Baby Rain Clouds and George Lucas making movies
Rain, falling down.
(Of course it falls down. Rain always falls down...except for that one time when it was falling up, and Paul Bunyan and Babe the Blue Ox had to figure out how to stop it from raining up. Paul took umbrellas and cut the handles off and all the lumberjacks strapped umbrellas to their legs so the rain didn't fall up all their jackets and slickers while Paul and Babe sorted the rain thing out.
I think it was a baby rain cloud that had gotten lost and fell down a cave and started crying for his momma.)
Shiny! maidenjedi and cretkid might find this look at the morals of George Lucas's movie-making. (Note that I said his movie making, not his movies.)
Via suelac: Harold Jenkins on SW fandom. Yeah, Harold Jenkins of Textual Poachers. While I think Jenkins has the whole "fanfic as campfire tales" down right, I wasn't comfortable with the tone and drift of the interview re: "George Lucas is marginalizing women's fan experiences." I think the article fails to note (with enough vigor) that our society is set up to permit legal use via parody (which men do), while dramatic reinvention (which women do) still falls into a grey area, one much closer to "theft."
If one wanted, one could argue that men are gravitating towards a legal use of the material, while women are less justice-minding (or law abiding) and don't mind using the material in legally iffy ways. (I'm not saying that's so, I'm playing devil's advocate.)
If one wants to argue that our laws reflect a patriarical pov that accepts parody (because men do it) but not dramatic investment (because that's women's work), well, that's another thing, and again, not one I'm supporting, just pointing out.
Via :
Life after Darth and a George Lucas interview - both Wired articles.
The first one in particular talks about the sorts of things movie wise that influenced GL, and so was entirely over my head. I don't know movie making from beans, I only know what I like. But the parts I did understand I thought were pretty interesting. The second one, GL says about SF and "movies with a message":
The thing I like about fantasy and science fiction is that you can take issues, pull them out of their cultural straitjackets, and talk about them without bringing in folk artifacts that make people get closed minded.
Yes. And he goes on to point to F9/11 as an example of a film that completely failed to engender discussion, but only sowed more shouting and shoving. And to that I have to say, YES, as well - it's not about me having the right answer, it's about me having an answer and bringing other people around to see my pov.
Or, as my Dad said about movies: "You got to make something that people want to see, something that entertains them. That's the first thing. Then, if you do that, try to make your point. But you can't be trying to stir people up, 'cause then only the people who want to be stirred up will come see your movie. And there are a lot more people who want to go to the movies to see something exciting or an adventure or something funny. You got to get them to see the adventure, and get them stirred up kinda accidentally."
Don't ask me why he was telling me how to make movies - iirc, I was fourteen and we were milking cows - but I think it's something a lot of movie makers forget, and something writers could take to heart as well.
(Of course it falls down. Rain always falls down...except for that one time when it was falling up, and Paul Bunyan and Babe the Blue Ox had to figure out how to stop it from raining up. Paul took umbrellas and cut the handles off and all the lumberjacks strapped umbrellas to their legs so the rain didn't fall up all their jackets and slickers while Paul and Babe sorted the rain thing out.
I think it was a baby rain cloud that had gotten lost and fell down a cave and started crying for his momma.)
Shiny! maidenjedi and cretkid might find this look at the morals of George Lucas's movie-making. (Note that I said his movie making, not his movies.)
Via suelac: Harold Jenkins on SW fandom. Yeah, Harold Jenkins of Textual Poachers. While I think Jenkins has the whole "fanfic as campfire tales" down right, I wasn't comfortable with the tone and drift of the interview re: "George Lucas is marginalizing women's fan experiences." I think the article fails to note (with enough vigor) that our society is set up to permit legal use via parody (which men do), while dramatic reinvention (which women do) still falls into a grey area, one much closer to "theft."
If one wanted, one could argue that men are gravitating towards a legal use of the material, while women are less justice-minding (or law abiding) and don't mind using the material in legally iffy ways. (I'm not saying that's so, I'm playing devil's advocate.)
If one wants to argue that our laws reflect a patriarical pov that accepts parody (because men do it) but not dramatic investment (because that's women's work), well, that's another thing, and again, not one I'm supporting, just pointing out.
Via :
Life after Darth and a George Lucas interview - both Wired articles.
The first one in particular talks about the sorts of things movie wise that influenced GL, and so was entirely over my head. I don't know movie making from beans, I only know what I like. But the parts I did understand I thought were pretty interesting. The second one, GL says about SF and "movies with a message":
The thing I like about fantasy and science fiction is that you can take issues, pull them out of their cultural straitjackets, and talk about them without bringing in folk artifacts that make people get closed minded.
Yes. And he goes on to point to F9/11 as an example of a film that completely failed to engender discussion, but only sowed more shouting and shoving. And to that I have to say, YES, as well - it's not about me having the right answer, it's about me having an answer and bringing other people around to see my pov.
Or, as my Dad said about movies: "You got to make something that people want to see, something that entertains them. That's the first thing. Then, if you do that, try to make your point. But you can't be trying to stir people up, 'cause then only the people who want to be stirred up will come see your movie. And there are a lot more people who want to go to the movies to see something exciting or an adventure or something funny. You got to get them to see the adventure, and get them stirred up kinda accidentally."
Don't ask me why he was telling me how to make movies - iirc, I was fourteen and we were milking cows - but I think it's something a lot of movie makers forget, and something writers could take to heart as well.