Did George do it for the money?

to push digital effects,

That is a very important and POSITIVE reason which I applaud. All of my own movies were done for the reason of proving to myself that I could do it and seeing how far I could go. Without Lucas, movies would still be working on technology from 1980, and the envelope isnt going to be pushed by someone just sitting around waiting for someone else to do it.

 

Oh yeah, Kurtz, the gutsy tough-talking "no man" who, when he was actually SW's producer, said it was his duty to get the director what he wanted, and who was described thusly by an observer: "When Lucas talks, Kurtz listens." The guy who allegedly kept all the childish, lowbrow stuff out of ANH and ESB, but then for some reason allowed a completely extraneous scene in "The Dark Crystal" devoted to the Skeksis burping, picking their teeth, and generally engaging in more lowbrow humor than is in all the SW movies combined.

I keep hearing about how Kurtz babysat Lucas, monitored him, made him care about storytelling, but no proof other than Kurtz's own words.

Indeed. There are many other ways he could've made money, if money was all he was interested in.

 

Lazy? He worked extremely hard on it. So did everyone involved with the movie. How did TPM demonstrate "laziness"?
[/quote]

He did work extremely hard on it? And you were on the set with him every day? I don't know if he was lazy or not, we'll never know, but lets not all pretend here that we know the actions of George Lucas each day, it sort of ridiculous.

 

Both sides can be equally ridiculous.

 

Did GL do it for the money? I doubt it, did he need the money? I don't know, I hope thats not the reason. I'll ask him next time he calls

 

Money hungry? Nah....

[image=http://people.freenet.de/djkris/Sithpaper3.jpg]

[image=http://people.freenet.de/djkris/Sithpaper2.jpg]

[image=http://im.edirectory.co.uk/products/2161/i/starwarsroomshot.jpg]

[image=http://images-eu.amazon.com/images/P/B0009A4PQG.02.LZZZZZZZ.jpg]

[image=http://i1.ebayimg.com/03/i/05/59/2a/b5_1_b.JPG]

[image=http://images.tfaw.com/coverst/400/s/sw_s2colplate_stormt.jpg]

[image=http://www.hollywoodshoppes.com/Merchant2/graphics/00000001/330.jpg]


Its all about the VISION!!!

 

He owns companies, companies do things to make money. That doesn't mean GL is the driving factor in all that marketing merchandise.

 

Showing product examples doesn't mean ****, you could do that with any of the SW movies including ESB was merchandised like mad.

 

Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes.


The difference is that in the OT, Lucas was hungry, in more ways than one which is what made them great. In the PT, he had lost his hunger and, to me, spat out the scripts. And with box set after box set, come on, it IS for the money.

In his defense though, so what. It is his baby, good for him. I'd take his place in a heartbeat, though at the expense of new creativity.

 

I don't think he did the PT for the money. As already mentioned he was already loaded with cash.

I don't think however already being loaded helped the PT either. Probably would of gotten a better PT if he was doing it for the money.

 

Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes.


The difference is that in the OT, Lucas was hungry

GL did take a big risk when he made ANH, but he was already a millionare thanks to A.G. It wasn't like he was having to eat cat food or anything in order to survive.

 

GL did take a big risk when he made ANH, but he was already a millionare thanks to A.G. It wasn't like he was having to eat cat food or anything in order to survive.[/quote]

Yes, but when he made ESB, he financed it all himself at 25 million, which was such a big gamble, most thought it was stupid at the time. But the success of that movie made his empire (no pun intended). That movie had to be great, Lucas said to Kershner when he hired him, this has to be better than the original cause if it isn't there are no more after this. Hence that is why ESB is the favorite by so many fans today.

Did he do it for money, yes, but you know what, what is wrong with that? But I do think after ESB he knew the fans would sop up anything with Star Wars, whether it was a classic or not? Whether you agree the next four SW movies are classics, that is up to you, I don't think they are, cause I think Lucas had us all after ESB, and you know what, he was right.

 

Yes, but when he made ESB, he financed it all himself at 25 million

Because he wanted to. He could have gotten studio funding if he wanted it.

 

If you were Lucas you would do the same. Almost everyone has a self preservation complex, a drive to make more, to do more to gain more power and that includes making more money.

It's also about being passionate about one's work, stretching it to the limits and addressing the needs of consumers however wacky or silly they may seem to you. Hell I would love to have a pair of Darth Vader boxers!


I say good for you George. I will never attain a scratch of the wealth or fame he has but I won't chastize him for it.

I say hurray for Darth Vader boxers, hurray for all the hype and the merchandize that goes with it. I won't buy any of it but I don't mind that it's there.


It's capitalism baby, don't hate the player, hate the game.

 

Of course he made the movies for money - who in their right mind would invest millions of their own dollars and years out of their own lives to show movies for free? But he also made the movies because he genuinely likes to.

All you have to do is listen to everyone who worked with George talk about him. It's obvious the guy loves his job and is a delight to work with. And I'm happy he's a success because he worked his ass off to become a multimillionaire and one of the most influential people in all of Hollywood.

 

Well said.

Bear in mind that Lucas struggled through the first 30-odd years of his life; he barely made enough money to get by. He was offered a nice sum for directing a film he didn't care for; in spite of the temptation, he said no. When it came to Star Wars, he declined a director's salary in favour of "worthless" merchandising rights and a hefty cut of what were predicted to be pitiful grosses. When filming Star Wars, he nearly collapsed. After Star Wars swept the box office, he subsequently plugged his own money into making The Empire Strikes Back and in building the companies he now owns. He was really only sitting comfortably after 1980. In the media-driven materialistic society we live in today, that's worth thinking about.

 

There were lots of tie-ins with all the movies, including ESB. bedsheets, toothbrushes, on and on.

 

The difference is that in the OT, Lucas was hungry, in more ways than one which is what made them great. In the PT, he had lost his hunger and, to me, spat out the scripts. And with box set after box set, come on, it IS for the money.

In his defense though, so what. It is his baby, good for him. I'd take his place in a heartbeat, though at the expense of new creativity.




By that argument, then why didn't he makes SW movies every 3 years after ROTJ? I mean he didn't even have to release the prequels, he could have just sat and re-released the OT many times and made plenty of dough off of that. He was already rich.

 

By that argument, then why didn't he makes SW movies every 3 years after ROTJ? I mean he didn't even have to release the prequels, he could have just sat and re-released the OT many times and made plenty of dough off of that. He was already rich.[/quote]

Because he got divorced when Jedi came out, and had to shell out alot of his empire to his wife, whatever half his worth was.

He said in an interview last year on the Charlie Rose Show, that even in the early nineties, Lucasfilm was still breaking even every year, trying to recoup from his costly divorce. He had an opportunity to make the prequels, which were pretty much guaranteed a financial success, but not 100%, but he said he had an idea there was a market for three more Star Wars films. He then said if he made the prequels, and they were successful, he would have such a financial cushion he could do whatever he wanted for the rest of his career. Remember his whole goal after American Graffiti and Star Wars was to become financially independent of any movie studio, so he could do the movie he wanted to.

I was very suprised how candid he was in the interview about really not being as rich as many people think he was before the prequels. Sure he wasn't eating out of soup cans, but the prequels have made his very very rich. I personally think the prequels weren't that great, but financially, you cannot argue with their success, and now I do believe that Lucas can do whatever he wants. Did he do it for money, sure he did, did it cloud his creativity to make the film to a more wider audience for maxium profit, that could be true too, but do I blame him when he is estimated to be worth over a billion dollars now, not one bit.

 

Fair comments.

One thing, however:

If this was actually true, why did Lucas risk alienating the fanbase by having Anakin as a kid in Episode I (something everyone told him was tenuous), conceiving of an epic romance where Anakin spilled his heart out in Episode II, not making Anakin particularly likeable and shifting the political backdrop of all three movies into the foreground? He took risks with these films. I don't think he really compromised his vision for the sake of earning an extra few hundred million or so.

 

If this was actually true, why did Lucas risk alienating the fanbase by having Anakin as a kid in Episode I (something everyone told him was tenuous), conceiving of an epic romance where Anakin spilled his heart out in Episode II, not making Anakin particularly likeable and shifting the political backdrop of all three movies into the foreground? He took risks with these films. I don't think he really compromised his vision for the sake of earning an extra few hundred million or so. [/quote]


Because I don't think Lucas thought, and I would have probably agreed with him at the time, that not appealing to younger kids would bring in the biggest box office numbers. As much as I and other people disliked the prequels, we were still curious about them, being fans from the OT, and I did see all of them in the threaters when they came out. The older generations was going to see the movies no matter what.

So even though he may have alienated his original fanbase, he knew and deep down and I knew that we were all going to see the movie once. So he figured let me get a whole new base of fans on top of the old ones, and that would equal big numbers.

Where I think Lucas miscalculated is he could have made these movies, especially TPM & AOTC less childish, and still made money. The Lord of the Rings, a PG-13 movie, which came out from 2001-03, made just as much as the PT, but didn't have the kiddy audience. ROTS finally proved that a Star Wars PG-13 movie can make big box office numbers, hence it making more than a PG AOTC.

I am not saying that Lucas was creating TPM, constantly thinking this has to be kiddy, I have to bring in a huge amount of young kids to make big box office numbers. I just think in the back of his mind, he didn't want to go too dark, cause you may not have the widest audience.

 

The Phantom Menace may have been slightly more "kid friendly" than Lucas originally intended - but I don't see that being true for Attack of the Clones or Revenge of the Sith. They have their lighter aspects, to be sure, but they're also pretty dark and disturbing.

 

TPM: $431 million
AOTC: $310 million
ROTS: $380 million


FOTR: $314 million
TTT: $341 million
ROTK: $377 million


PT: $1121
LOTR: $1032

Difference: PT makes more by $89 million


Even though it is not earth shattering, and both trilogies did very well, they did not make the same. The PT made more by a clear margin of almost $90 million dollars. And this is just domestic.

 

TPM is overly kid friendly, and Jar Jar is a major result of that. But it is my view of the picture, so we probably disagree on that. 6 years later, as I watch the film, I just really think it did not need to be that 'kiddy.'

AOTC is definitely less kiddy, and remember that was filmed in the summer of 2000, and Lord of the Rings came out in December 2001. I still think Lucas thought, after TPM made 431 million dollars, he still had to have the tone not too adult. (C-3PO with the one liners during the Clone Wars, Dex's Diner.)

Now ROTS is the darkest movie, just by the nature of the story, and that was filmed in 2003, two years after the success of the PG-13 Lord of the Rings movies, and Lucas by then was convinced he could go all out on this one.

I am not questioning Lucas, because he made alot of money on the PT, and all the more power to him. But in my opinion, and it is just my taste toward the PT, the first two movies, and even Return of the Jedi in some respects, were made with a little too kiddy friendly in certain parts to appeal to a wider audience. Hence that is why ANH, ESB, and ROTS are my top 3, they are very adult. It is just me, I am sure we all have different opinions.

 

DINVADER_RETURNS responded:

By that argument, then why didn't he makes SW movies every 3 years after ROTJ? I mean he didn't even have to release the prequels, he could have just sat and re-released the OT many times and made plenty of dough off of that. He was already rich.

He did, sort of. How many box sets, how much merchandise, Ewok movies, cartoons, etc. He wanted to wait until tech. was right before making more hardcore series, but he kept the franchise rolling with this other stuff, and it was easy. Not to mention, ILM working on dozens of movies. GL rewrote the book on movie magic in the off years. And I still don't think he is done milking the PT before he does anything else original.