Lucas says, "Oh, Star Wars was always about promoting democracy"

I am amazed by the number of reasons Lucas made his movies. Truly amazed. I wanna make a list of all of the different reasons he’s given so far. Anyone want to help?

I read a similar story this morning with the same quotations. My immediate reaction was “Oh Jeebus, George, please shut up.” I respect the guy’s technical skills and I might go to a theater to see the action sequences in Ep.III, but I won’t be there looking for political commentary. Seems to me his depth of analysis in that arena parallels his understanding of male/female relationships (as exemplified by the Anakin/Padme dialogues).

To be fair, I think it’s another case of journalists selecting quotes and blowing them up to create a story. Then again, perhaps the entire six-movie epic is in fact an eloquent endorsement of anarcho-syndicalism which I have yet to grasp in it’s entirety.

But, wasn’t the Republic enforced by a theocracy? The Jedi?

In some commercials currently appearing on the Discovery Channel, Lucas says (paraphrased) “Star Wars was always about expanding young minds.”

Let’s not forget that SW has made Lucas over $2 billion since 1997 alone.

  1. Vietnam/Iraq allegory
  2. Expanding young minds.
  3. Lining Lucas’ pockets.

Let’s keep this one going!

I remember someone saying about the original film that the Empire were Capitalists and the Rebel Alliance were Communists. The reasoning? The Empire used green (money) beam weapons, and the Rebel Alliance used red (commie) beam weapons. :rolleyes:

Jedi Knights Templar

Does it matter what Lucas says?

He can always ‘digitally enhance’ his comments later. :stuck_out_tongue:

Well, I wouldn’t exactly call Ben Kenobi a watery-tart. :stuck_out_tongue:

What a laugh … I’ve read interviews where Lucas specifically espouses “benevolent dictatorship” as the ideal mode of government. Democracy does not come off well in the Star Wars movies.

Heh. Nice catch, SaneOne

Well, “Vader”=“Father” in Dutch. I had previously thought that was an Anakin/Luke thing, but now maybe the character should be interpreted as a commentary about the evils of the patriarchy.

Nice idea for a thread. I don’t have a cite, but I saw Lucas on TV when Phantom Menace was coming out saying that Star Wars “is basically about free will and how it takes precedence over what some would call destiny”. :smack:

I read on a Yahoo! article on Episode III that Lucas said after this he wants to “return to his filmmaking roots” and make smaller, more personal films. LOL! How is he going to pull of dialogue like

without tons of CGI effects to cover his ass?

I meant “How is he going to pull off dialogue like…”

Oh, how right you are!

David Brin tees up Lucas and Star Wars

I love Star Wars. Being ten years old in 1977 made sure it had a huge impact on me. But I’m under no illusions about it.

Er. I don’t get it. Are you saying a person can’t have multiple reasons for creating a story?

If I was to write an adventure story, I’d make sure it had several different threads of purpose. Star Wars has many goals - entertainment in the forms of adventure, comedy, a new myth, character motivations, plot twists, two trilogies set in different eras, metaphors, parallels, influences… It’s one of the main reasons it has endured for so long.

And what the hell is wrong with making enough money so you can self fund your projects? Compared to standard Hollywood dealings, it’s an impressive achievement.

Well of course it’s about promoting democracy: wasn’t Leia a Republican senator as well as a princess of the blood? {And please, no tortured explanations about how this feat was possible, particularly any which involve the last two toy commercials}.

And Amidala was an elected Queen. :dubious: :confused:

(So…Lucas wrote Ep III before Iraq existed? Wow! I didn’t know he was working on Star Wars 6000 years ago! Or maybe he just means from before when modern Iraq was an independant country—1932, I think?)

You just had to, didn’t you? To be fair, elected monarchs aren’t entirely unheard of - the ancient Celts used to elect their kings - but I’m pretty sure Lucas didn’t have that in mind when he wrote Star Wars; he just figured “Well, heroines have to be princesses, and good guys have to be democrats”, and the contradiction didn’t occur to him until later.

There’s nothing wrong with it, nor did I imply that there was.

I know the acceptible non-dork answer is “who gives a fuck?” but anyhow:

Her mom was the “elected” Queen of Naboo in Episode I (whatever that means). So basically, if each planet is it’s own geopolitical entity, she rules that one. Maybe she’s elected from some aristocracy class. Who knows?

In Episode II, she is no longer acting Queen but she has taken on the position as her planets representitive in the Senate. Kind of like if a British prince took a job as a lawyer. He is still prince but his job is “lawyer”. It would stand to reason that Leia as the daughter of a former Queen would hold the inherited title of Princess but could also take a job as Senator (which may or may not be limited to Naboo royalty).
NOW!! LETS DESTROY THEIR CAPITALIST ROBOT ARMY IN THE NAME OF OUR BELOVED TYRANT!!!