[84summers]

I was watching "The Making of Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" documentary on the Indiana Jones DVD set Bonus Materials disc, and I heard this:

Steven Spielberg: When George (Lucas) and I were in Hawaii and I agreed to direct Raiders, George said that if I did wind up directing the first one that I would need to direct all three. He said he had three stories in mind. It turned out George did not have three stories in mind. We had to make up all the other subsequent stories..."

Sound familiar? Like any other criticisms on George Lucas's work? And this isn't any chump talking (though I would hardly call ChefElf a chump), this is Steven Spielberg, master filmmaker and one of Lucas's best friends!

There's more. Something else I noticed...

Steven Spielberg: (On Temple's opening scene) George's idea was to start the movie with a musical number. He wanted to start the whole film with a big Busby Berkeley dance number...that was George's contribution..."

In his interview on the 1997 VHS release of Return of the Jedi- Special Edition, Lucas had this to say...

George Lucas: In the Jabba the Hutt scene there was a little musical number which we never really had the time to shoot. When we were doing it, the production was running behind and everyone was racing. We managed to catch just a couple of shots of the band and we put a little bit of music in it, but it was meant originally to be a big musical number; which I thought would be funny in the middle of a Star Wars film."

Return of the Jedi was shot in London, 1982, then released in summer 1983, when Spielberg was shooting Temple of Doom.

Lucas took the idea he couldn't complete in Jedi and used it for Temple.

All of these films borrow (plagiarize?) from 30's serials, etc. I recall someone insightfully saying that what made the original Star Wars trilogy great was the talent of others who were only under the supervision of Lucas. And Indiana Jones is Spielberg's accomplishment (and Spielberg always credits his actors, editors, photographers, etc. He recognizes the team effort.)

At this point, I'm not sure why George Lucas is considered to be the creative visionary he is credited as being.

Any thoughts on any of this?

This post has been edited by 84summers: 03 December 2007 - 05:49 PM

[Darth Player]

At this point, I'm not sure why George Lucas is considered to be the creative visionary he is credited as being.

He's a genius because he wears flannel all the time even though he's a billionaire many times over and has a huge double chin to boot.


He also found a legion of witless saps (and I count myself among them) to buy the same films when released every few years. THAT takes genius....

[civilian_number_two]

Lucas is considered a genius because at a time when serious filmmakers were running amok around Hollywood, commenting on the American experience in their variously pretentious ways, he took something he remembered as being fun, the sci-fi serials he grew up on, and made an homage to them. He is credited pretty much for making movies fun again. Whether he really deserves all that credity is another question, but he sure got a lot of attention for something that hadn't been done in his time, and which while not directly responsible for anything today, is indirectly the inspiration for just about every fantasy action film made since.

PS: Keep in mind that the James Bond movies were already in force, so he's not even 100% responsible for the stuff they say he is ... there were other folks out there making fun films as well.

This post has been edited by civilian_number_two: 04 December 2007 - 01:35 AM

[84summers]

I understand why Lucas & Spielberg together are great. They were the entire 80's cinema experience.

I just don't get why Lucas is considered a "CREATIVE VISIONARY" when he has so few original ideas.

Watching the Making of Docs on all the new Star Wars films, we see all the characters, ships, worlds, etc. were designed by various departments and just selected by Lucas. He gives free reign on the CG designs and editing as long as it comes together the way he likes it. His writing in the new films is cheap, his direction of actors almost non-existant.

Yes, George Lucas made "Star Wars," the second highest grossing movie of all time, and it has legions of fans, inspired generations, etc. But I just can't see him as a "Creative Visionary" anymore.

This post has been edited by 84summers: 04 December 2007 - 01:22 PM

[civilian_number_two]

The entire 80's cinema experience? Ha ha! Michael Bay, Tony Scott, James Cameron, Ridley Scott and Brian dePalma were all pretty influential in them days too. And that's just off the top of the head; I'm sure I'm missing about twenty really big names.

[georgelucas4greedo]

Lucas is considered a genius because at a time when serious filmmakers were running amok around Hollywood, commenting on the American experience in their variously pretentious ways, he took something he remembered as being fun, the sci-fi serials he grew up on, and made an homage to them. He is credited pretty much for making movies fun again. Whether he really deserves all that credity is another question, but he sure got a lot of attention for something that hadn't been done in his time, and which while not directly responsible for anything today, is indirectly the inspiration for just about every fantasy action film made since.

PS: Keep in mind that the James Bond movies were already in force, so he's not even 100% responsible for the stuff they say he is ... there were other folks out there making fun films as well.

I agree with you there. The credit goes to the idea not to the final product. He surrounded himself with some amazing minds and some talented actors. I just cannot stand his hubris. Case and point: I use to get the Star Wars magazine as a kid. The year Titanic won for Best Picture, Lucas sent James Cameron a congratulations card which was reproduced in the magazine. The card was all of the Star Wars characters on the Titanic as its sinking. I just felt so turned off by his arrogance to do something like that. It seemed to be beyond a joke. It was more of a Hey you did something great, BUT remember my great thing!!!

[Little Nippatiz]

I have found lately to go beyond my distaste and befuddlement of Lucas directly, by watching interviews on documentaries of his good friend Steven Spielberg. How these two remain such good friends over the years is a mystery since they couldn't be more separated on their views on film making and themselves.

On the bonus features for films such as Duel, Jaws, CE3K, Spielberg talks about what a different person he was in those days and how amazed at himself it all came together, knowing he could not to the same films now with the same results. Also he says that some of the subjects he's tackled more recently would have been beyond his years and focus back then.

What I'm getting at is that he repeatedly points out how he has evolved and changed with time, --unlike Lucas. Addressing this makes me admire him more then trying to hide it.
The Spielberg interviews are always refreshing. You can see he really loves films, film making, and his crew that makes him look good.
Again --unlike Lucas.

[Chefelf]

The year Titanic won for Best Picture, Lucas sent James Cameron a congratulations card which was reproduced in the magazine. The card was all of the Star Wars characters on the Titanic as its sinking.

Didn't we all symbolically receive this card on May 19, 1999?

[barend]

George Lucas: In the Jabba the Hutt scene there was a little musical number which we never really had the time to shoot. When we were doing it, the production was running behind and everyone was racing. We managed to catch just a couple of shots of the band and we put a little bit of music in it, but it was meant originally to be a big musical number; which I thought would be funny in the middle of a Star Wars film."

Funny.

But not "ha ha" funny.

His writing in the new films is cheap, his direction of actors almost non-existant.

"Almost"?

[RandomThoughts]

QUOTE (georgelucas4greedo @ Dec 5 2007, 01:01 PM)
The year Titanic won for Best Picture, Lucas sent James Cameron a congratulations card which was reproduced in the magazine. The card was all of the Star Wars characters on the Titanic as its sinking.


Didn't we all symbolically receive this card on May 19, 1999?


Ummmm...I actually got a real one...it came with a picture of George Lucas with both his middle fingers up, and a note that said something about not buying anymore of his merchandise or something

[84summers]

I wrote "almost non-existant" because I remember a moment in one of the Episode 3 "Making of" features where Lucas told Christensen to turn toward Portman (away from the blue screen) when saying the line "My loyalty is to the Republic," or something such. Nothing on how he should deliver the line. Never anything like that. But Lucas does recognize the existence of humans in his movies.

Yet Lucas still always treated his cast members like puppets. "Faster and more intense," was his only direction, Mark Hamill recalled in the Bonus Disc "Making of" documentary. Actors are only another prop in Lucas's vision, one that Lucas has made clear is solely his.

Yes, he is a great filmmaker. He understands movement, mythology, storytelling, etc.

I just do not get why he is considered a "creative visionary."

He visits his various art departments, makes the occasional comment, chooses one of their designs, and that is that. It ends up in his film. The rest is based on things he liked from childhood, and while you can't blame him, Spielberg, Tarantino, you or me for wanting to pay homage to the things that bring us joy, it is not at all an original effort.

Examples: naming a character "Commander Cody"? Having Jango twirl his gun like a gunslinger? Han coming out from the blinding light of a star in the background like in a western? The Tarzan yell? The Wilhelm scream? Opening Return of the Jedi with a musical number? Even the mythological aspect of "the hero's journey" is not his (I don't remember the names of the stuff he read in college).

The first half hour of Star Wars (Ep.4, ANH). That is the work of a visionary. Nobody had ever seen anything like that before. I will admit that.

But I am a little disappointed that no one (except in maybe one or two of nine posts) has been able to argue for or against this thought, or even articulate why I'm wrong, which is always welcome (if polite).

This post has been edited by 84summers: 09 December 2007 - 06:01 AM

[RandomThoughts]

I wrote "almost non-existant" because I remember a moment in one of the Episode 3 "Making of" features where Lucas told Christensen to turn toward Portman (away from the blue screen) when saying the line "My loyalty is to the Republic," or something such. Nothing on how he should deliver the line. Never anything like that. But Lucas does recognize the existence of humans in his movies.

Yet Lucas still always treated his cast members like puppets. "Faster and more intense," was his only direction, Mark Hamill recalled in the Bonus Disc "Making of" documentary. Actors are only another prop in Lucas's vision, one that Lucas has made clear is solely his.

Yes, he is a great filmmaker. He understands movement, mythology, storytelling, etc.

I just do not get why he is considered a "creative visionary."

He visits his various art departments, makes the occasional comment, chooses one of their designs, and that is that. It ends up in his film. The rest is based on things he liked from childhood, and while you can't blame him, Spielberg, Tarantino, you or me for wanting to pay homage to the things that bring us joy, it is not at all an original effort.

Examples: naming a character "Commander Cody"? Having Jango twirl his gun like a gunslinger? Han coming out from the blinding light of a star in the background like in a western? The Tarzan yell? The Wilhelm scream? Opening Return of the Jedi with a musical number? Even the mythological aspect of "the hero's journey" is not his (I don't remember the names of the stuff he read in college).

The first half hour of Star Wars (Ep.4, ANH). That is the work of a visionary. Nobody had ever seen anything like that before. I will admit that.

But I am a little disappointed that no one (except in maybe one or two of nine posts) has been able to argue for or against this thought, or even articulate why I'm wrong, which is always welcome (if polite).

He read "Hero With A Thousand Faces" by Joseph Campbell...

[civilian_number_two]

The first half hour of Star Wars (Ep.4, ANH). That is the work of a visionary. Nobody had ever seen anything like that before. I will admit that.

??? The bit about a war and some separated heroes who will later get together to do their part? Is there something in that sort of story setup that was uniquely Lucas?

This post has been edited by civilian_number_two: 09 December 2007 - 05:23 PM