Brother Shatterstone said:
You know what's sad...?
That this cost him money, and in this day of the bottom line meaning everything its nice to see someone being honest and up front and its said to see people take shots at him for it.
So was he not suppose to make toys cause his movie was PG13?
I don't understand arguments like this. They somehow assume that criticism of something Lucas does is some kind of personal attack. You can legitimately criticism someone and not "take shots" at them. It ultimately comes down to the "haters" argument again, because no criticism of Lucas can be made without the critic being labeled as someone who's attacking him.
It involves a bit of circular reasoning, too. People who criticize him, hate him. How do we know they hate him? They criticize him, of course! Only people who hate him would do that.
In this case, some people take issue that he's telling parents not to take young children to see the film, while marketing certain things to those very kids, who will then want to see the movie. That seems like a legitimate criticism to me (especially if they are parents of young kids who bought the toys and now want to go see the film. Now those parents have to act as the "bad guys" and tell them, "no").
The toy question is a loaded question. They aren't saying he shouldn't make any toys at all, just certain ones. No one is complaining about action figures, but stuff like Playskool, which is aimed for those very young kids he thinks shouldn't see his film.
Lucas can market his film any way he wants, but he shouldn't be above criticism. It's not like the world will end if he doesn't market his film to 4 year olds. And we aren't talking about artistic rights or freedom of speech here. It's marketing. It's about making money. He doesn't want the kids to see the film, but he'll take their money. Again, that's a legitimate criticism.
You’re not going to change my opinion and I'm not going to change yours.
