Forums / Discussion / General

I recently watched a documentary called "The People vs. George Lucas", which was about how Star Wars and Indiana Jones fans alike were dissatisfied with what George did with Sequels, Prequels, and Remakes. It also talked about how far dedicated fans went and how attached they were to the series. There's been a lot of controversy around these things, and the movie did a really good job of summing it up.
In my opinion, George Lucas had all the right to make the Prequels to Star Wars, and the fans had all the right to complain. The movie's were badly written and well, just bad.
But the "Special Edition" versions of the prequels were uncalled for. The first 3 movie in the series were part of our cultural history, and changed the movie industry as we knew it. To change it is like changing our memories, our childhood. It seems like George is acting like he want's his mistakes to be eradicated, as his original version of Star Wars can only be seen on rare Laser Disc / VHS copies, as he didn't give an option to watch the original on DVD, Unlike E.T and many other movies.
I'd like to know what you think about this, as 2 brains is better than one. Or 3 brains. Or 4.

I saw this listed on Netflix, I'll be sure to check it out.

I didn't think the prequels were that bad. Sure, the second one deserves to be burned with fire and holy water (and so does Jar-Jar), but the rest wasn't too bad.

I never saw the problem with the prequels.

The only true problem I had with the prequels was making Anakin a whiny brat. I'm not sure what else they could have done, but it just didn't fit. I couldn't see someone that annoying become someone was awesome as Darth Vader.

See, there's a specific order where you watch all the movies in order to get the most satisfaction from the story. It's 4, 5, 2, 3, and 6, with no 1 (numbers refer to episode, so it'd be New Hope starting out). This way, you get to see Luke's story, then Anakin's, and finally Return of the Jedi where they're wrapped up simultaneously. Also has the added benefit of introducing the Luke/Leia Brother/Sister thing early, so it's not completely out of nowhere. And the best part: No Jar Jar.

Ahh, the machete order. Yes, it has a name.

The problem I have with the prequels is that I've seen the Plinkett reviews. You just can't go back from those.

Those reviews aside, I just felt like the prequels lacked the heart of the original. The mystery and wonder just wasn't there for me upon watching them when I got out of childhood.

Another thing: OP mentioned Indiana Jones. I love Indiana Jones. A lot. And I gotta say, I didn't hate the 4th one. Is it the best? Of course not. But the "aliens" thing never bothered me all that much, and though it was formulaic, I felt like it kept the intensity it needed to at least be decent.

Oh yeah, that's what it was. Cutting out Episode I is the best idea ever.

I once saw George Lucas on a talk show, and he claimed that people my age (late-30s and over) tend to prefer the original trilogy, while many younger people prefer the prequels, and younger still like the Clone Wars series. Essentially, you have a tendency to feel affinity for whatever part of the series you saw first. I think there's some truth to that, but of course there are exceptions. Even in this thread before my post here, there have been some clear differences of opinion.

I have often expressed that in my own final analysis, I think Return of the Jedi was the weakest of the six. Of course, that may be partially colored by the fact that while I do think Jar-Jar was annoying, he can't hold a candle to the intense level of annoying that is known as ( shudder ) Ewoks. You just know that George Lucas was thinking, "Man, I have made major bank on action figures; let's see if I can sell teddy bears…in space!"

Whatever one may feel about prequels and special editions, I understand that Lucas owns the movies, they're his "baby" and he has the right to remake them if he wants to, but I also agree that it's pretty unfair of him to not release the original versions on DVD. If Leonardo wanted to go back and re-paint the Mona Lisa, so long as it was still hanging in his studio, that's one thing; but if some patron has bought the painting from him and hangs it in their gallery at home, Leonardo doesn't get to barge into the house with his paints and touch the thing up. In not allowing the fans to have what they really want, it seems like Lucas is overstepping the bounds of what artists are usually all about.

So long as I'm posting, I might as well say that I also don't so much find Jar-Jar annoying as I think there was just too much of him for what really in the end was a comedy-relief character. If Jar-Jar had disappeared from the story after he led the Jedi to the other Gungans, I don't think anyone would have been disgusted by him. If he'd stayed with them through the story, but had stayed in the background and had at least 50% less dialogue, that probably would have been bearable. If, at the very least, Jar-Jar had not been involved in the climactic battle scene, the character would have stopped short of hideous.

This guy accurately and comically describes why you should hate the prequels. If you have the time, you should definitely watch all seven parts.

Anakin should have been in his teens rather than such a small child. It would have been better.

If you've seen the behind the scenes making of Episode 1, you can literally see the moment that George Lucas picks the wrong kid in the audition.

But I don't think that Indiana Jones 4 was bad and I feel that the criticism was a little unfounded: "The refrigerator scene is so unrealistic!" as though Indiana Jones was ever concerned about realism when he drives tanks off cliffs or uses life boats as impromptu parachutes.

And I was surprised that most people didn't see the Alien coming, "The Crystal Skull" was always a part of Alien conspiracy theories, History Channel won't shut up about it.

The only thing I hated was that the Alien looked kind of silly, almost cartoonish.

Looks interesting, and I'm checking it out, but very early on, I have my doubts about this guy when he brings up Starship Troopers as an example of good movie-making.

Funny, I found a clip about The People vs. George Lucas, and this guy makes almost the same analogy I did (although it's a pretty obvious parallel, I suppose).
Half in the Bag: People vs George Lucas

The first Starship Troopers movie was a masterpiece, Brucker.
The others, not so much…

They made sequels?

Just finishing watching The People vs. George Lucas and I think my favorite line would have to be,

"No one raped my childhood, least of all George Lucas. And, quite frankly, if some metaphorical version of George Lucas wanted to have sexual congress with some metaphorical version of my childhood, it would be the most beautiful, consensual of lovemaking." – Joe Nussbaum, Director George Lucas in Love

Something that was pointed out by several people in the film is that while so many of the adult fans were deeply disappointed in the prequels, Lucas didn't write those movies for adults, but for children, and little children think Jar-Jar is the best part of the Star Wars saga. So if indeed little kids were Lucas' target demographic, he hit the mark.

You could make the argument that these films were only targeted for children, but if that's the case, one could argue they targeted "The Dark Knight" towards children simply because they sold toys afterwards. The original Star Wars series was so grounded in philosophy and moral paradoxes that it's hard to claim they were ever designed JUST for kids, which is what most main-stream films strive for. Few movies in recent memory have pandered to just one generation or age group, and to say you're making a live-action science fiction movie rooted in Buddhist and Taoist philosophies (Jedi) and that this movie is ONLY for kids is quite hard to believe.

If he wanted to only make the films for kids, he should have made every prequel like that Clone Wars series on Cartoon Network; Animated, over-the-top, and generally silly. By doing so, he would have silenced the arguments that these stories were intended for adults. The kids would have their bright flashing colors and sounds, and the fan-boys could make fun of it and not take it seriously. Everyone would be happy.

Well, certainly there are issues that don't go away just because someone says the movies are for children. The original trilogy may have also been written for children, but it nonetheless had very broad appeal to people of all ages. Also, as others pointed out, if the movie is intended for children then what's the deal with the opening text crawl? Try to imagine Lucas thinking, "The taxation of trade routes…blockade…Trade Federation…Congress of the Republic endlessly debates…? This stuff is golden; kids will eat this up!"

Oh, I totally meant to come back and comment on this analysis and forgot! He makes a lot of good points, but I'm not sure that I agree with all of them.

1: Lack of a central protagonist. He's right about this as a simple fact, but at the same time, there are numerous excellent films out there that have an ensemble cast, even in the sci-fi genre, which he expresses to be most needing of such a character. Not every story has to have a central character the audience identifies with; some stories are just stories.

2: Stronger personality = stronger character. While the characters in The Phantom Menace definitely don't have the quirky personalities that the characters in A New Hope tended to have, I felt there were two flaws in his argument here. First, I personally felt that I could have passed his challenge and described many of the PM characters; it may be easier when it's a movie you like, perhaps? Secondly, and more important, the character that would be the easiest to describe would be Jar-Jar Binks, and I don't think he wants to imply that Jar-Jar is the best character in PM, right?

3. Complicated/nonsensical plot. Yeah, I'll give him this one, but I'd also note that if you really want to go around looking for plot holes to poke out, you can do the same with the original trilogy. (Yoda, Episode V: "You're not ready to face Vader!" Yoda, Episode VI: "Your training is complete, actually; all you needed was to face Vader." Huh?) I think Lucas isn't much for logic in general.

4. Too visually busy: Largely a matter of taste, but I agree. I was just saying to someone that the original trilogy's space battles were like ballet, while many battles in the prequels were confusing clusterfucks.

5. Anakin built C3PO? WTF? Yeah. As he said, you could come up with a long list of reasons why this is 180 degrees from making sense.

6. Over-choreographed lightsaber battles. In the particular case of Darth Maul's double-bladed lightsaber fight, not only was it unconvincing in its movements, but if you really think about it, a double-bladed lightsaber is an incredibly impractical weapon. In my opinion, it logistically would be more of a liability than an asset to have a second "blade" on the thing.

Obviously the reason these things have happened is because George has never heard of the phrase "If it ain't broke, don't fix it".

Sheesh, who's been krama-bombing so many threads lately?