Disney Turned Down George Lucas's Star Wars Scripts

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Disney Turned Down George Lucas's Star Wars Scripts

Posted by Soulskill on Friday January 23, 2015 @06:23AM from the not-enough-anthropomorphic-animals dept.

ageoffri writes: When Star Wars fans learned that George Lucas was making the prequels, most were filled with excitement and anticipation. When Episodes 1-3 were actually released, many found them unsatisfying, and became disillusioned with Lucas's writing. Now, it appears Disney felt the same way. Though they bought Lucasfilm and began production on Episode 7, they weren't interested in using the scripts Lucas had already worked on. In an interview, he said, "The ones that I sold to Disney, they came up to the decision that they didn't really want to do those. So they made up their own. So it's not the ones that I originally wrote [on screen in Star Wars: The Force Awakens]." After what happened with the prequels, that may be for the best — but others may worry about Episode 7's plot being entirely in the hands of Disney and JJ Abrams.

289 of 422 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Good news by slapout · 2015-01-23 06:25 · Score: 5, Insightful

As long as the plot's NOT in Lucas's hands, I'm happy.

--
Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
1. Re:Good news by Austerity+Empowers · 2015-01-23 06:29 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Statements like that one unfortunately lives to regret. Lucas dropped the ball on the prequels, but I'm pretty sure JJ got hit in the head once with the ball and suffered long term damage.
2. Re:Good news by Lunix+Nutcase · 2015-01-23 06:30 · Score: 2
  
  It's not. He's not involved and he doesn't own Star Wars anymore.
3. Re: Good news by Squapper · 2015-01-23 06:35 · Score: 1
  
  Abrams will do Star Wars way better than he did Star Trek.
4. Re: Good news by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-23 06:36 · Score: 1
  
  I'd still be interested to find out what he had in mind. Maybe they'll release his scripts as an alternate timeline novel or some such down the road.
5. Re:Good news by smooth+wombat · 2015-01-23 06:38 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  That explains why there is so much lens flare in his movies. He's trying to recreate what he sees every day.
  
  --
  We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
6. Re:Good news by Grishnakh · 2015-01-23 06:40 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Yeah, at first the idea of Lucas's script not being used sounds great. But then you have to just remember how awful JJ's Star Trek movies were.
  Honestly, I don't see this working out well at all. The movies would have sucked in Lucas's hands, and they're going to suck in JJ's hands. They should have hired Joss Whedon to do them instead. Or maybe James Cameron (though he probably wouldn't have been interested).
7. Re: Good news by spire3661 · 2015-01-23 06:40 · Score: 2
  
  Star Wars 'ethos' is front and center via the Force, so its harder for JJ to lens flare away the central theme of the story (balance of Light and Dark). Star Trek's story of humans becoming extraordinary humans for its own sake is completely lost. There is no 'hope' in JJ's Star Trek, and its a shame.
  
  --
  Good-bye
8. Re:Good news by bluefoxlucid · 2015-01-23 06:41 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  It obviously won't really be Star Wars; it won't be the story Lucas wants to tell, and will instead be some sort of mass Hollywood shoveled shit designed to appeal to the modal average and draw in dollars.
  Lucas did an okay job with the prequels. Arguably, he did too good of a job: the players are all too human, and Jar-Jar is too fluid and well-executed for the movie. It clashes with expectations: people want textbook epic heroes and villains played the way modern, bland actors portray them, not complex human characters thrust into an epic fantasy.
  
  --
  Support my political activism on Patreon.
9. Re:Good news by iluvcapra · 2015-01-23 06:43 · Score: 2
  
  He'll always be involved. Even if he doesn't participate in the making, he'll be the first person everyone asks when the new one comes out and his opinion is going to carry a lot of weight.
  Notice that Next Gen only really started getting good after Roddenberry died, and DS9, being the best Trek series ever*, was flatly impossible as long as he was alive. Even when these people are out of the loop, they are the "author" in the public mind and have a lot of clout.
  * I dare you, come at me!
  
  --
  Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
10. Re:Good news by Lunix+Nutcase · 2015-01-23 06:44 · Score: 1
  
  "Being involved" was referring to the production of the movie.
11. Re:Good news by Dan+East · 2015-01-23 06:45 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  His plots aren't all that bad. His screenplay (especially dialog) is weak, and his directing is of a very specific style that only works with certain kinds of actors. It is both those things that hurt the prequels.
  As far as directing, Lucas is a hands-off director. He doesn't give the actors feedback or direction - he expects them to bring the characters to life and flush out the nuances on his own. So what he'd do is shoot a scene over and over, even though the actors thought they got it perfectly right, until some nuance or personality came out that seemed more natural and unique. He always said he did his directing in the editing room - but to do that he needed a big pool of material to work with to pull the good stuff out of. With Hamill, Fisher and Ford, they had the talent, energy and personality to simply bring the characters to life. Do you think we liked Han Solo so well because Lucas directed Ford to be that exact character? Or Princess Leia being such a strong female lead and showing playful disdain in the harsh tone of her voice towards Solo? Lucus just stepped back and let them create.
  That directorial style worked well in American Graffiti too. Like the liquor store scene. The robber leaves the store and throws the bottle of liquor to Terry. They shot it over and over, and every time he caught it perfectly. Until finally, he turned around too late and just barely caught it with the tips of his fingers. That was what Lucas was waiting for, and that's what made it in the movie. At the very beginning, where Terry runs his Vespa over the curb and hit the wall - total accident, but Lucas kept the cameras rolling and that made it into the movie.
  So when it comes to most kids, like Jake Lloyd, they NEED coaching and prompting and directed. I strongly believe that Jake Lloyd was awful in Phantom Menace because of Lucas' directing style. When I watch him in other movies, like Jingle All the Way, I'm reminded that he was pretty talented for his age - Lucas just didn't bring that out because he just sits back and watches with no obvious emotion or constructive feedback.
  
  --
  Better known as 318230.
12. Re: Good news by iluvcapra · 2015-01-23 06:45 · Score: 1
  
  Low bar.
  
  --
  Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
13. Re: Good news by Lunix+Nutcase · 2015-01-23 06:48 · Score: 1
  
  Still better than JarJar and all the stupid Gungan scenes in the prequels.
14. Re:Good news by JeffAtl · 2015-01-23 06:49 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  George, no amount of astroturfing is going to convince anyone that the prequels were good or even tolerable. You should have at least hired someone who knew who to write passable dialog.
  You were good when you first started off, but now you've been blinded by your own success.
15. Re:Good news by kylemonger · 2015-01-23 06:52 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  I agree. IMO the complaints about the prequels were fueled primarily by nostalgia about the original movies, remembering the delight of seeing them as a child. I rewatched the original trilogy as an adult and wasn't nearly so enchanted. That shouldn't be surprising. These are all children's movies; we grew up. Lucas' movies didn't change so much as we did.
16. Re: Good news by MightyMartian · 2015-01-23 06:53 · Score: 1
  
  I suspect that Abrams is going to be given significantly less latitude to play around with the basic concepts. For Star Wars I think he was given carte blanche to do whatever was necessary to revive what Berman and Braga had driven into the ground. I find the results appalling, but the movies have been hits, so mission accomplished.
  But Star Wars, even the pretty dismal prequels, has a certain cinematographic vocabulary, heavily influenced by Kurosawa. At times, the vocabulary was about the only thing that marked the prequels as Star Wars films, seeing as Lucas so thoroughly muddied the waters in other ways. I have to believe that Disney has told Abrams that the "Star Wars" feel has to remain intact, so I don't expect any lens flare, or shot length to be cut to the dizzyingly short length that typifies the Star Trek reboots.
  
  --
  The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
17. Re:Good news by phantomfive · 2015-01-23 06:55 · Score: 2
  
  It obviously won't really be Star Wars; it won't be the story Lucas wants to tell, and will instead be some sort of mass Hollywood shoveled shit designed to appeal to the modal average and draw in dollars.
  Indeed, it's hard to see how this will be different than Star Trek, or Transformers.....
  
  The dialog in the three prequels was not the best, but from a story perspective, can you imagine JJ Abrams even attempting to write the story of a nice kid becoming an evil dictator? Then turning it around to show he wasn't pure evil?
  
  Hopefully Lucas will release his proposed scripts.
  
  --
  "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
18. Re:Good news by Firethorn · 2015-01-23 06:57 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  I think that Lucas's plots aren't bad. I think the problem became one of what many extremely successful writers and directors suffer from - lack of effective editorial control.
  Robert Jordan's books declined when he switched to having his wife be his primary editor - she just wasn't mean enough, if that makes sense. During the prequels Lucas ended up with a bunch of yes-men that agreed with every inane idea he had. Without that he'd have a better product.
  
  --
  I don't read AC A human right
19. Re:Good news by garyisabusyguy · 2015-01-23 06:59 · Score: 2
  
  this^
  Nostalgia for the things we found fascinating when we were teens sets a bar that can rarely be exceeded
  Just wait twenty years for all the complaining about how the 10th Transformer's movie will never live up to the first one, what with all of the stunning dialog and pacing of the first one
  Foggy memories and the halo of nostalgia have a way of turning crap into gold
  
  --
  Wherever You Go, There You Are
20. Re:Good news by grimmjeeper · 2015-01-23 07:02 · Score: 1
  
  My nostalgia for the originals extends as far as appreciating reasonably quality dialog, cast that can act instead of woodenly reciting lines in front of a camera, and a story line that is at least remotely compelling, convincing, and entertaining. Not really a high bar to clear but Lucas failed miserably on all of that with the prequels.
21. Re:Good news by Shadow+of+Eternity · 2015-01-23 07:04 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  I rewatched the original trilogy as an adult too and found it to mop the floor with the prequels. The difference is I watched the ACTUAL originals and not whatever even-more-slapstick-and-bad-editing version they're selling now.
  
  --
  A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
22. Re:Good news by jedidiah · 2015-01-23 07:05 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Bullsh*t.
  I remember the original release of Star Wars. It had a wide appeal even to non-child audiences. While it was a somewhat "childish" concept, Lucas did not treat it in childish manner.
  I knew adults that liked Star Wars as much as I did. One couple I knew even had some of the original action figures on display in their living room.
  That's in stark contrast to the prequels that managed to bomb with my own kid.
  Pandering to kids is ultimately selling them short. It's also likely to annoy adults in the audience. Trying to pretend you understand the mind of kids is likely folly. Just having fun yourself is probably a lot easier and more effective.
  
  --
  A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
23. Re: Good news by ThePhilips · 2015-01-23 07:06 · Score: 2
  
  If it would have some story, plot and action, I would definitely watch it.
  The problem is that most Star Wars fans (ditto Star Trek fans) want more of the same, being stuck in the loop of few memorable characters and few distinct fetishes of the original show. Change the characters and/or the fetishes - and it becomes a different show. And fans will not accept it.
  That's why IMO JJ should just ignore the fans altogether and concentrate on making a "good movie", not a "good Star Wars movie".
  
  --
  All hope abandon ye who enter here.
24. Re:Good news by __aaclcg7560 · 2015-01-23 07:07 · Score: 1
  
  Dropped ball in question became a droid. Oy!
25. Re:Good news by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-23 07:08 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  But then you have to just remember how awful JJ's Star Trek movies were.
  Really? The first one was terrible because nothing can live up to the expectations of angry nerds. We all know this. How many of us are convinced that fat bastard from New Zealand raped Valinor and made off with the Silmarils?
  Then you have Khan. Perfectly good movie. And you had nerds raging because herpaderpawhiteguynamedKhanNoonienSingh.
  While ignoring it's the distant future, and we've got white guys named Singh now. And black guys with Jewish last names. And Asians named Smith.
  And people whining about hurrspacejumping while having no problems with rerouting power from the asplody console to the shields numbah one.
  Abrams will do fine. He probably won't do Empire-level excellence, but I have no doubt it won't be the complete clusterfuck that was sand. It's coarse and rough and irritating and IT GETS EVERYWHERE. DO NOT WANT.
26. Re:Good news by kylemonger · 2015-01-23 07:09 · Score: 1
  
  TNG got better in the second second, years before Roddenberry died. The episode "The Measure of a Man" was when I knew the series had turned a corner in its writing and that aired in early 1989. The writers strike cast a pall over the end of season 2 but overall it was worlds better than the stinkaroo first season. As for Star Wars, there's a trove of stories and characters to be mined from the extended universe of Star Wars books and comics. Lucas will be a good consultant to sort the good from the not so good in that morass. Given how many times he's re-edited the old films I can't really believe Lucas' hand will ever be all the way out.
27. Re:Good news by FatdogHaiku · 2015-01-23 07:11 · Score: 1
  
  As long as the plot's NOT in Lucas's hands, I'm happy.
  I agree, let Jar Jar have a shot at it...
  Mesa has great plot lines and also no stinkowiff dialog! Wesa all gonnna be wich!
  
  --
  You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
28. Re:Good news by Tailhook · 2015-01-23 07:12 · Score: 1
  
  His plots
  Plots? Plural?
  The plot is a young male Jedi + sexy princess trying to blowing up the ebil command ship/death star thingee followed by celebration and an awkward award ceremony. This single, recurring plot is punctuated by light saber fights.
  Anyhow, as far as Disney discarding Lucas's work, it's really hard to imagine them doing worse. The only interesting part of this story is that George actually thought enough of his own work that he appears to be surprised they aren't using it. LOL.
  
  --
  Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
29. Re:Good news by Gr8Apes · 2015-01-23 07:14 · Score: 2
  
  The first Transformers movie sucked badly. Really badly. The first Star Wars movie was considered pretty awesome then, and has weathered the years pretty well (think about how many other special effects laden movies are treated well 45 years later). The second Star Wars movie was awesome, and is still considered good. I don't know about others, but the third movie was a major let down, bordering on the ridiculous, and seemed targeted at an age range half of the previous two movies. The prequels were... unmentionable, other than to hold them up to display how additional experience, wisdom, and financial capacity have exactly 0 bearing on the quality of a movie.
  
  --
  The cesspool just got a check and balance.
30. Re:Good news by CrashNBrn · 2015-01-23 07:15 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe he meant: TOS > DS9 > TNG > anything else > anything else > anything else > Voyager
31. Re:Good news by MightyMartian · 2015-01-23 07:16 · Score: 2
  
  I think The Empire Strikes Back still stands up very well. I agree the other two don't have the same magic they once held, but Episode V, which, ironically, had the least involvement from Lucas of the original six films, is extremely well plotted, with better dialog and much more convincing acting. The only thing that comes close to Episode V is the final confrontation between Luke, Vader and the Emperor in RotJ. Unfortunately, that's only a handful of scenes in an otherwise mediocre film.
  
  --
  The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
32. Re:Good news by iluvcapra · 2015-01-23 07:16 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  His plots aren't all that bad.
  Ah, I'd direct you to the writings of Harry Plinkett on that question. It's not just the plot holes, but really fundamental aspects of the prequel films: what is the Trade Federation, why are the blockading, what is the Republic exactly (The queen of Naboo is elected, but the senator of Naboo is appointed?), what is the fundamental cause of the rebellion, what exactly are the Jedi... These reflect on Lucas's really fundamental cynicism, and his inability to write characters as if they're intelligent agents that know what's going on, and his lack of faith in the audience to think about any of this stuff critically.
  The first trilogy managed to keep all these balls in the air, but he didn't write those. George's writing work isn't really represented in any of the original Star Wars films. Larry Kasdan wrote V and VI, and though George's name is on the first one, he had a ton of help from Hal Barwood, Matthew Robbins, Will Huyck, Gloria Katz, Alec Guinness, de Palma, Spielberg and many, many others, who he failed to credit.
  I dunno, he had a great original concept -- Flash Gordon meets World War II genre films -- and he saw it through to the conclusion, and he was the central person in those early films, but all the good stuff happened when he got out of the way and let the actors, Gary Kurtz, John Dykstra, John Williams and his wife Marcia do their magic. At some point in the 80s, after he banished Marcia and Gary and surrounded himself with sycophants, George must have thoroughly convinced himself that he did everything himself.
  
  He doesn't give the actors feedback or direction - he expects them to bring the characters to life and flush out the nuances on his own.
  Note that Michael Bay is known for this as well, and the results are very different. Not good, but different.
  
  I strongly believe that Jake Lloyd was awful in Phantom Menace because of Lucas' directing style.
  
  Jake Lloyd was terrible because George Lucas, himself, didn't know what Anakin was supposed to be or represent, what it was like to be him, what it meant to be a slave on Tatooine, or any of that. The character has no purpose in the movie but to establish that Anakin exists. Even if George were a "hands on" director, he wouldn't have had the slightest idea what to tell him. "Just sit in the cockpit while the battle happens."
  
  --
  Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
33. Re:Good news by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-23 07:16 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Honestly, in the original movies Gary Kurtz his producer kept many of his crazy ideas in check. Lucas wanted to create a Flash Gordon style adventure. Kurtz helped to shape the movies into what they were. The 2000 re-releases were closer to Lucas' original vision. No he didn't have a stroke, he just had a stroke of good luck with the original. He's always been a mediocre director.
34. Re:Good news by LaurenCates · 2015-01-23 07:17 · Score: 1
  
  "Foggy memories and the halo of nostalgia have a way of turning crap into gold"
  I've never been able to bring myself to watch full episodes of the old Thundercats cartoons.
  They were my favorite thing growing up, but a few YouTube clips later and I feel really old and weird.
  
  --
  Some people don't believe in fairies. I don't believe in The Patriarchy.
35. Re:Good news by iluvcapra · 2015-01-23 07:22 · Score: 2
  
  Yeah maybe I meant that. Animated series might actually go higher than the first two seasons on TNG, though.
  
  --
  Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
36. Re:Good news by Grishnakh · 2015-01-23 07:23 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Exactly. And he had a lot of other help; I read somewhere that his (now ex-)wife helped edit the script for ANH to keep it from having the same shit dialog that the Prequels had. And of course ESB and RotJ had other writers and directors. Lucas had a few good ideas for an overall story, then other people came in and cleaned it all up and gave us Episodes 4-6. The Prequels are what you get when Lucas has full control of everything, and the result is crap, some nice ideas, but overall crap.
37. Re:Good news by Isaac-Lew · 2015-01-23 07:28 · Score: 1
  
  It obviously won't really be Star Wars; it won't be the story Lucas wants to tell, and will instead be some sort of mass Hollywood shoveled shit designed to appeal to the modal average and draw in dollars.
  If he really wanted to tell the story, he would have sold the rights *after* making Episodes 7-9. Alternatively, he could have retained writing privileges as a condition of the sale.
  There's no law saying you have to watch the new movies: if you don't think they'll be any good, DON'T GO SEE THEM!
38. Re:Good news by jedidiah · 2015-01-23 07:29 · Score: 1
  
  > I agree. IMO the complaints about the prequels were fueled primarily by nostalgia about the original movies
  It's useful to note that The Phantom Menace managed to NOT win the Oscar for special effects that year. It's especially glaring when you're standing in the theater at ILM looking over at R2-D2 wondering why it's not on their little list. It's absence is conspicuous.
  It wasn't on that list because The Matrix got the Oscar that year.
  
  --
  A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
39. Re:Good news by omnichad · 2015-01-23 07:29 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  JJ is a fan of Star Wars, not Star Trek. He was even quoted as saying he didn't want to direct Star Wars because "I’d rather be in the audience not knowing what was coming, rather than being involved in the minutiae of making them.”
  Then again, M. Night Shyamalan was a fan of Avatar: The Last Airbender and we all know how that turned out.
40. Re:Good news by ndykman · 2015-01-23 07:30 · Score: 1
  
  All too human? What? Nope, not even. They were cookie cutter flat characters that were completely devoid of any emotional reality. I've seen more chemistry between two rocks in a photo than Anakin and Padme in the movies. And there are so many examples of "WTF, people don't do that" "Hey, the person I'm supposed to marry later on and really cares about me, I just killed a entire village because my mom." The reaction wasn't: "Okay" (slowly walks away) "Hello, Jedi hotline, um, yea, one of your students just went completely bat shit serial killer. Please come fix it." No, it's "I get it". Nope, not even close.
  Don't watch this, Obi Wan, it'll be hard to watch. Nope. The correct answer: Holy shit this is, kill this @#$@%$% we must.
  I'm going to arrest you after you tried to kill me repeatedly to cover a plot to destroy our government? Nope. You are a solider, is why you have a sword, you enter battle, two come in, one comes out.
  Okay, the person that tried to assert that guy died, but we have another shot. What do you do? Stride into the room and have a bullshit conversation? Nope. You go Leon, the Professional, cut the lights, drop out of the ceiling and kill that guy with piano wire. Why, because you are an organization that is tasked with keeping this Force thing from going ape-shit nuts, you don't get to play the moral high ground all the time. You learn to kick ass and you have to do it.
  Again, the prequels sucked. The original movies aren't great, but they are a cultural artifact that impacted a lot of people. But, Lucas isn't not a good script writer. Period. Sorry.
41. Re:Good news by iluvcapra · 2015-01-23 07:34 · Score: 1
  
  TNG got better in the second second, years before Roddenberry died.
  Yeah, that's when he got sick though and handed production over to Pillar and Berman. Note that the movies only got good after Roddenberry was kicked up to "Executive Consultant" and was frozen out of the process.
  Even when he was out of the loop on TNG, Roddenberry still managed to screw with early Ron Moore screenplays like The Bonding, loudly insisting that "children in the 24th century wouldn't morn their parent's death."
  Just as a counterexample, note the furferraw when Majel said that Gene would have disapproved of the Dominion War.
  (Yeah I'm a Ron Moore fanboy, as the sig would attest.)
  
  --
  Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
42. Re:Good news by rochrist · 2015-01-23 07:36 · Score: 1
  
  Out of the frying pan and into the fire comes to mind.
43. Re:Good news by aaron4801 · 2015-01-23 07:45 · Score: 1
  
  Call it nostalgia, or even cliche, but the original Star Wars films were the archetypal 'good vs. evil' 'David vs. Goliath' 'farmboy fulfills the prophecy' sort. The Hero with a Thousand Faces. Episode I opens with a trade blockade. I understand Lucas wanting to open up the universe a little, and make it more real, but the tedious, uninteresting parts of 'real' are the worst parts to write into a sci-fi epic.
  You can go back and try to re-edit Episodes 4-6 to take out any unnecessary parts, what gets cut? Maybe a few bits here and there, but nothing significant. Episode I? The entire pod racing scene only exists to sell a related video game. It adds nothing to any character, and it's over 10 minutes long.
44. Re:Good news by d34thm0nk3y · 2015-01-23 07:46 · Score: 1
  
  Lucas did an okay job with the prequels. Arguably, he did too good of a job: the players are all too human, and Jar-Jar is too fluid and well-executed for the movie. It clashes with expectations: people want textbook epic heroes and villains played the way modern, bland actors portray them, not complex human characters thrust into an epic fantasy.
  
  Is this a demonstration of Poe's law?
45. Re:Good news by sexconker · 2015-01-23 07:50 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  The first Transformers movie sucked badly. Really badly.
  The Transformers: The Movie is fucking awesome. It has a great story, an amazing soundtrack, and the most amazing voice cast of any movie ever:
  Peter Cullen
  Frank Welker
  Judd Nelson
  Kasey Kasem
  Eric Idle
  Scatman Crothers
  Lionel Stander
  Leonard Nimoy
  Robert Stack
  Orson Welles
  And you get to top that list off with a song by Weird Al Yankovic.
46. Re:Good news by mrchaotica · 2015-01-23 07:51 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Then you have Khan. Perfectly good movie. And you had nerds raging because herpaderpawhiteguynamedKhanNoonienSingh.
  No, we had nerds raging because the damn thing had plot holes big enough to drive a fucking starship through (except you don't NEED to drive a starship anymore because we can just BEAM TO GODDAMN Q'ONOS now...)!
  
  --
  "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
47. Re:Good news by Stormy+Dragon · 2015-01-23 07:54 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  It was the result of his divorce. Lucas's ex-wife was the editor on all his earlier movies, and his work went to crap as soon as they divorced.
  I'm convinced that Lucas was always terrible and she was just able to edit around his terrible directing.
48. Re:Good news by Lord+Crc · 2015-01-23 07:54 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Have you seen Mr Plinkett[1] pick the originals apart? While the presentation is a bit weird, though funny if you like that kind of thing, his points are spot on and overall does a very good job of explaining why the originals were considerably better than the prequels.
  [1] http://redlettermedia.com/plin...
49. Re:Good news by Slime-dogg · 2015-01-23 07:56 · Score: 1
  
  I'm pretty sure that they have the main writer of Episode V and VI on staff, so I don't think that writing will be much of an issue.
  
  --
  You need to restart your computer. Hold down the Power button for several seconds or press the Restart button.
50. Re:Good news by neilo_1701D · 2015-01-23 07:59 · Score: 1
  
  Even when he was out of the loop on TNG, Roddenberry still managed to screw with early Ron Moore screenplays like The Bonding, loudly insisting that "children in the 24th century wouldn't morn their parent's death."
  However, The Bonding turned into a very interesting story because of that. Now we have the consequences of someone else's guilt being pushed onto another person - in this age of outrage on behalf of someone else, very topical too.
  I agree that generally the scripts and ideas got better as Roddenberry was removing himself from the process - but his overarching vision and narrative framework made the interesting stories possible in the first place. It's that narrative framework that allowed Berman et al to create DS9 and VOY.
  As a counter-example to this, I present Enterprise. See what happens to Star Trek stories that are completely outside Roddenberry's influence.
51. Re:Good news by bluefoxlucid · 2015-01-23 07:59 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Yeah uh, the Jedi lived on ceremony, so didn't do shit like any rational human being. Obi-Wan let Anakin burn because it would be "of the dark side" for him to kill Anakin and put him out of his misery. This is the same reason Ben Carson talks about the world being 6000 years old and Homosexuality being a form of bestiality.
  People aren't rational when given emotional conflicts. In your perception, the moment you backhand a woman, she realizes you are abusive and leaves; in reality, if you beat your woman regularly, she will be convinced you are a great guy and just things sometimes get a little out of hand, and maybe it's her fault, and she should defend you when people talk bad about you because they just don't understand. That's how people work.
  Normal human beings are very broken.
  
  --
  Support my political activism on Patreon.
52. Re: Good news by neilo_1701D · 2015-01-23 08:02 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Star Wars 'ethos' is front and center via the Force, so its harder for JJ to lens flare away the central theme of the story (balance of Light and Dark).
  Lightsaber battles with lens flares. Lots of lightsaber battles. And put lens flares on the lightsabre exhaust ports. And the X-Wings speeding over the water; those water droplets surely must interact with light to cause lens flares.
  'nuff said.
53. Re:Good news by bluefoxlucid · 2015-01-23 08:03 · Score: 1
  
  The difference is whether they're written from George Lucas's ideas of what's actually in the universe and how to construct a story about that, or some fan fiction writer's basement hentai word docs that he's cleaned up now that he's gotten hired to sit in for Uwe Boll. Is it Star Wars, as good or bad as it's going to be; or "random shit we made up and wrote 'Star Wars' on"?
  
  --
  Support my political activism on Patreon.
54. Re:Good news by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-23 08:05 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Are you saying that kids are NOT interested in the drama of unjust taxation of trade routes?
55. Re:Good news by bluefoxlucid · 2015-01-23 08:05 · Score: 1
  
  It's a demonstration of someone who thought the acting in the screenplay for Rocky Horror Picture Show was vastly superior to the acting in Avengers, and who has watched books get criticism for "unrealistic characters" who act uncannily like real human beings put under extreme stress.
  
  --
  Support my political activism on Patreon.
56. Re:Good news by luis_a_espinal · 2015-01-23 08:10 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  I agree. IMO the complaints about the prequels were fueled primarily by nostalgia about the original movies, remembering the delight of seeing them as a child.
  
  Bro. Phantom Menace. Jar Jar Binks. Droids controlled from a single point of failure (even my non-technically inclined friends were like "wtf is that?"). You can't explain the hate of that away just by mere childhood nostalgia. That crap was awful in an absolute sense.
  
  I rewatched the original trilogy as an adult and wasn't nearly so enchanted.
  
  And neither was I (sans RoTJ).
  
  That shouldn't be surprising. These are all children's movies; we grew up. Lucas' movies didn't change so much as we did.
  Sorry, no. Phantom Menace can't be explained away. The Clone Wars and Revenge of the Sith were watchable as they portrayed Anakin's fall (sans the lingering doopey-doopey romance between emo-Anakin and hot-Amigdala and a whole bunch of other crap.)
  But Phanton Menace was some utter crap that stained the other two, and Jar Jar Binks is like the dog turd that stains the sole of your shoe that doesn't come out no matter how much you scrape it on the grass.
  You can't explain the utter fail of that to mere childhood nostalgia. You are crazy.
57. Re:Good news by DontBlameCanada · 2015-01-23 08:11 · Score: 1
  
  While I agree from a story perspective that the pod-racer stuff was fluff, I still pull that scene out to show off what a properly tuned home theatre surround sound system can do. Other movies might more effectively use the multi-channel audio, but aliens racing vehicles trumps mass splatter-fests when you have a mixed-age audience.
58. Re:Good news by slew · 2015-01-23 08:14 · Score: 1
  
  ... Voyager > Enterprise
59. Re: Good news by omnichad · 2015-01-23 08:22 · Score: 1
  
  Carlton Cuse and Damon Lindeloff are to blame for the terrible ending. Abrams gave them a great set-up to screw up.
60. Re:Good news by ahaweb · 2015-01-23 08:22 · Score: 1
  
  You like Titanic and Avatar more than Serenity, we get it.
61. Re:Good news by hondo77 · 2015-01-23 08:23 · Score: 1
  
  It's a demonstration of someone who thought the acting in the screenplay for Rocky Horror Picture Show...
  You can evaluate acting by reading a screenplay? Impressive.
  
  --
  I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
62. Re:Good news by Jason+Levine · 2015-01-23 08:27 · Score: 2
  
  I had the same experience with Voltron. As a kid, I was a huge fan - five lions combining into one giant robot that beats up space monsters? YEAH! When I came on Netflix, I decided to watch it again to relive how wonderful it was. I got a couple of episodes in before I couldn't take it anymore. The plot was horrible, dialog cheesy, and characters barely thicker than cardboard. As a kid, I might be able to overlook a group of kids on the run being somehow able to make their way from the enemy's planet to their own with no explanation (they didn't have or acquire a ship at any point), but as an adult that's a plot hole big enough for Voltron to fly through. Some shows should just be left in the fog of memory.
  
  --
  My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
63. Re:Good news by Mr.+Flibble · 2015-01-23 08:27 · Score: 1
  
  There was no Avatar Movie!
  No!
  That can't be True!
  
  --
  Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
64. Re:Good news by The+Grim+Reefer · 2015-01-23 08:31 · Score: 2
  
  Yeah, at first the idea of Lucas's script not being used sounds great. But then you have to just remember how awful JJ's Star Trek movies were.
  Meh, I'll wait to see it before I decide. The numerous complaints I saw about the new Trek movies were that they were more like Star Wars than Star Trek. So I'd think that JJ Abrams should do fine with this one. Unless he makes Star Wars more like Trek. I figure what ever he does, it will be better than Episode 1.
  The original Star Wars movies get a hell of a boost from nostalgia too. When they were released, there was nothing quite like them. The special effects were amazing. But the story was really nothing original, and the acting (particularly in the first one) was passable, but not great. They were made for kids for the most part. I'm not sure why everyone seems to forget that now. Unfortunately for George Lucas, we all grew up. So making the last three episodes for the same age group pissed off a lot of the very vocal diehard Star Wars fans. My 11 year old loves the new movies much more than the original three.
  I enjoyed the new Trek movies, but they were nothing like Star Trek in my mind. The comparison to Star Wars was, at least, somewhat valid. At least JJ Abrams won't print scenes with lines that were delivered as poorly as they were in Episode 1-3.
65. Re:Good news by Ralph+Wiggam · 2015-01-23 08:39 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  But then you have to just remember how awful JJ's Star Trek movies were.
  Really? The first one was terrible because nothing can live up to the expectations of angry nerds.
  
  Trekkies Bash New Star Trek Film As 'Fun, Watchable'
  http://www.theonion.com/video/trekkies-bash-new-star-trek-film-as-fun-watchable,14333/
66. Re:Good news by Hussman32 · 2015-01-23 08:43 · Score: 1
  
  My view is that George Lucas is great writing the overall story arc, but when it comes to dialog and subtle plotting...he leaves his comfort zone.
  I liked the stories behind Episodes I-III (and IV-VI). But the dialog in the movies (especially II) was hard to listen to.
  
  --
  "Who are you?" "No one of consequence." "I must know." "Get used to disappointment."
67. Re:Good news by ArmoredDragon · 2015-01-23 08:43 · Score: 2
  
  IMO they should just have Quentin Tarantino do Star Wars. We could finally have the glorious final showdown involving JarJar that everybody has been waiting for since he first showed his annoying face in episode 1.
  Though this is Disney now...hmm...I wonder how a Quentin Tarantino Disney film would look.
68. Re:Good news by Your.Master · 2015-01-23 08:47 · Score: 1
  
  Because Star Trek was known for how tight its plotlines were?
69. Re:Good news by painandgreed · 2015-01-23 08:49 · Score: 1
  
  As long as the plot's NOT in Lucas's hands, I'm happy.
  Actually, I thought the plots were fine for the prequels. The scripts needed a rewrite to clean up a few details, rework a character or two, and fix dialogue, but the general idea was ok.
70. Re:Good news by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-23 08:55 · Score: 1
  
  ESB was directed by Irvin Kershner, ROTJ by Rick Marquand. Once you pull Lucas out of the Director's chair, it gets much better. I believe he just got lucky on ANH. If he'd been left to direct the sequels we would never have had the degree of reverence for Star Wars that we have today.
  Sadly, the only real hope to save any of this bullshit is to bitchslap Disney down and raise ole Irv Kershner from the grave. I'll admit I had a small degree of hope when Disney bought it out (despite how deplorably evil they are). When they announced Dipshit McLost as director, it crushed my hopes and dreams all over again as though I was watching Episode I again for the first time. Then they went and basically threw out the entire Expanded Universe, and my dreams that Tim Zahn would write some more awesome books about Thrawn died, too. :(
71. Re:Good news by bluefoxlucid · 2015-01-23 08:59 · Score: 1
  
  You know what I mean. What is the word for a play done on the screen, instead of live on stage?
  
  --
  Support my political activism on Patreon.
72. Re: Good news by muirhead · 2015-01-23 09:00 · Score: 2
  
  As long as it's got Summer Glau then I'm happy.
73. Re:Good news by ndykman · 2015-01-23 09:01 · Score: 1
  
  "Normal human beings are very broken"
  No, they aren't. That was easy.
74. Re:Good news by CrashNBrn · 2015-01-23 09:01 · Score: 1
  
  I think that one is a toss-up, depending on what aspects you liked?
  
  I enjoyed the actual "acting" in Enterprise. Both shows (Enterprise & Voyager) relied far too heavily on "temporal anomolies" (the core basis of each were pretty much centered on them). The difference?
  
  Voyager's plots (and there were a lot) that dealt with "temporal anomolies" used the sitcom-effect, "whatever awesome or terrible event that occurs at the beginning is obviated by the end of the show" -- due to it being a "temporal anomoly".
  
  Enterprise's plots that delved into Time Travel were used as an actual plot-device instead of a throw-away story.
75. Re:Good news by Darinbob · 2015-01-23 09:04 · Score: 1
  
  Don't forget the second two movies, Lucas was making major plot changes during filming. The whole bit about Vader being Luke's father was one such last minute addition. The first movie was the best because it was the only one that was intended to stand on it's own and not just as a part of a continuing-but-unplanned series.
76. Re:Good news by azav · 2015-01-23 09:05 · Score: 1
  
  Holy shit. Whedon would have been beyond perfect.
  That man is a genius and he is the genius we need for thie franchise.
  
  --
  - Zav - Imagine a Beowulf cluster of insensitive clods...
77. Re: Good news by azav · 2015-01-23 09:07 · Score: 1
  
  The immensity of her forehead frightens me.
  
  --
  - Zav - Imagine a Beowulf cluster of insensitive clods...
78. Re:Good news by quantaman · 2015-01-23 09:09 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  But then you have to just remember how awful JJ's Star Trek movies were.
  Really? The first one was terrible because nothing can live up to the expectations of angry nerds.
  It was also terrible because it was terrible.
  Well not quite terrible but completely forgettable in the way that generic sci-fi action flicks are.
  
  Then you have Khan. Perfectly good movie. And you had nerds raging because herpaderpawhiteguynamedKhanNoonienSingh.
  I didn't hear that, though in retrospect it would have been cool to have a non-standard ethnicity in the role.
  Either way I just re-watched the new Khan movie a few days ago, it was better, but still a fairly generic and forgettable action flick.
  
  Abrams will do fine. He probably won't do Empire-level excellence, but I have no doubt it won't be the complete clusterfuck that was sand. It's coarse and rough and irritating and IT GETS EVERYWHERE. DO NOT WANT.
  He'll do fine in the sense that it will be another generic and forgettable action flick.
  I don't really understand why Abrams is getting all these franchises, he did some good TV series but I haven't found his film work to be particularly exceptional.
  That being said I think he's a far better choice for Star Wars than he was for Star Trek. Star Trek was always about exploring the philosophy, something Abrams has never really shown any particular talent for.
  Star Wars on the other hand is more about the myth, which is really the strong point of his best work. Maybe he will make something great with this one.
  
  --
  I stole this Sig
79. Re:Good news by Darinbob · 2015-01-23 09:10 · Score: 1
  
  Personally, I don't see the big deal about the second movie. The first one was great; it stood on its own, it kept a consistent thematic feeling, etc. The second one was just a bridge, no beginning and no end. Lucas still had an ego in check on the first movie and felt like it was written by someone who loved movies. The second movie felt like a sequel.
80. Re:Good news by dywolf · 2015-01-23 09:12 · Score: 1
  
  Willow sucked as did the book adaptions.
  Honestly, I think THX1138 was overrated too.
  This new cartoon thing he has coming looks thoroughly disinteresting as well.
  
  --
  The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
81. Re:Good news by Darinbob · 2015-01-23 09:15 · Score: 1
  
  Though by many insider accounts, Lucas did not have an overall story arc planned from the start, but that is how he likes to present himself. The first movie stands by itself, he was absolutely uncertain there would ever be a sequel, he wasn't even sure it would be popular. The other movies were tacked on later and people who worked on the films said that major script changes were happening during filiming. I will admit that he probably had some larger vision imagined but I seriously doubt it was at any level of detail.
82. Re:Good news by Chalnoth · 2015-01-23 09:17 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  In large part, I think Harrison Ford really carried the first trilogy. After I'd learned that Ford improvised a number of his lines, I watched the trilogy again and noticed just how wooden and dead nearly all of the other characters in the movies were.
  I do think that this trilogy stands a much better chance as long as Lucas isn't writing the dialog. He's okay, I think, as far as overall plot is concerned. But dialog and characters really aren't his strong suit.
  As for Abrams, his main problem, it seems to me, is that he seems to focus a bit over-much on action sequences. But Star Wars works pretty well with that, so I'm not too concerned. I think it might work fairly well.
83. Re:Good news by Grishnakh · 2015-01-23 09:17 · Score: 1
  
  Too late now. Thanks a lot, Disney.
84. Re:Good news by Yunzil · 2015-01-23 09:27 · Score: 2, Insightful
  
  Plot holes? In Star Trek?????
  Say it ain't so.
85. Re:Good news by bluefoxlucid · 2015-01-23 09:29 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  If you ever look at interviews or post-war writings by historical figures when their diaries are also available, you'll find a huge disconnect in perception. During the war, you get "nobody saw this happening" and "it's all winding down now, and will be blown over in a few days"; after the war, you get "everyone was on-edge with the thickening tensions in the air" and "the end was nowhere in sight, and we were desperately afraid it would go on forever." People remember a completely different narrative.
  
  --
  Support my political activism on Patreon.
86. Re:Good news by Yunzil · 2015-01-23 09:32 · Score: 1
  
  But then you have to just remember how awful JJ's Star Trek movies were.
  Hmm, no, I just remember how much I liked them.
87. Re:Good news by Grishnakh · 2015-01-23 09:36 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, lots of people liked the Transformers movies too. And lots of other people actually liked the SW Prequels.
88. Re: Good news by Stormy+Dragon · 2015-01-23 09:38 · Score: 1
  
  She left the business 30 years ago.
89. Re:Good news by Yunzil · 2015-01-23 09:44 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, but those people are wrong.
  Rottentomatoes ranking for the new Star Treks: 95% and 87%
  For the Prequels: 57, 67, 80 (which are still too high)
  For the last three Transformers movies: 19, 36, 18
90. Re:Good news by Hussman32 · 2015-01-23 09:51 · Score: 1
  
  I know for certain that they had the storyline of Obi-wan and Vader fighting on a planet with streams of lava and Vader was burned severely and had lost limbs because around 1981-82 my stepbrother told me that he read that in an interview (I don't remember if it was before or after Episode V release).
  The rest of the plot? I have no idea.
  
  --
  "Who are you?" "No one of consequence." "I must know." "Get used to disappointment."
91. Re:Good news by tnk1 · 2015-01-23 09:55 · Score: 1
  
  To be fair, it was always made 100% clear that the Expanded Universe could go that way. They basically turned on its ear whatever people were thinking about the Clone Wars with the prequels, so its not like trashing EU stuff is unprecedented.
  And while shitcanning the EU does trash many good stories, but it also trashes some ridiculous crap too.
  I did hear that they are probably going to work some of what is now in "Legends" back into the canon by linking to some of it in the new movies. Its probably not going to restore anything like full stories, but they could throw in Thrawn references in the movies and such to make him canon.
  The new movie has the original characters as much older, so that's well after the Thrawn stories and Dark Empire and a bunch of other things.
  It may not be so bad. (Famous last words, I know...)
92. Re:Good news by tnk1 · 2015-01-23 10:06 · Score: 2
  
  Sorry, but while TOS did do a lot of exploring philosophy and some groundbreaking stuff, it was full of glorious almost campy action throughout. That's because Roddenberry actually hadn't forgotten what audiences wanted to see on TV.
  TNG was preachy at the beginning and then they fixed it. TNG was never horrible, but the first season was sort of blah and I think it only really made it because "ZOMG HOLY SHIT WE HAVE TREK BACK AND PATRICK STEWART AND THE ENTERPRISE-D, FUCK YEAH!"
  The thing that comes closest to a philosophical masterpiece of Trek is probably the snoozefest that is TMP. Trek's answer to 2001, only not really.
  Kirk punched people out and had sex with green slave girls. The only thing that the new Trek got wrong about all that is that their portrayal of sex was presented stylistically as fan service, and they made Kirk into a frat boy instead of a red-blooded macho hero-type.
93. Re:Good news by meta-monkey · 2015-01-23 10:12 · Score: 1
  
  There's a series on io9.com called "Worst Episode Ever" where one of the writers finds old episodes of Thundercats, G.I. Joe, Transformers, etc and writes commentary about their plots. The articles are "I can't breathe I'm laughing so hard" funny. Look them up if you remember the 80s.
  
  --
  We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
94. Re:Good news by meta-monkey · 2015-01-23 10:13 · Score: 1
  
  YOU GOT THE TOUCH! YOU GOT THE POOOWWAAAAHHH!
  and then here is a bunch of lowercase letters for no particular reason whatsoever.
  
  --
  We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
95. Re:Good news by farble1670 · 2015-01-23 10:13 · Score: 1
  
  Droids controlled from a single point of failure
  "... under 12 parsecs .."
  an artificial moon that they decided to name "death star"
  ewoks
  that cheesy scene where obi-wan and vader showed up as force-ghosts
  muppet yoda
  hammil's terrible acting
  the most stereotypical villian ever (deep scary voice, a black helmet and cap ... and so on)
  the piles, and piles of action figures and ships that have ended up in land fills
  THAT crap was awful.
  the problem is, as it keeps getting stated is that when we watched Star Wars 4-6, we were kids so all that stuff didn't bother us. when we watch 1-3, we were adults and it did. 1-3 are not great movies, but let's face it, 1-3 are essentially the same style and quality as 4-6. they have a larger special effects budgets, and more marketing. that's it.
96. Re:Good news by j2.718ff · 2015-01-23 10:13 · Score: 2
  
  Yeah, at first the idea of Lucas's script not being used sounds great. But then you have to just remember how awful JJ's Star Trek movies were.
  Those were Star Trek movies? All this time I thought I was watching Star Wars. That explains why Sulu's light saber was made out of metal.
97. Re:Good news by lgw · 2015-01-23 10:15 · Score: 1
  
  Titanic and Avatar had better visuals than Serenity, to be sure, and Titanic had some good performances. I thought Avatar was a bucket of problems and flaws with some pretty colors, but really there's few of it's many, mnay flaws that I'm blame on a director. Bad story, bad characters, bad writing is every possible way, sure, but good direction, and the acting wasn't bad relative to the script (there's little an actor, even with great direction, can do to rescue a horribly trite and shallow character, but no one seemed to be phoning it in.)
  I wouldn't want Cameron to make a Star Wars movie, because he wouldn't just direct, he'd control other things. I wouldn't want Whedon either - just the wrong tone. Just like Abrams entirely missed the tone of Trek.
  It's really obvious from the directors commentary to the Start Trek reboot that most of the flaws in that film come directly from him trying to make a Star Wars film in the wrong franchise! I look forward to his Star Wars movie, lens flares and all, because he'll at least get the tone right.
  
  --
  Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
98. Re:Good news by Guspaz · 2015-01-23 10:45 · Score: 1
  
  Except Lucas didn't direct or write Empire, and he didn't direct or solely write Jedi. He came up with the story, and then other people wrote the screenplay and directed it. I think George Lucas isn't too bad at coming up with plot, but he's not so great at writing or directing. We've all heard the stories about how Star Wars was originally a rather terrible film that was saved in editing, but compare the quality of the dialog between Star Wars and Empire. There's a huge improvement between the two...
99. Re:Good news by tnk1 · 2015-01-23 10:49 · Score: 1
  
  Enterprise evolved in some senses from Voyager, but it evolved in removing those parts of Trek that I cared to see. Voyager went wrong, horribly wrong, but if someone had taken a firm hold of that series and turned it around, Voyager really could have been the exploration series that really took Trek boldly where no man had gone before.
  Unfortunately they took the worst parts of Voyager, bolted on some stuff, and boldly went where Trek had already gone before.
  Hey everyone! Let's rediscover the Klingons!
  Boring. And I was sort of interested in that time period of Trek, even. Still boring.
  And the time travel. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. Stop, just stop.
  Did Enterprise use all of the fan feedback from Voyager, and then use that as a model for the stuff that they would do the opposite of? "They don't want time travel? Let's make turn vast segments of the show in to a Temporal Cold War! What a great idea!"
  And fighting against like 30th Century people who can screw with the timeline in your gimpy-ass starship and winning.
  I'm sure that there is a lot of hard work, skill, and training that goes into being a TV producer that I don't have, but how the fuck does someone keep pushing the same ridiculous types of stories over and over, when they know how badly it went the last time they did it?
100. Re:Good news by quantaman · 2015-01-23 10:51 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Sorry, but while TOS did do a lot of exploring philosophy and some groundbreaking stuff, it was full of glorious almost campy action throughout. That's because Roddenberry actually hadn't forgotten what audiences wanted to see on TV.
  TNG was preachy at the beginning and then they fixed it. TNG was never horrible, but the first season was sort of blah and I think it only really made it because "ZOMG HOLY SHIT WE HAVE TREK BACK AND PATRICK STEWART AND THE ENTERPRISE-D, FUCK YEAH!"
  The thing that comes closest to a philosophical masterpiece of Trek is probably the snoozefest that is TMP. Trek's answer to 2001, only not really.
  Kirk punched people out and had sex with green slave girls. The only thing that the new Trek got wrong about all that is that their portrayal of sex was presented stylistically as fan service, and they made Kirk into a frat boy instead of a red-blooded macho hero-type.
  I'm not saying Star Trek should be a plodding intellectual discussion, the action and adventure is an essential part, but without the philosophy the films have no heart.
  Look at Wrath of Khan, you open up with Kobayashi Maru, a discussion about dealing with hopeless situations, and then transition to a discussion about growing old.
  Khan isn't just a random villain, he has a somewhat legitimate grudge against Kirk who exiled him and his crew on a planet and then never checked up on them and thus never realized the world was dying.
  In the new Star Trek Kirk is basically a kid with a spaceship, there's very little underlying philosophy guiding his actions and to the extent it does come up emotion is driving his philosophy rather than the other way around.
  Even the first TNG movies remembered this and have a bit of lasting power, the new Trek movies are just very forgettable.
  
  --
  I stole this Sig
101. Re: Good news by tnk1 · 2015-01-23 10:53 · Score: 1
  
  That's probably the point. There was a set up to nothing. Nobody, including the writers, had any idea what Lost was supposed to be about.
  And that is the clever metagame with a show called Lost.
  "Hey JJ, they're still watching a show about nothing! Get Seinfeld on the phone to collect on your bet that we couldn't pull that act twice on the TV watching population"
102. Re:Good news by tnk1 · 2015-01-23 11:01 · Score: 1
  
  Spot-on about the whole slave on Tatooine thing.
  Lucas managed to take something like grinding slavery and make me forget that this could be a reason why Anakin had a chip on his shoulder.
  I mean, Anakin just seemed like some poor kid who got to have fun building his own robot. Lucas probably meant us to think that this is an exceptional thing: "How can this slave build a full-on droid while being a slave????" What I got from it was actually, "Yeah, Anakin is kind of a slave I guess, but he gets great Christmas presents."
  I swear that if they switched up that part of Episode 1 introducing Anakin with the beginning of Conan the Barbarian, Darth Vader would have made a shitload more sense as someone who had been a survivor of slavery, while still being someone who could still become something like a hero, albeit with the chance of falling to the dark side due to just the shitty, shitty life he started with.
103. Re: Good news by omnichad · 2015-01-23 11:15 · Score: 1
  
  There was an endgame. The audience guessed it, but the writers changed it so that the audience's guess would be wrong. It's a stupid mistake that they never should have done. You can clearly see where that happened at the turning point of Season 6.
104. Re:Good news by tnk1 · 2015-01-23 11:15 · Score: 1
  
  I don't disagree with you too much. The new movies are fun, and I feel they resurrect a part of TOS that I think got lost in later Trek, but you're right, I think they tell the story in a way that says:
  "You already know who all these people are, so let's ignore the part where we bother to fill the holes in the plot."
  For instance, Kirk goes from cadet at the Academy to Captain of a starship. It was almost like he Riddicked the Enterprise and "kept what he killed" or whatever. I mean, sure... maybe he got to be temporary captain for that mission. That made a modicum of sense. But no, at the end, he's now the captain. Unlike "real" Kirk who was a youngish man, but still had a full military career before becoming captain.
  Khan, of course, suffered from the "okay, we already know who he is because we saw Space Seed and The Wrath of Khan," except that, of course, James T Kirk in the new timeline had *not* seen those episodes and Old Spock pointing out that Khan was a really bad man, was probably not going to be enough to explain why Khan was now Sherlock.
  I have to admit that I did have a bit of a subversive chuckle at the military style uniforms they used for Starfleet in "Into Darkness". For some reason, I'd have thought that would have had more people howling, because it made Starfleet look a lot more obviously military.
  For all of that, though, I do sort of still get a TOS vibe from the new movies. I just hope if they do another one, that they do get a little more introspective, between explosions. But I still totally want explosions, and green Orion girls.
105. Re:Good news by AmiMoJo · 2015-01-23 11:23 · Score: 1
  
  Those would be the rose-tinted spectacles that the GP was talking about. Transformers: The Movie was primarily designed to sell some new toys. To that end, all the characters we loved and which had been built up over two seasons of the cartoon were killed off with meaningless, lame deaths in the first 20 minutes. The battle between Prime and Megatron was short and anti-climactic, and then the rest of the movie was about a bunch of losers no-one cared about.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
106. Re:Good news by Livius · 2015-01-23 11:33 · Score: 1
  
  Lucas is a hands-off director.
  Isn't that a complicated way of saying he's an awful director who got lucky a few times with casting?
107. Re:Good news by guises · 2015-01-23 11:46 · Score: 2
  
  I like Blomkamp a lot, but he hasn't shown any flexibility as yet. His movies, his shorts, and his commercials all have the same sort of style - it's a good style, it's refreshing, but it isn't Star Wars. According to Wikipedia the last movies Lasseter directed were Cars / Cars 2, and I don't think del Toro is really any better than Abrams.
  
  Would Cameron have done it? I get the impression no. Whedon might have been very good, but Abrams wasn't a terrible choice for this. I am cautiously optimistic.
108. Re:Good news by NormalVisual · 2015-01-23 12:41 · Score: 1
  
  I actually didn't have much of a problem with the cast of the sequels, with the notable exceptions of Jake Lloyd, Hayden Christensen, Natalie Portman, and Ahmed Best. In fairness to them though, it would have been hard for anyone to pull off the insipid dialog they were often given - in particular the love scenes with Anakin and Padme were just painful to watch, as was any scene with Jar Jar. I did think that Ewan McGregor and Ian McDiarmid were outstanding in all three, though.
  
  --
  Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
109. Re:Good news by NormalVisual · 2015-01-23 12:50 · Score: 1
  
  I remember reading about it in Starlog magazine a year or two after the first movie came out (although it was told as Vader falling into a volcano after fighting Obi-Wan), and the story of the Emperor being a senator that maneuvered himself into unlimited power was in the prologue to the original movie's novelization back in 1977.
  
  --
  Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
110. Re:Good news by NormalVisual · 2015-01-23 12:59 · Score: 1
  
  Even when he was out of the loop on TNG, Roddenberry still managed to screw with early Ron Moore screenplays like The Bonding, loudly insisting that "children in the 24th century wouldn't morn their parent's death."
  
  Apparently he forgot about the TOS episode "And the Children Shall Lead" when he said that. It was one of Freiberger's episodes, so I guess he could argue that he wasn't too involved.
  
  --
  Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
111. Re:Good news by sexconker · 2015-01-23 13:04 · Score: 1
  
  Wrong. The deaths were impactful and gave weight to the story. It wasn't your typical Saturday morning good guys win bad guys lose tripe. There were consequences. The battle between Optimus Prime and Megatron was paced perfectly. You're a fucking moron if you think having the main protagonist and main antagonist, who also happen to be the two most popular characters, fucking die is anti-climactic.
  I bet you're the type of dipshit who prefers the fast cut, shakey cam, 20 minute shitfest where protagonist A fights antagonist B for a bit, then we switch to supporting character C doing some bullshit with the computers in a race against time, then we switch to female protagonist X fighting female antagonist Y for a bit, then we switch back to the main fight between A and C, all of which are resolved nearly simultaneously with the good guys winning and the bad guys losing, typically with the good guys refusing to kill the bad guys once defeated, but the bad guys going for a last ditch dirty move when the good guys turn their backs, only for the good guys to respond with a lethal finishing move.
112. Re:Good news by Richy_T · 2015-01-23 13:17 · Score: 1
  
  Gotta agree. I like Star Wars and Star Trek fine but I think what Abrams brought to Trek will be far more suitable to SW. Except the lens flare, that is.
113. Re:Good news by ATMAvatar · 2015-01-23 13:24 · Score: 1
  
  We could finally have the glorious final showdown involving JarJar that everybody has been waiting for since he first showed his annoying face in episode 1.
  Hostel 3: meesa gonna die now.
  
  --
  "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
114. Re:Good news by RedWizzard · 2015-01-23 13:35 · Score: 2
  
  Titanic and Avatar had better visuals than Serenity, to be sure, and Titanic had some good performances. I thought Avatar was a bucket of problems and flaws with some pretty colors, but really there's few of it's many, mnay flaws that I'm blame on a director.
  That's hardly surprising. Titanic had 5 times the budget of Serenity and Avatar's was even larger. I was at least as impressed with the visuals in The Avengers as I was with Titanic and Firefly was extremely impressive visually for a TV show of that period.
  It's quite hard to separate Cameron's direction of Avatar from his other roles of writer, editor, and producer. When a scene didn't work was it badly directed? Or badly edited? Or just poorly written? It's hard to tell. A perfectly well written scene can be ruined with poor direction and even if well written and directed it can be butchered by poor editing. In the end it doesn't actually matter because ultimately the bad result was the product of the same man's creative failure. As you say Cameron wouldn't simply direct a Star Wars movie. Whedon would probably not stick to directing either but I have rather more confidence in his ability to produce something good.
115. Re: Good news by jd2112 · 2015-01-23 14:25 · Score: 2
  
  Kill Jar-Jar: Vols 1&2
  
  --
  Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
116. Re: Good news by Mateorabi · 2015-01-23 14:47 · Score: 1
  
  We call that a fivehead.
  
  --
  "You saved 1968." - Ms. Valerie Pringle to the crew of Apollo 8
117. Re:Good news by iluvcapra · 2015-01-23 15:00 · Score: 1
  
  In that case they were under the influence of a malevolent entity... :)
  
  --
  Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
118. Re:Good news by iluvcapra · 2015-01-23 15:01 · Score: 1
  
  However, The Bonding turned into a very interesting story because of that
  It's a good episode, but when Moore finally got to do his holodeck-as-coping-mechanism episode in It's Only a Paper Moon, it was one of the best episodes in the entire ST universe...
  I liked Enterprise, particularly the Manny Coto episodes.
  
  --
  Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
119. Re:Good news by dcollins · 2015-01-23 15:58 · Score: 1
  
  Bullshit, and a pox on the prequel apologists. As an adult in the last decade or so I've seen all kinds of movies (et. al.) that fill me with equal enjoyment as the original Star Wars movies when I was a kid/teen. Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings movies, most of the Marvel superhero movies, etc., truly amazing works of wonder. But Lucas' prequels were appalling, offensive crap. Even among the original movies the standout is Empire which he didn't direct.
  
  --
  We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
120. Re:Good news by elfprince13 · 2015-01-23 17:40 · Score: 1
  
  I think this misses a little bit the problem with Lucas's film-making. The problem has never been the plot - he's fantastic at that. It's the dialogue and characterization. He does mythic, not interpersonal. I'd be all for a trilogy in which Lucas provided the plot structure and someone else handled the script-writing. This is basically what happened with the original trilogy, and it was amazing.
121. Re:Good news by elfprince13 · 2015-01-23 17:42 · Score: 1
  
  or...Andrew Stanton. Or Brad Bird.
122. Re:Good news by Zanadou · 2015-01-23 18:02 · Score: 1
  
  IMO they should just have Quentin Tarantino do Star Wars. We could finally have the glorious final showdown involving JarJar that everybody has been waiting for since he first showed his annoying face in episode 1.
  http://www.dustinresch.com/pulpphantom/phantom1.html
123. Re:Good news by The+Evil+Atheist · 2015-01-23 18:20 · Score: 1
  
  Watch the original series and start asking similar questions. What is the empire and why did they feel a need to report to the senate that all aboard were killed? Why would an empire have a senate? Why is this mystical old man looking out for this kid and does not get along with the kid's uncle? Maybe, not everything needs to be explained in the one sitting?
  
  --
  Those who do not learn from commit history are doomed to regress it.
124. Re:Good news by Wing_Zero · 2015-01-23 18:48 · Score: 1
  
  ummm
  http://www.collegehumor.com/vi...
  Granted, it's a college humor link, but it's a valid example
125. Re:Good news by AmiMoJo · 2015-01-23 21:35 · Score: 1
  
  Brawn, Prowl, Ratchet and Ironhide were all killed in the first five minutes with barely a fight, and for no other reason than to make way for the new toys.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
126. Re: Good news by iluvcapra · 2015-01-24 03:18 · Score: 1
  
  Right but none of that stuff in the original series is important. What "the Imperial Senate" is or Owen Lars's attitude to Kenobi aren't dispositve on the plot, if you simply removed those elements, the movie would still make sense.
  But you can't simply excise the trade federation blockade, it's the entire conflict of the first movie, and it happens for effectively no reason.
  The Jedi are more frustrating because we get alternate theories depending on George's convenience. At one point they're "keepers of the peace, not soldiers" and Quai-Gon "can't fight a war" for Padme, and through the rest of the movies they're effectively the generals of the Clone Army. Was there a conflict or some kind of contradiction there? Surely Yoda would have seen this as contrary to the Jedi code, but he was just as enthusiastic a soldier as anyone. It's werid. These questions go to the very core of the prequel trilogy, without resolution these movies make no sense, and thus they don't.
  
  --
  Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
127. Re: Good news by Kyogreex · 2015-01-24 04:18 · Score: 1
  
  I don't really care either way, but using the aggregate time is a poor measure of how it effects the experience of watching the film. Frequency is more important, because even if each instance doesn't last long, it's noticeable.
128. Re: Good news by The+Evil+Atheist · 2015-01-24 05:14 · Score: 1
  
  Except, for me, watching the prequels makes all that unimportant stuff in the original series important. After watching how the Republic fell apart, you understand why there was an emperor and why Senate approval was still a thing.
  
  Same with the prequels. They weren't explained because it wasn't important to the plot what they were. It only mattered that they were there. Given all the extra stuff that doesn't happen in the movies, you would think dedicated "fans" would put two and two together and think "hey, it may be answered outside of the movies, just like every other thing". And guess what? The whole thing about how the Republic functioned before being reorganized into an empire is further elaborated on outside the movies.
  
  I think people were just determined to hate the movies because they didn't like that George went back and changed the original films. "Han shot first" and all that.
  
  Did you ever think that it was the POINT that the Jedi's roles were confusing? That not even the Jedi knew what they were supposed to be as the Republic started failing? Did the fact that the Jedi did not see the Sith coming not clue anyone in to the fact that the whole point was to show that the Jedi's ideologies got themselves into a confusing mess which the Sith took advantage of?
  
  Those questions go to the core of the movies. And when has every story in existence served to placate everyone by ending neatly? Has anyone considered that it was the point that things are left open ended so they can be addressed later, while leaving things open for discussion and interpretation in the mean time?
  
  I really question people who call themselves fans of Star Wars (me, not really being one myself), and fans of "intelligent culture" when they insist everything must be answered for them. I expect this attitude for boring action summer flicks. Not from a story that some people consider it worthy to create a religion around.
  
  But then, I grew up on a steady diet of anime like Evangelion or Lain where nothing really makes much sense because they don't tell you everything and expect you to give your own interpretations.
  
  --
  Those who do not learn from commit history are doomed to regress it.
129. Re:Good news by stoatwblr · 2015-01-24 05:32 · Score: 1
  
  I always took Star Wars to be a straight homage to 1930s horse/space operas and the dialogue/plots to be deliberate
  ie: 2 dimensional characters, black/white morality, wooden dialogue were _intentional_
  On that basis, Lucas' plots were a intentionally that way. I could see many objecting, but an image evoking saturday matinee movies of a bygone era isn't always a bad thing.
130. Re:Good news by HuguesT · 2015-01-24 06:17 · Score: 1
  
  At the time it was innovative in many ways.
131. Re:Good news by Vastad · 2015-01-24 06:22 · Score: 1
  
  I know the scene you're talking about very well. I know the whole movie very well and its soundtrack is on my iPod playlist.
  At the tender single digit age I saw it, the brutal, rapid and almost careless way that 4 characters were simply murdered - especially Ironhide who was such an integral part of the first TV season of Transformers - had a major jaw-on-the-floor impact on me, setting the mood and tension for the rest of the movie. It informed me that this Cybertonian war was serious business just in case the whole opening sequence with the planet being devoured didn't succeed in conveying that.
  I identified with Daniel Witwicky and that epic Stan Bush song will always have a place in my heart. Can you imagine my joy when the same song is featured in Saints Row IV for a pivotal scene in the main story?
  
  I have watched it again several times as a much older person and you know what? It's one of the few 80s movies/cartoons that survived the lack of rose-tinted glasses (I'm looking at you Galaxy Rangers). I didn't sit there with my cynical hat on thinking they were doing this to get money off me. The Sharkticon pitfight "One hell of a repair bill", the Dinobots "Me Grimlock say execute them!" sparking a revolution, Leonard Nimoy delivering that delicious line at Starscream's ceremony "Coronation Starscream? This is bad comedy" and then killing him. Just "BLAM!" and he turns to carbon dust. Sure it was cheesy but me and the kid down the street who had the VHS, we incorporated Wreck-Gar's "TV-Speak" in our shenanigans around the neighbourhood. We always cracked up at the same bit where Daniel says "Yeah! I did it!" because it was such a bad piece of dialogue.
  
  There was so much other good stuff, I just can't see how Ironhide missing a chance to do some bad cowboy flick "it's gettin' cold Sarge...will ah see mah mutha-board again?" death rattle can somehow ruin it for you. Seriously?
  I think what I'm trying to say in a very long-winded way is that it sucks you cannot enjoy the 1986 movie the same way I can.
132. Re: Good news by iluvcapra · 2015-01-24 06:55 · Score: 1
  
  Except, for me, watching the prequels makes all that unimportant stuff in the original series important. After watching how the Republic fell apart, you understand why there was an emperor and why Senate approval was still a thing.
  Really? You know why the Republic fell apart? You know why the assent of the Senate was required? When did they explain any of that? The Republic didn't fall apart, Palpatine just lied to everyone and the entire senate just rolled over and accepted it, even people who knew he was lying did nothing to actually stop him, to tell others bout his misdeeds, or rally members of the senate against him. The Senate makes no sense. From the beginning of the trilogy to the end it serves no purpose and it could be completely excised without changing the actual stories a whit.
  The Jedi oppose the Sith; the senate represents people we never meet, don't fight in the war, have nothing to lose from the war, and no matter what the senate does or does not do, the characters just do what they were always going to do anyway.
  
  Given all the extra stuff that doesn't happen in the movies, you would think dedicated "fans" would put two and two together and think "hey, it may be answered outside of the movies, just like every other thing".
  So what you're telling me is, yes, the movies make no sense, but I should give them a mulligan because maybe they'd be better if I knew stuff from the Expanded Universe? Doesn't the movie have to stand on its own? Understand, I'm talking about books, or Expanded media, or things that happen "outside the movies." All that matters is the movie; if A New Hope had the sort of plot mess that Phantom Menace did, there would be no books or expanded universe, there would be no Empire Strikes Back. Star Wars would have just been another bad sci-fi movie and Damnation Alley would have been Fox's big movie of 1977.
  
  Did you ever think that it was the POINT that the Jedi's roles were confusing? That not even the Jedi knew what they were supposed to be as the Republic started failing?
  This is an interesting theory. It's not given any treatment in the prequels. At no point does any Jedi say anything like "What's going on, why are we doing this?" They act like everything is business as usual.
  
  I really question people who call themselves fans of Star Wars (me, not really being one myself), and fans of "intelligent culture" when they insist everything must be answered for them.
  
  We can argue about the depth and consistency of the Star Wars universe until the cows come home, because for an inconsistency I find, you can just invent a plausible explanation and demand I accept it, because to do anything less would be "asking to be given all the answers." When, in fact, I'm not asking for "all the answers," I'm asking for a story that's dramatic and comprehensible, and characters that have actual motivations.
  Are the prequel trilogy actual movies? Or are they just visual aides for a bunch of expanded universe novels? Cause that's how they play -- read the book to find out what's happening, then go to chapter 2 of the DVD to see what it looked like.
  
  But then, I grew up on a steady diet of anime like Evangelion or Lain where nothing really makes much sense because they don't tell you everything and expect you to give your own interpretations.
  Evengelion is endlessly compelling because it's clear that he's trying to say something. And Eva is deeply wrapped up in the inner lives and psychology of the characters, the giant robots are just props. When in the prequels do we ever get an inner monologue? Or any character express an internal state of mind? Anakin comes close, but we never really understand why he does what he does.
  
  --
  Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
133. Re:Good news by HuguesT · 2015-01-24 07:09 · Score: 1
  
  In episode V we have consistent great dialog, especially with Han Solo, excellent action, a sputtering Millenium Falcon, a really badass lightsaber & force fight, and of course, "Obi-Wan never told you what happened to your father, etc". We also have much better improved special effects compared with the wireframe rendering of the death star of Ep IV; Darth Vador gets really angry with the military brass. Best of all, there are now Ewoks.
134. Re:Good news by StarFace · 2015-01-24 08:44 · Score: 1
  
  You can practically follow the plot!
  
  --
  V
135. Re:Good news by Optali · 2015-01-24 11:41 · Score: 1
  
  oooooh yeah!!!!
  
  --
  -- 29A the number of the Beast
136. Re:Good news by ConceptJunkie · 2015-01-24 13:08 · Score: 1
  
  I rewatched the original trilogy as an adult (I was a teenager when they came out) and still felt the first and third were pretty good, and yes, nostalgia plays a part of that, but my opinion of "The Empire Strikes Back" improved significantly. I like it much more now than when I first saw it.
  
  --
  You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
137. Re:Good news by ConceptJunkie · 2015-01-24 13:15 · Score: 1
  
  Lucas is a visionary. He sucks at the details. He set out to recreate the Saturday morning serials with "Star Wars" and was very successful in setting a new bar in special effects. His vision for the scope and scale of the movie, the simplicity of the characters, being mythical archetypes, perfectly fit what he was shooting for, and made for a fun and exciting movie. But he can't write dialog to save his life. Even the dialog in "Star Wars" wasn't great, and in the sequels, it was awful. He also cannot direct people, because everyone in the prequels looked like awful actors, even though they aren't.
  But he's got the vision, an eye for the kind of spectacle that makes great movies, and should be recognized as such. The problem was when he was allowed to also do those things he was really awful at.
  
  --
  You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
138. Re:Good news by ConceptJunkie · 2015-01-24 13:21 · Score: 1
  
  A lot of people say that having seen the movies as an adult they don't hold up as well as when they saw them as kids. Does "Star Wars" affect me the same as an adult as it did when I was 12? No, but I still think it's a fine movie. However, my opinion of "Empire" has increased significantly since I first saw it with my Dad in the theater.
  
  --
  You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
139. Re: Good news by ConceptJunkie · 2015-01-24 13:35 · Score: 1
  
  Just as an exercise, imagine the original star wars movies without the spaceships and you'll know what i mean.
  Do you mean this?
  
  --
  You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
140. Re: Good news by The+Evil+Atheist · 2015-01-24 13:40 · Score: 1
  
  I barely know anything about the Expanded Universe and I thought the prequels answered all those questions in and of themselves. People just don't pay enough attention or think through the implications far enough. The Republic does fall apart. What do you think the Separatists were? A happy unified Republic? Palpatine didn't just lie to the Republic and people rolled over. He started the war which pushed systems into his control, many times unwillingly.
  
  The Senate is necessary. They were inept due to bureaucracy and corruption, and thus explained why some Jedi and others felt they had to do things outside the system. That was the point. The Senate is just a fact as to how the Republic was organized at that time and part of the world building. Do you think world building is pointless? Do you complain about world building in other films or series?
  
  Or would you prefer Star Wars be a bland story about absolutely good guys versus absolutely evil guys. Absolutely evil guys who happened to be emperor just because. All this stuff logically falls out of the prequels alone if people actually bothered to think about it. And I say this as only a minor fan of Star Wars.
  
  Star Wars IS actually just another bad sci fi movie. Imagine that exact same movie coming out today instead of 1977. It would have been critically panned. Wooden acting. Bad dialog. Predictable plot that is also a mess. About the only thing that stands up is the visual effects, ironically enough. Also the music.
  
  Think about this: the famous opening crawl. Right from the beginning, we are told that the Empire is evil and therefore the Rebels must be the good guys. We don't see that developed. We are just TOLD that and we must believe it. If that counts as acceptably self-contained to you, I don't think we can talk sensibly. Or how about the fact that Luke is Vader's son and to top it off, Leia his daughter. You get no explanation, other than the fact that they were. And people just accept this about the original series and have a double standard for the prequels?
  
  Bottom line is, everything people have with the prequels I can easily see apply to the original. The only thing saving the originals is nostalgia and people's hatred of the re-edited versions. There are many things in the original Star Wars that simply make no sense and is unnecessary until you take into account the later movies.
  
  Star Wars, unlike Evangelion, isn't an inner monologue kind of movie. There were none in the original series and it would be out of place in terms of style. They were all said aloud. So actually, we do understand why Anakin does what he does. It may have been badly written, but not any more than the original series and motivations.
  
  You have problems with Anakin's story, but you seem to have absolutely no trouble accepting that Luke grew up with his uncle and aunt, who were practically his parents, and comes back to find them murdered and smoldering. And with barely any emotion, he just goes off with Obi Wan and it's never mentioned again. That's apparently okay with people but not Anakin's (similarly badly written and acted) story?
  
  --
  Those who do not learn from commit history are doomed to regress it.
141. Re: Good news by iluvcapra · 2015-01-24 15:26 · Score: 1
  
  Or would you prefer Star Wars be a bland story about absolutely good guys versus absolutely evil guys.
  I dunno, worked pretty good for the original trilogy. Darth Vader is dressed in black and will blow up your planet if you cross him. And yet nobody condemns the original trilogy as bland.
  
  The Senate is necessary. They were inept due to bureaucracy and corruption, and thus explained why some Jedi and others felt they had to do things outside the system. That was the point.
  
  How do you know the senate was corrupt? When did any Jedi do anything "outside the system"? Seriously, work it through: how is the Republic corrupt, apart from the bare fact that Palpatine wins in the end? How is the corruption substantiated? It's pretty obvious that Lucas wanted the Republic to be corrupt, sclerotic, superannuated, bureaucratic, whatever, because that's the trope. But, he never really showed how it was, or why.
  I mean like, when Amidala goes to the senate and demands justice for Naboo, Terence Stamp is going to do it but then someone else demands an investigation. OK. Why isn't the word of a Queen and two Jedi enough for Valorum? Why is an investigation corrupt? It's all "imputed qualities," we're merely told, by Palpatine of all people, that the senate is corrupt and bureaucratic. And despite this, Senator Jar Jar, with no real opposition is able to propose the creation of an army and the senate straight up and does it with no debate whatsoever. They seem to be really efficient when they want to be.
  
  Right from the beginning, we are told that the Empire is evil and therefore the Rebels must be the good guys. We don't see that developed. We are just TOLD that and we must believe it.
  Are you kidding? The Empire kills everybody on a little ship they easily overpower; Vader snaps the neck of a rebel subaltern just because he doesn't know what he wants to hear; the Death Star blows up Alderaan and nearly destroys the moon of Yavin. Tarkin flatly states that the fear of his battle station will oppress the entire galaxy, and orders the death of Leia's family, friends and planet right in front of her.
  When does, say, the trade federation do anything of the type? They blockade a planet, but nobody on the planet actually seems to suffer. They demand a treaty signed, but we never actually find out what the treaty is for, or what it entails. And they're in cahoots with Sidious, but we have no idea what they actually have to gain from the dispute. I guess it stands to reason they have to gain something, but there are no stakes, there is no drama.
  
  --
  Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
142. Re:Good news by Gr8Apes · 2015-01-24 18:31 · Score: 1
  
  The first Transformers movie sucked badly. Really badly.
  The Transformers: The Movie is fucking awesome.
  You must be 11.
  Seriously, the animated cartoon posing as a movie wasn't a "movie". Animated feature would probably be doing it a large favor.
  
  --
  The cesspool just got a check and balance.
143. Re: Good news by The+Evil+Atheist · 2015-01-24 20:21 · Score: 1
  
  And yet nobody condemns the original trilogy as bland.
  Except they do. I do. There are many people who don't like Star Wars because of its simplistic good vs evil story. I like Star Wars, but I don't for one second think it's the epitome of story telling. Basically, what you're telling me is that you want Star Wars to always be the exact same story over and over again with basically just name changes here and there.
  
  How do you know the senate was corrupt? When did any Jedi do anything "outside the system"? Seriously, work it through: how is the Republic corrupt, apart from the bare fact that Palpatine wins in the end? How is the corruption substantiated? It's pretty obvious that Lucas wanted the Republic to be corrupt, sclerotic, superannuated, bureaucratic, whatever, because that's the trope. But, he never really showed how it was, or why.
  Funnily enough, you answered your own criticisms in your next paragraph. The word of the Queen and two Jedi weren't enough. All because the Trade Federation senator denied all the allegations. THAT is your substantiated corruption and bureaucracy. How much more do you need? As my parents love to say: do you need me to draw intestines on a stick figure?
  
  And despite this, Senator Jar Jar, with no real opposition is able to propose the creation of an army and the senate straight up and does it with no debate whatsoever. They seem to be really efficient when they want to be.
  Again, THAT'S THE POINT. Ordering a non-partisan investigation as to what's really going on? Obstructed. But the creation of an army that merely benefits the military-industrial-finance complex? Immediate effect. That's the corruption you're looking for. How much more hand holding do you need before you learn to put two and two together? I wonder if people who criticize the prequel even understands how bureaucratic corruption works? Do they even see that is how the many modern governments, including the US and the EU works? Sensible things are obstructed all the time, but bad ideas that make a few people rich could not be greenlit fast enough.
  
  Are you kidding? The Empire kills everybody on a little ship they easily overpower; Vader snaps the neck of a rebel subaltern just because he doesn't know what he wants to hear; the Death Star blows up Alderaan and nearly destroys the moon of Yavin. Tarkin flatly states that the fear of his battle station will oppress the entire galaxy, and orders the death of Leia's family, friends and planet right in front of her.
  No I'm not kidding. By that point, you're ALREADY on the side of the Rebels because you've been told the Empire was evil. Think about how you would interpret the scene without seeing the opening crawl. Sure, you may still side with the Rebels, but that's because it starts off being a David vs Goliath battle between ships and you're socially conditioned to root for the underdog.
  
  But nothing about any of those actions you've mentioned are evil (after disregarding the exposition of the crawl) UNLESS you're willing to imagine something outside of what is shown in the movies. Something you no doubt reflexively did and have no apparent trouble accepting when watching Star Wars, but hold a double standard for when it comes to the prequel.
  
  Hell, in the current political climate, it's not so far-fetched to think that if the opening crawl switched the evilness of two sides around, a sizeable proportion of the American population would side with the Empire thinking they were the good guys. The Rebels? TERRORISTS. Alderaan? AL QAEDA. They even both begin with "al". Or TALIBAN. Because they sort of rhyme. Yavin? IRAQ. Bail Organa? BARACK OBAMA. Many Americans would love to see that hippie-on-the-outside-terrorist-on-the-inside dead. He probably even faked his Alderaan birth certificate to hide the fact that he was born on Korriban. See how many things you just plainly assume and accept by being told?
  
  --
  Those who do not learn from commit history are doomed to regress it.
144. Re:Good news by davydagger · 2015-01-25 05:02 · Score: 1
  
  right into the lap of JJ Abrams. they should have found everyone from the 1970s that did the original star wars movies.
145. Re:Good news by Gr8Apes · 2015-01-25 14:14 · Score: 1
  
  Ewoks didn't appear until Return of the Jedi....
  
  --
  The cesspool just got a check and balance.
146. Re:Good news by LaurenCates · 2015-01-25 23:53 · Score: 1
  
  The difference between me and other people is that I don't interject the names of the people I favor unless asked to, or to offer an alternative when one name is shouted from the heavens as an answer.
  I didn't whinge and whine when Abrams was announced, nor did I shout "My guy is better than that".
  I don't really HAVE a guy. I'm just annoyed with the idea that Whedon is the answer to a question that nobody asked, ESPECIALLY since there are BETTER writer/directors in the business.
  That doesn't make me a troll, by the way. It makes me someone who disagrees.
  
  --
  Some people don't believe in fairies. I don't believe in The Patriarchy.
147. Re:Good news by mcvos · 2015-01-26 02:28 · Score: 1
  
  I'm totally fine with the plot being in Lucas's hands. That is the part that he's best at. The problem is with the script and directing; those should be kept as far away from him as possible.
148. Re:Good news by sexconker · 2015-01-26 05:15 · Score: 1
  
  Brawn, Prowl, Ratchet and Ironhide were all killed in the first five minutes with barely a fight, and for no other reason than to make way for the new toys.
  They were killed because Megatron assaulted their shuttle and shot them the fuck up.
  They were at war. People (and transformers) die in wars.
  The movie established right from the beginning that it wasn't just a Saturday morning cartoon and that it was going to have consequences. This is a good thing.
149. Re:Good news by sexconker · 2015-01-26 05:18 · Score: 1
  
  It's AmiMoJo. It's his job to be a contrarian cynic about everything.
150. Re: Good news by Meski · 2015-01-27 13:19 · Score: 1
  
  Two episodes to kill him, I could live with that. Perhaps they'd clone him, and we'd have an army of 10 million jarjars to deal with. Ugh.
151. Re: Good news by FlyHelicopters · 2015-02-03 21:56 · Score: 1
  
  I always thought that Summer Glau would make a good Jedi...
  She has the martial skills for it, the body to make it work, and she's... just cool...
JJ has a chance, maybe by willworkforbeer · 2015-01-23 06:26 · Score: 2

Since there's less canon to violate than Trek, and it's not a reboot... maybe?

--
Pretending this is my office full of bitter coworkers..
1. Re:JJ has a chance, maybe by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-23 06:36 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, how are they gonna explain the mouse ears on the Inquisitors?
  Maybe they can make the villains be nasty, nasty thieves who think that copyright should lapse and dated to print Imperial logos without paying royalties
2. Re:JJ has a chance, maybe by frovingslosh · 2015-01-23 06:36 · Score: 1
  
  As long as they promise me emphatically that this isn't all a dream or that they are all already dead, and then in episode 9 it turns out that they all were dead, then this will have fulfilled my expectations.
  
  --
  I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
3. Re:JJ has a chance, maybe by bhcompy · 2015-01-23 06:36 · Score: 1
  
  It is a reboot, actually, since they completely wiped all of the post-ep6 canon (Expanded Universe) and are starting from scratch. Different kind of reboot as the originating universe is the same, but that's no different than what's happening in the XMen movie franchise.
4. Re:JJ has a chance, maybe by Carewolf · 2015-01-23 06:55 · Score: 1
  
  Since there's less canon to violate than Trek, and it's not a reboot... maybe?
  Use the lenseflares, Luke!
  No.... There is nothing that man can't make stupid.
5. Re:JJ has a chance, maybe by MightyMartian · 2015-01-23 06:57 · Score: 1
  
  And that's the best decision they made. I've read a few of the books, including the often highly praised Timothy Zahn novels, and for the most part the books are so badly written that they actually make Lucas's scripts look good.
  And I don't call it a reboot to ignore all the Extended Universe storylines. Unlike new Star Trek and James Bond films, which literally restart the franchises at the very beginning. The new Star Wars films simply start some time after RotJ, so are more akin to Star Trek TNG.
  
  --
  The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
6. Re:JJ has a chance, maybe by halivar · 2015-01-23 07:06 · Score: 1
  
  The TZ novels were fine. I enjoyed them thoroughly. The rest is trash. In particular, I have special dislike for Kevin J. Anderson who, after ruining Star Wars Expanded Universe, went on to ruin Dune with his fan-fiction bullshit.
7. Re:JJ has a chance, maybe by grimmjeeper · 2015-01-23 07:09 · Score: 1
  
  Let's be honest though, most people haven't read too many of the post ep-6 books. Sure, a lot of fans have, but the audience that has seen the movies eclipses the fan base that reads the books. And to them, the universe is wide open post ep-6 so they can do whatever they want with the movies and not offend a majority of the people who go see them. Besides, even if they tried to follow cannon, they would have to make some compromise for translation to the big screen that would offend the fans who read the books anyway so it's not like they would be happy with the movies no matter what they did.
8. Re:JJ has a chance, maybe by MightyMartian · 2015-01-23 07:13 · Score: 1
  
  I read just one of the Dune prequels and refused to touch another. So far as I am concerned, Brian Herbert and Kevin J. Anderson just pissed over the late great Frank Herbert's legacy.
  I wish Brian Herbert had done what Christopher Tolkien did, and just simply release the unfinished stories and plotlines, rather than trying to "finish" the series with appalling novels.
  Maybe I'll give the Zahn novels another try. I mainly just remember finding the prose pretty stiff.
  
  --
  The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
9. Re:JJ has a chance, maybe by halivar · 2015-01-23 07:30 · Score: 2
  
  I avoided the prequels; haven't read a single one. It's the two follow-ups to Chapterhouse that have me pissed off for all eternity. They took Frank's notes and shoved Brian and Kevin's fan-fiction into it. That, on top of the fact that the writing was high-school level next to Frank's.
10. Re:JJ has a chance, maybe by schnell · 2015-01-23 08:36 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe I'll give the Zahn novels another try. I mainly just remember finding the prose pretty stiff.
  Nobody was going to nominate Timothy Zahn for the Nobel Prize in literature, you're right. But by and large his books (not just the Thrawn trilogy) made for entertaining stories that kept you turning pages and enjoying the experience. Even the Thrawn books had some lame plot elements (I personally believe that anytime you introduce clones into a novel or comic book you should go to Writer Jail for a mandatory 3 year sentence). But they were always fun to turn off your brain for a while and read. The same thing goes for most of the "Rogue Squadron" books.
  Sadly, the rest of the Expanded Universe varied wildly from interesting and fun (Luke and his son's Force User Road Trip in "Fate of the Jedi") to dull (many of the earlier EU books) to depressing (most of the Yuuzhan Vong invasion which was just a way to induce PTSD in the next generation of Jedi) to full-on WTF (the Jedi council holding press conferences in "Fate of the Jedi" or the string of '90s book after book about zOMG somebody cloned the Emperor [again] or is rebuilding the Death Star [again].) There were some real gems in the EU but you have to pick through a lot of crap to get to them, and even then you won't get the full impact of some of the plot/character arc elements if you didn't wade through all the dreck that came before. So your time is probably best served avoiding all but a few of the most highly-reviewed ones.
  
  --
  "95% of all Slashdot .sig quotes are incorrect or completely fabricated." -Benjamin Franklin
11. Re:JJ has a chance, maybe by Hobadee · 2015-01-23 11:49 · Score: 1
  
  Did you even watch the latest StarTrek? JJ is a *HORRIBLE* director, mainly for his overuse of lens flare, excessively bright lights, and shaky-cam. JJ was a terrible choice for StarWars and I hold out no hope for the new movies as long as he is in charge.
  On another note, Lucas isn't actually that bad of writer - the original 3 he wrote and they worked out, mainly because others directed them and were able to tell him "no". As long as he is reigned in, he is good. (Especially with story concepts.)
  
  --
  ...Had this been an actual emergency, we would have fled in terror, and you would not have been informed.
12. Re:JJ has a chance, maybe by MightyMartian · 2015-01-23 12:32 · Score: 1
  
  That's pretty much how I remember it. There would be all those awkward asides referring to events in the films, as if anybody who hadn't seen the movies would actually be reading the book. I found it fairly distracting.
  
  --
  The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
13. Re:JJ has a chance, maybe by bhcompy · 2015-01-24 05:17 · Score: 1
  
  KJA and Brian Herbert were bad, but let's not pretend that Frank Herbert didn't start going off the rails himself starting with God Emperor of Dune
after jar jar by ganjadude · 2015-01-23 06:27 · Score: 1

thats probably a good thing

--
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Yay!! by Lunix+Nutcase · 2015-01-23 06:28 · Score: 5, Insightful

Good on Disney. Lucas may be ok at imagining a story but he sucks at things like writing dialogue. That they dumped his scripts gives me hope these movies may be decent.
1. Re:Yay!! by Grishnakh · 2015-01-23 06:41 · Score: 2
  
  Not me. JJ's Star Trek movies were lame, so I have no hope he's going to do better here. Better than Lucas, perhaps, but that's not saying much.
2. Re:Yay!! by Lunix+Nutcase · 2015-01-23 06:45 · Score: 1
  
  They'll be more decent than 3 more Lucas shitfests.
3. Re:Yay!! by Grizzley9 · 2015-01-23 06:49 · Score: 2
  
  Not me. JJ's Star Trek movies were lame, so I have no hope he's going to do better here. Better than Lucas, perhaps, but that's not saying much.
  I know I'm not the only Star Wars fan that liked the new Star Treks better than the SW prequels.
4. Re:Yay!! by Trailer+Trash · 2015-01-23 06:52 · Score: 1
  
  Good on Disney. Lucas may be ok at imagining a story...
  That's part of the problem: "a story". I watched 4, 5, 6, and 1. 1 was bad enough that I haven't bothered to seek out 2 and 3.
  I would note that in 4, 6, and 1 the entire plot was "attack the single point of failure on the enemy ship/base for the win".
  
  --
  Do you have ESP?
5. Re:Yay!! by Grishnakh · 2015-01-23 06:53 · Score: 1
  
  The Kardashians is more decent than Lucas's shitfests, but I'm not about to spend my time watching the Kardashians.
6. Re:Yay!! by Grishnakh · 2015-01-23 06:55 · Score: 1
  
  I liked the first JJ ST movie better than the SW prequels (1 and 2, never saw 3).
  I still didn't like it enough to bother watching his second ST movie. And considering I used to be a big ST fan as a teenager, that's saying something.
  One shitfest being better than another shitfest just isn't enough to get me to spend time or money watching a movie.
7. Re:Yay!! by Grishnakh · 2015-01-23 06:57 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  What are you talking about? Shatner never directed a Star Trek movie. Although I have sometimes wondered why the Star Trek franchise went straight from Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home to Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country. I guess someone at Paramount forgot how to count. But that's OK, IV and VI were both good movies.
8. Re:Yay!! by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · 2015-01-23 07:04 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  No way. I hear JJ is saving the Kardashians for the DS9 reboot.
9. Re:Yay!! by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-23 07:05 · Score: 1
  
  JJ Abrams is toxic as a director and really not a very good writer. Shaky cam and lens flares are just unpleasant.
10. Re:Yay!! by Grishnakh · 2015-01-23 07:20 · Score: 1
  
  What blind spot? What are you talking about? And what is this link you posted? It doesn't go anywhere, or have a valid URL, it just says "http://".
11. Re:Yay!! by Pinkfud · 2015-01-23 07:21 · Score: 1
  
  I don't know, I think the singing three-headed chipmunks from the planet Doodah clash with the wicked stepmother who sounds like Donald Duck having a mad fit.
  
  --
  The world is my oyster. That's why it's always in a stew.
12. Re:Yay!! by Minwee · 2015-01-23 09:04 · Score: 1
  
  I think he was talking about one of those low-budget fan films.
13. Re:Yay!! by Minwee · 2015-01-23 09:06 · Score: 1
  
  I don't think the directing was necessarily bad in ST:V. Let's be honest, the story as a whole was ridiculous didn't leave him a lot to work with.
  That's right. The blame doesn't really belong to the director, William Shatner, but to the writer...
  Whose name was also William Shatner. That's a funny coincidence, don't you think?
14. Re:Yay!! by Grishnakh · 2015-01-23 09:16 · Score: 1
  
  Perhaps, but all those were actually pretty good.
15. Re:Yay!! by garyisabusyguy · 2015-01-23 09:45 · Score: 1
  
  American Dad already established the Kim is an alien back story
  
  --
  Wherever You Go, There You Are
16. Re:Yay!! by camperdave · 2015-01-23 10:07 · Score: 1
  
  I always thought it was spelled "Cardassians" not "Kardashians".
  
  --
  When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
17. Re:Yay!! by camperdave · 2015-01-23 10:10 · Score: 1
  
  It's probably a Rickroll link.
  
  --
  When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
18. Re:Yay!! by Etzos · 2015-01-23 10:39 · Score: 1
  
  Whoosh?
19. Re:Yay!! by ConceptJunkie · 2015-01-24 13:49 · Score: 1
  
  Whoosh?
  
  --
  You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
He's baaaaaack! by nikhilhs · 2015-01-23 06:28 · Score: 2

My guess is he brought back Jar Jar Binks, as a Jedi. He was in exile, just like Obi-Wan. Every scene will be like the one where he got the droids stuck on his foot, and accidentally killed enemies. Only this time, it will be with a light saber and mad acrobatics.
1. Re:He's baaaaaack! by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-23 06:31 · Score: 1
  
  I'm a white American male, aged 25-35, and I will pay $14 to go to the theater and watch what you described for 2 hours. As long as there is an overuse of CG animation.
2. Re:He's baaaaaack! by garyisabusyguy · 2015-01-23 06:39 · Score: 1
  
  It would be hilarious to bring back jar jar, but make him more serious than Mace Windu at a funeral
  Something about all of jarjar's stumbling luck was an expression of natural force abilities and the sith decided to turn the entire race into their new warriors
  
  --
  Wherever You Go, There You Are
3. Re:He's baaaaaack! by Minwee · 2015-01-23 06:47 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  I thought everybody knew that Palpatine was just the fall guy and Darth-Darth Binks was the real power behind the Empire.
4. Re:He's baaaaaack! by MightyMartian · 2015-01-23 06:59 · Score: 1
  
  I'm a white Canadian 40-50 who even owned the Princess Leia action figure back in 1978 because you needed a complete set to be cool, and dreamed at night of getting a Millennium Falcon playset. I'll throw down my money, even if I know I'm going to hate the results, because my childhood until about the age of 13 was defined by Star Wars.
  
  --
  The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
5. Re:He's baaaaaack! by mythosaz · 2015-01-23 09:10 · Score: 1
  
  I was 8 when I stood in line with my family outside of the Cine Capri to watch Star Wars. I probably watched it 50 more times in the theaters over the next few years, mostly summer matinees. Eventually I got to watch it on ONTV - my family's first PPV of any sort - and then on 3rd generation Beta tapes after that. I still have the bedsheets somewhere :)
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O...
Star Wars is over by JohnFen · 2015-01-23 06:29 · Score: 1, Insightful

The one-two punch of Disney and Abrams being involved with Star Wars basically kills any desire I have to see new Star Wars movies. Especially Abrams. After what Abrams did to Star Trek, I don't trust him.
1. Re:Star Wars is over by Lunix+Nutcase · 2015-01-23 06:32 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  How could they possibly do worse than Lucas?
2. Re:Star Wars is over by Grishnakh · 2015-01-23 06:43 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, that is true, but the thing is, even if Abrams's SW is better than Lucas's, that's not enough to make me spend my time watching it. Something slightly better than utter crap is still crap. I'm not going to go watch a movie just because it's not quite as horrifically bad as some other movie.
3. Re:Star Wars is over by Lunix+Nutcase · 2015-01-23 06:46 · Score: 2
  
  Better than 5+ minute drawn-out JarJar scenes.
4. Re:Star Wars is over by mrchaotica · 2015-01-23 08:14 · Score: 1
  
  He could crash the Millennium Falcon, let people teleport from Coruscant to Tattooine, and make Jedis be able to bring people back from the dead (and retcon it so that they could always have done it, making Vader's origins make even less sense).
  
  --
  "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
5. Re:Star Wars is over by Yunzil · 2015-01-23 09:37 · Score: 1
  
  After what Abrams did to Star Trek
  Saved a dead franchise?
6. Re:Star Wars is over by camperdave · 2015-01-23 10:15 · Score: 1
  
  How could they possibly do worse than Lucas?
  Red matter.
  
  Oh... Wait!... Midichlorians. Nevermind.
  
  --
  When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
7. Re:Star Wars is over by JohnFen · 2015-01-23 11:20 · Score: 1
  
  Not so much saved as converted it into something that isn't Star Trek at all.
8. Re:Star Wars is over by splashbot · 2015-01-24 17:33 · Score: 1
  
  Amen. Star Trek is dead. Hey there's still the novels, I think some of them might even be classed as cerebral and don't simply re-hash existing stories with role reversal, you wont be blinded by lens flare either. They are a fitting tribute to the original continuity. Long live Star Trek.
whew by roc97007 · 2015-01-23 06:29 · Score: 1

dodged that bullet.

--
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
Meh by Br00se · 2015-01-23 06:31 · Score: 1

I have a hard time getting excited about the new movies. I think I'm content to just enjoy the original trilogy and politely ignore anything new that comes along unless I hear something from sources that I trust that makes me change my mind.
1. Re:Meh by Grishnakh · 2015-01-23 06:45 · Score: 1
  
  Just read the Timothy Zahn books and ignore everything else.
Lolz by Maury+Markowitz · 2015-01-23 06:33 · Score: 4, Funny

> When Episodes 1-3 were actually released, many found them unsatisfying
Riiiight, unsatisfying. That's exactly the right description to use.
1. Re:Lolz by DoofusOfDeath · 2015-01-23 07:20 · Score: 1
  
  Riiiight, unsatisfying. That's exactly the right description to use.
  I disagree. In each of those episodes, I was unsatisfied at JarJar not dying in a fire.
2. Re:Lolz by Lunix+Nutcase · 2015-01-23 13:49 · Score: 1
  
  And then brought back to life to be killed again. And then repeat again and again and again.
Unsatisfying? by fortfive · 2015-01-23 06:33 · Score: 1

Saying the prequels were "unsatisfying" is like saying that a Corolla with two bad cylinders has "unsatisfying" performance.
Lucas has lost it. by Ecuador · 2015-01-23 06:34 · Score: 5, Interesting

I recently watched THX 1138. It is a good reminder of how brilliant he was. Years ahead, great vision, but as the years passed he started losing his edge, more and more. From the Director's Cut of THX that is evident from several unneded CGI scenes that distract from the otherwise great film. The prequels and special editions show the same thing even more prominently. And let's not even talk about Indiana Jones 4 (what, there are only 3 Indiana Jones movies? Ok, I feel you). So we should be grateful when he is not writing scripts nowadays... Now, J.J. on the other hand is being made fun of for his "flares" etc, but he actually made us Trekkers be the cool kids for once! Yes, it was not "Star Trek" in the traditional sense, however it was highly enjoyable action sci-fi. Given that Star Wars was in any case not "cerebral" to start with, he should be even more at home working on it.

--
Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
1. Re:Lucas has lost it. by halivar · 2015-01-23 06:39 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Given that Star Wars was in any case not "cerebral" to start with
  Oh, but it wanted to be. The places where it tried were solipsistic, cosmic-humanistic dreck, and the weakest dialogue in the original trilogy.
2. Re:Lucas has lost it. by Grishnakh · 2015-01-23 06:49 · Score: 1
  
  Oh please.
  THX-1138 was an enjoyable film, but it had no dialog! That's the #1 complaint about Lucas's scripts: he can't write dialog worth a shit. THX didn't have any, except a few weird lines ("I'm an android!"). THX was all about visual effects, nothing more. And it did well with that. It really didn't have much of a plot, and certainly no dialog worth speaking of.
  JJ's Star Trek movies were lame, and they cut out everything that made ST great: the intellectualism and consideration of social issues, instead of just having mindless violence and action like most other modern movies.
3. Re:Lucas has lost it. by mrmagos · 2015-01-23 07:04 · Score: 1
  
  And let's not even talk about Indiana Jones 4 (what, there are only 3 Indiana Jones movies? Ok, I feel you).
  Two. You meant 2 Indiana Jones movies, right? I'm sure you meant 2, because I really only remember seeing 2 (worthwhile) Indiana Jones movies.
  Seriously though, it's sad when a poor sequel like Kingdom of the Crystal Skull makes a mediocre prequel like Temple of Doom look good.
  
  --
  Never start vast projects with half-vast ideas.
4. Re:Lucas has lost it. by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · 2015-01-23 07:22 · Score: 1
  
  Could you be more ... specific?
5. Re:Lucas has lost it. by Toshito · 2015-01-23 08:00 · Score: 1
  
  Now, J.J. on the other hand is being made fun of for his "flares" etc, but he actually made us Trekkers be the cool kids for once! Yes, it was not "Star Trek" in the traditional sense, however it was highly enjoyable action sci-fi.
  
  I don't think you can speak for Trekkers if you think Star Trek should be "action sci-fi".
  
  --
  Try it! Library of Babel
6. Re:Lucas has lost it. by Deagol · 2015-01-23 08:04 · Score: 1
  
  I only remember Raiders of the Lost Ark. What are these "Indiana Jones" titles you speak of?
  
  --
  Method of processing duck feet
7. Re:Lucas has lost it. by Minwee · 2015-01-23 08:27 · Score: 1
  
  And let's not even talk about Indiana Jones 4 (what, there are only 3 Indiana Jones movies? Ok, I feel you).
  Three? There was Raiders of the Lost Ark, and then Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade. That's only two movies. Maybe you counted the Highlander movie as well.
8. Re:Lucas has lost it. by Ecuador · 2015-01-23 08:39 · Score: 1
  
  Ahaha. I watched the trilogy before going watch to the Kingdom of Crystal Skull. I was surprised at how well part 1 and 3 were holding on, especially in comparison to the Temple of Doom - even the effects were sub-par. I forgot all about it though after watching part 4. Thanks for reminding me... :p
  
  --
  Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
Re:Wer can trust Disney by Lunix+Nutcase · 2015-01-23 06:34 · Score: 1

Because Lucas didn't use the franchise as a cash cow and was going to give up his copyrights?
Good for Disney by sirwired · 2015-01-23 06:39 · Score: 3, Informative

After seeing a truly execrable trailer for "Strange Magic" (an upcoming animated movie, with the story provided by Lucas), I don't think there's anything JJ Abrams could possibly do worse than George Lucas.
1. Re:Good for Disney by crunchygranola · 2015-01-23 09:51 · Score: 1
  
  After seeing a truly execrable trailer for "Strange Magic" (an upcoming animated movie, with the story provided by Lucas), I don't think there's anything JJ Abrams could possibly do worse than George Lucas.
  Now you've done! Up until this moment not one person has referenced the infernal pestilence that issues forth from George Lucas's pen when he tackles a fantasy theme.
  Now, by mentioning Strange Magic you have awakened my nightmares of Willow also written by George Lucas. The horror! The horror!
  
  --
  Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
Re:I only worry about... by Grishnakh · 2015-01-23 06:44 · Score: 1

I don't; we've already seen what JJ produces with sci-fi with his Star Trek movies, and the result isn't pretty. Better than the SW Prequels, maybe a little, but that's not saying much.
Re:Who wrote the original by Minwee · 2015-01-23 06:50 · Score: 1

I believe it was a group effort involving Shinobu Hashimoto, Hideo Oguni, Ryuzo Kikushima and Akira Kurosawa.
Lucas: Highest form sci fi by michaelmalak · 2015-01-23 06:53 · Score: 1

Science fiction reaches its zenith when it is commentary by analogy to the present human condition. The original trilogy reached this as it was Lucas' protest of the Vietnam War. This was evident even before Lucas' public statements, from the 1976 novelization and its prologue Journal of the Whills. The prequels were, from the strict standpoint of plot and political commentary, a satisfying fulfillment of this 1976 prologue. That the prequels were released during the Iraq War, a mirror in many ways of the Vietnam War, couldn't have worked out better for communicating Lucas' original 1970's message. Everyone caught on for Episode III, but it was all there in Episode II as well. Episode II was released so soon after 9-11, though, that most people weren't able to key in on it then.
The prequels suffered by having too large a budget. Lucas did better in the original trilogy when budget constraints forced creativity. In the prequels, Lucas felt obligated to have ridiculously short filming schedules for the human actors, and then to leave most of it on the editing room floor so as to not waste all the CGI footage. But the stories in Episodes II & III were outstanding.
Now that Star Wars is in the hands of the Bono-seeking corporatocracy, I have dim hope of any continued criticism of government and monopolies -- and certainly not of any drawing of parallels between the Dark Side and contemporary power structures.
Not a good sign. by the_skywise · 2015-01-23 06:54 · Score: 4, Insightful

While I'm happy to see that Lucas wouldn't be directing the new movies and think Jar-Jar Binks must die - I'm disappointed that they completely ignored his scripts.
Like him or love him he still kept a good eye on the overall mythos of the Star Wars universe. While JJ Abrams can certainly do sci-fi action I highly HIGHLY doubt his sci-fi story telling skills which, while interesting, never seem to actually have a point (cloverfield, 8mm, ST:2009... LOST!)
I think Rebels is a decent entry for Star Wars, I don't think it's surpassed Clone Wars but with Lucas setting the bar so low with the Holiday Special it's hard to go wrong. Disney has shown with Marvel that they can do good stories too.
But this isn't Lucas' story - So bringing back the original cast plus Hollywood's current penchant for rehashing old plots that worked AND JJ's blatant cribbing of Wrath of Khan into STID doesn't give me warm fuzzy feelings.
I'd like to be pleasantly surprised...
1. Re: Not a good sign. by the_skywise · 2015-01-23 08:31 · Score: 1
  
  It didn't HAVE to be - Heck while watching STID and realizing (before the great "reveal") that he was probably Khan, I was secretly hoping that they were actually trying to redo the Botany Bay scenario and the third movie could be a full-on rehash of Wrath of Khan. Which, while not completely original and an obvious stealing from the franchise, would've at least been clever.
  I wasn't completely enamored of ST:2009 either but it was at least fun, didn't overly insult my intelligence (like STID) and I realized that the characters had truly passed into legendary status like other great heroes of the past (Sherlock Holmes, James Bond, Hercules, etc) and this was a "reinterpretation" of them (much like Roger Moore's Bond vs Connery's Bond)
  (and yeah, I gagged when I saw the preview of the new Terminator movie last week - "John! The timeline's changed!" Barf. Might as well throw Doc Brown in for a cameo explaining how they have to go back into the 1950's past to really stop Skynet while they're at it...)
2. Re:Not a good sign. by the_skywise · 2015-01-23 08:52 · Score: 1
  
  Abrams knows STYLE. The look and feel of 8mm and Cloverfield are excellent. I don't care at all for the new Enterprise design but Abrams at least attempted to care about it as an actual character compared to Berman and the Enterprise D where the ship was treated as just another prop. Scarlett Johansson is a good, if not obvious, pick (although most directors these days wouldn't know obvious if it came up and bit them on the ass) (I think Angelina Jolie might've been better as her personality is a better match for the character but there's the age factor and stunt work) But I digress...
  My beef is with his story telling which seems to follow the pattern of a series of exciting acts that add up to a fireworks style big bang finale but never actually has a point because, ultimately, I don't think Abrams has anything to say. Lost - they're all dead (WTF?!). 8mm has a giant showdown with the alien who then just" goes home" after leaving a swath of destruction miles wide and the kids learn that...uh... rescuing aliens is better than home movie making? Cloverfield. Great monster movie. Where'd the monster come from, was he actually destroyed by the nuke, why is he ripping up the city? Not important, but dang wasn't it cool?!
  Star Wars is, ultimately, a serial story-line and the main line has to continue the serialization and I don't think Abrams can pull that off. (It'd be different if he was doing one of the one-offs) Lucas didn't exactly do a bang up job himself on the prequels either (Darth Vader is C3PO's father... WTF?!) but he at least continued the narrative.
Re:Too Many Ewoks by ThePhilips · 2015-01-23 06:55 · Score: 1

Not sure if this is insightful, informative or funny. Or all three.
Lucas scripts for the prequels sucked badly. But modern Disney scripts are not much better.

--
All hope abandon ye who enter here.
Analogy: Sex by Virtucon · 2015-01-23 06:56 · Score: 1

There's good sex, great sex and just sex. None of it is ever really bad (between consenting people YMMV) just like a Star Wars film. Some were good, some great and some were just movies.

--
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
1. Re:Analogy: Sex by dywolf · 2015-01-23 07:21 · Score: 1
  
  no.
  no.
  Phantom Menace was bad.
  purely and completely.
  
  --
  The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
2. Re:Analogy: Sex by Virtucon · 2015-01-23 08:32 · Score: 1
  
  So, you're saying it was a random bathroom stall visit then? o.O
  
  --
  Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
Re:Your scripts were terrible by kuzb · 2015-01-23 06:57 · Score: 1

Except he was really an asshole who couldn't appreciate what was done for him. Fuck that guy.
"Reportedly hated working on Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope (1977) so much, Guinness claims that Obi-Wan's death was his idea as a means to limit his involvement in the film. Guinness also claims to throw away all Star Wars related fan mail without even opening it."

--
BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
I am say, 68% excited by jacks+smirking+reven · 2015-01-23 07:02 · Score: 5, Insightful

Couple things for the naysayers to consider though, and why I believe Episode 7 will be good (but not near the hype):

- Abrams himself said he is a much bigger fan of Star Wars than Star Trek. You can see that in the Trek films. They are far more "space action" akin to W than Trek.

- Disney is the big mouse and certainly has and can screw with production they have really let the Marvel folks run their own system and it's working to great effect. The hot thing for studios these days is a more hands off approach and that's good for everyone.

- Kathleen Kennedy is running SW and shes been around for the golden years for Lucas and Spielburg. Disney will let her and Abrams run the show.

- Dear god the script. Both ST reboots were penned by Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman. They are responsible for quite a bit of the new hollywood schlock (Look at their IMDB's). Hell you could make a case that Abrams direction is what made the new Treks at least somewhat enjoyable and not just Transformers in space (and Into Darkness came close). Lawrence Kasdan who wrote TESB is involved. Basically everyone who's had their hands on the SW script has far more talent then those two.

And lastly my biggest hope is that this is a movie being made by a generation that grew up on SW. They had to eat what Lucas was giving them like the rest of us and should want to start anew. Every fan has thought "if i made a SW sequel..." and now some of those folks are getting to, with some help from those that helped in the beginning.

Could it all go south? Very much so, but I am keeping restrained excitement.
what prequels? by megalomaniacs4u · 2015-01-23 07:07 · Score: 4, Insightful

There are no prequels, and this follow on trilogy won't exist either.
Just like the matrix sequels don't exist...
1. Re:what prequels? by kimvette · 2015-01-23 13:30 · Score: 1
  
  I wish they would make sequels to The Matrix. It set things up perfectly for sequels and I've always wondered why no one ever made any.
  
  --
  The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
JJ's ST wesnt that bad by future+assassin · 2015-01-23 07:07 · Score: 1

Yah the time line changes am not fan of and the first ones story was nothing special since its a reboot but over all it was ok and second one was fine. Transformers on the other hand were just bad movies.

--
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
1. Re:JJ's ST wesnt that bad by jlv · 2015-01-23 10:03 · Score: 1
  
  They were actually interesting space-themed adventure/action movies. It was a shame he slapped the Star Trek name on them.
2. Re:JJ's ST wesnt that bad by ConceptJunkie · 2015-01-24 12:56 · Score: 1
  
  I thought JJTrek was almost, but not quite as bad as Bayformers. There were fewer grotesque continuity errors and no (as far as I can remember) testicle jokes, and the action wasn't so much of a confusing mess, but the Trek reboot movies were just as stupid and incoherent.
  
  --
  You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
Re:Your scripts were terrible by MightyMartian · 2015-01-23 07:10 · Score: 5, Interesting

I have no idea whether Guinness was an asshole or not, but he was a very good actor, certainly the best one on the set of Episode IV. I recently rewatched his brilliant take as George Smiley in Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, and was reminded of just how good he was. That's not even mentioning his extraordinary work with David Lean in Bridge Over The River Kwai, Lawrence of Arabia and Doctor Zhivago. A personal favorite is the original The Ladykillers.
So far as I understand it, while Guinness disliked the dialogue (who can blame him, a lot of it was pretty bad), he was grateful for the money it gave him.

--
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
What?! by pitchpipe · 2015-01-23 07:17 · Score: 4, Funny

Disney Turned Down George Lucas's Star Wars Scripts
NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!

--
Look where all this talking got us, baby.
1. Re:What?! by wasteoid · 2015-01-23 14:19 · Score: 1
  
  I think you meant, "Do Not Want!!"
"These are not the plots you are looking for" by Tablizer · 2015-01-23 07:17 · Score: 2

If the Disney versions sell tickets, they will conclude they made the right choice. If they flop, then they'll probably return to Lucas's stories. As much as fans complain about Lucas's past plots, they still pay to watch. Fans like complaining; it means they are engaged and care. Talking about 100 ways to kill Jar Jar creates a common bond.

--
Table-ized A.I.
They cured my acme, the cancer patient said..... by TiggertheMad · 2015-01-23 07:19 · Score: 4, Insightful

But then you have to just remember how awful JJ's Star Trek movies were.

Some people have this opinion, but I think if you took a survey, most would agree with the statement that Episode 1-3 was much worse than The ST reboot. I'll take whatever JJ has in store after more of Lucas's awful writing.

--

HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
Didn't this happen originally, anyway? by King_TJ · 2015-01-23 07:19 · Score: 1

I could be wrong, but I thought I once read that the original Lucas script for Episode 4 (or was it Empire Strikes Back?) was pretty much ghost-written and revamped by someone else, in order to make for a better movie?
In any case, I've always thought George did an amazing job imagining all of the ships, creatures and planets that appear in the movies -- but that doesn't necessarily make him a great script writer. Disney, IMO, would be wise to keep him as more of a consultant on any Star Wars movie project. Take his input on the bigger picture stuff, but don't let him worry about the exact lines each character speaks.
Re:Too Many Ewoks by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · 2015-01-23 07:27 · Score: 1

Trust me, when the Disney execs get done with it, there will be more than enough princesses.
Viva Jar Jar! by Tablizer · 2015-01-23 07:34 · Score: 3, Interesting

You just don't "get" Jar Jar. The Force channels power through his clumsiness. His "accidents" are guided and/or re-shaped by The Force. It's not like Scooby Doo's F-ups where shear luck catches the bad guy; Jar Jar is divinely-guided chaos.
It's mutation-based evolution cross-bred with Intelligent Design (Catholic model?) It's a contrast to The Force channeled through skill, planning, and discipline of the other characters. He's a rare character pattern in film.
Maybe he gives hope to those of us sorely lacking Jedi qualities? :-)

--
Table-ized A.I.
1. Re:Viva Jar Jar! by Jason+Levine · 2015-01-23 08:36 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Best use of Jar-Jar I've ever seen was in the Clone Wars TV show. The clone troopers needed to get by some enemy soldiers so they let Jar-Jar talk to them to "negotiate." Jar-Jar's clumsiness winds up taking out every single enemy soldier. Jar-Jar is weaponized clumsiness. (Unfortunately, weaponizing his clumsiness also makes him extremely annoying.)
  
  --
  My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
2. Re:Viva Jar Jar! by painandgreed · 2015-01-23 09:04 · Score: 1
  
  You just don't "get" Jar Jar. The Force channels power through his clumsiness. His "accidents" are guided and/or re-shaped by The Force. It's not like Scooby Doo's F-ups where shear luck catches the bad guy; Jar Jar is divinely-guided chaos.
  I can't really argue with that. This makes me sort of sad.
Re:Who wrote the original by jedidiah · 2015-01-23 07:45 · Score: 1

Dark Horse adapted the Star Wars 1st draft script into a comic miniseries. It really does put things into perspective.

--
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Re:Wer can trust Disney by Lunix+Nutcase · 2015-01-23 08:07 · Score: 1

And George Lucas was against copyrights and fought against Disney trying to extend them?
More lensflare! by mwvdlee · 2015-01-23 08:13 · Score: 1

Whenever I hear the name "J.J. Abrams", I can't help but hear that SNL "More cowbell!" sketch but with the words "More lensflare!".

--
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
Re:Alladin? by ThePhilips · 2015-01-23 08:20 · Score: 1

Alladin - Han Solo, the good bad guy.
Jasmin - princess Leia.
Jafar - Dart Vader.
Genie - Obi-Wan Kenobi.
Iago & Abu - c-3p0 and r2-d2.
And so on.
They are already half way there. Basically, all they need is to change the character names. And, of course, add more princesses.

--
All hope abandon ye who enter here.
Re:I only worry about... by RavenLrD20k · 2015-01-23 08:24 · Score: 1

So he Star Wars-ified Star Trek. So long as he doesn't Star Trek-ify Star Wars, it should be fine. However, I swear to God if I hear Han yell out "Chewy! Check that plasma Conduit to make sure it's feeding the deflector dish properly! We may wind up having to eject the warp core if things don't even out!" or anything else that reads like "I can't the without causing a breach in the or blowing a ;" I'll be flipping chairs on the way out of the theater.
Re:Your scripts were terrible by RoccamOccam · 2015-01-23 08:53 · Score: 1

In addition, he was quite funny in "Murder by Death" playing a blind butler.
Re:Too Many Ewoks by the_skywise · 2015-01-23 08:54 · Score: 1

Ok, everytime I read the subject I'm thinking of Amadeus:
"Too many notes."
Lucas: "Well how many Ewoks do you want me to remove? I used exactly as many Ewoks for my cute, furry army as I thought I needed for merchandising."
Re:Your scripts were terrible by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-23 09:05 · Score: 1

What was done for him? You do realize this is *Sir* Alec Guiness (knighted for his contribution to theater/movies), who had won Academy and Golden Globe awards for decades before Star Wars, who did some of the most famous movies of his era (Bridge on River Kwai, Lawrence of Arabia, Dotor Zhivago, to name a few)?
Can't imagine he's any worse than any modern primadonna in the film industry, and I've read many interviews that said he's a pleasure to work with.
Sounds like someone is an asshole and its not Alec Guiness.
Re:Your scripts were terrible by the_skywise · 2015-01-23 09:06 · Score: 1

Scrooge!
Gotta love him playing Marley's ghost and chewing the scenery like the line "The first ghost will arrive at 1, the second ghost will arrive at 2 and the third ghost will arrive at..." looks around trying to remember "3"
And Then There's 'The Clone Wars' by Plumber,+Programmer, · 2015-01-23 09:09 · Score: 1

I hated the prequels. I hated the special edition of ANH so much that I never watched the special editions of ESB or RoTJ.
Han Shot First.

But..
.
Last fall, I happened to watch The Clone Wars movie and then the TV show. OK, so the first few episodes were a little rough - but I kept finding myself thinking, "This is more Star Wars than the prequels!"
Then, there was even an episode CENTERED AROUND JAR-JAR. Surprisingly, it was actually GOOD. At this point, I was hooked and really impressed. I started watching the little "making of" featurettes included on the disks. It was immediately obvious that Dave Filoni and other folks on the production team are SERIOUS Star Wars fans. (For instance, they discuss the choice of giving Jedi Master Luminara Unduli the wrong lightsaber hilt because they hadn't had time to create the correct model.) They are also clearly very knowledgeable about the Extended Universe, and they do take from it, though they only what fits.

As I watched the series and the featurettes, one name kept coming up over and over again:

George
George
George

Not as a problem, but as a source for ideas and as the maker of creative choices. George Lucas contributed a lot to The Clone Wars, especially to its feel - making it truly feel like Star Wars.

At this point, I have watched all of The Clone Wars except the Season 6 stuff, and I have three conclusions:

One, I really liked this show. Not everything, but most of it.
Two, The Clone Wars is very much Star Wars.
Three, The Clone Wars might not feel so much like Star Wars without George Lucas.

If I had heard this news a year ago, I would have felt like a lot of people - cheering that George Lucas was not at all involved with Episode 7. Heck, I still don't want another "George Lucas Unleashed" movie.

But after watching The Clone Wars? I am worried that without any George Lucas, Episode 7 might not feel ENOUGH like Star Wars.
Re:Your scripts were terrible by MightyMartian · 2015-01-23 09:10 · Score: 1

Another one of my favorite films. David Niven and Peter Falk were also a riot.

--
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Lawrence Kasdan gets only a quick mention? by VValdo · 2015-01-23 09:18 · Score: 3, Insightful

I don't understand. A hundred comments and you're the only one I see who even mentions, let's alone puts due faith in co-writer Lawrence Kasdan.
Kasdan co-wrote "The Empire Strikes Back", co-wrote a movie called "Raiders of the Lost Ark", and wrote other, ehem, minor movies like "The Big Chill", and "The Bodyguard" and "Silverado".
He's co-writing this thing.

--
-------------------
This is my SIG. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Parallel universe not new time line ... by perpenso · 2015-01-23 09:22 · Score: 1

Yah the time line changes ...
What time line change? Its an alternate parallel universe. From the original TV series we "know" that a parallel universe with a "slightly" different federation history is perfectly legit. :-)
1. Re:Parallel universe not new time line ... by Kuroji · 2015-01-23 21:45 · Score: 2
  
  It's been an alternate parallel universe ever since Tasha Yar went back in time with the Enterprise C, ended up being captured by Romulans, and had a half-Romular daughter who went on have her own warbird in the fleet; the ship was supposed to be destroyed with all hands and it was definitely not. Hell, it's been an alternate timeline since Kirk went back to San Francisco if you want to get technical. Which means it's actually been an alternate timeline since the eighties. And that's not even counting the stable time loop involving the 19th century and whatnot.
  The Trek timeline is a convoluted knot. Why should the latest movies be any different in that respect?
Jar-Jar - Well written, a nuanced and gripping! by TiggertheMad · 2015-01-23 09:25 · Score: 1

Arguably, he did too good of a job: the players are all too human, and Jar-Jar is too fluid and well-executed for the movie.

Wait....are we talking about the same movie...? Are there some other SW prequels that I haven't seen? I have honestly, in the last decade of listening to SW critique, never heard anyone say, 'the players are all to human'. I saw a bunch of bland, stiff characters shoveling awkward lines at each other in front of a green screen. I am genuinely intrigued why you think this, because I have honeslty never heard this before. If you are trolling, masterfully done sir.

If there is another set of 'secret' prequels that are only for SW fans, please tell me. I know the secret SW nerd handshake....

--

HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
1. Re:Jar-Jar - Well written, a nuanced and gripping! by bluefoxlucid · 2015-01-26 03:02 · Score: 1
  
  It's Star Wars. The characters have always been tropes. The epic hero who finds the power within himself versus the evil empire. Hell, the original movies are easily likened to such epics as Final Fantasy 6 (which came later).
  Most people are complaining because Jar-Jar is a goof, Anakin has a lot of teenage angst, the Jedi Council is entirely docile, Padme flips between a stiff diplomat and a flappy-mouthed chick, etc. Thing is, Jar-Jar is from an entire race of people who appear mentally retarded and act like overgrown children; Anakin was a slave child whose only social life was family life (with his mother) before he was ripped away from her, put up on a pedestal, manipulated by an evil sociopath, put into huge emotional conflicts, then faced with the death of his mother and the prophetic and eventual death of his girlfriend; the Jedi Council is made of deeply orthodox monks who value emotional stability and deep contemplation above all things; and Padme is exactly what real-life diplomats and politicians are.
  People wanted Anakin to be this bland, cookie-cutter hero who magically turns villain at a small trigger, instead of growing through emotional turmoil and coming out evil. "Oh no, my wife died! Time to be Darth Vader!" is preferred over "Oh man, my childhood was so hard, there were all these people, saying all these things, I'm so confused, I've lost everything, I'm now just pissed at everything, fuck it all!" How do you complain about a teenager acting like a teenager?
  
  --
  Support my political activism on Patreon.
Made for 10 years olds rather than 15 year olds by perpenso · 2015-01-23 09:37 · Score: 2

The "we were kids when we saw episodes 1-3" argument is perfectly valid. However I think it would be fair to say that from episodes 1-3 to 4-6 the target age group dropped from age 15'ish to age 10'ish. I think that is a legitimate complaint. Although I will entertain the thought that the change began in 3 with the ewoks.
My hopes are with Rian Johnson by Foresto · 2015-01-23 09:47 · Score: 1

None of the new episodes did much for me while I was watching them, and I can hardly remember anything about them now. J.J. Abrams might make the next one more fun, at least, but I recently learned something about Episode 8 that makes me care about the series for the first time in ages: Rian Johnson is doing it. His most recent work was a mainstream movie called Looper, which was fine, but the two he did before that were astonishingly good. (It would be fair to say that story and writing matter to me more than effects.) I'm not sure whether to be worried that he'll mute his talents in pursuit of mainstream money, or excited that he'll make Star Wars interesting again. Either way, I'm looking forward to finding out.
THX 1138, anyone? by ikhider · 2015-01-23 09:49 · Score: 1

C'mon, George Lucas is not that bad. THX 1138 is a very good movie, one of the best in sci-fi. I want more of that flavor. (Now that I think of it, THX 1138 looks like what would happen if Apple took over the world, everything is so darn white and shiny). While Star Wars has its moments, I do not think it measures up to THX1138. Lucas has to dig deep and find that story teller who informs us of what we really don't want to know about ourselves. Bring it George! You have money and clout! Now you can make good films! Let Disney have the Star Crap stuff. Now go make something awesome and blow us away! I want to believe! 'For more enjoyment, direct good movies...and have a nice day...'

--
"SO we bide our time, waiting for a purer kick to bloom and the future is still bleak, uncertain and beautiful" -GSYBE
Sneak Peek at Disney Star Wars script by AnalogDiehard · 2015-01-23 09:50 · Score: 1

"They killed Jar-Jar! You bastards!"

--
Eternity: will that be smoking, or non-smoking? I Corinthians 6:9-10
Good Call for The Rat by Anonymous Coward · 2015-01-23 09:54 · Score: 3, Funny
Reasons to throw out Lucas scripts:
- Jar Jar Binks.
- Han Shot first.
- 3 prequels.
- 2 ewok movies.
- Droids and ewok cartoons.
- Ewoks in RotJ.
- Boba Fett in RotJ.
- Wise Yoda is the King of Bad Judgement.
- Jedi Knights who lie like a rug Kenobi & Yoda in the original series.
- Mitachorians.
- Han Shot first.
- Jar Jar Binks.
There's really nothing they can do to make it worse than anything Lucas has done, except more Jar Jar and ewoks.
Re:They cured my acme, the cancer patient said.... by interkin3tic · 2015-01-23 09:58 · Score: 1

Plus there are different fan bases reacting as far as I can tell. I watched the original "Wrath of Khan" after the latest JJ star trek and almost couldn't get through it. At the risk of the wrath of the trekkies, I'm going to say that aside from nostalgia for the old series, most viewers would prefer the newer one. The hardcore fans were pissed, but they're dramatically outnumbered by people who liked it. So I wouldn't say "some people have this opinion," I would say "very few people think JJ star trek movies were awful compared to the older movies."
Re:Your scripts were terrible by steelfood · 2015-01-23 10:13 · Score: 1

Yeah, Guinness was the asshole who refused to play Obi-Wan as some crazy wizard character that Lucas wanted Obi-Wan to be.
I'm certain the world was worse off for it.

--
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
Re:They cured my acme, the cancer patient said.... by Guspaz · 2015-01-23 10:38 · Score: 2

Many of my problems with Into Darkness had to do with problems with the film itself, rather than as a Star Trek fan. Now, I've still got problems with it as a Star Trek film, but more on the level that they poorly copied something existing instead of coming up with something new. I think that the elements that they copied didn't work because they were trying to force many of them in for the purpose of making references rather than to make the film work. Even then, that's not really a problem because I'm a fan, it's a problem because of lack of originality, something not unique to Trek.
My main problems, though, were that they decided to fill the film with too much deus ex machina. It's like they wrote themselves into corners, and then decided to just do crazy stuff to resolve it that didn't make much sense, or that seem like they didn't think through the plot consequences. Like the whole "Did they just cure death with the magic blood? So death isn't a problem going forward?" issue.
That's not bad Trek, that's bad film-making.
Re: Hitchhiker's by gnunick · 2015-01-23 10:39 · Score: 1

Oh c'mon. HHGTTG was originally a radio series, and worked well in that form. It worked far better, IMHO, as books.
But how could anyone *ever* turn the books, with their nuanced and nerdy humor, into a single feature film (or even a series of films)? Of course, movies are rarely as good as the books they're made from--and if they are, they're still *always* very different stories.
Movie-fying HHGTTG just wasn't possible.
When I went to see the movie I had low, low expectations, and wasn't disappointed. I wish no one had attempted such an impossible feat, but what they produced was just as good as I expected. It was, incidentally, pretty crappy. Or at least, I'm sure Marvin would have thought so.

--
I have no special gift, I am only passionately curious. --Albert Einstein
Re:No Mickey, no script by Ash-Fox · 2015-01-23 10:41 · Score: 1

The only reason Disney rejected those scripts is because they don't include a role for Mickey Mouse.
Then why isn't Mickey Mouse in any of the TRON movies?

--
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
Star Wars Episode 9 final scene by Cito · 2015-01-23 12:44 · Score: 1

As the final ship fades out, Jack Shepard wakes up in the lamp post station. Confused, was it all a dream or did the island locator give him a vision of a time long ago in a place far away.
After realizing it was all purgatory and all but a couple were heading into paradise he explains to Hurley who stays behind that just in case the visions were real, beware of the Jar Jar!
I saw the trailer by rsilvergun · 2015-01-23 12:50 · Score: 1

and it's no worse than Shrek. No _better_ than Shrek, mind you, but it's not worse than any of the adult reference heavy dreck that passes for children's movies today. The days of Secret of Nimh or even Black Caldron are long gone...

--
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
He had all 9 treatments way back when, by jpellino · 2015-01-23 12:52 · Score: 1

but he didn't think he'd be around and working long enough to make all nine, so he rolled the dice on the middle three. Honestly, the Ep.IV treatment, if shot as written would have been a yawner. Heck, watch the Ep.IV original trailer - it's a miracle anyone went to see it. Lucas surrounded himself with a lot of talented people, many of whom had moved on by the prequels. How you can turn an actress like Natalie Portman into a prop is truly a puzzlement. By Ep.III he had painted himself into a corner since we all know who has to live and die in the next reel. They need a Episode 3&1/2 - and I don't mean cartoons - to tell how two infants end up a princess and a kid who can operate just about any device he's handed.

--
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
I'll rank the ST reboot over any of the prequels by jpellino · 2015-01-23 13:05 · Score: 1

and Into Darkness after that. Many wasted opportunities in ID, it became a set piece for Benedict Cumberbatch. Who as Khan was a hair less ludicrous than Rock Hudson as Young Bull in Winchester '73...

--
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
Re:Wer can trust Disney by Lunix+Nutcase · 2015-01-23 13:45 · Score: 1

Read my handle again. It doesn't say what you think it does.
"The Force" turned out to be by Grey+Geezer · 2015-01-23 14:09 · Score: 1

little bugs in the blood. What absolute dreck. JJ will need to try really hard to do worse than that...

--
The USA is only 4X older than me...perspective
Re:They cured my acme, the cancer patient said.... by Canth7 · 2015-01-23 14:59 · Score: 1

Indeed. There were plenty of redeeming qualities from both of the ST reboots. This brings the level of enjoyment to levels that are just impossible with Episode 1-3 - Jar Jar, annoying kids that accidentally blow up space stations, horrible love stories that no one believes, boring plots about trade embargoes and senate votes, etc, etc. And I assume that everyone agrees that ST V is worse than either of the reboots. The point is that while JJ Abrams may be flawed, we have reason to hope that the product will be far superior to the worst that Star Wars has offered us so far. George Lucas has passed the torch and I'm very happy to see him in the rear view mirror.
Finally! by MagickalMyst · 2015-01-23 22:39 · Score: 1

A New Hope.

--
Political correctness is really just herd psychology pushed by insecure people who desperately seek social conformity.
Re:They cured my acme, the cancer patient said.... by Trogre · 2015-01-23 23:40 · Score: 1

Nearly every kid I know disagrees.
Those that don't have not yet seen either the Star Wars prequels or the ST reboot.

--
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
Re: Hitchhiker's by LordLucless · 2015-01-24 00:52 · Score: 1

Agree. This might come across as heresy, but I even dislike HHGTG as a book - it's really a series of loosely-connected jokes strung together by an absurdist plot. The funniest things in HHGTG are the asides and internal monologues - and that's pretty much impossible to reproduce in a movie (unless you do the whole thing in voice-overs, at which point it becomes less a movie and more, well, a radio play).
My favourite Douglas Adams book was Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency: funny, with a coherent (albeit, somewhat wild) plot.

--
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
This sums it up nicely.... by w1z7ard · 2015-01-24 05:42 · Score: 1

http://cdn2.cad-comic.com/comi...

--

"Recursive bipartite matching"- try it!
Re:Natalie Portman hotter than Carrie Fisher by HuguesT · 2015-01-24 07:00 · Score: 1

CF is no hot In her slavegirl costume? come on!
Lucas's skill: Pacing, not writing by Keybounce · 2015-01-24 09:55 · Score: 1

Lucas was very good with Pacing. He knew timing. Not scripts/dialog.
How many people walked away from seeing the first star wars moving, overjoyed that the rebels had won? Probably lots. How long did it take before you realized that all they had "won" was a very temporary respite -- their location known to a large enemy fleet that had lost one superweapon, but still had lots of ships for bombardment?
Was the story of the prequels that great? Maybe, maybe not.
What was the pacing of the first 2 like? Pretty darn good.
(The story of 3 was so bad I could not finish watching it, pacing or not.)
===
If you want an old-school comparison, look at Walt Disney. He knew timing. He would alter the timings of the drawings made by his animators. But he knew better than to try to be the one doing the drawings.
Marvel by DarthVain · 2015-01-27 05:23 · Score: 1

If the success of Marvel has shown me anything... it is that the convergence of individual movies is the way to go. Nerds need to prepare themselves else they suffer catastrophic head 'splosions when the Star Wars and Star Trek franchises collide in a JJ Abrams script.
Gigantic Lens flare fade...
Starship Enterprise in a background field of stars drifts into picture right to left.
Pan from below slowly counter clockwise...
Appearing behind the ship, a "DEATHSTAR!"
Insert Massive ship battle.
Or
Due to public outcry the first 30min of the story will be about how the hilt of a lightsaber works with little tiny lightsabers.
Also
Waiting to see what the Star Wars Disney Princess looks like... If she starts singing a song I'm walking out.
Re:They cured my acme, the cancer patient said.... by RampantTycho · 2015-02-04 03:52 · Score: 1

As long as the new Star Wars movies do not have "red matter" in them, I am optimistic.