George Lucas= no talent hack

[gl2899]

Okay Im not one to complain, bitch and moan like a little lost fanboy but ive had it up to here (indicating top of head) with George Lucas. First we got the God awful kid friendly horrorific crapfest that was The Phantom Menace with so many problems that I dont dare mention them all here. And now we have N Sync in Episode II, granted, for less than a second and they get killed but it still gives the beloved Saga a pop taint that just wont die in my head. Why pander to a generation that regards Pokemon and Britney Spears as the end all be all of Entertainment? Yes I know I am bitter and resent the new generation (they like garbage) but Im not the only aging Gen Xer that feels this way. and lets list Lucas' other "hit" movies, Howard the duck (one of the biggest all time flops),Willow (one badly written midget fest, and even Return of the Jedi was like an albatross hanging around Lucas' fat neck. Im sorry....I think Ill save my money for Peter Jacksons next Masterpiece the two towers.

[jackson13]

I think, I THINK, were are kinda already talking about how shitty G.L. has become. See the topic about N'Sync being in SW Ep. 2. It's like the hottest topic in this forum right now. You can't miss it.

[jackson13]

It's called "what the fuck is this (about SW Episode 2)?"

[herculeez]

Ok...being annoyed with George Lucas for his previous movie and news of his upcoming movie is ok, but calling him a no talent hack...oopsy!
Kinda going over the top there mate!
What he has done in his lifetime, i'd be shocked if you could achieve 5% of that type of credibilty in YOUR lifetime.
This man is amazing, i really like all of his movies except for Episode 1, and i am slightly sceptical about Episode 2, but you cannot call this guy a "no talent hack", he has more talent than you ever will, he is superb with his knowledge for making movies, and as voted by most of the public didn't he make the greatest movie of all time? (Star wars, in case you didn't figure) http://www.joblo.com/ubb/smile.gif

Think about your nae calling next time.

[ColinM]

I think George Lucas is one of the greatest filmmakers of all time (notice I didn't say DIRECTOR, I said FILMMAKER). Maybe he has been slipping a little lately, but let's not forget that he is the man who gave us the greatest movie trilogy/series of all time (sorry, but LOTR is not nearly as good as Star Wars). I even enjoyed The Phantom Menace (9/10), even though it's not nearly as good as the first three.

I don't think putting N'Sync members in Episode II (for a split-second) is "pandering to a Britney Spears generation" at all. He did it because his daughter is a fan of them, and as long as he doesn't give them lines or make them featured stars, I don't see what the huge deal is. From what I've heard, we're barely going to even notice that they are there. I don't like them being in the movie very much either, to tell you the truth, but if they're just going to be extras, it's not THAT bad. It certainly doesn't make Lucas a no-talent hack.

Watch the original Star Wars trilogy, and then honestly tell me you think he has no talent. The man is a genius.

[Danreiter]

That fact that he would put NSYNC in his new movie makes me dislike him even more and only because of his daughter... What the hell would his daughter know about his movies? She's probably some bitchy spoiled little priss with 2 and a half million teeny-bopper magazine cut outs all over her gold-plated wall and the fact that Geaorge Lucas would put five of the most hated boys in america in his big budget movie because his daughter is a fan shows how weak of a film maker he really is... Think about it? What would his movies be if they weren't hidden behind his billion dollar special effects? They'd be nothing, probably only B-movies because there isn't true filmmaking and cinematic value behind anything he does...
Why someone like this has gotten so much notoriety as a filmmaker over a true visual genius like Brian De Palma is beyond me.

[dicaprio_travolta_man]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by ColinM:
I think George Lucas is one of the greatest filmmakers of all time (notice I didn't say DIRECTOR, I said FILMMAKER). Maybe he has been slipping a little lately, but let's not forget that he is the man who gave us the greatest movie trilogy/series of all time (sorry, but LOTR is not nearly as good as Star Wars). I even enjoyed The Phantom Menace (9/10), even though it's not nearly as good as the first three.

I don't think putting N'Sync members in Episode II (for a split-second) is "pandering to a Britney Spears generation" at all. He did it because his daughter is a fan of them, and as long as he doesn't give them lines or make them featured stars, I don't see what the huge deal is. From what I've heard, we're barely going to even notice that they are there. I don't like them being in the movie very much either, to tell you the truth, but if they're just going to be extras, it's not THAT bad. It certainly doesn't make Lucas a no-talent hack.

Watch the original Star Wars trilogy, and then honestly tell me you think he has no talent. The man is a genius.</font>

A FUCKIN MEN!!!!!!!!!!!!! VERY VERY VERY well written. ColinM you just became my favorite Schmoe http://www.joblo.com/ubb/biggrin.gif...... Everything you said is fuckin true, who cares if NSYNC is in Ep.2?? Shit, their only onscreen for a few seconds, hardly enough to ruin a two hour movie. If they were in there for an hour and a half or Lucas casted Justin Timberlake as Annakin then we'd have something to complain about. But at this moment complaining is pointless. Ep.1 was a fuckin MASTERPEICE! And Lucas is in no way a no talent hack... That's just rude, what if someone called you a no talent hack, how would you feel??????

gl2899, I am a huge and very devoted fan of Lucas's, everything he does is plain genius. And if you were EVER a huge fan of his you would stick behind him through thick and thin, come hell or high water you'd be there for him, and respect his every desision, like I do.... I mean if someone were ever a big fan of someone else you don't just turn your back on them, I find it to be selfish. Just My 2 Cents....

Danreiter, have you ever heard of NSYNC??? Just a question because you called them the 5 most hated guys in the world. That makes me laugh, I mean they own the record for most albums sold in one week, every single one their CDs has sold over a million copies, Their considerd The Beatles of the 21st century (for some odd reason), they are loved by millions and millions of people around the world (not just girls), and their on the cover of every teenybop magizine in America and the U.K.. How does that make them most hated?? I think their 5 of the most beloved people in the world, unfortunetly...



[This message has been edited by dicaprio_travolta_man (edited 01-05-2002).]

[nb]

I think people are just upset that Lucas would put the wishes of his daughter (his own flesh and blood) over the ones of his fans.

It's understandable on one hand, but prooves on the other hand that he apparently takes his job a lot more lightly than he did before (I guess age and a lot of money can do that to a person. I think the big difference between him and PJ is that PJ still has to proove himself to the big public. GL can just go and say "Fuck you all, I've already done my job".).

About the cultural thing. Well if people like me can enjoy "so bad it's genuis again" or "mindless fun" (Independence Day comes to my mind) movies, then I guess it's fine that there are people out there that enjoy NSync, Spears and the like. [doesn't mean that I'm too keen on seeing them in SW]

[Muha]

i think its pretty stupid what GL is doing with the whole NSync thing... I didnt like TPM that much, Darth Maul was awesome tho.

i still think the Star Wars trilogy is the greatest of all time, but LOTR is getting closer in my book... its a better story and im getting sorta tired of digital effects and stuff.

you cant say LOTR isnt as good as the Star wars trilogy b/c LOTR isnt completely finished... you gotta see the second and third ones before you make a statement like that i think...

i think LOTR runs circles around the Phantom Menace, but i dunno if it can beat The Empire Strikes Back... that was a pure classic film...


GL is not a hack... He created Indiana Jones... that was awesome shit

he created Willow... a LOTR copy yes, but quite awesome stuff too... val kilmer kicked ass

oh one more thing... dont ever compare nsync to the beatles... i dont want to have to get into a musical debate with you here, but Nsync are 5 corporate created singers with good looks and shitty ass talent... i think they are horrible singers; they only let Justin Timberlake sing lead vocal; they dont write their own songs and when they do its complete shit...

the beatles are the greatest rock and roll band of all time and they did many different things than n sync has done.

paul mccartney has more talent in his first knuckle of his pinky finger than all those boy bands have combined.

[bskutle]

My problems with George Lucas- definitely NOT a hack- are as such:

1. He can't write dialogue for shit. It's not as noticeable in "A New Hope" or "Jedi" as it was in "Phantom Menace" due to the difference in the visual sophistication, but he's rarely written very good dialogue.

2. He can't direct actors WELL. Some feeling comes through, but not a lot.

3. His biggest problem in "Phantom Menace"- made more obvious after "Fellowship of the Ring"- is that he's let the visual effects take over for focusing on the heart of the story, which are the characters. He needs to go back to the more personal storytelling that emerged from the modest budget he had for "A New Hope." Will he? It's doubtful.

Still, I enjoy "The Phantom Menace" very much, and I'll take Lucas over a Michael Bay any day.

[bskutle]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Muha:
oh one more thing... dont ever compare nsync to the beatles... i dont want to have to get into a musical debate with you here, but Nsync are 5 corporate created singers with good looks and shitty ass talent... i think they are horrible singers; they only let Justin Timberlake sing lead vocal; they dont write their own songs and when they do its complete shit...

the beatles are the greatest rock and roll band of all time and they did many different things than n sync has done.

paul mccartney has more talent in his first knuckle of his pinky finger than all those boy bands have combined.</font>

Amen to that (although my pick for great R&R band is Bruce Springsteen and the E-Street Band). Personally, record sales mean jack in the long run if the music is not that great, and N'Sync's isn't that great. A fad and guilty pleasure at best. It's unfortunate that money matters engulfed both the music and movie industries, placing quality a distant second in many cases. As far as popularity, I can see the comparison. But check back with me in 30 years and we'll see whether N'Suck holds up as well as the Fab Four. My guess is...no.

[Danreiter]

Thanks MUHA, for making it clear that NSYNC should never be considered great artists. AND YES THEY ARE FIVE OF THE MOST HATED MEN IN AMERICA!!!!!!! They may sell millions of albums but the only people that buy them are ten year old girls and once those girls grow up they are going to realize what REAL music is and probably not listen to N*SUCK anymore. Most people I know, not only dislike NSYNC's music but they also hate them as human beings for being given the opportunity that so many other talented people deserve. So as a matter of fact, NSYNC might be loved by millions, but I can also say that they are hated by hundreds of millions. I seriously do not know anyone who has passed grade school that doesn't HATE NSYNC.

P.S. Their last album has barely sold half the copies of their previous album... People aren't as interested as they were a few years ago.

[dicaprio_travolta_man]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Muha:

dont ever compare nsync to the beatles... .</font>

You totally totally totally took what I wrote the wrong way!! I was in no way comparing NSYNC to The Beatles, I was useing an example of what I have heard from music critics, fans, media, and regular people. They all have said that NSYNC are The Beatles of the 21st century, I haven't said that, they have, so talk to them about it, don't talk to me about it... Anyway, did you notice the little statement I put after I mentioned that? I said this "For some odd reason" so that basically means that I myself thought that was bullshit.

One more thing, I don't think The Beatles are all that great I mean they had like 4 good songs only. They are not the best rock band ever.. I happen to like a FEW Nsync songs, there pretty cool, with a good beat, and they get me laid everytime I listen to one of their songs http://www.joblo.com/ubb/biggrin.gif. Back to discussion though, I don't think LOTR will ever live up to Star Wars, I know I haven't seen the whole thing yet, but it's almost impossible (IMO) for it to be better then Star Wars. Because, Star Wars was perfect in every way possible, I actaully thought that even though the first LOTR was good in wasn't near as good as the first Star Wars, therefore meaning that it won't be the best trilogy ever, I think that if a films first part was perfect the trilogy will be perfect, but if the films first part was alittle short of perfect then the whole trilogy will be alittle short of perfect... Look at it this way Star Wars is still going strong after over 20 years of the trilogy, still making new movies. I don't see LOTR being near as popular as Star Wars is after 20 years. George Lucas is still making loads of money off Star Wars, I mean Episode One grossed over $400 million. That's pretty damn good. I don't see LOTR making that kind of money now or ever...

P.S. I own all three of their albums, and I assure you I'm not a 10 yr. old girl. Don't get me wrong I mean I live with my girlfriend (who is 19) and she is a HUGE Nsync fan (Don't Ask) so I have own their albums otherwise I don't get laid, she's not happy, and I'm sleeping on the couch http://www.joblo.com/ubb/biggrin.gif. That don't make me happy, so to keep her happy I had to buy all three albums, seriously though i'm not a fan of theirs, I just listen to them so I can get laid every now and then....

[This message has been edited by dicaprio_travolta_man (edited 01-05-2002).]

[My Neurosis]

ban all music here...

Has anyone noticed that George Lucas didn't have much to do with Empire Strikes Back? Everyone talks about how great it is, but it was directed by Irvin Kerschner...and written by two people. George Lucas was executive producer, and credited for the story...not the screenplay, the original Star Wars story...George Lucas returned to writing duties in Return of the Jedi. (very little pun intended) People consider that one the worst of the trilogy...so maybe he was beginning to suck back then...and now he's accumulated all of his suckness to release it on the masses. I smell blood.

I personally think that the new Star Wars looks like crap, N'Sync can't really affect it's awful dialogue and acting...and ILM has been doing shoddy effects work in movies lately. Did anyone see The Mummy Returns?

Hayden Christensen seems like a poor man's Ryan Phillipe. Maybe that's what the title's hinting at? Attack of the Cloned Ryan Phillipe?

Alright kids, break it up...to set things straight...

Danreiter, Brian Depalma rips off Alfred Hitchcock many, many, many, many times.

Dicaprio Guy...LOTR has a story already written. Star Wars does not. Star Wars can come up with any crappy excuse to make a new film. (even though when George Lucas was making Return of the Jedi, he stated that he was only making it because he felt like he had to and that he wasn't going to make anymore Star Wars films ever)

[This message has been edited by My Neurosis (edited 01-05-2002).]

[CRM114]

Thank fuck, there is finally someone talking sense. (at least a little bit)

George Lucas is a talentless waster, and should be seen for the charlatan that he is. Yes I know everyone is going to whine about Star Wars, but apart from that he really doesn't have anything to shout about.

He started his career by free riding on Francis Ford Coppolas' talent, and then, got a lucky break with Star Wars.

I think he is a lucky bastard to be where he is today, and some people in the business have far more talent and don't get as far.

As to the N'Sync crap, I guess some of you out there that are whining about them being in it will be the same group that would shite their pants if ET wasn't in there somewhere also.
If he isn't a pop culture icon then I don't know who is.

[dicaprio_travolta_man]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by My Neurosis:

I personally think that the new Star Wars looks like crap, N'Sync can't really affect it's awful dialogue and acting...and ILM has been doing shoddy effects work in movies lately. Did anyone see The Mummy Returns?</font>

RE: I ask this, have you seen Pearl Harbor? ILM did those effects, and those are considerd some of the best of 2001. Even the people that hated the movie agree that it had some of the best Special Effects of 2001.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted My Neurosis:

Hayden Christensen seems like a poor man's Ryan Phillipe. Maybe that's what the title's hinting at? Attack of the Cloned Ryan Phillipe?</font>

RE: Have you seen Life As A House? His performance there is utterly amazing. He is in no way a clone of Ryan Phillipe, and actually he is a better actor then Phillipe is. And he will be a great Annakin, I know he will..

[Dumb-Fokker-**]

Yeah, because we all know how great his line, "Sorry me` Lady." was. And we all know how everyone KNEW that Episode 1 was going to be the greatest thing since sliced bread. And now everyone knows that this new SW is going to be miles above the shitfest that was The Phantom Menace. ....well, it isnt looking like it. Screw Jar-Jar, and N*SYNC (even though they will make the movie even worse) all I want to concentrate on now is the dialouge. Its shit. Absoulte shit. I mean, just watch the trailer - the writing itself, the delivery of the line,.....its shit. But it always has been. The original trilogy had bad dialouge, for the most part. And the originall trilogy is leagues, and miles above Episode 1 (and more than likely, Episode 2). Anyways, to what DCT said. Star Wars is perfect`eh?? Sorry, but no film is perfect. Especially the SW trilogy. Sure, they were fun, and they were a part of alot of peoples childhoods,...but they were not anything close to perfect. And another thing you said that bothered me was that Lord of the Rings will not be looked at the same way as SW is today, in 20 years. I think your wrong there too. Compare the first Lord of the Rings film to the first SW and Episode 1, and cast aside all feelings you have for both, and judge the film on its merits. The acting. The editing. The cinematography. The special-effects (and not the special-effects themselves, but how they are integrated into the story). The music. The characters. The dialouge. ....everyhing in Lord of the Rings is on par (music) or better (everything else) than the original SW and Episode 1. And SW is a trilogy, not one story as LotRs is. So comparing them, really isnt that fair. But for the sake of the argument I posted everything above. Dont get me wrong though, I like SW; but I cant honestly say that, just because I hav like SW much longer, that it was a better film. It may be more special to me right now, but after a couple years, hen the story is complete, and I have the DVD`s, and my collection of Action Figures is complete - im sure I will look back on them both the same way - as great, fun movies, that I liked and still like alot. ...but LotR is still better. (Jus thought I would throw that in)

[The Rob]

He USED to be good........ I think the LSD finally cought up with him.

[ak]

George Lucas - Genius storyteller.

George Lucas - Good producer.

George Lucas - Bad scriptwriter.

George Lucas - Under-par director.

George Lucas - Genius visionary.

George Lucas - Very wealthy.

George Lucas - Wealthy why?

George Lucas - Because people like his films very much, and they have entered the public psych like no other film can possibly do.


I didn't like The Phantom Menace, The Empire Strikes Back is my favourite film of all time (I don't think any film will knock it).

George Lucas is one of the greatest things to ever happen to film. Like that or not, it is the honest truth. And if you don't know why, I suggest you go and read up about popular film culture and film ideology and film history, and film art, and the list goes on.

[Danreiter]

MY NEUROSIS, Name one movie where Brian De Palma actually takes an exact storyline from a Hitchcock movie and uses it for his films??? Name one and I bet that once you finally find one example, you will realize how very little you know about Hitchcock or De Palma, or films for that matter.

[CRM114]

Danreiter- I think that what he was trying to say was that Brian dePalma does take a lot of his 'trademark' shots straight from Hitchcock. Even the way that he cuts within a scene is so Hitchcockian that its untrue. I personally know a lot about both and the similarities are not by coincidence, nor are they simply copying.
Brain dePalma is a great director, but he has based much of his style in Hitchcocks work.

Personally I don't think that there is much wrong with that so long as he doesn't try to pass them off as his own ideas. Yet he does. sad really because he has a lot of talent.

[Muha]

didnt Brian DePalma direct the Untouchables?


thats a classic film and one of the ten greatest movies of the 1980s IMO.

[jackson13]

So basically, Lucas had nothing to do with Empire? Except for producing it? Did not know that. No wonder thats the only one I can actually say I liked. Lucas, word of wise, stay out of the rest of the SW Episodes, let someone else write em. Just stick your fancy little "Lucasfilm LTD." shit on there and make it look like you had something to do with it. At least your name might clear itself of some recent shame.

[This message has been edited by jackson13 (edited 01-05-2002).]

[nb]

3. His biggest problem in "Phantom Menace"- made more obvious after "Fellowship of the Ring"- is that he's let the visual effects take over for focusing on the heart of the story, which are the characters.


Wait a sec. LOTR and good characters ? In one sentence ? Bwahhahahahahaha. Sorry http://www.joblo.com/ubb/smile.gif

Actually I liked LOTR quite a bit, but most of the characters (mainly the good guys) were extremely stereotypical and underdeveloped (not that I mind, since I know that the book is exactely that same).
I don't think that LOTR will ever be able to beat out the original Star Wars in my head. But it sure beats the crap out of Phantom Menace.

But then again, if it 'been up to me than Anakin would have already shown his evil traid is Ep 1, joined the dark force in Ep 2 and Ep 3 would deal exclusively with the Empire enslaving the whole galaxy. But hey http://www.joblo.com/ubb/smile.gif that's just me.

Since I know that that's not possible, I'll say that I'm quite happy with the casting of Hayden and the whole love story angle is fine with me, because in the end it WILL be something completely new and different.

N'Sync ? Screw them. They are the least of my worries. JarJar and possible lack of interesting side-stories (aside from the lovestory) bother me a lot more.

[Dumb-Fokker-**]

nb please explain to me, how you foud the characters in Lord of the Rings stereotypical. Just want to know your opinion, seeing as how I didnt find them stereotypical at all; especially in the book.

[Danreiter]

Brian De Palma is known for his trademark slow motion shots and his split screen scenes. When did Hitchcock ever use either of these techniques??? And I'm still not seeing anyone come up with examples of how De Palma rips off Hitchcock. And yes, De Palma does acknowledge his use of Hitchcock's language in his thrillers... He says it in books, DVD interviews and countless magazine articles. I think it's funny how people say that De Palma's shots are exact Hitchcock shots when he has never used an exact Hitchcock shot. It's also funny, how no one seems to question how much JAWS plagiarizes Hitchcock's THE BIRDS and the shot where Roy Scheider sees a shark attack (the travelling and zoom shot) is straight out of Vertigo, literally right out of VERTIGO.

[bskutle]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by nb:
3. His biggest problem in "Phantom Menace"- made more obvious after "Fellowship of the Ring"- is that he's let the visual effects take over for focusing on the heart of the story, which are the characters.


Wait a sec. LOTR and good characters ? In one sentence ? Bwahhahahahahaha. Sorry http://www.joblo.com/ubb/smile.gif</font>

nb, you took my quote out of context. I didn't necessarily say LOTR had GOOD characters (although I do think they're better and more interesting than most in films), just that instead of the emphasis being on the visual effects- as it so obviously was in "Phantom Menace" (a film I most enjoy, mind you)- Jackson focused more on the telling of the story, with the visual effects being secondary.

[CrowTRobot]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Danreiter:
Brian De Palma is known for his trademark slow motion shots and his split screen scenes. . . It's also funny, how no one seems to question how much JAWS plagiarizes Hitchcock's THE BIRDS and the shot where Roy Scheider sees a shark attack (the travelling and zoom shot) is straight out of Vertigo, literally right out of VERTIGO. </font>

originality? if you want to criticize spielberg for his zoom shot in jaws (you use the work plagiarize), fine; but don't give DePalma all the credit for "trademark" techniques like split screen and slow motion that are as old as silent film. watch Vertov's Man with the Movie Camera. split screen is actually a tricky maneuver to pull off. what does it really accomplish? it's another, clunkier way to show to or three points of perspective at the same time, but to what end? why not shot/reverse shot, simple cutting?
as for Jaws' "unoriginality" notice in the same scene the clever cutting as beachgoers walk in and out of brodie's view, adding to the tension and anxiety of his character and of the audience, hopefully. It was that kind of ingenuity and forethought that allowed this simplistic (almost moronic) monster story to be filmed in a way that has made it a masterpiece, with the help of Gottlieb's brilliant script.
I won't get in to Hitch's formal genious. DePalma is...interesting, formally; certainly someone to be studied and talked about, but no Hitch.

[Danreiter]

And who ever said he was a Hitch??? Do you really understand the things that you read AT ALL??? Didn't think so.

[Zing!]

I'm not sure how we went from George Lucas to the Hitchcock vs. De Palma discussion, but here's an interesting excerpt from an article called "The Life of Brian" by Chris Herrington.

AUGUST 17, 1998: Despite directing more than 20 features over a 30-year career, Brian De Palma’s reputation as an auteur, if not as a bankable Hollywood commodity, springs from the handful of stylized, Hitchcockian thrillers and horror films he made in the Seventies. Since Scarface (1982), he’s been churning out big-budget Hollywood films, both successful (The Untouchables, 1987) and dismal (Bonfire of the Vanities, 1990).

The best of De Palma’s Seventies films come in two linked pairs, the teen horror of Carrie (1976) and The Fury (1978), and the visually audacious thrillers Dressed to Kill (1979) and Blow Out (1981). From Hitchcock, De Palma not only learned cinema’s visual vocabulary, but he picked up some specific elements that mark all of his films from this period. From Psycho there is the fetishization of knives and blood, from Rear Window the helpless observer, and from Vertigo romantic obsession and horror as dream state. Also, like the Master of Suspense, De Palma’s cinema of this era is rigidly formal, and suffused with the blackest of humor.

After Carrie and The Fury, De Palma got the chance to work with his own scripts, and the immediate results were his two best films. Dressed to Kill is a stylistic tour de force. Like Hitchcock, De Palma uses a relatively disreputable genre as a pathway to pure cinema. Ostensibly about a transvestite murderer, Dressed to Kill is a fantasy version of Psycho right down to the cheap psychology and tacked-on explanatory scene. It’s even framed by two “shower scenes,” – one a sex fantasy, the other a nightmare – and contains the bare bodies and graphic violence that Hitchcock surely would have if production codes hadn’t held him back. It’s De Palma’s most lurid film by far, and it has a misogynist streak, but as an example of filmmaking technique, it’s extraordinary.

De Palma’s camera also plays cruel jokes on the characters in much the way Hitchcock did in his early, silent feature, Blackmail (1929). In the museum scene, Dickinson is shown looking at the paintings and seems very contemplative. She pulls what appears to be a journal out of her purse and writes. The camera peers over her shoulder to see what she’s written: “buy turkey.”

In De Palma's film Blow Out - the final scene is obviously descended from Vertigo’s stunningly masochistic conclusion, and it cuts every bit as deep. Blow Out’s finale is a gaze into the abyss. It’s not surprising that De Palma’s films haven’t been the same since.

[dbd105]

Yeah, i gotta agree that lucas is an overrated primadonna dipshit, but you have to give him props for some things. he has managed to outrage millions of die hard fans with this whole nsync thing, but he's also managed to pull millions of teen girls into the fray. i guarantee you every last bitching die hard fan will see episodes 2 and 3, no matter how shitty/good they end up being. but now, to add to his box office returns, lucas has lured all these little girls who will line up to see if they can catch a glimpse of nsync in the background somewhere. regardless of whether the teenyboppers have been cut from the movie or not, any publicity is good publicity. this movie will make a ton. and i've heard they're even bringing jar jar back. lucas is an idiot, he keeps spitting in the faces of his fans with this crap, but at the same time he gets richer and richer because everyone is already hooked

[Zing!]

George Lucas is clearly not a no-talent hack, but it is interesting to note that his best films were made when he was young and had something to prove (ie: THX 1138, American Graffiti, Star Wars) and now that he has established himself and has millions at his disposal and is surrounded by an entourage of yes-men, his films are less than stellar. It is also interesting to note that the best Star Wars film (I think most will agree) is one of the two he did not direct - "The Empire Strikes Back." Somehow, some way, Lucas needs to get back in touch with the idealistic young filmmaker of the late 70's that got lost along the way. What I can't figure is this: Lucas previewed a rough-cut of Episode I to friends - including Spielberg - months before its release. Are we to believe that Spielberg watched the deplorable Jar Jar or Jake Lloyd's astoundingly bad performance (Yippee!) and not cringe? Can no one stand up to this man?

[Eelco]

1) This topic was created by someone who's very jealous of George Lucas.
2) You can't compare LOTR and Star Wars.
3) LOTR lICKS DICK has a few good things to say about people who think George Lucas and his Star Wars saga is shit, but on the other hand he hates LOTR. Seems to me that this person isn't really a moviefan and therefor not worthy of Joblo's movie discussionboard, because come on, both the LOTR trilogy and the Star Wars saga are very much fun to watch (and read).
4) LOTR LICKS DICK is also jealous. He can't have it that Peter Jackson has so much succes and he hasn't. Furthermore, he can't have it that he couldn't be a part of the LOTR trilogy (like starring in it or some other job like cameraman). I think Peter Jackson did a great job in translating the extremely complex book FOTR to film. And furthermore, The Frightners and Brain Dead were cery cool movies!!!!!!

[robk]

Yes, Tolkien was a big influence on Star Wars.
Although I have yet to see The Fellowship of the Ring, I've always considered the Star Wars Trilogy(yes, I'm excluding The Phantom Menace) to be to cinema what The Lord of the Rings Trilogy(& The Hobbit) is to literature.

[Common Sense Man]

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Muha:
all i gotta say to LOTR licks dick is that:


without J.R.R. Tolkien and LOTR... there would be no star wars.</font>

Exactly!

I have no problem with peoples differing opinions on things but part of the reason I stay on this board is that there is no rampant flaming or simple insults meant only to irritate or inflame others.

I hope this is not a sign that things are changing.

I will not validate any of his points with further response.

Out...........

[JoBlo]

I'd like to thank the courteous schmoes who were cool enough to email me and let me know about some genius who came on this forum and decided that he would rather belittle and insult others rather than to converse on a mature level about movies.

As you all know, we take great pride in our very basic rule on this board ("respect others at all times") and also appreciate the amazing restraint shown here by the rest of you. It bodes well for the future of our board, me thinks.

Anyway, we've obviously deleted all of this person's posts and banned from our board. BTW, feel free to email me or any other moderator at ANY TIME whenever you notice any other "undesirables" slinking into our midst (thankfully, this doesn't happen too often).

[Scarface989]

Lucas aint that good w/ dialogue. if he were to collaborate w/ Kevin Smith on Episode 3, then that would rule. but it obviously won't. i wont say that the LOTR trilogy will surpass SW since we've only seen 1 movie, and it doesn't mean each movie will be great. look @ The Godfather, or even SW: The first 2 were great, but the 3rd is always debatable. BTW, Lucas had a lot of control in Empire, since he ran basically everything. Irwin directed, but Lucas had control over the final cut.

[bob]

I've never been a big fan of the Star Wars trilogy. Not only do I not think that they are the greatest films of all time, I don't think any of them are the best films from the year they were released. And I gotta say that I wasn't so much disappointed with Episode 1 and the preview for Episode 2, as much as I was angry. Angry at what could have been two really good sci-fi films(even if the first, or rather last, three weren't great films, they were good sci-fi films). When I saw the episode 2 preview, I just felt like, oh well, it wasn't going to be good anyway. But my disappointment grew to anger when i saw that my star wars loving friends were retching at the sight of natalie portman asking "are you making fun of me?" to the lead singer of nsync or whoever the hell the lead actor is. In my opinion, lucas isn't a no-talent hack. He's a sadist bent on breaking the hearts of Star Wars fans worldwide.

P.S. I saw the Ep 2 preview before FOTR. Now there's a fantasy/sci-fi movie.

[Bogler]

I agree with the original poster. Lucas IS a hack.

[This message has been edited by Bogler (edited 01-19-2002).]

[ANTBond007]

Fokker, let the "Sorry, m'lady" line go. You've been banking on it long enough.

And I've already learned of what will probably be my favorite exchange of lines of "Attack of the Clones" --

"I'm just a simple man trying to make it in this universe, Master Jedi."

"Aren't we all?"

Is George Lucas a hack? In absolutely no way. Is he the greatest writer/director in the world? No, he's not. But the guy can come up with some excellent stories. From "Star Wars" to "Indiana Jones" to movies (even if they were considered failures) such as "Radioland Murders" and "Willow," no one can say the guy lacks range.

I've enjoyed all the "Star Wars" films thus far ("Empire" the most, "Jedi" the least), and everything I've learned of "Episode II" has led me to believe it's simply going to be a blast in the vein of "A New Hope" and "The Empire Strikes Back."

That, and Yoda looks to be the most convincing CGI character in history.

[dellamorte dellamore]

First i agree that GL has only the Star Wars franchise to thank for his success and that EP1 was atrocious on more than one level,and narrative is'nt exactly his strong point,but he's a visionary filmaker who founded ILM(industrial light and magic),a revolutionary special effects studio that is still in existence today,and whose services have made films such as the Jurassic Park Trilogy,The Mummy films and countless others possible.They were around long before Digital Domain,Sony Imageworks,and Pixar.You can make the argument that they made The Lord of Rings possible,because Jackson is utilizing the same computer technology(and sound standards)that Lucas helped invent.GL also created THX(which at the time was a quantum leap in surround sound technology,far superior to sensurround,and it was the genesis of Dolby Digital,DTS,and Sony dynamic digital sound,all sound standards the fancy ring movies utilize depending what theater you see it in).Also THX is still in use today nearly 30 years since its birth.So,GL is'nt an important filmaker just because of Star Wars,he's important because he paved the way for other filmakers to realize their cinematic visions,not just in the visual sense but the audio sense too.Yes he'll never capture the magic of the first three films but his contribution to cinema is beyond question,he's easily one of the most important figures in the history of cinema.