If you read that article carefully, you'll notice that it's nothing more than a few quotes from Hamill with a lot of interpretation.

Notice that this DOES NOT come from any attributed quote from Mark:

While this does:

The quote appears to be taken out of context, it's like an interviewer asked him if he still sees George Lucas a lot, or if they were still friends. I see nothing directly attributed to Hamill where he blames Lucas for a failed career, or even admits to having a failed career. Or that he's resentful of Harrison Ford in any way.

Hell, even the title of the article "Hamill: Lucas ruined my career." Where does he say this. The "my career" seems to come off like a direct quote from Hamill, when it doesn't appear anywhere in the piece.

I call bullshit.

With all due respect owed a man named "Qui Gon Jim," I must disagree.

These prequels aren't even as magical for "impressionable kids" as the Original Trilogy was at the time. As a prequel trilogy apologist, I have to assume you were too young to remember the phenomenon that was STAR WARS. It was undeniable and all-encompassing. It was not embraced by just a few geeks, but respected and liked by all.

Even the current LOTR phenom can't compare, as STAR WARS merchandising was much bigger than LOTR ever was. To be a kid in the late '70s and early '80s meant to be into STAR WARS.

Now I like the prequels ok, and Ep. 2 was a huge improvement over Ep. 1, but to say that I'm missing their magic because I'm not an impressionable kid is bunk. These films are a different beast entirely than their predeccessors.

My son was nine years old when Ep. 1 came out, and I saw his underwhelmed reaction when he was watching it. He was bored, for chrissake. Kids may bounce from one fad to another, as they did when I was young, but there's a reason youngsters respond more to HARRY POTTER or LOTR than the prequel trilogy.

Then again, maybe the reason you don't hear people badmouthing him is because he's actually a nice man in real life.

Doesn't seem that way in the docs. Besides, many of the ideas in the prequels aren't even his. The entire beginning of the clone wars in Episode II were created by the animatics team. He let them create it and he implemented their ideas.

As for wooden performances, the only films of his I see with wooden performances are in the prequels, and even those are hit and miss with good and bad performances. But you're talking to one person who thinks the acting in the original trilogy is convincing, and ranges from good to very good.

Oh hell! People are going to think what they think, right or wrong. I just don't see any evidence that Lucas is some mean, cold, evil man. From what I've seen and read, he seems like a nice family man. I'm sure disgruntled Star Wars fans are going to think the worst simply because they're pissed at him about many things.

As I'm sure most kids would be if they were watching C-SPAN, which is what Ep.1 felt like except the politicians were wearing Halloween costumes.

Rivero, maybe you can answer this question. It's been asked quite often. Honest answer. Why do those of you who hate the prequels continue to invest so much time in them? Why not move onto something you enjoy and leave them completely behind.

Well, Terrell...

I hope Rivero forgives me stepping on his toes, but speaking for myself: I want to like the prequels, really I do. I grew up with the originals and I've spent over 20 years daydreaming about the clone wars and what they might be. I used to worry as a kid that I would die before the prequels came out.

To see them handled in such a slapdash manner makes me feel like a fool for believing GL had some kind of "master plan" from the beginning.

But wouldn't you be much more happy by forgetting they exist, and move onto something you do enjoy. Maybe LOTR for example. Seems to me those who hate the prequels the most are the ones that can't let go. Perfect example. I don't like LOTR. TTT is the only one of the 3 films I enjoyed. So I don't spend time talking about it, nor do I wish to piss on the enjoyment that others do have for LOTR. Can you imagine LOTR fans if I went into LOTR threads and made some of the statements that prequel haters continually make? I'd be flamed to hell and back.

Maybe some of them like goading those who get some enjoyment out of the prequels. I just find it curious.

Thanks for you honest answer Bird! I hope you didn't take my post as a jab at you. I rarely see you continually whining and crapping on prequels, and when you do, it's always respectful. But there are a choice few who hate the prequels and can't stop letting us hear how godawful they think they are.

Rivero - that is truly the best one-sentence summary I've ever heard of Episode I! I've got to make that my new signature!

oh snap!

"He blasts: "My message to him is, 'Get out more, pal. You are surrounded by an army of sycophants who say that, even when you blow your nose, you are brilliant.'"

Agreed.

Terrell:

Being a loyal STAR WARS fan for so long makes it impossible for me to shut out the prequel trilogy and pretend it doesn't exist. It would be like if they took away the Yankees pinstripes. You can expect a few angry New Yorkers, not a bunch of new Mets fans.

The difference between this and your LOTR comparison is that LOTR was never yours to begin with. You were never a fan. As an old school STAR WARS fan, I feel betrayed by the prequels.

A better comparison would be if Peter Jackson made THE HOBBIT and decided to do it all in 2-d animation for some reason. Wouldn't the average middle-earth obsessed geek be a little sore if the original LOTR trilogy was then altered, if it was animated over a la WAKING LIFE and the original versions were no longer available, just to make it fit in with a newer, inferior product? I think so.

Well, you are right about that.

The one thing that really boggles the mind is when they buy the DVDs, even though they hate the films. Then they use the excuse that they bought them as demo discs. Why, when there are so many reference DVDs of films they may actually like.

God i love Star Wars.

Religion, Politics, and Star Wars.

This story I just read made me think of Lucas and Star Wars:

"I was working on a movie with an English crew and they loved to tell stories. One of them had worked on location in India with David Lean (Lawrence of Arabia). “Lawrence" was playing at a local movie theatre while they were shooting this other movie (decades after Lawrence's original release). At night after shooting, Lean would stop in to watch Lawrence, and inevitably he would go up to the projection booth and pound on the door, demanding to get in so he could make one little cut
here or there. He did this so often, they had to put a padlock on the projection booth door. Lawrence of Arabia is one of the greatest pictures ever made; and yet Lean wanted to give his masterpiece one more tweak. "

Well, someone over at CHUD posted Hamill's latest interview with Fanboy Planet. Here's the blurb about Lucas and Star Wars.



So, I guess we can chalk up that Ireland Online Interview as bullsh*t. We already know that Hamill wasn't quoted as saying "Lucas ruined his life." So the author made that up. According to Hamill himself, he talked to George recently, so the line about not having seen Lucas in years is also bull.

This interview was done June 23rd.

I absolutely remember. I have been a SW fan from the beginning, from the day I got a Darth and Chewie action figure. All I was saying is that most look at the prequels through adult eyes, and expect something that isn't there. I totally agree that the OT is better, but the prequels aren't terrible films as some make them out to be. Given the choice, I am OT all the way. The prequels are somewhat a victim of the OT's success.

I do stand by my statement, in today's culture, SW would not be the phenomenon it was in 78. Everything moves faster and people are always looking to get onto the next big thing. Harry Potter is one of the only exceptions I can think of.

Also, I give you a lot of credit. While I may disagree with you, you have made intelligent points, and not fallen back on the standard "Luca$ $ux" argument.

When I saw Star Wars Ep 4 for the 1st time I was 8 or 9. I was bored out of my mind too.

It wasn't until I was in my mid teens when I rewatched the movie where I started to enjoy it more.

and on Mad TV and Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back

And more importantly Rivero . . . how do you know what an ugnaht is?

That is exactly one of the things I meant. He managed to seperate himself enough to allow co-screenwriters and other directors on ESB and ROTJ (well sort of on that one). Overwhelmingly fans and critics will tell you that ESB is the superior Star Wars movie (Lawrence Kasden & Leigh Brackett screenplay directed by Irvin Kirshner, onlt the storyline by Lucas).

As someone who dabbles in writing I do understand controlling your work, but there comes a point where you must admit that it could be better and seek outside help.

How anyone can take this interview seriously when it contains the following is beyond me.

Come on! A superstar like Billy Dee and his Colt .45 commercials? Or a big-type superstar like Carrie Fisher who's career has consisted mainly of B-movies, bit-parts and rehab.

He's at least on par with Fisher career-wise, if not a little ahead. Harry Ford was the only breakaway star in the bunch.

Yes, the old "let's take away all the credit from George Lucas" argument. I was wondering when that would come up. Certainly, many people do like ESB the best. But I'd bet you take a poll of casual fans, and most would pick ROTJ as their favorite. In fact, if you want the truth, when the films first came out, ANH was much more highly praised than ESB. ESB received quite a few bad reviews. It's only over the years it's become much more appreciated.

As for ESB, it's as good as it is because the first film was so good, and did all the work setting up everything and telling the story. Without the great first film, there wouldn't even be an ESB. Lest we forget that the one Lucas directed was the only one nominated for Best Picture and Best Director. If ESB was so much better, why no Oscar nom? I'm playing devil's advocate here because I too agree ESB is a great film. But it's not all because of Kershner, who has directed little to nothing that's any good. It's great because of Lucas, Kasdan, Williams, Fisher, Ford, Hamill, Billy Dee, and yes, Kershner. But let's not make like Lucas had no involvement.

As for Leigh Brackett, her entire screenplay was scrapped. None of it was used. Lucas wrote a rought draft that was very close to the final film. Then he passed it off to Kasdan. Not to mention he wrote a fantastic story treatment.

Either way, it's Lucas' baby. He's let others take a shot at it, but only because he wanted them to. Lucas shouldn't let others take control simply because a bunch of disgruntled and disappointed fanbs think he should let others take control. Lucas should always do what he wants to do. He's going to anyway.

Turning? He's already done a great job of turning it into crap.

I have never heard anyone say that ROTJ was their favorite. I hear Empire and Star Wars as people's favorites.
As far as the script writing goes, I agree that Kasdan and Bracketts writing were much superior to the writing that Lucas did on the last two installments. Boring characters and a Hollow storytelling is what has brought Episodes 1 and 2 down.
It may be Lucas' baby but he has done a horrible job of bringing up his child.

Well she wrote several best selling books including Postcards from the Edge which was turned into a hit movie. I also wouldnt consider When Harry Met Sally as a "B Movie."

So because we dont agree with you and we really want good storytelling we should just move on?

I'm not trying to take all the credit away from Lucas. Lucas is undeniably a genius in his own right. However, I am saying that he has become more of a "mad scientist" lately. Collaboration was what made ESB work, and I'm saying that some collaboration would have made the new movies that much better. Shouldn't the fact that ESB has held up better over time be more of an indicator of what I'm saying?

Actually, the first film did very little story telling compared to ESB! The first film introduced the characters and played out an adventure. ESB furthered the story the most by exploring the characters and their motivations and relationships. As for "There would be no ESB without ANH" that is the most blandly obvious statement I have ever heard. As for "Oscars" you bring up a good point, ESB was more deserving, but don't know off the top of my head what the competition was that year or what Academy politics were going on. ANH deserved the nods because of how revolutionary it was at the time. And you further prove my point: collaboration, collaboration, collaboration.

It is Lucas's baby, and he can do what he pleases. That doesn't stop the rest of us from screaming "child abuse" though. I'm not saying that Lucas is a no-talent hack by any means. I'm saying that he is an evil genius who should remember his limits.