Hey, I'm just going by the way I've always seen, heard and read Hollywood being used. I dunno, maybe there's just a disconnect between the way peaple in Hollywood view what consitutes Hollywood and what the average joe considers Hollywood to be. Um... Okay, I'm very confused now. Pre-Disney Lucasfilm is on that list you just linked to as "mini-major"*, yet your saying its not part of Hollywood? *(and the definition given for what consitutes that - "Mini-major studios (or "mini-majors") are the larger film production companies that are smaller than the major studios and attempt to compete directly with them" is pretty much what I've been saying the whole time LFL was. A smaller-tier studio that had enough clout and wealth to more or less do its own thing but was still part of the broader Hollywood "extended family.") Fair enough, but he still sold Star Wars to Disney of all peaple, still allowed other studios to distribute his films, still rubbed elbows with the peaple he apparently hated and LFL still owned a special effects firm that was regularly and intimatly involved with Hollywood. Maybe he did'nt have to work with Hollywood as a filmaker, but he had zero issue doing it as a buisnessman and he did that all the time, so he was definantly a part of the system in that sense, even if it was as "George Lucas the seasoned CEO of Lucasfilms who is all too happy to make distribution deals and let peaple outsource their special effects to him" rather then "George Lucas the young, up and coming filmmaker begrudingly looking a way to get money to finance his films." I do see your point and if this is your field I'll concede that your probobly far more likely to be right about all this then I am, I just. I dunno, I guess I just don't see how a man can be considered to not be a part of something when he so often works within/makes deals with that thing in one way or anouther and maintains firm connections to both the thing and other peaple who work more regularly within said thing; does this make sense? The wikipedia link you yourself posted disagrees with that assesment though, as I noted above; it apparently considers LFL pre-Disney to have been just one step below those five/six (which is basically what I've been arguing it was anyway - a lesser, but still well-known - Hollywood studio) And agian, this thread is literally the only place were I've ever seen the defination of Hollywood that I use not treated as "the" definition. I'm not saying your wrong, but as I said perhaps there's a disconnect between insiders and joe everybody that leads to these differing opinions on what is and is not Hollywood, becuase that's all I can think of for our differing definitions.