What did Lucas do?

[J.T.B.]

DWF wrote:

---

All of the OT movies were studio movies, he didn't start paying for the Star Wars movies himself til the prequels came along. Kasdan and Kershner both turned down offers to work on the prequels.

With the first movie, Lucas negotiated for and got the sequel rights from 20th Century Fox, they thought that was small beans at the time. He owned and financed ESB and ROtJ, and Fox handled the distribution for a small cut, a deal that was very favorable to Lucas. When ESB went over budget, though, Lucas couldn't get his credit extended and Fox fronted him some money to get the picture completed, in return for a bigger cut of the profits.

Justin

[Donald Draper]

Set Harth wrote:

---

The Lucas you loved, gone he is. Consumed by Darth Ca$h Money.

Lucas is giving most of the 4 Billion Dollars he is getting from the sale to education charities. http://www.geeksofdoom.com/2012/11/0...ation-charity/

[Mr. Adventure]

^ He's not giving it all? Luca$ is a selfish bastard!

[Gaith]

^ Yeah, one can criticize Lucas for many things, not only in his art but in his personal life, but I don't think a fixation on personal wealth isn't one of them. He may allow stuff like Detours and themed Angry Birds games to water down the Star Wars brand past all sane barriers, but I do think that that's his loopy way of giving the people what they want rather than a means to buy himself a new dressage horse or yacht.

[FPAlpha]

Drago-Kazov wrote:

---

They are also bad for supporting a corrupt republic in my book.

I don't see it like that- The Jedi are an apolitical Force.. a more or less private organization (much more similar to a religion or church) which has a high public standing and regard that gives them some inofficial clout politically.

They would be a political factor if the Masters would speak publicly about politics and endorse certain candidates or run for office themselves bit they are careful not to meddle in politics.

Their task and motto is to defend the people against all threats but that doesn't include overthrowing rightfully elected governments no matter how inept or dysfunctional it is.
This is the job of the people themselves but if the government decided to turn on the people (think Tian An Men square for example) i'm pretty sure the Jedi would ignite their Lightsabres and stand with the people.

Gaith wrote:

---

^ Yeah, one can criticize Lucas for many things, not only in his art but in his personal life, but I don't think a fixation on personal wealth isn't one of them. He may allow stuff like Detours and themed Angry Birds games to water down the Star Wars brand past all sane barriers, but I do think that that's his loopy way of giving the people what they want rather than a means to buy himself a new dressage horse or yacht.

That's also something that has always bothered me in the years past.. i sincerely doubt it was about the money for Lucas at any time. The financial success of Star Wars made him independent of the studio system.. something that is very rare and not even grand directors like Spielberg or Scorsese have that freedom. Lucas could have made a new movie every few years since the first one and pay for it himself and not go broke but for all the other problems i have with him about his writing and direction being a greedy bastard is not one of them.

Lucas makes adventure movies for those wide-eyed kids and the adults who have retained that quality.. he's making those movies in a style he hopes that kids will love and be entranced by them. He's telling grand stories, uses huge visuals and cool stuff to make it a ride for 2 hours and i bet he'd be happy as he could be when he would sit in a schoolyard to hear the kids talk about the new Star Wars he just made.

This is why we got Jar Jar Binks, racially stereotyped Neimodians, slapstick combat droids etc.. adults will roll their eyes at it but kids love this stuff and they don't think too much about it. This is the core audience of Star Wars and under Lucas it always was.. of course a better writer and director could have pleased both kids and adults (Pixar proves it can be done) but we got what we got.

So no.. Lucas doesn't do it for the money.. he does it to make kids happy. And for that i applaud him.. i was a kid once and Star Wars was the greatest.

[Drago-Kazov]

I don't see it like that- The Jedi are an apolitical Force.. a more or less private organization (much more similar to a religion or church) which has a high public standing and regard that gives them some inofficial clout politically.

they should not support a morally corrupt senate. They could do all their jedi stuff and not take orders from the senate.

They would be a political factor if the Masters would speak publicly about politics and endorse certain candidates or run for office themselves bit they are careful not to meddle in politics.

They should run for office themselves since almost all the damm politicians are corrupt.

Their task and motto is to defend the people against all threats but that doesn't include overthrowing rightfully elected governments no matter how inept or dysfunctional it is.

No but they could dedicate themselves to expose corruption in the senate.

[Harvey]

DWF wrote:

---

All of the OT movies were studio movies, he didn't start paying for the Star Wars movies himself til the prequels came along. Kasdan and Kershner both turned down offers to work on the prequels.

As J.T.B. helpfully explains, this is incorrect. The first film was a studio movie; the other five were independently financed (except for some finishing funds provided by Fox for the first sequel when it went over-budget).

Drago-Kazov wrote:

---

I agree. For all his talk for doing artsy stuff did he ever supported up an coming talented directors with his wealth?

Lucas donated $175 million of his fortune to USC, a major contribution that seriously renovated and updated the facilities and equipment there. I think that counts as supporting up and coming talent. I believe he also funds grants and scholarships for production students there.

[Hound of UIster]

Harvey wrote:

---

What the prequels didn't have was a producer like Gary Kurtz (IV, V), a screenwriter like Larry Kasdan (V, VI), or a director like Irvin Kershner (V) -- people who could disagree with Lucas or at least present another point of view.

Stop drinking the Kurtz koolaid.

Kurtz may have been a positive force creative wise for ESTB, but the problems as a producer including budget and scheduling woes laid at his feet was what got him sacked from his job.

In fact the problems with the production of ESTB ultimately was why Lucas decided to end SW at Jedi instead of going with his original plan of cranking out SW movies every few years. And also probably why Marquand on ROTJ having such limited creative control.

[Drago-Kazov]

I think they made Lucas hire a damm dialogue coach for ROTS. I am not sure who made it happen.

[Hound of UIster]

It didn't help because he didn't have time to make any revisions. That was the same problem with AOTC.

TPM vice versa suffered from too many drafts.

[Harvey]

Hound of UIster wrote:

---

Stop drinking the Kurtz koolaid.

I never said he was perfect (nor were the other figures I listed; Kurtz wasn't the only one). But they weren't "yes men" like Rick Mccallum.

Hound of UIster wrote:

---

TPM vice versa suffered from too many drafts.

It certainly suffered from Lucas' awful dialogue. Even the original Star Wars brought in Gloria Katz and Willard Huyuck to polish the words. They didn't get screen credit, but Lucas valued their contribution enough to award them points on the gross.