Ok, forgive my ignorance. Who the heck is Pauline Kael? I'm around George Lucas' age, and I've never heard of her. If she's a "literary" film critic, someone who critiques movies or books from an intellectual standpoint, then that would be why I've never heard of her.
Personally, I think people think WAY to much and WAY too deep about the inner meanings of movies and books. Sometimes they're about nothing more than just popcorn, soda, a few laughs and time spent with dates, friends or family. Movies and books, as a general rule, are about being entertained. About escapism.
Star Wars, as you pointed out, is excellent escapism. The majority of people don't go to the movies to think. They go to escape the drudgery that is their daily life. What's wrong with being a kid once in awhile, the harsh realities of life is tough enough. Give me a day at Disney World anytime.
As for being entertained by children, I agree that most of Lucas's works have targeted his own desire for escapism and what appears to be a love of toys. He doesn't seem to aspire to something deeper as Spielberg has achieved via Schindler's List, Saving Private Ryan, etc. But then I'm not sure I see anything wrong with Lucas doing that. IMHO, Lucas's genius lies in what he's done for special effects. His strengths are his story ARCs not his characterizations or dialogue. He's about the big picture, and adding the window dressing. He's the best at it.
For the record, I thought this new Jones movie was horrible. I went to the first showing last month and I kept thinking to myself. It's going to get better any minute, right? It will get better, right? This is the first Lucas, Spielberg movie I've ever hated. Suspension of disbelief is everything. They failed this time around, but it wouldn't stop me from going to see another joint effort by them because first and foremost I want to have a happy ever-after simply because reality is grim enough.
Posted on June 8 at 11 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Ok, forgive my ignorance. Who the heck is Pauline Kael? I'm around George Lucas' age, and I've never heard of her. If she's a "literary" film critic, someone who critiques movies or books from an intellectual standpoint, then that would be why I've never heard of her.
Personally, I think people think WAY to much and WAY too deep about the inner meanings of movies and books. Sometimes they're about nothing more than just popcorn, soda, a few laughs and time spent with dates, friends or family. Movies and books, as a general rule, are about being entertained. About escapism.
Star Wars, as you pointed out, is excellent escapism. The majority of people don't go to the movies to think. They go to escape the drudgery that is their daily life. What's wrong with being a kid once in awhile, the harsh realities of life is tough enough. Give me a day at Disney World anytime.
As for being entertained by children, I agree that most of Lucas's works have targeted his own desire for escapism and what appears to be a love of toys. He doesn't seem to aspire to something deeper as Spielberg has achieved via Schindler's List, Saving Private Ryan, etc. But then I'm not sure I see anything wrong with Lucas doing that. IMHO, Lucas's genius lies in what he's done for special effects. His strengths are his story ARCs not his characterizations or dialogue. He's about the big picture, and adding the window dressing. He's the best at it.
For the record, I thought this new Jones movie was horrible. I went to the first showing last month and I kept thinking to myself. It's going to get better any minute, right? It will get better, right? This is the first Lucas, Spielberg movie I've ever hated. Suspension of disbelief is everything. They failed this time around, but it wouldn't stop me from going to see another joint effort by them because first and foremost I want to have a happy ever-after simply because reality is grim enough.
On Spielberg, Lucas films cater to our taste for childish toys