Digital Spy

Search Digital Spy
 

DS Forums

 
 

Why so much hate for Lucas


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 04-07-2013, 10:18
adamlee19
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 347

Ok theres obviously been bad films bad directors etc etc its just natrual noones perfect. But im 27 and ive never seen so much hate for 1 man George Lucas.

This is the guy that made a small film called star wars that just became Box office mania. If it wasnt for him there would be no star wars. I can understand people been angry with him for changing things over and over again. But some of the things that have been said is just wrong. I wont say some of the things thats been said but the way hes been treated you would think hes Saddam Husain.

The only problem i have with him he was to focused on CGI dont mean i hate him lol.
adamlee19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 04-07-2013, 10:27
Fowl Fax
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,635
Many movie fans as well as myself think he is one of the best directors in the business.

In fact none of my movie viewing friends have a bad word to say about him.
Fowl Fax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 10:57
TheIllusionist
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 318
As Mark Kermode put it, he couldn't direct traffic.

His script writing is shocking.

He rebooted a franchise to fill his coffers, when it didn't need rebooting.
TheIllusionist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 10:58
peroquil
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 1,382
The hate stems from the fact that Star Wars fans who were just kids when the original trilogy came out in the 70's and 80's, were hyped to the max to relive that heady experience of space-fantasy all over again with the prequels, but expected the tone to cater for them now as adults. When they were served, especially with the Phantom Menace, a great big dollop of childish pap, they all baulked and screamed "WTF is THIS!?", forgetting that to the children of the day, the prequels are probably pretty good.

I'm in the camp that screamed "WTF is THIS!?" though.
peroquil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 11:10
IvanIV
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 21,358
I think he upset a lot of people with the boxsets of "improved" versions of old classics. He apparently can't let go and keeps changing what does not need changing, just because he can.
IvanIV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 11:15
theonlyweeman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 6,486
It was also to do with the fact he keeps tweaking Star Wars without telling people or making high quality versions of the the theatrical cut available. And it's not minor tweaks, it big ones like redubing lines and reordering battle scenes so different characters shoot first.

Ridley Scott tweaked Blade Runner for the final cut, but nobody minded because they told people they'd done it, and Warner Bros. made sure that every different version under the sun was available to buy on blu ray...
theonlyweeman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 11:49
Finny Skeleta
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,221
It was also to do with the fact he keeps tweaking Star Wars without telling people or making high quality versions of the the theatrical cut available. And it's not minor tweaks, it big ones like redubing lines and reordering battle scenes so different characters shoot first.

Ridley Scott tweaked Blade Runner for the final cut, but nobody minded because they told people they'd done it, and Warner Bros. made sure that every different version under the sun was available to buy on blu ray...
I think that's the most important point; it's not the re-doing that bothers people, it's the Stalin-esque way that he is trying to erase the original versions from history.

There is nothing wrong with director's cuts; some are better than the theatrical versions and some are worse but in the overwhelming majority of cases both versions are available side by side and with the same amount of effort put into the presentation of both.

The joke of a joint release that Lucas put out a few years ago was so derisory that he may as well have put them out on old Memorex VHS tapes taped off the telly in 1987 complete with sloppily paused adverts and a label with 'Only Fools and Horses' scribbled out and 'Star Wars' written in with a felt pen.
Finny Skeleta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 12:20
PES 2009
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,018
The original Star Wars Trilogy are probably my favourite 3 movies. I also like Episodes 1-3.

The haters are probably more vocal so there appears to be a lot of hate.
PES 2009 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 12:39
-GONZO-
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Kent
Posts: 8,097
The hate stems from the fact that Star Wars fans who were just kids when the original trilogy came out in the 70's and 80's, were hyped to the max to relive that heady experience of space-fantasy all over again with the prequels, but expected the tone to cater for them now as adults. When they were served, especially with the Phantom Menace, a great big dollop of childish pap, they all baulked and screamed "WTF is THIS!?", forgetting that to the children of the day, the prequels are probably pretty good.

I'm in the camp that screamed "WTF is THIS!?" though.
That's probably the reason why I'm one of the ones that does actually like the Prequals as I'm just as much of a child now as I was when the original trilogy came out
-GONZO- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 12:46
Johnny Clay
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,006
George Lucas raped my childhood - the classic AICN quote.

Thing is, whoever originally said that probably willingly paid Lucas to rape it again, and again, and again. Such is the mentality of these things.

His tinkerings with SW were a timely reminder of who's actually in charge (i.e. not you, fanboy), and from this a sort of mutual contempt emerged from which Lucas could only profit. Then he offloaded the brand on to Disney for billions more.

He has my utmost respect.
Johnny Clay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 12:54
theonlyweeman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 6,486
I think that's the most important point; it's not the re-doing that bothers people, it's the Stalin-esque way that he is trying to erase the original versions from history.

There is nothing wrong with director's cuts; some are better than the theatrical versions and some are worse but in the overwhelming majority of cases both versions are available side by side and with the same amount of effort put into the presentation of both.

The joke of a joint release that Lucas put out a few years ago was so derisory that he may as well have put them out on old Memorex VHS tapes taped off the telly in 1987 complete with sloppily paused adverts and a label with 'Only Fools and Horses' scribbled out and 'Star Wars' written in with a felt pen.
I've heard a couple of people say that they'd rather watch Lucas' preferred version, but want the theatrical version as well.

I think to a certain extent it's the fact many people feel the original didn't need changing. The theatrical cut of "Kingdom of Heaven" hasn't received a blu ray release, but nobody minds because the theatrical cut was so poorly received, with Scott himself saying he disliked it. (Apparently Fox wanted him to cut the running length)
theonlyweeman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 13:03
yaristaman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: London
Posts: 686
At the end of the day he invented Star Wars so has every right to do with it as he pleases. If he wishes to update them continually then so be it.

The original versions ARE out there if people want to see them plus we all know that Disney will release them eventually. If anyone could teach George Lucas a thing or two about re-releasing films continually it's them.
yaristaman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 13:13
theonlyweeman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 6,486
At the end of the day he invented Star Wars so has every right to do with it as he pleases. If he wishes to update them continually then so be it.

The original versions ARE out there if people want to see them plus we all know that Disney will release them eventually. If anyone could teach George Lucas a thing or two about re-releasing films continually it's them.
Except that Fox have the rights till 2020 and indefinitely for Episode IV...
theonlyweeman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 14:51
dee123
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 14,546
Ok theres obviously been bad films bad directors etc etc its just natrual noones perfect. But im 27 and ive never seen so much hate for 1 man George Lucas.

This is the guy that made a small film called star wars that just became Box office mania. If it wasnt for him there would be no star wars. I can understand people been angry with him for changing things over and over again. But some of the things that have been said is just wrong. I wont say some of the things thats been said but the way hes been treated you would think hes Saddam Husain.

The only problem i have with him he was to focused on CGI dont mean i hate him lol.
Jar Jar Binks.
dee123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 15:27
-GONZO-
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Kent
Posts: 8,097
I don't get the hate for Ja Ja Binks either
-GONZO- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 15:33
theonlyweeman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 6,486
I don't get the hate for Ja Ja Binks either
It was perceived as childish, and was believed by some to be a characterisation of a racial stereotype...
theonlyweeman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 15:40
JimothyD
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 5,457
I don't hate him, but his standing has dropped in my eyes.

I'm not bothered about the re-releasing of the originals, probably because I have never seen the original originals (or if I have, only on TV when I was in short trousers). The version of Star Wars that I see as the 'originals' is the Special Edition. The update in the next version, where Ian McDiarmid was transplanted in to The Empire Strikes Back made sense to me, so no issue with updates like that.

So why do I feel his standing has dropped?

The Prequel trilogy.

They were particularly childish, the acting was unbelievably awful, the script was boring (just read the intro scroll to The Phantom Menace) and the dialogue was epically bad. I know GL is mocked for his poor dialogue, but the prequels were 100 times worse than the originals in that respect.

I only got in to the original trilogy in my mid teens. I was 17 when the Phantom Menace came out, so this has nothing to do with 'George Lucas raping my childhood' or being the wrong demographic. The prequels were just plain bad, so as a writer first and a filmmaker second, my regard for George Lucas plummeted after the prequels.

I would actually love to see the prequels rebooted (but leaving the original trilogy well alone). That way, George Lucas' prequels could be erased from all recorded media and never spoken of again - because they're sh!te.
JimothyD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 15:46
Fred E Star
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,521
I thought Winona Ryder was quite good in it, especially for her age.
Fred E Star is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 16:18
Virgil Tracy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 20,295
I thought Winona Ryder was quite good in it, especially for her age.
... took me a moment to get that .
Virgil Tracy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 16:58
grimtales1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: St. Albans, UK, Team Wagner
Posts: 39,145
I think that's the most important point; it's not the re-doing that bothers people, it's the Stalin-esque way that he is trying to erase the original versions from history.

There is nothing wrong with director's cuts; some are better than the theatrical versions and some are worse but in the overwhelming majority of cases both versions are available side by side and with the same amount of effort put into the presentation of both.

The joke of a joint release that Lucas put out a few years ago was so derisory that he may as well have put them out on old Memorex VHS tapes taped off the telly in 1987 complete with sloppily paused adverts and a label with 'Only Fools and Horses' scribbled out and 'Star Wars' written in with a felt pen.
Should I feel bad for owning that release?
At the very least the theatrical cuts should have been anamorphic, FFS!
grimtales1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 20:25
stripedcat
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,237
It's down to wasted potential - put aside the Star Wars films for a moment. Before that he directed two films : THX and American Graffiti. THX is an interesting sci-fi dystopian tale. Full of ideas. American Graffiti is a coming of age story - and has a zest and buzz about it. Heck, even the dialogue is good in it - although that might be down to Lucas' co-writers for that William Huyck and Gloria Katz. Both very interesting films, especially American Graffiti. Lucas was a member of the "movie brats" band of directors :Spielberg, Scorsese, Coppola, and De Palma. All of them were making interesting cinema in the 1970s. Indeed, Lucas was Coppola's assistant at one time.

Then a thing called Star Wars happened. Now, I'm not one of those people who think that "it destroyed ideas cinema" - I don't think you can blame Lucas for that. People were just trying to imitate what he and Spielberg had done and came away with inferior copies. The original Star Wars has a certain charm to it - a tale of a hero's story and so on. Guinness, Ford, Cushing and McDiarmid proving the acting chops in that - Hamill and Fisher less so.

It was just a shame that after that he sort of gave up. Now having the finances to make more independent and offbeat and personal films, he just sort of stuck to producing.

Compare this to his comtempary Spielberg who not only produced (Back to the Future, Gremlins, etc.) but also pushed himself to direct things like The Color Purple and Empire of the Sun. Okay, both are flawed, but he was at least staying true to his root of loving cinema as art.

Then the new prequel trilogy came around - and oh dear! An old Lucas quote from him : "A special effect is a tool not a device to tell a story." Hmmmm, yeah right George. Where was the story for the prequel trilogy? It was meant to be the tale of someone's downfall and there was precious little in them for that - only Revenge of the Sith even came close to that storywise. Then there was the dialogue or rather lack of it. The original might never have had the most profound of dialogue, but compared to the prequels it's Shakespeare. What was recycling "I have a bad feeling about this." ? I also think trying to tie every nook and crany into the original - using the same droids and having Anakin build them was mistaken. There is precious little in the prequels to be excited about it. Characterisation - what's that? In the original you had it - Han was the pirate, Leia the princess, Luke the hero, Obi Wan the wizard, Vader the bad king, etc from an old hero's journey type story - in this - bah. You could have had much better stuff for Obi Wan and Annakin.

Then there was the more experimental films that he was planning on doing afterwards. What happened to those? Red Tails was on the cards and he just produced it not directed it. Then it flopped and he blamed the audience. It was game over. When Spielberg's Empire of the Sun and Hooked flopped, he went on to make better films like Jurassic Park and Schindler's List. No comeback for Lucas.
stripedcat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 22:32
lordo350
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,239
People can be just a little ridiculous when it comes to the prequels. They are not bad movies, especially Revenge of the Sith, which is actually a pretty damn good one. They just have the unfortunate problem of following 3 of the most iconic movies of all time, with the largest fan base.

Lucas strikes me as a man who was not going to let anyone else mess with his baby, at least until Disney came knocking with their offer of 4 billion dollars. Hence, as he had such control, the prequels suffer from being massively overblown with special effects and with barley any attention being paid to the characters, with the possible exception of movie 3. Sure, the original trilogy has the iconic moments and lines, plus the whole Jedism thing, but fundamentally the movies would simply not have worked if it wasn't for the characters. We could get behind the hero Luke, the anti-hero Han, the Princess Leia, the wise old wizard like Obi-Wan, the evil Vader who is redeemed at the end.

I don't think Lucas made the prequels JUST for the money, but in all honesty money does seem to be a massive motivating factor for the bloke. He does have a story he wants to tell, that much is obvious, but its lost in a special effects spectacle and terrible dialogue that really brings the movies down. Selling toys did, it seems, take priority.

Its difficult to try and argue the bloke is not one of the greediest, if not the most greedy, director out there, when as soon as the 3D thing looked popular he jumped on the bandwagon and planned to re-release all 6 movies, after re-releasing them very recently on blu-ray.
lordo350 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 22:55
grimtales1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: St. Albans, UK, Team Wagner
Posts: 39,145
Star Wars is also somewhat based on a Kurosawa film called The Hidden Fortress, or at least takes much inspiration from it
grimtales1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 23:00
Callum_Brown
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 452
I remember just after The Artist won Best Picture, he said 'watching a film in 3D is simply a better way to watch a movie, in the same way that watching a film in colour is better than one in black and white.'
Callum_Brown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 23:48
theonlyweeman
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 6,486
I remember just after The Artist won Best Picture, he said 'watching a film in 3D is simply a better way to watch a movie, in the same way that watching a film in colour is better than one in black and white.'
Oscars are based on marketing campaigns not quality, and Harvey Weinstein is the king of marketing...
theonlyweeman is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:13.