TVTropes Now available in the app store!
Open

Follow TV Tropes

Following

George Lucas Semi-retires

Go To

MildGuy I squeeze gats. from the bed I made. Since: Jan, 2011
I squeeze gats.
#2: Jan 18th 2012 at 9:25:01 AM

I'll just quote Rob Bricken here:

...except it's not news. Goerge Lucas has said he's going to concentrate on making more "personal" films as far back as Return of the Jedi, and you can see where that's gotten us over the last 30 years. Hell, he's still planning on Indiana Jones 5, which immediately contradicts his "retiring from blockbusters" claim. And there's no reason he couldn't change his mind and make epsiodes 7, 8 and 9 later, just like he decided to finally make the prequels back in the '90s. I'm not saying that's likely, I'm just saying George Lucas has been saying he's going to concentrate on small, personal films forever, so I don't know why him saying it in 2012 is so significant.

Source: http://www.toplessrobot.com/2012/01/george_lucas_is_retiring_and_why_that_means_absolu.php#Comments

George Lucas is an attention whore. He probably hopes people will beg him en masse to return, and if they don't, he'll come back anyways.

Edit: To put it another way. Lucas is like the forum user who flounces and makes a big deal that they're leaving this cruel place forever and writes up a wall of text for their farewell thread and then expects to provoke a big response even though they pretend they don't care. Sadly, it's a ploy that'll probably work in Georgie's case.

edited 18th Jan '12 10:12:13 AM by MildGuy

Tyyrlym Jerk from Normandy SR-2 Since: Mar, 2011
Jerk
#3: Jan 18th 2012 at 9:26:05 AM

Come back? I'd be overjoyed if he was for real. I mean he's already fucked the Star Wars franchise beyond recognition. Indy could still be saved.

"Tyyr's a necessary evil. " Spirit
johnnyfog Actual Wrestling Legend from the Zocalo Since: Apr, 2010 Relationship Status: They can't hide forever. We've got satellites.
Actual Wrestling Legend
#4: Jan 18th 2012 at 1:14:17 PM

He's learned that he doesn't need to bother with writing scripts or directing on-set. He can just fund the movie and veto pretty much everything.

I'm a skeptical squirrel
Brandon Deadly Vu! from Between Thanksgiving and Christmas (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Don't hug me; I'm scared
Deadly Vu!
#5: Jan 18th 2012 at 1:39:38 PM

I assumed he retired in 2005.... hasn;t all he's done since then is just "produce"?

I know he co-wrote Crystal Skull, but I don;t think he's done much else.

edited 18th Jan '12 1:40:11 PM by Brandon

Like creepy stories? Check out my book!
Extreme64 Since: Dec, 1969
#6: Jan 18th 2012 at 8:28:24 PM

I can understand SOME of the hatred people have for George Lucas. Attack of the Clones and parts of Phantom Menace were utterly painful to watch dialogue-wise. However, Revenge of the Sith was freakin' AWESOME IMO, and my personal favorite Star Wars movie. People who complain about the bad dialogue and bad acting of the prequel trilogy seem blissfully unaware the originals had the same problems. Bad acting and dialogue is part of the Star Wars package. I can understand if you don't like CGI why you'd hate the prequels, but I love CGI and all the possibilities it brings, so that's A-OK with me. And I don't care what anyone says: Kingdom of the Crystal Skull was absolutely great, and any problems people have with it can be blamed on the Nostalgia Filter.

People forget that before the prequels came out George Lucas was a highly respected figure in film history, and he still somewhat is, as he was partially responsible for inventing the modern summer blockbuster. For this, I salute him.

TamH70 Since: Nov, 2011 Relationship Status: Faithful to 2D
#7: Jan 18th 2012 at 8:41:45 PM

The original trilogy? Oh, lets see. They were good, but Lucas had far LESS to do with them than most folks think. Other journeyman directors made him look far better than he actually was.

The prequels? He didn't have a Harrison Ford figure to tell him, "George, you can type this shit, but you sure as hell can't say it."

johnnyfog Actual Wrestling Legend from the Zocalo Since: Apr, 2010 Relationship Status: They can't hide forever. We've got satellites.
Actual Wrestling Legend
#8: Jan 18th 2012 at 9:27:45 PM

[up][up] I weep at your delusions. "It was always shit, lol"

I'm a skeptical squirrel
Extreme64 Since: Dec, 1969
#9: Jan 18th 2012 at 9:46:04 PM

I'm sorry, but exactly what part of my post was delusional? I expressed my opinion on why George Lucas, I believe, does not deserve the hate he always receives nowadays. And come on, have you SEEN the original Star Wars movies recently, WITHOUT the Nostalgia Goggles? They have their moments of greatness, too, but they were horribly acted, and had a lot of bad dialogue. Luke was just WHINY in the original movie, and he didn't get much better as they went on. The lines are insanely cheesy. The acting is stilted and wooden. But that's not my point. My point is, people pick on the newer ones for problems the older ones had as well. IMO, Revenge of the Sith had the LEAST amount of problems of all the Star Wars movies, although Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi are close seconds.

BorneAgain (4 Score & 7 Years Ago)
#10: Jan 18th 2012 at 10:04:02 PM

I often wonder what Lucas' reputation would have been if he had permanently retired around 94 and allowed others to work on the prequels/left Star Wars alone. Gene Roddenberry was someone who's actual writing was a very flawed and his ideal vision of Star Trek seemed to differ a lot from the audiences (sound familiar?). Indeed his personal involvement in Star Trek post-1969 (TMP, 1st season of TNG) led to some dubious output, yet thanks to getting kicked upstairs and his ill health preventing further work he gets far less vitriol in popular culture than Lucas.

edited 18th Jan '12 10:05:19 PM by BorneAgain

johnnyfog Actual Wrestling Legend from the Zocalo Since: Apr, 2010 Relationship Status: They can't hide forever. We've got satellites.
Actual Wrestling Legend
#11: Jan 18th 2012 at 10:41:57 PM

[up][up] That infers that ROTS is the best-acted of all six films. I don't think anyone has ever made that claim before, even its devotees.

I'm a skeptical squirrel
harkko Since: Apr, 2010
#12: Jan 19th 2012 at 3:27:25 AM

I think the original trilogy gets less flak, because it's less pretentious. They all have very clear and simple structure, which leaves room for more character driven moments and none of them have heavy handed and clumsy political allegory.

Parable Since: Aug, 2009
#13: Jan 19th 2012 at 9:47:16 AM

The prequels? He didn't have a Harrison Ford figure to tell him, "George, you can type this shit, but you sure as hell can't say it."

If I recall the story correctly, this was actually Harrison Ford who said this during the filming of The Empire Strikes Back.

jewelleddragon Also known as Katz from Pasadena, CA Since: Apr, 2009
Also known as Katz
#14: Jan 19th 2012 at 11:27:19 AM

Revenge of the Sith was freakin' AWESOME IMO, and my personal favorite Star Wars movie.

I weep for the youth.

Extreme64 Since: Dec, 1969
#15: Jan 19th 2012 at 12:47:57 PM

See, this is why the belief of "objective quality" is hurtful to moviegoers. When it comes to film, there's no such thing as objective quality, merely subjective opinion. No one is right about what movie is good or not, because there's no such thing as completely, factually "good" in the film industry. A film is not a scientific equation: its value cannot be proven or disproven. Anyone who says otherwise is saying opinions don't matter and if you like a movie that they don't, you're WRONG. And that's just disrespectful.

I'm sorry you cannot see that opinions exist. And my opinion still stands: Revenge of the Sith is my favorite Star Wars movie. Why? Because it's the most epic. It has the most stakes. It has the biggest climax, the best lightsaber fights, the best space battles. It has the most emotional moments of the whole saga. It brings everything together. It has the best music. The best effects. The best designs. And among the most satisfying-yet-depresing endings I've ever seen. Sure, the acting isn't that great, but do you honestly expect great or even good acting in a Star Wars movie?

CrimsonZephyr Would that it were so simple. from Massachusetts Since: Aug, 2010 Relationship Status: It's complicated
Would that it were so simple.
#16: Jan 19th 2012 at 7:27:39 PM

[up]Son, I've had bigger climaxes than Revenge Of The Sith and I'm still a virgin. The lightsaber fight dragged on for too long and was essentially the choreography team squeezing as much shit in the frame as possible, like a retarded five year old shining a flash light in your face. It could have been a quarter the length and had much more impact, but no, we needed fifteen minutes of that, getting more and more implausible and tacky as it goes forward. The most epic? You mean, an entire movie about the mentally-deficient expecting father running around the big city committing mass murder, while his submissive wife pines for him at home? That's your idea of epic?

Also, claiming a film with that much CGI has the best effects is a waste of time. As long as George Lucas pours enough cash into getting a tech upgrade, he's going to get better effects. Also, the ending is basically the end point of an Idiot Plot - rarely has there been a cast of characters with this much concentrated stupidity and outright genre-blindness. It wasn't very satisfying.

edited 19th Jan '12 7:33:06 PM by CrimsonZephyr

"For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die."
Brandon Deadly Vu! from Between Thanksgiving and Christmas (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Don't hug me; I'm scared
Deadly Vu!
#17: Jan 19th 2012 at 8:30:03 PM

I always thought A new Hope was the weakest of the original trilogy.

Coincidence it's the only one of the original trilogy that was directed by George Lucas?

The Shakespearean-esque dialogue in the prequels IMO could be chalked up to, different type of language from an older generation (since it takes place, what 20 years before the original trilogy?). Nontheless, some parts are awkward to listen to. Most of Anakin's rants sound like they should be coming from a soap opera. Also, this exchange from Rot S, still annoys me.

Obi-Wan: "Anakin! Chancelor Palpatine is evil!" Anakin: "From my point of view, the Jedi are evil!"

There's so many other ways Anakin could have responded to that. Basically he just said the Jedi being evil was an OPINION, and not a fact (as far as his twisted mind is concerned). I always thought Anakin should have just said, "No! The Jedi are evil!" See, Lucas really does need guidance.

Oddly enough, I don't remember finding Darth vader's "NOOO Ooooo OOO Ooooo" amusing when I saw it in theaters. But when I saw it on TV.... *giggle* It would be even funnier if footage of James Earl Jones delivering that line exists. tongue

edited 19th Jan '12 8:31:24 PM by Brandon

Like creepy stories? Check out my book!
Extreme64 Since: Dec, 1969
#18: Jan 19th 2012 at 9:26:29 PM

[up][up]Again, as I said, opinions exist. For me, the climactic fight between the two of them was amazing. It never dragged, it never let up, it was pure, raw power. And I actually like CGI and its infinite possibilities, so for me, too much isn't a problem, especially when it's a completely alien world like Star Wars. And sure, the way you describe it doesn't sound epic. But hey, listen to this: "You think a guy in tights fighting a dude with his grandmother's clown make-up and mostly LOSING for two and a half hours, while pining some chick he never had a shot with, sounds epic?" Yet many consider The Dark Knight to be epic. It's how it does it, not what it does. As for the ending? I completely disagree with you. Revenge of the Sith is one of only three movies in my life that have made me cry. And I didn't cry at Toy Story 3.

Again, though, just my opinion. I'm not right and you're wrong. But neither are you right and I'm wrong. That's what makes us all unique.

edited 19th Jan '12 9:28:39 PM by Extreme64

Brandon Deadly Vu! from Between Thanksgiving and Christmas (4 Score & 7 Years Ago) Relationship Status: Don't hug me; I'm scared
Deadly Vu!
#19: Jan 19th 2012 at 11:11:20 PM

I didn't meant to sound like I was ranking on Revenge of the Sith as a whole, I do like the movie a lot, and agree it is the best of the prequel trilogy.

I never saw much wrong with The Phantom Menace. Jar Jar Binks doesn't even bother me as much as other fans (although admittdly he is annoying throughout the Tattooine sequences, as he keeps disobeying Qui-Gon).

Don't get me started on Attack of the Clones. So boring and uneventful (save for the last 20 minutes). I can't think of too many things I really liked about this movie. Except Natalie's midriff.

Like creepy stories? Check out my book!
jewelleddragon Also known as Katz from Pasadena, CA Since: Apr, 2009
Also known as Katz
#20: Jan 19th 2012 at 11:59:55 PM

When it comes to film, there's no such thing as objective quality, merely subjective opinion.

If you really believe this, you're arguing the wrong way, because you're still evaluating the strong and weak points of the different films as you see them, which implies that a film could be stronger or weaker overall. For instance, you say:

People who complain about the bad dialogue and bad acting of the prequel trilogy seem blissfully unaware the originals had the same problems.

If you think there's no such thing as objective quality, then you'd also think there's no such thing as objectively good or bad acting, and you'd argue along the lines of "People complain about the bad acting, but you can't scientifically prove that poor timing, stilted delivery, and wooden expressions are bad, therefore Hayden Christensen is just as good an actor as Orson Welles."

But you don't say this; you just say that the originals were equally bad—implicitly acknowledging the possibility of a film that contained good acting and was therefore better.

TL;DR: Your argument does not support your point.

harkko Since: Apr, 2010
#21: Jan 20th 2012 at 12:53:28 AM

I personally love many martial arts films where one fight scene can last ten minutes, but I still think Obi-wan vs. Anakin duel in Revenge of the Sith is the worst in all six films simply, because it's so long, repetitive and boring. There's some structure and dramatic arc and characterization in Wong Fei-hung vs. Iron Robe Yim in Once Upon A Time In China, not to mention good choreography.

edited 20th Jan '12 12:53:46 AM by harkko

Extreme64 Since: Dec, 1969
#22: Jan 20th 2012 at 5:32:03 AM

[up][up]Apparently you missed all the times I said "IMO." I acknowledge that not everyone views the movie, or any movie, the same way I do. I'm merely arguing why I personally thought it was good. You guys can't seem to understand why I thought it was good, because you believe there's objective quality. And there isn't, when it comes to movies anyway.

Acting is a whole different thing. Unlike movies, acting is a procedure that has a guaranteed way to work or not to work. You either convince people or you don't. That's not how movies as a whole work. There's no guaranteed way to satisfy people by a movie as a whole.

Knowing there's no such thing as objective quality in entertainment has been my philosophy since I can remember. If you're trying to convince me I think otherwise, it's not going to work.

edited 20th Jan '12 5:35:08 AM by Extreme64

jewelleddragon Also known as Katz from Pasadena, CA Since: Apr, 2009
Also known as Katz
#23: Jan 20th 2012 at 11:09:19 AM

The point is not how many times you did or didn't say IMO, the point is that nothing you said actually supports the point that films aren't objectively good or bad. Bullheaded refusal to consider arguments isn't a very good defense, either.

If acting can be good or bad, then if two movies were identical except that one had good acting and the other had bad acting, wouldn't that make the former objectively better than the latter? And if acting can be evaluated as working or not working, can't screenwriting, special effects, editing, etc, be evaluated as well, based on similar criteria?

Extreme64 Since: Dec, 1969
#24: Jan 20th 2012 at 11:58:19 AM

Special effects and editing GENERALLY can be divided between good and bad as well, yes. There are plenty of exceptions, though.

Screenwriting? Hell no. What's a good and bad screenplay solely depends on the viewer. A movie called poorly-written by some can be considered a screenwriting masterpiece by others. This is called "opinion."

The problem isn't my arguments. Again, as I said, it's all my opinion. I never said that for someone else the movies are just as good as they are for me. I said that it's all my opinion, numerous times. The problem is you cannot seem to comprehend that a movie's quality is a matter of opinion, which is why when I say I liked this movie, you immediately conclude that I am WRONG.

And if you see the entertainment industry, something allowing a wide variety of opinions, as something divided by what's right and wrong, then I'm done. No point arguing. I really liked Revenge of the Sith, and you didn't. I'm leaving it at that.

edited 20th Jan '12 12:01:49 PM by Extreme64

jewelleddragon Also known as Katz from Pasadena, CA Since: Apr, 2009
Also known as Katz
#25: Jan 20th 2012 at 12:36:49 PM

The problem is you cannot seem to comprehend that a movie's quality is a matter of opinion, which is why when I say I liked this movie, you immediately conclude that I am WRONG.

"A movie's quality is a matter of opinion" is in itself an opinion. You're trying to force everyone else to accept it as a fact, but stating something loudly and repeatedly is not an argument. That's the point I'm contesting—not whether it's OK for you to like Revenge of the Sith (or even whether Revenge of the Sith is good or bad).


Total posts: 69
Top