Sign in to follow this  
StillKirok

General Star Wars Discussion

Recommended Posts

Jabba didn't just shoot them because he wanted them to suffer. Luke killed Jabba's "pet" and orchestrated a plot to remove Jabba's favorite piece of art work - Han Solo (the smuggler who screwed up).

Threepio mentions that they would be digested for a long time and die in agony in the Sarlaac Pit. It wouldn't mean much if he shot them and threw their corpses into the maw.

Well let's think about this for a minute.  C3PO mentions that they would be digested over 1000 years.  Sounds awful, until you realize that makes no sense.  Even if the beast lives that long, you wouldn't.  You would starve to death, and even if it naturally fed you, you would die of old age.  You would be a corpse for pretty much the whole time. 

And another thing--who would feed that monster? Because if it didn't move, it's not hard to avoid. 

But let's go further.  Luke just beat a different monster, with like 6 foot teeth, by himself, unarmed.  Jabba already tried to kill Luke and it failed miserably.  Wanting them to suffer is fine, but knowing what Jedi can do, and seeing what Luke just did, just shoot the guy. 

But some of us don't care for tension, storytelling elements, or things that aren't literal.

And others don't care about things like plotholes and logic.

 

Of course you wouldn't live that long, but it's saying that the Sarlaac would be digesting what was left of them through all that time. It does keep you alive the rest of your natural life span and you are literally left immobile, being filled with toxin, and slowly being devoured piece by piece. Jabba wanted that for Luke and Han. You wouldn't be a corpse until finally you were able to die - which could take years or decades. If you're a long lived species like Yoda - then possibly centuries. That is utter agony and horror to contend with.

Animals would fall into it. Plus, the Star Wars wiki implies it can move through the ground like a Dune sandworm. Also, it is implied in the wiki that it has a slow metabolism. Considering Jabba probably uses that spot to toss people into when they anger him - I bet the Sarlaac is well fed.

As I said, Jabba was furious about Luke's plan and wanted to make an example of him. He didn't believe Luke was actually a Jedi. At least, not powerful enough to be like the Jedi of the Old Republic. Luke did not beat the Rancor using the Force. He simply ran around and threw a skull at a door switch cleverly timed for the gate to kill it. That wouldn't make me think Luke is this scarily powerful Jedi Master - it'd make me think he was lucky. Period.

Jabba couldn't bargain with Luke. He's the most feared crime lord in the Outer Rim. It'd make him look weak and cowardly if he kowtowed to this upstart kid in a cloak. The other crime lords would possibly see a weakness in Jabba and move against him. Criminal politics exists. It'd be like slashing your wrist while in a pool filled with sharks. It'd make Jabba look like he backs down in cowardice. Luke proved his ultimate skill at the Pit of Carkoon but by that point it was too late - Jabba died by Leia.

It's not a "plot hole" because you don't like a decision a character makes. Jabba was furious because his pet Rancor died and because Luke tried to steal Han from his carbonite "prison". He wasn't going to be like "Oops. You bested me. Being the gentleman I am, I shall negotiate now."

It wouldn't mean much if he shot them and threw their corpses into the maw.

That would be more like Goodfellas than Star Wars... :P

In a future remix special edition - Lucas will replace Jabba with Joe Pescie. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a future remix special edition - Lucas will replace Jabba with Joe Pescie. :D

Yeah, but it'll be Joe Pesci with sixteen arms and 15 ft. tall (hehe).   GoodJabbas. :laugh:

One of thousands of reasons I'm so glad Lucasfilm was rescue--er, 'bought out' by Disney; no more f--king special editions. :thumbup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a future remix special edition - Lucas will replace Jabba with Joe Pescie. :D

Yeah, but it'll be Joe Pesci with sixteen arms and 15 ft. tall (hehe).   GoodJabbas. :laugh:

One of thousands of reasons I'm so glad Lucasfilm was rescue--er, 'bought out' by Disney; no more f--king special editions. :thumbup:

Hmm - you don't think we might one day get an extended blu-ray cut of The Force Awakens...? :P;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a future remix special edition - Lucas will replace Jabba with Joe Pescie. :D

Yeah, but it'll be Joe Pesci with sixteen arms and 15 ft. tall (hehe).   GoodJabbas. :laugh:

One of thousands of reasons I'm so glad Lucasfilm was rescue--er, 'bought out' by Disney; no more f--king special editions. :thumbup:

Hmm - you don't think we might one day get an extended blu-ray cut of The Force Awakens...? :P;)

I don't know if Abrams does extended cuts, but according to DigitalBits.com, the blu ray will have deleted scenes! :thumbup:

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/columns/my-two-cents/121115_1530

And... get this; it's already on preorder from Amazon.  True! 

http://www.amazon.com/Star-Wars-Force-Awakens-Blu-ray/dp/B018FK66TU/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1450746936&sr=8-1&keywords=force+awakens+blu+ray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a future remix special edition - Lucas will replace Jabba with Joe Pescie. :D

Yeah, but it'll be Joe Pesci with sixteen arms and 15 ft. tall (hehe).   GoodJabbas. :laugh:

One of thousands of reasons I'm so glad Lucasfilm was rescue--er, 'bought out' by Disney; no more f--king special editions. :thumbup:

Hmm - you don't think we might one day get an extended blu-ray cut of The Force Awakens...? :P;)

I don't know if Abrams does extended cuts, but according to DigitalBits.com, the blu ray will have deleted scenes! :thumbup:

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/columns/my-two-cents/121115_1530

And... get this; it's already on preorder from Amazon.  True! 

http://www.amazon.com/Star-Wars-Force-Awakens-Blu-ray/dp/B018FK66TU/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1450746936&sr=8-1&keywords=force+awakens+blu+ray

Damn - already?

It'll probably be the biggest-selling blu-ray of all time!

I was being a bit cynical... ;)  I'm kind of hoping JJ doesn't do extended cuts and that Disney stand behind that - that the film we get at the movie theater is the definitive version.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a future remix special edition - Lucas will replace Jabba with Joe Pescie. :D

Yeah, but it'll be Joe Pesci with sixteen arms and 15 ft. tall (hehe).   GoodJabbas. :laugh:

One of thousands of reasons I'm so glad Lucasfilm was rescue--er, 'bought out' by Disney; no more f--king special editions. :thumbup:

Hmm - you don't think we might one day get an extended blu-ray cut of The Force Awakens...? :P;)

I don't know if Abrams does extended cuts, but according to DigitalBits.com, the blu ray will have deleted scenes! :thumbup:

http://www.thedigitalbits.com/columns/my-two-cents/121115_1530

And... get this; it's already on preorder from Amazon.  True! 

http://www.amazon.com/Star-Wars-Force-Awakens-Blu-ray/dp/B018FK66TU/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1450746936&sr=8-1&keywords=force+awakens+blu+ray

Damn - already?

It'll probably be the biggest-selling blu-ray of all time!

I was being a bit cynical... ;)  I'm kind of hoping JJ doesn't do extended cuts and that Disney stand behind that - that the film we get at the movie theater is the definitive version.

Well, considering that we've never seen an extended cut of either of his ST movies?  I think it's a safe bet that the version in theatres is his cut.   It had great flow and pace; it's two hours and change but felt like an hour and 40 minutes (esp the 2nd time).

 

That was cute. :giggle:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lucas passive-aggressive and bitter over TFA?

“I think the fans are going to love it,” he said. “It’s very much the kind of movie they’ve been looking for.”

As opposed to your self-important vanity project prequels?

http://www.vulture.com/2015/12/george-lucas-delivers-a-verdict-on-force-awakens.html?mid=huffpoent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lucas passive-aggressive and bitter over TFA?

“I think the fans are going to love it,” he said. “It’s very much the kind of movie they’ve been looking for.”

As opposed to your self-important vanity project prequels?

http://www.vulture.com/2015/12/george-lucas-delivers-a-verdict-on-force-awakens.html?mid=huffpoent

Yeah, he probably thought it needed more scintillating taxation of trade routes.....  :P

George-Lucas-In-Carbonite.jpg

giphy.gif  << "HO, HO, HO, HO...."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've come to the conclusion, particularly after The West Wing , that only Aaron Sorkin can write interesting politics. Lucas should have hired him for TPM if he wanted it to be decent.

It's shocking that he considered all those bits the part of the movie that was supposed to entertain the adults. I've never been on the edge of my seat watching C-Span.

Edited by prometheus59650

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It's shocking that he considered all those bits the part of the movie that was supposed to entertain the adults. I've never been on the edge of my seat watching C-Span.

I have, and I still feel those parts in the prequels sucked. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've come to the conclusion, particularly after The West Wing , that only Aaron Sorkin can write interesting politics. Lucas should have hired him for TPM if he wanted it to be decent.

It's shocking that he considered all those bits the part of the movie that was supposed to entertain the adults. I've never been on the edge of my seat watching C-Span.

Not even during 'aggressive negotiations'?  :giggle:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading the whole article, I actually think it's a pretty balanced response. This, from someone who delivered the PT and seems - at least in the way he's represented in the media - not to comprehend why fans were disappointed in it. I've struggled to understand what it must be like to have success and then critical failure on the scale of Lucas' versions of Star Wars and I think it's probably impossible for me to grasp. I can imagine, sure, and wish I'd once seen some iota of humility from him about the PT, that could make me reconcile the idea of Lucas I had as a child and the aloof-seeming individual I felt he became. (It's all about ME, folks.) But on this occasion, he comes across as someone human who nods and says the right thing but can't disguise his true feelings. I might actually respect him a bit for that more than I would if he'd said he loved it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading the whole article, I actually think it's a pretty balanced response. This, from someone who delivered the PT and seems - at least in the way he's represented in the media - not to comprehend why fans were disappointed in it. I've struggled to understand what it must be like to have success and then critical failure on the scale of Lucas' versions of Star Wars and I think it's probably impossible for me to grasp. I can imagine, sure, and wish I'd once seen some iota of humility from him about the PT, that could make me reconcile the idea of Lucas I had as a child and the aloof-seeming individual I felt he became. (It's all about ME, folks.) But on this occasion, he comes across as someone human who nods and says the right thing but can't disguise his true feelings. I might actually respect him a bit for that more than I would if he'd said he loved it. 

You can't impugn his integrity, I suppose.   He really believed in the PT; that's almost heartbreaking.   To him, it was probably his 3-part "Citizen Kane."   To the rest of the world, it was a megabudget "Plan Nine From Outer Space"... :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading the whole article, I actually think it's a pretty balanced response. This, from someone who delivered the PT and seems - at least in the way he's represented in the media - not to comprehend why fans were disappointed in it. I've struggled to understand what it must be like to have success and then critical failure on the scale of Lucas' versions of Star Wars and I think it's probably impossible for me to grasp. I can imagine, sure, and wish I'd once seen some iota of humility from him about the PT, that could make me reconcile the idea of Lucas I had as a child and the aloof-seeming individual I felt he became. (It's all about ME, folks.) But on this occasion, he comes across as someone human who nods and says the right thing but can't disguise his true feelings. I might actually respect him a bit for that more than I would if he'd said he loved it. 

You can't impugn his integrity, I suppose.   He really believed in the PT; that's almost heartbreaking.   To him, it was probably his 3-part "Citizen Kane."   To the rest of the world, it was a megabudget "Plan Nine From Outer Space"... :(

How the mighty are fallen. Must be a pretty weird thing to be George Lucas right now, watching the world go nuts about something he originated while simultaneously deriding his own attempts to continue that universe. I don't feel sympathy exactly - far from it - but I admit, I'm curious to know what he really thinks and feels, and whether the motivation behind the sale to Disney was just money or him falling on his sword. But until a warts 'n' all autobiography/biography, I guess we won't know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading the whole article, I actually think it's a pretty balanced response. This, from someone who delivered the PT and seems - at least in the way he's represented in the media - not to comprehend why fans were disappointed in it. I've struggled to understand what it must be like to have success and then critical failure on the scale of Lucas' versions of Star Wars and I think it's probably impossible for me to grasp. I can imagine, sure, and wish I'd once seen some iota of humility from him about the PT, that could make me reconcile the idea of Lucas I had as a child and the aloof-seeming individual I felt he became. (It's all about ME, folks.) But on this occasion, he comes across as someone human who nods and says the right thing but can't disguise his true feelings. I might actually respect him a bit for that more than I would if he'd said he loved it. 

You can't impugn his integrity, I suppose.   He really believed in the PT; that's almost heartbreaking.   To him, it was probably his 3-part "Citizen Kane."   To the rest of the world, it was a megabudget "Plan Nine From Outer Space"... :(

How the mighty are fallen. Must be a pretty weird thing to be George Lucas right now, watching the world go nuts about something he originated while simultaneously deriding his own attempts to continue that universe. I don't feel sympathy exactly - far from it - but I admit, I'm curious to know what he really thinks and feels, and whether the motivation behind the sale to Disney was just money or him falling on his sword. But until a warts 'n' all autobiography/biography, I guess we won't know.

True, and no one can ever take the original Star Wars away from him; that was a paradigm shift in moviemaking that (literally) changed cinema forever.   If he'd only made that ONE blockbuster, he would've been the J.D. Salinger of movies....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's not disrespect Lucas too much--he did create the movie, and JJ pretty much copied the first movie.

I totally agree that the prequels sucked, but I realize now that at least he TRIED to not repeat himself.  He succeeded there, but he just made 3 movies that weren't that good.  I don't know what's better--a movie devoid of originality or a movie that is original but not good.  I'm guessing the former because at least you know you are making something that works.

But both have weaknesses.

I agree that Lucas doesn't get why the prequels weren't good.  It's really a shame.  It's odd that someone can make something so popular, yet not really get WHY it was so popular. 

 

If Lucas hates TFA, he CAN'T say so.  If he does, he comes off as bitter.  He may also be contractually obligated to never say anything bad.  Who knows?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's not disrespect Lucas too much--he did create the movie, and JJ pretty much copied the first movie.

I totally agree that the prequels sucked, but I realize now that at least he TRIED to not repeat himself.  He succeeded there, but he just made 3 movies that weren't that good.  I don't know what's better--a movie devoid of originality or a movie that is original but not good.  I'm guessing the former because at least you know you are making something that works.

But both have weaknesses.

I agree that Lucas doesn't get why the prequels weren't good.  It's really a shame.  It's odd that someone can make something so popular, yet not really get WHY it was so popular. 

 

If Lucas hates TFA, he CAN'T say so.  If he does, he comes off as bitter.  He may also be contractually obligated to never say anything bad.  Who knows?

 

To clarify on a personal level, I'm actually quite fascinated by Lucas and am not really inclined to disrespect him. I think he's made mistakes but, fundamentally, what he originated was modern myth that reached a bigger audience worldwide more than anything before or since. I think his achievements as a filmmaker are formidable and unprecedented. I love the original Star Wars trilogy, Raiders, American Graffiti. I can't help but respect him for those Olympian achievements. To be human is to be contradictory however, so I can't respect the creative decisions he made for the prequel trilogy. I would really like to understand them though, in much greater detail, which is why I wish for a warts 'n' all autobiography, as mentioned upthread. George is, to many, both hero and fool, and unlike most of us, permanently in the spotlight. That's incredibly tough - I have no real comprehension of how much.

Creators who grow apart from the original vision of their creation aren't so unusual, though. Many who are credited with singular authorship of a gigantic franchise (or the original text from which one grows) often work with excellent collaborators and often don't seem to comprehend or later acknowledge those contributions - in Lucas' case, i suspect the likes of Gary Kurtz, Marcia Lucas and Lawrence Kasdan had a much greater hand in shaping the first two films than generally is recognized (or allowed to be).

In that regard, he's not unique, just very high-profile. Add to that the sense of proprietorship fandom feels towards the Star Wars saga, and you have the perfect critical storm as to why the prequels generally weren't well-received. It's sad, because really, he gave so much of himself, so he must feel shut out. On a basic, human level, I feel bad for him for that. I just really do want to know how or why he can't comprehend why many people think the prequels suck. Thus far, with his reactions to the new movie, I think he's exhibited a fair amount of grace under what must be considerable pressure.

As to comparing the existing two trilogies made under his watch to the first episode of the new one, I'm not sure there's a way of measuring such things except subjectively or by mass consensus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's not disrespect Lucas too much--he did create the movie, and JJ pretty much copied the first movie.

I totally agree that the prequels sucked, but I realize now that at least he TRIED to not repeat himself.  He succeeded there, but he just made 3 movies that weren't that good.  I don't know what's better--a movie devoid of originality or a movie that is original but not good.  I'm guessing the former because at least you know you are making something that works.

But both have weaknesses.

I agree that Lucas doesn't get why the prequels weren't good.  It's really a shame.  It's odd that someone can make something so popular, yet not really get WHY it was so popular. 

 

If Lucas hates TFA, he CAN'T say so.  If he does, he comes off as bitter.  He may also be contractually obligated to never say anything bad.  Who knows?

 

 

To clarify on a personal level, I'm actually quite fascinated by Lucas and am not really inclined to disrespect him. I think he's made mistakes but, fundamentally, what he originated was modern myth that reached a bigger audience worldwide more than anything before or since. I think his achievements as a filmmaker are formidable and unprecedented. I love the original Star Wars trilogy, Raiders, American Graffiti. I can't help but respect him for those Olympian achievements. To be human is to be contradictory however, so I can't respect the creative decisions he made for the prequel trilogy. I would really like to understand them though, in much greater detail, which is why I wish for a warts 'n' all autobiography, as mentioned upthread. George is, to many, both hero and fool, and unlike most of us, permanently in the spotlight. That's incredibly tough - I have no real comprehension of how much.

Creators who grow apart from the original vision of their creation aren't so unusual, though. Many who are credited with singular authorship of a gigantic franchise (or the original text from which one grows) often work with excellent collaborators and often don't seem to comprehend or later acknowledge those contributions - in Lucas' case, i suspect the likes of Gary Kurtz, Marcia Lucas and Lawrence Kasdan had a much greater hand in shaping the first two films than generally is recognized (or allowed to be).

In that regard, he's not unique, just very high-profile. Add to that the sense of proprietorship fandom feels towards the Star Wars saga, and you have the perfect critical storm as to why the prequels generally weren't well-received. It's sad, because really, he gave so much of himself, so he must feel shut out. On a basic, human level, I feel bad for him for that. I just really do want to know how or why he can't comprehend why many people think the prequels suck. Thus far, with his reactions to the new movie, I think he's exhibited a fair amount of grace under what must be considerable pressure.

As to comparing the existing two trilogies made under his watch to the first episode of the new one, I'm not sure there's a way of measuring such things except subjectively or by mass consensus.

After reading the Rinzler books on the making of the SW OT?  I agree with your assessment that Kurtz, Kasdan and even Marcia Lucas had a much greater hand in shaping the original trilogy than is generally understood.   That said?   Lucas was, in his younger days, a very daring experimental filmmaker.   "THX-1138" is a remarkable piece of cinema, and as different from his next film ("American Graffiti") as two movies by the same person can be.   I love and enjoy them both, by the way.   

What I think happened to Lucas (as presumably happened to Gene Roddenberry) is that he began to believe his own press.   When he wrote and directed the original 1977 movie, he WAS Luke Skywalker; defeating the evil studio system with his scrappy band of rebel hippie filmmakers and making the blockbuster of the 20th century (and arguably beyond).  But then, as even he alludes to, he went from scrappy rebel to Imperial overlord.  He began to literally become a brand name; Lucasfilm.   This, to me, was the beginning of the end of the spirited, independent filmmaker from Modesto, California who began to see merchandising opportunities and back end profit to make his own corporations instead of focusing on story/creativity; and also (according to Kurtz) alienating some of those who got him to the top.    It's a sad, but very old story.

I think that by cutting out many of the people who worked with him to create the OT, the prequels suffered; he surrounded himself with "yes men" and ass-kissers like Rick McCallum who also bought into the "Lucas-is-God-and-can-do-know-wrong" mantra.  You hear McCallum speak (and I've heard him speak in person) about Lucas like he was a prophet issuing commandments from atop Mt. Sinai.   Truth is, NO filmmaker should work in a bubble like that; if anyone else has better ideas, they should feel a collaborative 'esprit de corps' with the filmmaker to at least present that idea (even if it is rejected, it can be heard).   But I think Lucas felt, at the time of the prequels, that the fans wanted him as much as Star Wars.   That wasn't true, it turned out.  
 

And yes, the prequels certainly made money, but not the kind of money a 'warmer to the touch', fan-friendlier, more collaborative Star Wars seems to be making at the moment (over $600 million in less than one week).   Abrams, Kasdan and Kennedy seem to recognize that the original Star Wars concept may have come from Lucas, but to bring it to the screen successfully required a lot of cooks toiling over the broth.  

It was not, nor will it ever be, a one-man enterprise... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's not disrespect Lucas too much--he did create the movie, and JJ pretty much copied the first movie.

I totally agree that the prequels sucked, but I realize now that at least he TRIED to not repeat himself.  He succeeded there, but he just made 3 movies that weren't that good.  I don't know what's better--a movie devoid of originality or a movie that is original but not good.  I'm guessing the former because at least you know you are making something that works.

But both have weaknesses.

I agree that Lucas doesn't get why the prequels weren't good.  It's really a shame.  It's odd that someone can make something so popular, yet not really get WHY it was so popular. 

 

If Lucas hates TFA, he CAN'T say so.  If he does, he comes off as bitter.  He may also be contractually obligated to never say anything bad.  Who knows?

 

 

To clarify on a personal level, I'm actually quite fascinated by Lucas and am not really inclined to disrespect him. I think he's made mistakes but, fundamentally, what he originated was modern myth that reached a bigger audience worldwide more than anything before or since. I think his achievements as a filmmaker are formidable and unprecedented. I love the original Star Wars trilogy, Raiders, American Graffiti. I can't help but respect him for those Olympian achievements. To be human is to be contradictory however, so I can't respect the creative decisions he made for the prequel trilogy. I would really like to understand them though, in much greater detail, which is why I wish for a warts 'n' all autobiography, as mentioned upthread. George is, to many, both hero and fool, and unlike most of us, permanently in the spotlight. That's incredibly tough - I have no real comprehension of how much.

Creators who grow apart from the original vision of their creation aren't so unusual, though. Many who are credited with singular authorship of a gigantic franchise (or the original text from which one grows) often work with excellent collaborators and often don't seem to comprehend or later acknowledge those contributions - in Lucas' case, i suspect the likes of Gary Kurtz, Marcia Lucas and Lawrence Kasdan had a much greater hand in shaping the first two films than generally is recognized (or allowed to be).

In that regard, he's not unique, just very high-profile. Add to that the sense of proprietorship fandom feels towards the Star Wars saga, and you have the perfect critical storm as to why the prequels generally weren't well-received. It's sad, because really, he gave so much of himself, so he must feel shut out. On a basic, human level, I feel bad for him for that. I just really do want to know how or why he can't comprehend why many people think the prequels suck. Thus far, with his reactions to the new movie, I think he's exhibited a fair amount of grace under what must be considerable pressure.

As to comparing the existing two trilogies made under his watch to the first episode of the new one, I'm not sure there's a way of measuring such things except subjectively or by mass consensus.

After reading the Rinzler books on the making of the SW OT?  I agree with your assessment that Kurtz, Kasdan and even Marcia Lucas had a much greater hand in shaping the original trilogy than is generally understood.   That said?   Lucas was, in his younger days, a very daring experimental filmmaker.   "THX-1138" is a remarkable piece of cinema, and as different from his next film ("American Graffiti") as two movies by the same person can be.   I love and enjoy them both, by the way.   

What I think happened to Lucas (as presumably happened to Gene Roddenberry) is that he began to believe his own press.   When he wrote and directed the original 1977 movie, he WAS Luke Skywalker; defeating the evil studio system with his scrappy band of rebel hippie filmmakers and making the blockbuster of the 20th century (and arguably beyond).  But then, as even he alludes to, he went from scrappy rebel to Imperial overlord.  He began to literally become a brand name; Lucasfilm.   This, to me, was the beginning of the end of the spirited, independent filmmaker from Modesto, California who began to see merchandising opportunities and back end profit to make his own corporations instead of focusing on story/creativity; and also (according to Kurtz) alienating some of those who got him to the top.    It's a sad, but very old story.

I think that by cutting out many of the people who worked with him to create the OT, the prequels suffered; he surrounded himself with "yes men" and ass-kissers like Rick McCallum who also bought into the "Lucas-is-God-and-can-do-know-wrong" mantra.  You hear McCallum speak (and I've heard him speak in person) about Lucas like he was a prophet issuing commandments from atop Mt. Sinai.   Truth is, NO filmmaker should work in a bubble like that; if anyone else has better ideas, they should feel a collaborative 'esprit de corps' with the filmmaker to at least present that idea (even if it is rejected, it can be heard).   But I think Lucas felt, at the time of the prequels, that the fans wanted him as much as Star Wars.   That wasn't true, it turned out.  
 

And yes, the prequels certainly made money, but not the kind of money a 'warmer to the touch', fan-friendlier, more collaborative Star Wars seems to be making at the moment (over $600 million in less than one week).   Abrams, Kasdan and Kennedy seem to recognize that the original Star Wars concept may have come from Lucas, but to bring it to the screen successfully required a lot of cooks toiling over the broth.  

It was not, nor will it ever be, a one-man enterprise... 

I agree very much, though I have always felt THX is an awful film (the short film is great but the feature is a tedious pretentious mess IMO).  And American Grafitti is decent, but it isn't this grand piece of cinema.  It is a solid teen comedy, nothing more, nothing less.  His only film that he is credited as director for that I think is truly above the mark is the original Star Wars.  And as you say, he wasn't the ONLY person who helped shape that into what it became.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is really interesting that Lucas, in my opinion and I guess in the opinions of what I believe is the majority, did such a poor job on the prequels.

Why?  What did he do so right in the OT that failed in the prequels?  Was it that he told an epic story and it was done?  Was it because he had to have a downer ending in a prequel trilogy?

Was it that he simply didn't get WHY people loved the OT? 

What changed?

For all the criticisms I gave to TFA, I liked it much better than the prequels. 

People often call ROTJ the worst of the three, and blame the Ewoks. As a kid, it didn't bother me, but today, I do see that once the Ewoks get on screen, the movie goes downhill a bit.

I didn't need fuzzy creatures to like Star Wars as a kid.  R2 and C3PO accomplished that without getting in the way.

ROTJ in some ways, with its flaws, is the prequel to the prequels.  It's like Lucas took all that was bad about ROTJ and enhanced it.

ROTJ still had a good cast, but the dialogue was terrible.  If I were to guess, I would guess that Lucas wrote the scene where Luke told Leia that they were siblings.  It was awkward.  Who talks like that?  It wasn't normal.

A normal person would spend the flight over there thinking, "oh crap, I had a really awkward kiss with my sister."  But by the end of the flight he would decide, "ok, it could have been much worse, and now I know.  We get along well, we're friends, and this is pretty damn awesome."

When he sees Leia, he wouldn't give some sly look and say, "ask me later."  He would be like, "holy crap Leia, check out this piece of news."

So in my opinion, the dialogue in ROTJ was weak, especially with Luke. 

That carried into the prequels.  Plus, in the prequels, the casting was pretty bad aside from Ewan McGregor.  He really blew it with Anakin.

It seemed that Lucas wanted more Ewoks. 

He also couldn't get why people didn't like certain things and was too stubborn to listen to the masses.  I know a lot of filmmakers talk about making a film that they like, but once you have a hit, you need to understand WHY it was a hit.

There's a balancing act next between giving the audience what it wants, but not repeating yourself.  TFA seemed to go to the other extreme to the point where it remade A New Hope, though if given the choice of extremes, we ended up with a better movie.

Lucas clearly doesn't like to be criticized, which is why he still defends certain decisions, like Han shooting first, and kept Jar Jar around.

I say this a lot--Star Wars needs its Moffat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ROTJ in some ways, with its flaws, is the prequel to the prequels.  It's like Lucas took all that was bad about ROTJ and enhanced it.

^

Very, very, very much this! 

 

RoTJ was the first time I was at all disappointed in a Star Wars movie.   The dialogue suddenly seemed leaden; it lacked the flow and wit of the first two (the one liners were straight out of a bad '70s sitcom).   Even the opening crawl ("Little does Luke know...") sounds childish.  

The Ewoks looked very much like what they were; little people in teddy bear costumes, nothing more.  There was nothing even vaguely alien or really interesting about them, like the Jawas or even the Wookiees (if only they'd made Endor Kashyyk instead, as originally scripted).   I could've seen an Ewok in a pile of teddy bears at a department store and I wouldn't even have noticed.   The rescue from Jabba's palace on Tatooine was needlessly protracted.  It could've taken place OFF SCREEN and the entire movie would've been better for it.   It could've began with the ships rising from Tatooine and a few throwaway lines about breaking out of Jabba's lair, etc.   Like the bounty hunter they ran into on Ord Mandell that was mentioned very casually in "Empire."   At the very least the sequence could've BEGAN with them breaking Han out of Jabba's lair and not some long song and dance (literally) and a bunch of other irrelevance that stops the action dead in its tracks.   And forgive me, Jabba fans, but I still would've preferred a mobile Jabba and not some bedridden slug.

And Yoda's dying (literally) in his sleep was exactly what I meant earlier about how you can't (or shouldn't) have characters simply curl up and die in a movie called "Star WARS."    It lacked punch and there was no sacrifice, hence, no drama.  Yoda could've died in an attempt to defeat Palpatine once more (and attempting to rectify his mistakes in RoTS; which, of course, didn't exist in 1983, but oh well...).  

Not to mention a new Death Star that looks exactly like the old one (only incomplete and more vulnerable) showed an utter lack of imagination.  At least the super weapon of the TFA has new characteristics to define it (I won't go into those in this thread, of course... hehe).

The only parts of RoTJ that still work for me today are the scenes with Luke, Vader and the Emperor and the dizzying final attack on Death Star 2.   The second space battle (and probably the last large scale optically created work of its kind) is simply stunning, even if it is a total rehash of A New Hope's climax (Lucas even admitted that he had no ending for RoTJ because he'd used it in ANH).   Luke's confrontations and the final battle royale were the moments I loved and wanted to see more of; their intensity almost belongs in a better movie.  RoTJ feels childish in comparison to the more sophisticated previous movies.  

And, as you say, the prequels seemed to have used RoTJ's clunky dialogue, overly kid-friendly aliens (Ewoks?  Meet Gungans) and general lack of sophistication as a jumping off point.  RoTJ was, IMO (and even Gary Kurtz') where Lucas became clearly more interested in merchandising and back end profits than crafting a really good story.

TFA feels much more in keeping with the tone of the first two movies; in short, it feels like a long overdue homecoming.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What Lucas failed to do with the Prequels that he did with the OT is take into consideration the talents and thoughts of other creative people around him.  He took the credit for everything they did to create the originals and tried to prove (maybe to himself, who knows) that he was indeed the one true genius needed for the series to work.  He wasn't. Ever. He sparked an idea and made a movie that other people's creativity and talents enhanced into something better. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What Lucas failed to do with the Prequels that he did with the OT is take into consideration the talents and thoughts of other creative people around him.  He took the credit for everything they did to create the originals and tried to prove (maybe to himself, who knows) that he was indeed the one true genius needed for the series to work.  He wasn't. Ever. He sparked an idea and made a movie that other people's creativity and talents enhanced into something better. 

Agreed.

He began to believe his own press; the idea that the show couldn't go on without him, etc.  TFA clearly demonstrates that not only can others make a Star Wars movie, but that (arguably) they can make it better

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this