[ion eon]

I just saw a documentary type thing on the History Channel about the making of Star Wars. It was really well made and interesting. I now sympathize with Lucas about many things. I think that most people don't realize what sort of pressure he was under to make these movies. And when he re-vamped the originals, it was only because that was the way he wanted them in the first place. Sure he messed some things up, but they were only mess-ups to some of the general public, these movies were never intended to be hits, just his dreams. Why hate him, he may have messed up the movies to us, but to him, they were what he wanted them to be. He created these movies, and to me, he can do whatever he wants to them because he made them, not us. They are his collection, he never did it for the money, just for the satisfaction of realizing his dream.

[Despondent]

He did it for the money. He never satisfied his "dream", and he did it AGAIN for the money.

love the sinner, hate the sin.

[Jejef Thgaron]

I just saw a documentary type thing on the History Channel about the making of Star Wars. It was really well made and interesting. I now sympathize with Lucas about many things. I think that most people don't realize what sort of pressure he was under to make these movies. And when he re-vamped the originals, it was only because that was the way he wanted them in the first place. Sure he messed some things up, but they were only mess-ups to some of the general public, these movies were never intended to be hits, just his dreams. Why hate him, he may have messed up the movies to us, but to him, they were what he wanted them to be. He created these movies, and to me, he can do whatever he wants to them because he made them, not us. They are his collection, he never did it for the money, just for the satisfaction of realizing his dream.

If I were standing anywhere near you in real life, I'd give you a standing ovation. It all started with Lucas' dream. I saw the same documentary and if I remember right, 20th Century Fox was the only company that would help Lucas out in making Star Wars. That would be like myself creating an animation (which I am into doing) for myself and having it become an overnight success. The only dream I had would to be able to make my dream visible for everyone else to enjoy. The money Lucas made was just a benefactor of being successful. I understand why we had to wait so long between trilogies, too. It had a lot to do with his ex-wife.

You're absolutely right, ion. He never did it for the money. He nearly went broke in the 16 years between doing the OT and the PT.

[sargon1955]

when he re-vamped the originals, it was only because that was the way he wanted them in the first place.

In at least the case of Greedo shooting first, that's total bullshit. In the original script (which you can read online) which LUCAS WROTE HIMSELF, HAN SHOOTS FIRST. THAT'S what he originally wanted, no matter how much he lies about it and no matter that lucasphiles eagerly swallow the well known substance.

[Jejef Thgaron]

In at least the case of Greedo shooting first, that's total bullshit. In the original script (which you can read online) which LUCAS WROTE HIMSELF, HAN SHOOTS FIRST. THAT'S what he originally wanted, no matter how much he lies about it and no matter that lucasphiles eagerly swallow the well known substance.

Who cares about who shoots first? Greedo can't hit the broad side of a barn. Even if Han Solo didn't shoot first, he hit Greedo before Greedo could hit him. That's what GL wanted. It would be a pretty boring movie without Han Solo, don't you think? It's the timeless cliche: The good guy can't die in the first half of the movie.

[Despondent]

establishing him as the good guy steals tension. But since you like it better that way (I guess.... ) let's just blindly accept that it doesn't matter. Right?

Not that I like it better or less, Mr. Infallable FUCKING CHANGED IT AND THEN CHANGED IT AGAIN.

[sargon1955]

Who cares about who shoots first?

It changes the character arc of Han Solo. In the original film, that scene shows him as a badass who will KILL before some scumbag has a CHANCE to do it to him. But Mr. "I always wanted it that way" changed his mind and decided he wanted a "kinder, gentler" Han.

Greedo can't hit the broad side of a barn.

You have NO idea if that's true, BASED ON THE ORIGINAL SCENE. You see a Han who doesn't fuck around with taking such a chance. He kills the bastard without hesitation.

That's what GL wanted.

He changed what he wanted and LIED about doing so, and you've said NOTHING that shows otherwise.

It would be a pretty boring movie without Han Solo, don't you think? It's the timeless cliche: The good guy can't die in the first half of the movie.

Exactly how does your redundant repeating of this cliche require a change in the scene that Lucas ORIGINALLY WROTE?

This post has been edited by sargon1955: 30 March 2006 - 08:48 AM

[sargon1955]

Greedo can't hit the broad side of a barn.

Also, if that's true, why should we give a rat's ass that Greedo has the drop on Han? He's never in any fucking danger, right?

[diligent_d]

The whole "Greedo can't hit the broad side of a barn" arguement came about after the fact that Greedo shot first.

In the original film, I never thought he was a good or bad shot - a bit niave perhaps in not making Han show his hands, but certianly not the colossal fuck-up everyone percieved him as being after the new editions came out.

[sargon1955]

the colossal fuck-up everyone percieved him as being after the new editions came out.

Yes, in one fell swoop Lucas managed to make a menacing bounty hunter into a joke, and a tough smuggler into an oh-so-politically-correct candyass.

And some people eat it up.

[Revan-47]

I went back and watched the OOT (nothing added or changed) and u cant actually tell that han shoots first. it really just looks like a jumble of explosions. If anything i would guess that they shot at the same time. that still keeps han from being a candyass.

[sargon1955]

u cant actually tell that han shoots first.

No one I talked to and saw the film with in 1977 EVER expressed any confusion about who fired the shot (there was never any doubt it was one shot). It was obvious. You saw Han unholster his weapon, then fire it. End of story.

[Revan-47]

LIke i said, im probably wrong.

[civilian_number_two]

Greedo never fired a shot until more than a decade after the film's release.

Lucas went nuts on the whole "Director's cut" concept. Some revisions should be allowed: the recut of TOUCH OF EVIL was based on 97 pages of notes Orwell wrote for the editor, notes that the Producers held on to while a shorter version was released; the voiceovers in BLADE RUNNER were added only on request from the Producers who wanted a more direct connection to the noir tradition, etc. BUt Lucas took this idea into whole new territory, adding sounds and images never conceived before, and even shooting new scenes to tie the series in with the prequels.

All the way to the end, I support Lucas in his vision, his realisation of a dream, and his triumph over whatever adversities he may have faced as an upper-middle-class college boy looking to become an upper-class filmmaker. But I won't go so far as to pretend to believe his lies. A simple "I changed my mind" would have been sufficient for a man of my intelligence. "That was a mistake in the editing," or "we missed Greedo's shot when adding the special effects" are such transparent bullshit that it insults the intelligence even of incredibly credulous people. Anyone even remotely copnnected to filmmaking knows that a director will have seen the film about 100 times before its release. Folks not at all connected can probably guess. There is no way he didn't notice that Greedo hadn't shot first. Also, the rough mercenary is a part of the Western tradition, and the American Wester is a strong influence on the whole Tatooine sequence. I can't believe folks fall for the revisionism. Lucas should genuinely try running a religion.

[sargon1955]

Excellent post!

Lucas should genuinely try running a religion.

Based on how some people react to the man, I have no doubt at all that he would have quite a few VERY devoted followers.

"That was a mistake in the editing," or "we missed Greedo's shot when adding the special effects" are such transparent bullshit that it insults the intelligence even of incredibly credulous people.

What's fascinating is that some people not only adamantly refuse to be insulted by his lies, they prefer to be outraged by the "insult" of those who CALL him on his lies.

This post has been edited by sargon1955: 04 April 2006 - 10:11 AM