the list of 9 for may 19, 2005:
NINE REASONS WHY I DON'T LIKE GEORGE LUCAS ANYMORE
With The Revenge of the Sith opening today, apparently the last new Star Wars moviethe world will ever see, I thought I'd weigh in on the phenomenon from a more criticalpoint of view. I saw the original Star Wars at least a dozen times in the theater when I wasa kid. I had all the action figures. I was a big fan, but nothing out of the ordinary for aseven-year-old lad in 1977. As I've since become a grown-up filmmaker instead of a raving fanboy,I can look at the whole thing with some perspective. And I'm not afraid to go against the grainand say that, no matter how decent this new movie may be, I'll never have the same admiration forGeorge Lucas that I did when I was a tot. Why? Well for starters...

  1. HE RECUT HIS OLD FILMS. I understand the temptation forartists of all stripes to revisit their old work and tweak it. But personally I think that oneshould move on and do new things, instead of farting around with decades-old projects. Especially when... but I'll save this for the next entry.

  2. HE RECUT HIS OLD FILMS AND NOW ONLY LETS US WATCH THE NEWVERSIONS. With a movie like Star Wars, after it's been seen by hundreds ofmillions of people, you have a responsibility not to take away their cherished childhood memories.If Lucas wants to go back and make Greedo shoot first at Han Solo, fine. But it's unconscionableto say "Sorry if you've been watching Han shoot first - and loving it - for the past 20 years. Youwon't get to see that ever again, unless you watch your shabby old VHS tapes."

  3. JAR-JAR BINKS. I don't think it's necessary to explain this entry.

  4. MIDICHLORIANS. With this awful plot device introduced in1999's The Phantom Menace, Lucas abandoned his lovely original idea of "The Force" as agroovy, oversoul-like entity that exists within all of us (it's God, really) for a clunky,Scientology-like notion of organisms in the bloodstream called midichlorians, which some peoplegenetically have more of than others. What crap.

  5. ACTUALLY, ALL OF "THE PHANTOM MENACE." Call it EpisodeI if you must, but Jar-Jar, midichlorians, a talentless child actor exclaiming "Yippee!", poopjokes and a lame two-headed sportscaster are just a few of the many things that made thismovie unbearable. Some apologists may remind you that Lucas's intention was to start light and enddark with his second trio of Star Wars films, but that doesn't excuse this from being atwo-hour-plus embarrassment.

  6. ONE MOVIE! NO, NINE MOVIES! NO, I SAID SIX MOVIES!There's a reason I don't refer to the original Star Wars as "Episode IV" or "A New Hope."Okay, two reasons: First, it's retarded and gay. Second, any fool can see that Star Warswas meant as a stand-alone story. No arguments. Darth Vader was the bad guy, not Luke's father.Leia was Luke's love interest, not his twin sister. This film offers no hint of the soapopera to come. Only after it became a huge success did Lucas announce, "Actually, it's the secondtrilogy in a planned series of three trilogies, or nine films." That's right, we all heardhim say "nine films." Yet in the late 90's, when he finally got to work on The PhantomMenace, he suddenly changed his tune and said "No, I always said six films."

  7. RAIDERS OF THE CHANGED TITLE. Let's not forget some ofLucas's non-Star Wars efforts. He has also re-released his first feature, THX-1138,with new and unnecessary special effects that mar the sparse nature of the film, and even stupidlychanged the title of Raiders of the Lost Ark, which he produced, to Indiana Jones andthe Raiders of the Lost Ark in order to be consistent with its sequels. What's next, Richard Dreyfuss finally hooking up with Suzanne Somers in American Graffiti?

  8. GENERAL ORWELLIAN REVISIONISM. As suggested by several ofthe above entries, Lucas has a creepy knack for revising history to suit his needs. It's likeObi-Wan Kenobi convincing the stormtroopers that these weren't the droids they were looking for."It was always called 'A New Hope.' I always meant for there to be six films."What's more disturbing is that people believe him. Thank God he's not a world leader.

  9. GENERAL CONTROL FREAK-ISM. Along with this paranoidrevising and suppressing (ala Stalin having Trotsy airbrushed out of old Party photos), Lucas hasalso spearheaded an awful trend of replacing real sets and exteriors with computer-generated ones.Not to mention pissing on the crafts of puppetry and make-up by throwing in awkward animatedcharacters. Why? Because this is the control freak at work, not leaving anything up to chance andthus draining his work of any spontaneity. What's sad is that his sterilizing technomania hascaught on with insecure filmmakers worldwide.

Copyright © Mark Tapio Kines 2011