What happened to the Star Wars that I used to know?

Let's look at it this way.... if you want to feel sorry for me that I don't get as wrapped up in my entertainment, go for it. That makes us even, then, right?

You misunderstood. The idea that movies exist to entertain is just an opinion.

... and I won't disagree with you. That is my opinion, that the purpose of movies is to en·ter·tain:
1. To hold the attention of with something amusing or diverting.
2. To extend hospitality toward: entertain friends at dinner.
3.
-a. To consider; contemplate: entertain an idea.
-b. To hold in mind; harbor: entertained few illusions.
4. Archaic To continue with; maintain.
5. Obsolete To employ; hire.
6. To give admittance to; receive.
[Middle English entertinen, to maintain, from Old French entretenir, from Medieval Latin intertenre : Latin inter, among; see inter- + Latin tenre, to hold; see ten- in Indo-European roots.]

Calixar wrote:

... and I won't disagree with you. That is my opinion, that the purpose of movies is to en·ter·tain:
1. To hold the attention of with something amusing or diverting.
2. To extend hospitality toward: entertain friends at dinner.
3.
-a. To consider; contemplate: entertain an idea.
-b. To hold in mind; harbor: entertained few illusions.
4. Archaic To continue with; maintain.
5. Obsolete To employ; hire.
6. To give admittance to; receive.
[Middle English entertinen, to maintain, from Old French entretenir, from Medieval Latin intertenre : Latin inter, among; see inter- + Latin tenre, to hold; see ten- in Indo-European roots.]

What is the purpose of this post, other than to insult someone else's intelligence? I do disagree with you---it doesn't mean I'm uninformed.

I am curious what you think movies are, and what you think entertainment is.

He's well informed. Sexual slavery, blood diamonds, child abduction. Maybe I should start my own A-Team and stop all of those things from happening? Perhaps I should become more passionate about reality, and donate money, or wave a flag?

Yes, I'm passionate, and I'm not the only one. And the only way to change something is to be passionate about it, be it "reality" or "entertainment". Yes, we are on a Doctor Who forum about a show (that I am passionate about), and the action figures from the show (which I am also passionate about).

I also like how you said you are not on a high horse, and then go off on a tangent about "real issues" like the ones you mentioned. As if the statement that you are doing something about those things, and I am doing nothing (but ranting about a silly little movie) makes you a better person than me? Seriously?

Calixar wrote:

... and I won't disagree with you. That is my opinion, that the purpose of movies is to en·ter·tain:
1. To hold the attention of with something amusing or diverting.
2. To extend hospitality toward: entertain friends at dinner.
3.
-a. To consider; contemplate: entertain an idea.
-b. To hold in mind; harbor: entertained few illusions.
4. Archaic To continue with; maintain.
5. Obsolete To employ; hire.
6. To give admittance to; receive.
[Middle English entertinen, to maintain, from Old French entretenir, from Medieval Latin intertenre : Latin inter, among; see inter- + Latin tenre, to hold; see ten- in Indo-European roots.]

Sometimes to make people think.

The Castellan wrote:

Calixar wrote:

... and I won't disagree with you. That is my opinion, that the purpose of movies is to en·ter·tain:
1. To hold the attention of with something amusing or diverting.
2. To extend hospitality toward: entertain friends at dinner.
3.
-a. To consider; contemplate: entertain an idea.
-b. To hold in mind; harbor: entertained few illusions.
4. Archaic To continue with; maintain.
5. Obsolete To employ; hire.
6. To give admittance to; receive.
[Middle English entertinen, to maintain, from Old French entretenir, from Medieval Latin intertenre : Latin inter, among; see inter- + Latin tenre, to hold; see ten- in Indo-European roots.]

Sometimes to make people think.

or to make people Feel, or react, or love. Movies are a form of Art, just like music, poetry, writing, videogames, etc. Some people cannot go a day without listening to music. Some people cannot go a week without reading a new book. Why are Movies so different? They are a story, visuals (like a painting), and even have music in them (the score). Some people love movies more than others, it doesn't mean that movies don't mean anything.

bret_owen99 wrote:

or to make people Feel, or react, or love. Movies are a form of Art, just like music, poetry, writing, videogames, etc. Some people cannot go a day without listening to music. Some people cannot go a week without reading a new book. Why are Movies so different? They are a story, visuals (like a painting), and even have music in them (the score). Some people love movies more than others, it doesn't mean that movies don't mean anything.

I won't argue that at all. Anything can become a source of inspiration. I have not drawn a line of distinction between books, music, and movies. I never even implied it (at least not intentionally).
As a writer (and I know there are a few here), my hope is to inspire people. But if all I managed was to make them passionate about the fictional universe I created... I failed. Some writers, like George Lucas, are in it for the money (which I think is the big complaint a lot of people have). His goal is to suck people into his universe so they'll spend above and beyond the price of admission. I think he intentionally creates this controversy about the changes because it keeps the paychecks coming. I mean... really... look at this:

Calixar wrote:

bret_owen99 wrote:

or to make people Feel, or react, or love. Movies are a form of Art, just like music, poetry, writing, videogames, etc. Some people cannot go a day without listening to music. Some people cannot go a week without reading a new book. Why are Movies so different? They are a story, visuals (like a painting), and even have music in them (the score). Some people love movies more than others, it doesn't mean that movies don't mean anything.

I won't argue that at all. Anything can become a source of inspiration. I have not drawn a line of distinction between books, music, and movies. I never even implied it (at least not intentionally).
As a writer (and I know there are a few here), my hope is to inspire people. But if all I managed was to make them passionate about the fictional universe I created... I failed. Some writers, like George Lucas, are in it for the money (which I think is the big complaint a lot of people have). His goal is to suck people into his universe so they'll spend above and beyond the price of admission. I think he intentionally creates this controversy about the changes because it keeps the paychecks coming. I mean... really... look at this:

And that...is why we are on two different wavelengths. As a writer, if you get someone passionate about the fictional Universe you created, that is a major accomplishment. How many writer's have there been (yes, I know that's a vague question), compared to how many fictional Universe's people have been enthralled by.

Modern day we have the Harry Potter saga, Twilight, even the Hunger Games now. I would argue those books/movies are not so popular because of the characters, but because of the Universe they created. Same goes for Star Trek, Stargate, Tim Burton's the Nightmare before Christmas, Pixar movies, etc. I could go on. To have people in love with you Universe, beyond the character's or the writing, is a pretty big deal in my opinion.

When shown an early preview of Blade Runner (which ended up being a lot different that "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?) Philip K. Dick said they captured his Universe on Film. Not the character's, not the writing, the Universe. I know I'm rambling now, but just because a Universe if fictional, doesn't mean it's not important/guarded by it's fans. That's why there is such debates on Doctor Who, over which writer's are true to the Universe or not.

The problem with Lucas, yes, I'm going on another rant, is that he doesn't care that the reason he is where he is in life is because of the Universe that came out of the Original films, even if they weren't his intended visions at the time. To just look back at something that made you millions of dollars, millions of fans, a franchise, and just say "it's garbage, I'm redoing it, and no one will ever see what it was originally like in the first place" is almost like meeting Destiny and spitting in her face. Bad Kharma

Looking back at this, I do feel like I should throw in that I'm responding, largely, to comments not even in this thread. To people who I've known personally and elsewhere who have said very strange, hyperbolic things about this topic. It scares me to think there are people who would actually like to do physical harm to Lucas over his "meddling" with the movies he created. None of those people are here, that I know of.

Have I never taken a too-serious opinion over the minutia of movies and TV shows... heck yes I have.

My inability to do so started shortly after the VHS release of Star Trek: The Undiscovered Country when I took part in a heated argument over whether or not there was a continuity error regarding Sulu's teacup at the beginning of the film. One of my former friends actually did physical injury to another guy over it. It was one of the most asinine results of a movie conversation I've ever witnessed.

Shortly after I heard about some people dying in Britain as a result of riots over the outcome of a football (soccer) game. The of people taking their recreational activities so seriously became increasingly ludicrous to me after that.

The reason I am not pleased about the changes to the films is that I cannot put my hand over my heart and swear to any of the younger generations that they are the same films I saw as a child, and thus, they will not have the same experience as I did.


True, the current generations are a LOT more jaded than mine was and they are a bit more 'sophisticated' as far as technology goes, but I pity them the loss of innocence we still had as children. We were the last generation to truly have a 'Saturday Morning'. No more cartoons, just some insipid version of The Today Show, and no need to be there to experience something, they can record it or download it, or read a blog about it anytime they care to.

Do the present generations of young people actually live 'in the moment' anymore?

Actually, I'd say entirely in the moment... with nothing really to look forward to. It's all instant gratification.

To be honest, I don't wish physical harm on him. However, if I ever came face to face with him, I would have the same discussion with him that I have had on this board. In addition I would ask for all the money back I spent on the first 3 films, toys, and all merchandise, and ask that he return the rest of the money he made from all of that to either the fans, or the people who helped shape the "original" films into what he called garbage.

Whoosier Whovian wrote:

The reason I am not pleased about the changes to the films is that I cannot put my hand over my heart and swear to any of the younger generations that they are the same films I saw as a child, and thus, they will not have the same experience as I did.


True, the current generations are a LOT more jaded than mine was and they are a bit more 'sophisticated' as far as technology goes, but I pity them the loss of innocence we still had as children. We were the last generation to truly have a 'Saturday Morning'. No more cartoons, just some insipid version of The Today Show, and no need to be there to experience something, they can record it or download it, or read a blog about it anytime they care to.

Do the present generations of young people actually live 'in the moment' anymore?

this is what has always been at the center of it for me. its like he erased my childhood. i mean i was six when jedi came out and because my mom rocked i saw the midnight showing with her and it is one of my happiest memories, which means even more now that shes gone. i don't care what he does with his movies from here on out, but to not at least give us good clean versions of the originals on what ever the latest tech to watch movies on is a load of crap if you ask me, especially since imho he wouldn't have the money he has now without the loyal devotion of his fan base, the least he could do is just give us our childhood memories, and i dont mean as a special features disc. its sad when he thinks so little of the movie that he calls it a special feature, only given to us after imho sales of the dvds weren't as good as they could have been. i find it quite insulting to a degree that he basically rewrote time and sacrificed my generation and the older guys to pander to the new generation. ahhhh i'm jumping off my soap box, i swore i was done with starwars debate. just when i think im out they pull me back in!!!