Frank Darabont defends TPM!!!!

Clonetrooper1000: I know nothing about those guilds and all that stuff, but I think Darth_Insidious quoted an interview with Frank Darabont, he didn't make it up.

here it is.

Fair enough, the legal issues are what has prevented it. Therefore not any opinion of DGA/WGA and vice-versa has affected this decision, it was purely legal. And Frank was still WGA when Lucasfilm enquired about his availability, therefore any enmity existing between Lucas and WGA is not applicable to George's decsions - thanks for the helpful link Darth Sillyname.

Clonetrooper1000 -

I must take issue with you on one thing, you said - I think Darth Insidious should stop changing the topic of discussion...

If you look back thru this thread you'll see that for the first page and a half we're all talking about Darabont. then at 5/12 9:54am Shelley writes a post which is nothing but a vicious irrlelevant attack on Gary Kurtz. she does it again shortly after at 5/12 11:16am. AFTER that Insidious makes his post challenging her on her statements and the thread goes off topic.
It was Shelley who dragged it off topic. She's made these claims about Kurtz before, she's hijacked other threads with them, she does it to bait people.

Durwood -
according to your logic : lack of proof is no proof
George Lucas is a bank robber - after all no-one has ever said he's not. Your logic doesn't make sense.
You could make up anything you like about someone and just say "well no-one has denied it". thats crazy.


g

That's a nice straw man you've constructed there.

By the way, lack of proof means you can neither prove nor disprove something. In this case, the burden of proof falls on you to prove that Lucas is a bank robber. Clearly since no such evidence exists, simply saying, "Well, no one has denied it!" is clearly not proof.

As such, Gary Kurtz (and Darth_Insidious by extension) have made some claims, so the burden of proof clearly falls on them, and again, "Well, no one has denied it!" is clearly not proof.

Edit: Clarification (since some people clearly don't know what a straw man argument is)

it's your straw man Durwood, I was just pointing him out.

g

Durwood -

Let me paraphrase you :
In this case the burden of proof falls on you to prove that Lucas fired Kurtz. Clearly since no such proof exists, simply saying "well no-one has denied it" is clearly not proof.

You are the one making claims, you have claimed Lucas fired Kurtz, the burden of proof falls on to you to prove it.

Or retract.

g

You are the one making claims, you have claimed Lucas fired Kurtz, the burden of proof falls on to you to prove it.

Yes, which is why I've conceded that it is inconclusive. Finding information on the internet about Gary Kurtz and his involvement with STAR WARS outside of a Kurtz interview has been a real challenge. As I said earlier, the only third party account I've found was a blurd on some movie site that simply said, "For whatever reason, Gary Kurtz was not invited back to produce RETURN OF THE JEDI."

Until someone can provide information that corroborates or disputes Kurtz's account, the matter is still up in the air. Like I said.

Durwood - until someone can provide information that corroborates or disputes Kurtz's account, the matter is still up in the air.

Okay here is what Bunny Alsup said about Lucas and Kurtz:
Gary was always there for him to get the scripts done and so on. They are both very individual and creative and they know all aspects of film together...I was actually quite happy when Gary decided to leave, it became so big and corporate, like working at Universal studios.
From Empire Building , Garry Jenkins, P.236 and 240

Bunny Alsup was the first employee hired at Lucasfilm, she was Lucas's secretary for many years.

Now - Can we bury this myth once and for all?
g

Who really cares whether or not Kurtz was fired or what the REAL reason Darabont didn't write the script was?

When Darabont says, "I hope George didn't change a word in Phantom Menace", that is NOT a half hearted remark only to butter up to George. Had he simply avoided negativity, then you might be able to argue that. But when he goes out of his way to basically say how perfect he thought it all was, he TRUELY does like it. No question about it.

Back to Kurtz, I find it funny how no one seems to mention that it was Kazanjian that co-exectutive produced Raiders of the Lost Ark with George, NOT Gary Kurtz. And as we all know, it would have been Kurtz in the Raiders credits instead of Kazanjian had Kurtz not departed with Lucasfilm. Kazanjian, whom meany of you accuse as a far inferior producer to Kurtz, seems to have been a contruter to possibly the greatest adventure movie ever (Raiders). Where was Kurtz? Oh, thats right, he wasn't involved.

I thought you said it all went down hill once Kurtz departed.

"I think PHANTOM MENACE will be assessed some years down the road more fairly than it is now."

what the hell! i thought TPM was well-done from the start.

cheers!

I don't care what Lucas originally intended. He also wanted Han Solo to be green skinned and for Luke to be called "Starkiller". If he changed these things I would be just as annoyed. The simple FACT is that the orginal version of the Greedo scene looked better and was better for Han's character development. The new scene is appauling.

The simple FACT is that the orginal version of the Greedo scene looked better and was better for Han's character development. The new scene is appauling.

Thank you for another fine example of mistaking opinion for fact.

"JenX, there is two options for a film of this magnitude that followed three of the most loved films ever.

You either have high expectations for it (ie you think it will be good and enjoyable).

Or you you don't have high hopes, which means that you expect to be let down."

Or maybe people judge movies on the actual movie itself. I know that seems like a mind boggling concept.

"No kidding, how the hell can some of you sit there and say SW don't captivate kids anymore. Are you a kid? My nephew saw it when he was 4, and let me tell you he's 6 now and it's all ON. The kid can't stop talking about it"

Kids also like McDonalds hamburgers, kids have no standards at all, it doesn't mean they don't deserve better, it doesn't mean they won't like a gourmet hamburger if they have it, they just don't know any better.

Kids like every movie they see if there is sufficient load noises and colours, why do you think all those crapass straight to dvd disney animated sequels get made? Kids will take what ever comes their way, but that doesn't change the fact that they deserve the best movie possible.

For the record I liked TPM, the opinions of many of it (and AotC's) defenders are always so ludicrous and stupid that it makes it unappealling to want to be associated.

Like the Christianity, its not the religon that pushed me away, its the people who like it.

Instead of constantly debating wether or not the Greedo shooting first thing was/was not the right decision, by stating how it detracts from the films/story. We've heard it many times how it screws Hans character up. Lets ask ourselves what it actually BRINGS to the film. What are the positive aspects of Greedo shooting first. Here, I'll start..Greedo shooting first is good because: It makes the aliens seem like imbeciles, who can't shoot straight and can't even shoot inanimate people sitting less than a foot away directly in front of them. This is good because, as we know from the PT, all aliens in Star Wars are imbeciles. Jar-Jar is an imbecile, the podracers can't drive properly and die in idiotic ways, so its only fitting that Greedo can't shoot things directly in front of him. The same as when alien speeder divers on Corruscant nearly collide with traffic, they say "what the!?!?"
So it connects the two trilogies together.

True true

Well, hello, Rebel Scumb. When did you get back in town?

Rebel Scumb: "Or maybe people judge movies on the actual movie itself. I know that seems like a mind boggling concept."

The point is that there are always other factors - external to the film in question - that affect people's judgements. There is probably little doubt that this is the case with the prequels, especially TPM. Franks views appear to be very honest and very well justified.

Rebel Scumb: "Like the Christianity, its not the religon that pushed me away, its the people who like it."

Well thats unfair on Christ and George

You should not let other people's opinions prevent you from making your own.

"For the record I liked TPM, the opinions of many of it (and AotC's) defenders are always so ludicrous and stupid that it makes it unappealling to want to be associated."

One reason I don't go around saying all the good qualities of the PT is that I may sound like a gusher. As you said, the gusher's can sound ludicrous.

On the other hand, I'm afraid to go around and criticise the PT in certain areas, as I may sound like a basher. The basher's can be just as ludicrous as the gushers. That's why I only do these things with personal friends, since none of them know what a gusher or basher is.

"Like the Christianity, its not the religon that pushed me away, its the people who like it."

Heh, I have the same problem. If I find something just adequate, but everyone else praises it beyond belief, then I'll usually end up hating it. I know it's the wrong way to act, but it's hard to help it. I can understand where you're coming from. I try to stay away from gusher or basher threads, or else I may start doing this with SW...

About the actual topic: I'm glad Darabont liked it. I doubt he was lying to get on George's good side. George is a shy guy. I don't think he gets very angry at any time, and I'm sure he can handle criticism (he just prefers not to ). I do agree with him on one thing: The script is good. Very good. The only problem is that GL writes more poetically. His words belong in books, not films. One thing that made Han such a great character was the dialogue that Ford and others would alter to sound more like his character. I've brought this quote by Ford up before, and I'll bring it up again, "You can write that, George, but you sure as hell can't say it." Luckily, with TPM, Neeson was, in fact, able to make these lines sound rather cool. Strange as it is, Hales was able to make the dialogue a bit better in AOTC (at least with Obiwan's scenes). The love scenes...well, there's GL's poetic writing again.

I think GL can write well, just not in this medium.

Cometgreen, who wrote way more than he needed to

No Durwood it is a FACT because you would have to be blind to prefer the new version where Greedo misses by a foot and they jolt Ford's head to the right. It is no different from me saying that it is a FACT that the scene was ruined by Lucas popping his head in the frame and winking. Some things are so blatant you have to stop calling them opinions.

No Durwood it is a FACT...

No, it's an opinion. I agree with your OPINION that the execution left something to be desired, but I disagree with your OPINION that it "ruined" the film or changed it in any way. And that's a fact!

Greedo misses by a foot and they jolt Ford's head to the right.

..in a very unconvincing fashion; I might add, and thats a FACT!

What the hell is the point of having Greedo shoot first?

Really - what was Lucas trying to achieve?

??

g

Beats me.

Easy. Lucas didn't want Solo's character to be perceived as being a ruthless cold blooded killer type. Even if it was only Greedo he blasted.

I know this explanation probably won't satisfy the masses, so feel free to proceed with your never ending discussion.