Slashdot Mirror
George Lucas: "I'm Done With Star Wars"
HughPickens.com writes: Entertainment Weekly reports that George Lucas has compared his retirement from Star Wars to a break-up – a mutual one, maybe, but one that nonetheless comes with hard feelings and although Lucas came up with story treatments for a new trilogy, those materials, to put it bluntly, were discarded. "They decided they didn't want to use those stories, they decided they were gonna go do their own thing," says Lucas. "They weren't that keen to have me involved anyway. But at the same time, I said if I get in there I'm just going to cause trouble. Because they're not going to do what I want them to do. And I don't have the control to do that anymore. All I would do is muck everything up. So I said, 'Okay, I will go my way, and I'll let them go their way.'" Lucas says he was going to tell a story about the grandchildren of figures from the original trilogy. "The issue was, ultimately, they looked at the stories and they said, 'We want to make something for the fans,'" says Lucas. "So, I said, all I want to do is tell a story of what happened – it started here and went there. It's all about generations, and issues of fathers and sons and grandfathers. It's a family soap opera."
Although the team behind The Force Awakens acknowledges they're taking the story in a different direction from what Lucas intended, they maintain affection for his original creations and the man himself. "Before I showed up, it was already something that Disney had decided they wanted to go a different way with," says J. J. Abrams. "But the spirit of what he wrote, both in those pages and prior, is everything that this movie is built upon." Some fans question why there was no "Based on" credit for Lucas in the poster for The Force Awakens. "I don't know why it isn't on the poster, but it's a valid point. I'm sure that that will be a credit in the film," says Abrams. "We are standing on the shoulders of Episodes I through VI."
Although the team behind The Force Awakens acknowledges they're taking the story in a different direction from what Lucas intended, they maintain affection for his original creations and the man himself. "Before I showed up, it was already something that Disney had decided they wanted to go a different way with," says J. J. Abrams. "But the spirit of what he wrote, both in those pages and prior, is everything that this movie is built upon." Some fans question why there was no "Based on" credit for Lucas in the poster for The Force Awakens. "I don't know why it isn't on the poster, but it's a valid point. I'm sure that that will be a credit in the film," says Abrams. "We are standing on the shoulders of Episodes I through VI."
Just more Cheez-wiz American cinema. Lucas ruined the first three movies when made the last three.
I'm done with Star Wars too!
#DeleteChrome
If Lucas is complaining about not having control, then why did he sell Star Wars to Disney? (No, I'm not related to George, to my knowledge.)
If you reply, do so only to what I explicitly wrote. If I didn't write it, don't assume or infer it.
He lost all credibility with Jar Jar Binks
Good news, but several parsecs too late.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Star Wars the flame thrower!
Had doesn't shoot first.
Han shoots.
Greed doesn't shoot at all.
Because he's dead.
Because that's what happens when Han Fucking Solo shoots you.
The last few Tarantino films have been pretty big budget, so I think whatever Tarantino wants, Tarantino gets. Despite the apparent excesses of Tarantino's films, you can tell they're very tightly plotted, edited to near perfection, and most importantly, Tarantino has a gift for a dialogue that Lucas never had.
Lucas was a great filmmaker, and there was a time when the technology was at just the right level of development that he couldn't go hog wild. The real problem with the prequels, to my mind, were that he didn't in fact have nearly enough story for 360+ minutes of film. I swear you can edit all three prequels into a reasonably watchable 150-180 minute film. You could get rid of most of the Phantom Menace, and Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith could be married together by turfing most of the romance (which was just awful anyways).
And yeah, edit down the final battle between Obiwan and Anakin to about two minutes. We've known it was coming since 1977, so no need to overplay it.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Meesa so happy Mickey Mouse will be here with me, and Ani! Meesa hopes the Muppets come too!
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Lucas came up with story treatments for a new trilogy, those materials, to put it bluntly, were discarded
This is absolutely the best thing that could have happened to Star Wars. While he did have good ideas back in the 70's, he's long since used up whatever talent he ever had. He single handedly turned his franchise into "mule fritters" with Episodes 1-3. There is no way for the franchise to go but up now that Lucas is no longer involved.
Good riddance. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
All I would do is muck everything up.
Interesting avoidance of past tense, there.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
I have a bad feeling about this.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I was never a big Star Wars fan. It was OK like Buck Rogers in the 25th Century was OK. I think 2001 a Space Odyssey is still the best.
George Lucas: "I'm Done With Star Wars"
That's what Daniel Craig said about Bond after 007 Spectre.
The difference is, with Lucas we hope it's true.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Hey, the Star Wars Christmas Special did have Wookie porn!
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Last I checked Disney started putting light sabers into the hands and paws of their cartoon characters,
They did it BEFORE Jar Jar? How'd they do that?
I don't respond to AC's.
Contentious thing to say, but it's technically true. The only thing he deserves credit for are the initial story ideas. In the end, the original trilogy was the result of a lot of creative input from a lot of people; to his great displeasure. Some of its most iconic moments happened in spite of him rather then because of him. (Actual quote to him from Harrison Ford during filming: "You can type this shit but you can't say it.") He has made it excruciatingly clear that he hates the original trilogy and has always hated it because he didn't have total control over it; and thinks that the only thing that made everyone love it was HIS creative input. All of the praise and fame he earned as a result of it's success, which he literally bet against with Spielberg, led him to think "Wow, if everyone loved movies that only slightly showcased my vision, imagine how much they will love them when I DO have control over every aspect!" At this point he was rich, powerful, and surrounded by yes men who dared not question him. We all know what the results looked like. The only thing he as proven beyond a shadow of a doubt is that if Star Wars had turned out how he wanted, it would have been terrible. There would have been no sequels, no merchandising empire, no worldwide generation-defining cultural impact. Just another sub-par sci-fi flick from the 70s. The "creator" of Star Wars was also its biggest liability.
While Daniel Craig hasnt been as bad for James Bond as Lucas was for Star Wars I tell you as a good bit of a Bond fan since childhood that I cant wait to see him go as he's been one of the worst at playing Bond. Bond is supposed to be suave and charismatic while Craig's Bond has all the charisma of a rock. The new Bond movies are just Mission Impossible movies (or any other big Holiwood action brand) which is fine if you like that sort of thing (and i do sometimes) but they certainly dont watch like any of the movies before Craig.
I understand what you're saying (Sean Connery is still everyone's favorite Bond) I'm not sure I agree. I guess I got so tired of the camp (Connery starting with Diamonds Are Forever, *all* of the Roger Moore Bonds, a short break from the silliness with Dalton and then baaaaack to campycampycamp with Brosnan) that the serious tone of Casino Royale (and other than the game changing to Texas Hold-whatever, not a complete travesty re: the book) that I was able to overlook Craig's ... ears. That's it really, isn't it?
It helps to remember that in the novels Bond is a stone killer. He occasionally does the right thing just because, but in general he can be pretty callous, at least up to the death of his wife. (Most people don't know the novels all follow a story arc, and specifically OHMSS-YOLT-TMWTGG is one complete story.) Craig fit that mindset pretty well, in my opinion.
I think the Craig movies did a good job of capturing the spirit of the novels without rehashing the story elements that had already been done (Casino being the obvious exception). I especially loved the call-backs to both the earlier films and the novels, even stories that had never been filmed. Did you catch the reference to The Hildebrand Rarity in Specter?
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.