StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Ok, this is completely wishful thinking on my part and I know it will never happen, but I would love it if Disney were to have the balls to redo the prequels and release special edition versions of them. And I don't mean add a bunch of gunk onscreen the way Lucas did to the original trilogy. I mean write new screenplays, get the actors back to reshoot scenes (Except for anyone who gets replaced, like Hayden Christiansen. My dream would be for his scenes to be reshot with a better actor), and have them replace the crappy parts of those movies while keeping the good. The Phantom Menace they'd probably have to recreate from scratch, but they can keep roughly half of Attack of the Clones, and even more of Revenge of the Sith.

For example, The Phantom Menace. Eliminate the character of Qui-Gon Jinn entirely and make Obi-Wan Kenobi the protagonist. Eliminate the Gungan's. Come up with a more sensible plot than the whole Trade Federation and space taxes thing. Hell, replace the Trade Federation as the villains entirely, and give Darth Maul a much larger and expanded role. Have him be the obvious villain of the film, rather than a lackey with two lines and zero motivation. And while you're at it, make Anakin older and give him a much more substantial role as Obi-Wan's sidekick. Then release that film to the theatres and rake in a couple hundred million dollars.

Like I said, it's complete wishful thinking, but boy would it be awesome to see a proper version of Episodes I-III. And to quote Lucas, "it's like poetry in that it rhymes". Where he took great movies and worsened them through the special editions, Disney could take terrible movies and improve them with their own special editions. God knows that Ewan Macgregor, Natalie Portman, Samuel L. Jackson, and company deserve to be in better Star Wars movies than the ones they found themselves in. I'd be thrilled to see them get a crack at improving their trilogy.

That moves beyond wishful thinking into retarded.

You'd be better served using Disney's resources to try and make a time machine.

Wishful thinking is wishful thinking, I.E. not realistic, nor did I ever claim that it'd ever happen. Is there anyone here who doesn't seriously wish that we couldn't get a better version of the prequel trilogy, though? Ah, if only...

Fox retained the distribution rights to episode 1 to 6 till 2020. Highly unlikely for Disney to redo the prequels.

Optimus Metallus wrote:Ok, this is completely wishful thinking on my part and I know it will never happen, but I would love it if Disney were to have the balls to redo the prequels and release special edition versions of them.

The word you're looking for is "reboot".

Preach it, brother Metallus; Amen!

But seriously, Star Wars needs to get back to the more science-fiction aspects and step away from the fantasy superhero/wizard Jedi. It makes everyone else --every "mere mortal"-- pretty much superfluous, and what I've read of the Jedi in some EU novels, the "normal" folks, non-Force adepts, seem to be nerfed a bit in order to make the Jedi seem that much better. It's not like they're total nebbishes, but they just seem... slightly clueless compared to the Jedi. I can't really put a finger on it or describe it exactly.

Galactic-scale wars and fleet clashes (and the goddamn "superweapon-of-the-month club") are crutches for weak writers. Political and social brinksmanship and the occasional clandestine raid or small-scale brushfire war gives a lot more opportunity for clever writing. It also gives the New Republic a real role and a chance to stand for something, instead of just being a logistics supplier for more fleets and Jedi to go forth and do glory.

I don't see the problem with Disney taking the helm, aside from Disney themselves being evil, of course. If we look at the most recent things to which George directly contributed, then what do we have? The Force Unleashed was absolute shit in terms of fidelity to the franchise, and although I certainly enjoyed parts of the prequels, nothing in them was anything near as good as when Lucas left Empire Strikes Back in the capable hands of Kerschner, Kasdan and Brackett.

Optimus Metallus wrote: "Star Wars by committee" is how we got A New Hope, The Empire Strikes Back, and Return of the Jedi. Star Wars where Lucas has absolute control over everything is how we got The Phantom Menace, Attack of the Clones, and Revenge of the Sith. Given that, I'd gladly take Star Wars by committee any day of the week.

Every character and story idea came from Lucas in the OT. The studio had no say in it.

George Lucas certainly has his talents, I'm not denying that. The tone, the imagery, the special effects, the broad story arcs, those are his strengths, and any new films should play to those strengths. But when it comes to the screenplay, the dialogue, the directing? He's absolutely terrible at that, and it shows. It's no coincidence that the best film of the franchise, The Empire Strikes Back, was neither directed by him nor was it filmed from a screenplay penned by him.

That's funny, because the only Star Wars movie to ever be nominated for Oscars for writing or directing was A New Hope. But then, what do his peers know?

So I guess you're not aware that Lucas considers The Empire Strikes Back to be the worst movie in the franchise?

No, but I am aware of how the Teabaggers of cinema took an obvious joke and ran with it -demonstrating their own stupidity.

Lucas has his strengths, but we wouldn't have gotten the original Star Wars film franchise which we got if it weren't for all the various people who put their hand in the till. Star Wars wouldn't have been as great if it weren't for the superb editing job done by his wife, which saved what would've been an otherwise terrible movie from all reports. The Empire Strikes Back wouldn't have been a great movie if it weren't for the efforts of screenwriters Leigh Brackett and Lawrence Kasdan, director Irvin Kershner, as well as the input of Harrison Ford and other actors. Return of the Jedi was co-written by Lawrence Kasdan and directed by Richard Marquand. That's quite a lot of people, what one could consider a "committee", and yet they produced a superior product to the new trilogy, in which Lucas had total control.

None of the people you mentioned had any say in the characters or story with the possible exception of Harrison Ford, whose reluctance to do a third movie led to Han being frozen (and Howard Kazanjian coaxing Ford to do ROTJ got Han unfrozen).

As for the idea that "No studio would have ever agreed to shoot TESB with the good guys being thrashed on every level. That was Lucas' decision", did you see The Dark Knight? Because a studio signed off on a film where the love of Batman's life is killed, he's accused of murder, and ends up on the run. More on point, did you see Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest, in which they killed off Jack Sparrow?

So 25-30 years later someone else does it? Am I supposed to be impressed or something?

The point, which went way over your head, is that suits might now have a say in the story and characters and that usually doesn't work out very well.

We've seen how destructive his having total control can have over the Star Wars franchise, so his no longer having that power can only be beneficial to Star Wars.

In what way was Lucas' total control "destructive"? Making six of the most successful films of all time? Creating an IP that someone was willing to pay over $4 billion for? What a blight the old man has been!

This whole thing is actually probably good news on the whole, since the SW EU turned into such a clusterfuck years ago that it has not been interesting (to me at least) on any level for a long time. Especially the "suddenly everyone's a Jedi" bullshit that came out and don't fucking get me started on the Yuuzhan Vong. And then the goddamn Clone Trooper wankery with Traviss.

It's such a festering sore that if it all gets discarded, it's not going to be such a great loss. The only ones I have good memories of are the Thrawn books by Zahn (largely because the Heir to the Empire trilogy was the first EU stuff to come out and was well written despite its flaws), both the trilogy and the duology. And the X-Wing books, especially Wraith Squadron.

All the rest was at best forgettable. If there's been anything decent since then, it has gotten lost in the shuffle. No point in keeping up interest when you get maybe one in twenty worth anything.

Disney can't really do any worse than the EU already is.

Objectively, Lucas is phenomenally successful. Anyone that tries to argue that is a complete moron.
Subjectively, he is still phenomenally successful and you still can't argue it.
Artistically, is the point of contention, but no one, no matter how hard they try can say he still wasn't successful, because anyone even bothering to argue the point at least loves Star Wars: ANH, which was all Lucas, and probably more than a few other of his creations.

Did he fall off? Maybe. Was he hit or miss? Yes.
My issue with it is that people act like because he made XYZ movie they didn't like or thought was awful, that it somehow negates that he made something the loved.

It's like people bitching that Metallica sucks now. No, they are still great, they just are making music you don't like now. You can't just keep remaking Master of Puppets or else you end up like AC/DC.

I think it's the childish conflation of 'rich' with 'good' that's sailing past here. Yes, your dad is rich. This is why someone bought his bankable brand, after all! We should all remember this logic for the next time people lambast amazingly popular or financially successful things they don't like as 'puerile rubbish'. All that kpop is actually amazing and the creators are brilliant musicians, and not just good managers of a product.

But seriously, you need to take a step back. 'Anyone even bothering to argue the point at least loves ANH' is just stunning as a statement. Maybe they're arguing because they either don't know or care about Lucas, or because they don't like the way quality plotted over time? Maybe they're not owned, body and soul, by a fucking brand? Elfdart I can understand because Lucas is clearly his dad, but I expect better from you.

I think people in general need to step back when talking about Star Wars and Lucas, because this topic always tends to turn into people loudly shouting about their subjective opinions and unsubstantiated "facts."

Does box office equal quality? No. Is "quality" subjective? Hell yes.

I'm sure there are tons of brand slaves out there, who need their damn fix and come crawling back anytime the SW brand is waved in their face. I'm sure their are OT fans who were really disappointed by the prequels. That's fine, I'm friends with some people like even if I really, really disagree with them. There's also lots of genuine prequel fans out there, as evidenced by not just box office, but professional polling that's been done (Gallup and CinemaScore). To THOSE people, the prequels are "quality." Are they wrong? No more than any fanboy of the OT.

One thing that I think needs to stop is the hearsay and gossip about behind-the-scenes stuff that no fan was ever privy to. For example, it was just said in this thread that Lucas's ex-wife saved ANH with her editing, when George's cut was terrible. Who actually said that, or saw the previous cut? And it's not like Lucas's wife was dropped, and her position (or one similar to it) went completely unfilled afterwards. I could've sworn that tons of other people were named in the credits of the newer movies, including an editor. I seem to remember seeing actual video of one such editor sitting in a rough cut screening in some DVD extra. It seems pretty far fetched to me that Lucas made all of the newer movies COMPLETELY by himself.

Are people calling these almost faceless but credited names unprofessional or sycophantic, completely sight unseen? I'd settle for accusations of untalented, since that at least doesn't reach beyond the product that can be seen onscreen.

And who is Lucas's wife to anybody, exactly? Do they know anything more about her than any other name in the credits? I don't know, it seems to me like people are engaging in speculation, reaching to create new heroes with which to award the OT to. Lucas's past accomplishments are thus taken away from him, while his more recent perceived mistakes are attributed completely to him.

Elfdart wrote:That's funny, because the only Star Wars movie to ever be nominated for Oscars for writing or directing was A New Hope. But then, what do his peers know?

Yeah-- nominated. But remember what won the actual Oscar for Best Picture that year? Annie Hall, my friend: a Woody Allen mope.

Star Wars was up for pretty much every Oscar except possibly "Best Western" and even that might have been swingable. But in the end, the jury of his peers decided to give Star Wars a brand-new special-made Oscar for... special effects. And thus was the argument born that Star Wars was notable only because it had cool pew-pew lasers and stood apart from the cheap-o sets and effects of previous science fiction films. Not a good hill to stake a flag on and defend.

Now here's hoping Brad Bird directs a Star Wars films. I've been saying for years that if the Phantom Menace was ever remade he'd be perfect for it.

Grumman wrote:

Optimus Metallus wrote:Ok, this is completely wishful thinking on my part and I know it will never happen, but I would love it if Disney were to have the balls to redo the prequels and release special edition versions of them.

The word you're looking for is "reboot".

As miniscule a chance of that ever occuring, a reboot is certainly a far sight more likely than my own personal hope. I guess you could say what I'd like is a soft reboot in that I want to retain the original cast for the most part. Keep MacGregor, Jackson, Portman, etc. The only one who really needs to be replaced are Lloyd and Christiansen, while Neeson would probably be better off cut entirely (Not because he's not awesome, but Qui-Gon was kind of like a middleman character when it should've been all about Obi-Wan from the start). I don't know. Episodes I-III were a pretty big wasted opportunity and there's a part of me that'd like to think that there's a chance that that could be fixed.

Stark wrote:I think it's the childish conflation of 'rich' with 'good' that's sailing past here. Yes, your dad is rich. This is why someone bought his bankable brand, after all! We should all remember this logic for the next time people lambast amazingly popular or financially successful things they don't like as 'puerile rubbish'. All that kpop is actually amazing and the creators are brilliant musicians, and not just good managers of a product.

But seriously, you need to take a step back. 'Anyone even bothering to argue the point at least loves ANH' is just stunning as a statement. Maybe they're arguing because they either don't know or care about Lucas, or because they don't like the way quality plotted over time? Maybe they're not owned, body and soul, by a fucking brand? Elfdart I can understand because Lucas is clearly his dad, but I expect better from you.

Did I say good? I said successful.
And it isn't a stunning statement, because I am talking about people that are bothering to argue about it. The % of people that will get involved in this debate that don't connect Lucas to Star Wars is next to nil. Maybe you really don't understand the pop culture status of Star Wars over here, but George Lucas and Star Wars are practically synonymous.
And the people that don't care if GL is involved, aren't going to argue one way or the other.

George Lucas is donating $4 billion to charity. In other words, since he owns 100% of the company and has no debt, all that money goes towards philanthropy.

Uh Hav, I don't care if Lucas is involved. I'm arguing with you about your ideas. You are thus obviously wrong. There's very little chance I'll even see the Disney movies, because Star Wars is just not something I pay money for.

However, broad sweeping generalisations that are almost certainly wrong are worth refuting regardless. I mean, this IS an idea that's pretty stupid on its face (yeah, Disney will totally do this thing for no reason), but the views it has brought out are extremely interesting to me. Just how do people view the brand that shapes their worldview to such a degree? As a free person, it's amazing to talk about.

Exactly. You aren't arguing whether or not it is good or bad that Lucas is involved. You don't care either way and you aren't arguing one way or the other. You are just arguing about people's viewpoints on the matter, not the matter itself.

Dalton wrote:George Lucas is donating $4 billion to charity. In other words, since he owns 100% of the company and has no debt, all that money goes towards philanthropy.

Wow. So much for him needing the money.

I WANT Lucas to stick around, but I want his ideas to go through a stringent filtration process.

Galvatron wrote:I WANT Lucas to stick around, but I want his ideas to go through a stringent filtration process.

That seems to be the general set up.

Jim Raynor wrote:For example, it was just said in this thread that Lucas's ex-wife saved ANH with her editing, when George's cut was terrible. Who actually said that, or saw the previous cut? And it's not like Lucas's wife was dropped, and her position (or one similar to it) went completely unfilled afterwards. I could've sworn that tons of other people were named in the credits of the newer movies, including an editor. I seem to remember seeing actual video of one such editor sitting in a rough cut screening in some DVD extra. It seems pretty far fetched to me that Lucas made all of the newer movies COMPLETELY by himself.

Are people calling these almost faceless but credited names unprofessional or sycophantic, completely sight unseen? I'd settle for accusations of untalented, since that at least doesn't reach beyond the product that can be seen onscreen.

And who is Lucas's wife to anybody, exactly? Do they know anything more about her than any other name in the credits? I don't know, it seems to me like people are engaging in speculation, reaching to create new heroes with which to award the OT to. Lucas's past accomplishments are thus taken away from him, while his more recent perceived mistakes are attributed completely to him.

Just to touch on this, but Marcia Lucas was nominated for an AA for American Graffiti and was the lead editor on Taxi Driver. She actually won the AA for editing on Star Wars.
There is a book that talks about her and GL's relationship and how she balanced out his work and made it better. I mean, it may just be a coincidence that she edited what is considered his best work and that his producer at the time was able to tell him "no" and once those two were gone he made what most people consider to be substandard movies, but I think there was a fairly large influence there and that his creative vision suffered without them.

And IIRC, it was Spielberg that told GL that his edit of Star Wars sucked.

George Lucas, as others have said, is a great idea man. His big problem is execution. With him being a consultant and helping them with stories while everyone else tells him, 'No, that won't work', or 'No, we can't do that', will probably ensure some good things.

Also, about the charity thing. Nice bit of class there on George Lucas's part.