Jump to content

Talk:George Lucas

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

T archive for wordley


Into Archive 2 (Talk:George Lucas/Archive 2). --CaptainNtheGameMaster (talk) 20:43, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 15 January 2020


Update BoxOfficeMojo link (currently in reference #4) to the following:


-- (talk) 00:06, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Thanks! Majavah (t/c) 06:12, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 31 January 2020


I'm looking forward to add George Lucas'THX 1138 award nomination for the FIPRESCI prize at the 1971 Cannes Film Festival on the QUINZAINE DES RÉALISATEURS section.

Here's the source, which comes directly from the official site of the section.


It's to be noted that on Williams Friedkin's Bug wikipedia page the prize appears. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bug_(2006_film)#Awards

Looking forward to your response,


Santideis (talk) 11:33, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done. The link you gave has no mention of any awards. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 16:21, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
EDIT: The page shows the nominees, not the winners. It gives the FIPRESCI prize to the winner. 2019 winner was The Lighthouse (https://www.quinzaine-realisateurs.com/en/edition/2019/) which you can see in the list of the official page on 2019 QUINZAINE DES RÉALISATEUR edition. On Film Affinity it's mentioned that it won the FIPRESCI award at the quinzaine des realisateurs: https://www.filmaffinity.com/ar/awards.php?award_id=cannes&year=2019
It also appears on IMDb: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7984734/awards?ref_=tt_awd
Santideis (talk) 22:15, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Still  Not done. I have no idea why you're talking about last year's prize. The edit request was for the award for Lucas, and you haven't provided any sources that support this. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 01:02, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What I was saying is that the official page doesn't announce the winners, just the selection. I mentioned "The Lighthouse" was the winner of the FIPRESCI Prize on 2019 as an example. It won (as you can see on IMDb) but wasn't mentioned on the page, even though it appears on the selection. THX 1138 was nominated, but didn't won.

Santideis (talk) 22:24, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done: While the proposed edit request states that the word "nomination" should be used, the provided source says only that the film was "presented" but does not use the phrase "nominated". Please provide a source which uses the same phrase as what is requested. If the reason why the phrase presented was used rather than nomination because there is some protocol in place which determines how films are described or not described in these types of web listings (e.g, The Lighthouse), then please provide a source which states that protocol.  Spintendo  15:29, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Moreover, you are now auto-confirmed and can make the edit yourself, so you shouldn't be using {{edit semi-protected}} anymore. However, if you do so without any better sources, it will be reverted. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 15:31, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why are Razzies counted under "Awards and Honors"? Shouldn't his demerits be kept to a separate section if they are considered noteworthy? (talk) 10:03, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I will second this. YouCanDoBetter (talk) 21:04, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Back in 2018 he said he was going to direct "experimental" films.


Yeah, what happened with that, or was the ones he made so under the radar? Or what now? (talk) 13:55, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 22 July 2022


Change alma mater to USC school of cinematic arts MasterMercury (talk) 09:04, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. (@MasterMercury) lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみなさい, ping me when replying 13:17, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

More Information on the Creation of Star Wars


I tried adding more of his influences on Star Wars like his interest in social anthology as he's mentioned it numerous times as a point of reference on his work. I also made mention of "other stories" as there's numerous other stories that influenced it. I included two sources. Joe12Hawk (talk) 05:26, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think I can help you out on this if you'd like? There's a book I own called The Star Wars Archives 1999-2005. In the book there's this section where in this long Lucas and Duncan interview, they start to talk about social structures and how religions started and why he thinks religion and spiritually is important. If you think it's relevant and will help your case then what do you think about me adding it. Is it too much of a primary source even though it came from an interview involving two people? Mobfighter63 (talk) 01:33, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Intro descriptor


Don't want to just add this without consultation as it seems there have been some edit disputes on this page before. But Lucas' philanthropy seems pretty central to his life at this point, I wonder if it would be appropriate to update the lede sentence to "American filmmaker and philanthropist." Specifically in the context of arts and education, his contributions are pretty seismic - I would argue it also makes sense to add an additional small paragraph or sentence to the intro section that gives a brief overview of his work (Lucas Educational Foundation, helping get E-rate enacted, the Lucas Museum in LA). Asking before I execute the change as the intro already seems almost overloaded with info, don't want to just make it more complicated. 19h00s (talk) 14:31, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

George Lucas’ car crash on June 12, 1962


On June 12, 1962, George Lucas was involved in a near-fatal car crash. He was driving a car when he was thrown from it. His car crashed into a walnut tree after he was thrown from it. Lucas almost died in the crash. He was critically injured and sent directly to hospital for treatment after the life-changing car crash. Lucas was 18 then. (talk) 12:07, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Academy Award error


The article states "The score was released to critical acclaim and won Williams his third Academy Award for Best Original Score."

This is incorrect. It was his third award, but only second for *original* score. The first Academy Award had been for his adaptation of the music to Fiddler on the Roof. 2601:643:8D80:9D10:8D71:55AA:7A11:236D (talk) 22:55, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 26 May 2024


In the “Personal life” section, the word “formally” in the sentence “She formally served as chairwoman at DreamWorks Animation” should be replaced with the word “formerly.” (talk) 02:25, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done M.Bitton (talk) 21:43, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Star Wars" vs. "Star Wars: Episode IV – A New Hope"


User Joe12Hawk has been engaging in an edit war insisting that the 1977 film Star Wars be referred to as Star Wars: Episode IV – A New Hope throughout the article and in the filmography. I believe this is not the best way to refer to the film as the retitling is already explained in the main heading and also for the fact that the article itself is titled Star Wars (film). I believe that the filmography should reflect the titles of the films at their original release, despite any later revisions. Another Lucas film which received a retitling, Raiders of the Lost Ark, maintains its original name throughout the article as well as in director Steven Spielberg's filmography. Hostagecat (talk) 00:05, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The key to me is that when looking at the original 1977 Star Wars it has been referenced since 1981 as Star Wars: Episode IV – A New Hope to make it both clear it was the fourth in the ongoing Skywalker series and to clarify Star Wars is more than just one film but a larger franchise. The header also mentions he is the creator of both Star Wars and Indiana Jones. This makes it even further clear A New Hope is part of the larger franchise that is Star Wars than just multiple links to various Star Wars pages under the same name. Likewise the difference is Raiders of the Lost Ark's title was never changed. It's always stayed Raiders of the Lost Ark. It's only the subsequent films that have Indiana Jones within the opening scenes of the films as always was the case in 1984, 1989, 2008, and the most recent one with Disney in 2023. It's very different context. It may help to further add needed reference to the 1981 change of A New Hope becoming the title of the 1977 film while talking about the re-release from that said year. It's also how George Lucas wants it and I think it's best to respect how he views these things since they're his movies. My apologies for any edit war but I only want to keep the page as accurate as possible to what George Lucas says. Thank you! Joe12Hawk (talk) 01:22, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As a disinterested party, I've gotta side with the majority on this one. You are engaging in an edit war, you have reverted or modified edits on the movie title like 4 times at this point. Just leave it be. It was originally released as Star Wars, that's how it's titled in the standalone article, and there is already a reference to the name change in this article. I would also recommend that you not use "what George Lucas says" as the barometer for what belongs in this article/how it should be written. Wikipedia is not edited based on the wants/views of its subjects. 19h00s (talk) 12:23, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not to sound rude but there is no majority opinion. There's only one other comment apart from my own and yours, where you yourself mention being disinterested in the topic at hand. This isn't a majority. So I think more opinions are needed to have a proper discussion.
However Wikipedia is meant to be factually accurate and that happens to be the film has been referenced as A New Hope since 1981 to make it clear with the reasons I've listed above. The film might be listed as Star Wars (1977) for the main article but it can get confusing within the context of this article where it should be made clear between the wider franchise and the actual episode mentioned I think. This goes above only what George Lucas says and is what the film itself says in the opening crawl. Shouldn't the measuring stick be by going off what is shown on screen and how it has been addressed for over forty years now? It feels more subjective to list it as only Star Wars throughout this article when it hasn't been called or shown to be that in over forty years.
Perhaps a compromise of having both Star Wars – Episode IV: A New Hope and Star Wars in the filmography box with mention of the title change in 1981 within the biography article itself would be sufficient as it let's both coexist to make it even clearer. I would personally say going off what is shown on screen is the way to go but having both would be sufficient I think as a compromise to give an objectivity account of things on here as it's important to show the truth on here. Joe12Hawk (talk) 23:08, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's really just not necessary at all; it's explained in the header paragraphs and the article it links to is titled "Star Wars (film)". I'm not sure who is going to see one movie called "Star Wars" in his filmography next to 3 other movies titled "Star Wars: The Phantom Menace" etc. and think that the first one means the entire Star Wars franchise. If you want to break it down to a really technical level, the filmography states which films were released which years, and in 1977 a film called "Star Wars" was released; there was no film called "Star Wars – Episode IV: A New Hope" released in 1977, so it doesn't work on that merit. There are now 3 editors, 19h00s, Binksternet and myself, who disagree with the way you think the article should be done but nobody else is currently fighting for your way. Put the stick down. Hostagecat (talk) 09:30, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]