I almost think moreso. I would almost equate it to an acclaimed author inventing the printing press.
Your art may be loved & long remembered, but allowing others to realize their vision is a much more significant contribution I'm my eyes.
Lets talk all things Star Wars
- Status
Your art may be loved & long remembered, but allowing others to realize their vision is a much more significant contribution I'm my eyes.
Joek3rr
Master Member
HeartBlade
Sr Member
True and I don’t think Darth Talon would be a bad character but the fact that people are getting outraged at RDJ “doing blackface” in Tropic Thunder (when was the whole point to make fun of the insane method actor in Hollywood as well as actors taking good roles due to name recognition), I doubt Twitter critics and social media can understand the detailed lore that not ever twi’lek is a slave girl.
I’m sorry but the fact that Anne Hathaway got criticized because of her evil witch hands is pretty ridiculous.
harrisonp
Sr Member
Yeah the internet is pretty good at making fringe voices sound like majority opinions.
just looked up the witch hand thing, and that’s the kind of faux problem that makes legitimate calls for diversity fall on deaf ears. These “controversies” tip the signal/noise ratio too far in the noise direction. Their hands look like chicken feet, easy to see how that’s a harmless interpretation of claws. The human condition is one of the most widely varied things we’ll ever experience, some things are absolutely going to accidentally overlap just on a statistical level, it’s the intent that matters and gets lost when we don’t look at things with nuance.
just looked up the witch hand thing, and that’s the kind of faux problem that makes legitimate calls for diversity fall on deaf ears. These “controversies” tip the signal/noise ratio too far in the noise direction. Their hands look like chicken feet, easy to see how that’s a harmless interpretation of claws. The human condition is one of the most widely varied things we’ll ever experience, some things are absolutely going to accidentally overlap just on a statistical level, it’s the intent that matters and gets lost when we don’t look at things with nuance.
Last edited:
HeartBlade
Sr Member
I stay off Twitter as a policy but the fact that the controversy made news (which is how I heard about it) and that Hathaway herself made a public apology did make double-take.
This is getting off the topic of Star Wars a little too much so hoping it would drop but it is getting harder for media to take risks with their entertainment due to the potential backlash that results.
One big challenge Lucas would have had to answer in his version of the ST would have been what the ideal government would have looked like (the one which Leia implements to bring peace to the galaxy). Democracy was shown to fail in PT and totalitarianism in OT. The ST has the difficult task of proposing an “ideal” form of government and no matter why Lucas proposes, I could see backlash coming his way.
harrisonp
Sr Member
I feel like he could have just steered away from much of the politics if the story heavily focused on the rise of new force users and Maul/Talon. There doesn’t really need to be an Empire/Rebels equivalent the way the ST did it.
of course they need to make it clear that this is the New Republic and things are mostly alright with a few holdouts etc. but the stability of that GOVT wouldn’t need to be in question.
of course they need to make it clear that this is the New Republic and things are mostly alright with a few holdouts etc. but the stability of that GOVT wouldn’t need to be in question.
I think the PC climate would also go after that, maybe not, but the thing with Twilek is that they supposedly don't share the same conservative views so that's why they dress more revealing. As for when she appears in the Timeline, well that's out the window. He owned the property so he could have changed where she popped up if he wanted. I wasn't too fond of that comic series anyway.
Regarding how Lucas was treated by critics remember that Lucas was very anti-Hollywood so that's, I think, a major reason he got the bashing he got. He even p*ssed off the unions by how he didn't put credits in the beginning of the movies! There are a LOT of really bad directors that are treated like rock stars because they do the "proper" movies and follow the "proper" Hollywood ideology, yet are awful.
HeartBlade
Sr Member
That makes sense. SAG is really strong and there is definitely an inner circle in Hollywood. Looking at JJ Abrams, he is a born “legacy” in a way (Father is a TV producer and Mother is an Executive Producer). Ron Howard’s father was a director and mother an actress. I’m sure there are more such legacies.
those connections are essential to get into the business. Joss Whedon started out as a script doctor which he likely got because he is the third generation in a line of tv writers. Doesn’t mean he isn’t talented or didnt work hard but those connections helped.
those connections are essential to get into the business. Joss Whedon started out as a script doctor which he likely got because he is the third generation in a line of tv writers. Doesn’t mean he isn’t talented or didnt work hard but those connections helped.
HeartBlade
Sr Member
wasn’t trying to imply any director is bad because of their connections. Joss Whedon is one of my personal favs . Just wanted to point out the barrier to entry is there.
I like Ron Howard and I like Joss Whedon. I don't think very highly of JJ Abrams and it has everything to do with his work and nothing to do with his connections.
Nepotism is a huge part of how anyone gets work out there and it doesn't concern me because I'm not in that business so that makes no difference to me. I'm not all that interested in the business side of Hollywood so much as I am the end result of the work that is produced.
All that aside I wonder if there are still problems with the technical aspects of film that Lucas is interested in improving or innovating? Or if he'd succeeded in all of his goals in that respect of his career?
Nepotism is a huge part of how anyone gets work out there and it doesn't concern me because I'm not in that business so that makes no difference to me. I'm not all that interested in the business side of Hollywood so much as I am the end result of the work that is produced.
All that aside I wonder if there are still problems with the technical aspects of film that Lucas is interested in improving or innovating? Or if he'd succeeded in all of his goals in that respect of his career?
I don't understand George's reservations about showing people being killed. It's an action-adventure film, not a cartoon. People are going to die and you can't cut away every time they do. Also this business about stormtroopers being bad shots because they were no longer clones and just recruits. Really, George? You don't have to rewrite history to cater to a 40 year old joke. Your heroes have plot armor like heroes usually do. It's okay.
George is an interesting fellow. Sometimes he sounds like a genius of film and sometimes he sounds like a mom that volunteered to direct a junior high school play. It's as if there's two Georges: HSF (Han shot first) George and GSF (Greedo shot first) George. That interview Joek3rr referenced was most definitely GSF George.
George is an interesting fellow. Sometimes he sounds like a genius of film and sometimes he sounds like a mom that volunteered to direct a junior high school play. It's as if there's two Georges: HSF (Han shot first) George and GSF (Greedo shot first) George. That interview Joek3rr referenced was most definitely GSF George.
ThreadSketch
Well-Known Member
It's even simpler than plot armor - both Leia and Tarkin with Vader blatantly explain that they were let go for the purpose of tracking. Those troopers were deliberately "bad shots" in order to allow the bunch to escape and reveal the Rebel base. In the first half of the film Obi-Wan states that the shots that killed the Jawas and destroyed their sandcrawler were "too accurate for Sand People; only Imperial stormtroopers are so precise."
Two obvious instances of plot armor are the droids magically not being hit in the intense crossfire when they scoot across the corridor during the opening firefight between the Tantive IV crewers and the stormtroopers, and Han not being hit when the troopers open fire right before he boards the Falcon to take off (though that one is visibly less of a stretch). It's unclear at what point the Death Star troopers would've received instruction to start aiming like drunkards, but for the majority of that whole chunk of the movie it's meant to be retroactively seen as purposeful once that info is dropped. I'll never understand why Lucas can seemingly forget something that basic. I know the "bad stormtrooper shots" have been joked and memed to death at this point but that doesn't render the clear reason in the film invalid.
EDIT: Also, it's just silly to claim that regular people can't aim straight and have to be genetically enhanced to do so consistently. Yes, I know Luke whined, "I can't see a thing in this helmet!" But he was shorter than regulation trooper height. The armor was a poor fit (and maybe he didn't know how to use the HUD properly in that bucket, if it had one). That doesn't mean every single trooper can't see crap through their helmets too. The Empire couldn't have been that sloppy with their equipment.
Good points. Otherwise they wouldn't have been able to take over the entire galaxy with troops that inadequate.
As much as I respect George I often find myself groaning when he talks about his "vision" for Star Wars because it literally changes with every interview. The only thing that seems to be consistent with his ideas are their inconsistency which robs the ideas of any credibility.
Rather than create revisionist history, why not just acknowledge things the way they were and make the distinction that he feels differently about it now. To me that seems more honest than telling people it was his "original vision" or that he "always intended for..."
I recently ordered a small print version of the Star Wars Archives 1977-1983 book for $35 but I only bought it for the beautiful photographs as reference material. I will likely roll my eyes at or flat out ignore most of the text because it's George's modern musings on those original films which will be more revisionist crap. I hope I'm wrong though.
As much as I respect George I often find myself groaning when he talks about his "vision" for Star Wars because it literally changes with every interview. The only thing that seems to be consistent with his ideas are their inconsistency which robs the ideas of any credibility.
Rather than create revisionist history, why not just acknowledge things the way they were and make the distinction that he feels differently about it now. To me that seems more honest than telling people it was his "original vision" or that he "always intended for..."
I recently ordered a small print version of the Star Wars Archives 1977-1983 book for $35 but I only bought it for the beautiful photographs as reference material. I will likely roll my eyes at or flat out ignore most of the text because it's George's modern musings on those original films which will be more revisionist crap. I hope I'm wrong though.
ghostryder
Legendary Member
George Lucas' Sequel Trilogy Would've Featured Leia as Chosen One
According to a new Star Wars book, George Lucas' original vision for the Star Wars Sequel Trilogy would've featured, among others, Leia as the Chosen One.
www.thathashtagshow.com
harrisonp
Sr Member
Are you trying to start the last 5 pages of this debate over again?!George Lucas' Sequel Trilogy Would've Featured Leia as Chosen One
According to a new Star Wars book, George Lucas' original vision for the Star Wars Sequel Trilogy would've featured, among others, Leia as the Chosen One.
What accident did Rey have to get those "enhancements"?
- Status
Similar threads
