George Lucas or Peter Jackson?

Who could possibly be voting for Lucas? After the travesty that is the first two prequels, I'd like to see a constitutional amendment preventing him from ever writing or directing a film again.

I want a constitutional amendment to ensure Peter Jackson makes the third star wars prequel.

He's a pioneer. I never saw the two latest "Star Wars" movies; I'm no longer interested in such films. But in my youth I, like most people, was blown away by the first trilogy.

Like comparing 7-Eleven to Saks Fifth Avenue. I take that back, because Peter Jackson would not think of himself as 'Saks'.

I just watched 'The return of the king' and now I'm convinced that this trilogy could not have been made by an american filmmaker.

George Lucas would have picked well-known american actors to play the parts, rather than relatively obscure actors. He would have picked Robert Redford as Gandalf, Robin Williams as Frodo, and Christopher Walken as Saruman.

Of course I voted for Jackson, but there's a part of me that feels sympathy for Lucas. Yes, I was truly dissapointed by the last two SW films. But he's the guy that created "Star Wars" (Episode III to the nit-picker, but it will always be just "Star Wars" to me). And Star Wars was THE MOVIE to me as I was growing up as it came out when I was 11 and the last movie (of the first three) came out the summer before my Sr. year in high school, so it was a pretty big part of my geeky youth.

in a way, he reminds me of John Hughes. Some pals and I had a conversation about Hughes a few years back and the differences in the first stage of his career and the second stage. We came to the conclusion that John Hughes was captured by space aliens and replaced by the "Evil and dumbed-down" John Hughes, much like what obviously happened to Lucas :)

I can not detract from how important Lucas's first films were.
Maybe he bacame a victim of his own success.
but as far as an allegorical modern myth, the Star Wars concept has validity.
I like both

Lucas is great at coming up with ideas, but not very good at putting them on screen?

Notice that the one film of the five that is considered by far the best is Empire Strikes Back, the one film he neither wrote nor directed. That may be a clue. :)

Hey, I loved Star Wars when I was young. Then I was blown away by Empire. But when we got to Jedi, something very disturbing happened.

Ewoks.

And at that point, Lucas jumped the shark. He really needs to sit back and produce and spin out ideas, and hire good people to write and direct.

Lucas had an amazing knack for picking actors in the 1970s. Actors who could, in his ensembles, work together to find their characters and have fun in spite of the lack of feedback they were getting from Lucas. That's why the first SW films - cheesy scripts and all - worked.

The younger actors in the later SW movies just don't have the skills and the chemistry to go out on limbs on their own. I've seen documentaries stating he's practically non-existent at communicating with actors and pretty much leaves them alone.

Contrast that to PJ and the 'behind the scenes' footage where he's right there showing the actors what they should be going for (at least physically), and the stories of how he and Viggo were collaborating via fax on Aragorn scenes.

With George Lucas and the current crop of Star Wars movies, it's like he's making the same movie over and over again. He knows people like me will see them the first day they come out and again and again after that.

What incentive is there for him to make a better movie with better character development. I saw Shattered Glass and thought Hayden Christenson did an excellent job in that movie so he can clearly act. It's just that George Lucas didn't give him much to play with.