Poll: Has George Lucas lost it?

[DannyDamage]

I'm sure I've seen at least 3 threads in the last couple of weeks about this. I know because I've posted on them too.

So for shortness sake: No he never had it.
[/thread]

 

[cleverlymadeup]

I'm not sure you're really receiving on the same wavelength as the rest of us. I'll break it down for you.

Lucas stole Dune, cut off the hard parts, and made a movie. It was only really groundbreaking because of its special effects and potential. The writing and plot were both awful. The sequel (which he had a *lot* of help writing, and he didn't direct) was amazing. It showed us how good the plotline really could be for something as simple as your basic space western. Then Lucas and Richard Marquand made Jedi and everything started to go downhill.

acutally i do believe he borrowed the story of Star Wars from the Hidden Fortress
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hidden_Fortress#Influence

mixed with Flash Gordon and such serials, stuff that he watched as a kid, which he has said many a time in interviews and no mention of Frank Herbert and Dune anywhere in there. so what does Dune have to do with Star Wars?

Flash forward a bit. The expanded universe starts being written. These aren't fan fiction writers, these are people who got Lucas' permission to add to his world(s), and they created this amazing, intricate universe with fleshed out characters and compelling scenarios. In case you don't get this point, I'm going to state it plainly here. THIS IS WHERE STAR WARS OFFICIALLY OUTGREW LUCAS. This is where his idea to steal someone else's good idea and cut off the parts that made him think was made into something really grand. This was a continuation of the "empire-esq" Star Wars. It was the Star Wars that we wanted and loved.

right and since it was HIS creation he can do what ever the hell he wants and change it, he's also stated he doesn't like how ppl have changed things or portrayed them as it wasn't part of his vision.

i clearly understand things, sadly you have some sort of grand illusion about what Star Wars is and really means. it means and is what ever Lucas wants to do with it

Everything he's done since he's started working on Star Wars again has shown nothing but contempt for the way the storyline and characters have evolved and developed (with his permission, remember) over the course of twenty years. He had a masterpiece that other people wrote but he was lucky enough to get credit for and he's shitting all over it. Saying that "he wrote it and he gets to decide what happens" doesn't wash in this case.

yes it does very much wash in this case, i mean would Gene Roddenberry really like what they've done with Star Trek? probly not and did he really pay attention to all the other "fleshed out" aspects of the Trek universe that people made? no sorry to say he didn't, he did what he pleased with Star Trek and they have WAY more rabid fans than Star Wars ever will

To put this in perspective, let's say that Bill Watterson had been shadow-writing Calvin and Hobbes under the name Jim Davis for ten years, and then Jim Davis decided to write it himself, threw out Hobbes completely, and gave Calvin a lasagna obsession. Do you see how that's a bad thing?

- J

that makes no sense at all and is rather confusing

it would work if you said "Jim Davis is shadowing writing Calvin and Hobbes as Bill Waterson and then wrote as himself and got rid of Hobbes and changed Calvin to a lasanga eating tiger" but the way you have it worded it makes no sense and really shows how much you don't understand about Star Wars and what Lucas wants and thinks about his creation

 

[COR 2000]

Spoiler: *sigh* That is it: I'm out of here.

 

[tiredinnuendo]

*snip*

You're just not getting it, and from your past record of ravenously defending the new Star Wars direction, it's fairly clear that you won't. I do want to clarify my analogy though, because I was proud of it.

To put this in perspective, let's say that Bill Watterson had been shadow-writing Calvin and Hobbes under the name Jim Davis for ten years, and then Jim Davis decided to write it himself, threw out Hobbes completely, and gave Calvin a lasagna obsession. Do you see how that's a bad thing?

- J

that makes no sense at all and is rather confusing

it would work if you said "Jim Davis is shadowing writing Calvin and Hobbes as Bill Waterson and then wrote as himself and got rid of Hobbes and changed Calvin to a lasanga eating tiger" but the way you have it worded it makes no sense and really shows how much you don't understand about Star Wars and what Lucas wants and thinks about his creation

Perhaps it would've helped if I'd started the point by saying: "Let's say that Jim Davis came up with an idea that there should be a comic strip named Calvin and Hobbes, and commissioned Bill Watterson to write it for him, but held onto the rights to the franchise."

Here's the breakdown: Davis is Lucas. A hack of a writer who happened to have one good conceptual idea but nowhere near the talent to form it into something great. Bill Watterson is Leigh Brackett, Lawrence Kasdan, Irvin Kershner, Timothy Zahn, and all the other talented artists who formed the idea into something great.

At the end of the analogy, Lucas (Davis, remember) throws out all the good people (Watterson) and much of their work and contributions to the franchise (Hobbes, which the added implication that he switched the characters because he didn't really understand them, thus making Calvin the tiger) and makes something really awful (reference to Garfield).

See the parallels now? Apologies if it was too hard to follow the first time. Trust me, to folks who were old enough to read Calvin and Hobbes in the newspaper, it's actually a pretty good comparison.

- J

 

[Caliostro]

Did he ever truly have it? More and more I believe the original Trilogy was an epic fluke.


Sadly, a force unleashed movie would be even worst...

 

[cleverlymadeup]

*snip*

You're just not getting it, and from your past record of ravenously defending the new Star Wars direction, it's fairly clear that you won't. I do want to clarify my analogy though, because I was proud of it.

compared to you who ended up getting all the influences of where Lucas got his ideas for the films completely wrong? sorry i DO get it, look at Doctor Who or Star Trek for great examples of that

Perhaps it would've helped if I'd started the point by saying: "Let's say that Jim Davis came up with an idea that there should be a comic strip named Calvin and Hobbes, and commissioned Bill Watterson to write it for him, but held onto the rights to the franchise."

Here's the breakdown: Davis is Lucas. A hack of a writer who happened to have one good conceptual idea but nowhere near the talent to form it into something great. Bill Watterson is Leigh Brackett, Lawrence Kasdan, Irvin Kershner, Timothy Zahn, and all the other talented artists who formed the idea into something great.

At the end of the analogy, Lucas (Davis, remember) throws out all the good people (Watterson) and much of their work and contributions to the franchise (Hobbes, which the added implication that he switched the characters because he didn't really understand them, thus making Calvin the tiger) and makes something really awful (reference to Garfield).

See the parallels now? Apologies if it was too hard to follow the first time. Trust me, to folks who were old enough to read Calvin and Hobbes in the newspaper, it's actually a pretty good comparison.

- J

or how about someone, such as myself, who is old enough to have actually seen Star Wars on it's original run in theaters pointing out how wrong you are and you just blindly following fanboyism without paying attention to the facts of what the person who created did and said about what he wanted to do with the stories?

and actually the parallels aren't there and the analogy is rather bad, i get what you're trying to say however it falls massively short of what really happened. take a look a Star Trek as a prime example, Kirk died in Generations, yet some writer brought him back to life but he's still very much dead according to actual Star Trek canon

just because a writer with some creative license has changed what the original creator has wanted or envisioned for his creation doesn't mean what they did is actually canon according to the original idea. look at Spider-man, Superman, Batman, Fantastic Four, X-Men, Star Trek, Doctor Who, Conan and Dune, they've all been changed and twisted around compared to what the original creator of those characters have created no matter what other artists have done

also notice stuff outside of Lucasarts and that is called the Star Wars EXPANDED universe not the Star Wars universe, they are not totally the same thing, notice the word EXPANDED in there

 

[Bob_F_It]

In terms of making digustingly huge stacks of cash, Lucas hasn't really lost it. To him, the ends justify these means.

 

[Littaly]

I honestly didn't mind the prequel trilogy at all. Sure, a blind monkey can see it's not half as good as the original, but for most parts, it's entertaining. People are mostly nitpicking it if you ask me, Jar Jar is just a support character made for the kids (who I think most people forget is the very core of Star Wars) and Midichlorians only have a small mention here and there, things you can look over. Now I agree episode II was crap, mostly because of bad acting from Hayden's part and an uninteresting plot, but that is pretty much made up for in episode III.

The point I am trying to make is that if you want to like the prequel than that is fully possible. Star Wars is not good because of it's good acting or special effects, it's a story and a universe that is one of a kind, and maybe in the end it's supposed to be take lightly, it's a movie for children whether they are 10 or 42.

Okay, so I'm ozzing of fanboyism, but I really can't see the bad part here ^^

anyways, on to TFU. I have no idea why episode III and IV would be tied together by someone who we don't know, and because of bad dialog never get to know. The plot had potential but got screwed over by having you for 50% of the game run around doing nothing of importance to the actual story... and bad dialog. Had it been more in the style of KotoR the story would have been a lot more interesting, but I suppose then they would have lost the whole physics engine, which I guess is what the story was dumped for in the first place.

The Clone Wars movie was horrible. But what little I have see of the series is more bittersweet than bad. Had it not been centered around Anakin and Ashoka but rather around Anakin and Obi-Wan I would have gone as far as saying that it was good.

Anyway, bottom line, even though he does a lot of stupid things I think people are being just a tad to hard towards Lucas, not that he does anything good nowadays, but it's not as bad as most people want to have it ^^

 

[Zeke109]

I wish they'd continued the origional clone wars....not this new shit.

 

[tiredinnuendo]

First off, this is the last thing I'll say on this. It's obviously not going to go anywhere interesting and you're *way* too emotional about it. I don't really think of myself as much of a fanboy when it comes to Star Wars. I'm able to tell the difference between a good product and shit in a box, and I recognize that Star Wars has gone from being the former to being the latter.

If you honestly don't think the Dune is basically Star Wars with real political and religious considerations, I don't have much more to say on that front. I admit to not being a big sci-fi fanatic, and I've never seen a whole episode of Star Trek (any series) from start to finish. Did see a few of the movies though. Point being, the influences that I'm able to see (as in, I look at this product and say, "This is exactly what they have in Star Wars!") are in Dune and various Buddhist belief structures. There probably were more, but honestly there's nothing in, say, Flash Gordon, that Lucas could have stolen that he couldn't have also gotten, in better form, from Dune.

If you were actually old enough to see the original films in theaters, and yet this is the manner you communicate in... my my, has school and maturity ever failed you. I'm finished here. You can rant about Lucas and how he has the right all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that he's taken something great and turned it into something you couldn't pay me to watch.

- J

 

[TOGSolid]

When Lucas did the original trilogy he was also married. His wife helped keep him on track and injected more than a few ideas into the series. I wouldn't be surprised if the only reason he clings to Star Wars is just out of some bizarre way to still feel 'married.'

Nerds are creepy like that.

Lucas should have just handed the whole thing off to Genndy Tartakovsky after those outstanding Clone Wars cartoon series. I bet he could have done some very interesting things in a live action venue.

 

[Jack Spencer Jr]

Lucas hasn't had "it" since he'd founded Lucasfilm Ltd. and became the money man he'd founded his own company to avoid. Return of the Jedi was the worst of the original trilogy because he'd stopped caring about quality and thought the audience didn't care, either. That he'd been proven right based on the box office does not excuse his lapse in artistry. He's been named a true visionary, but what has he done besides Star Wars and Indiana Jones? Nothing. A couple small, earlier films, but nothing since those two franchises which he's milking dry and once dry, he attempts to coax powdered milk out of the shriveled and crusty teats.

I think the best thing to do at this point is to ignore him and all of the product he puts out. It's the only way to avoid the disappointment.

 

[Zeke109]

Indiana Jones?

There are only TWO Indiana Jones movies, and only TWO.
The last Crusade and The raiders of the last ark.
ANYONE who says otherwise obviously has no brain in his skull, perhaps in his rectum.

 

[cleverlymadeup]

First off, this is the last thing I'll say on this. It's obviously not going to go anywhere interesting and you're *way* too emotional about it. I don't really think of myself as much of a fanboy when it comes to Star Wars. I'm able to tell the difference between a good product and shit in a box, and I recognize that Star Wars has gone from being the former to being the latter.

i'm not the one getting in a tizzy about how Lucas has ruined Star Wars, how am i being so emotionally wrapped up in this?

If you honestly don't think the Dune is basically Star Wars with real political and religious considerations, I don't have much more to say on that front. I admit to not being a big sci-fi fanatic, and I've never seen a whole episode of Star Trek (any series) from start to finish. Did see a few of the movies though. Point being, the influences that I'm able to see (as in, I look at this product and say, "This is exactly what they have in Star Wars!") are in Dune and various Buddhist belief structures. There probably were more, but honestly there's nothing in, say, Flash Gordon, that Lucas could have stolen that he couldn't have also gotten, in better form, from Dune.

simple he didn't get it from Dune because he has said many times where his influences for the movies have come from. i'm not pulling this stuff out of a rather uncomfortable parking spot that you could possibly get a car into if you just position the car correctly

If you were actually old enough to see the original films in theaters, and yet this is the manner you communicate in... my my, has school and maturity ever failed you. I'm finished here. You can rant about Lucas and how he has the right all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that he's taken something great and turned it into something you couldn't pay me to watch.

- J

how am i being immature and emotional about this? really i'm giving you good factual based arguments and great counter points with specific examples to illustrate my points.

you on the other hand are speaking totally from the hip with no basis in good factual information and totally ignoring my points i'm bring up. so you're the one acting out of emotion and immaturity, not me but thanx for thinking about me

 

[axia777]

Indiana Jones?

There are only TWO Indiana Jones movies, and only TWO.
The last Crusade and The raiders of the last ark.
ANYONE who says otherwise obviously has no brain in his skull, perhaps in his rectum.

Say what you like, but I enjoyed every single Indy movie. And saying I don't have a brain for doing so is in itself brainless.

 

[Samurai Goomba]

First off, this is the last thing I'll say on this. It's obviously not going to go anywhere interesting and you're *way* too emotional about it. I don't really think of myself as much of a fanboy when it comes to Star Wars. I'm able to tell the difference between a good product and shit in a box, and I recognize that Star Wars has gone from being the former to being the latter.

i'm not the one getting in a tizzy about how Lucas has ruined Star Wars, how am i being so emotionally wrapped up in this?

If you honestly don't think the Dune is basically Star Wars with real political and religious considerations, I don't have much more to say on that front. I admit to not being a big sci-fi fanatic, and I've never seen a whole episode of Star Trek (any series) from start to finish. Did see a few of the movies though. Point being, the influences that I'm able to see (as in, I look at this product and say, "This is exactly what they have in Star Wars!") are in Dune and various Buddhist belief structures. There probably were more, but honestly there's nothing in, say, Flash Gordon, that Lucas could have stolen that he couldn't have also gotten, in better form, from Dune.

simple he didn't get it from Dune because he has said many times where his influences for the movies have come from. i'm not pulling this stuff out of a rather uncomfortable parking spot that you could possibly get a car into if you just position the car correctly

If you were actually old enough to see the original films in theaters, and yet this is the manner you communicate in... my my, has school and maturity ever failed you. I'm finished here. You can rant about Lucas and how he has the right all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that he's taken something great and turned it into something you couldn't pay me to watch.

- J

how am i being immature and emotional about this? really i'm giving you good factual based arguments and great counter points with specific examples to illustrate my points.

you on the other hand are speaking totally from the hip with no basis in good factual information and totally ignoring my points i'm bring up. so you're the one acting out of emotion and immaturity, not me but thanx for thinking about me

1. It doesn't matter where Lucas says he got ideas from. Nobody is going to admit they ripped off somebody else, no matter how obvious it is. Luke and Paul are the same character, except Paul has depth. End of story.

2. Your age is irrelevant. If anything, the fact you saw it in theaters suggests you still view Star Wars with nostalgia-rimmed glasses.

3. I fail to see how a well-explained and detailed post is "immature and emotional." tirewhatever (sorry, long name) gave you some excellent examples and comparisons of where he was coming from. If you want to refute them, please do... With either a well-worded opinion, or proof. Things that Lucas says don't count, because most people here will agree Lucas talks from his hindermost.

4. What "points" did you bring up? I'm just hearing a lot of "no u."

5. Spelling is awesome.

6. Your age is irrelevant. I just have to say it again.

 

[cleverlymadeup]

1. It doesn't matter where Lucas says he got ideas from. Nobody is going to admit they ripped off somebody else, no matter how obvious it is. Luke and Paul are the same character, except Paul has depth. End of story.

actually Lucas he's stated MANY times where he got his ideas from, try watching the Hidden Fortress and then bring up Dune, btw Hidden Fortress was before Dune

2. Your age is irrelevant. If anything, the fact you saw it in theaters suggests you still view Star Wars with nostalgia-rimmed glasses.

ahh yes but i've taken the stance that Lucas and the prequels are good, not the fanboy stance of how he ruined it.

3. I fail to see how a well-explained and detailed post is "immature and emotional." tirewhatever (sorry, long name) gave you some excellent examples and comparisons of where he was coming from. If you want to refute them, please do... With either a well-worded opinion, or proof. Things that Lucas says don't count, because most people here will agree Lucas talks from his hindermost.

ahh but why waste words on long retorts when a few simple words will nicely explain my point? especially when the person i'm illustrating those points to has no clue about what i'm talking about?

4. What "points" did you bring up? I'm just hearing a lot of "no u."

i cited lots of examples, go back and read what i wrote, i also based mine on facts such as changing comic book storylines, Star Trek and Doctor Who and so forth

5. Spelling is awesome.

so is reading and comprehension, try it sometime

6. Your age is irrelevant. I just have to say it again.

it can be, especially when i don't put the series up on some sort of pedestal and distort the image of it and cry and whine because it's not the exact same as all the hype that i've built up around it

 

[Samurai Goomba]

1. It doesn't matter where Lucas says he got ideas from. Nobody is going to admit they ripped off somebody else, no matter how obvious it is. Luke and Paul are the same character, except Paul has depth. End of story.

actually Lucas he's stated MANY times where he got his ideas from, try watching the Hidden Fortress and then bring up Dune, btw Hidden Fortress was before Dune

2. Your age is irrelevant. If anything, the fact you saw it in theaters suggests you still view Star Wars with nostalgia-rimmed glasses.

ahh yes but i've taken the stance that Lucas and the prequels are good, not the fanboy stance of how he ruined it.

3. I fail to see how a well-explained and detailed post is "immature and emotional." tirewhatever (sorry, long name) gave you some excellent examples and comparisons of where he was coming from. If you want to refute them, please do... With either a well-worded opinion, or proof. Things that Lucas says don't count, because most people here will agree Lucas talks from his hindermost.

ahh but why waste words on long retorts when a few simple words will nicely explain my point? especially when the person i'm illustrating those points to has no clue about what i'm talking about?

4. What "points" did you bring up? I'm just hearing a lot of "no u."

i cited lots of examples, go back and read what i wrote, i also based mine on facts such as changing comic book storylines, Star Trek and Doctor Who and so forth

5. Spelling is awesome.

so is reading and comprehension, try it sometime

6. Your age is irrelevant. I just have to say it again.

it can be, especially when i don't put the series up on some sort of pedestal and distort the image of it and cry and whine because it's not the exact same as all the hype that i've built up around it

Is it more "fanboy" to say Lucas ruined Star Wars, or to say he didn't ruin it? We differ in opinon, so you call me a fanboy? If you had read any of my previous posts, you'd know that I don't really think Star Wars is all that great. It's fun, but lacks the kind of depth of character or strong performances of, say, Se7en.

You still haven't refuted anything, you just keep arguing in circles. Everything is the way you say it is, and anyone who says otherwise has no reading comprehension or "doesn't get it," eh? Well, you're wrong. Here's the proof:

No series of ANYTHING is ever good after the 4th or 5th installment. Prove me wrong. Even Dune gets cruddy by about the third book. Therefore, it is impossible for the new Star Wars movies to be as good as the last ones. Also, George Lucas is a horrible, horrible writer. Direct me to ONE THING he has written (by himself or with almost no help) that had a good story. You can't, because there isn't anything.

I haven't built any image of Star Wars, I don't put it on a pedestal, etc. You're attacking me, but it doesn't pull focus from the fact you are completely wrong. Finally, I don't give a fig what Lucas says. I firmly believe he'll say anything and everything that gets him more money/makes him look good. It's a lot easier to look at things like plot progression, character archetypes and what was popular at the time (if you want to see where Lucas stole from.)

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

http://www.imdb.com/rg/action-box-title/primary-photo/media/rm670340864/tt1185834

end of thread

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0193524/

End of thread proper.

 

[PhantomEnigma]

The south park episode, Yahtzee criticism and many other references to his shoddy film making ...I have noticed that an ever increasing amount of people seem to dislike George Lucas. I am mildly indifferent to the point of not really caring