[SouthernRonin]

In the Rolling Stones article I found here on the boards, Lucas makes reference several times to his decision to create Star Wars. Specifically, he says he wanted to make a children's film.

A children's film.

It's important to remember that this article came out before the real "Star Wars: Reflecting on a Saga" type of interviews began to come out. In this article, "Wookiee" still sounds funny to the readers. So Lucas hadn't yet gone along with all the metaphor and interpretation that other people would push on his series.

By his own, uninfluenced words, he wanted to make a children's film

Looking at it from that light, it makes sense why Lucas has had such conflict with the fan community. He set out to make a popcorn kiddy flick and he fell into one of the only true American myths.

The thing is, as the creator, Lucas can't see it as anything but "the kiddy flick that made good". So imagine his horror when he hands it over to Irvin Kirschner (a fan from the outside, not an original collaborator) and it becomes a moving character piece in Empire Strikes Back. Fans will remember Lucas tearing his hair out in frustration.

When he gets new director Richard Marquand for Return of the Jedi, he doesn't release his hold quite as much: hence we have Ewoks and little fluffy bits of merchandising love.

A children's movie.

And now, with the ideas stewing alone in his own mind for twenty-plus years: we have the prequels.

Children's movies.

I think fans were confused by his intentions because Star Wars: A New Hope is so pure, it could go either way. That could be a Saturday morning serial with unintended depth behind it, or it could be the work of a powerful myth-maker with a love for purely visual excitement.

That may be the cause of the "Prequel Hate" today: a giant misunderstanding. For the fans, Empire was a brilliant second stroke and Jedi was a sell-out sequel. For Lucas, it may be that Jedi was the real intention and Empire was, simply, a mistake.

Scary thought, huh?

[diligent_d]

Yeah, I read that too. Good points, though I'm not sure I agree 100% with them. I think the first Star Wars had a lot more substance than just simply a childrens movie - I mean he had some stuff in there that was intended for a bit older of an audience (ie. most of Han Solos actions and dialogue) that a child just wouldn't get.

But I guess if it comes from the horses mouth, it's hard to dispute.

[Jordan]

The first starwars was nominated for 10 oscars and brought home 7 of them.

That's pretty good for a Kids movie. And ESB is not for kids. I'd also argue that ANH wasn't either. Kids' could enjoy it sure, but bloody arms getting cut off? Planets blowing up killing billions? It's not a kids movie.

This post has been edited by Jordan: 18 June 2005 - 02:15 PM

[Thracozaag]

Sounds like yet another cop-out/lame justification on GL's part.

koji

[KurganX]

Sounds like yet another cop-out/lame justification on GL's part.

koji

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Interesting take. I thought I also remembered reading (it's foggy, so might be misremembering) that he basically had one "generation" in mind when making the OT.

So he made ANH for those 6 or 7 year olds going to see the film with their parents. Then during ESB they'd be 9 or 10 years old. For ROTJ they'd be just about 12 or 13. This was given as a justification for Leia's skimpy outfit, to try to appeal to the boys getting interesting in that sort of thing.

Anyway, whatever. Clearly he made Revenge of the Sith with young adults in mind, with the PG-13 rating. Not necessarily the late 20's, early 30's crowd that saw the OT in theaters when it first came out (somebody who was 6 in 1977 would be 34 today), but perhaps those fans taking their prequel era kids to see the film when those kids are 13. Or did Lucas pull out "all the stops" by making a long, PG-13 movie to try to win back the whiney fans who grew up with the OT and hated the PT so far with this?

It just seems that TPM was aimed at a much lower bracket than ANH. Instead of 6 or 7, it's more like 4 or 5. And the politics and saber dueling are thrown in to keep the parents from getting too bored. AOTC has unrealistic romance straight out of some victorian novel that kids might not think is so cheesy (after all, how deep are the romances at this age anyway? more like crushes and flirtation, like in ESB). Then we finally get those kids "growing up" a bit in time for the last movie.

Viewing all of the movies as adults (though the lense of kids who grew up with the OT) you'd definately get a different view, to be sure. That isn't an excuse for every flaw in the series, but I see the point of it.

This post has been edited by KurganX: 18 June 2005 - 06:11 PM

[floppydisk]

That's interesting. If he really meant it to be a kids movie all along, I guess we'd have to stop bashing him, cause he sure pulled it off in the PT.

So he made ANH for those 6 or 7 year olds going to see the film with their parents. Then during ESB they'd be 9 or 10 years old. For ROTJ they'd be just about 12 or 13. This was given as a justification for Leia's skimpy outfit, to try to appeal to the boys getting interesting in that sort of thing.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Dude, you don't need any reason for the metal bikini.

[i don't like sand]

Saying "it's a kid's film" is not an excuse for a lack of quality in the prequels, and it ignores that any decent children's story has relatable characters, substance, an engaging story, and sometimes hold appeal to adults.

I think that ANH could be considered a glorified and extremely well-done children's story. The storyline can be easily understood and it has a lot of fairy-tale-style archetypes and themes. The fact that there are some acts of violence doesn't necessarily preclude it being a children's story (His Dark Materials and Harry Pottter have some very violent details). The Empire Strikes Back is a bit more of an adult drama, but it can certainly be understood and enjoyed by children (action scenes, Yoda).

This post has been edited by i don't like sand: 18 June 2005 - 06:26 PM

[SithAvenger]

Even Finding Nemo is better than AOTC....

[diligent_d]

...And the CG special effects in Nemo were better too.

Sadly, I say that without even a shred of irony.

[KurganX]

That's interesting. If he really meant it to be a kids movie all along, I guess we'd have to stop bashing him, cause he sure pulled it off in the PT.
Dude, you don't need any reason for the metal bikini.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Supposedly Lucas made Carrie Fisher wear baggy clothes and tape her breasts down so she wouldn't be "too sexy" in his kids movie. Of course he let her wear a little more sexy outfit at the end but that was only for a few brief shots.

The reason for the metal bikini was because he felt the young boys in his audience were old enough for that sort of thing now. And consider how "tame" that outfit is compared to the kinds of outfits you see in comparable PG fair today. You'd see her butt cheeks and cleavage with nipples poking out of the material nowadays.

I would make a distinction between "children" and "kiddie" here. These are children's movies (or young adults' movies) with kiddie "moments." Take the antics of Jar Jar, Wicket the Ewok and various droid stunts. Take the poop/fart jokes, etc.

There was also the tendency in the PT to constantly put 6-10 year old kids everywhere. Name one time you saw a little child in any of the OT movies. You can't... unless you count some of the Ewoks (and maybe Jawas) under their costumes. I figure Lucas did this to put his child audience members "in the moment." Like "oh little boy or little girl you could be Anakin pod racing or little Boba flying with his dad, etc" Of course as a kid watching the OT I could pretend to be Luke Skywalker or Han Solo or Vader without worrying that my screen heroes were adults. I even practiced doing the Jabba laugh (and I was a skinny kid) and had loads of fun with my Yoda hand puppet...

It's the difference between (the first) Harry Potter and Barney or Elmo.

Saying "it's a kids' film" does NOT excuse it's flaws. But it does help explain why some things are the way they are. I think that Lucas's ideas of what made a children's film have simply changed over the years... perhaps as he's raised children of his own.

And yes, he did make these films for children, they were supposed to be the fairy tales that he thought had been denied that generation after Vietnam. That kids needed new heroes harkening back to the "good old days" of stupid serials and cowboy westerns and knights and wizards.

And yes, Lucas didn't set out to be this grand myth maker. He set out to make a fun movie for kids and young people and hopefully make some money. He ended up making a LOT of money and thus his Empire was built. If he sold out, he sold out when he made Empire. People just didn't start to notice until the Ewok dolls started rolling out... am I right? Gotta give the guy credit. Adding "Episode IV: A New Hope" to Star Wars and making Darth Vader Luke's father was genius...

This post has been edited by KurganX: 19 June 2005 - 06:10 AM

[SithAvenger]

...And the CG special effects in Nemo were better too.

Sadly, I say that without even a shred of irony.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yeah, that's really true.

[Giff]

Gotta give the guy credit....making Darth Vader Luke's father was genius...

Best movie moment in history. Hands down.

[andy_k_250]

The first starwars was nominated for 10 oscars and brought home 7 of them.

That's pretty good for a Kids movie. And ESB is not for kids.  I'd also argue that ANH wasn't either.  Kids' could enjoy it sure, but bloody arms getting cut off?  Planets blowing up killing billions?  It's not a kids movie.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I saw all the Star Wars movies when I was too young to remember actually seeing them the first time - they are definitely kids movies, but they are cross-generational. When I was three/four, I thought it was cool seeing Obi-Wan cutting off that Cantina guy's hand.

Same way with Indiana Jones - sure, you see a guy get his heart ripped out and three men burst into flames/melt/explode (but they were Nazis), but they are still kids movies, damn it.

Kids need to see these kinds of things. The Road Warrior was another one of my favorites when I was that age. Kids today are too sheltered but at the same time given too much lee-way and power too young.

The youth of America is a bunch of PT Anakin Skywalkers.

[SithAvenger]

I don't want that the new generation starts to whine like Anakin in AOTC. My god... that thought is horrible!

[floppydisk]

I saw all the Star Wars movies when I was too young to remember actually seeing them the first time - they are definitely kids movies, but they are cross-generational. When I was three/four, I thought it was cool seeing Obi-Wan cutting off that Cantina guy's hand.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Same with me. I actually wish I hadn't seen SW at all until I was about the age I am now. Basically because when you're a kid you don't care too much about the plot, and once you have all the plot details, the movie loses a lot of it's impact.

Kids need to see these kinds of things. The Road Warrior was another one of my favorites when I was that age. Kids today are too sheltered but at the same time given too much lee-way and power too young.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Wow, you saw the Road Warrior when you were a little kid? Seems like a sorta violent movie for kids to see. I The Road Warrior.