Subject:
|
Re: Another one of those 'what's wrong with TPM' posts
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.starwars
|
Date:
|
Thu, 1 Jun 2000 17:26:59 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
961 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.starwars, Shaun Sullivan writes:
> I always find it ridiculous to complain that George Lucas did a "poor job"
> with anything. People too often fall into the comfortable habit of
> critiquing his movies (well, the ones after ANH) as products of the movie
> industry, WHICH THEY ARE NOT.
Irrelevant. I'm not saying "George should have done such-and-such to
realize George's vision better"--I'm saying that George could have done such-
and-such to make a better film. Whatever else it is, it is also a film.
> Lucas financed the films himself, completely - he has no obligation to
> produce a certain caliber of product, or appeal to a certain sect of the
> population.
Not really. He financed it from the $$ he made off of the viewers and
merchandisers of 2+ decades. He is beholden to them, after a fashion, because
without them he would have no fortune, nor any way to express his "vision."
> It is completely alien to filmmakers and film critics to operate in an
> environment where the product and its producers are not beholden to
> financiers, advertisers, and third-party interests.
So it's a big-budget indy film--big deal. It can still be evaluated in
terms of its cinematic merits and flaws. Again, I'm not criticizing its
representation of George's vision; I'm critiquing its presentation as a film.
> it most definitely should *not* be subjected to the same critiques as
> other films, since the process by which it came about is anything but
> filmlike.
I disagree fundamentally with this point; it's a film, making money as a
film, showing in film venues, competing against other films, and referred to
by Lucas himself as a film. Whether it's a vision or not, it is also a film
and can be evaluated as a film.
Conversely, if it were a really good *film*, I would certainly be happy to
evaluate it as such; would you complain, in that case, that his vision was
being praised as a film?
> Lucas included JarJar because it was a character that appealed to the people
> his concept addressed - ten year old boys. And that's according to him. His
> story is fabricated with that audience in mind - an epic tale for kids who
> get an adrenaline rush running around swingsets in the back yard pretending
> to dodge carbon freezing chambers. He isn't there to develop the plot, which
> is a purely adult requirement. He isn't there to add interpersonal character
> development.
There's no reason whatsoever, other than outright laziness, not to include
both child-appeal *and* effective plot and characterization. While I'm at it,
I don't know any kids who liked JarJar; they thought he was kind of stupid,
and they gravitated instead to Darth Maul.
Besides all of which, George was only able to make these films because the
"ten year old boys" who saw it in 1977 have been putting money into it ever
since. They are the investors in the prequels. It would be nice if George,
on some level, recognized these contributions and tailored at least part of
the forthcoming films to his loyal supporters, rather than simply trying to
cultivate another two decades' worth of merchandise consumers.
Dave!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Another one of those 'what's wrong with TPM' posts
|
| In lugnet.starwars, Dave Schuler writes: <snip> (...) because (...) "vision." To paraphrase a wise man, that depends greatly on your point of view. You may see it as an investment of your money. I think George sees it as his movie, and people happen (...) (24 years ago, 1-Jun-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Another one of those 'what's wrong with TPM' posts
|
| WARNING: There's a grand amount of soap-boxing going on in this post. I've already posted these ideas before, but a long time ago ... ahh well, it's time to air out the attic, I guess. Please feel free to ignore me, I always do :) (...) I always (...) (24 years ago, 1-Jun-00, to lugnet.starwars)
|
94 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
