EDITORIAL: Psycho-analyzing George Lucas.

EDITORIAL: Psycho-analyzing George Lucas.

What is the psychology of George Lucas? Who the hell knows for sure. But based on a volume of sources, I think I've figured the guy out.

Editorial Opinion
By headlopper - Dec 26, 2011 01:12 PM EST
Filed Under: Star Wars




It all began with 'American Graffiti'- George Lucas's first hit. The film grabbed the attention of major film studios giving Lucas credibility. Through the success of this film, he gained the confidence of Fox to fund a project he'd been working on simultaneously which would eventually take the form of 'Star Wars'.

Now up to this point, Lucas was a writer/director struggling to get a foothold in the industry, so he was forced to work within the established studio system at the time.

With the massive success of "Star Wars: A New Hope" he was able to get financing for future projects like " The Empire Strikes Back" .



Success generated by the sequel propelled Lucas into financial independence. His company 'Lucasfilms' now was able to provide the capital needed for Lucas to not only make 'Return of the Jedi' , but whatever the hell else he wanted.

George Lucas's dreams came true: he was completely free of the studio apparatus , and financially self-sufficient. He realized that the popularity of 'Star Wars' was enduring and had taken on a life of it's own. Comic book publisher's , author's and toy manufacturer's were willing to pay millions in copy right royalties, which secured Lucas's financial future.

What began as a device- an idea- created by a combination of sources and inspirations, became something "larger than life".

I'm sure he was modestly surprised by the public's reaction to the films, and how they embraced the series, characters and lore of 'Star Wars'.

I think he may have even been a bit confused by the phenomenal, social popularity of 'it' and wondered why "this film, this trilogy " was so incredibly dynamic.

It wasn't the first film series: think of 'James Bond' or 'The God-father'.
So obviously it wasn't the factor that 'Star Wars' was a series that generated appeal, it must have been the films themselves. However , I don't think he cared much why , as long as they were making money- he probably though:"Let people think what they want about them".

Ultimately, it seems they were just films to him. He was a film-maker so he had the fortune and opportunity to do so- make films ...with auspicious results. Perhaps he got lucky- right place/right time, or maybe there's just something about these damn movies that resonates with us mere mortals that Lucas seems to overlook.

Either way, they're his creations and will do whatever he pleases with it.

But are they really? Are they really 'his'? Legally, " yes", publicly, "NO!"

Edison invented the light bulb. Did he hold it hostage? Motorola invented the cell phone- did they hoard the technology?!

George Lucas created something special which many people consider an indispensable part of international culture. 'Star Wars' is precious to many , almost a religion, and belongs to the world now!

Yet Uncle George doesn't seem to see it that way.

"They're movies", he might think ," I invented them with input from others, and they belong to me. If you want to 'blow them up' to be more than that, go ahead because I'll charge you a sum of money every step of the way!"

Maybe that's it then. They're just movies. Hey they are, aren't they? Why are so many people making such a prodigious deal out of these films and the auxiliary material associated with them? If Lucas doesn't see the magical quality of these films(1 ,2 & 3) why should we? GET OVER IT! Let it go! It's merely entertainment generated by an industry that caters to the art form to make billions of dollars.

Ha, as hard as I try, I just can't bring myself to rationalize 'Star Wars' as nothing more than that...sorry.

To me , it's like my favorite song or my beloved family pet. It's an indelible part of my life- like a family member- it's not "just a movie"!

George , I understand your perspective...I really do, but please try to understand ours:
WE.
LOVE.
STAR WARS.

Be grateful, and respect the people who gave you the financial freedom not to care WHAT we think.



As Yoda might say: " Respect you must the one's that made you rich"!

LANDO: Donald Glover Reveals What He Hopes To Bring To STAR WARS Franchise With Long-Delayed Movie
Related:

LANDO: Donald Glover Reveals What He Hopes To Bring To STAR WARS Franchise With Long-Delayed Movie

Disney Is Going To Trial For Using Peter Cushing's Likeness In ROGUE ONE: A STAR WARS STORY
Recommended For You:

Disney Is Going To Trial For Using Peter Cushing's Likeness In ROGUE ONE: A STAR WARS STORY

DISCLAIMER: ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and... [MORE]

ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

Vadakin
Vadakin - 12/26/2011, 7:44 PM
I am a massive Star Wars fan. I'm also a film maker. As such I may have a unique perspective on this subject. Does Lucas view Star Wars as "just movies?" Absolutely he does. And he's 100% right.

This notion that the fans own Star Wars is ludicrous. Were the fans expected to write the Star Wars scripts? Were they expected to hire crew and actors to shoot the films? Were they expected to edit the films? Market them? Distribute them? Whether people are disappointed in Lucas' vision or not, it was, in the end, his vision. Paying for cinema tickets and buying toys doesn't give us the right to dictate to Lucas what he should do with his property. That Star Wars is a cultural phenomenon is irrelevant. Lucas can do what he likes with it. I've read tons of bickering online about the special edition changes over the years. Guess what. Tolkien changed The Hobbit. He rewrote Gollum's Cave to better reflect what would happen in Lord of the Rings. Rings is a cultural phenomenon. It has been for longer than Star Wars. Where's the outrage? Why hasn't Tolkien raped our childhoods?

You talk about the fans being the reason Lucas became rich. Fair enough. We are. Does that give us any rights? Hell no. You get what you pay for. And that's where the fan ownership argument falls flat on its ass. Because the fans do have a power. We have the power to not pay. If you don't like Special Edition changes, don't buy them. Don't go to see the prequels. Don't buy the merchandise. Don't watch Clone Wars.

We made him rich because we keep coming back for more. The prequels were hugely successful. Star Wars toys remain top of the food chain. Clone Wars is the biggest show on Cartoon Network. The Blu Ray box set has sold a ton. Various EU novels have ended up on the NY Times best seller list. The Phantom Menace will likely be a hit when it's rereleased in a couple of months in 3D. Star Wars: The Old Republic is already proving to be a success and is the one MMO that has a slightest chance of competing with World Of Warcraft. Why? Because people still love Star Wars. For all the vitriol, for all the hatred online, Star Wars is still huge across multiple generations. They are just movies. And to Lucas perhaps it is just a brand. But it's a brand that continues to be successful.

Lucas owes us nothing. We vote with our wallets and so far Lucas has a clear majority. But Lucas didn't just pocket the money he made from Star Wars. He put it back into the industry. His companies developed one of the first non linear editing systems. Skywalker Sound is a pioneer in post production sound work. THX certified cinemas remain a high quality mark to this day. Industrial Light and Magic is the premiere visual effects house in the world (followed closely by WETA which is made up of many former ILM employees. He was a pioneer in digital film making.

Lucas didn't just give us Star Wars. He gave us The Wrath of Khan. Terminator 2. Jurassic Park. Avatar. Pirates of the Caribbean. Indiana Jones. Titanic. Every single Pixar film (yes Jobs took made it what it is but it originated with Lucas). Every single superhero film of the last decade. Name a big movie of the last 30 years and Lucas more than likely had a hand in it.

He didn't make all those films of course but his investment in film making helped to create the film world as it exists today. Whatever Lucas earned from Star Wars, he's repaid it in full by advancing film making to where it is today.

Um....apologies, my response may be longer than your editorial. Oops.
kriswone
kriswone - 12/27/2011, 7:51 AM
Every single time I read an article complaining about star wars or related material, it's an uneducated, erroneous pile of "Words In A Sentence(TM)" - and that's being nice.

@headlopper - If you are so upset about what George Lucas did or does with his own property maybe you should ignore it. Similar to what I try to do when I see that you have written another article.

For me, I enjoy every type of media format that Star Wars produces, books, TV, Film, Games, etc. I enjoy how everything goes together seamlessly (99% of the time - anyway). The universe it expands on is an ever evolving enjoyable experience that some people may not like, but, even humans poop. So I'll take the good with the bad.
kriswone
kriswone - 12/27/2011, 10:42 AM
This is why there are 300+ Christian Denominations:

"...George Lucas created something special which many people consider an indispensable part of international culture. 'Star Wars' is precious to many , almost a religion, and belongs to the world now!..."

What he (G.Lucas) gives you, as he gives it to you, is what you have, as long as you agree to the terms and conditions.

Imagine if people thought this way about the Constitution, or the Bill of Rights? (or is congress doing this already?...)

The only thing that belongs to the world is knowledge.
headlopper
headlopper - 12/27/2011, 6:56 PM
@kriswone- Try harder.

@Intruder- Amen!

@yossarian_- You're a good man! Thanx!

Fitz3241 - Thanx!(BTW,I knew about THX1138, but 'American Graffiti' was his first major success which launched his career- that was my point)

@Vadakin - You make good points, especially about all his other contributions to the film industry, but I'm sticking to my guns on this issue. Sorry.
Vadakin
Vadakin - 12/27/2011, 7:26 PM
@headlopper but what point are you trying to make here? That Lucas needs to please the fans? Because he can never please everybody. All he can do is make the films he wants to make and hope that people enjoy them. The notion of fan ownership is ridiculous.

I posted an article on my own page today about what I would do if I was making a Star Wars movie. So please understand, as a fan I'd love to be a part of the creative process and I'd love to help bring Star Wars into the future. But Star Wars isn't my property. It's Lucas'.

How exactly would you expect Lucas to open Star Wars up to fans? Would you have a committee of fans deciding what the story for the next movie should be? Who would you pick? And what about fans who don't agree with that committee's decisions? You can't please everybody. Should there be a poll on Starwars.com for fans to vote on every time Lucas has an idea?

I have issues with Lucas. I happen to like the prequels though I'm not blind to their problems. I wish Lucas would stop tinkering with the films and if he has to tinker, then fix what needs fixing before adding anything else. I want him to release the original versions of the films in a high quality format. This is something that many fans want. Lucas has said no. For one thing the original versions don't exist at Lucasfilm anymore. There are ways around that but Lucas has said the Special Editions are what he wants the world to see. Do I agree with Lucas not investing in restoring the original versions of the films? No. But I understand it. Lucas has made quite a few decisions that I don't agree with over the years, but it's absolutely his right to make those decisions for better or worse.

If fans don't agree with those decisions, keep your wallets in your pockets. It's as simple as that. That's where fan power lies. Not in bitching on the internet, which I've seen too much of over the years. Given how popular Star Wars remains though, the question has to be asked...are the disgruntled fans really just a vocal minority? Because in spite of the complaining and bitching, Star Wars remains as strong as ever.
headlopper
headlopper - 12/27/2011, 9:08 PM
@Vadakin - I discern you're indeed a true SW fan...like myself. As I wrote, 4, 5 & 6 are like personal friends to me.
I don't like your characterization of my editorial as 'bitc***'- that's a bit libelous to me, however I do understand your passion ...and respect it.

Frankly , I hope SW lives on forever, as you do.
I think 'A New Hope' is the greatest movie ever made, and wrote an editorial here stating as much.


The point I'm making is that being 'A New Hope' and 'The Empire Strikes Back' have been entered into the National Film Registry vault by U.S.Library of Congress, they now belong to everyone.

"... to preserve films with artistic, cultural or historical significance." This statement is text stating one of the goals of the Film Registry. When a film is honored thusly , it's no longer just a 'movie' legally owned, but a national treasure...and I treasure it!

So "NO", Lucas can't morally do whatever he wants with these two movies-legally , "Yes".

Although 'Return of the Jedi' hasn't been accepted into NFR, it's the 3rd of a trilogy and thus has continuity value, so it should be afforded the same honor.

As a hopeful film-maker, I know you're probably concerned with property rights. There are many laws to protect artists and their property, but my contention is SW 4 & 5 have taken on a life of their own independent of their original creator.

Look, an artist paints a masterpiece, sells it to a modern art museum and now the world can enjoy it. He can't go into the museum, take it off the wall and do whatever he wants with it because HE painted it. He CAN bask in the joy and honor of being the one who created it. He was paid well for it , so now it belongs to the world.

Other's DO complain regarding this subject, but my position is not that- it's a defense. I'm defending the magic and ideal of ANH and TESB...and I always will. Defending them from a seemingly pragmatic, corporate, apathetic money-making machine Lucas seems to view them as.

Post a link to your article and I'll read it.
Boekelaar
Boekelaar - 12/28/2011, 5:23 AM
I'm with Vadakin all the way, I also make my own films and if someone told me that I wasn't allowed to change my film because they enjoyed the way it originally was so much I'd tell the to go [frick] themselves. It's my film, I made it and I own it. Just because you enjoy it doesn't mean you get a say in how I choose to present it.
@Headlopper your argument doesn't make sense with the whole painting thing. Lucas didn't sell Star Wars to you or anyone else, it's more like he rented it. So if Star Wars was his metaphorical painting then he could take it off the wall because it's his!
Also on a separate note I never see anyone complain about the changes he made to cloud city in Empire..just sayin'. Some changes are appreciated and vast improvements. It should however be left alone and he should spend his time trying to digitally replace the Gungans with something less shit.
Also with the Special Edition releases on DVD my copies came with the original versions as well. Not HD but when played through my bluray player they're pretty good. But I like the Special Editions (DVD release)except for adding manakin skywalker to the end of Return. The VHS release of the Special Edition in my opinion is the definitive Star Wars.
Boekelaar
Boekelaar - 12/28/2011, 5:25 AM
oh and @Intruder ILM is better than Weta as much as I love Weta and being New Zealands neighbour and loving Peter Jackson I will still back ILM...Rise of the Apes was a significant step in taking the crown though.
Vadakin
Vadakin - 12/28/2011, 10:20 AM
@headlopper http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/moviewhatifs/news/?a=51918

A New Hope is also my favourite film ever. That movie literally changed my life. I went from wanting to work with computers to wanting to make movies after seeing that film.

As mentioned already, the comparison with a painting doesn't work. If an artist sells a painting, then sure he loses claim to it but Lucas didn't sell Star Wars. Fox did own A New Hope until around 1997 or 1998 but they gave it back to Lucas in exchange for the distribution rights to the prequels.

Don't get me wrong here, I understand your point of view. Star Wars is culturally important. However you can't just limit that to the first two films and Jedi by default. The prequels may have their critics but they are a painted piece of the canvas just like the more popular of the films. Michelangelo's work on the Sistine Chapel isn't limited to the God and Adam painting. It's the whole ceiling.

The idea of morality doesn't come into it. Lucas created it and he didn't sell it. Therefore he owns it. It is his artistic and moral and legal right to do what he wants with it. He's not the first person to go back and change his work after it has been released to the world. The great Stanley Kubrick cut over 20 minutes from The Shining for its European release. Tolkien went back and changed the Hobbit to reflect his later work on Rings.

But ultimately, putting everything else aside, we only get to experience Star Wars because Lucas allows it. We only have the blu ray set because Lucas allowed it to be released. The Clone Wars only exist because Lucas financed it. Lucas spends the money to make all of this stuff happen. Whether you like what he's done with Star Wars or not, nobody else on Earth has the right to make those decisions.

One last thing, the *term for a female dog* fest comment was about the general tone of Star Wars conversations on the internet, not your article specifically. It's nigh on impossible to have a civilized discussion about Star Wars online anymore. I'm surprised this article and comments have remained as calm as they are, Intruder's obligatory trolling notwithstanding.
Vadakin
Vadakin - 12/28/2011, 10:29 AM
@headlopper In regard to defending the magic and ideal of Hope and Empire, adding dewback-riding stormtroopers doesn't change anything. Putting McDiarmid in Empire doesn't ruin the film. For all the changes made over the years, the story remains the same. When I watch A New Hope, I watch it for the story and the characters, the adventure and the action. The humour and the drama. None of that has been taken away.

Heck, when Empire came out, it originally came out in selected cinemas in 70mm prints. For the wider 35mm release, Lucas actually added a new shot of the rebel fleet. That 35mm print is what today is perceived as being the original version of Empire, the version first released on VHS. But it isn't the original version. The original version has never been released on home video. Lucas has been tweaking his films for a long time. It's not something he started with in 1997 with the Special Editions. Every new release of Star Wars since 1977 has had some change made either on the audio or visual side. Chances are, the versions people call the originals actually aren't the originals.
headlopper
headlopper - 12/28/2011, 5:45 PM
@Vadakin- I have the originals on VHS. I've watched them so many times, they're totally shot. So I went to Target and bought ANH & TESB on DVD witch has both the original theatrical release and the modified version, so I'm happy.

I don't think Lucas is "a greedy bastard" AT ALL!

I believe ,based on empirical evidence amassed over time, that his creation is the product of serendipity, and was/ is probably more surprised than anyone how incredibly popular this franchise has become.

Look, Lucas is a artist, innovator and a businessman, and like any businessman, you give your customer's what they want to keep them happy. The irony is people are still buying his perversions of ANH & TESB and thus giving him the impression his actions are validated by the profits earned. I genuinely believe he thinks if he had the tech today BACK THEN when he was first making the films, he would have used it to make them in the now altered forms. So he thinks he's basically correcting the films to embody his 'original vision', witch I personally think is bilge.

That's were he's made his tragic mistake. The films are fine the way they are, with all their flaws and technological limitations, for that time they were filmed.

You make my point: the story , characters, dialog and action and paramount, which is THE VERY REASON-! WHY they don't need to be altered! All the alterations are just BLOODY distractions!

The two films are utter masterpieces! Don't fu** with the 'Mona Lisa' just because you legally can. It's immoral and disrespectful to all those who love them and support their place in society, AND embrace them personally.


@ Intruder- You sir, are a poet!
headlopper
headlopper - 12/28/2011, 6:15 PM
@Vadakin- BTW, I read your article , and found it to be an interesting , well though out concept.

Personally , I'd just love to see a Star Wars #7.
Vadakin
Vadakin - 12/28/2011, 9:16 PM
Oh I have ideas for a dozen Star Wars projects...but Star Wars isn't mine. :P
headlopper
headlopper - 12/29/2011, 10:24 AM
@Vadakin- I get the allusion( very subtle).

Good luck with whatever you create- it's a hard industry to achieve success in. See you on the threads.
View Recorder