The problem with the whole "Lucas's films, Lucas's way" attitude is that it negates the creative contribution of the thousands of other people that worked on the films. Empire and Jedi were directed by other people, Kasdan's writing is responsible for a lot of the character traits that people accept as a given, and even something like Harrison Ford improvising when the lines he was given were shit... They all combined to make Star Wars, it wasn't like Lucas was drawing creature designs.
I'd love to see someone else get a chance to reimagine Star Wars for the big screen. You never know when you're going to hit creative oil. Gene Roddenberry would have despised Deep Space 9, and there are plenty of Star Trek fans that couldn't imagine the "canon" without it.
When did anyone say the whole "Lucas's films, Lucas's way" thing? I'm not a fan of that line of thinking either. Especially his inane attempts to change "his" films, which like you said, aren't really his. I too would love to see someone else's take on Star Wars on film, but for now I'm content with the novels, comics, games, and episodes of The Clone Wars show that are actually worth reading/playing/watching.
But you also have to look at the relationship between the fans/critics and the authors. By holding the author's feet to the fire once in a while, you help them recognize their mistakes so that they can make improvements to their future works. That helps to elevate the art and is beneficial to both the fans and the author(s).
If you just keep accepting mediocre or crappy work, you give no incentive for the authors to hone their craft. What's worse is that it can create a cycle where fans accept lower and lower quality work, which hurts the fans, the authors, and the franchise as a whole.
Now, certainly there are some lost causes like George Lucas and Rick Berman, but that doesn't mean you should give up on the franchise and just accept whatever putrid half digested products that spew out of its maw. There may come a time when you need to step away from something you love so you don't support its self destruction.
Holding an author's feet to the fire over an actual, real, mistake is fine. I just did it to Traviss. But take a moment and look how I did it. I didn't say she was a bad writer, or that her books were bad, or any other arbitrary, meaningless criticism like that. I pointed out the genuine problems her novels and her interaction with the fans had. In doing so, I also left the door open for the reality that despite those problems, those novels can and have been enjoyed.
That's a very big difference than broadly saying something sucks. When you say something is bad, you only accomplish two things in my eyes. First, you state in a rude manner that it's just not for you (which doesn't make it bad). Second, you come across to me as a jerk. There is an entire world of difference between starting a critique with "I didn't enjoy this because..." and "This wasn't good because..." The latter assumes your tastes to define good and bad, whereas the former acknowledges that your tastes are just that; your own.
To be frank, with over 200 novels, hundreds of comic books, dozens of video games, a few TV shows, and like 10 movies, if all you enjoyed were the first 3 movies, maybe you're not a "big Star Wars fan" so much as you are "someone who really enjoyed the first 3 movies as a kid." Honestly, think about it, with all that material out there, if you can't find some part of it to enjoy then either it's not really for you anymore, or you are just being closed minded and harboring preconceived notions about the quality of Non-OT Star Wars.
I'll be 100% honest here. I believe that when Episode 1 came out, it was a disappointment to a lot of people, and it caused a backlash. This started to build a pop-culture fervor of "Oh no, Star Wars is ruined." Episode 2 came out, and just heaped fuel on that train. By the time Episode 3 came out, there wasn't really any hope. Pop-culture was already flooded with "George Lucas raped our childhood" mentality. I really do believe that this mentality has snowballed and become it's own thing. I believe that people who haven't seen the prequels or even Star Wars at all, go into them with a preconceived notion that the prequels will suck. They go in negative, looking for the negative. I believe this preconceived notion of "Star Wars isn't good anymore, stick to the OT," rolled on over the EU as well. I truly believe that a good majority of people who say the Expanded Universe sucks have never read a Star Wars novel in their lives. I think they heard some of the stuff that happens in the EU, taken drastically out of context, and said "Yup, that stuff's stupid, Star Wars books suck."
I honestly think that is Episode 1 had been more like Episode 3, the pop-culture impact on Star Wars would have been the opposite, and a lot of the negativity surrounding modern Star Wars wouldn't exist. If you read a bunch of Star Wars, watched the prequels, and still hate all that stuff, don't take offense. It'd be silly to deny that a lot of people get their opinions from pop-culture though. How many of you detest Twilight, but have never read a single word of it or watched one of the movies? I know I can say that my opinion of it has been influenced by pop culture, even though I never experienced it. After all, how could so many people saying it's bad be wrong? But the problem is, a good majority of the people saying it's bad probably only have a second hand opinion of it based on trailers, summaries, and pop culture. They really have no idea, at best they think a negative opinion seems accurate based on trailers and synopsis, and reinforce the popular opinion.
The point here isn't entirely to defend Star Wars, however. It's to rebut the idea that this kind of venom has a positive effect on the medium. If anything, it drives good authors away from wanting to take part in a project because of it's negative reputation, even if they really like the story or idea behind the project. The saddest part about that, is I feel confident in saying that anything that is popular to hate like Twilight or new Star Wars misses people who would genuinely enjoy that stuff if they didn't already have preconceived notions because of that popular hate. Add to that the number of people afraid to admit they like something unpopular, and I just think it's really sad and unnecessary.
Loving a franchise is one thing, but just blindly adoring everything that has the Star Wars logo on it doesn't do anyone any good, especially the super fan.
I know that bringing up the Red Letter Media reviews is a quick and easy tactic for Star Wars critics, but bear in mind that he eviscerated all the Star Trek movies as well, and as a person who loves, LOVES Star Trek, it was important for fans like me and the Star Trek filmmakers to recognize the major flaws in those films so that the franchise as a whole could evolve and improve.
And it did.
The problem with the whole "Lucas's films, Lucas's way" attitude is that it negates the creative contribution of the thousands of other people that worked on the films. Empire and Jedi were directed by other people, Kasdan's writing is responsible for a lot of the character traits that people accept as a given, and even something like Harrison Ford improvising when the lines he was given were shit... They all combined to make Star Wars, it wasn't like Lucas was drawing creature designs.
I'd love to see someone else get a chance to reimagine Star Wars for the big screen. You never know when you're going to hit creative oil. Gene Roddenberry would have despised Deep Space 9, and there are plenty of Star Trek fans that couldn't imagine the "canon" without it.
Critics of Star Wars love to use a few of the arguments/tactics you've used here. A lot of what I said above about the difference between constructive criticism and venom applies here too, but I wanted to talk about a few points your post brings up. It may sound critical of you, but please know I don't mean it like that. It's critical of a thought process I don't like, but don't blame individuals for having, because I don't think it's a conscious thing.
First, you start off by creating this hyperbolic and insulting idea of a Star Wars fan. I know it wasn't done out of a place of malice, but it is ignorant. When you say "Blindly accepting..." you are basically implying that what you are really saying is "These things you are defending are just bad, and you'd have to be blind to accept them." I understand that it's a turn of phrase, and easy to use without putting much thought into what it means, but that's what it means. You could have just said "Accepting everything...." and left off the "Blindly." It's insulting to assume we are either ignorant to the truth or willfully ignoring it. By saying we blindly accept it, you preclude the possibility that we enjoy it with out eyes fully open, understanding it the same way you do, but with different priorities and tastes.
Aside from that, still on the same point, you put forth this idea of Star Wars fans who "Accept everything," I don't know a single Star Wars fan who accepts everything. I've met very few people who love Star Wars as ravenous as I do and even I don't accept everything. I myself listed some things I didn't like in an earlier post. I just don't dwell on those things. Why would I dwell on what I don't like, when there are so many things I do like to think about?
Finally, you rounded it off with one last insulting idea, with "has the Star Wars logo on it," implying we are nothing but brand loyalists. This implication compares us to teenage girls shopping at The Gap just because it's a popular store, or obsessing more over the label on the jeans than how well they fit. First of all, the reason people do that, is to seek approval from their peers, something the Star Wars logo does not offer. Building on that point, you don't get Star Wars brand loyalty without liking what the brand offers in quality, cause the brand doesn't offer much else.
It would be silly of me to think that people like that don't exist, but they aren't very common. Certainly I haven't seen any of them speak up in this discussion. So using that sentence implies to me that you think someone like me is someone like that, obviously putting no real thought into what I like, because if I did, I'd realize that it sucks and I should complain about it for something better. So, basically it boils down to an insult on my intelligence.
Let me be clear that I know this isn't what you were aiming for, and I know you're probably taken aback by my interpretation of what you just said. I am not judging you for what I assume is an impression you did not mean to give. So you really have two ways to look at this now. Either you can roll your eyes about how I grossly and over-sensitively misinterpreted what you said, or you can use the opportunity to really think about the words you use and what they really mean. Especially remembering that his is the internet, where I cannot see your face, body language, or hear the tone of your voice.
If you chose to give that a little thought, then think about why you chose those words. While I feel confident you didn't choose them to insult, I'd be willing to bet that you chose them because a lot of what I said you implied you also imagined to be true. You just didn't think of them as insulting, you thought of them as true. If that's the case, use that information to color the point I've been making this entire thread about how people unconsciously or consciously use people's tastes in media to judge that person, and how that isn't right.
So the rebutal to the line itself is thus: I do not blindly accept anything, I like what I enjoy. There are plenty of Star Wars elements and even entire novels or series which I dislike. I support what I like by buying it, just like you don't support what you dislike by not buying it. Further arriving at the opinion that something you don't like is bad, and worse, using said opinion to color your opinion of people who do like it, is unnecessary and, I believe, wrong.
I don't think it's something that people consciously do usually either, I think it's entirely a natural and subconscious thing. I'm not judging people who do this or calling them dicks for doing it, that would be hypocritical of me cause I do it too. I just find it something worth thinking about and trying to be more conscious of.
That's the big thing, and it's just an example of a larger phenomenon. Like I said, it's a very common thing to see, not necessarily just that phrase but the thinking behind it. The other things I wanted to say are relatively quick.
Red Letter Media's reviews have some fair points, but when I listen to them I hear a lot that's opinion, a lot that's misinformation, and a lot that is just entertainment. I'm not going to get into a rebuttal of Plinkett, because it's to daunting a task. Even with all I've written in this thread on the subject I've not spent even half the time it would take to deliver a full rebuttal of his reviews. I will however say that if anyone id interested in hearing my rebuttal on the popular topic of midi-chlorians I will oblige. It provides one example of how misinformation influences a lot of negative opinions.
Finally, while I do think any creative needs to have other people helping him and directing him, and I do think Lucas made the temporary mistake of throwing off those chains and running free, your final argument assumes I would really want Lucas out of the process. It again assumes that because you don't like what he's doing, it's bad, and that the only reason I could possibly support him is because I haven't thought it through to see how much better Star Wars could be.
Here's the thing. I think Star Wars could really be great with a mostly hands off George Lucas executive producer on a project headed by someone else. I'd love to see it. At the same time, I feel nervous about the idea of someone else taking the reigns and producing a blockbuster. I imagine it would be good, but I fear it wouldn't really be the Star Wars I love. Because I love Star Wars now, I like George Lucas' Star Wars. I don't want it to stop or change that much.
I would salivate at a movie as good and faithful as what JJ Abrahms did with Trek. But for every example like that, there are many examples of reboots or changes in creative management that didn't work for me. Quite frankly, I don't see the need to risk it, because I don't think the title has been mishandled under Lucas, nor has it gone stagnant. Reboots are for times when something needs a resurgence, and I think Star Wars is still prolifically producing quality content under Lucas.
Lucas may make a lot of decisions fans don't agree with or see the need for, but he has also learned from his mistakes. The big Star Wars project in mainstream media right now is The Clone Wars TV show, which Lucas Exec Produces, but has allowed Dave Filoni to direct and creatively head. It's really good. Lots of people like it, including myself. Lucas has stepped back and allowed another creative to create under his supervision, and it's working great. It's going to happen again with the live action show, and I'm excited. I don't see any reason to oust Lucas right now, frankly I'm more excited to see Star Wars on TV than on the big screen, because I prefer the serial format.
Posts
When did anyone say the whole "Lucas's films, Lucas's way" thing? I'm not a fan of that line of thinking either. Especially his inane attempts to change "his" films, which like you said, aren't really his. I too would love to see someone else's take on Star Wars on film, but for now I'm content with the novels, comics, games, and episodes of The Clone Wars show that are actually worth reading/playing/watching.
Holding an author's feet to the fire over an actual, real, mistake is fine. I just did it to Traviss. But take a moment and look how I did it. I didn't say she was a bad writer, or that her books were bad, or any other arbitrary, meaningless criticism like that. I pointed out the genuine problems her novels and her interaction with the fans had. In doing so, I also left the door open for the reality that despite those problems, those novels can and have been enjoyed.
That's a very big difference than broadly saying something sucks. When you say something is bad, you only accomplish two things in my eyes. First, you state in a rude manner that it's just not for you (which doesn't make it bad). Second, you come across to me as a jerk. There is an entire world of difference between starting a critique with "I didn't enjoy this because..." and "This wasn't good because..." The latter assumes your tastes to define good and bad, whereas the former acknowledges that your tastes are just that; your own.
To be frank, with over 200 novels, hundreds of comic books, dozens of video games, a few TV shows, and like 10 movies, if all you enjoyed were the first 3 movies, maybe you're not a "big Star Wars fan" so much as you are "someone who really enjoyed the first 3 movies as a kid." Honestly, think about it, with all that material out there, if you can't find some part of it to enjoy then either it's not really for you anymore, or you are just being closed minded and harboring preconceived notions about the quality of Non-OT Star Wars.
I'll be 100% honest here. I believe that when Episode 1 came out, it was a disappointment to a lot of people, and it caused a backlash. This started to build a pop-culture fervor of "Oh no, Star Wars is ruined." Episode 2 came out, and just heaped fuel on that train. By the time Episode 3 came out, there wasn't really any hope. Pop-culture was already flooded with "George Lucas raped our childhood" mentality. I really do believe that this mentality has snowballed and become it's own thing. I believe that people who haven't seen the prequels or even Star Wars at all, go into them with a preconceived notion that the prequels will suck. They go in negative, looking for the negative. I believe this preconceived notion of "Star Wars isn't good anymore, stick to the OT," rolled on over the EU as well. I truly believe that a good majority of people who say the Expanded Universe sucks have never read a Star Wars novel in their lives. I think they heard some of the stuff that happens in the EU, taken drastically out of context, and said "Yup, that stuff's stupid, Star Wars books suck."
I honestly think that is Episode 1 had been more like Episode 3, the pop-culture impact on Star Wars would have been the opposite, and a lot of the negativity surrounding modern Star Wars wouldn't exist. If you read a bunch of Star Wars, watched the prequels, and still hate all that stuff, don't take offense. It'd be silly to deny that a lot of people get their opinions from pop-culture though. How many of you detest Twilight, but have never read a single word of it or watched one of the movies? I know I can say that my opinion of it has been influenced by pop culture, even though I never experienced it. After all, how could so many people saying it's bad be wrong? But the problem is, a good majority of the people saying it's bad probably only have a second hand opinion of it based on trailers, summaries, and pop culture. They really have no idea, at best they think a negative opinion seems accurate based on trailers and synopsis, and reinforce the popular opinion.
The point here isn't entirely to defend Star Wars, however. It's to rebut the idea that this kind of venom has a positive effect on the medium. If anything, it drives good authors away from wanting to take part in a project because of it's negative reputation, even if they really like the story or idea behind the project. The saddest part about that, is I feel confident in saying that anything that is popular to hate like Twilight or new Star Wars misses people who would genuinely enjoy that stuff if they didn't already have preconceived notions because of that popular hate. Add to that the number of people afraid to admit they like something unpopular, and I just think it's really sad and unnecessary.
Critics of Star Wars love to use a few of the arguments/tactics you've used here. A lot of what I said above about the difference between constructive criticism and venom applies here too, but I wanted to talk about a few points your post brings up. It may sound critical of you, but please know I don't mean it like that. It's critical of a thought process I don't like, but don't blame individuals for having, because I don't think it's a conscious thing.
First, you start off by creating this hyperbolic and insulting idea of a Star Wars fan. I know it wasn't done out of a place of malice, but it is ignorant. When you say "Blindly accepting..." you are basically implying that what you are really saying is "These things you are defending are just bad, and you'd have to be blind to accept them." I understand that it's a turn of phrase, and easy to use without putting much thought into what it means, but that's what it means. You could have just said "Accepting everything...." and left off the "Blindly." It's insulting to assume we are either ignorant to the truth or willfully ignoring it. By saying we blindly accept it, you preclude the possibility that we enjoy it with out eyes fully open, understanding it the same way you do, but with different priorities and tastes.
Aside from that, still on the same point, you put forth this idea of Star Wars fans who "Accept everything," I don't know a single Star Wars fan who accepts everything. I've met very few people who love Star Wars as ravenous as I do and even I don't accept everything. I myself listed some things I didn't like in an earlier post. I just don't dwell on those things. Why would I dwell on what I don't like, when there are so many things I do like to think about?
Finally, you rounded it off with one last insulting idea, with "has the Star Wars logo on it," implying we are nothing but brand loyalists. This implication compares us to teenage girls shopping at The Gap just because it's a popular store, or obsessing more over the label on the jeans than how well they fit. First of all, the reason people do that, is to seek approval from their peers, something the Star Wars logo does not offer. Building on that point, you don't get Star Wars brand loyalty without liking what the brand offers in quality, cause the brand doesn't offer much else.
It would be silly of me to think that people like that don't exist, but they aren't very common. Certainly I haven't seen any of them speak up in this discussion. So using that sentence implies to me that you think someone like me is someone like that, obviously putting no real thought into what I like, because if I did, I'd realize that it sucks and I should complain about it for something better. So, basically it boils down to an insult on my intelligence.
Let me be clear that I know this isn't what you were aiming for, and I know you're probably taken aback by my interpretation of what you just said. I am not judging you for what I assume is an impression you did not mean to give. So you really have two ways to look at this now. Either you can roll your eyes about how I grossly and over-sensitively misinterpreted what you said, or you can use the opportunity to really think about the words you use and what they really mean. Especially remembering that his is the internet, where I cannot see your face, body language, or hear the tone of your voice.
If you chose to give that a little thought, then think about why you chose those words. While I feel confident you didn't choose them to insult, I'd be willing to bet that you chose them because a lot of what I said you implied you also imagined to be true. You just didn't think of them as insulting, you thought of them as true. If that's the case, use that information to color the point I've been making this entire thread about how people unconsciously or consciously use people's tastes in media to judge that person, and how that isn't right.
So the rebutal to the line itself is thus: I do not blindly accept anything, I like what I enjoy. There are plenty of Star Wars elements and even entire novels or series which I dislike. I support what I like by buying it, just like you don't support what you dislike by not buying it. Further arriving at the opinion that something you don't like is bad, and worse, using said opinion to color your opinion of people who do like it, is unnecessary and, I believe, wrong.
I don't think it's something that people consciously do usually either, I think it's entirely a natural and subconscious thing. I'm not judging people who do this or calling them dicks for doing it, that would be hypocritical of me cause I do it too. I just find it something worth thinking about and trying to be more conscious of.
That's the big thing, and it's just an example of a larger phenomenon. Like I said, it's a very common thing to see, not necessarily just that phrase but the thinking behind it. The other things I wanted to say are relatively quick.
Red Letter Media's reviews have some fair points, but when I listen to them I hear a lot that's opinion, a lot that's misinformation, and a lot that is just entertainment. I'm not going to get into a rebuttal of Plinkett, because it's to daunting a task. Even with all I've written in this thread on the subject I've not spent even half the time it would take to deliver a full rebuttal of his reviews. I will however say that if anyone id interested in hearing my rebuttal on the popular topic of midi-chlorians I will oblige. It provides one example of how misinformation influences a lot of negative opinions.
Finally, while I do think any creative needs to have other people helping him and directing him, and I do think Lucas made the temporary mistake of throwing off those chains and running free, your final argument assumes I would really want Lucas out of the process. It again assumes that because you don't like what he's doing, it's bad, and that the only reason I could possibly support him is because I haven't thought it through to see how much better Star Wars could be.
Here's the thing. I think Star Wars could really be great with a mostly hands off George Lucas executive producer on a project headed by someone else. I'd love to see it. At the same time, I feel nervous about the idea of someone else taking the reigns and producing a blockbuster. I imagine it would be good, but I fear it wouldn't really be the Star Wars I love. Because I love Star Wars now, I like George Lucas' Star Wars. I don't want it to stop or change that much.
I would salivate at a movie as good and faithful as what JJ Abrahms did with Trek. But for every example like that, there are many examples of reboots or changes in creative management that didn't work for me. Quite frankly, I don't see the need to risk it, because I don't think the title has been mishandled under Lucas, nor has it gone stagnant. Reboots are for times when something needs a resurgence, and I think Star Wars is still prolifically producing quality content under Lucas.
Lucas may make a lot of decisions fans don't agree with or see the need for, but he has also learned from his mistakes. The big Star Wars project in mainstream media right now is The Clone Wars TV show, which Lucas Exec Produces, but has allowed Dave Filoni to direct and creatively head. It's really good. Lots of people like it, including myself. Lucas has stepped back and allowed another creative to create under his supervision, and it's working great. It's going to happen again with the live action show, and I'm excited. I don't see any reason to oust Lucas right now, frankly I'm more excited to see Star Wars on TV than on the big screen, because I prefer the serial format.