>I never said this movie was well written. I just said that
>your sweeping indictment of pointing out the target audience
>was lame. Which it is.

Your using "it's written for teenagers" as an excuse for this film's shitty writing - which is quite lame - is what I was addressing.

>
>At any point in this thread have I claimed that this movie was
>well written? If anything I've pointed out that most of
>Lucas's movies have bad dialogue and more often than not
>underrealized characters.
>
>But that is only tangential to the real issue. This is about
>whether or not pointing out a target audience is inherently
>copping pleas.

It is if the executive producer is using it in the context of defending a film before the reviews came out (doesn't this same interview use the phrase "a popcorn movie needs to have a lot of corn in it" as well?). I know you're not unfamiliar with the concept of pre-emptive damage control.

>
>Yeah the movie was also advertised during NBA games, Al
>Sharptons show, and a few other random cable channels...not
>just BET and TV one. And as I said anecdotaly, I saw many old
>white men in the theater....I'm sure they heard about it
>somehow.
>
>So the movie had a target audience and they tried to market it
>to as wide an audience as they could.
>
>OK..glad we got that out of the way.

I still don't believe "black teenagers" were this film's intended target audience (primary reason: nothing about the film's tone, style, editing, or even its action sequences is made to make it appealing to teenagers - unless we're talking about teenagers from 1985) and nothing short of internal story meeting documents will make me think otherwise.

>
>>I still highly doubt Lucas truly had black teenagers as his
>>target audience unless he envisioned himself as one,
>because,
>>yes, as you said earlier, he did have old-fashioned war
>movies
>>in mind when he made this film. But even a beginning
>filmmaker
>>will tell you what worked (barely) in 1947 is not likely to
>>work in 2012 (well, 2010). Second, there are _very_ few
>black
>>teens who would sit through a patriotic old-fashioned war
>film
>>unprompted.
>
>Well I wouldn't put it past George. Also they were prompted,
>by the advertising that emphasized action, the talk of Ne-yo,
>etc.

They were prompted by being goaded and prodded into going to see the movie because it was supposed to be "important". Like most of the rest of us.

>
>I'm not making excuses for George Lucas...lord knows I've let
>that go. The difference between the two of us is that I have
>realistic expectations and you seem to be personally offended
>by a kids movie...and worse than that you seem to think that
>because one of the most successful studios of all time, the
>one that ushered in a new type of film, makes excellent films
>for young and old alike, that other movies aimed at the young
>are undersereving their audience just because they lack the
>same level of execution. A lot of films do...but Red Tails
>isn't nearly as egregious an offender, in my opinion, as a lot
>of other films.

1. this isn't a kids' film by anyone's definition of the term.
2. I'm personally offended by any movie this bad.
3. Consensus has it that Lucasfilm hasn't made an "excellent" film in roughly 20 years. Now, with the first three Star Wars pictures on your resume, that may be all you need, but entertainment tends to operate on the "What Have You Done for Me Lately" factor.
4. Re: level of execution: no one expects SAT words and artistic cinema experiments in young peoples' films. There is, however, a basic expectation of decent writing, decent characters, decent dialogue, decent acting, and decent direction/filmmaking. Plenty of kids' films - especially the ones like the works of Disney that manage to still make money 70 and 80 years after their first releases - pull this off. "Red Tails" does not. This film has (barely) decent acting, and that's it.

>
>Now if you'd like to explain why this movie was poorly written
>compared to all the other movies aimed at kids,teens, black
>teens, etc that have been released in the last few years, I'm
>all ears. Don't forget by the way, that Pixar doesn't make all
>of those movies.
>

The existence of other bad kids' movies (and there are tons) does not permit or excuse the creation of more. It makes the creation of more _understandable_, but it doesn't save them from being shitted on. Especially if I'm guilted into attending.