Customer Reviews

Mythmaker: The Life and Works of George Lucas

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(4)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(4)

 

 

How well you like this book is probably going to depend a lot on your motivation for reading it in the first place. The recent *60-Minutes* segment did more in 40 minutes to show the personal side of George Lucas, than this book did in 400+ pages. Much of the personal information seems cursory and under-developed. However, the book does provide a fasinating look at the film industry. The chapters dealing with Star Wars are by far the most interesting and the strongest. They alone make the book worth reading.

I found the author's writing style detached, remote and unengaging, but readable. At points in the book I found myself asking "So what?", "Who care's" or "Why do I need to know this". If you aren't a Star Wars or Indiana Jones fan, the book may become tedious and boring.

At best this book pulls together a lot of scattered information about George Lucas, his life and his filmography into one readable volume. At worst it paints an unflattering picture of a reclusive, immature eccentric who is a victim of his own delusions and self-importance. Reality probably lies somewhere in between. If you are a fan of George Lucas and/or his movies, you will probably want to read this book, but it doesn't cover any ground that hasn't already been covered.

Pop culture biographies depend on a few key factors. One, how much gossip is there? Two, do they shed new light on old stories? And if the biography is based on a filmmaker, as John Baxter's Mythmaker: The Life and Work of George Lucas is, we can add a third: what new critical re-examination do they provide?

As I read Mythmaker, I kept thinking, "Where have I read this before?" Baxter dutifully retells all the uphill battles in making Star Wars: the struggle to sell the idea, the agony of production -- and its much more difficult post-production, an early screening evisceration at the hands of Brian De Palma which was later defended by Steven Spielberg, and finally, Lucas' discovery of just how big a phenomenon he'd created when he went to the Hamburger Hamlet across the street from Mann's Chinese and saw the lines queued around the block. These are great stories, to be sure. But Baxter takes almost all of them at face value, never digging deeper under the surface to find the real story. The book lifts liberally from other works on Lucas, notably Dale Pollock's Skywalking, Peter Biskind's Easy Riders, Raging Bulls and Empire Building. And since Lucas argues, correctly, that Biskind is basically taking everything from Skywalking anyway, that pretty much leaves two sources.

Matters aren't helped any by a number a factual errors. At first, it's simply distracting when he makes the casual claim that Spielberg lost the Best Picture Oscar for Jaws to Fellini's Amarcord. The point of fact was that Spielberg wasn't even nominated while Fellini was (and later lost). And perhaps a reader can shrug off Baxter's repeated flubs of Episode One - The Phantom Menace, calling it Part One and, later, The Phantom Empire, while only a student of Star Wars minutiae would know that Ian McDirmid, not Terence Stamp, plays Darth Sidious. But after about a hundred pages, the mistakes become more glaring, culminating in a monumental mistake as Baxter describes Lucas' efforts with Willow. He writes that Lucas took Willow to the 1987 Cannes Film Festival, hoping that audiences would embrace it the same way they did Spielberg's E.T. in 1992. Even if we forgive Baxter for what is basically a copy editing mistake, I had to stop and wonder, "Was anyone at the publishing house actually reading this book, much less proofing it?"

All of this would perhaps be forgivable if the book were well-written. And Mythmaker gets off to a good start detailing Lucas' early life, particularly his chafing childhood under a strict father who values business over imagination -- who can't understand his son's constant dreaming and desire to leave the desert suburb of Modesto, California. Baxter shows numerous influences on Lucas' life and how they would show up in his films. Lucas' feelings for Modesto show up in Luke Skywalker's dismissal of Tatooine. Lucas' father issues get dramatized in Luke's redemption of Darth Vader. Baxter even describes in great detail, Lucas' early student films at USC, showcasing his early obsession with cars, as well as one about a local radio deejay called "The Emperor."

Most impressively, Baxter lands an interview with Lawrence Kasdan, who sheds new light on the writing process of Raiders of the Lost Ark, as well as the struggles to finish Empire Strikes Back after initial screenwriter Leigh Brackett died of cancer. Kasdan talks about the frantic rush to finish Empire (re-written after he turned in Raiders) before photography began, and how Brackett's own fight with cancer imbued the film with its dark tone. For students of Lucas and Spielberg, as well as the writing process in general, these anecdotes alone are almost worth buying the book.

Almost.

Because even if one dismisses Easy Riders, Raging Bulls as the "revenge of the ex-wives," (as Peter Bogdanovich did), it's still an incredibly written and researched book. Baxter's narrative is stilted and incomplete. His notes section is woefully anemic. Where's the documentation that biographies like this stand upon?

But easily the biggest travesty of the book is Baxter's final chapter, which details The Phantom Menace and tries, in vain, to wrap up Lucas' life and work. I was hoping for the same detail to attention with Phantom Menace that Kasdan had supplied with Empire and Return of the Jedi. Instead, Baxter -- possibly running head on into the Lucasfilm wall of silence -- essentially re-processes the press machine. Though he does accurately describe the critical ravaging the film received, he barely delves into the digital process of filmmaking, its toll on the actors or its potential impact on the world of cinema.

Most depressingly, Baxter fumbles the ball when it comes to tying it all together. From the opening pages forward, Baxter describes friends and co-workers who get on Lucas' bad side and never work with him again. And the last five pages feel like Baxter himself fears reprisals from his subject. Rather than provide a coherent thesis, he gives Lucas the easy way out, forgiving him for Howard the Duck and Phantom Menace, with the excuse that Lucas is a man who loves stories.

So after 350 pages, that's all we're left with. Lucas loves to tell stories. Even Biskind went deeper than that to show us a frustrated Lucas caught at the bottom of the Star Wars pyramid, unable to create a movie that doesn't have a strange creature or aerial space battle in it. This is all the more annoying when one realizes Baxter has laid the groundwork for the real story in his early chapters with Lucas and his father. The real inversion of Star Wars' impact on Lucas' life is thematic: rather than redeem his father as Luke did with Darth Vader, Lucas has become his father. He has shown a keen and ruthless business mind, efficiently running Industrial Light and Magic and managing his deals from Star Wars and Indiana Jones to become a multi-millionaire several times over. Lucas' genius is in foreseeing the future of cameras, computers and merchandising, not in Jar Jar Binks or movies about trade federations.

Just as Lucas Sr. shook his head at his son's desires to explore a new medium, one can almost feel George Jr. being pulled dragging and screaming into the new means and medium of film. It took years before Lucas jumped on the computer graphics bandwagon, but Lucas' intransigence runs deeper -- to the core of the love of story Baxter claims Lucas has. In a year that brought us The Matrix, Being John Malkovich and many other groundbreaking films, the story Lucas created for Phantom Menace seems almost quaint by comparison. That Baxter can't, or refuses, to draw this conclusion -- particularly after so laboriously pointing us in that direction -- is the book's biggest failure of all.

I finally finished this book - it took me weeks! I had to keep putting it down due to nausea. I should have quit while I was ahead. It was slow, boring and torturous. Shame on me for buying the book - shame on me for reading it. I equate it with a tabloid cover story, maybe worse. It lacked in content and was full of recounted heresay by " a friend of a friend". I was looking for to learn more about George Lucas whom I have admired since I was a teen ager watching Star Wars. George Lucas has brought UNTOLD happiness into the world with his visions and all John Baxter likes to point out is that he is a short nerd whose wife left him. Who cares. John Baxter's writing in this book is full of bias and overt envy. It rambles off on tangents that make you put the book down and say "what does that have to do with anything? " I kept reading because I had read a review that stated that Baxter was won over in the end. Well I missed something. I don't agree with John Baxter at all and his inference that George Lucas sort of stumbled through his life and kept getting breaks because he was surrounded by competent people. John Baxter was quick to point out every failure (Howard the Duck)- and lose focus on the successes (ILM, Skywalker sound). It seems to me that George Lucas earned his "incomprehensible wealth" through hard work and sacrifice. That's the one thing I gleened from the book throught the heavy envy. This book was ridiculous. If you are a fan of Star Wars or Raiders please don't bother reading it. You will just be annoyed by the heresay. If I sound negative then you are getting a small idea of how negative the content of this book is.

I have just finished reading the italian version of this book. I can agree with some if the other reviws that some part are slow but overall the book is intriguing. I strongly advise that those in love with Lucas may be dissatisfied, in fact his image as a filmaker is fantastic, as a husband or friend less.

If possible I would recommend the original english version because in my opinion the italian translation is very bad (please advise the author)

Fans of George Lucas or his work should not read this book. Baxter has nothing positive to say either about Lucas the man or any of his films. While the narrative is generally factual, he seems to take every opportunity to attack the subject as a misanthrope, a poor businessman, an exploiter of others, and generally a maker of worthless films. Furthermore, there is practically nothing in this volume that can't be found in a work that doesn't tear Lucas down.

I don't know why John Baxter decided to write this book. Why does a self-proclaimed world-class writer invest the years of research, then proceed to write 400 pages on a subject that clearly means nothing to him?

This was the first real biography I read of George Lucas; since it I have read Dave Pollock's Skywalking, which is a far better and balanced look at the creator of Star Wars, George Lucas.

John Baxter's bio on Lucas is really mean toward its subject. In his narrative of the filmmaker's life he routinely slams Lucas, pointing out all the mistakes George made in his life and never really focusing on the happiness Lucas has brought to millions of moviegoers with the Star Wars and Indiana Jones films. In the end, it seems Lucas wins over Baxter with The Phantom Menace, but considering how much Baxter seems to hate George Lucas, I think I'm reaching a little bit.

Not only does Baxter hate Lucas, his book is littered with typos and errors. He never once gets the name of Steven Spielberg's college--Long Beach State--right (he calls it the University of California, Long Beach at one point and California State College, Long Beach in another). He mangles some of the details of The Phantom Menace as well (says that Valorum was played by Ian McDiarmid, when it was Terence Stamp who really played him). Some of the more gossipy parts in the book are backed up with shoddy references, too.

Another problem is that Baxter goes off on a lot of other tangents that are only vaguely related to Lucas. For instance, he discusses what Francis Coppola was doing while Star Wars was being produced, and the problems Star Wars' director of photography--Gil Taylor--had with Stanley Kubrick. Better editing would have eliminated these parts.

If you want a better and more balanced account of George Lucas' life, read Skywalking by Dave Pollock. Pollock doesn't take a critical machete to Lucas' life or films and there aren't any editorial mistakes.

I've always been a Lucasfilm/Star Wars fanatic, and have always gobbled up any shred of info, whether it be about the stories, or the behind-the-scenes realm. I'm one of those fans who knows the names of the modelmakers responsible for those great, worn ships in the original film.

And while I am a bit over the top in regards to what I know, this in no way absolves John Baxter for the mountainous errors in his work. Just because I'm sharp on a lot regarding Lucas doesn't mean that Baxter's innacurracies won't be such a sin if they fall on uninformed ears.I won't go through each and every flaw, but let me just warn you that this book drops the ball repeatedly regarding what Lucasfilm fans would call rudimentary data.

I t's best to bypass this mess and select David Pollock's "Skywalking" instead. It's the oldest and still the best bio on this great talent. Another book that proved to be immensely entertaining (though only covering the era of the first trilogy) was Garry Jenkin's "Empire Building." If it's behind the scenes Star Wars stuff you're after, then this is absolutely THE book to get.
In closing, I'm most disappointed with Mythmaker because it pales in comparison to Baxter's Steven Spielberg bio released a few years before. It makes me wonder how accurate (or innacurate) THAT bio was.....

This is quite a comprehensive biography of George Lucas' life to 1999, reaching all the way back to his grandfather's time, and then to George Sr.'s time, before starting in on the life of the man who brought you Star Wars and Howard the Duck. Baxter writes with an engaging style and includes interviews with primary and secondary school friends that show the depth of his due diligence. Be warned that this is not a biography that tries to present everything Lucas in a strictly positive light (Baxter gives examples of the Lucas machine's attempts in essence to re-write the legends surrounding its god). As any good biography should, this book includes not only the shining chapters of Lucas' life, but the less glorious ones as well. Still, the chapters that depict Lucas as a cold, asexual, genius do not detract from our admiration of him as a filmmaker, and the epic chapters that describe the underdog success of the first Star Wars film in fact allow us to re-live the moment as if we were back there in '77 cheering for the rebels in their battle against the Galactic Empire, for Lucas in his fight against the Hollywood studios.

Unfortunately, as much great information as this book might have, much of it is made questionable due to some glaring mistakes in the last few chapters. Despite the immense amount of research undertaken to write such a book, it is clear that Baxter has very little "street" knowledge of American popular culture. Ky Huy Huan was not the name of the Vietnamese Chinese boy who played Short Round (and later Data, in the Goonies) in Temple of Doom. No, Tom Ryan is not the name of Harrison Ford's character in the movies based on Tom Clancy's novels. No, Terence Stamp did not play Darth Sidious in Star Wars: Episode I. And no, the Trade Federation did not have an army of C3POs. For Baxter's target audience, a readership that comes from a generation raised on the films of George Lucas, these errors are painfully obvious and completely absurd, and thus cast the entire book in doubt. This is truly a shame because Baxter has put a mighty effort into giving us a very well-rounded look at the 20th century's most influential filmmaker. Four stars for the book's captivating narrative style.

I am a big George Lucas fan and I found a few errors in this book. The one that really bothered me was that the author repeatedly stated that Jim Henson did the puppeteering and voice for Yoda. IT WAS FRANK OZ NOT JIM HENSON! That was soooo annoying! I kept wishing that the author was around so that I could just scream it in his face!

Other than these small details, the book was pretty good. But still, I can't help but wonder what else was inaccurate that I just took as new information.

I read this book from cover to cover in less than a week (that's fast for me). The author's style finds the perfect balance between documenting facts and telling a story. Like Luke Skywalker, the hero he created in STAR WARS, George Lucas was a lonely boy who dreamt of worlds beyond his rural desert town. While his emotionally distant father (a clear inspiration for Darth Vader) made him something of a delinquent teenager (like the hot rod character from AMERICAN GRAFFITTI) it was Lucas' loving mother who made him what he is today. After nearly dying when he literally wrapped his car around a tree, Lucas awoke in a hospital bed to see his Mother crying in anguish, convinced that her directionless son would eventually kill himself. From that moment on, this quiet, shy desert farm boy devoted his life to telling stories. The book gives a fascinating history of his film school days at USC with brilliant but somewhat extremist classmate John Milius, his apprenticeship to the passionate and often scandalous Francis Coppola, to his close friendship and kinship with Steven Spielberg, and the marriage to his beautiful college sweetheart film editor Marsha Lucas which sadly ended in divorce. How his battles with studio heads who fought over mere frames just to leverage their positions in a time where the filmmaker, not the studio head, ruled. And how his plan to own the licensing rights so he could independently finance all of his movies through merchandise royalties, ironically established todays corporate studio model that has snuffed out the writer-director as the boss. If you're interested in the history of American cinema of the 60s, 70s and 80s and how the influence of counter-culture youth changed it forever, this book is a must-read.