|
|
Post by ShayMay on Oct 30, 2012 21:15:35 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Juliett. Bravo. Alfa. on Oct 30, 2012 22:30:37 GMT
Firstly Disney bought Marvel and that seems to have gone ok.
But more importantly we are looking at more Star Wars movies. No. God. Please God No. Etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Oct 30, 2012 22:46:53 GMT
I'm not sure if it says here (long article, tired) but, on top of the planned trilogy, I read (BBC?) that Disney want to release a new Star Wars "every two or so years".
Fantastic.
I'm not someone who went mad against the idea of the prequels so a new trilogy could be interesting. What would it be based on, though? I'm ashamed to say I haven't seen 'Return...' so I don't know how the saga "ended".
|
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Oct 30, 2012 23:27:46 GMT
There's a selection of post-Empire fiction in the expanded Universe - a lot of it deals with Luke, Han, Leia etc rebuilding the Jedi. It's feasible that we'd even see appearences from original cast members as the original cast playing the advanced age they'd be in-universe...
But yeah, as much as this is a surprising revelation and open to a billion disney/star wars related jokes... at the end of the day, it's been nothing but a good thing for Marvel. I'll wait to see what comes from this.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lost Mercenary on Oct 31, 2012 0:19:39 GMT
George Lucas has retired from making more Star Wars Movies.
Finally. Some good news.
|
|
|
|
Post by madhair60 on Oct 31, 2012 9:39:59 GMT
Wrong [censored]ing subforum you unbelievable imbecile.
Star Wars fans exhibit basically the same behaviour as abused children.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Shad on Oct 31, 2012 11:01:46 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Juliett. Bravo. Alfa. on Oct 31, 2012 11:43:15 GMT
Well... [censored].
|
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Oct 31, 2012 12:32:46 GMT
How is this not just normal business in cutting down on a business that isn't really making them that much money? Print comics sell bad enough globally - the UK specific ones, where the market has always been incredibly small due to availablility, are even worse. Would have happened eventually whether or not Disney were involved. In contrast, however, Disney's direct involvement has helped Marvel push their two main imprints (616 and Ultimate) with new talent, financed one of the biggest, most successful movies ever released and given them free reign in advancing that multimedia strategy by bankrolling more movies, more cartoons and more live action shows. This multimedia approach is absolutely critical to Marvel's success and general survival in an era where print is dying off and people would rather buy graphic novel collections than bi-weekly/monthly comics. Pretty much all of that success in the past couple of years is very much down to Disney's wealth. Star Wars has been around the block a billion times and back as a marketable brand - so it's hardly as if Disney can really do any further harm by putting even more emphasis on the multimedia franchise than already exists. The question is whether or not a Disney funded Star Wars movie could be better than, at least, the previous three. Given the smart moves made with Marvel's movies (in essence, basically leaving them to it) and the reduced influence of George Lucas himself (which, ultimately, is why the prequels suck more than the originals - because he didn't have anyone to overrule and curtail him this time), I can definitely see a scenario in which a new trilogy could be better than the last. Quite how they could handle further movies after that, I dunno. My guess is that they will approach it with the same approach as Marvel - to make the movies part of an overall Star Wars universe, not just part of the same, main story that's been going on since the 70s. My bet would put it towards going back to The Old Republic, but who knows. |
|
|
|
Post by Nam on Oct 31, 2012 17:55:40 GMT
Quite how they could handle further movies after that, I dunno. My guess is that they will approach it with the same approach as Marvel - to make the movies part of an overall Star Wars universe, not just part of the same, main story that's been going on since the 70s. My bet would put it towards going back to The Old Republic, but who knows. I agree. I mean I honestly don't think I'd want to see a full on episode VII. Return of the Jedi pretty much serves as an end point for the saga (expanded universe be damned), but at the same time, do we need even more backstory? Perhaps this would be more like the Clone Wars film and TV shows? Stories set very clearly in that universe, featuring characters, but not a continuation. |
|
|
|
Post by Balls on Nov 1, 2012 22:23:45 GMT
Never really was a big Star Trek fan.
|
|
|
|
Post by Beeth on Nov 2, 2012 9:45:32 GMT
Time to defeat those fracking Cylons once and for all!  |
|
|
|
Post by Devo DrakeFox on Nov 5, 2012 21:17:00 GMT
Not sure what to feel about Disney buying Star Wars (though I am sure I don't want to be told how to feel). On one hand, it would be interesting to see other directors' takes on the franchise and how they add to it. On the other, what does this mean for the expanded universe? So much material has been churned out over the years and a lot of it has been deemed as canon, what if Disney start re-writing Star Wars history and lore with their new films? Unless they simply end up making film versions of some of the various comics and books, etc. It's hard to keep up with such an open and diverse universe like Star Wars.
|
|
|
|
Post by rj on Nov 6, 2012 5:07:44 GMT
Give Duncan Jones the film, and the franchise. Entirely serious.
Go back and watch Moon and Source Code again and try to tell me that he wouldn't absolutely nail Star Wars.
I almost guarantee you that if you do your argument will boil down to incoherent screaming.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Nov 6, 2012 6:17:33 GMT
Why in the hell would anyone sit through Source Code once, let alone twice?
Star Wars in the hands of other directors is a proven method of success - Lucas only co-directed and co-produced the first trilogy and the taming back of his worse ideas is why it worked better than when he was given absolute free reign. I dare say enough fans exist out there in the profession to come up with someone capable of steering it right.
Personally I'd love to see Joss Whedon take it on. Mostly just for how the entire Internet would implode into its own naval. Though, one would probably guess that Disney have already thought of this themselves, given that he's now pretty firmly established as King of the Geeks and did happen to make them a hell of a lot of money in doing so. But, really he should focus on Marvel while he's got it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Super Sonic on Nov 8, 2012 15:32:58 GMT
Yay! More Star Wars films for me not to watch and then marvel at fans' reactions when I smugly relay this fact to them.
|
|
|
|
Post by rj on Nov 9, 2012 8:11:53 GMT
Yay! More Star Wars films for me not to watch and then marvel Although also owned by Disney, this is not, in fact, related to the Star Wars franchise. That's ok! It's a very common mistake. I wish you well. |
|
|
|
Post by Super Sonic on Nov 10, 2012 12:07:00 GMT
Lame.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Jan 26, 2013 13:10:13 GMT
J.J. Abrams is confirmed to direct and the bloke wot wrote Toy Story 3 is writing it.
Honestly, I have no idea what to make of this news. I haven't seen TS3, so I haven't a clue what the writing in it is like, and Abrams is a pretty bad director.
But can it be worse than George Lucas getting free run over it again?
|
|
|
|
Post by Devo DrakeFox on Jan 26, 2013 14:17:37 GMT
J.J. Abrams is confirmed to direct and the bloke wot wrote Toy Story 3 is writing it. Honestly, I have no idea what to make of this news. I haven't seen TS3, so I haven't a clue what the writing in it is like, and Abrams is a pretty bad director. But can it be worse than George Lucas getting free run over it again? What's wrong with Abrams? He did a pretty good job with Star Trek, I thought. 'Cept for all the bloody lens flares on the Enterprise, stupid set designers... -_- |
|
|
|
Post by Alex on Jan 26, 2013 14:19:45 GMT
The worst part of Star Trek was his direction of it. It's a very good movie, and Abrams did a good job of producing it and keeping Orci and Kurtzman from [censored]ing up the writing as they did with Transformers, but the direction of the action, the look of the movie and the goddamned [censored]ing lens flares are the weakest part of that movie by far.
Abrams needs direction as a director. I'd be pretty happy if he was co-directing with someone else, really.
|
|
|
|
Post by rj on Jan 26, 2013 21:32:39 GMT
It's remarkable how wrong you are. The look of the film was wonderful. Colorful without being kitschy. Bright-eyed and clean and streamlined. It was what the original series is like when viewed through rose-tinted glasses, except actually real.Can't imagine what you'd see wrong with it, unless your favorite movie is one of Lars Von Trier's Dogme 95 films. Probably The Idiots.Or if you enjoyed the way Human Centipede: Full Sequence looked. It's clean and pretty and well-framed and smoothly shot. It's incredibly competent (if uncomplicated) direction coupled with beautiful set work and effects. Perfect pure blockbuster fare like very few films of late have gotten right. Only The Avengers has come close, and even that didn't quite hit the mark the way Abrams' Star Trek does. And for all of its flaws, the best parts of Super 8 were down to Abrams' direction (and the brilliant cast, of course). Was it nothing more than an exercise in Spielberg emulation? Yes, but it was an incredibly polished exercise, and one that shows Abrams knows what the [censored] he's doing with a camera and a set of storyboards. For my money there's probably only one better stand-out pure blockbuster director I can name. (If you were wondering: it's Brad Bird, Abrams' Mission Impossible successor and the hand behind The Incredibles and The Iron Giant.) Honestly, I have no idea what to make of this news. I haven't seen TS3, so I haven't a clue what the writing in it is like It was alright. Competent and fun for what it was. Arndt is an excellent writer, though; Little Miss Sunshine (his first script) was his baby, after all, and that film is incessantly good. |
|
|
|
Post by modochi on Aug 19, 2013 17:39:19 GMT
The cynical jerk in me expects Disney to not care about the books, novels and massive extended universe works and just give us another run of the mill Sci-Fi movie with flashy sword fights and a princess in need of rescuing.
Oh, and there'll be another annoying Jar Jar Binks character and fuzzy animals.
Plus singing... Lot's of singing.
|
|
|
|
Post by L. T. Dangerous on Aug 19, 2013 19:23:08 GMT
The cynical jerk in me expects Disney to not care about the books, novels and massive extended universe works and just give us another run of the mill Sci-Fi movie with flashy sword fights and a princess in need of rescuing. Oh, and there'll be another annoying Jar Jar Binks character and fuzzy animals. So pretty much the original trilogy then. |
|
|
|
Post by Juliett. Bravo. Alfa. on Aug 19, 2013 20:14:04 GMT
The cynical jerk in me expects Disney to not care about the books, novels and massive extended universe works To be fair this is exactly Lucas said would need to happen for the third trilogy to happen. I think. |
|
