 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are older and fouler things than Berman in the deep places of the 'net.
Mind you, while I didn't care for his breaking of a better-than-average streak of good episodes with Enterprise's fourth season, I've never had strong feelings about him one way or the other. I think I've only ever seen one or two interviews with him in passing on a DVD. He was in charge of Star Trek for quite a few years, and for much of that time it was reasonably enjoyable. They just never seemed to know what to do with the movies.
Any long-running franchise like Star Wars (or Trek, or Doctor Who, or anything else) that's prone to being cheesy is bound to hit especially bad patches. Who knows how long they'll last.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Calling it Berman's show is probably enough to offend a lot of its fans, without having to add anything else, lol.
I don't think he ever reached the level of notoriety with his franchise's most hardcore fans as George Lucas has with his, but it was probably a close race.
I don't agree with the 99% figure, though. I know there are a lot of weirdos out there, but I've always held to the idea that the internet makes them appear more numerous than they are. Social misfits have always been more prominent on the internet. I think the majority of fans of these properties are just normal, non-vocal people.
If you judged by the internet alone, there'd be huge numbers of people up in arms in real life about the changes to Star Wars. But I don't think I've ever actually encountered anyone offline that even mentioned them, positively or negatively. Most people just don't care, and a lot probably wouldn't even be able to tell you which scenes are new (and as a result, probably aren't really clear on the history of the use of computer animation in film).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
May 31, 2012 - 6:05 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Tom Servo
(Member)
|
It boggles my mind so much that fans worked themselves into such a frenzy over George Lucas and his movies that they had a make a movie about their own problems. You know, I'm a big Star Wars fan, grew up with the Original Trilogy and still like the Prequel Trilogy as well and while there are some odd aspects Lucas changed in the OT for subsequent releases, I just don't gnash my teeth about it. I don't get the hate some people have for Lucas. He created Star Wars and Indiana Jones, which will far outlast anything any of us ever contributes to pop culture and he really doesn't have to do anything else to prove himself to audiences. And when he does, people still rail against him because the result somehow still doesn't meet whatever unknowable expectations they each cling to.
Good grief, everyone, just let it go. Don't crucify an artist for making art you don't like, just don't participate in it. Lucas built all of what he has from pretty much nothing, which is something we can all strive for in this country. If you don't like all the Star Wars movies, that's fine, it's no different than some people only enjoying the James Bond films that star Sean Connery. Maybe there are those of us who enjoy the rest!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Jun 1, 2012 - 6:37 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
JSWalsh
(Member)
|
Don`t mind me, they upped the codeine level yesterday and I only had this damned cell phone for company, who the hell knows what I posted yesterday. Who bought all these Justin Bieber cds, the hell am i gonna do with those? Anyway, yeah, I was so coded up I was dancing naked in the hallway with a nurse, and not only wasn`t he my type, I`m not even in a hospital. i have the friends of eddie coyle on yet again so no worries. as to the thread topic, jim, where you at, lucas is incessantly bashed in a `i hate my parents and am never talking to them again, and where`s my tuition and rent money you capitalist swine?` way. i wouldn`t pay a dime to see this stupid movie, but I WOULD pay to see GEORGE LUCAS VS. THE FANS, if he were honest and spoke his real feelings. Might do the guy some good. The whole Internet is an open forum for those immature, overly-entertained people who should go educate themselves and create their OWN films instead of just growing numb watching his and feeling entitled.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Jun 1, 2012 - 7:55 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
JSWalsh
(Member)
|
Solium, There`s no doubt you`re correct about that, he is indeed disrespectful of his fans. The thing is, though, such a thing isn`t really an issue--I mean, he made a product, and his fans who pay for it have paid for the right to see or own a copy,, nothing else. I suspect his respect level for them would increase astronomically if they weren`t such suckers for all the garbage he puts out, just as I suspect artists who put out substandard product that DOESN`T sell may not like folks` not giving their money, but are forced to respect that their audience won`t put up with less than respectful treatment. Lucas is being a greedbag who takes advantage of his fans`s immaturity and neediness, but it`s on THEM to raise their standards and force him to man up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure it's really greed on Lucas' part. If money was really sole dictator of his actions, then surely releasing the theatrical cuts of the original trilogy would make him even more money than he's making now. I think, like it or not, Lucas simply prefers his new cuts and sees no reason to release the theatricals because he genuinely believes that they're inferior.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I truly wonder sometimes how many people, out of all the hordes who complain about Lucas' tinkering, have actually seen the original theatrical cut of "Star Wars".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Having seen the original films in theaters and enjoying them, I am on the fence on average regarding the tinkering. I actually like the new, updated effects that rid the films of the traveling mattes, transparencies and overall clunkiness. The original Star Wars looked dated two years after it came out, especially after John Dykstra improved on the effects when he did Battlestar Galactica. I also loved the enhanced snow speeder stuff in Empire, because seeing through the solid sets and models was distracting. The revised ending of Jedi with the new music and the clips of other planets made the film better. The Rancor finally looks good. I'm really not that bothered by Heyden Cristensen in the finale of Jedi either. Whatever.
The changes that bother me are those that aren't necessary or shouldn't have been necessary. Cutting back and forth to Vader taking his trip from Bespin to the Star Destroyer was completely unnecessary and ruined the pacing of that part of the film. The music was butchered in order to accommodate it. Cinematically, it was a bad choice that didn't serve the narrative (did people really not get that Vader's "bring my shuttle" meant he was going back to his ship?).
Adding Vader's "nooooo" was just cheesy. It was cheesy in Sith and it's more cheesy in Jedi. Especially since I figured the Sith version was the last gasp of Anakin before he fully became Vader. Jedi now seems to signal the return of Anakin, but again, it wasn't necessary. It took a very suspenseful and pivotal point in the story and made it laughable.
I fully support the artist's right to revise until "satisfied"(which he never is), but the changes I mentioned do not do anything positive and are superfluous. They are poorly thought out and bad cinematic decisions. I don't mind if he wants to smooth out rough continuity, that's fine. But some of this stuff just dumbs it all down a bit.
However, it's his work and I lose no sleep over it. The DVDs I have from a few years ago are fine. I would like to have the Blu-Rays because the picture clarity is wonderful. But since I prefer the earlier revised editions, why spend da money?
What does this have to do with the Paople vs Lucas. Nothing. :-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Jun 1, 2012 - 9:53 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
JSWalsh
(Member)
|
Megaton, You`ve conflated two of my points--I think all the fan-feeding junk is a sign of his greed, I think he makes the changes in the movies for the reasons he says. ..... I agreed with the above points about the repairs and screwups of the movies, but ultimately if STAR WARS would be spoiled by its flaws, it would be nothing but a special effects flick, no more. The fussiness in Lucas is the iron-solid link that will keep him a slave to his ego AND his fans. Would CITIZEN KANE, KING KONG, THE WIZARD OF OZ, TEN COMMANDMENTS, FORBIDDEN PLANET and countless others be forgotten because of matte work that isn`t CGI flawless? It`s this fixation on the bottle instead of what it contains that has made infants of the post-STAR WARS movie audiences.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The original Star Wars looked dated two years after it came out, especially after John Dykstra improved on the effects when he did Battlestar Galactica.
??? This ... I would need some sort of visual example of before I believe it ... BG improved on Star Wars? Seriously?
In so far as ship movement and fluidity, yes. Group shots of Vipers and Cylon Raiders moved more individually, while the fighters in SW would see seen sliding across the screen in strict unison. Like they put three models on sticks and moved the camera to get all three in motion.
This is not a slight, SW pioneered a lot of that stuff and revolutionized photo effects. Anything done afterward would build on the prior accomplishments and enhance them. Dykstra was a genius and the effects are the one thing on BSG nobody ever had an issue with.
Dykstra left the series after Gun on Ice Planet Zero and stock footage was the norm. But while he was there, he did feature film quality stuff. The Viper and shuttle crashes in Gun were amazing. Still are.
The guys in ILM continued to improve and Empire blew away the films and shows before it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'd argue that Empire blew away all the ones that came after, too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
