ANNIE WILKES ATTACKS GEORGE LUCAS
Annie Wilkes is alive and well. She's apparently a Star Wars fan. And you thought Annie was dead!
I'm watching "The People vs. George Lucas" and loving it. Now, to be clear, these people are crazy. Very crazy. Most of them feel George Lucas betrayed them and personally set out to cause them pain and suffering. But, at a core level I don't want to admit. . . I agree with these people. Not that George Lucas ruined my life, but that there are a few problems with Star Wars -- the prequels in particular.
One of the scenes is a parody of Misery, in which a red haired woman wheels George Lucas into a room and announces it's a big day for George. What's going on? "You're new studio, silly. So you can keep writing Star Wars. You're going to rewrite episode three George. But this time, you are going to do it correctly. You're going to make it the way I want to see it." There is a final scene in which George and the red haired woman fight it out.
Director Alexandre O. Philippe gives the fans lots of room to complain. And complain they do! For starters, they complain that Lucas added scenes. They complain that he changed scenes; in particular, Greedo shot first. OH MY! That gets people going. The fans complain that the frames are
The fans also complain about the prequels. A lot of stuff I totally agree with. Yes, mesa hates Jar Jar Binks. I thought the Darth Vader "Nooooo" at the end of Episode 3 was the realm of melodrama. Mediclorines (no, I do not know how to spell that), were also dumb. But, it didn't ruin my life!
I like the documentary, simply because it pays tribute to the 1978 Star Wars Holiday Special. Of course, my favorite part is princess Leia singing.
STEPHEN KING
Like Goerge Lucas, Stephen King has taken more than a few liberties with his work. In particular, two works stand out -- and they're huge. In fact, the two biggest fan bases in the world of Stephen King are the two area's he has reworked; The Stand and The Dark Tower.
Now here's the thing, I like the changes. I like the rewrite of Dark Tower 1. I like the expanded version of The Stand. In fact, if anything, I think the works King has rewritten could stand even more revisions. Simple things -- like prices in The Stand were dated even by 1990's standards.
I think the artist maintains the right to keep working on something all they want -- because it ultimately belongs to them, not us.
Know where King fans really go crazy? MOVIES! Oh my. . . King fans get really uptight when a King movie comes out. "Better not mess thsi up!" Fans will warn. As if it is possible to mess a story up. See, here's the deal: No matter how much a book is revised -- it's still there. King has said this, and I buy this argument hook line and sinker.
You can't ruin the story because it exists in a form that can't be taken away. In fact, you cans till read the original version of The Stand. . . if you want! I did a couple years ago (and kept a journal). It was a joy -- but I still like the revisions more than the edited.
So, though I complain sometimes -- bring it on!
- Give us expanded versions.
- Give us re-edited books.
- Give us remakes of the reamkes of the remakes.
Just please. . . please. . . please. . . let the children of the corn die.
Now, if I could just find a picture of Stephen King in carbonite. . .
STAR WARS HOLIDAY SPECIAL:
By the way, why do the Wookie's have clothes on their home planet, but run around the galaxy naked? Anyway, here is the princess' special song. (3:35) The whole thing is posted at youtube.
The Star Wars Holiday Special is without a doubt one of the worst things ever committed to film.
ReplyDeleteI feel bad sometimes for all the scorn heaped upon Lucas, but then I remind myself that he's done very little to help himself avoid it. He consistently fails to give the fans simple things like the ability to watch the original versions of his movies, then when he is making what might well count as the most highly anticipated movie in Hollywood history, the best he could do was "The Phantom Menace." What a shame...
However, this is also the guy who directed "American Graffiti," which is one of the best movies ever made. For that if nothing else, he gets a lifetime pass from me. On top of that, he directed "Star Wars," produced "The Empire Strikes Back" and "Raiders of the Lost Ark," and played a part in Pixar's rise to prominence.
Anyone who has a resume like that is someone worthy of my respect.
The thing that really irked me (besides the postage stamp size of the original original trilogy on dvd, 4x3 letterbox?) was the Star Wars doc on the first box set of dvds, it basically was a "Isn't George Lucas awesome? Doc" I found that arrogant and unwatchable because of the butt-kissing. So many people were involved in making those movies and it boiled down to..."If it weren't for George..."
ReplyDeleteYea we get that. Move on.
I wanted to watch this Fans doc, thanks for posting.
-mike
Mike, are you referring to Empire of Dreams ? I loved that doc!
ReplyDeleteDoes an artist own something just because he was the first to write it? I'm not so sure.
ReplyDeleteThere was a time, back in the Middle Ages, when storytelling was more of a group enterprise.
If the audience felt the teller wasn't doing a good job or that the tale wasn't going the right way, that it ceased being "true" in other words, the audience could and did interrupt point out the perceived flaw.
Sometimes lengthy discussions would emerge from this, and if the critic was ultimately found right then the teller amended the tale and continued in what was agreed upon as a more better version. The difference was everyone had a chance to gurantee it was the "correct" version.
People have always had some latent knack for knowing if a story is right or wrong it seems, even in the minutest detail. Why else would they become so passionate about it? If they never did, it simply means they never cared. However they do.
Which brings me to Star Wars. For those looking for the best book on the subject of this post, and one that covers and validates my thinking about stories in general, I recommend The Secret History of Star Wars by Michael Kaminski or go to the book's website at www.secrethistoryofstarwars.com
It tells how the orginal trilogy was a collaborative process with Lucas making, well, not as much contribution as you might think, and how there weren't even plans for any kind of prequel to begin with. An interesting book on the nature of writing, the act of creation, and just when and where a writer might or might not step over the line.
All of which is by way of saying why I'm more an Indiana Jones fan these days.
ChriS
Interesting.
DeleteMy think on it is that I feel an author absolutely DOES own something if he writes it. Now, whether you feel a writer/director is the only author of an art form as collaborative as movies ... that's another matter.
Personally, I feel like Lucas is entitled to make any changes he feels like making to any of his movies. However, it is short-sighted and irresponsible of him to try and hold those versions forward as the ONLY versions people should watch. George, pal, don't tell me what to love. I spent nearly 25 years loving a version of "Star Wars" in which Han shot first. You want to change it so that Greedo shot first? Go right ahead, but let me make the choice as to which version I prefer.
You could theoretically -- as David implies -- level the same charge at Stephen King. However, in his case, the original versions of "The Stand" and "The Gunslinger" are so easy to find used copies of that it's kind of irrelevant, at least for now.
I'm just happy that Lucas has so far made no alterations to "American Graffiti."
David, Yes I think so. I also can;t stand the prequel producer guy and he was all over that.
ReplyDelete-mike
People don't get that sometimes, what makes for a good story on the page doesn't work on the big or small screen. Stories must be revised to work in a different medium.
ReplyDeleteBut, there are no excuses for Bag of Bones (just awful) or the second Carrie (a television series proposal?)Those are two instances of good stories being altered in bad ways.
Other bad movies based on King's work I'd argue were just poor choices of stories to bring to the screen. They wouldn't have worked as they were told (even though they were good stories) and there was no way to alter them to make them work on the screen.
Agreed (mostly). When prose is written well, it can be extremely difficult to adapt. A single sentence can reveal so much about a character that dramatizing it would take half an hour of screen time. You can take that out, but if whatever it is in that sentence has serious consequences later on in the story, then you've hurt the story.
DeleteA good filmmaker can make up for that simply by being good at knowing what all needs to be removed. But in some ways, dealing with hard-to-film story is like dealing with cancer: if you don't remove it all, then you've still got a problem.
I liked the television Carrie a lot.
ReplyDeleteI like that version a lot, too. I don't mind the big changes at all.
DeleteIn fact, I mostly prefer this version to the DePalma version. Sissy Spacek is better than Angela Bettis as Carrie, no doubt, but I'll take Patricia Clarkson as Margaret over Piper Laurie any day of the week.
Just had to comment on the Stephen King movie thing. It must be incredibly hard to adapt that kind of writing to screen because they really do butcher the books. I usually choose not to see the movies because of this.
ReplyDeleteThat said, writers have every right to edit and change their work if they want and I have no idea why any fan would have the audacity to think the work belongs to them. I work within a particular fandom of a TV show and I get so tired of fans telling the writers what they should or shouldn't do with their characters. They have gotten way out of line at times.
I think that fans should realize that in literature, the writer is the God of that world. It is the writer's creation and IMO, belongs entirely to them. If you like it, great. If you don't, do read it (or watch it).