George Lucas Criticizes Latest ‘Star Wars’ Installment

Originally Posted by GothicGothicness
Wow, you are really trying hard to discredit Lucas, what do you have against him? fact is without him Star Wars would not exist, and the original movie has the following: ( You make it sound like it was not good because of him ) He also worked so hard on the movie that he had health problems by the end of it.

Director: George Lucas
Writer: George Lucas
Story By: George Lucas

It is kind of sad that you try so much to discredit someone who brought such a great franchise to the world.


In following movies story is still by him, even if there is another director. So I really don't get what your point is? All my main points has been about story, and I admit there was some directing problems.

I don't "have it in for George Lucas", I just know a lot about the topic. Lucas 'lost' Star Wars with Empire Strikes Back, after that movie the age-range of the franchise was set, the style and genre was set. A New Hope was originally supposed to be full of political dryness, but it was all cut. snip snip snip that crap. If Lucas had made A New Hope entirely on his tod it would have been not to dissimilar to the watchability of Dune, that long-running super-franchise.

A New Hope was never written to be a continued story, it was continued because it was the no.2 selling movie of all time. I agree, it's not his fault his creation became bigger than he was able to contain it, happens all the time, but when that does happen it's not at all unusual for the 'creator' to start sub-contracting involvement.

Of course I feel sorry for Lucas, I am a human being, but he's hardly a hard-done-by genius auteur bullied into exile and hounded to live on the streets is he. He was sitting next to Obama at a gala event only a few days ago. I feel sure my pit of sympathy emotions have more suitable candidates. I feel sorry for him because he's obviously someone who struggles to understand humanity, a veritable Forest Gump who has had the luxury of spending his life in a dreamworld, quite separated from the mundanities of reality. Which is why he can't write for human beings. Which is why his 'comic sidekick' is a 1930s black caricature. Etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc.

I feel sorry for him because I poses empathy and humility, because I can see that he does not poses either of these traits. He is a man driven by competition who lost. He is a man driven by the commercial result of commercial results, he is not deserving of sympathy, but, yet, I sympathise, because I know how to. But absolutely none of my sympathy for the failed status of a bunch of movies effects my ability to understand why those movies were crap.

OMG that was truly a shot below the belt, how did you know I am a fan of Dune ?

I really like that world and setting, and I also loved the Dune games…. especially Dune II, really great game!

No matter how long we discuss, we are going to arrive at the same conclusion though, I love movies which has a depth and underlying unique stories, meaning and setting to them. While it is far from the best plot ever, I think the earlier movies had these elements, and I absolutely loved the setting and lore.

No one can claim The Force Awakens is such a movie, and I will never like it.

I take it you don't mind if movies has giant plot-holes, you prefer a clear cut and easy to follow plot, and you like mindless action, or at least this is what you want from a Star Wars movie, and it is what the majority wanted, at least temporary after having starved for so many years.

We don't entirely disagree about Lucas, you think he completely lost it after The Empire Strikes Back and you feel pity for him because of that. I think his prequels had an interesting idea and plot, and added things to the universe but where in many ways still failure as movies, I did enjoy watching them though ( well, only a few parts of TPM though ). I really wanted to see him finish it and perhaps if the prequels were better received he would have had the energy to finish the 9 movies, still he did sell it to Disney and for that I don't feel much pity for him.

Also in favor of Lucas, I am a huge Indiana Jones fan, and it is quite amazing how he was heavily involved in that as well… both Star Wars and Indiana Jones ( No I don't care that much for the new Indiana Jones movies either… )

Originally Posted by GothicGothicness
OMG that was truly a shot below the belt, how did you know I am a fan of Dune ?

I really like that world and setting, and I also loved the Dune games…. especially Dune II, really great game!

Why, because it's another messy plot-hole ridden disaster of a sci-fi/fantasy production with some semblance of interest in its core ideas of course

Originally Posted by lackblogger
Powell and Pressburger

Never heard of them. Who are they ?

Aw, c'mon Alrik, a 2 second internet search?

Here's a wonderfully funny snippet of the telling of the Phantom Menace debacle by none other than the actor who got to be… the voice of Darth Maul! :



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0wHqNi3x5M

In terms of 'originality', you and Jaz would be happy as long as, at some point, a character lands on a strange planet and exchanges pleasantries with a funny looking alien every half an hour - which is great… I guess… but anyone could write that, it would take some kind of genius to make it constantly plot-relevant and actually interesting beyond "oh look, here's another bunch of aliens"

This made me laugh. Not cause of Jaz, but because I actually know people that think like this.

Originally Posted by GothicGothicness
As for the future of Star Wars, I am sure that the direction it has taken now is very harmful.

The next Star Wars movie will not be Episode VIII which is scheduled for 2017 but Rogue One scheduled for this year, and that's a movie I'm really looking forward to because it should be different - not a rehash of the same old topics in a new setting that looks exactly like the old one … no, it takes place in the old setting. It is said to be the story of how the Rebellion got the Death Star plans - a one-off movie, so no cliffhangers. It features a totally new set of characters as well as Vader and probably also Leia in their prime, and before filming started, there was a roll call for war movie specialists.

So while it doesn't expand much on the setting* (at least I think it won't due to time restraints), it will hopefully be different enough for me - a dark, gritty commando flick in the SW universe. That's what the rumors say and the leaked production pics hint at, and if it was true - well, that's my wet dream.

Ah, by the way: my favorite part of TFA? In hindsight I must say it was the squid hunt. The gangs piqued my interest.


*lackblogger got that right, by the way … I love world building, but it's not just a few new aliens or places here and there. They wouldn't have made me feel better about TFA, I guess.


WHAAAA! Dune 2 was one of teh best gamez evah!

Originally Posted by lackblogger
Aw, c'mon Alrik, a 2 second internet search?

Yor list contained only filmmakers, not actors. That's why I had assumed that tzese 2 were in the U.S. important filmmakers I had heard nothing about.

For heaven's sake Alrik, what search engine do you use?

The British film-making partnership of Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger — together often known as The Archers, the name of their production company – made a series of influential films in the 1940s and 50s

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powell_and_Pressburger

Contraband (1940)
49th Parallel (1941)
One of Our Aircraft Is Missing (1942)
The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp (1943)
The Volunteer (1943)
A Canterbury Tale (1944)
I Know Where I'm Going! (1945)
A Matter of Life and Death (1946)
Black Narcissus (1947)
The Red Shoes (1948)
The Small Back Room (1949)
The Elusive Pimpernel (1950)
Gone to Earth (1950)
The Tales of Hoffmann (1951)
Oh… Rosalinda!! (1955)
The Battle of the River Plate (1956)
Ill Met by Moonlight (1957)
They're a Weird Mob (1966)
The Boy Who Turned Yellow (1972)

1943 49th Parallel Oscar nominated for Best Picture
1943 49th Parallel Oscar winner for Best Writing, Original Story
1943 49th Parallel Oscar nominated for Best Writing, Screenplay
1943 One of Our Aircraft Is Missing Oscar nominated for Best Writing, Original Screenplay
1943 One of Our Aircraft Is Missing Oscar nominated for Best Effects, Special Effects
1948 Black Narcissus Oscar winner for Best Art Direction-Set Decoration, Color
1948 Black Narcissus Oscar winner for Best Cinematography, Color Jack Cardiff
1949 The Red Shoes Oscar winner for Best Art Direction-Set Decoration, Color
1949 The Red Shoes Oscar winner for Best Music, Scoring of a Dramatic or Comedy Picture
1949 The Red Shoes Oscar nominated for Best Picture
1949 The Red Shoes Oscar nominated for Best Writing, Original Story
1949 The Red Shoes Oscar nominated for Best Film Editing
1951 The Tales of Hoffmann Oscar nominated for Best Art Direction-Set Decoration, Color
1951 The Tales of Hoffmann Oscar nominated for Best Costume Design, Color

Originally Posted by lackblogger
Why, because it's another messy plot-hole ridden disaster of a sci-fi/fantasy production with some semblance of interest in its core ideas of course

OMG, Dune 2 was the original RTS! This is like saying Wolfenstein and Doom were ridiculous.

lol, I had to look up Dune 2 to find out what you're even talking about:

Dune 2000 is a real-time strategy video game, programmed by Intelligent Games and released by Westwood Studios in 1998 for Microsoft Windows. It was later ported to the PlayStation in 1999.

Oh, a computer game called Dune 2000. I'll take your word for it

I kind-of like the Dune movie. I've seen it twice in my life, mainly because I'm always willing to give a lynch movie time & Kyle MacLachlan was in a lot of cool stuff back then. But the movie fails to leave any lasting impression on me, let alone any strong memories. It doesn't leave a bad taste though, just a "well, that was that" kind-of neutrality, as is often the case with weird movies with no previous entity to live up to (except the usual book fans).

Talking about how Dune was a missed opportunity is likely a far longer and more detailed conversation than even how Lucas dropped the ball with the prequels.

Dune 2000 is actually the remake of Dune 2 ( from 1992 )

Dune 2 now that was a really brilliant game for it's time, you could choose between Atreides, Harkonnen, and Ordos. Each had their own story and units, and ending. It is based on the Dune setting. You also had to compete for the spice, and the sand worm could come and eat your harvester ( oo, how everyone hated that ), basically Command & Conquer is based on the ideas of this game, but they changed spice to tiberium, removed the sand worm, and made two playable sides instead of three, and set it on Earth. Westwood was brilliant.

Again agree with you that the Dune film was flawed but it also has some brilliant moments and the setting is interesting.

I very much prefer a flawed innovative or unique movie, to a clone movie, that kind of give me nothing.

Of course the best movies are the once which have both, but sadly they are few and far between, especially if based on a existing franchise or book. In My opinion Batman: The Dark Knight is a perfect example of an excellent way to do it, it is also one of my favourite movies. I wasn't even much of a Batman fan before I watched it.

lol, google search fail. In fact, just typing "Dune" into my google search doesn't even bring the movie's IMDB page in the first page of results. "Dune 2" just took me to Dune 2000.

You can take any first installment or unique sci-fi/fantasy product and claim the "flawed unique" angle though. Take Robocop or Terminator, for example, they both had ok or better first sequels then dived into a pit of gradual worsening. Because they both have predecessors by which to judge them, expectations to meet. TFA is a part 7 sequel, that point in a franchise when it's not unusual to get a reboot overhaul that gets judged by how well it reboots rather than how well it functions as its own original product. Dark Knight was a sequel to a part 5 reboot, the initial reboot, Batman Begins, being mostly forgettable are rarely talked about.

Which goes back to a point made pages ago, TFA is just part 1 of 3. You yourself claim you didn't much like part 1 of the prequels, and I've already stated the original trilogy entered true legend status only because Empire was so good. We are in a position of judging just part 1 against two complete trilogies, which is very unfair. TFA's final assessment will involve it's relation to its sequels, if the next one is crap, it will drag TFA down with it, if its amazing it will lift TFA further still.

You do overstate the "cloneish" (lol, nice pun) state of TFA and understate the original concepts, that's just an unfortunate situation that happens when forced (lol) to argue personal points, to justify a generally negative impression which could have come from almost any abstract source (like those nutters in the USA who panicked at the site of the black guy in the advert and vowed to hate the movie whatever).

I noticed all the references the same as you, but I wasn't as offended, because I'd rather have a shoe-horned Millennium Falcon back in action than bland new ship no.341 provide no additional screen excitement. The MF is akin to a character, like The Enterprise is a crucial element to any Star Trek story. Lucas didn't use the MF? Does he even 'get' his own creation? Would Star Trek be Star Trek without an Enterprise (as in a marketable movie, not a tele spin-off series or EU product)?

Well, would Star Trek be believable if the Enterprise would be the same ship in every movie ? Actually I am a bit surprised, that did not happen in the Star Trek reboots given who the director is, some kid randomly found the original Entreprise parked in his neighbours backyard, not having been used for a couple of years, but fully functional and not in anyway locked. That part of the new Star Wars movie was just so ridiculously bad it almost made me puke.

It is unfair though to compare one movie to a trilogy and I've written elsewhere in this thread that the only saving grace for me could be if the second movie is a lot more innovative and better than The Force Awakens. On a side not it is with great pleasure I notice how the rating keeps getting lower for The Force Awakens, it is now down to 8.5, and keeps dropping.

Originally Posted by GothicGothicness
Well, would Star Trek be believable if the Enterprise would be the same ship in every movie ? Actually I am a bit surprised, that did not happen in the Star Trek reboots given who the director is, some kid randomly found the original Entreprise parked in his neighbours backyard, not having been used for a couple of years, but fully functional and not in anyway locked. That part of the new Star Wars movie was just so ridiculously bad it almost made me puke.

See, you just get all extreme about nothing. As if you didn't 'get' it in the first place. The Enterprise is a gigantic vessel owned by a galactic empire, the new model gets released like the new model of Ferrari, but it's still the same ship isn't it, they still say "its good to be back" every time they get on board a new Enterprise. The MF has always been a jokey play on the concept of new, it's always been the "old junk" that doesn't look like anything and ought to be scrapped, but, in the right hands… like the Jaguar E-Type was recently rebuilt as new following the original specs and costing more to purchase than the new Ferrari. You talk about the lore, but don't even grasp the basics.

Originally Posted by Alrik Fassbauer
Besides, I'm having a discussion with a group of Star Wars fans now, about "marginalising the original Rebel's efforts in the older movies by showing how the Empire is in the new movies".

My point is that because Disney wants thios setting to sell, it is stuck in an "Eternal War" setting now. There just will be no pece, because peace doesn't sell.
To me, that's the GAU of a setting, because I as a writer very firmly believes that "a good story needs a good end", and Star Wars has mainly always been a *story* to me.

This is a very good point. I'm really not a big fan of settings that end up in some permanent state of war, and each iteration has some sort of new and bigger threat. This happens far too frequently in successful franchises.

A setting can be re-used while still delivering good stories by seperating the eras (Star Wars has thousands of years of history to explore), with each era having a proper ending. Either that, or have parallel stories that each have proper endings.

As for TFA; I enjoyed it, but it is too close to "A New Hope 2.0" for me, and its version of the Death Star is just plain silly. However, I really like the characters and the chemistry between them, so the next two movies have a lot of potential.

Originally Posted by lackblogger
See, you just get all extreme about nothing. As if you didn't 'get' it in the first place. The Enterprise is a gigantic vessel owned by a galactic empire, the new model gets released like the new model of Ferrari, but it's still the same ship isn't it, they still say "its good to be back" every time they get on board a new Enterprise. The MF has always been a jokey play on the concept of new, it's always been the "old junk" that doesn't look like anything and ought to be scrapped, but, in the right hands… like the Jaguar E-Type was recently rebuilt as new following the original specs and costing more to purchase than the new Ferrari. You talk about the lore, but don't even grasp the basics.

If you want to use the Jaguar, you mean that someone would park their old super valuable jaguar that is great in the right hands with the keys inside it and without any guards what-so-ever, on a planet full of poor people that struggle to get enough money for food, and work with finding scrap metal and old parts?

Yet none even though trying to scrap it, or steal it ?

Besides, although it is not nearly as big a deal it is one thing to have such a ship in the original three movies, but now it is so many years later, I would find it strange if absolutely nothing has happened in technology advancement or design of the Tie-Fighters, while the empire ( ooops sorry they named it New Order in the new Movie ) is constantly researching and building new death weapons ?

Originally Posted by Maylander
This is a very good point. I'm really not a big fan of settings that end up in some permanent state of war, and each iteration has some sort of new and bigger threat. This happens far too frequently in successful franchises.

A setting can be re-used while still delivering good stories by seperating the eras (Star Wars has thousands of years of history to explore), with each era having a proper ending. Either that, or have parallel stories that each have proper endings.

As for TFA; I enjoyed it, but it is too close to "A New Hope 2.0" for me, and its version of the Death Star is just plain silly. However, I really like the characters and the chemistry between them, so the next two movies have a lot of potential.

Hehehehe

@Gothic - fantasy… because magic etc etc etc

Well, they could have at least tried to maintain some kind of credibility, after all Star Wars is not a Kafka novella, they could have run past some guards, short circuited the doors or something. The makers of the movie didn't even try or care though, that is the kind of movie The Force Awakens is, I guess they figured a lot of people would not care if there is any credibility what-so-ever in the movie because well, it is "fantasy becasue of magic etc etc etc."

Interestingly, even Youtube's brightest, funniest and most intelligent trolls are praising TFA:

Channel name: I Hate Everything - released a new video format titled "I love Everything" as a response to the movie, siting extreme hatred for the anti-trolls.

Channel name: Your Movie Sucks Dot Org - reviewed the movie within the framework of, "hey, I liked this movie", I give it Episode 7/10.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

On the factual side, it's just surpassed Phantom Menace and Return of the Jedi in all time inflation adjusted US domestic box office and is about to overtake Avatar. The movie is still 8.5 on IMDB after 370,000 votes (Attack of the clones only has 430,000 votes after years of release) and it's not falling in any dramatic way, considering 8.7 was it's first really settled score after release many weeks ago.