Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith Posted September 22, 2004 Share Posted September 22, 2004 The one everyone loves to hate because of his success. Like Lucas, Gates has also said some rather stupid things in his days, such as the now infamous, 640k ought to be enough. No one said they hated him, just being picky on un-thought-through comments. And personally I couldn't give a dam if he's more successful than I or anyone else; I'm not going to sit around watching him. I'm too busy making my own films and trying to make myself succesfull than to go following others around. Like my previous signature said, "Followers will never lead". That?s why I don?t have a favourite director, I may like their films but I?ll never worship them in anyway. If I met Lucas, wow, that would be great, but it wouldn't mean I'd treat him like royalty. People always look up at others, I mean; I respect Lucas just as I do the man that walks by me on the street who I don?t even know. My friend actually met Spielberg at the BFI. He stood outside in the rain holding Spielberg?s umbrella.. Why the hell did he do it? (Cos he's a sucker) It's not as though he got into any of his films. So what makes him so important? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christian Appelt Posted September 22, 2004 Share Posted September 22, 2004 Just saw the original STAR WARS at the Santa Monica pier under the stars. So much fun to see this film with an audience. It really is timeless. How did you see it? If it was the so-called Special Edition, I wouldn't call that the original STAR WARS, and AFAIK Lucas forbids to show the original version in public. :angry: It was a great fun film until he started to retouch this nice 1970s genre movie (in terms of direction and casting of the leads, excluding the effects budget) to make it look like a slick high-end 1997 CGI-loaded blockbuster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith Posted September 22, 2004 Share Posted September 22, 2004 I kinda liked what he did actually. It was just the point where he had finished retouching the original movies and making the new ones that it went a bit, naff.. He just went CGI mad. Original Star Wars in definition of, Ep. 4 5 and 6. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanStewart Posted September 22, 2004 Share Posted September 22, 2004 It amazes me anyone is still interested in what GL says. He's got it in him to make good movies when he's desperate and hungry enough to do so (THX, AG, the first SW), but has since dedicated his life to getting as rich as possible - and that's it. He should be congratulated for achieving his goals but what the hell has it got to do with serious film-making? If anyone here gets in a position where they can completely produce a $100m movie without breaking a sweat or ever getting up before midday, and every idiot in the western world (myself included) will pay $20 irrespective of it's quality, then more power to you. He thinks he can say and do anything he likes without it coming back to him in any way, and well, he's right. I'm surprised to find such interest in him on this forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Sanders Posted September 22, 2004 Share Posted September 22, 2004 Ah, the good old fashioned Lucas bash. Every board needs one. Yawn. It's his money. They're his movies. As long as he's paying the bills, he can do whatever the f*ck he wants. Oh, and that Avid you guys edit your films on...thank Lucas for that (EditDroid). And those digital touch-ups and fixes you'll need to apply, you can thank him for that too. Let's not forget all those salaries he's ponied up for over the last fifiteen years, they produced Photoshop (Knoll), modern compositing applications like Shake, etc (Sabre). Pushing Panavision and Sony to collaborate on a 24p camera system, we can thank him for that too. And there's pushing the limits of cinema sound systems, THX theater alignment programs... I guess the guy's a hack. java script:emoticon(':rolleyes:') Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanStewart Posted September 23, 2004 Share Posted September 23, 2004 Welcome to the forum. ...I'm not arguing that point. SW created a massive revenue stream (at the expense of creating the blockbuster era) and that money was put back into movies and associated technologies, which is great. But I don't think Lucas single-handedly invented any of the stuff you mention, and since the question is the validity of his newfound solipsistic philosohopy you've made the same point. And yes, lately he is a hack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Hayes Posted September 23, 2004 Share Posted September 23, 2004 Dear Mr. Lucas I saw ?Star Wars, Episode One?. Do you think it deserved to make $920 million. Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Hayes Posted September 23, 2004 Share Posted September 23, 2004 Hey if people are entertained by a film and want to see it multiple times it deserves to make huge somes of cash. I think the real question is if you are going to spend $200 million on a film do you want to risk it by hiring a DP who will shot it on the cheap. Or do you hire the absolutely best cinematographer you can find for your project. There is a reason these top DP?s make high salaries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Brad Grimmett Posted September 23, 2004 Author Premium Member Share Posted September 23, 2004 "Pushing Panavision and Sony to collaborate on a 24p camera system, we can thank him for that too." Well, personally, I wish he didn't. The F900 has been a pain in the ass for me on more than one occasion. I guess I have someone to blame for that pain in the ass now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Allen Posted September 23, 2004 Share Posted September 23, 2004 So much to comment about! First I have to put a perspective on the quote that started all this. He said "It's okay to be paid the same as the president." That's 400,000 plus 50,000 in expenses. (Side note prior to GW Bush it was 200,000 hm.) Anyway - that's still a lot of money, don't you think? Do you honestly think you can't get a GREAT DP at 400,000? I really doubt anyone on this board is getting 400,000 to shoot a feature. Are there no great DP's here? At somepoint it's all name and relationships and he knows this. Good maybe someone will turn him down and some less established guy will get a shot. Wouldn't you like the shot to shoot star wars? come on! you know you would do it. Rodriguez believes he should shoot his movies himself as well. I think his DP abilities are simply awful.... (as well as his Visual Effects talents). Here is a guy whose ego is hurting his own projects. But, like Lucas, I guess he wants to put his own thumbprint on it. Now. I've read a few interview with Mr. Lucas and I should say that I think his choices for changing star wars episode 4 (having seen the movie the week it came out I HATE calling it episode 4)... were really lame. I think updating the space scenes so it doesn't seem distracting for today's audience is an idea that has some merit. I think clearly changing characters - having Han Solo shoot second is just poor judgment. If he invisioned that from the beginning, he should have written it that way. That said - he's right. They are his movies. I think what it shows us most is how movies really are made by a handful of people though - a collaboration. I have heard that his wife had a great deal of influence in the first few movies - and then they divorced. Interesting. It's just a good lesson. You need the people around you - not to guide you necessarily - but to give you perspective. you still get to be the author even if you don't do it all yourself. thems are me thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Levy Posted September 23, 2004 Share Posted September 23, 2004 Regardless of contribution, his megalomaniacal attitude and the general brutality of his manner disgusts me. Star Wars was quite the good film, and, of course, by Star Wars I mean to say Kurosawa's The Hidden Fortress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Greg Gross Posted September 23, 2004 Premium Member Share Posted September 23, 2004 Hear Ye!, Hear Ye!,Hear Ye! Lucas for presdident,vote Lucas! If you want a film look,shoot film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith Posted September 24, 2004 Share Posted September 24, 2004 I just read a magazine on the original Star Wars (Ep. 4) Apparently, everyone working on it (part from Lucas) saw it being a complete flop. Boy were they wrong.. heheh From what was going to be one of the biggest flops of of the decade, turned out to be one of the greatest films ever made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Landon D. Parks Posted September 24, 2004 Share Posted September 24, 2004 Good ol' Lucas... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith Posted September 24, 2004 Share Posted September 24, 2004 (edited) Good ol' Lucas... Not sure if he'd appreciate the " ol' " for old, part.. But we get the idea, heheh. Yeah, I doubt Lucas will ever see that comment though :-) Heheh, well, we wish that he even looked at the board! Edited September 24, 2004 by ashleysmithd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Landon D. Parks Posted September 24, 2004 Share Posted September 24, 2004 Yeah, I doubt Lucas will ever see that comment though :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos M. Icaza Posted September 24, 2004 Share Posted September 24, 2004 Forbes just came out with their list of riches persons. #60 George Lucas, net worth 3 billion. Source = Star Wars (*Forbes magazine). #74 Steven Allen Spielberg, net worth, 2.6 billion. Source = Movies Hey, maybe George isn't that bad after all ;-) http://www.glef.org/ C.- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith Posted September 24, 2004 Share Posted September 24, 2004 Despite all that I and everyone else has said (Ok I?ll give the "doughnut" remark a rest, as long as Landon quits calling him old, heheh.. joking) George is a fantastic director. One of the best. If he wasn't then how come he directed the most successful film ever made in history? But then again, you will always get someone out there who will disagree with what he does, or someone that thinks he/she can do it better. (Usually around the 60?s mark, the ones that think they know everything. i.e. the ones that think that I know nothing) Ok, we've gotta admit those comments he made were quite... amateurish? He just didn't think them through that?s all. Doesn't make him a bad director, just a crap speaker. Just wondering, how the hell did he get the funding for Ep. 4? No one seemed to like the idea.. Hmmm.. Another puzzle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Brad Grimmett Posted September 25, 2004 Author Premium Member Share Posted September 25, 2004 "George is a fantastic director. One of the best. If he wasn't then how come he directed the most successful film ever made in history?" Well, at least one person thinks he's a good director. I think you're probably in the minority with that opinion though. Just because a movie makes a lot of money doesn't mean it was well directed. I'm willing to bet that there are more bad films that make money than good films that make money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanStewart Posted September 25, 2004 Share Posted September 25, 2004 Brad - how dare you. That's like suggesting Britney isn't the finest musician alive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Landon D. Parks Posted September 25, 2004 Share Posted September 25, 2004 I agree with ashleysmithd... I think Lucas is a great Director. Not the best by ANY means. But still, hes pretty good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Brad Grimmett Posted September 26, 2004 Author Premium Member Share Posted September 26, 2004 Brad - how dare you. That's like suggesting Britney isn't the finest musician alive. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I certainly would never suggest such a thing! ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Daniel J. Ashley-Smith Posted September 26, 2004 Share Posted September 26, 2004 (edited) Hmm yeh he isn't exactly renowned for his directing skills. Great idealist though. One of the key skills in directing is having the imagination to, imagine the scene and how you want it to look. Apparently George was a bit shy though, so I think that was a downfall. He probably didn't feel very comfortable explaining his ideas. To be honest a lot of how the movie turned out was probably down to the cinematographer as opposed to George the director. I've seen it happen before; last year when shooting a film the director didn't really have a clue. Luckily the cinematographer (David Beaumont) was quite experienced; he basically made the film by himself. ------------------------ QUOTE(DanStewart @ Sep 24 2004, 10:40 PM) Brad - how dare you. That's like suggesting Britney isn't the finest musician alive. I certainly would never suggest such a thing! ------------------------------------------ Haha... I'd watch what you say about Britney, her mother ran over a load of journalists.. Now just imagine what she?ll do to us lot :o EDIT_ One of the greatest directors has GOT to be Spielberg. I love every film I have seen of his. As a matter of fact, I'm about to see "The Terminal" in about 2 hours. (Crap, book the dam tickets!!) You can't really define "The Best" director. Since as different directors make different films, not better, just different. Like in music, there isn't a BEST guitarist since as everyone is better at different styles. Many people brag Clapton, he may be the most versatile guitarist but can he rock like Matt Bellamy? (Matt Bellamy - MUSE - Fav Band) Edited September 26, 2004 by ashleysmithd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fulgencio Martinez Posted September 26, 2004 Share Posted September 26, 2004 Hi, I really think george Lucas is no longer a director. maybe he wasted his talent thinking about selling jedi toys. THX is a great sci-fi movie as it questions the rules of society and the position of the individual in it. That is high class sci-fi as it has a great human value. Most serious sci-fi works in that way...Orwell, Asimov Now if you look at the first star wars what do you get..... i just get wored. Ok, when i was a kid i liked watching "The A team" now i´ve grown i can clearly see it isn´t art. About those how base his talent upon his sucess. Then vangoht is the worst painter ever as he didn´t get to sell a single painting. "You say coke, I say cola man Geoge was never my friend and i don´t like starwars." (bycicle race by Queen) Am i the only one who hates princess Leia? Why do they fall in love with her? It seems in this future we won´t have many pretty girls around Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Landon D. Parks Posted September 26, 2004 Share Posted September 26, 2004 princess Leia Who is this again? Its been a while since I watched Staw Wars :unsure: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now