# George Lucas Blames 'Star Wars' Critics for Killing Series



## Jasperak (Jan 19, 2012)

"For any fans awaiting future "Star Wars" films from George Lucas, it's going to be a long wait. The creator of the famed series says he's not going to make any more of these movies and that he's essentially retiring. And for that he blames the harsh feedback from certain fans."

All I can say is good. If the prequels were the best he could do, then good riddance. I have read dozens of ideas that would work better than the prequels.

Read the whole article at the following link: http://movies.msn.com/paralleluniverse/george-lucas-talks-star-wars-critics/story/feature/

p.s. also posted on CM


----------



## Starman (Jan 19, 2012)

The link is broken for me. 

Lucas can really come off like a bitter old man sometimes. In the age of the Internet, you better realize that no matter how awesome you (and maybe many other people) think your stuff is, someone somewhere is going to trash it in some pretty harsh terms, rightly or wrongly. If you can't deal with, it might be best if you just didn't create something for other people to consume.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jan 19, 2012)

I'm not one of those guys who spouted vitriol online when I saw _The Phantom Menace_ with my folks, just as I had the original _Star Wars_ as a kid.

We watched the whole movie...and left in abject disappointment.  It was such crap, none of us bothered with the other prequels.

Lucas- you want to know who killed the franchise?  Look in the mirror while you're washing the blood off your hands.


----------



## Kzach (Jan 19, 2012)

Agree with all the above.


----------



## pauljathome (Jan 19, 2012)

Starman said:


> . If you can't deal with, it might be best if you just didn't create something for other people to consume.




That is EXACTLY what he is claiming to be doing.


----------



## Relique du Madde (Jan 19, 2012)

I thought what killed Star Wars is the fact that George lucas only had 4 writing credits between the release of Return of the Jedi and Phantom Menace and zero directing credits between Star Wars and Phantom Menace..


----------



## Kzach (Jan 19, 2012)

Relique du Madde said:


> I thought what killed Star Wars is the fact that George lucas only had 4 writing credits between the release of Return of the Jedi and Phantom Menace and zero directing credits between Star Wars and Phantom Menace..




What made the first three successful was the fact that George was a nobody at the time and had producers and professionals in their craft and art telling him what to do and what not to do.

What made the last three such incredible suck was the fact that George was now up in the rarefied atmosphere of directing and producing legends and nobody could tell him what he was doing was stupid and idiotic even though it was stupid and idiotic.

And now, in his extreme arrogance, he blames everyone else but himself despite the fact that the rest of the planet blames him.


----------



## jonesy (Jan 19, 2012)

The 'making of' footage from the prequel movies pretty much showed that George is no longer a part of reality. He is surrounded by yes-men and marketing people. When everyone around you tells you you are doing a spectacular job the critics outside of it will feel like they don't know what they are talking about.


----------



## Vyvyan Basterd (Jan 19, 2012)

I agree with all of the above to a degree. This seems like "Why We Can't Have Nice Things: The Force Edition." There is a *huge* difference to me between criticizing the man's work and the choices he made in the prequels and the add-ons to the originals. But when you make your criticism into attacks, as he states:



			
				George Lucas said:
			
		

> Why would I make any more when everybody yells at you all the time and says what a terrible person you are?




And don't tell me he's using hyperbole, because I've read and listened to more than enough rabid fanboys calling him much worse than a 'terrible person.' Should he grow a thicker skin? Yes, IMO. But, not a single one of you can say you know how it feels when so much hate is directed _at you_. Not your work, but at you personally.

It's easy to say "boo hoo, poor George" sarcastically, as was my first reaction. But I'm not sure that's fair and this age of bullying people just because you're anonymously crapping all over the internet is getting out of hand.


----------



## billd91 (Jan 19, 2012)

Vyvyan Basterd said:


> And don't tell me he's using hyperbole, because I've read and listened to more than enough rabid fanboys calling him much worse than a 'terrible person.' Should he grow a thicker skin? Yes, IMO. But, not a single one of you can say you know how it feels when so much hate is directed _at you_. Not your work, but at you personally.
> 
> It's easy to say "boo hoo, poor George" sarcastically, as was my first reaction. But I'm not sure that's fair and this age of bullying people just because you're anonymously crapping all over the internet is getting out of hand.




When criticizing someone's art, is it really that different from criticizing them? Entwined in criticizing the art is criticizing their artistic vision, their personal preferences, their qualities of judgment. I can see how it would be taken to be incredibly personal. Perhaps not as personal as complaining that Lucas is a man with no neck or that, perhaps, Picasso was an asshat in his personal behavior, but it is stuff that gets at the core of who the artist is.

The terrible pieces of art Lucas foisted off on the public in the name of Star Wars deserve the criticism they get. I found them terribly disappointing on the whole with very few bright spots (the light saber fight between Qui-Gon, Obi-Wan, and Darth Maul being one of them). That wouldn't stop me from mingling with Lucas at a cocktail party or playing cards with him. It's not personal in that sense, but I do question his artistic vision and that *is* personal.


----------



## Vyvyan Basterd (Jan 19, 2012)

billd91 said:


> When criticizing someone's art, is it really that different from criticizing them? Entwined in criticizing the art is criticizing their artistic vision, their personal preferences, their qualities of judgment. I can see how it would be taken to be incredibly personal. Perhaps not as personal as complaining that Lucas is a man with no neck or that, perhaps, Picasso was an asshat in his personal behavior, but it is stuff that gets at the core of who the artist is.
> 
> The terrible pieces of art Lucas foisted off on the public in the name of Star Wars deserve the criticism they get. I found them terribly disappointing on the whole with very few bright spots (the light saber fight between Qui-Gon, Obi-Wan, and Darth Maul being one of them). That wouldn't stop me from mingling with Lucas at a cocktail party or playing cards with him. It's not personal in that sense, but I do question his artistic vision and that *is* personal.




Yes, but would you call him a 'terrible person'? Probably not, since you say you'd hang out with him. I've read and heard people proclaim that he should die for what he did to Star Wars. Die?! How many of these can one human being listen to and not feel bad about it.

I have multiple criticisms for his work on the prequels and the changes he made to the originals. But I think too many people go too far and cross the fine line between criticizing his work and attacking him as a person. Many people will tell me I'm wrong and that he should expect that, but I can still rail against this lack of civility that permeates our society.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jan 19, 2012)

> But, not a single one of you can say you know how it feels when so much hate is directed at you.




Well, I _am_ a black man who lives in the southern USA...



> When criticizing someone's art, is it really that different from criticizing them?




For many artists, the answer is no.


----------



## El Mahdi (Jan 19, 2012)

Wow! Talk about Hubris!

The Fans didn't like his "prequels", so it's the Fans fault the series is dead.

It absolutely has nothing at all to do with him making movies his fans didn't like...


----------



## Starman (Jan 19, 2012)

pauljathome said:


> That is EXACTLY what he is claiming to be doing.




And that's what I'm getting at. If you are someone who creates something for others to see/read/hear/whatever, then you had best be prepared for criticism, much of it overly harsh and personal. If you are unable or unwilling to deal with this, then it's probably best if you don't put your stuff out there. It's probably also best if you don't publicly whine about this.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jan 19, 2012)

> It's probably also best if you don't publicly whine about this.




_ESPECIALLY_ in the Internet Age.  That's like dangling a bacon-wrapped baby in a pirhana-infested river.


----------



## Banshee16 (Jan 19, 2012)

Vyvyan Basterd said:


> It's easy to say "boo hoo, poor George" sarcastically, as was my first reaction. But I'm not sure that's fair and this age of bullying people just because you're anonymously crapping all over the internet is getting out of hand.




Agreed.  When you're actually doing something creative, and that you pour yourself into, to have other people (many of whom are like armchair quarterbacks, with their own opinions, but nowhere near the skill to create anything themselves) tear apart your work, yes, it's disheartening.

I don't think he did nearly as good a job with the prequels, and I do feel that he was surrounded by people who must be too intimidated to call a bad idea a bad idea......but by no means were the prequels as absolutely craptacular as some critics made them out to be.

Definitely not the power houses the first trilogy was, but on a scale of 1-100, they were nowhere near a 1.

Bullying, whether it's by critics, anonymous fans online, or even via paparazzi is largely out of hand.

Banshee


----------



## Kzach (Jan 19, 2012)

Vyvyan Basterd said:


> But, not a single one of you can say you know how it feels when so much hate is directed _at you_. Not your work, but at you personally.




Are you sure about that? I've been banned from every forum I've ever posted on. Even this one.



Vyvyan Basterd said:


> Yes, but would you call him a 'terrible person'?




I would.

I think it is very much because of who he is as a person that the prequels were so terrible. His ego is the size of a gas giant that swallows up smaller planets that pass by it. He didn't make these movies because of a love for his art, he made them to capitalise on the success of the franchise. Read up on how he milked everyone for the franchise royalties and went from being virtually broke before the prequels to one of the world's 400 richest people.

Somewhere along the line, the dude lost his soul.


----------



## jmucchiello (Jan 19, 2012)

With that attitude, good riddance. There was just as much constructive criticism of the prequel and why they are just bad. George, don't take them to heart. Don't learn from the experience. Don't conceive that you could be fallible. Retire. Do or do not. There is no shame is not doing.


----------



## Relique du Madde (Jan 19, 2012)

The reason why some fans "hate" George Lucas so vehemently is because they treat fandom as something akin to religion.

In the case of star wars they view whatever was created ORIGINALLY as being dogmatic canon then seleced various EU pieces and then give them canonical status within their own version of the Star Wars mythos.  If the prequels and special editions never were created it would be fine.  But no, each edit and re-release of the prequels damaged that initial original vision of the my and despoiled it.  Then Lucas made the ultimate heretical and blasphemous act by inserting his own apocryphal movies into canon.  This   ruined some of the continually that the fans and various other authors created for themselves and cheapened the story..


----------



## El Mahdi (Jan 19, 2012)

> ...But, not a single one of you can say you know how it feels when so much hate is directed _at you_. Not your work, but at you personally...






Kzach said:


> Are you sure about that? I've been banned from every forum I've ever posted on. Even this one.




First, I highly doubt anyone here at ENWorld have ever had the amount of criticism, nerdrage, and outright vitriol directed at them, at even a miniscule percentage of the amount, that it has been directed at George Lucas (whether deserved or not).  I feel pretty safe in saying that not only are you or anyone else here not in the same league as Lucas, I'd say we're not even in the same Galaxy.  (That would be a Galaxy far, far away from Lucas...)

Second, if one thinks that being banned so many places was simply about hate being directed at them, then I believe they've missed the point considerably.


----------



## El Mahdi (Jan 20, 2012)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> _ESPECIALLY_ in the Internet Age. That's like dangling a bacon-wrapped baby in a pirhana-infested river.




I just about choked when I read that.  Too bad I've already used up my XP allotment.  I'm so stealing that phrase.


----------



## Glade Riven (Jan 20, 2012)

The prequels make a lot more sense when you realize that his target audiance wasn't Star Wars fans, it was his own children. It's why NSync almost ended up in Attack of the Clones.

Still, though, Star Wars fans are a pretty vitriolic and volitile fandom. They're almost as angry as Transfans.

Well, okay, not quite. Transfans are far, far worse. There's a reason I got out of _that_ fandom.


----------



## Starman (Jan 20, 2012)

El Mahdi said:


> I just about choked when I read that.  Too bad I've already used up my XP allotment.  I'm so stealing that phrase.




Got ya covered.


----------



## ssampier (Jan 20, 2012)

I just calculated that the three prequel films that "no body liked" made a collective profit of more than $2 *billion *dollars*. This does not account for all the merchandising or licensing, etc.

George Lucas has no reason to complain.

He just needs to retire and let a dedicated group of creative minds manage his empire.

*Source: Wikipedia


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jan 20, 2012)

El Mahdi said:


> I just about choked when I read that.  Too bad I've already used up my XP allotment.  I'm so stealing that phrase.




I don't need any royalties, but if it works for ya, let me know how much splurgleage* you managed to get. 









* Splurgle: to cause someone to choke on and/or eject the contents of their mouth via their mouth and/or nostrils as a result of being surprised or greatly amused.


----------



## billd91 (Jan 20, 2012)

At this point, I wouldn't read fan reactions to Star Wars as the only reason Lucas is looking to retire from the biz. He's been complaining about the difficulties in getting studios to get behind *Red Tails* as well... and that's a movie with Lucas in the role he actually seems to perform well - being executive producer.


----------



## Hand of Evil (Jan 20, 2012)

My prediction...in five years we will have a Knights of the Old Republic movie, it may all CGI but there will be more Star Wars movies.


----------



## NewJeffCT (Jan 20, 2012)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> I'm not one of those guys who spouted vitriol online when I saw _The Phantom Menace_ with my folks, just as I had the original _Star Wars_ as a kid.
> 
> We watched the whole movie...and left in abject disappointment.  It was such crap, none of us bothered with the other prequels.
> 
> Lucas- you want to know who killed the franchise?  Look in the mirror while you're washing the blood off your hands.




The prequels got steadily better, but he had a low bar to clear after Phantom Menace.  

Revenge of the Sith had some really good moments in it, but was wrecked by some terrible dialogue:  No, not just Darth Vader yelling out, "NOOOOOOO"... it was Anakin sliding into the lava shrieking "I hate you" to Obi Wan, or Padme telling Anakin, "You're going down a path I cannot follow" and a few others similar trainwrecks.   It was still a far cry from A New Hope and Empire Strikes Back, but maybe on par with Return of the Jedi, which featured Ewoks and a neutered Han Solo.


----------



## Relique du Madde (Jan 20, 2012)

I could understand why the studios were not interested in backing Red Tails...  THEY ALREADY DID THAT FILM WITH THE SAME STAR.  

There's only so much you could do to make that story original... 

 -Sent via Tapatalk


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jan 20, 2012)

> The prequels got steadily better, but he had a low bar to clear after Phantom Menace.




While that may be so, nothing I saw in the many trailers or reviews convinced me those movies were worth my $$$.


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone (Jan 21, 2012)

Jasperak said:


> "For any fans awaiting future "Star Wars" films from George Lucas, it's going to be a long wait. The creator of the famed series says he's not going to make any more of these movies and that he's essentially retiring. And for that he blames the harsh feedback from certain fans."




Good freaking riddance, George.  You're the creator and then revised your creation into something we couldn't recognize.  May Jar Jar Binks haunt you the rest of your days.

Han shot first!


----------



## billd91 (Jan 21, 2012)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> While that may be so, nothing I saw in the many trailers or reviews convinced me those movies were worth my $$$.




I would say Revenge of the Sith had some ideas that could have been well done by a better screenwriter and director. But Attack of the Clones? Even worse than The Phantom Menace.


----------



## TwistedBishop (Jan 21, 2012)

I agree with Lucas on this.  Why should he make more movies when people piss on him repeatedly for them?  Whatever your problems with the prequels or OT changes, he's a filmmaker and these are his movies.  It amazes me that people will berate him for taking chances when that's exactly how Star Wars got made in the first place.  

The whole "critics killed Star Wars" spin is more evidence of the way the internet nonsensically rips the guy apart.  I also don't see him canceling the Clone Wars series, the inevitable live action show, the comics or the games.  He hasn't even ruled out someone else making movies in the future.  He's saying he's done personally with them.  What a monster.  Unless he does decide to make more.  THEN he's a monster.  Wait, what?   Internet logic wins again.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jan 21, 2012)

> It amazes me that people will berate him for taking chances when that's exactly how Star Wars got made in the first place.




_Phantom Menace_ was so full of derivative stuff it could hardly be called taking chances.


----------



## Starman (Jan 21, 2012)

TwistedBishop said:


> I agree with Lucas on this.  Why should he make more movies when people piss on him repeatedly for them?  Whatever your problems with the prequels or OT changes, he's a filmmaker and these are his movies.  It amazes me that people will berate him for taking chances when that's exactly how Star Wars got made in the first place.
> 
> The whole "critics killed Star Wars" spin is more evidence of the way the internet nonsensically rips the guy apart.  I also don't see him canceling the Clone Wars series, the inevitable live action show, the comics or the games.  He hasn't even ruled out someone else making movies in the future.  He's saying he's done personally with them.  What a monster.  Unless he does decide to make more.  THEN he's a monster.  Wait, what?   Internet logic wins again.




If all someone is looking for is fawning devotion, then they should _not_ be putting out their creations for public consumption. People form opinions. Some of these people will voice their opinions. A smaller subset of these people are going to be giant douchebags about it. That's humanity for you, right or wrong. If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen. Show your movie/book/artwork only to your family members and close friends or whomever else you know that will, if not give you praise, at least give you nothing worse than, "That's nice." Screaming that you're taking your toys and going home just makes you look like a petulant, entitled whiner.


----------



## Kzach (Jan 21, 2012)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> While that may be so, nothing I saw in the many trailers or reviews convinced me those movies were worth my $$$.




Don't worry, they're not.


----------



## Kzach (Jan 21, 2012)

TwistedBishop said:


> I agree with Lucas on this.  Why should he make more movies when people piss on him repeatedly for them?  Whatever your problems with the prequels or OT changes, he's a filmmaker and these are his movies.  It amazes me that people will berate him for taking chances when that's exactly how Star Wars got made in the first place.




You haven't read any of this thread, have you.

Note that this is a statement and not a question.

It isn't JUST about Lucas ruining the originals and make prequels that were completely horrible, it's about Lucas being a total douchebag to his devoted fans and a complete egomaniac, not to mention the incredible greed with which he pursued his rights to the franchise, milking it for every penny he could find.

You call him a film-maker, I call him an extortionist and a con-man who took advantage of the good-will and devotion of his audience in order to squeeze them and the franchise until he drew blood, and then squeeze some more, all the while destroying what he made in the first place solely due to his insane ego and selfishness.

Really, you need to read up on the entire story before making snap judgements in threads you haven't even bothered to read.


----------



## Lwaxy (Jan 21, 2012)

I happen to like most of the prequels. Minus that silly midichlorian business. And I find it disgusting that some "fans" keep attacking him personally because they do not like his movies. 

Yup, they were developed for a young audience, and nothing wrong with that. Maybe that's disappointing for some die hard fans, but I remember the fun my son and me had when he grew up with these movies.


----------



## Insight (Jan 21, 2012)

Creative people (ie those who make a living creating content - art, music, writing, films) need to realize that their success is based on public perception.  And this is not success financially; there are plenty of terrible films that make truckloads of cash - see the recent Transformers films for an example.

If you're not willing to allow the public to have their opinion, or if the vast majority of the public opinion is against the quality of your creation, it's time to question whether or not to continue to pursue this line of work.  Perhaps Lucas realized that he could no longer satisfy the public with his work on Star Wars.  If that's the case, it IS time to step away.  Maybe not forever, but for a time.  Try something else.

The sad thing is that the prequel movies could have been so much better if Lucas had stayed the "idea guy" and exec producer (as on Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi) and let someone else write and direct.  Lucas' unwillingness to relinquish control and allow others' ideas to creep into the project really doomed these films from the start.


----------



## Zaukrie (Jan 21, 2012)

The name calling and vitriol here, on this thread, convince me that he's right.....SW's fans take it too seriously, and are pretty meanspirited when talking about Lucas. And this is tame, compared to other sites....

That said, I expect SWs movies to start coming out after Lucas has passed. Also, they movies were better when he was the idea guy, not the director. But I'm not going to be mean about those comments.


----------



## Umbran (Jan 21, 2012)

Starman said:


> That's humanity for you, right or wrong. If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen.




The idea that somehow the artist must be willing to take anything the audience chooses to dish out without comment or reaction seems hypocritical.  

What is good for the goose is good for the gander, you know. We fans are putting our comments out there to the public, too.  It is, if you will, our art.  It, then, should also be open to critique, and he gets to say what he likes about it.  

My thought is that if the public, the audience in aggregate, cannot keep itself to speaking in proportion, without showering the artists with hyperbolic vitriol, then the audience does not deserve to have good art made for it.

And you wonder why, maybe, we get so many crappy movies.  Maybe it is because we're kinda crappy, ourselves.  We get what we deserve, hm?


----------



## Kzach (Jan 21, 2012)

Umbran said:


> And you wonder why, maybe, we get so many crappy movies.  Maybe it is because we're kinda crappy, ourselves.  We get what we deserve, hm?




I recall a thread in which I said almost exactly this and got a warning for it. Apparently it's ok for you to call people crappy but it's not ok for me to do it.

Who's the goose and who's the gander in this scenario?


----------



## pauljathome (Jan 21, 2012)

Umbran said:


> My thought is that if the public, the audience in aggregate, cannot keep itself to speaking in proportion, without showering the artists with hyperbolic vitriol, then the audience does not deserve to have good art made for it.
> 
> And you wonder why, maybe, we get so many crappy movies.  Maybe it is because we're kinda crappy, ourselves.  We get what we deserve, hm?




In some discussions online somewhere I have very likely said that I do not like the prequels. I'm honestly not sure because, frankly, its not that big a deal to me

I've certainly voiced a negative opinion on the prequels to people in person,

I am fairly sure that I was always reasonably polite in that criticism.

I have NEVER attacked Lucas personally.

The above 2 paragraphs are almost certainly true for the vast majority of people who dislike the Prequels (or just about anything else).

Heck, even on this thread most people are being reasonably polite about the Prequels and very few are attacking Lucas personally.

I utterly reject the idea that a small vocal minority of douchebags means that society as a whole "deserves" crappy movies.


----------



## Starman (Jan 21, 2012)

Umbran said:


> The idea that somehow the artist must be willing to take anything the audience chooses to dish out without comment or reaction seems hypocritical.
> 
> What is good for the goose is good for the gander, you know. We fans are putting our comments out there to the public, too.  It is, if you will, our art.  It, then, should also be open to critique, and he gets to say what he likes about it.
> 
> ...




I'm not defending the people who have clearly crossed the line in their comments. I'm saying that there will always be people who do this, but Lucas seems to be conflating this vocal minority with the majority of people who have seen his films. Lots of people disliked the prequels, but not all (or even most) have directed angry bile at Lucas personally. Lucas is well within his rights to say that these attacks are over the top and ridiculous. But when he starts saying stuff like, "People say mean things about my movies, so I'm not going to make anymore," he doesn't sound like a reasonable adult who has been unfairly attacked; he sounds like a peevish child.


----------



## Remus Lupin (Jan 22, 2012)

I think what Lucas fails to realize is that it's NOT that fans will criticize anyone and anything that changes the Star Wars story. There have been LOTS of Star Wars stories that have been very well received by the fans ("Legacy," "Knights of the Old Republic," "Jedi Academy series"). Fans are willing to go with you if you're respectful of the source material and use it in interesting and faithful ways. Lucas decided instead to totally screw with the source material (apparently on the grounds that it was his and he'd do whatever the heck he wanted with it), and as a result the fans weren't willing to trust him with it.

I don't need to go into every single solitary detail, particularly here. Midichlorians are the least of it! There's retconning Anikan's history so it makes no sense in light of the original movies, there's the utterly wooden romance with Padme (which itself required retconning the original movies!).

I could go on and on, but I know I don't need to. What others have done with the materials and done well has been very appropriately praised (even if it's not necessarily universally loved), but Lucas was careless with his story, and apparently thinks that the fans owe him devotion for phoning in what was ultimately an unsatisfactory set of movies.

None of which is to say that he deserves the kind of vitriol that he's gotten from some fans, but you'll always get that in the age of the internet from some quarters. You've got to roll with it. And it's also not to say that there wasn't a lot of awesomeness in the movies as well. Pretty much every lightsaber battle was worth watching over and over again. But in themselves, they could not hold up the movies in the absence of a good story and respect for what had come before.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jan 22, 2012)

> I don't need to go into every single solitary detail, particularly here. Midichlorians are the least of it!




2 other things I picked up on in _Phantom Menace_:

1) certain starship sequences looked like they had been CGIed over footage from air-power shows like _Wings_ (not the comedy, the history show).

2) some of the species/characters played were likewise thinly veiled CGI references to RW stereotypes.  Not that i believe Lucas is racist, but certain it's could come across that way.

Again, not the limit of list of things I disliked, just further exemplars.  To me, the flaws I found spoke of laziness in storytelling and an overall lack of caring or artistic vision.


----------



## Starman (Jan 22, 2012)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> 2) some of the species/characters played were likewise thinly veiled CGI references to RW stereotypes.  Not that i believe Lucas is racist, but certain it's could come across that way.




Stereotypes are a real time saver.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jan 22, 2012)

If he'd done something _creative_ with the stereotypes, I wouldn't have been put off by their uses.


----------



## Dire Bare (Jan 22, 2012)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> 2 other things I picked up on in _Phantom Menace_:
> 
> 1) certain starship sequences looked like they had been CGIed over footage from air-power shows like _Wings_ (not the comedy, the history show).
> 
> 2) some of the species/characters played were likewise thinly veiled CGI references to RW stereotypes.  Not that i believe Lucas is racist, but certain it's could come across that way.




This was intentional.  Not derivative, but an homage.  Lucas has always been into classic sci-fi serials and war films, and ALL of his films (well, maybe except for American Graffiti) quite intentionally try to recreate these types of films to some degree.  If you look at his latest film, Red Tails (in theatres now), you'll see it again.

While I won't go surfing for the links, I'm 99% sure that Lucas has outright stated that he designed just about every space battle in all six movies to replicate the dogfights of war movies, and some of the action sequences are shot-for-shot recreations, substituting star fighters for fighter bombers.  This isn't lazy, it's actually harder to do, especially if you do it right.

You can like it or not, but to claim Lucas is being derivative is to miss an important aspect of his work.

As for characters, I doubt Lucas intended to be racist (although I agree that some of his characters certainly play that way), but again, he did deliberately use stereotypes based on the pulp serials.  Again, not lazy, but an artistic choice.  Although you can certainly argue how _successful_ he was at it . . .


----------



## Remus Lupin (Jan 22, 2012)

Let me just follow up last nights post by stating that the worst thing for me about the prequel trilogy is that they've made the originals almost unwatchable for me. Every time Obi Wan tells Luke about his father for the first time in "A New Hope" I have flashbacks to the pod race in Episode One and weep. George Lucas stole my imagined back story from me! And its was better than his!


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jan 22, 2012)

> This was intentional. Not derivative, but an homage. Lucas has always been into classic sci-fi serials and war films,




There's a difference between homage and being derivative, and I think he (or his team) strayed solidly into the latter territory.  There is one sequence that _literally_ looked like they grabbed a sequence about the SR-71 from _Wings_ and simply CGIed over it.  It wasn't the only one.



> Again, not lazy, but an artistic choice.




Stereotypes are the human mind's shortcut; they are your brain being a bit lazy- and we all use them.  Using stereotypes- especially _racial_ stereotypes- as a creative tool is thus playing with fire.

And he didn't do anything truly creative with them at all- he just reskinned them as aliens, some just barely.

Again, I don't think the man is racist, not even a bit.  But by staying too close to the source material, he turned some sequences in a nice sci-fi pulp movie into some pretty vile stuff.

That is what some would call a "tin ear"- not realizing how something would be perceived by the greater audience- and it's usually the kind of thing that happens when people don't think things through.


----------



## Remus Lupin (Jan 22, 2012)

Well the thing is, he could have satirized the racial stereotypes in some way, so as to show that a) they were part of these old fashioned serials and b) they deserve to be satirized. But he doesn't really have the capacity for satire. He takes himself far too seriously, as his whole "I won't do another Star Wars movie neener neener" attitude shows.


----------



## Joker (Jan 22, 2012)

But how is he suppose to support himself and his family if he doesn't have a job?
This doesn't seem like a decision he made with his spouse.  Quite selfish if you ask me, and deep down I know you did.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jan 22, 2012)

Remus Lupin said:


> Well the thing is, he could have satirized the racial stereotypes in some way, so as to show that a) they were part of these old fashioned serials and b) they deserve to be satirized.




Yes...but also be aware that even if done well, it can fall flat.  Remember, Ted Danson was dating Whoopi Goldberg and she persuaded him to do his bit- a shtick SHE wrote- at a Friar's Club roast _in blackface_ as a bit of satire.  It didn't go over well.


----------



## Relique du Madde (Jan 23, 2012)

Joker said:


> But how is he suppose to support himself and his family if he doesn't have a job?
> This doesn't seem like a decision he made with his spouse.  Quite selfish if you ask me, and deep down I know you did.




He makes  enough from royalties, licensing fees, investments, and Lucas Arts' / ILM's other ventures to sustain him.


----------



## Starman (Jan 23, 2012)

Relique du Madde said:


> He makes  enough from royalties, licensing fees, investments, and Lucas Arts' / ILM's other ventures to sustain him.










Your Sarcasm Detector seems to be malfunctioning. Please recalibrate.


----------



## Kaodi (Jan 23, 2012)

To be fair to Lucas, I am not sure that " everyone else's " Star Wars, also known as the Expanded Universe, is really the Cat's Meow either. They have taken the series in a couple too many weird and apocalyptic directions if you ask me. The Star Wars Universe seems to be a place where all is relatively calm for millenia and then all Hell breaks loose and a trillion things happen almost simultaneously in relative galactic terms. Luke, Leia and Han need to be retired as characters. They have been through enough.


----------



## Ahnehnois (Jan 23, 2012)

Not that the original Star Wars movies aren't a cultural icon, but George Lucas has had enormous success in a tough business, far more than many other better creative minds who are toiling away waiting for their big break. The scale of his works subjects them to well-deserved scrutiny. I don't see that he has much to complain about.

And the second trilogy did suck.


----------



## Relique du Madde (Jan 23, 2012)

Starman said:


> Your Sarcasm Detector seems to be malfunctioning. Please recalibrate.




I rolled a one.


----------



## billd91 (Jan 23, 2012)

Remus Lupin said:


> I think what Lucas fails to realize is that it's NOT that fans will criticize anyone and anything that changes the Star Wars story. There have been LOTS of Star Wars stories that have been very well received by the fans ("Legacy," "Knights of the Old Republic," "Jedi Academy series"). Fans are willing to go with you if you're respectful of the source material and use it in interesting and faithful ways. Lucas decided instead to totally screw with the source material (apparently on the grounds that it was his and he'd do whatever the heck he wanted with it), and as a result the fans weren't willing to trust him with it.
> 
> <snip>
> 
> I could go on and on, but I know I don't need to. What others have done with the materials and done well has been very appropriately praised (even if it's not necessarily universally loved), but Lucas was careless with his story, and apparently thinks that the fans owe him devotion for phoning in what was ultimately an unsatisfactory set of movies.




In George Lucas's defense here, I don't think he phoned in his effort on the second trilogy, nor do I consider his work to be intentionally screwing with the source material. I merely think that his ability to tell a story without a lot of help from better writers, editors, and directors is poor. His self-discipline to leave well enough alone is poor. His ability to tell discern the better outcome of his efforts is poor.

I don't doubt that Lucas intended to make good quality movies that would enhance the Star Wars legacy. I believe he failed in the execution, not the intent.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jan 23, 2012)

> In George Lucas's defense...<snip>...I merely think that his ability to tell a story without a lot of help from better writers, editors, and directors is poor. His self-discipline to leave well enough alone is poor. His ability to tell discern the better outcome of his efforts is poor.




You mean like Ed Wood?  Nice defense!


----------



## Thunderfoot (Jan 23, 2012)

Dear GL, it wasn't the critics that killed the series; it was the midachlorians.
And the pod racing.
And the EMO Anakin Skywalker.
And the poor depiction of the Clone Wars that you had already approved and then changed.


OH and also the Gungans, especially Jar Jar Binks.  Really, what the hell WERE you thinking?  Oh, I know, what the franchise really needs is a really bad Butterfly McQueen rip-off.  

I swear I was waiting for JJB to utter "Meesa don't know nuthin' 'bout birthin' no babies." 

Really George, just admit it.


Oh, and HAN SHOT FIRST!!!!!!


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jan 23, 2012)

I saw Star Wars on the screen back in the seventies
your sci-fi saga had me quaking in my knees
If I was young it didn't fail to wholly please. 


Oh-a oh 


But then we waited for your second trilogy. 
Rewritten by machine and new technology, 
and I dont understand the problems you can't see. 


Oh-a oh 

I saw your "children"
Oh-a oh 

Why did you film them? 
Your vision killed the Star Wars franchise
Your vision killed the Star Wars franchise


Critics came and broke your heart. 
Oh oh oh-oh ohhhhh

(etc.)


----------



## frankthedm (Jan 23, 2012)

Lucas's insistence on his vision is the death of the Star Wars series.







			
				Dannyalcatraz said:
			
		

> some of the species/characters played were likewise thinly veiled CGI references to RW stereotypes.



Watto you talking about?


----------



## billd91 (Jan 23, 2012)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> You mean like Ed Wood?  Nice defense!




I'm far more tolerant of a reasonably sincere incompetent than a cynical malefactor.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jan 23, 2012)

frankthedm said:


> Lucas's insistence on his vision is the death of the Star Wars series. Watto you talking about?




Yep, that was _one_ of 'em...and my reaction was on the order of "Really?  _REALLY?_"


----------



## GrayLinnorm (Jan 23, 2012)

Thunderfoot said:


> Dear GL, it wasn't the critics that killed the series; it was the midachlorians.
> And the pod racing.
> And the EMO Anakin Skywalker.
> And the poor depiction of the Clone Wars that you had already approved and then changed.
> ...




There were also the monologues about sand, more bad writing (younglings?), continuity lapses (one of the worst: having Amadala die in childbirth when Princess Leia actually talked about remembering her mother in _Return of the Jedi_) and shoehorning Hayden Christensen into a movie that came out before he was born.

There was also the whole "nuking the fridge", the phony rubber snake, the phonier CGI monkeys with Shia LaBoeuf acting like Tarzan...

No wait, that was Indiana Jones.


----------



## krunchyfrogg (Jan 23, 2012)

I really thought he'd just keep churning out crap because people will pay to see it.

Looks like I'll have to retire my picture:


----------



## Felon (Jan 23, 2012)

Awesome! A thread where we get to gripe about George Lucas! This is the sort of thing that unites us as fans. It surrounds us and penetrates us, it bind us together.....

....aw shoot. Who am I kidding? Every little snarky remark that springs to mind has already been said a million times. Guess I'll just go look for a fresher dead horse to pound on.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jan 23, 2012)

Hey, Lucas was the one who dangled the bacon-baby.  Nobody should be surprised the pirañas started to nibble...


----------



## El Mahdi (Jan 24, 2012)

Mmmmmm...bacon..


----------



## frankthedm (Jan 24, 2012)

Dannyalcatraz said:


> Lucas- you want to know who killed the franchise?  Look in the mirror while you're washing the blood off your hands.



must spread XP around...


----------



## Zaukrie (Jan 24, 2012)

I admit to being a white guy....but how are accents that aren't midwestern white guys talking racist? Maybe that's too much for this board, if so, I apologize in advance, but many of the people complaining about the racism were really just saying "this guy has an accent, and he's a bad guy, so it must be racist".


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jan 24, 2012)

Not necessarily racist, but playing into stereotypes.  And not creatively.

Watto was the worst and most obvious- follow the link above and you'll see a picture of him with all kinds of links listing the stereotypes he plays into.

The closing bit of the Wiki on him also catalogs some of this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watto

There were similar issues with the Neimoidians who had accents that would be characteristic of Japanese speakers of English from the Tokyo area.  I'm not plucking that out of the air, that was how specific my Japanese teacher was about it.  Personally, I thought they sounded more like a Hollywood Chinese stereotype.  And they're aggressively expansionist masters of trade.  If, as some analysts say, the Empire is roughly an analog for the Axis in WW2, this makes the Neimoidians...?

Gungans- a "backwoods", laid back culture with a mock-Caribbean accent...represented by a fairly meek, annoying and virtually incompetent Jar-Jar Binks.


----------



## Jhaelen (Jan 24, 2012)

frankthedm said:


> Lucas's insistence on his vision is the death of the Star Wars series. Watto you talking about?



Which reminds me of a famous quote of Helmut Schmidt (a German Politican): "Wer Visionen hat, soll zum Arzt gehen." (roughly translates to "Someone who's having visions should go see a doctor.")


----------



## krunchyfrogg (Jan 24, 2012)

On second thought, I won't have to retire the pic.  I saw a commercial last night for "The Phantom Menace" (in 3D -- Only in theaters!!)

Ugh.

I think recycing crap is even worse than churning out new crap.


----------



## Zelda Themelin (Jan 24, 2012)

I won't be missing series. Lucas is weird person, has too much money, can't live with woman and doesn't mentally live in planet earth. This is based on his interviews and my peronal opinion naturally.

New series might have been made for his motherless kids, but for normal family movie I think it's pretty rotten message to say wanting to save your mum that lives in slavery and even loving her leads to evil. Whole rewritten relationship with princess was very bad relationship full of abuse and strange age-cap for romance. 

Generally speaking Lucas is not good director of people. He doesn't get feelings, really. He is rather talented with special effects and I think all 3 newer movies had quite adventurous fun beginning but soon after that movies start to have strangely acting people with strange wooden dialogue. 

I am afraid once Lucas either feels his re-cycling and toys aren't selling enough he puts out new star wars related stuff, starring jar-jar-binks and ewoks maybe. Or does the trilogy or new indiana jones movie. With son of Indiana Jones maybe.

Never underestimate call of money.


----------



## Janx (Jan 24, 2012)

El Mahdi said:


> Wow! Talk about Hubris!
> 
> The Fans didn't like his "prequels", so it's the Fans fault the series is dead.
> 
> It absolutely has nothing at all to do with him making movies his fans didn't like...




As some other article I'd read about "who got credit", apparently Lucas did not write any of the original Star Wars.  He only directed A New Hope.  Most would agree that Empire and Return were the best of all of them (which he neither wrote nor directed).

So, I deduce that Lucas is not the ingredient for sucess.  He might in fact be the ingredient for failure.

I'm sure the levels of hate heaped against him affect him.  And it is irrational to have such feelings towards the man.

But technically, he made crap.  Unless something improves, he will likely produce more crap.  Therefore, him not making more stuff = more good.


----------



## Zelda Themelin (Jan 24, 2012)

He wasn't the one, you invented that story, really, well part of it, but most ideas he contributed were the bad ones. New trilogy is more of his. Like was his contribution to Indiana Jones meets UFO crystal new age skull.

Yes, I am being way too sarcastic, but thing is he really is special effect guy and owns rights for Star Wars, not a great storyteller or actually artist loving the mythology. It's business to him. 

I never believed he would make whole saga. Future of Star Wars universe is already sold for books and computer games. He would counter lot of ideas, and maybe his business consultants have told him making more movies woudn't bring enough money. And yeh, maybe he would like people to love his movies too. 

I think it's also the age, old men tend to do some things differently.

Remains me of Michael Moorcock, guy who wrote Elric and other Champion Eternal stories. They used to be dark, cynical and good books. Then he took lik 29 year pause and wrote some additional Elric stories. Edge was gone, books were some watered hallf-assed romantic crap. Well, at least if you were expecting similar thing than younger version of him wrote.

This kinda change is rampart in literature. I know pretty many writers whose stories were great... but not the newer stuff. Musicians too. Some can hold to the spark of creativity but others loose it. Or go soft.


----------



## NewJeffCT (Jan 25, 2012)

Janx said:


> As some other article I'd read about "who got credit", apparently Lucas did not write any of the original Star Wars.  He only directed A New Hope.  Most would agree that Empire and Return were the best of all of them (which he neither wrote nor directed).
> 
> So, I deduce that Lucas is not the ingredient for sucess.  He might in fact be the ingredient for failure.
> 
> ...




I had thought most people considered Empire & A New Hope as the best of the series, with Return being a weak finale to the trilogy (Ewoks with rocks & sticks defeating stormtroopers, a neutered Han Solo, too many rubbery looking aliens inserted for merchandising, Ewoks, etc)?


----------



## Janx (Jan 25, 2012)

NewJeffCT said:


> I had thought most people considered Empire & A New Hope as the best of the series, with Return being a weak finale to the trilogy (Ewoks with rocks & sticks defeating stormtroopers, a neutered Han Solo, too many rubbery looking aliens inserted for merchandising, Ewoks, etc)?




as always when I use the word Most, I'm probably wrong...

How about Empire?  That was the best.


----------



## krunchyfrogg (Jan 25, 2012)

Janx said:


> As some other article I'd read about "who got credit", apparently Lucas did not write any of the original Star Wars.  He only directed A New Hope.  Most would agree that Empire and Return were the best of all of them (which he neither wrote nor directed).



So, who did write the movie, and why haven't they written any more films?


----------



## Remus Lupin (Jan 25, 2012)

Well, Lucas is the only writer credited on the original screenplay. I had always heard he wrote it with a copy of Joseph Campbell's "Hero's Journey" sitting next to him on the desk, so I'm inclined to believe that he wrote most of the original movie himself.

And in fairness, Lucas was capable of making a good movie prior to Star Wars. American Graffitti is quite a good movie, but the rest of his career was totally swallowed up in Star Wars, and unlike many of his generational peers, he didn't see much point in trying to go beyond that.

I haven't seen Red Tails yet, but it looks like it may have some potential to pull his reputation out of its prequel trilogy funk. If so, then good for him. He may have gotten his mojo back. But he can't pretend that the prequels were something he genuinely should be proud of.


----------



## Bullgrit (Jan 25, 2012)

Check out number 5 in this list:
6 Pop Culture Visionaries Who Get Too Much Credit | Cracked.com

I originally brought this article to ENWorld for discussion here:
http://www.enworld.org/forum/media-...ture-visionaries-who-get-too-much-credit.html

Bullgrit


----------



## Mark Hope (Jan 25, 2012)

krunchyfrogg said:


> So, who did write the movie, and why haven't they written any more films?



Lucas wrote and directed Ep 4 (although much of the plot and setting was nicked from other films and classical myth etc).  Leigh Brackett and Lawrence Kasdan wrote Ep 5 (although Lucas did work on an interim draft) and it was directed by Irvin Kershner.  Kasdan wrote Ep 6 with Lucas, based on Lucas' story and with uncredited contributions from others.  Ep 6 was directed by Richard Marquand.  Kasdan has written, produced and directed many other films.  Brackett and Marquand are both deceased - the former shortly after completing her draft script and the latter a handful of years after Ep 6 was released - but Brackett was a hugely prolific sf author and Marquand a director with tv work and at least one film (iirc) under his belt.


----------



## Janx (Jan 25, 2012)

Bullgrit said:


> Check out number 5 in this list:
> 6 Pop Culture Visionaries Who Get Too Much Credit | Cracked.com
> 
> I originally brought this article to ENWorld for discussion here:
> ...




yup.  that was the article.  I'd + you but I already like what you say.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jan 25, 2012)

Mark Hope said:


> Brackett was a hugely prolific sf author...




And a damn good one, too.


----------



## Traveon Wyvernspur (Jan 25, 2012)

As [MENTION=10107]krunchyfrogg[/MENTION] said they are doing the movies in 3D:

Ugh this just gets my blood boiling, I hate it when companies re-release in 3D especially films that were NOT meant to be in 3D, it just looks cheap and it's a grab at making more money from loyal fans. I definitely will not be going to see them and will not buy them when they come out on 3D blu-ray.


----------



## TheYeti1775 (Jan 25, 2012)

Heck I just wish I had his problems.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jan 25, 2012)

George Lucas has 99 problems

If you're having film problems I feel bad for you son
I got 99 problems but a fan ain't one

I got the TIE patrol on the cash patrol
Foes that wanna make sure my casket's closed
Film critics that say he's a "CGI Hoe"
I'm from the hood stupid what type of facts are those
If you grew up with holes in your zapatos
You'd celebrate the minute you was having dough
I'm like damn critics you can kiss my Death Star hole
If you don't like my movies you can press fast forward
Got beef with with the nerds 'cause I changed Solo
They don't like edits well I don't give a damn SO
Film mags try and use my rich ass
So advertisers can give em more cash for ads...losers
I don't know what you take me as
or understand the intelligence that George-L has
I'm from rags to ritches fanboy I ain't dumb
I got 99 problems but cash flow ain't one

I got 99 problems but a fan ain't one
If you're having film problems I feel bad for you son
I got 99 problems but a fan ain't one


----------



## Ringan (Jan 25, 2012)

The quote from Lucas is taken from an original story in the New York Times.  I'm not a Lucas apologist by any means but it does shed some light on his perspective about filmmaking as a whole.


----------



## fanboy2000 (Jan 26, 2012)

Zelda Themelin said:


> This kinda change is rampart in literature. I know pretty many writers whose stories were great... but not the newer stuff. Musicians too. Some can hold to the spark of creativity but others loose it. Or go soft.



You either die a hero, or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain.


----------



## jmucchiello (Jan 26, 2012)

To anyone whoever says they weren't bothered by the prequel trilogy, I send this link: Star Wars: Episode 1 – The Phantom Menace |

It is two videos 70 minutes in length total telling one person's opinion of why The Phantom Menace is a bad movie. It is funny, insightful, and somewhat NSFW. The first one is 30 minutes. He does the same thing for the other two movies. They are sometimes weird but generally correct.

My favorite part of the video is a pseudo man-on-the-street interview where he asks the MOTS "Without describing his costume, his looks, his role in the films or any actions he takes in the films, describe the character of Han Solo." The interviewees describe Han in various way: thief with heart of gold, ladies man, dashing scoundrel, etc. You can fill in your own descriptions quite easily, correct? Now try the same thing with Qui Gon Jinn. The best one of the MOTS interviewees came up with was "stoic". 

But I'm not telling as well as the video does. They are "fun" to watch in a maudlin kind of way.


----------



## fanboy2000 (Jan 26, 2012)

*I'm an important member of the economy*



jmucchiello said:


> To anyone whoever says they weren't bothered by the prequel trilogy, I send this link: Star Wars: Episode 1 – The Phantom Menace |
> 
> It is two videos 70 minutes in length total telling one person's opinion of why The Phantom Menace is a bad movie.



That sort of thing just makes me want to like the movies more. I've never changed my opinion of a movie from like to dislike (or hate) just because someone else said it was bad. But I have liked something more as a result of being told it was bad.

I believe this is part of the role I play as a member of the lowest common denominator. I'm the guy who likes all that popular stuff that people with more refined tastes think is crap. So when people keep telling me that something is bad and I shouldn't like it, then I start to like more. Perhaps it's out of some kind of pride out of being a member of the group that keeps hollywood in business. People like keep the millions of people in the movie businesses employed. I'm an important member of the economy!

Yea!


----------



## Remus Lupin (Jan 27, 2012)

fanboy2000 said:


> That sort of thing just makes me want to like the movies more. I've never changed my opinion of a movie from like to dislike (or hate) just because someone else said it was bad. But I have liked something more as a result of being told it was bad.
> 
> I believe this is part of the role I play as a member of the lowest common denominator. I'm the guy who likes all that popular stuff that people with more refined tastes think is crap. So when people keep telling me that something is bad and I shouldn't like it, then I start to like more. Perhaps it's out of some kind of pride out of being a member of the group that keeps hollywood in business. People like keep the millions of people in the movie businesses employed. I'm an important member of the economy!
> 
> Yea!




So you're the one.


----------



## jmucchiello (Jan 27, 2012)

fanboy2000 said:


> That sort of thing just makes me want to like the movies more. I've never changed my opinion of a movie from like to dislike (or hate) just because someone else said it was bad. But I have liked something more as a result of being told it was bad.



Then go watch the reviews and report back how it convinced you The Phantom Menace was good (that hurt to type). It's not like they are 70 minutes of "It's the suxxor. F-- Lucas." It is 70 minutes (well, 60ish minutes with 10 minutes of weirdness) of criticism that is backed up by logic and actual clips from the film. He doesn't just say the plot doesn't make sense. He explains why and in what ways it doesn't make sense.

And it's funny. So it's not a completely depressing 70 minute slog into boredom.


----------



## billd91 (Jan 27, 2012)

jmucchiello said:


> My favorite part of the video is a pseudo man-on-the-street interview where he asks the MOTS "Without describing his costume, his looks, his role in the films or any actions he takes in the films, describe the character of Han Solo." The interviewees describe Han in various way: thief with heart of gold, ladies man, dashing scoundrel, etc. You can fill in your own descriptions quite easily, correct? Now try the same thing with Qui Gon Jinn. The best one of the MOTS interviewees came up with was "stoic".




As much as I enjoyed those videos, the Han Solo comparison is a little unfair since we've had 3 movies to see his character develop compared to Qui-Gon's one. I only say a little unfair because the points about the clarity of the story and characterizations are still valid, just the use of Han Solo, arguably the most clearly defined character in the series, is too easy.


----------



## jonesy (Jan 27, 2012)

jmucchiello said:


> To anyone whoever says they weren't bothered by the prequel trilogy, I send this link: Star Wars: Episode 1 – The Phantom Menace |



Also note that they've now finished reviewing the whole trilogy:
Star Wars |
The review trilogy feels like a saga on its own.


----------



## jmucchiello (Jan 27, 2012)

jonesy said:


> Also note that they've now finished reviewing the whole trilogy:
> Star Wars |
> The review trilogy feels like a saga on its own.



Yes, it does take a while to watch all six videos (but there is a storyline that kind of hooks you). (heavy emphasis on the "kind of" part.)

I didn't feel the need to point out the existence of the other reviews. People can click around and find things on their own. They also review some Star Trek movies. (I haven't gotten around to watching those.)


----------



## jonesy (Jan 27, 2012)

jmucchiello said:


> I didn't feel the need to point out the existence of the other reviews. People can click around and find things on their own.



Heh. That is so not my experience when dealing with the Internet. People can't even figure out there's a 'show more' button on YouTube. I went five years without noticing that Shlock Mercenary had forums. My mom thought Twitter only had one page, Lady Gaga's. Before the changes to the EN World forum layout I regularly noticed members who hadn't realized there was a front page with news.


----------



## fanboy2000 (Jan 27, 2012)

jmucchiello said:


> Then go watch the reviews and report back how it convinced you The Phantom Menace was good (that hurt to type). It's not like they are 70 minutes of "It's the suxxor. F-- Lucas." It is 70 minutes (well, 60ish minutes with 10 minutes of weirdness) of criticism that is backed up by logic and actual clips from the film. He doesn't just say the plot doesn't make sense. He explains why and in what ways it doesn't make sense.



This is so weird. Do you actually think whether or or not I like something is the sort of thing that's subject to _someone else's_ analysis? My own counsel will I keep about what I like.


----------



## jmucchiello (Jan 27, 2012)

fanboy2000 said:


> This is so weird. Do you actually think whether or or not I like something is the sort of thing that's subject to _someone else's_ analysis? My own counsel will I keep about what I like.



Hey, watch it or don't watch it. Like it or don't like it. I don't really care at all. It's just an amusing set of reviews for a bunch meaningless movies ultimately. The reviews are entertaining in their own right. And they are a good argument against the goodness of the movies. You made it sound like you were a challenger of all that isn't as bad as people say. So I put it out there for you to test your fortitude as it were. You don't want to? Don't do it. I can't and have not desire to "make you" do it. I'm just telling you it exists.

And many people are swayed by what is "cool" and what is not "cool" based on the what others speak about it. Why would you find my expectation that external analysis might sway one's internal analysis "weird"? Find it disappointing, or annoying, but weird? I don't think so.


----------



## fanboy2000 (Jan 28, 2012)

Makes sense to me, but let me answer a question:



> And many people are swayed by what is "cool" and what is not "cool" based on the what others speak about it. Why would you find my expectation that external analysis might sway one's internal analysis "weird"? Find it disappointing, or annoying, but weird? I don't think so.



See, you originally said "To anyone whoever says they weren't bothered by the prequel trilogy, I send this link..." Your next post went on to imply the video contained an objective argument grounded in logic when you said "He doesn't just say the plot doesn't make sense. He explains why and in what ways it doesn't make sense."

And that's what I find weird. Because the prequel trilogy's flaws, seven years after it's completion, are well known. The movies have been dissected, its parts labeled, and every element of them catalogued. Anyone who still likes the movies after all of that probably isn't going to be swayed by yet another argument that their bad.

Also the idea that anyone who like the prequel movies would be swayed to not liking them by popular opinion seems odd given that it hasn't worked in the 10 plus years it's been since The Phantom Menace came out. I suppose, if our hypothetical fanboy _just now_ started to want to be one of the "cool kids" it might work, but that number is likely a small subset and such a fanboy could be turned by efforts much less than a 70 minute video.

Of course, it's not weird to say that there's a funny and insightful review posted on the web. But you said _a lot_ more than that, and I wanted to respond to the other stuff you said. 

FWIW, I did watch a video today. But it was The Phantom Menace, and I still enjoyed it.


----------



## GreyLord (Jan 29, 2012)

krunchyfrogg said:


> So, who did write the movie, and why haven't they written any more films?




Well, though uncredited, from what I hear, the book was actually NOT written by George Lucas, though it's Lucas's name on the cover.  The book was ghost written by Alan Dean Foster who was also given the go ahead to write a sequel which would be cheap to make (they didn't expect Star Wars to make all that much at the time, but still wanted a sequel).

When Star Wars did better then expected, they scrapped ADF's sequel write up in favor of a new one.  However, that book also saw print and this time since it wasn't the "official" sequel, he even got credit for it.

Another guy that apparantly had a lot to do with the original (from Bullgrit's links) seems to be Kurtz?

PS: I should add, that from all I can tell the original screenplay however is ALL Lucas.  It was a different character back then, he was someone who I think could take a lot more criticism and see more of his weaknesses than what he became later.


----------



## jmucchiello (Jan 30, 2012)

fanboy2000 said:


> Because the prequel trilogy's flaws, seven years after it's completion, are well known. The movies have been dissected, its parts labeled, and every element of them catalogued. Anyone who still likes the movies after all of that probably isn't going to be swayed by yet another argument that their bad.



These reviews are old and contemporary with those catalogs being made, and may even be the source of some of the dissections. They are also entertaining and thought provoking because they aren't just a list of what is wrong. They are developed and supported by clips of the films.

Whether or not there are catalogs of what's wrong with TPM, to most people who will watch these reviews, it could be the first time they are encountering what is "wrong" with the films. Reading a list of what's wrong with a film is less entertaining than being shown, using excepts, what is wrong with that film.

And again, I don't care if you liked the film or not or whether you watch the reviews I linked to or not. It's just not that important. Your insistence on supporting TPM as a good movie is no more valuable than my opinion that it sucked. And I'll note that I did demand that you change your mind. I merely suggested watching a review to give you the reasons many people don't like it beyond "it's the suxxor, dude." 


> FWIW, I did watch a video today. But it was The Phantom Menace, and I still enjoyed it.



Haha! Admit it! You fear to watch the plinkett review! Bwahahahaa!  Um, never mind.


----------



## Kaodi (Jan 30, 2012)

I kind of want to see Beauty and the Beast in 3D, if only out of curiosity about how a traditionally animated movie can look using modern 3D techniques.


----------



## fanboy2000 (Jan 31, 2012)

jmucchiello said:


> These reviews are old and contemporary with those catalogs being made, and may even be the source of some of the dissections. They are also entertaining and thought provoking because they aren't just a list of what is wrong. They are developed and supported by clips of the films.



Well, I must say, you've written an intelligent and thoughtful post...I'm glad that...hey...what's that light...?

<center>
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





</center>


----------

