PT Do you believe the media/critics had an agenda against the prequels

I am not starting this thread to say that any media publication or any critic who didn't like the prequels weren't genuine in expressing their views, but I believe that George Lucas has been despised by Hollywood and hence made himself unpopular with the media. I have always felt that critics had contempt for Star Wars fans even in the height of originals thinking they were nothing more than simplistic moral stories that are sci fi/fantasy that are special effects extravaganzas with very little substance to them and they thought of the fans as simple individuals who didn't get real "film? Their are some media publications and critics who take glee in taking shots at Lucas in anyway they can, they want the reader to believe that everyone hates the prequels and they want to give a fraudulent perception of how people view the films. I have stopped buying Entertainment Weekly and Rolling Stone magazines because I despise their anti-prequel propaganda and I dislike the way they have disdain for the die hard fan. I don't agree with Roger Ebert all the time, and I disagreed with him on his attack of the clones review, but I will say this about him, he is not a follower, he makes up his own mind, he hates movies are loved, and loves some movies that are hated he does not let his agenda's get in the way of his reviews. I have said it before many hate Lucas for him going against the guild, and many critics despise that he doesn't put quotes on the VHS/DVD/Blu-Ray box's! It may sound paranoid or far fetched but I am pretty convinced that a segment of the media is against him...

 

There is a problem in star wars fandom basically called "prequel/lucas haters" or "fanboys" it feeds itself by perpetuating the elitist idea that basically half of the whole thing that these so-called fans claim to like is bad and unholy and should be boycotted and constantly attacked. It is made up of a lot less actual fans than they would like to have you believe and it has become something of a forced meme in the star wars fan community.

People who are at all new to Star Wars fandom should not allow themselves to be fooled by this trend.

These individuals spend ridiculous amounts of time and energy creating smug, all out manifestos to defend their tired argument that (basically) every star wars film besides the very first two made is somehow/someway bad and wrong and unholy. This small yet very loud amount of angry, obsessed "fans" was primarily started up by Gen X'ers who have a sad, very stubborn sense of fan ownership over what they call "their movies" and today it is emulated by pretentious college age hipster types/self proclaimed film experts who enjoy the thrill of being in on the 21 century "geek chic" phenomenon getting to feel smart around other people by "letting them in on the secret" that anyone who enjoys star wars as a saga is foolish and somehow "buying into" some kind of money scheme by the creator George Lucas who in reality is a hippy philanthropist who has donated more than half his money to charity, education and liberal causes while putting the other half of his money right back into the film industry by creating many innovations and trends which go on to be used by almost every other filmmaker in hollywood.

These fanboys/hateboys (or whatever you wish to call them) have been so obsessive and persistent since around 1999 that a lot of reviewers and bloggers for certain websites have fed into it in order to gain hits for their websites and blow up their comment sections. This is why we have people like the news casters on "G4 tv" saying things like "almost as bad as jar-jar, amiright guyz!?" standing there sweating holding the mike waiting for a response from the crowd of 19 year olds and their home viewer demographic of 11 and 12 year olds. Its all hype. Its trash. And its pathetic to think that this is what our 12 year olds are being taught is "cool". People have made whole careers on bashing Star Wars, or as they call it "the prequels maaan".

Since the Saga as a whole has been released on blu-ray this trend has finally started to die down because of the fact that the Saga box set sold incredibly well (over one million copy's the first week not even counting x-mas sales) despite boycott attempts by the fanboys which were embarrassingly proven by this fact to be in the extreme minority. As well as the very respectable success of the TPM re-release --a film that has been available on every home video format for well over a decade and in the digital streaming age no less!

These people (and the Trolls who help them) will use a large (and tellingly always different) variety of arguments, hyped up complaints and basically propaganda to get others to join in with them. They look at people who are or may be new to star wars as practice to make sure they "let them know" to hold up the status quo of rebelling against the "big bad lucas". And no not the George Lucas of reality. Not the brilliantly creative liberal philanthropist who teaches young people good morals through his timeless art. No. The Lucas THEY made up. The Lucas on south park. The image of this eccentric, greedy, all powerful guy who is the reason for all their frustrations of trying to cope with the fact that the petty EU chronology and trivia might not all match up to this idea they have in there heads of what Star Wars "should be".

Sadly this all makes us quickly forget that the intended way to watch the Star Wars Saga is in numerical order, 1-2-3-4-5-6.

This is fact. This is not some kind of "conspiracy theory" or opinion. Every action in life has some kind of a reaction and this phenomenon is the simple result of new fans coping with something that their big brothers and parents are so passionate about. They don't understand a lot about it and so when they google the words "Star Wars" this drama is what they find. Bashing is a mob mentality and goes against everything the SW Saga stands for. If it wasn't for the more stubborn "fans" then a lot more new comers would find that star wars is a visually and artistically beautiful and cleverly crafted fantasy/adventure series. Something that is as timeless and family friendly as The Wizard of Oz.

Lucas fundamentally changed the film making industry twice over and there ARE some parts of Hollywood that are vindictive towards him. Weather its for doing it his way or simply for the fact that they were forced to adapt to the technologies he made into the norm. As cliche as this will sound its simply just true: Haters are always going to hate. At the end of the day, after all the debates and probing thats the simple reality.

The fact is that big business interests also hate him. He has always been anti-corporate Hollywood all his life and proud of it. Thanks to his digital technologies a young film maker can now make a movie for a lot less than in the old days without being at the mercy of the big production company's. Thats always been one of LFL most basic goals.

Thats just one of the reasons why they are so spiteful to him like when they attacked everyone who worked on TESB simply over the fact that the credits came after the film instead of before. Thats why he dropped out of the writers guild, the directors guild and the american motion picture association. Thats the reason why they HATE ever giving him oscer recognition for anything. They DO have a bias against him no matter what way you look at it. It is a fact.

Even well before the PT came out Lucas and Star Wars really WAS always robed of a lot because of a general dismissive attitude towards blockbusters (that HE is one of the fathers of) and bias towards him for changing the industry and re-setting its course throughout the late 70's.

 

No. No I don't. I'd file this theory in with the staged moon landings cover up and the 911 thermite conspiracy.

 

The Lucas haters even have a film manifesto: The People vs. George Lucas. I think a lot of it comes from misguided nostalgia for youth. I find it interesting that almost as a rule these deluded fans that show their passion for Star Wars through hate were not adults when the original trilogy was released, but youth. Their manifesto song, "George Lucas raped my childhood" speaks to this you never see a fan in his 60s saying, "man my 35 year old memories of my 20s are ruined now!"

I think people forget just what a cultural phenomenon Star Wars was in 1977. It wasn't a niche fandom like it is today, everyone loved it. In the days before home video, Star Wars saw continuous theatrical release for YEARS. Some theatres held a first birthday party in 1978 a year after it was released. And it wasn't just kids going to see this movie over and over, their parents were the ones taking them. I lost count how many times my father took me to see Star Wars, sometimes sitting in our seats after the movie ended and waiting for the next showing in the theater watching it two times in a row. There was one time we went to the drive-in to Watch Smokey & The Bandit, but Star Wars was playing on another screen. During our movie we got out of our car, and walked over to the Star Wars screen to watch the Death Star Battle. And we were not the only ones that did so, there had to be about 20 or 30 other people that have left their screens to do that same. I will remember always adults, talking excitedly with each other about it after and a couple of them replaying the dogfight by making spaceship maneuvers with their hands.

Star Wars was so influential in the 1970s because nothing like it had ever been seen before. In 1999 Star Wars was familiar. No matter how good The Phantom Menace was, it could never live up to the historical game changer the 1977 film was. Those that remembered the phenomenon of 1977, 1980, 1983 especially in the haze of nostalgia for childhood could be nothing BUT disappointed that the prequels were not the same kind of transcendent experience. The greatness of the Original Star Wars was not just the film, but the cultural environment the film found itself in, and how it changed culture. The impact of the Phantom Menace was less not because of any merits or lack of merits in the filmmaking, but because our culture was in a different place.

The 1970s were a grim time in America. Watergate shook the faith we had in our government, and the War in Vietnam was a devastating blow to our Country's psyche and moral. Movies at the time glorified brutal, violent anti-heros Whose moral codes were not that much better than the "bad guys" they were fighting. Disaster films were all the rage where terrible things happen and there is nothing one could do about it. In this light, comes Star Wars, where the War in Vietnam muddied the waters as to what was a good guy and a bad guy in our collective minds, here was a story where the Bad Guys were truly bad and the Good Guys were clearly right a stark morality play of black and white in a culture where everything was a shade of Grey. Star Wars brought something to us that we desperately needed as a culture at the time: HOPE. The New Hope wasn't just for the forces of good in the film, but for all of us living in the 1970s.

Contrast with 1999 and things were not as grim. The Prequels could not bring about another cultural shift like the original trilogy did because the culture did not need the same kind of repair as it did in the 1970s. Sure there were things wrong it, but we were living in a Post-Star Wars culture. The Original Star Wars generation was growing up and making families of their own. And that brings us to the real point: The Prequel Trilogy is NOT for the Original Generation of fans, its for their kids.

The new generation did not go in with the expectations of a lifetime of growing up with Star Wars, they saw the films through something a lot of us did not have: fresh eyes. I think the critics of the prequels do not criticize merely on the merits of the films, but with the expectation of a transformative experience that simply did not happen. Why? It simply was not needed like it was in 1977.

 

Trilogies? What trilogies? My box set has 6 films in it. 1-6. I see nothing about trilogies! No! No different. Only different in your mind!

 

No. I believe that want more views on their website/blog/whatever. And what better way to get it than to create controversy? Specially when the hating community is so vocal that is perceived as the majority's opinion.

 

I'm not sure against him so much as seeing him as an easy target to sell "newspapers". I mean it was a risk, he must have known this himself. You try to continue and perhaps even impress again with the same franchise and well he's simply made a move/films that BEG to be compared to the hype and power of the originals. And then he goes and includes a lizard rabbit stepping in poop and a weird little kid and wooden priest-warriors and a convoluted plot and robots that talk like babies and on and on. I think it probably started out fairly genuinely, even if somewhat in part coming from a frustration on the part of the "adult" reviewers (who most likely were hoping for more of what they liked when growing up) and then, when he pushed back with such comments as "they are for kids" etc it just gave them more fuel. But actually just sitting there waiting to attack him? Not so sure there was much hate, animosity or whatever before the actual films came out. And if so, nothing special, nothing more than any other big, blockbuster "odd-ish" director wouldn't get. He wasn't a special case until he made the new films which are pretty special, not many other examples I can think of until Ridley Scott decided to redo "Alien" and probably Bladerunner soon. Usually remakes or reboots are done by studios that own the property so the target is "blockbuster reboot" and not "the Creator of said property".

 

Nah.

 

The problem is timing. When The Phantom Menace was on its way, everyone hoped for 1977-1983 all over again--heightened unrealistic expectations. The movie took a big risk and just wasn't the same, and that got amplified in the media, but it got even more bashing and became less favored by wide audiences because of the new wave of sci-fi fantasy adventure, CGI visual effects spectacles: Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, Spider-Man. Also, The Matrix. Everything was compared to the prequels; the prequels were held up as examples of what not to do. Times just changed, even though everything else might not even exist if it hadn't been for STAR WARS and what it brought to the film industry in 1977. Those other movies got the teenage audiences and the adult repeat viewers, and the old people. At the time it aggravated me to see Lord of the Rings get the Oscars, to see Spider-Man 2 outgross AOTC, to see the excuse about STAR WARS being "just kids movies" more than before. It made me resent those other movies. I have my complaints about the prequels but hate being classified by non-fans or to see the prequel angst cause the whole franchise to be bashed by a younger generation.

 

Well, for my money, I would say that the Prequels have stood the test of time better than the Matrix Trilogy - even though obviously the Matrix was more popular when they came out.

I myself used to enjoy the Matrix Trilogy. I even had the trilogy box (the bonus material to that set was fantastic, I wish the bonus material for the SW blue ray set was more like it). But after I got over the spectacle of the philosphical questions posed in the trilogy, I started to feel that the story itself wasnt all that great. And the two sequels are a jumbled mess. I then sold my Matrix Trilogy set. And it seems that the Wachowski Brothers have fared far worse Post Matrix than Lucas has Post Original SW.

Heck, even Lord of the Rings doesnt seem to be all the rage anymore - even with the Hobbit coming up. And future movies like King Kong really exposed some of the flaws of Peter Jackson that I always argued were there during the LOTR movies.

 

Listen I really don't care about awards at all or box office gross or what sci fi/fantasy series is the critics darling, I think people missed the point of my original post. I am saying that the sentiment against Lucas started before he made the prequels. His decision to go against the guild alienated many in Hollywood, also many in Hollywood resent him for being a maverick and for funding his movies and that he gets to keep all the profit his films gross in theaters, home video sales, and toys etc... I think many fans were rather ungrateful to him, he has no obligation to me or any other fan and he for better or worse made his movies HIS way and he didn't cave into anyone's else's "vision" of Star Wars. Many people tend to believe the revisionist history by many detractors that OT were critical darlings which is not true, the original film was well reviewed but it's oscar nomination was more due to the fact that it was such a huge cultural phenomenon, and nothing else has or ever will be like 1977. I am 33 and I was around in the 80's and I do think that film snobs always resented the success of Star Wars and to out-rightly dismiss my theory that many critics were acting like small petty children in their reviews of the prequels is naive. Please go back and read some of the reviews for the prequels and see how nasty and mean spirited they are to Lucas, and Star Wars fans in general, I have never seen anything more unprofessional in my life. I know it is not the right thing to hope for during this terrible global recession hitting us, but I hope a lot of these childish critics lose their jobs and with many newspapers and publications failing to stay afloat and journalism becoming a dying field I may soon get my wish....

 

I'm aware of reviews and opinions from the prequels just a few years ago. I don't know why you quoted me on that since it's not like your talking points are complete opposites or responding to what I wrote. I do know that even though the first film got major Oscar nominations, the other two were still popular and the critics weren't as divided as they would be with the Prequels. Even then, with technology not what it is now, bad reviews and cynicism weren't as ubiquitous and instantly accessible.

 

There may be some truth to this, you never know what the inside of that culture is actually like. On the outside though it would seem odd that reviewers would resent him for going against the system, essentially making similar types of films that the system makes (marketable blockbusters), because it would allow them to tell a David and Goliath story where David eventually comes almost as big as Goliath. Not sure where the resentment would need to come in. But hey, as I said, you never know! The resentment in that subculture may be stronger than we think. But I'd say there is still a portion of the "reviewer" crowd that don't have ties and may yet still have been hard on them for the reasons I stated above, the news films beg to be compared. Were they compared fairly. Most likely not entirely, not with clarity, not with a complete understanding of their personal reactions. Does this make the reactions illegitimate? Not at all. Being disappointed was a legitimate reaction. Being disappointed both because of the material and also because of a realization that perhaps history can't be so easily repeated for the individual is again, legitimate. Now where it gets odd is then getting angry with George for it, at least it is odd before he's opened his mouth to try to defend them and dismiss the reaction. I don't think he's ever made the best case for delegitimizing the reactions of some of the audience, though he has attempted in his own haphazard way to figure it out too. I don't think either side really understood what came forth with their release.

I do think there is some ungratefulness for sure. And sure, he has no legal or ethical obligation I suppose to do anything for fans. But this does not mean he is immune to criticism. This is a part of the argument I've never understood. He has the "options" to "choose" between a variety of "actions". He then chooses certain options and acts upon them. At this point he has taken responsibility for something, and doing so involves the risk of failure and criticism. Yes this criticism should be as balanced as possible but it may, depending on how it all plays out, give rise to anger and frustration. I am not defending the bulk of the reaction against him, but I do think he can't have his cake and eat it too! He's making films that the public are to watch, at that point we are free to react, free to like or not like, free to compare and criticize. This is the part of the equation that is our right as much as it is his to make the films he wants to make.

You're right, the OT wasn't untouchable, but it was also hard to compare it to anything else and no one had a kind of personal attachment to something it was now "adding on to". The PT had this in spades! I am not saying there couldn't have been some personal or cultural vendettas against him, but I think some of it was just legitimate and somewhat undigested disappointment.

 

Unfair, sometimes, yes. Agenda?
Why, and, nope.

 

I think what helped bring negative views to the PT was Lucas was more concerned with the best special effects rather than the plot, also the slapstick scenes felt forced and were there just to be there, unlike the scenes in the OT, which fit snug....at times. Lucas seemed like he was so preoccupied with what he could put into the PT, he never stopped to think if there were some things he shouldn't.

 

most critics, the media, and anyone else outside this community really don't care about Star Wars

certainly not enough to go out their way to trash anything Star Wars related,

most people (critics, hollywood studios, the Media) also don't care what Lucas has to say about the industry , he's hardly caused a stumbling block or stopped business in that area

 

Oh the irony of this thread is so amusing.

Accuse Lucas "haters" of being smug a-holes that build up their own self contained world where only their view is correct, then do the same thing on this forum.

Why would Hollywood hate George Lucas? Any time he puts a movie out with Star Wars attached to it, he breaks the bank. But no, keep perpetuating your own little world where everyone is against you so you can play victim. Just like the "haters" do.

Sorry that you cannot handle other people's opinions.

 

So your ability is mind-reading? Admirable!
Sad you didn't get to mind-control and changed his misguided concerns!

I don't believe there was a general "agenda".
No Star Wars movie, not even TPM, was "hated" by critics. Just look at Metacritic, RottenTomatoes or whatever you want. A typical "average review" movie.
So some genuinely liked them, others genuinely disliked them and some (as Alexrd said) just followed trends in their persuit of attention and sales.
That's only natural.

The ones with the agenda are so called "fans" who misunderstood being an fan with being an owner at some point in their life with Star Wars...

 

There are hundreds maybe thousands of people who have written their doctoral thesis on The Star Wars Saga for goodness sake who otherwise wouldn't have if it wasn't for the first 3 episodes keeping interest high for going on 3 whole new generations of fans.

How hateboys can just completely slap all this in the face by saying things like "yup and every single thing about them is all textbook bad" is not only painfully wrong but completely disrespectful and prejudice. It is almost FRIGHTENING to see what a bubble a lot of the hateboys like (or need) to live in, how these people just completely romanticize this image of "the smug, hipster fan who knows better" always up on a high horse with a loud mouth trashing more than half of the thing that all these community's exist to allow people to share positive enthusiasm for SW.

Actual fans who like SW constantly try to show REALITY. REALITY. How people in general loved the PT when they were coming out and threw party's and celebrations over it everywhere all around the country and all around the world to say the least!

LOOK:

OK? What part of facts like that dont you people understand? Why fight SOOO HARD against what is simply stated in facts like that? Every day. Everywhere you go. What is the goal here? I dont even think the hateboys themselves know anymore. They understand just fine. They WANT to disrespect it and change people viewpoints on it into something negative. As negative as they are because misery loves company.

There IS a very stubborn, determined bias against this Saga. You see it every day. EVERY DAY you see the SAME PEOPLE going out of there way spending ALL of their time almost exclusively beating the "these movies are awful" drum. There is nothing too petty for the hateboys. It never gets old to these people. And when EVER they see another anti-star wars zombie they try as much as they can to reward them for trashing the same thing that they like to trash. The fact is that these people wake up every morning and try to defeat Star Wars. Thats basically it and its pathetic.

And then they have the audacity to deny that there is any bias against SW/Lucas?! You aren't fooling anyone.

It would surprise bashers (or maybe not because they know) how many SW fans agree that such constant, every day excessive criticism and negative social conditioning is a big part of the problem we are all so sick and tired of. This may shock some individuals but SW fans are sick of this futile, stubborn, obstructionist mentality hateboys have with regards to anything with lucas's name attached to it.

I (like many other actual SW fans around the net) simply no longer know what it is that these stubborn extremists, and the pretentious college film class snobs who look up to them, wish or hope to accomplish anymore.

And then they have the audacity to deny that there is any bias against SW/Lucas?! You aren't fooling anyone.

YES there IS a very real, very prominent bias against George Lucas and the first 3 episodes of the SW Saga. By Hollywood and also (much more so) by a small, very determined, very stubborn, very vocal group of so called "fans".

 

Oh do continue. Hyperbole is so much fun.

 

@ obi-rob-kenobi
Um, you think they were actually going to promote the film with a negative advertisement? All that proves that some like it, that they weren't stupid enough to say "Come see it, it isn't half bad!" And at the end of the day it doesn't mean the 4 snippets they clipped with lots of "...." from articles means those same articles were themselves all positive and criticism-free.

So the argument can go on unhindered by that bit of self-promotion IMO. In fact, to me, it sounds like they pulled all these "comparing to the OT" quotes out perhaps to try to dissuade those that were a bit tired of the PT to get out to see it...maybe.

 

First I would say that I don't think there is any media conspiracy against SW or Lucas. It gets written about quite a bit but the main reason for that is that is it big and popular. Other things that are big and popular also tend to get written about a lot too, like Harry Potter, Twilight, James Bond, LOTR, Batman, etc.

My main problem with the idea that SOME negative criticism are due to some external factor and not an honest opinion about the movie is that it tries to invalidate what some people are saying and making what they say false. Turn this reasoning around and say that some POSITIVE reviews are not based on an honest opinion but is instead due to the person being a deluded Lucas fanboy who loves anything with the SW name on it. How does that sound?
Rude, stupid and false I would say. And yes I know some "haters" have used this reasoning and many others have, correctly in my view, dimissed this reasoning for being dumb and insulting. Any time you try to invalidate what other people are saying by saying "Oh your like/dislike of this isn't due to the actual qualities it has but is instead due to this or that.", it rubs me the wrong way.
Deal with the specific issues raised and talk about them and keep the broad generalizations to a minimum.

In another thread the subject of nostalgia was brought up and I think that nostalgia is a double edged sword. You CAN get the reaction "You hate this because it is not exactly how it used to be." but you can just as easily get the reaction "You only like this because this is about X but really it sucks."
Nostalgia CAN make you overly critical but it can just as readily make you more forgiving to the flaws. So if one wants to use it then one should be aware of both sides.

The return of old favorites, ex. Star Trek, James Bond, Transformers, have created fairly polarized fanbases that, in the words of one of my favorite reviewers "they have declared open war on each other and confuse anyone in the middle for being the enemy."
So Star Wars is not unique here, other franchises have had new things added with mixed results and they have often faced criticism from the die-hards.
Take James Bond, when Sean Connery was cast, some complained because "he wasn't David Niven." After him, every Bond has been compared to his Bond and not always favorably. The newset Bond has faced "haters" and websites that take shots at him.
Star Trek TNG got complaints from TOS fans, DS9 got complaints from TNG and TOS fans. The newest Batman film got complaints that basically said "Batman can ONLY be this and nothing else." So again nothing unique with SW.

The idea that Lucas is "hated" in Hollywood because he takes all the profits is false to me. He CREATES huge buisness with SW and unlike say, PJ, his main production site is in the US instead of New Zeeland. Yes Lucas has quit the guilds and this causes some problem when hirering some people but lets not kid ourselves, Lucas is a MAJOR player in Hollywood and has many friends like Spielberg and Coppola.

Yes the PT films had big shoes to fill but even the OT got some negative reviews. ESB and even more so, RotJ, got taken to task by some reviewers.
So the expectations were high but other films that had high expectations have gotten quite a bit of criticism when some felt the overall quality was not up to par. Take the Matrix films, the first was recieved quite warmly and I for one liked it a lot. It was quite new, interesting and offered many things I had not seen before. So the expectations of Reloaded was also quite high and to some the quality was lacking and they said so.
So SW is not alone in having high expectations and likewise not alone in having criticism leveled againt it when some people feel the quality is lacking.
An other example is the LOTR films, they had also quite a lot of anticipation, esp from book fans. But the first film did quite well, both in the BO and with the critics. The second and third film also faced growing expectations but BO-wise and criticswise, it did quite good. Some did not like it sure and I won't say that their opinion is invalid just due some external factor. It will be interesting to see how the Hobbit film fares, both BO-wise and criticswise.
In many ways PJ is were Lucas was in 1999, he is making "prequels" to three very popular films. And he faces quite big expectations.
So I don't think there is anything Lucas specific here.

In closing, I do think that a person that has done extremely well in the past CAN get judged a bit more harshly when some don't think it is up to his or hers usual standard. But Lucas is hardly alone in this, the same applies to some athletes, some are expected to win and break world records while doing it and when they don't, they face criticism. Ex James Cameron will have huge BO-expectations on his next film as his last two films have grossed almost five billion $ worldwide. So if that film grosses "only" 900 M$, it could be seen as a failiure by some. But if say Kevin Smith would make a film that grossed that much it would be a huge success.

To sum up, any kind of general dismissal of opposing viewpoints I don't really like. Deal with specific points and argue for or against those issues.

Bye for now.
Old Stoneface

 

It is not fare or realistic to try to start comparing star wars to other random franchises.

Now, let's look at some real figures and compare AOTC to that other big sci-fi franchise, Star Trek, in international gross, as the other 6.7 billion people on the planet do occasionally watch movies...and a Star Trek film came out the SAME year as AOTC did.

AOTC, 700 million dollars

Star Trek: Nemesis, 67 million dollars

Star wars absolutely blew star trek out of the water that year! This just goes to show the kind of power star wars has as a movie franchise. This is not even counting the IMAX re-release of the film latter that same year!

Its a typical basher cop out to start lumping Star Wars in with other franchises. Star Wars is in a class all by itself and always has been. The other franchises wouldn't even exist without Star Wars. Many actual fans know this as common fact. J.J. Abrams himself says that the Star Trek series cant hold a candle to The Star Wars Saga at the end of the day.

All six films in the Saga went above and beyond anything done in Hollywood by anyone else at the end of the day.

Like George Lucas himself says, people of all ages in other country's who speak other languages can watch Star Wars films and instantly relate to it. This can not be said about Star Trek or Transformers or The Matrix or anything else you wish to randomly compare SW to.

I also think that things like this are a big example of what a seriously different fundamental understanding Star Wars fans have with SW hateboys.

 

In regards to the thread question, in my opinion

Short Answer: No

Long Answer: