May 11 2006

source: iFmagazine.com


LIVE-ACTION SERIES

iF: What's the word on the upcoming STAR WARS TV SERIES?

Rick McCallum: I can't talk to you much about the TV show. The STAR WARS TV SERIES probably won't be for another couple of years. We've just started the basic concept. We're interviewing writers, and seeing a lot of people, but I would say it wouldn't be happening for about eighteen months. Don't believe a single thing [you've heard].

It happens between EPISODE III [REVENGE OF THE SITH] and EPISODE IV [STAR WARS]. It will be all new characters. It will be the missing twenty-year period during Luke growing up. Think about bounty hunter, that's all I can tell you. It's no one else that you will know. It's really early stages, and we haven't sat down to decide what direction to go.


CLONE WARS CGI

iF: Are you working on another animated series as well?

Rick McCallum: There's an animated series being done right now, so that won't be for another year. That's something really good that will be picking up from the CLONE WARS.


STAR WARS 3D

iF: What can you tell us about the 3D versions of the STAR WARS films?

Rick McCallum: 3D we're working on, and it's just a question of how many theatres are out there. Hopefully by the end of this year there will be about fifteen hundred theatres. We need about two or three thousand before it makes it viable for any of us to go forward with 3D. That looks like it's going to happen sometime in the year 2007, so I am unbelievably happy about that. The 3D is something I'm really happy with. We're not sure when the technology will be totally there. I think there are a lot of major filmmakers interested. Cameron is interested in re-doing TITANIC and TERMINATOR 2. Peter [Jackson] wants to do all of the LORD OF THE RINGS movies. We want to do all six STAR WARS, and we know there is hunger out there.

There is a dimensionalization process by a company called M3 that we're all working with. They have proprietary software that creates a double image that produces a 3D effecting post-production after you've filmed a 2D film. It's amazing. You use wonderful glasses that are flicker free, they are hooked up to a wireless transmitter in the theatre. It has to be digital cinema, that's our problem. That's what makes it great, and it makes it a problem because there aren't enough theatres out there to make fiscal sense.


STAR WARS DVD BOXSET

iF: Are there plans to release a comprehensive STAR WARS series DVD boxed set?

Rick McCallum: Absolutely. I don't know when, but definitely you will see one. The problem is we don't have a studio that does this for us. We do everything ourselves, so it takes a long time. We have to plan out the time, and sit down and decide how we're going to do it. You'll be happy I guarantee.

Intresting take on what Rick said about Lucas doing the Prequels. I can believe that.

Well it is nice to know there is confirmation that a box set will be coming out. They said they're not sure when but I'm sure it'll be next year for the 30th Anniversary date.

this train of thought never ceases to piss me off. gee... let's knowingly go out of our way to alienate 85-90% of the audience that want to see these movies. this guy has no clue that the success of ep1 was due to the old gen fans. each showing of every prequel i attended was packed with late 20s and up. what total bullshit.


[George Lucas] knew exactly what he was getting into with EPISODE I and EPISODE II; those were for a whole new audience of ten and twelve year old boys. By the time that audience was eighteen SITH came out, so it was a totally different generation. He didn�t make them for the old hardcore STAR WARS fans; he was making it for a new generation. Forget about box-office gross, and think about admissions. The films were incredibly successful, especially EPISODE I.

You can't put much, if any, stock in anything that McCallum says. He's more of a bullshit spin artist than Scott McClellan, with the key difference being that his George probably wouldn't back up anything that he says. What he says here doesn't even make any sense if you stop to think about it: the films were successful because they were made for a new generation, especially Episode I? That's idiotic. TPM was "especially" successful because the old generation flocked to it, and ROTS was packed with references to the OT.

And after all of Lucas's blather about the story following the classic hero cycle, that it had to be told the way it was because this was the idea he'd always had, you really think he agrees with the idea that the two trilogies were made for different generations? He sees the series as a cohesive whole, even if most of his critics don't.

Lucas and McCallum do have one common approach, and that's to "explain" to you why something that you think sucks actually doesn't. Lucas's arguments are just usually a little more logical.

BTW, is the text encoding in DP's first post fucked up, or is that just me?

The way I see it, it's an issue of style. The OT appealed most strongly to younger-aged people but more mature audiences weren't left out in the cold either. For Lucas to continue to appeal to that same group of people would basically require some pretty serious alteration to the style he'd set up with the OT itself.

On the other hand, McCallum rarely know what he's talking about. "You're going to see why Boba Fett hates the Skywalker family so much." Umm, whatever ya say, Ricky.


It's not just you.

nail on head. i don't think McCallum is even remotely qualified to be explaining star wars to me.

Rick's a fucking idiot. I've heard some retarded comments from that clown, but this one definitely takes the taco. The PT was specifically made for 10-12 year old boys? So, wait, Star Wars movies weren't made for Star Wars fans? What?

all i can remember about this guy is he always had his dick in a twist about how many fx shots were in each film.

Hum ... Who were the targets of ANH ? Fans ? There were none at the time. Who were the most pleased with the OT back then ? Old retired people, or children ?

That's something Lucas has always been very clear about, and I don't know why it took McCallum repeating it to make everybody suddenly open their eyes : Star Wars movies have always been aimed at children. Of course some adults were impressed by the OT, and some were impressed by the PT, although to a lesser extent I'll give you that. But who's running in the garden with a piece of wood in their hands, saving Queen Amidalas from evil Darth Mauls, after having watched the movie ? Children.

No offense ETAndElliot4Ever, but it would be really cool if fans stopped thinking Lucas lives for them, and everything he does is dedicated to them. It's never been the case, and Lucas has always been clear about that. Now the problem is children nowadays are way too different from those of the 70s - 80s. They are no longer impressed by a Han Solo firing first or a Chewbacca. They need to actually see thousands of Chewbaccas ripping arms on a beach. Children today are no longer impressed by a static and would-be menacing EV-9D9, they need a General Grievous killing Jedi. Face it, the Prequels were perfect movies for children, and I don't know much, if any, who disliked them.

I don't want it to sound like an apology for the PT, cause yeah, I too found the dialogues corny, as well as some scenes. But as a grown-up fan, I am not who the movie was made for. And you are not either.

If anything, Lucas said TPM was a kiddie flick and it was. (Just had alot of political manouvering as well, which could have gone waaay over their heads).

Maybe even the standards of "kiddie stories" have changed so much in two decades?

No offense, Mandalorian Wrath, but your defense of what most people see as Star Wars' flaws as being excused by the argument that they were made "for children" is almost as idiotic as McCallum's. Because something is geared toward kids doesn't mean that it has to be simple-minded and superficial. Some of the greatest fiction in history was made "for children." To dismiss criticism of storytelling faults by saying that the work was produced for an audience that wasn't supposed to know any better is condescending, and insulting.

Additionally, you're just flat-out wrong. A point I've already made in this thread is that Lucas has always stated that he sees the series as a whole. This is not the assertion of someone who made one batch of films for one audience, and the other batch for another. In fact, up until now, I have yet to see even McCallum state so baldly that there was a specific age range in mind. This is a guy who can't make a public appearance to promote these films without an inappropriate use of profanity. Who did he think he was addressing then -- 10-year-olds, or the late high school/college/post-college crowd that made up his repeat-paying audience? Who does he think is shelling out cash for every new DVD release -- 10-year-olds, or people with jobs and disposable income?

But hey, I'll play fair. Find us a quote where Lucas is "clear" about making these movies for 10-year-olds, and/or about making different kinds of films for the children of the 70's vs. the children of the 90's, and I'll happily concede the point.

I won't concede that McCallum isn't a moron, though. I mean, this is classic: "forget about box-office gross, and think about admissions"...as if those two aren't measurements of the same fucking thing.

yeah look we can all bit a bit tough on McCallum for the sole purpose the guy doesn't think before opening his trap. He says shit with the best intentions in mind, IMO, but generally his delivery is grossly fucked up and he gets otracized by every other living creature on the planet.

way ta go Rick !!

Well it's just not Rick either, it's Lucas too, who has a bad habit of sticking his foot in his mouth and not to mention his really big problem with admiting he screwed up. Just listen to the commentary and how Lucas makes half-assed excuses for things and blames the fans for not understanding things despite it being so simple in his eyes.

Hence my :



I want it to be clear I am not excusing anything here. I'm just making the point that the movies are primarily for a children audience and NOT for the fans. That's the only one thing my post was about.



First, about not making those movies for fans :



from here

Second, about shaping those films for a young audience :



from here

Same about the OT here :



And another, for the sake of it :



found here

Now do you concede the point ?

All that says is that some unnamed people thought the film would suck, but Lucas didn't give a shit. At no point does he establish that Star Wars movies weren't made in any way for Star Wars fans. He just makes excuses for why they weren't made for the Star Wars fans who didn't like them. If you're supposed to watch the films in order I-VI like Lucas intends, and you were supposed to start when you were a 10-12 year old boy in 1999 and see ROTS when you were 18, does that mean the OT was only intended for people over 18? There is no target audience when it comes to Star Wars. Kids and adults alike enjoy them, and Lucas and McCallum know this. The only reason they're making these excuses that the films were made for 10 year old boys is to explain why the people who didn't like them didn't like them. When you were 10, would you have even remotely understood even what the opening crawl of TPM was talking about, or any of the political shit?

Again, I don't want to excuse Lucas' lack of touch when it came to telling the back story from the prequels. Jar Jar sucked in TPM. C-3PO sucked in AOTC. The dialogues were corny. etc. etc. It has been said a million times and I did agree every now and then.
I'm just emphasizing the fact that Lucas did say -and not just once- that the movies were for children, and that McCallum didn't take it out of the blue. Now, whether those words are desperate attempts at excusing the failures of the PT or honest statements, I don't care. I don't side with Lucas and I still think the PT is more flawed than the OT. I just wanted to point out that it had been said before, a long time before McCallum even started thinking about it.

Eventually, what comes out of all this : The OT was praised by the youngsters of 70-80s, the PT was praised by those of 2000s. So if those movies were indeed made for children, Lucas achieved success in 1977 because the kids at the time loved ANH, and he achieved success in 1999, because the kids at the time loved TPM.

[quote]At no point does he establish that Star Wars movies weren't made in any way for Star Wars fans.[/quote]

Look I'm sorry but when this person tells Lucas "the fans will hate it" and Lucas answers "Well, I'm going to tell my story", it strongly feels like a "Do I give a fuck about what the fans will hate or no ?" And taking into account the other statements about the movies being made for a young audience, you can clearly sort out that the fans are not Lucas' primary target, which was all I was trying to point at.

this all comes across as transparent backpedaling. these guys know what age bracket payed the bills.

are there any quotes from Lucas before the film was released?

And I just don't believe that at all. I'm one of those people who believes Lucas intends the films for anyone who enjoys them, not just children. I remember a quote by him on the OT DVDs where he said something about accomplishing what he set out to do if he could get a room full of people to enjoy the films. With the PT, he was continuing a series with a massive fanbase he began 20 years before, and much of the advertising for the new films seemed to be aimed at these fans and new fans alike. And these "hardcore" fans were the reason the films were so successful. You know, I wasn't aware that Star Wars was aimed at any specific age group before these off the wall Lucas and McCallum comments about the PT. And I still don't believe it.



I would imagine not.

No, sorry. You've quoted nothing that says that Lucas was deliberately aiming at an age range as limited as 10-12, or that he did anything differently for the 90's generation as opposed to the 70's generation. If anything, Lucas is being as vague as possible (which, of course, will allow him to go back later and claim that people have misinterpreted him). Terms like "young people" and "adolescents" don't mean "children." "Young people" can mean anyone up through college age, and "adolescents" is generally used to describe the ages from 13-17.

And as ETAndElliot4Ever points out, none of those comments were made before the movies being discussed were actually released. They're all reactionary, all defensive. I think one thing you definitely won't find is any quote from Lucas that says anything similar to "these movies are made for little kids, and you'll see that more clearly with the next one."

In fact, I wonder how many quotes by McCallum could be found stating something to the effect of "this is what the fans have been waiting for"? That might be a more productive search.

The marketing for the PT (and TPM especially) needed to capitalize on the fact that this is a Star Wars movie. I don't see anything particularly dishonest about that. It's a continuation of the series and, as such, had every right (and every need) to use the SW logo, familiar imagery, etc. That's not a blanket appeal to hardcore OT fans, that's basic marketing. Any film series needs to expand the audience with each successive release. The OT appealed strongly to "young people" (ie, ages 5-22 or so). The PT was similarly successful, at least in terms of younger children... which goes back to expanding the audience.

Frankly, if the films were designed to appeal to more mature adults, they probably would've incorporated a more sophisticated cinematic style (along the lines of LOTR, which didn't seem to try very hard to get kiddies to buy tickets) and with far more "adult content".

Frankly, Lucas's statements more or less match up with what we've seen in the films.

As for "all the political shit" in the PT, when I watched the OT as a kid do you think I had the first friggin clue what Leia was talking about when she gave her speech to the Rebel pilots about their evacuation from Hoth? Or what was *really* at stake when Luke battled Vader in ROTJ? Of course not, but the adults in the audience did and, I'm sure, they appreciated having something a little more on their level to chew on. This sort of thing doesn't change the prime audience, it simply enables older people to get in on the fun too.

Frankly, it's not much different from how Pixar does their movies. Now *there's* a formula you can bottle and mass produce!

i just don't think this "we made these for a younger audience" approach is valid.

there is absolutely 0 reason for Lucas to even think along these lines. why after making the OT which obviously appealed to both young and old and was very, very successful would he even consider dividing/narrowing the appeal of the next three?

there just doesn't seem to be any reason for it. if your first try gets EVERYONE onboard why change?

unless... of course, you put it out there. alot of people see it and are like WTF? and you need to scramble to do damage control.

The problem with this argument (in my eyes) is that it suggests that the films were deliberately made with an exclusionary approach in mind -- that Lucas had the idea that kids' movies can only be for kids, can never appeal to adults, and in addition must be so childish and simplistic that an adult would never even bother with them. Now, not only is this not the mindset that the first trilogy was made with, but it doesn't even hold true for AOTC, which is a humorless, episodic, confusing mess. No one can convince me that that movie was made with a 10-year-old audience in mind.

As for TPM, I think that much of this debate stems from Lucas's part-and-parcel approach to the screenplay. He doesn't seem to know who that was being made for. Rather than construct it for a wide audience, he instead directs particular bits toward particular segments of the audience. So we get an intro with some political mumbo-jumbo, a mission for two Jedi that even they don't seem to understand, and then, so that the kids will stay awake, we get big monsters and Gungans. We get into a convoluted gambling scheme on Tatooine, we get a dissertation on midichlorians, we get a political speech by Amidala that doesn't really clear up what the hell is happening on Naboo or why, and in between, just to keep the kids engaged, Jar Jar steps in shit, sticks his tongue in a power coupling, and has an eopie fart in his face. But these aren't instances of natural humor arising from natural situations -- in fact, they're about as close as these movies ever come to breaking the fourth wall. As a result, they take that part of the audience that's older than 10 right out of the picture. Where's the humor for anyone who ISN'T a kid? Where's anything comparable to Han Solo recklessly charging after Stormtroopers until he realizes he's about to get his ass shot off, and doubles back screaming the other way? You didn't have to be under 12 to appreciate that.

To be honest, I think the difference between the two trilogies lies in the fact that Lucas had kids of his own the second time around. And I think that rather than trust his own instincts -- which had probably been dulled anyway, after 20 years away from the position behind the camera -- Lucas decided to go with what Jett thought was funny. So we have the parts that advance the overall story, and then we have the ca-ca doo-doo parts for Jett and his friends. And when the critics and the fans bitch about those parts, we have Rick McCallum to tell us that the movie wasn't made for us. The truth of the matter is that if it wasn't for the fans who were willing to sit through all the dumbass shit just to get their fix, we wouldn't now be talking about box office or admissions.

That's not what he's saying at all.

The Star Wars films are juvenille fiction with a target audience set at 10-14 year old boys. That doesn't mean no other audience can enjoy them. Younger kids probably won't be able to follow the story or relationships but can go for the visuals. There's some layering (the politics, philosophy of the Force) that may entice older audiences as well. At the end of the day though, the Star Wars story (from the films) is no more complex than a Silver Age Marvel comic book.

thecolorsblend is saying that if Star Wars was targeted for an older audience, you'd see a lot more "adult interesting" themes or story structures ranging from simple gore and violence to additional story complexities that would be beyond the scope of most young teens to appreciate or grasp.

I'm surprised people are up in arms over McCallum's comments about the intended audience. When TPM came out, Lucas said this in several promotional pieces. At the time I half-thought it was a bit of revisionism too until someone posted a photocopy of some article in 1977 or 1978 when Lucas said THE SAME EXACT THING.

IMO the whole division of young and old doesn’t even apply here. It’s an attempt like Ayatollah said, "Lucas and McCallum do have one common approach, and that's to "explain" to you why something that you think sucks actually doesn't." I don’t have a problem with the PT because I’m older and it’s not aimed at me (which isn't true in the first palce). And, I don’t think the faults I find in the PT are areas that I’m just too old to appreciate. I can thoroughly enjoy a movie aimed at a younger audience if it’s done right. This is not out of my grasp. Comments like, "It's for the child in all of us." are one thing but, "You didn't like it because you're older." are total crap.

Maybe not, but that is what Rick McCallum is saying, and that's how this thread started. Saying "we made this for them, not for you" is exclusionary by its most basic definition.



Yes, so you McCallum defenders keep saying. Yet none of you seem to be able to come up with such a quote that precedes any of the films' releases. Here's how I recall the last three films publicity periods: hype hype hype hype hype. Star Wars is back. This is the one. This is what fans have been waiting for. You'll see this, you'll see that. This is the dark chapter. People will be surprised, it's not what they're expecting.

Hundreds of millions of dollars later, someone points out: hey, Jar Jar sucks. Hey, that scene between Anakin and Padme had the worst dialogue ever written. And the response is: well, these movies are just for kids.

Funny, Rick and George, but you didn't say that when you were shoving them down our throats in April. And even more funny, they're still not saying it yet about the TV series. I guess we'll have to wait until a month after it debuts to find out who it was intended for.

And all of the above regarding Lucas's and McCallum's disingenuous behavior doesn't even address the whole condescending attitude that I brought up earlier -- that's it's OK for these films to be filled with fart jokes and other idiocy because, hey, they're just for kids. The Harry Potter stuff is pretty much "just for kids," too, but I have yet to see Ron Weasley fart on camera. More to the point, I have to read any of those films' writers or directors excusing their flaws by saying that the films are just for kids.

And "children" means something else than "children" too, right ? Because I did quote him using the word "children" here :





Of course not, since nobody cared about Lucas or his "space opera" before ANH. But what about this link to an interview done before the PT, and that was also present in my first message ?

The fact you don't want to see does not mean it's not there.



You can conclude anything from any sentence based on what you want to believe and not what is really said. Nobody on the board said "the fans should go fuck themselves. The movies are stupid but it's right because they were for children. Fuck fans". I anyway did not exclude anybody. The fact is those movies are PRIMARILY aimed at a young audience, which means in NO WAY that a mature audience is excluded from the target. Can you once and for all note that down so that those misunderstandings won't occur again. "PRIMARILY AIMED AT" doesn't mean "the others can go to hell", but "PRIMARILY AIMED AT" and nothing else. McCallum may have meant something else, but I'm only trying to defend my point here and not that of the big one, who is apparently reknown for saying shit through interviews.

Now, if you think (apparently you do, since you consider me a "McCallum defender") that we're trying to excuse the PT for its farting jokes because the main target of the movie is children, you're all wrong and I invite you to read AGAIN, and this time thoroughly and with a neutral mind, my/our messages, so that you can notice that I repeated like 4 times that I too found those movies corny and ridiculous on some level, and that I was unhappy with that. My whole point was to have you admit the MAIN (notice I didn't write "only one", but "main") target of those movies are and have always been children, in 1977, 80, 83, 1999, 2002 and 05, although two of the six were darker than the others. It doesn't excuse anything, Jar-jar is still stupid, but just admit that's the way things are. I don't side with the big Rick nor Lucas. Mistakes were made, as soon as 1983 with those fucky Ewoks. Still, the movies were made for a young audience from the very get-go.

The date of that interview is June 19, 1999, which is about a month after TPM was released. Interesting theory. Tell me, what do you conclude from "He didn't make them for the old hardcore STAR WARS fans". Now, being the jerk I am -- and I guess the lack of the word "primarily" in there is what throws me off -- I got from that that Lucas didn't make the new Star Wars movies for Star Wars fans. But that's me. What do you get from it?

Tarkin: "This bickering is pointless."

In the end does it really matter who the hell the movies are aimed towards? If you enjoy them you enjoy them. If you don't you don't, it don't matter if you're young or old.

That has actually never been the issue. I think everyone here will agree that the movies are "family-friendly" and were always intended to be.

My issue is with McCallum's chickenshit attitude as he dismisses all criticism by saying the movies were intended for 10-year-olds. This smokescreen defense of "they've always been for kids, how can you think differently" completely misses the point.

My mistake. Lucas was talking about conversations he had back in 1977 though, but he may have lied.

That's what I get from that too. But 1) I insisted on the fact that I didn't care for McCallum and that I intervened so many times only because of MY point of view that kiddies have always been the original targets of the movies, the six movies, and that so many people had a problem with that because they felt offended Lucas would aim his movies at other people than them, which tends to piss me off. 2) I'm sure McCallum didn't chose his words wisely in saying that and he was speaking about "primary / secondary" targets. Small additions to the movies like Aayla Secura or the mention of Quinlan Vos, although unimportant for the story, are clearly for the hardcore fans. And someone who wouldn't care about them wouldn't even bother. But perhaps you think differently.

Anyway, I think this is getting old and I am writing a lot uselessly since I already made my point as clearly as possible. You may still disagree and I respect that, but please don't post another message with those "you McCallum defenders are saying that..." "You didn't give me a quote with Lucas saying the movies were aimed at children" "Are you trying to excuse the PT with that ?" etc. I think I've been clear enough on those points.

In the end, the main target is still children / young people, and the movies are still corny.

Weird. My first reaction to that was "OK, I'll eat some shit, he seems pretty sincere about this." And then the bit about the little kids went on just a little bit too long. What he says in this clip so closely parrots what he said to If Magazine that it just sounds completely rehearsed. Apparently this is the new spin -- TPM and AOTC are for pre-teens, ROTS is for 16-year-olds.

So my question is, if you're the parent of a 9-year-old boy and you're in Blockbuster, how do you explain to him that it was OK for him to watch the first two chapters last week, but he can't see the third one for another 7 years?

"Well, honey, that's what Mr. Lucas intended, and he's kind of pigheaded about making sure people see his movies the way he intended, so you'll just have to wait."

"But Mom, what could be so bad? I saw Darth Maul get cut in half in the first one, and saw Jango's head get cut off in the second."

"Yes, and you had nightmares for three nights after, remember? That dumbass Mr. Lucas kind of dropped the ball on those ones, I agree, and that's why I don't want you to see this one until you're old enough. Besides, between now and then you can see the TV show."

"But what if that's made for the kids who were 16 last year? It'll be made for 19 and 20 year olds and I'll NEVER see it!"

"I'm sorry, honey, Mommy can't really follow this bullshit. Let's rent Shrek."

not buying it. not for one minute. not even close.

funny how the charred remains of beru & owen seemed to slip under the Lucas (this is a kids movie) radar when i was 4 too.

That's your fault. You ignored the fact that you should be at least 19 by the time you get to the fourth episode.