> Here's why people care: It surprised a lot of people how casually these 3 famous intelligent creative people were talking about making their main character an abusive creep. Except...they didn't think it would make him an abusive creep.
Lucas doesn't. Both Kasdan and Spielberg seem to push back (lightly, but ina collaborative creative environment, that's what you do if possible, and ultimately it didn't make it in) with Lucas’ suggested age (and Lucas keeps pushing the really young age).
Spielberg also pushes making her explicitly the instigator, perhaps also as a way of mitigating the “abusive creep” impression.
> Does that say something about how things have changed in the last 40 years?
Does it? I mean, without a broad sample of similar writers rooms forty years ago and today, I don't think we know: (1) that that kind of idea got tossed around and cut more than than today, or (2) that when it came up, the discussion was much different then than today.
Saying it says something about a change requires extrapolating a lot about 40 years ago from one data point, and then extrapolating as much about today from no equivalent data points. Most likely, its just spinning the story of this discussion into a preconceived narrative of what the difference is, rather than really reasoning from it at all.
Lucas doesn't. Both Kasdan and Spielberg seem to push back (lightly, but ina collaborative creative environment, that's what you do if possible, and ultimately it didn't make it in) with Lucas’ suggested age (and Lucas keeps pushing the really young age).
Spielberg also pushes making her explicitly the instigator, perhaps also as a way of mitigating the “abusive creep” impression.
> Does that say something about how things have changed in the last 40 years?
Does it? I mean, without a broad sample of similar writers rooms forty years ago and today, I don't think we know: (1) that that kind of idea got tossed around and cut more than than today, or (2) that when it came up, the discussion was much different then than today.
Saying it says something about a change requires extrapolating a lot about 40 years ago from one data point, and then extrapolating as much about today from no equivalent data points. Most likely, its just spinning the story of this discussion into a preconceived narrative of what the difference is, rather than really reasoning from it at all.