| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Capt. Nemo
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
630 Posts |
 Posted - 04/10/2006 : 01:28:09 AM
|
I figure after taking on the weird things Gene Roddenberry said and did after the Star Trek series that it would be fair to turn out attention to George Lucas and the Star Wars series.
I will admit that I hung on to fanasty as long as I could. An off the cuff admittion from a friend who said that "George Lucas is a better producer than director." And the spell was broken.
The original Star Wars was a very well done film. But that is ONLY film that Lucas did that was interesting and fun.
Now that I have seen some of his other work(admittedly I haven't seen American Graffitti) and listen to his commentary tracks, I have come to the conclusion that he is a total flake.
I chalk the fact that he got Star Wars right by saying even a broken watch gets it right twice a day.
He vigorously defends computer animation and scoffs at how people tell him it looks fake. He thinks props, makeup, and prosthetics are worse than computer animation. He plans to make movies that are not financially successful. That means he is deliberately making art that people do not want to see(and I think Speilberg is picking up some bad habits from him).
Have you people heard any other dunderheaded comments from this man?
_____________________________________________________________________
"Ward, the Beaver blew up the 7-11 again."
"I'll have a talk with him Dear" |
Edited by - Capt. Nemo on 04/10/2006 01:35:49 AM
|
|
|
Sardu
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
1126 Posts |
Posted - 04/10/2006 : 03:18:25 AM
|
For the record, I think that THX 1138 is a very interesting and ground breaking film in many ways (especially sound design) and American Graffiti is a solid movie. And THX is an example where he actually made a vast improvement in the film with his re-tinkering 30 years later. But over the course of his career and especially with the prequels his oeuvre as a filmmaker is actually pretty questionable. I actually think he has a lot in common with Roddenberry- they're both great idea men who are hugely overrated at taking their own conceptions further. And apparently both truly lousy writers. But, very very good overseers. They certainly both bought into their own BS at some point.
What you can't deny is that Lucas is a tremendous force for the tech side of the movie biz. I think his push into 24P digital filmmaking is the way of the future and people like Speilberg (who won't even cut on an AVID!!) are dinosaurs in that respect. Lucas has done more for good sound reproduction in film than anyone. And of course, there's ILM.
As for the making films that lose money, well that's an idiot way to put it. But if what he means is "I plan to make films that I belive in 100% and I don't give a damn if they make money or not", well me might get something out of him yet that's worthwhile.
Or not.
Coming soon-
Eraserhead: The Musical!! |
Edited by - Sardu on 04/10/2006 03:22:30 AM |
 |
|
|
Neville
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
Spain
1590 Posts |
Posted - 04/10/2006 : 04:00:57 AM
|
Hey, I certainly don't mind big names like Spielberg or Lucas trying to do more artistic movies. After all, if you take a look at Spielberg's careeer, his movies started looking much better when he decided he wouldn't make more Jurasic Park sequels.
About Lucas, he may not be that bad, but certainly he is overrated. I even think his first Star Wars is the worst of the original trilogy. It has some messy writing (why do we need two heroes?) and the pacing is very sluggish. |
|
|
|
jackspencerjr
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
262 Posts |
Posted - 04/10/2006 : 5:17:10 PM
|
Well, Lucas for all the hype surrounding him hasn't really made a whole lot of movies and his output dropped sharply after Return of the Jedi. Based on essentially three movies, he's become a hollywood icon. Sure you could add the Indiana Jones series, THX1138, American Graffitti, but these are not quite the cultural phenomenom that Star Wars is. So he's based his career on a movie he'd made like almost 30 years ago.
More to the point, watching Return of the Jedi, it was pretty clear that he'd gotten sick of Star Wars. Hence why the final chapter of the trilogy is sort of loose feeling, filled with neat coincidences and such and not really trying to hard to show us something new (another Death Star??). So, he waited a couple decades to make the prequels and now that they are finally here, I can say that he's still sick of Star Wars. The love is not there anymore.
"The MacGuffin that turns our to be a big fat MacNuthin'." |
|
|
|
BradH812
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
USA
1294 Posts |
Posted - 04/10/2006 : 5:52:11 PM
|
There's two George Lucas's here. The old one and the new. The old George Lucas was the director of THX-1138, American Graffiti, and Star Wars. Back then, he was a hungry up-and-comer who had a lot to prove. THX started out as his student film, Star Wars was based on stories he had written in the past, and Graffiti was based on his own teen years. He had an emotional investment in all of them.
Then came Empire. He handed the reins over to Kershner, who did a bang-up job, but I've read that the two of them butted heads quite a lot. (By the way, I do NOT believe ESB was the best of the bunch; it had some BIG continuity problems.) So he basically hired a yes-man to direct Jedi. I really wonder what might have been if Spielberg had accepted Lucas's offer to direct.
Now, skip ahead 16 years. We have the new, uh, old Lucas. When he made Phantom Menace, he hadn't directed a thing in over twenty years, and it showed. He had a $100 million budget so he could spend freely as he chose and throw money at any problem that cropped up, and it showed. He had complete control; no one was there to pull back. And it showed. The same thing happened with Clones. I have no idea if it was still there with Sith, since I haven't seen it (and don't have any immediate plans to). But everything I've heard tells me it's more of the same.
Jack Spencer may be right; Lucas may be sick of Star Wars. But it's his own fault; I don't see the guy trying to branch out at present, and he's had plenty of time. If he was really sick of it, he should've just let the first trilogy stand.
To sum that windy diatribe above.... George Lucas has become a victim of his own success. (And I suspect Spielberg is hurtling in the same direction.) If he really wants to go into smaller, more intimate work, I suggest he do it and prove to us that he's an honest-to-God director, not a mogul. Otherwise, he'd do well to shut up. |
|
|
|
jackspencerjr
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
262 Posts |
Posted - 04/10/2006 : 6:50:56 PM
|
Was it a post or article on this site I was reading that said that the big boom in the 70's in filmmaking was basically the work of a handful of people: Lucas (Star Wars), Spielberg (Jaws), Coppola (Godfather), etc. all of whome were young, talented directors striving to prove themselves and all of them have since failed to match their previous successes in their later work?
If so, at least Spielberg and Coppola have still been working, at least. (I will note that I really like The Rainmaker) Lucas had been resting on his laurels a bit, although I get the feling he'd rather be a writer than a director, but even there his work had been thin. Most of his credits on the IMDb are Star Wars or Indiana jones related. In fact, the only thing since 1980 he'd written since 1980 that was not related to those two properties appears to be Captain Eo, Willow, and Radioland Murders.
Compare that to Spielberg or Coppola who worked on a greater variety of projects in various genres. Lucas is showing himself to be a one-trick pony who'd managed to make a movie at just the right time. That is all.
"The MacGuffin that turns our to be a big fat MacNuthin'." |
|
|
|
zombiewhacker
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
USA
1475 Posts |
Posted - 04/11/2006 : 01:55:49 AM
|
Funny, I thought Revenge of the Sith was a return to form for Lucas. Not as good as the original SW but certainly a major improvement over the first two prequels.
It bears mentioning it appears that Lucas has alienated himself over the years from the many people who contributed to his early success. Screenwriters Huyck and Katz contributed mightily to American Grafitti (and to a less extent to Star Wars). Lawrence Kasdan co-wrote the two original trilogy sequels (as well as Raiders of the Lost Ark). As far as I know, none of them had anything to do with the new trilogy. (And the days of Brian DePalma patiently rewriting (and rewriting Lucas's opening credit scrawls are long gone.
That being said, it's amazing Sith turned out as good as it did. |
|
|
|
Terrahawk
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
USA
644 Posts |
Posted - 04/11/2006 : 09:58:20 AM
|
Some people only have one or two great ideas in their lifetime (others none). And actually, how many of us would be happy just once to create something that everyone for at least a generation remembers and loves? I would. Lucas' achievements beyond the technical advances listed previously are that he really is a good businessman. He's created an empire out of his success and that is nothing to laugh at.
It seems that there really need to be limits for creative people to really create. Too often when they have free reign, they create turgid piles of scum.
The ROPe gives you three options, convert, submit, or die. There is a fourth, resist. |
|
|
|
jackspencerjr
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
262 Posts |
Posted - 04/11/2006 : 2:59:30 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by zombiewhacker
Funny, I thought Revenge of the Sith was a return to form for Lucas. Not as good as the original SW but certainly a major improvement over the first two prequels.
Well, yeah, but that's part of the problem if you ask me. In a wy, Sith is where they should have started. Because that's when things finally happen.
However, I still found it to be mind-crushingly dumb. For lots of reason, which are no-doubt listed elsewhere all over the internet. It is better than the other two prequels, but it is only comparatively better.
Re-watching the original trilogy (non special edition) I have to say that the prequels work much, much better as backstory than as movies on their own.
All in all, the prequels, in spite of being number 1, 2, 3 work better if viewed after the originals. There is too much name-dropping and the like for them to work well as the opening chapters of a saga. They feel too much like latter-day prequels.
quote:
Originally posted by Terrahawk
Lucas' achievements beyond the technical advances listed previously are that he really is a good businessman. He's created an empire out of his success and that is nothing to laugh at.
True, but for some reason he keeps tinkering with them. Which is probably that creative part of him that really hates being stuck for having a new project to work on, so he monkeys with past projects, which worked, doggonit, but he has to "fix" them anyway because he can't be happy with them or something.
"The MacGuffin that turns our to be a big fat MacNuthin'." |
|
|
|
Neville
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
Spain
1590 Posts |
Posted - 04/11/2006 : 3:00:01 PM
|
True. The History of cinema is full of talented people who destroyed their careers when they were left absolute freedom. Director Michael Cimino or writer Joe Stherzas as just two of them.
|
|
|
|
BlamWalker
Archdeacon of Jabootu
USA
14 Posts |
Posted - 04/11/2006 : 4:37:58 PM
|
| After reading the comments on here and giving it some thought, George Lucas has a lot in common with another icon of his field: Trent Reznor. Both created huge legacies for themselves on a relative paucity of material (Lucas with Star Wars, Reznor with two-and-a-half albums, Pretty Hate Machine, Broken, and The Downward Spiral), both condemned and renounced their respective industries when they felt their creativity was threatened by them (Lucas burned his bridges with both the Screenwriter's Guild and the Director's Guild and formed his own production company, while Reznor breached his contract with TVT Records and refused to settle until he got his own label), both moved largely into production after their initial successes (Reznor spent most of the six years between Spiral and The Fragile working with Marilyn Manson, Two, Prick, and a number of other projects rather than his own), and neither (and this is debatable) have been able to live up to those previous accomplishments, now that they're back in business (the Star Wars prequels were awful, and Reznor's current output ranges from decent [The Fragile] to weak [With Teeth, which honestly, isn't]). Are either of them worthy of their hype as creative and artistic geniuses? Personally, I don't think so. They did some good stuff, sure, but there are any number of other talents in each of their fields who've done way more to deserve the kind of recognition these two have received. But hey, that's just me. |
|
|
|
jackspencerjr
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
262 Posts |
Posted - 04/11/2006 : 7:02:49 PM
|
I'd like to strike a comparason to Harper Lee who wrote only one novel, To Kill a Mockingbird, and then never bothered to write another. Now Mockingbird is a darn fine novel. No debate about that. And she apparently recognized that she just doesn't have another one in her. (I tried looking this up once. She apparently did more short stories in her day. Mockingbird may have been the one story she had that was in-depth enough to warrant a full-length treatment or possibly the only such story she'd come up with that would have been of length that she cared enough about to actually work on.)
However, once done she didn't dwell on it. And more importantly, she didn't spend time tinkering with it so that Atticus was now an alien robot or something. It was done and then she moved on.
I can only hope that Lucas will stop tinkering with Star Wars now that he's completed the second trilogy
"The MacGuffin that turns our to be a big fat MacNuthin'." |
|
|
|
Prankster
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
Canada
727 Posts |
Posted - 04/11/2006 : 10:20:40 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Capt. Nemo
He vigorously defends computer animation and scoffs at how people tell him it looks fake. He thinks props, makeup, and prosthetics are worse than computer animation. He plans to make movies that are not financially successful. That means he is deliberately making art that people do not want to see(and I think Speilberg is picking up some bad habits from him).
I don't really see the problem with any of this. CGI is being just as unfairly hated these days as it was once overpraised. Technically, it IS probably the best single tool for FX work, but it requires plenty of care and effort, which is the step that people tend to skip over.
As for "planning to make movies that are not financially successful", I assume what he actually said is that he'd like to make movies that may not be huge smash hits at the box office. And he created the most financially successful film series of all time, so his standards may not be the same as anyone else's. I fail to see the problem with any of this. Lord knows there are too many terrible movies that are cranked out just for the money anyway, and they aren't neccessarily "what people want to see". I mean, people are turning "Ice Age 2: The Meltdown" into a box office smash, and letting "Slither" die at the box office. Of the two, which are you likely to spare a thought for in another six months?
---
Check out my online comics at [URL]http://www.phantasmictales.com[/URL]! |
|
|
|
Triviachamp
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
254 Posts |
Posted - 04/11/2006 : 11:20:17 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Prankster
quote:
Originally posted by Capt. Nemo
He vigorously defends computer animation and scoffs at how people tell him it looks fake. He thinks props, makeup, and prosthetics are worse than computer animation. He plans to make movies that are not financially successful. That means he is deliberately making art that people do not want to see(and I think Speilberg is picking up some bad habits from him).
I don't really see the problem with any of this. CGI is being just as unfairly hated these days as it was once overpraised. Technically, it IS probably the best single tool for FX work, but it requires plenty of care and effort, which is the step that people tend to skip over.
CGI is just a tool that can be used properly or not. Many people hated sound and color when they were first were introduced. In many cases this was because the movies did not use them well. |
Edited by - Triviachamp on 04/11/2006 11:22:44 PM |
|
|
|
BradH812
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
USA
1294 Posts |
Posted - 04/12/2006 : 06:40:02 AM
|
The problem with CGI is that people too often turn to it first, rather than save it as a last resort. There are times when it is needed, and times when it is not.
I still chuckle when I think of something Ridley Scott said in his commentary for Legend. It was a scene where a fairy was flitting around a few inches above the ground. All we could see was a twinkle of light. In the commentary, Scott said, "Now, if this were done today (2000), it would be computer animated and cost a quarter million dollars. We did it with a Christmas tree light, an invisible wire, and a technician just off screen holding a fishing rod. Hel-LO-O-O!!!"
You gotta admit, he had a good point. |
|
|
|
Matrixprime
Diocesan Ecclesiarch of the Sacred Order of Jabootu
USA
69 Posts |
Posted - 04/12/2006 : 10:39:49 AM
|
My understanding of Lucas, from articles and interviews, is that he's an excellent concept man but rather poor in the writing half (not to different from Roddenberry, to tie it in to the original post). His work was always at its best when it was tempered by someone else.
As a young Producer/Director, he had other writers, studio bean counters, and executives to answer to. An article in the paper here once mentioned his original cast for the GOOD trilogy involved Luke as a midget, Leia was an amazonian hero, and Han Solo was a fish man. Budgetary restraints (and presumably, the hysterical laughter) convinced him otherwise.
Once he made the money he needed, though, he no longer had those restrictions. He now has his own Sound Company (THX), his own special effects company, and his own studio (Skywalker ranch, essentially). He has the technical expertise and the clout to get whatever else he needs with little difficulty. He's made the friends that are all important in Hollywood.
Just compare the two trilogies. Best comparison - one is early Lucas, the other is Fat Bloated Jabba Lucas. Even Return of the Jedi, which I've read some negative comments on 'cause of the Ewoks, is a far superior film to the new trilogy. I won't go into detail here, as its just secondary to the point of the thread, but key among them is the personal investment people have in the characters. you care about Han Solo, Leia, Luke, and so on. You feel the menace from Palpatine.
Also look at the CGI. I love CGI personally; I think it does a lot of good things, and I'm a big fan of Sky Captain, FF Spirits Within, and look forward to Advent Children. But its a mixed blessing when it comes to blending Real Life with CGI.
The new trilogy is all CGI. In an interview after Ep. 1 came out, Liam Neiiasan (however you spell it) told a reporter that the experience was enough to make him quit movies and go back to the stage. All CGI might not be so bad (like I said, I like some movies like Sky Captain) but Lucas goes insane with it. Evry damn thing is CGI. I also find it odd that most of his CGI locales look less 'real' than some lower budget, more castigated films (for example, after seeing AVP in theatres, I was very surprised to know the entire temple was CGI rendered - no sets or props).
I'll leave with this - when I first saw interviews with Lucas, during the original trilogy, I was impressed by this energetic, baseball cap wearing bearded guy who loved his craft.
In recent years, not only has he grown to look like Jabba he has the characters arrogance. When a CNN interviewer told him many fans were disappointed in that he won't allow the untouched original trilogy to be on the DVD, he said 'I'm sorry they fell in love with a flawed product; but the remake is what I want as a legacy. I destroyed all my originals - it doesn't exist anymore". It was also reported that after Spiderman took the top spot over episode 2, he pitched a fit and stopped filming Ep3 for a while, then initially stated the only way he'd release the originals on DVD would be after 3, as a big 6 DVD set. Obviously he needed more money, since 3 happened and the originals came out.
Here's my response to fatso - first, the films are yours, but they've become a national treasure of sorts, like movies like the Wizard of Oz. you have no right to go back 25 years, take my childhood memories, and whiz all over them because you want it to look that way now. They're no longer 'completely' yours once they entered the public forum. Turner is regularly castigated for colorizing B&W films, you're no different.
Next - I've got your number though. We own the original trilogy, widescreen, on laserdisc. We're getting a Laserdisc player, and then we'll convert to a DVD so we can watch 'em on our DVD player.
Bah Weep Granna Weep Ninny Bahn - Universal Greeting
Est Solarus Oth Mithas - Solamnic Knight Pledge
And now its me too:
http://matrixprime.blogspot.com |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Forum Locked
Topic Locked