Saga Point of view - George Lucas was right not to listen to the embittered fans

Well said.

 

Companies usually strive to reduce risk as much as possible, but sometimes you do have to take risks to make money. This is why companies diversify assets to reduce risk, if one section does bad hopefully the other sections make up for it to avoid a total loss. This is why Disney owns so many different things.

 

Another reviewer who summed it up quite nicely was Richard Brody of The New Yorker:

"The result is a movie that’s awestruck, warmhearted, good-humored—and conspicuously prefabricated, without a jolt of spontaneity or reckless impulse anywhere in its sealed-up universe...Abrams is a deft manager who balances tones and plots on the tips of his fingers, but he isn’t a director of images...His spectacle and its meticulous design are something to see, but his direction doesn’t shape the elements stylistically—it doesn’t provide anything to look at. The carefully crafted objects and the thoughtfully chosen settings never rise, by means of visual composition, to symbolic significance...Abrams delivers exactly what he wants to deliver, no more and no less. There’s no element of mystery, nothing to capture the eye or pique the mind (whether in active thought or subconscious resonance) between packets of plot information, jolts of martial energy, and waves of sentiment...The hearty sentiment and the breathlessly clever plotting of “The Force Awakens” are delights, but narrowly limited delights. There’s pleasure within measure, but no uninhibited joy or terror, no ecstasy, no unmanaged passion. The secrets of the movie are the secrets of its plot; the mysteries are purely narrative, not at all visual, symbolic, metaphorical, or experiential. Nothing of the true force of the cinema."

 

George Lucas was also right not to listen to Harrison Ford's desire to kill Han Solo off, which he had basically been asking for since the Empire Strikes Back!

He covered his bases by putting him in carbonite, in case Ford really did not want to come back for Return of the Jedi, but Abrams' just giving in to it, and killing him off....uh.

From listening to the actors, it does sound like a failing of Lucas is in directing the actors, which is possibly where some detractors of the PT acting referring to it being wooden.

Carrie Fisher is one who I have heard describe George Lucas directing her, and J J Abrams' directing her, and you can she see she is much more animated and grateful for the latter interactions.

 

re: perception of PT better outside N America. not necessarily. TFA cinema audience yesterday, (London, England) in the row behind there was a dude saying she refused to watch the PT

 

Indeed. IMO in Australia & the UK the PT unfortunately has a poor reputation. The overwhelmingly positive reviews here in Aust for TFA nearly all included a dig at the PT. Then there's the extremely poor performance of the prequels in China (the world's 2nd biggest film market). When they were released a few years back I think combined they made about $20m. TFA is sitting on 6 times that on its own. Not sure I buy that the PT has some kind of great standing overseas.

Then again out of the 92% of positive reviews there's observations like these:

"The Force Awakens isn't just one the finest movies of 2015, it's the best movie of the year, full stop." - Peter Howell, Toronto Star.

"Star Wars: The Force Awakens is actually probably objectively the best Star Wars yet, and would be held up as untouchable had it come first." - Chris Hooten, Independent.

"[Star Wars: The Force Awakens] returns the iconic sci-fi franchise to a glorious place that hasn't been seen since Ewoks danced off into victory in Return of the Jedi 32 years ago." - Brian Truitt, USA Today.

"The Force Awakens has succeeded where it counts most, in creating a cast of characters that viewers can spend the next several years rooting for, especially the spirited, resourceful heroine at its center." Anne Hornaday, Washington Post.

"The seventh installment in the series, started by George Lucas in 1977, is the best Star Wars sequel yet and one of the best films of 2015." - Mick LaSalle, San Fran Chronicle.

In fact for every one bad comment you can wheel out another 50 good ones can be produced. Then there's the AFI naming it one of the 10 best films of the year. The film placing on a huge host of end of year top 10 lists. 5 Oscar noms (the most since ANH & as many as the entire PT combined).
Of course no film has unanimous praise. We could post some critical remarks about the Godfather that would make even that sound like a bad film.

 

Sorry but...that review. Utter guph.

 

This is just silly. Generalizing about markets as though you're in touch with entire continents of sentiments before saying the PT did poorly in China by comparison. Lol.

You're aware the film market in China has changed a bit in the last decade right? You know China limits a U.S. or EU films success by pegging it to a quota within their own market. The market is much larger now than it was even ten years ago and the quota for Western films has been increased.

These arguments are all very silly.

As for the idea that TFA is the best Star Wars ever... I scoff at that with disgust. It may have he broadest appeal of any Star Wars film but that isn't a metric that should be used. You know what else has broad appeal? Adam Sandler movies, Fast and the Furious, chain restaurants, Wal Mart, and fake castles at theme parks.

Some of the reviews you posted are downright stupid. How could it be held up as the best if it came first? Everything in it is derivative! No viewer would even understand what the hell is going on if it came first. That's the dumbest thing I've seen about Star Wars since red letter media started their exploitative and self serving rubbish.

 

Try to form a coherent argument instead of just ranting. If it's silly to say that the PT isn't held in much higher regard outside of the US than it's just as silly to say the opposite isn't it? That's what I responded to.

As for your opinion on TFA, that's all it is - an opinion. However the acclaim TFA has & is still receiving isn't like an Adam Sandler movie. Even the prequels are held in higher esteem than that. What's "silly" are your comparisons. Have a look at awards, reviews & fan polling for TFA, including the poll right here in the PT forum. Sorry but the movie is extremely highly regarded. Impossible to please everyone though.

 

Personally I am glad George Lucas followed his own vision rather than trying to chase some nebulous idea of what the fans wanted. I think it's clear now with the release of TFA that it's very difficult to please all the fans. I can understand why some didn't like the direction he took, in which there was no Han Solo type character and where everyone speaks in a formal sort of way, but I think in a way that's the strength of the prequels, that they feel so different from the OT while still recognizably belonging to the same universe, albeit before the fall. The OT heroes were nobodies, farmers and smugglers and rebels, while in the PT they are knights and politicians. It makes sense that people will prefer one to the other. Ultimately we got three beautiful prequel films that are really kind of strange, unique movies. They are triumphs of creativity and worldbuilding unlike really anything else out there, and I'm glad they exist as they are.

 

I think that the point friedbantha is trying to get at previously is that many popular films back in the seventies, eighties and nineties as Star Wars, Rocky, Terminator, Jurassic Park, Robocop, etc..., the main reason why they were successful and are still popular today was because they were going against a common current. When these movies were originally released, they were all unique and unexpected, nobody at that time wanted to bet on those movies. If these movies were successful and so great back then, and are now held today as legends, it was because they were fighting a system which was already in place, thanks to their innovation, and by challenging the standards and its audience back then. They came out of nowhere and where all innovative with their stories, their contribution to the film-making industry with all the technology developed back then, ect...

The movies which are released nowadays are only sequels after sequels, after sequels, after sequels, etc... of those beloved original films. It is only rehash. And at the moment when you're getting too far from a so-called "spirit" or "feel" with those sequel movies, as Lucas did with the prequels, you're getting crucified by a group of fans which only wants that "same feeling" and being boozed like babies continually because they simply can't get out of their fantasy and of that dreamed and glorified time period from their past, during their childhood and youth, instead of looking at the present and at the future.

I'm not judging people here, I'm describing a fact. How many times I've heard so many fans, critics and armchair directors saying: "we want the same spirit from the OT", "we want the same magic in the TFA as the OT", "we want a return to practical effects", "we want the movie to be shot on film, not digital", "we want that same look and feeling of the 1970's and 1980's in the movie", etc...

And the worst thing, is that the corporations which are now in charge of producing those sequel movies, are playing the game. The perfect example was the whole "practical effects", "real sets", "real desert" promotion for the movie while in reality they used tons of CGI for TFA. The funniest thing is that those people and fans have bought it without asking themselves questions. They were believing that the "fan-service" thrown at them in a coarse and and unbelievable way was some sort of sign of emotional complicity in relation to a fantasized time that we all lived during our youth, or was some sort of "love letter" to quote HelloGreedo. But this also proves that people can easily be taken as fools, and it worked!

On my part, I don't mind sequels to a glorified franchise as long a you're trying to extend its myth and try to challenge the audience and the conventions, by presenting a story which will inspire and teach something to its audience. Because that's what the original Star Wars from 1977 and the prequels were trying to do.

I liked The Force Awakens and I think it's a pretty good film. But as time passes, I keep wondering more and more about many things towards this movie.

What I'm still wondering about is where are they exactly trying to do with the Sequel Trilogy. What will be its purpose except of being only movies meant for entertainment and pleasing its audience and the fans with its retro approach (Rian Johnson and Colin Trevorrow will still be shooting in film, and Trevorrow wished that he could take some shots in a "real space")? What the producers are trying to do? What are they trying to offer? What is their difference compared with what Lucas did with the OT? What is their singularity? What the story of the ST will add to the saga and to the entire Star Wars universe?

Unfortunately, I've seen nothing in TFA answering those questions or giving me a hint towards the importance of its story. But I do hope that Episode VIII and IX will answer those questions.

 

But I never gave that initial opinion...you weren't responding to me.

Second, I actually like TFA. Most of my distaste is for the wholly unjustified overreaction to it. There are far too many people making preposterous claims about its status within the films who haven't let it sink in. It reeks of "everything that's new is the best!" "Lebron James is the best basketball player ever!" "Tom Brady is the best QB ever." "Marvel films are the best comic book movies ever."

You know what all that crap has in common? It's all owned by Disney. ESPN. Marvel. Star Wars. They can promote the hell out of anything.

And so - like I have said many times - I thoroughly enjoyed TFA. I will be purchasing it the first day it's out on Blu Ray and I'm sure I'll watch it dozens of times. I admire it for its nostalgia and for truly recapturing many elements of the OT. It should be applauded.

It disappoints me in its lack of courage and its lack of original vision.

 

You articulated my feelings better than I could. Thank you.

 

Possibly the best comment in the whole thread (though I haven't read all of it).

Bravo, bravo!!!

 

It's only unjustified in your opinion. We hear the same thing about every highly praised movie. The Dark Knight, Fury Road, TLOTR...every praised & hyped movie results in people who don't like it coming out & saying it's all overblown & unwarranted. Your opinion is nothing new, but it is just your opinion.

Nope. New things are often panned, even Disney produced content is poorly received. Critics are only too eager to tear down an over-hyped movie if they think it's no good. They don't care that Disney produced it. Your argument doesn't hold up. If Disney had such power then John Carter would've been considered a masterpiece...bcs it was new & was promoted. Movies earn the praise they get & deserve the criticism they get. Even if you personally see it differently.

 

To be clear. since it seems you may have missed my point, I did not provide those quotes to make it appear as if TFA is a "bad film". Like the vast majority of people criticising TFA, I liked and enjoyed it very much. I offered those particular quotes from reviews because I felt they articulated what many of us fans have been saying are the weak points of the movie. Each one of those reviewers agreed that TFA is a very well produced and highly enjoyable movie but that it lacks a unique vision. That's an opnion that I and many other fans happen to share.

Whether or not it's a majority opinion is entirely besides the point.

 

Do you mean "guff"?

If so, I would have to disagree. For me personally, it's pretty spot-on.

 

Are you saying it's he best Star Wars film ever made? If not, then you and I don't have a disagreement.

 

That's true, there are so many iconic scenes that come to mind, be it the binary sunset scene, the tear scene with Anakin in ROTJ, the beautiful battle between Anakin and Obi Wan...
I only read that once that someone thinks that due to some weaknesses in dialogues and because some people don't like Christensen's acting (I do!) the blame should be put on Lucas' directing so I thought that maybe that could be a reason why some don't like the prequels (I do!). But remembering the Star Wars movies, it appears silly to say that Lucas is not a great director.
So in the end, I still don't understand why some don't like the PT, in my eyes they enrich Star Wars tremendously, they are well written and I like the actors. The only thing I do not so enjoy is the first half of AOTC which felt a bit lengthy but since I do not know how to make a movie, I cannot say why, maybe a bit much dialogue with not so many emotions, at least I remember it that way. Gonna re-watch it when it's on TV again.
I am glad that Lucas did his thing and I would love to have him still involved in the movies. His movies feel inspired, without him, I am not convinced that others can add much to the Star Wars universe.

 

I like this comment. The OT and PT seem to contain mysterious truths behind the plot that feel like religious revelations and wisdom. I am no Marvel/Transformers guy, they are nice to watch but usually don't have me emotionally invested (the only Marvel movies I care about are the Spider Man movies with Tobey Maguire) because they normally feel like superficial action without meaning.

 

It depends upon where you think the term originated, I suppose, but I'm pretty certain I mean guph (as in; over-elaborated, pretentious (tendentious?) nonsense, as in the Kabalistic notions of a 'heavenly realm')

The major theme of the criticism appears to be the lack of visually striking symbolism. The way the killing of the father is dealt with, the lighting; the sun going out as the deed is done....all very visually evocative. The lightsabre duel in the woods at the end, the 'skeletons' of Empire (of the OT) scattered around Jakku. There is a great thread on the TFA forum, http://boards.theforce.net/threads/analysis-of-the-force-awakens-themes-symbolism-etc.50037290/ which I would advise anyone who thinks TFA is shallow,or unworthy of Star Wars, to take a read of. And that would especially relate to the idea that the movie lacks visual artistry and exposition.

 

I find this thread to be funny, but it's not that I think there's no symbolism in TFA.

What I find funny, or ironic, is that people on this thread, who have been denying for a long time, or never wanted to know anything about the symbolism and the references to our philosophical and mythological preoccupations in the prequels, or were just snubbing the Ring Theory by Mike Klimo, are now suddenly discussing about that for TFA and are using the same arguments to defend TFA as the prequels. Whereas, for the prequels, most people call all this work and inspiration Lucas put on these films as "lazy", or where only calling these movie as "crappy" without any further arguments...

 

I have said before that there are moments in the movies that are visually stunning, particularly in ROTS imo. Just because we can see elements there....if the other ingredients aren't there (cogent narrative, engaging characters you could care about...) then it'snot enough to save the films.

I don't think I've seen anybody call the PT "lazy". I just think Lucas should have done what he did with the OT...have some proper help out with script-writing and directing. It's not that people are unaware or don't 'get' the visual imagery its just....not enough to save the movies from their faults.

 

Except that the prequel trilogy DOES have both a cogent narrative and characters that I - and millions of other people - care about, particularly Anakin ad Padme.

I for one have always been glad that Lucas didn't do with the PT what he did with the OT and bring others in to dilute his vision. What we got was pure George Lucas and I couldn't love it more.

 

No offence intended...just answering the claim that not being impressed with the PT was anything to do with not 'getting' it.