George Lucas plans to retire

[EternalFinality]

Do please re-read that last sentence. You are aware that he's talking about altering other people's work, right? Or are you trying to tell us that once something is created it is no longer under the control of the original artist? Because if that is your position, why would anyone want to create anything?

 

He's referring to "copyright holders."

 

That's him.

 

Plus, this alone should be enough:

 

People who alter or destroy works of art and our cultural heritage for profit or as an exercise of power are barbariansp

 

That's exactly what he's doing. For profit. He sells a new version every time.

[Kharnis]

He's referring to "copyright holders."

 

That's him.

 

Plus, this alone should be enough:

 

 

 

That's exactly what he's doing. For profit. He sells a new version every time.

 

He is not talking about what people can do with their own creations. It is very obvious what he is talking about, and anyone who would apply even a fraction of that "critical thinking" that you people keep trying to tell others to do would very quickly know this. Here's an idea: why don't you look up the original speech that he made, just to put that quote of yours into perspective?

 

Oh, right. That would completely destroy your argument, wouldn't it? No worries. I'll provide you with the full speech.

 

My name is George Lucas. I am a writer, director, and producer of motion pictures and Chairman of the Board of Lucasfilm Ltd., a multi-faceted entertainment corporation.

 

I am not here today as a writer-director, or as a producer, or as the chairman of a corporation. I’ve come as a citizen of what I believe to be a great society that is in need of a moral anchor to help define and protect its intellectual and cultural heritage. It is not being protected.

 

The destruction of our film heritage, which is the focus of concern today, is only the tip of the iceberg. American law does not protect our painters, sculptors, recording artists, authors, or filmmakers from having their lifework distorted, and their reputation ruined. If something is not done now to clearly state the moral rights of artists, current and future technologies will alter, mutilate, and destroy for future generations the subtle human truths and highest human feeling that talented individuals within our society have created.

 

A copyright is held in trust by its owner until it ultimately reverts to public domain. American works of art belong to the American public; they are part of our cultural history.

 

People who alter or destroy works of art and our cultural heritage for profit or as an exercise of power are barbarians, and if the laws of the United States continue to condone this behavior, history will surely classify us as a barbaric society. The preservation of our cultural heritage may not seem to be as politically sensitive an issue as “when life begins” or “when it should be appropriately terminated,” but it is important because it goes to the heart of what sets mankind apart. Creative expression is at the core of our humanness. Art is a distinctly human endeavor. We must have respect for it if we are to have any respect for the human race.

 

These current defacements are just the beginning. Today, engineers with their computers can add color to black-and-white movies, change the soundtrack, speed up the pace, and add or subtract material to the philosophical tastes of the copyright holder. Tomorrow, more advanced technology will be able to replace actors with “fresher faces,” or alter dialogue and change the movement of the actor’s lips to match. It will soon be possible to create a new “original” negative with whatever changes or alterations the copyright holder of the moment desires. The copyright holders, so far, have not been completely diligent in preserving the original negatives of films they control. In order to reconstruct old negatives, many archivists have had to go to Eastern bloc countries where American films have been better preserved.

 

In the future it will become even easier for old negatives to become lost and be “replaced” by new altered negatives. This would be a great loss to our society. Our cultural history must not be allowed to be rewritten.

 

There is nothing to stop American films, records, books, and paintings from being sold to a foreign entity or egotistical gangsters and having them change our cultural heritage to suit their personal taste.

 

I accuse the companies and groups, who say that American law is sufficient, of misleading the Congress and the People for their own economic self-interest.

 

I accuse the corporations, who oppose the moral rights of the artist, of being dishonest and insensitive to American cultural heritage and of being interested only in their quarterly bottom line, and not in the long-term interest of the Nation.

 

The public’s interest is ultimately dominant over all other interests. And the proof of that is that even a copyright law only permits the creators and their estate a limited amount of time to enjoy the economic fruits of that work.

 

There are those who say American law is sufficient. That’s an outrage! It’s not sufficient! If it were sufficient, why would I be here? Why would John Houston have been so studiously ignored when he protested the colorization of “The Maltese Falcon?” Why are films cut up and butchered?

 

Attention should be paid to this question of our soul, and not simply to accounting procedures. Attention should be paid to the interest of those who are yet unborn, who should be able to see this generation as it saw itself, and the past generation as it saw itself.

 

I hope you have the courage to lead America in acknowledging the importance of American art to the human race, and accord the proper protection for the creators of that art–as it is accorded them in much of the rest of the world communities.

 

Oh dear. Your entire argument is now invalid.

[Zeratho]

This is great news considering Indiana Jones 5.

 

No more aliens!

[EternalFinality]

He is not talking about what people can do with their own creations. It is very obvious what he is talking about, and anyone who would apply even a fraction of that "critical thinking" that you people keep trying to tell others to do would very quickly know this. Here's an idea: why don't you look up the original speech that he made, just to put that quote of yours into perspective?

 

Oh, right. That would completely destroy your argument, wouldn't it? No worries. I'll provide you with the full speech.

 

 

 

Oh dear. Your entire argument is now invalid.

 

The quote was in the context of him testifying before congress to PREVENT PEOPLE FROM RELEASING ALTERED MOVIES. It's the most damning perspective possible.

 

He's not an author. He didn't create everything. He came up with the ideas for the world and the characters and the plot, but he alone did not make the movie. A lot of people did. He didn't do all the directing, the producing, or the editing, or everything else. But now he alone is deciding that others didn't do what he "wanted." Star Wars is solely his own creation, but the original trilogy is not. He's become everything he used to despise. It's disgustingly ironic. No one should be able to change films, except for him of course.

Edited January 22, 2012 by EternalFinality

[Kharnis]

The quote was in the context of him testifying before congress to PREVENT PEOPLE FROM RELEASING ALTERED MOVIES. It's the most damning perspective possible.

 

He's not an author. He didn't create everything. He came up with the ideas for the world and the characters and the plot, but he alone did not make the movie. A lot of people did. He didn't do all the directing, the producing, or the editing, or everything else. But now he alone is deciding that others didn't do what he "wanted." Star Wars is solely his own creation, but the original trilogy is not. He's become everything he used to despise. It's disgustingly ironic.

 

So, you decide to continue to flaunt your ignorance. A bold, though puzzling, strategy. Okay, then.

[EternalFinality]

So, you decide to continue to flaunt your ignorance. A bold, though puzzling, strategy. Okay, then.

 

You're such a fanboy you can't even see how he destroyed his own future position. And I'm ignorant.

[Kharnis]

You're such a fanboy you can't even see how he destroyed his own future position. And I'm ignorant.

 

Okay, I'm going to try to use small words so you understand.

 

He is the maker of the Star Wars story. No one else is. No one else can tell him what to do with it. No one else is called "creator." That means the story is his. No one else's. The speech clearly shows him saying that the creators of art are the ultimate owners of art. No one else is. No one should be able to alter art if they are not the creator of that art. No one has that right, except for the creator of that right. Lucas is the creator of Star Wars. It is his right. He is not doing anything that he was against.

 

Are you getting it now?

[EternalFinality]

Okay, I'm going to try to use small words so you understand.

 

He is the maker of the Star Wars story. No one else is. No one else can tell him what to do with it. No one else is called "creator." That means the story is his. No one else's. The speech clearly shows him saying that the creators of art are the ultimate owners of art. No one else is. No one should be able to alter art if they are not the creator of that art. No one has that right, except for the creator of that right. Lucas is the creator of Star Wars. It is his right. He is not doing anything that he was against.

 

Are you getting it now?

 

Do you understand that a movie is not just a story? If you think that one person makes a feature film I don't know what to tell you.

 

He is not a painter who alone paints a painting. He is not an author who alone writes a book. He's not a musician who alone composed a song.

Edited January 22, 2012 by EternalFinality

[Kharnis]

Do you understand that a movie is not just a story? If you think that one person makes a feature film I don't know what to tell you.

 

He is not a painter who alone paints a painting. He is not an author who alone writes a book. He's not a musician who alone composed a song.

 

Make a Star Wars movie. Heck, just write a Star Wars book. Put it out for public consumption and make money. Let us know who the lawyers who sue you are working on behalf of.

 

Here's a hint: it won't be for Del Ray Books, Fox Studios, ILM, the Kershner Estate, the gaffers, the model makers, or anyone else who worked on the movie.

[EternalFinality]

Make a Star Wars movie. Heck, just write a Star Wars book. Put it out for public consumption and make money. Let us know who the lawyers who sue you are working on behalf of.

 

Here's a hint: it won't be for Del Ray Books, Fox Studios, ILM, the Kershner Estate, the gaffers, the model makers, or anyone else who worked on the movie.

 

That's because it's copyright infringement. But do note that if I did I wouldn't be sued by George Lucas, I'd be sued by a corporation. Hint hint.

 

Also, if George Lucas put out another Digitally Remastered Uber Blu-Ray 24 pack of the original trilogy but this time the credits of the movie listed only George Lucas as doing everything, he would be sued. I wonder why that is.

Edited January 22, 2012 by EternalFinality

[Kharnis]

That's because it's copyright infringement. But do note that if I did I wouldn't be sued by George Lucas, I'd be sued by a corporation. Hint hint.

 

Also, if George Lucas put out another Digitally Remastered Uber Blu-Ray 24 pack of the original trilogy but this time the credits of the movie listed only George Lucas as doing everything, he would be sued. I wonder why that is.

 

 

Who owns and runs that corporation again? Here's another hint for you: it's not a board. And the reason he would be sued would not be because he is claiming credit for creating something that he shouldn't be; he'd be sued because he'd be claiming credit for work he didn't do. It's obvious that he didn't string the electrical works, or provide the catering, or did the special effects himself.

 

You know what he did do, though? Order those who did as to what he wanted them to do. Or do you think that every single person who worked on those movies get royalties?

[EternalFinality]

Order those who did as to what he wanted them to do.

 

Actually, that's not true at all. Because if they did what he wanted them to do, why is he making changes now that he claims were what he wanted all along? I await the mental gymnastics you will be doing in your next failure response.

[Midasear]

Okay, I'm going to try to use small words so you understand.

 

You're awfully insulting for someone with having serious comprehension issues of his own.

 

Lucas was complaining about studios refusing to make the original versions of certain films available to the public, and of altering those films via colorization and potentially via digital animation (a new technology at the time).

 

You seem to think that Lucas is different because he's a "creator". But this is bull-#### on two levels:

 

First, the studios _WERE_ the creators for copyright purposes of the works Lucas was complaining about. Under the old studio system, almost all films were works for hire, and the studio chiefs had absolute control over casting, writing, and practically everything else. And they used that authority liberally. The studios were in exactly the same legal and creative position with respect to the old black & white works Lucas was testifying about that Lucas is with respect to Star Wars.

 

So the man really is a massive hypocrite.

 

Second, no studio production film like Star Wars has one and only one creator, it's a collaborative process that involves dozens, even hundreds of people. And Lucas has been doing _exactly_ one of the things he decried as barbarism decades ago: using digital animation to rewrite and even replace actor's performances. Do you really think Sebastion Shaw appreciated being deleted from the final scene of "Return of the Jedi"? What about the actor's creative rights?

 

Sure, Lucas has an absolute legal right to make changes to his film, withdraw the originals from circulation, and fiddle with rewriting things large and small via digital animation. But he had the right of it from an artistic, cultural and ethical level when he testified before congress. Doing that stuff is awful and serves the rest of us very poorly.

 

He deserves all the criticism he gets for it, especially since many of the changes Lucas chooses to make do _obvious_ injury to the original work.

[EternalFinality]

The amazing thing is that if the laws that Lucas was testifying for had passed - they would have prevented him from doing the things he has done.

 

That alone should be enough to undermine any credibility in arguments supporting him.

[Forgon]

Do you understand that a movie is not just a story? If you think that one person makes a feature film I don't know what to tell you.

 

He is not a painter who alone paints a painting. He is not an author who alone writes a book. He's not a musician who alone composed a song.

 

You honestly have no concept of one's attachment to their creations in their imagination. What he imagined for Star Wars is no different then what Da Vinci imagined for his Mona Lisa. It was a thought. That thought grew, expanded, and later was expressed into a form that could be communicated to other humans in the real world.

 

A movie and its collaborators share the experience to help express that thought from its creator. They are the extensions for the tools to have such work be expressed. However, the thought idea, and creation belongs to him; it is his.

 

If I was in GL's position, I would feel the same way. Whether I agree with him or not on everything else, its his creation to do with as he pleases and envision it as he pleases.

[EternalFinality]

You honestly have no concept of one's attachment to their creations in their imagination. What he imagined for Star Wars is no different then what Da Vinci imagined for his Mona Lisa. It was a thought. That thought grew, expanded, and later was expressed into a form that could be communicated to other humans in the real world.

 

A movie and its collaborators share the experience to help express that thought from its creator. They are the extensions for the tools to have such work be expressed. However, the thought idea, and creation belongs to him; it is his.

 

If I was in GL's position, I would feel the same way. Whether I agree with him or not on everything else, its his creation to do with as he pleases and envision it as he pleases.

 

What painter has, 20 years later, revised his work? What author has changed his book? What musician has changed their song?

 

You see, once an artist shares their art, it is no longer theirs - it belongs to the people that embrace it. You cannot come in and say - no, you're wrong. You're wrong for loving this - and I'm going to change it. Only those so arrogant, so egotistical would believe that THEY are the sole center of control. Legally, for purposes of copyright, yes. Artistically - no.

 

Old George Lucas, the one quoted, understood this.

 

People who alter or destroy works of art and our cultural heritage for profit or as an exercise of power are barbarians

 

Our cultural heritage.

 

Our cultural history must not be allowed to be rewritten

 

Not "our artists must retain the right to alter their work."

 

When he made the original movies, he wrote part of our cultural history. He argued that he MUST NOT be allowed to rewrite it. Yet that's exactly what he has done. Hypocrite.

Edited January 22, 2012 by EternalFinality

[jsdcaedus]

How can you blame a creator of something so great!

 

His ideas were/are great, the implementation of them from others are the problem.

 

empire strikes back. widely accepted as by far the best made movie of the entire series... directed by.... NOT George Lucas! go figure!

 

prequel trilogy, widely accepted as mostly a stinking pile of dung with cool fight scenes

directed by... George Lucas!

 

you're half right and all backwards. his creation was great, but it was the implementation by others (irvin kershner and the like), that made the original truely great.

[XjediXrf]

I like Star Wars and all,but he`s a freakin` Nazi when it comes to canon.Good riddance. Edited January 22, 2012 by XjediXrf
Replaced"approving stuff"with "Canon

[Terko_Koslah]

I invented something. The Eggo peanut butter and jelly sandwich. I don't go around acting like a messiah because of that.

 

Have you ever met George Lucas?

[Hanscholo]

GL is both a hero and a villain to me, in many respects he mirrors his characters. I think he is a very decent human being. He is incredibly talented, but flawed and dogmatic.

 

How can i stay angry at someone who gave me Darth Vader and Indiana Jones?

[Agemnon]

I like Star Wars and all,but he`s a freakin` Nazi when it comes to canon.Good riddance.

 

Well, it is his canon...

[XjediXrf]

I found something that reminded me of George:

 

You either die a hero,or live long enough to see yourself become a villian.

[Traven]

I bet everytime George wakes up, the first thing he does is listen to: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_rSjBxWQCQ&feature=related

[Gantoris_Aym]

Well, it is his canon...

 

haha yeah exactly, how dare he protect his inventions and his business. At the end of the day star wars is what YOU want it to be, although you can't argue your beliefs to other people. It's whatever helps you sleep at night.

Edited January 23, 2012 by Gantoris_Aym

[jediankh]

In the next 5 to 10 centuries from now, if some at that time find lost data from the internet and find this. they would question, laugh, or criticize this forum to hell.

 

I mean Lucas could be like Shakespeare or lower in that era. then their could be something like the History Channel that had a special about the fan-base of George Lucas or Star Wars, with them taking quotes from this forum or any forum Stars Wars or Lucas related. With the people on the special either applauding us or criticizing us for our intelligence, level of mind set, and/or opinions.

 

Which saddens me even more how the human race would end up in the future.

Edited January 23, 2012 by jediankh