Star Wars Discussion Thread v. Rogue One

[Super Dude]

I would say I like JJ. He's not one of my favorite directors, but he hasn't made THAT many movies yet. I would say Mission Impossible 3 is really good, and in terms of the Star Trek movies and Super 8, the direction in those movies is not the problem. A lot of people bash on Into Darkness, and I've also seen people bash Super 8, but the faults of those problems is not with the direction.

JJ seems really passionate about this project, and I believe the best person to helm a project like Star Wars is someone who is a fan themselves, and who is really excited and passionate about it.

Ah, you reminded me of another good thing: he wrote Forever Young and a draft of Armageddon. So it's not like he can't write, the question is his directing.

[snapple]

I don't think it is his directing. Into Darkness was a crap story. He probably did the best he could with the garbage given to him.

[Kotowboy]

It was JJ's idea to have Carol Marcus in her pants and Damon Lindelof pushed for the story to be about Khan.

They've admitted as much so apart from those two things - the one thing I don't understand is WHY Marcus wanted a war with the Klingons.

Also - the story for ST2009 was much better than Into Darkness and Damon wasn't writing that one... Coincidence ?

But anyway - leave all that to the Star Trek thread.


I'm not a SW fan but I am very interested in VII due to JJ directing.

[The Dark Master]

I don't think it is his directing. Into Darkness was a crap story. He probably did the best he could with the garbage given to him.

This.  Orci, Kutzman and Lindeloff are the absolute worst screenwriters in Hollywood right now, and yet they keep landing jobs writing for these big name franchises.  Their scripts are pretty much just built around "trailer moments", scenes that they think will look good on screen, and they then come up with a convoluted plot to tie all those cool-looking shots together, which is why a lot of their scripts really don't make a whole lot of sense under close scrutiny.  At least Lindeloff has admitted that he doesn't think he is a particularly good writer.  Orci and Kutzman are just plain oblivious to the fact that their scripts are awful.

[Super Dude]

It was JJ's idea to have Carol Marcus in her pants and Damon Lindelof pushed for the story to be about Khan.

They've admitted as much so apart from those two things - the one thing I don't understand is WHY Marcus wanted a war with the Klingons.

Also - the story for ST2009 was much better than Into Darkness and Damon wasn't writing that one... Coincidence ?

But anyway - leave all that to the Star Trek thread.


I'm not a SW fan but I am very interested in VII due to JJ directing.

No, but I do think there's something to that. Notice how Lost went waaay downhill after JJ scaled down his involvement and Lindelof stepped in (somewhere around season 3, IIRC).

Edit: Essentially ninja'd by TDM. Oh btw, who's Kutzman?

[zepp-head]

EDIT :

I googled it and found this : https://pressstart2begin.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/george-lucas-barbarians-quote.jpg?w=593

So i'm not making it up.

This is often taken out of context.  A full transcript reveals more, including these tidbits:

 

“Who better, than the person whose hard labor and unique talent created the art, to determine what is an appropriate alteration.”

“Buying a copyright does not make one an artist. The copyright owner does not suddenly become talented and creative, does not suddenly have the ability to write a novel, play music, paint pictures or make films. An artists’ creative talent is not something that can be transferred. And it is the artist’s unique vision that must be respected, that must be protected.”


It seems he has always felt that artists should always control their work.  Who'd a thunk it.

Close with this:


    “And it is the artist’s unique vision that must be respected, that must be protected.” -George Lucas, 1988

[The Dark Master]

It was JJ's idea to have Carol Marcus in her pants and Damon Lindelof pushed for the story to be about Khan.

They've admitted as much so apart from those two things - the one thing I don't understand is WHY Marcus wanted a war with the Klingons.

Also - the story for ST2009 was much better than Into Darkness and Damon wasn't writing that one... Coincidence ?

But anyway - leave all that to the Star Trek thread.


I'm not a SW fan but I am very interested in VII due to JJ directing.

No, but I do think there's something to that. Notice how Lost went waaay downhill after JJ scaled down his involvement and Lindelof stepped in (somewhere around season 3, IIRC).

Edit: Essentially ninja'd by TDM. Oh btw, who's Kutzman?

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0476064/


Writer/ producer for Michael Bay Transformers, JJ Abrams Trek and Amazing Spiderman 2..... yep, that's quite a resume

[Super Dude]

If by "quite a resume" you mean "quite a telling resume," then I wholeheartedly agree.

EDIT :

I googled it and found this : https://pressstart2begin.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/george-lucas-barbarians-quote.jpg?w=593

So i'm not making it up.

This is often taken out of context.  A full transcript reveals more, including these tidbits:

 

“Who better, than the person whose hard labor and unique talent created the art, to determine what is an appropriate alteration.”

“Buying a copyright does not make one an artist. The copyright owner does not suddenly become talented and creative, does not suddenly have the ability to write a novel, play music, paint pictures or make films. An artists’ creative talent is not something that can be transferred. And it is the artist’s unique vision that must be respected, that must be protected.”


It seems he has always felt that artists should always control their work.  Who'd a thunk it.

Close with this:


    “And it is the artist’s unique vision that must be respected, that must be protected.” -George Lucas, 1988

And I agree with him completely. As such, we should've labored to have Star Wars thrown into the public domain post-haste.

[Kotowboy]

For all we know - Bob Orci had all the best ideas but Lindelof & Kurtzman pushed for "trailer moments".

Bob Orci was very present on StarTrekMovie.com answering all fans queries about Into Darkness.

Plus him & Kurtzman don't work together anymore & Star Trek 3 has new writers.

There could be something in that.

ANYWAY. STAR WARS 7

[jammindude]

Something I guess I'm just not getting - Am I the only person who hates JJ Abrams?  I just don't think he's good at making movies.  The Star Trek reboot is one of my least favorite movies ever.  It's not that I have anything against reboots (BSG is my favorite TV show and a reboot), but the movie didn't work on its own merits.  Super 8 had great acting, but the tone was really inconsistent and the ending was horrible.

I expect the new Star Wars movie to at least be competent.  The fiscal potential and prestige of the franchise are too important for anything overtly ridiculous to be allowed.  There probably won't be any obnoxious lens flares.  And the ending probably had real through put into it.

But what has JJ Abrams done to make people believe he can actually make a good movie?  To me, at least Michael Bay is unapologetic about making shlock..  JJ Abrams makes shlock and pretends that it's meaningful sci-fi.

I think it is best summed up by what I heard someone say after ST09 came out, and before he was ever attached to Star Wars...

"He turned Star Trek into Star Wars."

I think they were right.   He made a great action/sci-fi flick...but in retrospect, it did have more of a Star Wars feel than a (typically more heady) Star Trek film.

ST09 is fun, but it really doesn't feel like a *STAR TREK FILM*....and Into Darkness is also fun to watch, but the story hasn't aged well.

BTW, I thought Super 8 was a very well done Goonies homage....and as that, it works.   

[Super Dude]

Something I guess I'm just not getting - Am I the only person who hates JJ Abrams?  I just don't think he's good at making movies.  The Star Trek reboot is one of my least favorite movies ever.  It's not that I have anything against reboots (BSG is my favorite TV show and a reboot), but the movie didn't work on its own merits.  Super 8 had great acting, but the tone was really inconsistent and the ending was horrible.

I expect the new Star Wars movie to at least be competent.  The fiscal potential and prestige of the franchise are too important for anything overtly ridiculous to be allowed.  There probably won't be any obnoxious lens flares.  And the ending probably had real through put into it.

But what has JJ Abrams done to make people believe he can actually make a good movie?  To me, at least Michael Bay is unapologetic about making shlock..  JJ Abrams makes shlock and pretends that it's meaningful sci-fi.

I think it is best summed up by what I heard someone say after ST09 came out, and before he was ever attached to Star Wars...

"He turned Star Trek into Star Wars."

I think they were right.   He made a great action/sci-fi flick...but in retrospect, it did have more of a Star Wars feel than a (typically more heady) Star Trek film.

ST09 is fun, but it really doesn't feel like a *STAR TREK FILM*....and Into Darkness is also fun to watch, but the story hasn't aged well.

BTW, I thought Super 8 was a very well done Goonies homage....and as that, it works.   

JJ said as much in several interviews. He thought that would help bring Star Trek into the 21st Century.

BUT ANYWAY STAR WARS GUYS

[BlobVanDam]

JJ said as much in several interviews. He thought that would help bring Star Trek into the 21st Century.

I'd rather he left it in the 23rd Century.

As bad as I thought those movies were, I'm optimistic the new SW movies will be good, because 1) JJ effectively was trying to make a Star Wars movie instead of a Trek one, so the style will work in this case, 2) he actually gives a shit about the source material, 3) and he's likely on a much shorter leash here. He's surrounded by a lot of the right people to make a great movie.

Through every bit of information, things are shaping up well for this movie. I'll actually give JJ the benefit of the doubt on this one until I see it. If he can turn Star Trek into Star Wars, just imagine what he'll do for Star Wars!

[Super Dude]

The old refrain is getting me through: "At least it can't be as bad as Lucas!"

But seriously though, at worst it'll just be like every other mindless Hollywood action film. It'll never be prequels bad again.

[Kotowboy]

The thing is -

- JJ knows what everyone wants Star Wars to be. George Lucas only knows what he thinks Star Wars should be.

JJ wants to make a great Star Wars movie whereas the prequels were purely a money making exercise and to show off the CGI.

[BlobVanDam]

The thing is -

- JJ knows what everyone wants Star Wars to be. George Lucas only knows what he thinks Star Wars should be.

JJ wants to make a great Star Wars movie whereas the prequels were purely a money making exercise and to show off the CGI.

And I think with Disney in charge, you no longer have a situation of one producer making all of the decisions surrounded by yes men, which is another reason the prequels were so weak. George Lucas was more concerned with doing what he wanted rather than what fans wanted.
Everything about this movie says they're trying to stay true to the OT feel. I mean, puppet characters in 2014? That should say it all.

[Kotowboy]

I wonder if anyone will bump into a door in this one.

Weirdly - kirk banged his head in ST09.

[Super Dude]

The thing is -

- JJ knows what everyone wants Star Wars to be. George Lucas only knows what he thinks Star Wars should be.

JJ wants to make a great Star Wars movie whereas the prequels were purely a money making exercise and to show off the CGI.

And I think with Disney in charge, you no longer have a situation of one producer making all of the decisions surrounded by yes men, which is another reason the prequels were so weak. George Lucas was more concerned with doing what he wanted rather than what fans wanted.
Everything about this movie says they're trying to stay true to the OT feel. I mean, puppet characters in 2014? That should say it all.

Yeah, I think Disney being in charge is a really strong indicator of success here. They literally engineer every inch of their parks to ensure maximum enjoyment (like, to brainwash-y levels), so you can be sure the same painstaking efforts go into their movies as well.

[bosk1]

Yeah, I think Disney being in charge is a really strong indicator of success here. They literally engineer every inch of their parks to ensure maximum enjoyment (like, to brainwash-y levels), so you can be sure the same painstaking efforts go into their movies as well.

And having just returned last night from a Disneyland trip, I will say once again that I LOVE them for that.

And I think with Disney in charge, you no longer have a situation of one producer making all of the decisions surrounded by yes men, which is another reason the prequels were so weak. George Lucas was more concerned with doing what he wanted rather than what fans wanted.

Yeah, that has been a huge problem.  And even where people did speak up, Lucas would often still overrule them and make bad decisions.  And while I recognize that the person in charge sometimes does have to overrule dissenting voices and make unpopular decisions at times, Lucas seems to have frequently done so to the detriment of the overall product.  Case in point, I remember getting a pretty bad taste in my mouth after listening to the director/producer commentaries for the prequels.  I remember a couple of different times, there was dialog that basically went along the lines of: [slightly exaggerated but not far from the truth parody for effect]
-Producer #1:  I remember having a bit of a disagreement about this particular scene.  We had an earlier scene that had a great character-building moment that really provided a lot of context and character development that gave this scene a much deeper meaning and significance, but that got cut.
-Producer #2:  Yeah, it really makes this scene seem random and out of place without that earlier scene.  I was kinda bummed about that too.
-Lucas:  Yeah, I decided to cut that in place of this other great CGI shot that adds nothing to the story or characters, but it looks friggin' cool!  And, hey, I'm George friggin' Lucas, so I'll do whatever I want.
[/slightly exaggerated but not far from the truth parody for effect]

Again, I realize it's his creative vision.  But he just doesn't see that, while he had a framework for a really cool story, the execution in storytelling suffered greatly at his hands. 

[Kotowboy]

News Just In :

Godzilla director Gareth Edwards will direct a stand alone Star Wars film !

Incredible news ! From making a movie in his bedroom to Star Wars in two moves.

[orcus116]

Standalone? I didn't think Disney would starting milking the cow dry already.

[Super Dude]

That's been the plan all along.

[Kotowboy]

Yes it was revealed when Disney took over that They would do a new Trilogy and Three stand alone films.

One film a year starting in 2015.

[orcus116]

News to me.

[ReaPsTA]

Yeah, that has been a huge problem.  And even where people did speak up, Lucas would often still overrule them and make bad decisions.  And while I recognize that the person in charge sometimes does have to overrule dissenting voices and make unpopular decisions at times, Lucas seems to have frequently done so to the detriment of the overall product.  Case in point, I remember getting a pretty bad taste in my mouth after listening to the director/producer commentaries for the prequels.  I remember a couple of different times, there was dialog that basically went along the lines of: [slightly exaggerated but not far from the truth parody for effect]
-Producer #1:  I remember having a bit of a disagreement about this particular scene.  We had an earlier scene that had a great character-building moment that really provided a lot of context and character development that gave this scene a much deeper meaning and significance, but that got cut.
-Producer #2:  Yeah, it really makes this scene seem random and out of place without that earlier scene.  I was kinda bummed about that too.
-Lucas:  Yeah, I decided to cut that in place of this other great CGI shot that adds nothing to the story or characters, but it looks friggin' cool!  And, hey, I'm George friggin' Lucas, so I'll do whatever I want.
[/slightly exaggerated but not far from the truth parody for effect]

Again, I realize it's his creative vision.  But he just doesn't see that, while he had a framework for a really cool story, the execution in storytelling suffered greatly at his hands.

In a draft version of the Episode III script, there's a lot of little extra nuggets here and there that flesh out everyone's motivations.  For example, in the movie, Samuel Jackson has Anakin spy on Palpatine because they suspect him of being a Sith... because "a dark cloud surrounds him" or something.  In the movie, Palpatine is pushing for the Senate to pass a law giving him control of the Jedi.  This creates a much stronger motivation for the mistrust between them.

3. If nothing else, Disney hand-picked him. They're basically our media overlords, so of course they're going to want to get this right. They chose him because they thought he could pull it off, and if he doesn't, they'll do something about it. I dunno what, but hey, they're Disney.

This to me is the big issue.  Disney is a bit smarter about crafting a product than JJ.  And I know he won't have Orci/Kurtzman/Lindelof (all horrible hacks) writing the script.

But this movie needs a director who's willing to fight for a creative vision.  I saw the leaked casting sheets.  All the new roles were ridiculous stock characters.  Female who's headstrong and insecure.  Male who's tough and cocky.  Stuff like that.  Because's JJ's so limited as a storyteller, I'm not even sure he cares about this stuff.

I guess it just would have been nice if the sequel trilogy made an honest effort to match the historical greatness of the original trilogy.  Instead, they'll churn out an effective product.  It will make money.  The prestige of the original trilogy will be damaged even further.  I'll be sad.  And Star Wars will be forgotten, because everyone will associate the OT with the prequel and sequel triologies.

Bleh.

[Mister Gold]

News Just In :

Godzilla director Gareth Edwards will direct a stand alone Star Wars film !

Incredible news ! From making a movie in his bedroom to Star Wars in two moves.

Oh hell yes! I wonder what his film will focus on?

[Super Dude]

3. If nothing else, Disney hand-picked him. They're basically our media overlords, so of course they're going to want to get this right. They chose him because they thought he could pull it off, and if he doesn't, they'll do something about it. I dunno what, but hey, they're Disney.

This to me is the big issue.  Disney is a bit smarter about crafting a product than JJ.  And I know he won't have Orci/Kurtzman/Lindelof (all horrible hacks) writing the script.

But this movie needs a director who's willing to fight for a creative vision.  I saw the leaked casting sheets.  All the new roles were ridiculous stock characters.  Female who's headstrong and insecure.  Male who's tough and cocky.  Stuff like that.  Because's JJ's so limited as a storyteller, I'm not even sure he cares about this stuff.

I guess it just would have been nice if the sequel trilogy made an honest effort to match the historical greatness of the original trilogy.  Instead, they'll churn out an effective product.  It will make money.  The prestige of the original trilogy will be damaged even further.  I'll be sad.  And Star Wars will be forgotten, because everyone will associate the OT with the prequel and sequel triologies.

Bleh.

You have absolutely no faith in JJ, do you? I honestly don't think it'll be that bad, and if it is, we do still have the originals. Their prestige wasn't actually damaged by the prequels, was it? The fans still hold the originals up as the holy grail of sci-fi, despite the prequels. If the same happens with the sequels - which again, I don't think it'll ever be that bad - people will still talk about Star Wars 4-6 the same as they do about The Matrix.

[orcus116]

I have faith that they have a group that will at least attempt to make a good movie. Also they have the prequels as an example of how not to make a Star Wars movie.

[Kotowboy]

JJ is a Star Wars fan. He was never a Star Trek fan.

I really think he'll make the kind of SW film he knows everyone is waiting for.

[Super Dude]

Not to mention he's not some creative tyrant surrounded by yes men. Notice that he doesn't have Lindelof or Orci with him for this outing.

[ReaPsTA]

You have absolutely no faith in JJ, do you?

I think he's a hack who's very good at convincing people he isn't one.  Again, this is why I like Michael Bay better.  Bay doesn't think he's a hack, obviously.  And I'm sure he thinks more highly of himself and his movies than most people.  But Abrams tries to present his shlock as being in the tradition of past great filmmakers.  Bay knows that he's making fun action movies for the purpose of making money.

Their prestige wasn't actually damaged by the prequels, was it? The fans still hold the originals up as the holy grail of sci-fi, despite the prequels.

The bolded part is crucial.  Star Wars fans love Star Wars, but the trilogy's place in the public consciousness and in the pantheon of great films has been damaged.  I never have conversations with people about how great Star Wars is.  The Workaholics guys noted that they don't use Star Wars references because it makes you look dated.  And I've seen way too many people say "really, the original Star Wars movies were just like the prequels.  People just like them more because of nostalgia."

If the same happens with the sequels - which again, I don't think it'll ever be that bad - people will still talk about Star Wars 4-6 the same as they do about The Matrix.

How well regarded is the Matrix though.  I know it's a part of pop culture because it's iconic, but how many people consider it a great film?

JJ is a Star Wars fan. He was never a Star Trek fan.

I really think he'll make the kind of SW film he knows everyone is waiting for.

Chris Nolan's never struck me as the biggest Batman fan, but he made a great Batman trilogy because he's a great filmmaker.  Why does anyone care about how big a Star Wars fan Abrams is more than his abilities as a director?  I consider myself a pretty big Star Wars fan, but that doesn't make me qualified to direct the film.

Not to mention he's not some creative tyrant surrounded by yes men. Notice that he doesn't have Lindelof or Orci with him for this outing.

But do you think he's really going to fight against the Disney execs if they have some sort of obviously ridiculous idea?  Based on the stuff he makes, he seems more interested in catering to what they want.

[Shadow Ninja 2.0]

I liked the Star Trek movies.

I'm not really a Trek fan generally, though, so that might be why.

[Super Dude]

You have absolutely no faith in JJ, do you?

I think he's a hack who's very good at convincing people he isn't one.  Again, this is why I like Michael Bay better.  Bay doesn't think he's a hack, obviously.  And I'm sure he thinks more highly of himself and his movies than most people.  But Abrams tries to present his shlock as being in the tradition of past great filmmakers.  Bay knows that he's making fun action movies for the purpose of making money.

Their prestige wasn't actually damaged by the prequels, was it? The fans still hold the originals up as the holy grail of sci-fi, despite the prequels.

The bolded part is crucial.  Star Wars fans love Star Wars, but the trilogy's place in the public consciousness and in the pantheon of great films has been damaged.  I never have conversations with people about how great Star Wars is.  The Workaholics guys noted that they don't use Star Wars references because it makes you look dated.  And I've seen way too many people say "really, the original Star Wars movies were just like the prequels.  People just like them more because of nostalgia."

If the same happens with the sequels - which again, I don't think it'll ever be that bad - people will still talk about Star Wars 4-6 the same as they do about The Matrix.

How well regarded is the Matrix though.  I know it's a part of pop culture because it's iconic, but how many people consider it a great film?

JJ is a Star Wars fan. He was never a Star Trek fan.

I really think he'll make the kind of SW film he knows everyone is waiting for.

Chris Nolan's never struck me as the biggest Batman fan, but he made a great Batman trilogy because he's a great filmmaker.  Why does anyone care about how big a Star Wars fan Abrams is more than his abilities as a director?  I consider myself a pretty big Star Wars fan, but that doesn't make me qualified to direct the film.

Not to mention he's not some creative tyrant surrounded by yes men. Notice that he doesn't have Lindelof or Orci with him for this outing.

But do you think he's really going to fight against the Disney execs if they have some sort of obviously ridiculous idea?  Based on the stuff he makes, he seems more interested in catering to what they want.

At this point, I'm sorry, but I think you're just being a naysayer. Maybe I'll eat my words come December 2015, but I'm not gonna just shit on it before I've even seen a trailer, let alone the movie itself.

[ReaPsTA]

At this point, I'm sorry, but I think you're just being a naysayer. Maybe I'll eat my words come December 2015, but I'm not gonna just shit on it before I've even seen a trailer, let alone the movie itself.

If it's good, it's good.  I didn't think the Avengers would be very good, and I was happy to be wrong about that one.

But I have to strongly advise against having any expectations for this movie whatsoever.  It's setting yourself up for disappointment.

And in a personal sense, I hate that JJ Abrams is successful.  I don't like what it says about America.

[orcus116]

Did he run over your childhood pet or something?

[ReaPsTA]

Did he run over your childhood pet or something?

Yes.