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."

33 of 424 comments (clear)

  1. Surprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just more Cheez-wiz American cinema. Lucas ruined the first three movies when made the last three.

    1. Re:Surprised? by ArchieBunker · · Score: 4, Informative

      There used to be laserdisc rips of the original trilogy on bittorrent. That is about as close as you'll get.

      --
      Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    2. Re:Surprised? by roc97007 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "and just to complete it" -- I know the feeling. Lucas was starting to go off the rails with RotJ. Then with TPM he went off the bridge, tumbled down the mountain, careened into the chasm and plunged into the magma.

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    3. Re:Surprised? by MightyMartian · · Score: 5, Insightful

      He also ruined the first three movies when he shamelessly screwed with them.

      Han shot Greedo first. End of story.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    4. Re:Surprised? by hairyfeet · · Score: 5, Interesting

      No he didn't, the problem was after Empire he began to lose people who would tell him no which is the kiss of death to a guy like Lucas.

      If you watch the behind the scenes on SW and ESB there were people there that would actually tell Lucas no, tell him what they REALLY thought, be totally honest with the guy...Watch the video on the making of TPM, there are literally dozens of times where you can see Lucas talking and the eyes and expressions of those he is talking to are fucking CRINGING because they know this is a dumb idea...do they say a word? Nope they bite their tongues and say "sure thing George, great" because they are afraid of losing a check.

      So if you want to know what killed the prequels it was Lucas not having anybody around him with the guts to say "this just isn't working George" and to let him know whats what.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    5. Re:Surprised? by roc97007 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Just more Cheez-wiz American cinema. Lucas ruined the first three movies when made the last three.

      It helps to assume that the last three never existed. Kinda like "wow The Matrix was good. Too bad they never made any sequels".

      --
      Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
    6. Re:Surprised? by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The official original versions as put on the re-release of the SE DVDs as bonus features (known as the GOUT, for George's Original Unaltered Trilogy) came from the Laserdisc masters. They're poor quality by today's standards, but better than any Laserdisc rip.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    7. Re:Surprised? by BitterOak · · Score: 5, Informative

      There used to be laserdisc rips of the original trilogy on bittorrent. That is about as close as you'll get.

      Not true! There are much better ones available! As an Anonymous poster noted below (and deserves to be modded up!) you should look for Harmy's "Despecialized" versions. Much of the source was actually taken from film and it looks really good at 720p. Look for version 2.5 of episode 4 and version 2.0 of episode. His current version of Jedi isn't quite as good yet, but hopefully a better version will be out soon.

      Some info here.

      --
      If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
    8. Re:Surprised? by Razed+By+TV · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well, if Disney does well enough with 7-9, maybe they will go back and remake eps 1-3. I'd like to see the look on Lucas's face...

    9. Re:Surprised? by PRMan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And it's not just a preference. Han Solo can't be redeemed if he's not a cold-blooded killer to begin with. He has nothing to be redeemed from...

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    10. Re:Surprised? by Nogami_Saeko · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You are absolutely, 100% correct. It was painfully obvious watching the behind the scenes footage that Lucas had been surrounded by a platoon of "Yes Men", rather than people who would give him honest feedback.

      And here's the thing, I think that Lucas did have some really great ideas, but he also had some terrible ones. And without the filter to remove the terrible ones, you got a mashed-up mess.

      --
      "Nothing strengthens authority so much as silence." - Charles de Gaulle
    11. Re:Surprised? by cfalcon · · Score: 5, Informative

      Han didn't shoot Greedo first. Han shot Greedo, and Greedo didn't shoot at all.

  2. What a coincidence! by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm done with Star Wars too!

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:What a coincidence! by Fire_Wraith · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Ironically, merchandise was the one thing that Lucas told Mel Brooks was off-limits, because the toys would be too similar.

  3. Lucas not having control to do what he wanted by pauljlucas · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.
    1. Re:Lucas not having control to do what he wanted by Billly+Gates · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Because you can't have your $4 Billion dollar cake, and eat it too?

      Dude do you have any idea how rich Lucas is?

      I had a friend from college who was a VP when a quote from Walt Disney came up in business management class "After a certain point. You come to work to do your passions. I have all the money in the world as it is .." Basically he told me the folks he knows work to piss on their other business owners to show who is top dog. They have all soo much money that a few million here or there won't make a difference.

      Yes for you or I would jump and trip over anyone offering me freaking $4 billion dollars!! But, I have bills to pay. Jobs I go to that are not all that great but needed so I do not have to move in with my parents. I have a car with 130,000 miles on it and student loans and a retirement to worry about. So yeah, Mr. Lucas does not have these problems.

      If he wanted he could go live like Mr. McAffee on a tropical beach with hookers, parties, and drugs, with his own jet to go and do whatever he wants when he wants before this deal with Disney. Money is not something on his mind unless his goal was to have another pissing ego contest on someone else so he can grin on how rich and successful he is.

      Just a perspective us peasants never really consider. Perhaps we too can make something of ourselves with a startup someday? But anyway he already has cashed out as wealthy back in the late 1970s. ... of course the flipside is poverty. I type this and am middle class. Imagine working 3 jobs and wondering how you are going to eat or keep the lights on? That too is not a concern for Lucas. Perhaps he should not have sold it? I wonder what his intentions were or did a divorce made him do this?

    2. Re:Lucas not having control to do what he wanted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      I suppose I'll post this as AC.

      I realize that people think $250,000,000 is a lot. It is. It's a metric butt-ton of money. However, those of us who have managed to acquire that much wealth aren't all that wealthy comparatively speaking. We can not, realistically, buy a mansion everywhere and buy a jet. Jets are expensive. Maintaining a home is very expensive (but not as expensive as a jet). At that level, well, you're getting a huge tax bill - plan on about 1/3 of it (or more) in Federal or State taxes. This is usually paid in the quarter that the income was earned.

      Then, say, you sold your business for 98,000,000 in cash and 120,000,000 in stock in the new parent company? You can't actually sell, trade, or touch those stocks (you could, in theory, take loans out against them) for six months or you'll end up in Federal prison. (It might be 60 days, actually.) You're probably not taxed on the full amount - if you're smart and have an accountant. With the above numbers, you're looking at somewhere $155,000,000 which is still a bunch of money but when you start buying things like a jet AND paying to keep that jet functional then you're looking at some serious expenditures.

      Now, assuming you do the "right thing" and you reward all the people who helped you to get where you are and make a bunch of anonymous donations you're looking at somewhere around half of that money being kept aside. So, call it $80,000,000. You're now going to want some privacy and a house out in the middle of nowhere. Something like 10,000 acres in the NW part of Maine, with a nice house, and the amenities is going to cost you something along the lines of $20,000,000 assuming you are also setting aside for taxes for the next ten years.

      Then you want a place in Florida, nothing special, and a place in Nevada - again nothing special. Plan on another $10,000,000. You want to set your kids, grandkids, etc up for life and pay off your ex-wife? Plan on another $20,000,000 - it could be more but you want the kids to have a trust that doesn't pay for everything so that they're still productive members of society and not just resting on their laurels. Throw in another $20,000,000 for friends and family.

      You want to maintain your land and property after you leave? That's another $10,000,000 or so. Throw in seeding a trust that enables a few kids to go to a nice private school? That's another $10,000,000...

      These are rather rough numbers but you get the idea? Point being, at the $250,000,000 level you still have to budget and don't get to go spend a metric ton of money on things like a jet. Well, you can if you want but it's really not prudent and is not a responsible thing to do. No, you charter a small plane when you want to fly. You do have a driver but you only hire one in a rented car when you're out on the town. You don't actually own a limo or anything but you might have a bunch of old cars and hire a mechanic on the weekends - you might even get your hands dirty and do some of the work yourself.

      If you're smart, and lucky, and aren't lazy - you can actually put your money into a few risky investments and then make your assets equal what they were when you first were paid for your business. That takes some work and some dedication. They don't seem to teach this sort of thing in college or anything. I understand that they do have special coaches for this but I've also heard that they're a scam - mostly. People who win the lottery usually end up broke for a reason.

      Really, though, you don't spend like that. What you do is you invest it - almost all of it, and then build up the other funds slowly on earnings from your investments. This keeps the money from being taxed as you're still keeping it in the investment pool and not spending it. Well, if it's taxed then it's at a lower rate. It depends on where you move it and *how* you move it. So, it's not quite as bad as I'm depicting above and you can certainly avoid a lot of that. That doesn't mean that you go spending on things like a jet, however. Sure, you can

    3. Re:Lucas not having control to do what he wanted by kilfarsnar · · Score: 4, Funny

      I think I know how you made all that money: You get paid by the word!

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
  4. Jar Jar Binks by rbrandis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    He lost all credibility with Jar Jar Binks

    1. Re:Jar Jar Binks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      If only this were true...

      https://www.reddit.com/comments/3qvj6w
      https://www.reddit.com/r/DarthJarJar/comments/3rntpj/theory_support_megathread/

      That would have been the best twist ever. Alas we just have a meandering annoying character.

    2. Re:Jar Jar Binks by Z00L00K · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, that's not the problem. The problem was the re-edits of the old movies where things like the sarlacc was changed for no useful reason, the original Darth Vader actor was edited out and Hayden Christensen was edited in instead of finding a Darth Vader actor that did resemble the original Darth Vader actor in the death scene in Return of the Jedi. (Anakin in first episode was not a problem) But the transition from a kid with rounded features to the thin Hayden and then to the more rounded features of the face that Darth Vader had in the death scene annoys me more.

      Smaller changes that aren't obvious to the watcher - they don't make things worse or better, at least when it comes to background items or pure graphical enhancements of stuff that weren't good in the original movies due to the fact that special effects weren't good at that time.

      You may be annoyed with Jar Jar Binks, but in the first movie C3PO was an annoyance. But his character actually got better over time. Initially the way Yoda talked was also an annoyance. So forget about Jar Jar and figure out that there are worse problems.

      What's possible to be more annoyed about is the story incoherences between the original movies (Episode 4 to 6) and the newer movies (Episode 1 to 3) where some things went on in a way didn't make sense to someone that had seen the original movies. Luke was a teenager and considered to be "too old", Anakin was a lot younger and still considered to be "too old".

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    3. Re:Jar Jar Binks by captjc · · Score: 5, Interesting

      There is still a belief that Kylo Ren may be Jar-Jar. Just look at the mask. Only time will tell.

      "No one cared who me-sa was until me-sa put on da bombad mask"

      --
      Slow Down Cowboy! It's been 1 hour, 47 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment
    4. Re:Jar Jar Binks by RobinH · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Natalie Portman is an award winning actor and quite good in other movies. Hayden Christensen might be terrible, but you can't come to that conclusion solely on his performance in episodes 2 and 3 because clearly even a really good actor couldn't act well in that situation. The blame has to fall on Lucas. He thought he was inventing a new form of film-making where he could fix everything in post production so he didn't push for good performances. He was wrong.

      --
      "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
    5. Re:Jar Jar Binks by Jack+Griffin · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'm still waiting for a remake of Corvette Summer with Christensen as lead...

  5. Good news by Hognoxious · · Score: 4, Funny

    Good news, but several parsecs too late.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  6. Re:"For the fans"? Really? by burtosis · · Score: 4, Funny

    Star Wars the flame thrower!

  7. Re:So now? by cfalcon · · Score: 5, Funny

    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.

  8. Re:The real reason by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.
  9. Re:"For the fans"? Really? by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Funny

    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.
  10. Now he gets it by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 4, Insightful

    All I would do is muck everything up.

    Interesting avoidance of past tense, there.

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  11. Re:"For the fans"? Really? by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Funny

    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.
  12. George Lucas did not create Star Wars by Dega704 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

  13. Re:Best part of the summary by grimmjeeper · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The difference is that Star Wars started out as an action movie. Trek did not. Turning Trek into an action movie was a "questionable" move at best. Keeping Wars an action movie is staying with it's roots. Still, I'm hedging my expectations so as to not be completely disappointed.