Lucas took our critisms of TPM to heart

Sorry, Dr. E, but that article is so full of quotes taken way out of context--honestly, if someone can only find three words out of a quote that "supports" their point then they shouldn't even bother trying to pretend it's a quote--and other general conjecture and misinformation, not to mention the writer's plainly obvious anti-Lucas malice, that its credibility is almost as low as yours for thinking it presented a sound argument in the first place.

 

Yes, those quotes are taken way out of context. Lucas has conceded for a long time that he let the marketing and hype for TPM get out of control. But that is all he conceded to. Expectations were not met because expectations were too high. My expectations were not high at all for TPM, but I was pleasantly surprised. Episode 3 is the movie that everbody should have been saving those high expectations for. THis is the movie. THe one. THe pivitol movie of the whole saga.

 

I for one was not affected by TPM hype. I just didnt pay any attention to it. In fact, I was afraid that partially becasue of the hype, it would be a terrible movie. Movies such as ID4 had followed that trend. TPM was the only movie in history that lived up to such hype IN MY MIND.

 

Again I'll ask the question. If Lucas was so concerned about backlash to Jar Jar why did he write a large part for Jar Jar, spend time and money filming a large part for Jar Jar, spend time and money having animators animate a large part for Jar Jar and spend time editing the scenes of Jar Jar into the movie?

The only reason Jar Jar doesn't have a large part in the final released film is because Lucas felt the film was running waaay long and thus cut out Padme's family, Obi Wan in the temple, various aspects of the Coruscant chase, Owen and Beru, Tattooine character development, Senate scenes, the trial and confrontation with Dooku, a Jedi raid on a droid ship, a space battle, extended Clone War skirmishes, parts of all the lightsaber battles, almost the entire Mace/Jango battle and Jar Jar. The reason Jar Jar has a smaller role in terms of screen time (which ignores the fact that he has a vastly more important role) is that the film was too long. Unless wasting writing time, filming time, animators time, editing time, Ahmed Best's time, the time of everyone on set and most importantly wasting money in creating a large part was all part of the plan to satiate fans who hate Jar Jar.

Whcih doesn't even begin to talk about the fact that Jar Jar didn't get his character changed, and was still all the things that people originally hated him for. Except he did it in nicer clothes this time.

 

And I wish people would stop using that Sam Jackson quote as evidence. (And if you are going to use it, please use the whole dam quote, dont leave out what Lucas said immediately afterwards out of the quote.) You would be amazed at how little some stars know about the movie they are in. A lot of the actors said AOTC was going to be a dark movie, but Lucas responded by saying, "I wouldnt call it a dark movie."

 

Durwood, please try and respond without attacking me again and again. I merely posted the article as it seemed to relate to the topic at hand. seems to me it has a lot of positive things to say about Lucas along with the negative.

why are some of you so entrenched on the defensive that you cannot help but attack another poster, rather than actually debate the issue?

ive made an effort to avoid this kind of thing. hopefully you can learn to do the same.

 

Good article Evazan. People usually resort to attacking the posters when they can't defend their argument. Let's try to be civil and focus on the debate NOT the posters for once.

Ultimate, I told you why Lucas included JJ. You don't invest that much into a character and then cut him entirely. It would not only show, without a doubt, that Lucas caved to fan pressure but would waste all the time they spent on him. Plus, they can't exactly cut all the characters out of AOTC because they didn't work in TPM. There has to be strong links to the first film. You don't have to agree with this though...

 

Why on Earth would Lucas start out giving Jar Jar a big role in AOTC, film scenes with him, have animators animate him, have Ahmed Best play him, only to ultimately waste everyone's time and money because of the complaints of fanboys made a year or more before? Why not limit Jar Jar's role from the first?

 

Durwood, please try and respond without attacking me again and again. I merely posted the article as it seemed to relate to the topic at hand. seems to me it has a lot of positive things to say about Lucas along with the negative.

Like what? It did nothing but snipe at him and say stuff like TPM was a disappointment with fans, offering no proof. Lucas admitted that the marketing for TPM was too excessive, so he scaled it back for AOTC. IMO, he scaled it back too much, but that's neither here nor there. Nowhere does it say he responded to fan criticism, and the writer conveniently overlooked (or more likely was ignorant of) the fact that Lucas tried to get help writing TPM too, so him bringing on Jonathan Hales was not a concession to fan complaints.

 

I've been asked to keep a closer eye on this thread, and I can see why. What I see is a lot of putting words in others' mouths and ad hominems on both sides, which will stop now.

There is evidence that supports both sides of the argument, which makes things murky. There are reasons to believe that Lucas learned from the reaction to TPM (both the good and the bad), and adapted his vision of the saga. There are reasons to believe that Lucas is maintaining his overall creative vision, and that perhaps the critics simply identified things that Lucas had already decided to do in the next film.

Concerning the words from his mouth, I'm of two minds. On the one hand, he is the utmost authority on the direction of his saga. On the other hand, he has been known to change his vision (the most concrete example is the compression of episodes 7-9 into ROTJ, as well as the Luke/Leia relationship). It would be extremely remiss for me to suggest that someone's opinion is wrong based on what a flexible and evolving storyteller has said. I have patients who tell me that they've done nothing to warrant involuntary commitment; I have no reason to disbelieve them from what they *said* aside from what I see before me. Words and actions can demonstrate very different things.

At heart, this debate seems to be about whether Lucas could have modified the realization of Episode II based on fan reaction (again, good and bad); I see nothing wrong with having opinions both ways - I do see something wrong with telling someone that their opinion is wrong because they don't use the same anecdotal evidence that you do, *especially* in light of SW revisionism.

 

We should try to get back on topic now, this thread still has much potential in offering some good discussion.

 

"Whcih doesn't even begin to talk about the fact that Jar Jar didn't get his character changed, and was still all the things that people originally hated him for. Except he did it in nicer clothes this time."

was he really the same though? he certainly wasnt stumbling about, knocking things over, stepping in poop, constantly moving, etc. this time around. to me he seemed to be toned down - a more refined jar jar, if you will.

 

to me he seemed to be toned down - a more refined jar jar, if you will.


He was a Galactic Senator in this film, thus naturally he would act more formal.

 

was he really the same though? he certainly wasnt stumbling about, knocking things over, stepping in poop, constantly moving, etc. this time around. to me he seemed to be toned down - a more refined jar jar, if you will.

And he showed that he still got goofy when he was excited, such as when Obi Wan and Anakin's elevator arrived: "Obi? OBI! Meesa so glad to be seeing you!" as he rushes over to pump Obi Wan's hand. Then he calms down and speaks in a graver tone, and sits quietly by Padme's side. Being a Representative has taught him to be less clumsy and goofy as befits his position, but he still talks a little funny. IMO it does a good job of showing the progress of Jar Jar from clumsy goofball to (more or less) dignified Representative.

 

right. so he changed. he was goofy but not constantly goofy and he showed some quiet behavior.

 

right. so he changed. he was goofy but not constantly goofy and he showed some quiet behavior.

Just like Han changed from a smiling, wisecracking, devil-may-care character in ANH to a (more) serious, dedicated fighter for the Rebellion in ESB. And just like Luke changed from a wide-eyed, excitable farmboy in ANH to a commander and serious Jedi student in ESB.

Both of them were extremely popular characters. So Lucas didn't change them in response to fan complaints, he changed them because it was the natural progression of their characters, as they matured and took on responsibility.

 

good points Shelley.

originally i was responding to the "Whcih doesn't even begin to talk about the fact that Jar Jar didn't get his character changed" comment... but i see what you are saying... natural progression of character vs. changes in reaction to criticism.
i have to disagree with you when you put Jar Jar and Han together as "extremely popular characters" i would say that Jar Jar is no where near as popular as Han, and i have yet to see any fans who activley hate Han as they do Jar Jar. the fan reactions to these two characters are wholly different as far as i can tell.

 

Thanks, DrEvazan. BTW, I wasn't saying that Jar Jar was popular like Han and Luke. I was using Han and Luke's popularity to show that even though they were popular, Lucas still changed their characters -- because it was the natural progression of things.

So Jar Jar was made less goofy, more dignified -- as was the natural progression of things, although he still had some moments of goofiness.

 

There is evidence that supports both sides of the argument, which makes things murky.

Oh, give me a break. It's only "murky" if you choose to ignore Lucas' direct comments on the matter. Lucas has pointedly and specifically said that he made no changes to CLONES because of fanboy criticism!

It's funny that some people "trust" Lucas when his words seem to support their argument but conveniently distrust him when his words contradict them.

Fine, if that's how you want to play, I think Lucas was lying when he said he would "rethink things" if his movies didn't make enough money. So there.

 

" Ultimate, I told you why Lucas included JJ. You don't invest that much into a character and then cut him entirely. It would not only show, without a doubt, that Lucas caved to fan pressure but would waste all the time they spent on him. Plus, they can't exactly cut all the characters out of AOTC because they didn't work in TPM. There has to be strong links to the first film. You don't have to agree with this though..."

You told me why you think Jar jar had to be in the film. What you didn't tell me is why Jar Jar would have such a large role (making numerous long speeches throughout the movie) until final cuts had to be made. Why Lucas and company decided to waste time and money writing, filming, animating and editing a large part for Jar Jar when fan backlash was allegedly making him reduce the role.

The clearest and simplest way to look at this is that Lucas simply didn't feel he had the time to show all the things he wanted, and like Padme's family, the Lars, the Clone War, and Mace/Jango, Jar Jar got cut down.

And if Lucas was bowing to such monumental fan pressure and reducing Jar Jar's role, why wouldn't he come out and say it? Wouldn't that mend alot of the bridges? Wouldn't that make fans feel that he was listening to them?

Instead he says the exact opposite, claiming he got exactly what he wanted out of Jar Jar's performance in the film and blamed the backlash on the Comic-Book Guy's of the world. He also flatly states that he hasn't changed anything because of any pressure.

So far your arguement consists of saying Lucas did the opposite thing anyone would do when he was changing the story to satisfy a group of people. Instead of concentrating on the bare minimum to get Jar Jar in and out of the film ASAP, he writes a large part, spends time filming it, assigns numerous animators to animate it and spends time editing it together. Why? So in the end he can cut it all and capitualte because of a backlash that existed before he even had a first draft of the script done? Then after he's done placating the fans, he insults them for holding the very opinions that allegedly caused him to change the film in the first place, instead of yelling out "I listened! Come on back fans, I care!".

 

It's funny that some people "trust" Lucas when his words seem to support their argument but conveniently distrust him when his words contradict them.

Unfortunately that is how it is for most people, they use his words when helping their argument but discredit him when they go against their opinion. A double edged sword would be an understatement...

 

When he decided to ditch the third trilogy, that was HIS decision. It certainly wasn't spured by reactions from his critics.

Lucas has gone on record saying that he doesn't listen to his critics, that he never has.

For better or worse, this is his story to tell as he sees fit.

As he says in my sig, if people don't like it, they don't have to go see it.

 

If Lucas did listen to his critics, he would have many more Academy Awards and us fans, well we would have a less than superb OT/PT.

 

Durwood, you seem to ignore the point of my last post, which was an effort to inject some civility into the discussion. DrE and Shelley have demonstrated that they can disagree without copping an attitude. I'd encourage you to do the same. There is evidence that goes both ways, whether you choose to believe it or not; for example, there is the "perhaps I went to far" line from the TPM DVD. It can be seen either as a comment on the marketing or it can be seen as a comment on the inclusion of Jar Jar Binks to such a high degree. Again, ignoring evidence goes both ways; I'm not endorsing one view over another - I don't really have an opinion on the matter, and I'm not really concerned with resolving the issue. Believe me, I have bigger fish to fry than resolving conflicting guesses on an internet bulletin board. All I am here to do is to make sure that you folks respect the terms of service.

Go-Mer, I'm not arguing that the inclusion of episodes 7-9 into ROTJ was due to fan pressure - I merely use that to illustrate that he changed his overall vision, which makes arguments like "it was always meant to be this way/it was always his vision" tenuous at best. Again, I really couldn't care less about why it was done; I take in the end product and judge for myself whether I liked it or not. I am skeptical, however, that things were *always* meant to be so. I don't presume to jump into his head and say what it true and what is not. I merely say that there is compelling reason to doubt, if one so chooses, and that artists are just like everyone else - they change over time. You cannot step into the same river twice.

 

Ultimate,

How big a role did JJ initially have? Even a few more scenes wouldn't make a difference and how do you get past the fact that Lucas could have changed his mind after he filmed them? It's not as if he is strapped for cash. Either way, if he needed to cut the film for time, he chose the JJ scenes to go. Hmmm. And let's not forget hpow toned down JJ was. I don't think JJ shaking ObiWans hand in that fashion compares to the outright clutz who landed on his crotch in TPM.

Durwood, if people still think the issue is a murky one, who are you to say that it isn't? If we see it as murky and you see it as clear as day that either means our opinions differ or we are just going out of our way to cause trouble. I assure you the latter is not true. Hence, perhaps you should just accept that people have different opinions on evidence that you don't share or understand. It isn't a big deal you know.


EDIT: ANd Ultimate, my main point was it doesn't sound like JJ had this huge role you mentioned. Remember the actual speech he gave? A few more of those kinds of speeches doesn't exactly broaden his character too much. And they obviously weren't even important enough to include in the deleted scenes. But I would like to know the extent of how much effort went into the filming of these scenes. If you have that info, it would be worth a look.