Lucas Spouts Off Again.

[Batty]

Lucas haters will be Lucas haters no matter what. I don't blame him for making statements like this considering all the criticism he's taken over the PT. He's just trying to downplay fanboy expectations. Should he have made these statements? Obviously not. It's a no-win situation for him.

 

[doesitmatter]

I have to wonder what Lucas is thinking. He's downplaying Indy then rushing another Star Wars movie into theaters three months later? Maybe he just doesn't want to share with Speilberg anymore.

 

[waterfold]

At this point, he just needs to shut up and let the movie speak for itself. Hell, HE'S the one who delayed it for years because he couldn't settle on a script he was happy with. And he even ditched one by Frank Darabont, probably the best screenwriter working today. And he wants to preach to us about expectations? Piss off, George!

That is what worries me the most. If I remember correctly, Spielberg said that Darabont's Indy script was the best since Raiders, yet somehow it wasn't the script shot.

And despite what Lucas wants to believe, the movies that we loved aren't just because of the fond memories we had watching them in the past, the movies DO hold up. I can still pop in Raiders any day of the week and get enthralled in it, and unlike the Star Wars movies, I don't have the super nostalgia factors playing in. It's just a great movie.

I do love the Nolan quote though. Awsome.

 

[foolkiller]

I agree with him to a certain extent. I saw Raiders and Temple as an elementary school kid. I loved them. I was in college when Crusade came out and thought it was ok. To think a film like this will affect you the same way as an adult and when you are a child is unrealistic. I will say though the trailer gave some of those kid feelings again.

 

[IrishJedi]

I agree with him to a certain extent. I saw Raiders and Temple as an elementary school kid. I loved them. I was in college when Crusade came out and thought it was ok.

Couldn't that be because TLC is a lesser movie than the other two? I felt that was in 1989 and still do.

It's still not a BAD flick, though.

 

[The Josh]

Couldn't that be because TLC is a lesser movie than the other two? I felt that was in 1989 and still do.

It's still not a BAD flick, though.

As I said TLC is my fave among the three. I saw it in the theaters in 89 when I was 8ish so I think what he's correct.

 

[foolkiller]

Couldn't that be because TLC is a lesser movie than the other two? I felt that was in 1989 and still do.

It's still not a BAD flick, though.

I think it is lesser than Raiders and about the same as Temple. I never thought Temple was bad until people pointed out things in it. So as an Adult I have changed my opinion on it some. I still like it, in fact I think the action sequences in Temple are "edge of your seat" great which I feel Crusade lacked. Really it comes down to suspension of disbelieve as an adult. I have a harder time buying the 500 year old knight and that somehow the had circular saw blades that worked like modern ones in Crusade. Same with Temple and jumping out of a plane with a raft,(which as a kid I thought was the coolest). Now I know Raiders has some far fetched stuff but nothing that seemed to crazy, even the opening of the Ark seemed plausible considering it supposed held the power of god in it. you could say the knight was the power of god too but it just seemed to out there for me. Crusade still is fun and I remember seeing the trailer thinking it would be great but when I saw it, certain things just didn't fit for me.

 

[IrishJedi]

Is this officially an Indy thread? If so how many threads are you at Irish? I lost count.

74... and a half?

 

[BadMoon]

74... and a half?

:chew

 

[occulum]

I think he's saying is

"Look at the SW prequals. They were bad. I don't really have THAT much talent. I got lucky with one great story back in the 70's/80's and have pretty much flopped since. Sure the new movies made money, but SW fans will buy and go see anything."

 

[galactiboy]

I disagree. First of all, that argument is a non sequitur. Lucas is trying to put himself in a no-lose situation by downplaying the movie and pre-emptively bracing for criticism. It's even worse when he goes to revisionism to imply that the originals were not exactly beloved either and would probably be hated if they were released today. The man makes no sense.

I agree with you Irish... its realistic to expect some fan expectations won't be met. But I think the audience for this film will be like that of TPM and will be a mixture of old and new fans wanting to see a great and fun movie.

I definitely don't expect it to be the best Indy movie ever, I just want it to be fun and not suck. But his statements, no matter what he actually intends do make one feel a bit uneasy about the final product. Which is odd since up until now I've been excited to see the new film. I don't need doom and gloom from Lucas before its even hit the streets.

 

[Darth Waller]

He's starting to make me worry about the movie now.

 

[IrishJedi]

He's starting to make me worry about the movie now.

Why? Is Lucas ever right about his own movies?

 

[Darth Waller]

Why? Is Lucas ever right about his own movies?

Is that a trick question?

 

[choopie]

I'm not worried about what Lucas says. I've always considered the IJ franchise to be Spielberg's baby. Lucas may have written the story, but the screenplay is from the guy who gave us Spiderman and Jurassic Park. Can't be all that bad.

 

[IrishJedi]

Yeah, Koepp is pretty solid.

 

[Bardoon]

George Lucas is one of the biggest idiots with the LUCKIEST break ever...and all he needed was that ONE. If Star Wars wasn't the MONSTER success it was AND is than I think Lucas would be a nobody today. I will not doubt some of his creativity for the elaborate stories, but he has always come off as a big dunce to me sitting on a pile of money.

The original trilogy went through many script re-writes because the studios KNEW Lucas' writing sucked. Thank God they reworked them and made them into the films they are today.

By the time the Prequel Trilogy was on the table, George Lucas had so much money and power that he could totally surround himself with "Yes Men" and FOX fell right into that category. It was more about the dolla-dolla bills to them and they didn't care of Lucas butchered it all with his horrible script-writing.

 

[Entropy]

Ultimately the end result of this film will speak for itself.

I'm sure it will be directed and edited well, Spielberg is much better than Lucas on that front. And the acting and action will be solid.

The plot is what concerns me. If it is shoddily written and full of forced jokes like the PT, fans will be disappointed and rightly so and GL will roll out more "you can never live up to what's in the fans heads" "I made it for a different generation" lame statements.

IMO, it all depends on whether people like and accept the alien crystal skull concept and the Mutt Williams stuff or not. As long as the giant ants aren't laughable and Indy doesn't fly off in a spaceship I feel it will be received well.

 

[IrishJedi]

As long as the giant ants aren't laughable and Indy doesn't fly off in a spaceship I feel it will be received well.

That's pretty much my take as well.

 

[Agent0028]

Sounds like Lucas is a bit gun shy from all the negative reactions to the PT. And I think its true that you can't live up to what the fans expect. I would wager money that if the A New Hope was coming out for the very first time in two months it would be very poorly received. Times, people, and tastes change. Still saying things like that before a movie comes out sure as heck isn't going to encourage people to see it.