Why is Lucas so pesimistic about Episode 3's box office potentital?

Discussion in 'Revenge of the Sith (Non-Spoilers)' started by seasider, Apr 4, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Durwood Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    May 18, 2002
    star 5
    Which is why he said that if Clones did less than $280 million domestically he'd have to rethink the way he was going to do Episode III?

    He said he would rethink the way he markets Episode III, which is a moot point anyway seeing as CLONES was a box office smash.
  2. Durwood Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    May 18, 2002
    star 5
    If I'm not mistaken, "Citizen Kane" was poorly reviewed upon its initial release.

    It was also a box office disaster that all but sent Orsen Wells packing to the poor house. According to some theories put forth in this thread, the double whammy of poor critical and box office success is "proof" that CITIZEN KANE is a terrible movie, but many film fans today consider it a masterpiece.

    Bottom line: Pop culture, box office receipts, and critical acclaim mean zilch and none of them can be used to prove a film's worth. What's left? Why that would be personal opinion.
  3. EuroJedi Jedi Padawan

    Member Since:
    Apr 29, 2003
    SW theme echoes the moral and political troubles and contradictions of today. That´s why it is hated as much as it is loved. An Empire is built for acceptable reasons, or the morality of using evil means to achieve some end, however good it might be. And the historically proven fact that bad means always corrupt the good ends that they were supposed the bring.

    I am affraid to say this to my american friends, but this looks more and more like your country´s behaviour; be it preemptive strikes on dangerous dictators (in SW it was Dooku´s separatists), rendering the United Nations irrelevant (in SW is was rendering the Senate irrelevant)...

    The list will go on, as history is unfolding at a fast pace now. As your republic is being destroyed by the empire-building guys, George Lucas reflects on that by showing us his Republic beeing destroyed by Palpatine´s empire.

    So, it is clear to me why there is so much american media bashing of the SW saga. I expect SW3 to be a huge success, here in Europe. In the US, however, it will be the most severely bashed film in the history of cinema.
  4. Durwood Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    May 18, 2002
    star 5
    I am affraid to say this to my american friends, but this looks more and more like your country´s behaviour.

    Yeah, I'd be afraid to say something as stupid as this myself.
  5. Garth Maul Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    May 18, 2002
    star 6
    I think the best you could say is that it is a heavy-handed warning to the US...

    but there are so many things that are different that I would paraphrase Dave Barry and call it "stretching the mozzarella cheese on the pizza slice of analogy".

    I think though that your idea has merit in another sense, and I think it's already been discussed in this thread: as GL has said, this trilogy IS more subtle and complex than the OT. The OT was pretty obvious, the equivalent of being hit over the head with a hammer, while the PT is someone jabbing a finger into your forehead repeatedly.

    That makes the plot harder to get into, and it is difficult for people to identify and categorize who is bad and who is good - it can be frustrating.

    But then again, maybe I'm now the one stretching the cheese.;)
  6. Durwood Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    May 18, 2002
    star 5
    I think the best you could say is that it is a heavy-handed warning to the US...

    First of all, STAR WARS is not a political commentary.

    Secondly, the events in STAR WARS and the current worldwide political climate (it's not just about the U.S., people; don't be so shortsighted) couldn't be more different than the events depicted in ATTACK OF THE CLONES. In fact, Palpatine's rise to power is modeled after Hitler, not George W. Bush.

    In order for there to be a parallel between Palpatine and GW, you'd have to make the absurd assumption that Bush is in league with Osama Bin-Laden and Saddam Hussien and that he was responsible for the unprovoked attack on America on September 11th. Secondly, Bush is as far away from being an emperorer as any U.S. president, thanks to a little thing known as the U.S. Constitution that prevents a president from acquiring too much power (there is no "emergency powers" provision in the Constitution, in case you didn't know, just as there's no clause preventing religion from actively participating in government business, but that's another matter). And as long as the whiney Democrats are in place, there is an adequate checks and balance system that will prevent Bush from ever ascending to the place that Palpatine will hold by the end of Episode III.

    To put it bluntly, anybody who thinks Lucas is creating a cautionary tale for the United States is ignorant about a lot of things.
  7. advent Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Mar 23, 2003
    star 2
    I think the truth lies somewhere in the middle. While Star Wars isn't a direct political commentary, it does have some universal politics that can be applied to nearly any form of civilization.

    Similarly to Tolkien's Lord of the Rings, Star Wars is applicable, not analogous.

    :)
  8. Shelley Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Sep 9, 2001
    star 5
    A critic actually accused Lucas of displaying bad taste, and also cashing in on Sept. 11th, by featuring a terrorist attack at the beginning of AOTC.

    First of all, it was an assassination attempt, which isn't quite the same thing. Second of all, AOTC was plotted and scripted before Sept. 11th, and I'd wager that principle photography at least was completed before then as well.

    There's no end to the twisted logic that people will use to justify their vilification of Lucas. A more recent example was the incredibly fatuous "Newsweek" article on the "Matrix" sequels, which not only accused Lucas of "ripping off" the human growth fields in "Matrix" with his clone production facilities, but also had the nerve to say that Lucas did so because he was feeling the heat -- "what other explanation can there be?"

    I'm still shocked by the sheer fatuousness of that statement.

    Then there's "Entertainment Weakly" and its wishful thinking about "Matrix" stealing TPM's thunder in 1999. How it did so has yet to be made clear.
  9. Darth_Insidious Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Apr 26, 2002
    star 4
    Then there's "Entertainment Weakly" and its wishful thinking about "Matrix" stealing TPM's thunder in 1999. How it did so has yet to be made clear.

    Because by any applicable indication, The Matrix was considered a better movie. Rotten Tomatoes, IMDB and Cinemascores all support this.
  10. advent Jedi Knight

    Member Since:
    Mar 23, 2003
    star 2
    History decides whether films are good or not; not box office or contemporary critics.

    Box office and critics are markers of the culture at the time of a film's initial release.

    Even in the end, it's all subjective.
  11. Darth_Insidious Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Apr 26, 2002
    star 4
    I happened to be rereading the excellent interview that IGN did with Gary Kurtz, and I came up this:

    One of the arguments that I had with George about Empire was the fact that he felt in the end, he said, we could have made just as much money if the film hadn't been quite so good, and you hadn't spent so much time. And I said, "But it was worth it!"

    ...he (George) had gotten into this mode of saying that the audience is interested in the rollercoaster ride and that he could make just as much money, and it doesn't have to be complicated, doesn't have to have as difficult a story.


    What was this about George not caring about the money his films made? :)
  12. Shelley Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Sep 9, 2001
    star 5
    How so? I haven't personally attacked him.

    You've personally attacked me (and again, I am not a him -- ask my mother, she was there when I was born) so many times I've lost count.

    Hypocrisy? How, I've called it straight the whole time.

    Except when you were being hypocritical, by accusing me of the same things you do.

    personal attacks? All I've said is that Shelley uses personal opinion rather than objectivity.

    And so do you, while offering irrelevant facts and pretending they prove something.

    Calling LOTR a "borefest" that has "tenth-rate effects"? That is a good argument?

    How have you made a good argument? By repeatedly ignoring the actual argument and by your only facts being irrelevant ones.

    Saying many critics have a bias against George Lucas simply because of the movies he makes? Stating that many of the critics wish to see him fail?

    Offering proof in the form of quotes and examples?

    Is that enough to convince me why SW was liked less by critics than LOTR?

    WHY do you keep trying to pretend that's the argument? I NEVER...repeat, NEVER...said that TPM was better liked by the (frustrated would-be filmmakers known as) movie critics than LOTR. I did say that TPM was better liked by the (frustrated would-be filmmakers known as) movie critics than bashers and the media want to admit. You proved this, though probably not intentionally.

    Personal opinion is one thing. Objectivity is another.

    No one is truly objective, but leaving that aside, you offer nothing but opinion and the facts you do offer are irrelevant.

    If one has a firm personal belief in the greatness of a movie or the belief that the movie was better than another, then he cannot be dissuaded.

    No kidding.

    If on the other hand that person is open to a suggestion by another that a certain movie was more of a consensus favorite among the general public,

    And you never proved, once, that LOTR was better liked than the prequels by the general public, nor have you proven your confident statement that LOTR "blew AOTC away."

    through a preponderence of critical reviews,

    What about critical reviews? They have nothing to do with the consensus of the general public. Sometimes the two are in sync but most often they are not.

    I trust SW3 will do just as well as Jedi, Clones, Matrix, Spidey, ESB and LOTR1/2 at the box office. That alone will make it a successful movie at the box office.

    Yep.
  13. Shelley Jedi Youngling

    Member Since:
    Sep 9, 2001
    star 5
    I'm sorry JKBurtola, but Shelley is making few, if any, well-backed arguments. Philip is bringing up critical reviews showing LOTR was much more well received that the PT so far.

    And those are the only facts he has ever offered. Too bad they're completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

    And to add to Philip's critical review, just look at how well the LOTR fares in imdb.com's top movie list compared to the PT:

    So what? Since when does IMDB represent all moviegoers?

    As you can see, neither PT movie makes the top 250, while both LOTR movies are right up there.

    Yeah, due to the efforts of the LOTR gestapo (i.e. the people who harassed a British film critic when he dared to give FOTR a negative review, to the point where he wouldn't review TTT), who make sure to lower the prequels' ratings while giving LOTR the highest ratings possible.

    Shelley is one of the worst gushers I've seen recently.

    Worst gushers? Um, OK.

    I love both Star Wars and LOTR, but she is ripping on LOTR as a borefest with tenth-rate effects. That is totally uncalled for!

    Why? I fail to see how it's more uncalled for than calling Lucas a liar and a hack, saying his daughters are ugly pigs, and proclaiming that the prequels are universally reviled and will be forgotten, that the LOTR borefests have killed SW off -- on a SW message board.

    Both are worthwhile franchises, but to tear apart LOTR is ridiculous.

    Why?

    Gollum was an extremely well-made, and well-acted, CGI character.

    Yeah, the only CGI in the entire two movies that even approached the CGI in TPM and AOTC, and that was because the Weta people consulted with ILM beforehand.

    Shelley just seems to be tearing apart LOTR because the critics praise it more than the PT.

    Uh...yeah.

    There's no logic in her taking her frustrations out on a quality franchise

    I don't think it's of that high a quality.

    such as LOTR - surely there other movies more deserving of her rage.

    Now until Shelley comes up with solid arguments, she should "post proof or retract."

    I did, except when it came to opinions. Philip has yet to post any proof that pertains to the discussion. You can't prove an opinion. An opinion is not a fact, no matter how much you wish it were so.

    Her blind faith in anything Star Wars while discrediting anything else as worthless is a joke.

    Ah yes, the most threadbare of all the non-responses: accusing someone who (gasp!) doesn't fall on their knees in worship of LOTR as having "blind faith" and "hating anything that isn't SW."

    If that were true, I'd hate the Harry Potter movies, wouldn't I? I don't. I love them. And I don't hate LOTR or "Matrix." I just hate the way they're elevated over SW on a SW message board, and everywhere else, for that matter, and treated as flawless by the same people who harp on the flaws of the prequels (many of which can be found in LOTR and "Matrix" as well.
  14. Darth_Insidious Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Apr 26, 2002
    star 4
    Yeah, the only CGI in the entire two movies that even approached the CGI in TPM and AOTC, and that was because the Weta people consulted with ILM beforehand.

    Nobody from WETA consulted with ILM. Peter Jackson took a tour with Rick McCallum to check out ILM's pre-viz department a few years back. That's all the involvment ILM ever had. WETA was alone, isolated in New Zealand. Anything they came up with, such as the incredible motion-capturing technology that was used to bring Gollum to life, they had to reverse-engineer themselves; that is, they started from the result they wanted, and figured out how to get it.
  15. SWfan2002 Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Jan 28, 2002
    star 4
    I think it's true though that many of the WETA employees were formerly at ILM-- where they undoubtedly learned a lot.
  16. Darth_Insidious Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Apr 26, 2002
    star 4
    Wes Takahashi is there, and he used to work at ILM. But the effects supervisors for LOTR are all from the now defunct FX company Boss, except for Richard Taylor.
  17. gezvader28 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 22, 2003
    star 4
    Shelley on LOTR -
    LOTR borefests
    tenth rate effects of the LOTR borefests
    LOTR borefests
    lack of coherent storyline
    I think Peter Jackson made some MASSIVE mistakes in LOTR
    LOTR borefests

    And I don't hate LOTR

    I'd hate to hear what you'd say if you did hate it. I lost count of the number of times you called it a borefest, but then to say you don't hate it, well that does seem somewhat contradictory.

    Shelley on IMDB's Top Movie List -
    due to the LOTR gestapo who make sure to lower the prequels ratings while giving LOTR the highest ratings possible.

    Do you have any proof of this? It's quite an outrageous claim. "LOTR gestapo" !

    Can I suggest you - post proof or retract.
    -----------------------------
    But back to the topic in hand - I think Lucas always paints a pessimistic picture of the B.O. , he's not stupid, it's best to expect the worst, any film can fail. On the TPM DVD he was the only one who voiced any doubts about its box office. He says he's worried because it'll be dark, whereas a lot of us are thinking - great! Maybe he's right maybe it'll only appeal to the fans who like it dark. But I think he's wrong, as soon as people know Darth Vader is in it they'll have to see it, I'm not being cynical, DV really is an incredibly powerful icon. Imagine - if they do a teaser poster with just a faint image of Vader's mask we'll all be revved up for it.

    And also Lucas has improved a lot over these two films , if Ep.3 is as much of an improvement as AOTC was over TPM it could be great. He says he's sticking to the story, and we're all dying to see how it happens. It could be big.
  18. SkiHoth Jedi Padawan

    Member Since:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Shelley, your responses are hilarious and ridiculous at the same time! Thank you for adding some humor to the boards! I'll be looking forwarding to your response to this as well.

    Let's see, imdb is full of the LOTR gestapo? That was the best!!! Why did the LOTR gestapo vote both ANH and TESB above TTT? Was it so they would seem less biased towards SW? Or could it be that anyone, including you (yes, you!), can vote on imdb? Maybe you should give it a try and see how much of a difference your vote makes.

    And I guess I should change my statement from you worshipping anything SW to you hating everything LOTR. That would seem to more fit the bill.

    Your defense of calling LOTR a borefest with tenth-rate effects is that others called Lucas a liar and hack, his daughters are ugly pigs, the prequels are universally reviled and will be forgotten and that LOTR has killed SW off????? I said *NONE of that! So why are you bringing it up? You're attacking LOTR because of what others said about SW? That argument has no weight with me because I love both series!

    You can think what you want about LOTR, that's your *OPINION*, but you have posted zero proof of anything, just your own *OPINION*! Again, Shelley you should "post proof or retract."

    So, until we can rid imdb of the dreaded LOTR gestapo, that's all we have to go with. Come to think of it, maybe you can start a campaign to break up the LOTR gestapo ring on imdb! That would free us all from their oppression and maybe we can see movies ranked how they truly should be - the SW movies in the top 6 and LOTR at the bottom, with all 0s! Or could it be this is just how things are in your mind and you can't accept facts?
  19. Durwood Jedi Grand Master

    Member Since:
    May 18, 2002
    star 5
    I happened to be rereading the excellent interview that IGN did with Gary Kurtz...

    Did Kurtz happen to mention that his chronic mismanagement of the production pushed EMPIRE far over budget and way behind schedule? That Lucas' objections weren't necessarily over making the movie "too good" but that a movie of similiar quality could have been delivered on time and under-budget with proper management?

    What's that you say? Kurtz left these details out? Curious.
  20. Darth_Insidious Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Apr 26, 2002
    star 4
    No actually, he flat-out admitted that George was pissed at him for letting it go over-budget.

    He's not anti-George, and speaks well of him in other parts of the interview. But he calls it like it is.

    One of the arguments that I had with George about Empire was the fact that he felt in the end, he said, we could have made just as much money if the film hadn't been quite so good, and you hadn't spent so much time. And I said, "But it was worth it!"

    There you have it. His objection was, specifically, that even if the film wasn't as good, and he hadn't spent so much money, the film would've done just as well at the box office. And that's a horrible attitude to have.

    George and I had many, many discussions about that, but it boiled down to the fact that he became convinced that all the audience was interested in was the roller-coaster ride, and so the story and the script didn't matter anymore.

    And that's the wrong attitude to have.
  21. Ekenobi Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Apr 4, 2002
    star 4
    Don't worry ShellEy. You have made excellent points with a lot of back up to those points. Some of these guys just do not have a counter argument. That is why they get personal. You and Phillip were having a decent "discussion"

    And if it was not for the U.S. taking care of Saddam, there would have been a lot more lives lost. From the hands of Saddam. Lot has come out that his regime was very evil. The U.S. is not on this planet to conquer other countries. Like, Hilter did, Neopolean, or to slaughter there own people like Saddam, or cause terror in the world like bin Laden. If anything it is here to help rid the world of evil. That is my say on that. FREEDOM RULES!!!!!!
  22. Darth_Insidious Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Apr 26, 2002
    star 4
    The US serves its own needs and wants first and foremost. I applaud kicking-out Saddam and his government, but don't make the mistake of believing it was done because of any overwhelming sympathy for the Iraqi people. Bush did the right thing for the wrong reasons, but he still did the right thing.
  23. Ekenobi Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Apr 4, 2002
    star 4
    That's all the involvment ILM ever had.

    And how do you know this? Were you there? Don't think so.
  24. Darth_Insidious Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Apr 26, 2002
    star 4
    Um, because things like these tend to be publicized in some way? Like when PJ went with McCallum to check out the pre-viz department.
  25. Ekenobi Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Apr 4, 2002
    star 4
    The US serves its own needs and wants first and foremost.

    And it is deservingly so. What country does not serves it own needs. I think Bush went in there for the right reasons. And I do believe it was for the Irai people. What other reason would it be for? Once the gov't is set up, the U.S. will pull out. They have made that clear. Why is it everyone wants to discredit anything good the U.S. does? So many things have came out of this war to show it was justified. And France did not want to go to war for their own needs, and that was because they were feeding Baghdad information about Wash D.C. They did not want anyone to find out what they were doing and now it is exposed. They are the ones who should be looked down upon. Not the U.S. So don't tell me the U.S. was only it in for their own needs when every country was too.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.