Science Explains Why You Hate George Lucas
Filed under: Sci-Fi & Fantasy, Celebrities and Controversy, Fandom, Newsstand, George Lucas, Comic/Superhero/Geek
It's a slow news day, so what better to read than a bit of neuroscience? Over at Very Evolved, Patrick the Researcher decided to explain the science behind nostalgia, otherwise known as "that warm and fuzzy feeling that is keeping Hollywood in summer blockbusters."Studies indicate that nostalgia is a kind of anti-depressant -- which probably isn't news to anyone who has found comfort in chocolate chip cookies or Flight of the Navigator.
But Patrick cautions that nostalgic memories can be "recoded" and what we once loved and cherished becomes associated with negativity. This, he reasons, is why Star Wars fans dislike George Lucas. "A great example of this in action that also demonstrates fluid nostalgia is the backlash against George Lucas. A large portion of 70's and 80's children had grown up owning Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader figures and playing in the backyard pretending sticks were light sabers. Fond childhood memories. When the first abysmal Star Wars Prequel was released the strong feelings against the film weren't just those of disappointment at a bad movie. If it were that simple, we should also feel the same way about Police Academy 7. The reaction can be partly explained by the sense of attack on our previously fond feelings. Watching the new movie automatically calls up memories from the previous series and all the pleasant childhood playtime memories associated with it. But recalling these fond memories in the context of a negative experience begins the process of re-coding, or modifying our old memories. This is an undesirable outcome for nostalgia."
But hey -- anyone who has ever screamed "George Lucas raped my childhood" could tell you that. Now they have science and psychology to back them up!
[via io9]
Movie Popcorn is Bad for You? Who Knew?_thumbnail.jpg)
'New Moon' Smashes 'Dark Knight's' Opening Day Record!
Black Friday Movie Deals: Best Buy
Sex and Nudity Don't Draw You to the Movies?
What Makes a Real Vampire?
_thumbnail.jpg)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
2-24-2009 @ 10:17AM
gunmahoro said...
I think it's more that they were really bad scripts. And George didn't help himself by saying that 'Empire' was the worst of the lot. Bad is bad.
Reply
2-24-2009 @ 11:09AM
SunKing said...
If he truly thinks that, then he really is off his head.
2-24-2009 @ 10:52AM
Kurt Munro said...
What if you were born in 1985 and never played with SW figures, but still think the new movies suck and George Lucas is an asshat?
Reply
2-24-2009 @ 10:53AM
Mr. R said...
I agree, it's the fact that those movies sucked, sucked and sucked that made everyone angry at him.
Reply
2-24-2009 @ 11:36AM
RollingBoner said...
You know how you people are all pathetic and have never achieved anything with your lives? Bare that in mind when you show disrespect to someone that has done $hit you can only dream of.
And when is someone actually going to show me real evidence that this extremely mellow man, who dedicates most of his time to his children is somehow the anti-christ? Because so far, you've vilified someone over an annoying CGI character, which means fook all. Losers.
Reply
2-24-2009 @ 12:09PM
dukrous said...
My, you're a mean one, Mr. Boner.
Understand the difference between hyperbole and discussion? Hope so...then you'd realize you're ranting about the first as if it was the second.
Then, under the guise of discussion, we can argue about how Lucas got real lucky on the first movie, found the talent he needed to make the second movie the unmatched masterpiece it is, and was forced by a studio to make illogical cuts into his third movie. Then he went away for a long time, and somehow lost the touch of magic he had on the first one, but is convinced by a network of yes-men that he's still got it, by George!
Menace was awful...Clones was worse...Revenge was slightly better than Menace, but compared to the original movies they're still pale imitations.
I've never understood the "Lucas raped my childhood" stuff...but then again, I was more into Trek that Wars anyways.
2-24-2009 @ 2:19PM
gunmahoro said...
First, you don't know anything about me (or others here). To formulate such an opinion about everyone as such, only displays your ignorance. You'll get peoples respect if you mature some and learn some manners.
Second, an opinion does not signify disrespect. If I or others think George's work was bad, so be it. I'm ok with the fact you think his movies were good. Say that and leave out the petty name calling.
As for George being the anti-christ. Who cares?
2-24-2009 @ 12:36PM
DanJack said...
I don't get all the George hate. I think Episode 3: ROTS was pretty good actually. I think alot of people have other deeply seeded problems if George somehow rapes their childhood. I admit I never gave a rat crap if he did movies about Anakin at all, as I was much more of a Luke fan frankly. I always wanted to see movies that took place after Jedi. The books have tried to fill that void, but they are woefully inadequate and mostly horrible fan fiction level poo.
George should still get credit for creating Star Wars (and Indiana Jones while we're at it. KOTCS was still better than Temple of Doom) in the first place, as he did create a great piece of work.
Reply
2-24-2009 @ 12:54PM
Brandon said...
This scientific theory helps me on the "Transformers The Movie raped my childhood" arguement.
Reply
2-24-2009 @ 2:11PM
Kurt said...
Yes, well, Transformers ruining your childhood is kind of a tradition, isn't it? We all saw the 1986 film when we were kids. Did anybody NOT cry when Optimus Prime bought it?
2-26-2009 @ 7:40PM
vegimorph said...
i agree with Danjack. George Lucas is one of my filmmaking heroes/idols. I've only seen the prequels once but I don't think it would hurt to see them again. I mean I really liked the look and different creatures and all that. Didn't affect my attitude toward the originals at all
Reply