George Lucas

Moedred

Administrator
Staff member
http://www.hulu.com/watch/886675
An hour with Charlie Rose. Mentions Indy and motifs starting around 6:12...
"A majority of people, boys, have a certain psychological relationship with their fathers.
We know your darkest secret.
We know what you're thinking about your mother."
latest
 

Joe Brody

Well-known member
Lucas is right about the TFA being retro movie -- as critical as I've been about Lucas over the years I respect him for trying to create new films each time out.

The 'white slavers' comment is interesting in that it validates a lot of the criticism that's leveled against him and is frankly consistent with his own view (stated in the same interview) of the inherently narcissistic nature of directors.

By me saying that, I assume he was using the 'white slaver' term in the sense that he views Disney as intellectually inferior to him. Given his personal relationships and stated views, I'm surprised he used the term at all -- which I find per se offensive.

In other words, George, leave the slang to Tarantino.
 

Grizzlor

Well-known member
I think it's clear, George didn't want to do a rehash, but Disney didn't spend $4 billion to risk it's biggest payday on a new story from him. It was a clear rehash, but the customers enjoyed it thoroughly. On the grounds of filmaking GL is probably right, but when it comes to audience appeal and making money, he's totally wrong.
 

Lambonius

New member
Grizzlor said:
I think it's clear, George didn't want to do a rehash, but Disney didn't spend $4 billion to risk it's biggest payday on a new story from him. It was a clear rehash, but the customers enjoyed it thoroughly. On the grounds of filmaking GL is probably right, but when it comes to audience appeal and making money, he's totally wrong.

While I loved TFA and unabashedly don't care that it's derivative (though I do think that point has been somewhat overblown,) I'd be very interested in seeing what George would have done with the story. I would never want to see him DIRECTING the movie, or, for that matter, having final say in any of the writing (especially of dialog,) but in terms of broad story strokes, I bet George's would have been very interesting.
 

avidfilmbuff

New member
As a film lover and overall misanthrope, there are many things in the world that anger me. It upsets me, for example, when people refuse to give a film a chance because of it's genre, when people nitpick a film to death rather than have an intelligent discussion, and overall the utter lack of respect for differing opinions.

The hatred that both George Lucas and his recent films have accumulated over the past two decades is in my opinion one of the sickest examples of mob mentality that humans are capable of without actually committing any acts of violence. That these people can actually claim to love both Star Wars and Indiana Jones and yet spread so much vitriol against the man who created such beloved franchises is boarder line schizophrenic.

These so called fans won't even give him credit for the films that they did enjoy, instead always insisting that his successes were either accidental or the results of someone else's contributions. Quite frankly, it doesn't matter what George Lucas does; he could create the greatest film ever made and people would still despise it. Why? Because his name is George Lucas. The very name sends people into a frenzy, they will never forgive him for their disappointment with special editions and the Phantom Menace. Anything he does will always be exaggerated; the flaws that exist in his films exist in many others, yet people will forgive them because they were not created by him.

I recently saw Revenge of the Sith again and completely failed to understand the criticisms, it was truly a remarkable film. And yes, I did watch the Redlettermedia review and it is worse than anything George Lucas has ever done.

There is a difference between disliking a film and what the Lucas haters are doing, they are destroying film criticism.
 
Top