Saga Would you prefer Disney not own the Saga?

I was 9 when the first film came out and 12 when EMPIRE came out. I was a strange kid, though. I absolutely hated THE WIZARD OF OZ until I was 31. To this day, I despise WILLY WONKA & THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY. Nor have I ever had any fondness towards E.T. THE EXTRA-TERRESTRIAL (it’s a good movie, but I don’t think it comes anywhere close to being a masterpiece).

On the other hand, one of my favorite movies as a youngster was KING KONG VS. GODZILLA. I tried watching it as an adult and…well, let’s just say it’s no longer a favorite of mine.

 

I love all those movies...

 

Watched The Addam's Family movie a lot when I was a kid in the 90's and the movie still holds up a lot.

 

Age has caused me to appreciate OZ, and I now recognize it as a great movie (saw it in theaters for the first time during the 60th anniversary re-release and my opinion of the movie improved dramatically). Still can’t understand the appeal of WILLY WONKA (my guess is that it has something to do with nostalgia and all that chocolate). And E.T. has always underwhelmed me (saw it again in theaters during the 20th anniversary re-release back in 2002, and basically thought it was decent, but nothing special, and overly schmaltzy).

On the other hand, I still love SUPERMAN, CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND, the original KING KONG, and the first two STAR WARS films. I also read THE LORD OF THE RINGS for the first time in 1978, and that remains one of my favorite books. I first became enamored of the original STAR TREK series in 1978 as well, and I still consider that a great show. Similar story with DOCTOR WHO. So…

 

I like Wizard of Oz because of Christmas nostalgia. (Alcohol helps too) Also there's somethhing mystical/eerie about how old the film is and the fact that it is the first colored film I believe. The original King Kong is great, 2005 is pretty good too, can't stand the 70's version though.

 

I don't see them trying very hard at anything. I just see someone pushing a narrative as though the narrative proves itself. What exactly about Disney's handling of things is supposed to look like they're "trying hard"? Four times zero is still zero.

 

No attacks. Just some friendly personal reminiscing.

 

As a Disney shareholder I'm very happy

 

I stand by my opinion. You don't pay 4 billion for a damaged franchise. And there's no way this number would be even close to that if Lucas hadn't done anything since 1983. Blu rays of the entire saga (not just the OT) is one of the top selling sets of all time despite the negative publicity - you can't claim it's just little kids buying them, you know. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with Star Wars being popular with kids, that's who the primary target was and the toys sales allowed Lucas to be an independent filmmaker. I agree that it wasn't as well received among adults as the OT but they were not total disaster like the geek media claims. Even a lot of die hard fans liked them to some extent (and not just on this forum as some people suggest). Personal experience doesn't prove anything. No one in my family cares about Star Wars, old or new. When ROTS came out, a few of my coworkers were excited and even though they were lukewarm on the first two but liked ROTS well enough to tell me about it (by the way even on IMDB ROTS is 7.7 and it has 80% fresh rating which is not bad for a "turd"). Currently one co-worker says he hates the prequels except some stuff in ROTS and the other says he dislikes Jar Jar but otherwise still plans to watch all six with his kids. He has libertarian views and likes the politics in the prequels (which by the way I see mentioned on pro-freedom blogs and podcasts quite a bit). I also don't remember a lot of love for Star Wars before SEs. Of course, someone will say I'm wrong and they watched OOT on VHS every day in 1992. It doesn't prove anything.

Clone Wars was #1 among boys 9-14 and I'm sure a lot of adult fans tuned in. They even showed it on Adult Swim. It was the highest rated sci-fi animation and won a lot of awards, too. And we're talking about a story where the ending is already known. Nothing to sneeze at.

There's another group that the English speaking fans seem to ignore (but I bet Disney doesn't), and that's international audience. In a lot of countries the OT wasn't widely released and and the PT was the first chance to see Star Wars on big screen (it brought attention to the OT, too). I recently looked up the rankings on the largest user reviews site in my old country (similar to IMDB) and was surprised to find out that all Star Wars movies have approximately the same rating: 8 out of 10. ROTS usually leads (slightly) in polls followed by TESB. Makes me wonder if American fandom overrated the OT due to nostalgia and underrated the PT because it was not what they expected (in terms of story).

So no, Star Wars didn't need to be saved by Disney. In fact, Disney probably needed the brand more - historically, they weren't as sucessful selling to boys in double digits so that's probably why they bought Marvel and then Lucasfilm.

 

A company like Disney would not pass up the opportunity to grab a hold of what is inarguably the biggest brand in movie history aside from themselves. The merchandising alone would cover the cost of the acquisition twofold. It’s a damaged brand, but one that they believed they could repair. The love for the original trilogy is still there beneath it all, and Disney is smart enough to know that if they can tap into that love, then they could literally make no other films but STAR WARS for the rest of eternity and still the most profitable movie studio on Earth. (Hyperbole, yes, but you get the point.)

The thing with the original trilogy is that it WAS popular with adults. They didn’t worship it the way us kids did, nor did they become fanatics like we did, but they enjoyed it quite a bit, and some of them even saw it two or three times. You have to realize that the original STAR WARS film more or less played in theaters nonstop for about 3-4 years. You also have to remember that STAR WARS got amazing reviews from critics. I think Roger Ebert articulated the way adults felt about the movie better than anyone else did:

Roger Ebert’s original review of STAR WARS

He literally said that it impacted him as deeply as the most intense and gut-wrenching of Bergman’s films did. That’s quite high praise. Now here’s what that same exact man said about ATTACK OF THE CLONES:

Roger Ebert’s original review of STAR WARS: EPISODE II - ATTACK OF THE CLONES

Simply put, the prequels elicited disappointment from most people. Notice that Roger’s criticisms are the same exact criticisms that the prequel detractors often throw at the film—an emphasis on computer-generated imagery and digital wizardry over characterization, wooden dialogue, an unconvincing love story, too much boring political exposition, etc. Even Anakin’s now-infamous “I don’t like sand” gets a snarky putdown from him. (As an aside, I really miss Roger. No other critic could do a snarky putdown as well as he could.)

And as I said, Blu-rays of STAR WARS sell like hot cakes because—GASP—people like the first three STAR WARS movies! I think for most people, they probably just see STAR WARS on the box cover and think, “Yeah, I’ll buy that.” Even the guy who made the “turd” comment mentioned that, in preparation for THE FORCE AWAKENS, he planned to show all six films to his kid, and made a quip about how he would provide moral support and comfort as they slogged through the prequels before seeing “a good one again from J.J.”. Some people buy them for their kids. Some people are completists. But I should again point out that, outside of STAR WARS fan groups, I have never encountered a single adult who thinks that the prequels are as good as the originals, let alone better. A few have said, “They weren’t THAT bad”. A few have even said, “Yeah, they weren’t as good as the first three, but I still liked them.” But I think it’s clear that the prequels just aren’t very well-liked. It’s also clear that, for 99% of the population, when you mention the STAR WARS films, the original trilogy will instantly come to mind.

I challenge you to name me a single iconic character exclusive to the prequel trilogy. Any character who appeared in the original trilogy doesn’t count—so no Yoda, no Darth Vader, no Obi-Wan Kenobi, no Emperor, etc. At most, I can name two—Darth Maul and Jar Jar Binks (and even Maul might be fading). Maul became iconic because he was the single most heavily marketed element of THE PHANTOM MENACE before its release, no doubt due to his distinctive visual design. Jar Jar, of course, became iconic as a punching bag. But how many people could readily identify Qui-Gon Jinn, Padmé Amidala, or Mace Windu? They might remember if you referred to them as the characters played by Liam Neeson, Natalie Portman and Samuel L. Jackson, but based on just the character names alone…no. But anyone can tell you who Han Solo is. You don’t need to remind people that he’s the Harrison Ford character. Anyone can tell you who Luke Skywalker, Princess Leia, Darth Vader, Yoda, C-3PO, R2-D2 and Jabba the Hutt are.

No one is saying that everybody watched the movies on VHS every day before the prequels came out. I certainly didn’t. But I did own the trilogy on LaserDisc. I did watch it. And here’s another thing—George Lucas was a near-universally beloved and revered figure within geekdom. He wasn’t hated. He wasn’t controversial. He didn’t incite anger. The only people who were starting to turn on him at that point were film critics who’d observed that he hadn’t made anything particularly good since 1981. Yes, I said 1981, NOT 1983. You said that it’d be like BACK TO THE FUTURE…and what’s wrong with that? Again, nobody hates Zemeckis. Zemeckis is a respected figure. Nobody has ever accused Zemeckis of “raping their childhoods” (an absolutely ridiculous and obnoxiously whiny slogan, BTW). Zemeckis does not inspire hatred, anger, derision, or controversy. People talk about BACK TO THE FUTURE with fondness and love, not bitterness, anger, and resentment. If STAR WARS would’ve been like that, it would’ve been healthier for the franchise. It would’ve been healthier for the fandom. It may have even been healthier for George Lucas.

As I said, there’s no doubt that Lucas succeeded in lining his own pockets during the last 20 years of his reign. Unfortunately, STAR WARS became something very ugly. What had once been a source of joy and exhilaration became a source of disappointment, resentment, bitterness, and anger. A man who had once been beloved by millions became reviled. Part of it was definitely that the fans overreacted. But part of it honestly was that the prequel films were, at best, lackluster and that George Lucas seemed dismissive and hostile towards any criticism. I think the biggest part of it was, though, that Lucas became blinded by his own vision. He had his ideas for what he wanted to do with STAR WARS and he could not care less about what anyone thought. The act of filmmaking ceased to be an act of communication and became an act of self-gratification. I remember reading issues of STARLOG in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Lucas talked about how he wanted to spark the imaginations of young people and that he was thrilled that he’d also attracted an adult audience and managed to spark their imaginations. He never said anything like that when making the prequels. He talked about fulfilling his own vision, and what he wanted, and his master plan. If anything, he seemed to treat the audience as a nuisance, an unpleasant necessity of filmmaking. STAR WARS was no longer about making a good movie. It was about satisfying the personal whims and desires of George Lucas.

Now, before you act as though I’m being mean and picking on Lucas, I’d like to point out that the same thing happened to Roddenberry, and the quality of STAR TREK likewise suffered as a result. When you spend 20 years hearing about what a creative genius you are, it warps your thinking. Some people, like Steven Spielberg, have this miraculous ability to not let it get to their heads. Others, like Peter Jackson, the Wachowskis, Francis Ford Coppola, Gene Roddenberry, and George Lucas, end up learning that pride goeth before a fall the hard way.

9-14 sounds about right. The thing is that most adults have seen the STAR WARS movies. The STAR WARS movies are arguably the most popular ever made. But on TV…no. I guarantee you that far more adults tuned into GAME OF THRONES, BREAKING BAD, THE WALKING DEAD, etc. And which name do you think more adults would recognize? Tyrion Lannister or Ashoka Tona? Walter White or Asajj Ventress?

Disney’s been doing quite fine without STAR WARS ever since before George Lucas was born. If anything, I’m seeing a level of goodwill towards STAR WARS these days that I haven’t seen since before THE PHANTOM MENACE opened. When people talk about STAR WARS now, it’s with excitement, passion, and anticipation. It’s not laced with bitterness, resentment and anger the way it had been for so many years. What this shows me is that people WANT to like STAR WARS again. They’ve wanted to like it again for years. If anything, this proves that Lucas’s wisdom and prescience, in that he knew that he had to get out of the way before that could happen.

 

Yep. I'm glad Disney have the saga. We're getting more films and on a regular basis, and I'm confident they will deliver a quality product. The sale has given the franchise a shot in the arm.

 

No. In my mind, Disney having control of the franchise will make it stronger than ever before. I mean, just look at what they did with Marvel. Before they were bought by Disney, they were a company that was on the verge of bankruptcy. Now the Marvel movies make up the highest grossing film franchise of all time. If Disney can do to Star Wars what they've done to Marvel, I think everything will be fine.

 

I say it's a good thing. If George Lucas trusts them, so do I. He didn't sell it to them for money, heck he practically donated every cent that wasn't stock to charity right away! He practically GAVE it to Disney at that price. Pixar, which branched off from lucas arts in a way was sold for more. He wanted it to have a good home, so I trust Disney. Also thanks to them we have a new star wars film each year so.....yeah....they kinda rocked my world :3

 

Also known as "oversaturating the brand".

Well, you're kind of stacking the deck when only one of those is an actual character name.

Is it that the "slogan" is ridiculous, or is it that the underlying sentiment expressed by the slogan is ridiculous? Is this just a question of using the wrong words, the kind of thing we might expect to see in modern-day political commentary? I wonder if there are any clues to this mystery close at hand.

Moral support and comfort... because of having to watch a prequel. Yep, absolutely obnoxious and ridiculous.

 

I get why you'd think that, but this isn't going to be like what Disney did to Marvel, All they can do is sell stuff, Lucasarts is in control really. I personally wish I had more then 1 film a year. That's just me. You can always wait until the last week to see it so you have like and extra 2 months spacing between the films, or wait for em on DVD.

I certainly understand moderation because if you eat to many marshmallow, even if they're all as good, eventually your stomach wants something else and to take a little break, but I feel it wouldn't happen to me.

I personally feel a year is a long time for me personally to wait. These next 10 days of wait.....not a long time to wait in reality, but it's borderline TORTURE in some regards for people.

If you're worried about them pooping them out to quick, I'm sure they're different teams working on 7,rouge one and episode 8,9 and so forth. It's not like JJ and the crew goes to rouge one after 7. I actually had this discussion on xbox yesterday

 

If you’re saying that it’s fundamentally ridiculous to claim that Lucas “raped my childhood” by making three disappointing movies, then yes, the underlying sentiment is ridiculous, and you’re absolutely correct.

However, if you’re saying that it’s fundamentally ridiculous to claim that the movies were disappointing, and that anyone who disliked them is wrong, then you’re simply insulting the opinions of people who disagree with you and calling them idiots for no good reason except that they don’t share your personal subjective opinion.

 

Nothing is wrong with BTTF (it even has better dialog or acting than any of the Star Wars movies). I was using it as something that a certain demographic (along with some others, of course) remember fondly, primarily on special occasions, but it's not actively in public consciousness due to the lack of new content. I'd rather take new content and controversy over the fossilization. I was even ok with Disney because we were getting more Star Wars. I'm still hopeful but somewhat disappointed by the blatant fan service. TFA sounds like a repeat of ANH - exactly what TESB, its sequel, wasn't!

That wasn't my impression. Yes, he wanted to fulfill his vision - what artist doesn't - and he did admit he might lose a certain demographic. But it didn't seem to me he was dismissive of the audience. He even liked that the was a whole new generation of SW fans that grew up with TCW (and he wasn't as involved with that). Remember, Lucas had total control of SW after ANH. Everyone else - Kasdan, McQuarrie, Williams, Burtt, etc. - all did a great job but ultimately were still fulfilling his vision.

You're might be onto something with some of these people being too stubborn or overestimating their capabilities. But there might be a reason for that since they typically become successful against some heavy odds. Making of Star Wars is a fairly illuminating book in that regard. Few people, if any knew what George was trying to do with Star Wars because it was so bizarre. Coppola was like "You just finished one draft, I thought it was ok, why are you rewriting it again?" The rough cut viewing was a disaster, as is well known, with Spielberg basically being about the only one who loved it. Some studio execs actually hated the movie. With stories like that, it's no surprise he valued his opinion over others.

That said, I don't think he never paid attention to disagreements. For example, he reshot the scenes of Anakin's turn because they didn't work with the test audience. There were other suggestions from the actors he accepted. He also was more open to collaboration than many fans think. For example, he asked other directors - including Spielberg, Zemeckis, Howard - to help direct Episode I. They all told him to go ahead and do it himself (guess they had a lot of trust in him... damn you Spielberg! ). He also had some help with writing/script doctoring from Mark Hamill, Carrie Fischer, Jonathan Hales (AOTC) and Tom Stoppard (ROTS). Maybe not as much as a lot of us wanted but he certainly wasn't as arrogant as it might seem.

9-14 sounds about right. The thing is that most adults have seen the STAR WARS movies. The STAR WARS movies are arguably the most popular ever made. But on TV…no. I guarantee you that far more adults tuned into GAME OF THRONES, BREAKING BAD, THE WALKING DEAD, etc. And which name do you think more adults would recognize? Tyrion Lannister or Ashoka Tona? Walter White or Asajj Ventress?

Disney’s been doing quite fine without STAR WARS ever since before George Lucas was born. If anything, I’m seeing a level of goodwill towards STAR WARS these days that I haven’t seen since before THE PHANTOM MENACE opened. When people talk about STAR WARS now, it’s with excitement, passion, and anticipation. It’s not laced with bitterness, resentment and anger the way it had been for so many years. What this shows me is that people WANT to like STAR WARS again. They’ve wanted to like it again for years. If anything, this proves that Lucas’s wisdom and prescience, in that he knew that he had to get out of the way before that could happen.[/quote]


You know what, I actually admire Lucas for being able to let go. It must have been hard for him. At least we can all say he's not like Anakin in that regard. I'm just worried that Disney will turn what was once a very original and creative franchise into the factory of MCU-like pleasing blockbusters - without the low points of post-TESB movies but also without the highs (lifted this from this article).

 

I did see all three LOTR films in theaters more than once. I believe I saw REVENGE OF THE SITH twice as well…once by myself at a midnight screening, and later with my wife. I also saw THE DARK KNIGHT in theaters more than once, but that was about it for me.

You still hear criticisms regarding Ewoks. But while I thought EMPIRE was a great film from the very beginning, I’ve never fully embraced JEDI. I saw JEDI on its opening weekend and left the theater feeling let down. After EMPIRE, I’d expected something breathtaking and instead I got 100s of teddy bears. All four friends I saw it with thought it sucked. Subsequent viewings have allowed me to see its strengths alongside its weaknesses, but there’s no doubt that this was the worst of the original three movies. For me, Lucas’s last great film was RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK, and JEDI was the beginning of his decline.

Really, only two of the STAR WARS films have undergone any sort of critical re-evaluation—EMPIRE and SITH. These days, EMPIRE is considered one of the greatest films ever made, while the initial enthusiasm for SITH has mostly died down.

Except that Roger also called John Simon a snob. Again, watch that YouTube video:



“Wasn’t your heart warmed, even a little bit, by Yoda?”

“I would say not that I’m childlike, but that [Simon] is old at heart.”

It’s clear that Gene and Roger were trying to make Simon look like Ebenezer Scrooge here. And let’s be honest, if I said that the prequels make people dumber than they need to be, you’d be jumping all over me for being a nasty meanie head prequel basher. But it’s OK if John Simon says it about the first three movies. Keep in mind that Siskel & Ebert, the 2 most famous film critics at the time, were very passionate supporters of STAR WARS, and gave glowing reviews to all three films. They even dedicated an entire episode to gushing about the trilogy:



I’d also like to point out that, while we’re on the subject, one of my favorite movies is ever is Bergman’s CRIES AND WHISPERS, which Roger mentioned in his review of the first movie. It’s a haunting, evocative masterpiece that I certainly found far more rewarding than anything Lucas has made since 1981.

He was pretty enthusiastic over THE PHANTOM MENACE, but less so over the other two. Roger always talked about the star ratings essentially being meaningless, so I don’t put too much stock in them. His review of SITH, while more positive than his review of CLONES, honestly reads very lukewarm.

Again, he complains about flat dialogue. He says that the visual effects, while sophisticated, didn’t stiumulate his imagination the way the earlier movies did. He even says that the lightsaber duel went on for too long and was overly choreographed. What shocked me, re-reading his reviews, was the fact that one name just kept coming to mind—Plinkett. These are honestly alot of the same points that Plinkett makes. The lightsaber duels are too long and overly choreographed? Check. The actors are stunted by being shoved in front of a blue screen, and thus never seem to interact with or react to the awesome environments that are added in later during post-production? Check. Boring, lifeless characters? Check.

It’s really interesting reading Roger’s review of REVENGE OF THE SITH, actually. In the opening and closing paragraphs he says that he liked the movie. Then he spent the rest of the review talking about everything he didn’t like. Even review of THE PHANTOM MENACE, while enthusiastic, still had a few reservations:

I think that he was enthusiastic about seeing a new STAR WARS movie, was blown away by the visual imagination, and was willing to give it a bit of a pass because he assumed that there’d be more human interest in the next two films. Sadly, I don’t think the other two really delivered on that for him.

And some people just see STAR WARS: THE COMPLETE SAGA on the box cover and make a purchase, without really putting that much thought into it. I don’t think alot of people will say, “Oh wait? COMPLETE SAGA means that the prequels are in there. Guess I’ll search around the store for a box set that only has the originals.” No. If they even give ANY though to the matter, they probably just say, “Ah, what the hell?” Essentially, if THE COMPLETE SAGA box set costs $70, and they’re just buying it for the OT, they’re paying $23.33 per movie—which is what most Blu-rays cost anyway.

International fans. You mean like Alexandre Phillippe, a Swiss STAR WARS fan who made a documentary called THE PEOPLE VS. GEORGE LUCAS and made sure to promote it on RedLetterMedia. Or how about a Czech STAR WARS fan named Harmy, who created the Despecialized Editions

Yes, I know that prequel defenders are eager to find other people who like the movies. I know that they feel bullied (with some justification). I have never attacked anyone for liking the prequel movies. But this need for validation strikes me as odd, and there’s alot of projection going on here. Even alot of people in their early 20s seem to dislike the prequels. I think part of it simply is that the prequels never captured the imagination of Millennials the way the original trilogy captured the imagination of Gen Xers. When I talk to Millennials about their “Holy Trilogy”, they’ll tend to mention THE LORD OF THE RINGS much more frequently than the STAR WARS prequels. I think LOTR hit that sweet spot for them that SW hit for us Gen Xers.

And he’s known to pop culture because of THE PHANTOM MENACE. Let’s keep it real here.

The prequels certainly boosted the Emperor. Even Plinkett liked the Emperor in the prequels. I disagree with Obi-Wan. The cultural image of Obi-Wan is of Alec Guinness, not Ewan McGregor (and I thought McGregor actually did a fine job in the prequels). I usually hear Obi-Wan mentioned alongside the likes of Gandalf and Dumbledore, which would be more in line with his OT character, rather than his prequel context.

Is it actively in the public consciousness every day? No. But it’s loved by many, and I’ve met plenty of younger people who adore that movie. And I’m sure the DVD and Blu-ray box sets of the BACK TO THE FUTURE trilogy sell just fine.

He always seemed incredibly dismissive to me. I remember an interview he gave where he basically said, “Look, it’s like painting a house. I don’t care if everyone tells me I shouldn’t paint it green. If I wanna paint it green, I’ll paint it green. And if everybody hates that, well, then screw them! It’s my house, not theirs! Just shut up!” And the way he treated fans who just wanted to see the movies they grew up with seemed especially insulting to me. “Look, it’s my movie and I can do whatever I want to it! If you don’t like it, screw you! Just shut up! I don’t care what anyone thinks! It’s all about my precious vision!”

I think after the success of the original film, Lucas was somewhat taken aback and in a state of disbelief. He still continued to encourage an atmosphere of collaboration. That’s why he brought in people like Kasdan and Kershner to help him realize his ideas, to polish them, to refine them, and to bring them to life. This atmosphere continued through RAIDERS, where he had Kasdan and Spielberg help him out. You start to see him casting aside collaboration with JEDI, but he still retained Kasdan. Even Marquand contributed a few ideas, despite essentially being a puppet director. With INDIANA JONES AND THE TEMPLE OF DOOM, he still had Spielberg and the Huycks. Notice how, during the behind-the-scenes documentary of THE PHANTOM MENACE, when Ben Burtt is pointing out how the climax’s tone is jarring and all over-the-place, Lucas initially seems to agree with him, but a few hours later, he interrupts an argument between Burtt and Rick McCallum, both of whom seem despondent over how the movie turned out, and comes up with some BS rationalization for why the tonally schizophrenic climax is actually brilliant and visionary.

Or just listen to Steven Spielberg’s account of what happened behind the scenes of INDIANA JONES AND THE KINGDOM OF THE CRYSTAL SKULL:



Listen to the way Spileberg talks about how he REALLY thought having aliens in the movie was a terrible idea. Eventually, after Lucas kept badgering him, he just threw his hands up and said, “Fine, George. Fine! You want aliens? We’ll do aliens. Happy?” Compare that to INDIANA JONES AND THE LAST CRUSADE, where Lucas still seemed at least somewhat willing to listen to Spielberg’s better judgment:



Lucas initially wanted a haunted house movie, but Spielberg rejected that, and eventually convinced Lucas to ditch the idea. Spielberg came up with the idea of the father and insisted that the relationship between Indy and his dad had to be the emotional crux of the movie. Lucas didn’t like that idea, but agreed to go along with it. It’s sort of interesting to hear Sean Connery say that he sensed that Lucas really didn’t want him there, making George Lucas the only person in history who didn’t like the idea of having Sean Connery in his film.

Yeah, but here’s what he said in an interview:

Lucas shows great wisdom here, which I’m afraid he’d later abandon. It’s interesting to hear him talk about how, after you’ve worked on something for so long, you can’t see it objectively anymore. Obviously, in the interview, “so long” refers to a few months, but you have to imagine that that gets exponentially worse when you’ve been working on something for 20 years. I do think that, after all that time, Lucas got to the point where he couldn’t see STAR WARS objectively anymore. He also talks about being wary of people giving him dishonest compliments. How many times have you heard about him surrounding himself with yes-men, such as Rick McCallum, during production of the prequel films? You see, I give Lucas all the praise in the world for writing and directing one of the greatest films ever made—the original STAR WARS. He knew what he had to do in order to make a great film, and the credit goes to him for all the ideas, and knowing what he needed to do, and whose help he needed, in order to perfect those ideas. No one can take that away from him. Some people would use these claims as proof that he just had other people do all the hard work, while he took all the credit. I think that’s nonsense. What Lucas is showing here is wisdom. Both he and STAR WARS would’ve been much better off if he’d retained this wisdom, and not given into hubris.

The problem is that as a result of the last 20 years of his career, his later hubris and self-indulgence has overwhelmed his earlier brilliance and wisdom. In a way, Lucas is like a real-life Anakin Skywalker. He started off as a young, idealistic, brilliant filmmaker. Eventually, though, as he became more and more accomplished, and he gained more and more recognition, he grew blinded by hubris, until he rejected everything that had made him the great man he once was. A man who once railed against huge corporations became the head of a huge corporation. A man who warned against writing in a total void ended up writing in a total void. A man who once criticized sycophants who gave him dishonest compliments surrounded himself with sycophants who gave him dishonest compliments. This lasted for about 20 years, until he finally redeemed himself, turned back to the light, and regained his former wisdom by selling the company to Disney and letting go of it.

I’ve heard the Carrie Fisher rumor over the years, and it’s listed as fact on sites like Wikipedia and the Internet Movie Database, but it’s never been substantiated. I have yet to find a single primary source showing that Fisher script doctored THE PHANTOM MENACE. As for Mark Hamill, I’ve yet to hear even a single rumor that he doctored it. I did know about Hales and Stoppard, but I have to wonder if Hales gave him dishonest compliments, à la McCallum. Hales is something of an enigma and he really doesn’t seem to have much of a non-Lucasfilm career. I don’t think I put him on the same level as Kasdan, the Huycks, Kershner, Coppola, De Palma, Scorsese, Milius, or Spielberg.

As I said, I think the Disney sale makes him exactly like Anakin…and I mean that as a compliment. In fact, it reminds me of this scene:

 

How can it be the Complete Saga release if we are getting 3 new movies?

 

So, according to you Lucas lost his magic touch and shouldn't make more movies.... but why does that mean he should sell the rights to make more movies based on his creation to another company (who never had that magic touch to create that creation in the first place!)?

Honestly, I find the sense of "ownership" over Star Wars that some fans seem to have (over the ownership of its creator) insulting. "Lucas doesn't make good Star Wars movies anymore, but I want more Star Wars movies, so I want Lucas to sell the company and let Disney make Star Wars movies for me".
Why not ask someone at Disney to create something as unique as Star Wars instead?

 

The Walt Disney Company has been making wonderful, magical films based on the intellectual property of others for 80 years- from SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DWARFS and PINOCCHIO through THE LITTLE MERMAID and BEAUTY AND THE BEAST. Despite some quibbles, they’ve essentially done a good job handling Pixar and the Marvel Cinematic Universe. I see no one better to continue STAR WARS

Again, it’s really no different from STAR TREK, where we needed people like Nicholas Meyer and Michael Piller to save it from Gene Roddenberry and his tunnel vision. Honestly, with THE FORCE AWAKENS, Kasdan’s involvement excites me alot more than Abrams’ involvement does, since Kasdan wrote the two best Lucasfilm productions- THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK and RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK.