SAN RAFAEL, Calif. — “Five down, one to go,” George Lucas said, settling into a chair in the John Steinbeck room at his secluded Skywalker Ranch. “And I'm working on the next one now.”

        Lucas, who will turn 58 this week, is in the final day of a press junket for “Star Wars: Episode II — Attack of the Clones,” which opens Thursday on 5,800 screens. The fifth of a projected six-film series, “Episode II” continues the story of Anakin Skywalker, who will eventually be transformed from a Jedi knight into that darkest of villains, Darth Vader.

        Three years in the making, the film continues a story Lucas first conceived for the original “Star Wars” in 1977. The original trilogy of “Star Wars” films concluded in 1983; Lucas renumbered them Episodes IV-VI, then reignited the craze with the 1999 release of “Star Wars: Episode I —The Phantom Menace” and the promise of the next two installments in 2002 and 2005.

        But, as he noted in an interview, when he initially decided to return to directing after a respite of more than 20 years, it wasn't a foregone conclusion that “Star Wars” would be the first film on his dance card.

        QUESTION: Did you always plan to make these prequels?

        ANSWER: Originally, I didn't expect to. After “Return of the Jedi,” I was burned out on “Star Wars.” These stories were so complex and I didn't have the technology to do them the way I wanted. When I decided to go back to directing, I wasn't sure that these were the films I'd do.

        Q: What made you decide?

        A: I always liked the story of Anakin's fall from grace. And, at that point, I did feel the technology was sufficient that I could get it done. There were other films I wanted to make. But I knew doing (the prequels) was a 10-year commitment. If I did the others first, I'd be 65 and looking at 10 years of “Star Wars.”

        Q: How do you deal with the expectations for this film? Millions of fans around the world are anxiously awaiting the film and have high expectations.

        A: I'm like anybody in this one-of-a-kind situation, whether it's a pitcher or a quarterback or a rock star. I want to do what it is I do. The fans are important, but you've got to call it the way you see it. That's the job. What I want to do is tell the story. It will always be controversial. But the manager of a baseball team will get as much controversy as a director.

        Q: How did you respond to the critical reaction to “Episode I”?

        A: The critical reaction was the same as to all the others: about 60 percent positive and 40 percent negative. I sort of expect to get grief from a number of critics. They think I'll change from one movie to the next. But it's all one movie. This is just one part of it. And they always complain about the same things: that the acting is old-fashioned. And the dialogue. But that's the style I'm doing. It's always going to be the same.

        Q: But there were other criticisms as well.

        A: I knew going in that the fans would be upset because I wasn't starting with the Clone Wars. But I have a story to tell. The first act is always the boring act. You're introducing the characters, setting up the plot, laying pipe for what comes later. You have to do that if you're going to tell the story. You have to know about Anakin's relationship to Obi-Wan and his relationship to the Jedi. These are all important issues you need to know for the story to work better.

        If I'm going to end up with him killing everyone, then you have to understand that he was a good kid. That's what Luke taps into at the end of “Return of the Jedi.” In this episode, you can still see the little boy in Anakin. But you can begin to see the Darth Vader side as well. In the next one, Anakin will be much more mature. It's a transition that Luke taps into. There are a lot of scenes in Episodes I and VI that link.

        Q: Yet you took your lumps for “Episode I” anyway.

        A: Each of these movies is one part of a six-part story. I'm focusing on the larger picture. But critics don't focus on that. They write about individual movies. Still, I think a lot of people will like this one better because the plot thickens.

        Q: You and Steven Spielberg were singled out in Peter Biskind's book, “Easy Riders, Raging Bulls,” for creating films in the late 1970s that, according to Biskind, triggered a blockbuster mentality at the studios.

        A: That whole idea that we killed Hollywood is so naive and misinformed — like we invented the blockbuster. That's ridiculous; there have been blockbusters since the day they invented movies. “Intolerance,” “Birth of a Nation.” Every year there was another silent-era blockbuster. “Gone with the Wind”? The blockbuster has existed throughout film history; it wasn't invented in the 1970s. But even before us, there was “"The Godfather,” then “The Exorcist.”

        We're not successful because we make a certain kind of emotional movie. We're successful because we love movies. And we love movies that get people emotionally involved. The idea that our movies are mindless amusement-park rides comes from somebody focusing on the literary part of the medium, who gets upset that we've tried to shift things over to the emotional side of cinema.

Zoo unleashes 'Frogs'
Jammin' on Main strong again
Mighty Diamonds deliver high-octane reggae
Latest Star Wars brings digital video to mainstream
Lucas Q&A answers Star Wars critics
Star Wars: Episode II leaves fans begging for more
Consistent writing defines classics
Muse makes fun music, but with a message
New friend fits into whirlwind weekend
Pavarotti addresses fans after cancellation
Youngster scoops ailing Pavarotti
Fit Bits
Low-carbohydrate diet may not keep weigh off
Use body fat numbers, not weight, to chart progress
Hocking Valley artisans helping with tourism campaign
'Spider-Man' stays on top
WCET VP dies
Get to it