• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Lucas: "I sold Star Wars to White Slavers"

Star Wars was the Beatles of blockbuster event cinema. It didn't do anything spectacularly original as a part, but as a sum of its parts it was utterly unique and defined its whole industry.
As much as I love Star Wars, I'm continually amazed at the exaggeration fans place on it's overall impact on society, or film making in general.
Id struggle to name any film or trilogy of films that has been both so important to the history of film and so popular. Without Star Wars we likely would not have had multiplex cinemas!
Multiplex cinemas became a thing in the 1960's, and greatly expanded in the early 1980's due in large part to competition with other forms of media growing, and consolidation in the industry.
So while in our lifetimes there will probably be another Beatles (simutaneously both incredibly popular and incredibly good) we will also never have another original Star wars trilogy.
Maybe not in our lifetime, but eventually. I'd personally say the early Pixar films (like Toy Story) did more to change the industry than Star Wars. Sure, we had a flash of cheap, Star Wars knock off films in the 80's, but how many animated films in the last 20 years have tried to be the next Toy Story?

In other words, Star Wars is not the be-all of cinema. It did not single handedly change film making as we know it. What it did was further evolve things that were already evolving, such as special effects technology, and the public's growing demand for merchandise.


Well said.
 
Well I think SW probably did start the trend of big special effects summer blockbusters like we're so used to seeing now. Since I don't think that was nearly as common beforehand.

Although I do agree that it's importance to film and society in general does tend to be greatly overstated. Especially considering the incredibly simplistic storytelling in each of these movies (which I think both fans and the media have read way too much meaning into over the years).
 
Lucas seems like his biggest criticism of the movie is that it lived too much in the aesthetic and plot points of ANH. Which is a completely accurate criticism. There's absolutely no reason they had to make so much of the story so similar.

But Lucas also seems to genuinely not understand why people hate Jar Jar so much or a lot of the reasons the original trilogy is so loved. He honestly thinks a thousand things going on in the background is better than a focused stylized action scene. If he could accept that his ideas work the best when he listens to people and lets other people's vision impact the implementation details, he could make some seriously great films.

I have to disagree that another Beatles is more likely than another Star Wars. Just because I think great screenwriting is more compatible with big movie production than great singing or songwriting is compatible with the sterilized production and autotuning of modern big label music. I personally feel Dark Knight is overrated, but it dealt with smart, complex themes, made a huge impact on the film industry and made a ton of money. And it did it inside the realm of an already popular IP. You can have smart, complex themes and make a ton of money so long as you get the explodies in too.
 
He's also blissfully oblivious to the fact that he'd make a lot of different bad decisions including writing the dialogue and casting actors with all the charisma and acting chops of the average tree stump.
Really? Liam Neeson, Natalie Portman, and Ewan McGreggor are all horrible, wooden actors? Yeah, no, can't even remotely agree there. It was Lucas's direction (or in some reports, lack thereof) that forced them to give horrible, wooden performances. The fact that Ewan's portrayal of Obi-Wan still managed to be half-way decent despite Lucas is a testimony of how amazing he is as an actor, if anything.

JJ made all the same feckups he made on his other movies (he always will - it's inbuilt), but still delivered a more enjoyable movie than any of the prequel triligy.
To be fair, the lens flares were significantly toned down.

Also, I think Lucas is really just upset because he wasn't asked to partake in the production of the film whatsoever. Or if he was, his contributions were quickly dismissed and he was politely asked to bugger off. I guarantee that he thought he would be able to sell the franchise, lose the responsibility, but still play a major role in anything that came of it, and the lack of the latter is what really bothers him.
 
The white slavers comment is just bizarre, though.

Given he laughs right after he says it, I think it was meant to be a joke. Still, he must know that's going to be repeated and taken out of context. I guess Lucas just wanted to create his own "raped my childhood" style line.

I can't say the prequels were better than TFA, but at the same time I feel like they had more artistic integrity than TFA. Certainly they were more idiosyncratic. Now that we've gotten a taste of Disney-era Star Wars I'm less thrilled with the sale than I used to be. I can only imagine how Lucas feels about it.

I get what you're saying and kind of agree. But really, anyone who actually thought we were going to get a new golden era of fresh storytelling for the franchise from Disney or Abrams were already living in a fantasy world.
 
The article Dennis linked was nothing but a pretentious, long-winded way of saying "Those damn kids and their rock and roll."
 
I get what you're saying and kind of agree. But really, anyone who actually thought we were going to get a new golden era of fresh storytelling for the franchise from Disney or Abrams were already living in a fantasy world.

I wasn't expecting a Golden Era, but I was hoping the fact that JJ grew up watching Star Wars would specially motivate him to want to make a great movie that he, as a fan, would want to continue the franchise.
 
Oh, it's just George being George.

It's not like Disney is subtle or shy about overexposing the IPs that they own. They plan to milk Star Wars for all it's worth.

If I spent over FOUR THOUSAND MILLION DOLLARS on something, I'd SURE AS HELL want some return on my investment, as well!
 
Granted the white slavers comment is a little weird in today's PC world but Lucas has been rather hesitant about this new movie in his comments for a while. He tries to put on a good face not to shill but you can tell he hasn't really been feeling it.
 
I get what you're saying and kind of agree. But really, anyone who actually thought we were going to get a new golden era of fresh storytelling for the franchise from Disney or Abrams were already living in a fantasy world.

Still. For a few months there I had actually hoped. Abrams and co. were all saying the right things, and the casting of female and black co-leads filled me with hope that he would bring innovation to the other areas of the film, too.

Guess the joke was on me.
 
So while in our lifetimes there will probably be another Beatles (simutaneously both incredibly popular and incredibly good)
Considering that the Beatles are still the ones setting the bar after 50 years, that's quite the optimistic prediction. The "Next Beatles" Hall of Has-Beens has gotten rather crowded....
 
So while in our lifetimes there will probably be another Beatles (simutaneously both incredibly popular and incredibly good)
Considering that the Beatles are still the ones setting the bar after 50 years, that's quite the optimistic prediction. The "Next Beatles" Hall of Has-Beens has gotten rather crowded....

sorry that was a typo - I meant to write "there will NEVER be another Beatles" - an unfortunate typo as it completely changes the meaning of my post! :rolleyes:
 
So Lucas recanted and took back the "white slavers" remark:

http://variety.com/2015/film/news/g...wars-successors-are-white-slavers-1201670406/

He also says this:
Disney is doing an incredible job of taking care of and expanding the franchise. I rarely go out with statements to clarify my feelings but I feel it is important to make it clear that I am thrilled that Disney has the franchise and is moving it in such exciting directions in film, television and the parks.

He sure back-pedaled quickly, didn't he? :rofl:

Most of all I’m blown away with the record breaking blockbuster success of the new movie and am very proud of JJ and Kathy.

I guess you can't argue with money. :shrug:

Kor
 
As much as I love Star Wars, I'm continually amazed at the exaggeration fans place on it's overall impact on society, or film making in general.

Well, agreed actually - I wrote a whole big reply last night and it wouldn't post!

There is no doubt to me that in terms of turning blockbuster films into a standard, improving SFX, putting the businesses in place to do the SFX, and so on, Star Wars turned the film industry's default main setting to the Blockbuster, a big deal.

Sure, to continue the Beatles allegory, lets say Jaws was Elvis, and the 70s disaster movie craze was Chuck Berry, but Star Wars helped bring it all together.

I don't claim for it having an effect on society, something to which the Beatles have a stronger claim.

Multiplex cinemas became a thing in the 1960's, and greatly expanded in the early 1980's due in large part to competition with other forms of media growing, and consolidation in the industry.

Well, OK, but their growth was attributed to SW in a documentary I saw the other day, and, as with the Beatles, they were not the only reason for the rise and rise of modern popular music.

Maybe not in our lifetime, but eventually.

I hope so, I really only meant that to refer to the Beatles and meant the opposite of what I wrote. I'd love to see another Beatles but while we sometimes have the popularity or close to it and some bands intermittently replicate the quality, we never seem to have both together.

I'd personally say the early Pixar films (like Toy Story) did more to change the industry than Star Wars.

Well I'm not going to knock Pixar. I'd say that SW has the edge but YMMV.

In other words, Star Wars is not the be-all of cinema.

I didn't say it was...

It did not single handedly change film making as we know it.

Well it did change film making as we know it, not single-handedly - though it deserves massive credit especially for its technical changes.

Of course the storytelling was as old as the sun, but storytelling is!

What it did was further evolve things that were already evolving, such as special effects technology, and the public's growing demand for merchandise.

Well yes, a bit like the Beatles really, reason for my analogy. Not exact but there you go.
 
So Lucas recanted and took back the "white slavers" remark [...] I guess you can't argue with money. :shrug:

Wasn't the interview from the OP taken before he saw TFA, and hasn't he seen it multiple times now? That's what I gathered from a few of the reports, but I could have gotten it wrong.

Perhaps seeing the film made him change his mind. I mean, he had already gotten his money...
 
He's also blissfully oblivious to the fact that he'd make a lot of different bad decisions including writing the dialogue and casting actors with all the charisma and acting chops of the average tree stump.
Really? Liam Neeson, Natalie Portman, and Ewan McGreggor are all horrible, wooden actors? Yeah, no, can't even remotely agree there. It was Lucas's direction (or in some reports, lack thereof) that forced them to give horrible, wooden performances. The fact that Ewan's portrayal of Obi-Wan still managed to be half-way decent despite Lucas is a testimony of how amazing he is as an actor, if anything.

JJ made all the same feckups he made on his other movies (he always will - it's inbuilt), but still delivered a more enjoyable movie than any of the prequel triligy.
To be fair, the lens flares were significantly toned down.

Also, I think Lucas is really just upset because he wasn't asked to partake in the production of the film whatsoever. Or if he was, his contributions were quickly dismissed and he was politely asked to bugger off. I guarantee that he thought he would be able to sell the franchise, lose the responsibility, but still play a major role in anything that came of it, and the lack of the latter is what really bothers him.

I also think that's it.. a massively bruised ego due to the insane box office the movie makes (outstripping Phantom Menace by a good margin), the overall very good reception of the movie and Disney rejecting all his influence and ideas, essentially totally cutting him out.

He comes off as the guy who very publicly announces he is done, makes a diva like storm off and then is pissed and insulted when nobody is going after him to convince him to return.

Oh and we already have the public apology for the slaver comment from him.. if someone insulted me like this i'd publicly tell him to fuck off but i guess celebrities think can get away with anything if they issue a public apology later.
 
I wonder if Lucas receives any royalties from the new products?
Why would he? He sold it outright, and if Disney didn't include all of the rights when they bought it, especially for four billion dollars, they were the fools.
 
I get what you're saying and kind of agree. But really, anyone who actually thought we were going to get a new golden era of fresh storytelling for the franchise from Disney or Abrams were already living in a fantasy world.

Still. For a few months there I had actually hoped. Abrams and co. were all saying the right things, and the casting of female and black co-leads filled me with hope that he would bring innovation to the other areas of the film, too.

Guess the joke was on me.

Skin-deep diversity is easy, creative diversity - the thing that makes for good entertainment - is hard.
 
Well I think SW probably did start the trend of big special effects summer blockbusters like we're so used to seeing now. Since I don't think that was nearly as common beforehand.

i'm afraid that even the "big summer blockbuster" claim is vastly overstated. Summer has always been a big time for films. Children are out of school, and an air conditioned movie theater is a good way to get out of the hot weather. So while I can't say for sure what the first big summer movie was, I can say for sure it wasn't Star Wars.

Jaws: released July 20, 1975
Return of the Pink Panther: May 21, 1975
Cannonball: July 6, 1976
The Omen: June 25, 1976
Smokey and the Bandit: May 19, 1977

As for it changing film making on a technical level, again it was more of an evolution than a revolution. None of the effect techniques on SW were invented specifically for that film, as miniatures, blue screen, and matte paintings had been around for decades.

What SW did do was have a space battle that was more akin to WW-II era dog-fighting instead of a submarine battle. While not as dramatic, it was certainly far more action packed and interesting. It was a style of fighting in space never depicted in film or print because, to be fair, it's entirely ridiculous and impractical. But Lucas and the folks behind SW deserve credit for redefining how a space battle could be depicted.

I'd still say that even on a technical level, films like Toy Story and Jurassic Park did more to change the industry than Star Wars.
 
Last edited:
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top