quote:He's had one BRILLIANT idea, and he's exploited it till it turned to crap. His own dream, his own vision, and look what he's done to it.
First, I would debate that the prequels are crap. Second, Lucas was the creator and writer of the Indiana Jones trilogy, with Raiders of the Lost Ark being one of the best movies ever. That definitely puts his number of brilliant ideas higher than one.
-------------------- "Having is not so pleasing a thing, after all, as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true."
Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
posted
My somewhat-rambling thoughts on the matter:
George Lucas is a brilliant and innovative guy, he's had a hand in tons of great projects throughout the past three decades. That being said, he's a much better "idea man" (ie, producer and story-writer, though not necessarily screenwriter) than a director.
I think his weaknesses as a director are a lack of experience (since finishing film school, he's only directed six films in more than thirty years, and four of those have been Star Wars movies) and a tendency to get a little too wrapped up in the very particular way he sees things. (I feel that Empire was the best of the OT because Lucas wrote the story but let Kasdan write the script and Kershner do the directing while he took a more supervisory role.)
And of course, there's the over-reliance on special effects, more specifically on CGI. THX-1138 and American Graffiti had rather little in the way of Star Wars-type SFX, and thus allowed for Lucas' directing talents to come through better. But since Star Wars it seems Lucas feels more comfortable working with SFX than with actors. I think it is because he has very specific visions in his head about how he wants something to look and feel, and having 70% of the scene being created on the computer allows for greater accuracy to that. Unfortunately, it can take too much focus away from the characters.
Now, you have to remember that the SW saga was supposed to evoke a certain kind of feeling, that of the old Flash Gordon serials and their ilk. This is a big part of the reason the characters are so one-dimensional and the plots and dialogue are so simple and, at times, cliched. It's intended to be that way, make no mistake. The problem (for me) is that all the CGI ruins the "homage" feeling, and I suspect that others have the same issue.
The thing is, it's also like the old saying about lightning in a bottle. Lucas literally changed the world of cinema with Star Wars, and it's really hard to trump that. You can only make history once.
I don't think Lucas should be bashed for making the story he wants. Nevertheless, there is much to be criticized about the prequels. My own personal gripe is that, in (I presume) trying to be more complex/sophisticated than the OT, there are introduced a number of interweaving plot threads (Sifo Dyas, etc.) that are ultimately left unresolved. My view is that if something isn't necessary to the story then it should be left out. Don't raise a question/mystery for the audience to fixate on now if you're not going to resolve it it later. (The Matrix sequels are another irritating example of this.) Stick with the essential characters and plotline. That's part of what made the OT so good.
-MMoM
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Am I the only person who thinks Sifo-Dyas was a pure MacGuffin, and there's no reason to wonder about him at all?
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I don't get the problem. The Clones were apparently ordered by Sifo Dias. Sifo Dias was dead at the time. Therefore he didn't do it. Therefore someone else did. There was one extremely likely candidate in the form of Palpatine, so it was probably him. I sleep now.
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Actually, it was probably Dooku, as Dooku -- not Palpatine -- recruited Jango. Certainly Dooku acted on Palpatine's orders, but I don't think Palpatine would risk blowing his cover by getting involved.
Because, if the cloners had just said "Oh, they were ordered by a guy called Darth Tyrranus. I think he's also a count. Looks a bit like Saruman," there would have been no mystery.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Well, the darkside of the force certainly does explain the 'magic bullet' theory.
-------------------- "Brave men are vertebrates: they have their softness on the outside, and their toughness in the middle" -Lewis Carrol
Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
posted
Ah, there's the story for episodes 7-9. The saga of Darth Oswald and his fight against Jedi Master Obi-John Kennedy. But, like all Sith, he gets killed by his apprentice, Darth Ruby.
Except, using the phrase "Darth Oswald" has simply left me with this image of Diedrich Bader in a robe with a lightsaber. So, that's the end of that.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Anyway, the mixed impressions about how significant the Sifo Dyas thing was supposed to be just goes toward illustrating my point. You don't want your film written/edited so that half the audience comes out thinking one thing and half comes out thinking another. If Sifo Dyas was never supposed to be expounded on, then they spent way too much time talking about him in an expositionary fashion. This is called poor writing/editing.
-MMoM
-------------------- The flaws we find most objectionable in others are often those we recognize in ourselves.
Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
