The Problem with Star Wars

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

No, they don't make tons of money because they're famous.

Star Trek is one of the most FAMOUS sci-fi franchises of all time. But when the movies aren't good, people tend to not go see them in the same numbers.

See how that works?

That's what I've tried to say about ten or fifteen times in this thread already. You'll be lucky if it gets through.

 

[Flyspeck23]

[alex trebek] What's the line from the Producers about the first rule of Broadway... "Never use your own money".

And the second rule? NEVER USE YOUR OWN MONEY!

1st rule of Broadway: Don't talk about Broadway.

Star Trek is one of the most FAMOUS sci-fi franchises of all time. But when the movies aren't good, people tend to not go see them in the same numbers.

See how that works?

No, as Star Trek is not the most famous sci-fi movie franchise.

 

[Villano]

Just because someone has enough money to do something doesn't mean that they're good at it. If Madonna produces a film and acts in it, God forbid we criticize her acting ability. It's her money, we can't say it's bad!

My problem is that people are defending Lucas based on his money. It's summed up best by that quote from the interview Ankh-Morpork Guard posted:

Until you make a multi-billion-dollar company and make your own movies and fund them yourself, don’t make a comment.

Because only rich people can have opinions.

And for the record, I never said you didn't have the right to criticize the movies because he made them with his own money.

No, but you did respond to my criticism:

Anyway, I have to agree that Lucas is ironically the weakest element of the new films. I think it's a combination of not being a "people director", being secretive, and, frankly, not having anyone around him to say that something is a bad idea.

By saying:

Now he's telling us the first half of the story, ON HIS OWN DIME.

Let me reiterate that, because to me, its a huge deal. He could have studio backing for this film. Heck any studio would jump at the chance to make these movies. But he has paid for every dime of every prequel himself.

I said he wasn't good at directing people, didn't give his actors complete scripts (which hampered their performances), and that he basically needed an editor to gauge his ideas. You countered my beliefs with a post about his money.

And talk about being misquoted...

If enough people agreed with you that the movies were completely worthless, he would have LOST a couple hundred million per film.

Where exactly did I say that his movies were completely worthless?

Unless you're the guy responsible for 7 (and now 10) of the top grossing movies of all time? I mean, American Graffitti, Star Wars 4-6, Indiana Jones 1-3... you might think the man who had a big hand in all those movies knew what he was doing wouldn't you?

You're absolutely right. He's a great producer. In fact, I never said he wasn't. I'd say he was a better producer than director. That's kind of part of my point.

For all the people saying that they aren't telling people that they can't critize Lucas because he used his own money, it seems like a lot of people are defending him from criticism by talking about his money.

 

[Vigilance]

Just because someone has enough money to do something doesn't mean that they're good at it. If Madonna produces a film and acts in it, God forbid we criticize her acting ability. It's her money, we can't say it's bad!

Im only going to say this one more time.

THE FACT THAT HE SPENDS HIS OWN MONEY GIVES YOU THE PERFECT WAY TO CRITICIZE HIM BY NOT BUYING HIS PRODUCT.

Did you get it that time?

I explicitly stated in every post that, of course, you have the right to say anything you want. Criticize away. Please. There, that's three times. You have my permission to criticize him, ab shalom, go with God my son. Ok? Ok.

You're absolutely right. He's a great producer. In fact, I never said he wasn't. I'd say he was a better producer than director. That's kind of part of my point.

He's not JUST a great producer.

He wrote American Graffitti, a movie that I think is fantastic.

He wrote Star Wars. Nuff said.

He directed American Graffitti and he directed Star Wars

For all the people saying that they aren't telling people that they can't critize Lucas because he used his own money, it seems like a lot of people are defending him from criticism by talking about his money.

Actually I said this first, which you completely ignored:

I keep seeing these references to the fact that "Lucas needs less control", "Lucas is a twis", "Lucas is the weakest link", "Someone needs to tell Lucas he's wrong".

So let me get this straight... the man tells us half of a great story, and in the process creates a universe people will be fascinated with 100 years from now, AND in the process of that changes the way movies are made (Lucas and ILM revolutionized FX forever).

You know, the apart about him CREATING the universe. He had the idea. He wrote, produced, directed Star Wars, everyone told him it was a lousy idea and people will still be telling stories about the Force 100 years from now.

And THEN I mentioned that, oh by the way, he's paying for it. And like it or not, that DOES factor into how much control you have over things in the real world.

If I ask my Dad to send me to college and he wants me to major in Engineering, then I have two choices. I can major in Engineering, or I can pay my own way to college.

See how that works? Being willing to pay the bills gives me more choices.

A lot of the criticism I see of Lucas amounts to "That isn't the way I would have made the movies".

So go make your own movie. Lucas made the movie. That was his part of the equation. OUR part is either to see it or not see it, and then like it or not like it.

Chuck

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

Because only rich people can have opinions.

Remember, though, that Lucas WASN'T rich when he started this out.

And really, the point is that its a lot easier to critize these movies than it is to MAKE them. Get out there and do it, and do a better job than Lucas your way, then we can talk. But until then, most of this "He's a bad director" "His casting was horrible" etc is all just baseless opinions with no meat behind them. Sure, opinion has some weight, but if they WERE SO BAD, Lucas would be feeling it by LOSING money on them.

I said he wasn't good at directing people, didn't give his actors complete scripts (which hampered their performances), and that he basically needed an editor to gauge his ideas.

This kind of thing always bothers me. How do you know there ISN'T an editor gauging his ideas?

For all the people saying that they aren't telling people that they can't critize Lucas because he used his own money, it seems like a lot of people are defending him from criticism by talking about his money.

My points about money are more that the fact that he keeps MAKING money on these movies proves he isn't as bad a director as some cry he is. Otherwise, he'd feel the impact and people wouldn't see the movies. Yes, bad movies make money...but bad movies DON'T make the kind of money Star Wars movies have made.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Many fencers prefer the pistol grip for their swords, as it gives a stronger hold on the weapon. I know some competitive fencers who refuse to use any other type of grip.

Thanks for this info. It's possible it may change my entire opinion of that pistol grip.

It's been a while since I watched AotC. But I don't recall Dooku using a fencing style of swordplay in the movie. Did he? Or did he use the usual longsword/kendo type style that most of the Jedi do?

If Dooku was actually fencing with his blade, then I'll have to amend my entire take on that bent lightsaber. Otherwise, it's still silly.

 

[Vigilance]

I keep seeing people mention Lucas having total control as if its purely a product of his being intergalactic warlord (or whatever his title is these days) of a global financial empire.

But I seem to recall that Lucas wrote, directed and edited a movie called American Grafitti back in 73. This movie was shot documentary style and used MTV-style music video scenes, set to music from the 50's for god's sake. Everyone thought he was nuts.

Yet the movie was a huge success, and I do not mean financially. This film was nominated for 5 academy awards and gave Lucas the clout to try something even more crazy.

He would make a science fiction film in the vein of Flash Gordon and Planet of the Apes.

Only he would do it in a way no one had ever done sci-fi. The FX would be state of the art. The sound would be state of the art. When no company could produce what he wanted, Lucas started two companies: ILM and Sprocket Studios (later changed to Skywalker Sound).

Note to those who thing money has NOTHING to do with this equation, starting companies costs MONEY. Lucas, at a time when he had very little money, was already willing to spend his own money to achieve his VISION. (See how money isn't all about money? Its about art too. This is American Way. Capalism in action.).

But we're talking about artistic success.

So he makes this movie, which he again writes, and directs and edits. And this time he produces it too.

Then he shops it around for a studio, and no one wants it. In fact, they hate it. They tell him it sucks.

Finally, desperate to get the movie into which he has sunk so much of his time, energy, vision, reputation and (wait for it) money, produced, Lucas agrees to a deal with 20th Century Fox.

He will receive NO SALARY for this film.

Instead he will receive 40% of the profits, the complete rights to all sequals and the complete rights to all merchanidsing.

Had the movie failed as EVERYONE (but George Lucas) predicted, he would have been penniless. He had sunk all the money he made on American Grafitti (his first and only real comercial film) into a labor of love.

This is called, vision, and big brass ones.

And THAT is why he has the right to make these movies any damn way he wants.

It's his house, and he will paint it whatever color he wants, because he built it with his own hands. When it was going up everyone told him it was ugly and that it would fall down before he could move in.

But it didn't, and now that everyone sees how beautiful and sturdy it is, they want him to paint it yellow.

Chuck

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

Thanks for this info. It's possible it may change my entire opinion of that pistol grip.

It's been a while since I watched AotC. But I don't recall Dooku using a fencing style of swordplay in the movie. Did he? Or did he use the usual longsword/kendo type style that most of the Jedi do?

If Dooku was actually fencing with his blade, then I'll have to amend my entire take on that bent lightsaber. Otherwise, it's still silly.

He does use a pseudo fencing style. But its still altered a bit to be more lightsabery than completely fencing.

 

[Villano]

Im only going to say this one more time.

THE FACT THAT HE SPENDS HIS OWN MONEY GIVES YOU THE PERFECT WAY TO CRITICIZE HIM BY NOT BUYING HIS PRODUCT.

Did you get it that time?

I explicitly stated in every post that, of course, you have the right to say anything you want. Criticize away. Please. There, that's three times. You have my permission to criticize him, ab shalom, go with God my son. Ok? Ok.

Yes, you state it in every post. And then you proceed to bring up the fact that Lucas produced his own films and "THAT is why he has the right to make these movies any damn way he wants" as if that invalidates my criticism.

He can make any film he wants and I'm free to talk about what I think are his weaknesses as a film maker. And, at no point have I said that you don't have a right to like them. Buy a thousand copies of the DVDs, I really don't care. I don't know why you're so obsessed with my opinion of them.

I could be belligerent and say, "Did you get it that time?", but that would be rude.

I'm done with this thread. Post away, but I'm not going to bother reading it anymore. It's pointless to respond since it's just going to go around in circles. Clearly, any work I've done in the television industry is no match for your mighty house painting analogies...

 

[LilMissKittyn]

Using his own money doesn't place him above critism, but it definitely puts him on a level that other directors and writers aren't on. He's done thing all on his own. He picked the original cast on his own, so why shouldn't he do the same with the Prequels? Hindsight is twenty twenty, but at the same time, cast choices are subjective. What one person likes, another won't.

The problem comes when people state opinions as FACT

Let me explain something. I'm an artist AND a conceptualist.

I'm going into college as a computer programmer/musician/teacher, and I'm arguably the best flutist (for the high school level) in the state, which makes me good enough to be professional. I've taken art lessons since I was six, danced since I was four, been writing as a hobby since I was seven, and I've been acting for three years. I think I know a little something about concept creation. I know my opinions aren't fact, but at least I have more to back them up than, "Oh, well, the movies made a lot of money."

I already SAID that bad movies can make a lot of money. I also, if you actually read the whole thread like I did before posting, I said that Lucas isn't the worst. In fact, I accentuated it by making it the last thing in my post. And yes, I know this wasn't directed at me, but the same thing has been said in replies to me and I thought I'd make it absolutely clear for those of you who seem to not be able to read.

Please don't reply to my post without examples. It just makes you look silly.

And really, the point is that its a lot easier to critize these movies than it is to MAKE them. Get out there and do it, and do a better job than Lucas your way, then we can talk.

My points about money are more that the fact that he keeps MAKING money on these movies proves he isn't as bad a director as some cry he is.

Someone posted something about "don't criticize unless you've done it yourself."

I've made movies. Not professionally, but I know how to handle a camera. But you don't have to make movies to know good movies. You just have to a) have eyes, b) have ears, c) have some kind of intellectual refinement, and d) know what to look for. It's not so hard, it just takes a little time and effort.

I know enough about psychology to pass a junior-year college exam on mood disorders (actually, that's an area I know less in than the others; my specialty is anxiety disorders) I can usually accurately diagnose a person long before they tell me what the actual diagnosis is. Does that give me the right to hand them a pill bottle? No. But it does give me the right to give them some advice, as a friend, on how to help them.

I hope that makes sense. Read it again if it doesn't.

One more thing. I've seen Episodes 1, 4, 5, and 6 ONCE. Read that again, ONCE. I'm not a Star Wars fan, though I am a gamer and a major sci-fi fan. I do know movies. I know how hard it is to make them, to produce them, etc, etc. There's people out there that can do it. Lucas is close, he just needs someone else to be there to "edit" his works. Think of it as a kind of newspaper system; he's the journalist.

Oh yeah, and I enjoyed American Graffiti. I really did; Lucas has some talent. And he did create a magical world that people will emulate for a long time. I'm asking about improving, not deleting. There's a difference. Don't let your idolation keep you from seeing otherwise.