George Lucas - Why the Vitriol?

[FPAlpha]

Where I disagree strongly with Lucas is his decision not to preserve, exhibit or release in a commercially viable home video format the first three Star Wars pictures in their original form. It is detrimental to the history of cinema and I simply can't fathom the motivation behind it.

This is my problem with Lucas also. I feel no hate or vitriol toward the man, but I do strongly disagree with his wish to erase any previous version of the OT once a new change has been made.

It's like he doesn't understand that there's money to be made in a giant DVD set of every version of the OT. Hell, just look at the 2007 releases of the three versions of Close Encounters, or that "suitcase" release of all five versions of Blade Runner. I'm happy to have those in my collection.

Ditto that three disk ET set.

Forget "every" version of the OT.. just release the Original Trilogy in the best quality possible with todays remastering technology and i guarantee you it will be the best selling Blu Ray box of all time breaking all kinds of records.

I can also safely say that i will pre-order that sucker no matter what it may cost.

While we're at that topic.. does Disney now own the full rights to the whole Star Wars universe meaning that may happen at some point? I know Lucas is hardcore against it because for some reason he feels they are bad (disregarding the fact that people who grew up with these movies don't care about outdated special effects and filming mistakes.. to them it's part of their childhood including mine) but can Disney release them? If so i'm pretty sure they will because they will do the simple math and come to the conclusion that there's a huge money explosion to be made with that set.

 

[137th Gebirg]

I wonder if a condition of sale mandated by Lucas to Disney was that the Holiday Special will never see the light of day. I could see them releasing that as a bonus disc in a set just for the sheer novelty factor - they might actually pull in some serious one-time coin from all the fanboyz who want to upgrade their fuzzy 30-year old VHS convention bootlegs.

 

[Galileo7]

The only place I see hatred for Lucas is the internet. For me, the man made some good movies and made some bad movies.

Agree.

 

[TheMasterOfOrion]

1
He's kind of a one trick pony, he has one story that story - put Han Solo in a magical scifi space temple, have him kiss the girl while fighting off swords, bullets and have Indiana lightsabre Solo reluctantly become a hero fighting cyborgs or fighting brain washed human police officers in some far away land where a rebellion is taking place. He's no Jack Kirby, no James Joyce, no Virginia Wolf, no Shakespeare, no Stan Lee, no Isaac Asimov, no Ursula, no Kubrick, no Spielberg, he's no Ridley Scott

2
I once almost loved the films but now in hindsight believe the original trilogy to be a bit childish and something of a fashionable fad in the 80s. I used to love the DVDs and VHS as a kid but when you grow into adulthood I don't think his films age well like other film classics

3
He's a money hungry freak and tried to sue Battlestar Galactica, yes he's a legal nutbag and will phone a lawyer over anything. Star Wars itself is not so original lifting heavily from Metropolis, Silent Running, 2001, Buck Rogers, Dark Star, The Hidden Fortress etc so Lucas legally attacking battlestar and other scifi films citing forty-four specific counts of plagiarism and other BS, he tried to sue hiphop and rock artists, sue video games, sue Reagan for cold war satellite names, had copyright lawsuit against the digg website, all of this was just money grabbing control freak bollocks

 

[Mysterion]

That's exactly the point. But that's not only the case with George Lucas. The better the CGI, the worse the films, at least that's my impression. Nowadays everyone can do exactly what he or she wants. That wasn't the case 20 years ago. Compromise makes the better films, simply because less is more.

Case in point: Jaws is a much better movie than it might have been because they couldn't get their mechanical shark to work right. Nowadays you just Sharknado.

 

[JarodRussell]

That's exactly the point. But that's not only the case with George Lucas. The better the CGI, the worse the films, at least that's my impression. Nowadays everyone can do exactly what he or she wants. That wasn't the case 20 years ago. Compromise makes the better films, simply because less is more.

Case in point: Jaws is a much better movie than it might have been because they couldn't get their mechanical shark to work right. Nowadays you just Sharknado.

One reason why I like the Nolan Batman films so much. Nolan insisted on doing as much on set as possible. The suit is real, the Tumbler is real, the Batpod is real (except for that wheel twist), the Bat is real (mounted on moving cranes). They basically imposed limits on themselves. And it shows.

They could have gone Avengers, Spiderman or Man of Steel, with lots and lots of CGI action scenes, but they didn't. But the end result is more low key, and a lot more exciting. While over the top CGI action scenes are just numbing.





Also great are happy accidents. Most famous example:
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anEuw8F8cpE[/yt]
Ford was too sick to film the originally planned fight scene, so they just shot the guy.

 

[crookeddy]

So what is on the "theatrical version" disc of my DVDs? Is its till the special edition? How is it different then whats on disc one?

The 2006 bonus discs are the laserdisc video from 20 years ago dumped onto DVD. It looks terrible on modern equipment, and has a number of glitches and artifacts from the video transfer process. I personally can't watch it on any of my home screens it looks so bad, and I am normally fairly tolerant of "low rez" video.

So shoudl I just sell tehse on eBay and buy the Blu Rays so I can at least get some extras for the PT?

 

[Set Harth]

To be fair, this is not from something normally thought to be part of what we mean when we say "the Star Wars films".

 

[Gaith]

So shoudl I just sell tehse on eBay and buy the Blu Rays so I can at least get some extras for the PT?

If you care about the pre-Special Edition OT, so long as you own the legit dvds/blu-rays, you should hope to acquire the sd/hd versions of Harmy's Despecialized OT editions. They're basically indistinguishable from the best OT restoration even paid professionals could do at this point.

 

[suarezguy]

I don't hate him but I do hate certain decisions he's made.

George Lucas created two of the most beloved film franchises of all time - Star Wars and Indiana Jones. Yet when his name gets brought up on the internet its usually to remind us what an awful writer/director/person he is. Why is that?

I think a lot of it stems from his initially not allowing the original OT onto DVD, dismissing it as rough drafts and ignoring that other people also contributed to them; this led some fans to be especially critical of the prequels, particularly their CG effects, as a way of emphasizing how much they preferred the o-OT and how Lucas changed for the worse.
However, there was also a lot of vitriol against Berman and Braga who didn't suppress any original versions.

Also, objectively speaking - why is the OT better than the PT? (Jar-Jar notwithstanding)

I think the prequels are at least on par with Jedi but the characters, story and action were much more interesting in the original two films. The prequels also have great effects but at times overuse them although I think it was interesting and certainly ambitious to use formal yet conflicted characters.

And, to be fair, it's not just Lucas. The Great Steven Spierberg's re-whatever-ing of E.T. by replacing shotguns with walkie-talkies in the hands of all the officer extras comes to mind. Made me want to swallow a bull...er...antenna.

But Spielberg did admit a couple of years ago that it was the wrong decision and said he would not do anything like that in the future.

And even in 2002 he released the original version along with the revision on DVD.

 

[thumbtack]

Because he makes movies for kids and, once you're no longer a kid, you can feel left out.

 

[Gaith]

^ Doesn't stop many of us from gushing over Pixar movies, though does it? Nice try, but: no.

 

[maneth]

Many adult viewers of the OT thought that the droids were silly, so the antipathy to Jar Jar shouldn't come as a surprise.

The story and characters in the OT had a heart and were more important than the admittedly impressive FX. The prequels suffered from the fact that the audience knew what the end result would be, i.e. Darth Vader. The journey was visually impressive but lacked the heart of the PT. Besides, while both Portman and Christensen are reasonably talented actors, they had absolutely zero chemistry on screen so that their romance fell completely flat in Episode II. The contrast with Fisher and Ford is about as stark as it gets. That Leia and Han had some feelings for each other was obvious from the start, although it took a while to figure out exactly what those feelings were!

Besides, nostalgia plays a big part in this. It will be interesting to see the reactions of the viewers of the coming trilogy, as the youngest of those weren't even born when the prequels came out.

 

[Lt. Cheka Wey]

I love it how everybody talks about Lucas being a savvy businessman but he almost killed the franchise. When the Thrawn trilogy came out nobdy knew if it will sell or not.

 

[The Wormhole]

I love it how everybody talks about Lucas being a savvy businessman but he almost killed the franchise.

I don't know. While the prequels may not be as highly regarded as the OT, he still managed to generate hype and excitement for all three. Especially Episode 3, which is pretty impressive considering it had to contend with bad word of mouth from the previous two movies.

 

[Lt. Cheka Wey]

I am talking about the marketing people in 1994 when the Thrawn Trilogy came out. They had no idea if it will succeed or not.

 

[BillJ]

I am talking about the marketing people in 1994 when the Thrawn Trilogy came out. They had no idea if it will succeed or not.

There was no way those books weren't going to be successful. People had been waiting for nearly a decade for a follow-up to the Original Trilogy.

Paramount could have learned a lesson or two from Lucas about not over-saturating the market with product. A lesson I fear Disney is going to ignore now.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

People hate Lucas for the same reason they hate anything or anyone else: he did things they don't like. How dare he make changes that I don't personally approve of? How dare he make films that I didn't enjoy? How dare he have opinions that aren't mine? That type of thing.

 

[Lt. Cheka Wey]

I am talking about the marketing people in 1994 when the Thrawn Trilogy came out. They had no idea if it will succeed or not.

There was no way those books weren't going to be successful. People had been waiting for nearly a decade for a follow-up to the Original Trilogy.

Paramount could have learned a lesson or two from Lucas about not over-saturating the market with product. A lesson I fear Disney is going to ignore now.

That's not how it seemed in 94, just listen to a Zahn interview about it.

 

[Gaith]

^ Even if true, a plain ol' novel - with no movie, TV, video game or tie tie-in push - is hardly comparable to making a new movie, which any studio would have greenlit in a second at any point after Jedi. The world waited on George, not vice versa.