PDA

View Full Version : Movies and TV George Lucas on new Clone Wars Movie and TV Series


DaneMcCloud
07-08-2008, 03:40 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/29/movies/29itzk.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1

George Lucas at Big Rock Ranch, one of the studios where Lucasfilm Animation has worked on “The Clone Wars.”

FUTURE generations will never need to establish a George Lucas museum, because George Lucas has already built one for himself. On either side of the Golden Gate Bridge he has constructed himself two temples where “Star Wars” is made and worshiped: at his Skywalker Ranch in Marin County and his newer office complex, the Letterman Digital Arts Center at the Presidio, he has gathered all manner of relics honoring his six-film saga, from the imposing (life-size replicas of the villains Darth Vader and Boba Fett) to the self-congratulatory (a Yoda fountain) to the self-deprecating (a carbonite block encasing the much loathed Jar Jar Binks).

Like religious shrines, these buildings both consecrate and confine the man for whom they were built.

Using the freedom and the fortune he has amassed largely on the astronomical success of “Star Wars,” Mr. Lucas has accumulated unparalleled creative resources; his next film could be anything from a sweeping epic to one of the intimate personal narratives he has often said he would like to make. Instead his next two ventures will be “Star Wars” projects, no less ambitious than his previous films yet potentially less commercial. And they come at a time when even the “Star Wars” faithful wonder if Mr. Lucas’s continued mining of this fantasy world has anything more to yield.

A few weeks ago Mr. Lucas, who is 64 with a full white beard, was visiting his Presidio offices somewhat reluctantly, on a layover between the European and Japanese premieres of his latest “Indiana Jones” movie. “I love making movies; I’m not the biggest fan of selling them,” he said, seated in the librarylike Lucasfilm boardroom, stocked with books about real-world military history and novels like “Quo Vadis.” “But since I’m in the selling mood, that’s what you’re here for. I’m doing all my selling for two more weeks. Then I’m sold out.”

He was pitching a computer-generated animated movie called “Star Wars: The Clone Wars,” which Warner Brothers will release on Aug. 15 and which will introduce an animated television series with the same title that will have its debut on the Cartoon Network this fall.

Despite his vows to the contrary Mr. Lucas did not conclude his “Star Wars” epic with his 2005 film “Revenge of the Sith,” the third in a trilogy of prequel movies that grossed more than $1 billion in the United States alone. As far back as 2002 he was contemplating an animated series that would take place between Episodes II and III of his prequels, fleshing out the adventures of the Jedi knights Obi-Wan Kenobi and Anakin Skywalker (who is doomed to become the evil Darth Vader), and explore heroes, villains and planets glossed over in the prequel films.

For Mr. Lucas this was an opportunity to revisit imaginary turf that gives him great personal satisfaction. “Star Wars,” he said, is “a sandbox I love to play in.”

“It’s not a matter of trying to prove anything to anybody,” he added. “I don’t have to.”

But his enduring interest in “Star Wars” hints at a lesson that his filmmaking peers have already learned: that it is sometimes easier for them to make big movies than small ones. As his longtime friend and collaborator Steven Spielberg wrote in an e-mail message: “All of us would like to make these little personal films that sneak into theaters under the radar. Sadly, for George and myself, and others who have enjoyed and endured great success — ‘under the radar’ has become a no-fly zone.”

Mr. Lucas began pursuing his “Clone Wars” projects about three years ago when he summoned the technological might of his company’s research and development division to start building Lucasfilm Animation, now a pair of studios at Big Rock Ranch — part of Skywalker — and in Singapore. (Lucasfilm declined to discuss budgets, but Mr. Lucas said that building a similar operation in the 1980s — the era when he sold a start-up computer-animation business called Pixar to Steven P. Jobs — would have cost him $60 million to $100 million.)

Next he hired a team of young “Star Wars”-obsessed artists who revere Mr. Lucas as if he were Yoda himself.

“He’s the guy,” said Dave Filoni, director of the “Clone Wars” show and movie. “Chewbacca exists because he named him, thought him up, put him in the cockpit.”

The two men worked closely together (Mr. Filoni is a former director of the Nickelodeon action cartoon “Avatar: The Last Airbender”) to hone the anime-inspired look of “The Clone Wars” and develop scripts, often drawing upon unused ideas Mr. Lucas had been stockpiling since the original “Star Wars” was released in 1977.

Then Mr. Lucas took the unusual step of waiting until the first 22-episode season of “The Clone Wars” was nearly finished before pitching it to television networks in late 2007. There were no immediate takers. Fox Broadcasting, the sister company of 20th Century Fox, which released the live-action “Star Wars” movies, passed. And the Cartoon Network, which had broadcast a series of traditional 2-D animated shorts called “Star Wars: Clone Wars” from 2003 to 2005, was lukewarm about the project.

That tepidness may have stemmed from some viewers’ dissatisfaction with the “Star Wars” prequels, with their stilted dialogue and baffling politics. Or it may have indicated that “Clone Wars” wasn’t compatible with a prime-time network schedule. “It didn’t fit any of the molds that everybody had,” Mr. Lucas said. “It’s not ‘SpongeBob SquarePants,’ but at the same time it’s also not ‘Family Guy.’ ”

Mr. Lucas said that Warner Brothers became interested only after he decided to produce a theatrical “Clone Wars” film (having been encouraged by the animation results he saw), and the film studio convinced its corporate siblings at the Cartoon Network to give the television series another look. (Executives at Warner Brothers and the Cartoon Network, both divisions of Time Warner, gave slightly different chronologies but did not dispute this element of Mr. Lucas’s account.)

Dave Filoni, director of the new movie and the related “Clone Wars” television series, which will have its debut in the fall on the Cartoon Network. More Photos >

For Time Warner the “Clone Wars” collaboration is more than a one-time opportunity to share in the money-minting “Star Wars” franchise. “It’s the relationship with Lucasfilm that we’re very excited about,” said Dan Fellman, president for domestic distribution of Warner Brothers Pictures. “Not just on the Cartoon Network but possibly for live-action television down the road.”

Sure enough, Mr. Lucas is already developing a live-action “Star Wars” television series, and Time Warner would love to demonstrate that one of its cable channels (like TBS, TNT or HBO) could give it a good home.

But the question remains: Just because new “Star Wars” can be made, should new “Star Wars” be made?

Some “Star Wars” aficionados — even those who have worked with Mr. Lucas on “Star Wars” projects — are ambivalent about his continued plundering of a science-fiction property that has already spawned numerous comic books, video games and novels, not to mention six movies.

“I think it’s the easiest thing to do, because he doesn’t need to come up with a whole new thing; everything’s established,” said Genndy Tartakovsky, the animator who directed Mr. Lucas’s previous “Clone Wars” shorts for the Cartoon Network. Speaking as a fan, Mr. Tartakovsky said, “I appreciate that, but there’s so much more that he could explore.”

Mr. Lucas said he had no urgent or compelling reasons for returning to his most popular characters and mythologies, except that he can and enjoys doing so. As an illustration he pointed to his work with Mr. Spielberg on “Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.”

“I mean, why do we have to make another ‘Indiana Jones’?” Mr. Lucas said. “There was no point to it, other than, gee, this might be fun.”

But to the extent that “Star Wars” had kept him from fulfilling his promise to return to making more personal, smaller-scale films, Mr. Lucas lamented this distraction. “You get sidetracked easily,” he said with a chuckle. “I do, anyway.”

And he was deeply pessimistic about the marketplace he will face when he someday releases a movie that is not set in a galaxy far, far away. “Maybe it ends up in a festival somewhere,” he said. “Maybe it ends up in half a dozen theaters around the country for a couple weeks.”

As he so often does, Mr. Lucas took a lesson from the experience of his friend and mentor Francis Ford Coppola, whose most recent film, “Youth Without Youth,” received a small independent release that was hardly on the scale of his “Godfather” movies. (In the United States the film played in just 18 theaters and grossed less than $250,000.)

“Did you see it?” Mr. Lucas asked rhetorically. “Uh, no. Did you even know it came out?”

Responding to questions sent via e-mail Mr. Coppola agreed that the films he now makes, and that Mr. Lucas says he intends to make, had little chance at achieving blockbuster status. “We make films for ourselves,” he wrote. “If no one wants to see them, what can we do?” (With a parenthetical shrug, Mr. Coppola added: “Emotion does much better at the box office than philosophy.”)

Other former colleagues of Mr. Lucas argued that new “Star Wars” projects have provided technological boons for the entire film business, yielding Industrial Light and Magic, Mr. Lucas’s pioneering special-effects company, and EditDroid, the digital film-editing hardware that was a forerunner to the Avid editing system.

“He does it in a way that might begin as self-serving and then of course is a bonanza for the whole industry,” said Sid Ganis, the president of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, who was a Lucasfilm executive during the 1980s.

Mr. Ganis added that Mr. Lucas possessed “an intuition that he stubbornly sticks by.”

“There’s something in him, when you’re told, ‘No, it’ll never work,’ it’s motivation to keep it going,” he added.

And as Mr. Lucas would be the first to remind you, he has proved his detractors wrong many times in his career, from the film executives who thought “American Graffiti” would work better as a television movie to the industry colleagues who warned him not to finance “The Empire Strikes Back” with his profits from “Star Wars.”

When he works on the “Star Wars” properties he owns outright, Mr. Lucas has the freedom to ignore the input of others. In the case of “The Clone Wars” he is financing the series himself and charging Time Warner licensing fees to distribute the film and broadcast the show. (A person with knowledge of the company’s animation operations, speaking anonymously to avoid offending Mr. Lucas, said that the earliest episodes of “The Clone Wars” probably cost $750,000 to $1.5 million each.)

“It’s much easier for me to just do the show I want, say, ‘Here it is, do you wish to license it or not?’ ” Mr. Lucas said. “That’s it. There’s no notes, no comments. I don’t care what your opinion is. You either put it on the air or you don’t.”

But Mr. Lucas’s creative independence cannot shield him from the larger realities of the film business. He is not planning, at least right away, to go head to head with more established animation studios like DreamWorks, Disney and Pixar. The mid-August release of the “Clone Wars” movie — an unusually late date for a new “Star Wars” film — was scheduled in part to avoid competition with recent offerings from these studios.

It is also exceedingly likely that “The Clone Wars” will be the lowest-grossing “Star Wars” movie ever; Mr. Lucas said he would be satisfied if the film made $100 million domestically. (“Revenge of the Sith,” by comparison, grossed $380 million.)

When he is not, say, testifying before a House subcommittee about classroom technology or appearing at Cannes with his frequent companion, Mellody Hobson, the president of the investment firm Ariel Capital Management, on his arm, Mr. Lucas has plenty of new projects to keep him busy.

He is already working on the second and third seasons of “The Clone Wars” and forging ahead on his live-action “Star Wars” television show. Then, he said, he would seek other films and television series for his animation studio and continue to develop “Red Tails,” a long-in-the-works feature film about the Tuskegee Airmen that he is producing.

And after that, who knows?

Mr. Lucas pointed back to his very first feature film, “THX 1138,” a dystopian work of science fiction released in 1971, one that at the time he believed would be his one and only shot at directing a movie exactly as he envisioned it. (The movie’s critical and commercial reception very nearly proved him right.)

All that his wealth has bought him, Mr. Lucas said, is the opportunity to make more films the way he wants to. “I’ve got more shots,” he said. “I can go and make half a dozen ‘THXes.’ I’ll lose everything I put into them, guaranteed. But I can have a lot of fun doing it.”

Deberg_1990
07-08-2008, 04:56 PM
This new "Clone Wars" CGI flick is going to be a real test of the current Star Wars fanbase.


Ill go on record right now and predict it will flop no matter how good it is.

irishjayhawk
07-08-2008, 05:03 PM
This new "Clone Wars" CGI flick is going to be a real test of the current Star Wars fanbase.


Ill go on record right now and predict it will flop no matter how good it is.

It will flop because it looks awful, visually.

And George lost all his credibility with his fan base with Indy 4. Just look at Claythan.

Deberg_1990
07-08-2008, 05:12 PM
It will flop because it looks awful, visually.

And George lost all his credibility with his fan base with Indy 4. Just look at Claythan.


So is this a continuation of the Cartoon Network series that aired a few years ago?? Those were pretty decent.

Bowser
07-08-2008, 05:25 PM
So is this a continuation of the Cartoon Network series that aired a few years ago?? Those were pretty decent.


I think it's going to be a continuation of the movie to be released next month, though I may be wrong.


Lucas really, really, REALLY needs to make the Timothy Zahn novels into movies, if he's serious about bringing the glory back to the Star Wars franchise. And a side question - is it true he wrote 9 episodes for Star Wars? If so, where and what are the remaining three, or is that all just bunk speculation?

Paging Claythan.....

DaneMcCloud
07-08-2008, 05:39 PM
I think it's going to be a continuation of the movie to be released next month, though I may be wrong.


Lucas really, really, REALLY needs to make the Timothy Zahn novels into movies, if he's serious about bringing the glory back to the Star Wars franchise. And a side question - is it true he wrote 9 episodes for Star Wars? If so, where and what are the remaining three, or is that all just bunk speculation?

Paging Claythan.....

He originally envisioned the Star Wars saga as nine episodes and initially, Luke & Leia weren't related. But studio pressure and health concerns forced him to re-think his strategy and consolidate it into six parts.

From what I understand, he's taking the same approach with the Clone Wars series as he's taken with the books, games and short stories: He's letting others "play" in his universe. He's not writing and he's not directing but he is producing.

Fan reaction will be "interesting", to say the least.

DaneMcCloud
07-08-2008, 05:40 PM
So is this a continuation of the Cartoon Network series that aired a few years ago?? Those were pretty decent.

No.

This is completely different. He set up a brand new animation wing of the Ranch. As the article states, he's not ready to take on Dreamworks and Pixar.

Yet.

DaneMcCloud
07-08-2008, 05:42 PM
It will flop because it looks awful, visually.

And George lost all his credibility with his fan base with Indy 4. Just look at Claythan.

What about Speilberg? Did he lose "credibility"? Or Harrison Ford?

All three men signed off on that project. That's why it took so long to produce.

If you hate the movie, the blame should be equal among the three men.

Not just directed at one man.

Braincase
07-08-2008, 06:52 PM
Viagra for Nerds.

Fried Meat Ball!
07-08-2008, 08:36 PM
What about Speilberg? Did he lose "credibility"? Or Harrison Ford?

All three men signed off on that project. That's why it took so long to produce.

If you hate the movie, the blame should be equal among the three men.

Not just directed at one man.

While I understand your sentiment, the blame gets laid at Lucas' feet because it's his story, not to mention what he gave legions of fans in the prequels and what he did to them for the DVD release of the original trilogy.

When has Spielberg or Ford given us a solid nine years of shitting on our heads?

Deberg_1990
07-08-2008, 08:44 PM
What about Speilberg? Did he lose "credibility"? Or Harrison Ford?

All three men signed off on that project. That's why it took so long to produce.

If you hate the movie, the blame should be equal among the three men.

Not just directed at one man.

I honestly think Spielberg is the most to blame. He directed the thing. He should have told George" This script is crap". "We should do less CGI" "Spaceships George?? WTF??"


Spielberg will bounce back im sure. Hes still a really strong director. I loved Munich, Minority Report and even War of the Worlds.

DaneMcCloud
07-08-2008, 08:49 PM
While I understand your sentiment, the blame gets laid at Lucas' feet because it's his story, not to mention what he gave legions of fans in the prequels and what he did to them for the DVD release of the original trilogy.

When has Spielberg or Ford given us a solid nine years of shitting on our heads?

It's not a sentiment: It's fact.

ALL three men signed off on the script. It was a triumvirate. A mutual decision made by those three men. There can be no excuses or exceptions.

You would be factually incorrect in blaming just one of the three people that made the decision to move forward with the script that was shot.

Not this moaning about unrelated movies or projects by singling out any one of the three. ALL THREE.

Bottom line.

Deberg_1990
07-08-2008, 09:04 PM
While I understand your sentiment, the blame gets laid at Lucas' feet because it's his story, not to mention what he gave legions of fans in the prequels and what he did to them for the DVD release of the original trilogy.

When has Spielberg or Ford given us a solid nine years of shitting on our heads?

Why would it not surprise me to see an all CGI Indiana Jones movie sometime in the next few years. hahah

Tribal Warfare
07-08-2008, 09:10 PM
Spielberg will bounce back im sure. Hes still a really strong director. I loved Munich, Minority Report and even War of the Worlds.

Jurassic Park 4 is coming up

Taco John
07-08-2008, 09:36 PM
I think the cartoon is going to be awesome. I loved the Clone Wars cartoon series. And in a cartoon format, you can tell a lot more story without special effects or actors getting in the way.

I don't know that it's going to be a big screen hit, but I think it will be a DVD hit for sure. I know I plan on seeing it in a theatre.

Taco John
07-08-2008, 09:39 PM
http://www.apple.com/trailers/wb/starwarstheclonewars/trailer1/

irishjayhawk
07-08-2008, 09:45 PM
What about Speilberg? Did he lose "credibility"? Or Harrison Ford?

All three men signed off on that project. That's why it took so long to produce.

If you hate the movie, the blame should be equal among the three men.

Not just directed at one man.

I didn't say they didn't also deserve blame. But Lucas still does. And I stand by my post.

Count Zarth
07-08-2008, 10:29 PM
I'll see it in the theater just because it's Star Wars and it'll be in DLP. **** it.

And I'll watch the live action TV show religiously. Even if it sucks.

I can't turn away from a bad trainwreck.

Guru
07-08-2008, 10:50 PM
I think it's going to be a continuation of the movie to be released next month, though I may be wrong.


Lucas really, really, REALLY needs to make the Timothy Zahn novels into movies, if he's serious about bringing the glory back to the Star Wars franchise. And a side question - is it true he wrote 9 episodes for Star Wars? If so, where and what are the remaining three, or is that all just bunk speculation?

Paging Claythan.....

Those were EXCELLENT books.

Guru
07-08-2008, 10:54 PM
I think the cartoon is going to be awesome. I loved the Clone Wars cartoon series. And in a cartoon format, you can tell a lot more story without special effects or actors getting in the way.

I don't know that it's going to be a big screen hit, but I think it will be a DVD hit for sure. I know I plan on seeing it in a theatre.

My 6 year old is extremely excited over this movie. He got to see the trailer today since I took him to Speed Racer (surprisingly not bad at all) and he just kept saying "I want to see that dad".

Tribal Warfare
07-08-2008, 11:13 PM
is it true he wrote 9 episodes for Star Wars? If so, where and what are the remaining three, or is that all just bunk speculation?

Paging Claythan.....


the last three were suppose to be about Luke starting a new Jedi Academy,(Luke is as strong as Yoda during this period) with Han and Lea's daughter in the mix, and some group decided to clone Anakin and Luke to kill the older and very powerful Luke.

DaneMcCloud
07-09-2008, 12:06 AM
I didn't say they didn't also deserve blame. But Lucas still does. And I stand by my post.

JFC.

You REALLY have a high opinion of your "opinion".

Give me a call when you get a REAL job in Hollywood.

Then we can "talk".

ROFLROFLROFLROFL

Guru
07-09-2008, 12:10 AM
JFC.

You REALLY have a high opinion of your "opinion".

Give me a call when you get a REAL job in Hollywood.

Then we can "talk".

ROFLROFLROFLROFL

you arrogant dickbag. :evil:

DaneMcCloud
07-09-2008, 12:23 AM
you arrogant dickbag. :evil:

Look, if IJH had any insight, I'd be all ears.

But he doesn't. He's a 21 year-old kid who lives in a place that's about as far away from Hollywood as the North Pole. Seriously.

If he had said something along the lines of "George Lucas, like Orson Welles before him, made his best films while in his 20's. But unlike Welles, while Lucas continues to make financially successful films into his "Golden Years", they fail to live up to the grandor of his earlier works".

Instead, the guy who fancies himself as some sort of "important" cog, spews typical fanboy bullshit.

If you want to "impress" us, Mr. IJH, come up with some original thoughts. Especially thoughts that don't include "Pulp Fiction" is over-rated.

Again. JFC.

Guru
07-09-2008, 12:29 AM
Look, if IJH had any insight, I'd be all ears.

But he doesn't. He's a 21 year-old kid who lives in a place that's about as far away from Hollywood as the North Pole. Seriously.

If he had said something along the lines of "George Lucas, like Orson Welles before him, made his best films while in his 20's. But unlike Welles, while Lucas continues to make financially successful films into his "Golden Years", they fail to live up to the grandor of his earlier works".

Instead, the guy who fancies himself as some sort of "important" cog, spews typical fanboy bullshit.

If you want to "impress" us, Mr. IJH, come up with some original thoughts. Especially thoughts that don't include "Pulp Fiction" is over-rated.

Again. JFC.

Just ribbin ya! heh

DaneMcCloud
07-09-2008, 12:32 AM
Just ribbin ya! heh

I know.

I guess IJH gets under my skin because he's a freakin' kid that lives on the North Pole, yet he feels his opinions trump all others.

I know people think I'm a dick but JFC, I at least live and work in this town.

Fried Meat Ball!
07-09-2008, 06:41 AM
It's not a sentiment: It's fact.

ALL three men signed off on the script. It was a triumvirate. A mutual decision made by those three men. There can be no excuses or exceptions.

You would be factually incorrect in blaming just one of the three people that made the decision to move forward with the script that was shot.

Not this moaning about unrelated movies or projects by singling out any one of the three. ALL THREE.

Bottom line.

I wasn't arguing that all three signed off. I know that. I was saying I agree with the sentiment that Lucas shouldn't get all the blame.

And like it or not, Dane, but Lucas gets most of the credit/blame for Indiana BECAUSE of his past, right or wrong.

That's all I'm saying.

And since we're talking about opinions here, let's keep in mind that YOUR opinion doesn't matter any more that irish's or mine simply because you live and work in H-town. It's an opinion.

And as far as having a high opinion of his opinion - do you end all arguments regarding movies by saying someone isn't valid since they don't have a REAL job in Hollywood? You seem to have this idea that YOUR opinion trumps all others just because you live in Hollywood. It's an opinion, man. We all talk like our opinions are fact. Not just you, not just me, not just irish. All of us.

I'm really trying to have a civil discussion here with you Dane, and I think we've had some good discussions before. I don't think you're a dickbag - I think you have some skewed views, but I'm certain you feel the same about me. But it's comments like "Give me a call when you get a REAL job in Hollywood," and "I at least live and work in this town" that make people think you're a dickbag.

Just saying.

Now you can flame away at me, even though I'm trying to be friendly. Call me names, too. Tell me I don't have the guts to be a filmmaker in H-town, that's why I've lived in the Midwest.

Deberg_1990
07-09-2008, 06:42 AM
since I took him to Speed Racer (surprisingly not bad at all)

Yea, its actually a pretty good movie that got an unfair shake. When it didnt "open" the general public thought it was really bad so they stayed away in droves.


Its not perfect but its not a bad movie by any means. It was just poorly marketed and targeted. It will get re-discovered on DVD.

Swanman
07-09-2008, 08:56 AM
Lucas really, really, REALLY needs to make the Timothy Zahn novels into movies, if he's serious about bringing the glory back to the Star Wars franchise.

Hell yes. Introduce audiences to Mara Jade, Grand Admiral Thrawn, a bad-ass Luke Skywalker (he is uber-powerful in the novels) and the Noghri, sounds like a good plan to me.

DaneMcCloud
07-09-2008, 09:00 AM
And since we're talking about opinions here, let's keep in mind that YOUR opinion doesn't matter any more that irish's or mine simply because you live and work in H-town. It's an opinion.

And as far as having a high opinion of his opinion - do you end all arguments regarding movies by saying someone isn't valid since they don't have a REAL job in Hollywood? You seem to have this idea that YOUR opinion trumps all others just because you live in Hollywood. It's an opinion, man. We all talk like our opinions are fact. Not just you, not just me, not just irish. All of us.

So now opinion trumps facts? JFC.

IJH consistently and in multiple threads laughs at people's movie tastes. If someone enjoyed "Hancock", he points out the flaws and basically insults people for enjoying "bad" films. Yet this is a kid that doesn't understand "Pulp Fiction". His opinions of movies, good or bad, are not the standard for which all movies should be judged but since he took a few courses at KU, he fancies himself as more important.

Ridiculous.

Additionally, I'm not judging anyone's tastes, like or dislikes. I'm bringing factual information to the table. And whether you like it or not, I do live and work in Hollywood and am privy to a huge amount of "inside" information and insight (99.9999% of which I'd never share in this forum).

If you don't like that, please put me on ignore.

I've never stated that my opinion is above others or above reproach. But don't expect me NOT to share factual information from time to time.

Especially in the Media Forum.

Adept Havelock
07-09-2008, 09:26 AM
I think it's going to be a continuation of the movie to be released next month, though I may be wrong.


Lucas really, really, REALLY needs to make the Timothy Zahn novels into movies, if he's serious about bringing the glory back to the Star Wars franchise. And a side question - is it true he wrote 9 episodes for Star Wars? If so, where and what are the remaining three, or is that all just bunk speculation?

Paging Claythan.....

I'd love to see the Zahn novels, but the cast is too old.

Pity, really. I think Julianne Moore could be a great Mara Jade, and a blue John Malkovich as Thrawn. Gary Oldman as Talon Kaarde?

Oh well, better to leave them unmade than risk another set of movies like the "prequels".

irishjayhawk
07-09-2008, 09:37 AM
So now opinion trumps facts? JFC.

IJH consistently and in multiple threads laughs at people's movie tastes. If someone enjoyed "Hancock", he points out the flaws and basically insults people for enjoying "bad" films. Yet this is a kid that doesn't understand "Pulp Fiction". His opinions of movies, good or bad, are not the standard for which all movies should be judged but since he took a few courses at KU, he fancies himself as more important.

ROFL

I don't laugh at people's tastes. I question, perhaps. And can you quote me where I insulted someone for liking Hancock. I don't believe I did. And who said I didn't "understand" Pulp Fiction. I said it was overrated.

I also never said nor was under the impression that my opinion was better than anyone elses.

Ridiculous.

No, what is ridiculous is you. You get super defensive any time someone says something contrary to your opinion. You got defensive last time someone said something about Lucas and even posted about it. Something like "Sorry, I get like what when people attack him". You got defensive in the LOST thread because people were challenging your condescending view point.

We get it. You live there. Therefore, you're opinion trumps all others. You don't have to deny it. It's pretty obvious.

And I'm hardly a Star Wars or Indy fanboy. Or Lucas for that matter. I merely stated he lost credibility with Indy 4. You haven't said anything to the contrary other than "oh look at this guy, he lives in Kansas which is far away from Hollywood." I guess that means Ebert doesn't qualify either.

Additionally, I'm not judging anyone's tastes, like or dislikes.

Yes, you are.

I'm bringing factual information to the table.

Can you explain the factual information in these posts:

JFC.

You REALLY have a high opinion of your "opinion".

Give me a call when you get a REAL job in Hollywood.

Then we can "talk".

I know.

I guess IJH gets under my skin because he's a freakin' kid that lives on the North Pole, yet he feels his opinions trump all others.

I know people think I'm a dick but JFC, I at least live and work in this town.

I know, I couldn't either. And for good measure, here's another:
What about Speilberg? Did he lose "credibility"? Or Harrison Ford?

All three men signed off on that project. That's why it took so long to produce.

If you hate the movie, the blame should be equal among the three men.

Not just directed at one man.

I couldn't find any "facts" in that one other than 3 men were on the project, which I never said to the contrary.


And whether you like it or not, I do live and work in Hollywood and am privy to a huge amount of "inside" information and insight (99.9999% of which I'd never share in this forum).

How lucky. None of that elevates your opinion higher than another's. I think your peers would agree too.


If you don't like that, please put me on ignore.

I've never stated that my opinion is above others or above reproach. But don't expect me NOT to share factual information from time to time.

Especially in the Media Forum.

Again, if you can point to factual information in the exchanges with me in this thread, please do. I don't see anything but overreacting because someone has a different opinion of you and stood by it.

And you seem to have trouble attacking the poster rather than the content. If you can see where I said my opinion counted more than others, please do. If you can find that in the Hancock thread, please do. If you happen to, I will apologize. But, I don't think I have.

Fried Meat Ball!
07-09-2008, 10:01 AM
So now opinion trumps facts? JFC.

IJH consistently and in multiple threads laughs at people's movie tastes. If someone enjoyed "Hancock", he points out the flaws and basically insults people for enjoying "bad" films. Yet this is a kid that doesn't understand "Pulp Fiction". His opinions of movies, good or bad, are not the standard for which all movies should be judged but since he took a few courses at KU, he fancies himself as more important.

Ridiculous.

Additionally, I'm not judging anyone's tastes, like or dislikes. I'm bringing factual information to the table. And whether you like it or not, I do live and work in Hollywood and am privy to a huge amount of "inside" information and insight (99.9999% of which I'd never share in this forum).

If you don't like that, please put me on ignore.

I've never stated that my opinion is above others or above reproach. But don't expect me NOT to share factual information from time to time.

Especially in the Media Forum.

I fail to see facts other than that all three signed off. And I offered an opinion as to why I think Lucas gets, deservedly or not, the bulk of the blame. I think... certainly could be wrong... I'm right as to why he gets the blame. For the record, you're right that they all share the blame in the putting a shitty story on screen. One of the three should have said, 'Damn, George... I really want to do Indy 4, but if this is the best we got, then we're better off not doing one.'

I know you are privy to a tremendous amount of information, and I for one wish you would share MORE... especially here in the media forum. That doesn't change the fact that you sometimes approach other people's opinions as if they aren't worth as much as yours, simply because you live and work in Hollywood. Just because you're there doesn't make your opinion worth more than others.

Deberg_1990
07-09-2008, 10:32 AM
One of the three should have said, 'Damn, George... I really want to do Indy 4, but if this is the best we got, then we're better off not doing one.'



Pure money grab. Plain and simple. The film to this date has made over 300mil in the US. Pretty amazing accomplishment for a bad film.

Fried Meat Ball!
07-09-2008, 10:34 AM
Pure money grab. Plain and simple. The film to this date has made over 300mil in the US. Pretty amazing accomplishment for a bad film.

I know. But it's not like any of them NEED the money. They could have held out for a movie that NEEDED to be made.

Deberg_1990
07-09-2008, 10:37 AM
I know. But it's not like any of them NEED the money. They could have held out for a movie that NEEDED to be made.

True, but they held out for 19 years already. If i had to guess, there is probably a very interesting backstory as to why this film got made at this time.

irishjayhawk
07-09-2008, 11:05 AM
Pure money grab. Plain and simple. The film to this date has made over 300mil in the US. Pretty amazing accomplishment for a bad film.

It's like George said though. He could make a million THX sequels and lose money and his status, but it would be fun.

I can't say I blame him for wanting to have fun. Though, I think you can have fun and still produce a good product.

DaneMcCloud
07-09-2008, 11:06 AM
Just because you're there doesn't make your opinion worth more than others.

Absolutely correct.

Look, everyone's entitled to an opinion of film, television, music, art, etc. Working in that particular industry doesn't necessarily mean more insight into those mediums. To the contrary: Sometimes it means less. People tend to get "caught up" in the business side so much and have so many inter-personal relationships that it can be like working in a bubble where no one has perspective.

I'm not saying that your opinion that the recent work of George Lucas isn't up to par with his earlier work is incorrect. That's for you to do decide.

But to say (and I think this has been covered) that the reason Indy 4 isn't as good as it predecessors is due to Lucas and Lucas only is factually incorrect. That may be the perception of internet fanboys but if there is "blame" to be laid, it lies at the feet of all three principles equally.

irishjayhawk
07-09-2008, 11:10 AM
Absolutely correct.

Look, everyone's entitled to an opinion of film, television, music, art, etc. Working in that particular industry doesn't necessarily mean more insight into those mediums. To the contrary: Sometimes it means less. People tend to get "caught up" in the business side so much and have so many inter-personal relationships that it can be like working in a bubble where no one has perspective.

I'm not saying that your opinion that the recent work of George Lucas isn't up to par with his earlier work is incorrect. That's for you to do decide.

But to say (and I think this has been covered) that the reason Indy 4 isn't as good as it predecessors is due to Lucas and Lucas only is factually incorrect. That may be the perception of internet fanboys but if there is "blame" to be laid, it lies at the feet of all three principles equally.

And where has anyone in here said that?

Looks like you got your panties up in a bunch with me for nothing.

DaneMcCloud
07-09-2008, 11:13 AM
ROFL

I don't laugh at people's tastes. I question, perhaps. And can you quote me where I insulted someone for liking Hancock. I don't believe I did. And who said I didn't "understand" Pulp Fiction. I said it was overrated.


Yes, you do question it with the veracity of a bulldog, at times. You question why people like what they like and in my case, came after me repeatedly with a question in which you already knew the answer. You've done it to others as well. You berate them when you don't like their answers.

I'm not the only one bringing this to light. You were asked several times in the "Reservoir Dogs" thread about your age, yet you didn't answer. You're a kid - that's fine. But you have to understand that people who are 42 see cinema differently than someone who is 21.

If you'd read my post regarding your opinion, I gave you a perfect example of how you could approach these things respectfully. But you don't. If someone likes a movie that you don't like, you just HAVE to chime in with "Well, I didn't see it that way" or "Well, I certainly didn't like it". So, who asked you? Are you the end-all, be-all of film criticism?

And why can't people just like mindless entertainment without being challenged by a 21 year old know it all?

Fried Meat Ball!
07-09-2008, 11:14 AM
Absolutely correct.

Look, everyone's entitled to an opinion of film, television, music, art, etc. Working in that particular industry doesn't necessarily mean more insight into those mediums. To the contrary: Sometimes it means less. People tend to get "caught up" in the business side so much and have so many inter-personal relationships that it can be like working in a bubble where no one has perspective.

I'm not saying that your opinion that the recent work of George Lucas isn't up to par with his earlier work is incorrect. That's for you to do decide.

But to say (and I think this has been covered) that the reason Indy 4 isn't as good as it predecessors is due to Lucas and Lucas only is factually incorrect. That may be the perception of internet fanboys but if there is "blame" to be laid, it lies at the feet of all three principles equally.
You, too, are absolutely correct. No one is arguing that point. My original post was an opinion as to why I think Lucas is getting the bulk of the blame. I also agreed that all three of the men deserve a fair amount of blame, but that Lucas was on the receiving side of most of it because of his recent transgressions.

What say you to that?

DaneMcCloud
07-09-2008, 11:19 AM
You, too, are absolutely correct. No one is arguing that point. My original post was an opinion as to why I think Lucas is getting the bulk of the blame. I also agreed that all three of the men deserve a fair amount of blame, but that Lucas was on the receiving side of most of it because of his recent transgressions.

What say you to that?

I addressed at some point. The perception among Internet Fanboys is that George Lucas is the devil.

But apparently in the real world, he's not. The prequels grossed over $2 billion at the box office and DVD sales are into the billions. Indy 4 has made over $735 million worldwide.

So in this case, perception isn't reality.

Fried Meat Ball!
07-09-2008, 11:20 AM
Yes, you do question it with the veracity of a bulldog, at times. You question why people like what they like and in my case, came after me repeatedly with a question in which you already knew the answer. You've done it to others as well. You berate them when you don't like their answers.

I'm not the only one bringing this to light. You were asked several times in the "Reservoir Dogs" thread about your age, yet you didn't answer. You're a kid - that's fine. But you have to understand that people who are 42 see cinema differently than someone who is 21.

If you'd read my post regarding your opinion, I gave you a perfect example of how you could approach these things respectfully. But you don't. If someone likes a movie that you don't like, you just HAVE to chime in with "Well, I didn't see it that way" or "Well, I certainly didn't like it". So, who asked you? Are you the end-all, be-all of film criticism?

And why can't people just like mindless entertainment without being challenged by a 21 year old know it all?

I do the same thing, Dane. Perhaps I have more tact? I don't know. But as for who asked whom? It's a public forum that's open for discussion. I didn't see a thread titled: "Hey JENSON. What did you think of Reservoir Dogs?" irish threw in his two cents. There's nothing wrong with that.

That's enough from me. irish can fight his own fight, this is between you two. I just see myself in a lot of what you're saying about him, so I was compelled to speak up.

Fried Meat Ball!
07-09-2008, 11:22 AM
I addressed at some point. The perception among Internet Fanboys is that George Lucas is the devil.

But apparently in the real world, he's not. The prequels grossed over $2 billion at the box office and DVD sales are into the billions. Indy 4 has made over $735 million worldwide.

So in this case, perception isn't reality.

You should know as well as anyone that the public pumping money into a film does not a good film make. The public is fickle, and for the most part just follow the hype.

I'd add that there are a lot of people like me that did this: I went to see all three of the prequels, despite continually being disappointed. I bought the DVDs, because I wanted them. I was HIGHLY disappointed with the product I purchased. I saw Indy 4 in the theater, despite horrible reviews. I wanted to believe they were better, Dane. I know a lot of people that were exactly like me, and I'm certainly not an internet fanboy.

irishjayhawk
07-09-2008, 11:24 AM
Yes, you do question it with the veracity of a bulldog, at times. You question why people like what they like and in my case, came after me repeatedly with a question in which you already knew the answer. You've done it to others as well. You berate them when you don't like their answers.
:LOL:

Asking someone why they liked it can be informative and is not always negative as you would assume.

I asked you a question in the LOST thread because it made no sense and because you didn't answer it. Then you got all condescending.

Please, quote me berating someone other than yourself because you won't answer a simple question.


I'm not the only one bringing this to light. You were asked several times in the "Reservoir Dogs" thread about your age, yet you didn't answer. You're a kid - that's fine. But you have to understand that people who are 42 see cinema differently than someone who is 21.

I don't recall being asked my age in that thread. I was asked in the DC and I responded. That's funny. I checked the thread. Not one question about my age. The closest we got was you're gem:

IMO, if you don't "get" Pulp Fiction, it's because you're too young

And I have never said anything to the contrary. I merely said T copies and that PF was overrated. Please, point me to where I drew anything of age. Hell, you even answered the question while I was away of what he borrows liberally from.

If you'd read my post regarding your opinion, I gave you a perfect example of how you could approach these things respectfully. But you don't. If someone likes a movie that you don't like, you just HAVE to chime in with "Well, I didn't see it that way" or "Well, I certainly didn't like it". So, who asked you? Are you the end-all, be-all of film criticism?

So, I cannot give my opinion in a thread about the film? Interesting. For someone that claims their opinion is not above others, you sure are demanding on when someone can and cannot post their opinion. I happened to be frustrated at Hancock for it's suckiness. I've seen people take equally bad rants at movies before and you don't get on their case. It seems you have a problem with me and me alone. For that, I don't know why.


And why can't people just like mindless entertainment without being challenged by a 21 year old know it all?

I thought I didn't say my age?

And it's interesting how much KU and my age has to do with my take on something as simple as movies or as complex as politics. It's like a giant ad hominem on this board. Maybe it's an inside joke I missed.

irishjayhawk
07-09-2008, 11:26 AM
I addressed at some point. The perception among Internet Fanboys is that George Lucas is the devil.

But apparently in the real world, he's not. The prequels grossed over $2 billion at the box office and DVD sales are into the billions. Indy 4 has made over $735 million worldwide.

So in this case, perception isn't reality.

Just because people dislike Lucas doesn't mean they won't go see his stuff in the hopes that it won't disappoint like "last time". Something like that can explain the numbers and the hatred having a disconnect.

DaneMcCloud
07-09-2008, 11:32 AM
And it's interesting how much KU and my age has to do with my take on something as simple as movies or as complex as politics. It's like a giant ad hominem on this board. Maybe it's an inside joke I missed.

You're right - it was another thread where people were questioning your age.

Why?

Probably because you come of as "young" on the internet. Nothing wrong with that but sometimes it's easy to see.

The KU thing? No idea. I brought it up because KU isn't exactly in the same category as NYU, USC, or UCLA when it comes to film schools.

irishjayhawk
07-09-2008, 11:38 AM
Probably because you come of as "young" on the internet. Nothing wrong with that but sometimes it's easy to see.

The KU thing? No idea. I brought it up because KU isn't exactly in the same category as NYU, USC, or UCLA when it comes to film schools.

Some of us don't realize what we want to do until we've already decided on a school. Again, it really doesn't matter if KU is as good as NYU or the like. It has no bearing on how good someone is at their craft nor the validity of their opinion.

So far, I've gotten the impression from you that it does have a bearing on those things.

However, I am not unforgiving. I forgive you Dane. And I call for a truce.

DaneMcCloud
07-09-2008, 11:40 AM
I know a lot of people that were exactly like me, and I'm certainly not an internet fanboy.

All I can say is that Spielberg, Lucas and Ford were basically in a no-win situation. There was no way they could produce a film as good as "Raiders" and they would have been lucky with a film as good as "Crusade".

The film was destined to make a ton of money due to the principles involved.

So with that in mind, should they have scrapped the idea of a fourth film altogether? There's no way it could live up to the hype, yet it would certainly garner worldwide interest.

So where do you draw the line?

Fried Meat Ball!
07-09-2008, 11:41 AM
Ebert's undergrad degree is University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign... not much on NYU, USC or UCLA, huh? Graduate study at University of Cape Town... not much on NYU, USC or UCLA, huh? Neither degree was in film.

Where you got your education as a mark is bullshit. If you're good, you're good. It doesn't matter where the degree came from.

As a matter of point, I'm not saying irish is right or wrong - I'm saying whether you got your degree at KU or Central Methodist, it doesn't matter.

Fried Meat Ball!
07-09-2008, 11:43 AM
All I can say is that Spielberg, Lucas and Ford were basically in a no-win situation. There was no way they could produce a film as good as "Raiders" and they would have been lucky with a film as good as "Crusade".

The film was destined to make a ton of money due to the principles involved.

So with that in mind, should they have scrapped the idea of a fourth film altogether? There's no way it could live up to the hype, yet it would certainly garner worldwide interest.

So where do you draw the line?
For me... again, this is me, personally... if I was in the position that any of those three are in... I absolutely would have scrapped it if I couldn't do it right. They were, in my opinion, whoring themselves. And that, in any profession, is wrong.

DaneMcCloud
07-09-2008, 11:44 AM
Some of us don't realize what we want to do until we've already decided on a school. Again, it really doesn't matter if KU is as good as NYU or the like. It has no bearing on how good someone is at their craft nor the validity of their opinion. So far, I've gotten the impression from you that it does have a bearing on those things.

I understand that but with this caveat: You're likely to be seen as more serious and talented had you graduated from one of those schools. That's doesn't make it reality but as I've stated in this thread, perception can be reality.

However, I am not unforgiving. I forgive you Dane. And I call for a truce.

I've never had any ill will towards you nor do I wish anything but the best for you. And there's nothing wrong with your approach or with the "Arrogance of Youth".

It may come in handy, especially in this business.