Phantom Editor Speaks: AOTC review

More like smart. Jar Jar is lucky.

I hardly worship GL as royalty. For me, it's a matter of principle and not, "well, successful artists are acceptable targets, no harm done."

EDIT: A satire is original in its own right, even with a basis from an original work. A copy-edit is not. There's certainly a distinction to be made, IMO.

 

I'm sorry if that's how I sound. I'm mostly arguing there's a "difference in kind" between protection available to GL vs. PE. PE gets little, GL gets a lot. Once you make it over the hump like GL, you are open to more criticsm. But you should be! He's responsible, and he's taken it upon himself to be responsible, for much more than his films. He has more than the movie. He controls an entire franchise with built in protections.

I'm arguing that we still view GL's work as a small time artist - on it's own merits, and not bash it because of his overall success. But comparatively, we also shouldn't overprotect GL because he has a lot of power. And some of that power isn't due to his "genius."

Anyway, I won't take up time with the comic book industry. DC wants to pull "Wildstorm" because it's not making money, and Marvel started "underproducing" the X-Men to make them sell better. Low grade anti-trust violations? Go to a comic store and ask whether business is as good as it was 20 years ago. No way! Kids don't read today.

Transmetropolitan, 100 bullets, all the small titles suffer from low sales. COmics are a dying medium!

 

"The fact that we keep forking over good money to witness descending levels of mediocrity is sending a message to Lucasfilm that he is in fact making great films. Witness George?s interviews in recent publications weakly defending the rumored disappointments of Episode I with a collective opinion that over 400 million dollars in grosses doesn?t sound much like a disappointment."

Only_2 "refutes" with:
envy

Only_2, do you agree or disagree with the PE's opinion? are the films descending in levels of mediocrity? do you think Lucas's defense is weak?


"Is it so much to ask someone with so many resources that you could have good storytelling, good performances AND good lightsabers fights? Why do we have to be sold so short? (Sorry actors, I know it?s not your fault)"

Only_2 again:
envy

Only_2, do you think its too much to ask someone with so many resouces to do a better job? do you think we were sold short? if not why?


"If this is all you need to make it a good movie and you?re content to hide the bruises, well, it?s all here and you?ll get your money?s worth with the eye candy. This definitely won?t hurt you as much as Episode I did."

Only_2 again:
envy

do you agree or disagree that eye candy is enough? do you think AOTC offers more than eye candy?


"I walked around the other day outside of the theater lines at Grauman?s Chinese asking fans in line what they hoped for in Episode II over I. The general consensus was an extreme distaste for Episode I, and a surprising lack of faith, allegiance, and respect for George Lucas himself. Everybody is still holding on to be a fan of the team and the players, they just don?t seem to care much for the coach."
Only_2, again:
envy

Only_2, do you agree fans are disheartened with TPM? do you think its reasonable for the PE to say they dont care much for the coach?



other than that...

"He complains about the dialog, not the delivery, which is an argument that will stand the test of time."

vague answer

"Remember the hero of your beloved OT is one of the worst deliverers of dialog ever. No better than anyone in the PT."

in your opinion

"He complains about the humor, which is as bad as it's always been. C3P0 bugs me, always has. I don't run around throwing it in people's faces."

some people think the quality and intelligence of the humor is of a much lower level in the PT then it is in the OT. ill debate this with you gladly. ill go so far as to say that many of 3PO's lines in AOTC are not only dumb and cliched, but totally out of character.


"He complains about the romance parts. How much you wanna bet he's single, very single, lonely single.

another form of envy."

what about his complaints do you disagree with? what does your made up assertion that he is lonely and single have to do with anything?

"He complains about the effects, what? these are probably the best looking effects in any movie, ever."

what are his complaints? did you read them and think about them or did you just come up with your opinion and ignore what he had to say?

"He likens the direction to that of the Friday the 13th movies. and then doesn't substantiate his point."

not sure what you are saying here other than its more envy.

"Other than that he doesn't really say much other than to say how he wanted to like it but didn't. (sure, we believe you)"

i wanted to like AOTC too, but i dont imagine you will believe me either. i was excited when some friends of mine saw it and told me it was great. then i went to see the film and was dissappointed. i saw it again and its shortcomings were even more apparent to me, and it didnt help that people were laughing at the stuff intended to be serious and groaning at the stuff intended to be funny.

 

not only that but the PE is using unconventional methods and working "outside the system" just like GL did many years ago.

 

What I think:

The prequels: So far, so good. I like the way Anakin's character is being handled. I like the way Lucas has given us new worlds, like Kamino, Naboo, and Geonosis- and expanded worlds like Coruscant and Tatooine. I like how all the leading characters thus far are three dimensional in characterization. I love the action, effects, and especially the story- and watching the story craft its way into the originals has been a load of fun.

The originals: The films I grew up with. The films I know the most about. The characters are more than just characters to me. When I was a kid, these characters lived and breathed, much like myself. The locations existed in my unlimited conciousness. The story? Flawless. The storytelling? Flawless. The action, effects, and everything else? Nothing short of stunning. The original films, like the prequels after them, have given me an alternate reality to explore and admire when things in my life go bad, which is frequent. Perfect films.

George Lucas: A God? No. A father figure? No. A genius? Depends. A very unique individual with a mind that is so vast and perplex, that it makes me wonder how BIG his mind can really be? Yes. A person that can send me off to distant, non-existing worlds filled with lush environments and interesting characters? You bet. I don't think Lucas is the Jesus Christ of this millenium, but I do think he is a very intelligent person with the capability to inject magic into his stories. Whether he can write dialogue is my own opinion- and yours- but really, after all that Lucas has one for us fans, and is continuing to do- I don't exactly care.

 

darth_pooh,

You're right, GL has reaped the benefits of good decisions when he started out and is obviously in a position of power today as a result. If the word "genius" is going to be thrown around, it would likely be in maximizing the financial benefits of what he created instead of getting bought out by a studio.

I still don't see how the PE enters into the argument because, as far as I know, he hasn't created any work of his own or released it for public consumption. He isn't an "artist" and shouldn't be treated as such. How do copyright laws enter into it from his perspective, despite the obvious? I think he seems more like a fan that got carried away with his arrogance or didn't realize that there might be something fundamentally unethical, in terms of respect for the work of others, (whether you think the work itself is good or bad) about what he was doing.

As for the comic industry, it was supposed to be dead 10 years ago. That sentiment is nothing new, believe me.

 

nice post Pooja!

truly.

 

nice post Pooja!

truly.



I'm starting to understand your train of thoughts as well, DrEvazan although I still think you're a bit too harsh in your setiments.

 

yeah well. i love film so i get carried away and lose my train of thought alot. when i write i have to take notes constantly or i forget everything i think of.

i love ANH and ESB and alot of ROTJ so much that i suppose i may get a little too mad when i see the (IMO) squandered opportunities of the PT so far. i still hope i will like epi III, believe it or not.

 

What exactly do you dislike about the PT so far? I'm not picking on you, I seriously want to know.

 

well, there is a general lack of warmth in these films. a lack of a sense of real fun in favor of forced fun.

i can go and cite examples of cliched and clunky dialogue and clumsy plot construction throughout TPM and AOTC.

i find the characters, with the exception of maybe watto and occaisionally obi wan to be cold, unmotivated stick figures who only use dialogue to move the plot along, rather than establish believeable relationships or to move me to feel any emotion towards them (good or bad) i think this is to be blamed on a combination of weak dialogue and poor performances, as well as poor direction.

lets see...

i think its interesting that the common response to these complaints is that star wars has always had bad acting and dialogue... but its hard to explain the difference between the acting and writing in the OT vs. the acting and writing of the PT. other than to say the warmth and sarcasm are just not there in the new films, and i think they are sorely missed (obi wans "good job" comes close)because it leaves a viewer like me totally uninvolved and not caring about the people im watching.

im trying to avoid saying what has already been said. ill add to this later.

 

Imperial_Guard

I'm very tired and you must be on the west coast or something...got work to do.

I didn't know anything about PE up until one hour ago. From what I've determined, he's copied an entire GL film (TPM apparently), and created an "edit" of it that omits the parts he doesn't like.

Well, in some strains of copyright law, this edit could be viewed as a new work. It changes the original with a new intent. DOn't quote me on that...but whatever. Reorganizing the content of another work can be a work in itself - look at Andy Warhol or Dada.

However, GL's law machine probably views this as total theft because all of the elements are someone else's - GL's. Fine. That's probably true and rings true with the way some of Copyright works.

I don't feel the PE is all that special, but I think that his "take" on the film is interesting to me.

Surely he didn't do the work of the "young" Lucas. Standing around in the desert, praying to god that things would work and that he would have the money. Going against the HUGE public distrust of stupid Sci Fi films...He took big risks, and like an investor he has rightfully reaped a benefit.

However, the PE perspective got slammed because he seems to have attempted to "criticize" GL, and the only thing he could back up his criticism with was an edited work of GL's. Well, that sounds reasonable to me.

Instead of sitting on his butt like a "couch critic" he got up, took the film and made the version he thought was superior. I find that actually kind of cool! He may not deserve a job at Lucasfilm. But he certainly deserves respect for changing the way that one could see the film. I also pointed out that the "event" of his copying is meaningful because it shows how far some people would be willing to go to get a different result.

GL and PE are not in the same ball park. They have completely different intentions with their respective "products." And the PE's is surely "derivative."

But at least it is authentic in its derivative universe. I mean to say that it may not be GL's kind of art, but it could still be art in a weird way - a shift in perspective carrying a message.

So, it would be worth it if such "attempts" like the one by PE were tolerated as long as they were not sold for money or mass marketed. If they remained an individual test for people to see - that would be fine, I think, and not troublesome to GL. He is protected enough that this shouldn't be viewed as sacrilige. As long as the PE wasn't doing it to take GL's profits, his criticism is important. If he's not doing it just for the money, that is!

P.S. I hope the comics industry stays where it is!

 

Your post does make a lot of sense.

Obviously, it's no big deal to Lucas at the end of the day though I still feel that he has every right to be irked about the process.

Why didn't the PE just post a customized script on a website or this site, for that matter? That question alone leads me to believe that while he may not be making money directly off of it, he is still using it for personal gain which is why I find any proclamations about the nobility of saving Star Wars to be highly suspect. At the very least, he should have made a stronger attempt to get a copy to Lucas if that was his primary intent.

Perhaps I was overly harsh earlier. Maybe he did have a hand in indirectly making AOTC a stronger film. Or maybe he didn't. Who knows? Still, the means used to achieve the end in this case still leaves a sour taste in my mouth. And reading some of this guy's quotes, he comes off as arrogant and self-centered whether or not you like his version of TPM or not.

Finally, I believe that, while the intentions may be good, altering copyright laws as you suggest could set all kinds of dangerous precedents. What happens when the "little guy" rips off the other "little guy" or what happens when someone goes back and takes any film and does a copy-edit and then passes it off as a "new original" where some people from newer generations might actually assume that he or she is the original creator if they aren't familiar with the source material itself? This would create way more headaches than its worth, IMO.

I may have been overly passionate when I said that I would have no problem with Lucasfilm going after this guy and quote, "string[ing] him up by his [censored]". At the same time, I think that these kinds of things should be kept as the exceptions and not allowed to become a modern genre.

Of course, the Soviet montage films, dada, etc, were great too. I suppose that in an ideal world, an artist could make any kind of statement that he or she wanted with any material that he or she wanted. Of course, the world is far from ideal and maybe we have lost something in art with lawsuits and copyrights. There's just no sense of trust or mutual respect anymore, I guess, and, for the most part, that's sadly why they're there; to protect the artist as much as possible.

Dammit, my head hurts. This is a real tough one!

 

"Why is it whenever a basher proclaims his love for Star Wars, the image
of Palpatine proclaiming his "love" for the Republic comes to mind?"

These powers I accept to rewrite and re-edit Lucas's movies as I see fit I will lay down once the crisis has passed.

 

the PE is using unconventional methods and working "outside the system" just like GL did many years ago.

Oh, please.

 

Dr E.

Ok I can't argue with you when you put your OWN feelings into your opinion. I just can't stand the people who flat out agree with the PE and don't say why. IMHO, disliking AOTC for your own reasons gives anyone much more ground to stand on in their argument than simply agreeing with the PE, he has no credibility given that he was rejected by Lucasfilm and is now apparently on a crusade to bash Lucas.

Yes I disagree with what the PE says in his review. I think it's biased. I think he's feeling rejected. I could be wrong, but I can't prove it either. Mostly I just think he's wrong.

And I wasn't arguing that there was a rumor the Kevin Smith was the PE. We all knew and read that. It has since been disproven. No point in really bringing it up is there? The only reason I mention Kevin Smith is because the PE seems to have devoted most of his webpage to buttkissing Kevin. Why I don't know, He doesn't like fart jokes from Jar Jar, but he does from Jason Mewes? and who's really a worse Actor Ahmed Best or Jason Mewes?

 

Instead of sitting on his butt like a "couch critic" he got up, took the film and made the version he thought was superior. I find that actually kind of cool!

As do I! It's been just over a year now since I got the edit, and I remember watching the entire debate unfold. I've always just been under the impression that it was a fun little experiment to see "what if". Honestly, what's the big deal? It's not a big deal, and it's definitely nothing to get upset over.


He may not deserve a job at Lucasfilm. But he certainly deserves respect for changing the way that one could see the film. I also pointed out that the "event" of his copying is meaningful because it shows how far some people would be willing to go to get a different result.

Yeah, there are probably a lot of interesting repercussions from this event, as it shows a real shift of power from the Hollywood elite to the independent filmmaker. Realistically, one can now shoot, edit, and master an entire movie on a personal computer. I think that's pretty cool, and consistent with the movement that Lucas is trying to pioneer. I am under the impression that George Lucas himself isn't bothered by the PE at all?

After all is said and done, it was just TPM, which isn't a great movie anyway. This of course, IMO.

P.S. Metallica SUX

 

Hey, confidential to anyone who cares:

I saw the Japanese dubbed version of TPM on TV a few days ago, and Jar-Jar, Boss Nass, and the rest of the Gungans had their dialogue replaced by Japanese speakers speaking clear Japanese (although in a Muppets / Sesame Street vein). I can't begin to express to you how much more enjoyable the film was.

Anakin and Padme's voice actors were also much more convincing and easier on the ears. Even though I own the DVD and never watch the film itself, I actually was able to sit
through the whole TV presentation. What do you think?

 

I still think Metallica sucks now too. I understand why they were trying to protect their property though.

AS far as the PE goes, if he really only wanted to see what if, and not use it for personal gain, most of us wouldn't have seen it. He did this solely with the intention of drawing attention to himself, not the film.

If not, why would he give it to the people at View Askew, and tell the world that he did on a website that he created to advertise his work as the Phantom Editor.

I've re-edited certain songs by popular artists to my liking. I have neither posted them on a sharing site, nor created a website to promote my work. It's not mine to sell or distribute.

 

Well, my take on this in a nutshell is that it was OK to edit the film (because who cares), but to use it for personal gain... that strikes me as opportunist.

However, no matter what I might think about PE the person, it shouldn't affect what I think about the specific points he makes about AOTC, TPM, or the PT as a whole. If I judge the person and not the point, then I am falling into ad hominem, and that's pointless and illogical.

I don't have a problem with disagreeing or entertaining opposing viewpoints, but I simply can't tolerate post after vicious post of non-sensical character attacks. Pathetic and worthless. What's the point of attacking someone's character anyway, except to stimulate a mob-rule majority of like-minded thinkers? Oh, I guess that is the point...

 

It's just hard to lend any credibility to a film's review that was authored by someone who has been rejected by the people who created the film. He's biased, which results in a tainted review.

He's created a website to promote his "work" in re-touching someone else's idea. The PE has opened the door to being criticised personally by doing so.

You can agree with what he has to say all you want. This doesn't give him any more credibility to author an unbiased, thoughtful review of AOTC.

He spends 85% of this "review" bashing Lucas and not the film.

But we shouldn't personally attack him right?

He's not an artist, he's a thief.

 

It's just hard to lend any credibility to a film's review that was authored by someone who has been rejected by the people who created the film. He's biased, which results in a tainted review.

Even if Adolf Hitler himself wrote the review, it doesn't change the truth or falsity of what he says, as they are his opinions. In this review, the PE gives specific reasons why he formulated his opinions. That's enough for me. So what if he's biased? Who isn't?

You can agree with what he has to say all you want. This doesn't give him any more credibility to author an unbiased, thoughtful review of AOTC.

You mean a "positive" review? Like I implied earlier, no review can be unbiased. It's because of bias that makes reviews interesting to read. If I were to write a thoughtful, negative review, do you think I would get any respect on this forum? That's why I never bothered to post one. What would be the point.

He spends 85% of this "review" bashing Lucas and not the film.

I've read the review several times, and I didn't see him attack personally attack Lucas anywhere. If I am wrong, please point to a specific place in the review.

But we shouldn't personally attack him right?

What good does it do?

He's not an artist, he's a thief.

That's just like, your opinion man.

 

If copyright laws weren't important, they wouldn't have made them laws.

Bashers can agree with the PE because of his views, but to say his methods of doing this were perfectly fine is basically saying that stealing is okay.

I'm an artist myself. If someone took a print of my painting. Removed parts here and added parts there and then showed up later saying his work (that is based off of mine) is superior, I'd hunt him down and pummel him. It's that simple. It's a MAJOR lack of disrespect to me. Besides, if he was such a creative soul, he wouldn't base his stuff off of my work.

He didn't make this movie. But he took it and altered it and THEN distributed it to others. His gain? Recognition. He could have kept his edit to himself and enjoyed TPM in his weird little way, but he didn't.

 

I agree with that. Lucas's intellectual property is the real source of his wealth, and he knows it, and that's why he protects it so agressively. The Phantom was wrong to distribute the Edit and deserved whatever Lucas aimed his way.

Now if it becomes a matter of making a political statement, in which the Phantom Editor is saying, I know what I'm doing is wrong, but I'm such a fan of Star Wars that I have to get this out to the public, and I accept the legal consequences, then I might question the guy's priorities, but it certainly is a move that takes guts.

 

You can agree with what he has to say all you want. This doesn't give him any more credibility to author an unbiased, thoughtful review of AOTC.

You mean a "positive" review? Like I implied earlier, no review can be unbiased. It's because of bias that makes reviews interesting to read. If I were to write a thoughtful, negative review, do you think I would get any respect on this forum? That's why I never bothered to post one. What would be the point.

No I mean an unbiased review. I don't know you. I know you didn't make the phantom edit, so yes I would take your opinions in your review seriously. Do it without questioning Lucas' intentions or motivations and base it solely on AOTC's merits or failings without comparing it to the other movies in the Saga. that would be fairly unbiased, but I haven't seen a single review that has done that, positive or negative.

He spends 85% of this "review" bashing Lucas and not the film.

I've read the review several times, and I didn't see him attack personally attack Lucas anywhere. If I am wrong, please point to a specific place in the review.

did we read the same review? Why bring up Kurtz or Kasden if it's only a review of AOTC? right, he doesn't talk about Lucas' ability or technique at all, just the movie, right.

But we shouldn't personally attack him right?

What good does it do?

it's not about doing good, it's about discrediting someone who is completely biased and rants childishly about a filmaker he wishes he was because he was left out of the game.