Have some fans come down too hard on Lucas about TPM?

Discussion in 'The Phantom Menace' started by TheJediCharles, Jan 23, 2002.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Jabbadabbado Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Mar 19, 1999
    star 7
    December 8, 1999, Wednesday
    Hasbro to Cut 20% of Its Jobs and Take $97 Million Charge

    By MILT FREUDENHEIM (NYT) 675 words
    Late Edition - Final, Section C, Page 1, Column 2

    LEAD PARAGRAPH - The toymaker Hasbro Inc. said yesterday that it was eliminating 2,200 jobs, or more than 20 percent of its work force, and taking a restructuring charge of $97 million, or 50 cents a share, in the final quarter of 1999.

    Sales of Hasbro's ''Star Wars'' line were sluggish as the latest movie failed to meet the hype-induced expectations at the box office. The company, based in Pawtucket, R.I., hopes to compensate with Pokemon trading cards, one of this year's sensations.
  2. TheJediCharles Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Dec 28, 2001
    star 3
    "You can talk you want, but until you provide hard facts, it's just meaningless drivel. "

    Even hard facts can't make it more than drivel. Just because one might manage to prove that Lucas was interested in making money that has not 'proven' that he is incapable of being a fine moviemaker, or that he indeed failed with TPM, or that he deserves the attacks on his character like so many feel free in doing hereabouts.
  3. Ultimate Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Sep 14, 2000
    star 3
    People are seeming to foget that most of the deals that were sold (like the toys one, and the Pepsi one) were made in the early/mid ninties before the SE's to include all the SE's and the Prequels (with the exception of Pepsi which was just for the SE's and TPM). Also, most if not all of the Star Wars lines have been the top sellers for each of their respective companies.

    Plus the companes that incurred losses (despite having SW lines as top sellers) were due to the fact that not only did they (not Lucas) project it would outsell earlier SW liscenses (which it did), but they projected it would outsell the SW lines by an almost ridiculous, inflated margin. Basically they expected TPM to sell twice as much in a year as the entire trilogy did in a decade. That is their own poor planning and unrealistic projections. I find it hard to believe that cold, heartless, mega-companies that make millions/billions of dollars a year bought into supposed Lucas induced "hype". They just made some very poor decisions.
  4. TravCon12 Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Aug 7, 1998
    star 3
    Hasbro to Cut 2,200 Jobs
    Tue, Dec 07, 99 09:49:55 AM EST

    Reuters News Service reports that Hasbro will be eliminating 2,200 jobs (19% of its workforce) as part of a company-wide restructuring plan. In the report, Hasbro Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Alan Hassenfeld states, "As we transition Hasbro from a toy and game manufacturer to being a leader in children's and family leisure time and entertainment, we must realign our business to support our commitment to technology and game play. They are the keys to our continued growth."

    Hmmm Reuters didn't seem to draw the same conclusion Jabba.

    Also you left out the other parts of the article about how a number of Hasbro's toy lines failed to live up to earnings expections, not just Star Wars.
  5. Darth23 Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 14, 1999
    star 4
    From Akron Beacon Journal. (of all places :p)




    Published Friday, June 2, 2000,
    in the Akron Beacon Journal.

    "No store is overrun with toys based on the characters from the
    movie, and Disney's usual marketing muscle is noticeably
    absent. And judging from the limited shelf space dedicated to
    the much-hyped Chicken Run, an animated film due late this
    month, DreamWorks is treading lightly also.

    ``I think that expectations going into it (Star Wars) were so
    huge that it was almost impossible to live up to that
    expectation,'' said Melissa Williams, a toy industry analyst for
    the investment and research firm of Gerard Klauer and Mattison
    in New York.

    Although Hasbro wouldn't release exact figures, spokeswoman
    Holly Ingram said the company was far from disappointed with
    its experience.

    ``(It) was a good year for Hasbro's Star Wars boys action line,
    with record shipments and record sales. The Star Wars boys
    line was the No. 1 boys action brand for '99,'' said Ingram.

    Big indeed.

    Williams estimated that Hasbro sold $650 million in Star Wars
    toys. In comparison, she said a hit film like one of the Batman
    movies would generate an average of $100 million in sales.

    Phantom Menace toys were far from retail poison, but some
    smaller retailers such as Socko! Comics in Stow took a hit.

    At Jami Meeker's Fishcreek Road shop, the Star Wars
    merchandise sits in its own corner, but few of the toys there are
    affiliated with the most recent George Lucas science fiction
    fantasy.

    ``By Christmas of last year distributors were selling a case of
    action figures for $20 (16 figures were packed in each case),''
    said Meeker, co-owner of Socko! ``Generally, the toy line
    didn't do well.''

    Meeker's experience was typical of some retailers, said Bill
    Jensen, executive editor of Playthings, a toy retailing trade
    magazine.

    ``Coming from the retailers, a lot of them said, `we learned our
    lesson,' '' Jensen said. ``There was that big rush in the beginning,
    but I think what they realize is the people that fuel the action
    figure market is the kids. And the kids weren't as taken as the
    25-year-old you saw online. It's a whole different mythology.''

    Ultimately, the Phantom Menace toys may have fallen victim to
    the success of the Star Wars franchise, Jensen said. Hasbro
    overproduced the figures in anticipation of a white-hot market
    filled with children who swore allegiance to Pokemon long
    before The Phantom Menace was released.

    Given Star Wars' continued popularity for 23 years, there was
    every reason to expect out-of-this-world business. The toy
    business also continues to be a very lucrative industry."


    So what do we have here? A normal toy line sells $100 million - TPM sold $650 million but Habro made even more stuff than that. $650 million wasn't enough.

    Lucas may approve what is or is not sold, but Lucas did not tell Hasbro that it should lose money if it only sold 650 million bucks worth of TPM stuff.

  6. Jabbadabbado Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Mar 19, 1999
    star 7
    True. Hasbro made plenty of mistakes, including the price it paid for the Star Wars license.

    CBJedi, since you're the moderator here, I'm holding you accountable for allowing these unbelievably rude attacks directed at me rather than at the debate. I assume that because you're biased against my arguments you're more inclined to let people resort to name calling and ad hominem attacks. I have not attacked any of them or their characters. I have argued that GL is a businessman more than an artist, something of a huckster, and possibly not a nice person, but I have not directed those arguments against any of the posters here. Usually you do an adequate job, CB, but yesterday and today you screwed the pooch.
  7. TheJediCharles Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Dec 28, 2001
    star 3
    I wish some major publication would publish an article on how "if you don't like something don't go to places that are created to celebrate them" so I can use it as PROOF bashers should just get lost... since articles mean so much to them.

    Edit: or maybe they won't publish such a thing because they just concider that to be common sense.
  8. TravCon12 Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Aug 7, 1998
    star 3
    Subject(s): General financial/business news

    Document Type: Articles & General info


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Summary: PAWTUCKET, R.I. (AP) -- Second-quarter earnings at Hasbro Inc. plunged 80 percent due to slower sales in three major product lines, Pokemon, Star Wars and Furby toys and games. The company's shares fell 21 percent on the news.


    Boy Hasbro bombed out on even Pokemon and Furby.....that most be Lucas fault too.
  9. Jabbadabbado Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Mar 19, 1999
    star 7
    Licensed product sales also hit record highs in 1999, thanks in big part in TPM. But one of my points is that the huge price Lucas charged Hasbro for the license made it necessary to build those huge inventories - because without those huge levels of sales it would be impossible to turn a profit.

    And it turned out to be impossible to turn a profit. If Lucas Licensing had been a bit more sensible, and if the movie had been a bit better, everyone could have made out like a bandit, not just Lucas.
  10. TravCon12 Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Aug 7, 1998
    star 3
    Oh wooh is me....I call Lucas a liar, greedy, hoaxster, take pop-shots at his personal appearance and the raising of his children. In mid-arguement I say I do not really think he is such and such, and then later on in the debate say that he is indeed such and such. I do this in a fan site of all places and I get people who do not take kindly to those kind of attacks and who retailiate?

    Give me a break. If you are going to come in into a fan site and attack the film and the maker, on not only a profession and critical level, but also on a personal level, I have to wonder what you were thinking?
  11. Jabbadabbado Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Mar 19, 1999
    star 7
    On the other hand, I think GL is a good enough businessman to learn from his mistakes.

    He is going to take steps to limit the merchandising for AOTC, because he knows he overdid it for TPM. He knows he oversold the license. He knows he should have kept it more restrained to maintain the value of the brand. He knows he should not have helped push Hasbro and Lego into a financial tailspin. And he knows part of the media backlash is due to his extreme devotion to commercial merchandising.

    So I think you'll see a much more modest approach for AOTC. And that, more than anything else, will be the proof that I'm right. GL tries his best to do what's good for his business.

    Look, Travcon. I obviously don't know for a fact that Lucas is greedy. We all know he's an autocrat and a control freak. We all know his zealous litigious nature when it comes to protecting his intellectual property (because that is the value of Lucas licensing). I also agree with most of you that Lucas probably isn't all that interested in material wealth.

    He has pumped most of his money into his business empire. If GL is greedy for anything, it's power and control. Market power. Financial power. He dictates the hardest distribution terms in the business for his films, not because he has to , but because he knows he can get away with it. He is a business man.
  12. TravCon12 Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Aug 7, 1998
    star 3

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Title: Hasbro Reports $25M Q1 Loss Purchase this Document - more details


    Get this article for $1.00.








    Source: AP Online
    Date: 04/23/2001 18:41
    Price: $1.00

    Document Size: Very Short (0517 words)
    Document ID: EB20010423170000053
    Subject(s): General financial/business news

    Author(s): BRIAN CAROVILLANO, Associated Press Writer
    Document Type: Articles & General info


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Summary: PAWTUCKET, R.I. (AP) -- Hasbro Inc. reported a greater-than-expected first quarter loss Monday as the company was hurt by declining revenues for its Pokemon and Furby products and the sale of its interactive division.

    Wow another loss on Hasbros part and more job cuts, but this time it sites Pokemon and Furby and its interactive division as declining revenues and not Star Wars.

    Sounds like a Hasbro problem not a Lucas problem.

  13. Jabbadabbado Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Mar 19, 1999
    star 7
    Read Star Wars out of it if you want, but I'm perfectly willing to admit that Star Wars was only part of the problem at Hasbro, as with Lego.
  14. Doo-Kimmie Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Oct 22, 2001
    star 1
    I'm going back to the question posted in the poll. I do believe some fans have come down too hard on Lucas about TPM.

    IMHO, because TPM was not the "slick, dark" story that fans had hoped or hyped it up to be (probably, again IMO, due to the success of the cynical, dark film "The Matrix"), these fans said that TPM was a disappointment. It is my opinion that TPM is not a bad film. I think it is a great film. It has its flaws, all films do. But because we as a culture have moved to a more cynical society, the innocence of TPM is seen as dull, boring, or a huge disappointment.

    Having watched the A&E Biography, I cannot see how anyone could think of Lucas as a money-hungry business man more interested in the bottom line than in his art. He said in the Biography interview that he loves all his films. Yes, some did not do so well (Howard the Duck, Radioland Murders), but he is proud of them nonetheless, because they are his films.

    If Lucas was so interested in money, wouldn't it be in his best interests to hand over all things Star Wars to the studios and just sit back and let the money roll in? Why doesn't he do this? Because, if he signed over Star Wars, the kinds of films produced would be just hackneyed, formulaic "blockbuster" summer flicks that the studios are now, unfortunately, famous for inundating audiences with.

    Star Wars was, is, and always will be something beyond the studio film. They are bought and paid for by a single man, George Lucas. It's all his own money. It's his story. Let the man get on with it.

    I promise to put my soapbox away.
    :cool:
  15. Shelley Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Sep 9, 2001
    star 5
    Would you make up your mind, Jabba?

    Lucas is greedy and sleazy...no wait, he isn't all that greedy...no wait, he is greedy...no wait, he's a control freak...no wait, he admits his mistakes...no wait, he's greedy and a huckster and sleazy...no wait, he's not greedy...
  16. Jabbadabbado Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Mar 19, 1999
    star 7
    I want to offer an alternative to the "Lucas is all about his art" story. Feel free to pick the facts out of my arguments and disregard my conclusions. It doesn't matter whether I'm right or not, just that the cold hard facts support the idea that Lucas didn't merely luck into being one of the top 100 or so richest people in the world.

    The A&E biography was a fluff piece, with very little useful, and absolutely no new information about GL. It ignored his litigiousness, his cutthroat marketing policies, it made no ironic note in offering up the fact that, in order to free himself of studio control and commercial interests, GL became one of the biggest commercial forces in the industry.

    One of the reasons Hollywood is as commercial as it is is because Lucas pioneered, refined and brought to its absolute peak the role of merchandising in big budget movies. He outDisneys Disney.

    There is a mix of good and bad in the man. Of course. There is an autocratic streak, a lust for power and control, an apparent joy in playing hardball with his business partners, zealous defense of his intellectual property, and the confusion of the historical record as it filters through his public relations/marketing machine.

    And, apparently, all his good movies are long behind him.
  17. JarJarGabor Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Feb 4, 2001
    star 2
    MountainMan, I don't want to argue semantics with you. You called Jabba a moron. You also said he was "stone deaf" or whatever. Jabba has not called you anything.

    That was clear-cut flame. You can't spin your way out of that one.
  18. Bud Frescoe Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    May 19, 2000
    star 3
    Okay, I will try to respond to all of the comments addressed to me?I apologize if I miss anything.

    ===?First of all, there was no "editing team" on Star Wars. After firing the original editor early in the production, much of the editing duties fell on Lucas' wife and Lucas himself. So the "editing team" was, in fact, George Lucas and his wife.?===

    Um, no, and if that?s the story that George is telling now, this becomes another example of George altering his past. The story I have always heard, and for which there is plenty of evidence, is this: George was suppose to edit ANH by himself. George attempted to edit Star Wars, but his version was awful, and he knew it (ANH chapter of Skywalking). He then hired Marcia Lucas, Paul Hirsch and Richard Chew to edit the film. Marcia worked on the film for a while, but then left the team in order to edit Taxi Driver (Skywalking and Scorsese on Scorsese). Marcia, Richard and Paul won academy awards for their work (the ?proof? is the nice, shiny picture in Skywalking of Paul Hirsch, Richard Chew and Marcia Lucas all holding their Oscars).

    Until the A&E Biography, I have never heard the story that Lucas fired the original editor and then edited the film himself with his wife. Maybe George is saying he fired himself as editor of the film, in which case his story fits with the evidence. But until someone comes up with a name of an editor who worked on ANH before Lucas?s version, I am going to stick with the Skywalking version, and make the claim that George?s claim in the A&E Biography is not accurate.


    ===?As I've said before, I have no reason to distrust Lucas, so if he says that it was always his intention for Greedo to shoot first but that it was unclear in the original cut, why should I disbelieve him?===?Perhaps [George] did always mean for Greedo to shoot first, but didn't script it that way originally because he thought it worked better for Han to shoot first. He changes his mind a lot, as has been established, but whereas you and Jabba seem to think it's a character flaw, I think it shows he's human?===

    You should disbelieve George?s tale because all of the evidence (the script, the editors? comments, logic, the sideways shot in the SE?s) strongly suggests that George is not telling the truth, and because George has a motive for lying. People were upset with the Greedo shoots first thing because it alters Han?s character arc and was a sign that George was influenced by the PC Police (or simply that he was losing his edge). If people don?t like the SE version, they won?t buy tickets or buy the videotape. George wants people to buy tickets and the video. So he makes the claim that Greedo was always suppose to shoot first because he knows that fans are more likely to embrace something if he claims that it was ?always suppose to be this way.? A simple white lie that doesn?t hurt anyone, but it is not the truth. Now, if George came out and said, ?I changed my mind and now want Greedo to shoot first,? my reaction would be very different: I would disagree with his choice as an artist and grumble about that, but I wouldn?t say that George has a character flaw (well, maybe just bad taste).


    ===?I imagine that the matte lines could have been erased. Where's your evidence that the FX people wanted them erased and Lucas ignored them??===

    I am claiming that Lucas is distributing an inferior product in order to make deadlines (which means he is choosing commerce over art). The fact that the ESB and ROTJ SE?s were released before the fx work was completed is common knowledge (hence the necessity of an Ultimate Edition)?also, if you look at the film, you can notice that the Hoth sequences were cleaned up properly, yet the matte lines in the space battles were not. It seems very unlikely that the fx people didn?t want to clean up the space battle matte lines, and very likely that they didn?t have time because they were forced to meet a deadline.

    ===?Lucas is a greedy, money-grubbing tycoon who cares nothing about art. Scorsese is an artist who ca
  19. SomeRandomNerd Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Dec 20, 1999
    star 4
    Jabbadabbado,

    You've commented a few times that Hasbro paid too much for the Star Wars licence.

    How much did they pay?
  20. SomeRandomNerd Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Dec 20, 1999
    star 4
    >>>>I am claiming that Lucas is distributing an inferior product in order to make deadlines (which means he is choosing commerce over art).

    He started the Special Editions with the aim of cleaning up the films for the 20th Anniversary. (Or at least, he claimed to.)

    He cleaned up the films for the 20th anniversary.

    How exactly is this a commercial over artistic decision?
    :confused:


    >>>>People were upset with the Greedo shoots first thing because it alters Han?s character arc and was a sign that George was influenced by the PC Police (or simply that he was losing his edge)

    I sometimes wonder whether "the fans" would have been as upset if he changed it so that Han shot first...
  21. prof_frink Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Feb 1, 1999
    star 3
    I'm not sure why I'm bothering to post again here, but quite frankly I'm getting a bit dizzy at the back and forth debate going on...

    Here's my irrelevant take on things.

    1. Fans (like me) are always saying to 'bashers' why do you come here? Why don't you go where your interests lie. And quite frankly I agree with this, to a degree.

    We should never blindly accept things the way they are, everything deserves to be scrutinized, no matter how much we love it - but it's factless debates that irritate me.

    What happens all too often is that 'bashers' throw out inane comments like 'TPM was a failure, that's a FACT' or 'George Lucas sold out, that's a FACT' and then the cycle begins of the 'fan' asking for proof.

    So many people come up to me and say 'That new Star Wars movie sucks' because they know that I'm the fan and that I'm the one they need to argue this with - so I always ask them back 'Why?' And the response I get is as if they were quoting Entertainment Weekly 'Jar-Jar sucks, that kid in the movie is boring' blah blah... The point that I'm trying to make is that the easiest thing to do is criticize, and the harder part is backing it up.

    2. Lucas is a billionaire - however - most of his money does go right back into his companies - Lucasarts, Skywalker Sound, THX and ILM. Which are used by almost every other filmaker and studio, which, by my estimation, has NOTHING to do with Star Wars (except for Lucasarts, which does produce Star Wars games among others).

    Here's my question - do you think Star Wars would have been better off if 20th century fox had kept the merchandising rights and movie rights?

    I, personally think that it would have been far worse off... just imaging Studio controlled sequels, the movies would have ended up more like Mortal Kombat, or some other equally lame 'studio' type movie - and don't kid yourselves - you think that the studio wouldn't milk the marketing wagon for all it's worth?

    My bottom line is that - yes Star Wars as a whole does have many flaws - but the way I look at it - considering the alternative, I think we should consider ourselves lucky that the man who envisioned the story still has control of it.

    Either way - somebody would have profited from this movie - and I'm glad it's the one who thought it up, and not the cheesehead executives at a movie studio who care mostly about money, and not about product. (how else can you explain The countless Police Academy movies, anything with Pauly Shore... you see where I'm going with this)

    And for the record - Lucas had nothing to do with Howard the duck other than lending his name as an executive producer - he had nothing to do with the story, filming, editing... he lent his name to a friend with a troubled project - and obviously regrets it - this is documented in that book that came with the original box set of laserdiscs - I can't remember the name, but I can dig it up tonight for the exact quote -but I just get sick of hearing how Howard the duck is an example of a Lucas failure.
  22. SomeRandomNerd Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Dec 20, 1999
    star 4
  23. Jabbadabbado Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Mar 19, 1999
    star 7
    "My bottom line is that - yes Star Wars as a whole does have many flaws - but the way I look at it - considering the alternative, I think we should consider ourselves lucky that the man who envisioned the story still has control of it."


    I completely agree with this statement. I also agree that had GL not been such a relentless business mogul we would not have much of the technology and techniques that make modern movie and sound effects so interesting.

    Much of what GL does has benefitted Hollywood.

    But if you're going to acknowledge that, you also have to understand GL's role in the crass commercialization of mainstream moviemaking. He is as big and pervasve a part of the problem as any major studio. He's not the only one to make merchandising tie-ins central to the movie business, but his business model is the one that everyone emulates. He and Disney compete head-on for the crown.

    And if you don't believe that these marketing concerns, maximizing the value of the license, affect how GL makes his movies, then you simply don't understand how much "making movies" and the Lucas business empire are one and the same pursuit for Lucas.

    I do not for a minute believe that GL differentiates between directing a Star Wars movie, and running his conglomerate. It's all part of the same day. If you honestly believe that doesn't affect the end artistic result, then fine, I'll leave off the debate. But really. Think about it.
  24. Shelley Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Sep 9, 2001
    star 5
    I want to offer an alternative to the "Lucas is all about his art" story.--
    Oh for pete's sake...

    I will REPEAT myself from a previous post, which you conveniently chose to ignore. You fancy yourself to be someone who can "see" Lucas' more money-oriented side, which fans of TPM cannot. That is flat-out not true. Many people on this very thread have acknowledged that he does have his business-oriented side. Conversely, YOU are the one insisting he's all about money and not about art.

    --just that the cold hard facts support the idea that Lucas didn't merely luck into being one of the top 100 or so richest people in the world.--
    NO ONE SUGGESTED HE DID. The "cold hard facts" do NOT support your assertions that he's greedy, money grubbing, doesn't care about art, etc.

    --The A&E biography was a fluff piece, with very little useful, and absolutely no new information about GL. It ignored his litigiousness,--
    His litigiousness? He's sued people who've used his creation in a disrespectful/defaming way, i.e., making porn movies out of it or some toilet-mouthed rapper using the name Luke Skyywalker.

    --his cutthroat marketing policies,--
    What cutthroat marketing policies?

    --it made no ironic note in offering up the fact that, in order to free himself of studio control and commercial interests, GL became one of the biggest commercial forces in the industry.--
    Huh?

    --One of the reasons Hollywood is as commercial as it is is because Lucas pioneered, refined and brought to its absolute peak the role of merchandising in big budget movies. He outDisneys Disney.--
    Oh, so you're one of the "Lucas ruined Hollywood and movies" crowd. PLEASE. Hollywood has ALWAYS been commercial. I am sick to death of nostalgia-fogged people moaning about the "good old days" where Hollywood cared only about putting out quality products, and no one (gasp!) hoped to make MONEY off of it. That is not the case, and even YOU know it. You speak loftily of Lucas rewriting history? Look what YOU are doing.

    --There is a mix of good and bad in the man. Of course. There is an autocratic streak, a lust for power and control, an apparent joy in playing hardball with his business partners,--
    Huh?

    --zealous defense of his intellectual property,--
    Oooohhh, kill him. How dare he.

    --and the confusion of the historical record as it filters through his public relations/marketing machine.--
    Your proof?

    --And, apparently, all his good movies are long behind him.--
    No they aren't.

    Would you please answer this question:

    Why are you here, devoting so much time to a man and a movie you dislike?
  25. Shelley Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Sep 9, 2001
    star 5
    --But if you're going to acknowledge that, you also have to understand GL's role in the crass commercialization of mainstream moviemaking.--
    I have to acknowledge no such thing. Please quit rewriting history so that Hollywood was used to be about "quality" product and Lucas ruined it and made it about money.

    --And if you don't believe that these marketing concerns, maximizing the value of the license, affect how GL makes his movies, then you simply don't understand how much "making movies" and the Lucas business empire are one and the same pursuit for Lucas.--
    No, I'm afraid I don't. I don't see his movies as toy commercials, the way you (choose) to.

    --I do not for a minute believe that GL differentiates between directing a Star Wars movie, and running his conglomerate.--
    Goody goody for you. You've provided no proof of this, just your own opinions and the biased opinions of self-proclaimed "authorities."

    --It's all part of the same day. If you honestly believe that doesn't affect the end artistic result, then fine, I'll leave off the debate. But really. Think about it.--
    Please, please, leave off the debate. And I have thought about it and I don't come to your conclusion. Deal with it.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.