George Lucas and Brett's Blade Runner analogy (caution: long rant)

Posted by Rik Duel from pbarray01.powerup.com.au on July 19, 1999 at 17:43:51:

I've been a little busy of late, and so haven't been keeping on top of the forum discussions. I've just read Brett Lambert's defense of George Lucas, and his use of an analogy with Blade Runner's Eldon Tyrell in doing so.

I think that this is a very apt analogy, but I don't see it as a defense of George Lucas.

Lucas has, like Tyrell, created some great things. And in the years since, he has, also like Tyrell, modified his creations.

And, once again like Tyrell, in my opinion, his adaptations have not necessarily been beneficial to those creations.

Now before a thousand rabid Lucasfans pounce on me, keep in mind that I am of your number. A bigger Indiana Jones fan you would be hard-pressed to find, and my earliest memories are of sitting in a movie theatre watching Star Wars, and of begging my Mum to buy me that Star Wars figure for $1.99. To this day, I shell out my hard-earned cash to the Star Wars Insider, and I queued up early to see the Phantom Menace on opening day.

But I am more fanatical about the actual creations, than I am about the creator himself. I am very critical of Lucas, most especially the Star Wars Special Editions, The Phantom Menace, and now the change to the title of Raiders of the Lost Ark.

To me, the Special Editions were an exercise in trying to improve on perfection, and they could not possibly have succeeded. The only changes that I found satisfying were the explosion effects (of Alderaan and the Death Star). The rest, to me, were clumsy and distracting. Who here really wanted to see Greedo shoot first? Did anyone really think Han Solo less heroic for making that pre-emptive strike in the Cantina? The encounter with Jabba in the spaceport was just plain stupid. It didn't work. Sure, I got a buzz out of seeing Boba Fett walk into frame, but that didn't make up for a really clumsy and unnecessary scene. The CG Musical number that was included in the Jedi SE really made the setting slightly comical, and far less brooding and scary than it should have been. Overall, the SEs for me were a great disappointment.

The Phantom Menace, to my mind, is inferior to the three films that preceded it. Sometimes, an artist needs the constraints that a form will provide. At some point, someone should have told Lucas, 'less is more'. Good story, sure, but not nearly enough time to tell it properly, especially with large action sequences like the pod race and the climactic jedi fight scene. These were entertaining sequences, but the film overall suffered because of the large amount of storytelling that had to be fit in between. And what of the total de-mystification of Jedis and the Force? I personally preferred it when I thought that the Force was a mystical energy that surrounds us, penetrates us, binds the galaxy together. But no, we now are told that it's the result of the microscopic midichlorian symbiotes. Give me The Empire Strikes Back anyday.

(I actually can forgive the title change of Raiders. I don't like it, but I can forgive it. I teach martial arts to children, and once I asked them if they'd seen Raiders of the Lost Ark. No? It's the first Indiana Jones movie. Oh. Cool. The Indiana Jones name is an important identifier for people who weren't around when Raiders was released. But I still think that the LOGO should stay much the same. Have 'Indiana Jones and the' in a smaller font, with the big, familiar Red-to-yellow 'RAIDERS' still there as the main part of the frame.)

My point is, Lucas's alterations to his creations have not necessarily been worthwhile or even that good. Is it really so unfair for us, the fans of his creations, to stand up and object loudly to these changes, or to any ways in which Lucas can be perceived to be doing something at the expense of his creations or their fans?

Brett's analogy to Tyrell in defending Lucas, is so very apt in that in my viewing of Blade Runner, there is more than a small amount of justice involved in his destruction at the hands of Roy Baty. Tyrell is not an innocent victim. Baty and the Replicants are the victims in Blade Runner. Just as Star Wars (although I'm hoping not Indiana Jones) has suffered of late by its creator's hand.

Don't expect me to be cheery if we hear an announcement of "Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark: Special Edition".

Rik.

Follow Ups:

Re: George Lucas and Brett's Blade Runner analogy (caution: long rant) The Man with the Hat 19:16:48 7/19/99 (1)
- You're both right on the money! ROB T. 23:27:16 7/19/99 (0)

Post a Followup:

Name:    
E-Mail:  
Subject: 
Comments:

: I've been a little busy of late, and so haven't been keeping on top of the forum discussions.  I've just read Brett Lambert's defense of George Lucas, and his use of an analogy with Blade Runner's Eldon Tyrell in doing so.

: I think that this is a very apt analogy, but I don't see it as a defense of George Lucas.

: Lucas has, like Tyrell, created some great things.  And in the years since, he has, also like Tyrell, modified his creations.

: And, once again like Tyrell, in my opinion, his adaptations have not necessarily been beneficial to those creations.

: Now before a thousand rabid Lucasfans pounce on me, keep in mind that I am of your number. A bigger Indiana Jones fan you would be hard-pressed to find, and my earliest memories are of sitting in a movie theatre watching Star Wars, and of begging my Mum to buy me that Star Wars figure for $1.99.  To this day, I shell out my hard-earned cash to the Star Wars Insider, and I queued up early to see the Phantom Menace on opening day.

: But I am more fanatical about the actual creations, than I am about the creator himself.  I am very critical of Lucas, most especially the Star Wars Special Editions, The Phantom Menace, and now the change to the title of Raiders of the Lost Ark.

: To me, the Special Editions were an exercise in trying to improve on perfection, and they could not possibly have succeeded.  The only changes that I found satisfying were the explosion effects (of Alderaan and the Death Star).  The rest, to me, were clumsy and distracting.  Who here really wanted to see Greedo shoot first?  Did anyone really think Han Solo less heroic for making that pre-emptive strike in the Cantina?  The encounter with Jabba in the spaceport was just plain stupid.  It didn't work.  Sure, I got a buzz out of seeing Boba Fett walk into frame, but that didn't make up for a really clumsy and unnecessary scene.  The CG Musical number that was included in the Jedi SE really made the setting slightly comical, and far less brooding and scary than it should have been.  Overall, the SEs for me were a great disappointment.

: The Phantom Menace, to my mind, is inferior to the three films that preceded it.  Sometimes, an artist needs the constraints that a form will provide.  At some point, someone should have told Lucas, 'less is more'.  Good story, sure, but not nearly enough time to tell it properly, especially with large action sequences like the pod race and the climactic jedi fight scene. These were entertaining sequences, but the film overall suffered because of the large amount of storytelling that had to be fit in between.  And what of the total de-mystification of Jedis and the Force?  I personally preferred it when I thought that the Force was a mystical energy that surrounds us, penetrates us, binds the galaxy together.  But no, we now are told that it's the result of the microscopic midichlorian symbiotes.  Give me The Empire Strikes Back anyday.

: (I actually can forgive the title change of Raiders.  I don't like it, but I can forgive it.  I teach martial arts to children, and once I asked them if they'd seen Raiders of the Lost Ark.  No?  It's the first Indiana Jones movie.  Oh.  Cool.  The Indiana Jones name is an important identifier for people who weren't around when Raiders was released.  But I still think that the LOGO should stay much the same.  Have 'Indiana Jones and the' in a smaller font, with the big, familiar Red-to-yellow 'RAIDERS' still there as the main part of the frame.)

: My point is, Lucas's alterations to his creations have not necessarily been worthwhile or even that good.  Is it really so unfair for us, the fans of his creations, to stand up and object loudly to these changes, or to any ways in which Lucas can be perceived to be doing something at the expense of his creations or their fans?

: Brett's analogy to Tyrell in defending Lucas, is so very apt in that in my viewing of Blade Runner, there is more than a small amount of justice involved in his destruction at the hands of Roy Baty.  Tyrell is not an innocent victim.  Baty and the Replicants are the victims in Blade Runner.  Just as Star Wars (although I'm hoping not Indiana Jones) has suffered of late by its creator's hand.

: Don't expect me to be cheery if we hear an announcement of "Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark: Special Edition".

: Rik.

Optional:

Link URL:   
Link Title: 
Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The Indyfan Forum ] [ FAQ ]