Reading the post reminded me of this excellent TV program I just finished watching recently.
What program you ask?
Ridley Scott's "The Prophets of Science Fiction" series he produced for The Discovery Channel.
Was pretty damned good. Its one part history, one part literary review, one part biography, and one part study of scientific developments.
The reason the post DomA wrote made me think of this show? Because he mentioned Ridley Scott while we all are talking about Lucas. The 8th episode of the series was all about Lucas and his influences on SF and science.
What program you ask?
Ridley Scott's "The Prophets of Science Fiction" series he produced for The Discovery Channel.
Was pretty damned good. Its one part history, one part literary review, one part biography, and one part study of scientific developments.
The reason the post DomA wrote made me think of this show? Because he mentioned Ridley Scott while we all are talking about Lucas. The 8th episode of the series was all about Lucas and his influences on SF and science.
Death to the Regressives of the GOP and the TeaParty. No mercy for Conservatives. Burn them all at the stake for the hateful satanists they are.
When the career of George Lucas is reviewed, will he be the most influential film-maker of all time?
- 10/10/2012 12:27:59 AM
967 Views
Shrug. He might be the most influential special-effects artist *NM*
- 10/10/2012 08:43:05 AM
305 Views
It is going to be the same way with Steve Jobs
- 10/10/2012 02:38:25 PM
591 Views
Steve Jobs shouldn't be remembered for the Apple II, it was Woz's creation.
- 18/10/2012 04:37:38 AM
525 Views
He deserves all the credit he gets, he's a superior artist to his pals Spielberg & Coppola
- 10/10/2012 04:15:29 PM
716 Views
My point is that his greatest contribution is horrifically overlooked.
- 11/10/2012 06:14:53 AM
577 Views
Hell has frozen over
- 11/10/2012 04:31:56 PM
595 Views
I'm going to start making a list of people who say stuff like this to me.
- 12/10/2012 03:48:36 AM
638 Views
That's giving a single man way too much credit and influence, and under the wrong title
- 12/10/2012 01:13:07 AM
561 Views
I'm not sure the OP was saying he was the most influential director
- 12/10/2012 08:34:02 PM
593 Views
Pretty sure I said film-maker. (Checks the Subject line.) Yep, I did. *NM*
- 15/10/2012 05:28:50 AM
302 Views
That's precisely the problem. You said filmmaker, not effects studio owner. *NM*
- 18/10/2012 10:31:26 PM
269 Views
Re: That's precisely the problem. You said filmmaker, not effects studio owner.
- 19/10/2012 03:46:33 PM
579 Views
this is not in response to DomA's comment, but
- 19/10/2012 08:31:23 PM
603 Views
Short answer, no.
- 15/10/2012 06:19:52 PM
657 Views
So who beats him out?
- 16/10/2012 02:23:19 AM
545 Views
Thats the point, he didn't actually change anything; he demanded that others change things.
- 16/10/2012 02:35:03 PM
716 Views
You have a strange definition of influence.
- 16/10/2012 09:55:59 PM
599 Views
Not really, influence is somthing actively done, his role was too passive.
- 17/10/2012 03:23:40 PM
635 Views
Spielburg, Howard, Coppola, Tarrentino... There is a long list, even only among the modern filmakers *NM*
- 16/10/2012 02:39:28 PM
305 Views
Maybe, no, no, and no. Lucas had a much bigger impact that any of the film-makers .....
- 18/10/2012 04:40:41 AM
554 Views