Thirith on 4/11/2012 at 17:47
You forgot Hoth, perhaps the most iconic Star Wars location.
What I loved about the original Star Wars' battle scenes (and, to a lesser extent, about the entire trilogy) was how much they felt like The Battle of Britain and other WW2 aerial combat films. The prequel dogfights lost this quality, being way too busy to be effective. I don't think it's just the difference in my age that makes me want to play the battle of Yavin but have little interest in playing any of the dogfights of the prequels.
ZylonBane on 4/11/2012 at 19:58
Quote Posted by Jason Moyer
Nicked you could make that exact same post substituting Toy Story for Cars.
No you couldn't, and anyone saying such a thing is either trolling or was repeatedly dropped on their head as a child.
Angel Dust on 4/11/2012 at 21:24
Quote Posted by fett
It's the first I've heard of it (thanks for the link) but has anyone also noticed that it's chock full of bullshit double-speak? It goes on and on about how the stories "aren't linked" to the previous films, have "new characters" blah blah blah, then they throw this gem in there:
In other words, new characters, new story, re-cast Luke Skywalker who apparently has NO interaction with characters from the previous films. Which brings us full circle to my original (and pretty much ONLY objection) - how the fuck is this going to work?
I'm sorry but that whole article smacks of "Hey, don't worry old fans, we're not going to mess with beloved characters, this is a new story!" and "We're going to keep Luke Skywalker because that's what George Lucas intended." They're talking shit out of both sides of their mouths.
Here's what I don't get about you guys (in general, this may not be the case individually) - you are the first to poo-poo a new Thief game, un-needed sequels, three Hobbit films, etc. But you're all for this convoluted idea - a half-assed re-boot of a story that has long outlived its originality or the character's purpose.
I hope I have to eat my words. But until I hear - "We're doing a completely new story in another part of that world that doesn't attempt to shoehorn in some sad version of Luke at 40 with George Lucas standing over our shoulder," I'm not likely to get very excited about this. And the fact is, they haven't said that yet - in fact, it seems they plan on doing exactly the opposite. I'm not expecting everyone to throw shit at Disney, but I'm flagergasted (Yes, I said FLABERGASTED, GOOD SIRS), that very few in the press or in this conversation are willing to acknowledge what a horrible idea this is if Disney tries to straddle the new story/George's story fence.
As you say, right now, all the PR peeps are doing is just running around talking shit trying to pre-empt and manage nerd rage. This is exactly why I personally am not at all worried about the particulars of what they are saying. If the property lands with the right people, who have some clout (e.g. a Pixar director or a Joss Whedon etc), then I have some faith that they will be able to push back on any really dumb ideas. If not, well then we're just going to get another shitty Star Wars film like the prequels and the franchise will be no more dead and diluted as it is already.
Quote:
edit: Am I the only one who gets a kick out of the myriad flaws in the SW trilogy? It's what made the prequels bearable for me. People complain about Darth Vader's "Nooooo!" and such, but I love stuff like that. It reminds me that these are Saturday morning cartoons, not Shakespeare. I don't want that stuff fixed or "modernized" - and a new set of movies (like the prequels) are sure to be so polished that the earthiness and grunge is all gone. These aren't the only films appreciated for those qualities either.
My brothers and I (we'd watch the trilogy every school holidays) used to love all the goofy bits too but with the OT, the really bad and cheesey stuff is mostly confined to the background ("Good, our first catch of the day!"); with the prequels it infects everything.
CCCToad on 5/11/2012 at 02:42
Quote Posted by Morte
The nonsensical setting of Cars wouldn't really matter if the story was engaging, instead of a tired, charmless retread of Doc Hollywood.
This.
Stitch on 6/11/2012 at 16:23
Quote Posted by Scots Taffer
Hay guyz how'd I miss this thread... (oh yeah because I hardly come here anymore - sorry :()
This thread reeled me back in, too :cool:
Stitch on 6/11/2012 at 16:38
Quote Posted by fett
I'm not expecting everyone to throw shit at Disney, but I'm flagergasted (Yes, I said FLABERGASTED, GOOD SIRS), that very few in the press or in this conversation are willing to acknowledge what a horrible idea this is if Disney tries to straddle the new story/George's story fence.
You're really hung up on this bit, aren't you? It doesn't need to be a fence that is straddled, as neither side needs to not play well with the other.
Anyway: I wouldn't take too seriously the word of someone who saw a treatment twenty years ago. Whatever he saw was written back when the cast was still relatively young, and the years have only really proven that George never really had the over-arcing plan that he might have once claimed. And besides, ol' neckless no longer has the final say on any of this.
My guess, again, is Disney is savvy enough to recognize the following three universal truths from which all beauty and innocence spring: (1) a sequel trilogy should be somewhat tied to the first two trilogies, and should therefore feature
some familiar characters, but (2) nobody wants to see old Luke and fat Leia wheezing and jiggling through action setpieces, and yet (3) recasting familiar roles would be difficult to pull off.
As such, I'm guessing (as I've said) that the new trilogy will feature the next generation of characters, and Luke and co. will return as peripheral elders.
SubJeff on 6/11/2012 at 16:56
I think you're right Stitch, bang on in fact, and that is the only way that they could realistically do it without it being really poor.
However, there will be light sabres which are dull as dish water now, and light sabre fights, which are so yawn inducing.
Doubtless there will be Sith, also a yawn. Makes me wonder; do the Jedi realise that the cycle will repeat ad nauseum?
Pyrian on 6/11/2012 at 22:22
Quote Posted by Stitch
...and yet (3) recasting familiar roles would be difficult to pull off.
Whatever. How many people have played James Bond? Or Batman? Or Spiderman? Or The Hulk? Looper even has two people playing the same character in the same movie. I don't think the movie-going public in general gives a rats-arse about recasting. I think movie-
makers actually care more - something about "artistic integrity" - but IMO that shouldn't get in the way of telling the right story.
Stitch on 7/11/2012 at 16:04
Pretty much everything you typed is wrong, beginning with your dismissive "Whatever."
Pyrian on 7/11/2012 at 17:42
You appear to have some pretty major delusions. :confused: I've presented substantial evidence for my position. You've merely made a dismissive statement, ironically focusing solely on what you're calling a dismissive statement.
