Talk:George Lucas

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the George Lucas article.
Article policies


This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

Contents

[edit] Biography assessment rating comment

WikiProject Biography Assessment

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Yamara 02:15, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Successful fellow

"he was born into a family of mexicans who mow lawnssuccessful independent directors and producers."

Isn't he film industry's most financially successful director? http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/54/biz_06rich400_The-400-Richest-Americans-Media-Entertainment_8Rank.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-grossing_films#List_adjusted_for_inflation

[edit] NPOV tag

Please stop deleting the Tags that are being placed on this item, factually incorrect information and biased opinions exist in the section regarding "Controversy," and I have also tagged "Lucas Bashing" as another biased article. You are vandalizing and supressing my right to open a debate on this issu

Please help us improve the article by highlighting a specific claim (i.e. a single sentence) which is "factually incorrect". If you do this, and no one can find evidence to support it, then the claim can be removed. Without this effort on your part, tagging the page is tantamount to slander or childish petulance -- this only hurts Wikipedia. This page has a history of people tagging it for no decernable reason -- other than petty vandalism. Hence, I have removed the tags that were, once again, placed on this page without supporting comment.Mattisgoo 00:25, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

I changed his birthdate from 1947 to the correct 1944. He was 62 this last May. But I noticed it is still incorrect under his picture. Don't know how to change that. Also, I deleted the "drifting" reference after his graduation from USC. He tried to join the Airforce because like most young men then he figured he should enlist before they drafted him and thought he could put his film/photography skills to use. I found that in Pollock's book "Skywalking" and I believe that Baxter covers it too in "Mythmaker". Lucas always knew that he would be a filmmaker once the bug bit him, drifting just doesn't seem to fit as a descriptor. If I did this wrong, I apologize. I have never tried to post here but noticed that the original article on Lucas seems to have vanished and that you are attempting to recreate it. Annie42 04:16, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lucas Bashing

PLEASE READ THE "CAPS-LOCK" USER'S ADDITIONAL DEFENSE AND COMMENTS ON THE "LUCAS BASHING" DISCUSSION ENTRY==

I have vehemently opposed the inclusion in this article of the reference to the "Lucas Bashing Phenomenon," for reasons of author bias, and the lack of appropriately substantiated evidence for the existence of such a thing at all. I HAVE ALSO MADE REFERENCE TO THE FACT THAT IF THE SAID ARTICLE REMAINS, AN ARTICLE WHICH GIVES AN ALTERNATE PERSPECTIVE OF THE FILMMAKER SHOULD ALSO EXIST TO ENSURE THAT THE WRONG IMPRESSION OF THE CONCEPT IS NOT BEING IMPOSED BY AN OPINIONATED AUTHOR.

SEVERAL USERS HAVE OPENLY OPPOSED MY PROTESTS, ONE SUCH GOING BY THE ALIAS "MATTISGOO." I NOW FIND THAT MY LATEST POST DETAILING MY POSITION AND OPINION ON THE MATTER - WHICH APPEARS ON THIS OPEN FORUM "DISCUSSION PAGE" HAVE BEEN DELETED. I HAVE NO EVIDENCE THAT THOSE OF OPPOSING OPINIONS HAVE DELETED MY POSTS, BUT I CERTAINLY SUSPECT THEM, ESPECIALLY AFTER THE SAID USER THREATENED MY OPINIONS WOULD BE "IGNORED" ON THE FORUM. WHO ARE THEY TO DISAPPROVE AND THEN SUBSEQUENTLY DELETE MY PROTESTS AGAINST WHAT I CONSIDER A BIASED AND UNFAIR ARTICLE??? HOW DARE THEY DELETE MY OPINION TO SILENCE A CRITIC OF THEIR POSITION ON A PUBLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA FORUM!!!

THE SECTION IN THE LUCAS BIOGRAPHY CONCERNING "LUCAS BASHING" SHOULD EITHER BE DELETED, OR INCLUDED WITH AN ARTICLE WHICH EXPLAINS THE OPPOSING VIEWPOINT OF THE ISSUE THAT THE AUTHOR HAS CREATED HIMSELF, SO AS NOT TO CREATE THE WRONG IMPRESSION ON AN UNSUSPECTING READER SEEKING THE UNBIASED AND TRUTHFUL ACCOUNT OF THE FILMMAKER.

I DO NOT KNOW WIKIPEDIA'S POLICIES ON VANDALISM, BUT ANYONE WHO DELETES ANOTHER'S POSTS ON A FORUM SHOULD BE BANNED FROM USAGE OF THE FORUM UNTIL THEY UNDERSTAND THEY MUST ALSO RESPECT OTHER'S OPINIONS!!!

I'd like to suggest replacing the 'neutrality' tag with 'weasel' tag, which really seems to be the underlying problem with the bashing section. Thoughts? EEMeltonIV 13:15, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Fan criticism of George Lucas is marked with the neutrality template and Lucas Bashing is marked for deletion. Do we really need to mark this article with the neutrality template, too? All the comments made in the controversy section are either substantiated with fact or common knowledge. MaxVeers 17:17, 7 January 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Filmography is Complete

I finished the filmography adding all his student and short films, as well as the other films he was involved in. I do wonder about the convention of dividing up his films as "notable" and "other" and now "student and short films"

ZenMondo 20:31, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Pointing out that he didn't direct

In the opening paragraph, I removed the following sentences:

He was not, however, the director of any of the Indiana Jones films (done by his friend Steven Spielberg) or Star Wars Episodes V (directed by Irvin Kershner) or VI (directed by Richard Marquand).

Rationale: The opening states that he is a screenwriter and producer, as well as a director. We don't need to point out what he didn't direct. That can be clarified in the later text. He was involved in all the films indicated in some manner, whether it be as writer or producer. — Frecklefoot | Talk 15:51, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Buddhist?

Why was Lucas added to the Buddhist category? Where is the documentation on this? I read that he modelled his Star Wars universe on some things he had read about Buddhism, but that doesn't mean he subscribes to the belief. Unless someone can dig up some evidence for this, I'll remove it. — Frecklefoot | Talk July 6, 2005 19:56 (UTC)

I highly doubt that Lucas is a Buddhist. He definitely seems like a Methodist, or a Christian, or something along those lines; just think of the Christ allegory in Phantom Menace and such. Darth Katana X 22:49, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
He considers himself at least partially buddist. From an interview in time "Q: What religion are you? A: I was raised Methodist. Now let's say I'm spiritual. It's Marin County. We're all Buddhists up here." Grzesik 03:00, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
That's sarcasm. He doesn't actually mean that everybody in Marin County is Buddhist. What he means is that he's spiritual, in other words, he doesn't belong to a particular church or faith.
Yes he does. He's Methodist, simply stated in more than one circumstance. By spirituality, he compares his own spirituality with that of a Buddihist, meaning, he's as religious as a Buddhist, but he's Methodist. I found that quite easy to understand. IronCrow 02:35, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] the "blockbuster approach" to filmmaking

The article states: Along with Spielberg, Lucas is credited with (or blamed for) establishing the blockbuster approach to filmmaking.

I don't see any explanation of what sort of approach is being referred to. The link to "blockbuster" defines it as the effect which a movie has on the market in terms of money taken in, and of devastating the competition. These are after-the-fact observations, not an approach which one might take during production.

Unless someone can explain what a "blockbuster approach" is, I'd like to delete that statement.--Keeves 15:20, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Okay, no reponses to the above. I'm taking that line out. --Keeves 13:25, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
The "blockbuster" approach to filmmaking can be defined, I think, as being one that: (a)Has higher than average budgets. (b)Wide theatrical release (2000+ theaters) (c)Use of sequels to extend the "brand." (d)Film that is closely tied with merchandising and creates a brand instead of a film. All these things weren't so standardized before the Lucas era. Comedian x 20:10, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RfC/poll – Darth Vader/Anakin Skywalker: one article or two?

What do you think? E Pluribus Anthony 19:35, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] ghost written Star Wars Episode IV

This is news to me, a fan since 1977. I'm very curious as I enjoy both writers. Alan Dean Foster ghost wrote Episode IV??? Where is the factual information coming from on this? I can't find it anywhere. Please clarify or delete if this is a rumor. Thank you.

This has been known for years, and both Foster and Lucas have admitted it many times over. Remember, Google is your friend, and this information is easily verifyable. Mind you, we're talking about the novelization here, not the movie... TheRealFennShysa 17:09, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Major Vandalism

On 30th January 2006, the entire article was deleted and replaced with a rude message. I tried to fix it but alas do not know how. At least I got rid of the obscene comment. Scott197827 30/01/2006

Febuary 18 2005 I just found this page and noticed Fart Wars is listed twice, when referances to the Star Wars prequels is made. Didn't read it throughly, but someone should fix that and any other vandalism.

I blocked new and unregistered users from making edits. IG-2000 08:01, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stuff to Include?

I'd like to point out a few things for consideration in including in this artical also. http://www.jitterbug.com/origins/index.html Please look through that interesting bit to find out where he got many of his ideas, some of them directly ripped off from certain other films.

And I think it interesting to note that American Graffiti, his first movie, cost only $800,000 to make, but grossed $100 million dollars. Amazing isn't it? Thats where he first used Harrison Ford, by the way, later shown as Hon Solo and Indiana Jones. The sequal to that film was named More American Graffiti and it grossed only $8 million.

I see a lot of people bashing Willow around the net, which I thought was a good film.

Anyway, shouldn't the artical mention details about how he innovated certain special effects technology, and whatnot? I think that is a very important aspect of the man. --Thomas Prewitt


[edit] Star Trek Fan?

Is George Lucas actually a Star Trek fan? He is at the moment in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Star_Trek_fans

He is indeed. Clint Howard said that during his audition for Star Wars, Lucas immediately remarked that Howard had played Balok in the Original Series episode "The Corbomite Maneuver."

[edit] Trivia factcheck

"Never attended his high school prom" -- Is there any source here besides his appearance on The_O.C.? If not, can we be certain he was speaking factually in any of his lines from that show? Siyavash 18:02, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

"[THX] ostensibly stands for 'Tomlinson Holman eXperiment' after its chief engineer, however, it is obviously a reference to Lucas' first film THX 1138." -- this is disputed in the article about THX 1138. -193.110.108.67 07:13, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Also says he has HIV, never heard about that and can't find any ref to it anywhere else. -(66.131.254.21 02:48, 17 October 2006 (UTC))

I am a USC graduate, class of 1978. Back then the cinema school was called the "USC School of Cinema". Cinematic Arts is a recent change. For propriety, the reference should be changed in his "early years" biographic material. ThanksJvortiz 16:14, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Health Condition

I have noticed over the years a swelling occuring around Lucas' neck. Is there any information on any health issues the subject is expeiencing?DarthAlbin 19:23, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Flannel

This guy sure does love to wear flannel. Is that notable?—Wasabe3543 00:18, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

No,It is not significant. Unless he has a unhealthy obession towards it. --XAVCAMM 13:17, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Awful

This article needs to be re-designed from the top down. The layout is bad and the picture appears to be from a cell phone shot. Can't we have a proper and respectful article here? Also, I don't much care for yellow on black font used at the bottom in general. We need something a little more slicker and not painful to the eyes.Monty2 06:22, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Trivia Section

As part of the wikiproject to reduce the amount of trivia, I went through the trivia section and removed the more 'trivial trivia' and some trivia without references. If some of what I removed is deemed by the editors of this article to be necessary information, please find a way to incorporate it into the article proper, rather than re-adding it to the trivia section. Wikipedia does not outright ban trivia, but it strongly recommends that it not be included in articles. The guidelines state that trivia sections are particularly okay in new articles because they can add information before the article is formatted. However, once an article is as developed as this one is, the trivia needs to be removed from the trivia section and incorporated into the article proper. I strongly recommend that editors here try and do this if they want the trivia information to stay as there is a growing movement to remove trivia. More trivia may be removed if not incorporated. Furthermore, much of the trivia I removed is absolutely unencyclopedic; it has no place in a wikipedia article. Cameos fall under this category. The biggest example of this was the statement that he didn't go to prom, come on people... focus on important details. Finally, much of the trivia pertains more to the Star Wars articles than this one, incorporate it into those articles. --The Way 02:16, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Trivia - Famous Celebrity Anagrams

Famous people sometimes have names which form anagrams which accurately and/or meaninfully say something special about that celebrity, anagrams that are sometimes praiseworthy, sometimes notorious, sometimes mysterious.

For example, Oliver Reed, committed all his life to partying and living life to the social maximus, had the prized, infamous anagram "Revel or Die!" and George Romero, who started it all with "Night of the Living Dead" spells "Gore, Rome! Gore!" (Where else did his vision of the dead walking the earth come from if not "The Book of Revelations"?!)

George Lucas, whose alma mater is USC, and who has donated $175 million dollars to its school of film-making undoubtedly has earned high social esteem and praise at USC, but his name produces the slightly less glamorous anagram of "Large ego, USC."

Luke Skywalker, George Lucas' light-sabre weilding, cinematographic namesake (NOTE: Luke = Lucas, and Lucas means "light") produces a historically accurate anagram which has special meaning for Hollywood with respect to the dark days of the McCarthyist witchhunts against Communist-red and left-leaning "pink" actors and writers - it is: "KKK were U.S. ally!" Thank you for that information, Luke Skywalker, and perhaps we do need reminding! White Knights against the Dark Forces of Evil! ... and how could it get any whiter and brighter than the KKK??!


Elizabeth Jane 11:00, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Interesting, but doesn't really belong here. PacificBoy 00:17, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


I removed a line where someone put that Lucas was killed on the 11th.

[edit] How Lucas really got his ideas for Star Wars

Is there any way we could incorporate the link to this video in the article?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5058529870025933880&q=Lucas+Arts

It's a video that a group of people made to show how George Lucas really came up with his ideas for Star Wars. Pretty funny and worth watching. vDub 21:21, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

  • This is a fictional fanfilm and has no connection tot the real George Lucas. It should not be included. Fredvdp 19:57, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Empire is "the worst" quote

I have added this bit of trivia twice and both times been reverted by TheRealFennShysa. I believe both reverts to be in bad faith and in violation of the spirit of wiki for a number of reasons. 1) it is verifiable information that this joke was made, it is not a rumor or from a bad source. 2) it is NPOV since it is documented that it was just a joke. 3) reverting is used for vandalism, copyright, and other abuses, not things that we think are unimportant. The revert page makes a number of points which TheRealFennShysa has not done: assuming that the edit is done in good faith by a reasonable person, just summarily deleting it without any discussion, etc. 4) the event mentioned is relevant both to Lucas and to his most important films and his fans, even if as a joke. If anything it shows his sense of humor. 5) it is a "minor event" which has been cross-posted on a number of Hollywood news sources and SW fan blogs (not linked in the wiki because they aren't the first source), so it isn't that minor. in any case, as an encyclopedia, wiki doesn't gauge importance.

Honestly, I don't see what the big deal is. There's no reason to "protect" Lucas from a correctly attributed, goofy quip he made at a public event. But what bothers me more than that is the summary deletion of the entry with no discussion and little justification.

--shift6 02:31, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

To quote you, I honestly don't seen why you have to make a big deal about it, and assume bad faith, which is, as you say, "in violation of the spirit of wiki for a number of reasons." You claim I deleted it without any discussion, yet I stated my reasons in the edit summaries - both times. I clearly stated my reasons. But to expound, since you appear to want that, only Cinematical (which is not a Hollywood news source, despite its parent company Weblogs Inc. having recently been bought by AOL) tried to report on it as if it was the main thing Lucas said, and they were quickly corrected in their comments section. Any futher discussion from that point by fan blogs proceeded from mistaken assumptions based on bad reporting. Had the Hollywood Reporter article been about *the quote specifically*, I might think there was some validity to including it, but the only reason this has been brought up is because *one* blogger overreacted to something taken out of context. This is not about protecting anyone - this is about *not* including something that is a non-issue. I will be removing it again, unless you can show some legitmate news sources, not blogs, reporting on Lucas' statement as if it were a real opinion. TheRealFennShysa 16:26, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Yawn, you win. Placing reasons in a revert/edit comment is not "discussion", it is simple deletion outside wiki's revert guidelines. The Hollywood Reporter is a legitimate source but apparently not good enough for this bit of trivia because the article didn't focus on the quote. Is Netscape Movies "legitimate"? Would it be legitimate in an entry on Sid Ganis since a highly-respected Hollywood person (Lucas) praised his skills? I see on your talk page that you've made some controversial edits before, deleting things altogether without discussion and so forth, so I'm not going to bother your sacred cow any further. --shift6 18:51, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
We apparently disagree on discussion guidelines, since that is the purpose of edit summaries. We disagreed on content, now we're discussing it further. I'm sorry you expected to have others just roll over and let you have things your way. Now - Netscape Movies? You mean this link? That's essentially a blog post reposting and linking to Cinematical, which itself was only reporting on a blog post, NOT The Hollywood Reporter - I looked again and that link was provided in the comments section, not the article. I don't think the Lucas quote alone would be noteworthy on an article about Ganis, although the award at the event would have been. And my your allegations about my past history have nothing to do with this discussion - although your characterization is incorrect and misleading. TheRealFennShysa 20:14, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
If edit summaries are "discussion", why do the revert guidelines consistantly refer to the talk page? Why do they say that edits shouldn't be made back and forth in an "edit war" which fills the wiki database and complicates article histories?
I'm not interested in people "rolling over" to give me my way. My point has been that summarily deleting someone's update because you subjectively don't think it belongs, and without first discussing it, is outside the wiki guidelines.
And actually The Hollywood Reporter did include this information in an article under their main film news section, not just in some comment. I agreed with your first edit comment (although again, not with your complete deletion) that THR should be referenced instead of the Moviefone blog, and I did so in my second article update. You still deleted it. Every time you have left a "discussion" in your edit comments, I have addressed it in the follow-up update, yet you continue to delete it. I believe this is "bad faith" and this is why I characterize it as such.
I recalled those "allegations" (which are clearly displayed on your user talk page by the way; an "allegation" would be something I claimed but could not prove exists) to hopefully bring to mind previous times you have made summary changes without discussion, and that those people didn't appreciate it either. My intent was to edify a community member, not convict him. I'm sure if you ask an official wiki "admin" or other person, they'd agree that "delete completely and leave an explanatory edit comment" is not the kind of "discussion" they aspire to. --shift6 21:28, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Trivia section moved

Moving this here, since it's the usual unstructured, unreferenced mess.--Eloquence* 17:07, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Trivia

  • High school nickname was "Luke," hence the name of Luke Skywalker in "Star Wars."
  • A noted fan of Mel Brooks, he gave permission to Mel Brooks to film Spaceballs after reading a copy of the script Brooks had given him.
  • Made a cameo appearance in Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith at the insistence of his daughter. He appeared in the opera scene, near Palpatine. Also made an Appearance in Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace near the end of the film.
  • In 1976, Lucas published a novelization of A New Hope, which was initially (like the film) titled just Star Wars. Although Lucas was credited as author of the book, it was later revealed that the book was actually ghost written by Alan Dean Foster.
  • Sold Lucasfilm's Computer Graphics Division (by then named Pixar) to Apple Computer co-founder Steve Jobs. It eventually became Pixar Animation Studios.
  • Made as an action figure in 2002 with the name "Jorg Sacul". In 2006, a toy based on his appearance in Revenge of the Sith was created, as well as a mail-away special figure of George Lucas in Stormtrooper disguise. Jorg reflects his first name while Sacul is Lucas backwards.
  • The producers of Superman offered Lucas the chance to direct but declined saying he didn't think he could do a good job with the material.
  • Lucas has taken a number of people to court over the use of his creations. He took Luther Campbell to court for appropriating the name Luke Skywalker (spelled Skyywalker) and Dr. Dre for sampling the THX theme.
  • In 1969, Lucas was hired to shoot the Rolling Stones in concert at the Altamont Music Festival.
  • On October 11, 2006, Lucas appeared on The Colbert Report as "George L.", presumably a finalist to Colbert's "Green Screen Challenge". He ended the episode by defeating Colbert in a mock lightsaber battle.
  • Utopia Spaceage Colony (2008), Is A Science Fiction, Comedy, Adventure, A Major Motion Picture Film,

With, George Xenophon Papadopoulos. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.181.102.205 (talk) 18:45, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Length

Why is this article so short? I would have thought for sure with all the Star Wars fans out there this would be a good 25-30kb article. Instead it's a mere 17 kb and everything is in 1-2 sentence paragraphs. Quadzilla99 01:25, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Because the pedants keep trimming it. Sort of like the trivia list above which is all verifiable with other sources and some are so well known as to be in the common domain. Maybe this is for the best, otherwise sci-fi/star wars fanatics like me would have character descriptions and technology listings here for everything including the second thing on the right in the third scene which was cut from Empire Strikes Back! Yanqui9 01:39, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Heritage

Can anyone add or share some light on this that was found on the net?:


Now for the task at hand: I am desperately searching for information pertaining to George Lucas' Greek heritage. Not too long ago, there was much info available on the highly reliable Internet Movie Database (www.IMDB.com) suggesting that Mr. Lucas (or shall I say Mr. GEORGIOS LUKAKIS) is Greek! There was also evidence that he was involved in THREE Greek films before Star Wars came into existance. Now that information is no longer available on the IMDB.

Regards,

Φilhellenism 11:14, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Merge of Lucas children pages

None of the three Wikipedia entries on Lucas's children (Amanda, Katie, and Jett) meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability. Their only achievements are cameos in the newer Star Wars films, information that is already gotten across in a sentence in the George Lucas article that reads: "All three of his children have appeared in the prequels." Furthermore, all three are private figures. 24.59.41.65 20:07, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Concur. Robert K S 21:17, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Photo of George Lucas

Just took a photo of George Lucas at D5 which I have licensed under a CC-BY. I personally think it's slightly better than the one on the page, but didn't want to be vain and just replace it. Feel free to use it or let me know and I'll swap with the current one. -- Joi 01:43, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Did the auditorium just make a sudden right turn? :-) Robert K S 00:23, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
It was a visual effect. ;-) -- Joi 20:13, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
This is a terrible picture, can somebody who can unprotect it replace it with the georgelucas.jpg from the www.lucasfilm.com site. (I uploaded it.) Give the guy a break.Jbersie 00:48, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
Probably can't do that, as the one you uploaded is non-free. However, I did like the "signing autographs" picture a little better than Joi's snapshot. Looks like it got deleted, which is too bad. Robert K S 01:00, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

George Lucas

I agree. I think the D5 picture of George is pretty unflattering and I actually deleted from my gallery on my Commons user page. I realize this is lower quality, but of the photos of George that I've taken, I like the following with JJ Abrams much better. The next time I see him, I'll try to take a better quality photo. --Joi 03:03, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

George Lucas and JJ Abrams

[edit] Image linking

Hey guys, when you click the image in Lucas's infobox, it takes the user to a different image, though they are both apparently named GeorgeLucas.jpg. Perhaps this is a cashing issue with the server? 69.252.188.131 19:53, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Link

I was reading about American Billionares and was shocked he was not included on the list. According to this artice, he should be listed on that page. Since this page is "locked" could someone please link him to the wiki artice American Billionares? Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by G312 (talk • contribs) 18:46, August 30, 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Force Behind Star Wars - Tales of Power

In a 1977 Rolling Stone Magazine Article, Lucas attributes The Force to “Tales of Power”, a book by Carlos Castadneda: http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/7330268/the_force_behind_star_wars

GLamunyon@aol.com

71.129.43.228 (talk) 17:25, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Diabetes - misleading statement

Just thought I'd find a direct source for GL's diabetes. I found this clear reference so far:

  • Rolling Stone magazine, The Force Behind Star Wars, George Lucas talks about why robots need love and where Wookies come from, Paul Scanlon, May 1977.
GL: "I'm also a diabetic and can't eat sugar and I want to have a little store that sells good hamburgers and sugarless ice cream because all the people who can't eat sugar deserve it."
--Ashley VH (talk) 16:57, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
What would be interesting to find out are the details of the reclassification Lucas mentions in the USC interview. All sources that refer to Lucas's diabetes are from the 1970s, except the USC interview, which is from 2000. Robert K S (talk) 17:01, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

On the page at the moment is "Lucas was prescribed medication for the disease, but his symptoms are sufficiently mild that he does not require insulin and would not be considered diabetic under the disease's current classification", which is factually incorrect; if you are diabetic this does not automatically mean you need insulin or depend on how mild your symptoms are (under any classification that I know of, particularly as a diabetic myself who also does not take insulin). The other interpretation is that GL now takes no medication, which might be possible if he had a pancreas transplant or was able to control his blood glucose levels by diet alone (he would still be monitored as a diabetic) or was misdiagnosed in the first place (see Diabetes mellitus type 2#Treatment).

If this is a direct quote by GL from the 2000 Drew Casper interview, can someone please confirm, and change the text to be a direct quote as at the moment it is medically misleading and promotes a common misunderstanding about diabetes. --Ashley VH (talk) 17:18, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Is there no other hyperglycemic condition that could at one time have been categorized as diabetes but would now not be called such? Robert K S (talk) 20:30, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
The reverse is true, over time more conditions have been recognized as the result of diabetes rather than a separate disease. Examples include eye, kidney and heart problems where the cause can be long term undiagnosed diabetes (type 2). Ashley VH (talk) 10:39, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Filmography

I noticed the filmography is sorted following the Star Wars periods... I don't find it's the appropriate way to do that, as if Star Wars was the only George Lucas creation. A simple chronological list would be more objective :

Filmography :

  • Freiheit (1965)
  • Look at Life (1965)
  • Herbie (1966)
  • 1:42:08 (1966)
  • The Emperor (1967)
  • Electronic Labyrinth: THX 1138 4EB (1967)
  • Anyone Lived in a Pretty How Town (1967)
  • 6-18-67 (1967)
  • Filmmaker (1968)
  • THX 1138 (1971) (director, co-writer)
  • American Graffiti (1973) (director, co-writer)
  • Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope (1977) (director, writer, executive producer)
  • The Star Wars Holiday Special (1978) (story)
  • More American Graffiti (1979) (executive producer)
  • Kagemusha also known as The Shadow Warrior (1980) (Executive Producer of International Edition)
  • Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back (1980) (story, executive producer)
  • Body Heat (1981) (uncredited executive producer)
  • Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981) (co-writer, executive producer, uncredited second unit director)
  • Twice Upon a Time (1982) (executive producer)
  • Star Wars Episode VI: Return of the Jedi (1983) (executive producer, co-writer, uncredited co-director)
  • Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984) (co-writer, executive producer)
  • Caravan of Courage: An Ewok Adventure (1984) (executive producer, story)
  • Ewoks: The Battle for Endor (1985) (executive producer, story)
  • Mishima (1985) (executive producer)
  • Howard the Duck (1986) (executive producer) (disowned)
  • Labyrinth (1986) (executive producer)
  • Captain Eo (1986) (producer, screenplay)
  • Powaqqatsi (1988) (executive producer)
  • Willow (1988) (writer, executive producer)
  • Tucker: The Man and His Dream (1988) (executive producer)
  • The Land Before Time (1988) (executive producer)
  • Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989) (co-writer, executive producer)
  • The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles (1992 - 1996) (story, executive producer)
  • Radioland Murders (1994) (co-writer, executive producer)
  • Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace (1999) (director, writer, executive producer)
  • Star Wars Episode II: Attack of the Clones (2002) (director, co-writer, executive producer)
  • Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith (2005) (director, writer, executive producer, actor [cameo])
  • Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008) (story, executive producer)

Cameos in films and TV :

  • Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (1984) (Cameo as "Tourist boarding plane")
  • Hook (1991) (Cameo as "Man kissing on bridge")
  • Beverly Hills Cop III (1994) (Cameo as "Disappointed Man")
  • Men in Black (1997) (Uncredited cameo as Himself)
  • Just Shoot Me! (2003 episode "It's Raining Babies" (Cameo as Himself)
  • The O.C. (2005 episode "The O.Sea") (Cameo as Himself)
  • Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith (2005) (Cameo as "Baron Papanoida")
  • The Colbert Report (2006) (Cameo as Green Screen Finalist George L.)
  • Rollin' with Saget (2006) (Cameo at 1:43)
  • Robot Chicken (2007 special "Robot Chicken: Star Wars") (as the voice of Himself)
  • Alien Planet

343KKT Kintaro (talk) 07:28, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

he is cool —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.115.143.124 (talk) 00:19, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Please move Look at Life to the first position; it was Lucas's first film (refer to http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/page/luc0int-1). I'm not sure whether to move Frieheit to the second or third position down and/or whether to relabel as 1966. IMDB http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000184/ quotes Freiheit as 1966 (and interestingly all but the writer credits list it as his third movie). The USC link cited by Freiheit's page would seem to be a reliable source given that the films were made for USC classes, link is dead but is available via Internet Archive http://web.archive.org/web/*hh_/cinema-tv.usc.edu/Archives/lucas.html; has question marks next to date so they didn't know the order either; the dates are questioned by the USC archivists so it's actually kinda useless. . For all we know his 1966 films may have been worked on concurrently and submitted at the same time, though the "animated" film Look at Life was pretty clearly this first animated film he was referring to. Maybe somebody should ask him the right order, if we trust his memory. I would make these changes but for stupid Indiana Jones hater vandals forcing edit locking --Kodrin (talk) 06:59, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed Criticism Section

Considering the widespread criticisms that George Lucas has received for his writing and directing of late (particularly regarding the Star Wars prequels and Special Editions), I feel that a criticism section would be more than appropriate. I would be happy to have a go at the first draft, but the current lack of a criticism section prompts me to check here first before beginning.

Possible links for criticism section: http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1808534,00.html http://filmcritic1963.typepad.com/reviews/2005/05/star_wars_episo.html http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,1041491,00.html67.177.49.13 (talk) 23:17, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Academy Award-winning?

George Lucas has never won an academy award, though it says so in the article. He has been nominated four times, but never won. I've edited the information.

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000184/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.72.152.160 (talk) 14:37, 25 May 2008 (UTC)