GEORGE LUCAS MERELY READ LORD OF THE RINGS

[taylormade]

<p><font size="3">now i know this may upset alot of you die hard star wars fans i myself enjoy the movies purely on an entertainment basis&nbsp; (the first&nbsp;trilogy i refuse to watch his recent "ive run out of money so I better come up with something new" series)&nbsp;but we can not credit george lucas as one of the great story tellers of our time, for he merely read lord of the rings and instead of a fantasy world known as middle earth he translated it to an inter-galactic space travel realm of space ships an lasers. sit down an think about it every character in lord of the rings has his counter part in star wars. from the ring to the force.</font></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> everyone gets one </div>

 

[a_lost_packet_]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>now i know this may upset alot of you die hard star wars fans i myself enjoy the movies purely on an entertainment basis&nbsp; (the first&nbsp;trilogy i refuse to watch his recent "ive run out of money so I better come up with something new" series)&nbsp;but we can not credit george lucas as one of the great story tellers of our time, for he merely read lord of the rings and instead of a fantasy world known as middle earth he translated it to an inter-galactic space travel realm of space ships an lasers. sit down an think about it every character in lord of the rings has his counter part in star wars. from the ring to the force. Posted by taylormade</DIV></p><p>I'm not quite sure I could agree with that.&nbsp; Star Wars is a classic fairytale in space.&nbsp; It's a "Rescue the Princess from the Evil Castle" type of story.&nbsp; The Lord of the Rings is more of a "Heroic Journey" or "Heroic Quest" story where the hero starts as an ordinary "man" and, by the end, is transformed into a hero.&nbsp; The LotR is a lot like a popular Arthurian Legend or Holy Grail quest story in some respects.</p><p>Both stories use "archetypical" characters. Archetypical characters are characters that are products of the same mold and share many characteristics and similar involvement in whatever plot they happen to be found.&nbsp; Most stories use archetypical characters simply because they are very well understood by the reader and the storytelling mechanics can be spent telling a story instead of continiously fleshing out the characters ad nauseum. (IMO)&nbsp; An interesting thing that many readers find enjoyable is the steps the author takes to make their "archetypical" characters somewhat unique.&nbsp; This gives the reader a "surprise" and piques their interest. IMO, in order to really make the use of Archetypical characters work, the author must take steps to make them unique.&nbsp; That's somewhat ironic.&nbsp; For instance, we find that Darth Vader was once a "good guy" and, more than that, he's the father of the good guys yet is now evil but, later, returns to good.&nbsp; That's a bit of a twist on the archetype of the evil antagonist and gives the story more flavor and interest.&nbsp; </p><p>The use of character archetypes and a few plot archetypes in both stories is probably why you find similarities between them.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="1">I put on my robe and wizard hat...</font> </div>

 

[taylormade]

Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I'm not quite sure I could agree with that.&nbsp; Star Wars is a classic fairytale in space.&nbsp; It's a "Rescue the Princess from the Evil Castle" type of story.&nbsp; The Lord of the Rings is more of a "Heroic Journey" or "Heroic Quest" story where the hero starts as an ordinary "man" and, by the end, is transformed into a hero.&nbsp; The LotR is a lot like a popular Arthurian Legend or Holy Grail quest story in some respects.Both stories use "archetypical" characters. Archetypical characters are characters that are products of the same mold and share many characteristics and similar involvement in whatever plot they happen to be found.&nbsp; Most stories use archetypical characters simply because they are very well understood by the reader and the storytelling mechanics can be spent telling a story instead of continiously fleshing out the characters ad nauseum. (IMO)&nbsp; An interesting thing that many readers find enjoyable is the steps the author takes to make their "archetypical" characters somewhat unique.&nbsp; This gives the reader a "surprise" and piques their interest. IMO, in order to really make the use of Archetypical characters work, the author must take steps to make them unique.&nbsp; That's somewhat ironic.&nbsp; For instance, we find that Darth Vader was once a "good guy" and, more than that, he's the father of the good guys yet is now evil but, later, returns to good.&nbsp; That's a bit of a twist on the archetype of the evil antagonist and gives the story more flavor and interest.&nbsp; The use of character archetypes and a few plot archetypes in both stories is probably why you find similarities between them. <br />Posted by a_lost_packet_</DIV><br /><br />well written <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> everyone gets one </div>

 

[ZenGalacticore]

<p>George Lucas 'borrowed' quite alot from other artists and writers. C3PO is a great example. The look of 3PO is a masculinized version of the image of the female robot in the&nbsp;1927 Sci-fi silent film "Metropolis". But the more brazen rip-off is 3POs personality, almost entirely hijacked from the character of the robot Marvin from "Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy", right down to his constant worrying, complaining, and depression.</p><p>On a Lucas website, I came across posters who were<em> praising </em>Lucas for his <em>genius&nbsp;</em>for coining of the term 'blasters' to refer to energy weapons instead of the standard 'ray gun' or 'laser'. I felt compelled to correct them with the fact that Lucas shanghied the term from Issac Asimov's 'Foundation Series', written in the 1950s.</p><p>I could go on but I think any reasonably well-read person gets the point or already has it. Don't get me wrong, I thoroughly enjoy the ORIGINAL 'Star Wars' trilogy. But he is a big-time hack!</p><p>And the latest 'Star Wars', episodes I, II, and III? Oh man don't get me started! Horrible writing and storytelling outdone only by even worse acting. Total garbage!</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>ZenGalacticore</p> </div>

 

[taylormade]

Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>George Lucas 'borrowed' quite alot from other artists and writers. C3PO is a great example. The look of 3PO is a masculinized version of the image of the female robot in the&nbsp;1927 Sci-fi silent film "Metropolis". But the more brazen rip-off is 3POs personality, almost entirely hijacked from the character of the robot Marvin from "Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy", right down to his constant worrying, complaining, and depression.On a Lucas website, I came across posters who were praising Lucas for his genius&nbsp;for coining of the term 'blasters' to refer to energy weapons instead of the standard 'ray gun' or 'laser'. I felt compelled to correct them with the fact that Lucas shanghied the term from Issac Asimov's 'Foundation Series', written in the 1950s.I could go on but I think any reasonably well-read person gets the point or already has it. Don't get me wrong, I thoroughly enjoy the ORIGINAL 'Star Wars' trilogy. But he is a big-time hack!And the latest 'Star Wars', episodes I, II, and III? Oh man don't get me started! Horrible writing and storytelling outdone only by even worse acting. Total garbage! <br />Posted by ZenGalacticore</DIV><br /><br />thank you, and indeed what a series the mad russian Asimov created sort of lost to the bottom shelf of time but never the less a rocking read, you havnt by any chance read the mars trilogy by kim stanley robinson? if you havnt i recommend it. The way that man describes mars and the colonization of it you feel hes been there, done it and taken a picture. You know when you get a quote from arthur c. clarke saying its the best book ever written on mars your in for a treat. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> everyone gets one </div>

 

[eburacum45]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>George Lucas 'borrowed' quite alot from other artists and writers.&nbsp; 3POs personality, almost entirely hijacked from the character of the robot Marvin from "Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy", right down to his constant worrying, complaining, and depression.</DIV></p><p>Some hijack, since 'Marvin' did not appear until 1978, well after Star Wars.</p><p>I should say, however, that I prefer Douglas Adams as a writer to Lucas any day of the week.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>---------------------------------------------------------------</p><p>http://orionsarm.com  http://thestarlark.blogspot.com/</p> </div>

 

[yevaud]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>now i know this may upset alot of you die hard star wars fans i myself enjoy the movies purely on an entertainment basis&nbsp; (the first&nbsp;trilogy i refuse to watch his recent "ive run out of money so I better come up with something new" series)&nbsp;but we can not credit george lucas as one of the great story tellers of our time, for he merely read lord of the rings and instead of a fantasy world known as middle earth he translated it to an inter-galactic space travel realm of space ships an lasers. sit down an think about it every character in lord of the rings has his counter part in star wars. from the ring to the force. </p><p>Posted by <em>taylormade</em></DIV></p><p>It goes far deeper than that.&nbsp; LOTR itself is merely a similar&nbsp;retelling of the "standard" mythos (albeit a very content-heavy and richly described one), such as the legend of King George and the Dragon.&nbsp; These are "standard" legends, and have the same sort of punched tickets: the hero, the somewhat jaded marginal type turned hero, the loyal sidekick, the damsel in distress, the kingdom lost or in peril, the evil lord, the brave knights, the good wizard, the bad wizard, and so on.</p><p>In reality - and Lucas himself has acknowledged this - Star Wars is <em>not </em>Science Fiction.&nbsp; It's what's known as "Space Opera," in the same vein as the 1930s Buck Rogers series.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[JonClarke]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>It goes far deeper than that.&nbsp; LOTR itself is merely a similar&nbsp;retelling of the "standard" mythos (albeit a very content-heavy and richly described one), such as the legend of King George and the Dragon.&nbsp; </DIV></p><p>LOTR in a great many quite different from the "standard mythos" and was without real parallel at the time it was written.&nbsp;This is not to say that there are not&nbsp;elements rooted&nbsp;in the soil&nbsp;of&nbsp;European mythology and the Old Testament, Tolkein recognised and wrote about this.&nbsp; But it was not simply a reworking of them.</p><p>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>These are "standard" legends, and have the same sort of punched tickets: the hero, the somewhat jaded marginal type turned hero, the loyal sidekick, the damsel in distress, the kingdom lost or in peril, the evil lord, the brave knights, the good wizard, the bad wizard, and so on.</DIV></p><p>This is Campbell's thesis and Lucas is&nbsp; devotee of Campbell.&nbsp; There are two things to note.&nbsp; First of all Campbell's archetypical story is no generic almost anything can be made to fit the mould when in reality the real story might depart from the suppose archetype in more ways than it matches it.&nbsp; The other is that even if Campbell's theory is true, just because a particular story conforms to the pattern does not determine it is agood one, as Lucas' later efforts show.&nbsp; Minor details like plot, creative tension characterisation, description and style are critical.</p><p>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>In reality - and Lucas himself has acknowledged this - Star Wars is not Science Fiction.&nbsp; It's what's known as "Space Opera," in the same vein as the 1930s Buck Rogers series. <br />Posted by yevaud </DIV></p><p>This I will agree with.&nbsp; What makes it great is that it occasionally rose&nbsp;above space opera, at least in the first three films, and was at times genuinely creative in terms of story line.</p><p>Jon<br /></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>

 

[yevaud]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>LOTR in a great many quite different from the "standard mythos" and was without real parallel at the time it was written.&nbsp;This is not to say that there are not&nbsp;elements rooted&nbsp;in the soil&nbsp;of&nbsp;European mythology and the Old Testament, Tolkein recognised and wrote about this.&nbsp; But it was not simply a reworking of them.</DIV></p><p>Well, no.&nbsp; Sorry if I was unclear on that.&nbsp; It was a <em>reinterpretation</em> of them.&nbsp;</p><p>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>This I will agree with.&nbsp; What makes it great is that it occasionally rose&nbsp;above space opera, at least in the first three films, and was at times genuinely creative in terms of story line.Jon </p><p>Posted by <em>jonclarke</em></DIV><br /><br />I would be inclined to agree.&nbsp; Lucas found a new interpretation of the old Space Opera format, and it was a good one.&nbsp; Regrettably, as seems to occur when one keeps on and on along the same storyline, it grows tired.&nbsp; </p><p>I have a great deal of respect for Lucas, but even more for those authors and film makers who recognize this fact, and just end their series, rather than perpetuate them.&nbsp; Witness Robert Jordan, writer of the "Wheel of Time" series.&nbsp; He'd "Jumped the Shark" a long time ago, yet kept going on and on.</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis:  </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>

 

[ZenGalacticore]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Some hijack, since 'Marvin' did not appear until 1978, well after Star Wars.I should say, however, that I prefer Douglas Adams as a writer to Lucas any day of the week.&nbsp;&nbsp; <br />Posted by eburacum45</DIV><br /><br />My mistake. I didn't bother to look that up. I relied on a friend of mine who held that the first installment of 'Hitchiker' debuted on radio in 1975, and that in '78 all five installments were printed in one volume. A quick research proved this to be incorrect. So, maybe Adams ripped off Marvin's (or Martin, can't remember) personality from Lucas and 3P0.</p><p>But it doesn't change the fact that the look of 3P0 was from the film poster of 'Metropolis'. Nor does it change the apparent use of much of Tolkien's 'LOTRs' by simply putting the story into a galactic setting.</p><p>I agree with you that Adams is much better reading. When I first read "Hitchiker", for the first 30 pages or so I was like "What in the f--- is this guy talking about? But then he really takes you on a comical trip. I laughed my ass off more than I did when I read Voltaire's 'Candide'.</p><p>BTW, I've heard that 'Forrest Gump' was inspired by 'Candide'. Don't know if that's true either.</p><p>And granted, artists and writers always 'borrow' from each other. The original 'Star Wars' was a tight package of a story but the theme was nothing new: Farm boy finds adventure and rescues the princess. But I admit that Lucas put it in good likeable new packaging. But he's still a hack.<img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/content/scripts/tinymce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-money-mouth.gif" border="0" alt="Money mouth" title="Money mouth" /></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>ZenGalacticore</p> </div>

 

[ZenGalacticore]

Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>thank you, and indeed what a series the mad russian Asimov created sort of lost to the bottom shelf of time but never the less a rocking read, you havnt by any chance read the mars trilogy by kim stanley robinson? if you havnt i recommend it. The way that man describes mars and the colonization of it you feel hes been there, done it and taken a picture. You know when you get a quote from arthur c. clarke saying its the best book ever written on mars your in for a treat. <br />Posted by taylormade</DIV><br /><br />No I haven't read Robinson. But if Arthur C. Clarke vouches for it, then I will. Thanks! <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>ZenGalacticore</p> </div>

 

[ZenGalacticore]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>It goes far deeper than that.&nbsp; LOTR itself is merely a similar&nbsp;retelling of the "standard" mythos (albeit a very content-heavy and richly described one), such as the legend of King George and the Dragon.&nbsp; These are "standard" legends, and have the same sort of punched tickets: the hero, the somewhat jaded marginal type turned hero, the loyal sidekick, the damsel in distress, the kingdom lost or in peril, the evil lord, the brave knights, the good wizard, the bad wizard, and so on.In reality - and Lucas himself has acknowledged this - Star Wars is not Science Fiction.&nbsp; It's what's known as "Space Opera," in the same vein as the 1930s Buck Rogers series. <br />Posted by yevaud</DIV><br /><br />Absolutely. There is very little science in 'Star Wars'. It's what many of us call 'Science Fantasy'. But, in conjunction with your thoughts and info, I think 'Space Fantasy' is more accurate. </p><p>He's still a hack who got lucky and hit a chord with 'Star Wars'. Try sitting through 'Howard the Duck'. lol</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>ZenGalacticore</p> </div>

 

[a_lost_packet_]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Absolutely. There is very little science in 'Star Wars'. It's what many of us call 'Science Fantasy'. But, in conjunction with your thoughts and info, I think 'Space Fantasy' is more accurate. He's still a hack who got lucky and hit a chord with 'Star Wars'. Try sitting through 'Howard the Duck'. lol Posted by ZenGalacticore</DIV></p><p>I actually liked "Howard the Duck." &nbsp; I also liked the comic character a little bit so I suppose I'm biased there.</p><p>As far as Lucas goes, he seems to do his best work with "The Big Story."&nbsp; As a writer, he has an impressive list.&nbsp; He does a great job with cultures and painting social/cultural pictures.&nbsp; BUT, I don't think he does that good of a job with describing personal issues and relationships or bringing those "home" to the audience.&nbsp; But, as far as weaving threads, he's pretty good.</p><p>I guess, the best situation I can think of would be one where someone handed Lucas something to write with and said "Write a serious story or script but, take as long as you want and make it tellable in one movie."</p><p>I wouldn't think anything Lucas did would be worth watching if it was 30 minutes or an hour.&nbsp; I also think his "Star Wars" universe is collapsing on itself.&nbsp; He needs something fresh and completely different.</p><p>You know, I'd like to see what he would do with a classic "horror" movie.&nbsp; The simple kind, not some planet filled with vampires or something.&nbsp; ..Just a cabin in the woods type of story.&nbsp; Something that focuses on the characters intensely.&nbsp; It may be that he couldn't pull it off.&nbsp; But, it may be fresh enough for him that he could surprise me. </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="1">I put on my robe and wizard hat...</font> </div>

 

[3DBO]

Can we all agree that every book and movie is a ripoff of Homer's Odyssey? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[JonClarke]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Can we all agree that every book and movie is a ripoff of Homer's Odyssey? <br />Posted by 3DBO</DIV></p><p>Pride and Prejudice?</p><p>Waiting for Godot?</p><p>The hound of the Baskervilles?</p><p>All Homer ripoffs????</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>

 

[a_lost_packet_]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Can we all agree that every book and movie is a ripoff of Homer's Odyssey? <br /> Posted by 3DBO</DIV></p><p>Does that mean I should cancel the tickets?&nbsp; An Odyssey ripoff?</p><p><br /> <img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/9/10/594ee7ec-9fcc-4655-9a7c-13f833feade9.Medium.jpg" alt="" /></p><p>Or, is it an "Ivanhoe" ripoff?&nbsp; </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="1">I put on my robe and wizard hat...</font> </div>

 

[lampblack]

<p><font size="3">Good Lord... who knew that there were so many below-the-radar English majors hanging around?</font></p><p><font size="3">There's hope for this place yet. *grin*</font></p><p>&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#0000ff"><strong>Just tell the truth and let the chips fall...</strong></font> </div>