| Author |
 Topic  |
|
hbrennan
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
Philippines
1455 Posts |
 Posted - 04/12/2006 : 10:56:02 AM
|
quote:
Matrixprime wrote:
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.
Actually, he does have the right. But we also have the right to endlessly remind him of his foolishness, to piss him off constantly with those reminders and to take action when it comes to circulating wonderful items like the original trilogy and "The 'Star Wars' Holiday Special".
"...yet it hadn't destroyed his brain."
re: Charles "The Butcher" Benton (1956)
http://henrybrennan.blogspot.com/ |
 |
|
|
Matrixprime
Diocesan Ecclesiarch of the Sacred Order of Jabootu
USA
69 Posts |
Posted - 04/12/2006 : 12:21:42 PM
|
I have to disagree. The script, the original story, etc, are his. But when something reaches the level the movies did (Books, Comics, etc) it definitely goes far beyond that.
Plus I'd argue that a movie is owned by all who contributed, though to much smaller extent.
For example, in RotJ, a gentleman was hired to stand in as the ghost of Darth Vader, now human again. It was about the only thing he did, and in an interview with his family he was very proud of being part of film history.
For 20+ years, that man WAS human Darth Vader. Then Lucas goes in for revision 2, and changes it to the new actor and destroys the originals.
To that man, it was as if he never was (and perhaps with laws the way they are, perhaps if he was entitled to residuals he wouldn't any longer). He is no longer in the film, he's no longer in the credits, its as if he never was. His contribution was meaningless. Shades of 1984 - soon enough, it will have been so long since anyone saw the REAL original trilogy, that no one will ever believe him or his family.
I live in Orlando. Every year MGM does 'star wars days'. Many if not all of the actors and actresses that show are the bit players, those that had few or no lines or a minute or two of screen time. My friend and her fiance attend regularly and meet them, and they're all proud to be a part of it.
Lucas didn't just whiz on my childhood (Star Wars being one of the few common bonds I had with my father), he whizzed all over everyone's contributions with his revisions. I wonder how many others were removed, deleted, or digitally altered from their bits to make him happy?
I've been at the same job for many years; I've created most of the manuals, the reports, etc. I've been put on just about every single project. Management has always given me credit for what I've done, and I'm very grateful for it. But if one day I went in, and it was as if I'd never done any of it, I would be very upset. And that's small potatoes comparing to being part of history.
And yes, I have no problem with signifying my disgust in other ways. I waited until $1 rental day at my local grocery store to see Revenge (and gee, odd how Sith has the same letters as...). I don't buy the books, I stopped picking up the roleplaying supplements, and I stopped buying the books. I still haven't bought the Revised Revised Original Trilogy on DVD, and I don't own any of the crap trilogy. And if I had the time and the money, I'd be making and mailing DVD copies of the holiday special around the globe, just to make him mad.
Bah Weep Granna Weep Ninny Bahn - Universal Greeting
Est Solarus Oth Mithas - Solamnic Knight Pledge
And now its me too:
http://matrixprime.blogspot.com |
|
|
|
Matrixprime
Diocesan Ecclesiarch of the Sacred Order of Jabootu
USA
69 Posts |
Posted - 04/12/2006 : 12:29:18 PM
|
I should add that I'm not against the principal of some revisions. Star Trek TMP underwent some changes (I bought but haven't watched yet). Chiefly, the big focus was in touching up the aging SFX, removing a ladder that was floating behind Spock when he goes EVA, and restoring a scene that was a flyby of Vger's core that was never implemented, because the fog machines made it melt (it was restored using some CGI and pictures of the diorama).
Something like that, where the story itself wasn't impacted, is one thing.
As a comparison; in one of Shatners Star Trek fiction books, he posits that the Borg are damaged probes sent from the machine world that rescued Voyager, and initially went out to meet other life forms (Voyager being the first 'life form' met). Unfortunately, a copy of a copy of a copy....and meet and learn became assimilate. (personal note - I love the idea and the book was pretty good too).
Now, if Paramount went back and digitally changed Ilira (sp) into a Borg or ProtoBorg after her 'assimilation' by Vger, and gave Vger less of a nebulous appearance and more of a Borg Cube, I would be royally ticked off. That would be an alteration of the movie I like (and yes, I like the movie) and a disrespect to the actress.
Bah Weep Granna Weep Ninny Bahn - Universal Greeting
Est Solarus Oth Mithas - Solamnic Knight Pledge
And now its me too:
http://matrixprime.blogspot.com |
|
|
|
Sardu
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
1126 Posts |
Posted - 04/12/2006 : 12:32:17 PM
|
"Yes, no. Maybe. I don't know. Can you repeat the question?
You're not the boss of me now, you're not the boss of me now
You're not the boss of me now, and you're not so big.
You're not the boss of me now, you're not the boss of me now
You're not the boss of me now and you're not so big.
Life is unfair."
Coming soon-
Eraserhead: The Musical!! |
|
|
|
Mark Hawley
Minister of the Sacraments of Jabootu
Canada
48 Posts |
Posted - 04/12/2006 : 3:45:08 PM
|
This is actually my first post on the "new" board, but here goes:
Uh Matrixprime,
Where did you hear that Neeson was so pissed about working with greenscreens, he threatened to retire from film acting?
I know that he once did say he was thinking of retiring around the time Phantom Menace came out and the press "speculated" that it was due to his experiences on TPM, but that was never confirmed and he shot TPM over the summer of '97, so when he did say that he was thinking of retiring, some time in '99, he had probably shot at least two films since (one of which was "The Haunting").
And even if so, what sense would that make? He has a bad experience working with greenscreen. For most, the logical thing to do would be to not make movies where extensive greenscreen work is used. Why would anyone in their right mind think of quitting film in general? And to go back to the stage? I think it's fair to say actors have had to use their imaginations a few times while performing on stage, so why would working with greenscreens be that much of a switch?
And the comment about Lucas pitching a fit and quitting shooting Episode III for a while because of Spider-man beating Episode II at the box office, where did you ever hear that? I can even begin to decscribe the illogic of that one. First of all, Episode II and Spider-man came out the summer of 2002. Episode III wasn't shot till the summer of 2003 (at least a one year time-descrepency) to be released in 2005. While it's possible Lucas wasn't that happy having a Star Wars film play second fiddle to another summer blockbuster (the first -and now last, so it seems - time that's ever happened), unless he's completely insane, I can't imagine him being that down. Episode II still did $300 million-plus million in the U.S. alone on a budget of around $100 million.
As for Star Wars coming out on DVD one whole year earlier than he said it was, well it was certainly a cash-grab, but not because he "lost" money on Episode II, but most likely because at least two new formats were on the horizon, so he wanted to take advantage of DVD while it was still going strong.
As for the special editions, you're pretty much on the mark. I don't care what he changes, as long as the original cuts are easily available in definitive formats (they are available, and easy as hell to find on laserdisc and VHS), but most of the changes are add ons and not replacements (a few shots are, mostly during the final space battle in Star Wars. I'd probably say at least 99% of all effects work done in the OT is still intact). Also, the actor you mention, Sebastian Shaw, still appears in ROTJ, and has lines, when Luke removes the Vader mask. Clive Revill, the voice of the Emperor in ESB, is another story, but it would make sense Lucas would want to add Ian McDiamid in since he plays the character in four other Star Wars films. Again, if he would release both versions, this wouldn't be much of an issue, which is why he should release both versions, but then again I own the originals on laserdisc, so I can easily watch them if I want to see Clive Revill do the voice of The Emperor so it isn't much of an issue (for me anyways).
As for the quality of the prequels, sure they have flaws, and some things I absolutely hate (Jar Jar and the Neidmodians), but are they honestly anything significantly worse than the originals? It's not that some critics and those who fancied themselves part of the intellectual elite didn't take the originals to task for their acting, dialog and somewhat childish story telling back in the day.
Remember, Star Wars was envisioned by Lucas as a homage to Flash Gordon and Buck Rogers serials, so if he geniunely wanted to tip his hat to them, he's going to allow some cheesiness and childishness to go with the proceedings. He wanted them to be fun, rousing, adventurous and exciting fantasy films that would appeal to all ages and I'd say he succeeded in spades with all six films..
Not that this proves the prequels are incontravertably great, or even good films, or that you have to like them, but Episode I grossed over $400 million in the U.S., Episode II grossed over $300 million, and Episode III made just $20 million shy of $400 million. Alot of it due to hype, I'm sure, and a devout-no-matter-what fanbase, but I'm sure if they're really as reviled as some people (particularly on the net) would have you believe, II and III would have taken a much bigger hit (though II did take somewhat of a hit, it wasn't that big - a 25-30% drop) at the box office (just look at what the third Matrix film did in comparison to the second to see what happens when you release a disappointing entry in a series alienates the audience).
And they weren't that critically reviled either. A trip to Rottentomates shows all Star Wars prequels rated as fresh, with both Episode I and II in the early 60%s and Episode III in the early 80s. Not ringing endorsements (at least for I and II) but hardly the critical bloodbath that many in the press and net have claimed. However, pretty good considering these films were going to divide people no matter what, and when you're a pop-cultural phenomenon like Star Wars or as insanely rich as Lucas is, people are always going to take easy shots at you, you know, sour grapes and all(not that he doesn't deserve it every now in then, but it definitely gets to be a bit much), not to mention schadenfreude (ie: I'm sure Episode II's box office was a bit of a disappointment, it was no means a flop and I doubt Lucas ever came close to throwing a fit).
So basically, the prequels, collectively, made billions for Lucas, got generally strong reviews (particularly Episode III), yet some people still act and insist that Lucas fell flat on his face with them. I don't get it. By pretty much all criteria, they were, at the very least, solid successes and things like some negative reviews, audience divisions (though not enough to get that much of them to jump ship), and mildly flucuating box office are things to be expected with a near 30 year old franchise. |
Edited by - Mark Hawley on 04/12/2006 6:53:29 PM |
|
|
|
hbrennan
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
Philippines
1455 Posts |
Posted - 04/12/2006 : 4:42:31 PM
|
Welcome to the board, Mark Hawley. That was a well thought out and quite accurate (in my opinion) assessment.
"...yet it hadn't destroyed his brain."
re: Charles "The Butcher" Benton (1956)
http://henrybrennan.blogspot.com/ |
|
|
|
Mark Hawley
Minister of the Sacraments of Jabootu
Canada
48 Posts |
Posted - 04/12/2006 : 6:46:56 PM
|
| Thanks, though I've always been here, I just haven't posted since before this new board format came in, though I've always checked in. |
|
|
|
Matrixprime
Diocesan Ecclesiarch of the Sacred Order of Jabootu
USA
69 Posts |
Posted - 04/13/2006 : 9:49:43 PM
|
Bullet time, due to the fact medicine's makin' me quite drowsy:
>Where did you hear that Neeson was so pissed about working with >greenscreens, he threatened to retire from film acting?
After Phantom Menace came out, I was watching an interview with him on *something*. It's been years, I can't remember, but it was either a Broadcast news program or CNN/etc. When asked about the film he indicated that the extensive blue/green screen bothered him to the extent that he was considering leaving the movie business altogether and going back to theatre. He made some comment about walking in front of a green screen talking to a ball on a stick with people calling out bits like 'there's something flying over your head' and feeling less like an actor and more like a puppet. Obviously he didn't, and maybe he was blowing off steam, but he was pretty sincere about it. I vaguely recall an interview a few years later where he was looking for less CGI intensive scripts, but don't hold me to that.
>And even if so, what sense would that make?
There's some who feel the use of CGI and so on can be detrimental to films. At various points I've seen the comment that too many people use CGI/SFX as a crutch, to the detriment of the film. I can't crawl in Liam's head, but for myself I'm mixed. On one hand CGI has helped to bring about some of the best movies out there, but I've rented plenty of movies that seemed like CGI was something to fill in the cracks of a weak story. I'd also seen some comments about how extensive CGI could render living actors obsolete; hyperbole to be sure, but there's something in that you could reach the point where you'd license an actors likeness and have him provide voice acting, and do the rest in studio. Maybe good, maybe bad; its an evolution of entertainment, like film was to stage, and it could go either way.
>nd the comment about Lucas pitching a fit and quitting shooting >Episode III for a while because of Spider-man beating Episode II at >the box office, where did you ever hear that?
A coworker of mine was a big scifi buff, and used to read up on as much as possible. He's the one that indicated that Lucas had been really ticked that a Star Wars movie was second fiddle, and after getting critically blasted on 1 and 2, was threatening to cease production on 3. Even then I didn't think he'd do it, and neither did my coworker, but his behavior of late doesn't really disagree with the image of someone throwing a tantrum like that and griping. If I can find the coworker again (he's in another part of the company) I'll ask if he remembers the source.
As for the DVD's - at several parts I'd seen articles where he indicated the original trilogy wouldn't come out on DVD until 3 did. I personally think he eventually released it early because he was trying to keep interest peaked for 3, but I've never seen anything on TV or in print to indicate.
>By pretty much all criteria, they were, at the very least, solid >successes
Yes, but as I've seen mentioned at various points on this and other sites, profit/etc isn't always an indicator of a good movie. To quote Ken:
"...The Trial of Billy Jack. Astoundingly, the latter was 1974’s fifth most successful film..."
My opinion to that is they made a lot of money because it had something few other movies ever do; it had a built in guarantee of people seeing it. Regardless of how good/bad they were, people were going to see the prequel to see how they began. I was guilty of that for one and two, seeing them as they came out. In a CNN.com article I read just before III came out, Lucas himself made the comment that regardless of 1 and 2, he knew people were going to 3.
As for reviews, the positive reviews I read for 2 and 3 seemed to be on a sliding scale, as in 'It sucked, but less than the previous'.
Honestly I think 3 was an OK film; it seemed to veer wildly from well done (the space battle in the beginning) to lousy (the whole death of Dooku sequence) throughout the entire film. 2 was the same way, with some segments (like the non R2/C3PO segments of the last 30 min or so) being quite good, and the sand people segment being badly done IMO. 1 was unredeemable, again IMO.
I think Lucas had real talent, and I think he's lost it. I think he's walled himself into delusions not unlike The Wall, and is almost as disconnected from reality as Michael Jackson is. I think he's got a bit of megalomania and more than a little arrogance.
If I've come across as a bit vitriolic with my posts, I apologize. Star Wars and Star Trek have always been a core part of my childhood, (along with Transformers obviously). Also, I feel very strongly that revising something (removing guns in ET, the original trilogy remixes, colorizing B&W) is wrong. I'd rather see a remake than something like that. When its unfinished or unreleased by its creator, thats one thing. But I feel that once something is released for public consumption, its almost immoral to alter it, and its definitely immoral to go so far as to destroy all original copies so only a remake exists. Perhaps I've read too much dystopian fiction, but thats my opinion.
It's not sour grapes on my part, its frustration that too many people don't know when to leave well enough alone, and he's got the power and money to go further than most. I don't envy him his money or the limelight, and I went to see 2 even after seeing 1 and hating it, because I felt that it had been so long, perhaps I had unrealistic expectations.
Now, as it seems that the thread has gotten rather snarky, and I'm feeling like the focus is on me and my opinions, I'm going back to lurking for a while, at least until this thread dies out. Discussion is one thing, but it seems like some are getting a bit too personal.
Bah Weep Granna Weep Ninny Bahn - Universal Greeting
Est Solarus Oth Mithas - Solamnic Knight Pledge
And now its me too:
http://matrixprime.blogspot.com |
|
|
|
Sardu
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
1126 Posts |
Posted - 04/13/2006 : 10:23:39 PM
|
The thread doesn't seem snarky to me- you and Nemo have a position that a lot of people share (I do to a large degree), and I thought Mark was just presenting another side. I think it's just a discussion and you should definitely stick around and present your side.
The Liam quote sounds exactly like the sort of exclamation one throws out after an experience like that; sort of half meaning it and half not. I've said I'm going to quit the music business on plenty of occasions; it's really just a way of saying "I just got through something that wore me out." I don't even get the impression that he hated making Ep. 1; but clearly it's a type of filmmaking that he doesn't enjoy. No sin there. At least the actors making LOTR didn't have to act in front of green-screen ALL the time; they got outdoors on occasion!!
And the CGI situation- it's a cliche but CGI is a tool, like any other tool. It doesn't help or harm a movie in and of itself any more than shooting in color or black and white, or using model shots. What counts is A) does the director have a good story to tell, and B) does he know how to use his tools to tell it?? Cast Away is full- FULL of CGI. It's in every frame of that film, almost. You just don't notice because it wasn't about making dinosaurs and spaceships- it was about erasing a tree and adding another one somewhere else in the shot.
My fundamental problem with the prequels isn't in the CGI. For me it's mostly an uninteresting story that's full of holes and bad choices in directing the actors. The craft in making them is outstnding though. Revenge almost- ALMOST- got things back on the right path but it was too little, too late for me.
I hate to be a back seat director but if it were me the entire two first movies would have been the first reel of Episode III and it would have been two films. There's this dumb notion in sci-fi that everything is a trilogy now.
I really do think that Lucas has bought into his own somewhat undeserved legend as a maker of myth, and might be a bit meglomanical in that regard. Although, if you were that successful, you would be too. When you see him making the films though, in the docs, he seems like a realy open and down-to-Earth guy- not that anyone has the balls to disagree with him though.
Coming soon-
Eraserhead: The Musical!! |
Edited by - Sardu on 04/13/2006 10:29:40 PM |
|
|
|
Capt. Nemo
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
630 Posts |
Posted - 04/14/2006 : 8:53:22 PM
|
I think you guys misunderstood what I was saying about CGI and Lucas.
I'm not saying I have a problem with Lucas using CGI.
I'm saying Lucas has problem with directors who DON'T use CGI.
_____________________________________________________________________
"Ward, the Beaver blew up the 7-11 again."
"I'll have a talk with him Dear" |
|
|
|
zombiewhacker
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
USA
1475 Posts |
Posted - 04/14/2006 : 10:59:31 PM
|
One thing to be said on Lucas' behalf is that he isn't completely tone deaf to fan reaction to his films. After the merciless pounding Jar-Jar received in Phantom Menace, Lucas easily could have easily gone on the defensive, said "Screw you, guys", and proceeded to put petal to the medal for installments II and III. Instead, he limited Jar-Jar to a mere cameo in Clones and by the time Sith rolled around the unloveable Gungan had been reduced to a non-speaking extra.
In the same spirit, it should be noted that Lucas heeded criticism that the cast of the original Star Wars was too lilly-white by expanding its cast to include blacks and Hispanics in the follow-ups.
That said, I wish Lucas would restore the original trilogy at least for history's sake. Lucas thinks his early films are flawed? Fine, let them be viewed as flawed, just like Willis O'Brien's unconvincing King Kong and the fake matte/rear-projection work for the Mount Rushmore climax of North by Northwest were flawed. Hey, to stretch the argument just a bit: Edison's inventions are flawed, too, but would you rather the Edison estate tossed his phone into the dumpster and replaced it with a Bluetooth just to conceal how "short-sighted" Thomas E. was once upon a time? |
|
|
|
Prankster
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
Canada
727 Posts |
Posted - 04/15/2006 : 08:38:54 AM
|
What were his exact words? Because, no offense, but I highly doubt he said that specifically.
---
Check out my online comics at [URL]http://www.phantasmictales.com[/URL]! |
|
|
|
zombiewhacker
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
USA
1475 Posts |
Posted - 04/15/2006 : 1:17:27 PM
|
Prankster's point is well taken. The transcript of the CNN George Lucas interview can be retrieved from the Google cache (Why Lucas tinkered with 'Star Wars' - Sep 20, 2004).
quote:
'I'm making the movies'
Q: Why not release both the originals and special editions on DVD?
LUCAS: The special edition, that's the one I wanted out there. The other movie, it's on VHS, if anybody wants it. ...
I'm not going to spend the, we're talking millions of dollars here, the money and the time to refurbish that, because to me, it doesn't really exist anymore. It's like this is the movie I wanted it to be, and I'm sorry you saw half a completed film and fell in love with it. But I want it to be the way I want it to be.
Note in the interview Lucas doesn't actually say he destroyed the original trilogy prints; rather that the original trilogy "doesn't really exist anymore". (Ooh, doncha hate it when George waxes philosophical?)
Still, extant or not, Lucas isn't allowing his originals to be shown anymore, and that's a shame. |
|
|
|
jackspencerjr
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
262 Posts |
Posted - 04/15/2006 : 2:50:02 PM
|
"...I'm sorry you saw half a completed film and fell in love with it."
Well, Georgie, I'm sorry you saw a good film that millions fell in love with and saw a half-completed film.
Either that or I'm sorry I fell in love with it in the first place. Thanks for the tinkered-with memories.
"The MacGuffin that turns our to be a big fat MacNuthin'." |
|
|
|
Representing Labor
Diocesan Ecclesiarch of the Sacred Order of Jabootu
62 Posts |
Posted - 04/16/2006 : 4:50:07 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by zombiewhacker
by the time Sith rolled around the unloveable Gungan had been reduced to a non-speaking extra.
One small digression: I keep hearing how Jar Jar had a non-speaking role in Sith. Yet I distinctly recall him saying something in the crowd scene after Anakin lands the Invisible Hand(?).
Then again, I may be imagining it. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Forum Locked
Topic Locked