Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Star Wars' Han Solo Spinoff Directors Quit In the Middle of Shooting (theverge.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the job-opening dept.

hondo77 writes: Due to "different creative visions," Phil Lord and Christopher Miller are no longer directing the Han Solo movie, despite filming having started in January. The film is still scheduled to be released in May 2018. "Phil Lord and Christopher Miller are talented filmmakers who have assembled an incredible cast and crew, but it's become clear that we had different creative visions on this film, and we've decided to part ways. A new director will be announced soon," Kathleen Kennedy, president of Lucasfilm, said in a statement. The Han Solo spinoff is set to star Alden Ehrenreich as a young Han Solo, with Woody Harrelson as his mentor, Donald Glover as a young Lando Calrissian, and unspecified roles for Emilia Clarke and Thandia Newton.

115 of 160 comments (clear)

  1. Not a good sign by skam240 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Wasn't a fan of the force awakens (ending on what was basically a third death star run ruined the movie for me. Sure it's better than 1-3 but that should never, ever be a benchmark for Star Wars.). Sure, Rogue One managed to have an original ending and it was a movie I even enjoyed but given the recent history of Star Wars movies I don't have high hopes at all for the Han movie given this move.

    --
    I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    1. Re:Not a good sign by SomeoneFromBelgium · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Well I kind of (dis)agree.
      I agree that the force awakens was not a great movie. And that Rogue One was better, but only marginally.
      I disagree on the Rogue One ending though. Once it occured to me that they were really going to make the end of Rogue One match the start of A New Hope to the letter the end became much less interesting. Halfway through the end scene it was clear that all involved were doomed. Of course the transmissing HAD to happen. But Darth Vader HAD to find out. The two main characters HAD to die etc. Not very interesting.

      I was really hopefull afther The Force Awakens, since it was for me a great 'setting the scene' movie. I was looking forward to this Ray character developing and her training by Luke. The Force Awakens dealt (for me) with the past in a credible way and introduced a number of very interesting characters (Kylo Ren and his misterious master, Finn, etc.). I'm still eager to find out how they will develop further.
      So for me: more of the same please!

    2. Re:Not a good sign by RobinH · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'm not a big fan of The Force Awakens as a movie, and I definitely think the directing/acting in episodes 1 thru 3 was terrible (save for Anakin's mother). However, my kids love episode 1 with young Anakin and Jar-Jar, and my daughter loves episode 7 with a new female hero. She's watched the entire clone wars animated series, and what I particularly like about the whole Star Wars franchise is that it has this very childish quality to get kids interested, but there's a lot of hooks into real life history and politics. It's a good starting point for many discussions.

      For instance, there's this whole Clone Wars arc about Mandalore being a (mostly) pacifist society who stayed neutral in the war. At other points they're dealing with refugees from the war. When I was a kid I found out that storm troopers were a real thing in Nazi Germany, and that prompted me to go and learn more about it. Of course there's the whole idea that Palpatine created a climate of fear in the Republic so he could convince the senate to grant him emergency powers, which he then uses to turn the government into a dictatorship. Padme's line, "So this is how liberty dies... with thunderous applause" is chilling. The fact that these important ideas are discussed in a kids' movie is a really great tool for me, as a parent, to start interesting discussions with my kids.

      I also like how it introduces this (mostly Eastern) idea that you need to be mindful of your feelings and not let them control you. I find modern thinking, and I hate to say this, but particularly from women, is that you should embrace your feelings and let them control you. This idea that somehow whatever your feelings make you do is good because emotion = good is just opposite of my experience in general. I want my kids to be self-aware. Notice when you're angry. Accept it but don't let it control you, or you'll regret it later.

      As a father, I really get the idea that Lucas created Star Wars for his kids, and I can excuse most of the flaws because as much as those of us who grew up with episodes 4 thru 6 hate on the prequels, kids really do like them.

      --
      "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
    3. Re:Not a good sign by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Hate is a powerful tool. Especially if felt by others.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re:Not a good sign by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Normally for a hit movie with staying power you need a good plot and characters you can relate with.
      Ep. 1,2,3 had neither it was all special effects
      Ep. 4,5,6 had ok plots but lovable characters
      Ep. 7, 3.75 had humdrum plots, and relatable characters
      The new Star Wars movies are fine. But not exceptional as they one were, but still better than the prequels

      I think the problem is they are trying to fill gaps in the story that we had filled in our imagination. As a kid I always saw the move to Darth Vader as a slow tragic fall from an older wiser person who was a real hero however as age sets in he makes compromises for the greater good, until it took him too far. Not teenage angst.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    5. Re:Not a good sign by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 1

      my kids love episode 1 with young Anakin and Jar-Jar, and my daughter loves episode 7 with a new female hero.

      What does their dad think of Star Wars Underworld?

    6. Re:Not a good sign by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 1

      Argh, just checked and there's actually a legit version of Star Wars Underworld, some sort of planned TV series. What's the opposite of rule 34?

    7. Re:Not a good sign by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I find modern thinking, and I hate to say this, but particularly from women, is that you should embrace your feelings and let them control you.

      That's not quite right. The idea is that you should express your feelings in order to process them. The main difference between Eastern and Western philosophies here is that in the East you do the processing internally, in the West you do it with your friends or on daytime TV.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    8. Re:Not a good sign by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Anakin's turn the dark side has to be one of the worst bits of character development in cinematic history. He goes from good guy to murdering kids in the space of a few minutes... In order to save his own wife and child. Even if they had a competent actor, the way it was written was impossible to pull off.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    9. Re:Not a good sign by RobinH · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I find modern thinking, and I hate to say this, but particularly from women, is that you should embrace your feelings and let them control you.

      That's not quite right. The idea is that you should express your feelings in order to process them. The main difference between Eastern and Western philosophies here is that in the East you do the processing internally, in the West you do it with your friends or on daytime TV.

      Yes, and in Star Wars you grab your light sabre and mow down a village of sand people or a room full of younglings. :) Your phrasing of the idea is more correct than mine, but I don't buy the logic that if you don't express it, then you can't process it. I think you can be aware of your feelings and "process" them without telling them to someone else. It's called mindfulness. I see a lot of people expressing their feelings all over facebook, and I'm not sure they're better off for it. Telling a friend about your feelings who then goes and tells someone else is unfortunately common, as is someone reading someone else's diary. I see some colleagues expressing their feelings over email in a very inappropriate manner. I think people who can learn to avoid inappropriate expression of their feelings do better as adults. Expressing your feelings often results in giving someone else something to use against you later.

      Encouraging people to express their emotions is sometimes a way of encouraging them to share weaknesses with you. My wife is a big proponent of "expressing to process" but then I overheard a discussion she had with a friend. The friend said that she'd been talking to a man, that he'd gotten very emotional and started tearing up, and then she'd felt very uncomfortable, and then both women agreed it just wasn't socially acceptable for men to do that. That it was "really weird." So here's a person who watched a man express his emotion, and then related that story to another woman in a way that made him seem weak. Wasn't he supposed to express his emotion so he could process it? What if he'd expressed an even more socially inappropriate emotion like anger or lust? Would someone record video of it now and stream it live to shame them? That's why I don't buy it.

      --
      "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
    10. Re:Not a good sign by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      I actually liked Rogue One, probably because I love classic war movies and it essentially had all the tropes of a classic war movie (right down to the surprising lack of blood), just in space. I want more of the actual war between the Rebellion and the Empire. More invasions, more ambushes, guerrilla/insurgent tactics. Show a war that is actually a war. Rogue One was on the right track with the end results of the group, but the way it happened was a bit deus ex machina. I want Saving Private Ryan, Platoon, or Fury in space. I don't want the contrived and cartoonish evil and darkness of episode 3. I want to see the real evils and horror that an interplanetary war can have.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    11. Re:Not a good sign by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      I don't buy the logic that if you don't express it, then you can't process it.

      I completely agree with that. All I would add is that it can be helpful to talk about stuff, especially with professionals. But you don't have to share everything on Facebook.

      The friend said that she'd been talking to a man, that he'd gotten very emotional and started tearing up, and then she'd felt very uncomfortable, and then both women agreed it just wasn't socially acceptable for men to do that. That it was "really weird." So here's a person who watched a man express his emotion, and then related that story to another woman in a way that made him seem weak.

      That kind of thing is why I'm a feminist. Patriarchy and toxic masculinity.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    12. Re:Not a good sign by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      Honestly, I don't know if it's because I'm an adult now, or the quality of the films have gone down. The first three films (Ep IV- VI) were fantastic to me as a kid. Everything since has ranged from awful to "decent".

      One of the prequels (I don't remember which now) was actually ok. Rogue One was decent, just nothing amazing, it would probably have been better if NOT in the Star Wars universe, just a standalone movie with a similar plot. Force Awakens was very blah.

      Star Wars just seems very stale to me now. Perhaps I'm getting old, perhaps they've taken it the wrong direction, or perhaps... just perhaps... they've over done Star Wars. Maybe they should wait another 30 years before revisiting it.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    13. Re:Not a good sign by squiggleslash · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I thought TFA was an awesome movie, and I'm tired of the whining about it. It was easily one of the top three - it was definitely better than the Ewoks movie. Yes, it had traits in common with the other OT movies - and thank goodness it did, because that's what makes it a Star Wars movie, and not Star Trek with Wookies.

      There was nothing about ANH that declared or implied those who got the Death Star plans had died. Perhaps you're confusing ANH with RoTJ ("many Bothans died to...")? The second half of Rogue One was something I've not seen from Hollywood in a long, long, time, it took risks and the result was an emotional punch in the gut that was also exciting to watch.

      I doubt R1's quality has much bearing on the Han Solo movie, simply because it's largely different people, but thus far I think Disney's done a surprisingly great job with the franchise. I hope they continue.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    14. Re:Not a good sign by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      George Lucas did a shoddy job alright, but the expanded Universe does eventually make it all a bit less terrible because if you think of Anakin Skywalker as a young soldier forced into years of war and suffering from PTSD it begins to make more sense.

      It's a shame Lucas wasted 3 films telling us about the childhood and early life of Anakin Skywalker when what we really wanted was his fall and turning into Darth Vader.

    15. Re:Not a good sign by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The friend said that she'd been talking to a man, that he'd gotten very emotional and started tearing up, and then she'd felt very uncomfortable, and then both women agreed it just wasn't socially acceptable for men to do that. That it was "really weird." So here's a person who watched a man express his emotion, and then related that story to another woman in a way that made him seem weak.

      That kind of thing is why I'm a feminist. Patriarchy and toxic masculinity.

      That's not "Patriarchy" or "toxic masculinity" or any other phrases you want to recite. The word you're looking for is "hypocrisy." The poster's wife expressed a belief that all people should act a specific way, and then when her friend related a tale of someone acting in that exact way, (who happened to be male), agreed with her friend who was criticizing the person for acting that way.

      Whether society as a whole espouses the same or different standards on men and women (IE: "Patriarchy") is completely irrelevant to this anecdote. The poster's wife has previously expressed *her own* belief system to the poster (from context), thus her conduct is and should be judged according to *that* system, not *societies*. She violated *her own* belief system by saying it wasn't appropriate and is thus a hypocrite.

      Or alternatively, she was possibly just trying to comfort her friend by saying whatever she believed her friend wanted to hear. People, (not me, but "normal people" do this a lot, and it often leads to more problems, yet they continue to do it...) This would make her less of a hypocrite, but more of a liar, even if it was only a small lie. This kind of thing is often what happens: someone says something small and it gets taken grossly out of context by people with an agenda. I'm not saying that's the case here with either the poster or you, but it happens far more often that people are willing to admit to themselves.

    16. Re:Not a good sign by allcoolnameswheretak · · Score: 1

      Yeah, as soon as I heard there would be yet another superweapon, even bigger and badder than the ones before, I knew the film was going to be shit.
      Original cast was also a sign they were going for fan service instead of actually making a good movie that stands on its own merits.
      The introduction of Luke Skywalker in the end... like some senile old guy that has gotten lost in the mountains, such a let down.
      I seriously hate JJ Abrams now. Such a unique opportunity to make a great, real sequel, and we get such a rehashed piece of shit film with baby-faced bad guys and predictable death of Han Solo.

      Oh, and did you notice how in the end, they blow up 4 inhabited planets at once, possibly killing tens of billions of people, yet everyone is celebrating like they won? WTF piece of shit film.

      Rogue One on the other hand is a great Star Wars movie, finally. Not only is it a good movie on its own, it also polishes up the Star Wars saga by putting the "war" into Star Wars and providing a plausible explanation for the exhaust port thing. And the ending, epic. After such a long wait, finally another worthy Star Wars film.

    17. Re: Not a good sign by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

      Indifference is a very powerful tool. Especially when expressed toward people with strong love/hate for superficial drivel.

    18. Re:Not a good sign by Eloking · · Score: 1

      Wasn't a fan of the force awakens (ending on what was basically a third death star run ruined the movie for me.)

      I remember the first time I saw the first Star Wars movie. One of the biggest moment was when Tarkin threatened Leia to destroy Alderaan if she didn't reveal the rebel base location. Eveyone was holding their breath as Leia struggled to decide. I remember well the loud reaction of everyone when Tarkin still ordered the destruction of the planet.

      But in The Force Awakens, when the Starkiller Base destroyed like half a dozen planet everyone was like "meh".

      --
      Elok
    19. Re:Not a good sign by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      Well, nothing except for all the Alderaanians on the corvette in the beginning of the movie that, I'm sure, were subsequently marched off to a day at a very nice spa. Hell, within the first five minutes of the movie Vader choked one guy to death himself.

      Had died. Not are going to die. The person I was responding to believed that ANH implied that the people who got the Death Star plans had already been killed before the movie started.

      You're talking about different people, and you're talking about them dying, not already being dead.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    20. Re:Not a good sign by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      They really missed a trick at the end of rogue one. All they way through they had this hope motif going, rebellions are built on hope etc etc, they must've dropped it in four or five times. Then at the end when they get to leia and she has the plans and everyone's all like, what's that? And she says '...hope'. Why the fuck didn't she say ' a new hope'. I mean for fucks sake, it writes itself!

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    21. Re:Not a good sign by rvw14 · · Score: 1

      I think you hit the nail on the head with the reason it was so "meh". There was no emotional connection to anyone on those planets. Starship Troopers, as bad as it was, had a much greater emotional impact as Jonny is talking to his parents and the video darkens and then goes to static when the asteroid obliterates Buenos Aires.

    22. Re:Not a good sign by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      No, he's right, "toxic masculinity" is the phrase that actually describes this. The fact that TM is also a demonstration of contradictory, hypocritical, social standards is one of the signs TM is a bad thing.

      The women aren't simply expressing their own opinions, those opinions were not formed in a vacuum. They're repeating what they've been brought up to believe, that men need to bottle their emotions, and that expressing emotions is a feminine, anti-masculine, quality. They've been brought up to believe that's an acceptable and reasonable thing to assert because that's what society pushes, it's a common theme to the movies and television we watch, the stories we tell one another, and the language we use. People - men and women - tell other people upset about things to "Be a man" by which they mean shut the fuck up and stop showing how upset you are.

      If it wasn't a common social meme (if that's the right word), then there's a strong chance the women involved wouldn't have had that reaction, and if they were, wouldn't have felt it worth sharing with one another, any more than an observation than shivering on a cold day is unmasculine.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    23. Re:Not a good sign by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      Rogue One was the most boring, dragging Star Wars out of all of them. I seriously considered just turning it off about half-way through and the rest of my family didn't care either way. That doesn't bode well for following movies, IMO.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    24. Re:Not a good sign by RobinH · · Score: 1

      That kind of thing is why I'm a feminist. Patriarchy and toxic masculinity.

      I think you're right. It is an example of toxic masculinity, as defined. Ironically the term "toxic masculinity" is an example of itself. It implies that there's something different and negative about typical traits associated with males. For that matter, so is "feminism" since that implies equality (which is good) is feminine. Nobody's going to agree as long as we use loaded terms like that.

      Putting all that aside, I intended that case as an example of hypocrisy. I prefer "be how you want to be, but don't hurt anyone, and respect others for being how they want to be." Gender doesn't need to be considered. Even if most women want men who are emotionally restrained, it's still my choice how to be. People are allowed to have unfair views, illogical desires, and unreasonable wishes. I'm allowed to deal with my emotions privately, people are allowed to be hypocrites, and I'm allowed to point it out. :)

      --
      "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
    25. Re:Not a good sign by PvtVoid · · Score: 1

      Halfway through the end scene it was clear that all involved were doomed. Of course the transmissing HAD to happen. But Darth Vader HAD to find out. The two main characters HAD to die etc. Not very interesting

      I felt the same way about Hamlet.

    26. Re:Not a good sign by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I think trying to make inferences based on just the name of the thing is a bit silly... It's called feminism for historical reasons, it doesn't imply anything.

      And as for toxic masculinity... Yeah, some traits commonly associated with males are toxic, that's well understood.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    27. Re:Not a good sign by netsavior · · Score: 1

      some fan cuts 1,2,3 show Anakin's fall a lot more realistically, "Turn to the darkside" cut out all of the "anakin being good right before he was bad" parts and showed a gradual descent from mostly good to all bad.

      If you want to watch a movie about Anakin turning into Darth Vader, you should watch "Chronicle" it is gimmicky and isn't star wars, but the story is a believable character progression from innocent kid, to accidental inhuman super being. It is 10 times better to pretend this is the prequel.

    28. Re:Not a good sign by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      The Force Awakens as a movie, and I definitely think the directing/acting in episodes 1 thru 3 was terrible (save for Anakin's mother).

      Palpatine was solid too, he took his role seriously.
      I would also argue that Jar Jar Binks did a great job in the third movie, based on the horror that the entire audience felt upon his appearance. Not easy getting an emotional reaction like that. Dexter Jettster did a good job, and a few other characters were good as well.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    29. Re:Not a good sign by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No. Women are not weak. Women make their own decisions. Women are responsible for their own behavior.

      Women behaving badly is not "patriarchy and toxic masculinity", its just those specific women behaving badly.

      Men are not responsible for all evil in the world.

      Men are not the enemy.

      Women are not weak.

      Women are not pawns for men.

    30. Re:Not a good sign by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      . He goes from good guy

      He wasn't a good guy. He was barely holding it together, cut off from parental ties that would have kept him well grounded and unable to bond with his new community.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    31. Re:Not a good sign by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I did enjoy Chronicle.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    32. Re:Not a good sign by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      Yeah, some traits commonly associated with males are toxic, that's well understood.

      I would reword that because as it stands its compatible with the Internet-Anti-Feminist "definition" of toxic masculinity ("They're saying we're toxic! TOXIC! Let's flood Anita Sarkeesian's Twitter feed with death threats until they stop!")

      I would use "Some traits that society encourages men to exhibit are toxic."

      That's compatible with the actual definition of the term, and but rejects, more or less, the paranoid-Gamergater definition.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    33. Re:Not a good sign by RobinH · · Score: 1

      And as for toxic masculinity... Yeah, some traits commonly associated with males are toxic, that's well understood.

      I just don't get that, or maybe I'm not familiar with these toxic things that "they" commonly associate with males. I'm a male. I spend pretty much all my time trying to do stuff that I believe is productive: go to work, do something useful to get paid, try to provide an enriching and educational upbringing for my kids, along with a safe, healthy and happy home environment, including trying to set an example of a strong but balanced work ethic. When I'm home I'm fixing stuff around the house, loading and unloading the dishwasher, folding clothes, vacuuming, or playing checkers (or Kerbal Space Program) with my kids. This is literally 95% of what I do. Then I watch like one half-hour show on Netflix and go to bed. People around me seem to think I'm a "typical man," so what gives? How is this toxic? The whole concept is nothing but insulting to men.

      --
      "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
    34. Re:Not a good sign by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      We were just talking about how guys taking and their feelings was considered weak. The idea that men should always be stoic and never show weakness is an example of toxic ideas about masculinity.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    35. Re:Not a good sign by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Thanks, that's a good way of phrasing it.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    36. Re:Not a good sign by Your.Master · · Score: 1

      You have to actually read the links given. You are super confused. You seem to think that "toxic masculinity" means blaming men. It doesn't. Toxic masculinity isn't men. It's the thing that is done *to* men.

    37. Re:Not a good sign by skam240 · · Score: 1

      If by " it had traits in common with the other OT movies" you mean it was almost a complete copy then yes, I agree.

      Ending on on a Death Star run a third fucking time in inexcusable. I would have enjoyed all of the tribute moments from the rest of the movie if they only had an original ending.

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    38. Re:Not a good sign by skam240 · · Score: 2

      Not to be rude but kids like all sorts of garbage. What's impressive about the original trilogy is that it didn't have to depend on gimmicky kid crap like jar-jar to be big with kids which is exactly why the originals are big with adults both when they were released and now.

      Most kids movies are garbage they will forget by the time they grow up. The ones they'll really remember are the ones they watch again in adulthood and still enjoy.

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    39. Re:Not a good sign by skam240 · · Score: 1

      I couldn't agree more. I didn't care a bit about the Republic's capital in Force Awakens getting blown up but blowing up Alderaan feels like diabolical evil in the original.

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    40. Re:Not a good sign by skam240 · · Score: 1

      I can't agree with that at all. There's just no way it's worse then any of the prequels. I really believe that if you think so then you should stick to Michael Bay movies.

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
    41. Re:Not a good sign by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      If it's easier for you to ignore what's you're being told, and invent some other narrative that's easier for you to knock down, then go ahead.

      But, to be honest, from where I'm standing, it looks like it makes you a big ol' pussy.

      Because, let's be clear here, you're not man enough to click on a link. A link. A single link that would have put the entire thing in context and made it easier for you to understand what you were responding to. You're not man enough because you're such a wuss you're afraid of little words. You hear "Toxic masculinity", and rather than think "What does that mean? I'm strong enough to find out, and damn the consequences", you go "Ooo scary! Please don't hurt me! I'm just a little girl! I'm just going to wish you would go away!"

      That makes you weaker even than a woman who says a man is pathetic for crying. So here's a tissue, you wuss. Really, I should take you outside, and beat the shit of you right now. Pull your panties up and get the fuck out of here.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    42. Re:Not a good sign by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      The hell does Michael Bay have to do with anything? What, Rogue One wasn't chock full of explosions, laser battles, and special effects?? A Michael Bay movie was just what it was most like: shallow characters, thin story, predictability, creepy CGI, plodding plot, and lots of fights and explosions.
      Not that the prequels were much better, but they didn't drag out so badly. Maybe you're too young to remember when movies were actually good.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    43. Re:Not a good sign by RobinH · · Score: 1

      We were just talking about how guys taking and their feelings was considered weak. The idea that men should always be stoic and never show weakness is an example of toxic ideas about masculinity.

      Only some people hold that idea (I only gave an example of one person, which is only an anecdote). I was trying to give an example of where expressing an emotion is considered inappropriate, and backfired on the person doing the expressing. I am free to express my emotions or not (unless I express anger by hurting people, of course). The fact that a majority of people would rather I not express them is a preference they're allowed to have. People also want me to wear a shirt in public, even though I'm perfectly free to walk down the street bare-chested. Is the shirt rule an example of toxic masculinity, or is it a social norm? What's the difference? If the men-don't-express-emotions social norm is toxic, then why don't we call them all "toxic social norms" and include toxic norms independently of gender?

      The fact is, by using the term "toxic masculinity" people feel good because they can point to men and say there's something wrong with them, not us. Clearly there's something wrong with masculinity, not our social norms. It's no different than saying "the fairer sex," or "the model minority." It's all based on stereotypes that we need to step away from.

      Accepting that some group might be statistically more likely to be a certain way, or do certain things, or think certain ways, and yet treating each individual in a way that doesn't automatically apply those stereotypes to your expectations the moment you meet them is really hard. It takes practice. Using terms like "toxic masculinity" is just letting yourself subconsciously give in to stereotypes.

      --
      "I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
    44. Re:Not a good sign by ZayJay · · Score: 1

      Everything Lucas did regarding 'Star Wars' was for kids, and 1-3 are solid evidence for that. I imagine if I had been a kid in 1999 rather than the teenager that saw #4 (i.e. the first one) when it first came out I could maybe go with the "It's for kids" thing and be done with it. But there is always "Empire Strikes Back" that was done with such finesse that it always showed that a truly excellent movie can be done, and still the kids are happy. Maybe the bar got raised too high but there it is. On a side note, the original should have one the 1977 best picture award, Not even because its its so "great", as that we knew even then it was a game changer. If not that one, then "Empire" for sure. I mean, we've been talking about this franchise for 40 years now. But as far as '77 goes it should have been a shoe-in. Who the hell remembers "Annie Hall"?

  2. Should have shot first. by religionofpeas · · Score: 5, Funny

    Star Wars' Han Solo spinoff directors quit in the middle of shooting

    They should have shot first, and then quit.

    1. Re:Should have shot first. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Originally they did, this is the later director's edit news release presented by a poorly done CGI Jabba the Hutt,

    2. Re:Should have shot first. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Are you kidding? Hollywood would never, ever pair up different colored main characters in a mainstream movie aimed for the US audiences. At least in a consummated way. Alden-Thandie, Donald-Emilia, Alden-Donald and Thandie-Emilia hook-ups can only happen in foreign produced movies.

    3. Re:Should have shot first. by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      and then quit.

      Or alter the deal?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    4. Re:Should have shot first. by dwillden · · Score: 2

      Enforced diversity? Han is White, Lando is Black. It's only enforced because that's the story as established way back in 1981. The roles were established back before Hollywood was enforcing diversity. I hate enforced diversity in media as well. But stop trying to blame something that isn't an issue here. The characters are as established long ago.

      --
      I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
    5. Re:Should have shot first. by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      Enforced diversity? Han is White, Lando is Black. It's only enforced because that's the story as established way back in 1981. The roles were established back before Hollywood was enforcing diversity. I hate enforced diversity in media as well. But stop trying to blame something that isn't an issue here. The characters are as established long ago.

      Star Trek TMP did it in 1979, and only because the cast was intentionally diverse back in 1966. Unheard of at the time, but it was completely intentional to have black, women and asian actors all together.

  3. Han shot first! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    FU, Lucas. You are the personification of the Peter Principle.

  4. Enough with backstories. by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Although I think they should let Star Wars universe die (As well as the Star Trek Universe) as they are a fictional universe of a different age and the new storylines are hacked into the universe rules.
    But if they are going to continue they should just move forward. The backstory will only lead us to conflict with our preconceived notions of the person. Han Solo for me while had some adventures before they were mostly just petty crimes and doing the odd jobs, getting involved with some bad people and trying to get money.
    Now this could be an interesting story, but let's do it with an other person someone we don't know and watch them evolve. Not someone that we can observe like looking in the old photo album.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    1. Re:Enough with backstories. by RavenLrD20k · · Score: 1

      Now this could be an interesting story, but let's do it with an other person someone we don't know...

      Like Star Lord?

  5. the Disney Empire Strikes Back by turkeydance · · Score: 2

    ESPN knows all too well

    1. Re:the Disney Empire Strikes Back by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Yes, my Lord Mouse.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  6. Both Lucas and Disney fucked it up: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    There was 15-20 years of awesome extended universe history, covering every aspect of the universe from 10 years prior to 25 years after the original trilogy.

    What do they do? Rather than finding periods in-between those works, or doing the smart thing, and running with an entirely new set of characters with minor character parts/cameos from any surviving original cast members up to reprise their roles, they instead choose to canonically shit all over the years of plot development they tacitly supported to keep Star Wars going, and in fact utilized in their *OWN* official materials (videogames, star wars encyclopedias, etc, even published/produced/copyrighted by LucasFilm/Arts/Games companies themselves!)

    The only reason Star Wars survived as it did was because of the secondary media production market, and they SHIT ALL OVER IT. Trek has been doing the same since the reboot (Or TNG/Generations/DS9/Voyager depending on what was important to you.)

    What is my point with all this? That it is really time for people to band together on creating non-commercially owned replacements for these universes. Tolkien, Trek, Wars, etc, figure out what people cared most about from each, turn it into a new living breathing universe, and each contribute new stories to it (But try and not stink it up with a Death Star Run 3, or Dark Horse Super Emperor Clones, or Trek continuity errors in canon materials.)

    Transferrable Copyright today is just the right to rape our nostalgia while keeping us from being able to improve it when a 'new creative direction' is taken on the 'official' branch. Whether it is Dungeons and Dragons, Battletech, Crimson Skies, Shadowrun, or any of the aforementioned media franchises. It is time for *US* to remind them who allowed them to benefit from their overall meagre creativity, and turn it into a media powerhouse.

    captcha was 'approval': If you approve this message, +1 it!

    1. Re:Both Lucas and Disney fucked it up: by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The problem with Star Wars for the last couple of decades has been that the Timothy Zahn books and several of the LucasArts games have had far better stories than anything that the franchise has ever had on the big screen. Mind you, the extended universe has its own prequel trilogy in the form of anything written by Kevin J Anderson.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    2. Re:Both Lucas and Disney fucked it up: by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sorry, but that shit is actually owned by them. And yes, it sucks to invest your time into learning the lore of something only to see it thrown away by the next bozo coming in and saying "don't like that, let's do something completely different!" and does "all wrong".

      The lesson to learn here is simple: Don't invest into something that isn't yours. Hard to do, I admit, but in the end, every moment spent learning about a universe you cannot make your own if you are fed up with the official one is a wasted one.

      And yes, I'm fully aware that these hardcore fans that spent time and money to learn about the world, to amass amounts of merchandise, to recreate their favorite characters, create faithful costumes and so on, those are the ones that kept the franchise alive while their owners were pretty much abandoning them, milking them for all they're worth all the while and living off those fans that keep it alive and vibrant, drawing in new potential fans. I'm fully aware of that.

      But studios will never learn if they don't learn the hard way. So yes, let them keep it, let them use it as they see fit and stop investing your time, money and energy into it. Wait until a studio learns that those things are not given freely but have to be earned.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    3. Re:Both Lucas and Disney fucked it up: by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What is my point with all this? That it is really time for people to band together on creating non-commercially owned replacements for these universes.

      Or, ya know, just forget about it and do something else.

    4. Re:Both Lucas and Disney fucked it up: by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 2

      What is my point with all this? That it is really time for people to band together on creating non-commercially owned replacements for these universes.

      . . . that's what String Theory is all about . . .

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    5. Re:Both Lucas and Disney fucked it up: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Well, the +5, Insightful mod kind of speaks for itself these days.

    6. Re:Both Lucas and Disney fucked it up: by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'd definitely watch GNU Wars. The evil Darth Vim getting his ass kicked by the furry little Emacs, Richard Starman and his GNU mind tricks...

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    7. Re:Both Lucas and Disney fucked it up: by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      This is probably kind of relevant here, too.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    8. Re:Both Lucas and Disney fucked it up: by Wraithlyn · · Score: 1

      Thrawn is officially canon again thanks to Rebels, here's hoping he makes it into the films.

      Fuck, put him in suspended animation (on Outbound Flight or whatever) for 50 years, and have him come back to take command of the First Order.

      I can dream, right?

      --
      "Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson
    9. Re:Both Lucas and Disney fucked it up: by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      But that's exactly what happens. People have a concept of certain characters, later movies change what they're like and people feel hurt by it.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    10. Re:Both Lucas and Disney fucked it up: by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Hard to do when you can't get the movies in the way you liked them anymore, isn't it?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    11. Re:Both Lucas and Disney fucked it up: by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Yes. Of course that is a huge part of it. Nerd-cred, knowing more about some show that some other nerd, is a pretty big issue here. Who doesn't want to be the wise sage for something his circle of friends considers relevant?

      And before you belittle and patronize those that do, don't try to tell me you don't have some kind of pet topic that you try to know more about than anyone else, even though it's neither marketable nor will ever make you a dime, simply because it makes you look knowledgeable? It's the same with the guy at the sports bar that knows all the football results back to times immemorial.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    12. Re:Both Lucas and Disney fucked it up: by Cinnamon+Beige · · Score: 1

      I pretty much took one look at the first trailer for the Prequel Trilogy and fled the fandom--and I adored the Original Trilogy. But...the Prequel Trilogy really does make it very easy to believe that a huge part of the Original Trilogy's quality had to do with the people working with Lucas, and not Lucas himself.

      That said, Timothy Zahn is a very good author and it's well worth reading his original works.

  7. As I pointed out elsewhere: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's all been done to death in the Extended Universe, of which they have stated 'since we don't own it, none of it happened', even though they licensed those same people to create new stories in the universe, AND supposedly vetted them before they were released.

    Trek at least set out an up front policy that licensed Trek stories are never canon. Whereas Wars/Lucas integrated them into a large part of the story and gaming pantheon, much of which was taken by fans as canon up until the midichlorians, anakin built c3po, and cloned Boba Fett plotlines shat all over the EU.

    1. Re:As I pointed out elsewhere: by CeasedCaring · · Score: 1

      Thrawn was the big bad in season 3 of the Rebels cartoon.

  8. Creative differences by rmdingler · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Though they formerly collaborated on 21 Jump Street & a Lego movie, Lord and Miller sounds more like a high end Mall clothing outlet for teens than the directors of the Han Solo movie.

    Rumors being reported suggest their attempt to interject revisionism into the Solo character were not appreciated by Lawrence Kasdan.

    Kasdan is the screenwriter behind The Empire Strike Back, Raiders of the Lost Ark, and this movie (with his son, Jon).

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

  9. Woody Harrelson by PoopJuggler · · Score: 2

    Never a good sign...

    1. Re:Woody Harrelson by scourfish · · Score: 1

      Woody Harrelson has been in plenty of decent films. "The People Vs Larry Flynt" and "White Men Can't Jump" immediately come to mind.

    2. Re:Woody Harrelson by tsqr · · Score: 1

      And the first season of True Detectives.

    3. Re:Woody Harrelson by neo-mkrey · · Score: 2

      I quite enjoyed him in Zombieland and thought his acting in the Hunger Games movies was quite good.

  10. Quit or fired? by Bruinwar · · Score: 2

    This article claims they were fired: The Hollywood Reporter

    --
    SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT
    1. Re:Quit or fired? by slickwillie · · Score: 1

      So they will be directing their next films from a carbonite wall?

  11. Emperor Palpatine by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 1

    Something something something franchise something something something

    --

    Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

  12. This should have happened before filming started. by Edward+Nardella · · Score: 1

    Contacts and agreements for projects with a budget as high as a film like this should involve enough negotiating, commitment, honesty and planning to avoid such a large problem. My suspicion is one of the following happened: The negotiations were nowhere near comprehensive. Someone was dishonest with themselves or the other party during the negotiations. Someone went back on their commitments during the negotiations. Those directors must be in quite the comfortable position of they can afford to drop such a lucrative contract.

    --
    My sig doesn't address Anons, sigs aren't visible to them.
  13. I wonder if it was anything like this... by DeplorableCodeMonkey · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Mark Hamill apparently completely disagreed with how Luke Skywalker was written in The Last Jedi. Seems to me that a lot of the newer chefs in the kitchen think they can improve the original, actually universally loved, characters and stories. I wonder if that was at play here.

    If you want to tell a Star Wars story that really diverges from the past, that's totally fine. Get the studios to actually give you a semi-blank canvas that is set in that universe. Everyone will be better off for it.

    1. Re:I wonder if it was anything like this... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      But then I have to establish a new set of characters and make them likable and believable, this is hard, ya know? Nah, let's just toss in all the old heroes that everyone already loves and cares about, that way I needn't invest anything into this and can fully concentrate on my VISION.

      You know, the one where I butcher those characters into MY fanboy imagination of how they should have been in the first place. I always thought Han was way too rough and should show his sensitive side, and Darth Vader shouldn't die and instead turn back to the light side and become Anakin again, and we should definitely show more Ewoks to make it more family friendly.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:I wonder if it was anything like this... by antdude · · Score: 1

      Too bad they won't let him decide on his character.

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  14. It's not necessarily bad news by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The story is that the directors had problems with Kathleen Kennedy, who runs LucasFilms and is their boss, from day one. Basically they couldn't get along with the CEO and she fired them. Kennedy has a pretty good track record in the industry and picking a fight with her was not a great plan. Plus, remember news leaked out that Rogue One had re-shoots and lots of people concluded that the only possible outcome was a disastrous movie that would fail spectacularly. Rogue One made half a billion at the box office. I thought it was pretty good. These guys' claim to fame is they made 3 comedy movies that turned a profit. Losing them with most of the shooting done is not a tragedy and the final result may still be pretty good and probably more in line with what the bosses expect than what they were planning on doing themselves.

    1. Re:It's not necessarily bad news by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

      Rogue One made half a billion at the box office

      So by all accounts a failure, right?

      --
      Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  15. When Recycling goes Too Far by geekmux · · Score: 4, Funny

    Spinoff Directors Quit In the Middle of Shooting

    I can only hope the difference in creative vision went something like this:

    "You know what, fuck this sequel/prequel/spinoff bullshit. I've had enough of it. Every damn thing coming out these days is nothing more than a shitty recycle of an older movie that tries to justify itself with a half billion dollars worth of 21st century special effects, or the 17th movie in a drawn-out storyline that should have died long ago. Give me an original storyline with a new concept for once."

    Here's your 2023 summer movie lineup to prove a point:

    Resident Evil: Gotta Catch 'Em All, Part 2

    Fast and Furious: Lunar Drift

    Pirates of the Caribbean: Hanna Montana's Revenge

    Transformers: Rise of the Transgender

    Star Trek: Teen Spock and the Vulcanettes

    Sharknado Mayhem 4D: Movie Theater Wetsuit Edition.

    1. Re:When Recycling goes Too Far by Hognoxious · · Score: 4, Funny

      Somewhere in Hollywood, at this very second, someone is looking at your list and saying "You know, that one might work".

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    2. Re:When Recycling goes Too Far by geekmux · · Score: 1

      Somewhere in Hollywood, at this very second, someone is looking at your list and saying "You know, that one might work".

      The amount of recycling in Hollywood tends to validate the consumer quality standard, so there's little doubt half my list will come to fruition.

      Shit can in fact still make money.

    3. Re:When Recycling goes Too Far by sl3xd · · Score: 1

      Nearly everything copies from a few of Shakespeare's plays - and even they were derivitive.

      The trend hasn't slowed down for 400 years, so I doubt things will change.

      --
      -- Sometimes you have to turn the lights off in order to see.
    4. Re:When Recycling goes Too Far by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      As long as people keep buying tickets, the formula will be followed.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    5. Re:When Recycling goes Too Far by geekmux · · Score: 1

      As long as people keep buying tickets, the formula will be followed.

      Tends to say a lot about people...

    6. Re:When Recycling goes Too Far by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      > Resident Evil: Gotta Catch 'Em All, Part 2
      This would work so well. Some dumbass decides to make a zombie hunting preserve, and hires Alice "Ashes to Ashes" Catchem to take them through the restricted zone on a hunting trip.

      > Fast and Furious: Lunar Drift
      Make it a prequel to Pitch Dark with Vin Diesel going into hibernation and radiated by cosmic rays or something.

      > Transformers: Rise of the Transgender Hanna Montana's Revenge
      You get the best of both worlds!

  16. Predictable can be fine - sometimes by sjbe · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I disagree on the Rogue One ending though. Once it occured to me that they were really going to make the end of Rogue One match the start of A New Hope to the letter the end became much less interesting. Halfway through the end scene it was clear that all involved were doomed. Of course the transmissing HAD to happen. But Darth Vader HAD to find out. The two main characters HAD to die etc. Not very interesting.

    Knowing where a movie is going ahead of time does not by itself make it less interesting. In virtually all superhero movies you know the main character is going to live and the ending will probably be a happy one. Most of the time the story is rather predictable too. Doesn't make it uninteresting as long as they make the journey getting there fun. To use the classic example, we all knew the Titanic was going to sink before anyone walked into a theater.

    I was really hopefull afther The Force Awakens, since it was for me a great 'setting the scene' movie.

    I suppose they had to get back to baseline after the prequels. Really it was just a reboot and the movie was for all practical purposes nearly a scene for scene remake/update of A New Hope. It was done well enough but this was ground that Star Wars has covered several times now which was disappointing to me at least. Predictable doesn't need to mean identical. The Force Awakens was something of a love letter to A New Hope and that's fine but I have to admit I wasn't expecting a remake.

    1. Re:Predictable can be fine - sometimes by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      Knowing where a movie is going ahead of time does not by itself make it less interesting. In virtually all superhero movies you know the main character is going to live and the ending will probably be a happy one. Most of the time the story is rather predictable too. Doesn't make it uninteresting as long as they make the journey getting there fun.

      I don't think "superhero" movies are a good example. They're the epitome of high-budget junk with no original plot or quality of story. - just action.

      They sell well to kids wanting to watch their favourite marketing device, but you'll find very few superhero films on any critics "must watch" top films.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
    2. Re:Predictable can be fine - sometimes by shess · · Score: 1

      To use the classic example, we all knew the Titanic was going to sink before anyone walked into a theater.

      OMG I hated Titanic. The scrappy underclass dude is surrounded by dead people in lifejackets, and is all like "Nah, I'm just going to die right here." Criminy, make a raft, dude!

    3. Re:Predictable can be fine - sometimes by SomeoneFromBelgium · · Score: 1

      Point is: they could have dealt with it much more creatively.
      Why did everyone in the movie have to die? Is it a problem that they would survive but not appear in A New Hope?
      Why did Darth Vader have to be on the scene? Would it not be more logical that once the transmission was detected DV would be called to intercept?
      The big clash between the 2 fleets (described as 'the first victory' in the introductory text of A New Hope') did not have to happen at the same time as the transmissing thing.
      So, that is why I don't agree with the original post claiming that 'Rogue One managed to have an original ending'

  17. and they are going to rape Indy in Indiana Jones 5 by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    and they are going to rape Indy in Indiana Jones 5.

    The reward for this is that the mouse get's an other copyright extension.

    south park knows the mouse is doing.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

  18. Jabba the Hutt's cousin... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    Does this mean we won't see Pizza the Hut's cameo in the new movie?

    1. Re:Jabba the Hutt's cousin... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      My god, how dumb are you.

      Not as dumb as you.

      He died when he ate himself to death because he was trapped in his limo.

      The new movie takes place before that happen, featuring a younger Pizza the Hut with fresh toppings.

  19. Re:This should have happened before filming starte by swb · · Score: 1

    I would assume that these guys wound up with only a fraction of the money they could have made. I suspect at the directorial level they have a cut of the gross, or at least before some expenses. Regardless, I'm sure they walked away from a pretty big payday.

    Who knows what actually happened, but regardless of the money I'm sure they quit at the point where it would be most painful for the people they work for.

    I'm sure there's some backbiting that results from this and some favors will be called in to try to deny them future jobs and/or their boss may have to give up more to hire people in the future.

  20. Super hero movies by sjbe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't think "superhero" movies are a good example. They're the epitome of high-budget junk with no original plot or quality of story. - just action.

    What do you think Star Wars is if it isn't a super hero movie? Jedi are nearly the epitome of super heroes. Furthermore I completely disagree that super hero movies inherently lack original plots or good stories. Sturgeon's law applies to any genre of movie you care to mention. Some of the stories that are coming out of the comic books these days are absolutely awesome stories and only a narrow minded snob would think otherwise. You could argue that the story could have been realized better but the stories themselves are often great.

    They sell well to kids wanting to watch their favourite marketing device, but you'll find very few superhero films on any critics "must watch" top films.

    I can name quite a few superhero movies that are must see cultural touch stones. Star Wars and Empire Strikes Back are two of them.

    1. Re:Super hero movies by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 1

      What do you think Star Wars is if it isn't a super hero movie?

      Yeah, and there hasn't been a good Star Wars film made in the last 30 years either.

      There is nothing to say a superhero movie can't be good. It's just that in the modern era of film, that's not going to happen because studios want a guaranteed return on their productions and so every high budget film has to follow a predictable formula with a specified number of highs and lows- and at what part of the film they have to occur, etc.

      Back in the 70's and early 80's films could have more flexibility, and so big budget films COULD be more unique. (they often weren't for superhero films even then though, but the potential was there),

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  21. Time to call in ... by PPH · · Score: 1

    ... Alan Smithee

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  22. No lesson learned. by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

    Did nobody learn from the disaster that was "Young Indiana Jones"? The magic is gone, don't try to recreate it.

    --
    Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    1. Re:No lesson learned. by PoopJuggler · · Score: 1

      This is Hollywood we're talking about.

    2. Re:No lesson learned. by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      I don't know if Young Indiana Jones was actually a disaster ... but it is interesting that one of the reported problems during production was that they kept changing directors every episode, and none of them had the same ideas about how the show should be made.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
  23. Tell Disney i have his money by puddingebola · · Score: 1

    Tell Disney i have his money.

  24. Star Whores by sexconker · · Score: 1

    I didn't even know a Han Solo spinoff was coming next year.

    But I did know that something was coming next year, because this year we're getting Episode VIII, and Disney is whoring Star Wars out for annual films, whether anyone wants them or not.

    The fact that the directors have quit implies that we've got another unnecessary, unoriginal turd on our hands.

    I'm hoping that Episode VIII falls well short of the box office watermark that Episode VII set. Disney needs a hard reality check. For my part, I won't be seeing it until the BluRay hits Redbox.

    Episode VII was such a fucking turd. In a few years, the Empire has rebuilt itself, rebuilt another massive superweapon, lined up a bunch of fancy new toys, turned and enlisted a new force-using apprentice for a new big, bad, shadowy dude and paired him up with a new rank-and-file military type so they can fight the same old battles over plans/maps that, surprise surprise, are stored in a cute little droid.

    Fuck off. It's basically a remake separated by a generation, just like Jurassic World was. And just like Jurassic World, it makes no fucking sense. Logistically, how did all of this happen in the short time since the last movie? How did no one learn from past mistakes? This isn't a failing to earn from history scenario, we've got characters who lived through the mistakes. And we're not talking about wishy washy lessons about human behavior. We're talking about simple practical fucking details.

    Why design a third huge super weapon with a cartoonish "blow this lil bit up and destroy the whole thing"? Why not proactively guard that weak point? Why hide things in little droids? We know they have radios. If you have a map of where a missing person went, and then a missing chunk of that map where the trail cuts off, why not just search around the missing chunk of that map? Oh, because you didn't even have that part of the map because your droid was having a rest? When and how did the droid collect the data? You can't have a tech poke at the droid and wake it up?

    And why the fuck do you need to find Luke Skywalker so badly? You need an army (that you control) and a functioning government. Or did you already forget the failures of the Jedi Council? Herp Derp, we're a religion and we kind of act as knights but also as political advisors but we also hate war and politics. Herp Derp, we're getting involved in politics and wars, might as well just trust this slimy politicians and use this army of clones we didn't know we bought to fight... wait, who are we fighting and why? Blockades? Communications disruptions? One little shit stain planet? OH JAR JAR U SO SILLY! Herp Derp, I guess the government turned on us and used that army against us, now we're all dead except for 2 special dudes who are key characters in the original movies.

    Why design a dinosaur park without heavily armed guards at each exhibit? Hell, we managed to murder a gorilla in about 4 seconds because of some shitstain child with useless parents. Why have a cage for the new, super dangerous dinosaur that ONLY has a dinosaur-sized gate? Why not have a man-sized gate to the side, so you can have people enter and leave without risking the dinosaur escaping?

  25. I've got a bad feeling about this by jediborg · · Score: 1

    These aren't the directors you're looking for

  26. Um.. isn't the investment of time it's own reward? by rsilvergun · · Score: 2

    If you enjoy the old lore they can't really take that away. Sure, you won't get any more, but it doesn't devalue what you already have.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  27. not quit... by SuperDre · · Score: 1

    word is, they did not quit, they were fired..

  28. In proper Han Solo tradition by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

    despite filming having started in January.

    Well, at least they shot first.

    --
    Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  29. Woody Harrelson and Donald Glover? by rewardian · · Score: 1

    With all due respect to both of them, I get it. Who's directing this?

  30. They had to use a recording by KWTm · · Score: 1

    Why the fuck didn't she say ' a new hope'.

    I think it's because they had to take a recording of her voice from the old movie, and in the old movie she never said "a new hope".

    But we all know when she did say the word "hope".

    --
    404555974007725459910684486621289147856453481154 in hex is "You sank my Battleship?"
    [GPG key in journal]
  31. Eye-candy for male-(ish) nerds by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

    and unspecified roles for Emilia Clarke and Thandia Newton.

    Their roles are going to be as eye-candy with skimpy clothing. Token speaking parts, maybe. A bit of BDSM, for those who like such things.
    It's Hollywood. You expected better?

    I can't say that I'm particularly enthralled by the prospect. I'm wondering if the Star Wars franchise is going to become the first movie series where I've got a catch-up list that's into double digits.

    And will it become the first such series where I'm double hexadecimal digits behind the most-recent version?

    --
    Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"