ST Franchise's Legacy vs. Short Term Profit

The Ewoks were designed because Lucas decided Wookies wouldn't make the point he wanted to make

I assume you mean "degrade" from a position being an artistic endevour.

No movie an entirely an artist endevour. Someone always needs to make their money back, plus a little bit on top of that. Lucas has NEVER made a Star Wars just because he wanted too.

And so far, what Disney is doing looks much better then the last "artistic" endevour that Lucas made.

 

Apparently you've not heard the "dare to be cute" story.

 

No. I mean degrade from care for the brand into one of pure exploitation. It's just a fact, the longer that Disney has Star Wars odds are it will enter a creative slump, but it will always make money.

In other words, the artistic quality will vary, but -- the goal of profit will remain. They may care about the quality now, but as long as it brings in money that care and attention to quality will probably weather away.

 

That same creative freedom produced Empire Strikes Back and all the Indiana Jones movies. Do you prefer Age of Ultron? Plenty of corporate oversight on movies like that.

No, that's not all it is.

 

I think every franchise has gotten there eventually. The only exception that comes to mind, oddly enough, is Fast and Furious. Seems like it gets more popular the longer it goes.

Also, I'm not counting things like Harry Potter, which are adapted works.

 

TPM effects supervisor Rob Coleman on Jar Jar:

He said that Lucas told him, though, that he had designed Jar Jar to appeal to children ages 9 to 15, and the director was confident the target group would find the character appealing.

http://articles.latimes.com/1999/jun/21/entertainment/ca-48611

 

Those aren't Coleman's words. They don't quote him on that. Lucas made all the movies with things for children to enjoy. The whole point was to make movies like they didn't make them anymore. Not so grown up sci-fi as things had become in the 70s. More like the space adventures of Lucas' youth, but a little more grown up. He made the movie he wanted to see. Nobody was making movies like that anymore, so he made one. The same thinking went into Indiana Jones.

 

Thats always been the goal of people making Star Wars movies. You think Lucas wanted to lose money on PT?

 

You're not aware that Rob Coleman came up with the idea of Yoda and Dooku talking and showcasing their force powers before lightsaber fighting, then. You're not aware of the countless contributions Lucas allowed, and the countless pieces of advice he took while making the prequels. It's too much to go into here, but there were many contributors, including Spielberg and Tom Stoppard.

On the Originals, Mark Hamill wanted to change his lines, and Lucas would not let him. Harrison Ford advised Hamill just to say the wrong lines and see if Lucas noticed. Nothing changed. Lucas had total creative independence from 1977 onward.

Lines were collaboratively changed on the OT? Oh. Lines were collaboratively changed on the PT too.

Really? Sounds familiar.

 

No one re-wrote Luca's scripts of the PT, they were re-written in the OT.

And if the PT has the same kind of collaboration as the OT, then Lucas simply hired worse people to work with when making the PT.

Anthony Daniels said this about it - ‘George (Lucas) has changed a lot over the years but I think he finds it slightly hard to collaborate,’ he added.
‘He made decisions that I believe might have been better discussed with other people. JJ is more collaborative. He likes to listen.’

 

Marvel/Avengers movies HAVE to have oversight because everything is connected

(Im not saying this will happen this is just an example)

Let's say jj returns for star trek XIV and wants a star wars crossover but rian johnson had rey said she hated the federation with every fiber of her being

They'd be screwed

 

In an ongoing series with multiple writers, that's the showrunner's job. Kevin Feige is basically the showrunner for Marvel, but he's still not independent. The higher-ups have lots of notes and changes. That kind of thing can frustrate the directors to no end, because the ultimate decision makers are not someone they can collaborate with directly. The "showrunner" on Star Wars is now The Story Group. Disney had lots of notes and changes for them on something so small as Strange Magic, so no doubt they will do the same on Star Wars. When the showrunners don't have creative independence, then you get top down corporate control. Often times, the owners are not concerned with story continuity, like the showrunner would be, when they demand changes to a series. Most people don't really nitpick Marvel Cinematic Universe continuity problems, because continuity isn't really expected with a studio controlled series.

 

All the scripts were written and re-written by Lucas. That is how it works.

From the start to finish whether it's one the page or the editing.

That is purely subjective to each individual.

I would say the collaboration on the prequels was excellent from everything I've been able to find out about them and the results were some of the most brilliant movies in cinema history.

I would say he knows far less about Lucas and the way he works than he'd like to admit. By that statement he obviously does not know about how Lucas worked or the collaboration that was done. The scale and scope of the prequels dwarfs anything that was ever done in Star Wars before. I very much doubt the new movies will come anywhere close to the insane production levels of the prequels.

I think one of the basic problems is that many people still think in terms of "write the script and then shoot the script" not appreciating that as a visual storytelling medium the enormous number of ideas generated by the Lucasfilm personnel at all stages of the movies.

The work and collaboration Lucas did with all phases of the production is there to find out about all the way through the making of books and behind the scenes features.

The thing is though the basic story and direction of the characters and script in writing terms obviously comes from Lucas as always. Everyone else around him on all 6 movies could help him refine things and rework things but at the end of the day it's his story. It always is.

 

Edit: Wrong thread.

 

You're not aware of the collaboration that went on in making the dialogue for the films. Contributors to the scripts were Rob Coleman, Tom Stoppard and Jonathan Hale.

He hired Steven Spielberg and Tom Stoppard. He also asked to hire Kasdan to brush up the TPM script, but Kasdan thought the script was good and didn't want to do something that was not needed. He was more than a brush up artist at that point. That's all he did on ESB and ROTJ.

Daniels is talking about Lucas getting MORE collaborative since the time of the OT. Mark Hamill complains at length about Lucas being non collaborative on the OT here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=772&v=W5EU5kM2pX0 at 12:51

Lucas didn't have a reputation for being collaborative at the time of the OT. Lucas wrote Star Wars, and co-wrote ESB and ROTJ. The stories are his, and he owned the rights to the movies by funding them himself, except the first one, where Alan Ladd Jr. gave him his trust and creative freedom.

 

All the scripts were written and re-written by Lucas. That is how it works.

From the start to finish whether it's one the page or the editing.


That is purely subjective to each individual.

I would say the collaboration on the prequels was excellent from everything I've been able to find out about them and the results were some of the most brilliant movies in cinema history.

I would say he knows far less about Lucas and the way he works than he'd like to admit. By that statement he obviously does not know about how Lucas worked or the collaboration that was done. The scale and scope of the prequels dwarfs anything that was ever done in Star Wars before. I very much doubt the new movies will come anywhere close to the insane production levels of the prequels.


I think one of the basic problems is that many people still think in terms of "write the script and then shoot the script" not appreciating that as a visual storytelling medium the enormous number of ideas generated by the Lucasfilm personnel at all stages of the movies.

The work and collaboration Lucas did with all phases of the production is there to find out about all the way through the making of books and behind the scenes features.

The thing is though the basic story and direction of the characters and script in writing terms obviously comes from Lucas as always. Everyone else around him on all 6 movies could help him refine things and rework things but at the end of the day it's his story. It always is.[/quote]

Leight Brackett and Lawrence Kasdan wrote ESB, with Kasdan also writing RotJ (using stories by Lucas). Lucas shared a writting credit on AotC, and not on the other PT movies. The OT were much more collabrative efforts then the PT.

"brilliant movies in cinema history" - .........right.

Yes, lets not listen to a man who was on ALL 7 sets at all. What does he know that a fan sitting at home doesn't?

No, just about everyone I've ever spoken too knows the basics of how movies are made, re-writes, etc... But some film makers are much more open to collaboration then others - as Daniels points out, Lucas finds it hard too. The difference between the PT and OT is on the PT no one was there to tell him no, to filter out the bad ideas, to change the dialog when it needed changing. There wasn't someone different sitting in the director's chair bring something new or different to the table. Its Lucas from craddle to grave and the PT suffered for it, while the OT (and its looks like the ST) benefitted from those different views and voices and opinions.

Not enough to actually get a written credit, so how much did they actually contribute?

Claiming Lucas "hired" Spielberg is a laughable attempt to re-write history.

What does lucas owning the franchise have to do with anything? The question was is the new group going to ruins star wars since its no longer just 1 person guiding the ship - and the counter is when it was just 1 person guiding the ship (ie the PT), some pretty.........meh movies were produced while it appears that this new group has produced something very good. History/facts would inidicate that having a group is a better creative dynamic then a single person doing what they want.

its weird how so many fans are unable to even acknowledge the bad in Star Wars, and have to go such lengths to defend every little aspect of it. Admitting that the PT has issues (along with some cool ideas) and Lucas has some serious flaws (along with some pretty amazing assets) as a film maker doesn't mean you aren't a fan.

 

.

 

Sorry, I love all 6 movies and I don't see any "bad" in any of them. That's just the way it is. Imperfections are not "bad." There are no serious flaws in any of the movies that I can see. I honestly can't imagine seeing serious flaws in them. They're that damn good. Any serious problems in the films are subjective. You really need to learn that.

How much did Willard Huyck and Gloria Katz contribute on the first one? How much did Leigh Brackett contribute on the second one? The former actually wrote used lines and got no credit. The later had her whole script tossed and got credit. Lucas didn't give himself a credit for co-writing ESB, but he did for ROTJ. Credits don't mean diddly. And maybe you don't know what "Story by" means, but it means the actual story. Not just some vague sentences written on one piece of paper. You don't know what writer wrote which lines because it's all done in the same style of dialogue.

 

Too good to miss, but when I heard Rick McCallum start waffling about the number of this-and-thats involved in developing the 'Final Duel', all I could think of was that great quote from Macbeth: '...a tale, told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.'

I'm amazed that so much went into a scene which carried so little emotional heft. All fur coat and no knickers, as my grandma might have said.

 

One of the most memorable scenes in modern cinema.

 

Then you just have no critcal eye at all, because there is good AND bad in all of them. Honestly, if you're going to claim there is no "bad" in all 6 of those movies, it makes your opinion completely invalid to me.

The point isn't "this writer wrote that, this writer wrote this". The point is the movies were generally better when Lucas had people around to edit him, tell him no, filter his ideas etc.. With the PT he didn't have that. The ST does have that. Abrams isn't surrounded by nothing but yes men.

 

Yes Lucas wanted to lose money. . .

Of course not!

But there's a difference between trying to make something profitable, and trying to make a profit. What I'm talking about here is the obvious eventual degradation of the franchise's quality in favor of seeking the path of least resistance towards profit. It happened with Disney Animation, perhaps the brands most prized and oldest asset, and it's going to happen to Marvel, and eventually The SW brand.

 

Everything in the movies is at least good to me. Is there literally no series you like that is at least "good" all the time? Or do you see bad in everything? How is it any fun to watch movies if you see bad in all of them? Do you like the dianoga? Because I do even though it's a stop motion animated eye popping out of the water. I LIKE the "cheesy" dialogue. I don't like movies where everything is trying to be uber serious and realistic. I think The Dark Knight is bad, like a bad cop drama with Batman in it. It has good moments, but it has a lot of bad moments. I think Star Wars is better, and that's why I'm a fan of the work. I judge movies very critically, and I really, really like what I see and hear in these movies. I'm not embarrassed when my opinion doesn't match the majority. I judge things for myself. I don't bother being a fan of things I think are full of bad.

 

The only way is up for Star Wars, degradation really isn't that much of a possibility at the moment.

 

Goodbye.