Disney's Titling Problem With Its Star Wars Movies

An anonymous reader writes "When George Lucas produced his Star Wars movies, he subtitled them 'Episode I,' 'Episode IV' etc. But that style will become inappropriate and confusing with Disney producing a new Star Wars movie each year, observes blogger Christopher Knight: 'Those were individual chapters of one story in an epic fantasy setting. And it suffices for that one multi-generational epic on film. Except now, there is the intent to produce several stories in that same setting. And they aren't necessarily going to pertain to the tale of the Skywalker family from Anakin to Luke to whoever it will be in the next trilogy.' Knight's solution is to retroactively amend the titles of Episodes I through IX to reflect it being the Skywalkers' saga, just as Lucas retroactively subtitled the first movie to be Episode IV."

Comments

Peh.

[Black Parrot]

They should just name them after the action figure each one is made to sell.

Re: Peh.

[Anonymous Coward]

You misspelled. "Pez".

Re:Peh.

[pitchpipe]

Jar Jar Strikes Back??? NOOOOOOOOOOOO...

Re:Peh.

[Billly Gates]

Well better than Darth mouse!

Re:Peh.

[MightyMartian]

Meesa thinking a movie about da Binks family is mooie mooie good. Nowsa that I'm a traitorous bastard who sold da Jedi and da Republic up da river, it could be called Revenge of da Binks!

Re:Peh.

[Anonymous Coward]

Would pay to see a grimdark Jar Jar forced to choose between his love for country and the power required to protect it, slipping farther into darkness until he becomes the befouler of the very homeworld he sought to defend.

Re:Peh.

[Anonymous Coward]

Jar Jar as the new Sith Lord!

Re:Peh.

[gagol]

How about Mickey Skywalker?

Re:Peh.

[HornWumpus]

Jar Jar grows up to be Jabba the hut. Radioactive pizza/time machine/black hole/kessel run if need be for story line.

Re:Peh.

[Patch86]

Radioactive pizza/time machine/black hole/kessel run if need be for story line.

I find your ideas intriguing an would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

Re:Peh.

[dintech]

Since they've already gone into full corporate sell-out mode, I suggest Disney take some advise from Electronic Arts. Similar to the Madden, NHL and NBA games, they should just name it Star Wars 2014, Star Wars 2015 etc. At least it's not going to make things worse.

Re:Peh.

[jellomizer]

Why not just drop the Episode nonsense from the movies.

It isn't like anything you will do will stop a bunch of Raving Sci-Fi lunatics from complaining about it anyways. Even though they complain about it they are going to see it anyways.

That said, the biggest problem with Ep I-III, wasn't the special effects or Jar-Jar, but the fact we never really liked Anakin Skywalker. Yes we knew he will go to the darkside, but I wanted a character who I didn't want to go to the Dark Side, and the transition of Jedi Knight to Sith Lord should have been a tragic one. Not
"Oh you are the Sith Master!"
"Yea, wanna join the Dark Side, I'll give you a cool name"
"Sure, sounds good, let me throw Samuel L. Jackson out the window"
"Good, your name is now Darth Vader"
"Sweet!"

Re:Peh.

[TWiTfan]

Meesa feel moy moy hate!

Re:Peh.

[CimmerianX]

"Sweet".... "Plus you get to choke a bitch with your mind" "Awesome" "And you get to wear a cape" "That's just boss"

Re:Peh.

[shmlco]

The concept was for Anikin to be a classic tragic hero. The implementation, however, gave us a spoiled, whiney teenager. The original stories had heart and pretty good character interaction and humor. The later stories gave us stilted dialog, and Jar-Jar Binks doing slapstick sight gags.

Re:Peh.

[Anonymous Coward]

The big problem is nobody had any character development. The audience couldn't connect to the characters and therefore didn't give a crap what happened to them. It was actually somewhat of a relief when whiny Anakin ended up limbless and burning (I had a big grin on my face). When Padme died, it was a "meh" moment; I didn't care about either of them. Lucas really messed up by even making Episode I because the entire thing was a big waste of time. We didn't need to see Anakin as a toddler. We didn't need a comic relief character like Jar-Jar when we already had C-3PO. We certainly didn't need a completely worthless character like Qui-Gon Jinn. There also should have been far fewer Jedi, making them much more rare and individually more awesome, but also weaker as a whole.

Episode I should have presented Anakin as a likeable, young adult and his entire past as a slave on Tatooine summed up as a reflective moment in a couple of minutes. Obi-Wan should have already been a Jedi Master, Anakin his Padawan, Padme a fellow Padawan and Palpatine a member of the Jedi high council when viewers are first introduced to them. That would have allowed a lot more time to show Obi-Wan, Anakin and Padme's relationship build and become something that viewers would begin to develop an attachment to. Obi-Wan and Anakin get into some scrapes together, while Padme and Anakin have a realistically portrayed chemistry immediately, culminating in them hooking up at the end of the movie. Palpatine, in his own arrogance and madness, commissions the creation of a secret clone army to seize power.

Episode II should have furthered Obi-Wan, Anakin and Padme's development while also, ever so subtly, hinting at Anakin's temptation towards the dark side as he learns more about his own extraordinary abilities. Luke and Leia are born, creating an even stronger bond between Anakin and Padme. Palpatine unleashes his clone army and those loyal to him upon the galaxy, killing off most of the Jedi and getting his forces entrenched. At the end of the movie, Obi-Wan and Anakin confront Palpatine, but are handily defeated. Anakin gets captured but Obi-Wan escapes. This fuels Anakin's desire to become more powerful as quickly as possible, while giving him a twisted respect for Palpatine and a misplaced disrespect for his own master, Obi-Wan. Palpatine uses his power to begin warping Anakin's mind, construction of the Death Star commences and the Empire is formed.

Episode III should begin a number of years later, perhaps five years. Led by Yoda, the last remaining Jedi and newly formed Rebellion wages a guerilla war upon the Empire. Obi-Wan has spent most of his time searching for Anakin, but is greatly hindered by the current state of the galaxy. In the meanwhile, Anakin tracks down Padme and she contacts Obi-Wan to tell him the news. Anakin and Padme spend the night together, but after years of Sith indoctrination and training, he attempts to take her and the children away in order to present them to Palpatine. When Padme resists Anakin's seduction, he attempts to just take the kids, forcing Padme to attack him. Out of pure reflex, Anakin kills Padme. Obi-Wan shows up to find Anakin still there, distraught over what he's done. When Obi-Wan tries to appeal to the good still in Anakin, the two get into a heated argument over Anakin's perception of Obi-Wan and the Jedi being weak next to the power of the dark side. They battle and Obi-Wan ends up severely wounding Anakin. Obi-Wan takes the children and Anakin off-planet to the hidden Rebel based where Yoda is currently located. Upon arrival, Anakin is placed under medical care. Unknown to them all, Palpatine has been tracking Anakin through the force and an entire fleet of Star Destroyers shows up, bombarding the whole planet. The Rebels are forced to flee and everyone gets separated. Luke ends up on a transport with Obi-Wan, who takes him to be cared for by a couple on Tatooine. Leia ends up on a transport with Bail Organa. Anakin ends up on a transport that is captured by the Empire. The Rebel planet is wiped of all life. Yoda, filled with guilt and feeling responsible for what happened, becomes a recluse on Dagobah. Under Palpatine's order, Anakin is rebuilt into the Darth Vader we all know. Palpatine cackles evilly.

Re:Peh.

[HornWumpus]

Sing sing prison is 'up the river' from new york. That's generally being 'sent up the river' though.

Re:Peh.

[LMariachi]

“Sent up the river” refers to being sent to prison (originating from Sing Sing, as you point out,) but “sold down the river,” which has come to mean betrayal, referred to the slave trade on the MIssissippi. http://www.grammarphobia.com/blog/2011/11/river.html
 

Just rename everything

[anarcobra]

The movies formerly known as star wars.

Re:Just rename everything

[aliquis]

"Camel-frog guy and laser sabers" is my suggestion.

I don't know the Star wars saga good enough but maybe:

"Camel-frog guy and the creation of the Israeli state" or something such would work to. Conflict and the princess involved somehow.

Retroactively?

[sayfawa]

Didn't the original scrolling intro always say "episode 4"?

Re:Retroactively?

[CaitlinAnnPatton]

Didn't the original scrolling intro always say "episode 4"?

Not in the original showing of the film. The "Episode IV" part was added later when the film's popularity made it viable for a sequel. OR something like that.

Re:Retroactively?

[Anonymous Coward]

Didn't the original scrolling intro always say "episode 4"?

Nope, that came later.

Re:Retroactively?

[ericloewe]

The very original release just read Star Wars, from what I've seen, with the "Episode 4" added later

Re:Retroactively?

[Ghostworks]

It did. The idea as Lucas originally described it in his draft (back when it was called "Journal of the Whills") was that it was like picking a book off the shelf and finding it was the fourth volume of a history series. (While he said that later, it seems more likely that it was actually more like coming into a Buck Rogers serial halfway through.) Perhaps the original poster is referring to the way it was subtitled retroactively _on_posters_. That is, until Episode I came out, it was just "Star Wars", with sequels "(Star Wars:) the Empire Strikes Back" and "(Star Wars:) Return of the Jedi".

Episodes 1 through 3 are a lot more modern idea than Lucas wants many to believe. He never really talked about them until he was into his second sequel. There was likely no master design for a 9-part arc as he described. There was just a convenient gap left by an earlier gimmick.

None of this really changes the point though: Star Wars doesn't have a title problem. Well, other than the fact it keeps changing titles on movies that already exist, a problem this proposed scheme exacerbates. Nobody cares if a Star Wars movie follows the Skywalkers anymore than they care if every videogame, novel, cartoon, and comic follow them. Star Wars is not a brand. And while that makes it ever so slightly awkward for the movie to call itself "Star Wars 7", they never did that in the first place, and likely won't do it by the time the movie has a real title. So who cares? Star Wars: Number-free Title.

Re:Retroactively?

[sjames]

Why not change the title considering that he keeps changing the movie itself?

Re:Retroactively?

[Animats]

Didn't the original scrolling intro always say "episode 4"?

It did when I saw the original theatrical release on opening day in1978. Seeing that go by, I thought they were showing a serial out of order by mistake.

Re:Retroactively?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it did not. You are misremembering it because it was changed and has been seen in that form so many times since.

The Episode IV moniker was added to the film later.

Re:Retroactively?

[MightyMartian]

I guess it all depends on which version of reality Lucas is peddling at any given time. One day it was three trilogies, then two, now it's nine trilogies plus unrelated add-on movies. Why, by the time Disney is done, the Christmas Special will return its rightful canon place and we'll have full length Wookie porn flicks; "Revenge of Chewbacca's 36 Inch Dong!"

Re:Retroactively?

[Chris Mattern]

It did when I saw the original theatrical release on opening day in1978.

Except that Star Wars premiered in 1977. And it did not say "Episode 4" when it did. I was there, and it didn't. It did get a 1978 re-release, but "Episode IV" was not placed into the title crawl until the 1981 re-release (after The Empire Strikes Back proclaimed itself "Episode V" in its original 1980 release).

Re:Retroactively?

[icebike]

Why change anything?

We still reference dates with BC/AD, what wrong with negative Episode numbers, and even decimal versions if they decide to squeeze something between two others?

Or betting yet, just let it end, and use their imagination to come up with something totally new and different rather than changing one digit in the title and slapping a brand new copyright date on the same old movie.

Re: Retroactively?

[_merlin]

IIRC the "Episode IV" line was added in 1981 for the Laserdisc and cinematic re-release. It definitely wasn't there in the '70s.

Re:Retroactively?

[Anonymous Coward]

I saw it in the UK the first time it came out, and it definitely said Episode IV. I remember trying to find the first names of the first 3 episodes in the library.

Re:Retroactively?

[plover]

No, it did not. You are misremembering it because it was changed and has been seen in that form so many times since.

The Episode IV moniker was added to the film later.

He's obviously confused or deranged. Next he'll be claiming something outlandish, like "Han shot first" or something equally absurd.

Re:Retroactively?

[nedlohs]

It's amazing how bad human memory is. Unless you had a time machine, that never happened.

Re:Retroactively?

[OhANameWhatName]

It did when I saw the original theatrical release on opening day in1978

Karma: Geek Cred +1

Re:Retroactively?

[Anonymous Coward]

More like geek cred -1. The movie came out in May 1977 and did not have any numbers or subtitles.

Re:Retroactively?

[thereitis]

How do novels do it? There must be plenty of Star Wars novels out there.

Re:Retroactively?

[Anubis IV]

More like a reason to strip his geek card. Not only was he off by a year (opening day was May 25, 1977), but he's outright wrong or misremembering the episode number being there. They didn't add "Episode IV: A New Hope" until Empire Strikes Back came out a few years later (it wasn't even there for the 1978 re-release, which is what he may be thinking of). The original film, when first released, was simply titled "Star Wars" and nothing else. No episode numbers, no "A New Hope", no nuthin'.

Re:Retroactively?

[Darinbob]

The studio did say 9 very early on, after the initial release. However based on how they scripted things on the fly in the next two films, even changing major story lines, I seriously doubt Lucas had things planned out beyond a rough idea. The first movie is clearly a standalone one, and roughly follow the thematics parts of The hidden Fortress instead of being open ended.

Re:Retroactively?

[gl4ss]

I saw it in the UK the first time it came out, and it definitely said Episode IV. I remember trying to find the first names of the first 3 episodes in the library.

was the uk on the original release lineup?

Re:Retroactively?

[Patch86]

I guess it all depends on which version of reality Lucas is peddling at any given time. One day it was three trilogies, then two, now it's nine trilogies plus unrelated add-on movies.

Not to be pedantic, but 9 trilogies would be 27 films.

Re:Retroactively?

[Aboroth]

From http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0076759/faq#.2.1.7


Why has the title been changed? I always remember it as "Star Wars."


When the film was originally released in 1977, it was simply referred to as Star Wars, though supposedly, George Lucas had intended to put Episode IV: A New Hope in the opening crawl, but 20th Century Fox didn't want Lucas to do so because they thought it would confuse audiences, since there were never any other episodes released before it. After the commercial success of the original Star Wars, Lucas was able to continue with the multi-film epic he originally envisioned. The Empire Strikes Back was released in 1980 and bore the full title of Star Wars, Episode V, The Empire Strikes Back in the title crawl, although it was referred to only as The Empire Strikes Back as the title of its commercial release. It was the "Episode V" appearing in the opening crawl which originally confused those members of the audience who had not been made aware of what Lucas was explaining, that the original "Star Wars" was now intended to be the 4th part of a nine-part series (since cut to 6). The original "Star Wars" was re-released in 1981 with a new title: "Star Wars, Episode IV, A New Hope" in the title crawl. This title appeared on all subsequent re-releases and versions from then on (though the original version was released on DVD in 2006, which shows the title crawl in its original form). All subsequent Star Wars films have followed this new naming structure, although "Star Wars" often refers specifically to the 1977 film.

Re:Retroactively?

[wonkey_monkey]

Then you didn't see it in the cinemas on opening day in 1978. Or you're not remembering the opening day screening.

Or he doesn't live in the US, like 96% of the people on the planet.

Re:Retroactively?

[wonkey_monkey]

Yeah, okay, or he lives in one of Uruguay, Hong Kong, West Germany, Ireland, South Korea, Japan, India, Iceland, or Iran.

Re:Retroactively?

[wonkey_monkey]

Don't get people started. The big one in Star Wars land is those who claim they saw Luke throw the grappling twice, missing the first time.

Re:Retroactively?

[mwvdlee]

They just make up an original title and fit it into the timeline without a need for serial numbers.

To me there seems no good reason to deviate; release episodes VII, VIII and IX, then don't use episode numbers for the rest of the movies.
Considering Disney plans to release a new one every year it's not like people are going to care much for any release beyond the "planned" third trilogy.

Re:Retroactively?

[_Shad0w_]

Yes; it came out in December 1977, not in 1978. It also didn't say Episode IV, that was added in 1981 after ESB was released the previous year with the Episode V label on it.

Re:Retroactively?

[Skrapion]

Time to have the protocol droid's mind wiped.

Re:Retroactively?

[RaceProUK]

I thought the big argument was who shot first, Han or Greedo?

Re:Retroactively?

[gsslay]

I think it's clear to everyone but the most obsessive of fans that Lucas has been following the methodology of "making shit up as I go along" the entire time.

The idea that he had planned out an entire series of movies and over-arching plot, and that we were started somewhere in the middle of the saga in 1977, is appealing to fans, but frankly laughable.

"Star Wars" was a simple space opera that was a great success on that basis. As movie after movie gets added to the pile, its limitations become increasingly obvious and the plot is a mess that creaks under the weight of its own implausibilities and inconsistencies. Hence the continual re-hashing.

Re: Retroactively?

[multimediavt]

Citation please! I clearly remember "Episode IV" appearing in the scrolling intro to the original, 1977 release and until someone can give me non-anecdotal evidence to the contrary I am sticking with what I know I saw, TYVM. Now, I did go see it again in 1978, and 1981 multiple times because that's what us kids did those days; play arcade games and see how many times we could watch Star Wars. I do not remember anything changing in those screenings from one release to another. AFAIK, Lucas didn't change them until he did the new space FX.

Re: Retroactively?

[Sqweegee]

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0076759/alternateversions

It list all the alterations ever made, which makes for a very long list. There was a whole lot of changes made between the 77, 78, and 81 releases but are hidden in with all the new ones. Terrible record keeping and Lucas' habit of destroying old versions and footage makes it tough to watch the old releases, side by side. I remember seeing different versions of the opening crawl.

"When the original theatrical version was first released, it was simply titled Star Wars.The opening crawl was changed to "Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope" during the 1981 re-release. According to Sterling Hedgpeth, Lucasfilm film archivist: "I found a box with all the positive elements for the 'revised' opening crawl, and the assorted trim boxes are dated from October through December 1980. This, then, is consistent with the view that Episode IV: A New Hope was added for the first time to the opening crawl for the April 10, 1981 re-release." "

Re:Retroactively?

[MrYingster]

It did not. It was added on in 1981 after ESB was released. Here is an article on Wookiepedia that explains it. http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Opening_crawl

From Wookiepedia: "When originally released in 1977, the first film was simply titled Star Wars, as Lucas was not certain if he would follow the film with a sequel. Following The Empire Strikes Back, the film was re-released in 1981 with the subtitle 'Episode IV: A New Hope'. The original version, without the subtitle, was not released until the 2006 limited edition DVDs. "

Re:Retroactively?

[Chris Mattern]

Mine was "Close the blast doors, close the blast doors...*open the blast doors!". I was really surprised when I was talking about the movie with some younger fans and they didn't remember that moment, because it had been edited out of the release they'd seen; apparently it wasn't on the first home releases either. While Lucas has done some awful edits (he should be strung up just for making Greedo shoot first), one of the good things he did was put that back into the latest editions.

Re: Retroactively?

[N0Man74]

Citation please! I clearly remember "Episode IV" appearing in the scrolling intro to the original, 1977 release and until someone can give me non-anecdotal evidence to the contrary I am sticking with what I know I saw,

I can't tell if you are just extremely arrogant, or just clueless as to just how incredibly susceptible the human brain is to false memories. I don't even trust all of my own memories, let alone yours.

Re:Retroactively?

[mister2au]

Or in the UK in a city that debuted it after 27th December 1977 ... not really that difficult to work out !

FYI - the UK release was London only until January 1978

Re: Retroactively?

[TWiTfan]

You only believe you did. Memory is fluid, and yours has changed. The "Episode IV" was NOT there at the premiere. In 1977, they hadn't even begun planning a sequel, much less the idea of a "trilogy of trilogies." It was there in the 1981 re-release.

Re:Retroactively?

[markhb]

He definitely threw at least twice. I have a friend who remembers Luke missing twice, then landing it on the third try, but I don't clearly remember that one way or the other. (I didn't see it on release day, but I did first see it during the summer of 1977.)

Re:Retroactively?

[wonkey_monkey]

And yet there is no evidence of it ever being cut, or even shot, that way. Ever. It's one of those things which has seeped its way into people's memories and ends up getting remembered as fact. I used to have a perfect example from my own life, but ironically I can't remember what it was.

Numerous studies have shown how easy it is to plant false memories of events that occurred minutes ago, let alone decades.

Re:Retroactively?

[rwise2112]

It did when I saw the original theatrical release on opening day in1978.

Except that Star Wars premiered in 1977. And it did not say "Episode 4" when it did. I was there, and it didn't. It did get a 1978 re-release, but "Episode IV" was not placed into the title crawl until the 1981 re-release (after The Empire Strikes Back proclaimed itself "Episode V" in its original 1980 release).

1981 according to Wikipedia - the source of all knowledge in the galaxy and other galaxies far far away.

Re: Retroactively?

[bonehead]

I don't even trust all of my own memories, let alone yours.

Heh, I have memories that I *know* are false. And can prove so conclusively. Yet they seem absolutely true to me, while I can't recall the version of events as they really happened no matter how hard I try.

And, no, I'm not talking about situations where chemical influence was a factor.

Re:Retroactively?

[jedidiah]

Greedo initiated the classical "quick draw" from a Western.

Han responded in kind.

If you want to get all modern about it, Greedo was also guilty of assault with a deadly weapon. That's a legally valid reason for defending yourself (or others) in most sane jurisdictions.

Nothing remotely evil on Han's part.

Although it did say something about the kind of people he associated with.

Re:Retroactively?

[Gonoff]

"Not in the original showing of the film."

When I first saw it - 1979 or 1980 - it was called episode 4 not IV. But that may have been the Scottish dislike of pretentiousness.

Re:Retroactively?

[Hognoxious]

I don't which is sadder - that you know, or that you care.

Re:Retroactively?

[typo-lfm]

I thought it was there in the original too. I remember being let down before it even started that it was some sort of series. I don't know how these other people can be so certain it wasn't there, they could have missed it. Its not like they have a copy of the original screening to verify it.

Re:Retroactively?

[Hognoxious]

In those days the delay between US and UK releases was huge. Sailing ships were at the mercy of the weather, steamships were in their infancy and the only relaible thing about them was that they were unreliable. Then there was the redone dialog (adding "please" and "thank you" all over) and conversion for right-handed projectors.

And don't get me started about Australia. They have to reshoot the whole movie in a mirror because the spools turn the other way. In fact they still haven't got round to doing "Cocktail", which many say is a mercy.

Re:Retroactively?

[oreiasecaman]

Wookie porn flicks; "Revenge of Chewbacca's 36 Inch Dong!"

Will it have subtitles?

Re:Retroactively?

[Anubis IV]

The first Star Wars release with an episode number was "Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back" in 1980, so it's entirely possible that you're remembering that one, since it doubtless would have engendered a similar response from the audience. Episode IV was re-released the next year with "Episode IV: A New Hope" added to the intro crawl.

As for it being an urban myth, it must be a pretty pernicious one, since George Lucas repeated it as fact in the audio commentary for the 2004 DVD release. Not to mention that every single source I've seen backs it up as fact. The best writeup on the topic I've seen is this one, which cites numerous 1980 articles reporting on the imminent retitling that was to occur to the next year: http://www.starwarz.com/tbone/the-missing-episode/

Re:Retroactively?

[mannd]

I can confirm that. Saw it first day it was released in the theater.

How about this

[MonkeyPaw]

How about this? Stop making stupid Star Wars movies and come up with a new idea.

Re:How about this

[Anonymous Coward]

come up with a new idea.

Disney? Come up with a new idea? Hahaha, oh wow, are you kidding? They've finished sucking classical childrens stories dry, and now they've moved on to modern culture, Disney hasn't had a single original idea since the ink dried on Steam Boat Willy.

Re:How about this

[The Sad Nazgul]

Inconceivable!

Re:How about this

[phantomfive]

Incidentally, I feel like I've seen more Star Wars related things since Disney took over than in the previous five years combined. The marketing power is strong with this one.

Re:How about this

[jamstar7]

Great idea. Not gonna happen. They already looted our childhood fairy tales and locked them in the vaults under eternal copyright and there was nothing left for them to do except buy Lucasfilms to get Star Wars.

Re:How about this

[Billly Gates]

come up with a new idea.

Disney? Come up with a new idea? Hahaha, oh wow, are you kidding? They've finished sucking classical childrens stories dry, and now they've moved on to modern culture, Disney hasn't had a single original idea since the ink dried on Steam Boat Willy.

What are you talking about? Disney has re-innovated Star Wars quite well. Just look at the new characters introduced in episode 7?

Re:How about this

[MightyMartian]

Disney paid a lot of dollaro for the rights to Star Wars. They will milk it every nickel they can. And you'll buy it! Do you hear me, you'll buy it!

Re:How about this

[OhANameWhatName]

come up with a new ide

Quit living in the past. Modern film making is about certainties. If you try to come up with a new idea, what if it didn't work?

The studios need to know precisely what's going to happen before they even try. That's why you stick with the same formula over and over again and the only new content is derived from best selling works. That way you know what's going to fail and what's going to succeed.

Risk is not an option.

Re:How about this

[quantaman]

How about this? Stop making stupid Star Wars movies and come up with a new idea.

I don't necessarily agree, Star Wars has a very rich universe which gives a new movie the advantage of ditching some exposition and working in a universe the viewer has an emotional connection with.

Of course that only works if they recapture the vision and adventure of the original trilogy, I think it's possible (particularly if you pull in some of the old cast) but if they can't make it work it's probably better to leave it alone.

Re:How about this

[westlake]

How about this? Stop making stupid Star Wars movies and come up with a new idea.

There are three durable Sci Fi franchises and geek culture would be lost without them: Dr Who, Star Trek and Star Wars.

If the geek wants to know why HBO's audience gets Crown of Thorns and CN's DreamWorks: Dragons, he might want to look at his own fandoms --- not exactly a hotbed of original ideas.

Re:How about this

[Anonymous Coward]

This isn't the movie you're looking for.

(Also, you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.)

Re:How about this

[MonkeyPaw]

Of course that only works if they recapture the vision and adventure of the original trilogy,....

...and I could go back to being 10 years old when I first saw the movie and thought it kicked ass.

Watching the original Star Wars now is boring. It really isn't that good of a movie. The RiffTrax version helps though.

Re:How about this

[dk20]

I think you mean look at project gutenberg for some out of copyright material to turn into a movie? Why not combine them both and use the star wars characters?

Re:How about this

[Zargg]

I think a lot of people are focusing on the movies too much, remember that Disney does much more with their characters than movies. Imagine a Star Wars land at Disney world, Star wars cruises, and then do it all again with Marvel also. They are the one company is a position to do way more than just more Star Wars movies.

Re:How about this

[GodfatherofSoul]

Disney was a cool, innovative entertainment company while Walt was alive. He was the Pixar of the mid 20th century. It was long after his death that Disney turned into the "milk parents company." Disney still churns out the occasional hit like The Lion King, but most of their releases are shamelessly accountant-driven.

Re:How about this

[mjwx]

come up with a new idea.

Disney? Come up with a new idea? Hahaha, oh wow, are you kidding? They've finished sucking classical childrens stories dry, and now they've moved on to modern culture, Disney hasn't had a single original idea since the ink dried on Steam Boat Willy.

This.

Why do you think Disney supports copyright extensions/abuses with such reckless abandon?

Because they dont want people doing to Disney what Disney did to Hans Christian Anderson.

Re:How about this

[Anonymous Coward]

Disney hasn't had a single original idea since the ink dried on Steam Boat Willy.

Perhaps not even then...

Re:How about this

[blackraven14250]

The Lion King was substantially ripped off too, from Kimba the White Lion. What, you thought Disney actually did anything original?

Re:How about this

[Anonymous Coward]

What's lilo & stitch based on? Seriously, I really liked it, quite original, and the art as well, non of those blocky characters..

Re:How about this

[seandiggity]

come up with a new idea.

Disney? Come up with a new idea? Hahaha, oh wow, are you kidding? They've finished sucking classical childrens stories dry, and now they've moved on to modern culture, Disney hasn't had a single original idea since the ink dried on Steam Boat Willy.

Actually, Steamboat Willy was a cartoon parody of a Buster Keaton film.

Re:How about this

[Miamicanes]

> The Lion King was substantially ripped off too, from Kimba the White Lion.

Twenty years from now, kids will watch the remake of the Lion King. During the climax scene, he'll be running away, and right as he's starting to get tired, he'll hear a familiar voice booming from the sky:

"Simba! Use the Horse! THE HORSE... USE THE HORSE!"

At that moment, the lion chasing him will start to laugh so hard, he won't be able to run. In fact, while skidding to a halt, a pebble will get thrown up into the air, and land in his windpipe as he rolls on the ground writhing in laughter at the cheesy attempt to tie the Lion King to Star Wars. He'll choke to death, and discover that Leia the Lioness is his sister...

Re:How about this

[Miamicanes]

^^^ argh. Terrible typo I missed because I was laughing so hard while I typed this. The lion CHASING him chokes to death on the pebble, and Simba discovers that Leia the Lioness is his sister.

Re:How about this

[Stormwatch]

Disney hasn't had a single original idea since the ink dried on Steam Boat Willy.

Are you implying that Steamboat Willy was original? Nope! It was a parody of Buster Keaton's Steamboat Bill Jr.

Re:How about this

[Stormwatch]

There are three durable Sci Fi franchises and geek culture would be lost without them: Dr Who, Star Trek and Star Wars.

Is Star Wars even science fiction? Lucas himself called it a "space fantasy". One might say it often feels closer to Lord of the Rings than to Star Trek.

Re:How about this

[GodfatherofSoul]

So, do you dismiss Disney for creating the first color animated feature and the first movie length animated feature because it was based on an old fairy tale? Is every book adapted to film a "rip off"?

Re:How about this

[blackraven14250]

Books adapted to film have the book listed in the credits, something along the lines of "Based on the Novel 'Yadda Yadda' by Random Author". It's also changing the medium entirely whereas Kimba/Lion King is moving from TV to a movie (very similar mediums) without credit given tot he originator of the concepts, so that's almost completely irrelevant.

Disney has done one hell of a job creating and improving technology (sometimes by buying the most advanced companies, i.e. Pixar), and I don't disagree there, but it's a stretch to call their stories or characters since Walt's death original. My comment, while technically not saying that I was referring to the stories, was definitely meant to refer to their lack of creativity in stories.

Re:How about this

[AcidPenguin9873]

Yeah, exactly - I mean, look at all the stuff Disney did that's a total rip-off, like the animations, 3D models, voices, music, dialog and lyrics. I can't believe they just took that from the days of yore that Slashdot longs for.

/sarcasm

A feature film is a heck of a lot more than a 5-minute fairy tale from hundreds of years ago. I'm so sick of everyone saying "Disney ripped off this and that". Sure, almost all of their movies are adaptations or based on or directly taken from old fairy tales. But that's not the point. No one is paying money to hear a 5-minute fairy tale told by a traveling bard. If you think that's what Disney is doing, go ahead and start up your own traveling storytelling company that tells 5 minute stories, and start raking in the profits.

Re:How about this

[clickclickdrone]

Aside from TRON (and not that travesty TRON Legacy), there isn't a single thing that Disney has made that is original or creative

The Black Hole?

Re:How about this

[sturle]

How about this? Stop making stupid Star Wars movies and come up with a new idea.

Hear, hear! Disney aren't making more Star Wars movies, they are making a Star Wars soap opera.

Re:How about this

[rasmusneckelmann]

So it's okay for me to rip off things created by Disney, as long as I'd be making more money than them?

Re:How about this

[_Shad0w_]

Also Hamlet and Macbeth.

Re:How about this

[Anonymous Coward]

Come on. They both ripped off Steamboat Itchy.

Re:How about this

[chowdahhead]

Disney has made an innumerable amount of money on others' works in the public domain, like Grimms' Fairy Tales. Yet, they have lobbied and pushed for copyright laws to prevent their work from being used the same way.

Re:How about this

[cyborg_zx]

I think there may be a little more than a hint of performance art in that post.

Re:How about this

[jedidiah]

I dunno. How long before the idiots wise up and realize that they don't have to buy new material anymore? You can just get the old stuff for cheap and watch that instead.

Re:How about this

[jedidiah]

Make those space wizards derive their power from technology and suddenly it's not just fantasy anymore.

Even just calling them the Psi Corps would de-fantasy them.

Re:How about this

[HornWumpus]

You slay you....somebody should.

Re:How about this

[HornWumpus]

Is Star Drek even science fiction? There are more episodes that are 'Court Dramas' then are 'Science Fiction'.

Not that I'm speaking in favor of Star Wars. That sucks too.

Re:How about this

[toddestan]

Lilo and Stitch?

Re:How about this

[squiggleslash]

You're right, Star Wars (or ANH episode 4, whatever, shuttup George) does lose its charm after the 56th or 57th time you watch it.

Re:How about this

[evilviper]

the only new content is derived from best selling works.

That was pretty much true for the past several decades, as well.

And there's plenty of exceptions today, too. How about: Inception

Re:How about this

[mjwx]

A feature film is a heck of a lot more than a 5-minute fairy tale from hundreds of years ago.

So you've never read any of them.

That wasn't a question. Some of these "fairy tales" are quite long.

And if time is a good reason, why cant we do what we like with Disney's older works, I mean it's from dozens of years ago.

Re:How about this

[AcidPenguin9873]

Some of these "fairy tales" are quite long.

Okay, fine. A feature film is a heck of a lot more than a hours-long fairy tale from hundreds of years ago.

And if time is a good reason, why cant we do what we like with Disney's older works, I mean it's from dozens of years ago.

No, you have completely missed the point of my post. Time has absolutely nothing to do with it. Disney is selling a specific retelling of these fairy tales, complete with their own animation, characters, dialog, music, lyrics. That's what you can't take (for free). Like I said in the original post, if you want to sell your own version of Beauty and the Beast (which is one of those hundreds-of-years-old fairy tales), that's totally fine - or at least I would support that. But want to rip a DVD copy of Disney's version? Better pay them for their animation, characters, dialog, music, and lyrics.

Re:How about this

[SiChemist]

I will buy instantly a blu-ray version of the ORIGINAL Star Wars trilogy that doesn't have any of Lucas's ham fisted changes.

Just use the A.D. notation . . .

[PolygamousRanchKid]

. . . you know, like A.D., as in, "Anno Disneyi" . . . ?

. . . and BCE . . . "Before Crap Era" . . .

Re:Just use the A.D. notation . . .

[jrumney]

. . . you know, like A.D., as in, "Anno Disneyi" . . . ?

. . . and BCE . . . "Before Crap Era" . . .

You're missing Episodes 1, 2, 3 and the remakes of 4, 5 and 6.

Re:Just use the A.D. notation . . .

[plover]

. . . you know, like A.D., as in, "Anno Disneyi" . . . ?

. . . and BCE . . . "Before Crap Era" . . .

BCE == Before Copyrights were Eternal.

Re:Just use the A.D. notation . . .

[gl4ss]

. . . you know, like A.D., as in, "Anno Disneyi" . . . ?

. . . and BCE . . . "Before Crap Era" . . .

what's the lost perioid in the middle? jarjar years? a decade at zero?

Re:Just use the A.D. notation . . .

[Valdrax]

what's the lost perioid in the middle? jarjar years? a decade at zero?

NEVER HAPPENED.

Reboot!

[Anonymous Coward]

Star Wars: 2015
Star Wars The Next Generation
Star Wars The Dark Night
Star Wars 2: Electric Boogaloo

Or my favorite, how about just:

Star Wars

but in an alternate universe. Hey it worked for Star Trek!

Re:Reboot!

[cyborg_zx]

2 Star 2 Wars

Star Wars II: The Search for More Money

[Gothmolly]

Or why not "Star Wars That Sucks" ?

Re:Star Wars II: The Search for More Money

[JustOK]

Or why not "Star Wars That Sucks" ?

Not nearly specific enough

Re:Star Wars II: The Search for More Money

[gagol]

What about "Star Wars that sucks the balls off a dead moose" ?

Re:Star Wars II: The Search for More Money

[Anarchduke]

That's "mouse", not "moose".

Re:Star Wars II: The Search for More Money

[mrchaotica]

A mouse once bit my sister...

(Oh, how I wish Slashdot had proper special character support!)

The least of our concerns

[SammyRenard]

If you think that's the biggest problem about star wars right now...

Old style serials?

[zippthorne]

So, we're to understand that now that they're going to produce actual episodic content, which is more in the style of old serials that the original were intended to homage, they're going to drop the episodic titling for something else?

Re:Old style serials?

[almitydave]

Exactly. The 2 made-for-TV Ewok movies didn't have episode numbers, and I'm not sure they even had "Star Wars" in the title originally. The one-offs shouldn't have episode numbers. It makes sense to use numbering for sequential stories that are part of an arc, however they don't have to have "Star Wars" in the title. "Dawn of the Jedi: Episodes I-V", "Yoda's Playhouse, Episodes I-X", etc. etc. Thus each story arc can have a clearly identifiable name without messing with the films already made.

Re-re-subtitling is stupider than stupid.

I don't get it...

[lrsach01]

What's the problem? There is almost 40 YEARS of novels and they never seem to have any trouble.

Re:I don't get it...

[phantomfive]

Yeap, you have the answer, the blogger doesn't know what he's talking about; problem solved, thread closed.

And they can always recycle the "Christmas Special." Or the cartoons.

Re:I don't get it...

[jtownatpunk.net]

There can't be that many years. Because, counting forward from the...D'oh!

Re:I don't get it...

[Chris Mattern]

Yep, there's nothing like contemplating Star Wars' release date to make you feel old. Yes, I remember watching it when it came out--multiple times, in theaters, which I don't think I ever did with any other movie.

Re:I don't get it...

[WillAdams]

Except for all the novels where the nature of entire planets was ret-conned, forcing authors of incompleat trilogies to just stop writing.

Re:I don't get it...

[dywolf]

you mean novels that simply tell the same story over and over... ...by destroying the Star Crusher..the Planet Killer...the Galaxy Smasher...the Universe Burner...ad inifinitum... ...by rescuing and redeeming from the Dark Side Luke Skywalker...Leia...Han...Han/Leias Kids... ad inifinitum... ...and oh by the way, everyone is a Jedi all of a sudden and Luke is no longer the last one. Leia becomes one...and Han...and their kids...and everyone eventually... ...then some perpetuate the midicholorians travesty... ...others introduce "force blocking/nullifying" tricks, violating movie canon, to give the bounty hunters more even footing... ...and oh yeah, the interesting characters...if they arent Jedi, they're a bounty hunter....or a reckless rogue with hodgepodge yet surprisingly capable ship...

Ya, the EU is such a bastion of creativity...

Re:I don't get it...

[Valdrax]

Ya, the EU is such a bastion of creativity...

So, it's pretty much a match made in Heaven for Disney, right?

I recently embraced the New Imperialism

[Anonymous Coward]

So in my view the Rebel Alliance are not freedom fighters, but terrorists. Leave it to Disney to make movies celebrating horrific, terrorist acts against the forces of the democratically elected galactic government. It's sickening.

Re:I recently embraced the New Imperialism

[Anonymous Coward]

I liked playing TIE Fighter better than X-Wing too.

Re:I recently embraced the New Imperialism

[WhiplashII]

They destroyed the planetary mineral extractor! All aboard were killed! Hundreds of thousands of civilian contractors perished in the explosion!

These terrorists must be STOPPED!

Re:I recently embraced the New Imperialism

[gijoel]

I had clones on that Death Star.

Re:I recently embraced the New Imperialism

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't forget about the Endor Holocaust

Re:I recently embraced the New Imperialism

[joe_frisch]

Actually they could do some really nice movies showing the story from the other side. The legitimate government of the galaxy battling an unholy alliance of slavers, smugglers, and terrorists being manipulated by a secretive theocracy.

How many contractors died on death-star 2? The terrorist alliance tricked neolithic "ewoks" into a suicidal assault on an imperial base, just as a distraction. (OK, personally I don't mind ridding the universe of Ewoks, but it wasn't nice).

Was there even an attempt at a recall election for the chancellor? No, they went immediately to assassination because they found out that he belonged to a rival religious group.

All I really want though is 2 hours of the opening battle from episode 3......

Re:I recently embraced the New Imperialism

[SuperKendall]

How many contractors died on death-star 2?

All the ones that didn't care Alderaan had been blown up by the first one.

Re:I recently embraced the New Imperialism

[joe_frisch]

I'm not saying the Moff Tarken didn't exceed his authority.....
I'm sure there would have been a full investigation and a clarification of the rules of engagement.

Re:I recently embraced the New Imperialism

[gignac.adam]

Alderaan shot first...

Re:I recently embraced the New Imperialism

[jbeaupre]

You're not alone...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kN9LdTkR85Q

Re:I recently embraced the New Imperialism

[evilviper]

Send in Seal Team Six to wipe out those godless rebels.

Re:I recently embraced the New Imperialism

[aevan]

Welll...technically... wasn't 'peaceful' Alderaan hosting numerous rebel terrorist cells, and while a 'peaceful world' it had arms/supply depots for said rebels. Factor in that a large percentage of the populace joined the Rebellion, its senator was smuggling top secret information to hostiles...

Then when Death Star finally approached the system, a rebel fleet engages its escorts...

Surely a sign of seditious hotspot, and a member of the Axis of Terror that needed quelling. Alderaan may indeed have shot first.

Re:I recently embraced the New Imperialism

[Patch86]

Let's face it- the Taliban got knobbled for less than that...

Re:I recently embraced the New Imperialism

[isorox]

Let's face it- the Taliban got knobbled for less than that...

A more apt description would be Iraq, who had change the currency they used to trade oil, and got wiped back to the stone age in "Shock and Awe" tactics.

Re:I recently embraced the New Imperialism

[tfmachad]

All I really want though is 2 hours of the opening battle from episode 3......

All I really want is the X-Wing series made into movies. That'd be sweet.

Re:I recently embraced the New Imperialism

[devman]

"TIE Fighter" had a much more developed story line and (accompanying materials) and would be awesome for a movie. Forgive me if you include that game in the "X-Wing series".

Re:I recently embraced the New Imperialism

[gl4ss]

"TIE Fighter" had a much more developed story line and (accompanying materials) and would be awesome for a movie. Forgive me if you include that game in the "X-Wing series".

usually people do count it. it was essentially the same engine and gameplay, with just minor variations.

(one of the minor variations was that in original xwing with mouse countrol you could turn around instantly.. iirc. as an overall package though tie fighter was so much cooler and more polished, with the included novel and all).

Re:I recently embraced the New Imperialism

[almitydave]

I have somewhere an old flyer advertising TIE Fighter, and it had the slogan "Flying for the Rebel Alliance was never this fun!" and it's true, it wasn't. TIE Fighter was a better game. And I liked the fact that they didn't make it like you were playing for the bad guys, it was really told from the Empire's perspective of things.

TIE Defender FTW.

Re:I recently embraced the New Imperialism

[thejynxed]

That's the interesting bit. I think that Hussein swapping from the petro-Dollar to the petro-Euro is all the excuse Jr "needed" to go finish the job daddy started.

Hussein swapped the currency, presto-chango, we're in Iraq less than 4 months later.

Who on earth cares?

[vux984]

What else is there really to say?

Are there even any star wars fans who care all that much how disney resolves this apparently complicated and difficult conundrum?

Re:Who on earth cares?

[dcw3]

Are there even any star wars fans who care

You're kidding right?

No, because the only people who will give a shit, are those who attend Star Wars conventions, or live their lives through role playing. 99% of the consumer base does not.

Will Lucas ever be satisfied?

[fizzer06]

Go on and do it, do it,
Do it 'til you're satisfied,
Whatever it is, do it,
Do it 'til you're satisfied.

Re:Will Lucas ever be satisfied?

[gagol]

Sure Lucas is satisfied, he is laughing all the way to the online bankin website to check his account!

If you don't like it, make your own

[Darth Hubris]

Star Wars: The Skywalker Saga: Episode IV: Con Carne y Salsa Verde

Spaceballs: The Search for More Money

[LostOne]

Maybe we can have that Spaceballs sequel, too?

Oh, wait. That's essentially what this is.

Of course, there's an outside chance it won't suck horribly.

How did they name those 2 Ewok movies?

[taxman_10m]

Why should this be any different?

Re:How did they name those 2 Ewok movies?

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh god I hope it's very different.

Re:So?

[MightyMartian]

Star Wars 2.5?

Re:Expanded Universe

[MightyMartian]

The one thing I'm reasonably certain about is that whatever Lucas had approved for the expanded universe will be thrown out the door. Disney is out to make a lot of money, and it will have absolutely no interest in is optioning Zahn or any other expanded universe author.

Besides, most of the Expanded Universe stuff I've read (admittedly only a splattering here and there), is just gawdawful shit.

On second thought, considering how the standards for the prequel trilogy went down the shitter and Disney's involvement, maybe the Expanded Universe crap will set the perfect tone.

No longer matters

[dbIII]

The naming was to make people think it was like the old Republic serials and nobody younger than Lucas is really going to get the reference any more. While I've been told this I don't really "get it" since I didn't grow up seeing those things in smoky cinemas and waiting for the "next exciting episode" to come out.

Truth in advertising

[PopeRatzo]

They could just name the last six movies, "The.Star.Wars.Saga.dvdrip.engsubs.aXX0" and I'm not sure anyone would notice.

Re:Truth in advertising

[thegarbz]

Oh I hope Disney gets sued by aXX0 for trademark infringement.

Re:Truth in advertising

[Stormwatch]

You mean that's not the official title?!

Re:Truth in advertising

[Anarchduke]

damn you nailed it with that comment.

/. editors seduced by the Dark Side

[mrsam]

Following the link to TFA, I find myself reading a few pages on some nobody's personal blog, where he fan-wanks off in some general what-if idle speculation.

And the esteemed /. editors bought this whole load of some fanboy's idle speculation, hook, line, and sinker, thinking it was real news, straight from Lucas's horse's mouth.

Idiots.

Um, no

[gignac.adam]

No need to add "The Skywalker Saga" on to the titles. Movies that are part of the main thread keep their "Episode $n" titles, and spin-offs get their own titles. Worked for X-Men (the quality of that series notwithstanding) which had X-Men {1,2,3} (spanning the Xavier vs Magneto stories), Origins and First Class (prequels), and the upcoming Wolverine and Days of Future Past.

Ahem

[justthinkit]

News for nerds, stuff that matters?

Re:Ahem

[Stormwatch]

News for nerds, stuff that mattered a long time ago.

Re:It was always episode IV

[radarskiy]

The original film prints did not say Episode IV in the titles.

They'll use...

[Horshu]

"The Clone Wars", "More Clone Wars", and "Still More Clone Wars". Wait, no, that was the cartoons.

I read that as "tilting"

[RogueWarrior65]

And I thought "Tilting? Are they finally realizing that Star Tours doesn't really simulate motion?"

I've got it!

[evilviper]

I've got the PERFECT name for the next Disney-produced Star Wars film:

Spaceballs 2: The Search for More Money

You're welcome.

Re:Wasn't it originally supposed to be 1 movie?

[Miamicanes]

As I understand it, Lucas always intended for there to be a sequel to Star Wars, but the investors made him go through the motions of pretending Star Wars could stand on its own. The problem wasn't that they didn't think it would be popular, but rather that it wouldn't be popular enough to justify the unholy production cost of a sequel made to the same standards. They wanted to make sure that if it merely did "OK", they could keep wringing cash out of it for a few more years in second-run and international markets.

I believe The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi were kind of like the final two "Back to the Future" and "Matrix" movies... filmed mostly back-to-back, and some parts filmed simultaneously to cut costs. I think Lucas originally planned to wrap everything up in a single ~3-hour second episode, but after Star Wars turned into a license to print money, he (or his investors) decided to make it into two separate movies, and leave the door open to a 3-movie prequel that Lucas himself didn't really have any interest in making.

Re:Not a surprise

[Macgrrl]

Only after releasing it from the Disney Vault for a limited period release - be sure not to miss out - call 1-800-DISNEY now for our special collectors edition edition.

I'll go see them, but will be thinking ...

[jbeaupre]

The secret title of every one of the new movies will be:

Star Wars: Episode ? Now give me your money, fucktard!

Retroactive?

[typo-lfm]

"Lucas retroactively subtitled the first movie to be Episode IV."

Did he really? Exactly when was this? I seem to remember the episode IV subtitle when I saw the first run in the theatre. Is my memory fooling me?

Ummm...no.

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

There are already plans for Star Wars "one-shot" films, focusing on individual characters like Yoda and Boba Fett .

and Boba Fett
and Boba Fett
and Boba Fett

It shall be interesting to see the first Star Wars flop.

It did say Episode IV originally!

[cstacy]

I remember very clearly that the original release said "Episode IV"; I was enjoying Stay Puft marshmallow treats while watching the movie. Always loved those as a kid growing up in the 70s. (And wasn't JFK assassinated that week? I remember the trauma of watching that on TV a couple days after Star Wars.) Pretty sure.

Re:It did say Episode IV originally!

[asmkm22]

No, it was originally just Star Wars, until it was re-released in '81. Lucas has never had a problem retconning his stuff.

Re:It did say Episode IV originally!

[Thugthrasher]

JFK was assassinated in 1963. Star Wars came out in 1977. I'm thinking that you are not remembering things correctly here.

Re:It did say Episode IV originally!

[cstacy]

what? nothing about Stay Puft? what an epic WHOOSH!

StarWarsOne with daily web login and no used DVD s

[charlesjo488]

Then Star Trek will make an announcement about how they won't require daily logins and permit used DVD sales and there will be much rejoicing throughout the universe.

Makes no sense

[wonkey_monkey]

Knight's solution is to retroactively amend the titles of Episodes I through IX to reflect it being the Skywalkers' saga

To what?

Episode I: Anakin Begins
Episode II: Anakin In Love
Episode III: Anakin Goes Bananas

Re:Makes no sense

[JTsyo]

Star Wars: Skywalker saga: Eps (X): Title

just leave it

[SuperDre]

Or just leave it as it is and only continue counting with movies actually pertaining to the skywalker family.. and have the rest just like they did with ewoks, which in itself are also starwars movies but didn't get a 'number'...

Re:Yes, in all but name

[devman]

I just wish they'd make a film for Star Wars 5.5 (aka Shadows of the Empire) which had an awesome story line.

clear solution

[intermodal]

Leave the original arc alone, give new storylines subtitles. The franchise has been doing it for years in the books and so forth. Star Wars: X-Wing Rogue Squadron. Star Wars: Heir to the Empire. Star Wars: Millennium Falcon. Star Wars: George Lucas Ruins The Original Trilogy.

It's not that hard.

The episodes already have a name!

[Misagon]

They episodes are already together called the [url=http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Journal_of_the_Whills]Journal of the Whills[/url].
This is found in early "drafts" of George Lucas' Star Wars scripts from the '70s and has since then become included in Star Wars novels.

Space

[WilyCoder]

I'm still waiting for SpaceBalls 2: The Search For More Money

yeah, but it was for research purposes...

[Thud457]

Try downloading the torrent of the original theatrical release.

WORST advice on /. evar! Yeah, just steal bread from the mouths of Lucas and the Mouse, that'll end well.

Misread "titling" as "tilting"...

[mrt_2394871]

... and assumed it must have been something to do with the gimbal-lock you can get if you're rotating 3D objects and not using quaternions.

TGIF.

Star Trek > Star Wars x 20 million parsecs

[Hognoxious]

Terrible record keeping and Lucas' habit of destroying old versions and footage makes it tough to watch the old releases

Whereas now he has to rely on retarded characters and stupid plots to get the same effect.

Shit ... not given.

[RockDoctor]

I've still only seen about 1 and a half of the Star Bores films - is it 6 or nine now? - and I find my desire for my post-breakfast shit to be much more significant than my non-existant desire to watch the rest.

Do we care...

[Meski]

How Disney number future StarWars? It's a story that's been taken well beyond its use-by date. Disney would do better investing in new stories. Or, here's an idea. License existing books, and attach completely unrelated stories to them.