Isn't Lucas using the term MacGuffin wrong?

M

Montana Smith

Active member
The word is only used once during the 1978 Story Conference, and it's George employing it in the Hitchcock sense:

GEORGE LUCAS : ...essentially he ends up in Cairo or some exotic middle-east area, which is where most of it takes place...He's given the name of a man who knows about the situation, an agent. He goes into this very sleazy Casablanca type club and makes contact with this agent. The agent is a girl...he's trying to get information from this girl. Finally she gives it to him, about where the Germans are. We had thought of giving him another piece of information, a MacGuffin, that he could take with him to try to analyze.
Click to expand...
 
Finn

Finn

Moderator
Staff member
What if it's the article before the word that's making all the difference? *A* MacGuffin is the generic item, in true Hitchcockian sense. *The* MacGuffin instead is the main prize, the lost treasure the whole film revolves around.

There. A simple enough distinction. And even if it isn't so... go make it so. It's the Internet, guys. This place is a meme mill, if you feel something's amiss, start using the form you think is correct and see what comes of it.
 
Stoo

Stoo

Well-known member
Me said:
ADD the term, "McGuffin", to the list of other, trendy, misused words...along with:

- cameo
- reveal
- epic
Click to expand...
Time to add another word to the list of misused terms: "Franchise".:rolleyes: Many folks refer to the Indiana Jones film series as a 'franchise'. If these people knew what the word actually meant, they wouldn't/shouldn't be using it to describe the Indy movies.

Please get this straight, chumps:
Indiana Jones films are NOT a franchise!:gun:
Attila the Professor said:
And here I'm not sure to what you're referring.
Click to expand...
I'm referring to folks (including Spielberg) who say, "the reveal". It should be "the revelation", therefore, I would like to know: when & why did the word, "reveal", get changed from a verb into a noun?:confused: (I know that languages change over time but I hate to see them dumbed down.)
 
M

Montana Smith

Active member
Stoo said:
Time to add another word to the list of misused terms: "Franchise".:rolleyes: Many folks refer to the Indiana Jones film series as a 'franchise'. If these people knew what the word actually meant, they wouldn't/shouldn't be using it to describe the Indy movies.

Please get this straight, chumps:
Indiana Jones films are NOT a franchise!:gun:
Click to expand...

Makes Indy sound like a hamburger stand. With Lucas retiring from the big stuff franchising Indy could be music to stomach. (Somebody else will then be responsible for any allegations of food posioning).
 
Lance Quazar

Lance Quazar

Well-known member
Stoo said:
Time to add another word to the list of misused terms: "Franchise".:rolleyes: Many folks refer to the Indiana Jones film series as a 'franchise'. If these people knew what the word actually meant, they wouldn't/shouldn't be using it to describe the Indy movies.

Please get this straight, chumps:
Indiana Jones films are NOT a franchise!:gun:
Click to expand...

The word "franchise" has taken on an additional, specialized definition over time, as used in the film industry.

It's accurate now.

As you say, words and definitions change over time. Specialized communities adopt and adapt words for their own use.

I suspect "franchise" was first used in Hollywood in a slightly tongue in cheek way. But now it's acceptable and has a very specific, widely-used definition in that community.

The word had multiple uses and definitions already. A franchise to vote is quite different than your local McDonald's.

I'm afraid you'll have to let this one go.
 
Stoo

Stoo

Well-known member
Montana Smiff said:
Makes Indy sound like a hamburger stand.
Click to expand...
If Indiana Jones really IS a hamburger chain-restaurant...that would be one hell of an EPIC REVEAL!:eek:
Lance Quazar said:
The word "franchise" has taken on an additional, specialized definition over time, as used in the film industry.

It's accurate now.

As you say, words and definitions change over time. Specialized communities adopt and adapt words for their own use.

I suspect "franchise" was first used in Hollywood in a slightly tongue in cheek way. But now it's acceptable and has a very specific, widely-used definition in that community.
Click to expand...
Just because it is used within the film industry doesn't make it right (and the industry folks whom I personally know, agree that it's usage is silly). Even the great, Francis Ford Coppola said about Star Wars, "now matter how valuable that franchise, that they call, is...". Coppola's verbage shows how a prominent, Hollywood veteran doesn't really embrace the term and is aware of its misapropriation when using it.

Plus, how many fans out there, who use the term, work in the industry?:confused: Being a parrot to what other people say (without even thinking about the meaning of the word/s) is one of the reasons why languages change.

The film-series-definition will become acceptable only when the Oxford English Dictionary says so.:p

As a whole, the Indiana-Jones-brand-name could be considered a franchise because of the all the merchandise produced by LEGO, Hasbro, etc. but not the theatrical films, which is what many people refer to when using the word. That said, I could understand the term being used to describe a film series which has had more than one director, etc. but Indiana Jones films have all been directed by the same person, thus franchising doesn't apply (which is my main point).
Lance Quazar said:
The word had multiple uses and definitions already. A franchise to vote is quite different than your local McDonald's.

I'm afraid you'll have to let this one go.
Click to expand...
Nah. A 'franchise to vote' is not much different from running a McDonald's. In both cases, it is a given right/privelege, allowed by a higher authority.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top