Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Movies Media

New Lucasfilm Campus Breaks Ground at Presidio 142

Posted by Hemos from the making-the-movies dept.
GuyMannDude writes "Lucasfilm has broken ground on the new $300 million special effects campus that he hopes will help San Francisco rival Hollywood as a producer of movie magic. Some see the project as a way for the Presidio (a national park) to become economically self-sufficient while critics claim that level of commercialization is unnecessary."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

New Lucasfilm Campus Breaks Ground at Presidio More

New Lucasfilm Campus Breaks Ground at Presidio

Comments Filter:

  • And so the second tower rises out of the north... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 10, 2003 @04:49AM (#5269345)
    Which dark lord will win? George Lucas, or the faceless conglomeration known as Hollywood?

    Well, at least there'll be more work up north, though with Davis taxing things, that might not last too long...

  • Star Wars games (Score:5, Interesting)

    by syr ( 647840 ) on Monday February 10, 2003 @04:56AM (#5269362)
    Hopefully the Lucas compound will be able to use the close connections to create better products all around. Lucasarts has produced some great games over the years but the teams have always had a hard time dealing with NDA agreements with the other Lucas companies and tailoring a specific game to an upcoming movie release.

    With everything in one boat maybe future titles will improve upon titles such as Bounty Hunter [gametab.com] which surely could have been much better if the process was streamlined better internally.

  • Self sufficient.. (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    There can be no free lunches for anyone.. even if its a national park. Gotta manage on their own.

    OTOH, its a great step forward for Lucasfilm. On the galaxy far, far away Lucasfilm wins Starwars. :)

  • The question is... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Scrab ( 573004 ) on Monday February 10, 2003 @05:03AM (#5269381)
    Will this campus actually improve films, or is there still room in films for plot and characterisation? Or have all films become so obsessed by graphics that the story no longer matters....... Scrab

    • Re:The question is... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by theefer ( 467185 ) on Monday February 10, 2003 @05:11AM (#5269396) Homepage
      LOTR-TTT was great, and had great FX. SW-Ep1 was crappy, and had great FX.

      I don't think the quality of special effects is related to the quality of movies. Let the FX guys do their jobs well, and let the screenwriters do theirs. There already are plenty of screenwriters schools anyway.

      • Re:The question is... (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward
        The effects for ep 1 + 2 were technically great, but it seemed the effects were used too much and created a very synthetic fake universe which didn't have the grit of the original Star Wars.

      • Re:The question is... (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Jondor ( 55589 ) <{gerhard} {at} {frappe.xs4all.nl}> on Monday February 10, 2003 @05:44AM (#5269460) Homepage
        But then again, with LOTR the effects were needed to make the visualisation of the story possible in the first place. Just enough to make it happen (which is still a lot, but that's due to the story!)

        With SW there is way to much effects in that it get's in the way of the story. Not just what's needed, but it gets a life of its own.

        IMHO this clearly a case of "less is more".

        • Re:The question is... (Score:2, Funny)

          by Anonymous Coward
          If by "less is more" you are referring to Gollum's loin cloth, I think you need to get some help.

          "Bring it to me raw, and wriggling."
      • I think we're in a period where's there's a lot of fascination with the ever growing effects. (I suspect we also have The Matrix to thank for this.) Some movies released over the last year seem to have almost nothing going for them except stunts, special effects and explosions. (Triple X comes to mind instantly.)

        Hopefully once everyone is used to the massive amounts of digital effects in every movie, movies will succeed or fail based on quality and enhanced by, not just composed of, flashy stunts and digital effects.

        Speaking of which, Shaolin Soccer [imdb.com] (Kung Fu Soccer in the US) combines bullet time type effects with (obviously cheap, but workable) digital effects and a HILARIOUS premise. It's a light hearted riot for anyone who can find it to rent it. It's a good example of effects used to extend the over the top comedy of any given situation.

  • Story is everything (Score:5, Interesting)

    by xeniten ( 550128 ) on Monday February 10, 2003 @05:04AM (#5269384) Homepage
    I'd rather see Lucas break ground on a writer's workshop.

  • It takes money to make money… (Score:5, Insightful)

    by insecuritiez ( 606865 ) on Monday February 10, 2003 @05:08AM (#5269389)
    I am sure this will be useful to other producers as well. There is such a demand for land and room to do movie effects that this should really make it a lot easier to film movies in a timely fashion. As well as bring in cash for LucasFilm when they decide to rent out some of their campus. Very smart move.
    • Nope, the campus will be all for Lucas companies, mainly ILM and LucasArts. Just ILM has around 1000 employees (it has balooned to around 1200 aound prequel time). His plans are to put most of his companies there, except maybe Lucasfilm and Skywalker Sound which reside over at the Ranch. Producers, directors and other Lucas firend usually stay at the Ranch which has a guest house.

      The incentive is financial though for other reasons. Apparently the land where ILM is right now is owned by Lucas' ex-wife, Marcia, and apparently the rent is a bit high. Also Lucas received some sort of incentive from the city, like a tax break or something, which would save him a ton of money. It was on an article on one of those newspapers long ago.

      Movies will not be filmed in a timely fashion, simply because the way studios do things nowadays. Now everything has a release data and all this strategic planning. Movies are released according to this instead of being released when they are ready , like they used to in old times.

  • Hollywood == Competition? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Clan Hanna ( 146060 ) on Monday February 10, 2003 @05:09AM (#5269390) Homepage

    Perhaps it's just my jaded and cynical view of recent movies, but it seems that this new San Francisco-based studio wouldn't really have to do a great deal to rival Hollywood as a great movie producing town. Sure, Hollywood has the name, and has a long and glorious history, but the really good, honestly-worth-seeing films of the last few years have come out of other countries, not Hollywood. LOTR is just one example one that immediately pops to mind. Star Wars of course was done in England (and Marin, CA, of course). Lest anyone forget, The Matrix was an Aussie production. A personaly favorite of mine, The Boondock Saints was East-Coast, USA made. My list here is short for the point of brevity, not due to a lack of examples.

    The last really good Hollywood production I saw was The Score. Hollywood may have a name synnonymous with movie making, but ? at least recently ? not so synnonymous with good movie making.

    • Re:Hollywood == Competition? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by pubjames ( 468013 ) on Monday February 10, 2003 @05:22AM (#5269422)
      Sure, Hollywood has the name, and has a long and glorious history, but the really good, honestly-worth-seeing films of the last few years have come out of other countries

      This has also struck me.

      I think the issue is that, any big budget film is just assumed to be a Hollywood production, even when - as you point out - these days very few of them are. For instance,the big films over Christmas and the New Year - Harry Potter and LOTR TTT - were not as far as I am aware Hollywood films, although I am sure that many people probably think they are, just because they were big budget productions.

      Was "Gangs of New York" a Hollywood film? If it was it just illustrates the point, because frankly it was s**t.
      • Well tge real measure of a Hollywood movie is if it done by a Hollywood studio, not by the film shooting location. LOTR was financed by New Line pretty much, and Harry Potter by Warner Bros., even if they shot overseas because of their particular deals (Rowling demanded that certain percentage of the HP films be done by UK people, all the cast, the stages and most of the VFX, before selling the rights; PJ wanted to shoot in NZ where he is from).

        Gangs of New York was a Hollywood film, it was done by Miramax. SW was a Hollywood film (Lucafilm and 20th Century Fox), The Matrix too (Warner Bros.

        Lastly to the parent post, this is just Lucas consolidating his companies in one place. It's not an actual movie studio like Disney, Paramount and the like, depsite the misleading title in the nwespaper article.

    • Re:Hollywood == Competition? (Score:3, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      >The last really good Hollywood production I saw was The Score.

      "So I was talking to the low-level systems administrator on the other end and then he sends me this [pan to screenshot: 'nothing in life is free asshole']. He comes into my world and calls me an asshole. So I said, 'fuck you,' and he goes, 'fuck you,' and I was like, 'no, fuck you' and he was like, 'no, fuck you ' and I said..."

      One of my favorite scenes from any movie. Nothing like a stressed-out over-caffeinated fake-geek scene!

    • Canada == The Real Competition (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 10, 2003 @05:42AM (#5269459)
      One country you forgot to mention is Canada, which is attracting more and more filmmakers. The reason is that Canada provides a number [pwcglobal.com] of tax credits [pch.gc.ca] and incentives [netribution.co.uk] for production companies who film there and use Canadian labor. It's easy to spot movies filmed in Canada under the auspices of this program, as one of the requirements is that the Canadian government and the tax credit be mentioned in the movie credits. This mention is often the first thing that pops up when the movie ends, even before the cast (or "The Players," as many Canadian-filmed movies call them, that may also be a requirement).

      I'm seeing this with ever-increasing frequency. It's just plain cheaper to film a movie in Canada than it is to do it in Hollywood; it's often cheaper than filming elsewhere in the U.S. as well, even for fairly low budget stuff. You can't beat the tax breaks. British Columbia (among other locations) is becoming sort of a mini-Hollywood in its own right.

    • Please let me put forth my movie theory:

      The quality of a Hollywood movie varies proportionally to the distance of the primary set location from Hollywood.

      All movies where they don't even bother to leave L.A. to shoot always turn out crap. Getting away from L.A. means more money, effort, and diverse actors are being put into the movie. Sometimes you get a medium movie shot in Las Vegas.

      • Counterpoint (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Galvatron ( 115029 )
        Back to the Future was filmed entirely in the Universal back lot. Indeed, in the days before CG, such a movie requiring total control of the set would have been impossible to do anywhere but a Hollywood backlot.

        Maybe your law is true today, though. I'm not sure I can think of any movies made today that are filmed entirely on a back lot. I think those days are pretty much over.

      • Steve Martin's LA Story? Also wasn't Chinatown shot in LA?
    • ...it better be, with all the subsidies Lucas is getting from the City and COunty of San Francisco. Free water, sewer, fire, and police protection. They're basically paying Lucas to relocate to the Presidio.
    • Some of the films you mentioned (LOTR:TTT etc) were certainly not physically filmed in H'Wood but they were made with money from Hollywood studios.
      Lord George of Marin is an exception in that he finances his own movies. Most other big budget productions go through at least one (if not three) Hollywood studios to get financing. In some ways this does make them Hollywood movies.

  • Wow! (Score:5, Funny)

    by DarklordJonnyDigital ( 522978 ) on Monday February 10, 2003 @05:10AM (#5269395) Homepage Journal
    A special effects campus? Sounds fun! You walk in and every room is blue - the campus is added in using special effects. Watch out for the destroyer droids. ;)

  • Does this mean... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by DrLudicrous ( 607375 ) on Monday February 10, 2003 @05:11AM (#5269400) Homepage
    that the next Star Wars won't suck like the last two? I don't want to be a troll or flamebaiter here, but this seems like another step by Lucas towards films that exclusively rely on their special effects rather than plot. Whatever happened to the director that put together American Graffiti, and the original Star Wars trilogy, parts of which were heavily influenced by Kurosawa? I mean, I'd even take the George Lucas that produced the first two Indiana Jones movies, but this tripe of the last few years... ugh. No character development, no REAL excitement, nothing of substance underneath those spectacular special effects.

    But they ARE spectacular...

  • why the splurge ? (Score:1, Insightful)

    by vvikram ( 260064 )

    i am curious as to why everything has to be
    done so grandoise. is it an american thing ?

    i might be mistaken but living in the
    bay area for the last 3 years i see one thing:
    people going overboard mainly caused the dot com boom, caused all the moaning and crying now....the huge buildings, the parties, the vacations, the freebies. i believe the old school style was different and probably a little long lasting?

    how is this related to lucas : $300 million
    in presidio ? yes lucas inc. has a lot of
    money [so did enron:)] but presidio is prime property in SF and talk of $300 million consolidationa.....whew

    thanks

    • might have been cheaper (Score:4, Informative)

      by alizard ( 107678 ) <alizard.ecis@com> on Monday February 10, 2003 @06:22AM (#5269551) Homepage
      This might have been more cost-effective and a lot less hassle than trying to expand further in Marin County. There probably isn't that much commercial space in a single blob in the surrounding cities for sale either s buildings or developable.

      Particularly since Marin is wall-to-wall NIMBY and upscale enough to make it stick both politically and in local courts. Of course I'm an ex-resident.

      While land further north in Sonoma County would have been cheaper, there are certain resources in San Francisco that Lucas probably didn't want to be any further away from. The other case for the Presidio is that it's about as close to the Golden Gate Bridge as one can get, and the commute hassles involved with SF get more unpleasant as one gets further into the city... check a large scale street map and see where the freeways are and aren't to get the idea.

      Even post-dot-bomb, there probably isn't enough loose commercial space in the art/media community South of Market for the company physically to fit. 850K square feet is close to 20 acres.

      So if Lucas wants a reasonable commute and given the other parameters, this actually makes sense for him. Though possibly not for the park or the surrounding community.

      • I've never been to their facilities myself, but we do have a friend of the family who's designed a couple of the expansions Lucas has made in the past few years (also the new Moscone Center expansion). As I understand it from him, efficient use of space is a pretty low priority for their current location. That suggests they do have a fair amount of room to expand, unless there's some kind of a zoning restriction or something

        I think a more likely explanation is that when the Presidio went up for sale Lucas saw a chance to grab a piece of prime real estate. There are a limited number of companies in the Bay Area that would be able to use that space (Gap and Levi already have giant HQs, so they don't need more offices), and are also stable enough that the government wouldn't be worried about them going bankrupt midway through construction (which eliminated most of the .coms that were big at the time). Over time, as the area becomes more privatized and built up, Lucas can decide if he wants to hold onto the land, or sell it for a nice profit and reconsolidate in Marin.

        • Ahhh but what place has he gone to? He probably designed stuff for the Ranch which has plenty of space.

          I've been to ILM twice and the space is at premium there. They are really quite tight in there and even a few years ago considered expanding to Pixar's old grounds. The buildings in the campus are filled, and of course you need space for the stages and model shop. They didn't have enough room that they built these wood or prefabricated "bungalow" offices (over a dozen) outside the buildings so that they could fit everyone in there.

          I've heard that Lucas' ex, Marcia, owns quite a bit of land in San Rafael including where ILM is now and the rent is high (though I've never confirmed). Also an article a few years ago in one of those newspapers cited that Lucas would get some huge tax incentive or something like that by relocating to the Presidio.
      • There's plenty of empty space in finished buildings in SOMA. I work at 8th St. and Townsend, and several large buildings in the area have been completed in the last year (even though the boom was over, projects that had already started more or less had to be completed, thanks to clever time-limits on the building permits). But for that much space, they wouldn't have been a nice set of contiguous buildings, and it wouldn't be secluded like the Presido space appears to be.

        Although I'm not a big fan of "campus-style" workspaces, those are nice looking plans. And, hey, it would shorten my commute from the beach. I wouldn't mind working there :).

        mahlen

        Van Roy's Law:
        "An unbreakable toy is useful for breaking other toys."
      • Part of his goal, I'm sure, is to have a cool place to work near where the talent lives. I know several of the people in the CG industry in the bay area, and they tend to like living and working in the city. It's far more interesting place than Marin.

        However, South of Market, while probably cheap, would be way too gritty and ugly for a company as prestigious as Lucasfilm (say what you will about the Phantom Menace sucking, blah blah blah.... :) ). How can you spend your days laboring over the tiniest detail in a shot, when you've trained yourself to ignore all the ugliness and grime of your surroundings?

  • It will make Star Wars location shots cheaper. (Score:5, Funny)

    by mikeophile ( 647318 ) on Monday February 10, 2003 @05:19AM (#5269415)
    San Francisco has the only bars stranger than a Mos Eisley cantina.
    • Well, I frequent the bars around the Presidio, the closed beeing the 'Final Final' directly at Lombard gate. Haven't noticed anything especially strange around there apart from the unusually high percentage of false blondes in the marina district. It is actually a pretty nice area down there. People are friendly, educated, the local Safeway was for time the best place to meet women. There are actually many more women than guys living there. Here we go, this is the real reason those hopelessly geeky artists and programmers want to move from San Rafael to San Francisco city...

  • hmmm (Score:4, Funny)

    by Timesprout ( 579035 ) on Monday February 10, 2003 @05:49AM (#5269476)
    I would have thought that breaking ground in an earthquake zone is possibly not the most intelligent thing to do. Is the campus consuming earthquake to be the first special effect ?

  • interesting (Score:4, Funny)

    by Rhinobird ( 151521 ) on Monday February 10, 2003 @06:11AM (#5269521) Homepage
    From the sfgate article:
    Lucasfilm and Letterman Digital Arts Ltd., as the new venture is called

    Is that the Letterman of Late Night fame? I wonder. Imagine a Late Night home game. You as Dave shooting blue cards and pens at stupid pet tricks. Paul Schaffer as a help bot. The goal: rescue Mujiber and Sirajul.

  • Shome mishtake surely? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 10, 2003 @06:14AM (#5269529)
    rival Hollywood as a producer of movie magic.

    Surely raising the bar involves rivalling Weta Digital (NZ)?

  • new intergalactic language school (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Bob-o-Matic! ( 620698 ) <{moc.liamg} {ta} {sretep.trebor}> on Monday February 10, 2003 @06:16AM (#5269535) Homepage
    There used to be a language school at the POSF... Alas I studied and later taught Korean Language at the Presidio of Monterey instead... I really wish I could have been stationed there, as SF is such a great place. Well, Monterey isn't all that bad at all...

    Anyways, perhaps Lucas could reopen some of the schoolhouses, teaching Jedi Knights the language of the Sand People, which could be useful for recovering stolen droids, or, maybe the Stormtroopers could learn the language of the Jawas, also good for recovering stolen droids, or better yet, teach us mere mortals the Hut Language, so we too could someday acquire our own Princess Leia (dressed in the golden bikini w/chain and collar, of course!)

    All that aside, I'll bet it was a real bitch to have to run up and down all those hills for physical training... it is bad enough on the Presidio of Monterey!

  • Why San Francisco? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Galvatron ( 115029 ) on Monday February 10, 2003 @06:22AM (#5269553)
    I grew up here, so don't get me wrong, I like the city. But why on earth would you base anything movie related in San Francisco? It's just far enough away from LA that it's not convenient, but you still have to deal with an expensive US dollar and expensive US labor. Granted, being near LA is becoming less important, but why give yourself a deliberate disadvantage, no matter how small? It seems like either LA or overseas would both be better options. *shrug* Maybe Lucas is just too infatuated with having his own freeway exit :)
    • Because Lucas would rather live in Northern California. I guess they should move Pixar to the dark side as well, because it is having a hard time making "hits". BTW does anyone think it is funny that the creator of the Star Wars universe is relocating to the center of the Star Trek universe?

    • Re:Why San Francisco? (Score:2, Insightful)

      by catbutt ( 469582 )
      There are lots of CGI houses around here (Pixar and PDI are some of the bigger ones), and people in the industry move around from company to company a lot as jobs come and go. This is going to be far more of a special effects and CGI house than a full movie studio, and SF is a certainly as central a place for that as anywhere.
    • Because everyone that currently works for Lucasfilms lives in the area?

  • Why Bother? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Cyno01 ( 573917 ) <Cyno01@hotmail.com> on Monday February 10, 2003 @06:46AM (#5269597) Homepage
    Star Wars ('77) was amazing, and they managed fien back then with buckets of sawdust in the parking lot and all that. TPM and AotC have been so so and had multi-million dolar effects budgets. George lost it somewhere along the way and now sees FX as the makings of a good movie.

  • The fossil record (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 10, 2003 @06:53AM (#5269605)
    Bah. this geological era will be identifiable by the layer of Phantom Menace crap visible in the strata. Is that a fossil or another JarJar binks comemorative cup?

    Maybe in a few hundred million years, the evolved roaches will find enough stuff to start a religion over. Roach priests standing at the pulpit holding several fossilized action figures and having them do the force on each other.

    Then they'll clone George Lucas, breed him in a Mamma roach and then he'll be the only human being in a world full of sentiant roaches, and they'll all love him. He'll walk around with a robe that has a C-3PO insignia on one shoulder, and a roach on another, and be transported to all the popular sideshows.

    And then, maybe then, he'll decide maybe he should have stuck to being a filmaker rather than a Plastic Crap salesman.
  • At first I thought it said "George Lucas to remake The Presidio [imdb.com]"...

  • I know it's been said before... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 10, 2003 @07:45AM (#5269749)
    ... but Hollywood is no longer the standard for making movies. For making refuse flung at the long suffering or just plain fucking stupid morons who dont care, sure. That's Hollywood.

    But consider, ILM is already outside the Hollywood system. Inhouse effects by the major studios just do not come close, do they? Wh do these major studios go to to get effects? Mainly ILM. That must piss the studios off having the best fx guys in the USA working there, cause ILM owe nothing to anyone.

    So....

    If you look around, who matches ILM? I cant name them, but I know there is a fx house in Canada, one in Aust and of course WETA. None owned by studio per say, but most are bankrolled to some degree. WETA's now industry leading effects work was bankrolled by New Line, owned by AOL whom own Warner Bros and a few other studios. Hey, watch New Line especially now go to WETA instead of ILM. WETA basically is now New Line's defacto effects house. Presto, problem of having to deal with ILM fixed!

    Look, while it's cool as WETA has risen to genuinely challenge ILM in f/x (Competition will really drive effects tech forward I bet - watch these two try to outdo each other for the next few years), Lucas' present move is all about tryign to consolidate the f/x market. He senses real competition now with the smaller f/x groups doing things ILM have not done - or like WETA, beating ILM at their own game. For the studios, having these other f/x places is good, cause it gets them away from the ILM f/x strangle hold. Gives them choices or even the chance to basically have a f/x group basically of their own. You cant tell me New Line and WETA arent now quite closely associated. New LIne gave WETA shitloads of dollars to ramp up.

    I'd say whatever New Line paid, they got a bloody bargain. LOTR (FOTR and TTT) so far has earned 640 million in the USA, 1.2 billion intl and 750 million in VHS and DVD in the USA alone. With more DVD releases and another movie in the already paid for set, New LIne could have 10 billion in revenue when it's all over.
    • "I'd say whatever New Line paid, they got a bloody bargain."

      I can't remember the exact figure ($270m rings a bell), but I saw several reports which said that the Box Office alone on FOTR paid for the production of all three movies. So anything they make on the next two is almost pure profit (after prints and advertising).
    • Well there is still one studio owned VFX facility: Imageworks, by Sony. The other one The Secret Lab (formerly Dream Quest Images) was owned by Disney but Disney decided to close it in the end. Both are on the same level as ILM. Unfortunately it seems studios for the most part don't know how to manage internal VFX studios. Seems Sony learned the lesson and has more or less let Imageworks be.

      There are tons of VFX shops in Canada, most doing VFX TV work for a lot of American TV series like Stargate SG-1.

      As far as Weta and New Line. Well for one thing Weta will most probably be dissolved after Return of the King, or more precisely they will go to the same size before LOTR (like when they were doing stuff for Xena). After all how many big productions are gonna go to New Zeland. Unless Jackson can find them a steady stream of projects, maybe a Hobbit film and his long delayed King Komg version. But most probably most of the artists will go back home (many are from California) after the last LOTR film wraps. post production. In the future New Line would probably have to get bids like everyone else.

      Lucas present move is not about consolidating the VFX market, it's about consolidating his companies in one place. There is no ILM stranglehold. Beside ILm there are tonos of big and small shops like: Imageworks, Digital Domain, Tippett Studios, ESC, Rhythm and Hues, Matte World Digital, Hammerhead, Banned from the Ranch, Cinesite, etc. and lots more. THat is not counting some of the places elsewhere particularly in the UK which has a constant flux of projects, like: Framestore/CFC, Double Negative, Cinesite Europe, Glassworks, etc.

      I believe it was more actually like New Line gave Jackdon and the producers a ton of money and they used that money to ramp up Weta among other things. After all PJ is the owner. I doubt New Line has a stake in Weta, and if does it won't be the majority.

      • Well for one thing Weta will most probably be dissolved after Return of the King, or more precisely they will go to the same size before LOTR (like when they were doing stuff for Xena). After all how many big productions are gonna go to New Zeland. Unless Jackson can find them a steady stream of projects, maybe a Hobbit film and his long delayed King Komg version. But most probably most of the artists will go back home (many are from California) after the last LOTR film wraps. post production. In the future New Line would probably have to get bids like everyone else.

        Hmmm, I mostly disagree with what you've said here. Firstly, where the artists come from and where they might return to isn't exactly relevant. They're in New Zealand and working for WETA because WETA commisioned them to do a job.

        WETA has always been an independent company, and it was paid by New Line (through Peter Jackson's film budget) to do a job. With the success of the effects in LOTR, Richard Taylor now has project offers coming out of his ears. WETA can afford to pick and choose what it wants to do. No doubt some of this will include future Peter Jackson films, because Peter Jackson and Richard Taylor originally created WETA to produce effects for the films that Jackson wanted to make. It'll certainly include other things, though.

        When WETA gets future projects (and that's a certainty), they'll get those artists or other artists out again. It's not as if WETA doesn't have the reputation to get enough money now, and New Zealand has more going for it than a good job. It's also a pretty nice place to live.

        The other main thing is that the cost of production is very cheap compared with most parts of the US. In fact, the whole cost of living is cheap.

        • I think you misunderstand. I should have said that they will probably be reduced in size, not that they will disappear.

          There aer two Weta's here, the Workshop and Digital. Workshop, which makes prosthetics and props has at least another project for this year, Master and Commander. I don't doubt Taylor will continue it successfully.

          Weta Digital has hundreds of people in there at the moment. But after Return of the King they don't have anything lined up. They should have some bids by the Summer at the latest. The problem with big facilities, like Weta Digital, ILM and Imageworks is that they constantly need to have projects on the pipeline so that they can survive. After all you can't have dozens and dozens of highly paid artists just sitting idly.

          My argument was, and I've heard this from others at SIGGRAPH, is that after LOTR, Weta Digital will reduce in size. They of course will continue to do VFX for films by PJ, like The Freighteners, and some for others, say like what they did in Contact. It's not that Weta Digital has the money or not, but the ability to get enough projects to continually sustain itself in the long run at its current size. Other big studios like ILM and Imageworks have several projects already lined up for this and next year. What other projects does Weta Digital have lined up?

          All the key personnel are from the US: Jim Rygiel, Joe Letteri, etc. and many of the artists were hierd just project-based, not long term, and are on special work visas. When LOTR: ROTK finishes they'll most probably will have to go back.

          Yes Weta will go on, but the final size and shape are yet to be seen. We'll continue to see and admire them but I doubt it'l be as many "big" projects as the LOTR movies are. You just wait and see ;-).

  • developers && location (Score:3, Insightful)

    by SubtleNuance ( 184325 ) on Monday February 10, 2003 @08:13AM (#5269846) Journal
    to become economically self-sufficient while critics claim that level of commercialization is unnecessary

    By looking at this map you can understand why this particular park must have been chosen to 'sustain itself', the Land Development Community must have been chomping at the bit to get there hands on such a terrific piece of desirable property.
    • And yet Lucasfim is paying a measly $7 per square foot per year. You are right - in a city that lacks large spaces that are open to development - a chance to develop the Presidion *is* every company's dream. Even now when the city's economy is "depressed" construction projects are constantly filling the few empty lots available. So why, I wonder, is Georgie getting such a killer deal - a full $13/ft less than market cost? It sure makes me wonder who is really running this town...
  • Lucasfilm has broken ground on the new $300 million special effects campus that he hopes will help...

    Heh. Wonder what the anti-trust settlement would be like? Arm here. Leg there. Lots of Baby Egos running around wiping their asses with our dork dollars.

  • Office Complex in a National Park is a Bad Idea (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Robert McMillan ( 102977 ) on Monday February 10, 2003 @11:56AM (#5271307)
    This deal sets a very bad precident. The National Park Service was set up to preserve the outdoors, not spur the film industry and there is no other National Park with an 850,000 square foot office complex built on top of it. Though it's true that the Presidio does have a mandate to break even by 2013, a close analysis by a neighborhood newspaper [filbert.net] (I've reprinted it here with permission) has shown that this development is un-necessary. Many neigborhood associations [friendsoft...alpark.org] and the Sierra Club are against this deal.
    • I don't get it. Why does a park need to 'break even'? It's a frickin' *park*! Trees, grass, flowers, the odd lake, some birds... why does it need a honking great Hall of Jar-Jar dropping into it?

      Is this the state we're in now, where even the natural environment has to turn a profit to survive?

      BTW, I've been to Skywalker Ranch. It's *massive*, genuinely a case of "everything you see, I own" for the tubby beardo. Now, what tax breaks has Lucas been offered to move ILM et all to the Presidio rather than onto his own property?

      • Remember that the Presidio is a park as of only a few years ago, it was a military base before that. A lot of military bases in the bay area are being turned into parks, but it costs a lot to maintain them.

        So they decided to do something with it that would do good for the city and would not suck up a bunch of money. I don't see what is wrong with that.
    • But keep in mind it's not your usual National Park. It's not like they're going to be clearing old growth forests for this, paving over a river, and blocking a hiking trail with a highrise. It's a former military base that had some cheapo eyesore buildings (other on the former base are actually pretty nice, but the Letterman building had no real architectural value).

  • Impact on Park? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mrs clear plastic ( 229108 ) <allyn@clearplastic.com> on Monday February 10, 2003 @12:06PM (#5271415) Homepage
    I have just read the sfgate article as well as most of the comments on this site about the new Lucas Presidio headquarters.

    It's interesting to me to see that much of the conversation here has turned toward the movies themselves rather than the impacts, both positive and negative of the new facility on the park and the city.

    The article mentions that a group of residents have expressed concerns about the development. In my skimming of the comments, I did not notice any from that group.

    I would like to see what you folks think of the development itself (not the films or the characters) and it's relation to the park.

    Will it affect public access in any way? I know that Lucas has been very security conscous at it's Marin headquarters. Will this paranoia on Lucas's part adversely impace public access to the park?

    Will this add any more jobs to the Bay Area? Or just move jobs from one part to another?

    Being on federal land, will this project contribute anything to San Francisco's tax coffers?

    Mark

    • Re:Impact on Park? -- None (Score:5, Insightful)

      by zeitgeist_chaser ( 607006 ) on Monday February 10, 2003 @01:27PM (#5272121)
      As a resident of San Francisco, I feel I should point out some things that were not made clear in the article. First, the Lucas facility will not be in any of the beautiful wooded park land that most people associate with Presidio National Park. Rather, it is right under the 101 freeway overpass and built on the site of an old Army hospital that has been nothing more than pavement and abandoned buildings for decades. It is on the edge of the park and will not affect any major throughfares into or through the park. None of the parks wilderness is threatened by the project. You bring up a good point about paranoia and security. The Lucas companies are very security conscious to the point of paranoia. Granted, some of that is justified as they have had a great deal of problems with people trying to break into their facilities, fans rummaging through the garbage, etc. I don't see security being as much an issue as it is easier to secure a small group of tightly knit bulidings than many locations in Marin that share office space or parking lots with other businesses. The complex doesn't envellop any major roads into the park, so I doubt that there would be any effect of park traffic due to security concerns. Overall, I think the move is a positive one for the Presidio. They get a non-polluting business on the edge of their property to help keep them self sufficient. None of the park will be ruined by the development and access to the park should not be affected. Sounds like a win-win situation to me.
      • Good posting. Thank you very much for clerifying what is happening. You are right. I did not know that this project is taking place on a part of the grounds that has been unused for so long and what seems to have been almost an eyesore.

        Mark
    • I'm with the group mentioned in that story, the THD. Here's a reprint [filbert.net] of a story we ran on why this is a bad deal. Here's a San Francisco Chronicle story [sfgate.com] about the apparent conflict of interest (you have to scroll halfway down the page) behind the deal.

  • Sellout at the Presidio (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    This is a huge sellout of Federal land, engineered by SF Mayor Willie Brown. It's a long, sad story. This is one of the most beautiful vista points within a city anywhere in the world. From that spot, you can see the bay, the Golden Gate bridge, the bay islands, and the mountains in Marin, but almost no urban clutter. Lucas is putting up an office building.

    "Groundbreaking" for this project took place months ago. Letterman Army Hospital was demolished last year, and pilings are already being driven for the new Lucas buildings. I was up there last Friday. What happened this week was just a photo op.

  • Economics of parks (Score:2, Interesting)

    by RoufTop ( 94425 )
    Can somebody explain to me why a national park needs to be economically self-sufficient? It can't possibly cost taxpayers more than a few pennies a year to run the thing. I always thought people willingly paid for the upkeep of national parks.
    • First of all, I agree that it's ridiculous to ask it to break even.... but I can see some of the rationale. The Presidio is NOT a national park, it's part of the Golden Gate National recreation area. It's NOT a pristine woodland, but rather a former millitary base. Money is needed to continue the de-comissioning... building facilities for park goers, demolishing hazardous buildings, keeping up historic buildings. There's no good way to charge admission to it, and the city of SF has the expense of golden gate park to worry about.
    • It depends. If it's a park that has nothing but trees and bears, it's pretty easy to maintain. i fit has buildigns to keep from crumbling, it's a bit harder.
  • Coincidentally the NY Times ran an article [nytimes.com] about how tought the animation industry has become, especially for Disney.
  • Is it just me, or does one or two of the buildings (particularly the one near the water) look like they come out of Naboo from Ep I & II
    • You're talking about the drawing on the Letterman Digital Arts Center home page? Ironically, those are classic SF structures, the Palace of Fine Arts, and have nothing to do with Lucas or the new structures that are being built. But now that you mention it, they do look like they're from Naboo. Maybe _that_ why Lucas wanted to set up shop in the Presidio. ;-)
    • Probably a coincidence. Part of the deal entailed that the buildings should architecturally fit the surroundings. After all part of the Bay Area influences are Spanish, and some of Naboo (like the space port in Ep. 2) were filmed and based in Seville, Spain.
  • We have a glut of office space and a lack of housing, but Lucasfilm needs to build a "new campus". Why don't they just lease some dot-bomb office space in Redwood City? Oh, I forgot, that wouldn't be cool enough for a "creative company".

  • Two things (Score:4, Interesting)

    by blair1q ( 305137 ) on Monday February 10, 2003 @02:21PM (#5272618) Journal
    1. Lucas doesn't operate in reality. They make billions off of mickle investment. Where and how is unimportant.

    2. Film isn't a significant industry*. One studio won't change the fortunes of more than a few hundred citizens. And George gets most of the profit from his companies. Banking on this to revive a city's economy is irrational. It's political hype.

    * - the sum of the box-office grosses for every movie released in 2002 was on the order of Intel's 4th Quarter. Adding home video doubles it, but by then you're looking elsewhere on the financial page.
  • I think this will have a great impact on the park. The old Letterman Hospital that it's replacing was both an eyesore and an environmental hazard. The only sleazy part I've heard about the deal is that it exempts Lucas from any city taxes, as the park is not officially part of San Francisco.

    dan shahin
    hijinx comics [wackyhijinx.com]
    The World's Greatest Comic Book Store!
  • ...the United Federation of Planets (as in Star Trek) will some day build their HQ as is portrayed in the films. This is his way of making sure that won't happen.

    (/sarcasm)

    Dolemite

Slashdot Top Deals

"How to make a million dollars: First, get a million dollars." -- Steve Martin

Close