PT Casual dissing of the PT in mainstream coverage of Ep VII

I don't want to repeat quote, I have quoted what he has had to say on the issues in a couple of other threads and, his argument is actually that who owns the films (legally) don't have the right to alter them....

 

I put a list of 5 reasons on this thread why it is quite sensible why some PT are annoyed at the constant anti-PT bias in the media. After reading over the last few pages, I realized I need to add a sixth: PT fans are annoyed that the hatred directed towards the PT oftentimes is just veiled hatred directed at all things GL-related because GL simply will not relent and allow the OOT to be released in the most recent digital format.

Not liking the PT for its own sake is one thing, but allowing one's hatred of a director to grow so deep that it blocks one's ability to look objectively at any film that director subsequently makes and then attacking anyone who might like that director's subsequent film as morons is pretty warped. PT-fans shouldn't have to be constantly subjected to constant bitching about the PT when what those bitchers really have a huge issue with is the director of those films and not the PT films themselves. Now I'm sure some can separate these things, like fans of Polanski films do with his films, and these film-goers just have dislike for the PT on its own merits. However, it's abundantly evident to me that some people on this very thread can't possibly make this distinction between filmmaker and his films. For instance, it's pretty safe to assume that a person who equates a filmmaker to a Nazi would be so completely prejudiced against that director's films that he couldn't possibly like whatever appears on screen.

I'd also like to point out something else. Some on this thread have wondered -- why do you let PT-bashing bug you so much? Again, I agree that anything beyond annoyance -- like getting upset or truly angry -- doesn't make much sense and is probably not very healthy for a person, but come on! This same question needs to be directed at the SE-haters as well. It's been 18 years since the release of the SE, and the changes in the SE amount to probably 5 minutes of screen time out of 7 hours of film-watching. Shouldn't some people here on this thread gain a little perspective? Is it really the PT-fans who are over-sensitive?

 

Well than that is news to me. Not that you're wrong, but I thought I heard it differently. But whatever the point is he don't own it no more. So what he did in the past is done. But he changed it and did so on his own. He even had Kirshner come in on the SE changes of the ESB. I don't know if Lucas actually had to have his permission or not, but Kirshner was fine with the changes. I would assume he would have gotten Marquand in on it if he was still around.

 

Maybe I find myself going a tad overboard here with things. I am aiming to stay on the topic of this thread from here on out. The media is what the problem is here with the dissing of the PT. That in itself is an issue. Because the media doesn't need to put their dislike of something unrelated into the mix. The news is about TFA, and should stay as such from a media standpoint. Media is supposed to report with no bias if I assume correctly?

 

But make no mistake about it, I still love SW to death. And contrary to "popular" belief, the PT as well as the SE's are as much SW as the OOT or OT is. So if someone drags the PT thru the mud, the SW name is being dragged along with it. And the SW name applies to all those films, regardless of what their status is.

 

Andy Wylde: don't want to see you get banned dude, so you might wantto ease up on the double/triple posting

 

Correct. He did personally invite Kersh to oversee the changes; Kersh didn't think they were necessary but didn't have a problem with them. (Which is pretty much my attitude toward the changes.) Lucas then said, "I have a surprise for you," and showed Kersh the opened-up interiors for Cloud City, which Kersh had wanted for the original release, but Lucas rejected as a cost-cutting measure, being as the budget had spiraled way out of control by then. Speaking of which, according to Kersh himself, Lucas told him not to worry about the budget: "Let me worry about that. Just keep doing what you're doing."

It is irritating that the media can't seem to make a comment about SW without dragging in a PT dis. But it does happen, once in a while. I listen to a classical station at work, and shortly before Christmas, the station played "Across the Stars" (I think someone there is a John Williams fan because they play his movie music quite a bit). The announcer simply said, "We're going to play some 'Star Wars' music. This is from Episode II." No snide remarks or snark anywhere. That made me smile.

Tolkien severely revamped "The Hobbit" to fit in better with "Lord of the Rings." Tennyson tinkered with "The Lady of Shalott" for the rest of his life. Likewise for T.S. Elliot and "The Waste Land." Stephen King altered his earlier "Dark Tower" books to fit in better with the later ones. (In fact, I wish he'd altered them more.) Lucas is not the first artist to alter his work after releasing it and I doubt he'll be the last. I recall reading a quote, although I can't recall who said it: "Art is never finished. It is merely abandoned."

 

maychild

 

If you are referring to me, I have given honest (and informed) critiques of why the prequels fail on many levels. In the instances I can praise them for doing something right, I have done so occasionally as well.

You take offense to that statement why? Because the truth hurts. Throughout human history, some people have attempted to destroy artistic works to further their own agendas. That political organization was one such group of people. There have been many other groups as well. Does George Lucas fall into that category? What side of history does he want to be on?

When it comes to owning and making profit off the films, that's one thing. But when it comes to preserving and making public the films, that's another. From a commercial standpoint, they can be owned. From an artistic and cultural standpoint, those films cannot be owned by a single individual or company. They belong to everyone artistically. They should not be destroyed to further someone's private agenda. The artistic performance of Sebastian Shaw, or Jason Wingreen, or some matte painter, should not be erased from history, anymore than someone else's artwork should have been destroyed or burned in a fire by some SS officers.

 

I think it's overused for people to take the comparison out of context. Nobody compared him to someone who murdered people. He was compared to people who destroyed artwork to further their own agenda.

 

Lucas modifying his work and what the Nazi's or other totalitarian regime's do isn't even comparable. The bulk of what he did to episode IV was fixing dated effects shots.

 

Ah, but you're assuming GL altering his own works is destroying those works. And to you, perhaps it is, but not to all.

My biggest objection, here in this thread, is that the thread was addressing the MEDIA always dragging in PT "hate" (those horrible prequels) - which most certainly happens - then a bunch of posters (not all of course) come in here and essentially say "get a thicker skin," and that PT criticism is open expression of opinion and shouldn't be censored (and who even says that?).

Literally, one cannot discuss the prequels (not praise them to high heaven as the "bestest evuh" but discuss) without it turning into "but criticism is fair; expressing my opinion is fair." Not only that, but us PT fans are expected - no matter the thread subject - to include PT criticism to be taken seriously. (Yet, dare to express anything "against" the OT and we're being petty and negative and can't we leave it alone and can't we all get along by the PT fans stifling their opinions to keep the peace and not rile up the OT fans.)

Ahem.

Anyway, almost always there is no need for the media to gratuitously drag in how "awful" the prequels were when discussing the OT, or the new films.

The OT fans would be all over us PT fans if EVERY thread on the OT was full of other posters arguing the OT had cardboard characters, or no characterization, or was full of teddy bears (which I am not arguing, btw) and seriously, the films really aren't all that good it's just that when released it was all new and exciting (again, not making that point).

Any gratuitous dragging in of something not really relevant to the discussion irritates me, be it Star Wars movies, politics, or really anything.

 

Because of the extreme, reductive, biased, hate-filled nature of your posts, I feel that it is pointless to attempt to participate in a rational discourse with you. I'm sorry if you feel I am mistaken in my opinion of you, but I am only giving my honest critique of why I feel you fail to express yourself in a rational way on many levels, and I further apologize if you think I am mistaken to have the impression that, for some reason, you have over-whelming bias against the Prequel Trilogy, Mr. Prequel_Rubbish. I can't quite pin down what has given me that impression, Mr. Prequel_Rubbish, but that just seems to be the impression I have.

 

I'm not even sure there is any great amount dissing of the PT in the media. The only thing I ever hear is that they are going to be respectful to the look and feel of the OT to create a visual continuity and go against the whole cinema trend of using a lot of CGI. Using models for ships, etc. Also that JJ wanted to use 35mm film instead of digital cameras. Again he wants to create a close connection to the OT. That's why we are getting Mark Hamill, Harrison Ford and Carrie Fisher back. To play on the nostalgia and fond memories that Star Wars brings to the collective consciousness.

Now if you were to say that the PT is being ignored for the OT, I would agree. Who cares about 3 mediocre films when you have the return of Luke, Han, Leia, Chewbacca, R2-D2, C-3PO and the new characters (Finn, Rey, Poe, Kylo etc) in a series of films that don't have the ending predetermined?

 

The OT cast is returning because these new films are a continuation of a trilogy that previously had them in it. Not to please anyone in particular.

 

Oh but it does please people.

 

Who would care? Easy answer. The tons of fans who think the PT films are much better than merely mediocre.

However, it's clear that ST would connect more with the OT than the PT. The ST is set 55 years after the last PT film and virtually every PT character has died by the end of ROTJ.

 

Really? You think it didn't ever cross anyone's mind how ****ing awesome it would be for fans to see Luke, Han and Leia again?

 

That may be true. But as I stated that these characters are not being brought in for nostalgia reasons.

 

Um yeah, I am happy to see them coming back in SW once again. But I am happy to see them be characters that are continuing a story and not something for me to say, hey! look Luke and co are back! There here just to make me love the OT again!

 

Do you remember when . . . a long time ago on this thread . . . there were talks of group hugs and making peace, maybe even locking the thread while it was on a positive note? That was before the dark times.

War broke out. Sudden, intense, unrelenting. An end in sight? No way to know for sure, but with the strong feelings behind it, at the very least the embers will still be burning, ready to ignite at the slightest provocation.

And the 'neutral-ish' Cushing's Admirer, where is she during this pages long skirmish? Either watching and reading from a safe distance, waiting for the appropriate time to drop some advice . . . or she's in her underground bunker, watching The Curse of Frankenstein on her iPod till this thing blows over.

Sent from my RM-917_nam_usa_100 using Tapatalk

 

LMAO.... Better watch out, because you know the morality police are getting ready to tell you that you can't judge someone by the name they choose to call themselves in a forum!

 

After seeing newly released pictures of the Big 3 a lot of people were excited but there are still negative nancy's out there.