ST George Lucas and the Mystery of the Treatment

Personally speaking, I'd rather he wasn't a fan but the majority loved them.

 

Very true.

I loved the OT and liked the PT. Sure not each movie was totally awesome all the way through, but Star Wars as a whole is very entertaining.

Let's just hope that after the ST finishes, we get to know what George was planning since they threw away his ideas. Maybe they kept some of the characters, but yeah.

 

What of it? It doesn't matter whether HE watches the movies or not. It matters whether I do or not.

 

Oh no please not another George Lucas raped my childhood...........

You do realise that without George Lucas there would be no Star Wars, no Jedi Forums and no reason for you to be bitter about the comment I made.

 

You do realize that I never SAID "George Lucas raped my childhood?"

My point was straightforward: whether Lucas feels the franchise has been taken from away from his basic idea or not is not relevant; whether he can watch them or not is not relevant. What any other solitary person feels about these movies, whether that person is named Django Fett or George Walton Lucas, is not relevant to me; whether they can watch them or not is not relevant to me. WHAT IS RELEVANT TO ME IS WHETHER I LIKE THEM OR NOT, WHETHER I WATCH THEM OR NOT. Because at the end of the day, I'm NOT George Lucas; I'm NOT anyone else. I'M ME. George Lucas is doing just fine for himself enjoying his retirement, and I'm not going to base my happiness, my enjoyment of a thing, on whether he likes it or not when he's miles and miles away living his life. And he's not living it, by the way, based on my opinion about anything, and he shouldn't.

It has nothing to do with what George Lucas did or did not do, with what he does or does not like. It has EVERYTHING to do with whether or not I'm going to let those kinds of concerns have agency over me, or let those concerns make my decisions for me. I'm not. Regardless of whether Star Wars would exist without him or not, he's a stranger to me. He's not my family or friends. He doesn't get to decide what I like.

Nor, by the way, should I get to decide what HE likes based on my preferences. Just for the sake of discussion, I don't think Lucas cares if I don't like a painting I'm doing, or about whether it adheres to my vision for it or not. And whether I do or don't, what of it? Why should he base his liking of something I do on whether or not I like it? That completely cuts out his own opinion on a piece of art. Maybe he likes it whether I do or not. And to care whether or not Lucas likes or can watch the films completely cuts out my opinion. Maybe I like them whether he does or doesn't.

Seriously, should I or would I do that for anything else? Should I base my liking of Star Trek, for instance, on whether or not Gene Roddenberry thought it was true to his vision or not? Of course not. Roddenberry's word was not and is not law. And if it isn't, then why should I care what he thinks about it? Should I base my enjoyment of Weeds on whether or not Jenji Kohan likes it? How important should Sherwood Schwartz's opinion be when it comes to my enjoyment of The Brady Bunch? Does the fact that they created those things matter when it comes to whether or not I like them? No indeed.

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter to me what other people think about anything in regards to the decisions I make. WHAT MATTERS IS WHAT I THINK. To suggest that what anyone else thinks should matter to me, and impact my decision to like or not like something, is ludicrous.

 

I agree. I love ole George... but him liking them, or not, has little significance to anything. I'm more concerned about my opinion of them to be honest...

 

This has to be the most egregious example I've seen of someone putting words in somebody else's mouth. How does stating that it's not important whether or not George Lucas watches the films translate into "George Lucas raped my childhood?" Baffling.

 

I wonder if the Rinzler book will give us any indication on the development side of the story? I think it's fairly obvious that the Story Group went back to earlier concepts batted around in the pre-production phase of the OT films. There's a lot of Lucas in that already. Hell, Lucas did that himself, mining the old ideas and concepts to build and go forward in each successive film in the series. We are going to see a modern film that balances every technique at the disposal of the filmmakers to tell a story that is based on previous pre-production concepts and earlier story conference ideas. With an addtional thirty years of original story telling between ROTJ and The Force Awakes. ILM is pushing the development of motion capture immersed in a total and complete digital technology environments(s) that will allow the consumer to interact with their favorite films in 3-D and/or holographically. Perhaps even choosing from several scenarios at key points in any given narrative. So I'm not concerned with the use of 35mm or a lack initiative in pushing the envelop on the horizons of technological advancement and cinema. That's being done on the basis of Moore's Law of technology.

 

I thought the scene was channeling a scene from GRR Martin's books.

 

Ok I just wanted to clarify this wasn't a rant on George Lucas raped my childhood which was why it was in italics which you didn't notice.

You like others have missed my original point by 1,000,000 miles. My point was never about whether any fan would see the film but whether the person who created this whole universe would see it. NEVER was my point on whether Lucas liked, hated or had no opinion of these films.

It was purely a comment that it would be a TRAGEDY that Lucas felt he couldn't watch the films, in the same way it would be a tragedy whether Roddenberry felt in the remaining years of his life that he could no longer watch a Star Trek film of serial. Lucas knew that the franchise could go in a different direction when he sold it and it seems that has always been a factor close to him ever since he set up Lucasfilm to keep Star Wars from studio control.

 

If the phrase "raped" could be henceforth replaced with the word "ruined" it'd be much appreciated. Not that the sentiment in and of itself is made any more valid, but there's really no reason in 2015 to continue propagating a meme created in an AICN talkback in 1999.

 

I believe Lucas will watch the hell out of this film. As he said in a recent interview, he's excited about watching TFA as a fan. In the dark just like everyone else. He's never been able to do that.

 

I really hope Lucas loves this movie. Given how the tone, style, and feel they seem to be aiming for, and how well they've concealed the films' secres in the teasers, I hope he feels the same way while watching this movie as we all did watching the original film for the first time.

 

Having been around back then, I can assure you that it was NOT a tragedy that Roddenberry didn't like what he was seeing. The further along he went, the more it was clear that there was very little that he DID like in Trek, and a lot of what he didn't like turned out to be extremely solid Trek. His opinion, therefore, was clearly not a valid measure as to whether what I was going to be watching was good or not. If an idea somehow broke with his completely, utterly pie-in-the-sky worldview, he damned it. Many of the best episodes of Trek wouldn't have passed his muster; he hated Family. Who the hell hates THAT episode?! If they had listened to him when he said families don't fight anymore in the 24th Century, we would have been robbed of one of the better episodes of that series. They ignored him and wrote it anyway.

It was NOT a tragedy that Roddenberry felt in the remaining years of his life that he could no longer watch a Trek film or series. The very idea that it was is what needs to be challenged.

It is NOT a tragedy if Lucas decides that he can't watch the films. The very basic premise of your argument that it WOULD be is what needs to be challenged.

At some point, every revolutionary person becomes a hindrance to the furtherance of the idea that they themselves have carried forward. At that point, they automatically become irrelevant; the idea has its own survival to think of, and to survive it will cast off any hindrance to it or else perish. Roddenberry became a hindrance after a time; he was not able to see that about himself, and he was not self-sufficient like Lucas was, so he was slowly and unceremoniously shoved to the side, his opinion more tolerated than heeded. Lucas had the wisdom and insight to see when he was done, and he had the power and the money to shape the manner of his leaving, and he did so while still on top and with a rather smart flourish (he is also a far nicer PERSON than Roddenberry was, but that's another story).

In culture, the person is not important; the IDEA is. The person is only important until the idea has self-sufficient life; then he ceases to be important. Then, only the idea matters - that, and the relationship it has with the many individual VIEWERS of the idea.

 

Speaking of Gene Roddenberry, it's a well established fact that he hated every Star Trek movie except for the first one (the only one he had direct control over) and The Voyage Home (which he only liked because it involved time travel and he really wanted to make a time travel movie). He especially got into heated arguments with Nicholas Meyer who directed Wrath of Khan and Undiscovered Country. So heated in fact that Nicholas had to storm out of meetings with Roddenberry because Star Trek's creator was just that unreasonable and insufferable, being actively against the elements that made the Trek films work. Meyer's movies are regarded as some of the best material the franchise has seen.

EDIT:,Ninja'd.

 

But not just ANY time travel movie; the rumor is he kept wanting to do a movie where they go back and undo the Kennedy assassination.

 

That's the one. It basically sounded like a redo of City on the Edge of Forever, but without the dramatic hook that kept us invested in that episode. Much like how The Motion Picture is basically The Changeling with a huge budget.

 

But would it be the same if Thomas Edison lost faith in the electric light bulb or Alexander Graham Bell lost faith in the telephone? What if Michelangelo had seen the additions to the Sistine Chapel done by other artists and decided he could never enter the chapel again, would that not be a PERSONAL tragedy for Michelangelo as seen by his piers? These are just examples, they probably make the media of cinema far less of an importance.

And that's what I feel it is, a PERSONAL tragedy for Lucas but to others its a sad indictment that the creator has lost faith in his creation.

 

The thing is, though, I cannot possibly find it in my heart to dislike The Motion Picture. That may actually be my favorite of the original films. Shocking, but true.

Loaded with script issues, yes. Filled to the gills with shots of people just staring at the viewscreen with their mouths agape, sure. Packed with pacing problems, positively. Derivative of old episode ideas, without question (but then, which of the films couldn't make that complaint?). But to my mind it's the only one of the films that had any REAL sense of scope. It's the one that had the best score of all the films put together. It's the one where the very idea of space travel was celebrated, and where the Enterprise looked its most gorgeous. It had the best design aesthetic of all the films. The effects were gorgeous rather than just effective. There was a LOT to like about that film; it was just boring, that's all. But I've liked worse movies.

How much do I like it? I like the film enough that I decided to hold my nose and just ignore the fact that I've since learned that the executive officer was played by a CONFESSED CHILD MOLESTER (Decker, how could you!?), even though I have personal reasons to just let that hard-to-ignore fact trigger my rage - I'd have to like a movie pretty damned much to try to look past the fact that a child molester is in it. It's that much of a guilty pleasure. I just never thought growing up that I'd have to feel THAT guilty watching it...

 

For me, enjoying the Motion Picture got a little easier when I realized the first hour is just a big reunion special, and the second half is a decent episode of the Original Series.

 

The restored Director's Edition was a huge improvement IMHO.

 

as much as I like the music, I find myself having to fast forward during the mouth agape staring scenes

It's also the movie that first gave us the theme heard in the TNG opening credits

 

Ah, Jerry. You were enjoyed...

 

As we saw with those episodes that were source material for TNG that ST: Phase II was a decent prospect. May be it was here when the whole franchise was getting messed about with that Roddenberry faith in the series started to be tested? Nimoy's hemming and hawing then Shatner demands for cash, directorial rights and his feud with Takei may be Roddenberry should've been grateful others took the strain.

 

Since neither one of those people actually invented the items you mentioned, I'm pretty sure everything would've been fine.