• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Lucas convinced Ep III will tank?

Orius said:
That's probably the diehards kicking in. Howevers, those sales are probably people buying for just one showing. The real impact from fans will be those who see the movie multiple times.
I've seen every Star Wars movie at least three times in its initial theatrical run. Sith would have to be considerably worse than the previous two to make a dint in fan sales of guys like me. Heck, it takes me at least a viewing or two to realize what I don't like about the movies. And all indications are that this will probably be a fair bit better than the last two.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Joshua Dyal said:
Yeah, you really showed me there by quoting the sum total of everything he's ever said. :rolleyes: Heck, he made comments like that during the first week of the original Star Wars theatrical run.
And you really showed me here since sarcasm, as everybody knows, is far superior to logic when it comes to arguing on the internet (irony too!). To reiterate: I have yet to see a "woe is me, my new movie won't make any money" quote from Lucas. The closest thing, in the interview that sparked this thread, was "And like everyone who makes movies, I'm always convinced the next one will be a flop. So right now I'm thinking it probably won't make any money and will be considered a failure." That's a far cry from what you're implying (in fact it's consistent with every writer I know, as I said earlier), So, when you say:
Joshua Dyal said:
He's been saying for years that he thinks the 6th movie will by financially the least successful. Seeing now that he's apparently claiming he doesn't know if it will make any money at all fits the pattern of years of interviews.
I can't help but notice that your generalization, while it fits Lucas' statement in terms of propositional content, completely ignores the tenor in which he made it. I'm sure of all the interviews out there there's at least one where he comes off how he's been made out here, so please, feel free to go ahead and actually quote the sum total of everything Lucas has ever said, and if you don't mind put the bits that back up your point in bold. Paraphrasing and putting your own spin on his words doesn't really prove anything. I'm not disagreeing (what do I care? It's not like I know the guy), I'm just waiting for some actual evidence.
 


Wayside said:
I can't help but notice that your generalization, while it fits Lucas' statement in terms of propositional content, completely ignores the tenor in which he made it. I'm sure of all the interviews out there there's at least one where he comes off how he's been made out here, so please, feel free to go ahead and actually quote the sum total of everything Lucas has ever said, and if you don't mind put the bits that back up your point in bold. Paraphrasing and putting your own spin on his words doesn't really prove anything. I'm not disagreeing (what do I care? It's not like I know the guy), I'm just waiting for some actual evidence.
You'll keep waiting. I have no desire to research a post enough to prove anything to you. If you believe he meant something otherwise, then fine, that's what you believe. I believe he made a boneheaded comment, and I already said that the boneheadedness was related more to the timing than to the fact that I also think it's totally wrong. This entire discussion has been a tangent of what I was trying to say. If you think I'm going to do some heavy researching to find transcripts of years old interviews, read all the way through them, and cut and paste the relevent portions for that, then I'm sorry to disappoint you -- I'm not going to that much effort. I'll just retreat to my own little corner of the internet and admit defeat since, hey, I guess you won if my memory of a bunch of interviews isn't enough to convince you. :uhoh:
 

Wayside, I have posted this article before.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/SHOWBIZ/Mov...g.ap/index.html
Here are the last 2 paragraphs.
Of course, the PG-13 rating does not prohibit children under 13 from seeing the film without an adult tagging along. And while it's not likely to make much of a dent in the movie's certain blockbuster status, the rating could give some parents pause.

"These are pretty intense. Who should be allowed to see them should be left up to the parents, but at least they're warned that it's pretty intense," Lucas said. "And obviously, that's not a good business move."
To me when someone says they made a bad business move that equates to them expecting to lose money
 

Taelorn76 said:
To me when someone says they made a bad business move that equates to them expecting to lose money

It does and it could... At the moment, or in a few weeks, I don't see to many PG movies worth seeing at the theater.

So I'm sure there are some parents who would love to see a great movie for the kids to come out…

Me I’ve always thought that Lucas took it hard later on when he bulked on the rating for RotJ and changed it from what he original wanted to tell.
 

Taelorn76 said:
To me when someone says they made a bad business move that equates to them expecting to lose money
Yeah, but not because he made a bad movie. It's because he'll lose certain customers of age.

Honestly, I don't know what impact a PG-13 rating could do to a PG-rated franchise. I I know is the higher the rating, the more selective and smaller your audience become. Of course, there are movie theaters out there that don't bother to check ID and let even 7-year-olds to see an R-rated film (if they can't make money off of $5 small drink, they'll sell as many tickets) but there are parents (some of which are conservative) that are aware of what their kids watch.

If it were some other film studio that foot the production bill as well as printing and distributing the reels, they'd have force Lucas to make Revenge of the Sith "kid-friendly."
 
Last edited:

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top