Yes we do, this is the management org chart of Lucasfilm. http://lucasfilm.com/our-team

Lucas does not own it. He is not an employee of it. He is not an employee of Disney.

There is no secret status, it is now part of a publically traded company and it's all open book.

And if he doesn't show up in anything anymore except to say he's no longer involved, I'll happily lick my core rulebook and admit I was wrong. But that chart just says he's not he big boss anymore, which we know. We don't what what he actually is, what he actually does, and what kind of clout he still maintains.

Is he just a treatment writer? Does he still get to do Rebels story meetings with Filoni and pals? Is he still going to have Exec Producer Credits on the new films? Will his wife and kids still get cameos? Was he required to get a tattoo of Mickey on his buttocks?

That's things we don't know, and only time will tell for sure. But for now I'm stick to my guns and saying that there's no reason to think that George doesn't have a significant role in the future of the IP. Just because it's not officially his doesn't mean that Mickey is locking him out, and if history is any indication, Mickey's probably at least still letting him shoot the quadlasers.

These are publically traded companies that are required by federal investment disclosure law to release everything about who runs these companies, so we do know. There is no secret anything.

What I recall was that Kathleen Kennedy was the brand manager and was in control while Lucas was just going to be a creative consultant. Which to me means, he's still the idea man and receives a paycheck but Disney and/or Lucas Arts have ultimate control. I'm not sure if this means Disney CEOs proper, or if it's Kennedy who actually has creative control.

This article has a video where Lucas and Kennedy describes what being creative consultant means from a year and a half ago. What it sounds to me is that they'll still run ideas past him for a stamp of approval for if something "sounds Star Wars".

http://www.businessinsider.com/george-lucas-creative-consultant-role-in-star-wars-2012-11

I bet Disney can do whatever they want but will probably save face and go with Lucas and Kennedy blessings whenever possible.

As for how the behind the scenes looks now, who knows. I did a quick google search and found articles reporting that Lucas was in contact with JJ and that Lucas was not in contact. So, from our current vantage point it's impossible to tell who's creative vision we'll actually see.

@ghostofman: So, basically, no matter what the proof says you are not persuaded.

Do you think $4.000.000.000,- is a prife anyone would pay for only a part of ownership? Would you buy a car but have the person you bought it from keep driving it into work every day?

Yes we do, this is the management org chart of Lucasfilm. http://lucasfilm.com/our-team

Lucas does not own it. He is not an employee of it. He is not an employee of Disney.

There is no secret status, it is now part of a publically traded company and it's all open book.

And if he doesn't show up in anything anymore except to say he's no longer involved, I'll happily lick my core rulebook and admit I was wrong. But that chart just says he's not he big boss anymore, which we know. We don't what what he actually is, what he actually does, and what kind of clout he still maintains.

Is he just a treatment writer? Does he still get to do Rebels story meetings with Filoni and pals? Is he still going to have Exec Producer Credits on the new films? Will his wife and kids still get cameos? Was he required to get a tattoo of Mickey on his buttocks?

That's things we don't know, and only time will tell for sure. But for now I'm stick to my guns and saying that there's no reason to think that George doesn't have a significant role in the future of the IP. Just because it's not officially his doesn't mean that Mickey is locking him out, and if history is any indication, Mickey's probably at least still letting him shoot the quadlasers.

These are publically traded companies that are required by federal investment disclosure law to release everything about who runs these companies, so we do know. There is no secret anything.

Who runs the company and more importantly who controls the money, not who makes creative decisions on specific IP lines.

That's the issue. As a "creative consultant" his title is nebulous enough that he could be doing anything, be it a major player on the creative side of Star Wars, or making Yoda face pancakes for craft services. We know he's not the big boss, we know he doesn't manage the money, we don't know if he gets to decide what color Darth Baddgui's lightsaber is.

. What it sounds to me is that they'll still run ideas past him for a stamp of approval for if something "sounds Star Wars".

Nah, to me it seems more like my colleague that retired but still was paid respect in some way... He left after 2 years of his own accord...

Yes we do, this is the management org chart of Lucasfilm. http://lucasfilm.com/our-team

Lucas does not own it. He is not an employee of it. He is not an employee of Disney.

There is no secret status, it is now part of a publically traded company and it's all open book.

And if he doesn't show up in anything anymore except to say he's no longer involved, I'll happily lick my core rulebook and admit I was wrong. But that chart just says he's not he big boss anymore, which we know. We don't what what he actually is, what he actually does, and what kind of clout he still maintains.

Is he just a treatment writer? Does he still get to do Rebels story meetings with Filoni and pals? Is he still going to have Exec Producer Credits on the new films? Will his wife and kids still get cameos? Was he required to get a tattoo of Mickey on his buttocks?

That's things we don't know, and only time will tell for sure. But for now I'm stick to my guns and saying that there's no reason to think that George doesn't have a significant role in the future of the IP. Just because it's not officially his doesn't mean that Mickey is locking him out, and if history is any indication, Mickey's probably at least still letting him shoot the quadlasers.

These are publically traded companies that are required by federal investment disclosure law to release everything about who runs these companies, so we do know. There is no secret anything.

Who runs the company and more importantly who controls the money, not who makes creative decisions on specific IP lines.

That's the issue. As a "creative consultant" his title is nebulous enough that he could be doing anything, be it a major player on the creative side of Star Wars, or making Yoda face pancakes for craft services. We know he's not the big boss, we know he doesn't manage the money, we don't know if he gets to decide what color Darth Baddgui's lightsaber is.

We do know though. He got the credit for the rough story treatments he originally wrote for 7 thru 9. That's not a secret either.

But what's actually going on with the production right now is a secret.

But what's actually going on with the production right now is a secret.

OMG, not who is doing it. They can't keep that secret. They are making a movie with money they got from selling shares on the stock market. You don't get to keep secrets.

"Creative consultant" can mean many things. I think that's Ghostofman's point. Pretty much speculation, which you can argue ad nauseum and still not reach any form of consensus because it's still speculation.

Where are people getting the exact details on what Lucas is being consulted on?

"Creative consultant" can mean many things. I think that's Ghostofman's point. Pretty much speculation, which you can argue ad nauseum and still not reach any form of consensus because it's still speculation.

Where are people getting the exact details on what Lucas is being consulted on?

It doesn't mean producer, which is who is in charge of a movie. He originally stated Lucas was still in charge overall. He is not. He is not a producer. He then talked about his position at Lucasfilm. He doesn't have one. I Posted the org chart for the company.

http://screenrant.com/star-wars-episode-7-george-lucas-role-jj-abrams/

Here is one of any number of readily accessible articles with quotes from Lucas himself. There is nothing shadowy or hidden about his involvement, or lack thereof.

When someone says "we don't know" my answer is "yes we do" and "how many articles have you actually looked up to read about it?" because there are a ton.

The problem is I've been in both production and PR. What goes on publicly, and what actually goes on behind the scenes don't have to match. Heck, I've even been in cases where I've had to sit quietly by while the director-types just outright lied to the execs, so even internal info can get fuzzy fast.

There's plenty of cases where sequel reports aren't matching up. On one side you've got "George is totally not involved at all" and on other you've got "Disney doesn't mess with a good thing, and George likes being involved." Add in that it's frelling Star Wars, and the rumor mongers goes to death star levels.

If George really felt as beat up about the prequels as has been suggested, then, were I his PR man, I'd say "For Ep VII lets start by playing up JJs role, and playing down yours. If the movie goes well and everyone likes it, we release some behind the scenes footage of you picking out concept art, and laying down plot and character design to JJ, and we have JJ talk about how involved you were. If we end up with Jar Jar 2.0, it's all JJs fault and you were just as surprised as everyone else."

That's where I'm really going. We know what the legal disclosures say, we know what the PR people have released to the media and briefed everyone to say in interviews, and we know the mouses track record. But, we're not on set. We're not in story meetings. We're not married to George and discussing it over dinner every night.

My money is on him doing the "fun stuff" of development and conceptualizing, and making sure the script rewriters didn't go totally off the rails and making regular visits to the set to look things over and have coffee with JJ and chew that fat a little, and whatever else George finds fun about film making. From my point of view, that's him still calling the shots on what's going to make this Star Wars. But I don't think he can change the production schedule, or rewrite the script extensively after shooting starts, or decide that the movie should be about Nelson Solo instead of Herbert Skywalker halfway through production, which he does have something of a track record of doing.

Sure, I have read a few such articles. Another is this one https://www.blastr.com/2012/11/george_lucas_reveals_how.php

And this one http://www.slashgear.com/george-lucas-constantly-talking-to-jj-abrams-about-star-wars-sequels-09300737/

As far as I can tell, we are still in the dark as to what "creative consultant" means. I definitely get that he's not the director or producer. I understand that he's not calling shots anymore. But unless you have found some piece of news that actually defines Lucas' role, it's still all speculation and hearsay.

This interview with Jett Lucas suggests George has more to do with the sequels than has previously been let on, and also suggests JJ and the "big 3" leads have been working on this for about a year prior to the sale:

This interview with Jett Lucas suggests George has more to do with the sequels than has previously been let on, and also suggests JJ and the "big 3" leads have been working on this for about a year prior to the sale:

He's still alive??? Jimmy Smits has some 'splaining to do...

(Sorry, couldn't resist. )

Late to the argument and thus neutral, I'm seeing speculation vs. oodles of concrete linked sources.

So for more speculation vs. concrete material, I would speculate that "Creative Consultant" means just that. He's paid to give some his opinions due to being the father of Star Wars, but he has no powers over decision making at all.

George Lucas is like the Queen of England. She doesn't hold office, but you're very mistaken if you think that means she doesn't have power.

My point is that though George Lucas may not have a position on the org charts being waved around, it's a safe bet that the people at the top of said org charts are going to pay attention to what he has to say. You don't have to be someone's boss to influence them.

...That being said, the kind of role Ghostofman described for George seems perfect. He doesn't seem to do well with being in charge with nobody to tell him no, as has been discussed, but he still is a great creative mind.

Basically Lucasfilm is still Lucasfilm, just with "A Walt Disney Company" added to the stationary. Lucasfilm made money hand over fist before being donated to the mouse, the mouse isn't going to change anything at all because it's in the rodent's best interest to keep that sweet lasersword cash flowing.

I'm sure they're all also keenly aware of the backlash from the fans and community over some of the elements of the prequels (Jar-Jar and the awful dialogue and acting for Anakin and Padme, if not necessarily the inconsistencies between the prequels and the original films).

"Creative consultant" can mean many things. I think that's Ghostofman's point. Pretty much speculation, which you can argue ad nauseum and still not reach any form of consensus because it's still speculation.

Where are people getting the exact details on what Lucas is being consulted on?

It doesn't mean producer, which is who is in charge of a movie. He originally stated Lucas was still in charge overall. He is not. He is not a producer. He then talked about his position at Lucasfilm. He doesn't have one. I Posted the org chart for the company.

Of course he doesn't have a position, he's a third party contractor now. Which means we can't see his position in the org chart because he isn't directly employed by Lucasfilm. As a consultant he bills them for services but isn't on the payroll. There is a difference.

George Lucas is like the Queen of England. She doesn't hold office, but you're very mistaken if you think that means she doesn't have power.

My point is that though George Lucas may not have a position on the org charts being waved around, it's a safe bet that the people at the top of said org charts are going to pay attention to what he has to say. You don't have to be someone's boss to influence them.

This Queen of England analogy is perfect.

The question will be, how much control does he have as a consultant. Honestly, I hope the answer is pretty minimal. He has some great ideas but needs help to put them into a cohesive story. After his complete control on the PT and how that turned out, I'd rather see what others can do with this franchise.

After his complete control on the PT and how that turned out, I'd rather see what others can do with this franchise.

I was trying to avoid this thread, but geeeesus, WTH. "How that turned out"? 2.5 billion in revenue is how that turned out. Revitalized the franchise is how that turned out. A very successful and entertaining TCW is how that turned out. A long run of D20 Saga, and now EotE is what's up with that. Darth Maul and dual light sabers; Mace Windu and purple ones; Yoda absorbing lightning; grand vistas and a whole society filling up the background...that's how it all turned out.

Seems to me the PT-deniers need to step back and take a look at the big picture, and maybe spend a little less time obsessing over their favourite-to-hate details. We all know the flaws, but they're making a mockery of their position.

After his complete control on the PT and how that turned out, I'd rather see what others can do with this franchise.

I was trying to avoid this thread, but geeeesus, WTH. "How that turned out"? 2.5 billion in revenue is how that turned out. Revitalized the franchise is how that turned out. A very successful and entertaining TCW is how that turned out. A long run of D20 Saga, and now EotE is what's up with that. Darth Maul and dual light sabers; Mace Windu and purple ones; Yoda absorbing lightning; grand vistas and a whole society filling up the background...that's how it all turned out.

Seems to me the PT-deniers need to step back and take a look at the big picture, and maybe spend a little less time obsessing over their favourite-to-hate details. We all know the flaws, but they're making a mockery of their position.

You shouldn't have given into the dark side like I did.....

I'd have to agree, financially the PT was very successful, a rock solid 10 figure profit on ticket sales alone. What's funny is these next six movies will have a harder time reaching the PT's 3 movie roughly $2 billion in ticket sales profits.

Disney has to first pay off the $4.06 billion it paid for the IP. Couple that with production budgets for each movie of about $200 million I bet. Then there is marketing distribution, so the six movies will cost about $1.2 to $2billion to produce and market. That comes to close to $6 billion, so the six movies each have to hit close to or exceed $1 billion to accomplish that. That's just to break even. To match the PT's $2 billion in profits they will all have to exceed $1 billion by a large margin. It's a tall order.

After his complete control on the PT and how that turned out, I'd rather see what others can do with this franchise.

I was trying to avoid this thread, but geeeesus, WTH. "How that turned out"? 2.5 billion in revenue is how that turned out. Revitalized the franchise is how that turned out. A very successful and entertaining TCW is how that turned out. A long run of D20 Saga, and now EotE is what's up with that. Darth Maul and dual light sabers; Mace Windu and purple ones; Yoda absorbing lightning; grand vistas and a whole society filling up the background...that's how it all turned out.

Seems to me the PT-deniers need to step back and take a look at the big picture, and maybe spend a little less time obsessing over their favourite-to-hate details. We all know the flaws, but they're making a mockery of their position.

You shouldn't have given into the dark side like I did.....

I'd have to agree, financially the PT was very successful, a rock solid 10 figure profit on ticket sales alone. What's funny is these next six movies will have a harder time reaching the PT's 3 movie roughly $2 billion in ticket sales profits.

Disney has to first pay off the $4.06 billion it paid for the IP. Couple that with production budgets for each movie of about $200 million I bet. Then there is marketing distribution, so the six movies will cost about $1.2 to $2billion to produce and market. That comes to close to $6 billion, so the six movies each have to hit close to or exceed $1 billion to accomplish that. That's just to break even. To match the PT's $2 billion in profits they will all have to exceed $1 billion by a large margin. It's a tall order.

That's true, only if the movies are all the revenue the purchase of LA gets them. But you're forgetting the licensing (LEGO toys, Hasbro, etc...), the video games, the product placements, etc... those add up.

I've always wondered about that - if Episodes 1-3 were as terrible as everyone says, then why did they make money? Okay, we'll give Phantom Menace a pass since nobody knew that it would stink*, and that the just slightly south of one billion dollars at the world wide box office was a complete fluke.

* I actually don't think it stinks, but I'm arguing a point here.

But now the cat is out of the bag! Everyone knows that Star Wars is artistically poison! Why then did Attack of the Clones go on to make 648 Million worldwide?

Okay, so two abosultly terrible movies in a row, and no sign that the third one is going to be any different. And yet Revenge of the Sith goes on to make 848 million dollars world wide. That's some pretty spectacular box office for a third sh*tty movie in a row. . . . or that perhaps the prequels were not as badly received by Joe Six-Pack, that it was only the fans that were The Enemy?

After his complete control on the PT and how that turned out, I'd rather see what others can do with this franchise.

I was trying to avoid this thread, but geeeesus, WTH. "How that turned out"? 2.5 billion in revenue is how that turned out. Revitalized the franchise is how that turned out. A very successful and entertaining TCW is how that turned out. A long run of D20 Saga, and now EotE is what's up with that. Darth Maul and dual light sabers; Mace Windu and purple ones; Yoda absorbing lightning; grand vistas and a whole society filling up the background...that's how it all turned out.

Seems to me the PT-deniers need to step back and take a look at the big picture, and maybe spend a little less time obsessing over their favourite-to-hate details. We all know the flaws, but they're making a mockery of their position.

You shouldn't have given into the dark side like I did.....

I'd have to agree, financially the PT was very successful, a rock solid 10 figure profit on ticket sales alone. What's funny is these next six movies will have a harder time reaching the PT's 3 movie roughly $2 billion in ticket sales profits.

Disney has to first pay off the $4.06 billion it paid for the IP. Couple that with production budgets for each movie of about $200 million I bet. Then there is marketing distribution, so the six movies will cost about $1.2 to $2billion to produce and market. That comes to close to $6 billion, so the six movies each have to hit close to or exceed $1 billion to accomplish that. That's just to break even. To match the PT's $2 billion in profits they will all have to exceed $1 billion by a large margin. It's a tall order.

That's true, only if the movies are all the revenue the purchase of LA gets them. But you're forgetting the licensing (LEGO toys, Hasbro, etc...), the video games, the product placements, etc... those add up.

I'm not forgetting licensing. I'm pointing out the PT made $2 billion in profit off theatrical ticket sales alone. I am only focusing on the revenue that was generated from theatrical release, because it isn't like the PT didn't also make money off licensing.

I think he is referring to all licensing. Star Wars is an evergreen product. Disney is making money hand over fist already. Books, movies, games, et al. And as they get more organized that will increase. The movies will just expand that exponentially.

Why did the PT make so much money? I don't know. I'm not a film historian, but it's fun to think about. Why do they keep making big action movies that "everyone" thinks suck but keep making money, such as the Transformers movies? It's proven time and time again that profit doesn't necessarily correlate with quality.

Some of the profit was due to the world market. Big flashy showpieces make more money overseas because they are easier to translate. People who speak other languages and have different cultural backgrounds have an easier time connecting with a movie that has less dialogue and more explosions, so they go see it more. Everyone enjoys action. So those movies make more money overseas.

Some of my "hate" towards the PT is that I'm not the target audience. I'll wholeheartedly agree that I wasn't a10 year old boy when the PT came out. So, there will be parts of the PT that my adult self will not like, such as JarJar and the super long pod race. People such as Lucas will say that Star Wars was always kids movies. However, there is a different between kids movies. There are the ones that rely on dumb kid jokes, which kids will love but adults don't care for. Then there are the Pixar movies which entertain kids and adults on different levels.

Side topic: This makes me wonder how much control Lucas had over the Clone Wars pilot/movie as opposed to the show. It has been a while since I've seen the movie and I've only seen a handful of episodes, but I remember the movie being not that great and the show being fantastic.

While I'm glad that the PT reinvigorated the franchise, I don't think it's too much to ask for new Star Wars movies to be closer to Pixar quality than fart joke kids movies. Personally, I have full faith in Disney to be able to put out a product that I'll be happy to purchase.

Now that we got that out of the way, the income Disney will make will be interesting. I wonder what return on investment they are looking for. I wonder if they expect to be in the black in 10 years or more or less. Or perhaps they don't really care about how long it'll take to make their money back because they wanted to own the characters anyway. Some would argue that this is why they bought Marvel. Comic books don't sell super hot. Some would argue Disney bought Marvel because of what they could do with the characters, not with what they could make just selling comic books.

I'd like to think Disney is factoring everything into their math for figuring out if buying Lucasarts was a good investment. Which, remember, is both Star Wars and Indiana Jones. They no longer have to pay to use those characters in their theme parks. (Which is a small amount for Disney, but it is a cost.) Non-movie related licensing will get them a tidy sum too. People who want to make some in universe video games or other merch, such as an awesome pen and paper RPG. There are several streams of income going into one big pot, which makes spending so much on Lucasarts worth it.