Saga Who handles Star Wars better? George Lucas or Disney? (Discussion)

...wut.

 

Are you a big fan?

 

Not particularly. But comparing Attack of the Clones to Chicago is like night and day. Like, out of all the Star Wars movies, Attack of the Clones is the least deserving of an award. Especially compared to its opponents.

I don't think it's an abysmal movie. But it's miles away from an Oscar winning one.

 

Ok, well the question was asked and I personally feel Chicago is painfully mediocre, and I like musicals. Also, AOTC is my favorite Star Wars film, so I would quite easily rank it over Chicago.

 

Do you think the movie deserves an Oscar for Best Picture in general, not counting who it's running against?

 

It blends scifi, fantasy, romance, westerns, politics, noir, 1940s serials into a fun romp of a film and I think it's highly ambitious in trying to combine all these different elements, so on a personal level, yes.

 

But do you think the same thing on a critical level? I love The Last Jedi, but I know on a critical level divorced from how much I enjoy the movie that it doesn't deserve Best Picture.

 

On a critical-level I would say no, because there is definitely an unrefined quality to the film. It certainly isn't perfect, but for me I really love what it strives for. I think the ST is more streamlined and lacks the blemishes of the PT, but I don't see the ambition or the storytelling finesse.

 

I think that's a pretty fair assessment, actually. I obviously prefer the latter to the former, but I completely get what you're getting at.

 

I think the original six films all had Lucas’s voice. What was Star Wars if nothing more than Lucas’s childhood fantasies of fast race cars, Buck Rogers, Flash Gordon, comic books etc intermixed with his later fascinations with mythology, Joseph Campbell and anthropology? When we watch those films we are seeing the dreams that came from the child and the intellectual curiosity that came from the man. Whatever you thought about any of the first six films they all had his voice.

So what is the voice of the sequel trilogy? Is it coming from Kathleen Kennedy? What about JJ Abrams and Rian Johnson? Whose childhood dreams and intellectual curiosities are we seeing now? I know JJ was a big fan of the original trilogy. If JJ’s dreams when he was younger was Star Wars, should we be surprised that what came from his imagination was essentially Star Wars repeated? And what about Rian Johnson?

I feel now we have Star Wars fans making these films. What I appreciate about coming to these forums is listening to everyone’s interpretation of what Star Wars is to them. No one person’s vision is the same. However watching these movies I feel like I’m getting Star Wars from other fans’ point of view. Because each view is so different it feels disjointed. We have people making Star Wars movies who don’t really understand the driving force and intellectual concepts by the original creator. It’s like if someone other than JK Rowling wrote a new Harry Potter book. I miss the voice of George Lucas. His childhood dreams became my childhood dreams. His concepts of mythology and Campbellian ideas are part of me now. When I listen to other people’s voices I hear none of that. I don’t know whose voice I’m listening to anymore. I can only say it doesn’t resonate with me.

 

I'm at a weird place where I'm really happy with the films we've gotten post-Disney, but I also find myself agreeing on some level. The Force Awakens and The Last Jedi feel like Abrams and Johnson having a conversation with Star Wars, and although I understand why some fans might not like that, I think it's neat and an opportunity that's all but unique to this series. From Abrams that means an attempt to distill Star Wars down to a Platonic ideal of its iconography and themes, whereas Johnson critically engages with the narrative and thematic choices Lucas made in his six films, and plays rough with some core concepts to see whether they break or remain solid. Despite how closely they play off of the original films, which can feel corporate at times, I genuinely believe both are deeply personal movies. But, because they're meta-conversational works, they inherently lack the sense of pure originality that permeated Lucas' films.

In contrast, I find Rogue One feels more like Lucas-Star Wars, as does what's been shown of Solo so far. This is almost paradoxical, because I would say they're absolutely not personal works; the late-game directorial shifts both underwent pretty much guarantees that, although I don't doubt that all involved cared immensely about the films they were making. They're far more corporate and calculated, but this lack of a driving singular personality behind the camera results in a direct emulation of Lucas' Star Wars that I think is pretty well-executed. Because they scribble within the margins of the world Lucas established, rather than pushing past the point he left off at, the result sounds similar to Lucas' voice even though we're not hearing his words, so to speak.

I don't think either approach is inherently negative, but rather both have their unique pros and cons, and you can still explore interesting stories, characters, and themes. I think this is why you see generalized breakdowns of people who liked TFA/TLJ more than RO and vice-versa; each approach can appeal more to fans who specifically engage with the series in one way or another, who want one thing or another out of it. Of course there are people that like both, which is great, or neither, which is unfortunate, but c'est la vie. Personally, I think thus far we've gotten some pretty great films out of this new era. I absolutely loved both TFA and TLJ, I liked Rogue One a lot, I'm really excited for Solo, and I'm curious to see how Abrams wraps up the ST both narratively and stylistically.

That said, I do think if Star Wars is going to survive in the long run and remain culturally relevant, it's going to need a strong voice and an aesthetic that draws on personal interests and influences, some of which will inevitably be the same as those that informed Lucas, some of which will be distinct. It's why I'm so excited by the idea of Johnson's trilogy, as I think it's the series' best chance to achieve that. He instilled some of his own influences and interests into TLJ, which is noticeable in regards to tone and the way certain shots are framed or sequences edited, and I think his personality will be more unrestrained when presented with a blank canvas. Whenever he talks about stripping Star Wars of all its recognizable iconography, characters, and locations, cutting it right down to the bone and building anew upon the foundation that remains... that's what I think needs to happen. New stories, characters, and designs that remain "Star Wars" in the broadest possible sense rather than trying to fit them within a narrow conception of what Star Wars can be. After all, it's what Lucas would do.

 

What I would like to see is a George Lucas directed SW film, released thru Disney/LFL's current production teams.

 

Agreed on those points especially. I don't know about the "better" handling, but I love where Star Wars is now -- or, perhaps, where we are in relation to Star Wars. Lucas' creation of it is phenomenal, but what he explored is the tip of the iceberg. I love Star Wars more for its world than for any one person who tells a story within it, and I want to see it explored, narratively and stylistically.

I think this is underlined by Yoda's statement that "we are what they grow beyond."

 

Personally, I would rather see George in a creative supervisor role.

Disney has the money and energy to keep the franchise going, but it lacks the discipline and philosophical proclivities on which so much of Star Wars is dependent.

 

I see where you are coming from. In a way I don't mind if someone has their unique view of Star Wars, and yet keeps to the same spirit and ideology of George Lucas. After all I grew up in love with Lucas's vision and voice and the story he had to tell. I've seen many sci-fi fantasy films being made since then, all with unique voices and ideas. Despite that none of the resonate with me the way Lucas's vision does. I see how some may like having Star Wars essentially deconstructed by other people and then reconstructed to their own ideology and perception. I will say that when I do come on these forums, there are many people who I read and enjoy their point of view about Star Wars as they often closely align to mine. However, there are many more people who's interpretation, while I respect, I do not at all agree with. When I watch the films of Abrams and Johnson, and maybe to some extent Edwards, it feels like I'm forced to read a thread full of opinions that don't even closely resemble my own. In a way it is like trying to translate a foreign language. The source language it what it is, and yet the translation may slightly differ based on the translator's own views and perceptions and there may even be disagreements about it. It that sense, instead of interpreting the source, I feel like I'm interpreting the interpretation, particularly one that I don't agree with. And so when I do come across other fans who's opinion I don't agree with, I can either debate those opinions or simply ignore them. However when it comes to the interpretation of these filmmakers, I'm in a debate with myself or else I can simply ignore them. Of course by ignoring them, that puts me in a rather sad predicament.

 

For me there can be only one answer: GEORGE LUCAS! He CREATED SW, others only copied. He gave us something new in each installment, Disney only had the courage to rehash when they could have reinvented the universe or added new ideas. I hate to say it, but Lucas is like a renowned star cook who creates fantastic and inventive new dishes. What Disney has done so far is take Lucas' dishes and warm them up in a microwave, adding huge amounts of mayonnaise, ketchup, sugar, oil, cream and salt to "improve" them, then selling them as their own creations. They don't CREATE, they only RETELL.

 

I prefer Lucas. No one understands it like he does. He's daring, an innovative film maker and storyteller. I can quote dialogue endlessly from the 6 films. I can't quote much of anything from the new ones because the quirky dialogue is just not there. He didn't need to pour extended effort into each film to drum up nostalgia so people could get into it. He had a way of establishing the characters, the quest and the stakes of the story within the first film of the two trilogies, and from there build up on it by raising the stakes and layering the dangers. I really got into each and every one.Now, these are good filmmakers. Disney has the budget to really bring an audiovisual epic to fruition, but they are spending it on scenes and sets made to re-purpose previous scenes from the other movies. Whether you like what he did with his story or not, each episode was distinct in tone and style from the one before it. This ST feels small, redundant, and without direction. From TPM to ROTJ I had a full generational epic that spoke to me about themes such as good and evil, duty and loyalty, action, adventure, sacrifice and heroism. I'm not sure we will be able to say what the ST was about, really. Just an excuse to make more of these movies, I guess.

 

100% agreed. Wondeful post!

 

I also agree with this %100.

George Lucas absolutely handled Star Wars better because it was his. It was his creation. He was inherently an artist (that also ran a corporation) and made the kind of movies that he wanted to see. Disney is a corporation that makes movies primarily for profit. They may hire artists to make these movies, but there is no unifying creative vision other than a committee of accountants.

 

George Lucas

 

Without a doubt George Lucas.
One of the biggest failures Disney did, was giving EA exclusive rights to make games, which I will never forgive.
Lets see what Disney and EA did so far since they put their claws into Star Wars.
Rogue One, Solo, a mediocore ST, two Battlefield games with Star Wars skin and Fallen Order.
Thats two good movies and one good game, in almost 5 years.
They could do more and better with a strong name like Star Wars, but like many corporations these they just play safe and sit on their money.

 

George Lucas. He knows how to plan his stories better and he is a more original storyteller than any of the writers/directors recently hired by Disney. Mind you, the studio has done a good job with stand alone films, but for some reason, the current Lucasfilm has proven to be incapable of creating a substantial trilogy or any other kind of series of films. And as much as I like "The Mandalorian", it's not blowing my mind. It's like watching a cute Star Wars version of a spaghetti western with a thin narrative.

 

agreed 100%.

 

Both are capable of brilliant and terrible...