Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: Can Star Wars Episode VII Be Saved?
An anonymous reader writes "10 years ago today, in the wake of two disappointing Star Wars prequels, we discussed whether Episode III could salvage itself or the series. Now, as production is underway on Episode VII under the care of Disney, I was wondering the same thing: can it return Star Wars to its former glory? On one hand, many critics of the prequels have gotten what they wanted — George Lucas has a reduced role in the production of Episode VII. Critically, he didn't write the screenplay, which goes a long way toward avoiding the incredibly awkward dialogue of the prequels. On the other hand, they're actively breaking with the expanded universe canon, and the series is now under the stewardship of J.J. Abrams. His treatment of the Star Trek reboot garnered lots of praise and lots of criticism — but his directorial style is arguably more suited to Star Wars anyway. What do you think? What can they do with Episode VII to put the series back on track?"
The movies are all terrible. The only one that is half way decent is the Empire and that because Lucas neither wrote nor directed it. The more this new one completely ignores everything that came before it the better.
...better be absent.
My backpack has jets.
...it's hardly even started filming yet. Maybe wait until it's released to worry?
Or better yet, don't worry. Skip it entirely if you can't hold "sequel" and "rose-tinted memories of the originals" in your brain at the same time. No one's ruining your childhood if you just stay home...
No, it can not return SW to its former glory. That is because the three SW films that came out first have got their cult status over the last 30 years. You can't just 'make' that.
-- Cheers!
Currently the IP has been pwn3d by Sith Lord Disney. Obviously the Force was not with us.
Unless they put something in your drink to reduce your intellectual and emotional capacity to that of a 10 year old you are not going to like it.
love is just extroverted narcissism
...when the Star Wars fans were laughing at the situation with Abrams and the Star Trek movies that he made...
I've noticed that they're rather quiet now...
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
It's gotta be better than Episodes I, II, and III.
Our childhood memories have been raped six ways to Sunday, but does anyone care anymore? Yes, stupid remakes of the movies we grew up with exist. The songs of our youth have been remade into cheap dance tunes and ringtones. The games we played are now free-to-play tablet apps with in-app purchases. The originals all still exist, should we need them - but do we need them? How long can you hang on to the past without becoming old instead of grown-up? I just wish they would spare the actors the embarrassment.
Making it a bit darker in a gritty way would be nice. More character development. I saw this on reddit today, and I kind of agree with where that's going.
Hey, I liked reading a lot of the extended universe stuff.
But as much as I enjoyed that, I'm not sure much of it would make for a great movie. At least not the parts they are thinking about now.
And the Extended Universe has a lot of weight to it by now. It's also pretty piled on, not leaving a lot of room for creativity...
I think a fresh start for Star Wars is a great thing, using the originals as a base. To me that offers the most excitement, a good story re-thought by people new to the universe.
So, I'm pretty excited about that aspect of the movie, that it is removed from a lot of chains and story expectations.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Stick a fork in it, it's done.
Seriously, this isn't going to turn out well. For one thing, they got JJ "Lensflare" Abrams to do it, and he'll probably have the protagonists all be teenagers.
But even if they had a good director, they can't just undo the Prequels. They're already out there, and they've already ruined Star Wars. The only conceivable way to fix this is to not do Episode VII yet, but to go backwards and redo the Prequels, and pretend the old ones didn't happen. They're obviously not going to do that.
What's more, even if you ignore the crappy Prequels, Episodes IV-VI are quite old now, and are a product of a different time, and being sci-fi, would not ever pass as modern sci-fi movies.
What can they do with Episode VII to put the series back on track?"
Start the movie with a beheading of Jar Jar of course.
Sorry. Jar Jar Abrams is probably going to make worse movies than Eps 1-3.
SW EP VII, Scene 1
Leia: Luke, after studying for years the effect of Midi-chlorians in the way we use the Force, I've come to the conclusion that they bare no effect in who can or cannot become a Jedi, all we know about them is wrong...anybody can be a Jedi...
Luke: whoa!
--Necesito una chela, bien fria...
Another Star Wars sequel shouldn't be made in the first place. You can only take a movie story line so far and then you're just milking nostalgia for the sake of box office returns with no art or soul. The first three movies were perfection. Enough already.
If Disney knows how to do anything it's to take the work of others and run with it.
Episodes I-III barely touched the extended universe just as fan boy nods - the new ones can have this easily too.
The books are separate from the movies. The masses don't know what all happened in them anyway. We'll wish to see it on screen but I'm thrilled to see what they do.
In closing. They are doing fine with Marvel and Disney paid a billion dollars for Star Wars. A BILLION dollars. They won't mess this up. If they do well it's safe to say the mouse will be very upset.
Jokes aside, Disney is one of the worst pushers of extended copyright and draconian content laws. I for one won't be giving them a dime of my money. If I want to see it, I know how I will.
Silence is a state of mime.
I think a Star Wars/Cloverfield mash-up could be cool. The sith would set loose several huge Rancorrs on Coruscant to further the purposes of the dark side and then the jedi could carve them up and create buildings from the skin and bones that would grow on their own under the influence of the Light Side and turn Coruscant into a giant pulsating heart of Force. This would accidentally produce a tear in the Force and a new Chosen one would be born to restore balance. Twist: the one to bring balance to the Force is the first Rancorr able to become a Jedi. It mind-melds with the flesh-and-bone half of Coruscant and becomes a living planet capable of moving itself across the galaxy because of the number of Midi-chlorians it now commands, smashing itself into other worlds to absorb their life essences and drain Midi-chlorians from any Force sensitives.
George himself broke so much canon, or "retold" it, that it is not even funny. I've gone back and watched the original trilogy many times (I own them on laserdisc), to keep it fresh in memory so when I get into discussions about original vs prequels I'm not looking back with nostalgia.
Here is one great example:
Yoda: Size matters not. Look at me. Judge me by my size, do you? Hmm? Hmm. And well you should not. For my ally is the Force, and a powerful ally it is. Life creates it, makes it grow. Its energy surrounds us and binds us. Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter. You must feel the Force around you; here, between you, me, the tree, the rock, everywhere, yes. Even between the land and the ship.
vs
Qui-Gon Jinn: Midi-chlorians are a microscopic life form that resides within all living cells.
and
Qui-Gon Jinn: Without the midi-chlorians, life could not exist, and we would have no knowledge of the Force. They continually speak to us, telling us the will of the Force. When you learn to quiet your mind, you'll hear them speaking to you.
Complete and total turn around. The Force is now administered through a third party to let the Jedi/Sith know what to do - the will of the Force? *gags* *pukes* That is exactly opposite of what Yoda tells Luke - in that LIFE creates the Force. Quo-Gon says without midi-chlorians life could not exist and that you must "hear" the midi-chlorians speak to you. If that was the case, why didn't Yoda explain that to Luke? Because it was some retconning bullshit Lucas came up with to give life to his god-complex character.
There are many, many other examples of complete "WTF?" moments between original and prequel.
Dream as if you'll live forever.
Live as if you'll die tomorrow.
~Anonymous~
Seriously. Go back in time and prevent the release of the prequels. And also don't make VII.
The Star Wars franchise, such as it still exists, has been run directly into the ground for an entire generation. Most kids growing up during this period never even saw any of the good Star Wars movies, and still haven't. The momentum behind this died years ago. Seriously, Episode VII could be the second coming of Joss Whedon and they still couldn't bring back the Star Wars glory days.
Stick a fork in it, for pity's sake.
Why should we expect anything less for Star Wars? Fuck plot, let's move the camera so much that the audience gets motion sickness! BRIGHT LIGHTS! BIG EXPLOSIONS! VULCANS THAT HAS FEELS!
The vast majority of Hollywood movies have been shit ever since this thing happened. Independent and classic film both seem far superior, especially since they have generally made up for poor access to special effects with creativity in other areas. (Remember when special effects were, well, special?)
is some grit. Sure, the whiz-bang crap is expected, but give the overall film some grit, ala Road Warrior. Make it a high-stakes edge-of-your-seat film, not some prancing teenage protagonists in metrosexual space clothes.
"Let them die."
If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
Yay!
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
They don't need to put the series back on track.
The series exists.
They just need to let it continue to exist.
We don't need more star wars movies. We already have 6.
They just need to let go and create some new IP instead of rehashing the same old shit.
Like most things, star wars is a product of the culture at a particular time, so the further we get from that time period, the harder it is to recapture. It's sometimes possible to reinvent, but most times, the reinventions that actually do ok share little in common with the old. That's just the way it is. Lucas waited too long to flesh out the story and it shows.
Because I have seem the other six in the theaters and I have watched a lot worst stuff. I will still try to enjoy them.
I long thought of an answer.... and after careful consideration I can synthesize an appropriate answer: NO!
Step 1: Take series that people already have a connection to, getting around having to do so on your own.
Step 2: Get rid of everything but the basics of the storyline, including what people liked about the series in the first place.
Step 3: Try to reinvent the wheel using the same paint job of the original.
Step 4: Release the movies and hope that the fans connection to the previous movies will push them into seeing it, even though it gets bad reviews.
Step 5: Find new series, rinse and repeat.
Sorry, but adding Disney to the mix will only mean hidden phallic symbols and scantily-clad teenaged actresses.
.. because it will hopefully at least reduce the amount of soul killing damage that Abrams can do to Star Trek by keeping him preoccupied with SW.
Star Wars Episode VII or as it will be commonly know - The Return of Jar Jar Binks.
s that it wasn't intended to give the same experience as IV, V, and VI. The prequels were aimed at a larger audience, and of course could not stand up to the dissecting lens that geek-dom uses to rip apart said movies. In terms of of what it was supposed to do, the Prequels made more money than the original three, so using "voting with your wallet" metrics, they are better movies (wikipedia).
Now, I'm not saying that they ARE better, but the intention was not to create a "cult" movie, the intention was to spend money making a block-buster, that appeals to all sorts of viewers, in all age groups.
Oh, and another thin: awkward dialogue... yea, there are bad lines in the Prequels, but noting remotely resembling the list in that blog... and not in that order, not by far! ("You don't want to sell me death sticks"). Great way to display the Jedi mind trick, on the unsuspecting, weak-willed citizenry.
My assumption is that this movie doesn't need saving... it will do what its designed to do: Bring in expensive talent, and create a movie that the masses will enjoy. It even has many from the original cast coming on board to give it MORE marketing hype, more legacy milking, and more affiliation with the franchise than ever. Disney will make their investment back, by far.
George has already ruined Star Wars and Abrams can't actually do worse.
Remember in addition to the garbage prequels George made 2 Ewok movies and the Droids cartoon.
We have racist jar jar (blacks). We have Asians who are good at building robots and evil. And we have jabba the hut for Jews.
Why did George Lucas cross the road?
To urinate on my childhood.
Why did J.J. Abrams cross the road?
To join Lucas in urinating on my childhood.
"Once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny. Consume you it will."
There's no question that Episode VII will be better than the prequel trilogy. This is guaranteed. Because Episode VII is going to be polished, focus tested to a sheen, and designed to alienate as few people as possible. That's the exact opposite of the prequel trilogy, which were designed in the vision of their author, George Lucas, and as a result alienated anyone who wasn't crazy. The budget and need for a return for shareholders guarantee this. The stewardship of the franchise by businesspersons rather than creatives will guarantee this. So yes, Episode VII will be a sanitized, safe, polished sequel. ... but will it be saved? No. Star Wars is a commercial property now. This is not a product being made for creative reasons, even if some people involved are happy to make it. There will be annual Star Wars releases now until the end of time. Which is fine, but none will be memorable or iconoclastic like the first two films were.
Anyone considering themselves a "Star Wars fan", rather than a fan of a few of the movies and some of the non-film content, is at this point crazy and basically submitting that they'll buy anything. It's so much bigger than that. Same is true of comic book fans: people who are fans of Marvel rather than fans of specific things Marvel have made are basically stamping "exploit me" on their forehead. Quality products should attract your attention, not products that happen to be made by companies that once upon a time made a quality product.
Nope. The original trilogy managed to appeal to a wide swath of the population. It managed to be a cultural phenomenon with a scope so massive it's hard to relate to unless you actually lived through it.
The prequels tried to pander to small children and failed.
The originals treated the idea of being a Flash Gordon knockoff seriously. The prequels not so much.
Much like some Trek suffers from too much Roddenberry, Star Wars suffers from the same effect. An artist that built a success on his vision as distorted by collaborators creates a big steaming pile because no one is willing to say WTF.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Yup. He painted himself into a corner by releasing them as 4,5,6,1,2,3. But that need not be a problem. There are plenty of times when we know what's going to happen - such as with any movie based on a book - LOTR, Harry Potter, GoT... so what's a director / producer to do? MAKE US CARE. Use actors that we want to watch just because they are such great artists. He had decent actors at his disposal - he did well with Liam Neeson, less so with Ewan McGregor (see Life Less Ordinary or Trainspotting if you're not sure how good he can be.) He had Natalie Freaking Portman. This is the actress who chewed up the scenery in The Professional. She looked by Ep3 like she was the greenest member of a high school drama cast. I cared what happened to people in 4,5,6. What held me through 1,2,3 was the whizzy parts, the arc of the story, and the four-parallel story technique that was actually done so well you don't really notice it.
I think Abrams can salvage it and make it thrive. He may not follow the canon, but hey - it's story telling. Did you ever hear a story told the same way forever? We can all excuse The Kessel Run if it gives us Ep4, right? Same here. Heck, I'll spot him JarJar if he makes a movie that I want to turn right around in the lobby and watch again - like he did with Star Trek.
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
If Mr. Abrams has anything to do with it it will start really strong and end confused and unresolved. I will hold out the hope that it will be good but his track record is not filling me with confidence.
like something that has never been done before. I love the og Star Wars and all the Star Trek shows but I'm sick on the same lets "reboot" every 20 years bull shit that is happening.
GIVE US SOME NEW SCI-FI. I think The Matrix was the last show when you can really say WOW I'll be re-watching this for years to come. Yes there were plenty of other good sci-fi but nothing to keep talking about for 40 years.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
There were some pretty terrible story elements in both Abrams Star Trek movies that made stories in TOS and TOS movies (as well as some of the other Star Trek series) sure to not happen in the new Abrams reality and some of the characters were acting very out of character since Trek fans know them like they were members of the family.
The problem is that Star Wars fans have been feasting on material that is now going to be thrown out and we will now have a new Star Wars reality, if the story is good and the characters true to the originals it may stand a chance of being good but if the story changes the original characters in ways the fans disapprove of it's not going to be well received by the traditionally minded.
Pretty easy:
1) avoid medechlorians, JarJar and Ewoks.
2) Avoid really stupid looking special effects
3). Avoid really bad dialog
4). Avoid truly stupid plots.
5). Avoid completely transparent toy marketing.
Then the movie will make a billion dollars, as will the next two. Its really not that hard.
At the moment, they are in the middle of an incredibly complex and boring process to try and make the Star Wars universe make sense.
Every idea will be scrutinised and analysed with respect to all the other films and thousand page style guides.
This is creative suicide.
Just allow the writers to have fun and write something enjoyable. It's fiction and doesn't need to always make sense.
It is crazy that that particular meme has not yet been posted, as this is a pretty clear example of where its invocation would be accurate.
Disney has an entire division devoted to cranking out crap sequels to hits. They're responsible for Cinderella 2 and 3, Bambi 2, Pocohontas 2, Mulan 2, Tarzan 2, The Lion King 1.5 and 2, The Jungle Book 2, Lilo and Stitch 2, and a host of others, most of which can be found wherever used DVDs are sold. So grinding out Star Wars 7 is in line with the established Disney production pipeline.
Yes, Star Wars 7 is nominally a live action film, but today that's just a few principal characters on top of CG animation. Most of the pixels come from the animation teams.
Wait... is that supposed to be bad?
Ask Slashdot: Can Star Wars Episode VII Be Saved?
Episode VII has barely started filming. Did you mean "Can Episode VII save Star Wars?"
Well... I expect it to be at least the 4th best film in the franchise.
That's not including the Ewoks movies, of course.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
The 1st one ever released in the late 70s was a gem, and in my opinion remains a stand-alone classic. Everything after it became less story and more eye candy, and the frustration of moving audience targets. ...Seems they are going to milk the franchise dry until it becomes unprofitable, then discard it like an empty milk carton.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T...
Uh, Linux geek since 1999.
yes plover, you nailed it
often when I hear people talk about why the love trek or star wars or D&D or video games it relates to exactly the same...I just sort of insert "I like nostalgia and fun things" for whatever they are babbling about (fyi of all these i'm a 'trekkie' and a gamer sub-genre of tetris nerd)
there *is* of course the times when these silly things that were aimed at middle schoolers have really interesting storylines that go beyond their target market
that's up to interpretation, but it's all about distinguishing **why**
Star Wars and Alien are awesome scifi films but are hugely different in tone/subject matter....I'm sure some fanbois would argue that both are equally great in all ways but they aren't. Alien is written and acted much better in all ways. Again that's an interpretation but it's one most people share and its easily defendable.
I say the original trilogy are all "classics" for their own reasons...but in film discussions should be viewed as a whole...sort of like LotR...the prequels are kind of a B-/C+ retread, but reduced to its component parts it has some moments that are "classic" (note that the fan-edited versions of the prequels are much better)
Thank you Dave Raggett
I don't understand all this hate shit against Star Wars VII. Movie is in early stage, last SW movie was quite good (SWIII), ok we had two "bad" one before, but the III still a pretty decent prequel. Bunch of old school actors are back, JJ didn't made a bad job with Star Trek (way better than any previous ST movie previously release than JJ ones). I don't think disney made a bad Job with X-Men franchise nor Iron Man, nor Avengers (those movies revenues are speaking by themselves). At least have decency to wait the movie release before hating it...
You're entitled to think this, but I don't see any evidence that you're right. My parents were the same as I am now when the old movies came out, and they thought they were childish pap, much like you seem to think of the prequels. They're all in the same category to me. I think it's hard for people to see these films objectively.
You know it will have a "blockbuster" opening, probably clearing the production budget in a couple days. Just from a curiosity factor, people will go just to see what Luke, Han and the rest look like.
After the unforgivable hatchet job he pulled on Star Trek, I don't trust JJ Abrams with any more of my childhood playthings.
I don't care about the movie, but at least everything Kevin J Anderson did to the Star Wars universe has just been erased from continuity. That alone is the best thing that's ever happened to Star Wars.
Really, the stakes are too high. Too many people have memories of IV, V, and VI that are too fond. Even if we had a young George Lucas directing it we would still likely deem it a failure after the first 10 minutes. If you try to make it feel like the original trilogy people will discard it as "uninspired" or "derivative". If you try to make it groundbreaking people will say you "tried too hard". And obviously he can't reboot it like he did with the new Star Trek movies for much the same reasons.
I actually feel bad for JJ Abrams, as he will be the scapegoat in the end regardless of how good - or bad - the screenplay is.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Abrams looked at the canon of Star Trek and decided he didn't want to deal with that nonsense. He didn't want to have to deal with stupid fans calling him out on everything he did in every scene like the "A wizard did it" scene from the Lucy Lawless Simpsons episode. So, he destroyed Vulcan, and killed Kirk's and Spock's families.
What part of canon does he have to deal with in Star Wars? The Expanded Universe is what. So, he destroyed it.
The thing that thrills me is that I HATE the stupid fanfic nonsense that people call The Expanded Universe. All of that is complete and utter shit. I'm GLAD it's gone.
Stupid regenerating Palpatine? Dumb as fucking Hell. He's DEAD. Vader KILLED his ass. All of the other shit about the sith can burn for all I care.
As long as they don't try to put Ms. Fisher in a bikini...
1. Deep Storyline, focusing on story first action second, that's what made the original trilogy good
2. Don't throw away the content the fans are screaming for...ok some of the expanded universe is just silliness, but there is some good stuff...AKA Timothy Zhan books...keep most the concepts from there...Mara Jade, Leia and Han's kids...
3. Attribute 1,2,3 and to unclear memories and retcon some of that crap!
4. Don't make new characters poor clones of previous characters
5. for the love of god make sure the villains aren't Vader/Emperor retreads...and PLEASE don't find some half asses way to resurrect the them!
Power Corrupts,Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely, leaving one person(group)in charge is absolutely corrupt.
It's perfectly fine the way it is. I really don't care how many other people were disappointed by the prequel trilogy. They were fun and exciting movies, and they were a heck of a lot better than some other stuff that was in theaters those years. I'm sure the new movies will be fun and exciting too. I don't need them to be all-time classics for me to be ok with my life. Movies come and go, and if you or your family can use them for a day of fun with some pizza and popcorn, great! But if you get enjoyment out of sitting at your PC in your underwear debating the 'cinematic quality' of a bunch of space alien adventures, and nitpicking everything to death, well guess what? You will never be happy - with the new Star Wars movies, or anything else.
The whole point was that the original trilogy was very much a whiz-bang adventure story with cool looking aliens (well, providing you exclude the cantina scene from A New Hope). Things were goofy, lots of knockoffs of Golden Age B film serials, but it was all a great deal of fun. Even when things got a bit more serious in Empire and RotJ, there was still that goofiness; Yoda was funny and cool all at once, the Emperor was spooky and just over the top enough that a Nazi SS uniform wouldn't have been out of place.
And then you get the prequels, filled with a late middle aged Lucas's political angst, his desire to make these big expensive films that would make some sort of point beyond just being some crazy action sequences interrupted by a little green guy spewing Zen-like metaphysical phrases. Oh no, it had to be about THE FALL OF DEMOCRACY AND THE RISE OF TYRANNY, and everything that actually made Star Wars a silly and fun experience was tossed out the window.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
That way there will be less poseur-geek confusion about which is better.
Don't get me wrong: I liked Lost and Fringe. However I wanted to strangle someone over Star Trek. The first three Star Wars movies were pretty good, I thought, and didn't need to have anyone pile on for more profit, but they did it anyway. I'll even admit to kind of liking the animated television series. But now Disney mucking about with this, and getting J.J. Abrams involved in it? Screw that, it's probably going to be a crime against humanity by the time they get done with it. Memo to Disney: Dump J.J. Abrams. I'd rather he keep making weird television series and stop mucking about in movies. Of course if I had my way I wouldn't have Disney having anything at all to do with anything Star Wars, either.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
Opening scene of ep VII should be C3-PO waking up from a 30 year hibernation mode and say: "I just had the strangest dream that I was built by a young Darth Vader, hung out with an irritating alien no one liked, and everyone spoke in the most flat, two dimensional manner. It was a horrible, horrible dream. I'm certainly glad none of that actually happened."
That is one way that ep VII could save the series and get it back on track.
it will be shit, just like episodes 1-3. except more masturbatory cg fx. but it will make shit loads of money anyway.
I would suggest that anyone who has given it enough thought and is already expecting to be disappointed by Episode VII probably needs to go back to their room in their parentÃ(TM)s house, lock the door, turn out the lights, and strangle themselves with their official Luke Skywalker Utility Belt Grappling Hook!
Abrams directs action/drama videos. Now, they can have a Star Trek theme, or a Star Wars theme, or whatever theme seems appropriate, but they're action/drama. So how much does a Star Wars theme mesh with Abrams' approach to action/drama?
As far as establishing new canon goes, I'm rather more skeptical. I rather get the impression that either consistency is a low priority, or he's having later parts of the video retcon earlier parts, or something.
I, for one, find that Abrams' videos are not to my taste. I expect to skip his take on Star Wars.
T. M. Pederson
"Lies, Damn Lies, and Documentation"
Fuck plot, let's move the camera so much that the audience gets motion sickness!
Every Hollywood blockbuster is going to follow the same basic formula because that's what sells tickets. Rehashing The Hero's Journey isn't exactly new, either.
Disney didn't buy the rights to Star Wars so they could make a 3 hour space opera - they are making a Summer blockbuster to get a return on their investment. You can be sure that means a Hero's Journey based plot and lots of explosions. If you think that looks like shit, no one's forcing you to watch it. No one's taking away the multitude of indie movies where the characters swear at each other for two hours and everyone dies from AIDS at the end.
On the other hand, "shaky camera" needs to die and never come back. JJ Abrams and Michael Bay both should be locked in a room and forced to watch portrait video shot on an iPhone by a hyperactive 6-year-old until they learn the value of proper camera work.
---
DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
If you make a sequel within a few years of the original film you're essentially making another version of the same film. The actors are roughly the same ages and playing the same characters, the action and direction style are similar. You have a pile of things that worked great and all you have to do is tweak the formula.
Such was the case with the original trilogy. The first film was great, the next two were variations on the first film so they were great as well.
But if you make the sequel decades later the characters are different, the action and direction are now outdated in the current era, all you have is the mythology which gets people in the door but doesn't tell you how to make a film.
Thus the average decades late sequel ends up being as good as the average new movie, it sucks. You hear about most movies for a year or two and then forget them. The only difference with the sequels to the big franchise is they stick around so you keep remembering how not amazing they were.
The second trilogy died with the first film. They came up with a crappy film and were stuck re-shooting that for the next two prequels.
There's no secret for making Episode VII great. Even with the same actors the characters will have to have grown and they need a new feel. Hopefully Star Trek has shown Abrahms what not to do and he'll find something good. But make no mistake, this is essentially a new SF action/adventure movie. It might be great and it might suck just like any other movie.
I stole this Sig
Get rid of JJ. The man's a menace to everything sacred.
The only good thing to come out of the Star Wars prequels were [Plinkett's reviews](http://redlettermedia.com/plinkett/star-wars/), which I wholeheartedly encourage you to check out.
#1) ... that lucas directing 1-3 sucked (when he wisely shrugged off the duty for 5-empire and 6-jedi).
#2) ... that everything else resulting from #1 (mitichloridians, jar-jar, the overall acting, the overall dialog) sucked. it was a bit too much over-control on the prequels... all he needed to do was hand off directing, and focus on everything else that interested him about it. but maybe the director's cut/percentage was too much temptation for him to hold on to... hmmm, oh well.
problem is, even with "phantom edits" (never watched), there is no such thing as "the pre-cg prequels"... they are, what they are. there's lots i still enjoy about the prequels, and i'm a die-hard "you have to watch the pre-cg" original trilogy type. (i think the audio fx are "classic sw" through and through - jw's music is alright at times, but he is faltering, repeating himself too much too many times. the spfx and cg/scenic design itself is awfully pretty and pretty seamless, once we get to the end of 3. fact is, anyone from the prequels or originals still up for the designing, the actual artwork and soundwork of the thing, are up to it, they better be back on!)
for what it's worth, i hope they don't suddenly go all batman/spiderman and start redoing the whole goddamn idea over and over again, reboot-style, every ten to twenty years - that's getting too fucking much on my nerves (and already did with jj's st reboot, although it was an "ok watch" - as far as lens flares, since i'd been recently rewatching mst3k's "manos" over and over, it makes me want to think that jj must have said to that cinematographer, "LENS FLARES?!? GREEEATT, GO WITH IT!!") i did greatly enjoy "cloverfield" - much more than most others, i guess - and think it funny someone mentioned trying to crossover that?! hmmm i don't think so directly, but SW doesn't have too many "easter eggs" in it, other than in the spfx (the rumored shoes and potatoes in the asteroid field, or the SF skyline along the entrance to the "jedi" death star). it'd be funny if the cloverfield monster was in some scene, like in the monster arena act in "clones".
for that matter, for a brief "cloverfield" tangent, i'd love to see that sequel mentioned in the director's track i think, where jj mentions maybe making another "clover" as shown from the point of view of the other "cameraman" briefly encountered during the brooklyn bridge sequence... maybe that guy gets more footage of city-destroying carnage than the first one, finds himself more inside the military operation to fight the thing. maybe the end of the first one is the halfway or one-third way through the movie; it was hinted that the monster outlives nyc; perhaps goes on to destroy more of america. since godzilla is a nuclear-age monster, cloverfield is - or at least has already been set up to be - a "global climate change" monster. (the net-only snippits before the movie release hinted that deep-sea oil drilling awoke the monster.)
anyhow, in any case, back to SW... if he can just keep his camera-stylistic dick in his pants, maybe he can pull it off. at least lucas isn't directing!
More Jar Jar in every scene. He should be the focus.
Oh and do not forget that Ewok muppet planet, the Ewok's should have a big role.
Oh no, it had to be about THE FALL OF DEMOCRACY AND THE RISE OF TYRANNY, and everything that actually made Star Wars a silly and fun experience was tossed out the window.
Oh, cry me a river. The rest of us actually appreciated that plotline.
Is suited to anything apart from Star Trek.
No, because you can never be a child again. So you will never view Star Wars through the lens of the young person you were when Ep. 4/5/6 were released.
Lucas had stuffed teddy bear people, cute robots and cartoonish muppet alien characters in all of the original films. Fans loved them. Lucas put silly characters in Ep. 1/2/3 and they were panned.
Did Star Wars change?
No.
You did.
THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.
No.
Long answer: Fuck no.
-1 Troll
Obviously the Disney people are here tonight. You all can fuck off now. Assholes.
"I have a bad feeling about this"
The original Star Wars was simply a good, swashbuckling tale that just happened to take place in a future time far, far away. The ideas and representation of that future were novel and ground-breaking at the time, but its an excitement that simply could not be repeated today. The SFX have improved exponentially in films since then and the franchise has become tired and worn.
The answer, IMO, is simple to express but may be impossible to execute. Good story, less reliance of special effects, good and interesting characters that have good chemistry on the screen can still make a good movie and great experience. They could do like Star Trek and mirror current political and mortal dilemmas in their world where the subjects can be examined as a commentary on the current day.
Also, please god, REAL science fiction authors!
With all the options in the sci-fi section of the local library and bookstores, you would think they might pick something entirely NEW, instead of making Star Wars 164...
I first saw star wars I was 20+ (due to a combination of not owning a TV for a long time after I left my parents home, and before that I watched few TV). And they are good film with an arc, comply to standard story telling and film. The prequel do not comply. Check the red letter media review, plinkett bring a lot of good points :
* You can easily tell who is the protagonist and main hero in SW4,5,6. You cannot with SW1 and arguably SW2.
* character ? Character in SW4,5,6 can be described with trait independently of their role. It is much harder with SW 1,2,3
* Plot ? The plot in SW4,5,6 is simple and follow the standard heroic epic there are plot holes but not many Villain actions make sense as a wehole. In SW 1,2,3 the plot makes no sense whatsoever as the villain is givign contradictory order to its goal.
and I pass many other. Look I did not watch SW when I was young , but already an adult. I could recognize it as a nice fantasy (not SF) story with knight in space. The throne room scene still leaves frisson in me. The lava scene is forgettable. Lucas mistook the fight in the throne room for what it was. He then added fighting everywhere to break the boring dialogues.
As a whole the prequel are poor tredning to bad. It is not only rose colored glasses , but simply a fair assessement.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Not many people liked the cannon of star trek. In fact many young people I talk to find the best episode of all series of star trek, then one without fight and the one with philosophical implication, the most boring. So the two newest star trek were filmed for the new audience , not the old one, as an explosion loaded action flick. Which is why JJ Abrams was chosen for the star trek reboot. It sounds to me that SW7 will be like that : action loaded. Now for SW it is not too bad. The question is : will the protagonist have character development, or will the plot and characters be secondary, and that is the 2$ question.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
the same guy is directing Star Wars and Star Trek?
I can see it now: Captain Kirk will be making out with Princess Leia, and Han Solo will shoot first at the Klingons.
They were great, not only because you saw them when you were 13, but because they were something completely new and unseen. Sci-Fi movies were not considered profitable or even worthy of a major studio back in the late '70s. Sci-Fi was the stuff of B-movies, they had B-movie budgets and everything that came with it, from stories, to visual effects, characters and actors playing them.
ST:TOS had failed years earlier. Even Roddenberry's dad was ashamed of him for it, and there's an anecdote of him apologizing to his friends and saying Gene would go back to writing Westerns.
Along came this renegade movie director. A rebel who had had some success with a few movies, including a low-ish budget scifi gem. He decided to finance his movie outside the studio system, using his own money, because no studio would touch scifi with a 10ft pole. He took a fantasy story based that followed the path of the "hero's journey" and gave it a sci-fi setting. The story was fun, the visual effects were innovative and unlike anything shown on screen before, the characters were interesting enough. And a landmark movie was made, a classic that enjoys a large following nearly 40 years after it came out.
But it wasn't without its problems. Notice how the director took his next project about an adventuring archeologist to a different studio for production and distribution. There must have been some bad blood there.
Star Wars (as it was called then) paved the way for the first Star Trek movie and most SciFi movies that came after. It's that big a deal.
If you were seeing it today for the first time, of course it wouldn't have the same impact it did back then, not even if you were 13 because most 13-year-olds today have seen stuff that came after that original Star Wars.
---
Having been born in '76, I didn't see it in theaters when it first came out. I really only remember seeing ROTJ in theaters when it came out, not sure if they took me to see ESB in theaters.
For those younglings not being mature enough to remember the premier of the original Star Wars movie (please don't jam that "Episode IV" crap here), those three extra, unnecessary prequels were never meant to exist. Lucas forced them down our throats using a lack of proper funding to tell the whole story when he imagined the Saga. He placed the opening sequence, with the written recap at the beginning as a homage to the old short-chapter, serial-based stories the movie theaters used to play before the actual movie in the 20s and 30s, such as Flash Gordon, Batman, etc. Then he devised that mumbo-jumbo about the short budget and how he decided to tell the most important part of the story and crap. But the truth is the original three movies didn't (and still don't) need any prequels/sequels/bollocks.
Seems to me like they've started off right by not basing the whole thing on fanfic.
only a few of those comments in the top 50 were even mildly awkward. episode 1 was definitely the weakest, but i absolutely loved 2 and 3 was my favorite of all 6.
If it's J.J. Abrams, then the central theme will be around time travel. Maybe Luke will become evil and travel back in time to kill himself. There you have it :P
I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
Star Wars has always sucked. There is no "former glory". You fucking nerds are just nostalgic towards the original three. Nostalgia is taking your memories and removing all of the bad. It's just another form of advice.
To understand the apple you must look at the tree.
George Lucas was a student of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Campbell
Campbell is the magic man, he understood how a good story works because he studied myths and found that there was a core pattern regardless of what culture or what side of the planet people were on. Lucas consulted heavily with Campbell and carefully crafted his saga.
Lucas does three movies - episodes four and five had the magic spark and six was solid but felt off. Still, it managed to wrap up the trilogy well enough.
Campbell passed away in October 1987, later when episodes 1-3 where made, Lucas of course did not have Campbell's assistance. I feel this is why the series went completely off the rails. I also feel that if Lucas understood and embraced Campbells work then the 1 - 3 episodes would have have been much better.
Lucas exits stage left and now we have all these captains at the wheel who feel they know what is best for Star Wars.
One parts lightning and one parts bottle. Star Wars has the power of myth carefully weaved into the story so it resonates with people across the world. Episode 7 needs to follow in its footsteps or I feel it will go right off the rails like the first three episodes did. We need good stories and with that are good myths, if they are not crafted then the production will end up as just another soulless fluff release.
So long as George Lucas is not directing it will do well.
I think you are both right in many ways. I think that other then the fact that Lucas couldn't direct, the failure of the prequils was that they were targeted to the same audience that the original Star Wars was. The problem is, that audience got a lot older. My son and daughter grew up in the Star Wars prequil era. They love the original movies.
I don't expect JJ to make the same mistake. He tends to give things a much more ambiguous twist on the good-vs-evil paradigm and his directing style lends itself to both adult and mature child audience's alike. I think he's a good fit for star wars which has both extremely dark themes mixed with humor all surrounding characters that you like to watch. JJ Abrams is a master at getting you to like his characters. Say what you will about the Star Trek reboot, I loved every single character in those movies.
"it's that big a deal"
right.....
above comment is an example of a fanboi who has his internal self-concept tied up to his interpretation of his existence in terms of a sci-fi film franchise
as long as 'Star Wars' is an epic film series unlike any other that changed the world of not just sci-fi but *all film* then this AC's internal self-concept is balanced...
"Along came this renegade movie director."
when someone puts 'Star Wars' into context with other films with no ego connection...well...it pisses fanbois off...because you're piercing the fiction of their self-concept
I can tell this partially because parent is an AC, yet somehow has a signature at the end of the comment...
Thank you Dave Raggett
Actually, Backstroke of the West was a fantastic film, especially the final scene. Every time I think of EP 1 - 3 nowdays I think of that scene.
First, I saw Ep. IV when I was well into my twenties. What most of you *kiddies* missed, that was even more evident in Raiders, was the use Lucas made of the old serials, which I'd guess 90% of you have never seen. All the folks I knew enjoyed it on its own terms.
Second, "awkward dialog"? Now, Ep ! was disastrous. A buddy found, just before, or around the time it came out, a 17-page treatment someone had done (and I've googled for years, and can't find it), that was everything we all wanted, and he couldn't even get it into the slushpile.
Third, NONE OF YOU, NOT A SINGLE ONE, understands the arc in ep's IV-VI, and NOT ONE PERSON seems to have *EVER* understood ep III, which was everything *I* wanted. Now, if you actually wanted to understand it, read a couple-three ancient Greek tragedies... because that's *exactly* what it is, and is intended as. Geez, look at the whole story of Agammemnon, or Edipus, and then look at Anakin's story.
Geez, you turkeys - all you want is explosions and special effects, you're not into plot, or character development, or. anything else that actually makes a story worth reading, or seeing.
mark
Please please make sure Jar Jar comes back. He was what made episodes I and II. I'm so looking forward to getting my picture taken with him, and maybe R2D2 in mouse ears, at Walt Disney World.
I hope they do up a Tattooine cantina as a family-style restaurant and some animatronic singing Ewoks having a hoe-down would be most excellent. Maybe they could transform that Epcot sphere into a deathstar for the lulz and have daily incinerations of the Canada pavilion.
It'll be the swagalicious product that will remake Episodes VII-IX what the originals were: a massive toy sales ad campaign. Nobody does that better than Disney. Nobody. Mees-a thinks-a so.
Star Wars now with LOTS of LENS FLARE!!!!! LOL
It cannot be "saved" or "salvaged" or "restored to former glory" simply because the original 3 Movies live in our childhood memories as these amazing experiences and fantasies and colourful images. No one can create a movie which will compare or surpass your childhood memory.
Even with the argument that the original 3 Movies are still good if one watches them again now, you will just remember or re-live your own personal childhood memory.
Are the 3 Original Movies better than the 3 newer ones? according to my 5 year old son yes - but then again for him it is Darth Vader that sells it. Besides Darth Vader it is Yoda for him in the 3 new movies he loves. Will he think the original 6 movies are by magnitudes better than Part 15 - 18? I am betting everything that he will feel that way.
I am still looking forward to watch every single one of them together with him, because we love the Star Wars, each for his own reasons.
The original films were all about good battling evil, and they managed to do it, for the most part, without weighting the film down with a whole political sideshow. Just look at the gravitas of the scenes with Vader and the Emperor trying to pervert Luke to the Dark Side. Pretty good action, lots of cackling by the bad guy, Vader being Vader, and it worked because it was done economically. It helped that the filmgoer could relate to Luke, who was played as a likable fellow by Hamill, as opposed to Anakin, played by Hayden Christensen, an actor with the charisma of a block of wood. Frankly, I didn't care at all about Anakin, whereas Mark Hamill's Luke was someone I could like, care about, feel the tension as he fights his darker half, and then cheer at is final rejection of evil.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Betteridge's law of headlines
Ditching the EU was probably JJ's non-negotiable demand, because he wants all the new characters/races introduced in the news movies to be OWNED by HIM.
I totally expect him to reuse shitloads of characters, races, settings and plots from the EU, all slightly changed, all now owned by JJ Abrams...
For the freaking bloody love of god, Star wars should be open source and tha damn VII episode script uploaded to github!!
or whatever..
***Game Over***Insert Coin***
i have to give you props for this...I lol'ed:
otherwise, you're justifying your behavior...I put SW in a real world context and it casued you cognitive dissonance b/c you value SW way, way more than most people
SW **fandom** is part of your self-concept...that's what I'm saying...your intpretation and application of the film to your life makes it part of your self-concept...and when someone makes SW look bad (rightly or not) it provokes a reaction in you
Thank you Dave Raggett
Lucas created Star Wars. Without him, we would only have Star Trek. Stop bitching people !
Ok. I think I know were we went wrong.
Nothing in your original comment made me think you were making Star Wars look bad. Honest. I've looked it over and I can't find anything that I find an attack on Star Wars, at all.
Also, I don't believe I was disagreeing with you. I am a SW fan, as I mentioned, I find no shame in it, it is a part of my life, not a major one, but a part nonetheless. After all, I've been alive since less than a year before the first film came out. For me it's always been there, and I happen to like it.
I still don't like the term "fanboi", especially with that spelling (i instead of y). I don't like it in any context, from movies, to brand of computer, to operating system, to game genre, to salad dressings.
And, yes, when someone speaks of Star Wars (or any topic I find interesting) I will want to be part of the conversation. I don't mind finding someone who disagrees with me, I do mind someone who steers the conversation into name calling on the other, let's keep the topic on the films we're discussing.
Star Wars and Alien are awesome scifi films but are hugely different in tone/subject matter....I'm sure some fanbois would argue that both are equally great in all ways but they aren't. Alien is written and acted much better in all ways. Again that's an interpretation but it's one most people share and its easily defendable.
Star Wars and Alien are awesome scifi films. In my opinion they're not equally great in all ways. One is a mix of scifi and fantasy, the other scifi and horror. They're aimed at different audiences, the style of the dialogs is quite different; the setting, mood and tone are almost polar opposites. The level of acting is waaaaay different. I mean Hamill, Fisher and Ford compared to Weaver, Hurt and the rest?
I say the original trilogy are all "classics" for their own reasons...but in film discussions should be viewed as a whole...sort of like LotR...the prequels are kind of a B-/C+ retread, but reduced to its component parts it has some moments that are "classic" (note that the fan-edited versions of the prequels are much better)
Yes, exactly. The only thing I would mention here is that maybe you shouldn't put in the original star wars trilogy with the prequel trilogy. Mostly because there's a 20+ year gap between them, the context for each is very different.
The LotR movies were filmed and released back-to-back, only released 1 year apart... I'm thinking it was to double-down on chances for Oscars. But I wouldn't put P. Jackson's LotR movies in the same box with Ralph Bakshi's. Just like I wouldn't put the new Hobbit movies with the Rankin/Bass anitmated film that came out in 1977.
On another topic. I don't like Tetris. I can recognize the impact it has had on the history of video games, it is a landmark game, a classic. It enjoys a great deal of "staying power", new versions come out every couple of years, there are tons of derivatives. It came out in the USSR, before Perestroika and the fall of the Berlin Wall, that's part of its context, and it also adds to its charm. I think I played it for the first time in '87 or '88, and I've played many versions since. I don't like it.
---
I'm keeping this thread bookmarked, in case you want to continue the conversation.