If you got a job (on TPM) working with the creator of Star Wars would you speak up?

Working in Lucas' toyfactory, my main focus would be preventing my jaw from hitting the floor and keeping my eyes in their sockets.

I would not speak at all.

 

But logically cb, don't you think becomming a billionaire and in total control would increase the liklihood that others would be less inclined to question and Lucas would be less inclined to listen? I'm not saying that it is either black or white. All I am saying is that Lucas' role and his staff's role would have changed.

 

You're right, hawk. Look at how badly Lucas was treated (during the filming of SW) by virtually the entire team he worked with from England. In fact, after shooting was over, most everybody thought the whole thing was a disaster that would wind up right in the tank (if it even made it out of post-production and onto the big screen).

Lucas was barely in his thirties and (in the eyes of many of those he worked with) didn't know what the hell was going on. He tried so hard to make his movie work that he wound up in the hospital, thinking he was having a heart attack (thank goodness it was only stress). That man put his whole heart and strength into SW, and he was fought every step of the way.

The bemused, fat, and contented multi-billionaire Lucas is in a far, far different position from the lean and hungry Lucas of the mid-1970s. Back then he was a kid with one lucky movie (American Graffiti), now he's a demigod. Back then he risked putting himself into a lifetime of debt to make SW, now he wonders if his net worth might go down from 3.2 billion to 3.1 billion if his current movie isn't successful.

 

Exactly. We all change with time but Lucas has changed enormously. The evidence is in the "new" films he is making. I sometimes wonder if he always wanted SW to be like the PT but couldn't (budget and less control) or if he simply changed his taste after 20 years building an empire.

 

This is the Basher "problem" I have:

I think you make a logical and accurate observation...

but what other reaction can I give than "Hey, that's just the way it went."
We're not gonna change it, why not focus on the positive things?

I never got this.

 

Well, it is just a discussion. Why focus just on the positives? Isn't that really boring after a while?

 

Yeah, I agree with you hawk that the combination of more than 30 years passing and Lucas' good fortune must have changed him. How could it not change a person? But there's still no evidence that he's this un-listening megalomaniac.

I wasn't saying that. All I was saying was that it is more than likely going to make him so powerful that more people today would avoid diagreeing with him. Agree?

Also, it would more than likely give him the guts to do what he wants regardless of what people think. Even if these may be drastic, bad choices or vice versa. Agree?

Once again I will point out that it is not black or white. It is somewhere in the middle. But I do think the sheer power of Lucas would make some major changes in the creative process. Some would say this is a good idea especially if they want Lucas' unfiltered vision. Others, on the other hand, preferred a greater collaboration.

And I am not putting Kurtz on a pedestool, but he did say that there were many heated discussions about the OT when he was around and that he didn't think anyone was challenging Lucas. I trust his opinion only because he has worked in film and with Lucas himself. But more evidence is needed to be sure I suppose.

 

My point is there's not much to discuss,

Yes, the status and fortune of Lucas changed the way people approach him...

Who do we blame for that?


Indeed, the fans who bought too much toys.

 

So you are saying there isn't a correlation between status/power/money and people who agree to avoid conflict?

In my studies I have learnt:

1. A person's anxiety increases when being observed by an audience of higher status. Increased anxiety around Lucas could lead a person under him to hold back opinions.

2. The presence of an experimenter makes a person more likely to conform or to inflict pain on others. Hence, authority can make a person go against their judgement.

Basically, I think logic dictates that fewer people are standing up to Lucas. We know this so far:

1. Lucas, like everyone, must change with time. Becomming a billionaire from nothing would have changed him greater than the average person.

2. Huge wealth and huge status can place a person in great positions of power. This would increase the anxiety of those who work with him. They would be more likely to follow his instructions against their judgement and conform to his beliefs.

 

I just don't think there is room to complain in the first place. He earned the right to make his films the way he sees fit. There is nothing to indicate that Lucas doesn't listen to the people he employs, and there is nothing to indicate they would not speak up if they had another point of view to offer.

No matter how many people here say they would shrivel in front of the flannelled one, the people he employs didn't get where they were by being a bunch of timid wage-earners. I would think at the very least they would know how to be professional.

 

I think ruling out the effect that money and absolute power has over people is problematic.

Recently, I saw an interview with Matt Damon (Oscar winner who has worked with powerful directors and actors). When meeting the President, he was terrified. All that power he already had meant nothing when meeting someone in such a postition of power.

Liam Neeson recently told of his legs shaking when meeting the Queen. All his status and power meant nothing at this moment.

Is this any different from Lucas' effect on his employees? Who ARE they? A lot of them sit behind computers or sketch pads working behind the scenes because they don't have the strong edge that Lucas can command. Are you seriously saying that the entire team of employees working for Lucas are a bunch of square-jawed heroes? Most of them are lucky to be working on a Star Wars film! Sure they may know their stuff but I bet you Lucas' power doesn't bounce off them.

 

I think we have all agreed that Lucas is now in a position where he has earned the right to do what he wants. Good for him.

The point is that he wasn't in that position as strongly when he made the first two films.

I don't think his employees are spineless but they didn't get to work with George by acting like Kurtz and Marcia did either.

 

Hawk and cb, you both touched on a unique point if you don't realize it.

Hawk brought up the point that Lucas was going head to head with Kurtz and Kasdan during the OT and that this conflict may have in fact helped make the OT so great. cb brought up the counterpoint that neither Kurtz or Kasdan have done much since the OT.

I'd like to suggest that perhaps both are true. I believe Lucas needs somebody with a strong personality to check himself every now and then. I don't necessarily believe that both Kurtz and Kasdan were geniuses, but they were willful individuals. If Lucas pushed them, they pushed back. Great things can be born out of both conflict and collaboration. Every great artist needs a sounding board. Musicians have producers, writers have publishers and editors, and painters have their peers and the enlightened art community. Hell, even Mozart had conflicts with the establishment when he was alive.

cb, I agree that Lucas wasn't pan-handling when he made the OT but 20th Century Fox gave him the overwhelming portion of his budget to make the films. Lucas answered to Fox, they owned him and his movies. Fox ALLOWED Lucas to make sequels to ANH because they all made money. Now look, 16 years after ROTJ Fox was practically begging Lucas if it could please please please release the new Star Wars Trilogy in it's theaters. Lucas now had so much pull he could dictate his own terms. Fox lost money this past summer when it released AOTC. Lucas made them front most of the money for advertising and it's wide release in theaters and Fox actually agreed to this. I agree that a true artist has a vision and wants to stick that vision as much as possible. But the ancient adage is also true. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

 

Found it!


Lucas: "I may have gone too far in a few places."

Burtt: "In a space of about 90 seconds, you go from lamenting the death of hero, to escape, to slightly comedic with Jar Jar, to Anakin returning with his little kind of tag. It's a lot, and, really, it's a very short time."

Lucas: "It boggles the mind."


The impression I got from the documentary was that this critisism made Lucas reconsider the editing...
(and also that Lucas genuinly cares and is activly involved in all stages of production)

discuss!

 

Good thoughts guys. Thanks for pulling this topic away from the basher/gusher debate that was brewing. Thank you too Go-Mer.

Well, you can't compare Damon and Neeson meeting the Queen and the President to them meeting a powerful film-maker such as lucas. A world leader is someone that neither of them have much contact with, and would be unfamillar with them. Famous and powerful directors would probably be common place for the both of them though. Apples and oranges no?

Yeah I guess the analogy wasn't very good. I reconsidered my views and realised that it doesn't matter.

Here is my point. The reason why Lucas is surrounded by "yes men" (or those who do not rile him up) is because he can now choose to. In other words, Lucas chooses his own vision (as we all agree) and gets people to do the job. THAT is how they are selected. He no longer has to depend on anyone so he is in no danger of working with another Kurtz or dealing with 20th Century Fox and bankers. So, by default he is actually selecting people who don't oppose him. If you agree he has the power to make them how he wants, you also must agree that he surrounded himself by yes men. One entails the other.

The term "yes men" is too harsh. They would not be mindless idiots who obey him at any cost. But Lucas wouldn't select anyone who would be likely to force his opinions or push him in any direction.

The only question now is what effect does this have on the films. Gorilla has pointed out perfectly how this CAN be troublesome. His post says it all. Nice job.


Plo,

I think Lucas does care but he doesn't have anyone really challenging him. It's one thing for someone to suggest something and another for someone to argue with him. I get the impression that Lucas fought a lot of people making ANH and TESB. The evidence is Kurtz and Lucas separating and, perhaps, his divorce with Marcia. I think a lot of conflict is gone from making these films. Now Lucas is making things his way without any trouble and the films are very different. I believe they are vastly inferior but that is another story. I honestly believe Lucas would be making better films under stress and limitations.

 

hawk,

>>>I think we have all agreed that Lucas is now in a position where he has earned the right to do what he wants. Good for him.

The point is that he wasn't in that position as strongly when he made the first two films.

I don't know about that- there's an article at the front of my copy of the "A New Hope" screenply. Here's a relevant paragraph;

What happens when you direct one of the all-time box-office smashes? Well, everything. You can write your own deal, do what you want, spend what you please, get your own way. Even up old scores. What a director does with this freedom tells a lot about the man. Some sink into self-indulgence, others into conspicuous consumption of movie budgets. George Lucas has used the success of American Graffiti to make an $8 million animated comic strip called Star Wars.

The article first appeared in American Film, April 1977 (a month before Star Wars was released, I think.)

Back then, as the article makes pretty clear, he could do what he wanted and spend what he pleased, so I don't think that has changed. He pumped his own money into his own project, as with all the subsequent Star Wars films, and could hire and fire as he wished.



Patrick Russell

>>>Yoda yelling in anger, flinging himself aggressively at Dooku, striking "A badass am I!" poses... NONE of this dovetails with the mindset he holds and tries to impart to Luke in ESB.

Do you think he was attacking out of anger? Do you think it was anger that controlled his actions?

>>>What we really needed to see was Yoda confronting Dooku in a manner which reflected the values Yoda espouses in literally EVERY other film in the SW saga... a Jedi Master who is so advanced that he can defeat a foe using purely defensive tactics. Yes, we see other Jedi solving problems with lightsabers, but Yoda has the distinction of being close to a thousand years old... he's had FAR more time to perfect more subtle abilities than the average Jedi.

"A Jedi uses the Force for knowledge and defence- never for attack."

Where does Yoda say, or even imply, that a Jedi should never attack anything or anyone? (Maybe it was the bit where Obi Wan attacks the guy in the cantina...) How should they be "guardians of peace and justice in the Old Republic" with some strange iunability to attack the bad guys?

How can anyone be defeated using "purely defensive tactics"?

And as Otis_Frampton pointed out, he insists that Luke must go and confront Vader. Does he mean so that he can block his lightsaber attacks until his suit runs out of batteries?

>>>the obvious solution once Dooku drew his saber would have been for Yoda to have used things like his speed, perhaps an ability to generate illusion, etc., along with a stream of Yoda-esque taunting to push Dooku's buttons, get him riled and attacking, and simply avoid every single blow and ultimately cause Doku to exhaust himself angrily lunging at shadows.

Isn't that remarkably similar to Palpatine's tactics in ROTJ? Yoda should have tried to anger Dooku, and push him as far towards the Dark Side as possible?

The Yoda you describe who never draws a lightsaber could never win a fight- the best he could ever do is force a stalemate. Or are you suggesting that his Jedi minions should do actual killing of the Darth Mauls of the galaxy, and Yoda should just sit in the Jedi Temple, where he won't get his hands dirty?

>>>Also, the other problem I see is that the implied distinction between "Jedi Knight" and "Jedi Master" from the OT was completely abandoned in the PT. Now we have a Padawan being made a Knight and being simultaneously given an apprentice of his own, and a Jedi Master bashing sticks with an enemy like any other Jedi Knight.

I don't recall any such distinction in the OT. In ANH, Obi Wan was a Jedi Knight, who had already taught Anakin/Vader.

Or are you just saying that Jedi Masters should leave the fighting to "lesser" Jedi? Why on earth

 

What happens when you direct one of the all-time box-office smashes? Well, everything. You can write your own deal, do what you want, spend what you please, get your own way. Even up old scores. What a director does with this freedom tells a lot about the man. Some sink into self-indulgence, others into conspicuous consumption of movie budgets. George Lucas has used the success of American Graffiti to make an $8 million animated comic strip called Star Wars.

The more things change the more they stay the same.

I find it amusing--and not just a little ironic--that techniques and practices that were "good enough" for the original trilogy are harshly criticized when applied to the prequels.

As has been pointed out time and time again, Ben Burtt is obviously not afraid to speak his mind and directly challenge Lucas, and it stands to reason that there are other ranking members of Lucas' staff who enjoy the same priviledge. Certainly, Lucas has surrounded himself with professionals who will do the job he's paid them to do, but to say that everybody on the team is a mindless "yes man" is begging the question. At the same time, Lucas has always invited other notable filmmakers like Steven Spielberg, Ron Howard, and Oliver Stone to view early cuts of his movies and make suggestions, so this theory that he "isolates himself from any and all constructive criticism" is a ridiculous attack.

Answer this question: If you were helming a film project, would you knowingly hire people that you would butt heads with on a daily basis? Would you seek out candidates who would force their "honesty" on you at every opportunity? Would you want to stack your production team with those most likely to challenge your every decision? Of course you wouldn't. While it is important to seek out other's opinions when doing a project, you also want to make sure you can get the job done.

Now if you wouldn't do that then why would you expect Lucas to?

 

There's another part of the same article that highlights what has changed about the saga though.

"Although it costs a lot of money," Lucas says of Star Wars, "it's still a low budgeted picture. So it's on the same intensity level as a Roger Corman movie only a hundred times bigger. We still don't have the luxury of a big movie- time, doing things right. Everything is a compromise, cutting corners, not doing this or that. You suffer. You say "I can't do this" or "That looks terrible, but we'll go with it", which you are normally doing on a $700,000 picture where you're saying "Get it done!" We're doing that, only it takes four years."

From a 1976 interview. Now, although there's still a budget to stick to, it's a heck of a lot bigger... I guess the only real constraint is the (self-imposed) release deadline.

 

Random, you've been watching WAY too many Schwarzenegger flicks...

Of COURSE Yoda could defeat Dooku using defensive maneuvers. Don't get so stuck on this Hollywood action movie trip where the only way to deal with an enemy is to kick the everloving **** out of him. I'm talking about a classic old Eastern philosophy where you use your enemy's own energy against him rather than just beating on him. The idea is that Yoda (as he is portrayed in the other films) would be much more likely to want to get Dooku to exhaust himself so that when the rest of the Republic Forces arrived, they'd be able to take him alive.

THAT is the whole point of taunting Dooku... to shake him up and make him expend even MORE energy. In that sense, the Dark Side is self-defeating, you see?

And come on... "Yoda comes up with secret tactics that he doesn't teach to anyone?" No, not at all. I'm talking about him having almost a millennium to develop his skills to a profound degree, to attune himself to the Force to a deeper degree than normal, and possibly even to come up with a few tricks that he ONLY can do because of his centuries of meditation on and attunement with the Force. Or did you not see him catch Dooku's Force Lightning with one hand? Of COURSE he's going to be able to do things that the average Jedi cannot.

The idea is that Yoda was always set up as a clear opposite to the Emperor in terms of his outlook and his approach to the Force. He's not just another Jedi, he's a Master... and as such it makes perfect sense that he would embody an ideal that Jedi Knights would strive for, and that includes being able to defeat an enemy without attacking him and beating on him with a lightsaber.

No, most Jedi do not attain this, and IMHO here's the distinction between Knight and Master which is blurred almost beyond recognition in the PT. The path of a Jedi involves a hell of a lot more than just developing spiffy powers and learning how to swordfight. It involves refining one's abilities and perceptions away from the coarse approach of the Dark Side. The Dark Side is all about power and flashy abilities and kicking ass. On the OTHER end of the spectrum, you'd have a level of refinement where the approach to Force use would have little, if anything, to do with countering violence with violence.

Now then, as I said... most Jedi wouldn't get to the point where they could embody that. There's a definite time factor here... it stands to reason that a being who has been a Jedi Master for 800+ years would have considerably more time to develop and grow as a Force user than a being who lived 80-90 years total. But it still wouldn't mean that a normal Jedi knight wouldn't strive to refine his/her abilities using an ancient master like Yoda as their ideal... even if there was no way they themselves could ever achieve all of what he's achieved.

But no... instead we got a 900 year-old Jedi Master who was reduced to being an action movie gimmick in AOTC. (And Durwood, no... that's not "character development", that's just being gimmicky. What, Yoda was an impetuous youth for 900 years, and then in his last 20 he suddenly became a virtual pacifist? That's just ridiculous.)

 

A lot of people are correct in their assumptions. I've worked on a ton of films from independents to Hollywood features & there are a whole bunch of factors that determine how you act to the higher ups. If you have little experience & are getting your first opportunity you aren't going to say anything where you will clash heads with someone. If you are working with people you know well & with whom you are on the same level in terms of experience more conflicts can occur, which can be good or bad.

It also depends a lot on the project & one's faith in the director. A first timer is going to get a lot more help from the more experienced crew memebers. After a film is over getting hired again will depend on how well you got along with everybody as well as how you did your job. A director with a lot of experience is not going to get questioned as much. Now despite having only a handful of films Lucas falls into the category of having a lot of experience plus I'm sure a lot of people want to continue working in features.

For a lot of people Lucas is using, he is hiring from within & this is their big break to work on a huge film. In the case of Ben Burtt he is not a well respected editor but he has been given the chance by Lucas to edit his first feature. I don't think he is going to speak out as much as someone like Stuart Baird who has been around a long time & knows how to edit. If it was about sound I'm sure Burtt would speak up & Lucas would most likely defer to him or have to defend his choice. That is what I think people are complaining about. Is Lucas being puched to make a better film or is he allowed to be lazy because he has earned it?

 

"Making a film isn't a democratic process. The buck should always stop with whoever's story is being told. Yes, it's important that the director get's feedback and constructive crisism from those around him, that doesn't mean that he should bow to their wishes everytime."

I agree 100%, I use to be a total tyrannt director, and I would quote GL verbatem, but betweent he disaster of AotC and some really possitive colaborations I've had recently I've changed my tune. I still think the director has ultimate say, but they should liten as much as possible to those around them, a director can often be blind to the problems of a movie.

GL is also against test screening (excpet to spielberg) which I think is sad, because you can learn so much about your work by letting an audience see it.

 

>>>Random, you've been watching WAY too many Schwarzenegger flicks...

I can?t wait until these forums get past the ?you must be of this mindset if you say that? arguments?

>>>>Of COURSE Yoda could defeat Dooku using defensive maneuvers. Don't get so stuck on this Hollywood action movie trip where the only way to deal with an enemy is to kick the everloving **** out of him. I'm talking about a classic old Eastern philosophy where you use your enemy's own energy against him rather than just beating on him. The idea is that Yoda (as he is portrayed in the other films) would be much more likely to want to get Dooku to exhaust himself so that when the rest of the Republic Forces arrived, they'd be able to take him alive.

Isn?t that exactly what Yoda does when Dooku is using the Force to attack him? He uses his energy against him. As literally as possible. You?ve basically described the first half of the fight.

Then Dooku, rather sensibly, stops expending all that energy (so he isn?t going to be ?exhausted when the Republic Forces arrive.?)

As Dooku points out, the fight can?t be decided over mastery of the Force (ie. if Dooku can?t lay a finger on Yoda, and Yoda won?t raise a finger to Dooku, it?s a stalemate), so they will have to see who is the most masterful with a lightsaber?

They fight, then Dooku realises that he isn?t going to win, creates a distraction to get Yoda off his back, and runs away.

Are you saying that Yoda should have been able to hold Dookus lightsaber blade and make him stab himself with it or something?

>>>And come on... "Yoda comes up with secret tactics that he doesn't teach to anyone?" No, not at all. I'm talking about him having almost a millennium to develop his skills to a profound degree, to attune himself to the Force to a deeper degree than normal, and possibly even to come up with a few tricks that he ONLY can do because of his centuries of meditation on and attunement with the Force. Or did you not see him catch Dooku's Force Lightning with one hand? Of COURSE he's going to be able to do things that the average Jedi cannot.

I thought that Yoda with a lightsaber looked like he?d ?developed his skills to a profound degree, to attune himself to the Force to a deeper degree than normal? - compared to the TPM battle, Yoda had far more speed, more agility, and more energy than Qui Gon, Obi Wan and Maul combined. He was literally running rings round Dooku. And it was clear (to me, at least) that he was drawing this energy from the Force, yet remaining in control.

As for ?tricks that only he could do?, I think you answered your own question. Was that not enough?

>>>The idea is that Yoda was always set up as a clear opposite to the Emperor in terms of his outlook and his approach to the Force. He's not just another Jedi, he's a Master... and as such it makes perfect sense that he would embody an ideal that Jedi Knights would strive for, and that includes being able to defeat an enemy without attacking him and beating on him with a lightsaber.

Then how? How could he ever achieve anything other than a stalemate? Without using either the Force or a weapon to attack, what would he use to strike the winning blow? (If you ignore everything else in this post, then please answer this question.)

Your argument seems to imply that Yoda should simply leave the actual killing of the baddies to less pure and enlightened beings than him- which equates to letting someone else do his dirty work- the same as the Emperor.

>>>No, most Jedi do not attain this, and IMHO here's the distinction between Knight and Master which is blurred almost beyond recognition in the PT. The path of a Jedi involves a hell of a lot more than just developing spiffy powers and learning how to swordfight. It involves refining one's abilities and perceptions away from the coarse approach of the Dark Side. The Dark Side is all about power and flashy abilities and kicking ass. On the OTHER end of the spectrum, you'd have a level of refinement where the a

 

One thing a lot of people don't realize is that there is a chain of command & a particular etiquette on a film set. Not just anyone can talk to the director. In fact there are only 5 positions where you can speak to one. Actors, director of photography, producer, sound mixer and assistant director. If anyone not in one of those positions has a question it goes to the assistant director & it is his/her job to determine whether or not to bring this question to a director.

 

(And Durwood, no... that's not "character development", that's just being gimmicky. What, Yoda was an impetuous youth for 900 years, and then in his last 20 he suddenly became a virtual pacifist? That's just ridiculous.)

Of course it's character developement. We see Yoda humbled into learning from his mistakes. And as for being a pacifist, that's just your own interpretation as Yoda was never put in a combat situation in the original trilogy, so you can't really say. At the same time, he did encourage Luke to confront and kill Vader and the Emperor (presumably using aggressive tactics, unless you know of a pacifist way to strike a killing blow on an adversary), so your interpretation of pacivism doesn't coincide with what we see in the original films.