Please don't kill me

[Lamented]

TCW is one of the few things that make the prequels make sense, imo. Sometimes it was a little pointless, but I learned a few things. And it did what Episode I couldn't, it presented emotions. It did what Episode II couldn't, have logic. And it made Episode III that much more meaningful. TCW also gave a glimpse to the dark secrets behind what was inevitably to come.

 

In the movie, I learned what lengths the duty of a democracy could reach.

In Season 1, I learned how a spark of hope can defeat even the worst of enemies.

In Season 2, I learned how trust can eventually bring peace.

In Season 3, I learned how revenge can ruin more lives than intended.

In Season 4, I learned about what rage, hot or cold, could accomplish.

In Season 5, I learned that it would only be a matter of time before corruption would eventually take over.

 

And in Season 6, I realized the consequences of sacrifice. It was a great journey, and it was a shame to see it end.

[Cerez]

And it did what Episode I couldn't, it presented emotions.

 

That's so true. It made the story a personal journey for all of us, instead of keeping us as spectators like the prequel films did. All the films really did was establish a setting (a world) and present a whole lot of action, but without real emotional involvement.

 

That's where The Clone Wars are so much closer to the original trilogy than the prequels.

[Lamented]

Yeah. It rhymed more than George's dumb imaginations...

[Cerez]

Umm… it was George's imagination that the TCW team built upon, and it was in consultation with him that they created the series. I don't think George is/was unimaginative. I just think that he chose to sacrifice his own art for the sake of immediate popularity. I don't think he put the same heart into the prequels as he did with the original trilogy.

 

But it could be that the original trilogy was created with the active help of a whole lot of other people -- big projects like movies tend to be that way -- and that his involvement and own ideas in the original saga was less than what we perceive. Perhaps he really did intend to create an sci-fi action extravaganza from the beginning, and not the gripping personal and emotional journey of an unlikely group of heroes that the original trilogy came to be.

 

Either way, I wouldn't put George down so. It's not right. The artist should be respected for their imagination and their work, but the artist should respect their muse as well.

[redsaurus]

There was, of course, an earlier clone wars series replaced by TCW.

[Cerez]

Very true, @@redsaurus! A series that most certainly has been all but forgotten. Do you know if Lucas was involved with the production/licensing of that series as well? I presume he was… Wikipedia says that he was even involved with the writing of these series.

 

In that case we have an example of a direct replacement of art content, even to the exact name. Need we say more?

 

That's the same as if Da Vinci had decided to repaint the Mona Lisa five years after its public release and called the new work of art the same name: Mona Lisa. That would have caused an outrage among fans of the original work, and jeopardised his name as a respectful artist -- because of no appreciation and/or confidence shown towards his own art.

 

Would he have had the right to do so? Yes, since he created the original. Would that have been seen a respectful course of action with everyone involved? I highly doubt it. Would that have been true to himself, and considerate/appreciative towards his initial inspiration? Most certainly not.

 

Does the Mona Lisa as an artwork have faults? You bet! That's what makes it so interesting; it has faults and merits alike.

[Ping]

I don't see why a remake must be bad at all and why you can't treat the older TCW as a standing series anymore. You can still buy it and unless Lucas made significant changes to the plot, the older TCW should still be canon to some extent - and even if it isn't, that shouldn't be a big deal either, since we enjoy the EU and various games a lot despite them not being canon. I don't see why we have to say that Lucas is disrespectful or otherwise a bad man because he remade or reworked something. Should we hunt down Disney too for all of his remakes and variations on previous releases?

[Cerez]

It's not about liking or not liking, George Lucas, @@Ping, or labelling him. There are wonderful things Lucas created, and there are not so wonderful things, too. I'm only critically discussing the artist's relationship to his work, and Lucas' recent actions fit the bill in terms of what constitutes, in my honest opinion, as a lack of respect for one's own art, and as such his actions present a good case study. It's just an observation and analysis, not an attack on the individual. Please don't misunderstand my intentions. I'm just as much a fan of Lucas' work as you are, and I do have immense admiration towards his earlier work.

 

Lucas is not the only person/artist who has made such drastic revisions to their work in the world of film. There are others as well, but he's one of the few who has ventured so far with his changes.

 

Critical analysis requires a non-biased standpoint. We need to look at the good as well as the bad, and we can't afford to idolise or protect the subject for sentimental reasons. Otherwise it won't be a critical discussion.

 

This thread seems to have turned with everyone's input from an analysis and discussion of the artwork into a critical discussion about the artist's relationship to his work -- which is the artistic subject of the artwork, so I see no problem in discussing this.

[Ping]

If you call someone inconsiderate, disrespectful, 'not true to himself' and lacking in integrity as an artist then that is quite insulting. I do get that you might not have meant to do that though, so all is forgiven. But on the subject: The same as I said before applies to remakes too. Remakes are not entirely abhorrent as an artform (it's like painting on the same subject as before), so some changes are good, others are bad, which ones are which is very hard to tell, so we should reserve judgement. There are clear cases of selling out, but this is not one of them.

 

Even if we treat the new TCW as something that should remove the prevous TCW from existence (and it doesn't), it says nothing about Lucas' relationship to his art without significant mindreading and the assumption that there are things every artist must value or ways that every artist must behave qua being a good artist. I tried to argue that at least the criterion you propose, namely changing previously published artworks, falls into the water and the more refined one, namely changing previously published artworks in a 'bad' way, is far too vague to be useful. So why not just stick with saying whether or not you liked the prequels or the new TCW etc better and whether or not they are well done in comparison to others? That way we would directly engage with the art and judge it for what it is.

[Cerez]

I actually personally consider Lucas a worthwhile and in some ways very accomplished artist who has taken a route rarely visited by other artists that I feel has impacted much of his art in a negative way. I was merely trying to explore what these negative effects meant through a critical discussion, and try to come to a conclusion as to how an artist should view their own work.

[Futuza]

How to stop talking to people: A guide.

 

1. Stop replying to the thread they are posting in.

2. Put them on your ignore list.

3. Stop trying to "have the last word".