Role of the Producer in Star Wars

Should the producer have any creative input or is he just there to keep the books balanced?

We've all read stories about how Gary Kurtz was the greatest producer because he butted heads with Lucas over everything. But then we also know that both Star Wars projects he worked on went way over budget. Likewise, McCullum has been tarred as a yes-man because he does what Lucas wants. However his projects come in under budget.

Clearly the Zanucks and Bruckheimers of the world have the clout to make any creative decision they want, but what about the everyday film producer? Should they limit their roles to making sure the creative vision of the director/writer are brought to fruition? Does their telling the creative team that yes they can do X, Y, and Z really constitute being yes-men, especially if they can still do X, Y, and Z and still be under budget? Or should a producer have the ability to step in and tell the creative people how to tell their story? Is it the producers job to tell the director he is wrong, and yet not keep the books in the black? Is there a happy medium?

Please no blanket bashing McCullum or Kurtz or anyone else.

 

Hmm...I'm not really sure how this relates to the Star Wars Saga...

 

Well you know, the roles of the people making the films...

 

Should the producer have any creative input or is he just there to keep the books balanced?

IMHO, both. Great producers like Joel Silver, Bruckheimer and even Spielberg when he's we wearing a producer's hat, are great providing both creative input and keeping the film on schedule and on budget.

The producer credit in filmmaking is very nebulous. Some producers are just responsible for finding material and bringing in the right elements and getting the script in tip top shape. They'll write notes. They'll be present in story meetings and have much of their own input. In essence this was George Lucas' role on ESB and ROTJ. Most people feel filmmaking is a director's medium, which is for the most part true. But there are a great number of films that bear the imprint of the producer. This is what's called a creative producer.

The other end of the spectrum is the producer whose sole duty is to keep the film on schedule and budget. They are their to further the director's vision within the realm of the money and time alloted to the film.

My feeling on the whole Kurtz/McCallum debate is that Kurtz had more of a creative side. And more importantly, Lucas valued Kurtz's opinion. Whereas McCallum was hired simply to make things run smoothly on schedule and under budget. I highly doubt while Lucas was writing the script he'd run things by McCallum to see how McCallum thought about or to get his input.

 

You have to realize that, for ANH, Lucas didn't really have complete control. Kurtz was butting heads with him, but so was Alan Ladd Jr, and others at Fox. Had Lucas had control, things would have been different.

Now that he has control, he's not going to surround himself with people who see things contrary to his own vision. Possibly he should, but would you go out of your way to work with people who didn't want to do things the way you thought they should be done? Were you in charge of your particular department at work, would you hire people who you knew were going to get the job done fastest and for the least amount of money, or a guy who's always arguing with you and going over budget? You're going to hire the guy who gets things done.

 

Well, obviously the Producer CAN offer creative input into the movie if he/she wants feels inclined.

However, IMO, without question the central role of the Producer is to keep the production on track, on budget. This is where Kurtz totally FAILED at his job. If he had been less interested in trying to make his own version of Star Wars, and more interested in keeping the thing from going over-budget, he might not have had to be sacked for ROTJ.

Remember Lucas was financing these films with his own money. He couldn't let Kurtz keep squangering it away.... Would you?

That said, clearly it would be nice is Lucas and Kurtz patched up their differances, and came together for the Episode IV and V DVD's. I don't think that's very likely though....

 

G-Fett -
However, IMO, without question the central role of the Producer is to keep the production on track, on budget. This is where Kurtz totally FAILED at his job. If he had been less interested in trying to make his own version of Star Wars, and more interested in keeping the thing from going over-budget, he might not have had to be sacked for ROTJ.

Remember Lucas was financing these films with his own money. He couldn't let Kurtz keep squangering it away.... Would you?

Firstly - Star Wars was produced for $9.5 million, now even back then this was not a big budget, look at the film, it is truly astonishing that it got made for that amount of money. 2001 cost $10million TEN YEARS earlier. SW looks like it cost 5 times it's budget. And Gary Kurtz deserves credit for that.

Secondly - a producer has various jobs, one of them is to support the director and help him get what he wants. Kurtz was in a difficult position on ESB, Lucas WASN'T the director, Kershner was. So he had to support Kersh. It went over budget, there are a lot of reasons for this, they have been documented, Kurtz "squandering" the money isn't one of them.
And if The Empire Strikes Back is evidence of squandering then I only wish every producer would squander the money in a similar way!

As far as I know Kurtz LEFT , do you have any evidence that he was fired?

g

 

I realise Kurtz has a lot of fanatical fans, but the central issue, both Star Wars films went over-budget. And as a consequence of this Kurtz had to go.

I understand he didn't like being fired by Lucas, so he has put aroud this mis-conception that he left because Lucas stopped taking his much needed advice....

But I promise you, if Lucas asked Kurtz to Produce Episode III, he'd be back like a SHOT!

 

You have absolutely no proof that Kurtz was fired. There's nothing to even suggest it.

 

It is my understanding that Kurtz left over 'creative differences'; Lucas did NOT ask him to leave over budgetary concerns.



Rick McCallum loves you!

 

Well, I can see I'm not going to win this one.

All I'm going to say, is that for the last 20 years Kurtz has seemed like he's bitter about something. He's been endlessly going around telling anybody who will listen how terrible Star Wars has become without his imput. That bitterness tells me that Kurtz didn't want to leave Star Wars when he did. Of course, I don't have any proof....

All these years Gary Kurtz has sucessfully portrayed himself as a victim of the nasty, dominering Lucas, and all I'm saying is that 9 times out of 10, it takes two to create an arguement. I'm certain Lucas has his side to this. Just a shame he's to much of a gent to ever share his side with us.

 

Dehrian: "You have to realize that, for ANH, Lucas didn't really have complete control."

Well, creatively he had complete control, he had the final say. That was one of the most amazing aspects of the deal he struck with Fox, he done everything the way he wanted to. There was very little studio interference and very little creative interference from Kurtz.