The Ecuse: "It's a film about a duck from outer space... It's not supposed to be an existential experience... We're supposed to have fun with this concept, but for some reason reviewers weren't able to get over that problem" - Gloria KatzIf you want the real explanation for why Howard The Duck was so poor, look to the grotesque, moronic characters, wooden performances and inane "jokes" of the Star Wars prequel trilogy, and their creator George Lucas. Why wouldn't the screen version of Marvel's mutant water bird made by the creator of Jar Jar Binks completely miss the point of the source and make the character hard to love? It stands to reason: Lucas' sense of humour resides on an entirely different planet to the rest of us, and he seems to neither notice nor care. The worst point of this excuse is not that it suggests that films should be allowed to be bad because they seek only to be entertaining on a base level - which in itself is pretty damaging - it's that Katz conspires to completely miss the point of Marvel's source. Yes it is supposed to be an existential experience, chiefly because it's about a duck from outer space trying to find out who he is and where he fits in. Proof if ever it were needed that the film-makers basically just ignored everything Howard was about, and made the film because someone thought a talking duck was side-splittingly funny.