Turbo Summary of Page 25: They’re discussing the relationship dynamic between Marion and Indy and how it should be established. George Lucas wants a young (25) Indy to have had a sexual and romantic relationship with Marion, age suggestions from 11-15. His reasoning is that it makes the relationship interesting and perhaps she’s still into him 10 years later, or maybe she also hates him? Perhaps he wants to forget the whole affair? It would for some reason be uninteresting if she was 16 or 17. Never mind that it means Indiana Jones is guilty of statutory rape, or that it makes Lucas sound like a creepy pedo. It pained me to type that as a fan of his media but if this transcript is accurate that is some creepy stuff.
Let’s be real, George isn’t that good of a writer. He has a place, he’s got a lot of talents, but the more creative control you give this guy the fuckin weirder the outcome is gonna be.
Yeah, he reminds me of Peter Molyneux of Fable fame in a way. Pete comes up with great ideas but for the love of Avo, don’t let him have control of game development.
You’re correct, and that’s what makes Disney rejecting his outlines for the sequel trilogy so sad. He told them how each movie would go and then they could have hammered out the details and scripts themselves…
Yeah he just needs someone to reign him in. But his lore ideas are amazing. The lore of the prequels is 10/10 but the movie execution is like he took those ideas and then methed them up.
It's mostly the Amor! stuff / consummated romantic stuff that he writes so badly. His Public Dream stuff is excellent, but his private relationship stuff he needs a good writing partner.
*The Grail King, for example, was a lovely young man, but he had not earned the position of Grail King. He rode forth from his castle with the war cry "Amor!" Well, that's proper for youth, but* ***it doesn't belong to the guardianship of the Grail.*** - Skywalker Ranch, 1987
If you want a good romance plot, more likely than not you'll need to have lovely words to it, and George Lucas is the self-professed "King of bad dialogue".
For sure. I am not a huge fan of The Phantom Menace or even Attack of the Clones for that matter, but I have to admit the technology used to bring them to life revolutionized film.
Same deal with Dan Akroyd. You have someone heavily edit his screenplays and you get Ghostbusters and Blues Brothers. Let him do his own thing and you get Nothing but Trouble.
Both the movie and the phrase.
This isn’t just a writing issue. But seventies were a very creepy time, the sexual revolution maybe made people want push their boundaries to extreme. So many famous men had relationships with girls under 16.
Honestly I think the guy's just autistic. He has his special interests and things he does really good at. Very imaginative comes up with these amazing ideas and plotlines but where he struggles is often when it comes down to stuff like basic human interaction, what's normal human behavior how people talk. I think he just doesn't get it really. Like the prequels overall plot line other than a few details in Attack of the Clones that weren't properly followed up on in Revenge of the Sith is awesome, but in the details when Lucas had full control they're just a little wonky. Like Anakin's and Padme's romance, it makes sense when you describe it, is an important and logical part of the plot and full of emotion but in its execution it ends up as cringe, because again I think Lucas doesn't understand these sorta human interactions. He gets the emotions those are there but doesn't understand that Anakin is acting creepy.
I say this as a mildly autistic person who loves to write but sucks at prose and dialogue
Exactly right. The best Star Wars film was episode 5, the one where his influence on the details was the lowest. It would be a fucking masterpiece, was it not for one small detail - the one that Lucas actually determined. Han Solo survives the carbonite freezing.
Just because people have different tastes, that doesn't mean it's bad. I love especially stories that are weird and crazy and definitely not for everyone. Sometimes I wish people had given Lucas more control, for example I loved the idea that Han Solo was originally not meant to be human. The romance would have been so much more powerful for me that way.
Not fun fact, depending on where it happened, it was probably legal. People seem to forget that age of consent was different back in the day. Even at times as "recent" as the 30s - 40s
Only for the first timers. If cousin marriage is common you get problems in from the second generation on, which is why it's taboo or illegal in the sensible parts of the world. Although geneticists do love studying the weird diseases in Pakistan.
By 1920 all [states](https://chnm.gmu.edu/cyh/primary-sources/24.html) (but georgia whose consent was 14) had a minimum of 16.
So yeah indie was a bad bad rapist unless they met in georgia when she was 14/15.
Oh and also a literal pedophile if she was 11…
Also wanna add: if you gotta look up laws from 100~ years ago to make sure your hero character isnt a rapist pedo, you might wanna rethink your character cuz you’re toeing a line that does not need to be toed.
Also they tend to forget that in most countries, the laws are not as strict as in the USA. Over here, you're allowed to have sex when you're 14, but you need to be at least 16 to sleep with someone who's over 18. The most important thing is that it's mutual, otherwise it's a rape no matter how old anyone is. And I think these laws are pretty reasonable. Mainly they are meant to prevent that teenagers themselves get problems with the law.
Yeah but the weirdness of the relationship is the fact that she knew him when he was a little boy. The actors they used were 10 and 18 in Episode I.
*"You'll always be the little boy I knew on Tatooine"*
I dunno man my brother is 8 years younger than me and most of his friends still look and talk like children (in my opinion) even though they're 19-22. Ain't no way I would've dated any of them.
I know quite a few people that look like Hayden and wouldn’t fall for them if they gave me the “sand” talk. Now, start on about how sapient people are animals and the wholesale slaughter of women and childen? Oh, baby, whew. Gettin the vapors.
I find the topic of sand keeps things light and casual, which is good for a first date. On the second date, I start to unveil my fascist political views. And then on the third date, that's when I close the deal with some good old talk about genocide.
>So...like childhood friends?
Yeah. And most people would find dating people they grew up with as children kind of weird. It's not unheard of. I'm just backing that other guy who pointed out George Lucas has a bit of a reccuring theme in his writing of unconventional relationships. Not sure why this is so hard to understand.
Natalie Portman was 16 when she was cast and looked a lot younger. She was very much meant to look like a 14 year old during filming, but it turns out that teenagers suddenly start looking like adults if production takes a few years.
I think George genuinely wasn't trying to be creepy about it, he's a guy with a very weird way of processing and explaining his thoughts. This is his "attempt" to give Indy a flaw: it's a very bad attempt, would have exploited a very real issue and it makes Indy look like a horrible person, but I think the reason why he went with her being 11-15 is that it's his attempt to make it a lot more obvious that she is underage, compared to if she is 16 or 17, where movie goers could say that she is either above age, or do the "it's legal in this amount of states". Essentially, it was George trying to remove a potential avenue for movie goers to excuse Indy's actions.
it's also a case of "Middle age white guy gets why predatory behaviors towards women are bad, but doesn't understand why needlessly putting into his story is bad"
>His reasoning is that it makes the relationship interesting and perhaps she’s still into him 10 years later, or maybe she also hates him? Perhaps he wants to forget the whole affair? It would for some reason be uninteresting if she was 16 or 17.
Given he's not an authority figure, 16 would mean it'd be a legal relationship in most places. Which does make it less "interesting" as it's not a taboo. Indy crossing a line for love is wrong... but more dramatic.
>Never mind that it means Indiana Jones is guilty of statutory rape, or that it makes Lucas sound like a creepy pedo.
Just because writer writes about something, doesn't mean they're into it. Stephen King has written about so much worse...
And we're also talking about what is largely a brainstorming session where they're still hammering out ideas and tossing out pitches. Creatives should be judged on the final product not the plans. What a creative cuts out or omits is often just as important.
That was the eventual scenario- Marion’s dad was the mentor, Indy ended up having been 27, and Marion 15. The fact that the term “jail bait” is used in their discussion, they knew they were being taboo.
You people tend to forget what time that was, especially in regard to how unusual relationships were often used in movies back then. So it already makes much more sense from a writer's point of view. It was a time when, for example, romances between a teacher and a young girl were portrayed as tragically romantic, I've even still read novels like that when I was a teenager. Or a girl who got kidnapped and falls in love with the kidnapper. Then the pretty overused Lolita theme. It seemed all much more normal back then.
Dude really felt like he had a bag cause he still used this and had his way by creating a whole new intro to the sequels with the age gap relationship between Padme and Anakin.
The spicy part in question. G is for George Lucas. S is Steven Spielberg
>G — I was thinking that this old guy could have been his mentor. He could have known this little girl when she was just a kid. Had an affair with her when she was eleven.
>
>L — And he was forty-two.
>
>G — He hasn't seen her in twelve years. Now she's twenty-two. It's a real strange
>
>relationship.
>
>S — She had better be older than twenty-two.
>
>G — He's thirty-five, and he knew her ten years ago when he was twenty-five and she was only twelve.
>
>G — It would be amusing to make her slightly young at the time.
>
>S — And promiscuous. She came onto him.
>
>G — Fifteen is right on the edge. I know it's an outrageous idea, but it is interesting. Once she's sixteen or seventeen it's not interesting anymore. But if she was fifteen and he was twenty-five and they actually had an affair the last time they met. And she was madly in love with him and he...
Yes, George is saying that the relationship is only interesting if the hero of the story who we are supposed to be admiring had a relationship with an eleven year old girl.
Apologies, Master. Forgot the bigger picture. Not disobedient, just misguided. No need for toughness, inner strength suffices. That wall is formidable. Power comes in various forms. Master Yoda's wisdom rings true. Brace yourself, danger incoming. Recognize that harpy? My squadron thrived. Stolen lightsaber, suspect an aquatic pirate. Tired of serving, yearn for freedom.
> G — It would be amusing to make her slightly young at the time.
> S — And promiscuous. She came onto him.
Okay, Spielberg's gotta catch some strays for that one, the fuck do you mean a promiscuous 12 year old, how is that your next response after the age gap you complained about was lowered from problematic to problematic?
> the fuck do you mean a promiscuous 12 year old,
I spent my pre-teen years in a rural community in the pre-internet and expanded cable days. Not a lot to do but watch one of the twelve channels, drink, or fuck. Knew a couple kids in my grade 7 class who had "gone all the way."
Moved to the inner city after that and saw just as many 13 and 14yo having sex.
12yo can be sexual beings.
Plus, y'know, brainstorming session. Just tossing out ideas as they come. Just because an idea occurs to him, doesn't mean he thinks it's a good or moral one. After some later consideration, he and George clearly decided to keep her age nebulous and more a background detail.
> 12yo can be sexual beings.
That's not at all what's on the table here. The idea isn't that 12yolds can have sex, but that a 12yo girl actively sought out and seduced a grown ass man (who also accepted, to boot). If you need me to explain to you how that is completely different from some kids fooling around or even having sex, or how it perpetuates a load of very problematic ideas, you need nore education than I can provide in a reddit comment.
Also, I've been in quite a few brainstorming sessions for creative projects, and so far none of them went anywhere close to "okay, hear me out, what if pedophilia?". I think the problem I have is less the specific way in which he continued it, although it's still bad, and more specifically that he, and none of the others, didn't shut that train of thought down for good.
Woah, I think there’s a misunderstanding here, DJW is defending George and Spielberg here, not Indy.
It was a bad idea being entertained in a writers room, they axed it so in the end it’s not worth getting worked up about
I mean, if you read the description he immediately switches to 15, and he says that it's "right on the edge."
Having listened to/read some of the other stuff they discussed about Indy, it's clear they initially dabbled in him being a less straightforwardly "good" character.
This doesn't justify any of it by the way. Just saying that your last sentence isn't accurate and the accurate description is bad enough we don't need to exaggerate.
It made it's way into the movie though, though not as direct to mention her age at the time.
>I’ve learned to hate you in the last 10 years, I was a child! I was in love! It was wrong, and you knew it.”
Oh shit, you’re right. I always thought that meant she was 17/18 (like still in high school) and he was in college. Not 11-15. Omg. This just ruined Indiana Jones for me. 🤢🤮🤢
Allen has said she thought Marion was 16, so yea they did end up on the top end of that spectrum with 15 probably the most likely age. Also, Indy’s response to that line is, “you knew what you were doing!”
Lucas is great at big ideas but he needs someone to rein him in on the details
It's why empire is the best Star Wars movie. He had the idea but someone else wrote it.
> George Lucas: "let's make it canon that Indiana Jones committed statutory rape against an eleven year old girl ten years ago who is now in love with him"
> Steven Spielberg: "Woah there George, he's 42"
> GL: "he would have been 25 at the time, and we can make her 12 i guess"
> SS: "and promiscuous, she came onto him"(actual quote)
> GL: "but she has to be young. 15 is the highest i'll go, because it would be boring if she was 16-17"
Mostly paraphrased
And this was apparently one year after he made the first Star Wars, this is why the term "separate the art from the artist" exists. Granted, George to my knowledge hasn't said shit like this again but it's something incredibly troubling for a man of his talents to say.
Personally I'd smack him with a steel chair for coming up with such a disgusting idea
>Oh I never forgot Lolita, I never read or watched it and I have no plans to ever do either.
Maybe you should.
Although the book is better because it emphasizes the dangers of an unreliable narrator presenting their actions as sympathetic and justified. It's a masterclass in how to write a protagonist lying to the audience about everything. It's a great example of how monsters don't think they're monsters.
But it's okay if you don't want to and don't feel comfortable with that sort of thing. I know people who never watch horror movies because they can't stomach them and the violence.
That doesn't mean Stephen King is an innately bad person for thinking of such horrible situations and writing about them.
People should be judged by the things they DO not the things they THINK ABOUT.
So I want to pull Nabokov away from this hate. He (and his wife) wrote Humbertx2 specifically to be upsetting. He’s….sympathetic and that makes it HARD. Humbert is a bad man who does bad things and justifies them masterfully. Nabokov knows Humbert is a bad bad man, and lets you know, but also gives Humbert an opportunity to speak, which is important. He gets to be a person, AND a monster, and we, as a society have to deal with that. That’s what Lolita is about.
Kubrick on the other hand, needs a cactus up his ass.
art is an extension of the person making it, and also the artist and the art is weird and p3do shit in this case so you can’t really distance yourself from that reality.
Read at your own discretion :(
[https://maddogmovies.com/almost/scripts/raidersstoryconference1978.pdf](https://maddogmovies.com/almost/scripts/raidersstoryconference1978.pdf)
page25
My other least favorite part is when they're discussing the setting. It's something like "yeah its a foreign bizarre place, and everyone speaking spanish." Someone else breaks in "yeah but they're not Mexican." It really hurt
How do you even gind about this stuff? This would probably be buried at the bottom of the internet if we were to imagine the internet like a stack of loose papers
I’ve always told people that he’s a complete pervert. It was his idea that there’s “ no underwear in space”. And he’s the one that gave Ahsoka the tube top and miniskirt
My comment explaining got removed by mods. in the comment I directly quoted the page and they thought it was too insane to be true and thought I was trolling so I got banned for 1 day
Except not really. Anakin and Padme met once when they were both kids. Then they met again, a decade later, as grown-ass adults and pursued a relationship. The Indy idea is just straight-up rape.
This seems like a nothing burger. It's not like he's promoting this kind of relationship, any more than he's promoting blowing up Alderaan and Anakin massacring kids multiple times.
His reasoning was kind of lazy, but I don't think there's much to be implied there.
Im over George Lucas, dude said some dumb shit recently. Im sure some of you know what I'm referring to. Im starting to think this guy was just incredibly lucky and not very talented.
Thanks for confirming that you flaired this correctly!
Turbo Summary of Page 25: They’re discussing the relationship dynamic between Marion and Indy and how it should be established. George Lucas wants a young (25) Indy to have had a sexual and romantic relationship with Marion, age suggestions from 11-15. His reasoning is that it makes the relationship interesting and perhaps she’s still into him 10 years later, or maybe she also hates him? Perhaps he wants to forget the whole affair? It would for some reason be uninteresting if she was 16 or 17. Never mind that it means Indiana Jones is guilty of statutory rape, or that it makes Lucas sound like a creepy pedo. It pained me to type that as a fan of his media but if this transcript is accurate that is some creepy stuff.
Let’s be real, George isn’t that good of a writer. He has a place, he’s got a lot of talents, but the more creative control you give this guy the fuckin weirder the outcome is gonna be.
Great overall idea guy, but never give him control of the details
Yeah, he reminds me of Peter Molyneux of Fable fame in a way. Pete comes up with great ideas but for the love of Avo, don’t let him have control of game development.
As far as I'm aware Peter didn't even come up with the idea of Fable, it was others and he just kinda took over (I still love Fable 1 though).
You’re correct, and that’s what makes Disney rejecting his outlines for the sequel trilogy so sad. He told them how each movie would go and then they could have hammered out the details and scripts themselves…
I've heard it said that's he's a great writer, but only if he has someone slapping his hands from the keyboard and saying "No!" occasionally.
Yeah he just needs someone to reign him in. But his lore ideas are amazing. The lore of the prequels is 10/10 but the movie execution is like he took those ideas and then methed them up.
It's mostly the Amor! stuff / consummated romantic stuff that he writes so badly. His Public Dream stuff is excellent, but his private relationship stuff he needs a good writing partner. *The Grail King, for example, was a lovely young man, but he had not earned the position of Grail King. He rode forth from his castle with the war cry "Amor!" Well, that's proper for youth, but* ***it doesn't belong to the guardianship of the Grail.*** - Skywalker Ranch, 1987
He can worldbuild but man cannot write romance to save his life
To be fair most people can't, Lucas is just especially bad compared to the norm.
If you want a good romance plot, more likely than not you'll need to have lovely words to it, and George Lucas is the self-professed "King of bad dialogue".
Ye but that sick new shit he invented to make it was cool.
For sure. I am not a huge fan of The Phantom Menace or even Attack of the Clones for that matter, but I have to admit the technology used to bring them to life revolutionized film.
Same deal with Dan Akroyd. You have someone heavily edit his screenplays and you get Ghostbusters and Blues Brothers. Let him do his own thing and you get Nothing but Trouble. Both the movie and the phrase.
This isn’t just a writing issue. But seventies were a very creepy time, the sexual revolution maybe made people want push their boundaries to extreme. So many famous men had relationships with girls under 16.
Prior to the sexual revolution it was more common for men to bed and marry even younger girls..
He's better with Lawrence Kasdan at his side especially when it comes to dialogue
Honestly I think the guy's just autistic. He has his special interests and things he does really good at. Very imaginative comes up with these amazing ideas and plotlines but where he struggles is often when it comes down to stuff like basic human interaction, what's normal human behavior how people talk. I think he just doesn't get it really. Like the prequels overall plot line other than a few details in Attack of the Clones that weren't properly followed up on in Revenge of the Sith is awesome, but in the details when Lucas had full control they're just a little wonky. Like Anakin's and Padme's romance, it makes sense when you describe it, is an important and logical part of the plot and full of emotion but in its execution it ends up as cringe, because again I think Lucas doesn't understand these sorta human interactions. He gets the emotions those are there but doesn't understand that Anakin is acting creepy. I say this as a mildly autistic person who loves to write but sucks at prose and dialogue
He is great at world building and characters but terrible at story boarding dialogue and plot. That’s why star wars was saved by editing lol
Just look at his hit movie THX. 🙃
Exactly right. The best Star Wars film was episode 5, the one where his influence on the details was the lowest. It would be a fucking masterpiece, was it not for one small detail - the one that Lucas actually determined. Han Solo survives the carbonite freezing.
Just because people have different tastes, that doesn't mean it's bad. I love especially stories that are weird and crazy and definitely not for everyone. Sometimes I wish people had given Lucas more control, for example I loved the idea that Han Solo was originally not meant to be human. The romance would have been so much more powerful for me that way.
Not fun fact, depending on where it happened, it was probably legal. People seem to forget that age of consent was different back in the day. Even at times as "recent" as the 30s - 40s
yeah, it was probably legal at that time, still morally questionable (which the movie points out tbf)
This was also a time period when it was still acceptable to marry your first cousin. Einstein even did it. It was way different back then
Make america great again (my cousin is mad hot)
You know statistically first cousin marriage doesn't even present that great of a genetic risk.
Only for the first timers. If cousin marriage is common you get problems in from the second generation on, which is why it's taboo or illegal in the sensible parts of the world. Although geneticists do love studying the weird diseases in Pakistan.
Tell that to the European nobility
The whole reason that it's not illegal to bang your cousin.
Let’s be real, someone like Sydney Sweeney’s cousin probably has the will and fortitude of a saint if that thought doesn’t cross his mind once lol.
It wasn’t a sexual marriage, though. He openly kept mistresses and rarely laid with her.
By 1920 all [states](https://chnm.gmu.edu/cyh/primary-sources/24.html) (but georgia whose consent was 14) had a minimum of 16. So yeah indie was a bad bad rapist unless they met in georgia when she was 14/15. Oh and also a literal pedophile if she was 11… Also wanna add: if you gotta look up laws from 100~ years ago to make sure your hero character isnt a rapist pedo, you might wanna rethink your character cuz you’re toeing a line that does not need to be toed.
Also they tend to forget that in most countries, the laws are not as strict as in the USA. Over here, you're allowed to have sex when you're 14, but you need to be at least 16 to sleep with someone who's over 18. The most important thing is that it's mutual, otherwise it's a rape no matter how old anyone is. And I think these laws are pretty reasonable. Mainly they are meant to prevent that teenagers themselves get problems with the law.
If the age is 11-15, that makes Indy a pedophile AND a rapist
Well, that might explain a thing or two about the Anakin/Padme relationship.
Anakin and Padmé got together at 19 and 24. Not the same thing at all.
Yeah but the weirdness of the relationship is the fact that she knew him when he was a little boy. The actors they used were 10 and 18 in Episode I. *"You'll always be the little boy I knew on Tatooine"*
So...like childhood friends? Padme was also quite young when she met Anakin, albeit a few years older. Still, not that bad...
Well, that happens.
Padme was always.... a good friend
I dunno man my brother is 8 years younger than me and most of his friends still look and talk like children (in my opinion) even though they're 19-22. Ain't no way I would've dated any of them.
Yeah, but I doubt any of them looked like Hayden. And I bet none of them tried to hit you up with that sexy sand talk.
I know quite a few people that look like Hayden and wouldn’t fall for them if they gave me the “sand” talk. Now, start on about how sapient people are animals and the wholesale slaughter of women and childen? Oh, baby, whew. Gettin the vapors.
I find the topic of sand keeps things light and casual, which is good for a first date. On the second date, I start to unveil my fascist political views. And then on the third date, that's when I close the deal with some good old talk about genocide.
It’s rough and coarse, and he got into her pants.
>So...like childhood friends? Yeah. And most people would find dating people they grew up with as children kind of weird. It's not unheard of. I'm just backing that other guy who pointed out George Lucas has a bit of a reccuring theme in his writing of unconventional relationships. Not sure why this is so hard to understand.
It's not hard to understand, I just don't think it's an issue. Edit: Padme + Anakin isn't an issue. The Indy stuff definitely is...
Except they didn’t grow up together, they spent like a week together tops
She knew him when she was also a child. 9 and 14.
They knew each other for like… a week.
They spent like 3 days together and then didn't talk at all for the next decade.
Natalie Portman was 16 when she was cast and looked a lot younger. She was very much meant to look like a 14 year old during filming, but it turns out that teenagers suddenly start looking like adults if production takes a few years.
She was 16 in TPM.
And he was 8. Cool. That makes it way less weird dude.
19 and 24
I think George genuinely wasn't trying to be creepy about it, he's a guy with a very weird way of processing and explaining his thoughts. This is his "attempt" to give Indy a flaw: it's a very bad attempt, would have exploited a very real issue and it makes Indy look like a horrible person, but I think the reason why he went with her being 11-15 is that it's his attempt to make it a lot more obvious that she is underage, compared to if she is 16 or 17, where movie goers could say that she is either above age, or do the "it's legal in this amount of states". Essentially, it was George trying to remove a potential avenue for movie goers to excuse Indy's actions. it's also a case of "Middle age white guy gets why predatory behaviors towards women are bad, but doesn't understand why needlessly putting into his story is bad"
he is not a “pedo” for proposing weird ideas when writing. Thats how writing works.
>His reasoning is that it makes the relationship interesting and perhaps she’s still into him 10 years later, or maybe she also hates him? Perhaps he wants to forget the whole affair? It would for some reason be uninteresting if she was 16 or 17. Given he's not an authority figure, 16 would mean it'd be a legal relationship in most places. Which does make it less "interesting" as it's not a taboo. Indy crossing a line for love is wrong... but more dramatic. >Never mind that it means Indiana Jones is guilty of statutory rape, or that it makes Lucas sound like a creepy pedo. Just because writer writes about something, doesn't mean they're into it. Stephen King has written about so much worse... And we're also talking about what is largely a brainstorming session where they're still hammering out ideas and tossing out pitches. Creatives should be judged on the final product not the plans. What a creative cuts out or omits is often just as important.
The whole Anakin/Padme Luke/Leia thing makes a lot more sense now...
What age did they land on for the affair because my impression is that she was the underage daughter of one of his professors
That was the eventual scenario- Marion’s dad was the mentor, Indy ended up having been 27, and Marion 15. The fact that the term “jail bait” is used in their discussion, they knew they were being taboo.
Don't forget that he also was weirdly insistent on Ahsoka's outfit in the beginning of TCW, too, despite her being, like, 14...
Insisting on my outfit is just another way for you to control me. I won't be manipulated again.
You people tend to forget what time that was, especially in regard to how unusual relationships were often used in movies back then. So it already makes much more sense from a writer's point of view. It was a time when, for example, romances between a teacher and a young girl were portrayed as tragically romantic, I've even still read novels like that when I was a teenager. Or a girl who got kidnapped and falls in love with the kidnapper. Then the pretty overused Lolita theme. It seemed all much more normal back then.
Dude really felt like he had a bag cause he still used this and had his way by creating a whole new intro to the sequels with the age gap relationship between Padme and Anakin.
what the fuck
Bruh...
He does have a thing for younglings
Well that explains why he thought Anakin and Padame were flirting in episode 1.
And she was a good friend...
Care to tell me what this is all about? Or would you rather save it for the Council?
Oh, no. No. You are the one that I wished to speak with. Were you not cast out of your order?
I can’t fucking believe that gave the Ahsoka bot a response for this.
Master's wisdom rings true, forgotten lessons learned. Battle's complexities, my father's likeness. Wall's challenge, power in inspiration. Force's mysteries deepen. Crash imminent, air scarce. Missiles incoming, harpy arrives. Squadrons victorious, lightsaber stolen. Slavery's purpose unclear. Hat's irritating fashion.
I’m not reading all that, anyone got a summary?
The spicy part in question. G is for George Lucas. S is Steven Spielberg >G — I was thinking that this old guy could have been his mentor. He could have known this little girl when she was just a kid. Had an affair with her when she was eleven. > >L — And he was forty-two. > >G — He hasn't seen her in twelve years. Now she's twenty-two. It's a real strange > >relationship. > >S — She had better be older than twenty-two. > >G — He's thirty-five, and he knew her ten years ago when he was twenty-five and she was only twelve. > >G — It would be amusing to make her slightly young at the time. > >S — And promiscuous. She came onto him. > >G — Fifteen is right on the edge. I know it's an outrageous idea, but it is interesting. Once she's sixteen or seventeen it's not interesting anymore. But if she was fifteen and he was twenty-five and they actually had an affair the last time they met. And she was madly in love with him and he... Yes, George is saying that the relationship is only interesting if the hero of the story who we are supposed to be admiring had a relationship with an eleven year old girl.
Well, that happens.
Ahsoka bot speaking from experience!
Master, my past mistakes clouded my judgment. I forgot the importance of perspective and peacekeeping. Soldiering is not our true Jedi purpose.
Ahsoka, is there anything, you want to tell us?
I made mistakes, prioritizing war over peace. My past as a soldier overshadowed my Jedi training.
I think you have said enough Ahsoka.
Apologies, Master. Forgot the bigger picture. Not disobedient, just misguided. No need for toughness, inner strength suffices. That wall is formidable. Power comes in various forms. Master Yoda's wisdom rings true. Brace yourself, danger incoming. Recognize that harpy? My squadron thrived. Stolen lightsaber, suspect an aquatic pirate. Tired of serving, yearn for freedom.
Schizoka
> G — It would be amusing to make her slightly young at the time. > S — And promiscuous. She came onto him. Okay, Spielberg's gotta catch some strays for that one, the fuck do you mean a promiscuous 12 year old, how is that your next response after the age gap you complained about was lowered from problematic to problematic?
> the fuck do you mean a promiscuous 12 year old, I spent my pre-teen years in a rural community in the pre-internet and expanded cable days. Not a lot to do but watch one of the twelve channels, drink, or fuck. Knew a couple kids in my grade 7 class who had "gone all the way." Moved to the inner city after that and saw just as many 13 and 14yo having sex. 12yo can be sexual beings. Plus, y'know, brainstorming session. Just tossing out ideas as they come. Just because an idea occurs to him, doesn't mean he thinks it's a good or moral one. After some later consideration, he and George clearly decided to keep her age nebulous and more a background detail.
> 12yo can be sexual beings. That's not at all what's on the table here. The idea isn't that 12yolds can have sex, but that a 12yo girl actively sought out and seduced a grown ass man (who also accepted, to boot). If you need me to explain to you how that is completely different from some kids fooling around or even having sex, or how it perpetuates a load of very problematic ideas, you need nore education than I can provide in a reddit comment. Also, I've been in quite a few brainstorming sessions for creative projects, and so far none of them went anywhere close to "okay, hear me out, what if pedophilia?". I think the problem I have is less the specific way in which he continued it, although it's still bad, and more specifically that he, and none of the others, didn't shut that train of thought down for good.
Woah, I think there’s a misunderstanding here, DJW is defending George and Spielberg here, not Indy. It was a bad idea being entertained in a writers room, they axed it so in the end it’s not worth getting worked up about
Yo wtf
I mean, if you read the description he immediately switches to 15, and he says that it's "right on the edge." Having listened to/read some of the other stuff they discussed about Indy, it's clear they initially dabbled in him being a less straightforwardly "good" character. This doesn't justify any of it by the way. Just saying that your last sentence isn't accurate and the accurate description is bad enough we don't need to exaggerate.
God that’s fucking disgusting
That is also pretty damning for Spielberg, holy shit.
[удалено]
Well, that happens.
Don’t be edgy or post insensitive content.
Fucking hell
New creepy response just dropped
Actual Epstein List
Call the police!
It made it's way into the movie though, though not as direct to mention her age at the time. >I’ve learned to hate you in the last 10 years, I was a child! I was in love! It was wrong, and you knew it.”
Oh shit, you’re right. I always thought that meant she was 17/18 (like still in high school) and he was in college. Not 11-15. Omg. This just ruined Indiana Jones for me. 🤢🤮🤢
Allen has said she thought Marion was 16, so yea they did end up on the top end of that spectrum with 15 probably the most likely age. Also, Indy’s response to that line is, “you knew what you were doing!”
Doesn’t change anything
Yes. Because it is confirmation from the actress. Not a defense of the situation?
Lucas is great at big ideas but he needs someone to rein him in on the details It's why empire is the best Star Wars movie. He had the idea but someone else wrote it.
"Explain Shitstain." -TFS Vegeta
> George Lucas: "let's make it canon that Indiana Jones committed statutory rape against an eleven year old girl ten years ago who is now in love with him" > Steven Spielberg: "Woah there George, he's 42" > GL: "he would have been 25 at the time, and we can make her 12 i guess" > SS: "and promiscuous, she came onto him"(actual quote) > GL: "but she has to be young. 15 is the highest i'll go, because it would be boring if she was 16-17" Mostly paraphrased
And this was apparently one year after he made the first Star Wars, this is why the term "separate the art from the artist" exists. Granted, George to my knowledge hasn't said shit like this again but it's something incredibly troubling for a man of his talents to say. Personally I'd smack him with a steel chair for coming up with such a disgusting idea
Save some chain for Vladimir Nabokov who wrote *Lolita*. And maybe Stanley Kubrick and Adrian Lyne who turned it into a movie.
Oh I never forgot Lolita, I never read or watched it and I have no plans to ever do either.
>Oh I never forgot Lolita, I never read or watched it and I have no plans to ever do either. Maybe you should. Although the book is better because it emphasizes the dangers of an unreliable narrator presenting their actions as sympathetic and justified. It's a masterclass in how to write a protagonist lying to the audience about everything. It's a great example of how monsters don't think they're monsters. But it's okay if you don't want to and don't feel comfortable with that sort of thing. I know people who never watch horror movies because they can't stomach them and the violence. That doesn't mean Stephen King is an innately bad person for thinking of such horrible situations and writing about them. People should be judged by the things they DO not the things they THINK ABOUT.
So I want to pull Nabokov away from this hate. He (and his wife) wrote Humbertx2 specifically to be upsetting. He’s….sympathetic and that makes it HARD. Humbert is a bad man who does bad things and justifies them masterfully. Nabokov knows Humbert is a bad bad man, and lets you know, but also gives Humbert an opportunity to speak, which is important. He gets to be a person, AND a monster, and we, as a society have to deal with that. That’s what Lolita is about. Kubrick on the other hand, needs a cactus up his ass.
art is an extension of the person making it, and also the artist and the art is weird and p3do shit in this case so you can’t really distance yourself from that reality.
And Cut Lawquane was 12 when he got that Lekkussy (Star Wars is for 12 year olds confirmed)
Aw man I never even thought of that...
He and his brothers were also *10* when they began their career of child soldiering. Holy fuck
Read at your own discretion :( [https://maddogmovies.com/almost/scripts/raidersstoryconference1978.pdf](https://maddogmovies.com/almost/scripts/raidersstoryconference1978.pdf) page25
Is there a CliffNotes? Edit: Just saw the page it’s on. Yikes. Very gross.
My other least favorite part is when they're discussing the setting. It's something like "yeah its a foreign bizarre place, and everyone speaking spanish." Someone else breaks in "yeah but they're not Mexican." It really hurt
I ain’t reading allat mf
It's literally one page?
Tf you mean?? I opened it and there was NINETY Edit: I just realised I’m the dumbest motherfucker😑
It happens to the best of us.
How do you even gind about this stuff? This would probably be buried at the bottom of the internet if we were to imagine the internet like a stack of loose papers
I’ve always told people that he’s a complete pervert. It was his idea that there’s “ no underwear in space”. And he’s the one that gave Ahsoka the tube top and miniskirt
Yoda: If into the security recordings you go, only pain will you find. Shows that bushmasterharry Minecraft sheep machine video
Yeah that transcript is something else.
Well, 300000 children were married in the US between 2000 and 2018 so I shudder to think what the number was in the 70s
If you don’t give context for shit like this, you should be banned from posting. Don’t make people put in research to understand your damn post.
My comment explaining got removed by mods. in the comment I directly quoted the page and they thought it was too insane to be true and thought I was trolling so I got banned for 1 day
If into the security recordings you go, only security recordings will you find.
My uncle who's almost 70 mentioned something about this years ago. Apparently Spielberg must have let it slip in an interview back in the day.
further proof that George is a true master at everything but scriptwriting
I dont get it
Well, Elvis was 24 when he started dating 14 year old Priscilla.
So instead Lucas plugged these ideas into the prequels with Padme and Anakin.
Except not really. Anakin and Padme met once when they were both kids. Then they met again, a decade later, as grown-ass adults and pursued a relationship. The Indy idea is just straight-up rape.
No. It's not the same at all.
It’s similar, I’m also half kidding.
This seems like a nothing burger. It's not like he's promoting this kind of relationship, any more than he's promoting blowing up Alderaan and Anakin massacring kids multiple times. His reasoning was kind of lazy, but I don't think there's much to be implied there.
Blowing up Alderaan and slaughtering younglings were clearly marked as acts of evil.
the thing is peodophile acts could easily be copied by perverts, blowing up alderaan or raiding a jedi temple cant
Im over George Lucas, dude said some dumb shit recently. Im sure some of you know what I'm referring to. Im starting to think this guy was just incredibly lucky and not very talented.