Star Wars: Episode VII - The Force Awakens (USE SPOILER TAGS!)

[Steelmaker]

Originally Posted by EvaDK

What Lucas got wrong (as a film maker) with the PT films, was staying in his comfort zone, surrounding himself with 'yes people' not really in a position to question or challenge his ideas and writing the stories by himself with no or little input from other creative partners.

That kind of setup rarely ends well, artistically speaking. In essence, Lucas at some point became a better film company CEO at the expense of his talents as a director & storyteller.

I've been saying for years that biggest problem with the prequels is that unlike the original trilogy, they were made at ZERO risk. With the original trilogy, Lucas really had to fight for those films. There was quite a bit of struggle that went into the making of those movies. With the prequels, as you have already said, they were too "safe" to make. There was absolutely no risk involved. Plus Lucas surrounded himself with too many yes men and he really needed a good sounding board to give him contrasting feedback. I can't believe that no one stopped to question Lucas about things like...oh I don't know... why was Qui-Gon even necessary? Why wasn't Yoda Obi Wan's master or why wasn't Obi-Wan a "reckless" Jedi as he self-describes in TESB instead of Lucas making him such a straight-laced/by the book kind of Jedi?

Still to this day I believe that Attack of the Clones has by far the worst acting/per dollar spent on any movie I've ever seen. I mean there is some really REALLY bad acting in that movie. The complete and utter lack of chemistry between Natalie and Hayden is SO instantly apparent, it makes me wonder how in god's name did Lucas or anyone involved in casting not notice this during screen tests or early principle filming? It's so bad that it astonishes me that those scenes were allowed to happen. Those "love" scenes are so painful to watch. It's like watching two lawyers negotiate their love for one another.

[Dotpattern]

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

That's all true in the business world, but it's telling of Lucas' character as an artist. Whether he meant to consciously or not, he let his ego dictate the outcome of his art, rather than listen to creative criticism that could have improved the quality of his work. Now, he suffers for it, as all his fans continue to rant and complain about it.

It's been well documented that a lot of Lucas' friends, colleagues and execs at Fox advised him not to make the original Star Wars, which he ignored. Was that also telling of his character as an artist? Later, they also offered "creative criticism" that they felt could have improved the quality of the movie, which he also ignored. Was that him letting his ego dictate the outcome of his art?

[Steelmaker]

Originally Posted by Dotpattern

It's been well documented that a lot of Lucas' friends, colleagues and execs at Fox advised him not to make the original Star Wars, which he ignored. Was that also telling of his character as an artist? Later, they also offered "creative criticism" that they felt could have improved the quality of the movie, which he also ignored. Was that him letting his ego dictate the outcome of his art?

You can't possibly suggest that 1977 Lucas and 1998 Lucas were even remotely the same person.

[Dotpattern]

Originally Posted by Steelmaker

You can't possibly suggest that 1977 Lucas and 1998 Lucas were even remotely the same person.

I suggested no such thing. But can you enlighten me as to why an artist who ignored criticism in 1977 and, as a result, was validated with a phenomenal success, should then suddenly listen to criticism in 1999? More importantly, and more to my point, can you explain how one is a product of ego and the other is not?

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by Deathbymonkeys

God forbid someone who spend 120 million of his own money wants a movie the way he wants it instead of how you want it.

Well, he did, and now we all have to put up with Jar Jar forever, among other things.

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

Ummm hmmm

Well...okay, not all his fans.

Originally Posted by Dotpattern

It's been well documented that a lot of Lucas' friends, colleagues and execs at Fox advised him not to make the original Star Wars, which he ignored. Was that also telling of his character as an artist? Later, they also offered "creative criticism" that they felt could have improved the quality of the movie, which he also ignored. Was that him letting his ego dictate the outcome of his art?

It actually is telling; he is passionate about Star Wars and it gave him the guts to make the original trilogy and make it well. However, he had to do so on a less-than-ideal budget with limited technology. Those limitations helped him make the most out of what he had, and it allowed him to make groundbreaking work. Innovation yielded the best product.

Years later, he had all the money and technology in the world to work with, and as a result, he created films that had excesses.

Anyway, there's a difference between criticizing the whole project (which was baseless, because people didn't understand it at first) and criticizing specific alien designs or character ideas (if numerous people told Lucas that Jar Jar was a bad idea, he should have listened; the whole film would have been swell all the same).

It is genuinely inspiring to hear how Lucas made the first few movies the way he did. It's far less endearing to hear about the new movies and how he had to have things his way, and how he fired people who disagreed with him.

For the record, I enjoy all the Star Wars films including the prequels, and I'm not as big of a Jar Jar hater as others, but I do believe he was funnier on paper than in execution.

[Dotpattern]

Originally Posted by Al_The_Strange

if numerous people told Lucas that Jar Jar was a bad idea, he should have listened.

But that's what I'm asking - why should he have listened? Francis Ford Coppola, writer and director of the Godfather, tells you not to make Star Wars. You don't listen. It becomes a huge success. Years later, a few guys tell you not to do Jar Jar. What qualifies their opinions over yours?

[stvn1974]

Originally Posted by Dotpattern

But that's what I'm asking - why should he have listened? Francis Ford Coppola, writer and director of the Godfather, tells you not to make Star Wars. You don't listen. It becomes a huge success. Years later, a few guys tell you not to do Jar Jar. What qualifies their opinions over yours?

Someone should send a Terminator back in time to stop Lucas from creating Jar Jar and Coppola from casting his daughter in the Godfather Part III.

[Al_The_Strange]

Originally Posted by Dotpattern

But that's what I'm asking - why should he have listened? Francis Ford Coppola, writer and director of the Godfather, tells you not to make Star Wars. You don't listen. It becomes a huge success. Years later, a few guys tell you not to do Jar Jar. What qualifies their opinions over yours?

Every artist receives advice and critiques that are good and bad, and they have the right to accept or reject them. It's always bad advice when somebody tells you not to go through with your passion project (even when it's from award-winning director and mentor Francis Ford Coppola). I mean, it's discouraging, if not outright disrespectful.

When it comes to somebody saying that a certain character isn't working, or the humor's not working, or there are plot holes, or there's something else specifically wrong with a script or project, it seems to me that a little fine-tuning would go a long way in improving the final product. There is a chance that such criticism is baseless, which is why feedback from multiple sources would be beneficial. Without such feedback, however, how can an artist truly know if his work is genuinely good, and will be accepted by audiences? How can an artist learn and mature otherwise?

Year after year, movies are pumped out, and plenty of them have bad scripts, poor artistic choices, bad casting, etc. How many of these movies would have succeeded better if somebody actually proofread the script first, or stopped a director from making a bad choice?

[Dwayne Hicks]

I think The Phantom Menace is the most underrated movie of all time.

P.S. It's also the most Star Wars movie of the past 30+ years. And I also like that Lucas tried new things, i.e. force speed, midi-chlorians, etc.

[aiman04]

When Lucas hired writers for his earlier movies, there was a few sessions of intense brainstorming, many hours each time, to get the story right. Only him, the writers and the director and then the writer go back with his notes to write. They did this on Empire and Jedi, all Indiana Jones movies and all Lucasfilm projects. And tell you what, he listens a lot even during Skull. Now with the prequels, he writes alone and of course, no brainstorming sessions for story. His staffs only involved in production/technical meetings. He could change some here and there but won't affect the main plot and characters anymore. My point is, during the prequels, Lucas' ego and "Yes Men" are not the real issue. He actually listens a lot but himself and those around him had no chance. Not hiring writers and/or a director to have the brainstorming sessions is Lucas' real mistake. I partly blame Spielberg for this, Lucas never intended to direct, but he convinced him otherwise.

The Force Awakens had multiple writers so from writing part it's already improved.

EDIT: Jonathan Hales did some work for Clones but it was just for certain scenes already laid out by Lucas. I guess you can put him in the "Yes Man" category for those scenes.

[Richard Graham]

This is the Force Awakens thread, not a prequel thread.

Just trying to be proactive. Not a jerk.

[aiman04]

Originally Posted by Richard Graham

This is the Force Awakens thread, not a prequel thread.

Just trying to be proactive. Not a jerk.

Added The Force Awakens to my post.

[Himmel]

Why Episode 7 Removed A Bunch Of Star Wars References!!

It was while talking with Vanity Fair for their recent Star Wars issue that J.J. Abrams made this reveal.

Abrams noted that the early stages of the project did spend a good amount of time seeing how elements from that history could be seeded in. But eventually they hit a point where they felt it necessary to limit those kinds of references.


http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Why-E...ces-71297.html

[Himmel]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=asz8Y2cC7qo

[Himmel]

Becoming the latest film to get out of the way of Star Wars: Episode VII — The Force Awakens, Paramount's family offering (Monster Trucks) is being pushed back from Dec. 25, 2015 to March 18, 2016.

[spectre08]

Originally Posted by Terminated

https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...&v=asz8Y2cC7qo

I would watch this 100 times

[EvaDK]

Originally Posted by Dotpattern

But that's what I'm asking - why should he have listened? Francis Ford Coppola, writer and director of the Godfather, tells you not to make Star Wars. You don't listen. It becomes a huge success. Years later, a few guys tell you not to do Jar Jar. What qualifies their opinions over yours?

I think you need to look at the context to understand Coppola's reservations about Star Wars. He and Lucas had produced a Lucas directed entry in the sci-fi genre previously with THX-1138 that wasn't successful (it was re-discovered and re-evaluated by critics and the audience after Lucas' success with Wars).

Then Lucas made American Graffiti which was a tremendous box office hit as well as celebrated by critics. In that context it's not hard to understand Coppola's initial reservations about Lucas going back to sci-fi, which at that time was still a genre most known for low budget B movies with mediocre box office earnings.

Also, perhaps Coppola didn't realize that Wars was essentially a Western/Kurosawa hybrid with stints of Flash Gordon on top in a futuristic setting. The film basically created a genre for itself instead of comforting to existing genres.

[Himmel]

Dine on the galaxy's finest Star Wars-themed food this summer, at Star Wars Weekends...

Rebel Hangar: A Star Wars Lounge Experience

You never know who you’ll find lurking in the abandoned starship hangar — located in a galaxy far, far away. Reports have been made that this location was once a known hangout of Rebel pilots, aliens, bounty hunters, and smugglers; with the immersive environment and stellar bites.

http://www.starwars.com/news/rebel-h...-wars-weekends

[kurtlingle]

Originally Posted by Steelmaker

You can't possibly suggest that 1977 Lucas and 1998 Lucas were even remotely the same person.

Was he cloned?

:-)

[aiman04]