Does George Lucas suffers of OCD?

cylon

Member
I was thinking in the last days if George Lucas has some form of OCD (obsessive compulsive disorder). A weird question one might think but considering his obsession about the Star Wars films he made and the continued need of improving or changing it over the years rises the doubt that he is one of those not able to leave something but instead gets stucked in this OCD spiral that never ends.

I must admit that I have too OCD and I see many similarities in Lucas. The setting is different but the problem is essentially the same. OCD is very widespread and affects a lot of people so there's nothing to be ashamed of. Many celebrities have it too. Not that it is of particular interest in regards of Lucas has he considered a genius anyway and who cares if he has OCD, but, I am just curious.
 
Yep.

He made masterpieces and kept messing with them. People did not like it and so he made even more changes.

Even those who liked the Phantom Menace, all three of them, agreed "enough with the CG animals" so he doubled down and made Ep 2 with even more CG animals.

He said we was gonna make Ep 7-9,

Then claimed he never really ment that,

Then decided to make them,

Then sold it all to Disney after hanging on so tight for so long,

Now seems to regret it and not like what they did. (He ain't the only one)

Yep, I would say he has some issues and OCD is likely one of them.

On the other hand he is just a guy and all guys and gals have issues. I am sure his several billion dollars helps.




Tom
 
Lucas may have some OCD in him. But I don't think that was the biggest reason why he kept tinkering with the OT.


George Lucas spent his whole career in a quest to get and keep control of his own work. This always meant everything to him.

In the early 1970s his adversary was Warner Bros recutting THX and Graffiti against his will. 30 years later it was the SW fanbase telling him to quit touching his own SW movies. It probably stepped on the same nerve in his psyche. The more the fans complained, the more his stubbornness flared up & made him want to keep changing stuff in the OT.


The first round of SE changes in 1997 don't need explaining. We don't all agree with exactly what he did, but I'm speaking of his decision to do an SE in the first place. In 1996/97 nobody was complaining when he first announced that the SE would be made. We all thought it was a great idea before we saw the result. Even after the result it was mainly the Han shooting first thing that bugged everyone. It's only with several more years of hindsight that everyone's opinion turned against anything other than the original versions of the OT.
 
I think a LOT of us here have OCB or are OCD. (Myself included) Sometimes by the way we nitpick and pick apart things over & over. OCD isn't really a rare thing these days, as millions have it in some shape or form. Truth told with the attention to detail, I'd say people in the RPF are more OCB/OCD than the general public because of their extreme attention to details. I'm not saying that's all bad. Just sayin'.
 
OCD seems to be a major issue with creative people of any sort, it's why folks can't stop fiddling with their music/movies/paintings no matter what and sometimes don't even see that they're doing more harm than good. It doesn't help that George was surrounded by yesmen who were just leeching off him and didn't care enough about the franchise to call him out on it.
 
As somebody who has behaviours that nudge towards the begins of the autistic spectrum (not quite Aspergers but near) I'd say George Lucas possibly exhibits some of the same tendances. He seems to have some difficulty understanding peoples attitudes as being significantly different from himself but that's true for many people, just read some of the posts in this section, we all do differ and that's a strength overall for humanity. When you read the problems he had in the past with cast and crew in the production of the OT you release just how badly it does effect him. But then people have a history of being unkind towards him, so Its not surprising he deals poorly with negative relationships.
Producing a ANH made him very ill, which is why he stepped back from directing the others and instead choose people he could trust. And thats why his divorce was such a loss to all of us, Marcia "balanced" his personality perfectly by bringing support and a more humane perspective to his stories, scripts ,production and editting. If you look at "American Graffiti", "ANH and TESB" they are very different to everything that comes afterwards, which is on the whole is more simplistic, less grounded and immature. He always works better in a collaborative relationship, such as he had with Spielberg and Kershner, people whose friendship and perspective he trusted. Just look at the emotional depth that "TESB" has ,then compare it with "ROTJ"and then the prequels. Its immmensely different. In that single case the director got better performances from his actors by trusting them and allowed changes to the TESB script. So the characters developed more humanely.Lightning in a bottle.
If only Kersh had done the last one and Marcia had not left him. The film we would have got would have been significantly different. But George dislikes conflict because he doesn't really understand it nor responds well towards it, hes not an overtly aggressive person and thats why time after time, people who have disagreed with him have quietly been moved to the side and left , leaving only the company "yes" men which results in him being able to make the choices he makes without a counterbalancing argument. To the loss of all of us to an extent.
He really is a nice guy, quiet and generous to a fault. If you look at his charitable work and what he has contributed to the film industry as a person there is a strong argument that he has had the single most defining influence of anybody in the last four decades and continues to do so .His vision and foresight into production techniques have been incredibly innovative and the modern digital cinema had been hugely influenced by what he and his company have brought in to being. Without him all the effects heavy films we so enjoy would never have come to be so early or have been produced with in such tight timescales or so cost effectively.
Which is why it is rather annoying to listen to everybody picking on him for whatever he does. I really wonder what drives such attacks, on somebody who has had such a hugely positive effect in cinema. I struggle to understand that. Many directors make mistakes and misfires, but few people seem as determined to burn them at the stakes, though the internet seems to encourage more negative feedback than positivity these days.
If he had produced "TFA" he would have got slaughtered personally and attacked by the media for producing a film that amounted to nothing much more than his "greatest hits". By exculding him and his percieved influence on it, Disney and Lucasfilm made a politically astute move and instead everyone is hailing it as a welcome return to the SW universe. And thats got to hurt, because the reason that it works so well IS THAT IT SO successfully copies everything that was right with the first films. Though I do hope he finds some comfort from the fact JJ is getting as much hate from certain quarters as he ever got from the prequels, for not being original enough.
So just leave the guy alone.Stop knocking him. It comes across as nothing more than being ( to a large extent) simply jealous and spiteful. For all his faults hes had such a hugely positive effect for millions of people and for the medium he loves as much as they do, which is the cinema. For that alone he deserves a little of your respect. Just try this as a thought experiment.Its a little bit "Its a Wonderful Life" but that does not make it any the less true.

Imagine a world in which George Lucas died of the injuries he recieved in his car accident on 12th June 1962.
No "Star Wars". No industry changing perspective of sci fi genre films. No "Star Trek" films, for the same reason. No "Raiders" or ,at the very least ,not one we would have recognised. And thats just the tip of ice berg.TV doesn't change. No BSG. No new Star Trek series. Sci fi and fantasy as a media genre doesn't evolve quickly because nobody takes the risks. And no SW means theres nothing to inspire all those other directors. James Cameron remains a truck driver and nothing ever gets terminated.No "Alien" because no Studio would have risked backing that kind of movie. "Lord of the Rings" remains an unsuccessful cartoon, never to be remade by Peter Jackson because nobody understands what a franchise blockbuster could ever do . The list of causiological knock on effects is astonishing. And it continues.
No ILM , no early specailization in groundbraking movie effects by studios.Few other effects firms come into being because nobody makes those kind of big budget movies because of the cost in investing in them. No Lucasfilm , so nobody leaves to start up so many other effects companys. Many other films never get made because there simply are not the technical abilities developed to make their visual effects box office draws.No PiXAR, because George never has to sell it off to pay for a divorce to a woman he would never marry. Digital film progresses more slowly. 3D doesn't happen quickly because "Avatar" never gets made.
So from this one person and his vision, from all his successes (and "failures") and the many many people he gathered around him and also indirectly influenced, who then went their separate ways and did for themselves what they saw he did, an industry is completely revoutioniszed and changed beyond recognition. By that one film. And one man alone clinging doggedly to his belief he could make that kind of movie. That some people might like to watch.
So give the him a break.
The human world will never ever really notice if the majority of us had ever been born for all the difference we have on it. Just our families and friends, for better or worse, just ordinary everyday stories.

But George Lucas?

I rest my case.
 
Last edited:
Many artists continue to alter their "finished" work throughout their lives. Lucas isn't that unusual. Monet painted 250 versions of Water Lilies, etc.
 
I think there is some confusion in this thread.

Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD) is a completely different thing from having an obsessive compulsive personality or being a perfectionist or revisionist.

I suffered from OCD when I was a child but grew out of it in adolescence. At one time I was a "handwasher", but mostly I experienced anxiety for having walked a certain path or put something at a certain place - feeling that I had to redo it and redo it until it felt right. Small things in my daily life, affecting me directly there and then.
Since I had reached adulthood, it resurfaces sometimes when I experience stress but does normally not bother me in my daily life.

I find it very unlikely that Lucas making the Special Editions and revisions in DVD and BluRay editions to be the result of direct compulsions, interruptions in his daily routine. Instead, these were choices that he made.

Moving on:
One fan-theory about the Special Editions is that he would have made them because of a simple, petty grudge: he wanted to "undo" the editing work of his ex-wife Marcia, obliterating her contribution from history. It is well-known that he had taken his divorce from her badly, and that he had difficulty with releasing the cash for it - having to sell ILM's computer division to afford it (that which became Pixar).
Lucas had originally wanted to redo only the first movie: Star Wars (1977). That is also the movie that Marcia Lucas had received an Oscar for, but he hadn't.
 
Last edited:
If Lucas suffered from anything when tinkering with the Special Editions it was insecurity.

If you want an example of an obsessive director driving a film into the ground with his compulsions, look up Michael Cimino and Heaven's Gate.
 
Im still confused why he sold his company? he should have kept it. he worked hard for it so why sell, and especially to Disney of all companies!
 
Im still confused why he sold his company? he should have kept it. he worked hard for it so why sell, and especially to Disney of all companies!

Well, he is a HUGE fan of Disney, always has been. He was at Disneyland on opening day.

- - - Updated - - -

If Lucas suffered from anything when tinkering with the Special Editions it was insecurity.

If you want an example of an obsessive director driving a film into the ground with his compulsions, look up Michael Cimino and Heaven's Gate.

I don't know if it was insecurity as much as disappointment seeing what he perceived as flaws and missed opportunities to do to time and budget restrictions.
 
One fan-theory about the Special Editions is that he would have made them because of a simple, petty grudge: he wanted to "undo" the editing work of his ex-wife Marcia, obliterating her contribution from history. It is well-known that he had taken his divorce from her badly, and that he had difficulty with releasing the cash for it - having to sell ILM's computer division to afford it (that which became Pixar).
Lucas had originally wanted to redo only the first movie: Star Wars (1977). That is also the movie that Marcia Lucas had received an Oscar for, but he hadn't.

I have a hard time imagining that theory being true. GL's frustration with the original ANH was public knowledge back when Marcia was right by his side.

He made it clear that he was never happy with many of the SFX and the limits heavily shaped the film. We're talking about a film that never had enough time & money in the first place. It was absolutely SLAMMED together at the end using 3 units filming at once and still doing sound editing touch-ups after it was already in theaters.

I think GL's desire to overhaul ANH in particular was totally understandable.
 
I think the problems with the relentless changes to the OT and the less-than-stellar prequels is not really OCD related. It's part of it, sure, but not all of it.


Back when he was making Star Wars, he was still a relative unknown in Hollywood. He was surrounded by people whom he collaborated with to make the trilogy. Some of it was willing collaboration, others were compromises with people who had the leverage to stop the movie or screw with his career. However, when the time came for the special editions, he was a really big deal in Hollywood, and suffered the same fate as many other Hollywood types. He had fully bought into his own hype. Unlike the original trilogy, Lucas was not burdened by the need to have people okay his decisions or compromise with people to get something done. He was surrounded with a small army of yes-men who were unable or unwilling to challenge him on anything. His will was law. Granted, some of the special effects could have used the overhaul, but Lucas went WAY overboard with the special effects additions, possibly to make it "worth it" to get a new release in the theaters.

What he needed (and indeed what many celebrities need) is a person to follow him around and remind him not to buy into his own hype and to keep him grounded.
 
I have a hard time imagining that theory being true. GL's frustration with the original ANH was public knowledge back when Marcia was right by his side.

He made it clear that he was never happy with many of the SFX and the limits heavily shaped the film. We're talking about a film that never had enough time & money in the first place. It was absolutely SLAMMED together at the end using 3 units filming at once and still doing sound editing touch-ups after it was already in theaters.

I think GL's desire to overhaul ANH in particular was totally understandable.


I actually liked the changes for the special editions, except the Greedo shoot
 
Another way of looking at Georges changes of the OT could be,....at first when the first SE's were released he was testing the technology by adding in CG elements that he wanted,....Jabba & expnding Moss Eisley.....tweaking things that annoyed him,....Han shooting first.....improving spaceships,...the Falcon & X-Wings.....

That proved to him that the technology was there for the PT,....it also tested the water for how the fans reacted to these improvements to the OT,....mostly positive

The subsequent release of the PT lost George a lot of love & with reviewers distancing them from the OT,....I think this annoyed him, that the OT (which was a more collaborative project) was regarded as being superior to the PT (more HIS project)......the public now wanted the original versions of the OT released without the digital effects which he had filled the PT with

So he gave the public a sub-standard DVD release of the OT at the same time that he released another updated SE with further changes.....pushing a cleaned up version with more un-neccesary alterations,....it's almost like he's reminding us that he can do anything he wants with the OT, that they are his,...solely his,....the thought that people love them more than the PT which he didn't have to compromise decisions with collaborators.....he could cut them,...re-time them,....re-colour them,....re-do the soundmix,.....these films that won oscars for these things,.....he's cutting out the credit that his ex-wife had made

He decided not to revisit the OT era in any more projects......sticking around with the Clone Wars,....not wanting to go back to the success that made him,.....only when he needed another cash boost,...releasing the BD's....

More alterations on the OT,....

Then 3D

Then, he decided to do the ST & met with Harrison, Mark & Carrie....but it meant leaving his failing PT era

....sale to Disney

J
 
Last edited:
As somebody who has behaviours that nudge towards the begins of the autistic spectrum (not quite Aspergers but near) I'd say George Lucas possibly exhibits some of the same tendances. He seems to have some difficulty understanding peoples attitudes as being significantly different from himself but that's true for many people, just read some of the posts in this section, we all do differ and that's a strength overall for humanity. When you read the problems he had in the past with cast and crew in the production of the OT you release just how badly it does effect him. But then people have a history of being unkind towards him, so Its not surprising he deals poorly with negative relationships.
Producing a ANH made him very ill, which is why he stepped back from directing the others and instead choose people he could trust. And thats why his divorce was such a loss to all of us, Marcia "balanced" his personality perfectly by bringing support and a more humane perspective to his stories, scripts ,production and editting. If you look at "American Graffiti", "ANH and TESB" they are very different to everything that comes afterwards, which is on the whole is more simplistic, less grounded and immature. He always works better in a collaborative relationship, such as he had with Spielberg and Kershner, people whose friendship and perspective he trusted. Just look at the emotional depth that "TESB" has ,then compare it with "ROTJ"and then the prequels. Its immmensely different. In that single case the director got better performances from his actors by trusting them and allowed changes to the TESB script. So the characters developed more humanely.Lightning in a bottle.
If only Kersh had done the last one and Marcia had not left him. The film we would have got would have been significantly different. But George dislikes conflict because he doesn't really understand it nor responds well towards it, hes not an overtly aggressive person and thats why time after time, people who have disagreed with him have quietly been moved to the side and left , leaving only the company "yes" men which results in him being able to make the choices he makes without a counterbalancing argument. To the loss of all of us to an extent.
He really is a nice guy, quiet and generous to a fault. If you look at his charitable work and what he has contributed to the film industry as a person there is a strong argument that he has had the single most defining influence of anybody in the last four decades and continues to do so .His vision and foresight into production techniques have been incredibly innovative and the modern digital cinema had been hugely influenced by what he and his company have brought in to being. Without him all the effects heavy films we so enjoy would never have come to be so early or have been produced with in such tight timescales or so cost effectively.
Which is why it is rather annoying to listen to everybody picking on him for whatever he does. I really wonder what drives such attacks, on somebody who has had such a hugely positive effect in cinema. I struggle to understand that. Many directors make mistakes and misfires, but few people seem as determined to burn them at the stakes, though the internet seems to encourage more negative feedback than positivity these days.
If he had produced "TFA" he would have got slaughtered personally and attacked by the media for producing a film that amounted to nothing much more than his "greatest hits". By exculding him and his percieved influence on it, Disney and Lucasfilm made a politically astute move and instead everyone is hailing it as a welcome return to the SW universe. And thats got to hurt, because the reason that it works so well IS THAT IT SO successfully copies everything that was right with the first films. Though I do hope he finds some comfort from the fact JJ is getting as much hate from certain quarters as he ever got from the prequels, for not being original enough.
So just leave the guy alone.Stop knocking him. It comes across as nothing more than being ( to a large extent) simply jealous and spiteful. For all his faults hes had such a hugely positive effect for millions of people and for the medium he loves as much as they do, which is the cinema. For that alone he deserves a little of your respect. Just try this as a thought experiment.Its a little bit "Its a Wonderful Life" but that does not make it any the less true.

Imagine a world in which George Lucas died of the injuries he recieved in his car accident on 12th June 1962.
No "Star Wars". No industry changing perspective of sci fi genre films. No "Star Trek" films, for the same reason. No "Raiders" or ,at the very least ,not one we would have recognised. And thats just the tip of ice berg.TV doesn't change. No BSG. No new Star Trek series. Sci fi and fantasy as a media genre doesn't evolve quickly because nobody takes the risks. And no SW means theres nothing to inspire all those other directors. James Cameron remains a truck driver and nothing ever gets terminated.No "Alien" because no Studio would have risked backing that kind of movie. "Lord of the Rings" remains an unsuccessful cartoon, never to be remade by Peter Jackson because nobody understands what a franchise blockbuster could ever do . The list of causiological knock on effects is astonishing. And it continues.
No ILM , no early specailization in groundbraking movie effects by studios.Few other effects firms come into being because nobody makes those kind of big budget movies because of the cost in investing in them. No Lucasfilm , so nobody leaves to start up so many other effects companys. Many other films never get made because there simply are not the technical abilities developed to make their visual effects box office draws.No PiXAR, because George never has to sell it off to pay for a divorce to a woman he would never marry. Digital film progresses more slowly. 3D doesn't happen quickly because "Avatar" never gets made.
So from this one person and his vision, from all his successes (and "failures") and the many many people he gathered around him and also indirectly influenced, who then went their separate ways and did for themselves what they saw he did, an industry is completely revoutioniszed and changed beyond recognition. By that one film. And one man alone clinging doggedly to his belief he could make that kind of movie. That some people might like to watch.
So give the him a break.
The human world will never ever really notice if the majority of us had ever been born for all the difference we have on it. Just our families and friends, for better or worse, just ordinary everyday stories.

But George Lucas?

I rest my case.

you posted some very interesting points. i was aware that he got a depression during the make of the first sw. for many this could cause a lot of problems afterwards that last for years. the case of lucas and his films is particular because i don't recall anything similar at least in movies. it is ok to improve your work one time but he did it several times over a long period.

- - - Updated - - -

If Lucas suffered from anything when tinkering with the Special Editions it was insecurity.

insecurity is closely related with ocd.
 
He made it clear that he was never happy with many of the SFX and the limits heavily shaped the film. We're talking about a film that never had enough time & money in the first place. It was absolutely SLAMMED together at the end using 3 units filming at once and still doing sound editing touch-ups after it was already in theaters.

the ot version had that charme of being not perfect but with evidence of technical knowledge and devotion. spielberg once said a film should never be altered because it remains a testimony of that period with all it's flaws and imperfections. it was a movie made in the seventies with models, matt shots and hand made tricks that stood up extremely good. why changing this? could you imagine metropolis or ben-hur with added cgi effects? wouldn't this destroy the original look of the picture?
 
I never believed it was any mental condition for his "tinkering" beyond one thing: boredom. No one ever believed Star Wars was gonna be as huge as it was and for 40 years, he's been holding stewardship over it and has been intimately linked to it. Without it and what they eventually lead to for the benefit of Hollywood and movies, he wouldn't be the figurehead in cinema as he's built up to be. He had to take the good and bad with being so attached to the Star Wars name and that's something I don't think many people would want for 40 years. That's like being chained to a three ton brick of gold; sure, it makes money regardless but you're pretty much stuck. So, it makes sense to me, that just to keep it fresh and interesting to him, Lucas altered and changed some things just to keep him invested some way. Up until he sold it, at least. I feel at that point, he was just old and tired and wanted to be done with the series and film-making, in general. But seeing what TFA was, I'm sure that protective nature that was hammered into him from THX-1138 got the better of him. Nevermind he's a billionaire, there's a point when money's no longer an object of desire; his work is still his on a personal level.

On a personal note, I can tell you I go back to many of early works that I've kept and revise them in some way. Whether to preserve them, update them, or to keep it fresh to me; on some level, I can sympathize (which is something I don't think many people ever take into account). I mean, how many people here update their collections?
 
the ot version had that charme of being not perfect but with evidence of technical knowledge and devotion. spielberg once said a film should never be altered because it remains a testimony of that period with all it's flaws and imperfections. it was a movie made in the seventies with models, matt shots and hand made tricks that stood up extremely good. why changing this? could you imagine metropolis or ben-hur with added cgi effects? wouldn't this destroy the original look of the picture?


Depends.

A crappy CGI'd overhaul designed to replace the original permanently? That would suck.

A set of good-quality & seamless CGI improvements, with no artistic changes (only technical), as a secondary version in the package when you buy the original? I'm on board with that.


IMO there could still be validity to doing CGI improvements of old movies. But it would take a much better-chosen & subtle job of altering things than we have seen done so far.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top