Does Lucas' vision make TPM the best Star Wars movie?

The earliest drafts are very different, so if that was his initial vision, then no, the final film is not his original vision. As they did represent his earliest vision, and are IMHO not as good as later drafts, I would argue that the film is better because that vision DIDN'T make it to the screen. The auteurist notions that the director is the author, and that films should always be about the director's vision, are ideas I don't agree with.

If you argue that the later drafts are his vision as well, then certainly you must concede that his vision changed. And it did so not only because of the normal process of rewriting, but because he had to solve technical problems. He had to figure out how to tell a story he liked with the resources available to him. He had to rewrite the story so it could be done with the technology of the day. By doing so, he made a better movie than he otherwise would have.

 

In ESB, Lucas actually gave Kershner a great deal of free reign over the picture. I'm going to find those quotes, but Kershner said Lucas was great in that he let him decide many things on his own.

The Han frozen in carbonite scene was initially going to have Harrison look as if he's sleeping peacefully and hibernating. It was Kershner's idea to have it look as if Han is in twisted agony, and his face frozen in that now-classic pose.

Kurtz and Kershner also remember GL rushing through many things (sounds familiar! ) and using his famous phrase of "good enough". The final shot of ESB where we see the Rebel Fleet fly away wasn't Lucas idea. He was against it because of time and budget limits. The scene between Han and Leia in Bespin discussing the reliability of Lando's friendship was rehearsed and filmed mulitple times to nail the timing and humor down. Lucas wanted it to end in the first couple takes (sounds familiar! ). And had he directed ESB, he'd be doing that all the way through probably.

Don't get Kershner wrong, fans, becasue he still speaks highly of Lucas. He regards him as a genuis and visionary. I only throw this in to save myself so that people don't get enraged and start insulting Kershner as some old hack who "never did anything after SW" excpet for RoboCop II.

 

In ESB, Lucas actually gave Kershner a great deal of free reign over the picture. I'm going to find those quotes, but Kershner said Lucas was great in that he let him decide many things on his own.

Yep. He talked to him every night on the phone when he didn't visit the set, and Kershner said he gave him a lot of freedom: "Don't worry about the effects, we'll do those later."

The Han frozen in carbonite scene was initially going to have Harrison look as if he's sleeping peacefully and hibernating.

No, actually, the original idea was to have it be rocky and featureless. Not the same thing.

Kurtz and Kershner also remember GL rushing through many things

I'm not surprised Kurtz "remembers" this, as he's made it his mission to badmouth Lucas wherever possible and cast himself as the real genius behind the OT, but where has Kershner said it?

The scene between Han and Leia in Bespin discussing the reliability of Lando's friendship was rehearsed and filmed mulitple times to nail the timing and humor down.

What humor? I don't recall any humor in that scene, and I don't see why the timing had to be nailed down.

Unless you're referring to the cut part of the scene, in which Leia tries to play on Han's jealousy and they nearly kiss before Chewie comes in. In that case, Kershner decided to not use the scene anyway because it took away from the tension of the carbon freeze.

Lucas wanted it to end in the first couple takes (sounds familiar! ).

How?

And had he directed ESB, he'd be doing that all the way through probably.

How do you know? Considering how outspoken, say, Harrison Ford was, I think that he would've given Lucas plenty of suggestions, just like he did during ANH.

Don't get Kershner wrong, fans, becasue he still speaks highly of Lucas.

Salon.com: "Kershner's respect for Lucas has never wavered."

He regards him as a genuis and visionary. I only throw this in to save myself so that people don't get enraged and start insulting Kershner as some old hack who "never did anything after SW" excpet for RoboCop II.

Who has ever insulted Kershner that way? I recall plenty of people insulting Lucas by calling him a hack that had nothing to do with the OT while other, more talented people did everything for him. I recall one person saying Lucas "wanders around the set with a dumb look on his face." But I've never recalled anyone calling Kershner an old hack. As for him not doing anything after SW except RoboCop II, he did other stuff, but nothing of note. It was obvious that it took a story of SW's caliber to bring out his talent. Kershner himself says that his career is a disaster (Salon.com) and that ESB is the highlight.

 

This thread might as well be entitled "Does Billy Corgan's vision make Machina the best Smashing Pumpkins album?" The answer to both questions is exactly the same, for the same reasons.

 

****so in essence you have said that lucas is a great director because he directs. what you described is nothing unusual nor unique, nor innovative.****

Dr.Evazan, please, not only has Lucas been on the cutting edge of devloping sound for the use in the film industry, in general, but his sound mixes have long been known as some of the most progressive in American cinema. Also, Lucas is noted as being one of the innovators and perfectors of a very tight style of editing and interweaving stories. None of this eludes to the fact that he has been visionary with his storytelling and with his foresight into special effects. As far as American directors go, I can only think of one or two that had as much impact and overall effect with the use of sound as Lucas has.

****these are all skills that any director should be expected to have. wow he can let the audience know what is going on in a scene, what innovation and talent.****

Obviously that's not what I said, but keep on twisting my words... you're good at that. The innovation was in covering a large amount of space in a short span of screen time. Most would not even attempt as much information in such a short period, so we wouldn't know how others would fare. Lucas stretches out, especially with his style of storytelling through far-reaching editing skills. Fail to see that? Too bad.

****when i asked what lucas' vison is i didnt mean it so literally. i mean what is he trying to put across in his films? what is he trying to say? if you ask me he isnt trying to say a damn thing beyond "buy this movie".****

Then, you obviously didn't get it then, don't get it know and never will get it. It's a shame you've devoted so much of your life to something which amounts to nothing more than commercial product from and for a Capitalisic sensabiliy... completely void of any soul, made solely for money.

 

"but his sound mixes"

'HIS' sound mixes huh? Riiight....

 

C'mon, Jedi_Waster, we all know that filmmaking is a collaborative effort... must we explain that every single time we post something about Lucas as a director? And besides, I never hear anyone talking about collaboration in terms of Orson Welles or Stanley Kubrick or the almighty Peter Jackson. Lucas has long been obsessed with sound and picture, even over directing actors, this all since "THX-1138" in 1971, so lets give some credit where credit is due.

You can cut down the PT all you want, but let's not act like Lucas isn't involved in the creative process at all, and that every good idea comes from Ben Burtt or the others who surround the man. He actually has talent... you do know that, right? His first three films had many calling him a great filmmaker, even a genius.

 

No. I love episode I. I thought, flawed as it was (jar-jar, jake loyd, the pathetic droid troopers, etc.), it was a great movie worthy of the title of SW. That said, i do not think that it is a good as the originals, although the final lighsaber battle was unbeleivably awesome-i dont think any other SW movie has come close in respect to lighsaber duels-(no, not even yoda's handiwork in AOTC) and i dont think GL will match it in the next and final SW film. But i still say ANH is the best film of the trilogy (although ROTJ comes in a very, vety close 2nd). The same rings true in the SW series as it does with any other movie(s): the original is always the best. I looked on a poll the other day and the vast majority of respondents said that ESB was the best--I dont see how they can think that--to me, it is the 2nd worst SW movie after the disaster of AOTC(but thats a whole other discussion). Does anyon agree with my jedi-like assesment of the situation?

 

It's certainly the "purest" film of all five movies to date, in terms of it being 100 per cent Lucas, straight from the tap, with no modification from anyone else. (If that makes any sense.)

 

Son_of_Kurtzman, though I disagree with some of your opinions, I do have to say that your posts are enjoyable to read. I agree that George's ability to "cram" characters is one of his better skills when it comes to directing, but on the other hand he lacks in some other skills, which are best shown by comparing the directing of "ESB" to the other films.

 

SW -is- George Lucas's vision. Nobody else could ever do it proper justice.

 

So are you saying that TPM is the best Star Wars movie?

 

I am saying the eventual 12-14 hour SW saga is the best SW movie.

 

I am saying the eventual 12-14 hour SW saga is the best SW movie.

If only more people could see this.

Unfortunately . .

"Hey, look at that tree! That tree sucks! The tree we saw the other day was so much cooler. This tree has nothing to do with the other tree we saw."

Oh well.

-ZM

 

"I am saying the eventual 12-14 hour SW saga is the best SW movie."

But is Lucas' "true vision portion" of the saga better than the other parts?

 

But is Lucas' "true vision portion" of the saga better than the other parts?"

Personally, I can't make that kind of judgement. When reading novels, I don't rate one chapter against the others. They form part of a whole, dependent on each other to form the whole. Star Wars to me (and to GL, face up to it) is a work in progress. I'll make my final judgement when I have the complete Saga on DVD.

Until then, there are things I like and things I don't like about each Episode. But the positive outweighs the negative, no matter whose name appears under the title of "director".

-ZM

 

All of the SW films are George Lucas' vision.

 

Maybe, but I recall someone saying that TPM was closer to his true vision than any of the other episodes. My question is, does TPM being closer to his true vision make it a better movie than the others? I mean, come on, don't tell me nobody can judge these movies as individual movies.

 

In a lot of ways, yes I think TPM was better off for being closer to his original vision, however, that doesn't mean the classic trilogy is worse, it just isn't up to par yet. When the archival editions come out, they will be just as good methinks.

 

how do you feel the classic trilogy is not up to par with TPM, Gomer?

any examples?

 

Yeah, ANH ESB and ROTJ.

 

You mean special effects... that's what you're saying isn't it, that GL's vision is essentially the quality of the special effects, the visual look?

 

So even with the SEs, the Classic Trilogy is still not close enough to the PT? I would think CG-ing the Xwings and Tie Fighters in ANH would be enough. I really don't see how much more alterations can be fit in short of actually refilming the whole movie.

 

i meant examples of ways that the films are not up to par with the PT.

i am truly curious as to why you feel the films of the OT are not up to par.

please clarify.

 

The story, dialogue and acting is about as good as the prequels so far, but the effects could use some more polish here and there.

It's not that Lucas is more worried about the effects than the story, it's a matter of bringing the classic trilogy up to the standards he set with TPM and AOTC across the board.