Wow. Whoever made this “Lord of the Rings by George Lucas” film is 100% clueless about the realities of 1) the filmmaking process and 2) the film industry.

I do not consider myself necessarily a huge George Lucas fan. Or a huge Peter Jackson fan or a Steven Spielberg fan. But this film seems to be indicating that Peter Jackson is somehow a directing genius while George Lucas is a corporate henchman and sellout with zero artistic value. I couldn’t disagree more.

I am a student at one of the “top five” film schools in the U.S. My directing professor this semester is an extremely dedicated teacher and has won the “Best Directing” award at the most prestigious US film festival multiple times. He went out of his way to point out – today – in my class – that The Lord of the Rings is an extremely poorly-directed film. Every castle in the film is presented with a swooping camera going down and up and revealing: the castle. Regardless of if it is a good or an evil castle. Every castle is shot in the exact same way. Every character seeing something of interest in the distance is filmed with a: push in on the character’s face. Regardless of who the character is or what they are seeing. A close-up – on the character’s face. Watching King Kong I wanted to shoot myself in the head after the 100th closeup on Naomi Watts’s face.

To assert that George Lucas is a hack while Peter Jackson is a genius is so extremely biased and wrongheaded that it could only be the position of a huge Star Wars fan who lacks any understanding of film form.

This person has no idea of what story or directing is. They are separate things, by the way. There is story – The Lord of the Rings, which Peter Jackson DID NOT WRITE. And there is directing – the VISUAL EXPRESSION of that story.

George Lucas – say what you want about him – created a story that has resonated with millions of people. You can’t take that away from him. If you’re a super obsessed fan, you can argue that the 2nd trilogy was bad. I personally think that it – while not up to the standards of the original trilogy – was a fine series of films. Better than most of the Hollywood dreck that is released.

But to argue that the Lord of the Rings is of a different order – a series of films so completely beyond the Star Wars movies – is to completely misunderstand the role of film and filmmaking in American popular culture today. This man is completely ignorant. His opinion should not be elevated, as it has been, by posting it on this blog.

So why is then the director the main person credited for the film if what audiences come to see and resonate about most is the work of the writers, the editors and the producers?

Your question seems to assume that the current crediting system could not possibly be flawed. At least, to appeal to a political, bureaucratic system such as who gets credited on a film as the obvious basis for who actually is responsible for what goes on in a film seems to me to be completely backward.

There are many good films that lack good expressive directing. Just look at the studio era of the 30's and 40's - "I Am A Fugitive From A Chain Gang," "Public Enemy", etc... lots of these classic films are shot with basically just a single wide shot for each scene. And back then, incidentally, directors were not given the "primary" credit.

Story is extremely important and drives most film viewing. Even now, most television is directed very basically, if not badly. I saw an episode of Entourage - an HBO (high budget) TV production - in which the same extra walked through the shot 3 times in a row. Most people probably didn't even notice though, because they're engaged with the STORY.

Luke -- I watched about 30 secs of "Lord of the Rings by George Lucas." When it got to the part that was bagging on the fact that Lucas would create CGI laden version of Tolkein's stories, my only thought was --

-- has he seen Guillermo Del Toro's version?!

Great way to undermine your own argument. And it's not funny.

The last one with the interview with the acapella Star Wars guy (awesome vids on YouTube btw)...

W T F !

He talks like he is a 100 years old and lived through the 70s to witness all of George Lucas's creations. He talks like he is a psychologist, a film critic, a pop culture guru -- and I don't even think he realizes he comes off like a total idiot.

That interview was about 6 minutes too long.

I want to see The People Vs George Lucas -- the reality TV BOXING match. I'd have to put money on Lucas. Man, some of his fans are such terminal wusses.