Did George Lucas Lie To Us?

It's okay, I know that for the most part, my argument was critical of the films while you had to resort to criticising me to make your points of defense. I understand, you were desperate and trying to hide it. It's all right, I have no hard feelings against you.

Well, if believing this helps you sleep at night, then God bless. We both know it's not the truth, but why let that bother us, right? I haven't really criticized you, but rather I have criticized your arguments. Sorry if you are not able to tell the difference.

Oh - and using sarcasm is not the same as criticising you. If it is, then you are far more guilty of it than most people I have seen on these boards.

Nice touch though using the basic idea of what I said to you, and simply changing the words. Not terribly original, but nice. "I wasn't desperate - YOU were!" Heh heh heh. Nice try.

 

Well, if believing this helps you sleep at night, then God bless. We both know it's not the truth, but why let that bother us, right? I haven't really criticized you, but rather I have criticized your arguments. Sorry if you are not able to tell the difference.

Oh - and using sarcasm is not the same as criticising you. If it is, then you are far more guilty of it than most people I have seen on these boards.

Nice touch though using the basic idea of what I said to you, and simply changing the words. Not terribly original, but nice. "I wasn't desperate - YOU were!" Heh heh heh. Nice try.

You have a really vivid imagination there, Monkey. It's just simply amazing to see someone who has really accomplished nothing in a debate convince himself he's won. When in actualiy, you exhausted everyone with exorbitantly lengthy posts (I put this last one into Microsoft Word, it was six pages).

And yes, you most certainly did resort to criticism against me. That became the crutch for much of your argument. For the most part, you had nothing to actually back your claims other than personal attacks in lieu of substantive debate based on the film. That shows how weak your argument was, Monkey; where you felt the need to veil personal attacks in with your defense of a film. It was like you were practically giving up; and not only that, the fact you had convinced yourself into taking the high road made it oh so hilarious.

 

You have a really vivid imagination there, Monkey. It's just simply amazing to see someone who has really accomplished nothing in a debate convince himself he's won. When in actualiy, you exhausted everyone with exorbitantly lengthy posts (I put this last one into Microsoft Word, it was six pages).

And yes, you most certainly did resort to criticism against me. That became the crutch for much of your argument. For the most part, you had nothing to actually back your claims other than personal attacks in lieu of substantive debate based on the film. That shows how weak your argument was, Monkey; where you felt the need to veil personal attacks in with your defense of a film. It was like you were practically giving up; and not only that, the fact you had convinced yourself into taking the high road made it oh so hilarious.

This is all true.

With one minor change.

Change the word 'Monkey' in the first sentence to 'Loco,' and it will be nearly perfect.

Speaking of this last one that was apparently six pages. (I didn't measure it.) I noticed that you ignored it comepletely other than to tell me how long it was. Just an observation.

Although once again you have done nothing but take my post, change around the wording, and direct it back towards me. I'm beginning to think you don't even HAVE an argument.

You only see criticism of you because your own argument was so flimsy. You could not effectively defend your stance so you cried foul, acting like the victim, and then resorted to sarcasm instead of anwsers. This you have done repeatedly, not only in this thread, thus I am not surprised to see it again. None of this is an attack on you, but a simple pointing out of the truth and what actually transpired. Once again, there was nothing in the tone of my posts that has not been present in yours as well. So we once again have a case of POT KETTLE BLACK.

 

This is all true.

With one minor change.

Change the word 'Monkey' in the first sentence to 'Loco,' and it will be nearly perfect.

You call that a response? *sigh* Okay, if you insist. *shakes head* I haven't claimed victory at all, nor am I carrying myself as victorious, so you really had no basis in your response. Sorry.

Speaking of this last one that was apparently six pages. (I didn't measure it.) I noticed that you ignored it comepletely other than to tell me how long it was. Just an observation.

Surely you aren't egotistical enough to expect me to sit through six pages of your redundant posts? The others were draining enough due to sheer volume, but to take exhaustion and turn it into some sort of victory is really low of you.

Although once again you have done nothing but take my post, change around the wording, and direct it back towards me. I'm beginning to think you don't even HAVE an argument.

You really DO have a vivid imagination. Not only that, but an inflated ego to think that you are being mimicked.

You only see criticism of you because your own argument was so flimsy. You could not effectively defend your stance so you cried foul, acting like the victim, and then resorted to sarcasm instead of anwsers. This you have done repeatedly, not only in this thread, thus I am not surprised to see it again.

Umm, no, I was "calling foul" because you resorted to an old tactic of blaming the fan rather than defending the movie. It really was a foul because I had restrained from doing anything of the sort before then.

And if you think that highly of yourself to believe I had to "resort" to sarcasm, then you are gravely mistaken. If you hadn't noticed, sarcasm is a part of my posting style. Once again, you are taking the slightest thing and claiming it as your own handiwork.

None of this is an attack on you, but a simple pointing out of the truth and what actually transpired. Once again, there was nothing in the tone of my posts that has not been present in yours as well. So we once again have a case of POT KETTLE BLACK.

You really have deluded yourself, to think you are the "holder of truth?" Sad, it really is.

In any case, in our discussions, it was you who started with the personal criticism. That really was your crutch, as "flimsy" as my argument was, at least I can know that mine wasn't as flimsy and weak as yours; seeing as how you had to resort to criticising me to make your point.

 

What was the discussion about again? Right, George Lucas!

GL does not lie to us. He might change his mind sometimes, but who doesn´t? Do you think ANH would´ve been the same if he hadn´t changed his mind 100 times before releasing it? or TESB? ROTJ? TPM? AOTC?

 

What was the discussion about again? Right, George Lucas!

LOL

Gotta admit it, Lars, that was perfect. Timing and everything.

 

This was long, but a very entertaining read.

 

Entertaining for you, tedious for me.

 

In any case, in our discussions, it was you who started with the personal criticism. That really was your crutch, as "flimsy" as my argument was, at least I can know that mine wasn't as flimsy and weak as yours; seeing as how you had to resort to criticising me to make your point.

THAT'S your argument? "You started it!"? What is this, third grade? Sheesh.

You do realize of course, that every one of your responses in that post were criticisms of me, and have nothing to do with the films themselves. So much for the high ground you were supposedly standing on.

And hey, you don't wanna answer what I wrote, no problem. I mean, it was no problem for me to read through the countless redundant posts you put up, but that's okay. Now that I know you cannot respond, I'll let it go.

 

AHEM.

The baiting will stop. Now. I don't like having to come back a day early to remind folks to be civil and respect each others' opinions. Strawman arguments, ad hominems, and flame-baiting do not make me a happy mod, so they will stop.

Monkey and Loco, the two of you have couched so much hostility in your comments it's amazing that no one stepped in earlier. Your entire "dialogue" created only heat - it cast no light on the subject at hand. I think you've both said your piece here, so I suggest you move on to other threads. Consider this a warning.

My own $.02 is that Lucas has changed as he grew older - we all do, and our perspective on our lives and goals changes. If we want to go in different directions or reassess what we have done, it is no more a lie than no longer believing what we did as an adolescent or pre-teen. We can believe whole-heartedly in something or someone, and then we change, and with it comes a change of belief. Does it make our old beliefs a lie? Does it make our new beliefs a lie? Hardly.

Human nature isn't static - it's plastic. The whole "you can't step in the same river twice" kind of thing. I believe Lucas has changed as he's grown older, and he no longer believes what he used to believe. I don't cast any praise or blame for this - that's like blaming someone for getting their first gray hair. Lucas once said that an effect without a story was meaningless, now he wants to push the technical envelope just to see what can be done (i.e., effects without story) - I believe both statements are true. This is not to condemn him for his choices - some of the technical achivements have been extraordinary (the digital backgrounds meshed with live actors and modeled environments), and have opened up new avenues for all filmmakers. That is laudable, but it also isn't what he espoused in From Star Wars to Jedi.

He didn't lie - he changed. There is a world of difference between a lie and something that is no longer true.

 

George has said a lot of things on the SW saga over the years. It has been the Adventures of Luke Skywalker. It has been the journey of the Droids (C-3PO and R2-D2). It is now (and who know for how long) the story of Anakin Skywalker. I take anything GL says now a day with a grain of salt. It may change tomorrow.


Just something I posted in another thread. This thread's title just makes it feel right at home here.

I do argee that GL does not lie, he just changes his point of view. He is older how and has the money to do anything he wants to do. He is not wrong, he just a differant person now.

 

I don't know Quix. If the author of a series is trying to explain a decision that he made which is unpopular with his audience, and he says that the reason for making that decision was for x reason, and x reason never happens, I question his credibility.

Let's face it, "poor Sidious trying to replenish his apprentice supply" never happened.

 

^^^
Why don't we wait until we have all six chapters before condemning Lucas, okay?

 

I think, as someone said earlier in the post that it will be revealed in EP3.
After seeing TPM I thought that with AOTC, we would see at least one sith apprentice die. I now think that the GL quote will relate to the circumstances that will eventually lead Anakin into becoming a Sith lord and that it relates into watching the saga from 1-6, and not 1-3.