Posted by Magus 23 at 208.213.219.104 on November 29, 1999 at 10:46:15:
In Reply to: Re: A Q Vincent... posted by Justin Q Ramond on November 29, 1999 at 01:00:33:
Vincent: Don't mince words, man, tell us what you really think ;-)
Justin: Now, now, the man's entitled to his opinion. And while I don't necessarily agree with him--I enjoyed the latest Star Wars offering but didn't think it perfect by any means--I think he's certainly got a point. I believe half of Lucas's appeal results from *how* he is able to present his stories (effects and such), and not necessarily from his being a great storyteller. I mean, look at his script--it's extraordinarily stilted, not to mention predictable. But still, I did enjoy the film. As to your argument that he doesn't need to act out of fiduciary concerns, I counter that just because he doesn't *have* to doesn't mean he *doesn't*. To use your example of Bill Gates--the man is the richest man on Earth, and he still uses unethical and patently illegal business techniques to gouge every penny he can out of anyone he can get his slimy little hands on (can you tell I'm a Mac user?). Not that Lucas is deliberately doing so (hell, even in Gates's case, I think his megalomania is instinctive rather than premeditated), but he is obviously *considering* the merchandising angle in his storywriting.
Maybe I'm hurting my case by failing to be monomaniacal in my arguments (well, except for the Gates thing), but I don't fall absolutely on one side of the argument or the other (I run into similar problems when I discuss Titanic). Oh, well, I'd rather be honest than vitriolic.
Bill