Lucas Returning to Digital Animation

deadwood writes "It seems Lucas is creating a Digital Animation studio as a subsidiary of ILM, according to this Yahoo! article.
Lucasfilm Animation is created roughly 17 years after George Lucas sold Pixar to Steve Jobs. I wonder if Episode VII-IX would be a good choice as first projects?"

Comments

Dear God No!

[FatRatBastard]

I wonder if Episode VII-IX would be a good choice as first projects?

Dear god no! It wasn't the technology that was the problem with I, II (and, no-doubt, III), but piss-poor stories. It wouldn't have mattered if Lucas did I, II, III, VII, VIII, or IX as live action, animation, stick figures, a puppet show, or Kabuki theatre unless he has a plot that doesn't suck the sweat of a dead donkey's balls they'd still stink.

Re:Dear God No!

[Tarindel]

It wasn't the technology that was the problem with I, II (and, no-doubt, III), but piss-poor stories

It's not even that the concepts behind the stories were so bad. It's that the screenplay adaptions of the stories were absolutely horrid and the casting was worse (with a couple notable exceptions). Then, to make matters worse, Lucas decided to aim Episode I at youngsters in an attempt to capture the imagination of a new generation (via devices such as Jar Jar and the overly-long video-game-influenced pod racing scenes). However, in reality he not only failed at this, he also managed to upset a fairly large portion of his ever-aging fanbase.

The reason Pixar succeeds so well is simple. It's not because the stories are all that fabulous - because in reality they're pretty simple. It's because they're well written, have a great mix of humor/action/etc, and most of all, they have an awful lot of heart.

The best thing that could happen to this unit is for Lucas not to have any control over it. At this point in his career, he should stick to what he's good at, which is the technical side of film-making.

All the CG in the world...

[Guano_Jim]

...won't help a bit if your script sucks. Films like Monsters, Inc. succeeded not because they show off the latest and greatest in rendering power, but because they have an engaging story and interesting characters.

You could have done Monsters, Inc with sock puppets and it still would have been entertaining.

Lucas hasn't recently shown that he can deliver the plots and characters that are necessary to make an animated film work.

Why not?

[NetDanzr]

It can't be any worse than Episode I and II. And, after all, Lucas gives absolutely no freedom to his actors, so replacing them with animated characters wouldn't change a thing.

Tired of the Ep 1/2 complaints.

[Randolpho]

I wonder if Episode VII-IX would be a good choice as first projects?

Well, I for one, hope Lucas goes ahead with some post-Return of the Jedi movies.

I'm also quite tired of the people who bitch about how great the first trilogy was and how boring/stupid the second trilogy is turning out to be. Look, Star Wars (the first one) was not that great a movie. But we loved it anyway, because it was cool. Empire was darker, and we loved it too. Jedi had Ewoks, and they were annoyingly cute, but we still loved the damn movie! Why? Because it was still really damn cool!

Now I will grant you that Jar-Jar got a little anoying at times, but on the whole, Episode 1 and 2 were damn cool movies. So what if Anakin and Jar-Jar bumbled their way through to victories in Ep1? They were not the stars of movie, folks. The stars showed up to chew bubble gum and kick ass, and they found they were all out of bubble gum. Although Qui-Gon found a piece right there at the end, and that was a bit disappointing.

So, to those who think Ep1 and Ep2 somehow sullied their memories of the original trilogy, I say go watch the trilogy again. I mean, really watch it. Watch all the bad acting and bumbled lines. Watch the melodrama and sap. Watch the forced and often unfunny humor given us through the C3PO/R2D2 banter. And then go enjoy Episodes 1 and 2 for what they are: damn cool action flicks.

Re:Star Wars = 6

[Thud457]

" Han shot first "

Is that available on a XXXL Hanes T at thinkgeek?
That statement says worlds about Lucas, Hollywood, and America today.

Pixar does exactly what Lucas can't, right?

[ianscot]

The biggest strength Pixar has is that it really hones the personality of a character with tiny little well-considered style points. The writing's okay, it's not completely rote Disney crap, but it's the little stuff in a character like Woody that makes it work.

Think of that first short with the lamp, way back -- who'd have thought they could make it so expressive? Or all those birds on the line; they all look alike, but the little character touches set each one apart.

George Lucas, on the other hand, can have someone like Samuel L. Jackson in a movie and make him deeply boring -- even as a Jedi Freakin' Knight! Does anyone think Lucas improves his actors? Anyone? Does he direct for nice little character touches??

What George wants this splinter company to do is make huge, distractingly detailed landscapes and gratuitously gigantic battle scenes. Take a look at the battle at the end of Episode II; that's what he thinks computer animation is about. He's as bad with character touches as any director out there.