Obviously there’s been a raging if not volatile debate since the release of The Phantom Menace on the merits of the PT, how it stands up to the OT and so on and so forth. The debate will probably never end and representatives from both sides of the fence will declare their opinions as gospel etc…
I believe that the weakness of the Prequel Trilogy [or dualogy if I can invent a word] has nothing to do with the story or the actors. It all boils down to one man, and that man is George Lucas.
I’ve written about this before but I thought the time was ripe for another mini-article on the topic.
I’ve never had an issue with the story of The Phantom Menace or Attack of the Clones. My problem is the execution of these films. It all boils down to perspective [point of view – more on that later]. The George Lucas today who’s writing these new Star Wars films is not the blue collar George Lucas of 1976-1983 who worked himself into the ground. GL wasn’t a rich billionaire, ILM wasn’t the established effects and post house it is today.
Basically, George Lucas’s lifestyle today is night and day from what it used to be. 25 years ago George knew what it was like to work with the everyman, try and make your art and pay your bills etc.. Even with the success of American Graffiti George still wasn’t his own man, he was owned and operated by the studio. A New Hope was a real struggle for George, creatively, financially, in almost every way. I believe that A New Hope was alive with wit and a dash of realism because that reflected George’s demeanor and life. I believe that the poor, or the working class [albeit filmmakers, prosecutors, retail workers, etc…] have a better grip on the reality of life than the rich. The rich have their toys and their general ease in which they live their lives but ultimately many of them lose grasp on reality and real people and how they interact and how to interact with them. [Barbra Striesand has to have her linens in her hotel room match her flowers outside her room for goodness sakes]
I’ve noticed that artists who’ve become wealthy tend to lose their ability to connect to their art, or make art that connects with the everyman / woman. As I watch the films of Steven Spielberg, Martin Scorsese, George Lucas [obviously], Francis Ford Coppola and others I witness a real trend in the films that they produce.
I grew up on Spielberg, his films inspired me to become a filmmaker and writer in my own right. I watch Spielberg’s films today and I find it very difficult for me to connect with them. They look great but they’re overly sentimental and not challenging creatively. I believe that Spielberg had the ability [in his younger days] to make actual art house films and summer blockbuster movies. Today it appears that he can only make big summer films. The saying is true, “your art reflects your life.” If your life is filled with private jets, staying away from the everyman [i.e. people who make less that 100,000 a year] than your reality shifts.
George Lucas has become a man who only sees through 24k gold lenses. He hires nannys to help him raise his children and other people to do his every bidding. To me, that’s not the recipe for an artist that has the ability to connect with people like you and me who still have to drive ourselves to work, raise our children by ourselves, stretch our own canvasses and make our lives and art from the sweat of brows.
This may sound like an absolute diss on GL for the fortune he has made. Not at all, more power to him. Certainly the box office results from TPM and AOTC have only made GL richer, again more power to him. But with that kind of success comes criticism.
The reason the prequel trilogy is the way it is [thus far, ROTS is the final thermometer] is because GL is the way he is today. I’ve come to believe that GL can’t quite understand the criticism he receives. He cannot grasp or comprehende it. No doubt the OT received criticism when it premiered, and with the final release of Return of the Jedi it was clear where things were headed.
Case in point for me is the relationship between Anakin and his mother Shmi in The Phantom Menace. I know I’m not alone in realizing how one dimensional their relationship was. At every turn Shmi had the perfect thing to say “Oh look, now you can make your dreams come true” “Oh that’s so very wonderful Annie” “I’m so very proud of you” “But you can’t stop the change.” Nearly every word from Shmi’s mouth was stilted and contrived. Do you wonder why? I don’t, I know why; it’s because George doesn’t know how mothers and children interact on a daily basis. He’s raised his children as a single father and fathers are drastically different from mothers in how they raise their children.
Continuing….
George is writing a new trilogy of films that basically revolve around the interaction of different classes of people. The Jedi are the UN of their day [with a bit more spirituality and a lot more force excuse the pun], Amidala, part of a government, and so on and so forth. The biggest sub plot is a love story. George hasn’t been married in nearly 20 years, and then he had a falling out with Linda Ronstadt a few years later. George has an idea of what being in love is but not a current reality of what being in love is. Every single over the top word that Anakin says to Padme in AOTC comes off ridiculous because people in love might feel that way but rarely do they talk that way. In the old serials that kind of way of talking may have worked but the movies were already bubblegum so that kind of language wasn’t anything worth mentioning. In 2005, that language doesn’t work. Not only doesn’t it work, it’s awful and no one gets it. Star Wars may be fun, even popcorn fare but bubblegum the films are not.
In Return of the Jedi Obi-wan talked about “a certain point of view” and that’s the nail on the head as far as I’m concerned where the prequels are concerned. George Lucas has decided to tell the story of the origins and rise and fall of Anakin from his point of view. The point of view of a billionaire who can do anything he wants to, whenever he wants to, by whatever means he wants to. Probably the biggest factor in the failure in some respects of the prequel trilogy to capture the imagination and excitement of fans is George’s rustiness. George hasn’t worked with actors in a long time, much less everyday people. The cardboard performances from some of the actors is, in my opinion just as much George’s fault as it is the fault of the performer. They give him the performance and he decides whether or not to write off on those performances. At the end of the day everything still boils down to interacting with people. Natalie Portman might be a successful actor but a billionaire she isn’t. Neither is Liam Neeson, Jake Lloyd, Ahmed Best, and so on. Many of those actors are blue collar real people. George doesn’t know very many real people and the end product of that limited knowledge has birthed itself on the screen.
What the prequels have going for themselves is a visual texture unlike any other films. On a visual level George hits it out of the park every time. Unfortunately Star Wars isn’t a story about a great looking blue sky, or a comped in CGI creature. Star Wars is about real people expressing real emotions going through real traumas. George said on a commentary that he wants to tell his stories visually as opposed to literally. I just don’t believe that can work. In a film like The Three Colors : Bleu telling a visual story is possible when they are real people to look at, real sets etc… When you tell a story in a far off land about people who deal with 2005 problems, visual storytelling only extends itself so far.
I’ll end this longwinded little essay with this. I love what George Lucas has done for filmmaking, pushing digital cinema, state of the art effects, etc… He’s been a godsend in that respect. I don’t believe George is a great artist, I don’t believe he is a good artist. I believe George is a craftsman, a master craftsmen who makes visual porches and patios [great vistas, spaceships, CGI sets] but he’s not a good storyteller and never really has been. I don’t fault George for where he’s at, but I also don’t expect someone who makes more money in 5 minutes than I do in 5 years to ever be able to have his art connect with my life.
J.M. Prater
I believe that the weakness of the Prequel Trilogy [or dualogy if I can invent a word] has nothing to do with the story or the actors. It all boils down to one man, and that man is George Lucas.
I’ve written about this before but I thought the time was ripe for another mini-article on the topic.
I’ve never had an issue with the story of The Phantom Menace or Attack of the Clones. My problem is the execution of these films. It all boils down to perspective [point of view – more on that later]. The George Lucas today who’s writing these new Star Wars films is not the blue collar George Lucas of 1976-1983 who worked himself into the ground. GL wasn’t a rich billionaire, ILM wasn’t the established effects and post house it is today.
Basically, George Lucas’s lifestyle today is night and day from what it used to be. 25 years ago George knew what it was like to work with the everyman, try and make your art and pay your bills etc.. Even with the success of American Graffiti George still wasn’t his own man, he was owned and operated by the studio. A New Hope was a real struggle for George, creatively, financially, in almost every way. I believe that A New Hope was alive with wit and a dash of realism because that reflected George’s demeanor and life. I believe that the poor, or the working class [albeit filmmakers, prosecutors, retail workers, etc…] have a better grip on the reality of life than the rich. The rich have their toys and their general ease in which they live their lives but ultimately many of them lose grasp on reality and real people and how they interact and how to interact with them. [Barbra Striesand has to have her linens in her hotel room match her flowers outside her room for goodness sakes]
I’ve noticed that artists who’ve become wealthy tend to lose their ability to connect to their art, or make art that connects with the everyman / woman. As I watch the films of Steven Spielberg, Martin Scorsese, George Lucas [obviously], Francis Ford Coppola and others I witness a real trend in the films that they produce.
I grew up on Spielberg, his films inspired me to become a filmmaker and writer in my own right. I watch Spielberg’s films today and I find it very difficult for me to connect with them. They look great but they’re overly sentimental and not challenging creatively. I believe that Spielberg had the ability [in his younger days] to make actual art house films and summer blockbuster movies. Today it appears that he can only make big summer films. The saying is true, “your art reflects your life.” If your life is filled with private jets, staying away from the everyman [i.e. people who make less that 100,000 a year] than your reality shifts.
George Lucas has become a man who only sees through 24k gold lenses. He hires nannys to help him raise his children and other people to do his every bidding. To me, that’s not the recipe for an artist that has the ability to connect with people like you and me who still have to drive ourselves to work, raise our children by ourselves, stretch our own canvasses and make our lives and art from the sweat of brows.
This may sound like an absolute diss on GL for the fortune he has made. Not at all, more power to him. Certainly the box office results from TPM and AOTC have only made GL richer, again more power to him. But with that kind of success comes criticism.
The reason the prequel trilogy is the way it is [thus far, ROTS is the final thermometer] is because GL is the way he is today. I’ve come to believe that GL can’t quite understand the criticism he receives. He cannot grasp or comprehende it. No doubt the OT received criticism when it premiered, and with the final release of Return of the Jedi it was clear where things were headed.
Case in point for me is the relationship between Anakin and his mother Shmi in The Phantom Menace. I know I’m not alone in realizing how one dimensional their relationship was. At every turn Shmi had the perfect thing to say “Oh look, now you can make your dreams come true” “Oh that’s so very wonderful Annie” “I’m so very proud of you” “But you can’t stop the change.” Nearly every word from Shmi’s mouth was stilted and contrived. Do you wonder why? I don’t, I know why; it’s because George doesn’t know how mothers and children interact on a daily basis. He’s raised his children as a single father and fathers are drastically different from mothers in how they raise their children.
Continuing….
George is writing a new trilogy of films that basically revolve around the interaction of different classes of people. The Jedi are the UN of their day [with a bit more spirituality and a lot more force excuse the pun], Amidala, part of a government, and so on and so forth. The biggest sub plot is a love story. George hasn’t been married in nearly 20 years, and then he had a falling out with Linda Ronstadt a few years later. George has an idea of what being in love is but not a current reality of what being in love is. Every single over the top word that Anakin says to Padme in AOTC comes off ridiculous because people in love might feel that way but rarely do they talk that way. In the old serials that kind of way of talking may have worked but the movies were already bubblegum so that kind of language wasn’t anything worth mentioning. In 2005, that language doesn’t work. Not only doesn’t it work, it’s awful and no one gets it. Star Wars may be fun, even popcorn fare but bubblegum the films are not.
In Return of the Jedi Obi-wan talked about “a certain point of view” and that’s the nail on the head as far as I’m concerned where the prequels are concerned. George Lucas has decided to tell the story of the origins and rise and fall of Anakin from his point of view. The point of view of a billionaire who can do anything he wants to, whenever he wants to, by whatever means he wants to. Probably the biggest factor in the failure in some respects of the prequel trilogy to capture the imagination and excitement of fans is George’s rustiness. George hasn’t worked with actors in a long time, much less everyday people. The cardboard performances from some of the actors is, in my opinion just as much George’s fault as it is the fault of the performer. They give him the performance and he decides whether or not to write off on those performances. At the end of the day everything still boils down to interacting with people. Natalie Portman might be a successful actor but a billionaire she isn’t. Neither is Liam Neeson, Jake Lloyd, Ahmed Best, and so on. Many of those actors are blue collar real people. George doesn’t know very many real people and the end product of that limited knowledge has birthed itself on the screen.
What the prequels have going for themselves is a visual texture unlike any other films. On a visual level George hits it out of the park every time. Unfortunately Star Wars isn’t a story about a great looking blue sky, or a comped in CGI creature. Star Wars is about real people expressing real emotions going through real traumas. George said on a commentary that he wants to tell his stories visually as opposed to literally. I just don’t believe that can work. In a film like The Three Colors : Bleu telling a visual story is possible when they are real people to look at, real sets etc… When you tell a story in a far off land about people who deal with 2005 problems, visual storytelling only extends itself so far.
I’ll end this longwinded little essay with this. I love what George Lucas has done for filmmaking, pushing digital cinema, state of the art effects, etc… He’s been a godsend in that respect. I don’t believe George is a great artist, I don’t believe he is a good artist. I believe George is a craftsman, a master craftsmen who makes visual porches and patios [great vistas, spaceships, CGI sets] but he’s not a good storyteller and never really has been. I don’t fault George for where he’s at, but I also don’t expect someone who makes more money in 5 minutes than I do in 5 years to ever be able to have his art connect with my life.
J.M. Prater
It's just that when you take something trivial like the Coleman incident and then restate the insignificant fact that Lucas has used an assistant/nanny like we're supposed to be shocked, it does seem like your posts are personal. That's all I'm saying. 
