.
User avatar
bluebottle
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 5354
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 3:17 pm
Location: Canada

Postby Lord Voldemoo on Wed Jan 02, 2008 10:00 pm

Bluebottle wrote:
What I find funny here is that Lucas was once heralded as a visionary and a rebel for bucking the system... But now, even though he still holds those same ideals, fans hate him because he wants to do everything himself, and they don't trust him with the materials that he created in the first place.


I'm neither a writer nor any other type of filmmaker, I've never really cared about his ideals except for having a great deal of respect at his foresight regarding securing the merchandising rights for Star Wars, heh.

Let me ask you one question: did you find the prequels to be well-written?
Image
User avatar
Lord Voldemoo
He Who Shall Not Be Milked
 
Posts: 17641
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 1:18 pm
Location: Pasture next to the Red Barn

Postby Chairman Kaga on Wed Jan 02, 2008 10:21 pm

Lady Sheridan wrote:However, there's something in his stubborn unwillingness to let anyone have a crack at that script that says he KNEW it was flawed and he went ahead anyway. If you're confident in your project, you'll let someone else critique it. He didn't. And that makes him a bad artist.

I can tell you that's way off. Some of my current friends and mentors have and do work at ILM and he is much more collaborative on films than most writer/directors (incidently most won't believe it here but everyone swore up and down to me that Michael Bay was the best director any of them had ever worked with) . On a number of occasions he changed things in the prequels due to feedback from people working at ILM. He's far from stubborn and unwilling to change. As Moo pointed out earlier he drastically scaled back Jar Jar just based on fan unrest.

I don't really see how he's wallowing in hatred either.
Chairman Kaga
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 7660
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:49 am

Postby tapehead on Wed Jan 02, 2008 10:35 pm

Lady Sheridan wrote: Just once, I'd love to hear him praise someone like Peter Jackson, Christopher Nolan or Gore Verbinski. I'd like to see him praise the innovation of "Sin City" or "300." SOMETHING to show me he hasn't become a soulless cash machine, lost in his own glory days.



George Lucas praises Peter Jackson, just for an example.

I'm no great Lucas Fan, but the picture you're painting just seems horribly distorted. I'm sure I've read some stuff about supportive conversations he's had with Verbinski while the latter was doing post at ILM, but I can't source it off-hand.
Last edited by tapehead on Wed Jan 02, 2008 10:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
tapehead
BALLS!!!
 
Posts: 9427
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 2:13 pm
Location: OZ

Postby Chairman Kaga on Wed Jan 02, 2008 10:37 pm

Retardo_Montalban wrote:Maybe self hatred. Because he knows that he's just a creatively vapid shill, who recycles a generic consensus of what people want to see in Star Wars and creates a shallow film filled with special FX and lame winks and nods to his previously successful films.

Just because he never hired you for open shirted, plastic chested Jedi action doesn't mean he's a shill. :lol:
Chairman Kaga
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 7660
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:49 am

Postby Chairman Kaga on Wed Jan 02, 2008 10:49 pm

I'm sorry LS but your description seems way off to me. You want to think of him as bitter and depressed and from everything I know he just doesn't take it that seriously at all. He's generally being honest when in his opinion he's making movies "for kids" not slamming the fan base. He realizes that some people will complain and he is stating as much but he's not angry at them by any means....At most I think he's more bewildered by the rabid fans than angry at them for not singing his praises.
I don't think that's very different from any celebrity who has risen to the top to find the fans turn on them calling for blood.
Last edited by Chairman Kaga on Wed Jan 02, 2008 10:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Chairman Kaga
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 7660
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:49 am

Postby Ribbons on Wed Jan 02, 2008 10:57 pm

Lady Sheridan wrote:I'm glad he's praised Peter Jackson, so I'll eat my words on that, but look at that article. "I'm not about Star Wars, Star Wars is as far from me as you can get, I'm going to make movies I've thought about for 30 years. I'm avant garde." Where is anything that contradicts the "distortion" I'm conjecturing on...

Who's stopping him from doing that? If he's so avant garde and artistic, why is his first post-Star Wars movie...Indiana Jones 4? And he's already going "whatever, the fans will hate it." That's far from an excited, confident artist.

I'll admit, none of us know the guy. I'm only speculating from interviews I've read and seen. He's a lost soul and it's a shame, as he has the money and resources to make or do anything he wants.


In some ways... and I'll admit that this is conjecture and apologize in advance to his fans... I've always gotten the impression that he's very insecure about his creative endeavors (Star Wars or otherwise), and this tunnel vision of having to "finish" his other franchises is a way of putting them off (perhaps not intentionally, perhaps not at all). There's no real reason he couldn't have done anything besides for Star Wars in the last 25 years, just like there's no real reason Indiana Jones needs a third sequel in order to be complete. I don't judge him for that, exactly, and I'm sure the fans love more Star Wars or Indy stuff regardless of the reason, but that's always how it's come across to me. He insists that he's got all these ideas for movies but he never follows up on any of them.
Last edited by Ribbons on Wed Jan 02, 2008 10:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Ribbons
SQUARE PEG
 
Posts: 13991
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:00 am

Postby Chairman Kaga on Wed Jan 02, 2008 10:58 pm

Lady Sheridan wrote:I'm glad he's praised Peter Jackson, so I'll eat my words on that, but look at that article. "I'm not about Star Wars, Star Wars is as far from me as you can get, I'm going to make movies I've thought about for 30 years. I'm avant garde."

Who's stopping him from doing that? If he's so avant garde and artistic, why is his first post-Star Wars movie... Indiana Jones 4?

Those are good points. He's said that sort of thing for years and hasn't really moved much on that front. Why? I have no idea..
Lady Sheridan wrote:Where is anything that contradicts the "distortion" I'm conjecturing on...

I think tape means that your perception of him as bitter etc is a distortion not the thing about him not doing these avante garde things.
Lady Sheridan wrote:And he's already going "whatever, the fans will hate it." That's far from an excited, confident artist.

I think it's obvious he doesn't literally mean all fans or even a majority merely the vocal complaintists. Do you really think he's wrong? I mean hasn't Lucas bashing grown from disappointment over the prequels to just bashing everything the man says and does? Just look to the TB's for example. I think he's right on the nose that no matter what some people are going to hate it and voice their hate.
Last edited by Chairman Kaga on Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Chairman Kaga
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 7660
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:49 am

Postby DaleTremont on Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:01 pm

Lady Sheridan wrote:Where are these smaller films he dreams of making? Why does he continually go back and tinker with his one masterpiece? Is it because, deep down, he knows he can't produce anything else?


The Lucas empire is an "invervted pyramid balancing on a pea."

I paraphrase from ERRB (I know, I know...I'm relentless.)

I also recall a little bit in there about a fan coming up to Lucas (post-Star Wars), telling him how much he loved THX 1138, how it was his favorite film of Lucas', etc...etc....to which Lucas replied, "Why? It didn't make any money?"

Just throwin' that out there.
Image
User avatar
DaleTremont
Loincloth Bronson
 
Posts: 3507
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 2:51 am
Location: Москва, bitches!

Postby Zarles on Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:04 pm

DaleTremont wrote:
Lady Sheridan wrote:Where are these smaller films he dreams of making? Why does he continually go back and tinker with his one masterpiece? Is it because, deep down, he knows he can't produce anything else?


The Lucas empire is an "invervted pyramid balancing on a pea."


Uh, not really. Lucasfilm is FAR more diverse and widespread than six freakin' movies.
User avatar
Zarles
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 3773
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:52 am
Location: Bringing something to the table

Postby Lady Sheridan on Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:07 pm

Chairman Kaga wrote:I think it's obvious he doesn't literally mean all fans or even a majority merely the vocal complaintists. Do you really think he's wrong? I mean hasn't Lucas bashing grown from disappointment over the prequels to just bashing everything the man says and does?


It's grown and while I think some of it is cruel and unjustified, I also think he tends to fuel it with off-the-cuff remarks like the one in Vanity Fair, like the recent "Blockbuster movies are dead." It makes him appear reactionary and out of touch.

I think if it had been the prequels, fans would have been disappointed, but ultimately would have let it go. But combine the tinkering with the OT, re-releases, prequels, careless remarks...he sets himself up for it. On one hand, I feel for him. He must feel like he's destined to fail. On the other hand, he has no learning curve.

If only he'd left the OT alone, done the prequels, and started work on something altogether new, I think you'd see a much different reaction from the world of fandom.
User avatar
Lady Sheridan
RED
 
Posts: 5035
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 6:09 pm
Location: Croft Manor

Postby DaleTremont on Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:08 pm

Zarles wrote:
DaleTremont wrote:
Lady Sheridan wrote:Where are these smaller films he dreams of making? Why does he continually go back and tinker with his one masterpiece? Is it because, deep down, he knows he can't produce anything else?


The Lucas empire is an "invervted pyramid balancing on a pea."


Uh, not really. Lucasfilm is FAR more diverse and widespread than six freakin' movies.


He's expanded to be sure, but it all comes down to Star Wars, my friend. The merchandising, the legend of Lucas, the fanfare, and the Big Buck$$$. It's The Force.
Image
User avatar
DaleTremont
Loincloth Bronson
 
Posts: 3507
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 2:51 am
Location: Москва, bitches!

Postby Zarles on Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:08 pm

I mean the Lucas empire. All of what he owns and operates. ILM, LucasArts, his educational foundations, etc etc etc.

Star Wars started it, yes, but it's far from the end of it.
User avatar
Zarles
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 3773
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:52 am
Location: Bringing something to the table

Postby Ribbons on Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:08 pm

Zarles wrote:I agree, and I can't say I blame him. I'd say he's eaten enough fanboy shit for ten lifetimes.


Bah! What about the rest of us unsung victims who have to eat fanboy shit everyday without having the awesome filmmaking $killz and the big piles of money to show for it? I ask you!
User avatar
Ribbons
SQUARE PEG
 
Posts: 13991
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:00 am

Postby Ribbons on Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:12 pm

Image

My only regret... is that I have... boneitis... [dead]*
____________
Last edited by Ribbons on Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Ribbons
SQUARE PEG
 
Posts: 13991
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:00 am

Postby Chairman Kaga on Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:12 pm

Lady Sheridan wrote:If only he'd left the OT alone, done the prequels, and started work on something altogether new, I think you'd see a much different reaction from the world of fandom.

That I agree with though I still think you read too much into his oft quoted sentence fragments .
Chairman Kaga
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 7660
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:49 am

Postby bluebottle on Wed Jan 02, 2008 11:46 pm

Lord Voldemoo wrote:Let me ask you one question: did you find the prequels to be well-written?


No, I thought they were dreck, but that's totally besides the point...

Lady Sheridan wrote:It's grown and while I think some of it is cruel and unjustified, I also think he tends to fuel it with off-the-cuff remarks like the one in Vanity Fair, like the recent "Blockbuster movies are dead." It makes him appear reactionary and out of touch.


LS, I would say that you are being reactionary. If you can show me a transcribed interview with Lucas where all he says is bitter - then I will concede, BUT if all you can show me are articles where he is "quoted" then I will argue the point of "spin".

I read the same Vanity Fair article, and yes, I got the same vibe you did, but I also realized that they gave very little space to Lucas in the first place. Most of the emphasis was on Spielberg.

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying that it all depends on your point of view, and your choosing to vilify Lucas because the movies he makes don't live up to your high standard (and to be fair, I have that standard as well, I'm not saying you don't expect the best) BUT what you end up doing, is proving his point.

Why would he make a movie for the fans, if the fans are going to react the way that you do?
User avatar
bluebottle
AIRWOLF PLUS
 
Posts: 5354
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 3:17 pm
Location: Canada

Postby DennisMM on Thu Jan 03, 2008 1:02 am

I have absolutely no emotional investment in Star Wars. I liked Ep. 4, loved Ep. 5, thought Ep. 6. Had its moments. 20 years down the line I thought Ep. 1 was as boring a movie as I'd sat through in years. Ep. 2 was better but not particularly interesting. I passed on Ep. 3. Still haven't seen it.

I don't have any emotional investment in Jones except that I think Raiders is one of the most FUN experiences you can have at the movies - and it really does have to be in a theater to work. If Skulls is a bore or demonstrates the Lucas touch rather than the Spielberg touch, I'll live with it.
Last edited by DennisMM on Thu Jan 24, 2008 9:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all." -- Noam Chomsky
DennisMM
NOT PARTICULARLY MENACING
 
Posts: 16808
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 5:02 pm
Location: Watchin' the reels go 'round and 'round

Next

Return to Director Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron